China and the United States Are Headed for a Nuclear War

China and the United States Are Headed for a Nuclear War

A prominent Beijing scholar on international relations is warning that without a “new stability” in China’s relationship with the United States, “there will be war.”

“It cannot be taken for granted and fantasized that conflict will never erupt between the two,” said Shi Yinhong, a professor at the Institute of International Relations at Renmin University.

A transcript of his speech at the National Institute of Development and Strategy of Renmin University was posted Monday on Guancha, a news site affiliated with the Chinese Communist Party, according to the Middle East Media Research Institute.

He said the stability that the U.S. and China have had in the past is gone.

“So there must be new strategic stability which will be achieved by being practical, sufficiently focused, and through specific and important proposals, dialogues or negotiations,” he insisted.

“I think the trend of China-U.S. relations after the U.S. election can be influenced or shaped by China to a large extent,” he said. “Therefore, China’s strategies and policies, as well as appropriate adjustments to these strategic policies, are very important. The current situation of China and the U.S. determines that it is impossible for the two sides to significantly back down from their confrontation or rivalry.”

He said China first must “implement strategic/military adjustment and revision with resolution, commitment and persistence, and use it as a basic condition for negotiation to reduce the risk of collisions on strategic frontiers between China and the U.S., while promoting new strategic stability.”

“The stability of the past three years between the two countries is gone, and without new stability, there will be war,” he said. “So there must be new strategic stability which will be achieved by being practical, sufficiently focused, and through specific and important proposals, dialogues or negotiations.”

Secondly, he said, that for a “certain period of time, although there can be and must be exceptions, but in general, China cannot have confrontation with other developed countries besides the United States and Britain, as well as any major developing countries.”

“The purpose is to focus strategically and reduce first- and second-tier opponents,” he said.

Shi said that over the past year, “the strategic frontiers of China and the U.S. are inching closer, especially when the two countries were set in motion of confrontation and opposition against each other.”

“It cannot be taken for granted and fantasized that conflict will never erupt between the two. [If we] do not deal with problems, or properly solve problems, at least part of the problems of stability, who can say that China and the U.S. will not be on a clashing path? So it is necessary to encourage the two countries to reduce the threat of the collision of their strategic frontiers, and promote new strategic stability between them,” he said.

“We must strive to solve new strategic problems through practical thinking, sufficient focus and dialogues or negotiations on important proposals. At the same time, this will also serve to isolate the views towards China of the U.S. political class and to win over other important countries in the world with their more understanding and sympathy for China.”

China Preparing for the Inevitable

In late June 2021, The New York Times broke a very important story about Chinese construction of large numbers of ICBM silos for its new large DF-41 ICBM stating, “Researchers in the United States have identified the construction of 119 new intercontinental ballistic missile silos in a desert in northwestern China…” The analysis was conducted by Mr. Jeffery Lewis of the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies. According to Mr. Lewis, “If the silos under construction at other sites across China are added to the count, the total comes to about 145 silos under construction.” The U.S. Department of State voiced concern about China’s actions.

The Chinese DF-41 ICBM is not a small Minuteman-class missile but rather a large Peacekeeperclass missile and is generally reported as capable of carrying ten warheads. Peter Huessy of the Mitchell Institute has pointed out, “Just this deployment alone will provide China over one thousand new on-alert warheads—1,450—almost double the day-to-day U.S.A. on-alert force and by itself a nuclear force roughly equal to the entire current U.S. nuclear-deployed force of 1,490 sea- and land-based missile warheads.” Chinese media have talked about a DF-41 leveling New York City, but that is not its real function. The threat posed by such a large DF-41 silo deployment (and all we know at this point is the 145 launchers is what they are now building rather than the maximum number they plan to deploy) is its ability to destroy large numbers of U.S. military targets. Deployment of 1,450 warheads is about 75% of the U.S. Cold War ICBM force, and this does not count the other Chinese ICBMs and SLBMs, including the mobile DF-41. In light of the massive reduction in the number of U.S. ICBMs and military bases since the end of the Cold War, the silos-based DF-41 force could probably launch a coordinated attack against about all major U.S. military facilities. This is an extremely serious development.

