I loved the anecdote about how the cost of the Gerald Ford is = the total budget for US SOCOM as well as the point that US intelligence expects PLAAF/PLAN to be able to deny safety to any carrier East of the 2nd island chain.
China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread
- Thread starter peace_lover
- Start date
- Status
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
Johson and his cabinet speak with a fork tongue, like a snake, His belly's touching the ground especially with Brexit and is a lapdog to uncle Sam. Nothing worthwhile can be expected from him. He's day dreaming of UK colonial past and gunboat diplomacy, opium war! Wake up, if you can, this is 21 century not the good ole colonial days!
Last edited:
The Great Britain is to reinvent its past glory
While many Conservative supporters revel in the Rule Britannia bandwagon, Britain’s Trident nuclear weapons were in fact designed by American firm Lockheed Martin and the replacement system that's planned, the W93, is also from the good old US of A.
The review also states that Britain’s defence budget will rise by £24 billion over the next four years.
With national debt standing at £2 trillion coupled with expectations of 2.2 million people unemployed by the end of 2021, this is nothing short of perplexing, but it makes sense when viewed through the prism of aping America.
The shift in the UK’s foreign policy can firstly be attributed to the events of the past year, and the influence of the United States. But it is more obviously a product of Brexit and its ideological influence on the country’s global outlook. The fact that the tedious discourse of “global Britain” was shoehorned into the title of the report – ‘Global Britain in a competitive age’ – confirms this.
But the UK is a European country, which has chosen to shun its neighbours – with things not going too well – and is now trying to transplant itself into the Pacific and raise a nuclear challenge to China. At best, this is a militarist strategy based on nostalgia. It does not offer any practical solutions as to how gunboat diplomacy on the other side of the world will contribute to its growth or prosperity.
However, the new Dreadnought Class SSBN will not save Britain. It is not the Dreadnaught of 1906 because Britain is no longer the Britain of 1906. With regards to competition with China, given the newly refurbished Bohai Shipyard and the likelihood of mass production of 095s and 096s in the 2030s, it is unrealistic for Britain to challenge China with regards to underwater firepower. Leaving that job to the Quad (the real stakeholders in the Indo-Pacific and limiting China's military buildup) would help London save a lot more resources.
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
A lot of armchair war monger(beltway) think that defeating China is easy or just read the comment on youtube channel on China But real military men think differently. Here is what an ex Leut colonel think
It is crucial to understand that for China, the Taiwan issue is not merely a , but an one. They are far more willing to pay extraordinary costs, sacrifice many men, and could risk it all to eventually compel unification with Taiwan. The issue does not directly affect our national security unless we get involved.
America should never take such risks unless our security and freedom are directly threatened. Fighting China for any reason short of that would be a foolish gamble of the highest order.
US officials who are ready to fight China over Taiwan don't understand how much is at stake
Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis, ret, Defense Priorities
14 hours ago
Many of America's leading military and political figures have issued increasingly alarmist warnings in recent days about the potential for conflict with China, especially related to issues surrounding Taiwan.
But before the US gets into a crisis that brings it to the threshold of war — or finds itself stumbling into one — policymakers and military leaders need to address some hard realities.
There is almost no scenario in which the United States can successfully intervene in a war between China and Taiwan that will not leave our country in far worse shape than it is right now; in a worst-case scenario, American territory could be struck by nuclear missiles.
In testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee last week, Adm. Phil Davidson, commander of US forces in the Indo-Pacific, warned that Chinese military developments looked to him like a nation .
Davidson added that he believed China would attempt to Taiwan "in the next six years." To guard against this possibility, Davidson asked Congress to provide a whopping $27 billion in additional funding over the current defense budget.
It is crucial to understand that for China, the Taiwan issue is not merely a , but an one. They are far more willing to pay extraordinary costs, sacrifice many men, and could risk it all to eventually compel unification with Taiwan. The issue does not directly affect our national security unless we get involved.
If we eventually choose war with China over Taiwan, we will at best suffer egregious losses in ships, aircraft, and troops; in a worst-case, the war could deteriorate into a nuclear exchange in which American cities are turned into nuclear wastelands, killing millions.
America should never take such risks unless our security and freedom are directly threatened. Fighting China for any reason short of that would be a foolish gamble of the highest order.(cont)
It is crucial to understand that for China, the Taiwan issue is not merely a , but an one. They are far more willing to pay extraordinary costs, sacrifice many men, and could risk it all to eventually compel unification with Taiwan. The issue does not directly affect our national security unless we get involved.
America should never take such risks unless our security and freedom are directly threatened. Fighting China for any reason short of that would be a foolish gamble of the highest order.
US officials who are ready to fight China over Taiwan don't understand how much is at stake
Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis, ret, Defense Priorities
14 hours ago
- US defense officials are increasingly warning of the potential for conflict with China over Taiwan.
- There is almost no way in which the US could intervene in that conflict without devastating losses.
Many of America's leading military and political figures have issued increasingly alarmist warnings in recent days about the potential for conflict with China, especially related to issues surrounding Taiwan.
But before the US gets into a crisis that brings it to the threshold of war — or finds itself stumbling into one — policymakers and military leaders need to address some hard realities.
There is almost no scenario in which the United States can successfully intervene in a war between China and Taiwan that will not leave our country in far worse shape than it is right now; in a worst-case scenario, American territory could be struck by nuclear missiles.
In testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee last week, Adm. Phil Davidson, commander of US forces in the Indo-Pacific, warned that Chinese military developments looked to him like a nation .
Davidson added that he believed China would attempt to Taiwan "in the next six years." To guard against this possibility, Davidson asked Congress to provide a whopping $27 billion in additional funding over the current defense budget.
It is crucial to understand that for China, the Taiwan issue is not merely a , but an one. They are far more willing to pay extraordinary costs, sacrifice many men, and could risk it all to eventually compel unification with Taiwan. The issue does not directly affect our national security unless we get involved.
If we eventually choose war with China over Taiwan, we will at best suffer egregious losses in ships, aircraft, and troops; in a worst-case, the war could deteriorate into a nuclear exchange in which American cities are turned into nuclear wastelands, killing millions.
America should never take such risks unless our security and freedom are directly threatened. Fighting China for any reason short of that would be a foolish gamble of the highest order.(cont)
i reckon the Five Eyes are wanting to formalise their unification into a union of anglo states. They more or less function as a single polity.
Used to be that the UK was more independent and did things for her own interests, what dick cheney once called "Perfidious Albion".
Used to be that the UK was more independent and did things for her own interests, what dick cheney once called "Perfidious Albion".
- Status