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

[Vil_Riker]

Military campaign are not what the war is about - after all, despite being the self proclaimed only superpower, we couldn't handle Afghanistan, or Iraq.

The battlefront is the US$ domination - once our ability to print money and use that to finance our economy, the days of the superpower will be numbered. And this is the battle we are observing today.

 

[SC Maintenance]

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.

Yes, I agree 100%. China is 100 about China. They also promote all the green energy accords yet all those accords state they don't even have to stop increasing their carbon footprint for a decade. Make bets in a decade they leave said accords.

China has lots of capabilities, but require lots of imported inputs. They can grow their own food, but require a lot of fertilizer - their soil is terrible. They can make their own fertilizer, but require natural gas imports to do it.

They can make IC's but require imports of the equipment and the special sand required. Etc, etc.

 

[ZZman]

Nobody stays on top forever

 

[pbm]

Nobody stays on top forever

Yes that's true but it's sad that you are no longer 'on top' because you (our politicians and elites) allowed your demise for their own $$$ gain.

 

[Bjornviken]

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 agree, but its not that simple. Since many countries in EU can't have "armies", only defense force. For example Finland are not allowed to have attack force, or own submarines. But that will change soon... maybe

 

[buster]

We have to remember that we opened China up starting with Nixon, and the capitalists moved businesses there for cheap labor. People can complain about DC being at fault, but who was it again that moved their manufacturing there? American CEOs. De-coupling sounds good, but is a far fetched myth that will only occur in a very limited amount IMO.

We've gone unchallenged for nearly 40 years. That is now changing.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Yes that's true but it's sad that you are no longer 'on top' because you (our politicians and elites) allowed your demise for their own $$$ gain.

There's no such thing as a free lunch and the sky ain't falling.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

We have to remember that we opened China up starting with Nixon, and the capitalists moved businesses there for cheap labor. People can complain about DC being at fault, but who was it again that moved their manufacturing there? American CEOs. De-coupling sounds good, but is a far fetched myth that will only occur in a very limited amount IMO.

We've gone unchallenged for nearly 40 years. That is now changing.

We're still unchallenged. Neither China or Russia have the capability to project naval power across the globe. China has always been defensive and maintaining influence within their near sphere. It's not that much different than US policy beginning with the Monroe Doctrine (1823).

There's not going to be a war any time soon and the US only invades countries which don't have nuclear weapons.

 

[BISCUT]

Russia oil still comes by sea - so my comment remains.

Add to this: And that seaward journey is not one that is readily protected by the Chinese Navy. US Navy protection after WWII has been an incredible force in international shipping throughout the globe and is waning and will continue to wane. Future is less security, smaller ports from the current mega-ports, smaller shipping vessels, and the higher insurance and costs associated with that.

 

[GON]

Add to this: And that seaward journey is not one that is readily protected by the Chinese Navy. US Navy protection after WWII has been an incredible force in international shipping throughout the globe and is waning and will continue to wane. Future is less security, smaller ports from the current mega-ports, smaller shipping vessels, and the higher insurance and costs associated with that.

Biscuit,

Not going to counter your post- but China has been violating sovereign nations fishing rights for over two decades, and violate an incredible amount. No one, and I mean no one, has been able to stop this.

One of many thousands of examples:
Chinese flotilla includes some of the seafood industry’s worst offenders, with long records of labor abuse, illegal fishing and violations of maritime law. But they’re being drawn to the open ocean around the Americas — where the U.S. has long dominated — after depleting fish stocks closer to home and fueled by an increasingly fierce race between the two superpowers to secure access to the world’s dwindling natural resources.
https://apnews.com/article/taiwan-fish-pacific-ocean-oceans-china-810be144e62b695da2c6c0da65e9f051

 

[PandaBear]

Russia oil still comes by sea - so my comment remains.

Do you really want to attack Russia (a nuclear power) to blockade China (another nuclear power)?

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Do you really want to attack Russia (a nuclear power) to blockade China (another nuclear power)?