Mr. Lewis deserves praise for bringing the large-scale Chinese silo construction to the attention of the world. Prior to his announcement, all we heard from official Washington were generalities such as “…Beijing has accelerated its nuclear expansion and is on track to exceed our previous projection.” However, Mr. Lewis’s suggestion that this silo construction may be part of a Chinese multiple aim-point system with only one out of ten silos containing missiles is not credible. This is not any normal nuclear threat assessment or arms control analysis. Under the original START Treaty, each launcher for ICBMs or SLBMs was assumed, for counting purposes, to contain a missile. There is apparently no evidence for any Chinese interest in a multiple aim-point system for ICBM basing. It is reasonable to assume that if Mr. Lewis had any evidence for this, he would have cited it. He did not do so either in his interview with The New York Times or in his article on the subject which appeared in Foreign Policy. However, there is ample evidence of Chinese interest in nuclear force expansion.

According to the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Lieutenant General Scott D. Berrier, “The Fifth Plenum [of the Chinese Communist Party] communique in October 2020, specifically called for strengthening strategic forces and creating high-level strategic deterrence.” In April 2020, the Editor in Chief of China’s main English language mouthpiece Global Times said that “China needs to expand the number of its nuclear warheads to 1,000 in a relatively short time. It needs to have at least 100 Dongfeng-41 strategic missiles.” In November 2020, Global Times characterized the DF-41 as one of “the breakthroughs across all [the] services.” It is interesting that Global Times did not really deny The New York Times story but launched a vicious personal attack on Mr. Lewis, characterizing him as “an amateur,” and saying that, “Lewis may not understand the basic features of [the] DF-41 before shooting off his mouth at the media.” The argument that Global Times made (i.e., that the DF-41 could not be a silo-based ICBM because it is a mobile ICBM) is nonsense. Global Times continued, “China should neither confirm nor deny such [a] ‘revelation’ and let the Western media imagine it. This is what a nuclear deterrent means. By doing so, China will smash any U.S. attempt to suppress China’s nuclear capacity building.” It seems clear that China did not want such a disclosure just before the Biden administration’s Nuclear Posture Review.

China has a major nuclear buildup underway that goes well beyond the DF-41 silos.  In February 2021, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff General John Hyten stated China was building nuclear weapons “faster than anybody on the planet,” including new ICBMs, cruise missiles, and nuclear-tipped hypersonic missiles “that we have no defenses for.” In April 2021, Admiral Charles Richard, head of the U.S. Strategic Command, revealed new and important information concerning the scope of the Chinese nuclear weapons buildup in his testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee. He stated that “The CSS-20 (DF-41) became operational last year, and China has stood up at least two brigades.” In April 2021, Major General Michael J. Lutton, Commander, Twentieth Air Force, Air Force Global Strike Command, stated that:

Specifically, Russia, China, and North Korea share five themes in foreign nuclear development and proliferation:

Increasing numbers or capabilities of weapons in existing programs;

Enduring security threats to weapons and material;

Developing delivery systems with increased capabilities;

Developing nuclear weapons with smaller yields, improved precision, and increased range for military or coercive use on the battlefield;

Developing new nuclear weapons without conducting large-scale nuclear tests.

While the new silos are apparently for the DF-41, noted China expert Richard Fischer writes, “There are also reports of a rail-mobile version of the DF-41, a larger solid-fuel and silo-based ‘DF-45,’ and an HGV[hypersonic glide vehicle]-armed ICBM.”

No nation has ever built an ICBM multiple aim-point system. The Carter administration started such a program for a 4,600 aim-point system, but it quickly died due to costs and effectiveness concerns within a few years. It did not involve silos. As an alternative, the Reagan administration proposed basing 100 Peacekeeper ICBMs in silos in a concept called “dense pack,” which attempted to limit effective Russian targeting against the system through close location and fratricide effects (the first Russian warheads to detonate and destroy the subsequent warheads). According to Mr. Lewis, the Chinese silos are located three kilometers apart, which is anything but a defense pack. He characterized the Chinese ICBM base as “enormous—more than 700 square miles …” “Dense pack” involved basing 100 missiles in 15 square miles. It was never built. The Chinese deployment appears to be a traditional method of laying out an ICBM deployment. If all the Chinese wanted was a dozen surviving silo-based DF-41s, they could have built them in a mountainous area like China’s original DF-5 ICBM silos and, this time, use the new super concrete. Concrete with 30,000 psi compression strength is now commercially available. A cheap way to augment survivability is G.P.S. jamming and even short-range cruise missile defense. Moreover, alternatively, an even cheaper way is another dozen DF-41 mobile ICBMs based in China’s Underground Great Wall, 5,000-km of deep underground tunnels.

