Western astrology focuses on the Sun and Moon, while Vedic astrology focuses on the emotional aspects of an individual. Vedic astrology uses the Sidereal Zodiac, which calculates the positions of planets based on their actual observations in the sky. Western astrology uses the Tropical Zodiac, which is based on the Sun and Moon.
There are four hemispheric divisions of the chart: Northern, Southern, Eastern, and Western. The two most popular Eastern branches are Indian and Chinese, but we often refer to Western astrology. Eastern astrology is more focused on the future, while Western astrology is more focused on the present.
Both forms of astrology have their advantages and disadvantages. Western astrology is more focused on the future, while Eastern astrology is more focused on the present. Ascendant sign calculators account for time differences, so it depends on the individual’s preferences.
Astrology-inspired travel can be based on your zodiac sign’s element (fire, earth, water, or air), helping you choose a destination and time of year. Retirement based on your zodiac sign can make the most of your golden years. Travel horoscopes can help you find the best places to go in Europe and the United Kingdom based on your star sign.
Time and place are the basic factors in calculating a horoscope. Astrocartography, or locational astrology, allows you to see how your perspective on the world, energy, love, and career prospects might be. With just a few clicks, we can access a wealth of knowledge from the comfort of our own homes or on the go.
📹 पूरे घर का वास्तु दोष दूर कर देगी यह वीडियो | Happy Life Astro | Dr. Yogesh Sharma
पूरे घर का वास्तु दोष दूर कर देगी यह वीडियो | Happy Life Astro | Dr. Yogesh Sharma Dr.
Which astrology site is more accurate?
Astrodienst, also known as Astro. com, is a popular site for free natal chart readings. It offers horoscopes written by human astrologers and computer-generated into a holistic birth chart for each individual. The site offers 16 different types of horoscopes, including Psychological, Money and Success, Career and Vocation, and The Child’s Horoscope, with free previews of buyable content. The horoscopes are written by various astrologers who view the chart through different lenses. The Personal Portrait is the most complete horoscope, but the Psychological Horoscope by Liz Greene is highly recommended.
Cafe Astrology is another site that offers horoscopes and astrological information about zodiac signs and planets since 2022. It is an encyclopedia of beginner astrology with numerous types of reports, both free and paid, as well as “cookbook astrology” such as descriptions of each planet in each sign viewed through the lens of a natal chart, love, or how the latest retrograde planet will affect your sign. Both sites provide valuable insights into astrology and provide a comprehensive understanding of one’s natal chart.
Are horoscopes 100% accurate?
Astrology, a belief system that links astronomical phenomena to human events or personality descriptions, has been criticized by the scientific community for its lack of explanatory power. Scientific testing has found no evidence to support the premises or purported effects outlined in astrological traditions. The most famous test, led by Shawn Carlson, concluded that natal astrology performed no better than chance. Astrology has not demonstrated its effectiveness in controlled studies and has no scientific validity, making it regarded as pseudoscience.
There is no proposed mechanism of action by which the positions and motions of stars and planets could affect people and events on Earth in the way astrologers say they do, which does not contradict well-understood aspects of biology and physics. Astrology is regarded as pseudoscience due to its lack of scientific validity and the reliance on vague statements to avoid falsification.
Should I believe Western or Vedic astrology?
Vedic astrology is considered more accurate due to its consideration of planets and their movements. Unlike western astrology, which uses a fixed tropical reading, Vedic astrology uses the sidereal zodiac to calculate horoscopes. This approach takes into account the changing patterns and universe as a whole, making it more detailed and accurate. The twelve astrological signs include Aries, Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Leo, Virgo, Libra, Scorpio, Sagittarius, Capricorn, Aquarius, and Pisces. While both Vedic and western astrology have similar planets and interpretations, Vedic calculations are more detailed and potentially more reliable.
Is sidereal more accurate?
The text Mastering the Zodiac posits that the most accurate system of astrology is sidereal astrology, which employs the original celestial configuration and the essential chart. While tropical astrology is still accurate in displaying physical characteristics, Vedic astrology is more accurate due to its reference to the visible sky. To ascertain one’s true sidereal signs, one may utilize the sidereal chart calculator.
