The internet is a funny place. One button takes you to interesting places, and another takes your down a black hole of lies and manipulation.

For instance, I saw this little guy. Must have had one Hell of a hard life. Rescued, and is now with a family that loves him and who will take care of him and appreciate him. Poor guy. He has seen some shit. I’ll tell you what.

Yeah. This little guy has seen some shit.

On the other hand, I just read a great knee-slapper of a fantasy from the American neocon publication “Foreign Affairs“. It is titled “Washington is preparing for the wrong war with China.” While they correctly warn that it would be a mistake to get involved in defending Taiwan from China, they are wholly incorrect on their reasoning.

Caitlan Johnson, an astute social and political columnist, writes:

” …going to war with Russia or China over who governs Taiwan or Ukraine would only be supported by crazy morons. People often object to this position saying... 

‘So you’re saying we should just let China/Russia invade Taiwan/Ukraine??’ 

And the answer is ...

"Yes. Of course we should. What are you a fucking idiot?'”

There are many such articles. Overall the promoted mainstream media trend seems to be…

• The USA getting involved in a war over Taiwan serves no benefit to the USA.
• That the war would be a long, drawn out affair.
• The war would be similar to the war in Afghanistan where billions of dollars will be spent fighting a war on Chinese soil.
• But overall, in the long term the USA would benefit because it is “exceptional”.

Ugh.

True moronic pieces, but judging from the likes and forwards, it must really ring a bell and resonate with Americans.

It would take Beijing decades to overcome the losses incurred from a war to take Taiwan, even if Beijing triumphs. 

The United States and our western allies, on the other hand, would remain at full military power, dominate the international business markets, and have the moral high ground to keep China hemmed in like nothing that presently exists. 

Xi would be seen as an unquestioned aggressor, even by other Asian regimes, and the fallout against China could knock them back decades. 

Our security would be vastly improved from what it is today – and incalculably higher than if we foolishly tried to fight a war with China.

-The Guardian

Like I said. These people are living in a fantasy world.

Here, for shits and giggles, I am going to tear into one of their “articles” and pull out and highlight some terrible inaccuracies.

Buckle up.

Let’s go through this article paragraph by paragraph.

The United States is getting serious about the threat of war with China. The U.S. Department of Defense has labeled China its primary adversary, civilian leaders have directed the military to develop credible plans to defend Taiwan, and President Joe Biden has strongly implied that the United States would not allow that island democracy to be conquered.

All absolutely true. The United States has taken a strong war stance and is beating the war drums very loudly.

Yet Washington may be preparing for the wrong kind of war. Defense planners appear to believe that they can win a short conflict in the Taiwan Strait merely by blunting a Chinese invasion. Chinese leaders, for their part, seem to envision rapid, paralyzing strikes that break Taiwanese resistance and present the United States with a fait accompli. Both sides would prefer a splendid little war in the western Pacific, but that is not the sort of war they would get.

Both sides anticipate a short war.

The Chinese are planning a military exercise that would be over within hours.

The American and Taiwanese anticipate a short war also, but one that would be drawn out on the order of weeks to pull in American and Allied forces from Japan, Korea and Australia to fight the Chinese on Taiwan soil. they also believe that China would not consider this action as an invasion. And thus it would be a regional battle on Taiwan and on the South China Sea. A Pretty ENORMOUS assumption.

A war over Taiwan is likely to be long rather than short, regional rather than local, and much easier to start than to end. It would expand and escalate, as both countries look for paths to victory in a conflict neither side can afford to lose. It would also present severe dilemmas for peacemaking and high risks of going nuclear. If Washington doesn’t start preparing to wage, and then end, a protracted conflict now, it could face catastrophe once the shooting starts.

Nope. No. No. No.

What would the United States do to China if China started bombing Hawaii, put manpower, missiles, and tanks on Hawaii and took over the cities there?

America would launch missiles at Beijing. That's what America would do.

It would NOT send forces for a "long war" on Hawaii.

And so I am a telling youse guys that any American attacks, landings, or military actions of any kinds, type or manner will result in equal and measured attacks against American CITIES inside of America.