What China wants is a lot of missiles and nuclear warheads. Chinese interest in nuclear targeting of military forces goes back a long time. China scholars originally called it “limited deterrence.” A 2004 article by Gao Yan in Hong’s Kong Kuang Chiao Ching, a magazine reputed to have close ties to the P.R.C. military, argued that “an all-out conflict can take place between China and the United States over the issue of Taiwan at any time” and that China must have a nuclear capability “balancing and offsetting the United States’ hegemonic power.” The article further concluded that China’s concept of nuclear war: 

Is completely wrong and absurd … Minimum nuclear deterrence is only a phase-specific strategy that one is forced to adopt in the early stage of nuclear weapons development because of insufficient nuclear capability….,[China would have] to compromise or concede defeat at a certain stage [unless it is] able to totally destroy any enemy through nuclear attack and the targets must include all enemy strategic military, economic and population centers.” (Emphasis added).

The timing of the start of the silo construction and the Global Times’ endorsement of prompt deployment of 100 DF-41s and 1,000 nuclear warheads is unlikely to be a coincidence. The large DF-41 silo constructions raise the possibility that in less than a decade, China will have more deployed nuclear weapons than the U.S. China has now reached the stage that its ICBMs are more than a match for U.S. ICBMs because of Chinese technical advancements and the drift of U.S. nuclear weapons policy toward Minimum Deterrence. Due to the combination of Chinese technical inferiority and economic limitations, the objective of parity or superiority wasn’t feasible until recently.

The large-scale DF-41 deployment is exactly what one would expect in light of China’s increasingly aggressive foreign policy and its ongoing military provocations, which could precipitate a war. Noted China expert Gordon Chang has recently listed worrisome Chinese actions:

-Beijing looks as if it is preparing for a full-scale invasion of Indian territory… Ladakh is not the only hotspot. There is a Chinese encroachment in India’s Sikkim as well as incursions in neighboring Bhutan and Nepal.

-Lately, Xi’s references in public pronouncements have become unmistakable, and his subordinates have been clear that Xi believes that everyone outside China owes him obedience. While spouting tianxia-like language and bellicose words, Xi has been getting the Chinese people ready for war.

-The changes signal the growing clout of the People’s Army inside the Party and highlight the militarization of the country’s external relations. China is fast becoming a military state.

-Xi Jinping, on July 1, told the world what he is going to do. We are, in all probability, in the last moments of peace.

-China in recent weeks has sent tens of thousands of troops to its disputed border with India in Ladakh, high in the Himalayas.

-Beijing looks as if it is preparing for a full-scale invasion of Indian territory.

In a speech delivered on July 1st to commemorate the 100th birthday of the Chinese Communist Party, President Xi Jinping said, The Chinese people will never allow foreign forces to bully, oppress or enslave us,” reads a quote translated by The New York Times. “Whoever nurses delusions of doing that will crack their heads and spill blood on the Great Wall of steel built from the flesh and blood of 1.4 billion Chinese people.” According to Admiral Phil Davidson, Commander of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, China may seek to occupy Taiwan by military means within the next six years. This could explain the ongoing nuclear weapons activity, the belligerent statements by their most senior officials, their continuing military buildup, and the unusual nuclear disclosures in Global Times about the scope of their nuclear capability. Gordon Chang has observed that the silo construction program “suggest[s] China is now shifting to war-fighting mode.”

An official disclosure of the scope of China’s nuclear capability will probably not occur until just before an attack. The objective would be to deter U.S. military support to the victim of Chinese aggression, and if necessary, defeat the U.S. and our allies with nuclear strikes.

Reasons Why China Wants War with the United States

INDIAN OCEAN (Jan. 1, 2021) Sailors inspect an F/A-18E Super Hornet, from the “Kestrels” of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 137, on the flight deck of the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz (CVN 68) to provide close-air support to Operation Octave Quartz. The mission of OOQ is to relocate U.S. Department of Defense forces in Somalia to other East Africa operating locations while maintaining pressure on violent extremists and supporting partner forces. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Elliot Schaudt/Released)

There is a plethora of articles appearing about the growing Chinese threat to the United States. The essential reporting of the threat is accurate, however, how deep the determination, the length of the plot and the motivation behind China’s intent to exterminate as many Americans as possible, is omnipresent and being largely ignored, even within the Independent Media. In fact, it is accurate to say that since the Obama administration, we have forced China’s hand to make destroying America China’s number one goal. And in the present reports I am reading, this point is going ignored. Much of the media is acting like we went to bed one night and awakened to a hostile and determined China.

