[Scoggin]

Nothing can replace 100 years of carrier experience. China building a carrier is like cavemen building a locomotive. Now use it.

 

[Scoggin]

On whom?

The idea is Walk softly and carry a big stick. I served on 4 carriers, 8 deployments; 6 were peaceful keeping the sea lanes free. Two were not peaceful, one sinking Iran’s navy during Operation Praying Mantis, the other supporting OSW missions in Iraq. The U.S. is the dominant empire of our day… we are modern Romans. China is the modern Celtic horde. Chinese carriers are meant to challenge our global military presence. Thankfully so… it shows Chinese weakness in military strategy… any military think tank knows carriers are obsolete in all out modern warfare where the goal is global control. Think of carriers as the conventional speed bump before nukes fly.

 

[Scoggin]

Also reminds me of the Buran… the entire world wants to imitate us… but imitations are cheap.

 

[Scoggin]

Why are you wasting money on making more then?

Because you need a big speed bump before going nuclear. That’s the deal. Perhaps China knows that too. You might not like the reality of a conventional force but I do.

 

[Scoggin]

Buran was actually more functional in design than the American shuttle... which proved itself to be nothing more than an expensive death trap.


So they are giving themselves the same options. And it seems you don't like them doing that.

Risks always accompany exploration. You can smugly armchair quarterback space failures but until you honor the men that perished in pursuit of space then you literally fail at being human.
i think we are done.

 

[Scoggin]

No, you are now muted.

NOW we are done!

No, you are now muted.

NOW we are done!

 

[Scoggin]

To be fair, the Pakistani Al-Khalid tank development program demonstrated that they know how to run a military engineering project, and they didn't sabotage themselves out of pride like the Indians did with their Arjun project.

They hired foreign experts who knew what they were doing to work with their domestic engineering team to implement Al-Khalid, which means they have a practical, modern tank in production right now, and their engineers have some solid experience with tank technology. They did it on time and on budget, setting modest, achievable goals and adhering to them.

That's good engineering. It might not be as glamorous as if they'd invented everything from scratch, but sometimes good engineering is boring.

They also have Chinese VT-4 tanks and are in China’s pocket. Pakistan is in full compliance with Chinese policies in exchange for Chinese investments in poorly developed Pakistan. This Paki love of communist economics has brought about serious internal stability issues from separatists groups. It will be interesting to see what the future holds for countries loyal to China.

The question is has China put Pakistan into a debt trap? Hard to tell at this stage as CPEC moves forward but having the Chinese run your facilities and keep the lions share of revenue isn’t a partnership… sounds more like an ownership.

 

[Scoggin]

China to get 91% of Gwadar port revenues…

China to get 91pc Gwadar income, minister tells Senate

Gwadar Port Authority will get 9pc share in the income for the next 40 years.

www.dawn.com

Evidence that China doesn’t play fair with countries it bargains with who are sacked in debt. Any perceived partnership with China is in actuality ownership.