Near Peer: China (Understanding the China's Military History)

This film examines the Chinese military. Subject matter experts discuss Chinese history, current affairs, and military doctrine. Topics range from Mao, to the PLA, to current advances in military technologies. “Near Peer: China” is the first film in a four-part series exploring America’s global competitors.
0:00 Title Screen
0:27 Introductory Statement
1:40 Chapter One - History of China
17:14 Chapter Two - Current Military Power & Its Application
33:37 Chapter Three - The Chinese Threat
39:49 Conclusion - Summary Comments
42:12 Credits
The map at 19:46-19:59 incorrectly labels the country of Myanmar as Thailand and fails to completely color-in the contested area northeast of India. We offer our apologies for these inaccuracies.

[@ArmyUniversityPress]

Thank you for watching! To view more of our films, check out our full collection at www.armyupress.army.mil/Films/Feature-Film-Catalog/

[@pinkowa]

I know you did hard work, but the video still makes many mistakes.

[@ameliah8164]

My grandfather's older brother was in the Red Army and died in the Chinese Civil War. My grandmother said that at that time many peasants volunteered to join the communist army, because under Chiang Kai-shek's rule, rioters and prostitutes were rampant. The soldiers rob the food and youth（Forced conscription, shot if you don't go） without compensation (at least the PLA made an IOU, which was paid later), and Chiang Kai-shek was very weak and incompetent towards the Japanese. Chiang Kai-shek was a self-disciplined man, but he was cowardly, jealous, and ruthless. He could not run a Republic of China together with the Communist Party, massacred the docile Communists at that time, and was definitely not a leader respected by the people. So he was abandoned by the people. This is what my grandmother said, not any history book, but her own experience.

[@aimeezhou6406]

Can‘t agree with you more. My grandma also had similar experience 🤝

[@berryfin4648]

Mao Zedong was back by the Russian and the USA with money and weapons. No body was backing chiang kai shek and see mao as a main threat rather than the smaller Japanese forces. Chiang try to save as much money as he could as he doesn't have much. When chaing asked the usa for help, they given him a shipment of old guns and nothing more because the USA does not want chiang to win against mao and bring democracy to China, in order to keep China weak and backwards with mao's victory. And the USA kept China weak until 1971, when Richard Nixon visited mao to do business because Nixon was afraid to lose China to the Russians as potential ally.

[@jinniwind]

not surprised. Chiang was backed by the US and the rich Chinese, and had way better equipments, and he had to retreat to Taiwan in the end. "abandoned by the people", definitely.

[@SF-zc3mm]

It sounds like your grandma was forced to read too much of maos little red book.

[@ameliah8164]

@@SF-zc3mm 。。。 She has experienced the days when the Japanese brought guns to the village to mop up and had to hide in the water tank, the days when the villagers were raped or killed by the Japanese, the civil war between the Kuomintang and the Communist Party, the three-year drought and the cultural revolution. You need to know that Chinese people know more about their own country.

[@elom6441]

Never thought I could see a fair coverage of China by any American. These guys seems to be approaching China from a realistic point of view and also truly want to understand their adversary.

[@AcidBombYT]

thats how you win. Not lying/corrupt like russia.

[@sweatybotfn9982]

@@AcidBombYTand America, when it comes to social media blackmails

[@unholydanger]

Honestly they are right about China about the most parts but still wrong on minor ones such as they believe China sees the other worlds as competitor, that is not true. China is not competing with most other countries.

[@elom6441]

I get what you mean. China mostly want to develop and feels as though it has a lot of catching up to do. But the west views this as a direct competition due to the sheer size of China and the strong will of its leaders and people. Definitely a big misunderstanding from the west.

[@NeostormXLMAX]

@@AcidBombYT lmao you talking about the americas? literally every video is them being boastful and thinking they are invincible while calling all others a paper tiger, pure arrogance

[@magnaviator]

Excellent presentation. Just FYI, 9-line was originally claimed by Taiwan (and is still claimed by Taiwan as Chinese territory). Note that after WW2, none of the other contending countries existed as countries, they were still all colonies of western powers.

[@zsarimaxim692]

Not only were the 11 dash line first claimed in 1947 by the ROC government, but the US navy actually escorted and transported ROC troops in garrisoning many of the islands in the SCS.

[@catrojana3694]

@@zsarimaxim692 The mother of all ironies. 😂

[@jxmai7687]

Check again, today became 10 dash line next to Taiwan.

[@aboutraore6754]

No, it was claimed by Republic of China, not Taiwan, and PRC inherited that

[@Vzzdak]

Overlooked detail is that Chinese civilization is only about seventy years old. Claims of historic strength, or economic miracle, is merely propaganda. Emulating the U.S. military is likewise propaganda, as is claiming that the U.S. is in decline. If you're going to fold each time that the CCP bluffs, then why are you in a position to defer your country's earned authority? Just in it for a paycheque? China is not a peer. But they'll bluster and play whatever sleight-of-hand they can to win advantage.

[@lagrangewei]

When ask why doesn't China negotiation with US on a nuclear limitation treaty, China spokesman ask "is the US saying they are willing to reduce their warhead to our number?" the Chinese do not understand what the American are offering in the treaty, because if the negotiation is to have parity then US would have to massively cut down their nuclear weapon and in such a treaty, China would not have to reduce anything to begin with, if the negotiation is to impose US superiority over China, why would China agree to such term? US position lack clarity, and without clarity the request does not sound honest. China read the request for negotiation more as an attempt to blame China for the failure of negotiation than an honest offer to reduce US weapon threat to China. if US really want negotiation, they have to put an offer ON THE TABLE, else going to talks without an agenda or purpose is useless.

[@yaoliang1580]

Never trust the words of an imperialist nations

[@billlee2983]

Was there any such proposition ? I've never heard this. What Brad Marvel said is surprising. I wonder where he learnt that from. The USA has more than 6000 warheads. Do you have any links?

[@riceball4u172]

@@billlee2983 it was in the news in the US a few months ago. US want China to join the negotiation with Russia, but when he ask US that, no further discussion were made.

[@user-zd1wz7mn5s]

America honor treaty… three words of great irony

[@trawmmwart8149]

US wants to bite you more than you think

[@ameliah8164]

The opinions of the Chinese people in the comment area are the best portrayal. Even high-level American intellectuals still lack a real understanding of China (if this video is not intended to confuse English-speaking people in the name of popular science), your one-sided description of the history before the founding of the People's Republic of China ignores the Chinese people in history. feelings and attitudes. There is a saying in China that history is written by the people and chosen by the people. It was not the Communist Party and the Kuomintang that made history, but all the Chinese people who chose the Communist Party.

[@zhnzn]

兄弟，外国人可不管这些，他们只相信BBC，CNN

[@ronaldohajong6780]

And now the common people are regretting it especially the people of Hong Kong 😂

[@williamspitzschuh8167]

You don’t get to choose a communist party?

[@livany6255]

@@ronaldohajong6780 If a 90 percent approval rating is regret, what is your government's approval rating? The media never told you whether the Hong Kong people who cooperated with the anti-China forces to make trouble later went to the UK regret it?

[@user-dt7iw2dp1q]

@@ronaldohajong6780 中国政府在全球人民信任度排名里，一直全球前5。剩下200多个国家是不是都要后悔。😂

[@glennpenrose5646]

I spent many years in business dealings with Chinese in the higher echelons of wealth and power. One has to understand their traditional mindset regarding their position in the world and I don't think westerners can grasp it. The Chinese thoughts and core beliefs are not transmissible to most westerners. Study of Chinese history is essential to understand modern Chinese thought. By and large they haven't changed.

[@0akland510]

I would have to heavily disagree. The Chinese population isn’t this large homogeneous population that holds the same ideals. I’ve been to Beijing, Guanzhou and Hong Kong, and I can tell you that the locals are far different from each other in many ways. Any person who’s been to China would know that 😂

[@spammerscammer]

Are you talking about "sewer oil" because yes we don't get it.

[@changchadchanamdong2668]

@@0akland510 . You don't understand his comment. Hong Kong is irrelevant mixed people..

