It's true, and as time goes on it appears that America is just the big bad neighborhood bully that everyone is afraid of, and that no one ever stands up to. That is until one day...

This is a pretty damning and frightening title, don’t you think? Well, it’s true and it’s accurate. But you won’t ever see anyone be so absolutely blunt as MM here. This isn’t salacious and eye catching as some kind of “click bait” for “doom porn”. Never the less, it’s a real and serous issue. And we are talking about it here, simply because the “drums of war” are beating loudly inside of America.

American war drums are beating loudly.

 #7  ·  Jul 17, 2016 

It's a shame that everyone is China bashing these days, and all of that is based on the USA government controlled press. 

If anyone were to do some research on the subject of China's claim to sovereignty over these South China Sea Islands, then they would quickly agree with China's stance. 

However, almost all are like "LindaLou" who watched "some" of a morning program "Inside China" and immediately made up his/her mind that China was bad and should be condemned for standing up for their rights. 

If this were the USA, making these claims, then ALL of the pandering USA citizens would be following the government press and saying "YES, YES, YES". 

The citizens of the USA should be very mindful of the fact that you're being manipulated to believe whatever the government wants you to believe. 

Ever watched "1984" ?

America is not able, and is not capable, of fighting either Russia, or China on their territory. And would suffer catastrophic losses at a horrific level. Probably one that would result in the absolute collapse of the country (the entire United States as a nation) to a point where it is completely unrecognizable afterwards.

And you know, many, many people are starting to wake up to this fact. Even the most deluded sheeple. Some Americans. Maybe in numbers as high as 1% are scratching their heads and asking… what? You want to fight?

Why?

You're not suggesting that taking out China would be as easy, are you? 

I guarantee you that the US cannot defeat China. We are no longer the world's leading super power and, in fact, we're on the verge of becoming #3. 

China is #1 and we're close to coming in behind Russia. 

#18  ·  Jul 17, 2016 

Any of the following areas of American provocation would result in the nuclear detonation upon American cities…

• • • China over Taiwan.
    • China over Tibet.
    • China over Hong Kong.
    • China over Xinjiang.
    • China over the South China Sea.
    • Russia over the Ukraine.

The American military planners are aware of this fact. And so they have been conducting all sorts of studies, and war games, to find solutions where America would win a war again either Russia, China or both simultaneously.

They can’t find ANY.

Many in the know, believe America has two options when it comes to  winning a world war against China and Russia. Also, what most agree on  is the fact that America cannot win a conventional war against either  power, or both. 

-  Can America Win World War III? A Critical Analysis 

Of course, because everyone is “dancing around it” and refuses to look at the issue “face to face” the actual study results (studies… many) are coded in euphemisms. Instead of saying that the United States military was wiped off the face of the globe, the studies say…

 "...there were challenges and difficulties that were encountered..."

Instead of saying that all the United States carriers were non-functional after three days, the reports read…

"...the Navy needs to invest money to improve defensive capabilities in a new and contentious environment...".

Instead of saying that half of the expensive and elaborate high cost weapons and equipment were no longer operable, the reports stated…

"...challenges in training must be addressed..."

These euphemisms have become the “New Speak” of American Imperial Policy. As this quote outlays…

"Question: So you think that the United States can no longer be called a democracy?

"Answer: Democratic countries do not engage in blackmail and threats against other sovereign states, do not interfere in their internal affairs. They do not violate international law, do not use military force and economic sanctions bypassing the UN. They do not trample on human rights or restrict freedom of speech on their territory and abroad. They do not try to use racism of all stripes to solve internal problems, nor do they lure extremists and terrorists to their side for geopolitical purposes. They do not allow transnational corporations to interfere in the work of the government, imposing their own interests on the country and society, much less block the legitimate head of state in social networks and mass media. In democratic countries, the administration that came to power does not disavow the decisions of its predecessors simply because there has been a personal antagonism between them."

But a "democratic country" is whatever America defines it as--at any given moment!

America is just like Humpty Dumpty in Alice in Wonderland: “When I use a word ... it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."

Torture is Enhanced Interrogation.
Coup D'etats are Regime Change.
Kill Lists are a Disposition Threat Matrix.
Wars of Aggression are Wars of Choice (or Pre-emptive kinetic military action).

Ignorance is Strength....

As a former high-level Bush Regime official boasted, “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”

Welcome to the American Rules-Based Order.

-Posted by: ak74 | May 4 2021 23:21 utc | 30

And this use of euphemisms has been seriously misinterpreted by the American leadership elite who mistakenly believe that they can fight either or both Russia and China simultaneously and win in any conflict. And here you have Metallicman saying that this is simply not true.

Fifty years of fighting small, lightly armed military, in under-developed nations that rely on obsolete technology and who, at best engage in Guerilla Warfare  should not be considered the same thing as fighting a determined, skilled, peer capable military in Asia.

Well, this is well understood.

But whether or not American military is able to fight a war is not a concern to the bureaucracy in Washington DC. Whether they are able to profit from the threat of war is. And thus we have this curious article…

The following is an article titled “US ‘Gets Its Ass Handed To It’ In Wargames: Here’s A $24 Billion Fix “

By   Sydney J. Freedberg Jr. on March 07, 2019 at 5:53 PM And of course, all credit to the author, it was edited to fit this venue.

US ‘Gets Its Ass Handed To It’ In Wargames: Here’s A $24 Billion Fix

Warships sink. Bases burn. F-35s die on the runway. Can $24 billion a year — 3.3 % of the Pentagon budget — fix the problem?