Where should I retire based on my zodiac?
To make the most of your golden years, consider your zodiac sign when choosing your retirement destination. Aries: Palm Springs, California; Taurus: Quepos, Costa Rica; Gemini: Rehoboth Beach, Delaware; Cancer: Falmouth, Maine; Leo: Sarasota, Florida; Virgo: Caminha, Portugal; and Libra: Bordeaux, France.
Your zodiac sign can provide insight into your core desires and help you tap into your ideal retirement destination. Socially-minded air signs may seek a bustling community, while pragmatic Earth signs focus on finding the most suitable funds. Fun-loving fire signs seek excitement and enrichment, while emotional water signs may prefer a more tranquil environment.
In summary, your zodiac sign can provide valuable insights into your core desires and help you find the perfect retirement destination for your golden years.
Does Vedic use sidereal?
Vedic astrology, an ancient Indian form based on the Vedas, uses the sidereal zodiac, which corresponds to different constellations. The Moon’s position in a person’s birth chart is considered crucial for determining their destiny and influencing their emotions and moods. Sidereal astrology, originating in Persia, is based on the tropical zodiac, aligned with the seasons. Both astrologies emphasize the importance of the Moon in a person’s life and the Moon’s influence on their emotions and moods.
What is the happiest age to retire?
Individuals who have retired early tend to experience a peak in happiness levels between the ages of 55 and 75. This is until their health declines, at which point they may experience an increase in happiness at the end of their lives due to a reduction in regret. This results in an earlier rebound in happiness, a higher peak level of happiness, and a longer steady-state level of happiness. The financial implications of these benefits are contingent upon the initial level of distress, with the potential for costs reaching millions of dollars.
What is the strongest predictor of when someone will retire?
The study presents an integrative model of early retirement using data from the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study, which extends prior work by incorporating work-family conflict to capture the interaction between work and family domains. The model suggests that family and job demands and resources predict family-to-work and work-to-family conflict, respectively. These factors are presumed to have only indirect effects on retirement timing via the intervening effect of quality of life measures, such as marital satisfaction, job satisfaction, and health.
The authors assume that these three factors constitute predictors of early retirement in addition to socioeconomic status and the availability of a pension plan and health insurance. The model was tested with structural equation modeling techniques, and the results were supportive, offering a general framework for the integration of previous research findings.
Should you use tropical or sidereal astrology?
The most accurate method of astronomical measurement for astrological charts is sidereal measurement. In contrast, the fixed snapshot of the cosmos used in tropical measurement, which is the standard of modern Western astrology, is now astronomically inaccurate.
Which astrology is more real?
Vedic astrology is considered more accurate due to its consideration of planets and their movements. Unlike western astrology, which uses a fixed tropical reading, Vedic astrology uses the sidereal zodiac to calculate horoscopes. This approach takes into account the changing patterns and universe as a whole, making it more detailed and accurate. The twelve astrological signs include Aries, Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Leo, Virgo, Libra, Scorpio, Sagittarius, Capricorn, Aquarius, and Pisces. While both Vedic and western astrology have similar planets and interpretations, Vedic calculations are more detailed and potentially more reliable.
Which form of astrology is most accurate?
Nādi Astrology is a detailed and accurate method of predicting the future based on the combined results of all sixteen divisional charts. However, it requires precise birth time and knowledge of genuine Nādi texts, which are often unpublished and kept secret by custodians. This is similar to Samhitā texts in north India, such as Bhrigu Samhitā or Rāvana Samhitā. Atma, the’real’ self, is immortal and characterizes the real self. It changes only to the physical bodies during common stages such as birth, childhood, teenage, adulthood, old age, and death.
Atma enters a different body based on one’s Karma and takes form based on their good or bad deeds. In Karmic terms, a transition like this is like a person being promoted or demoted based on their sincerely, honest, and efficient work in an organization.
