Carrolade

Same technique as making and integrating a cornstarch slurry to thicken a soup.

China does have a very large number of active duty servicemembers, though I don't think that's all that surprising when they're one of the planet's largest countries, and have been steadily modernizing over the last few decades. I also imagine their unusually high youth unemployment numbers contribute to the ease of recruitment. When you have over a billion population, keeping 1% of them active duty is probably not particularly difficult.

Russia has the advantage of global recruitment, and are offering frankly huge financial incentives to anyone willing to fight. It's got to be rapidly draining their coffers. I suspect Xi is mainly just war profiteering off of them. In light of western sanctions, this has probably been the best period to be a Chinese exporter in many years. lol Russia is likely willing to pay top dollar for whatever they require to fuel their war machine. And there's always their raw material exports as well.

This is just off of wikipedia, so I'm not sure how up-to-date it is:

3 aircraft carriers 4 landing helicopter docks 12 amphibious transport docks 32 landing ship tanks 33 landing ship mediums 58 destroyers 54 frigates 75 corvettes 150 missile boats 26 submarine chasers 17+ gunboats 36 mine countermeasure vessels 79 submarines 19 replenishment ships 232 auxiliaries

Those corvettes, missile and gun boats could all be considered "small". The frigates and up are all capable of deep water work further out, independently if necessary. Interestingly, it's almost a revival of the 19th century French naval doctrine Jeune École, which was typified by a heavy reliance on torpedo boats, with the idea that that would be a cheaper way to operate a navy while still posing a threat to the larger battleships that dominated naval strategy during that period.

It's certainly more than just a big business. Which is also smart, a large country would want a significant blue water navy if it hopes for influence on the global stage. Even the UK and France have them, and they are much smaller countries. It would just be very illogical for China to ignore blue water capabilities.

Yeah, the problem isn't the articles you post, those are fine. Trying to misdirect onto that is a strawman. People don't like you due to how you engage in comment sections with the people that want to talk about those articles.

Yeah, not particularly fun, either. Would be very convenient if you were looking for an excuse to never bother with anything though.

Yeah, exporting some smaller craft is definitely not out of the question. It's always nice when you can gather up additional buyers for your kit, that way you can leverage additional economies of scale to keep your own costs down. They are building large amounts of naval assets that won't be suitable for export though. Patrol craft are one thing. Larger seagoing warships are another--most countries simply don't maintain a very large fleet of them, as they're very expensive to operate and not broadly useful during peacetime outside of certain niche situations. Since its the type of thing where a few countries would maybe buy a few every few decades, it's never really going to be a big money maker for anyone.

That's an interesting insight on moving into Russia's export market. I hadn't thought of that, but it actually makes a tremendous amount of sense. lol Aircraft are definitely a hotter export market. They're just something you want in greater numbers, generally speaking, and have a much broader appeal.

Fair question. Yes I was considering arms suppliers specifically. I'm not sure we can simply include every company that works with the military in any way though, it makes more sense to consider companies that get the majority of their profits from the military-affiliated work.

I would not count Kraft as part of the MIC for instance.

Yeah, that's an evolution from his earlier style. Note that he often subtly flips it to something personal though. Just pay attention to how often he talks about "you" and "them". He seldom addresses facts or arguments, instead he addresses people. Individuals and groups.

What frustrates me is there is enough trolling on social media already, we should not be condoning it by simply allowing it here, in what is usually a more mature Lemmy space. We don't need more internet-ey behavior on the internet, there's already plenty everywhere.

Regardless of his intentions, it's very aggravating how many of his clearly combative comments stay up despite "no trolling" being in rule 4.

I frankly do not understand why we have the rule if it is never going to be enforced. Is there question among our mod team about what constitutes trolling?

Looking through the modlog though, the only rule 4 enforcement seems to be low-effort stuff. High-effort trolling appears to be completely welcome in this community, which I just do not understand. But I'm contemplating beginning to take advantage of it. I can piss people off with subtle, passive-aggressive personal digs and logical fallacies while maintaining a veneer of civility too. It's been a lot of years, but I'm sure it'll come right back to me.

Anyone genuinely dedicated to a socialist or environmental cause would pretty clearly see the danger posed by a Trump presidency.

Should back those up on punch cards, just to be extra safe. As a bonus, they even make good coasters.