Move along people nothing suspicious.
Surely these are not against Ukraine, right?
Surely these are not against Ukraine, right?
Last edited:
Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
Well I can think of the most recent "war" that happened in the Balkans, namely in Kosovo during the Operation Allied Force Nato operations - led by SACEUR Gen. Wesley K. Clark along with his subordinate commander, the deputy chief and the architect of the campaign, Ltd.Gen. Mike Short.
That war was mostly waged by the air assets of NATO countries primarily led of course by the U.S. After 78 days of bombing campaign then Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic capitulated in surrendering Kosovo. It was hailed back then as the first air operation that was able to compel the surrender of it's enemy.
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
Serbia is small country with no mean to fight back and nobody help them with Anti air missile against the overpowering NATO. So no wonder they lost But Taiwan has the backing of US and Japan and they will rush reinforcement as soon as hostility start!
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
That's why China has its ever-improving area-denial capabilities. So once again, we are back at air power, missile technology, and asymmetrical naval assets (all developed by those "stupid no good" PhDs), instead of your outdated concept of we-need-tons-of-people-to-fight-their-tons-of-people.
Why are you being so aggressively whiny though? Is everything okay? I ask this question in a sincere manner because I have been re-reading your past comments and quite honestly the result is night and day. You sound like a frustrated individual and you're projecting whatever disappointment you're going through against China and it's lack of "SPINE" as you put it.
Putting away the question and concern I raised aside, you haven't actually written anything that resembles a coherent "strategy" that has any chance of succeeding let alone the notion of strategy you have suggested will not ever see the light of day in any military countries that are worth their salt and expertise.
You're suggestions are nothing but that suggestions; I don't know what qualifies you to make such overly confident statements and pronouncements about China/PLA'S lack of fortitude and brass balls to declare war or make a precipitous attack of Taiwan for all the wrong reasons. I don't know if you have served or is serving in the military in a meaningful capacity or have a degree in military arts science, military history and strategy background for you to make such quixotic, arrogant statements.
I feel your sentiment and share your frustrations in terms of wishing that China would forego all this strategic patience and timing it's employing against all it's strategic enemies near it's periphery and against the western alliance led by the U.S. I want to see the west bloodied and humiliated and maybe just maybe China will gain the respect it rightfully deserves. But whenever my anger and frustrations subside I am glad that Chinese leadership doesn't have anyone with the impatience and undisciplined mind, feelings that I do because that would be a tragedy for the country lol.
Most importantly, based on my cursory readings of military history and strategy as just your average lay person, there's a constant theme that the commitment of expending blood and treasure along with the lives of young men and women must never be taken lightly and must only used as a last, last resort when all options have failed and exhausted. Fight when we must and legitimate national security is at stake, not when it's convenient.
A great video from Alexander Mercouris, spot on as always, 'Don't do unto others what you don't want done unto you.' the west had been using sanction as a weapon, now China is hitting back and the west is surprise and is complaining....LOL.
2.7K views
Yep. China is going to hit them where it hurts, in their pocket.
Especially the failing EU which is the supposed "human rights defender" and sanctions China for genocide while it quietly takes its money.
Let them make the choice if they want to virtue signal or to make money
US officials who are ready to fight China over Taiwan don't understand how much is at stake
By Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis, ret, Defense Priorities, 18 March 2021
• US defense officials are increasingly warning of the potential for conflict with China over Taiwan.
• There is almost no way in which the US could intervene in that conflict without devastating losses.
• Daniel L. Davis is a senior fellow at Defense Priorities and a former lieutenant colonel in the US Army.
Many of America's leading military and political figures have issued increasingly alarmist warnings in recent days about the potential for conflict with China, especially related to issues surrounding Taiwan.
But before the US gets into a crisis that brings it to the threshold of war — or finds itself stumbling into one — policymakers and military leaders need to address some HARD REALITIES.
There is ALMOST NO SCENARIO in which the United States can successfully intervene in a war between China and Taiwan that will not leave our country in far worse shape than it is right now; in a worst-case scenario, American territory could be struck by nuclear missiles.
In testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee last week, Adm. Phil Davidson, commander of US forces in the Indo-Pacific, warned that Chinese military developments looked to him like a nation planning for a war.
Davidson added that he believed China would attempt to forcibly reunify Taiwan "in the next six years." To guard against this possibility, Davidson asked Congress to provide a whopping $27 billion in additional funding over the current defense budget.