📹 What Countries Would Look Like After WW3
The next world war will be an all-out battle involving every country and depending on who comes out on top, the world you know …
All of these scenarios are totally laughable. The only reason countries have so many nukes is to NOT lose a war. Any side that is losing, whether China, Russia, or the US would start using nukes to wipe out the other countries. If a WW3 scenario ended up with one side losing, rest assured the majority of territories on both sides would simply be uninhabitable rather than divided.
12:15 So India remains neutral during the whole war. But after the war, it is divided into 3 parts controlled by Pakistan, China and remaining India? This scenario is very very unlikely. India can defend itself because it is a nuclear armed country. Any power however mighty can’t hope to attack, divide and conquer India without suffering consequences. Yes, India has the “no first attack” rule of nuclear weapons, but if the very existence of the country is threatened, do you expect that India will not use its nuclear weapons?
So, if you don’t know, India will fight in the WW because at this time, India doesn’t avoid war and capturing India by both of the countries would not be possible after the WW because they are exhausted in energy, weapons, food etc. So in both scenarios even if India stays neutral or fights in the war, there’s no way for them to capture any territories of India.
I can’t even imagine a scenario where Mexico decided to oppose the US in a world war. Obviously Germany could imagine that scenario in both ww1 and ww2… And yet they were wrong both times. But the two countries are tied so intensely and deeply that it’s basically unimaginable that Mexico would side with a foreign power over the US.
Scenario 2 is more likely. 1-Ukraine is falling 2- the US will have 70 trillion in debt, 5 years from now. 3- Europe is DE-industrializing and getting poorer by the day. Meanwhile 1- Russia’s economy is growing with 87% approval rating for Putin 2-China is preparing to build a base in the moon 3-Africa is ditching Europe and the US 4- China is controlling more and more of the industrial supply chain Though, I don’t think Russia will absorb any flailing nation in Europe. Not their style to spend money.
To anyone perusal this article solidifying these possibilities in their minds as “the possible outcomes” remember, everything is changing, always. These are just some sketches, maybe educated guesses we might call them, as to what COULD happen. But any of these scenarios remain 99.999% unlikely. In 1937, I doubt anyone in America would’ve predicted the USA and USSR would end up in an alliance together.
India would be broken up ? The current nationalist govt wont give away this chance to take back kashmir and other regions of Pakistan, its the UN and international pressure that is keeping us from reclaiming (plus both of them wont be able to rule the land with highest population which is nationalist)
What made me laugh was part from 12:18 😂. I mean India has 4th most powerful armed forces and has killed around 44 Chinese soldiers as early as in 2020 by losing 20 Indian soldiers without any support from the West. India also has around 300 nuclear weapons which can be launched on any part of China with India’s Intercontinental Ballistic Missile system. But I can’t blame the content creator because western education system suffers from geopolitical myopia and disregards any non western nation’s as strong military power.
Netizens here didn’t catch the last point of this article. It doesn’t matter whether you win or lose. If a nuclear war occurs, then people will not fight over territory that has been exposed to nuclear radiation. We from Indonesia (a neutral country) really hope that we can live in peace. Loser be ashes; winner be charcoal☮️
India’s non alignment, seems unlikely in such an extreme scenario, the current gov is much more aggressive, and while it has turned a blind eye to many conflicts, it has been to keep the power, and it would be quick to notice that not taking sides will lead to the power being irrelevant, in short, India will be supporting the cause to save itself, and provide full support in the form of power and machinery…
I have a different scenario in mind. Everyone fights to a stalemate where the fighting force of each participant gets so low that even if there is a “victor”, the fighting force is so damaged that they would be unable to take advantage of the loser and even attempt to split the land or install puppet governments. After the war each participant would be too focused on recovery to care who won or lost.
If India stays neutral which would actually be likely, they would be building military strength in their country. Perhaps once the end of WW3 closes in, India could take advantage of weakened China and Pakistan. Overall, if WW3 happened, it would be just like WW2, countries such as Canada, USA, Australia etc. Would shift their production of machinery from civilian hardware & necessities to military hardware and technology. Then Russia would probably be experiencing a lot of problems and face having to deal with resistance in their territories, then that would be their end. Again, this is a theory so don’t start a war in replies.
