Posted on 03/31/2005 12:01:29 PM PST by Willie Green
Yet. China is going full-speed ahead with development of a greatly-expanded navy.
Plus, the Navy is still our only way to get large numbers of troops and supplies to a war zone.
Agreed. Gotta keep our eyes squarely on China.
And they're cutting their ground forces to pay for it.
Problem is, those ground forces have a significant domestic security (read: "busting dissident heads") mission. And that requires numbers.
China could well find itself in an embarrassing position of fighting a war at sea to a draw...
...and collapsing into civil war at home...
Canada is a good example of where this is desired to go.
The left is looking to disarm the USA so the french can push us around.
A while back they kicked that around that it would be. But, I have not seen anything about that lately. They are building another new Tacoma Narrows bridge next to the one that is down at the south end of the Sound crosses from Tacoma to Gig Harbor and Kitsap County. We are going to have to pay $5 a trip to cross it. But, they want a gas tax to pay for the floating bridge.
Absolutely. However, I think China's attempt to "reunite" with Taiwan will happen when the Chinese leadership needs a foreign adventure to quiet dissent at home. It's the oldest trick in the book for dictators.
Whatever the longer-term consequences of such a situation, we still need to be able to squarely defeat any Chinese attempt to conquer Taiwan and/or challenge our naval supremacy in the Western Pacific.
Overstretch is a legitimate concern for our military, even if the situation is nowhere near as dire as liberals and the MSM make it out to be.
Our Military is still too small. We can't make up for a lack of troops with improved weapon technology alone. I agree that we don't need the same amount of troops that we once did but we need to have a better balance of new weapons tech and actual troops. We don't have as many troops as we need if China and North Korea decide to attack Taiwan and South Korea.
The recent history of such endeavours is not promising for the dictator.
Dang good point. Military power has no real meaning except in comparison with possible opponents.
No country that the US could realistically expect to get into a war with has a navy capable of providing realistic opposition.
If you think the US navy got downsized during the 90s, compare what happened to the Russian Navy!
Agreed. However, a desperate, nuclear-armed dictatorship intent on foreign adventurism is a nightmare scenario.
Since when is speaking English high on your priority list?
I really think that the endstate for China is a civil war (not a revolution--think more along the lines of our own civil war).
I do so constantly, so it's pretty high. You, conversely, seem to have a hard time understanding it.
Quote: Our greatest enemies don't have (significant) navies.
Not yet by one country in particular is working on it 24/365
It certainly wouldn't be the first time in Chinese history. The Chinese leadership has done a very good propaganda job of glossing over the fact that China has had a lot of historic problems when it comes to actually keeping the country in one piece.
It would be ironic if an attempt to unify with Taiwan (a territory that has only ever been under direct Chinese rule for something like two decades) leads to a massive civil war and fracturing of the current incarnation of the Chinese Empire.
Wait... A government agency is saying it needs more money? You dont say!
Here's the nasty thought, though:
Suppose that both sides in our Civil War had possessed (or had access to) nuclear weapons.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.