Chinese Aircraft Carriers

Look up how easily the Vietnamese severely crippled Americas Huey Armada (very High Tech during that conflict) with something that became known as the "Golden BB"

More than once we believed our high tech was going to overwhelm the enemy only to be put back in our place by the simplest application of ingenuity and determination. Never get cocky and underestimate your enemy. Rule #1
 
A major disadvantage the USA has is that China has significant access to Americas information technology networks and infrastructure. It's the open nature of our society and access allowed. China also doesn't have the diversity of citizens the USA has. While China may be at a slight disadvantage in terms of combat experience, they do have a massive, overwhelming manufacturing advantage and can severely cripple the USA simply by with holding RE materials and even pharmaceuticals.

They have a no combat experience.

More than once we believed our high tech was going to overwhelm the enemy only to be put back in our place by the simplest application of ingenuity and determination. Never get cocky and underestimate your enemy. Rule #1

We would have easily won if we just fire bombed them like we did with Dresden and Tokyo in WW2 and didn't have to go through the political ho-hah. Drop a bunch of napalm on their huts and end it as fast as possible. But like always the people sitting comfortably on their couch watching the war from across the world and trying to put their little grubby fingers in everything is the problem.
 
A major disadvantage the USA has is that China has significant access to Americas information technology networks and infrastructure. It's the open nature of our society and access allowed. China also doesn't have the diversity of citizens the USA has. While China may be at a slight disadvantage in terms of combat experience, they do have a massive, overwhelming manufacturing advantage and can severely cripple the USA simply by with holding RE materials and even pharmaceuticals.

War is a game of attrition. China knows this and knows the USA has no chance to win a conflict which depends on sustainability and production capability.

China is laser focused on high tech research and leads in ALL 9 fields. The USA is now far behind China in that aspect (and falling further).
We also have very little true knowledge of their capabilities. But as Americans, we always pride ourselves in over estimating our abilities while simultaneously underestimating our foes'
I hope you’re wrong. Scary thought.
 
A major disadvantage the USA has is that China has significant access to Americas information technology networks and infrastructure.

I have significant access to all the information on how to bench press 600lb, how to do a triple axel on ice, how to throw an uppercut to KO Mike Tyson and how to run 100m dash in sub 10 seconds. The information is there. I read it all. Or so I think 😙

WARNING: Long read ahead. Grab a beer.
It's the open nature of our society and access allowed. China also doesn't have the diversity of citizens the USA has. While China may be at a slight disadvantage in terms of combat experience, they do have a massive, overwhelming manufacturing advantage and can severely cripple the USA simply by with holding RE materials and even pharmaceuticals.
A severely crippled USA is an USA that brings all shipment routes to a full stop in 48 hours, anywhere.

China's sea access is interesting. To quote Sarah Paine - "China has access to the sea — but not freedom at sea". You can not block China's Navy, they can go where they want, but all of China's exits to the world sea routes are subject to friction with close and further neighbors. There is no single maritime exit passage (or barely) which is fully under Chinese control.

In this sense, China can exercise very good sea denial, but not as good control of its local seas This is inportant, because its navy automatically shifts towards being a defense shield. It can bring the whole area to a halt, but can not bring the area to full control.

War is a game of attrition. China knows this and knows the USA has no chance to win a conflict which depends on sustainability and production capability.

This is patently false.
An isolated USA will tighten its belt and have to replace its iPhones every four years rather than every year. If you manage to isolate it economically and politically at all. And unless a very solid anti-US coalition is created and for some miracle the US refuses to use nuclear weapons - there is no scenario where you can do a maritime blockade on the US. Or on Canada. Or even on Mexico.

An isolated and blockaded China will experience food shortages. Serious ones. They will not starve from that, they do produce carbs and calories (rice, wheat, corn, potatoes), they will be able to establish a wartime diet for sure, and they will not starve. They will however experience a severe protein crisis. They rely on imports for soybeans, animal feed, oils.

And soybeans are not something you nibble in front of your TV - they are the main staple of the livestock diet. Cut that, and their meat production collapses. Poultry will probably be salvageable - it is the main "restauration" meat source, the full cycle from egg to chicken is about 90 days, that's why countries recovering from wars first start with poultry then go with everything else. But the population's diet will become miserable. People will eat what their grandparents did.