I feel like the India part in 2nd scenario might be a little illogical. For the most time if not in the whole war, India would be neutral, that’s the correct part. But the problem is the invasion. Russia has been a very big ally of India since Soviet Union era and has even helped it fight against China and USA altogether. So, based on the stats, it is more likely to betray China than it’s friend, India. Anothet big point is that Russia and the whole world would find India at least more reliable than China because, well, China can’t be trusted.
Pretty sure even if scenario 2 happened without nukes, there’s no way NATO would lose even against most of the world. Europe would easily take care of Russia and America would easily take care of China, not to talk about the rest of NATO like Japan, SK, and more… Even if Mexico entered the way, America could fight two fronts.
The part about India in the 2nd scenario was quite flawed. India has strong relations with Russia and even if there are no permanent friends in geopolitics Russia would still want to keep India as a counterbalance to China. India would most likely maintain armed neutrality in any kind of World War III scenario.
I got about half way through. Very fun as a fantasy game type story, but completely unrealistic and off-target on a number of aspects. For example CSTO’s provisions are NOT like NATO (witness Azerbaijan and Armenia) and some CSTO members are fairly openly ‘pro US’ – so the likelihood of some of those entering a war against NATO is slim to none (none). And the idea in #2 that Mexico is going to align itself with China and make war against the USA (what???) and that North Korea will lead a reunited country … Ack!! Well, it’s a fun watch anyways.
One thing came to mind: China wants/needs water from Russian land, namely lake Baikal. To my understanding the Russians are currently unwilling to allow China access, and even limited access to any mining in their land. Perhaps China may decide to take it in the scenario of WWIII and say to heck with Russia.
Hello, The Infographics Show, I recently watched your article, and I found it to be informative and engaging. However, I noticed a geographical inaccuracy regarding the depiction of Indian territory. Specifically, the regions of Jammu & Kashmir, and Ladakh. These areas are integral parts of India, and it would be great if the article could be updated to reflect this accuracy. Ensuring correct representations of borders is crucial to avoid any unintentional misinformation 9:32. Thank you for your attention to detail, and I hope this concern can be taken care of in the future. Best regards
I would imagine that South America would literally refuse China’s “belt and road” diplomacy and just unite as a united continent. It would be rough but they would make it work. Especially since some countries (Venezuela for one) would have no better options or ways out of the holes they are in. Mexico would immediately just glom onto the US and Canada as one block, bring along the entire Mexican Peninsula. They would remain separate nations as before but would be more firmly tied to North America.
As an Indian I would support west…i mean in reality we are close to west or say USA than russia or china..how many indians know and speak russian or chinese? ..mostly we speak english,people to people connection is more with west than russian or chinese, most our students go to west for study, western influence is increasing more here, which car brands we love?…mostly western or Japanese,most of our brains want to work abroad in the west etc…we do not have any relations with russia apart from military supplies..to all my dear indians saying russia is our brother blah blah…please be realistic…
I had a huge respect for The Infographics Show team & their work but your views regarding India in the scenario 2 is disappointing. Had you done more research, you’d conclude a country of 1.4 bn people and 4th largest economy in the world wouldn’t easily bend in front of its neighbours just like that. India is well capable of countering the attack from 2 sides together even in normal scenario, you’re talking about the time when the other countries would be drained out of resources & men power
This article is ridiculous… Any time the top nuclear nations of either side feels it’s losing, they would simply launch nuclear weapons rather than face the prospect of being conquered, which would of course invite retaliation from the other side… What remains of humanity will divide the Wastelands between themselves depending on what power and resources they have…
Interesting thought experiment, but i can not even foresee that second scenario ever happening, much less far fetched. Basically as long as the USA still has even half of its nuclear arsenal and was facing existential defeat, it would burn every single Chinese and Russia city, and face the same results for its own.
