Comments by "Carey\x27s Corner" (@careylymanjones) on "Deglobalization: The US Navy's Withdrawl as Global Protector || Peter Zeihan" video.

@BountyFlamor Cutting off oil to China. China gets 2/3 of its oil via tankers, from ports beyond the reach of its Navy. A couple of carrier battle groups, in the Gulf of Oman, and the Persian Gulf is off limits to Chinese tankers. A boatload of missiles on Tsushima Island, and Vladivostok, the other tanker terminal serving China, is cut off. With that much oil lost, it becomes doubtful that China can maintain industrial agriculture. They need the oil, not just for farm machinery and crop distribution, but for feedstocks to make pesticides and fertilizers. Expect major famine as a byproduct.
7
@billobrien4680 Good. Let Chinese companies pay the full cost of shipping their crap. Chinese prices will rise, and cheap Chinese labor won't look as good.
6
@asterixdogmatix1073 China cannot win a naval war with the US, in the Gulf of Oman. Neither can they force tankers past Tsushima Island, to Vladivostok. The vast majority of China's naval ships don't have the range to reach the Persian Gulf.
5
 @austinduke8876 Considering the pain that Asia has caused American workers, I'm not terribly sympathetic.
4
@Roboticpycotic We currently protect EVERYBODY'S shipping. Unless you're prepared to argue that America has no enemies, and that EVERYBODY loves America, it follows that we're protecting enemy shipping.
2
@user-microburst That's the short version. If you are part of America's "Friends & Family Network" you're probably okay, too. Japan, South Korea, Australia have signed on. Vietnam wants in, too. Not sure if an actual deal has been done, with Thailand.
2
Navy can strangle any enemy dependent on maritime trade, such as China, for example.
2
The question is why they EVER protected such supply chains. The answer is graft.
2
@deja699 The largest ships don't even fit in the locks of the Panama Canal.
2
Mahan is not mocked. You wanna be a Great Power, you need a Great Power Navy.
2
@henrytep8884 Let them protect their own damn trade. Breton Woods Globalism wasn't about benefiting America economically. It was about buying allies against the Soviets. In case you didn't get the memo, the Soviets have been gone for a couple of decades, now. Nowadays, we're subsidizing the trade of our enemies.
1
@vaakdemandante8772 Up to a point. But most Americans no longer buy the notion that "War is good business. Invest your son."
1
@user-microburst Nothing that would destroy the US, unfortunately for out enemies. We will outlast them, and if they lash out, we will defeat them.
1
India's Navy is capable of dealing with raggedy-assed pirates, and it could be a really sharp stick up China's @ss, if the two ever got into it, for real.
1
@Pause_café_Avec_Dr_Djon Globalism, as we know it, did NOT exist. Great Powers had exclusive trading networks with THEIR colonies, but it wasn't world-wide. The problem with trying to continue it, without the USN, is that the rest of the world's navies simply aren't up to the job. China's Navy doesn't have the reach. It's an overgrown Coast Guard. Britain and France aren't up to the job, either. They've downsized way too far.
1
@Bayard1503 China's "huge fleet" is an overgrown Coast Guard. 85% of China's naval vessels don't have the range to sail 1,000 miles, without refueling. It has two ski-jump Admiral Kuznetsov-class clones, and one proper CATOBAR carrier, Fujian. The Kuznetsov-clones don't have the range to reach the Persian Gulf, w/o refueling. Not sure about Fujian's range. However, Fujian carries no AWACS aircraft, leaving it vulnerable, beyond land-based air support.
1
@Thanksforaskingme Japan made trade deals with BOTH Trump AND Biden. They weren't particularly GOOD deals, from Japan's perspective. But some deal beats no deal. Japan learned the VERY hard way, that it's better to be America's friend than its enemy.
1
@SayNoToDemocide1 And when privateers get into the act, with heavier weapons capable of severely damaging a ship? Approach from the stern, draw the guards there, and hit them with 20mm fire? Or heavier. There are a lot of surplus Bofors 40mm guns, out there.
1
If we keep Russia and China bottled up a bit longer, they'll finish collapsing, and we will be able to step back from being the world's policeman. China likely falls apart by 2030. Russia probably takes a bit longer, because Russia is a net exporter of food and energy. Both have FUBAR demographics.
1
@BountyFlamor If China makes a grab for Taiwan, it will happen. It's the simple way of putting China down. Cut off their oil, and their economy falls apart.
1
Who said anything about giving up US naval supremacy? Peter's just talking about being selective about who we PROTECT, with it.
1
@AFuller2020 And if we stop protecting ships with their flags?
1
@DavidAmmann Doesn't count the illegals. They're not officially part of the workforce. Unemployment numbers are based on unemployment claims. Illegals aren't eligible for unemployment.
1