4 ms·

How's the Iran thing figure in, then? That's a lot of the stockpile used up before China starts.

by nemomarx 3mo ago

petcat 3mo ago
It's the same as Venezuela. These are strategic moves to control China's crude oil supply.
s1artibartfast 3mo ago
Possibly the first strike in the war with China.
margalabargala 3mo ago
The point made by the parent comment should not be taken to mean that the Trump administration strategically accomplished the aforementioned goals, just that they were, in a vacuum, accomplished. If you're saying that it seems to you that the tactical goal was accomplished at the expense of the broader historical strategy, I would respond that yes, it does seem that way.
- nemomarx 3mo ago
  I'm also personally a little skeptical that the current administration would actually go to war with China over, say, Taiwan or control of the South Sea or so on. Maybe they are keeping that in mind, maybe they're just isolationist in general? Whether the admin would have done anything to Iran without being asked by Israel is a big open question for me here.
  - actionfromafar 3mo ago
    The logistics are already straining against Iran, can't see how the US could hold up around Taiwan. And China can now see for themselves how weak the US military machine has become. Testosterone injections won't help there.
    - no_wizard 3mo ago
      They aren’t. Political will is faulting but the military is holding back on Iran. There is no follow on ground invasion or clear carpet bombing of the entire country. These strikes are all suppose to be strategic. If the US military was waging a true all out war, Iran would be piles of rubble and glass I am not supportive of war with Iran by a long shot but to see the US military and be like “oh it’s strained” is just not talking from a place of knowing. The politics is straining the military and rightly so, but capability wise it’s as good as ever
      - Sabinus 3mo ago
        >If the US military was waging a true all out war, Iran would be piles of rubble and glass Then the Gulf oil infrastructure would be gone in retaliation and the impacts to the global economy would be severe. Trump's popularity and legacy would be utterly destroyed.
        no_wizard 3mo ago
        Doesn’t negate capability which is what is being mentioned.
        Sabinus 3mo ago
        The USA wouldn't be able to invade and carpet bomb China and end the war before logistical strain started to show either. There's no point talking about USA's theoretical capabilities to end a war quickly if they can't use those capabilities to end a war quickly. Yes, the USA is holding back on invasion, carpet bombing, total war and nukes. It doesn't matter to the Chinese assessment for the capability of sustained high intensity US military operations.
        no_wizard 3mo ago
        Oh it most definitely does matter, to think it doesn’t makes no sense. The Chinese may be building up their military capabilities but they still spend a fraction of what the US does every year. They’re different leagues, and in a gloves off war being on the receiving end of the US military would be devastating. I think if China makes a move it’s because they perceive US political will to defend Taiwan to be weak enough that there won’t be a real protracted fight or escalation. Which I half wonder if that is why they aren’t more defensive about Iran. Bleed out the political will of the US populace on a war and it’s unlikely we’ll want to support another one anytime soon.
  - ColdStream 3mo ago
    It is all starting to feel like a stalemate between the US and China, each hoping the other fails from their own internal issues before it comes to actual battle.

How's the Iran thing figure in, then? That's a lot of the stockpile used up before China starts.

petcat 3mo ago

It's the same as Venezuela. These are strategic moves to control China's crude oil supply.

s1artibartfast 3mo ago

Possibly the first strike in the war with China.

margalabargala 3mo ago

The point made by the parent comment should not be taken to mean that the Trump administration strategically accomplished the aforementioned goals, just that they were, in a vacuum, accomplished. If you're saying that it seems to you that the tactical goal was accomplished at the expense of the broader historical strategy, I would respond that yes, it does seem that way.

nemomarx 3mo ago
I'm also personally a little skeptical that the current administration would actually go to war with China over, say, Taiwan or control of the South Sea or so on. Maybe they are keeping that in mind, maybe they're just isolationist in general? Whether the admin would have done anything to Iran without being asked by Israel is a big open question for me here.
- actionfromafar 3mo ago
  The logistics are already straining against Iran, can't see how the US could hold up around Taiwan. And China can now see for themselves how weak the US military machine has become. Testosterone injections won't help there.
  - no_wizard 3mo ago
    They aren’t. Political will is faulting but the military is holding back on Iran. There is no follow on ground invasion or clear carpet bombing of the entire country. These strikes are all suppose to be strategic. If the US military was waging a true all out war, Iran would be piles of rubble and glass I am not supportive of war with Iran by a long shot but to see the US military and be like “oh it’s strained” is just not talking from a place of knowing. The politics is straining the military and rightly so, but capability wise it’s as good as ever
    - Sabinus 3mo ago
      >If the US military was waging a true all out war, Iran would be piles of rubble and glass Then the Gulf oil infrastructure would be gone in retaliation and the impacts to the global economy would be severe. Trump's popularity and legacy would be utterly destroyed.
      - no_wizard 3mo ago
        Doesn’t negate capability which is what is being mentioned.
        Sabinus 3mo ago
        The USA wouldn't be able to invade and carpet bomb China and end the war before logistical strain started to show either. There's no point talking about USA's theoretical capabilities to end a war quickly if they can't use those capabilities to end a war quickly. Yes, the USA is holding back on invasion, carpet bombing, total war and nukes. It doesn't matter to the Chinese assessment for the capability of sustained high intensity US military operations.
        no_wizard 3mo ago
        Oh it most definitely does matter, to think it doesn’t makes no sense. The Chinese may be building up their military capabilities but they still spend a fraction of what the US does every year. They’re different leagues, and in a gloves off war being on the receiving end of the US military would be devastating. I think if China makes a move it’s because they perceive US political will to defend Taiwan to be weak enough that there won’t be a real protracted fight or escalation. Which I half wonder if that is why they aren’t more defensive about Iran. Bleed out the political will of the US populace on a war and it’s unlikely we’ll want to support another one anytime soon.
- ColdStream 3mo ago
  It is all starting to feel like a stalemate between the US and China, each hoping the other fails from their own internal issues before it comes to actual battle.