China can wait. The Army’s focus should be Europe.

Status
Not open for further replies.

GON

$100 Site Donor 2024
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
8,165
Location
Steilacoom, WA
The title of this article really caught me by surprise. My first thought (before reading the article) was the article was authored by an adversarial information operations campaign. Only after reading the article I found one of the two co-authors a USMC COL. With the US Army in alignment with China as being a pacing threat, the traditional roles of the USN and more so, the USMC as being the Pacific component of choice, are now being realigned to the US Army have a larger role.

Wondered if the co-author was holistically sincere in his article or protecting the USMC as the ground force of choice in the Indo-China region. I will say I don't concur with the theory of the article.

Today, the world’s only superpower similarly faces challenges in both Eurasia and in Asia. This time the Department of Defense has decided to prioritize the Asian theater, calling China its pacing threat. While DoD has made its choice, that does not mean that the Army must necessarily follow lockstep into an Asia first strategy; in fact, it shouldn’t. The Army’s priority should be Europe, looking East rather than West, even as the rest of DoD is locked on Asia. In fact, the Army’s priority should be Europe precisely because the rest of the department is focused on Asia.''

This line from the article really caught my eye " the Army should not and for the sake of the security of the American people and the world must not go all in on Asia."

 
The pool of eligible recruits for the military is shockingly small. Insufficient ASVAB scores, obesity, criminal history, physical and mental disquifications all combine to eliminate a huge percentage from joining.
A significant percentage of those who do get accepted end up being discharged during training.

If 100 18 to 24 year olds were picked at random to sit for the ASVAB(IQ type test) exam, on average about 30 of the 100 would fail because the Army only accepts those that score in the 31st percentile and above. It is worse for the Navy and Air Force.
 
I'm in agreement (not that my opinion actually means anything :unsure: ). Go back to Obama admin and the moves of 2014. The US sure seems to have drawn first blood so to speak. Add to that recent reporting the US is coercing (we are pretty **** good at that!) Ukraine NOT to negotiate and it's enough to question the US role and end game. We haven't heard anything substantial about what the offramp would be or the US goals in this. All we get is the cry of defending democracy. Ya, right.

Lots of hype about China's navy and the build-up. While they are building naval vessels at a heightened pace I don't see any direct competition for the US Navy but sure do see some issues if we had to be engaged in multiple theaters at the same time. Just me and a single opinion but the more serious danger to US would be EMP, loss of electric grid, and not often spoken about but the rather easy target satellites we need for everyday life are up in the big ol sky.
 
Europe needs to fight their own war. I have no issue providing equipment and intelligence, but they should have enough of their own soldiers. We have seen this movie before, at least 3 times.

China imports like 80% of their energy inputs and 50% of their food inputs. Naval blockade and China will be starving in the dark in a few months.

I seriously think the military needs a boogie man. I don't think its malicious, I just believe that's how they think. Remember how fearsome they told us Russia was. Kiev will fall in hours or days, and here we are a year later.

Bring our troops home. Keep them strong and fit. If anyone messes with us, send them back to the stone age.
 

I included this even though it is unrelated to the OP's topic as it has come up in this thread.


Back on topic, OP's article is interesting. From a higher viewpoint, military strategy is set by the national defense strategy.

"Fact Sheet: 2022 National Defense Strategy

Today, the Department of Defense transmitted to Congress the classified 2022 National Defense Strategy
(NDS).

For the first time, the Department conducted its strategic reviews in a fully integrated way – incorporating
the Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) and Missile Defense Review (MDR) in the NDS – ensuring tight
linkages between our strategy and our resources. The unclassified NDS will be forthcoming.

Consistent with the President’s Interim National Security Strategic Guidance, the classified NDS sets out
how the Department of Defense will contribute to advancing and safeguarding vital U.S. national interests
– protecting the American people, expanding America’s prosperity, and realizing and defending our
democratic values.