Let’s continue…

IMPENDING SLUGFEST

A U.S.-Chinese war over Taiwan would begin with a bang. China’s military doctrine emphasizes coordinated operations to “paralyze the enemy in one stroke.” In the most worrying scenario, Beijing would launch a surprise missile attack, hammering not only Taiwan’s defenses but also the naval and air forces that the United States has concentrated at a few large bases in the western Pacific. Simultaneous Chinese cyberattacks and antisatellite operations would sow chaos and hinder any effective U.S. or Taiwanese response. And the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) would race through the window of opportunity, staging amphibious and airborne assaults that would overwhelm Taiwanese resistance. By the time the United States was ready to fight, the war would effectively be over.

All true.

However, the scale of the takeover would be beyond all this kind of fighting. The Chinese and the Taiwanese are brothers. They speak the same language, and both consider themselves Chinese.

It will be a silent coup.

One day you have Taiwan, the next day, you have China. And everyone will be trying to figure out what happened.

The Pentagon’s planning increasingly revolves around preventing this scenario, by hardening and dispersing the U.S. military presence in Asia, encouraging Taiwan to field asymmetric capabilities that can inflict a severe toll on Chinese attackers, and developing the ability to blunt the PLA’s offensive capabilities and sink an invasion fleet. This planning is predicated on the critical assumption that the early weeks, if not days, of fighting would determine whether a free Taiwan survives.

I agree that this seems to be the American military strategy.

Yet whatever happens at the outset, a conflict almost certainly wouldn’t end quickly. Most great-power wars since the Industrial Revolution have lasted longer than expected, because modern states have the resources to fight on even when they suffer heavy losses. Moreover, in hegemonic wars—clashes for dominance between the world’s strongest states—the stakes are high, and the price of defeat may seem prohibitive. During the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, wars between leading powers—the Napoleonic Wars, the Crimean War, the world wars—were protracted slugfests. A U.S.-Chinese war would likely follow this pattern.

Yes. The American cities of Chicago, Atlanta, Boston, New York, and San Francisco would be glowing for months afterwards.

If Washington doesn’t prepare for conflict now, it could face catastrophe once the shooting starts.

 

If the United States managed to beat back a Chinese assault against Taiwan, Beijing wouldn’t simply give up. Starting a war over Taiwan would be an existential gamble: admitting defeat would jeopardize the regime’s legitimacy and President Xi Jinping’s hold on power. It would also leave China more vulnerable to its enemies and destroy its dreams of regional primacy. Continuing a hard fight against the United States would be a nasty prospect, but quitting while China was behind would seem even worse.

This is all dreaming nonsense by a writer who has absolutely no clue as to how the Chinese think. 

Taiwan is Chinese. Period. They speak the Chinese language, they hold Chinese residency, they own Chinese passports, and they have relatives throughout the mainland China. 

Any action regarding it, win, lose or draw will be favorable in the eyes of the Chinese people.

Washington would also be inclined to fight on if the war were not going well. Like Beijing, it would view a war over Taiwan as a fight for regional dominance. The fact that such a war would probably begin with a Pearl Harbor–style missile attack on U.S. bases would make it even harder for an outraged American populace and its leaders to accept defeat. Even if the United States failed to prevent Chinese forces from seizing Taiwan, it couldn’t easily bow out of the war. Quitting without first severely damaging Chinese air and naval power in Asia would badly weaken Washington’s reputation, as well as its ability to defend remaining allies in the region.

Again nonsense. 

Once the shooting starts there will be ZERO American presence in the Pacific. It will all be over. All the bases will be radioactive craters.

Both sides would have the capacity to keep fighting, moreover. The United States could summon ships, planes, and submarines from other theaters and use its command of the Pacific beyond the first island chain—which runs from Japan in the north through Taiwan and the Philippines to the south—to conduct sustained attacks on Chinese forces. For its part, China could dispatch its surviving air, naval, and missile forces for a second and third assault on Taiwan and press its maritime militia of coast guard and fishing vessels into service. Both the United States and China would emerge from these initial clashes bloodied but not exhausted, increasing the likelihood of a long, ugly war.

Again, such idiocy!

China and Russia are as one. Both share military equipment, data and operations. Any war against China would be one against Russia as well.

China would take over the Pacific.
Russia would take over the Atlantic.
Iran would take over the Mediterranean.