I hold great hope for the success of various SMR projects which are going forward. These smaller scale units are a factory produced alternative to the “grand experiment” approach which has given us the overrun issue for new nukes. One of the larger benefits can be placing these close to where needed, rather than suffer major transmission losses. Install times are said to be lower. We shall soon see as Canada’s first unit is expected to be in service soon in Ontario. There are four other provinces in line to move on this tech. Solar, wind and battery power are not as useful here in Canada as you enjoy in Australia..
The one fallacy in using debt as a way to join is, debt would cause the country to join the other side with the promise of the debts being wiped out after the dust settles. Even if I had twice the size of the US army with gear and equipment I would still not invade the US, they people there have more guns than people and most people know how to use those guns very well. Take the US’s war for independence, Britain which was many times bigger in army people and equipment failed to keep the US as part of Britain.
You usually have pretty good articles, but this one is way off the mark. Latin America could not possibly threaten the United States. For one thing, they’re militaries are a joke, the second thing is, there’s no way they could get at us via a land route. South American, and central American geography is a nightmare. And of course they have no way of getting at us by water.
Another factor to consider. Civilians. All out world war in western countries would look vastly different to ww2. Highly skilled, educated population and the ability to utilise the female population beyond factory jobs and technically capable young people easily upskilled. If you look at current areas of conflict and the endless drifting of refugees, it would not be acceptable for EU/US people. We like our stuff, and there’s an extreme motivation to keep it. Also I’ve travelled through Asia. India, Japan and South Korea, Thailand, Philippines etc would contain China. Even North Korea may relish the opportunity to take out it’s overlord.
I think the WW3 could be fought without nuclear war but only unless one side would start loosing… if Nato for example land in china or was fighting for Moscow…. i bet Russia or China would use nukes in this situation. Especially with authoritative rulers they have… maybe it wont help them but it could be their only desperate way to defend themselves from losing war, power and very possibly their lives
I feel like India wouldn’t, it would be right to say that India would abstain in a world war condition and could join the battlefield just in case it is invaded or attacked to defend itself. And it is highly unlikely that any party either the USA or Russia lead would even think of attacking a friendly nation like India. I can’t promise about China or Pakistan, but even if they were to occupy an inch of land, they would be shaken by India’s outrage to their very foundation.
Post American Civil War, Prussia must have come to regard itself as “Europe’s Mexico equivalent” in geostrategic terms. So the fast expanding “”Wild East” of an ever more prosperous and quickly modernizing Russian Empire would represent a major future obstacle to a “future united” Germany’s own ambitions to rule most of Europe.
Here is my own proposed scenario, not tomorrow but maybe 20 years from now: China launches a conquest of Taiwan; US (but not NATO) + Japan and South Korea go to war against China. For Europe, all depends on what Putin’s regime (by then, without Putin) has become, and also what will be the final outcome of present-day Ukranian war; in case of defeat or with a poor result, and being US focused in Asia, an authoritarian Russia (if Russia still is authoritarian) could seek revenge upon Ukraine and Europe.
Woah, there are so many points in this article which are not exactly accurate I do not really know where to begin. Some random points: 1. Why would non-communist Putin-Russia create a communist European super state? 2. Why would Xinjiang join Kazakhstan after a dissolution of China? The Uyghur people are related to the Kazakhs, but so are the other Central Asian countries. 3. Giving Bangladesh to Myanmar? How on earth would Myanmar integrate the several times larger Muslim Bangladeshi population into its Buddhist majority fold? Ever heard of the Rohingya? 4. You are aware that giving Chinese Inner Mongolia to Mongolia would turn the new Mongolia into a Han Chinese majority country overnight, except you expelled all Han Chinese from Inner Mongolia – which lived there for generations partly even before the CCP rose to power. 5. The world maps you use are all over the place in respect to the borders portrayed, even in shots supposed to represent the real life borders in the present day. 6. You do not even address the possibility of the Republic of China aka Taiwan might want to become the legitimate government of a democratic China proper again after a PRC defeat. I am aware this is fiction, but you should know a thing or two about the regions in which you redraw borders in your hypothetical scenario to make it more realistic.