The Defense priorities are:
1. Defending the homeland, paced to the growing multi-domain threat posed by the PRC
2. Deterring strategic attacks against the United States, Allies, and partners
3. Deterring aggression, while being prepared to prevail in conflict when necessary, prioritizing
the PRC challenge in the Indo-Pacific, then the Russia challenge in Europe
4. Building a resilient Joint Force and defense ecosystem.

The Department will act urgently to sustain and strengthen deterrence, with the People’s Republic of
China (PRC) as our most consequential strategic competitor and the pacing challenge for the Department.
Russia poses acute threats, as illustrated by its brutal and unprovoked invasion of Ukraine. We will
collaborate with our NATO Allies and partners to reinforce robust deterrence in the face of Russian
aggression.

The Department will remain capable of managing other persistent threats, including those from North
Korea, Iran, and violent extremist organizations.

Changes in global climate and other dangerous transboundary threats, including pandemics, are
transforming the context in which the Department operates. We will adapt to these challenges, which
increasingly place pressure on the Joint Force and the systems that support it.

Recognizing growing kinetic and non-kinetic threats to the United States’ homeland from our strategic
competitors, the Department will take necessary actions to increase resilience – our ability to withstand,
fight through, and recover quickly from disruption."


The Commander-in-chief sets the priorities with "President’s Interim National Security Strategic Guidance". The Secretary of Defense implements the strategic guidance through policies, then strategies - based on current capabilities, identified shortcomings, and plans based on those determinations.

This is a real problem and involves both Russia and China:



I talk with my friends about military strength and strategy on occasion (mostly civilians) and I describe it kinda like this:

The US is a prepper. What am I prepping for? Depends on where you live. East Coast (most likely hurricanes), West Coast (mostly earthquakes, drought). Then further down the list, pandemics, society breakdown, climate change, apocalyptic type event, etc.

Bottom line: you prep based on where you live and your most likely problems. Extrapolate that to a country and then you have the beginnings of a defense strategy.

Having said that, I think the Marine Corps commenter is looking in his "area" so to speak, so does indeed seem somewhat biased.
 
Last edited:
The title of this article really caught me by surprise. My first thought (before reading the article) was the article was authored by an adversarial information operations campaign. Only after reading the article I found one of the two co-authors a USMC COL. With the US Army in alignment with China as being a pacing threat, the traditional roles of the USN and more so, the USMC as being the Pacific component of choice, are now being realigned to the US Army have a larger role.

Wondered if the co-author was holistically sincere in his article or protecting the USMC as the ground force of choice in the Indo-China region. I will say I don't concur with the theory of the article.

Today, the world’s only superpower similarly faces challenges in both Eurasia and in Asia. This time the Department of Defense has decided to prioritize the Asian theater, calling China its pacing threat. While DoD has made its choice, that does not mean that the Army must necessarily follow lockstep into an Asia first strategy; in fact, it shouldn’t. The Army’s priority should be Europe, looking East rather than West, even as the rest of DoD is locked on Asia. In fact, the Army’s priority should be Europe precisely because the rest of the department is focused on Asia.''

This line from the article really caught my eye " the Army should not and for the sake of the security of the American people and the world must not go all in on Asia."

They all want to protect their turf.
The pool of eligible recruits for the military is shockingly small. Insufficient ASVAB scores, obesity, criminal history, physical and mental disquifications all combine to eliminate a huge percentage from joining.
A significant percentage of those who do get accepted end up being discharged during training.

If 100 18 to 24 year olds were picked at random to sit for the ASVAB(IQ type test) exam, on average about 30 of the 100 would fail because the Army only accepts those that score in the 31st percentile and above. It is worse for the Navy and Air Force.

IMO the size of the pool is proportional to the memory potential recruits have with regards to past campaigns and current career opportunities. It also depends on operational requirements and current military doctrine (Fighting a world war on two fronts). It's kinda like justifying 3,000 nuclear weapons when 300 would be no less effective.
 
Europe needs to fight their own war. I have no issue providing equipment and intelligence, but they should have enough of their own soldiers. We have seen this movie before, at least 3 times.