Not to mention that a blockade would be prohibitively expensive and ineffective.

 

[OVERKILL]

Military campaign are not what the war is about - after all, despite being the self proclaimed only superpower, we couldn't handle Afghanistan, or Iraq.

The battlefront is the US$ domination - once our ability to print money and use that to finance our economy, the days of the superpower will be numbered. And this is the battle we are observing today.

Eh, I think that comes down to what you consider "success". The 2nd Gulf War was "successful", other campaigns were not. This wasn't due to capability but more how and what resources were deployed and in what capacity. Vietnam is another example, fighting a ground war against guerrillas; sending American boys over there to die in the jungle because bombing it into oblivion wasn't a palatable strategy.

The middle east could have been turned into a sheet of glass. It wasn't because that's not seen as a proportionate or humane strategy; it's not proper "conflict etiquette" and would be universally condemned. Fighting disparate rebel groups/factions/pockets that are utilizing guerrilla tactics with conventional forces designed to engage other conventional forces isn't going to be pretty. Drone strikes were more effective.

I think we need to be careful in judging a country's capability based solely on their ability to project military might and their dabbling in these foreign campaigns in a limited capacity. In a SHTF scenario with another large power the strategy would be clearly quite different.

 

[Pew]

Europe needs to fight their own wars, as well as Asia needs to fight their own wars. I'm done listening to the brass and politicians that tell us to take care of other people's problems. 20 years of the Sandbox helped us with nothing but filling caskets.

 

[slo town]

i agree, but its not that simple. Since many countries in EU can't have "armies", only defense force. For example Finland are not allowed to have attack force, or own submarines. But that will change soon... maybe

Then that's their problem, not mine. Most of Europe are freeloaders in this sense, especially Germany.

Scott

 

[PandaBear]

Europe needs to fight their own wars, as well as Asia needs to fight their own wars. I'm done listening to the brass and politicians that tell us to take care of other people's problems. 20 years of the Sandbox helped us with nothing but filling caskets.

I used to think this way until I realize how much USD / financial interest / military interest / etc are across the world.

If we are just minding our own business USD would not be USD, it would be Canadian dollars, and US financial interest and political interest would not be anything more than Canadian financial interest and political interest.

Maybe it doesn't matter, maybe it does, depending on who you ask.

 

[buster]

I used to think this way until I realize how much USD / financial interest / military interest / etc are across the world.

If we are just minding our own business USD would not be USD, it would be Canadian dollars, and US financial interest and political interest would not be anything more than Canadian financial interest and political interest.

Maybe it doesn't matter, maybe it does, depending on who you ask.

Agree. It's not as simple. Who would fill the void if we let them?

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Then that's their problem, not mine. Most of Europe are freeloaders in this sense, especially Germany.

Scott

Are you aware that they pay the US to have a presence in their country? Approx $1B over the last decade.

 

[slo town]

Are you aware that they pay the US to have a presence in their country? Approx $1B over the last decade.

Are they paying their 2% of GDP for NATO protection? No, they are not. And even then, 2% of GDP is not enough. America has committed $30B to the defense of the Ukraine, money I'd rather see spent within my borders.

Until the Germans got called out for their lack of contributions they had contributed a whopping 5,000 helmets to the cause. What a bunch of freeloaders. Let them learn Russian.

Scott

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Are they paying their 2% of GDP for NATO protection? No, they are not. And even then, 2% of GDP is not enough. America has committed $30B to the defense of the Ukraine. Until the Germans got called out for their lack of contributions they had contributed a whopping 5,000 helmets. What a bunch of freeloaders. Let them learn Russian.

Scott

Sure, but German companies also invest billions of dollars in the US (#3 behind Japan and Canada).

The 2% figure is just made up anyways. Besides the US will always be the leader by a wide margin because of the USD hegemony. The market does not demand that the US act fiscally responsible.

ttps://santandertrade.com/en/portal/establish-overseas/united-states/foreign-investment#:~:text=The%20main%20investing%20countries%20in,and%20New%20York%20(BEA).