[@0akland510]

@@changchadchanamdong2668 are you telling me that folks from Shanghai and Shenzen are similar to their Beijing counter parts? 😂 you are funny to think they are homogeneous in ideals 🤣

[@trolllo9729]

agreed the comments here are completely ignorant. just because you been to a city doesn't mean you understand the cultural mindset. they don't care about elections and democracy. They care about security. and which ever form of government can provide them that they will be content with it...some people want clear directions on how to live their lives and not be left to freely think about it themselves.

[@andrewareva4605]

The biggest problem with army intelligence is the language barrier. It's unrealistic to be a China expert without being fluent in Chinese. Experts need to be as fluent in mandarin as Chinese experts are with English. edit: Saw the most concrete example with the Xi's speech at the CCP national congress. He said Taiwan 问题. Some translated it in to 'Taiwan topic,' and others 'Taiwan issue,' or 'Taiwan question' and others 'Taiwan problem.' There's a huge spread of meaning and intent here from benign to hostile. As a decision/policy maker, are you going to rely on a translator to frame your analysis?

[@evrydayamerican]

you cant truly understand someone unless you can understand their language

[@kieran6814]

正确

[@DD-wx4jc]

@@evrydayamerican and you can't truly understand Mandarin without understanding the culture too

[@ZZGZBF]

And yet there are heaps of so called China Experts in the west who cannot even speak Chinese. What a joke

[@HamasTearEnjoyer]

I would disagree, do you really believe intelligence agencies don't have access to flawless translations?

[@ameliah8164]

7:28, why did Mao switch to having an independent army? Because at that time there were brutal and sudden massacres against the communists, they had to protect themselves. And you have avoided describing the persecution of the communists by Chiang Kai-shek, the leader of the bureaucratic capitalist party, in a seemingly objective statement. . . Maybe this is the Western narrative, but as a Chinese, I have to add these historical details.

[@liambird2053]

They say both of those things in the video.

[@ameliah8164]

When describing the process, they did not say it together. This will definitely weaken people's understanding of the bloody massacres during that period

[@liambird2053]

@@ameliah8164 Directly beforehand, he says Chiang “turned on his communist allies”. In English, “turned on” means “betrayed”, so he was stating that Chiang started attacking the communists. He didn’t directly say “bloody massacre”, but that sort of imagery is unnecessary to the purpose of the video.

[@ameliah8164]

Honey, it's different. If it is just betrayal, it can be understood as no longer cooperating. Mere non-cooperation leads to wanting to have an independent army is a radical act. But having to have an army to resist the carnage is a completely different story.

[@liambird2053]

@@ameliah8164 In English the connotation of “betray” is similar to “treason”, so its fitting.

[@maureenotis99]

You have a good understanding of the military part. However, there are still many wrong understandings about the history of the Chinese Communist Party. After the founding of the CPC, the CPC was divided into two factions. One faction believed that the Soviet Union's path was correct and that it should completely copy the Soviet model, uprising in cities, occupy cities and carry out revolution. The other faction is the local faction thought by Mao Zedong. Mao Zedong thought that the theory of communism should be consistent with the actual situation of China, and that it should carry out revolution in the countryside and mobilize the peasants to carry out revolution. Before 1935, there was always a struggle between the Soviet Party and the native party within the CPC. Most of Mao Zedong's military actions were successful, but the leaders of CPc of the Soviet party seized the right to speak. Therefore, he was always a marginalized figure, and was not even allowed to participate in various meetings and work.

[@forgettohaveaname2954]

I was trying to reply on this part, when one argued in the video that Mao was by chance elected to be the leader to be in control of the PLA. what a stupid assertion. Your reply fully explained the history, I am just curious that, how can one believe such low quality documentary

[@arthas640]

@@forgettohaveaname2954 It can often be hard to get reliable info on controversial parts of history and the PRC is one of the most glaring of examples. Part of this is western bias and part of it's a general hatred and mistrust of communism in general, but it's also because of Chinese propagandize and an overall lack of concrete/unbiased info in general. When it comes to Mao specifically and the early parts of the CCP/CPC there's tons of propaganda that was produced after he rose to power including erasing his competition from history, attributing things others did to him, overstating his accomplishments, understating his failures, and exaggerating the evils of his opponents. There's also very poor reliable records from the time. Of course the ROC and the communists both painted the other more negatively then they were while making themself seem better which muddies the waters. The civil war itself caused mass chaos which makes things even cloudier, lower literacy rates means we have fewer first hand accounts to begin with, and Japans invasion all mean many records from before 1945 were destroyed even when they were written in the first place (if you've got wars raging across your country and invasions coming from every direction chances are you're not going to go into great detail in your diary). The Japanese destroyed tons of records too, as did both sides in the civil war. The end of the civil war also brought the Cultural Revolution and decades of repression so even without propaganda people werent eager to keep any records that could get them in trouble, which could be just about anything. Today people and even the CCP are more critical of Mao then they were even 20 years ago and his cult of personality is greatly diminished but history is written by the victors and Mao spent decades rewriting history so the records he approved of are sometimes the best or only source of first hand info, and most other sources are terribly biased. All this combines to make it so that the only records we really have of the early days of communism in China are what the Nationalists wrote, which is biased against the communists, what the USSR wrote, which could be both unreliable and biased, or what the official CCP history says, which was basically written by Mao himself since he purged many of his opponents during his rise to power and then purged many of his allies later to consolidate power. This is why even on major historical stories we have pretty shaky info, which is why you can look up things like The Great Leap Forward and there's a spread of 35 million on the death toll with some estimates at 15mil or lower and some around 55mil. I've read that even with things like some regional famines the PRC basically says that drops in population for a town, city, or district were due to people being displaced or moving while other sources will say those were mostly deaths and there are independent groups who agree with either opinion or a point in the middle.

[@forgettohaveaname2954]

@@arthas640 Good understanding to the overall, and a richness of reasoning, I applause for your work. but please remember, truth is a thing, the tool of propaganda to form consents is another, Just like the US has been continuously beautifying its ugly history, especially in regarding how they treated the Indians, PPC has its duty to write its history in a sounding way to portray some mistakes bad have-tos. So for an individual, the first smart is to find out the truth, the second is to understand what’s good for the society to portray them, the third , if you can go that far, you may even find out the truth were the best possible already, don’t rush to criticize me, I personally did a lot research to the history that you mentioned

[@adaptercrash]

China proper and same thing some guy they keep saying its mine, then go over here and do it again and it's all intentional, we have those too. They use to do that after Mao.

[@iamreallycai]

Just wondering, Jiang had massacrer against communists before the Japanese invaded, so why would the communist would act like Jiang's Consumables?

[@a1to8]

Seriously, people are downplaying Mao's strategic abilities in this video. The three great campaigns that led to the CCP victory were all decided by Mao, in opposition to his best generals.

[@DarkwarriorJ]

I'd have assessed Mao in the opposite manner. Decent guerilla general, decent inspirer, absolutely terrible statesman who should've never had direct rule.

[@a1to8]

@@DarkwarriorJ Yes, but the video made it sound like Mao was just a cunning politician without military abilities and basically got his position through smooth talking, which is clearly not the case. He got to where he is because his military suggestions, from the long march, to the guerilla people's war, to taking Manchuria first followed by the three campaigns, all worked.

[@DarkwarriorJ]

@@a1to8 Personally, I speculate that it may be a bias from many of us in the west having extensively studied the USSR but not the PRC, and then projecting everything about the USSR onto the PRC. That description largely fits Stalin very well, but it doesn't fit Mao. There's other such apparent analogies between the USSR and the PRC that obscure the very different details or are just wrong, from what I can see.

[@user-ds3un8sv3b]

是的，三渡赤水如果你仔细研究一下。就会发现是一次完美的战术与战略的结合。

[@user-em9dg8se4w]

毛泽东是一个那个时代的理想主义者，当他的党逐渐偏离他的理想时，他相信那时的人民能够理解和践行他的理想，很可惜当时并不是那样，到如今越来越多中国的年轻人开始学习毛泽东思想，希望能够找到解决现今中国问题的方法@@DarkwarriorJ

[@hooderik8699]

Like what the presenter said "No one should call themselves an expert on china" for the most part i don't think these researchers have quite understood completely Mao's role in China and his own political history within the CPC. There are still biases and misunderstandings of the questions "what is the CPC and why the CPC.

