3 ms·
A war with China over Taiwan, for example, wouldn't be a total war (at first, god willing). But it would be one that would have the US pitted against a foe with
by samlevine 9y ago
A war with China over Taiwan, for example, wouldn't be a total war (at first, god willing). But it would be one that would have the US pitted against a foe with better technology than we've ever faced, even if they can't easily project much non-nuclear force into our territory.
People in the 20th century didn't think WWI would happen, because it would be incredibly stupid to blow up yourself and your trading partners. We did it anyway, and underestimating our capacity for self-destruction invites it.
- andrewjl 9y agoA war with China would be even more destructive for China than for the US. The entire Chinese economy is oriented around global trade in the neoliberal system built post-WW2. In the scenario you're outlining, the entire country would face massive food shortages and the resulting riots would quickly force the elite from power. The big difference between now and pre-WW1 is that back then most countries were still able to be self sufficient at their then-current living standards. Trade was more for domination and luxuries, not basic necessities. It's impossible to maintain current living standards without extensive trade. Edit: Re capacity for self destruction, we have a far higher (IMO 1,000x) risk of permanently dooming our planet via climate change or chemical pollution than armed warfare. The solution is unprecedented global cooperation, which also lowers the risk of a WW type scenario. So I think we're on the same page wrt that.