Will China Send Weapons to Russia for Use in Ukraine?

Expatriated Russian naval officer Andrei Martyanov thinks they will.

Real General Staffs salivate at the opportunity to try their technology and fighting doctrines on a real battlefield. It is all about those precious war correlates, performance data and its statistical analysis which allow to constantly update tactical and operational manuals, to shape technical requirements, which, in the end, translate into crucial advantages over the enemy.

Martyanov’s point may seem obscure to someone who thinks of modern warfare as a John Wayne movie. Martyanov is referring to the formal discipline of operations research as the foundation of contemporary warfare tactics and strategy.

China might decide for diplomatic reasons not to supply weapons to Russia, but if ever it fears a military confrontation with the U.S. it virtually must conduct operations research by field testing its systems on a battlefield. Ukraine at present is the obvious choice.

31 thoughts on “Will China Send Weapons to Russia for Use in Ukraine?

          1. “Why, because you say so?”

            No. Not because I say so. It is because too much reliance on a particular source of supply is risky. It is more sound business practice to cultivate multiple sources.


          2. I get it. You don’t say so, but you are qualified to tell Walmart what its business practices should be.


          3. “You don’t say so, but you are qualified to tell Walmart what its business practices should be.”

            You can put away your childish snark and just shut up if you have nothing more to add. It does not take great business acumen to know that it can be risky to put all your eggs in one basket.


          4. I will add that wanting to make others regret what they do seems like a childish sensibility to me.


          5. “I will add that wanting to make others regret what they do seems like a childish sensibility to me.”

            Uh, no. It is not childish. Not in the least. Your comment is though. You clearly have not thought it through. Do we not make burglars regret what they do? How about rapists? Murderers?

            Russia is committing war crimes. Helping Russia commit war crimes would be criminal. Criminals should be punished. Simple really.


    1. Why would it be wrong for China to provide arms to Russia, which we have made their ally, but OK for us to send arms to Ukraine?

      Seems like about a year ago I warned we would be pushing Russia into China’s waiting arms.


      1. It is important to understand that decisions Russia and China make are to a large and increasing extent beyond our ability to influence.


      2. “Why would it be wrong for China to provide arms to Russia”
        Because Russia is in the wrong in this war. Duh!

        “I warned we would be pushing Russia into China’s waiting arms.”

        It is China’s choice to make. If they would rather be closer to Russia and alienated from the United States, Europe and Japan they can accelerate that process by helping the criminal invaders.

        Your kumabaya vision of some sort of anti-Muslim alliance with Russia is (a) not needed – Islam is not expansionist and hasn’t been since 1492, and (b) an betrayal of our values so long as Russia remains an authoritarian state. We should “push” Putin away. If China wants him, they can have him. IMHO. But not without cost.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. And yet the result was entirely predictable to those outside your bubble.

          You only think you are not a religious person, but you jump from one false god to another.


          1. “And yet the result was entirely predictable to those outside your bubble.”
            What result? That by aiding Ukraine, Russia would seek help elsewhere? What has a “bubble” got to do with it? You did not have to be one half as wise as you think you are to know that would happen. By the way, Russian and China have been close to each other geopolitically for about 75 years now.

            “but you jump from one false god to another.”
            I know you are doing your very best to land an insult. Sorry, it does work when it not only does not make sense but is bearly decipherable in the context. But, I will bite – What “false god” are you refering to this time?

            Liked by 1 person

          2. Zelensky this time, when not bowing down to Gaia.

            Well, thanks for clarify your, uh, “thought.”

            I admire Zelensky.
            I am reminded of the Churchillian expression . . . “Cometh the hour, cometh the man.”
            When the war started and Russia seemed certain to take the whole country and execute the “Nazis” Zelensky was offered safe passage for himself and his family. His answer was pithy and historic. He said . . . “I don’t need a ride. I need ammunition.” Since then he has mobilized and motivated his countrymen and women and has galvanized support all over the world.

            So yes, I admire him. But to say I treat him as a god to worship is childish nonsense. Especially coming from a Trump cultist who struggles to find any fault with the most venal and corrupt degenerate to ever hold high office.

            As for Gaia, that is just silly. My concern is for the future of people. Earth will be here in one form or another until the sun explodes.

            Bottom line, if you are going to land insults that sting, you are going to have to do a lot better.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. “The point is your support on both issues in impervious to reason, They are clearly religious in nature.”

            So not buying your silly mantra – “There are no good guys here” – means I am impervious to reason? I hate to break it to you, but your mantra is bullshit and YOU – not me – are impervious to reason. It is not reasonable to equate the invader with the invaded. Not one little bit. You just love your own opinions beyond what is reasonable.

            As for religion, most of what we get from you on almost every subject is closer to dogma than to reason. So, to use one of your favorite come-backs – you are projecting again.


      1. “The Russians turned down China’s offer for negotiations. Some friend.”

        Of course they turned it down.

        China stated that respect for the territorial integrity of all countries was fundamental. Russia will not give up the land it has siezed until it is pushed out at the point of a gun.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. “What are you referring to; do you have a cite?”

          The other day you posted China’s terms for peace. Shortly afterwards Russia said thanks for trying but we cannot go along with that. Look it up.

          Liked by 1 person

  1. Before WW2, Franco in Spain was embroiled in a civil war. Hitler sent some of his latest weaponry to test them out while slaughtering Spaniards.

    This smacks of deja vu all over again.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s