[@shaozhihao]

没办法，你这两个问题要是回答对了，会动摇米国国本，不管是真的还装的，都只能瞎说🤧🤧

[@yifug375]

谁让中国人民站起来 中国人民就选择谁

[@gestorespanama]

Makes more sense that China claims the SOUTH CHINA SEA, than the US considering Guam and solomon islands as strategic for the US. Also, China doesnt have 800 military bases around the world. This whole thing is projection on the way US does things.

[@notamoonraker]

@@gestorespanama oh claiming by name basis only? So it makes sense too for *INDIA* to claim *INDIAN OCEAN* ? 🤣🤣🤣

[@jarredbell4455]

@@notamoonraker only if there's oil 🛢

[@tyh9206]

Respectful discussion! I find the panelists are fair and factual. They are so much more accurate in their statement and assessment of china than the folks on the Capitol Hill or the White House.

[@Indi.a.B33ger.Viru.s.Nation]

Facts based is better than accusations.

[@larrymiracle2791]

Every time I see these comments? Not only when I talk to stupid people. All I have heard I really get pissed oh no China will beat us. No China will be put in there place so we can now be confident that we are going to win

[@junyuanma4243]

Though they still missed a lot about China's revolutionary history, such as warlords. They intentionally avoided Mao's military skills and depicted him into a political-only leader.

[@TheRyanandRachael]

​​@@junyuanma4243 They addressed his military skills as being poor, noting that at one point he was demoted. It was later due to other leaders failure that he rose through the communist system. They also discussed how the nationalist and communist united to crush warlords in the north only for the nationalist leader to turn around and attack the communist.

[@junyuanma4243]

@@TheRyanandRachael Yes he addressed, but he omitted other important information to make him look like one with poor military skills.

[@PK-cj1pg]

China's communist ideology is totally different from what it originally was. It is communism with Chinese characteristics and capitalism combined. It is a potent combination that has contributed to China's economic and military might today that challenges US's supremacy .

[@user-iy2he1mk5p]

Friends of the world, there are two words on the Tiananmen Square in Beijing. Long live the people's Republic of China. Long live the great unity of the people of the world. The Chinese army and technology has become more and more powerful to protect ourself, not for hegemonism. I hope you will trust China more. Peace is the pursuit of the people of the world. The first sentence of the Chinese National Anthem: “People who rise up and do not want to be slaves "

[@louiswu6300]

yup, that's why USSR collapsed meanwhile China still keep going up.

[@luoyanyang7625]

@@user-iy2he1mk5pPeople who do not want to be slaves, rise up!

[@CN-lq2oy]

@@luoyanyang7625明明自己就是个奴隶，叫自由的人起来，真可笑！

[@luoyanyang7625]

@@CN-lq2oy 明明你就是个SB却跑出来指指点点，你真是个SB！

[@danielchua1713]

I am surprised by the fair down to earth analysis, after way too much of mainstream media propaganda. Yes, you have to know your enemy to know yourself. I do hope both military strategy makers and most important politicians could truly understand Chinese culture, history and military doctrine. This is the only way to prevent hot war which benefits no one. Well presented, keep up the good work

[@finestrecarmelo5738]

Fully agreed, the most important mission ,for all strategies makers all over the world to me is to prevent hot war which hurt everyone, not only those greatest powers, but also those minor regions and nations. War always hurts.

[@yaogrover4858]

但是这个视频也没有提到对他们自己（美国）军事能力的认知，现在的美军早已不再是当年的美军了。我觉得现在美国人最应该了解的对自己军事能力的评估。

[@4-SeasonNature]

Better than what comes out of the filthy mouths of politicians.

[@danielchua1713]

@Jack China 中国人要有自信,但决不可以盲目自信. 我绝对相信中国领导人有智慧去和平崛起.以避战止战,以实力竞争避开冲突. 但我担心的是平民老百姓的不理性,特别是在网络上看到的. 希望中国举国上下可以沉着气应对接下来许许多多的挑战与挑衅, 特别是来自于不孝子孙台湾. 中国加油, 也为我们这些在外国生根的黄炎子孙争一口气.

[@alexhua6894]

@@danielchua1713 这就是为什么我不是很赞同“民主选票制度”的原因，民众总是短视的，竞选人为了获取选票总要迎合大多数民众的意愿，很多台湾蛙蛙一直说中国没有选票不民主，我真的有点搞不懂他们在想些什么，如果中国真的是选票选出来的领导人，早就不得不迎合民意把台湾收回来了。选票制在民生方面是有优势的，但在国家发展战略层面就不行了。说不好哪种制度更好，我更相信世界上没有完美的制度，只有相对合适的制度。

[@harrydhaliwal6756]

Enjoyed this video because it is objective without bias and not a western propaganda.

[@rmerrifield100]

Is it? I don't think the Chinese Navy can hold a candle to us.

[@funnyfriend9025]

@@rmerrifield100 Yes, you are right, the PLA navy is still using wooden ships, and all the air crafts are made in 1928, they don't have aircraft carriers, Liaoning, Shandong, Fujian are all made by paper. The PLA "Rocket army" does not have any missiles, df21d, df17, df15d, df41 are all fireworks, and df41 is certainly not a nuclear missile, it is only a empty large paper can filled with fireworks.

[@toicoi6758]

@@rmerrifield100 well, maybe same as the US won't change their "eagle" mentality and withdraw their military bases overseas. The eagle won't obey like chicken unless it meets more powerful creature. This is a pure military-for-military talk with some "mistakes" for example taking the humor by Chairman Mao as real "the Japanese saved us (CPC)". The fact was the opposite.

[@2hotflavored666]

@@toicoi6758 They did, Mao hid behind the KMT so they can take the brunt of the war, while Mao was doing the bare minimum. With this, Mao won, and proceeded to murder 65 million of his own people through famines and 2 Billion birds causing further famine.

[@toicoi6758]

@@2hotflavored666 facts said "no"

[@Norsemano1921]

Great and informative video, as a former corporal and a platoon sergeant in the 2nd Brigade (pre-164th Brigade) of PLAMC (2016-2021), PLAMC also adopted a similar combined arms doctrine to that of the army, but there are a few points in the video I cannot concur: 1) PLA has never been a conscript-based military at least since 1949, although legally defined as "conscripts" (during the service soldiers receive no "salary" but "allowances" instead), everyone de facto enlists voluntarily. You may argue that it had not been a "professional" military for a long time, but definitely not conscripts. 2) At the battalion level, there was NOT a "sergeant major" or "platoon/company sergeant" existing before 2017. The battalion HQ only has the battalion commander, political instructor, one or two deputy battalion commanders, and several couriers. But it was accurately pointed out that there were no battalion staff pre-2017.NCOs in Platoon, company, and battalion HQ began to exist in circa 2017. 3) I do not believe that the PLA Group Army is equivalent to the U.S Army Corps, as U.S Army Corps was led by a Lieutenant General and GA was led by a Major General. I'd rather believe the PLA Group Army is equivalent to a reinforced U.S Army Division (reinforced with several combined arms bayonet brigades etc. ) and they are both led by a major general. 4) PLA began experimenting with combined arms battalions as early as 1975 (I read about this in the brigade archive division where there was a copy of PLA Newspaper dated back in 1975 reported an unidentified corps of Beijing Military District began forming combined arms battalion). It's presumed that it failed at that time but definitely provided a scope of the doctrine. I would argue that the PLA combined arms battalion isn't actually based on that of the US but PLA's own experience instead. I mean... yes it did combine elements from different arms, but the focus and emphasis on digitalization is the key during the transformation. It leads to the introduction of digital devices and terminals to almost every squad vehicle to make sure that intel processing burdens can be shared upon each terminal rather than the battalion HQ alone. So the term "combined arms" in the Chinese language is actually more related to digitalization rather than simply combining different arms and professions. Secondly, the PLA has a relatively larger contingent of ground artillery than the equivalent echelon of the US as the PLA relies mainly on ground fire support rather than naval and air fire support (The majority of the combined arms battalions in PLA are also very capable of calling for air support but not a huge fan of it yet AFAIK). Thirdly, PLA employs organic logistics elements to each echelon while the US often attaches them (FSB and FSC) from a higher echelon. Lastly, the PLA combined arms battalion is NOT smaller in size when compared to that of the US, the PLA CABs have 4 maneuver companies, 1 firepower company, 1 combat support company, and 1 HQ element so it's 6 companies plus one HQ element while the ABCT-CAB has only 3 maneuver companies and 1 HQ element so I have no clue where LTC McCaughkin drew the conclusion that Chinese battalions are smaller "in composition" 38:45, enlighten me if possible.

