[ethbr1]

Bingo.

The terrifying thing about China's shipbuilding and armament focusing is "Why would they be building these specific things if they weren't planning on invading Taiwan?"

The focus on amphibious capability doesn't have a lot of dual purpose use...

[ramblenode]

"31 Amphibious Ships are 'Not Enough,' Expert Says" [0]

I guess the US is about to invade Cuba.

[0] https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2023/4/5/31...

[digitalscribe]

> Why would they be building these specific things if they weren't planning on invading Taiwan?

It's basic, obvious, and rational defense policy. Everyone does it.

Why does the US have thousands and thousands of nukes? It's to ensure the destruction of any adversary in case of nuclear war.

The US isnt the only country that's entitled to an arms stockpile.

[ethbr1]

There's a difference between building nukes vs. building amphibious assault ships and transports.

The former aren't much use if you want to invade an island. The latter are.

https://asiatimes.com/2025/01/china-building-monster-barges-...

Pretending like Chinese needs to stockpile amphibious assault capabilities for defensive purposes is sticking your head in the sand.

[digitalscribe]

> There's a difference between building nukes vs. building amphibious assault ships and transports.

Nukes have essentially zero "defense" purposes. Yet all the great powers have them. It's called "good defense policy." All great powers do this.

> Pretending like Chinese needs to stockpile amphibious assault capabilities for defensive purposes is sticking your head in the sand.

Pretending that building out a military = instant invasion is paranoia.

Take a look at the USA military posture, including in Asia. See what forces are available.

So this means the USA is prepared to invade China any minute now? Plus nuke China, Russia because of the nukes?