China can wait. The Army’s focus should be Europe.
- Thread starter GON
- Start date
- Status
The neighboring countries to Russia know how the Russian behaves, we have a long and negative history with Russia. Especially Finland, from the greather wrath time (1714-1721)
to the Second World War. They killed civilians then, and still do. A Russian is a Russian even if you fry them in butter.
to the Second World War. They killed civilians then, and still do. A Russian is a Russian even if you fry them in butter.
There will always be balance of power movements and disruptions. Hopefully this one will be resolved non-militarily.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/mar...az0N_5t36bLcbapmouxDTLoSdeT7ofpN67OKarTPLmv4A
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/mar...az0N_5t36bLcbapmouxDTLoSdeT7ofpN67OKarTPLmv4A
From your article:
"I assess that the U.S. alone has every capability to break such a blockade," he said. One reason, according to Paparo, was the ability to bring to bear greater firepower across all domains and services—air, sea and land. "And U.S. superiority in key domains leads me to be confident in our ability to break a blockade," he said." China's intense war games around Taiwan in August included the drawing of half a dozen "closure zones" near its major ports, into which some 11 ballistic missiles were fired."
So, I guess, China will just do nothing, right? Roll over, play dead? We'll just break the blockade and no reply from China.
From the article it continues:
"Taiwan's defense minister, said Wednesday that China had "taken the initiative" and would most likely follow a future blockade with an all-out attack. "These actions are a preparation for war, of which a blockade is one phase. What happens next depends on how the Chinese Communist Party plans to proceed,""
Very tough talk from military commanders far overconfident in our own abilities and discounting the enemy. Taken from the playbooks from the same West Point and Military Commander schools that brought us the overconfident losses and failures in Vietnam, N. Korea, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
Pardon me if I ignore these "leaders" (yes men) who are far too overconfident.
Just like when you play chess, the other party also gets to move. See, part of warfare is appropriately estimating your opponent and appreciating they can hit back. China (and Russia) can hit us probably harder than we can hit them. If you can't grasp this, I don't know how else to put it.
I do, however, believe the scores of generals former and current who caution that the US military is ill-prepared for a fight, a more pragmatic and realistic view.
I can make educated guesses on how China would respond. It would only go blockade if it intended to fight back, anticipating the US moves. It would strike back. This would escalate. Every article written on this states there would be enormous losses on both sides. Articles differ on who wins. But it would be massive losses. Are you prepared to take massive US military losses, men and equipment, and economic beating that a conventional war with China will likely cost? That assumes it doesn't even reach mainland USA (which is almost surely will).
Are you saying the Chinese and Russian militaries are superior to the American military? Please explain.
Scott
How many bank and market bailouts in the last 15 years just to prop up this collapsing fiat house of cards? 2008-2011, 2020-2022, 2023... lol.
In 1980, US had $900,000,000,000 national debt, and Debt to GDP was a healthy ~35%, and we had strong manufacturing base. https://www.usdebtclock.org/1980.html
In 2000, US had $6,000,000,000,000 national debt, debt to GDP was pretty good at 60%, and we were deep into NAFTA exporting jobs and importing goods. https://www.usdebtclock.org/2000.html
23 years later, with 2 GWOT conflicts, numerous banking and financial collapses and bailouts of systems (banks, autos, airlines, insurance), the dollar has been deflated to practically nothing. We're $32,000,000,000,000 in debt, growing at $3 Billion daily in interest, $1 trillion annual budgets, printing, borrowing, and spending so recklessly that the rest of the world is jumping ship on our currency. Surely anyone can see this happening. https://www.usdebtclock.org/
It is not sustainable. We are projected to be $44 TRILLION in national debt in just 4 years from now. https://www.usdebtclock.org/current-rates.html
ANYONE suggesting this is sustainable should be simply ignored as not understanding economics.
Why this is important is that our economy is critical for our survival. The dollar is tied to our economy nationally and globally, as is oil. This is a fragile ecosystem that may not survive the near term, hurtling the US into significant strife and the inability to even fund basic needs and a military power. How would we pay for military service members, buy equipment, buy oil? How would we fund anything, anywhere, without any credible currency?
