That is why the United States is on alert. "We can no longer be sure of winning a war against China"

[Saithan]

Derfor er USA i alarmberedskab. »Vi kan ikke længere være sikre på at vinde en krig mod Kina«

Læs mere her.

www.berlingske.dk

Paid content

The United States is realizing that it cannot win a war as superiorly as it has in the past. On the one hand, the world has become more complicated, and on the other hand, potential opponents are hauling the United States technologically and militarily strategically at an eerie pace.

 

[Gary]

translation: more funding needed.

otoh, the area round the first and second island chain greatly favors the USN

 

[Mis_TR_Like]

If the USA banned ethnic lobbying it would be in a much stronger state right now. Lobbyists have greedily used the USA for their own interests. For decades now, the USA hasn't done what's good for its self. Strategy has gone out the window.

NATO is getting weaker as lobbyists from certain nations pit the USA against Turkey. How do you expect to stand strong against China when your main military alliance is falling apart?

 

[xizhimen]

When they can? Did they win any wars against China in or around at all?

 

[xizhimen]

US doesn't dare to directly attack China, but it waged 3 wars with 3 China's neigbors, Korea, Vietnam and Afghanistan and US lost every single of them.

 

[Gary]

some corrections to made:

1. The US doesn't lose the Korean war, they saved the ROK from the brink of complete annihilation thereby destroying the communists plan for total control in the Korean peninsula.
2. Such was the destruction that the US delivered to the Communists in Korea that a decade later, the Chinese refuse to participate directly in Vietnam, offering material and rear supports instead.
3. Afghanistan is political defeat not military defeat for the US. It is otoh a dual political+military defeat for the now defunct Islamic Republic of Afghanistan.

 

[xizhimen]

some corrections to made:

1. The US doesn't lose the Korean war, they saved the ROK from the brink of complete annihilation thereby destroying the communists plan for total control in the Korean peninsula.
2. Such was the destruction that the US delivered to the Communists in Korea that a decade later, the Chinese refuse to participate directly in Vietnam, offering material and rear supports instead.
3. Afghanistan is political defeat not military defeat for the US. It is otoh a dual political+military defeat for the now defunct Islamic Republic of Afghanistan.

It's the business between North Korea and South Korea, for the Chinese part, we started from the very border of the Yalu river and ended half way through Korea, we achieved our goals and US didn't.

 

[xizhimen]

some corrections to made:

1. Such was the destruction that the US delivered to the Communists in Korea that a decade later, the Chinese refuse to participate directly in Vietnam, offering material and rear supports instead.

China sent troops fighting in Vietnam, but not officially declared it. I said US waging wars with Chinese neighbors, not China. Read again.

 

[Gary]

China sent troops fighting in Vietnam, but not officially declared it. I said US waging wars with Chinese neighbors, not China. Read again.

yes operating in the rear, not face to face.

Those bombing in Korea did scar the PLA for quite some time.

 

[xizhimen]

1. Afghanistan is political defeat not military defeat for the US. It is otoh a dual political+military defeat for the now defunct Islamic Republic of Afghanistan.

All wars happen for a purpose or a goal, no wars happen just for the sake of wars themselves. US lost completely in Afghanistan, same as Soviet did, Do you claim that Soviet Union won the Afghan war as well?

 

[xizhimen]

Those bombing in Korea did scar the PLA for quite some time.

Their bombs landed inside China repeatedly, we sent troops to push them away from our borders for a reason.


Enemy at Gate, China Korea border Yalu river, US bombs landed inside China on daily basis

我国安东市（今丹东市）被美国侵朝空军轰炸后的情景。从这天起，美国侵朝空军就不断侵入我国领空，疯狂轰炸我城镇和乡村。造成我边境城镇无数村庄被炸毁，无数居民被炸死，美军犯下了不可饶恕的滔天罪行。
市民刘桂英（左）的母亲被炸死

 

[Gary]

All wars happen for a purpose or a goal, no wars happen just for the sake of wars themselves. US lost completely in Afghanistan, same as Soviet did, Do you claim that Soviet Union won the Afghan war as well?

I'm waiting for this exact answer from you. Now I'm going to give you a run for yur money



While it's true that all military wars are in the sole purpose of achieving political victory, there are some difference on where such scenario such as that in Afghanistan could be imitated elsewhere. For example this thread casts doubts if the US military is capable of winning war against China

On the one hand, the world has become more complicated, and on the other hand, potential opponents are hauling the United States technologically and militarily strategically at an eerie pace.

In Afghanistan no matter the military defeats suffered by the Afghan Talibs doesn't result in political defeat for them. Because they simply run away and hide while continue to recruit in the safety of the rural areas.

Now the most likely place war will start between that of China and US will be in the Taiwan strait.

T-Day: The Battle for Taiwan

China's quest to rule Taiwan has already begun with a campaign of

www.reuters.com

a US military victory in the Taiwan strait WILL ensure political defeat for the PLA/CCP. Once the USN thumps the PLAN or the invasion of Taiwan failed, the only worry left for the CCP is to control anger and dissent at home.

hence the military victory in AFghanistan =/= military victory elsewhere.

 

[xizhimen]

Do you also claim that Soviet Union won the Afghan war?