WASHINGTON: The US keeps losing, hard, in simulated wars with Russia and China. Bases burn. Warships sink. But we could fix the problem for about $24 billion a year, one well-connected expert said, less than four percent of the Pentagon budget.

Easy-peasy, lemon-squeezy.

• The US Apparently ‘Gets Its Ass Handed to It’ in War Games
• The Scary War Game Over Taiwan That the U.S. Loses
• In China Russia war games United States ‘gets ass handed …
• War Games Simulation Shows U.S. Forces “Crushed” By China
• RAND Corp wargames: U.S. loses to combined Russia/China forces
• US ‘would lose any war’ fought in the Pacific with China
• War Games Simulation Shows U.S. Forces “Crushed” By China
• How a War Against China Could Cripple the United States
• US has been losing simulated war games against Russia & China
• S. Air Force Loses Simulation Attack Against China
• War Games Over China Suggest U.S. Would Lose
• US ‘Gets Its A** Handed To It’ By Russia, China in WWIII
• America ‘Is Going to Lose Fast’ in a War With China …
• WW3 simulations ‘leave America destroyed by Russia and China’
• Congressional Report Warns US Might Lose a War Against
• ‘US will lose next war’ RAND report warns
• World War 3: Outcome of US vs China conflict laid bare in …
• the US Could Lose a War With China or Russia, New Report
• China could overwhelm US in military first strike

“In our games, when we fight Russia and China,” RAND analyst David Ochmanek said this afternoon, “blue gets its ass handed to it.”

In other words, in RAND’s wargames, which are often sponsored by the Pentagon, the US forces — colored blue on wargame maps — suffer heavy losses in one scenario after another and still can’t stop Russia or China — red — from achieving their objectives, like overrunning US allies.

No, it’s not a Red Dawn nightmare scenario where the Commies conquer Colorado.

But losing the Baltics or Taiwan would shatter American alliances, shock the global economy, and topple the world order the US has led since World War II.

Hey! Boys and Girls! I've got news for you all. The US no longer leads the world. It just thinks it does. The American Leadership shill haven't read the reports yet. -MM

Body Blows & Head Hits

How could this happen, when we spend over $700 billion a year on everything from thousand-foot-long nuclear-powered aircraft carriers to supersonic stealth fighters?

Well, it turns out US superweapons have a little too much Achilles in their heels.

“In every case I know of,” said Robert Work, a former deputy secretary of defense with decades of wargaming experience, “the F-35 rules the sky when it’s in the sky, but it gets killed on the ground in large numbers.”

Even the hottest jet has to land somewhere.

But big airbases on land and big aircraft carriers on the water turn out to be big targets for long-range precision-guided missiles.

Once an American monopoly, such smart weapons are now a rapidly growing part of Russian and Chinese arsenals — as are the long-range sensors, communications networks, and command systems required to aim them.

So, as potential adversaries improve their technology, “things that rely on sophisticated base infrastructure like runways and fuel tanks are going to have a hard time,” Ochmanek said. “Things that sail on the surface of the sea are going to have a hard time.”

That’s why the 2020 budget retires the carrier USS Truman decades early and cuts two amphibious landing ships, as we’ve reported. 

It’s also why the Marine Corps is buying the jump-jet version of the F-35, which can take off and land from tiny, ad hoc airstrips, but how well they can maintain a high-tech aircraft in low-tech surroundings is an open question.

While the Air Force and Navy took most of the flak today at this afternoon’s Center for a New American Security panel on the need for “A New American Way of War.” the Army doesn’t look too great, either.

Its huge supply bases go up in smoke as well, Work and Ochmanek said. Its tank brigades get shot up by cruise missiles, drones, and helicopters because the Army largely got rid of its mobile anti-aircraft troops, a shortfall it’s now hastening to correct.

And its missile defense units get overwhelmed by the sheer volume of incoming fire.

“I think it’s unanimous from all the soldiers involved that we got this one right,” said the Army’s project manager for the Future Tactical Unmanned Aerial System. Manned aircraft, FARA and FLRAA, are also moving out sharply.

- Sydney J. Freedberg Jr.

“If we went to war in Europe, there would be one Patriot battery moving, and it would go to Ramstein. And that’s it,” Work growled. “We have 58 Brigade Combat Teams, but we don’t have anything to protect our bases, so what different does it make?”

Worst of all, Work and Ochmanek said, the US doesn’t just take body blows, it takes a hard hit to the head as well.

Its communications satellites, wireless networks, and other command-and-control systems suffer such heavy hacking and jamming that they are, in Ochmanek’s words, “suppressed, if not completely shattered.”

The US has wargamed cyber and electronic warfare in field exercises, Work said, but the simulated enemy forces tend to shut down US networks so effectively that nothing works and nobody else gets any training done.

“Whenever we have an exercise and the red force really destroys our command and control, we stop the exercise,” Work said, instead of trying to figure out how to keep fighting when your command post gives you nothing but blank screens and radio static.

The Chinese call this “system destruction warfare,” Work said: They plan to “attack the American battle network at all levels, relentlessly, and they practice it all the time.”

Our Navy “gets its ass handed to it” in one scenario examining a fight against China over Taiwan and the Air Force “is going to lose fast.” 

In short, if Biden rashly sends the military to Taiwan’s defense, he could be sending us to our greatest naval defeat in our history. 

