Posted on 01/13/2023 2:38:00 PM PST by MarMema
Because he is one of them.
The Chinese will not invade Taiwan, the PLAN-N will blockade and starve them out economically. No need for a frontal assault.
It is not about money. It is about industrial base and manpower. We suck at both.
Our somewhat gay invaded military commanders say we don’t have enough equipment to fight in two different conflicts. We gave too much of it away.
I certainly hope they are not just starting to prepare. It’s should be an ongoing activity that started decades ago. But who know, perhaps they have been too busy working on diversity, inclusion and equity (DIE).
One might assume that 11 Chicom dams would become piles of rubble and the COVID epidemic in China would, by default, be eliminated...
In the beginning.
And Siberia is FAR more valuable to China than Taiwan is. Wanting to take Taiwan is just ego; taking Siberia — with its vast natural resources — is strategic.
The US has no “vassals” in Asia, and Brandon’s Pentagon would only be planning to surrender to Red China.
“The Chinese will not invade Taiwan, the PLAN-N will blockade and starve them out economically. No need for a frontal assault.”
I’ve been saying much the same thing for years.
Considering the Pentagon used to prepare for war with major countries like Russia and China and minor countries like North Korea and anywhere in the middle East,. I would hope they’re doing so now... after woke training and gender transition compliance.
But Truman did fire MacArthur, whose complaints against the commander in chief had grown louder and more public. MacArthur wanted to expand the war against China, which had entered the Korean fighting in late 1950. MacArthur complained that the president was tying his hands by forbidding the bombing of China, thereby sacrificing American lives and endangering American freedom.
Truman suffered the complaints for a time, out of respect for MacArthur and wariness of MacArthur’s allies in Congress. But the complaints began to confuse America’s allies and enemies as to what American policy was and who made it. The last thing Truman wanted was a wider war in Asia, which would weaken the American position in Europe. And Europe, not Asia, was where the Cold War would be won or lost, Truman judged.
Truman’s top advisers agreed. The MacArthur firing prompted the Democratic-led Congress to invite the general to address a joint session, which MacArthur moved to applause and tears when he declared that “old soldiers never die; they just fade away.” Among Republicans, there were murmurs of support for a MacArthur candidacy for president. The Senate’s Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committes held joint hearings, at which MacArthur detailed his disagreement with the president and claimed the backing of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for his position.
The joint chiefs contradicted him. The Senate hearings were closed to the public, but a transcript was released each day including all but the most sensitive comments. Omar Bradley, the chairman of the joint chiefs, flatly rejected MacArthur’s call for a wider war. “In the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, this strategy would involve us in the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time and with the wrong enemy,” he said.
Bradley’s categorical conclusion proved the most compelling public statement by any official at the committee hearings. For a soldier of Bradley’s stature, with no history of politics, to contradict MacArthur so completely caused even the most ardent of MacArthur’s supporters to pause and reconsider.
Yet it was the statements that were not made public that did the real damage to MacArthur. Not until the 1970s was the secret testimony declassified, and even then it languished in the archives, overlooked by all but a few specialists in a topic time seemed to have passed by. But to read it now is to understand how quickly, and thoroughly, one of America’s most popular generals was undone.
General Miley on line one!
Recent wargames simulation showed two U.S. carriers lost... Chinese losses greater.
I think we could defeat them in the sea and in the air, but I sure wouldn’t want to be involved in a land war with them.
I was thinking that China already won but has not yet claimed possession.
“Lieutenant General James Bierman thinks there are “numerous parallels” between Ukraine and Taiwan”
The general is stupid and/or corrupt.
We have essential interests in and around Taiwan.
We have no interests whatsoever in Ukraine.
I think we would do pretty well against China.
Obviously, not on the mainland. But China does not have an ability to project much force beyond their territorial waters. They don’t have an amphibious force or the heavy lift capabilities.
We would get our nose bloodied. We would lose some satellites. But we would not be invaded or defeated.
They are posting it from financial times.
Maybe they jazzed it up. I don’t know because I can’t read it without a subscription.
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.