NATO would be in ruins.
America would be smouldering.
Australia would have enormous craters.
Japan would meekly tremble an back down with it's gaping craters.
Korea would be busy dealing with it's own problems.

Iraq it will NOT be.

BIGGER, LONGER, MESSIER

When great-power wars drag on, they get bigger, messier, and more intractable. Any conflict between the United States and China is likely to force both countries to mobilize their economies for war. After the initial salvos, both sides would hurry to replace munitions, ships, submarines, and aircraft lost in the early days of fighting. This race would strain both countries’ industrial bases, require the reorientation of their economies, and invite nationalist appeals—or government compulsion—to mobilize the populace to support a long fight.

China can do this. It has already mobilized.

America cannot. You can see this with the joke of a COVID response. America is terribly balkanized and has zero ability to do anything. heck! They can't even build a wall on the Mexican border, a walk-bridge in Florida, or repair highway bridges.

America has a make-believe economy based on an artificially inflated dollar. Were a war to break out, the value of the USD would become zero.

Long wars also escalate as the combatants look for new sources of leverage. Belligerents open new fronts and rope additional allies into the fight. They expand their range of targets and worry less about civilian casualties. Sometimes they explicitly target civilians, whether by bombing cities or torpedoing civilian ships. And they use naval blockades, sanctions, and embargoes to starve the enemy into submission. As China and the United States unloaded on each other with nearly every tool at their disposal, a local war could turn into a whole-of-society brawl that spans multiple regions.

Yes. The moment that the United States starts bombing China, all Hell would break lose. No American cities would survive.

Bigger wars demand more grandiose aims. The greater the sacrifices required to win, the better the ultimate peace deal must be to justify those sacrifices. What began as a U.S. campaign to defend Taiwan could easily turn into an effort to render China incapable of new aggression by completely destroying its offensive military power. Conversely, as the United States inflicted more damage on China, Beijing’s war aims could grow from conquering Taiwan to pushing Washington out of the western Pacific altogether.

The intro sentence is correct, the rest is fantasy. 

There will be no American air power, no American naval power, and no American leadership. Instead, there will domestic turmoil, destruction, and while the "war" for Taiwan was envisioned as another long-duration war, it would instead be the death-blow to the United States as a nation.

All of this would make forging peace more difficult. The expansion of war aims narrows the diplomatic space for a settlement and produces severe bloodshed that fuels intense hatred and mistrust. Even if U.S. and Chinese leaders grew weary of fighting, they might still struggle to find a mutually acceptable peace.

More nonsense.

China, and Russia, can survive war. America cannot.

America is a mess, or haven’t you all been paying attention? video 2.2MB

GOING NUCLEAR

A war between China and the United States would differ from previous hegemonic wars in one fundamental respect: both sides have nuclear weapons. This would create disincentives to all-out escalation, but it could also, paradoxically, compound the dangers inherent in a long war.

There would be no escalation. It would be nuclear from the onset.

This is Chinese military doctrine.

For starters, both sides might feel free to shoot off their conventional arsenals under the assumption that their nuclear arsenals would shield them from crippling retaliation. Scholars call this the “stability-instability paradox,” whereby blind faith in nuclear deterrence risks unleashing a massive conventional war.

Chinese military writings often suggest that the PLA could wipe out U.S. bases and aircraft carriers in East Asia while China’s nuclear arsenal deterred U.S. attacks on the Chinese mainland.

On the flip side, some American strategists have called for pounding Chinese mainland bases at the outset of a conflict in the belief that U.S. nuclear superiority would deter China from responding in kind. Far from preventing a major war, nuclear weapons could catalyze one.

Unrealistic.

Chinese military doctrine is to release nuclear fury the moment their land is attacked.

They DON'T GIVE A FUCK.

Once that war is underway, it could plausibly go nuclear in three distinct ways. Whichever side is losing might use tactical nuclear weapons—low-yield warheads that could destroy specific military targets without obliterating the other side’s homeland—to turn the tide.

That was how the Pentagon planned to halt a Soviet invasion of central Europe during the Cold War, and it is what North Korea, Pakistan, and Russia have suggested they would do if they were losing a war today.

If China crippled U.S. conventional forces in East Asia, the United States would have to decide whether to save Taiwan by using tactical nuclear weapons against Chinese ports, airfields, or invasion fleets. This is no fantasy: the U.S. military is already developing nuclear-tipped, submarine-launched cruise missiles that could be used for such purposes.