If the president’s military advisers convince him to attack military targets on the mainland, the results would be mushroom clouds over U.S. cities.

-1945

The $24 Billion Fix — And Cuts

So how do you fix such glaring problems?

The Air Force asked RAND to come up with a plan two years ago, and, surprisingly, Ochmanek said, “we found it impossible to spend more than $8 billion a year.”

That’s $8 billion for the Air Force. Triple that to cover for the Army and the Navy Department (which includes the US Marines), Ochmanek said, and you get $24 billion.

Yes, these are very broad strokes, but that’s only 3.3 percent of the $750 billion defense budget President Trump will propose for the 2020 fiscal year.

Work was less worried about the near-term risk — he thinks China and Russia aren’t eager to try anything right now — and more about what happens 10 to 20 years from now. But, he said, “sure, $24 billion a year for the next five years would be a good expenditure.

So what does that $24 billion buy?

To start with, missiles. Lots and lots of missiles. The US and its allies notoriously keep underestimating how many smart weapons they’ll need for a shooting war, then start to run out against enemies as weak as the Serbs or Libyans. Against a Russia or China, which can match not only our technology but our mass, you run out of munitions fast.

Specifically, you want lots of long-range offensive missiles. Ochmanek mentioned Army artillery brigades, which use MLRS missile launchers, and the Air Force’s JAGM-ER smart bomb, while Work touted the Navy’s LRASM ship-killer. You also want lots of defensive missiles to shoot down the enemy‘s offensive missiles, aircraft, and drones. One short-term fix there is the Army’s new Maneuver Short-Range Air Defense (MSHORAD) batteries, Stinger missiles mounted on 8×8 Stryker armored vehicles. In the longer term, lasers, railguns, and high-powered microwaves could shoot down incoming missiles much less expensively.

The other big fix: toughening up our command, control, and communications networks. That includes everything from jam-proof datalinks to electronic warfare gear on combat aircraft and warships. The services are fond of cutting corners on electronics to get as many planes in the air and hulls in the water as possible, Ochmanek said, but a multi-billion dollar ship that dies for lack of a million-dollar decoy is a lousy return on investment.

In the longer run, Work added, you want to invest heavily in artificial intelligence: not killer robots, he said, but “loyal wingmen” drones to support manned aircraft and big-data crunchers to help humans analyze intelligence and plan. Of course, you have to find the money for new stuff somewhere, which means either raising the defense budget even further — unlikely — or cutting existing programs. Ochmanek was unsurprisingly shy about specifics, saying only that the services could certainly squeeze out $8 billion each for new technologies.

Work was a little harder-edged. He said cutting a carrier and two amphibious ships over the forthcoming 2020-2024 budget “seems right to me.” He argued the US Army has way too many brigade combat teams — tanks and infantry — and way too little missile defense to protect them. And he bemoaned reports the US Air Force will retire the B-1 bomber, one of its few long-range strike aircraft: If the Air Force doesn’t want them, he said, give them to the Navy, revive the old VPB “Patrol Bomber” squadrons, and load them with Long-Range Anti-Ship Missiles to sink the Chinese navy. Pentagon leaders should challenge the armed services to solve very hard, very specific problems.

Work said: Sink 350 Chinese navy and coast guard vessels in the first 72 hours of a war, or destroy 2,400 Russian armored vehicles. Whoever has the best solution gets the most money. Those are hardly easy goals, Work said, but they’re also doable with technology now in development.

Easy Solution. The immediate problems could be fixed with technology already in production, Ochmanek said. For $24 billion, “I can buy the whole kit,” he said. “It’s all mature technologies and it would scare the crap out of adversaries, in a good way.”

It’s all about the money…

According to Washington DC K-Street neocons, the solution is more money. Not, instead, to rethink the value of conducting war against a peer-capable enemy. Especially one that has no intention on invading America. And they should think about the consequences…

No matter how one calculates it, fighting China over Taiwan would harm American interests and security without even holding the potential for benefit. 

We must resist the temptation to act on the presumption that we can always choose to fight because we will always win. 

The future of our country might hinge on getting this right.

-1945

The only threat to America these days is domestic. Internally, America is collapsing and the rest of the world isn’t. But… Let’s suppose that the money-grabbing Washington “think tanks” have made the necessary Power Point PPT presentations and convinced, actually convinced, those that control the utilization of the military that it is indeed possible to win a war. What then? Well let’s look at the situation from this point of view…

Biden Can’t Assume America Beats China in a Taiwan War

By Daniel Davis  . Published December 30, 2020. All credit to the authors, edited to fit this venue.

Joe Biden will face a host of difficulties and challenges when he assumes office on January 20, but perhaps none more consequential than deteriorating China-U.S. relations.

It is the potential flashpoint of Taiwan that will have the greatest urgency. Many in Washington are advocating a shedding of the decades’ old policy of “strategic ambiguity,” in favor of an overt declaration that we would come to the defense of Taiwan if China ever seeks to reunify the island by force.

Well. According to the UN, and both China and Taiwan, Taiwan is Han Chinese and part of China. It operates independently like Hong Kong does. But in no way is it an American territory. Which is something that the United States media and the neocons in Washington DC wants everyone to believe.

Assumed in such advocacy is the presumption the U.S. Armed Forces would be able to successfully accomplish that mission. For at least three major reasons, those assumptions are badly misplaced.