One of the featured programs for this increase is the Pacific Deterrence Initiative. Last year Congress allocated $2.1 billion for the initiative. This year Davidson is asking for more than double that amount, to $4.6 billion.
The PDI's main objectives will be to increase the number of ground-based cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, and hypersonic missiles in areas closer to Chinese territory. That effort is already well underway.
In October the US Marine Corps completed construction on its first new permanent base in the Indo-Pacific area since 1952. The Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force have additional plans to establish new bases or expand existing ones at TINIAN ISLAND, PALAU, GUAM, and AUSTRALIA — all along the so-called "FIRST ISLAND CHAIN" near China's coastline.
The expansion is designed to enhance US' ability to conduct "island-hopping" operations and create the ability to rapidly construct military airfields in austere environments.
The reason for this expansion, Davidson said, was to reduce or eliminate the time necessary for American military forces to engage Chinese targets.
The admiral said that right now it would take US forces on the West Coast more than three weeks to get within range of China and troops from Alaska 17 days. But the "perfect speed," Davidson concluded, was "being there."
ALMOST ENTIRELY ABSENT from the hearing was any explanation of WHAT'S DRIVING the United States to elevate the risk of war by increasing the number of troops NEAR the Chinese coast.
As a freedom-loving democracy, the United States is a strong advocate for the independence and freedom of any people, including those in Taiwan. But to that laudable belief must be added a WILLINGNESS TO ASSESS the world in a REALISTIC WAY.
Right now, both the United States and China ARE IN A SPIRAL in which one side expands its capabilities for war, citing rising threats from the other — which each then offers as justification for yet more military spending and preparation for war.
China is building infrastructure to project its power WESTWARD to the first island chain at the same time US forces are moving infrastructure EASTWARD toward the first island chain and Chinese coast. Every day increases the chance of an accident or miscalculation leading to war.
Both the United States and China SAY THEY DON'T WANT WAR, but BOTH SIDES are accelerating and expanding their preparation for war.
If the United States were to one day fight China for anything other than an unprovoked attack, we would be choosing a course which would — IN THE BEST-CASE SCENARIO — cause extraordinary harm to our military and markedly degrade our national security; in the worst-case, we could lose a war, putting at risk our very freedom.
It is crucial to understand that for China, the Taiwan issue is NOT MERELY A CORE INTEREST, BUT AN EMOTIONALLY CHARGED ONE. They are FAR MORE WILLING TO PAY EXTRAORDINARY COSTS, sacrifice many men, and could risk it all to eventually compel unification with Taiwan. The issue does not directly affect our national security unless we get involved.
If we eventually choose war with China over Taiwan, we will at best suffer egregious losses in ships, aircraft, and troops; in a worst-case, the war COULD DETERIORATE INTO A NUCLEAR EXCHANGE in which American cities are turned into nuclear wastelands, killing millions.
America should never take such risks unless our security and freedom are directly threatened. Fighting China for any reason short of that would be a FOOLISH GAMBLE OF THE HIGHEST ORDER.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Daniel L. Davis is a senior fellow for Defense Priorities and a former lieutenant colonel in the US Army who deployed into combat zones four times. He is the author of "The Eleventh Hour in 2020 America." Follow him @DanielLDavis1.
By Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis, ret, Defense Priorities, 18 March 2021
• US defense officials are increasingly warning of the potential for conflict with China over Taiwan.
• There is almost no way in which the US could intervene in that conflict without devastating losses.
• Daniel L. Davis is a senior fellow at Defense Priorities and a former lieutenant colonel in the US Army.
Many of America's leading military and political figures have issued increasingly alarmist warnings in recent days about the potential for conflict with China, especially related to issues surrounding Taiwan.
But before the US gets into a crisis that brings it to the threshold of war — or finds itself stumbling into one — policymakers and military leaders need to address some HARD REALITIES.
There is ALMOST NO SCENARIO in which the United States can successfully intervene in a war between China and Taiwan that will not leave our country in far worse shape than it is right now; in a worst-case scenario, American territory could be struck by nuclear missiles.
In testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee last week, Adm. Phil Davidson, commander of US forces in the Indo-Pacific, warned that Chinese military developments looked to him like a nation planning for a war.
Davidson added that he believed China would attempt to forcibly reunify Taiwan "in the next six years." To guard against this possibility, Davidson asked Congress to provide a whopping $27 billion in additional funding over the current defense budget.