The awakening of the military intentions of China has been an evolving process and most are missing this essential motivation to attack the United States in multiple ways. One cannot fully appreciate the present gravity of world affairs without knowing how we got here and also it is key to understand that the globalists are using the same plan as they did to start World War II with Japan. 

The number one goal of the Obama administration was to get World War III started on behalf of the globalists. Obama pulled out all the stops, but failed to get World War III started with Syria and Iran. Obama also turned his intentions to the Pacific and attempted to get World War III started in the same manner as FDR did when goaded Japan into attacking Pearl Harbor by following the 8 Point Plan. 

President Trump had introduced tariffs on Chinese products, the Chinese have greatly increased their naval presence in the South China Sea. Countries from Vietnam, to the Philippines, to Taiwan and Australia are fearful of China’s next move. China is in a similar position as to what Japan was in during the period from 1929-1941. They need natural resources to cover their expanding industrial base and the US is blocking them at every turn just like the US did in the 1930’s. Prior to WWII, the US created something called the 8 point plan (MCollum Memo). Eventually, this caused Japan to respond to the interference with its trade and attack Pearl Harbor. Is this what the Trump administration was doing? This seemed to be when Trump lost full control of his administration. A decided shift occurred when war-monger Bolton joined the Trump administration.  

In short, Trump was following the same script as FDR did in the late 1930’s and early 1940’s and this led to Pearl Harbor and and America’s entry into World War II. 

The McCollum Memo: The 8 Point Plan

Fleeing Jewish scientists from Nazi occupied Europe, who came to America, were desperate to speak with President Franklin Roosevelt about the fact that the Germans were making progress toward building nuclear weapons. Combined with Germany’s developing rocket program, the simultaneous development of the two would have meant world domination. Eventually, Einstein, who had a path to FDR was used, and FDR was made aware of these developments. This began the development of America’s journey into the development of its first set of atomic bombs. Unknown to the fleeing German scientists, Werner Heisenburg, the leader of the German Uranium club was purposely keeping Hitler from getting these weapons by telling him it is too expensive, to many unknown variables, etc. 

At the end of the war, after Hiroshima was attacked with an atomic bomb, British Intelligence, holding Heisenburg at the Wimbley House, told him. He promptly sat down and sketched out how the bomb would have been detonated. He knew how to perfect the use of nuclear weapons all along. He is one of the unsung heroes of World War II. However, none of the fleeing scientists or even FDR were aware of this and they were proceeding on the premise that the Germans were far ahead of them. Subsequently, FDR had his people develop a plan to get America into WWII in order to stop Germany’s development of nuclear weapons, which was problematic because the American people were determined to stay isolationist. FDR had to have his people devise a plot that would anger the people so much that they would demand war. Certainly, provoking an attack on Pearl Harbor which would kill nearly 2,400 Americans, sink 21 ships and destroy almost 350 planes on the ground, would do the trick.

Out of the noise came the McCollum Memo. I bring this to the readers attention not to recite history, but rather to tell you that the same set of provoking actions have been set into motion to provoke an incident with China. It has often been said that China is 1929 Japan. They have industrialist expansion dreams, but lack sufficient resources to fuel the expansion. The American military and diplomatic corps are taking advantage of this weakness in order to provoke conflict as an excuse to start with Syria, Iran, Venezuela, or anywhere else war can commence. This will bring in Russia and WWIII will commence. President Trump was deliberately provoking China with a trade war which will culminate with a major incident either against Taiwan (eg blockade) or a direct confrontation between military vessels in the disputed South China Sea, which almost happened this week.

What lies ahead? The answer to that question will be covered in the latter part of this article. First, let’s take a look at the original McCollum memo from pre-World War II which was designed to get us into the war so we could defeat Germany before they could nuke us and our allies. It is interesting to note that the day after Pearl Harbor, we declared war on Germany as well as Japan. Germany had not attacked Pearl Harbor. Even more damning, we developed a “defeat Germany first” Pentagon strategy. These facts are all smoking guns for World War II.