Yes it would go nuclear, but not on the terms determined by the United States.

A local war could turn into a whole-of-society brawl that spans multiple regions.

 

China might also use nuclear weapons to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. The PLA has embarked on an unprecedented expansion of its nuclear arsenal, and PLA officers have written that China could use nuclear weapons if a conventional war threatened the survival of its government or nuclear arsenal—which would almost surely be the case if Beijing was losing a war over Taiwan. Perhaps these unofficial claims are bluffs. Yet it is not difficult to imagine that if China faced the prospect of humiliating defeat, it might fire off a nuclear weapon (perhaps at or near the huge U.S. military base on Guam) to regain a tactical advantage or shock Washington into a cease-fire.

Such ignorance! 

I wonder if they actually believe this garbage, or are just fabricating a fantasy for cash dollars.

As the conflict drags on, either side could also use the ultimate weapon to end a grinding war of attrition. During the Korean War, American leaders repeatedly contemplated dropping nuclear bombs on China to force it to accept a cease-fire. Today, both countries would have the option of using limited nuclear strikes to compel a stubborn opponent to concede. The incentives to do so could be strong, given that whichever side pulls the nuclear trigger first might gain a major advantage.

There will be no escalation.  

It will be nuclear from the get-go, and Russia and China will control the entire event sequence. America would be trying desperately to catch up.

A final route to nuclear war is inadvertent escalation. Each side, knowing that escalation is a risk, may try to limit the other’s nuclear options. The United States could, for instance, try to sink China’s ballistic missile submarines before they hide in the deep waters beyond the first island chain.

Yet such an attack could put China in a “use it or lose it” situation with regard to its nuclear forces, especially if the United States also struck China’s land-based missiles and communication systems, which intermingle conventional and nuclear forces. In this scenario, China’s leaders might use their nuclear weapons rather than risk losing that option altogether.

There will be no escalation. 

It will be nuclear from the get-go, and Russia and China will control the entire event sequence. America would be trying desperately to catch up.

AVOIDING ARMAGEDDON

There is no easy way to prepare for a long war whose course and dynamics are inherently unpredictable. Yet the United States and its allies can do four things to get ready for whatever comes—and, hopefully, prevent the worst from happening.

First, Washington can win the race to reload.

China will be much less likely to go to war if it knows it will be outgunned as the conflict drags on. Washington and Taipei should therefore aggressively stockpile ammunition and supplies.

For the United States, the critical assets are missiles capable of sinking China’s most valuable ships and aircraft from afar. For Taiwan, the key weapons are short-range missiles, mortars, mines, and rocket launchers that can decimate invasion fleets.

Both nations also need to be ready to churn out new weapons in wartime. Taiwanese factories will be obvious targets for Chinese missiles, so the United States should enlist the industrial might of other allies. Japan’s shipbuilding capacity, for example, could be retooled to produce simple missile barges rapidly and on a massive scale.

Crazy fantasy.

So the United States plans on out-manufacturing the manufacturing powerhouse. Uh huh. What a fantasy.

Second, the United States and Taiwan can demonstrate their ability to hang tough. In a long war, China could try to strangle Taiwan with a blockade, bombard it into submission, or take down U.S. and Taiwanese electrical grids and telecommunications networks with cyberattacks. It could use conventionally armed, hypersonic missiles to attack targets in the U.S. homeland and flood the United States with disinformation.

Countering such measures will require defensive preparations, such as securing critical networks; expanding Taiwan’s system of civilian shelters; and enlarging the island’s stockpiles of fuel, food, and medical supplies.

Complete ignorance of reality.

The ignorance of the actual on-the-street realities of Taiwan, and the proud American trans-gender forces is stunning.

 

China might use nuclear weapons to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat.

 

Breaking a Chinese campaign of coercion also requires threatening Beijing with painful retaliation.

A third objective, therefore, is to own the escalation ladder. By preparing to blockade Chinese commerce and cut Beijing off from markets and technology in wartime, the United States and its allies can threaten to turn an extended conflict into an economic catastrophe for China.