First, the risk is high that on purely military fundamentals, the United States would fail to successfully prevent a resolute and committed Chinese assault. As the most recent Department of Defense annual report to Congress on China details, China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) – remains on a multi-decade modernization push that has seen them develop a substantial defensive capability, known as anti-access, area-denial (A2/AD).

China’s A2/AD strategy, the Pentagon report explains, is designed to “dissuade, deter, or, if ordered, defeat third-party intervention during a large-scale, theater campaign such as a Taiwan contingency.”

Their strategy includes the use of modern weaponry including warships, new fighters, increasingly lethal missile forces, heavy armor, and cyberattack capability.

When comparing the armed forces of the United States and China, we are still substantially more capable than China. Our ability to project power, for example, remains ahead of China.

Critically, however, the balance of power near China’s shores would give them virtually EVERY military advantage.

Repeated wargames conducted in the United States pitting the U.S. against China in a Taiwan scenario reveal the ugly truth.

Former Assistant Secretary of Defense and current RAND analyst David A. Ochmanek revealed earlier this year that simulation exercises have exposed troubling results when the U.S. intervenes in war between China and Taiwan.

The American side, Ochmanek admitted, has “had its ass handed to it for years.”  

The reasons for the simulated combat losses aren’t hard to understand.

Over the past few decades, the Chinese have developed modern weapons of war and have improved the quality of their fighting force substantially above where they were when the U.S. dismantled Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi army in 1991.

Though our military is globally superior any fight within the so-called “first island chain” near China’s coast would play to Beijing’s tactical advantage.

As if 2020, this is now obsolete. According to the United States military, and the Trump White House the "first island chain" delimitation line is no longer an American advantage. 

It is an area of Chinese military advantage.

Our conventional and nuclear power deter China from ever attacking the U.S. mainland or Armed Forces – but if we choose to intervene in their back yard, they would have the advantage.

Second, in the event of war, Taiwan may defend itself not merely by targeting the attacking Chinese forces, but by hitting military bases on the Chinese mainland. 

If the U.S. joins the fight against China, it is unlikely China would differentiate whether an attack against its mainland came from a Taiwanese or American source and may well prompt a Chinese retaliation against U.S. targets either in the region (such as in Japan, South Korea, Guam, or Hawaii) or directly on our continental homeland. The risk would then rise precipitously of a nuclear response against American Cities on American soil.

Third, even if we overcame all the difficulties and imposed an outright defeat on the Chinese, there’s no guarantee China wouldn’t try again and we would be saddled with permanently garrisoning Taiwan, indefinitely making its security our responsibility. It would also all but guarantee a new war with China, as an American military presence across the Strait would entice Beijing to prepare for the next round. Taiwan is a core interest of China and they would never quit fighting.

As China has repeatedly warned the brain-dead American leadership, that Taiwan is Chinese territory. 

Any American killing of Chinese people on Chinese soil would result in American deaths on American soil.

Of course, the idea that China would stick to a conventional strategy and isolate Taiwan and allow it to work with the United States unencumbered is another major illusion. 

There is a much higher chance of San Fransisco turned to a flat, glassed over radioactive plain than this scenario coming into being. The Chinese leadership does not think like an American oligarch.

We would have to spend scores of billions annually to perpetually defend Taiwan, placing severe strain on our economy, diverting military forces and resources from everywhere else in the world, and require a major increase in the size of our military and thus base defense budget.

Undertaking such a burden as the “prize” for successfully preventing China from taking Taiwan could literally bankrupt our country and leave us more vulnerable than we’ve been since before World War I.

If you thought that Afghanistan's trillions of dollars was a waste, you ain't seen nothing yet. 

China would make that look like play-money. 

China could turn Taiwan into Verdun if it wanted to. And America would be trapped in throwing trillions of dollars into that sink hole, all to the glee of the neocons on K-street.

It should be beyond clear that it is not in America’s interests to take such an enormous risk. Naturally, the United States is a genuine advocate for freedom and self-determination across the globe.

It is not, however, our responsibility to be the global guarantor of every land and peoples’ freedom on the planet.

It would be a tragedy beyond compare if in trying to defend one country’s freedom, we put at risk our ability to guarantee our own.

Why are we even talking about this?

Well? Why?

Like him or hate him. Bernie Sanders made a great point thirty years ago (30 years!) that is even more pointed now. And it describes exactly what is going on right now. It describes the WHY everyone in Washington DC is talking about war with China, or War with Russia…

This video was made exactly 30 years ago.

Now, China at that time was truly third world. Over 90% of it’s people lived in poverty. But the government did exactly what Bernie Sanders proposes in this video, and now look at China today.

Now we have America looking to start a major war.

Idiots!

The next war will reduce all of America to slag. All of it. And the nations… nations… fractured remains that rise up, will be fourth world nations working hard to become more than just a radioactive banana republic.

How a War Against China Could Cripple the United States

By Daniel Davis  . Published March 16, 2021. All credit to the authors, edited to fit this venue.

Once China has decided to use military force to reunify Taiwan, their first actions will be covert actions designed to quietly set the stage for the assault of their main combat forces.

The assumption is...

The first action that will signal a full-on war has begun will be an initial, major barrage of ballistic missiles screaming across the strait at multiple civilian and military targets.

Once that happens, everything happens at warp speed.

The first barrage of missiles will target critical infrastructure and seek to destroy Taiwan’s ability to respond to the Chinese onslaught.

They will target military airfields to make them unusable, seek to destroy aircraft on the ground, especially those with the ability to conduct command and control and to direct other weapons (like AWACs-type craft); missile boats and Aegis-type destroyers in their births; anti-air and missile batteries on the ground.