There is additional complicating factors which shows that America provoked Japan. However, that is another article on another day. The only purpose of this article is to demonstrate that the Trump administration, or the Deep State without Trump’s approval, set us on a course of war that will begin with provoking the Chinese in the same manner that the Japanese were provoked in WWII. Establishing the base of this argument begins with the presentation of the McCollum Memo 8 Point Plan

Provoking Japan

Here are the key excerpts from the McCollum Memo:

It is not believed that in the present state of political opinion the United States government is capable of declaring war against Japan without more ado; and it is barely possible that vigorous action on our part might lead the Japanese to modify their attitude. Therefore, the following course of action is suggested:  A. Make an arrangement with Britain for the use of British bases in the Pacific, particularly Singapore.  B. Make an arrangement with Holland for the use of base facilities and acquisition of supplies in the Dutch East Indies.  C. Give all possible aid to the Chinese government of Chiang-Kai-Shek.  D. Send a division of long range heavy cruisers to the Orient, Philippines, or Singapore. E. Send two divisions of submarines to the Orient.  F. Keep the main strength of the U.S. fleet now in the Pacific in the vicinity of the Hawaiian Islands.  G. Insist that the Dutch refuse to grant Japanese demands for undue economic concessions, particularly oil.  H. Completely embargo all U.S. trade with Japan, in collaboration with a similar embargo imposed by the British Empire. 10. If by these means Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war, so much the better. At all events we must be fully prepared to accept the threat of war. – H. McCollum 

Japan was provoked for two reasons (1) they were threatened militarily through the establishment of military bases in their backyard which threatened their continued invasion of China, and, (2) the raw materials, needed for industrialization, and that they were to pay top dollar for, were suddenly cut off by the US and her key allies of the day.

The US is repeating the same actions with China in 2021. And today’s 2021 China is in the same place as 1929 Japan. False flag strategies are repeated when they work.

America’s Path to War with Iran and Russia

Rather than imposing a trade embargo with on China as FDR did with Japan, tariffs were being used to unseat the Chinese economy. As in 1941, without going into laborious detail, President Trump had done exactly the same thing to modern-day China. The US has violated, with its ships every precept of Chinese claims in the South China Sea (go to the search engine on The Common Sense Show and put in “South China Sea” as a search term to see all of the articles I have written on this topic covering the past several years). For example, we sent an aircraft carrier to Vietnam. We moved massive amounts of shipping across the Pacific to Japan and South Korea and even Australia. The bulk of our carrier fleet and nuclear submarines are in Asia. And as stated, we were looking at a desperate China because of the tariffs.

The whispers of the coming World War III are turning into a deafening roar. Once considered a remote possibility, China is ready to begin World War III and it will probably center on Taiwan. However, the war will not end with Taiwan. It will culminate with a massive biological attack upon the United States followed by a Red Dawn invasion. This will be in retaliation for the attempted destruction of the Chinese economy by Obama and later by Trump. 

Was Trump really acting on behalf of American interests OR globalist interests to break the back of the nationalism as a whole? That is a question that will be explored in more detail in a future article. Suffice to say, for now, the Chinese view America’s actions as being globalist friendly and are designed to cause the failure of nationalism in China. How did this conflict with China reach the Apex in the modern era? It began with Obama’s Trans Pacific Partnership trade agreement in which China was totally cut out of a major trade deal in its own backyard.. In 2015, Dave Hodges printed the following analysis from The US Trade Office with regard to the TPP:

American Competitiveness In the Asia-Pacific 

“The TPP is the cornerstone of the Obama Administration’s economic policy in the Asia Pacific. The large and growing markets of the Asia-Pacific already are key destinations for U.S. manufactured goods, agricultural products, and services suppliers, and the TPP will further deepen this trade and investment.  As a group, the TPP countries are the largest goods and services export market of the United States. U.S. goods exports to TPP countries totaled $698 billion in 2013, representing 44 percent of total U.S. goods exports.  U.S. exports of agricultural products to TPP countries totaled $63 billion in 2013, 42 percent of total U.S. agricultural exports. U.S. private services exports totaled $172 billion in 2012 (latest data available), 27 percent of total U.S. private services exports to the world.America’s small- and medium-sized enterprises alone exported $247 billion to the Asia-Pacific in 2011 (latest data available)…”

One can quickly see the enormity of the agreement. Eleven nations totally engaged in all-out trade and all of this was in China’s backyard and the Chinese were totally and purposely left out. Why? Because the globalists desperately want World War III because they are losing their grip around the world. They are being opposed in Hong Kong, France and increasingly in the United States. The globalists need World War III as a war of global unification. China is being goaded to to attack the United States in the same manner as Japan was in 1941.