By preparing to sink Chinese naval vessels anywhere in the western Pacific and destroy Chinese military infrastructure in other regions, Washington can threaten a generation’s worth of Chinese military modernization. And by developing the means to hit Chinese ports, airfields, and armadas with tactical nuclear weapons, the United States can deter China from initiating limited nuclear attacks.

Washington should confront Beijing with a basic proposition: the longer a war lasts, the more devastation China will suffer.

Bye Bye USA.

They FUCKING KNOW THAT.

And the way to prevent that from happening is to destroy the top 40 American cities.

It will be pretty fucking hard without cities, people, and an angry world ready to tear Americans limp to limb.

Because controlling escalation will be essential, the United States also needs options that allow it to dial up the punishment without necessarily dialing up the violence. By subtly demonstrating that it has the cyber-capabilities to cripple China’s critical infrastructure and domestic security system, for example, the United States can threaten to bring the war home to Beijing. Similarly, by improving its ability to suppress Chinese air defenses near Taiwan with cyberattacks, electronic warfare, and directed-energy weapons, the United States can increase its freedom of action while limiting the amount of physical destruction it wreaks on the mainland.

China is not Iraq. Look at a map why don't you.

Any escalatory moves risk ratcheting up the intensity of a conflict. So the final preparation Washington must make is to define victory down. A war between nuclear-armed great powers would not end with regime change or one side occupying the other’s capital. It would end with a negotiated compromise. The simplest settlement would be a return to the status quo: China stops attacking Taiwan in exchange for a pledge that the island will not seek formal independence and that the United States will not endorse it. To sweeten the deal, Washington could offer to keep its forces off Taiwan and out of the Taiwan Strait. Xi would be able to tell the Chinese people that he taught his enemies a lesson. The United States would have saved a strategically positioned democracy. That may not be a satisfying end to a hard-fought conflict. But in a long war between great powers, protecting vital U.S. interests while avoiding Armageddon is good enough.

As I said, this is a fantasy piece. 

Any one actually taking this article seriously is a FUCKING IDIOT. And if they are in powerful policy making decisions then they DESERVE the "heat" that will come straight towards them.

Conclusions

I pulled out a laughable “article” that is apparently being taken seriously inside the Washington Beltway. I point out the pretty amazing errors in it, and lay down the law of ready vs. perception.

So here is a quick review of reality.

Chinese citizenry is 1600 million people. Every single one of them learned how to fire guns, operate weapons and perform military operations in first grade and throughout their youth. If you think that they would agree to any kind of assault you are out of your God Damn mind.

The entire population of the USA is only 330 million, of that only 1.3 million are in the Armed Forces. Which are spread out all over the globe.

Here’s a Chinese third grade mortar crew

When did you all learn how to fire mortars, arm and hit targets on military operations? The Chinese learn in third grade. video 6MB

You know, I get many comments that I do not publish. One of the comments that I have since deleted, but I will paraphrase here. It went like this…

"Playing pretend soldiers are nice and cute, but America is a warrior culture, with a long and glorious history. You simply cannot equate the Chinese play soldiers against a real modern and well-trained fighting force like the United States has."

Fifth grade students learning how to disable tanks

When did you learn how to do this? Do you really think that America’s great military can actually take on China? Video 16MB

You have to see things as the really are, not what you want to believe.

Here’s America today. How do you think it will be able to handle a war with a unified Russia and China? I do not. And you, if you were really honest with yourself wouldn’t either. Video 2.2MB

Everyone is questioning if America is still functioning.

It’s obvious. And no, a war is not going to make things better. it will make things far, far worse. video 2MB

Meanwhile…

The American psychopaths are not stopping for shit. Here’s on the Russian Front.

https://zen.yandex.ru/media/id/5e184bafa1bb8700b26a3e2f/sivkov-pogranichniki-dnr-sorvali-specoperaciiu-nemeckogo-specnaza-v-donbasse-61c43c3ac6858e66417f572b?&

According to military expert Konstantin Sivkov, British and German special forces tried to enter the territory of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR). However, the Western saboteurs failed, as their operation was prevented by employees of the DPR border service. The analyst noted that the border guards managed to detain foreign special forces without a fight.

"The Americans are going to make a provocation and disappear. One thing is important: now there is actually another wave of hysteria about the fact that Russia is going to attack Ukraine. We are talking about the fact that they are purposefully going to put the Russian Federation in a position where it will be forced to take military measures.",- said the expert on the air of "Solovyov LIVE".