[@yuluoxianjun]

lol

[@arthas640]

I hear that they dont enforce conscription a lot but even that sounds kind of iffy. They had things like forced labor for the military or military related projects, mandatory enrollment in paramilitaries, militarization of what in the west would be civilian organizations (police, border guards, merchant marines, etc), mobilization of the populace and other things that aren't _technically_ conscription but would almost certainly be counted as such if they occurred in the west. The military itself wouldnt need to enforce conscription with all that going on since people will volunteer for a better job rather than be forced into a worse one, especially in times of hardship. After the death of Mao China really modernized and after Deng's reforms they've often been able to raise recruitment standards by paring down the military so even things like forced labor or mobilization of civilians hasnt been relevant for decades. China isnt the only country to do stuff like that. The US for example had plenty of volunteers for the Coast Guard, merchant marine, and parts of the military even during WW2 and Vietnam since people volunteered to avoid active duty (a worse job) and the draft also drove up volunteers for war industries as people raced to get jobs that would exempt them from the draft. Many European empires could claim similar since they often were able to avoid a draft by drawing on their colonies to fill any gaps or since some colonies had to provide soldiers and workers as a tax (corvee system) or were sometimes pressured to do so (some Indian princes received more investments or business deals from Britain if they sent more troops and/or laborers from their state so they "volunteered" them). It's a bit like "creative bookkeeping": they werent conscripted, they just had little to no choice but to volunteer.

[@fengm9873]

@@arthas640 Reports from China: Joining the army is not compulsory (although our documents stipulate that it is compulsory to join the army), after graduating from high school, going to college, and having a stable job, you don't have to join the army. The current policy is: (1) The conditions for joining the army have been relaxed. In the past, the standard for joining the army was very high (especially eyesight). Now the condition is that the body must be healthy. (2) You can also choose to join the army when you go to college. Before you went to college, you were not allowed to join the army. (3) Reserves, that's a, um, non-existent existence.

[@tougheasterndicksoftblackdick]

@@fengm9873 so?Try to vilify China one more time that no one surprise?

[@tougheasterndicksoftblackdick]

叛徒上油管啦

[@cmcomfort1]

I appreciate how this piece was focused on developing understanding of a current topic, versus reviewing a historical event.

[@viwesidneymfundisi9623]

"We will fight the enemy in our own way, at the time we determine, in the place we determine. We'll not act according to the enemy's plot, nor will we fall into the enemy's trap, " Mao Zedong.

[@kazimierzkalinowski1320]

CWP Cyny zmiażdzą USA Żydy 🤣✌️🥳

[@kazimierzkalinowski1320]

Tak ,😈☮️😭😇

[@wuhaninstituteofvirology5226]

"We will fight the enemy after the Japanese destroyed them." Mao Zedong

[@user-dy7jh9ys8j]

@@wuhaninstituteofvirology5226 然而国共内战开始时国民党自然保持着巨大的优势，奈何派系林立心不齐

[@derrickchu8201]

我打我的，你打你的

[@pzhang66]

one of the few pieces that are produced by experts that know their stuff about China, and where the assessments are based on facts, not on wishful thinking or hearsay.

[@arthas640]

Both are pretty rare qualities. I'm a relatively patriotic American but I'm also a realist and hate it when people let themselves be blinded by patriotism or their own biases. There are many who either view China as an unstoppable juggernaut (a prediction people also had in the 20the century for Germany twice, Japan twice, the USSR a few times, and India about every year) or they still think of China like it's the 80s or 90s and they're just a struggling 3rd world nation.

[@rickwhiterock2681]

Excellent, analysis and presentation without bias and laying the truth. 🇺🇸

[@sonnybully]

Truly superb presentation in every way. I have some research to do! Thank you!

[@johnnyb1368]

This channel is very different and truly stands out on presentation and informative news. Well done! Subscribed and liked👍

[@user-ne9tb9tr1u]

China has been a cultural based nation instead of races since about 221 B.C. The language, currency, measuring were standardized since then. So many dynasties were established and collapsed one after another. Some of the dynasties were established by the nomadic people who usually were living north of China; however, all of them were localized or merged into "Han". Long story short, China has been gone through up and down cycles just like four seasons repeating each year. Just like a tree, when the leaves fall in the winter and come back in spring, because the root is always there.

[@robij3475]

interesting point

[@Shadowless_Kick]

Excellent, you know better than most foreign China experts, because you understand the root of Chinese civilization - the culture.

[@KaiwenXu-gz6si]

17:18 “China views everyone as competiors” this sentence can be applied to all countries. It basically means nothing. This is how a country can survive in the world.

[@staubsauger2305]

No. Most countries ***businesses*** compete, hard, but at the bureaucracy level the governments tend to help each other out (keeping all the tax slaves in line).

[@zsarimaxim692]

@@staubsauger2305 Ever heard of the Plaza Accord?

[@DucaTech]

@@staubsauger2305 Ever heard of Frédéric Pierucci and the GE takeover of Alstom?

[@Commievn]

@@staubsauger2305 Ever heard of economic hitman?

[@david50665]

this is pure projection....usa views any near peer competitor as an existential threat

[@DigitalCodeOwl]

Great stuff like always!

[@Afahs993]

This is the type of presentations quality I look for, no bias or one side story.. excellent work 👏🏻. Thank you. All the best for both nations, hope their govs behave & think about their own people and not world domination.

[@user-rz2hy6rs2y]

你是在说美国吗？ 对 美国应该规矩点 别到处入侵其他国家 世界上没有哪个国家需要另一个国家的军队强行闯进去 美国收割着全世界金钱 毫不夸张 世界上有几千万人因为美国 变成难民甚至死亡

[@hectoroftroy2470]

Agreed

[@dwy2588]

I dont think this is very objective actually,also the maps in the video is wrong

[@CarlosCastillo-vf7bu]

one-fifth of man kind and in their own court. This with out a doubt, places things into perspective

[@mr.normalguy69]

This video felt like it ended a bit too quickly. Great interview, through and through.

[@yingding9479]

Tremendous insight and profound knowledge ❤

[@ys6y]

I would like to begin my comment with a quote from Sunzi: “知己知彼 方能百战不殆”, Which translate as “Know yourself and know your enemy, and you will never be defeated” I am quoting this mainly because I think this American (or to be more specific American Military think tank)'s assessment of China/PLA is spot on regarding most of the issues it covered. There might be a little exaggerated regarding the PLA's capabilities. I mean US's military spending is still more than the next 11 nations combined, let alone the fact that most of them are US's close allies. However it is always better to over estimate your "enemy" than under estimate them. As a Chinese who has lived in the States for the last 15 years (first studied to get my PhD and then work as a research scientist), I see both nations as my beloved parents, and who would want to see their parents fighting each other? However, through out of the years, I have been hearing an increasing amount of narratives which basically treat the other side as a potential enemy. This documentary is just one another example. It is seems from history patterns, that whenever a new power rises, there will be a fight. And if that pattern holds, just like what LTC Dave Mc Caughrin says "Its not a matter of if, its a matter of when" that the two forces will eventually cross swords. I don't want to believe this theory or prediction, but pathetically my logic tells me that might be true, so now all I can do is hoping that day may never come, just be as late as possible. I do hope you guys could understand my feelings over these issues.

[@XxfishpastexX]

Do you have any Chinese immigrant friends that have expressed similar or different feelings as yours? There’s a lot of Chinese students at my university and I wonder what they must think of all this…

[@zhuyuan0624]

@@XxfishpastexXI am a university faculty in China and I lived in US for 9 years and got PhD degree in US. In my opinion, not only the Chinese immigrants, but also most of Chinese people, have similar opinions above. I quote one representative sentense from a patriotic movie in China "Heng kong chu shi". The movie is about the history Chinese people developed A-Bomb in 1960s, the movie was made in 1999 when US just bombed Chinese ambassy in Yugoslavia. The words is as follows: "We must say that US is a beautiful country, but they should't bully us like right now(in cold war), and make me want to say: no mxxxfxxxer". We can see that even at that moment, the Chinese people is still rational and admit the greatness of US. To sum up, there are two bottom lines of Chinese people. 1. Don't treat us like the enemy. 2. Don't try to make trouble in our backyard. Therefore, I think the video here is one of the most objective video I saw in recent years by US official media. Thanks.