“We warn those ‘Taiwan independence’ elements – those who play with fire will burn themselves, and Taiwan independence means war.”

— Chinese Defense Ministry spokesman Wu Qian

In the early hours of the battle, Taiwanese troops are shocked, confused, lack clear communications, and are fighting in the rear and from the front at the beaches.

Also an assumption. 

China’s initial objectives will be to secure at least one of the three airfields and capture one or more beach landing sites by the end of the first day of fighting.

If they do, they will have a chance to open an airbridge and beach landing site through which they can pour more and more material with limited opposition. Like at the Normandy beach landings in 1944, once the invading force breaks through at the beach, it is almost impossible for the defenders to win.

The defenders’ primary objective is to identify and destroy all Chinese efforts on the island as quickly as possible, retain control of all airfields, and keep the beaches impregnable.

If China is not successful in landing the knock-out blow within the first 48 hours, it will likely have to switch its efforts to dramatically increasing its use of ballistic and cruise missiles, fighter and bomber sorties, and ship-to-shore missiles to try and force an opening at one or more beach landing zones.

They will try to overwhelm the island through brute force. If Taiwan is successful at preventing any large scale incursions either on the beach or via airborne or air-assault operations, their chances of thwarting the invasion increase dramatically. But they still won’t be out of the woods.

If China cannot penetrate the beach after two weeks of fighting, they may shift to a siege mentality, in which they will continue sustained bombing of the island, but at a reduced rate while putting into effect a naval blockade.

If things broke well for Taiwan, it is entirely possible that they could prevent China from opening any beachheads against their defenses. A naval blockade, however, will be more difficult to overcome.

Without any ability to replace the missiles and other ammunition they expend, no way to medically evacuate their wounded, or to import oil to power their warships, fuel their armored vehicles, and generate electricity – not to mention feed the population.

Though Taiwan can inflict serious damage to the PLA military, China’s capacity to absorb the damage and replace losses – while maintaining a blockade – is unlikely to be enough to stave off eventual defeat.

Taipei’s hope that by holding out long enough the U.S. will come riding to a the rescue will, one way or another, be dashed.

Constraints on U.S. Response

As Admiral Philip Davidson said in recent Congressional testimony, it would take American ships based in Alaska 17 days to reach Taiwan; 21 days from the U.S. West Coast.

Which is the entire idea behind the QUAD. To have massive military forces within close proximity of China. And thus American military would stream from Australia into the South Pacific Sea.

Beijing’s attack will require a no-notice launch to minimize the Taiwanese defender’s ability to man their positions, but possibly the greater purpose will be to ensure the U.S. Navy and Air Force are caught flat-footed and unable to mount an effective response.

To even have a chance at success, U.S. Forces in the Pacific region would have to have months to prepare.

They would have to bring personnel strength up near 100%, make all their ships and aircraft combat ready and fully supplied with wartime ammunition and fuel stocks.

That will never happen. At best American equipment is at 35% readiness, with a goal of some day reaching 50% readiness.

Any shortfalls in personnel, ships, and planes would have to be redeployed from other theaters to bring the Pacific naval and air fleets up to full capacity. None of those will be possible with a no-notice surprise attack by Beijing – and that vulnerability will put the U.S. president in a real bind.

Crisis in the White House Situation Room

The instant the first report reaches the Situation Room, the White House will assemble a crisis response team of senior advisors to begin analyzing the situation and debating potential responses.

Some will suggest the president order immediate long-range missile attacks against Chinese invasion air and naval forces in an attempt to aid the defenders.

Others may advocate hitting the Chinese bases supporting the invasion.

China will likely warn Biden that any attack on China-proper will result in missile strikes on American cities with conventional warheads* (still very lethal).

Word is that America HAS been warned. And the type of weapon used has not be specified. 

*One of the biggest problems that Americans make is assuming that everyone else thinks like them.

As Mike Sweeny recently wrote for Defense Priorities, such attacks against targets on the Chinese mainland will inflame the Chinese domestic audience against the United States in increase the pressure for a nuclear response.

Again. There is a serious fundamental difference between China and America. In China, day to day public option does not matter. Decisions are not made by mob rule. They are made by merit-appointed true experts and the decisions are always sound. If China believes that the advantage would be to eviscerate New York City with a cluster of six nuclear war heads, then it will do so, and what the newspaper reader on the street thinks will not factor into the equation.

The risk of a war between Washington and Beijing escalating to nuclear is higher than many understand.

Duh!

But the president will face enormous pressures to act militarily in the face of Chinese aggression.

Taiwanese officials will certainly be pleading for the U.S. to intervene. Those in the United States who are already China hawks will almost certainly advocate “limited” military retaliation.

They will argue that Washington cannot stand passively by while China swallows a leading democratic country in Asia.

To refuse to act would be tantamount to Neville Chamberlain’s infamous appeasement at Munich and encourage China to try and conquer other nations militarily. In all fairness, such concerns would not be without merit.

But Biden’s ability to respond militarily would be far more limited than would be commonly understood.

If Congress declared war on China or gave Biden authority to launch a military strike, the best he could do would be to unleash a relatively few cruise missiles and order some long-range bombing sorties from regional bases.

Those would have some impact but be insufficient to stop China’s invasion.

“China’s navy is viewed as posing a major challenge to the U.S. Navy’s ability to achieve and maintain wartime control of blue-water ocean areas in the Western Pacific.” 