Sivkov is sure that such attempts at penetration should not be ignored. According to the analyst, such provocations are part of a plan to destabilize the situation in the Donbas. Similar actions are also directed against Russia. Washington wants Moscow to start a war, Sivkov believes.

Final Key Points…

In US war games, any war with Russia escalates to nuclear then to total destruction. Russia seems to be saying accept these demands or we’ll have a crisis the equivalent of the Cuban Missile Crisis. I feel concerned that both sides, esp the US do not understand how rapidly a conflict could go nuclear or how unwinnable and destructive that war would be. Even though Biden and Putin recently acknowledged such a war would be unwinnable, the US actions do not show show they really believe that.

[1] It is important to promote that a USA war with involving Taiwan / China will be a long one. This is because it will guarantee a long-duration revenue stream for the American military-industrial complex.

[2] It is important to promote the idea that the war will be conventional only and not go nuclear kinetic. That way, the war will permit Western allies participation.

But neither is true, and I am telling you all something quite different…

[3] If the USA fires one single weapon at Taiwan or the United States, the war will go HOT and Kinetic against America itself. Not just it’s surrogates.

This is BECAUSE Taiwan is part of China. So anyone attacking Taiwan will be attacking China. And China has a long-standing policy to produce measured responses.

Destroy one VTOL carrier, and watch yours get destroyed.

Launch one Bio-weapon attack against the Chinese people, and watch yours suffer from a substantive Bio-weapon attack.

Attack a Chinese city, watch yours get destroyed.

[4] China WILL use nuclear weapons.

This is because it is it's long-standing Chinese military doctrine. 

That is the sole purpose of the hyper-velocity ICBM flights. It is to tell the Jack-asses in the United States that China WILL destroy American cities, and that there are no defenses that America can use. That has never changed.

[5] Russia and China WILL fight together.

This is because it's the SEO doctrine and all members will act together as one. This too has been telegraphed to the Western "leadership". Just because it is not in the mainstream media does not mean that the "leadership" is not aware of it.

Taken together, points [3], plus [4], plus [5] means…

[6] American cities will be blasted into the stone age if the USA starts invading China. To ignore that fact is dangerous. the only question is how many will be destroyed.

[7] It is in the benefit of the United States to have a USA-China conflict that is of long-duration and isolated to China and the South China Sea.

[8] It is to the benefit of China and Russia to stop the mad craziness of the United States once and for all. Whether the Ukraine, or Taiwan. All the provocations are to end because the presence of the provocations destabilizes world harmony.

[9]  Thus, because of points, [6], [7] and [8] it is HIGHLY LIKELY that United states involvement fighting against China will result in the complete and utter fast and quick destruction of the United States.

This is a dangerous, dangerous “game” those fools in Washington DC are playing.

The Chinese are determined to fight to KILL.

It all starts in first grade.

So you think you can take on 1600 million soldiers? America’s military is 1.4 million troops. Or 1/100 of the size. You dunderheads! Are you fucking out of your God Damn mind? video 5MB

And a final RETORT

From a comment (that I did not publish) but is worthy to include here…

“MM is wrong because…

• America is exceptional. It is blessed by God.
• America is far stronger economically than China.
• China has fallen into the “debt trap” with over 3 trillion dollars worth of debt.
• America has a far stronger society than China. China is weak and it’s people are ready to overturn it once the central government crumbles.
• The BRI is a sham to overthrow the world.
• America has more and better factories than China.
• The World loves America and hates China.
• China only copies. It does not innovate.
• China enslaves the minorities and has enormous prison concentration camps.
• America has never lost a war.
• America is a military culture.

Therefore, China doesn’t have a chance.”

Do you want more?

You can find more articles related to this in my latest index; A New Beginning. And in it are elements of the old, some elements regarding the transition, and some elements that look towards the future.

New Beginnings 2

.

Articles & Links

Master Index

.

• You can start reading the articles by going HERE.
• You can visit the Index Page HERE to explore by article subject.
• You can also ask the author some questions. You can go HERE to find out how to go about this.
• You can find out more about the author HERE.
• If you have concerns or complaints, you can go HERE.
• If you want to make a donation, you can go HERE.