If you read Frederick Forsyth's "The Biafra Story" (one of his lesser known books) - there's a passage about the famine in Biafra when the supply routes were cut. Kids were dying from malnutrition in droves, while having good access to grain and staple food. It's simply that the shipments of Norwegian dried cod (or whatever other fish it was) that used to come for the last several decades, stopped abruptly. And it turned out this was their only source of protein. Kids starved to death while eating.

Do this for long enough, and this very homogenous population (it is not, btw) will very homogenously kick its government out. They've had famines in the 50s and 60s, but back then they were coming from 30 years of civil wars (killed about 28 million), then another 30ish years of warlords and Japanese occupation. Nowadays, they have tasted the western way of life. They have tested comfort. They have tasted stability. Try getting that away and switch them to glorious fight for glorious Winnie, see what happens.
China is laser focused on high tech research and leads in ALL 9 fields. The USA is now far behind China in that aspect (and falling further).
We also have very little true knowledge of their capabilities. But as Americans, we always pride ourselves in over estimating our abilities while simultaneously underestimating our foes'

America's only strategical problem is that most of its opponents are smart enough to not poke it enough to make it switch to war setup. Their skills are to keep it at the edge, but never have it cross and switch. Those are great skills. They are very dangerous. And they can hurt a lot.

That came out long, but there's a lot to discuss. I was moderating a forum in Eastern Europe for a very long time, and have first hand experience with direct propaganda, and most of the usual narratives. Take this as pure truth, and you'll cry bitter tears. "American soldiers are soft, they rely on technology only, their weapons are too complex, they never met a real ennemy in the last 70 years, they have no spirit, they are mercenaries, they lost in Vietnam, they won the First Iraq war because the Iraqis were incompetent, blah blah blah".

I happen to understand Russian - there were recordings of a call from a Wagner soldier that was part of the Wagner forces that "weren't there" during the battle of Conoco Field in Syria a few years ago.
What was that - well, in short - US forces were engaged by some unknown Syrian groups, so they picked up the de-escalation phone to the Russian forces on the other side and went

- "guys, we're being attacked, just to confirm - it's not you, right ???"
- "No no no, comrade, of course not, we don't know what you talking about".
- "Ok then, good, we can retaliate then".

Epic stuff. The Wagner guy boiled down to "We deserved what we got, because for a second we bought into our own BS".

So no. Don't bury us yet 😇.

PS: About China's industrial abilities - yes, they are impressive. Search the following in YouTube: "China’s Machine Tools 50 Years Behind West; A 1.4 Billion Nation Bested by 200-Person Japanese Shops". The channel it's on is not exactly pro-Chinese, but the video is quite interesting and shows stuff that you don't see every day. Does it put things in a different light - I'm not sure.

PPS: Little piece of useless analysis from a guy who grew up elsewhere:

- What sport do little and less little boys play in the whole World ? Football, it's called everywhere but here. Well - SOCCER, in our neck of the woods.
What does soccer teach ? Running. Stamina, and running. Health, and running.

- What sport do little and less little boys play in North America ? Let's see...
Football. AMERICAN football.
Baseball.
Hockey up North.

What are boys from all over the World good at when they go to war ?
- They are good at RUNNING. They can run forever, in various directions, in very fast sprints.

What are boys from North America trained to do when they go to war ?
- Throw grenades - very far, and very accurately.
- Smash things and people with bats. Very accurately.
- Run THROUGH people. Very efficiently.
- Do all of the above, ON ICE, for our friends up North.

Sounds like a joke, but it's not. There's deep wisdom into what boys learn.
 
Last edited:
I happen to understand Russian - there were recordings of a call from a Wagner soldier that was part of the Wagner forces that "weren't there" during the battle of Conoco Field in Syria a few years ago.
What was that - well, in short - US forces were engaged by some unknown Syrian groups, so they picked up the de-escalation phone to the Russian forces on the other side and went

- "guys, we're being attacked, just to confirm - it's not you, right ???"
- "No no no, comrade, of course not, we don't know what you talking about".
- "Ok then, good, we can retaliate then".

Epic stuff. The Wagner guy boiled down to "We deserved what we got, because for a second we bought into our own BS".

I love this video:


Gen Mattis will be missed but he has earned every moment of his retirement.
 
... only to be put back in our place by the simplest application of ingenuity and determination...
Our place is where we deem we need to be, and we never have left these places other than from internal pressure back home. Опорная точка much ?

I love this video:


Gen Mattis will be missed but he has earned every moment of his retirement.