USSR was an adversary. Russia is only the 10th or 11th economy. It is hardly populated compared to size and has a dozen borders. US, China and India are major countries militarily and given population. These three also have awesome geographic borders. The entire reason Russia feels it needs to recreate the USSR they picked the largest breakaway countries from soviet times. You see China and India are no longer emerging. They are also no longer overseen by England. They are entirely independent.
The amount of people who seemingly don’t seem to understand that this conflict is the start of something much larger boggles my mind. Yea this is a “European war” and countries in the global south, and east, obviously have more important issues going on rather than Ukraine But if left unchecked this conflict could, and will devastate the world and reshape it for centuries to come.
One most important thing is China’s demography. It has all the disadvantages which someone won’t want. Although china is big but 90 percent of china lies in south. So a concentrated at one place is easy to target.. Northern border to India is impossible battle ground for them. Naval attack towards India has to come though very narrow strait.
A China – Russia alliance would never work as well as the Germany – Japan in WWII. It’s because the CCP’s primary interest is to maintain power within China. Also Xi is not as strong as he portrayed himself to the West. They might launch a limited attack on Taiwanese territories but will soon chicken out if the mainland is being attacked. China might collapse into a civil war between different CCP factions soon after that. But for Xi’s interest, he might not get involved in Russia’s war. But it’ll be hard to say if Russia finally collapsed and there’s a power vacuum in its far eastern territories. Those land were historically claimed by both China and Korea and was once part of the Japanese empire. It’s underdeveloped, rich in resources and strategically valuable. Will the northeastern Asian countries conflict with each other over those land is hard to say.
In the scenario that Russia loses, I don’t think it is the east/siberia that will end up in conflict. These are underpopulated stable areas. If Russia breaks up, St. Petersburg and Kaliningrad would probably be the favorite children of the West. Siberia and Far East will probably go on their own silently under the influence of whoever is proactive e.g. Japan+west or China or Kazakhstan. It is Caucasus up to Urals that will become next conflict hotbeds.
Senario TWO has some problems as Russia would not even want to control eastern Ukraine much less all of Europe. I can see Scandinavia and Alaska going to the Russians but Mexico has no army and won’t be doing any conquering. As for Africa becoming an industrial power house? Really? You need rule of law and security for that plus an average IQ of 100 at least for that. That leaves Africa were it has always been. The Russians have done very well attriting the Ukrainians actually with casualty rates running at around 10 to 1 according to European and Russian sources.
You should’ve also consider the factor – ‘time’. According to the world bank economic projections and international economic experts, India is going to be the 2nd largest economy in the world (ranks after China) by 2075 . Indian currency’s purchasing power will be 30% more than that of the US. India has the highest working-youth population ratio right now which is one of the most important key-changing factor in economy. The similar increased working-youth ratio once changed the economy of China (early 20s), Korea (90s), and this time is for India. With increased economic strength, obviously India will increase it’s defence budget, strengthen it’s defence system, upgrade and manufacture new equipment. By the time when WW3 begins, INDIA will become the key-factor sitting in the leading role of choosing the fate of WW3’s outcome.
They are thinking that India is cake…. But don’t know that if US left nato whole Europe will come under control of Russians😂. And don’t know defence power of India…. India is going to replace Russia soon. Probably in upcoming 5-6 years… In the term of conventional war(without nukes) and at that time India will be 3rd big economy of world……and have highest no of people and youngers😂. How fool the creator is!! 😂😂😂😂
Let’s be real in a global conflict there’s two outcomes. One, war is waged to the point where both sides agree to a ceasefire with minimal demands from either sides making the conflict utterly pointless or in scenario 2 one side loses and launches as many nukes as possible. Scenario 2 seems more likely to me.
Respectfully, I think you underestimate the Canadian war machine. Their war machine is different than the USA’s, because theirs is the people. Some of the most resilient, tough, smart and best trained soldiers in the world come from Canada. Also, the Canadian people… although the nicest people in the world… do NOT like being bullied. The rise of the nation on the backs of people willing to fight would be astonishing, and would be one of the most impressive things the world has ever seen since WWII. 80% of the able bodied men in Canada would not think twice about going to war to fight if it meant saving the world. Canada would not have the weaponry at first, but with the help of USA weaponry… that combination with the USA’s current assets and I don’t believe any country or combination of countries would be able to defeat USA and Canada together. North America is impossible to invade, and that’s not even taking into consideration the amount of hunting/hunters and non-military weapons in North America in general. North America is an unbreakable fortress.