—Congressional Research Service analysis

To engage in sustained operations in support of Taiwan’s defenses, it would take the U.S. Navy and Air Force months to properly enter the war theater.

Trying to rush our military into a fight as soon as it can reach Taiwan would be near suicidal, as we would be arriving to the fight in sub-optimal condition, not fully resourced – and would face the full brunt of the Chinese air and naval forces (which are about double the size of the U.S. Pacific fleets). As importantly, PRC air and naval forces have long had existing plans to fight a U.S. force sent to aid Taiwan and have conducted countless computer simulations and field exercises.

We would be outnumbered, out-prepared, and out-gunned while fighting a motivated enemy engaged in what it considers an existential battle.

Duh! If Texas was Attacked how would American react? The same kind of visceral reaction should be expected of China.

All of the recent U.S.-based computer simulations reach similar conclusions.

Our Navy “gets its ass handed to it” in one scenario examining a fight against China over Taiwan and the Air Force “is going to lose fast.”

In short, if Biden rashly sends the military to Taiwan’s defense, he could be sending us to our greatest naval defeat in our history.

If the president’s military advisers convince him to attack military targets on the mainland, the results could be mushroom clouds over U.S. cities.

Fortunately, however, there are superior options for Biden to choose that don’t involve dead Americans.

Preserving U.S. Military Power, Maintaining Security and Freedom

If China bull-headedly turns to violence to take Taiwan by force, the U.S. Government’s overriding priority will be to safeguard American security, freedom, and prosperity.

America's "freedom", and "prosperity"? Americans are so used to repeating the narrative that they no longer know what the words mean.

If Biden resists the temptation to respond immediately, he can dramatically shift the balance of power back in America’s favor by adopting realistic and attainable diplomatic and military strategy that features isolating, resisting, and containing China.

LOL. As if that is going to happen. Did you see any reasoning or strategy in the Alaskan meeting in April 2021 between Washington and China?

If China is foolish enough to gamble its future by attacking Taiwan – and America is smart enough to stay out of the war – the PRC will be severely weakened from its current status.

I disagree. 

The entire world relies on Chinese manufacturing. And factories do not grow on trees. There are no quality alternatives for precision manufacturing, high technology products or innovation. Everything has been outsourced to China, and that includes Japanese products and design, German products and design, Korean products and design and all the rest.

The United States has, for some time, championed Taipei building a defensive fortress that would make any Chinese attempt to invade prohibitively expensive.

If anything, (America)  should encourage Taiwan to expand further their defenses.

Even if China were successful in catching Taiwan unprepared, the surprise would not be complete, and Taipei would still have the ability to launch retaliatory strikes against the Chinese.

Unlike the United States, Taiwan would have no incentive to resist attacking mainland targets and would attack mainland airfields, naval bases, rocket and missile launch sites, and Chinese defense industry targets.

It would be very difficult seeing that the Chinese can render all missiles inactive by energy beam weapons.

They would also successfully sink some Chinese warships, knock out some fighter jets, and destroy thousands of their troops.

Maybe.

But China does not think like that.

Let me tell you what is more probable.

Nothing happens. Then one day the news says that Taiwan has embraced China as a co-family member. And has decided to get closer to the mainland.

That is the kind of level of strategy that we are dealing with here. Not the crude "blow 'em up" Rambo style of neocon warfare.

The net result of even a successful attack would gouge the PLA, severely weakening their ability to wage war; if Taiwan somehow held out and prevented an island takeover, the PLA would be set back decades and the PRC itself at risk of falling internally.

Um. Not even remotely realistic. 

Any nation that can build two (x2) 4000 bed hospitals in ten days, or a 80 story skyscraper in a week, would have no problem replenishing military forces.

In either event, America’s advantage over China would be significantly increased, our ability to protect U.S. interests global continue to be unmatched, and our people continue in complete freedom.

Americans living in "freedom"? Obviously he was doing drugs when he wrote this. I think that he is just rolling off some trite sayings without thinking, rather than adding constructive dialog to make his points with.

Moreover, we would then have decades to increase our defenses from Guam to Hawaii to the West Coast – should that be deemed necessary – to ensure China could never, even decades into the future, successfully mount a cross-Pacific attack.

With what money? When it would take a wheel-barrel full of $100 bills to buy a hamburger?

What Americans think China’s military is like…

This is exactly what Americans think that the Chinese military is today. It’s what most people think. It’s a group of peasant, illiterate, with little training using 1980’s era hand-me-down old Soviet Union weapons. Where, their only strength is in their enormous numbers of people.

What China’s military is actually like…

This has rapidly become my favorite video. This is what the Chinese military is actually like.

This is a singular unit in XinJiang, you know the place; where the gateway to the BRI is, and where America must stop at nothing to disrupt it.

You probably know of it though the propaganda campaign about Uighur Muslims in Concentration Camps and other bullshit. You know. That America “must do something to help those poor oppressed Muslims”. As if the American oligarchy ever cared about Muslims at all, ever.

And some of the technologies that China has. Their quads operate and behave quite differently than what the American units do. And it’s very interesting. You have to keep in mind that all, and every Chinese person is a member of the irregulars. They all have military training, and the enormous size of the Chinese military is only the active “professional” warrior class. Not the irregulars.

And every squad has one of these curious weapons. They also have this other “neato” gun which is sort of a pocket howitzer that is the size of a rifle.

Chinese knives are sure cool, eh?