This one indeed. The one I was talking about are the reports from the wagners themselves:

EDIT: Found a fully translated one. Starts here, at 9m57s.



Far from me to play the hubris note btw. It's just that the narrative about how bad things are for the US is a known one, and serves both sides - the US military can always benefit from more funds, and whoever thinks they'll have to face it some day need all the pep talk they can get. As Chuck Norris would say - "not all the stories you hear about me are true"
 
Last edited:
I have significant access to all the information on how to bench press 600lb, how to do a triple axel on ice, how to throw an uppercut to KO Mike Tyson and how to run 100m dash in sub 10 seconds. The information is there. I read it all. Or so I think 😙

WARNING: Long read ahead. Grab a beer.

A severely crippled USA is an USA that brings all shipment routes to a full stop in 48 hours, anywhere.

China's sea access is interesting. To quote Sarah Paine - "China has access to the sea — but not freedom at sea". You can not block China's Navy, they can go where they want, but all of China's exits to the world sea routes are subject to friction with close and further neighbors. There is no single maritime exit passage (or barely) which is fully under Chinese control.

In this sense, China can exercise very good sea denial, but not as good control of its local seas This is inportant, because its navy automatically shifts towards being a defense shield. It can bring the whole area to a halt, but can not bring the area to full control.



This is patently false.
An isolated USA will tighten its belt and have to replace its iPhones every four years rather than every year. If you manage to isolate it economically and politically at all. And unless a very solid anti-US coalition is created and for some miracle the US refuses to use nuclear weapons - there is no scenario where you can do a maritime blockade on the US. Or on Canada. Or even on Mexico.

An isolated and blockaded China will experience food shortages. Serious ones. They will not starve from that, they do produce carbs and calories (rice, wheat, corn, potatoes), they will be able to establish a wartime diet for sure, and they will not starve. They will however experience a severe protein crisis. They rely on imports for soybeans, animal feed, oils.

And soybeans are not something you nibble in front of your TV - they are the main staple of the livestock diet. Cut that, and their meat production collapses. Poultry will probably be salvageable - it is the main "restauration" meat source, the full cycle from egg to chicken is about 90 days, that's why countries recovering from wars first start with poultry then go with everything else. But the population's diet will become miserable. People will eat what their grandparents did.

If you read Frederick Forsyth's "The Biafra Story" (one of his lesser known books) - there's a passage about the famine in Biafra when the supply routes were cut. Kids were dying from malnutrition in droves, while having good access to grain and staple food. It's simply that the shipments of Norwegian dried cod (or whatever other fish it was) that used to come for the last several decades, stopped abruptly. And it turned out this was their only source of protein. Kids starved to death while eating.

Do this for long enough, and this very homogenous population (it is not, btw) will very homogenously kick its government out. They've had famines in the 50s and 60s, but back then they were coming from 30 years of civil wars (killed about 28 million), then another 30ish years of warlords and Japanese occupation. Nowadays, they have tasted the western way of life. They have tested comfort. They have tasted stability. Try getting that away and switch them to glorious fight for glorious Winnie, see what happens.


America's only strategical problem is that most of its opponents are smart enough to not poke it enough to make it switch to war setup. Their skills are to keep it at the edge, but never have it cross and switch. Those are great skills. They are very dangerous. And they can hurt a lot.

That came out long, but there's a lot to discuss. I was moderating a forum in Eastern Europe for a very long time, and have first hand experience with direct propaganda, and most of the usual narratives. Take this as pure truth, and you'll cry bitter tears. "American soldiers are soft, they rely on technology only, their weapons are too complex, they never met a real ennemy in the last 70 years, they have no spirit, they are mercenaries, they lost in Vietnam, they won the First Iraq war because the Iraqis were incompetent, blah blah blah".

I happen to understand Russian - there were recordings of a call from a Wagner soldier that was part of the Wagner forces that "weren't there" during the battle of Conoco Field in Syria a few years ago.
What was that - well, in short - US forces were engaged by some unknown Syrian groups, so they picked up the de-escalation phone to the Russian forces on the other side and went

- "guys, we're being attacked, just to confirm - it's not you, right ???"
- "No no no, comrade, of course not, we don't know what you talking about".
- "Ok then, good, we can retaliate then".

Epic stuff. The Wagner guy boiled down to "We deserved what we got, because for a second we bought into our own BS".

So no. Don't bury us yet 😇.