Because China is led by leaders that are fiercely nationalistic and the TPP was the brainchild of the globalists, this put China at odds with the United States. This conflict was artificially created and was designed by the planners of the Obama administration to create a potential global conflict between China and the United States. But at least the Chinese had a trade deficit advantage with the United States. At least they did until Trump became President. Was Trump furthering the globalist agenda that Obama started by increasing conflict with China or was Trump just being the nationalistic President he said he was going to be when he ran for President? That point is hotly debated in some circles. 

But back to the point that we are forcing China to start World War III, we can demonstrate the enormity of the TPP to China, I published the following analysis which was printed in 2015, also on The Common Sense Show:

Leading Asia-Pacific Regional Integration Initiative

“The United States is negotiating the TPP with 11 other like-minded countries (AustraliaBrunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, JapanMalaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam) that share a commitment to concluding a high-standard, ambitious agreement and to expanding the initial group to include additional countries throughout the Asia-Pacific region…:

Seven of the 11 TPP nations are connected to the South China Sea. So, how did China respond? They responded militarily. They were posturing for war back in 2015 because they were left out of this major trade agreement. This led the Chinese to illegally claim personal ownership over the South China Sea in complete violation of international law. The following map and accompanying analysis makes it clear China was a on collision course for WWIII and recent current events, covered later in this article, make it clear that the threat of World War III has never been greater.

Please take note of the Spratly Islands. China began to build artificial Islands to serve as a type of aircraft carrier that China does not possess in its arsenal. China was clearly planning to take on the US Navy with this move and the Chinese anticipated that the US would move to keep the South China Sea open for trade, specifically for the TPP. When one looks at the nations most impacted by China’s planned geographic embargo, the seven principals in the former TPP agreement were impacted

Along Comes the President On the White Horse

When Trump took office, he promptly cancelled the TPP. This was like FDR cancelling oil and scrap metal sales to pre-World War II Japan. However, to Trump’s defense, cancelling the devastating TPP saved the American economy and sovereignty. Yet, it set the US on a course towards war with China. I must confess, that based upon the facts, I cannot determine if Trump was an agent of the war-seeking globalists, or was he merely saving the American economy. A case can be made for either argument. 

Now that the requisite background to the coming war has been established, we can talk about the recent current events in the proper light.

First we must ask the question: is America friend or foe to China? The accuracy of your answer depends solely on your perspective. French leader Macron stated that a EU Army is needed to combat the nationalist desires of Russia, China and the Americans. On one hand, this makes the three super-powers de facto allies. However, the wild card here was whether or not Trump could control his administration. Clearly, he could not, and now it has been hijacked by globalist/Communist traitors.

General Mattis, who thank God is gone, ended up being an unmitigated traitor who aligned with McCain and Clinton as he trained ISIS troops in the Jordanian desert. Mattis quit the Trump administration because Trump was not “globalist enough”. Additionally, Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner is aligned with George Soros. So much for having control over your own administration. Philippines President Duterte, stated he liked Trump but he did not control his own government so aligning with America was out of the question. I will say quite clearly that if Trump wanted to avoid WWIII, he would have declared a national emergency and shut down the border.


Final Thoughts

There is a lot to unpack. China has food shortages. They face rebellion in the outlying provinces and they are an oil importing nation. They cannot afford what the globalists and what Donald Trump’s tariffs were doing to their country. And Putin now appears to be their partner. It is the 8 point plan all over again, whether or not, Trump realized this to be the case. The Chinese were/are cornered and they will strike if there is not a change in foreign trade policy towards China and a war is what the globalists want.

In the meantime, both Russia’s and China’s respective war machines are again on the move. Because of the ignorance on display with regard to the China problem, a quick review of Chinese Defense Minister Wei Fenghe’s position about the number military goal of China is, bears repeating. Make no mistake about it America, you have been sold out by key members of your government, mostly in the Democratic Party. 

Notify of

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x