Hillbilly wisdom: Yes, you can have both but not equally. Examine the countries around the world and you find that all spend a portion of their wealth on the defense industry. You will also find different areas of priorities. Since @ 2012 China has developed a national foreign policy of developing trade with other nations. They have invested billions in infrastructure and ports for other nations that allow China and these countries to move products quickly within the country and improve both imports and exports efficiency. This type of mutual benefit has positioned China to grow both its economy and its influence throughout the world. They trade. Trade benefits both parties.

During this time period, the United States continued to manufacture the latest and most advanced war technology in the world. The problem is trade with the United States for weapons means under- developed countries must sacrifice or choose between goods (bread) and military hardware (bombs). To this extent it is necessary for the world to adopt the view that danger is imminent and without an increase in defense spending all will be lost. Safety is offset and counterbalanced by feeding and caring for the population.

By constantly and continuously disrupting the political climate, the need for advanced weapons is maintained. Thus the United States justifies its disruptive actions.

Chinese aggression is not the fear that drives the United States. Look at their record. China is “winning without fighting”. Trade as a weapon is working!

As Chinese increase and upgrade their military production, we can only hope their military capabilities does not reach the scale of production that their domestic production has. We can hope. What happens when we cannot compete with the scale of production in the area of defense weapons? When the ability to destroy the world can be achieved for half the cost; you can deal with a country that has invested your countries infrastructure; a trading partner which allows you to use your local currency as payment with a better exchange rate, which country would you align with?

China has sanctioned 20 companies that produce and provide military equipment to Twain. This includes freezing assets within their jurisdiction. The sanctions will extend to companies and countries that support these companies. How will it be when our products are intercepted and confiscated under the banner of sanctioned goods? Tit for Tat.

Within the United States, there is a consensus that we can not produce as cheaply as our competitors. Which is so much bullshit. If we desired, we could. Advanced automation works the same for everyone. But it requires investment. Our investments should address our needs and excess goods can be traded.

United States has about 1/5 the population of China. Does it not stand to reason that our domestic needs are less than China’s needs. Our immediate needs are smaller so we do not produce in scale and we condemn others for dumping excise products on the international trade market.

Supply and demand dictates trade, we must produce what the other countries need if we desire to trade.

If we are convinced that war products are the way to go then we should continue as is. It is, after all, working so well. Look at the trade surpluses of the top nations. The United States spends more on defense than the next top ten countries combined. And we just increased the amount of defense spending. Love that Big Beautiful Bill. We will be safe as we spend ourselves into the poor house. When you have few products for trade, you limit yourself as a trading partner.