PS: About China's industrial abilities - yes, they are impressive. Search the following in YouTube: "China’s Machine Tools 50 Years Behind West; A 1.4 Billion Nation Bested by 200-Person Japanese Shops". The channel it's on is not exactly pro-Chinese, but the video is quite interesting and shows stuff that you don't see every day. Does it put things in a different light - I'm not sure.

PPS: Little piece of useless analysis from a guy who grew up elsewhere:

- What sport do little and less little boys play in the whole World ? Football, it's called everywhere but here. Well - SOCCER, in our neck of the woods.
What does soccer teach ? Running. Stamina, and running. Health, and running.

- What sport do little and less little boys play in North America ? Let's see...
Football. AMERICAN football.
Baseball.
Hockey up North.

What are boys from all over the World good at when they go to war ?
- They are good at RUNNING. They can run forever, in various directions, in very fast sprints.

What are boys from North America trained to do when they go to war ?
- Throw grenades - very far, and very accurately.
- Smash things and people with bats. Very accurately.
- Run THROUGH people. Very efficiently.
- Do all of the above, ON ICE, for our friends up North.

Sounds like a joke, but it's not. There's deep wisdom into what boys learn.

Only disagreement I’ve got with this is about the boys “up north” things have changed and are rapidly changing & they are trying to align with China and they are looking at buying non US fighter jets cuz screw the US
 
Let me add that aircraft carriers are the ultimate ability to project power. No other nation in the world can project power, just through the presence of a carrier, the way that the US can.

We maintain that credibility through actual use of the carriers in combat operations, so that a carrier strike group cruising off the coast of another nation shows that we are right there, able to act at any time, in close proximity.

The Chinese have long resented the presence of the USN in the Western Pacific. Ever since World War 2, the USN has kept carriers in WESTPAC, and often employed them on combat, right near the coast of China. They see the Pacific as partly theirs and right now, they have no way to parry the presence of the USN.

No other nation puts carriers off our coast, though the Russians, and to some extent, the Chinese, operate ships and aircraft nearby.

But those individual units are nothing on comparison to the capability of a USN Carrier strike group, able to generate 150-200 combat sorties per day within a few miles of the coastline of any nation we choose.

The Army likes to say that wars are won by boots on the ground, and that is true, but the Army takes months to get to the fight. The Air Force likes to say that 100% of the world is covered by air, and that is true, but the USAF cannot get more than a few airplanes to the fight around the world without forward basing, or a tanker bridge that allows one strike.

When a carrier shows up, it is bringing the ability to fly the entire air wing in repeat sorties for continuous operations. One simply has to take a look at Operation Eldorado Canyon in 1986 - The US struck Libya using Carriers in the Mediterranean and F-111s from the UK. The F-111s had to fly for over 12 hours, with multiple tanking operations on the way, to go around France and the rest of Europe because of treaty and overflight issues. The USN put up 38 airplanes that met the F-111s over the target. Before the F-111s even got to the first tanker on their way back, the USN airplanes were re-armed, refueled, and ready to fly again. The USAF got 24 airplanes over the target in 24 hours, and it would have been 24 hours before those F-111s could have returned, IF the tankers were available (and they weren’t).

The Carrier could have put 150 sorties over the target over the next 24 hours. No treaty issues, no overflight constraints, no refueling.

Every hostile nation, and every friendly nation, realizes this - a carrier allows us to put an airfield right next to any country we choose - and fly around the clock sorties from that airfield. True, some nations are land-locked, but most of the world’s population lives within 100 miles of the coast.

Carriers are complex, expensive, and difficult to operate, but the capability they offer is simply unmatched by any other combination of forces.

That’s why the Chinese want carriers - they want parity with us, they want the world to notice them when they operate, they want the ability to project power the way that we do.
Excellent write up. A bit OT but worth mention, lets not forget the USN subs, and the firepower they bring to the fight.
 
Mattis was a empty suit while being an expert in propaganda

If you say so. Probably one of the most respected generals of our time and stuck his finger against trump when he was SecDef too.

A respectable man who earned his place. Unlike our current members.

Gen Amos before him was a shrill.
 
Last edited:
I have significant access to all the information on how to bench press 600lb, how to do a triple axel on ice, how to throw an uppercut to KO Mike Tyson and how to run 100m dash in sub 10 seconds. The information is there. I read it all. Or so I think 😙

WARNING: Long read ahead. Grab a beer.

A severely crippled USA is an USA that brings all shipment routes to a full stop in 48 hours, anywhere.