The notion of fighting a war with China is so bewildering I cannot even understand such a idea.
HK was "returned" back without a fight because, basically China buy out the British on their way out and let them keep making money afterward.
The war threat in Taiwan was real, at least from 1949 to 1979 there were active military preparation for war. The newer generation won't be seeing a war unless they go independent is the common consensus, but back then Taiwan was more like a dictatorship we see in many Latin America and Middle Eastern countries, I am happy they transformed into a real democracy.
Do you think these militaries are inferior and have no ability to harm the US, militarily or domestically?
And should America crash and burn for economic/currency reasons, it will be a free for all in Europe and Southeast Asia. For example, China would own and occupy all of Japan and Australia within a year. Large portions of Eastern Europe, including Germany, would become Russian states. We'd see illness and famine on a global scale. Probably 1/3 of the world's population would die within two years.
And let's not forget, one of the primary reasons for America's possible collapse is because it protected large parts of the world, nations that were unwilling to pay for it themselves. These freeloader nations will be the first to fall.
Scott
Yes, their militaries are inferior. Yes, they could harm us both militarily and domestically. But could they persevere and actually win? I don't think so.
You have portrayed Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan as military failures. The reason these conflicts were lost was because of the restraint shown by our military forces. My Dad served in the 8th Air Force during WWII, based out of Snetterton-Heath. To say that we bombed the #@^% out of Germany is an understatement.
To defeat the enemy requires total war on the civilian population. This is why WWII was won by America and its allies (and Russia's total annihilation and take no prisoners treatment of the German invaders). It requires annihilating both the military as well as the civilian population. Is this something I want? No. But it is the way wars have been won in the past.
All I know is that if the Chinese or Russian military were to occupy my homeland, I would fight back with unimaginable, inhumane savagery at every opportunity. And views like mine are not rare in America. Even with you, leadcounsel. Imagine the things you would do to protect your way of life. I know you would. Admit it. And this is the attitude, along with the 2nd Amendment, that separates America from most other nations.
Scott
Last edited:
Anything non-Nato bordering them first. But yes, history indicates Poland is at risk. The germans in WW2 started from poland and made it to the outskirts of moscow, Napoleon did similar. It stands to reason they want the strategic depth that Poland/slovakia/ bulgaria/romania and the baltics provide.... If those countries can be guaranteed to be neutral that would be just as valuable to them but that ship has sailed since 1994 ish.
The four named, and most of "the baltics" are all NATO members. Not neutral.
The idea that Poland would try to take over part of Ukraine is novel. I could see Polish troops entering Ukraine (with permission) to fight the Russian invaders, but I don't think that NATO would be keen on letting them stay later should Ukraine want them out.
I know they are Nato, but I'm sure they are in danger after the non nato countries are brought "in line". Moldova only really
Poland has been saying they want to enter ukraine to fight russia, but if they do that they risk losing the protection provided by article 5.
They are near peers. Every expert agrees. If we were to manage to defeat them, Russia specifically, it would rain nuclear weapons down on the US and we would not exist as a functional nation any longer. Russia has more, and far more advance, nuclear weapons than the US. We would be unable to stop such an attack.
Economic attacks would collapse our currency. How would we fund anything? Grid attacks would shut down our power grids? How would we power anything? We import nearly everything to run our nation. Those ships and planes would be sunk and shot down until no more come. How would any of our industries like trade and travel, survive? In 1 year the US would be collapsed from within thru military and unconventional warfare. Neither China nor Russia are as vulnerable for a host of reasons.
Military fights would be on the order of WWI and WWII bloodshed. The US has never lost as many in any war as it would lose in such a multi-front war. Tens of millions of men and women would not come home. Do you honestly think the typical American has this resolve today? I don't think Russia or China would flinch, losing 10 million men.