Id like to see countries getting together to agree to keep all nukes and weapons in one central/neutral area like the Antartica (in case of an alien invasion heh heh) and only a select few in each country allowed to retain a certain amount to train citizens in the event of out-of-this world invasion. Without these weapons in ANY country, no one would dare to wage war on another flagrantly for the sake of appropriating that country’s resource in the name of democracy or freedom. Greed has many faces. Countries that refuse to surrender their weapons under this neutral inventory, well it shows who they really are. This is the only way to safeguard our future generation.
India would stay neutral but it’s border are threatened… Its would be danger for the one who dare to do that …. If India join either of the two side, it would definitely change the game … Also, it’s very likely uncertain that India could break apart … Russia won’t let, also Pakistan is not even close to take over parts of india …
One way or another, victory for the west will in-fact hinge in India. It is extremely unlikely that they would remain neutral in a global conflict. Frankly, whomever is allied with them will likely push the other side over the edge in a key area of the conflict. It also depends on the will of the Indian peoples themselves. Though I think it more likely they will not approve of China’s vision for the world.
i see how you got that dislike ratio… that second scenario was made mostly to a peace the sino russian supporters and it shows by how little effort was put in the justifications to how and why they win the war in such a decisive way i was so baffled by this that i’m even writing this comment 6 months latter (“knowing” that no one will read it) just to complain about the lack of thought put into it
Did you take into account how many troops would be needed to oppress western Europe and from where these tropps will come from? There are more than 440 million inhabitants in the European Union and 50 million more in Great Britain and I think that less than 10 % would like Russia and Arab countries to take over their regimes.
If the Belarus army where to get weapons, they would turn on their own government first, and then Russia. Russia had the 2nd most powerful army in the world. Then they had the 2nd most powerful army in Ukraine. Now they have the 2nd most powerful army in Russia. They are out of arms and they are out of soldiers. China has lots of soldiers but their equipment is magnitudes below par with NATO for now. NATO simply cannot lose for now. Authoritarian governments suppress innovation because of rampant corruption but NATO is doing everything they can to destroy their own militaries (because of corruption).
I don’t get, if China n India indulged in war then two massive military power in terms of military personnel(2.4 million chinese and 2.1 million Indians) will get indulged in fight. How long this battle will last. In case of this fight, the lose of Chinese military will be imminent. After this heavy casuality, how can china sustain in other war fronts.
problem is russia’s military is currently crumbling, this means all of its power would rely on china. china is currently too focused on taiwan and the south china sea, this is where america is focused right now, not Europe. the other thing gou need to take into consideration when thinking about america is, 127 guns per 100 civilians average. im pretty sure an invasion would be like going up against a nation sized secret army.
Well, with China growing, BRICS growing, Russia growing and winning the war in Ukraine while the West is collectively struggling, losing the Global South, Middle East, Central and SE Asia and Ukraine, it’s sort of easy to see the Scenario 2 as winning this race to the bottom. Scenario 3 is just a collection of unrealistic assumptions starting with NATO being stronger than Russia/China…
As a Chinese, this article makes my blood boil. But come to think of it, isn’t it good to stay alive? How can there be so many things worth fighting for that hurt principles? Let Putin go. He is already the Caesar of Russia, and if the West, led by the United States, had not done too much to him, I don’t think he would have had to take such a risk.
Scenario 4…..Japan admits it has nuclear weapons……and have based them in Taiwan, Philippines and Vietnam…….Japan also has perfected particle beam weapons and tells the world it can shoot any missiles launched by the CCP. At this point, the people rise up in China to over throw the CCP…..and invite the US, Japan and other Asian nations to over see new elections to turn China into a free republic…… China becomes a larger peaceful economic power that benefits the world.