3 ms·
I agree with most of the assessments in this article. The United States engages in proxy wars around the world. The United States purposefully waits for places
by elmerfud 3y ago
I agree with most of the assessments in this article. The United States engages in proxy wars around the world. The United States purposefully waits for places to become destabilized and then does not engage in a campaign of stabilization but in a campaign of neighbor destabilization.
I can't speak for other US citizens about why they don't worry about the prospect of a world war but I can explain why I don't worry about that prospect. The United States military establishment learns its lessons very well. The pattern of is destabilization and stabilization that it engages in is very strategic around the world. It would be nice if everyone got along and it wasn't needed but the days of that kind of grand Utopia will not be for several lifetimes. So instead of risking countries banning together as we saw in previous world wars there is constant meddling to prevent that. When certain powers become aggressive such as Russia with Ukraine we don't have to physically engage we can simply engage with support and equipment.
This kind of support allows us to effectively drain the resources of Russia and by connection China by really only spending money. The US military when it shows force it typically shows an overwhelming force. When we talk about a war with China even a direct war with China I'm not sure people comprehend the military might of the United States. China loves to put out propaganda as does Russia and so when you see something like the Chinese Navy is nearly double the size of the United States Navy it sounds impressive. But when you look at the actual tonnage in the water and the capabilities of the fleet the United States Coast guard which operates worldwide could take out the Chinese Navy.
When other countries are afraid of 50-year-old jet technology that the United States developed that tells you how far advanced we are compared to anyone else. They may field a few advanced technologies but all of the things the United States Fields is advanced technology.
The only cause for concern I would have in a war with another major power is not anything with conventional weaponry it would be with nuclear weaponry. Because once nuclear weapons begin to be fielded in an exchange there is no winners. A conventional war the only hope that others would have against the United States is if they could band together long enough and support each other long enough to exhaust the supply of smart weapons that were able to field. That would be an incredibly difficult thing to do for China and still remain a viable fighting force. The United States does rely much to heavily on Smart weapons and that risk is they do not get replaced as quickly as dumb weapons. There is something to be said about fielding a battleship that can just throw many tons of high explosive shells cheaply and repeatedly.
The really scary thing is that the F-22 is effectively old technology and it has never been allowed to engage and intercept an enemy. Enemies flee the field of battle to protect their planes when an F-15 comes within range because it does done hundreds of interceptions and have never been shot down. I know people like to bring up the battle scenarios that we engage in with other countries and point out that they're able to defeat us in many cases in these contrived scenarios. It's important to realize that the United States intentionally handicaps themselves in these scenarios because we learn more from losing than we do from just defeating everyone.
The real risk in a world war to the United States is the war of propaganda more than of military might. Because the sway of the people will hold our victory or our defeat in our hands not the capability of our military establishment. Both China and Russia know this fact which is why they would never challenge us in conventional warfare. They wage these proxy wars as well to see what the capabilities are.
- jmpman 3y agoAnd thus the reason to ban TikTok.
- ok_dad 3y agoThe reason young people don’t trust the USA gov as much today, and why it seems our population is unmotivated, isn’t because of social media, it’s because time and time again our officials and politicians have acted against the public’s interest, and continue to do so, and that message is publicized via social media much more than via traditional media. People don’t like seeing rules for them but not for the rich or powerful or connected. It’s because of our social failings, the lack of morals and standards, which is undoing the country, not because of social media or any of the other boogeymen of today.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> United States purposefully waits for places to become destabilized and then does not engage in a campaign of stabilization but in a campaign of neighbor destabilization No, we don't. We're simply exceptionally bad at following through. You're on the money with our air superiority. It's ahead of the competition to an unknowable degree, beyond "a lot." Unfortunately, that's lead to a doctrine--since WWII--of trying to bomb our way to strategic ends. That doesn't work. It's never how air power has worked. But we like our Air Force, don't like losing troops, and are optimistic about our allies' competence, so time and time again we try solving problems that can only be solved with boots on the ground with bombs. (Air only doesn't work because planes can't hold ground, but they can push someone off their hill. It thus creates power vacuums. Which is fine if there is someone competent to fill it. But there usually isn't. Almost certainly not after we've bombed the infrastructure the last regime used to project force.) > instead of risking countries banning together as we saw in previous world wars there is constant meddling to prevent that This is 19th-century realism [1]. It remains a good geopolitical model. (I have a copy of Clausewitz above my desk.) But American foreign and military policy is only loosely realistic. Exhibit A: China. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realism_(international_relations) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realism_(international_relatio...