China's sea access is interesting. To quote Sarah Paine - "China has access to the sea — but not freedom at sea". You can not block China's Navy, they can go where they want, but all of China's exits to the world sea routes are subject to friction with close and further neighbors. There is no single maritime exit passage (or barely) which is fully under Chinese control.

In this sense, China can exercise very good sea denial, but not as good control of its local seas This is inportant, because its navy automatically shifts towards being a defense shield. It can bring the whole area to a halt, but can not bring the area to full control.



This is patently false.
An isolated USA will tighten its belt and have to replace its iPhones every four years rather than every year. If you manage to isolate it economically and politically at all. And unless a very solid anti-US coalition is created and for some miracle the US refuses to use nuclear weapons - there is no scenario where you can do a maritime blockade on the US. Or on Canada. Or even on Mexico.

An isolated and blockaded China will experience food shortages. Serious ones. They will not starve from that, they do produce carbs and calories (rice, wheat, corn, potatoes), they will be able to establish a wartime diet for sure, and they will not starve. They will however experience a severe protein crisis. They rely on imports for soybeans, animal feed, oils.

And soybeans are not something you nibble in front of your TV - they are the main staple of the livestock diet. Cut that, and their meat production collapses. Poultry will probably be salvageable - it is the main "restauration" meat source, the full cycle from egg to chicken is about 90 days, that's why countries recovering from wars first start with poultry then go with everything else. But the population's diet will become miserable. People will eat what their grandparents did.

If you read Frederick Forsyth's "The Biafra Story" (one of his lesser known books) - there's a passage about the famine in Biafra when the supply routes were cut. Kids were dying from malnutrition in droves, while having good access to grain and staple food. It's simply that the shipments of Norwegian dried cod (or whatever other fish it was) that used to come for the last several decades, stopped abruptly. And it turned out this was their only source of protein. Kids starved to death while eating.

Do this for long enough, and this very homogenous population (it is not, btw) will very homogenously kick its government out. They've had famines in the 50s and 60s, but back then they were coming from 30 years of civil wars (killed about 28 million), then another 30ish years of warlords and Japanese occupation. Nowadays, they have tasted the western way of life. They have tested comfort. They have tasted stability. Try getting that away and switch them to glorious fight for glorious Winnie, see what happens.


America's only strategical problem is that most of its opponents are smart enough to not poke it enough to make it switch to war setup. Their skills are to keep it at the edge, but never have it cross and switch. Those are great skills. They are very dangerous. And they can hurt a lot.

That came out long, but there's a lot to discuss. I was moderating a forum in Eastern Europe for a very long time, and have first hand experience with direct propaganda, and most of the usual narratives. Take this as pure truth, and you'll cry bitter tears. "American soldiers are soft, they rely on technology only, their weapons are too complex, they never met a real ennemy in the last 70 years, they have no spirit, they are mercenaries, they lost in Vietnam, they won the First Iraq war because the Iraqis were incompetent, blah blah blah".

I happen to understand Russian - there were recordings of a call from a Wagner soldier that was part of the Wagner forces that "weren't there" during the battle of Conoco Field in Syria a few years ago.
What was that - well, in short - US forces were engaged by some unknown Syrian groups, so they picked up the de-escalation phone to the Russian forces on the other side and went

- "guys, we're being attacked, just to confirm - it's not you, right ???"
- "No no no, comrade, of course not, we don't know what you talking about".
- "Ok then, good, we can retaliate then".

Epic stuff. The Wagner guy boiled down to "We deserved what we got, because for a second we bought into our own BS".

So no. Don't bury us yet 😇.

PS: About China's industrial abilities - yes, they are impressive. Search the following in YouTube: "China’s Machine Tools 50 Years Behind West; A 1.4 Billion Nation Bested by 200-Person Japanese Shops". The channel it's on is not exactly pro-Chinese, but the video is quite interesting and shows stuff that you don't see every day. Does it put things in a different light - I'm not sure.

PPS: Little piece of useless analysis from a guy who grew up elsewhere:

- What sport do little and less little boys play in the whole World ? Football, it's called everywhere but here. Well - SOCCER, in our neck of the woods.
What does soccer teach ? Running. Stamina, and running. Health, and running.

- What sport do little and less little boys play in North America ? Let's see...
Football. AMERICAN football.
Baseball.
Hockey up North.

What are boys from all over the World good at when they go to war ?
- They are good at RUNNING. They can run forever, in various directions, in very fast sprints.

