3 ms·
>The US would instantly have at least one carrier sunk minutes after declaring and that alone could break morale. Isn't that the exact reasoning which led to t
by anvandare 6y ago
>The US would instantly have at least one carrier sunk minutes after declaring and that alone could break morale.
Isn't that the exact reasoning which led to the attack on Pearl Harbor? "One quick strike and they'll be out of the war..."
>The US will sanction and draw lots of red lines in the sand and then tug its tail between its legs.
And that's the kind of reasoning that led to Ukraine being invaded by Russia. The inevitable result of China being allowed to take Taiwan is China sailing their own carrier fleets along the West Coast a decade or two later. Absolutely unacceptable. Great Powers will always use force when faced with an existential threat.
The thing that usually leads to a war is thinking the other side lacks the willingness to go to war.
- Daho0n 6y agoIn the pearl harbor analogy the US would be Japan, believing a naval force could win. >And that's the kind of reasoning that led to Ukraine being invaded by Russia. Yes, the US will draw lines and do nothing. Just like with Ukraine. PRC sailing a carrier fleet just outside US waters is absolutely acceptable. The US made it so by doing the exact same thing to everyone else. It's only a matter of time before they have the capability. The big difference is that the US might go to war over such a thing unlike anybody else. Another superpower is needed to stop the aggression by the US. US navel fleets belong in US waters. US bases belongs only on US land. If it takes PRC to do this then I'll happily cheer them along.