China imports like 80% of their energy inputs and 50% of their food inputs. Naval blockade and China will be starving in the dark in a few months.

I seriously think the military needs a boogie man. I don't think its malicious, I just believe that's how they think. Remember how fearsome they told us Russia was. Kiev will fall in hours or days, and here we are a year later.

Bring our troops home. Keep them strong and fit. If anyone messes with us, send them back to the stone age.
SCM,

Some supplemental data that is not talked much about. China is finding ways of growing foods very successfully that they were not able to not so many years ago.

One example, bananas. China barely grew bananas 50 years ago. Today's China is the second largest producer of bananas in the world. Another example, China was unable to grow much of the tropical durian fruit. China is expected to be the world's largest producer of durian by 2035.

For energy, China is building two coal power plants per week, yes two. While the rest of the world is being forced off of coal power generation, China is gaining a great cost/ competitive advantage.

The argument (not yours) that China simply wants to feed its people, IMHO is a widely successful information operations campaign, by China.
 
This is the way I see things in my 52 yo eyes -


This country (they USA) had better grab some awareness, dump some candy-a** feeeeeelings and hope like heck we can defend ourselves against the new cooperative formed this week in Moscow.

Every one of you had better have a talk with yourself if you have a more 'forgiving' ideology ingrained in you through your higher learning years or through the media, you had better have a talk with your offspring and theirs and decide if you want to continue living in a decent country or not.

That or order some Rosetta Stone in Mandarin and Russian.
 
For energy, China is building two coal power plants per week, yes two. While the rest of the world is being forced off of coal power generation, China is gaining a great cost/ competitive advantage.

If anyone believes this is not true, I urge you to go to the Baltimore Port area, specifically the Patapsco River area and have a look at the amount of coal being processed ("mixed") and then loaded onto to container/cargo ships. Here's an idea- throw you an Apple Air Tag on the ship and see where it goes.

You might think that coal isn't being burned to produce electricity much anymore in the US (and it isn't), but China is burning it like it's free.
 
Europe needs to fight their own war. I have no issue providing equipment and intelligence, but they should have enough of their own soldiers. We have seen this movie before, at least 3 times.

China imports like 80% of their energy inputs and 50% of their food inputs. Naval blockade and China will be starving in the dark in a few months.

I seriously think the military needs a boogie man. I don't think its malicious, I just believe that's how they think. Remember how fearsome they told us Russia was. Kiev will fall in hours or days, and here we are a year later.

Bring our troops home. Keep them strong and fit. If anyone messes with us, send them back to the stone age.
I believe you are referring to crude oil, not total energy.

66012D73-5F38-46AE-85A5-AC26DE650B8B.jpeg
 
If anyone believes this is not true, I urge you to go to the Baltimore Port area, specifically the Patapsco River area and have a look at the amount of coal being processed ("mixed") and then loaded onto to container/cargo ships. Here's an idea- throw you an Apple Air Tag on the ship and see where it goes.

You might think that coal isn't being burned to produce electricity much anymore in the US (and it isn't), but China is burning it like it's free.
Here is more iinfo.

AE97297E-C381-473B-90B1-4FC4365DA3F3.jpg
 
I believe you are referring to crude oil, not total energy.
My OP was "energy inputs." That includes fuel (like oil, coal and gas) and also the tech needed to make it work and transmit it. Its a number that has been sighted many times in Peter Zeihan's books and its well referenced. But even if its 50%, stopping half would work pretty well also.
 
If anyone believes this is not true, I urge you to go to the Baltimore Port area, specifically the Patapsco River area and have a look at the amount of coal being processed ("mixed") and then loaded onto to container/cargo ships. Here's an idea- throw you an Apple Air Tag on the ship and see where it goes.

You might think that coal isn't being burned to produce electricity much anymore in the US (and it isn't), but China is burning it like it's free.
We need to clarify how much electricity still comes from coal in the USA. Almost 20% is from coal, more than nuclear, and almost as much as all the renewables, combined.

E6F020ED-6E2F-4140-8570-E9589EE92BC9.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top