[@zhuyuan0624]

BTW, most of the Chinese people can distinguish between the American people and American politicians

[@user-on7xm3dr5z]

你认为美国会愿意让十几亿中国人过上和美国人同样富裕的生活吗？

[@conradgonzalez1570]

I hope the EU, NATO come apart and Europe goes back to the way things used to be before the EU. The way EU is now the individual States( former Nations) the citizens are being asked to sacrifice ever more their own economic well being for the greater equity of the entire world. This reminds me very much how BolSHEVviks in Russia and PolPots Khmer Rouge asked the people to sacrifice ( starve their selves to death) for the greater good of all. I see the EU plans on seizing the Dutch Farmers land the same as Lenin, Stalin, Mao seizing land in the name of Communism as the same thing. The International Socialists ( Left) have been around atleast since Carl Marx , maybe even since French Revolution and maybe ever since European Enlightenment Movement ( Renaissance Period). There always seems to be this never ending conflict between Beehive Collectivist " WE THINK" CULTSand those love people who love Individuals Freedoms and Individual Property Right and Individual Sovereign of Ones own Mind.

[@mixwellnz]

Very informative and balanced perspective. I’m a Chinese and I would never wish my country and my brothers to go into war with US or any other countries for that matter. But we will always defend our nation’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. In China we have always been taught through generations - Our nation comes before our family, before us as individuals.

[@vortolex]

Yep 👍🏻 still there is so much missing what about the real wars (the secret wars) the true main goals that would define Humanity Future. That would be interesting. Me, never wish to come close to a global war. it is ok as long is in the video games but in the real world Nope.

[@jeffjohnson5053]

It is the sell out democrats in the USA who sold all military tech to china! And allowed all chinese spies to work in US tech companies and STEAL OUR technology!!

[@yaoliang1580]

The wellbeing of the nation is certainly more important to that of the individual

[@TimothyOakes]

It ain't looking good, my dude.

[@Jonnesdeknost]

Enjoying that vpn to acces youtube?

[@zinedinezethro9157]

You thought official medias from the UsS military will be propaganda, but actually it's one of the most objective analysis on China's military there is.

[@royhuang9715]

When missile start flying they does the fighting and dying not some political commentators, politicians or KZbin content creators they will be the first to dodge the draft.

[@infernosgaming8942]

Thats because the U.S. Army fights wars professionally, we don't give a damn about "image" when our back is up against the wall.

[@theamazinghippopotomonstro9942]

It is good to be objective when analyzing your enemy. Otherwise you decieve yourself to their advantage

[@irimeyilmaz956]

Fails to mention China is mostly reactive. China was not the first building airports and radar installations. In the South China, on disputed Philippine Waters. Vietnam, Malaysia & Taiwan were the first to build military outpost on disputed Philippines waters. China just followed.

[@DarkwarriorJ]

@@irimeyilmaz956 Western and Russian media and politics tends to highly discount the actions of smaller regional powers I've noticed. We just don't pay attention to what Saudi Arabia is doing, or Turkey, or Poland, or Indonesia and so on. It's a pretty big blindspot and will probably bite us in the butt at some point.

[@leeeysturlid3725]

Great video. But most folks seem to think that. Need more (and we need one from the Navy and the Air Force).

[@cplson2706]

Very well made, its respectful and not a bunch of mud slinging.

[@Eldorik]

I hate commies, but it’s hard to watch an intellectual video when the creator is taking sides instead of coming from an objective view

[@waveygravey3575]

Propaganda is for the public not the military

[@jamesdoesitmatter]

Facts and strategic information should never contain mud or politics.

[@wli2718]

its pretty well made given how little the US knows about China. hell, it even has the map of China drawn wrong in this video. so i wouldnt take the details in this material seriously.

[@olympia5758]

@@wli2718 Yeah, isn’t Hainan part of China? It was excluded.

[@marcwilliams2504]

AUP has done an excellent job with this presentation.

[@nobojerry]

THIS IS ONE OF THE PRACTICAL BASE ANALYSIS I EVER WATCHED

[@jumanji5239]

Excellent in depth analysis and presentation without bias!

[@KVX21]

Is it?

[@meisterproper8304]

@@KVX21 considering that this is made for/by the US military, it's quite unbiased

[@dracozyf]

Well as a chinese, i have 2 say it's a high quality presentation，we really need 2 know each other batter

[@tmoe6674]

Greetings from the USA!

[@taijistar9052]

Understand this movie is mainly for Americans , that this is the most objective I have seen.

[@johnfajer7691]

These are fantastic productions! Thanks!

[@KaiwenXu-gz6si]

19:47 Just want to pointing out a mistake in the map of China. Fine, let’s put aside the Taiwan issue. But, how about Hainan? The large island southern of the mainland. If you really want to understand China, please pay respect to the basic geographical facts.

[@ArmyUniversityPress]

Thank you for pointing out that error in our map. We will make a note of it in the description. We are quite disappointed that we missed it. We appreciate your attention to the details of our film.

[@gstlb]

I don’t think it’s fair to suggest this omission reveals a lack of understanding. It was a simple mistake.

[@xiaogangdasha]

@@ArmyUniversityPress I dont mind as a Chinese myself. I care about the quality of the content which is fantanstic, thank you!

[@randyyoung3332]

Good video ! US shouldn't worry China's growth if you don't go to their backyard and provoke matters.

[@douglaswhite9777]

Oh, I love your program. Well, done, gentlemen well done.

[@foxhugh222]

Excellent video that should be seen more than once by all Americans! “If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles." Sun Tzu! War should be an instrument of national survival not a tool to get votes! I used the incendiary and inaccurate term enemy but am quoting someone. The relation ship between China and the US is COMPLICATED but competitor would be a less incendiary term but Sun Tzu did use the word enemy to the best of my knowledge. I was called on the word enemy by K and have added this section to clarify. My goal at least is to make bilateral relations good and the word enemy does not do this. I will endeavor to be more intelligent in the use of language about this important topic in the future!

[@whosyourdaddy5719]

It's the politicians who always push us into the edge of the wars. America's credibility is decreasing around the world, and people haven't even realized yet especially those politicians.

[@Dana-cb7vk]

By that context China has no need to go to war over Taiwan, because their survival as a nation does not depend on its existence or not.

[@matthewburrow3089]

@@Dana-cb7vk Taiwan is a strategic chokepoint, that makes Taiwan a threat regardless of CPC ideology.

[@notamoonraker]

@@matthewburrow3089 still an ideological threat to China's communist party.. having a more democratic idea of China exists near P.R.China is a threat to China's communist party power.

[@ingdo8707]

知己知彼,百战不殆 -- Know yourself and the enemy， not be passive of a hundred battles

[@yihaoliu426]

Modinger was actually inaccurate about Mao in his leadership competence in the Red Army. Mao was not a centric figure in early Red Army because of the structure of Communist International. Red Army suffered great losses in early stage against nationalists because of the bad judgments by the Soviet, though in good faith. It was a major different revolutionary background in China vs Soviet so many experiences did not apply. A good example is the theory of 农村包围城市. This was also a reason why the famous Long March happened. After Zunyi meeting, Mao became influential in the power center, and the Red Army started to gain more strength. You could find a lot of evidence in the party documents etc.

[@a1to8]

On top of that, the three great battles over the Nationalists were all decided by Mao primarily, sometimes in opposition to generals like Lin Biao. Mao was instrumental in the CCP's victory. IT's nonsense that he takes no credit. Mao did not rise to the top just through his ideas, it was through the fact that his ideas and suggestions actually worked most of the time.

[@Ottovonostbahnhof]

Mao earned his support victory by victory

[@RobertWilliams-us4kw]

I particularly liked and appreciated Dr Geoff Babb realistic view. It's odd, the U.S. for all intent and purposes help facilitate rise of modern China and now it's woken to the fact it can no longer influence nor control it like it thought it could. Nice to see the U.S. rushing, alas far to late, to understand Chinese history, culture, after over a century of neglect. But then again, it did the same with both the Vietnamese and Chinese during the Viet Nam War.