One of the featured programs for this increase is the Pacific Deterrence Initiative. Last year Congress allocated $2.1 billion for the initiative. This year Davidson is asking for more than double that amount, to $4.6 billion.
The PDI's main objectives will be to increase the number of ground-based cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, and hypersonic missiles in areas closer to Chinese territory. That effort is already well underway.
In October the US Marine Corps completed construction on its first new permanent base in the Indo-Pacific area since 1952. The Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force have additional plans to establish new bases or expand existing ones at TINIAN ISLAND, PALAU, GUAM, and AUSTRALIA — all along the so-called "FIRST ISLAND CHAIN" near China's coastline.
The expansion is designed to enhance US' ability to conduct "island-hopping" operations and create the ability to rapidly construct military airfields in austere environments.
The reason for this expansion, Davidson said, was to reduce or eliminate the time necessary for American military forces to engage Chinese targets.
The admiral said that right now it would take US forces on the West Coast more than three weeks to get within range of China and troops from Alaska 17 days. But the "perfect speed," Davidson concluded, was "being there."
ALMOST ENTIRELY ABSENT from the hearing was any explanation of WHAT'S DRIVING the United States to elevate the risk of war by increasing the number of troops NEAR the Chinese coast.
As a freedom-loving democracy, the United States is a strong advocate for the independence and freedom of any people, including those in Taiwan. But to that laudable belief must be added a WILLINGNESS TO ASSESS the world in a REALISTIC WAY.
Right now, both the United States and China ARE IN A SPIRAL in which one side expands its capabilities for war, citing rising threats from the other — which each then offers as justification for yet more military spending and preparation for war.
China is building infrastructure to project its power WESTWARD to the first island chain at the same time US forces are moving infrastructure EASTWARD toward the first island chain and Chinese coast. Every day increases the chance of an accident or miscalculation leading to war.
Both the United States and China SAY THEY DON'T WANT WAR, but BOTH SIDES are accelerating and expanding their preparation for war.
If the United States were to one day fight China for anything other than an unprovoked attack, we would be choosing a course which would — IN THE BEST-CASE SCENARIO — cause extraordinary harm to our military and markedly degrade our national security; in the worst-case, we could lose a war, putting at risk our very freedom.
It is crucial to understand that for China, the Taiwan issue is NOT MERELY A CORE INTEREST, BUT AN EMOTIONALLY CHARGED ONE. They are FAR MORE WILLING TO PAY EXTRAORDINARY COSTS, sacrifice many men, and could risk it all to eventually compel unification with Taiwan. The issue does not directly affect our national security unless we get involved.
If we eventually choose war with China over Taiwan, we will at best suffer egregious losses in ships, aircraft, and troops; in a worst-case, the war COULD DETERIORATE INTO A NUCLEAR EXCHANGE in which American cities are turned into nuclear wastelands, killing millions.
America should never take such risks unless our security and freedom are directly threatened. Fighting China for any reason short of that would be a FOOLISH GAMBLE OF THE HIGHEST ORDER.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Daniel L. Davis is a senior fellow for Defense Priorities and a former lieutenant colonel in the US Army who deployed into combat zones four times. He is the author of "The Eleventh Hour in 2020 America." Follow him @DanielLDavis1.
Then you're talking about WWIII. Once the shooting starts each countries within the periphery of China and Taiwan must decide whether the loss of lives by expending their men and women into war against China’s core national interest and identity is worth dying for and to what ends?
Is Japan society ready, willing, and able to die for Taiwan? Is the country ready to be f..d up by China and have it's country bomb in ruin? Because one has to make a military calculation that if Japan and the U.S. are going to jump into the conflict, the Chinese military calculus must expect the worst or at least telegraph that it's prepared to go Scorchedearth or bellum romanum (war without mercy) escalation dominance, threat dominance etc..Because if China fails to capture Taiwan and is then beaten back by the combined forces of U.S. and Japan what do you think are going to be the consequences to the CPC, the country, it's national pride; are the Chinese prepare to relive and re-experience another century of not just humiliation but probably the decapitation of the country?
Taking the country into war is not easy even if you think China has all the military advantages. Come on man, you can't be this shallow and oblivious to the realities on the ground. All that reading of military history have brought you nothing but mental staleness.
@voyager1 I'm disappointed by Adidas action, I'm one of those fools who collect their sneakers
well with the lockdown and the Pandemic. It gave me a reason not to buy their products.