What are boys from North America trained to do when they go to war ?
- Throw grenades - very far, and very accurately.
- Smash things and people with bats. Very accurately.
- Run THROUGH people. Very efficiently.
- Do all of the above, ON ICE, for our friends up North.

Sounds like a joke, but it's not. There's deep wisdom into what boys learn.
Good information thanks. I'm going to re-read it. I worry about this: "And unless a very solid anti-US coalition is created". Not sure how we look these days on a global scale.
 
Only disagreement I’ve got with this is about the boys “up north” things have changed and are rapidly changing & they are trying to align with China and they are looking at buying non US fighter jets cuz screw the US
Yes, we're pushing many away. Not good.

If we mess with Greenland I expect even worse blowback.
 
Good information thanks. I'm going to re-read it. I worry about this: "And unless a very solid anti-US coalition is created". Not sure how we look these days on a global scale.
I wouldn't worry too much, despite the current temporary insanity. It is not good at all, it is destructive and hurtful, but in the grand scheme of things - we need the world and the world needs us. It's that simple.

I am thoroughly ashamed to our neighbors up North. I hope we manage to make it up some day.

The US is what it is at least in part because it is blessed with amazing geography defense-wise. Open (unblockable, or "un-blockadable" seas on two sides, resources, etc), resources, manpower, etc. In my book the only others who have that are Canada, Australia and the UK (minus the resources for the UK though).

Russia is cursed with a sad history and suffers from historical PTSD of every single one of their neighbors having attacked them at one time or the other. In their mind, nothing less than a buffer zone of countries under their control will satisfy them.
China has territories about the size of France or larger that we're taken by Russia in the last two centuries.

They are beasties right now, but it was not forgotten, and that piper will have to be paid - maybe in our lifetimes. No surprise at all that China supports the Russians in Ukraine. Those Russian forces are being dilapidated on the opposite side of them.
 
What China does well is manufacturing. They're specialists at manufacturing at all levels. That allows them to quickly copy/turn out products fast. Look at how close their rockets and other things resemble ours. They clone these things quickly.
Not “at all levels”. There are still a lot of complex items they’re not up to speed on (yet).

A couple that come to mind are jet engines and complex computer chips/systems.

WRT turbine engines, it’s really just us (GE, P&W) and the UK (RR) who are building the highest performance engines in the world.

The Chinese are still a long way from being able to duplicate the kind of turbine engines that would allow them to produce aircraft that would reach parity with ours.
 
Mattis was a empty suit while being an expert in propaganda

I'm curious to know why you doesn't like him. Every Marine I know has nothing but praise about him, including me. He's stood watch in the middle of Iraq with the Marines under his command. He treated his enlisted exceptionally well; the officer type that enlisted guys would have no qualms about making sure Chaos got his 8 hours of sleep and coffee in the morning - not because of his rank but because we had that much respect for him. Made sure senior officers would apologize directly to enlisted. Would personally walk the line to see if his Marines needed anything. He's the only guy that comes to mind that nearly all Marines would die for.

The only people that ended up hating him were the cult followers of a draft dodger because Gen Mattis decided he couldn't protect the Constitution as SecDef under him.
 
I'm curious to know why you doesn't like him. Every Marine I know has nothing but praise about him, including me. He's stood watch in the middle of Iraq with the Marines under his command. He treated his enlisted exceptionally well; the officer type that enlisted guys would have no qualms about making sure Chaos got his 8 hours of sleep and coffee in the morning - not because of his rank but because we had that much respect for him. Made sure senior officers would apologize directly to enlisted. Would personally walk the line to see if his Marines needed anything. He's the only guy that comes to mind that nearly all Marines would die for.

The only people that ended up hating him were the cult followers of a draft dodger because Gen Mattis decided he couldn't protect the Constitution as SecDef under him.

Oh now you are turning this political
 
Yes, we're pushing many away. Not good.

If we mess with Greenland I expect even worse blowback.

we are not pushing anyone away

Look at who is saying what and actions that are taking to join chin and the EU and why

But that’s also political and breaking the rules here
 
His actions are that of a politician and someone who cared about himself & knew how to use propaganda
Your single short statements are unsubstantiated opinion. With no examples, no evidence, they are meaningless opinion.

I’ve been in the room with the guy, and you’re completely wrong about him. He was respected, admired, and loved by his Marines.
 
Back
Top Bottom