[@hectoroftroy2470]

Sorry to say but USA has a poor sense of judgement when choosing allies. PAKISTAN as an ally was hiding Osama. Most of 9/11 bombers were Saudi. Saudis have used US weapons to commit war crimes in yemen. US helped China against USSR and now the same China is threatening USA. 🤔🤔🤔

[@BigChapDidNothingWrong]

There's too much money to be had to have stirred up the military machine towards China as an adversary. Russia presented very little opportunity cost in terms of war. As long as the Yuan keeps showing up in the right pockets there won't be the sort of reaction there was towards the Soviets.

[@TheLabecki]

Thank you for the sober analysis of the current geo-political salutation from a military perspective.

[@dohbart877]

I think the guy in the dark suit said it really well in the end "the issue [the US] need to think our way through [or] the question remains will america make that attitudinal adjustment that's necessary to live in a future world at peace albeit competitive[ly] but at peace..." with a gradually rising near peer china? I believe the answer to that question is: its going to be very difficult for the US to make that attitudinal adjustment without significant bloodshed on both sides! which is very sad for everyone!

[@jxmai7687]

Funny, The answer also looks like one of factor which created the question or issue.

[@zhuyuan0624]

Good video, the only defect of the video is that Mao's military achievements are underestimated. Mao is actually the most genius military strategist in Chinese history.

[@JP-eh7wm]

🤣 Lin Biao and Peng Dehuai would laugh at this comment. You clearly don’t understand the concept of “military strategy.” Just because Mao purged and killed the great generals, it doesn’t make him a military strategist.

[@xiaogangdasha]

@@JP-eh7wm I thought Su Yu was the best.

[@zhuyuan0624]

They are better in tactics, not strategy. 我的英语没有你好，但是你的回答完全体现了你对历史的无知，可能是被法轮功洗脑洗多了了吧。

[@zhuyuan0624]

@@xiaogangdasha 粟裕大将的确非常了不起。但是没有最高统帅的运筹帷幄，是打不赢解放战争的。在重要时刻让下面来做决定也是大智慧。看看对岸的微操大师。

[@DarkwarriorJ]

Genius is too powerful a word when assessed against other great figures in Chinese history, or to the other generals under Mao. But this documentary definitely seems to downplay Mao too much.

[@dr.wianmeintjes9028]

Thank you. I live in South Africa. Concerned about my country. Valuable information and insight.

[@BurdenofTheMighty]

Does your country owe money to China?

[@TheDaeroner]

@@BurdenofTheMighty lol, it owes money to the IMF not China. But South Africa is part of BRICS and has a very close and deep historical relationships with not only both China but Russia and Cuba...

[@BurdenofTheMighty]

@@TheDaeroner i hope they are reliable…

[@TheDaeroner]

@@BurdenofTheMighty to quote Mandela: “One of the mistakes which some political analysts make is to think their enemies should be our enemies... Our attitude towards any country is determined by the attitude of that country to our struggle. Yasser Arafat, Colonel Gaddafi [and] Fidel Castro support our struggle to the hilt. There is no reason whatsoever why we should have any hesitation about hailing their commitment to human rights as they’re being demanded in South Africa. They do not support [the anti-apartheid struggle] only in rhetoric; they are placing resources at our disposal for us to win the struggle. That is the position.”

[@williamgray9692]

honestly the biggest threat to south africa is from within

[@letmusicspeakforitself9493]

Very good rational discussion. Good educational documentary. Thank you

[@Lin-De]

Very good video, makes both the Chinese and the Americans rest easy after watching👍🏻

[@spammerscammer]

One thing they failed to mention is china lies alot about its military capabilities. Alot of CGI and reused launches to spread propaganda. On the other hand the US and NATO allies have the highest level of military might.

[@MaziarYousefi]

Good document, We appreciate it.

[@ssgwhiskers]

That was great effort. Will want to use for our school house as a prereq for all the courses we hold in person.

[@defective6811]

Fantastically well made

[@zylaaeria2627]

Absolutely brilliant. This is probably one of the most well put together videos that I have found regarding China & the US. It is inevitable both will clash, but hopefully it never goes beyond basic competition & only for the best of all of mankind.

[@NeostormXLMAX]

12:23 the united states is trying to turn india against china this time so china will collapse like the soviet union

[@unifieddynasty]

The concluding remarks redeemed this video. This cannot be about conflict and confrontation and hegemony. This must be about diplomacy and negotiations and respect between (near) peers.

[@samfrost9957]

It's just impossible. China wants to overtake the USA e dictate the future world. It's not a fair opponent, it's a sneaky enemy

[@unifieddynasty]

@@samfrost9957 When in history has China ever wanted to dictate the world?

[@samfrost9957]

@@unifieddynasty Now

[@unifieddynasty]

@@samfrost9957 Example?

[@samfrost9957]

@@unifieddynasty China is aiming to rule the world It's not a secret Every speech of the Leader of the Communist Party regards to become the greatest and biggest nation in the world, translated: to achieve the supremacy in the world. Everything that she's doing is to put herself on the leading of the world for the next century. It's a threat for the entire global stability and security

[@0xtankgz]

Excellent work, top quality!

[@tadeuszmierzecki5917]

Rzetelne rozpoznanie zagrożenia.

[@soha7271]

It’s the 1919 Paris Accord after WW1 that drove China into a new direction, Mao was heavily influenced by two of his communist mentors Chan and Lee whose doctrines had influenced the Chinese leaders, in particular Xi who endorsed the making of a TV series in 2021 to commemorate the influence and achievements of Chan and Lee

[@royhuang9715]

Yep somehow those imperial power thought it was a good idea to give a piece of China to Japan was a good idea. As expected, large scale protest erupted within China and this event mark the beginning of modern day China.

[@cedrichunter9759]

Outstanding, fair minded, objective analysis of Chinas military capabilities.

[@johncarpenter4083]

Professor Wang Huning, Xi Jinping's right hand man, visited America years ago, and stayed for a time. He was on a fact-finding mission. He cataloged his findings in his book titled: "America Against America." I don't know if the book is available in English, yet. In 1988, Wang-having risen with unprecedented speed to become Fudan’s youngest full professor at age 30-won a coveted scholarship (facilitated by the American Political Science Association) to spend six months in the United States as a visiting scholar. Profoundly curious about America, Wang took full advantage, wandering about the country like a sort of latter-day Chinese Alexis de Tocqueville, visiting more than 30 cities and nearly 20 universities. What he found deeply disturbed him, permanently shifting his view of the West and the consequences of its ideas. Wang recorded his observations in a memoir that would become his most famous work: the 1991 book America Against America. In it, he marvels at homeless encampments in the streets of Washington DC, out-of-control drug crime in poor black neighborhoods in New York and San Francisco, and corporations that seemed to have fused themselves to and taken over responsibilities of government. Eventually, he concludes that America faces an “unstoppable undercurrent of crisis” produced by its societal contradictions, including between rich and poor, white and black, democratic and oligarchic power, egalitarianism and class privilege, individual rights and collective responsibilities, cultural traditions and the solvent of liquid modernity. www.palladiummag.com/2021/10/11/the-triumph-and-terror-of-wang-huning/ Summarizing, Wang returned to China convinced that the Western model was not something China could or should follow, for a laundry list of very good reasons including, most importantly, the disintegration of the American family and the commodification of any and everything in Capitalist America. An America vocally Christian, yet morally destitute, where individualism is king and collectivism is a distasteful afterthought. An America run by a two-party political system that, while espousing Unity, in fact guarantees Disunity. And allows its citizens full access to weapons of unimaginable destructive power.

[@pykemid3954]

guess what still true to this day 2022 rich and poor, white and black, democratic and oligarchic power, egalitarianism and class privilege, individual rights and collective responsibilities, cultural traditions and the solvent of liquid modernity. everything he saw in 1988 = everything in 2022

[@bitcoinzoomer9994]

While America bears its faults with no shame, China just pretends they have no problems until it blows up in theirbface

[@agoodman2146]

I haven't finished watching found a mistake. The nine-dashed line is not created by Xi. The Republic of China(KMT or Taiwan now) claim the 11-dashed line. Later, Mao thought it was too overbearing and reduced it to the nine-dashed line. It's just that the military strength in that time was too weak so in the past, claiming is just claiming.