Maybe, maybe not. Since the 50s or so, due to international agreements, the US generally tries in modern wars to not target civilian infrastructure and/or populations. I suspect we would, at least initially, abide by those rules of armed conflict. (FYI I was an instructor on such rules in my Active Duty days.) It would be interesting to see if our enemies adhere to such wartime "rules." We see that Russia is bombing civilian areas in Ukraine, but partly because the military is illegally using civilian areas as shields. Hard to say, but I suspect Russia and China would have no qualms of targeting civilian infrastructure. Would the US retaliate in kind, not unless it became legal because it is not legal now, so that is an unknown.
What would "winning" or "victory" look like? Whether conventional, unconventional, economic, or I shutter to think nuclear war with either nation, I believe most of us would probably die or suffer great loses. Keep in mind, insurance does not tend to cover property damaged by war or terrorism. So, imagine you lose all your assets in a bombing and reset your finances to zero. Or hacks to the markets erase all your digital assets. Or many of your close friends, relatives, neighbors, are victims of war. Starvation, Energy crisis, deep economic hardships for Americans, possibly entire big cities just destroyed... these are all very plausible outcomes that folks never factor. Folks never think they'll be impacted, it's just some far away war on TV... Modern tech and weapons can reach you at your zip code today.
Unlikely war sabotage, but just look at a few instances today - various bird and mammal viruses destroying livestock, train derailments like in Ohio, mass shootings, people hitting electric grids, etc. all causing real hardships.
Deaths from WWI and the Spanish flu, over a period of about 4 years, saw something like 100,000,000 deaths representing about 10% of the globes population, with far less effective warfare weapons (they had no city leveling weapons as we do) limited in scope, size, geography, and range. Almost nobody in the US was killed, for instance. A comparable number today with 8 billion people, would be 10% of that, or 800 million. In reality it would probably be a higher % of deaths given the size, range, sophistication of weapons, and our reliance on energy grids (e.g. shut the grids off on the eastern US seaboard for 2 weeks and millions would die). So think of everyone you know and consider that a modern war would likely yield higher numbers in a shorter timespan.
Everything you say, leadcounsel, seems to be one way. So the Russians nuke us. Do you think America will cower in the corner and do nothing? We will nuke them back. Destroy our grid? We will destroy theirs. Target our civilian population centers? We will destroy theirs. I will demand it!
It is for these very reasons I think modern warfare is obsolete. No one will win. Future wars may be fought using illnesses that suddenly appear out of nowhere. And don't go making any assumptions. It may be nature itself declaring war on humans.
Scott
Last edited:
I FULLY acknowledge the purpose and reason behind MAD, and accept that we would strike them back, killing tens of millions of Russians. While we suffer and die too. If that gives folks comfort, so be it. But it's like being in a gunfight were you get shot and die, but you got them too. There is no winner in such a scenario. We all lose, badly.
I'd live very, very much that we don't engage in any of such things. The thought of the foolishness of superpowers destroying the globe and every creation on it, over this pettiness, is a great burden IMO.
One point of order, however, is that unlike the US which has invested nothing in civilian sustainability, underground bunkers, etc. for the masses, Russia has invested heavily in underground bunkers and survivability. So we in the US would take the greater beating in an exchange, for whatever that is worth. Are you aware of any practical civilian bunker networks in the US? I'm not.
You first two paragraphs echo what I said in my previous post, "Modern warfare is obsolete".
With respect to Russia's underground bunkers....good luck with that. If they don't die from radiation poisoning they will die a slow death from starvation because of the nuclear winter.
And, yes, their mutually assured destruction gives me comfort.
Scott
Comfort in the fact that over a irrelevant piece of land the size of Ohio or some microchip plants, super powers obliterate most of the world, poison the rest of it, and kill, maim, poison, or cause suffering to nearly every human and creature big and small, plants, insects, poison the air and water for centuries to come. Anything that does survive likely suffers hardships for generations. Destroy almost everything men built, structures, tech, art, knowledge, books, music, film, historical buildings, world wonders, etc.
Correction. It is insane.
- Status
