That kind of relies on the US continuing to be incompetent, no?
No; it's all comparative. They just have to keep underperforming compared to China. And also, things do look a lot like the US will continue and accelerate its incompetence. China's rise never relied on others' failures; we are simply better and move faster than them. That that caused them to get bent out of shape and become increasingly incompetent in desperation is just a bonus.
The present military trajectory also depends on the US calculating that they cannot defeat China right now. Suppose they get their shit together and decide to use their present advantages before China flips the table, what then?
The table is flipped in Asia, but the outcome of a conflict is not binary. It's not an American victory or a Chinese victory. As time goes on and China's military gets stronger in comparison to the US military, not only do its chances of overall victory increase but also the totality of the victory as well as the preservation of its forces. It's quite a difference to lose 60% of your forces fighting the enemy until he is forced to give you an acceptable agreement you can sell to your population as a net victory vs losing almost nothing due to technological superiority and inflicting horrible losses on his forces until he retreats out of Asia unconditionally.
This is why I believe locking in a period of uncontested military buildup now while making a conventional military confrontation impossible for the foreseeable future (nuclear confrontation still has China at a decisive disadvantage) would be the best way to address China's most vulnerable time: the present.
You are adverse to risk; you fear the future turning against us even when everything is turning against the US in favor of us.
This is simple mathematics.
What?
If you're weakening and your enemy is getting stronger, you act immediately for the best odds of securing your position.
So that's what the US should be doing while China should be looking to keep things fluid and to be decided in the future. That's what's happening. What you're advocating for is that China create the conflict to lock things in now when we would do better in the future.
China's future ascension due to industrial scaling means nothing if the US consolidates their power to cripple China tomorrow.
Consolidates what? You're scared of the US rising when they are falling and China is rising. All of our technological sectors are on track to turn the US into a dinosaur. Our military is on track to absorb all that tech and become the premier military of the world. And you're scared to keep going because you think the advantage we just managed to achieve in Asia is good enough to call it game set.