A personal mortar. Also standard with all squads…

The jeep howitzers are pretty cool too…

And aside from the regular training, and the mandatory of all military train for every single 14 year old boy and girl in China, you have elements of training that is simply not present in the United States, such as being able to shoot, and load a weapon with one hand. As in this movie…

And of course, since all the parts and engines, and subsystems of all the latest military hardware is contracted out to China, it should be no surprise that their home-gown, home-design, and home-manufactured weapons systems would be equal or better than the American ones that spawned them…

All the videos

If you cannot access all or some of the videos you can get them all HERE. Some good stuff, especially if you are a military buff.

Conclusion

In sum, by staying out of a China vs. Taiwan war, not only would America  maintain our current strength, our national security would be stronger.

Conversely, if we foolishly insert ourselves into their fight, we will suffer severe damage to our Armed Forces at a minimum, placing our national security around the world at higher risk; in a worst-case, American cities could smolder in radioactive waste for years to come.

No matter how one calculates it, fighting China over Taiwan would harm American interests and security without even holding the potential for benefit.

We must resist the temptation to act on the presumption that we can always choose to fight because we will always win.

The future of our country might hinge on getting this right.

MM Comments

Ah. Perhaps. I can parse though many of his comments and poke holes through them.

(Taiwan) "...would attack mainland airfields, naval bases, rocket and missile launch sites, and Chinese defense industry targets."

Perhaps if he looked at a map he would see how ridiculous this statement is.

Taiwan would try.

And the planes wouldn’t be able to fly with  directed energy beam weapons causing them to fall out of the sky.

And even if they could make it back, where would they land.

All the airfields would be cratered.

Ok. You can never predict the outcome of a military operation.

Certainly [1] the failure of the Trump administration to cause starvation in China by using drone launched bio-weapons against livestock didn’t work. The [2] aggressive “color revolution” in Hong Kong didn’t work. The [3] attempt at destabilizing Xinjiang didn’t work, and most certainly [4] the COVID bio-weapon attack against China on CNY with the lethal B-strain did not work.

Any military action in defense of Taiwan… … has a very small likelihood of working.

Chances are that it would not be successful.

And the participation of the American military against China WILL LAUNCH a hot war against America. Which would have  at least a few of the following characteristics.

• Destruction of Guam
• Destruction of Diego Garcia
• End of all trade with China… resulting in a collapse of many American industries as they still rely on Chinese trade to operate.
• Probable war with Australia and the destruction of Australian Cities.
• Russian involvement for certain as an ally of China.
• Destruction of the cities in Hawaii.
• And a high chance of nuclear destruction of American cities.

I would suggest the destruction of every city over a population of 750,000 in America. That would include all the “big names”. Perhaps the capital of the United States could relocate to Salina , Kansas.

All of these potential issues have an over 65% chance of happening if the USA gets involved and tries to provoke a war regarding China.

So the question really is… …just how out of touch, insane and crazy is the United States leadership? Would they be that foolish to tangle with Russia and China over some South China Sea incident?

Well…

Maybe this next article will provide the answer…

CIA Wokeness

Michael Tracey writes about a weird CIA video that is making the rounds (emphasis added):

In a mind-blowing marketing video first published on March 25, but which had escaped widespread notice until recent days, the CIA enthusiastically endorsed several key tenets of what has now indisputably become a hegemonic left/liberal ideological and rhetorical construct:

“I am a woman of color,” the video’s protagonist, an unnamed CIA officer, triumphantly proclaims. “I am a cisgender millennial who’s been diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder. I am intersectional, but my existence is not a box-checking exercise.”

She continues, “I used to struggle with imposter syndrome. But at 36, I refuse to internalize misguided patriarchal ideas of what a woman can or should be. I am tired of feeling like I’m supposed to apologize for the space I occupy.”

I have to admit that I do not know what the words are supposed to mean. (Nor does my Firefox spellchecker. It flags them.) I also do not understand the  phrases. To me they sounds like utter bullshit. But if the CIA wants to hire more such people I am all for it. Folks who can not leave their personal issues at the door typically muck up their workplace and create productivity problems. A less effective CIA will be a plus for the rest of the world.

But it will certainly enable the already insane leadership to go blindly towards a very dangerous path.

And that path looks, more and more everyday, like a high-speed rail straight to Hell.

But America is invincible, don’t you know!

• https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/05/china-paper-dragon/618778/?utm_source=feed

It’s all over the chat rooms. America has the best training, the most capable leaders, the strongest military, and the best manufacturing in the world. While China is what? “A third world, has been nation, that has stolen more than it contributes”, right? That’s the narrative. This is typical…

(This article is) Complete BS. You don't understand how military power and capability works. 

China doesn't have any Carrier groups, not one. That is a BIG deal. 

They can't project any significant sea / air power. 

They also don't have any significant amphibious assault capabilities such as the USMC. 

Their air-force isn't close in capability. 

The majority of their service members have very rudimentary training at best. There is much more to "staff" a military than just hand a rifle to a 16 year old peasant. A 155mm artillery shell or 1000 lb air delivered bomb takes care of numbers. 

#34  ·  Jul 17, 2016 

But the interesting retort is here…

• I completely understand how military power and capability works. I didn’t say they could or would invade the US. I said we couldn’t defeat them in a context of their island building in the South Pacific. They’ve been testing and demonstrating anti-satellite weapons for over a decade. They don’t have a lot of carriers but they have a lot of submarines to take out carriers. They don’t have the capability to deliver an invasion force on the US but they definitely have that capacity throughout the South Pacific. They have massive manufacturing capacity and we have dwindled ours to virtual non-existence. In WWII, our fleet was decimated in short order but we had massive manufacturing capacity and we cranked out ships and carriers in droves. Where are we going to do that today? Where are we going to make the electronic components to drive a modern fleet?

