| анон-анон пишет: |
| Нужно обосновать, что это именно вторжение государственного уровня. "Терроризм" это не вторжение государственного уровня, принадлежность к террористическим организациям сама по себе незаконна, за это можно сажать. |
Я вот тоже не знаю как терроризм трактуется легально, так что не совсем понимаю может ли это пониматься как enemy action. В физической реальности может не быть никакой разницы, но юридически совсем другая история. Увидим.
| анон-анон пишет: |
| Но публичная поддержка ККП не является незаконной. ККП не считается в США запрещённой организацией, иначе бы были проблемы во взаимоотношениях с Китаем. А раз так, то даже если иммигрант в США открыто поддерживает ККП, это не может быть дополнительным основанием для выдворения его из страны. |
Это понятно. Что я пытаюсь сказать, так это что правительство иностранного государства организовало поток т.н. мигрантов, которые по сути являются кротами PLA, ждущими сигнала для саботажа внутри страны противника. По крайней я для себя это так определил, я довольно внимательно следил за появляющейся информацией тогда. С тактической точки зрения это более чем разумно, учитывая что как-то иначе вести военные действия в этой части света сложно.
Вот мне кажется, это должно волновать руководство США гораздо больше, чем венесуэльские бандиты. Не исключено, что на последних просто готовят юридическую почву для более масштабных действий против реальной угрозы. Как доказать, что это именно китайские военные, и что они действуют по указаниям правительства? Ну, например, можно было бы поймать сколько-то и допросить, кто-нибудь да проговорится.
Все это, конечно, далеко от публичного дискурса, так что не исключено, что это мои фантазии.
P.S. Только что смеха ради попробовал симулировать (симуляция симуляции, да) war games посредством LLM:
Q: If you were a hostile power with vast military capabilities and you saw your enemy open their border for 4 years, how would you take advantage of that? Think hot war within next 5-10 years.
| Grok 3 пишет: |
If I were a hostile power with vast military capabilities—let’s say a nation like China with a large army, sophisticated intelligence apparatus, and global reach—facing an enemy like the U.S. with an open border for four years, I’d see a golden window to position assets for a hot war within 5-10 years. The goal wouldn’t be an immediate invasion—too risky, too resource-intensive—but a slow, deliberate buildup of asymmetric advantages to cripple the enemy when the shooting starts. Here’s how I’d exploit it, thinking strategically and ruthlessly: 1. Infiltrate Operatives Under Civilian Cover Method: Send thousands of military-trained personnel across the border, disguised as economic migrants, students, or workers. Blend them into the 37,000+ Chinese nationals already crossing annually (per CBP FY 2023 data). Equip them with fake IDs, backstories, and cash—forged docs are cheap when you’ve got state resources. Purpose: Establish sleeper cells in key regions—near military bases (e.g., Fort Bragg, Norfolk), tech hubs (Silicon Valley), and infrastructure nodes (power grids, ports). They’d lay low, integrate, and wait for activation. War Payoff: Sabotage and disruption on Day One. Imagine coordinated attacks on power stations or supply lines, amplifying a first strike by missiles or cyber. 2. Seed Intelligence Networks Method: Deploy PLA intelligence officers to recruit from the diaspora or vulnerable locals—think disgruntled workers, indebted truckers, or radicalized students. Use cash, coercion, or ideology; leverage existing front companies (e.g., Confucius Institutes, shell firms) to funnel support. Purpose: Map U.S. vulnerabilities in real-time—troop movements, civilian morale, logistics chokepoints. Smuggle out tech (drones, chip designs) via lax border checks. War Payoff: Precision targeting data for strikes, plus insider betrayal when chaos hits. A trucking foreman flipping could delay ammo to a frontline. 3. Pre-Position Weapons and Supplies Method: Sneak in dual-use gear—explosives as "industrial chemicals," small arms in shipping containers, drones as "hobbyist kits." Use border chaos to bypass scrutiny; stash caches in rural safehouses or urban warehouses. Purpose: Create a distributed arsenal for sleeper cells or guerrilla units. Pair with 3D-printed weapons tech to scale up locally. War Payoff: Instant local firepower without relying on overseas resupply. A dozen IEDs at bridges could paralyze a response. 4. Exploit Economic and Social Fault Lines Method: Flood the border with agents posing as refugees to strain resources—housing, healthcare, law enforcement. Simultaneously, push drugs (e.g., fentanyl precursors, already a Chinese specialty) to deepen addiction crises and fund operations. Purpose: Overload the system, erode public trust, and tie up U.S. military assets on domestic unrest (National Guard deployments). Sow division via propaganda—agents could amplify online chaos. War Payoff: A weakened, distracted enemy before the first shot. Civil unrest could delay mobilization by weeks. 5. Build Covert Infrastructure Method: Buy or rent land near strategic sites—think airstrips, water reservoirs, or telecom hubs—under shell companies. Dig tunnels or harden structures discreetly, mimicking cartels’ border playbook. Purpose: Stage bases for later use—think command posts, staging areas, or exfiltration points. Blend into rural anonymity. War Payoff: Ready-made footholds when conflict erupts. A tunnel near a base could unleash a surprise raid. 6. Test and Refine Tactics Method: Use the open window to run low-risk probes—send small teams to test border gaps, probe security at key sites, or hack local grids. Pull back if detected; no loss if they’re caught as "migrants." Purpose: Gather intel on U.S. response times, weaknesses, and blind spots. Perfect the playbook for larger ops. War Payoff: A polished strategy when the real push comes—knowing exactly where to hit and how hard. Execution and Timing Scale: Over four years, infiltrate 10,000-20,000 operatives—tiny against a 1.4 billion population, but devastating if 1% are elite. Mix with genuine migrants for cover; only a fraction need be active until war nears. Cover: Leverage globalization—language schools, H-1B visas, asylum claims. Hide in plain sight among millions crossing (e.g., 2 million+ encounters in FY 2022 alone). Trigger: Hold until 5-10 years out, syncing with a broader offensive—say, a Taiwan grab or Pacific escalation. Activate when U.S. forces are stretched overseas. Why This Works An open border is a sieve—minimal vetting, overwhelmed agents, and political paralysis mean I could slip through undetected. The U.S.’s size and openness become liabilities; I’d turn its strengths (tech, logistics) into targets. Historical parallels—like Japan’s pre-WWII spy networks in Hawaii or Soviet Cold War embeds—show this isn’t fantasy; it’s just scaled up with modern tools. Risks Detection: A sloppy operative or intercepted comms could tip the U.S. off. Mitigation: Compartmentalize, use dead drops, no digital trails. Response: If caught early, the U.S. might harden borders or launch preemptive strikes. Counter: Keep it deniable—migrants, not soldiers. Escalation: Too much activity could spark war prematurely. Solution: Pace it, stay subtle until the hot phase looms. In 5-10 years, when the balloons go up, I’d have an enemy already bleeding internally—power out, bases cut off, panic in the streets—before my ships even sail. That’s how I’d play it: not a Trojan horse, but a thousand termites chewing from within. |