[@kangbule]

充满冷战思维的视频

[@ajwo5984]

This video is much nuance with factual points than the usual propaganda from the western media.

[@ArkDiabLord]

Peace & Respect.

[@JustinRM20]

A very sober examination. Dr. Geoff Babb seems like a very knowledgeable professor.

[@xiaogangdasha]

This is such great and professional video, and I thought it's about imaginary PLA UAV. Appreciated from 🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳 and peace 🕊️🕊️🕊️

[@tonywu1222]

15:57 is incorrect, those are Hong Kong police force officers of the riot control branch, not the PAP from the mainland.

[@JJ-yg1sf]

Civil war is not finished yet, and Taiwan is still last piece of puzzle.

[@obiwan5781]

Still have North and South Korea to go.

[@jessemills3845]

FINALLY! PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY SEE ! I have been saying this for years! People say I'm nuts! I recommend they read SUN TUZ! This is a Great segment!

[@outsidewell6932]

Very sensible analysis.

[@forgettohaveaname2954]

As a Chinese mainlander, but an expate overseas - so no need to criticise why I post here, I'd like to raise several misleading arguments in this video, which is streamlined by assertions. 1. The origin of the name Zhongguo- center country, has no relation to any perception of Chinese nation's arrogance to be the center-or the height of nations, it was only a geographic term that reflect their understanding of their where about. In regarding to the national personality, Chinese as a nation has its trait of humble, modesty and unsaggressiveness, thankful to the deep root of Confusious phylosophy; 2. China now has no willing to be the great power in the world, militarily or economically, It is pursuing the equally among all nations. in other words, it doesn't accept the current rule that a minority of nations and population dominate the world, and under a Zero-Sum ideology, the other nations and population including China servers as the fertilizer to nuture the alegance of the minors. 3. China doesn't see everyone else like enemy, it only see who decided to be that of Chinese, enemies. eg the US, the Japanese, and the US controlled Anglo-Saxon nations.

[@forgettohaveaname2954]

@In Lee It's Okay to learn English from my point of view, globalization should continue to grow, and English is more accessible than Chinese. Chinese mainlanders all learn English from elementary school too, and that doesn't prevent us from developing our Confucious mindset.

[@showsjohn]

@@forgettohaveaname2954 Hopefully, a common language the world over will help bring us closer to peace. It's such a shame because the common people of China, Japan, and the US have absolutely no desire to do harm to one another.

[@rog4464]

I agree. The region was called "Central Plain" in ancient China and then later evolved into Zhongguo (center country). So it definitely has geographical and practical origin.

[@derrickchu8201]

@In Lee Your Korean historical materials and ancient books are all recorded by Chinese character 漢字, you younger generation has been artificially cut off from history.

[@unifieddynasty]

Hmm, Mao was a major factor in the Long March and the development of Guerilla Warfare. He may not have been the best general, certainly not the best conventional general, but as a militant revolutionary, he was quite adept.

[@sojourner4726]

YES!!! The way they went out of their way to diminish his contributions and paint him more as an opportunist is infuriating. I value accuracy in information, not ideological grandstanding. And the way they diminish the PLA versus the ROC army is absolutely bizarre. These people are not experts, more than they are ideologues. or at the very least the editing team is as such.

[@Davionknight1]

@@sojourner4726 Fact is, militarily Taiwan is hopelessly outnumbered on all fronts. Western media tend to suggest that the US would pursue direct intervention in a PLA invasion scenario, but they have forgotten that Biden needs to win elections, Xi doesn’t and he knows it. The US has never plunged itself into a direct conflict with a nuclear power and I do not think they will deviate from this policy. Sending aid, planes, weapons, providing intel, yes. But fighting for Taiwan and risk casualty numbers not seen since Vietnam is something the US public cannot stomach. Japan and South Korea will also not allow the US to launch strikes from their territory as their population falls within PLA’s retaliatory range.

[@jameszhou162]

Me too. I had read many articles about his military doctrine and actual combats he commanded. The red army was on the verge of extinction if there was no decision reversal at Zunyi. as a leader, he was thinking strategically and tactically. During the war with Japanese Empire, the No 8 Route army defended and defeated Japanese invaders trying to expand westward to access Shanxi coal and natural resources.

[@MORE_BEANS_PLZ]

@@Davionknight1 you'd be surprised how many Americans are willing to fight, same with our allies now china in the other hand Chinese are not happy with their government but you dont see that with Chinese controlled media 🤡💀especially how their banks took people money to some scamming investors and have a huge debt and people refusing to pay for their mortgages on houses that aren't even built lmao! 🤣

[@overlord6887]

Tbf, I dont think that they were necessarily being dismissive of Mao. Even military historians will often struggle to distinguish between tactical and strategic proficiency. For example, its why in the mainstream in the US folks often tend to underrate generals Grant and Sherman, both brilliant strategic thinkers, but relatively average in their generalship at the tactical and operational. Their assessment of Mao probably stems from this dichotomy. He was primarily a strategic and political thinker. Hence as you noted, his biggest contributions being in the realm of doctrine and strategy. In cases of military leaders with these skill sets, historically they often tend to be mediocre or outright bad when it comes to the operational/organizational, and the tactical.

[@bcrnl9603]

This was fantastic.

[@jackcheng7437]

A nice talking about China military and so on 👏👏👍👍

[@seitch1]

These guys describe China's efforts to defend their land and sea against outside aggression. But it's interesting that they don't see their own actions in building bases around China as aggressive.

[@XxTheGreatDestroyerx]

China operates death camps and is currently committing genocide.

[@TheSAMTHOO]

Just being a little bit of the devil's advocate here, but the same can be said about Americans not seeing the building of hundreds of foreign military bases as aggressive

[@reptilexcq2]

Exactly lol. They even said China look at everybody as a competitor lol. I don't know about that. Today, US is the one that said China is our competitor lol. Damm hypocrites.

[@thomaszhang3101]

@@TheSAMTHOO I think it’s really a case of “dignify is only above the edge of a blade and truth is only within the range of cannons”.

[@krossfield9139]

Because their values are based on cult believing and cheating. Their monotheistic core caused colonization and massive genocide in each continent, but definitely conflict with the values they showed, like diversity, respect, human rights.... It's gross, really. China & India, you should do your job now. This planet need a new peaceful concept. The one, don't manipulate countries anymore, get some politicians weak points to control them for your own interests is evil.

[@douyin8197]

This is a real piece of strategic thinking instead of propoganda everywhere else.

[@ricosun]

very timely documentry

[@billwill7383]

☮️ is what we all should strive for.

[@user-3DXG]

As a Chinese, I am partially relieved to know the existence of these rational gentlemen, but not fully because whether the highest commander is rational enough or not is another issue

[@williamgray9692]

let this be clear. america does not want war with china, and america will not fire the first shot should it come to that. china would have to but i believe china will not fire the first shot either so i do not think war will come

[@spartanparty3894]

These people are largely representative of the consensus, and consensus matters a lot more than the presidents opinion in America politics. I will say that the president is largely in tune with these opinions as well. He seems to want to strengthen American ties with allies and to help nations in the region against Chinese aggression. As an aside I lived in China a decade ago, and though I hate the CCP I love China's people, history, and culture. I hope that our nations can avoid catastrophe and I wish nothing but success on the Chinese people.

[@user-uw6qi7be5p]

@@spartanparty3894 Where are you from, if I may ask?I think we have not actively invaded any country since the founding of the People's Republic of China

[@spartanparty3894]

@@user-uw6qi7be5p I just wrote and essay and accidentally deleted it. I am American, and if you look it up (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China) then you can tell that that statement is false. I wish you the best, have a good day.

[@user-uw6qi7be5p]

@@spartanparty3894 There's nothing in it

[@user-cx5pn6ct6s]

do u guys know the 9 dash line is inheritage from 11 dash line which claim by ROC(which rule taiwan now) under United State of America navy's help?

[@ricotheman8139]

41:57 very well said. Think your way through that.