  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...56/US-weapons-full-of-fake-Chinese-parts.html

  Read that carefully. We get our legitimate Mil-Spec electronic parts from China and we get fake parts from China. Where are we going to get them when we go to war with China and have to rebuild a fleet? What about training? We’re training them on how to defeat us:

  http://blogs.reuters.com/great-deba...hinas-military-while-inching-toward-conflict/
  
  http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...up-u-s-training-of-communist-chinese-military

  If you think of China as a backwards country where the soldiers would be 16-year-old peasants, I think you’re wrong. Then you have to consider the likelihood of China using a tactical nuke. Are they crazy enough? They don’t have to be; they need only convince our President that they might be.

But it doesn’t matter. Decades of anti-China propaganda and an onslaught in the belief that America is a nation of Rambo’s has created a situation where everyone is living in this fantasy world…

They would not stand a chance vs the US today.

China has never won a war. They are defensive by nature, they are not an offensive power. historically they build walls. Their "islands" are an example of that. They don't plan on projecting force, they plan on defending what they see as their's.

China can't build a jet engine worth a poop.
China can't come up with their own ideas and relies on stealing to make their military products - so how do you conclude they can figure out how to out-think the west?

China has virtually NO access to oil/gas/coal should a war happen. Sounds like a short war.

Their navy would have a fair fight with japan.

If I recall correctly, Japan was beaten without any foot troops...

#40  ·  Jul 18, 2016 

Lots of underestimating your enemy going on here.

Ah. A bunch of “arm chair” warriors debating some war that is on the other side of the world. A place where they never visited, and a society and culture that they know nothing about. It’s 2021. China has been very clear about what would happen;

• Taiwan, and the SCS islands are all Chinese territory.
• Kill one Chinese person on Chinese land, and China will retaliate in an equal measured manner.

They have already demonstrated this…

April 2020 China’s first Type-075 amphibious assault carrier, designed for launching helicopters, caught fire. It was mysterious how it happened. The Chinese Navy put out the fire, and repaired the damage and launched the ship as scheduled.

Then…

July 2020 The Navy’s USS Bonhomme Richard burned for days at its pier in San Diego. After the fire was put out, the Navy registered the destruction as “total” and wrote off the vessel as a total loss.

The Chinese Do Not Play.

A fine reminder…

Here’s a fine reminder for all the jack-asses that believe that American could shoot and kill Chinese people, on Chinese land, and somehow go unscathed…

And let’s continue…

We need to look at the full scope about what it going on…

The full scope

• American leadership are clueless psychopaths.
• Their toadies are sociopaths that run the levels of government.
• The bureaucracy that serves them has been politically and socially corrupted beyond usefulness.
• Never the less, all studies point to catastrophic consequences if the United States tries to get involved in a war with either Russia or China.
• And Russia and China have signed mutual military treaties so that they will work together if the USA tries to instigate a war.

The public is not aware of this. And because of that, we have a situation where American and their leadership wants a war. And this was made obvious in the April 2021 meeting in Anchorage Alaska.          

Meanwhile, the Chinese are not FOOLS. They know exactly what the stakes are, and they will absolutely not permit any “wars of democracy” to land anywhere near them. And if they do… oh, Lordy. God help the American citizenry. There will not be any mercy.

Why?

Because the Chinese know history…

.

Make no mistake.

The Chinese will fight to the death to guarantee that they will not be exterminated like vermin by the psychopaths in Washington DC. They will guarantee it.

Like it or not, but Trump has a real chance of winning the 2024 elections. 
This in fact will be the best thing ever because the whole world will immediately turn their backs on USA the way they did. 

Personally I can't wait for him to f*ck USA up and try to start a war with either China or/and Iran. About time USA get its ass whipped.

Posted by: Hoyeru | May 18 2021 3:28 utc | 66

The USA is ready with a new army

Do not worry, the “new and improved” military forces are more than ready to deal with 16 year old goat-herders with malfunctioning cheapo Chinese AK-47 clones…

• Army changes minimum requirements for several fitness …
• Trends in overweight and obesity in soldiers entering the …
• Changing Basic Training To Suit A Changing Army …
• Military to Allow Transgender Troops to Serve Openly …
• Pentagon Announces New Policies For Transgender People …
• ‘Nail polish in camouflage’? Army eases grooming rules …
• ACFT: The New Army Combat Fitness Test

Oh, and you want a real hoot?

Check out what the fuck happened to the enormous Armada that steamed to China in 2020. Nope, it did not go as planned. It was a fiasco, and President Trump sacked the top military brass for not following through on his wishes.

You all just got to read this…

• The Waterloo moment  to the Trump Naval Flotilla in the Summer of 2020.

Check out the stats

They don’t tell you the entire picture, but they do give you a feel for what is going on. Click on the link.

Do you want more?

I have more posts in my SHTF Index here…

.

Articles & Links

.

You’ll not find any big banners or popups here talking about cookies and privacy notices. There are no ads on this site (aside from the hosting ads – a necessary evil). Functionally and fundamentally, I just don’t make money off of this blog. It is NOT monetized. Finally, I don’t track you because I just don’t care to.

• 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.

.