[@christianklima1140]

Very objective, well done.

[@haidongzheng3009]

Wait.....Nothing about Korean War? I couldn't believe this and watched the clip again. LOL. For the US military, there is just no way to understand Chinese military without looking long and hard at Korean War 1950~1953, when the PLA had the largest gap behind the US military might.

[@x-creator4460]

I am from South Korea and I must admit that you guys fought well against the superpower, it was truly amazing. But we have been brainwashed since childhood to believe that the Chinese used human wave tactics, totally ridiculous !

[@showsjohn]

@@x-creator4460 What was amazing? The US was outnumbered 4 to 1 and still managed to inflict 15 times more casualties on the Chinese than the Chinese/NK did to the US. Also, consider the fact China borders Korea directly, the US had to transport it forces 6,000 miles away to fight the war. And don't forget the fact that just 10 years earlier, the US had one of the smallest armies in the world, smaller than Portugal's! The fact the US went front almost nothing to the world's most powerful military in 5-6 years is pretty remarkable. Be thankful the US military were able to stop the Chinese or else you would be living under Kim Jong-un right now.

[@rs-dp6pr]

@@showsjohn outnumbered? US had 480 thousand and Chinese had 700. US had united nations troops and South Koreans.. so just stop reading one side numbers.

[@showsjohn]

@@rs-dp6pr Don't know where you get your numbers from... US peak strength in the Korean War was about 326,000. China's was nearly 1.5 million. South Korea had roughly 600,000 peak strength, rest of the UN forces totaled less than 40,000 and were token forces at best. China + North Korean strength was more than twice that of the UN forces.

[@NeostormXLMAX]

@@showsjohnchina only had 300,000 volunteers and zero airforce

[@sophisticatedthumb5364]

If only everything about China was well researched like this

[@jimmielin1141]

The president of China XI got his civil engineering degree from Ohio University. So yeah US politicians needs to be adequately understanding China instead of talking nonsense all the time.

[@NDAGR-]

This is pretty good👍🏾

[@cbskwkdnslwhanznamdm2849]

Thank you!

[@prfwrx2497]

20:00 Y'all butchered the map here. Northeastern India isn't shaded into India, and Myanmar (which borders China, and is politically interfered by China) is labeled as Thailand (which does not border China, but the ruling regime does collaborate with China somewhat).

[@ArmyUniversityPress]

Thank you for pointing out that error in our map. We will make a note of it in the description. We are quite disappointed that we missed it. We appreciate your attention to the details of our film.

[@yzhang9265]

If you know PLA's history from founding till end of Korean War, you will know they re-define the honour and glory of Chinese military and even whole country's confidence and fighting spirit - which was lacking for more than 100+ years before that.

[@Yuki_Ika7]

Very nice presentation! probably the biggest advantaged we (the United States of America and NATO) have is that we have much more experience and more budget in total, but those are still not reasons to underestimate our peers, as underestimating an opponent is one of the biggest mistakes you can make, such as how Russia saw Ukraine before February 24th, 2022.

[@ubfubeufbeuibinfejnjfnejn2283]

there was no reason to think nato was going to dump everything into Ukraine. After all, i see ukrainian using nato stuff, may that be atgm's, tanks, and much more. Some of this stuff was sent before the war. Ukrane is no iraq.

[@user-wp4yr7sj8b]

谢谢，希望人类和平，让人类迈向宇宙。这是人类几万年来最有希望突破地球的时代，错过了也许就不会有下一次了。

[@alfredyap14]

The minimum is to stay clear of Taiwan and south China seas… You know the best defence is to stop intimidating China and treat her as an equal.

[@alfredyap14]

@@feydrautha012 that earth and human civilisation is over and it doesn’t matter who is the polar bear. Everyone has turned to dust…

[@alfredyap14]

Throughout Chinese history, the military is the army of the Dynasty in power. It’s only very recent that the KMT(the party whom Sun Yet Sen founded and established the Republic of China) commanded and controlled the Nationalist Army even after retreating to island province of Taiwan. The nationalists army still bares the KMT logo! So the CPC control of the PLA is no different

[@liuchengwang6882]

愚不可及，鼠目寸光，歪曲历史。没有解放军和国军在阻挠日本侵略的历史，还有亚洲国家的稳定吗？力量取之于民，用之于民，而非权力者谋利工具，如果习近平不行，不用人民反他，内部的党派人士早就分裂了。

[@alfredyap14]

@@liuchengwang6882 嗨..道可道非常道…是非永远是从当事人的目观解读。1911-1949年民国做得好吗？非常的”民”但是内忧外患又如何？二战期间祖国实在无能为力但是我祖辈作为中国人他们从新加坡用钱寄钱支持祖国抗战，但是很多都牺牲和因为他们支持祖国而被杀害屠杀……有多少祖国和民国在台湾还记得在新加坡的-日本占领时期死难人民纪念碑呢……

[@liuchengwang6882]

​@@alfredyap14 哥们你即便是华裔，但也不能代表老一辈爱中国，希望中国独立自主的心情。新加坡还没建国时，中国并没有去干涉和帮助，并不是无情而是本身无法干涉别国是否独立（新加坡想成为中国邦建国还是殖民地？弱小的中国哪敢干涉啊）。还有你又错了，我们几十年的历史书和教育里面明确说明了海外华侨的无私帮助和爱国情怀--深刻在每一代中国人学生心里，我本人就是初中走到硕士都有这方面的教育。为啥中国最近面对灾难都无私帮助华侨撤离、为啥中国面对华侨都是叫”华侨同胞“，为啥中国相互平等的外交策略对待东南亚？不言而喻的结果啊。你原先就是要讽刺内部权力的滥用，但你无法确定共产党的权力是否滥用啊……

[@alfredyap14]

@@liuchengwang6882 王先生，有几点需要澄清：1） 您说： 新加坡还没建国时，中国并没有去干涉和帮助，并不是无情而是本身无法干涉别国是否独立 A：这我们认可和了解呀。 2） 您说：你原先就是要讽刺内部权力的滥用，但你无法确定共产党的权力是否滥用啊…… 我没有讽刺的意思。我只是说明我们祖国历史上军队都是忠于党派和朝代，从来不是国的直接管辖而已。清朝的淮军，李鸿章的北洋军舰都不是清朝的-（虽然他们为清朝而战而亡）。连八旗也是如此啊。。。。所以我只是说明不管是国民党军还是解放军都是在党的控制和指挥啊。。。是现实没有讽刺的意思。 关于权力是否滥用。。。我无法评论。我不知道也无法说个对错。您说得对我毕竟是华裔国籍是以独立和建国后的新加坡人，也不方便。。。但是祖国今天的成就是有目共睹的。怎么坏也不会比1911-1949年一样吧？

[@alfredyap14]

@@liuchengwang6882 谢谢陈清祖国还记得我们祖辈以往的爱国情怀。我误解，也认错。谢谢

[@fredfrond6148]

‘To subdue the enemy without fighting is the Acme skill in the art of war” Sun Tzu.

[@michaelmulligan0]

Really interesting analysis

[@rezzob]

I love how they talk about another attacking country because it’s going close technologically and also talk about US being a global empire as if that’s normal and everyone should be onboard! at one point all the talking head experts say “we need to keep them in the first island chain”!! I’m sorry? who is going to put you in your chain so not go around like a rabid wolf attacking everyone that doesn’t bend over

[@Daculaboy]

No one is tough guy. 😂

[@ebrahimkhan322]

With due respect, your speakers have given a twist to the true causes that have given rise to the type of Chinese response, e.g. you had mentioned the Chinese buit the artificial Islands; but, the speaker failed to mention the fact that it was the Philippine and the other smaller nations started building artificial islands in the first place,; but, not China! There are other facts which the preseners failed to address in proper context! ( e.g. Tsung Kuo, the speaker interpreted as center,which was confusing- how should the audience understand by that? These are just a few examples!

[@tyraelk7629]

Didn’t expect a history documentary when I clicked in😅

[@wenren7067]

There is a glaring error in the assessment of the technological development of the Chinese military: it's accelerating not plateauing in the recent years. Look no further than the Zhuhai Air Show 2022, do those new hardware (albeit for export only) mushroomed in every military field look like from a technologically plateauing force?