USS destroyer sailing by chinese disputed islands

[Rasputin_Vol]

Yep, they can take on China all by themselves. . .

We have no interests here.

Are you really telling me that Japan, South Korea, Australia, India and the Gulf States couldn't collectively deal with China without our help?

 

[VolStrom]

Take that up with you national leaders. If we focused on our own matters here and were more self-reliant, we wouldn't need to concern ourselves as much with these long as supply chains.

It was sarcasm Ras, I agree with you, we need to dump most of these off shore and especially Chinese suppliers for the betterment of our own manufacturing and country.

 

[37L1]

No, you miss the point. There is a balance. Full blown isolation (which is what I am not advocating) is harmful just as much as being a busybody world police. The United States right now is essentially the global military version of a Karen. Isolationism and Karen-ism are two extremes that are undesirable.

No, we aren't a Karen, nor are we isloationist, yet. But if we show weakness by withdrawing, it will be exploited and those things that the Pacific Fleet is tasked with, such as maintaining shipping lanes, will become much more difficult and will probably directly lead to what you are hoping to avoid, a confrontation. Only now, we will be at a disadvantage by having withdrawn from the area.

 

[37L1]

Are you really telling me that Japan, South Korea, Australia, India and the Gulf States couldn't collectively deal with China without our help?

Yes. Very good, Ras.

Do all those states have a navy able to cope? Do all those states have reciprocal alliances? Do all those states tend to agree with each other?

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Yes. Very good, Ras.

Do all those states have a navy able to cope? Do all those states have reciprocal alliances? Do all those states tend to agree with each other?

May be if we kicked off the training wheels and forced them to rely on each other, you may see some cooperation between all of them. This is really the best option for all involved anyways. The United States doesn't need to be policing these matters into perpetuity. There needs to be a stopping point, and I say the sooner the better.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

It was sarcasm Ras, I agree with you, we need to dump most of these off shore and especially Chinese suppliers for the betterment of our own manufacturing and country.

I kind of figured it was, but I needed to make a point just to make sure. LOL

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

No, we aren't a Karen, nor are we isloationist, yet. But if we show weakness by withdrawing, it will be exploited and those things that the Pacific Fleet is tasked with, such as maintaining shipping lanes, will become much more difficult and will probably directly lead to what you are hoping to avoid, a confrontation. Only now, we will be at a disadvantage by having withdrawn from the area.

That isn't weakness. That is simply pragmatism. The entire world is in poor economic shape. The US is no different. This is an open secret at this point. And truth be told, China is not much better off. So if there was anytime for us to pull back when the playing field is level, it would be now. It isn't going to get much better then right now. Australia, Japan, South Korea, India and the Gulf States all have China as a trading partner. China, on the other hand is the regions largest exporter and importer, so of course they have a desire to keep the waterways open, as well. There is plenty of room for negotiation and cooperation if we stood out of the way and let them resolve this amongst themselves.

 

[NorthDallas40]

And they remained far away from us before, during and after the war. Germany never posed a serious threat to the US mainland. Facts.

 

[NEO]

Are you really telling me that Japan, South Korea, Australia, India and the Gulf States couldn't collectively deal with China without our help?

Australia, no. Would be a bloodbath.

South Korea, no. N. Korea would hit Seoul hard and fast under Chinese orders.

Gulf states, no.

Japan, would be interesting. Japan does not have the troops or oil to go into a prolonged war but their tech is amazing. It would depend on how fast they could convert auto and electronic plants into war machines. Long term they would lose but it would be interesting.

India, yes. I dont see either side winning here. It would be Germany vs Russia in the winter all over again and would cripple both countries.

Combined though these countries would defeat China though. India and Japan teaming up alone I think could given how they would both attack from different angles.

 

[Carl Pickens]

Yeah, china would. While we're concerned about dead leaders' statues they've been upgrading their military.

Perhaps.... but that sht is still made in China

 

[Carl Pickens]

They have far more nuclear missiles than the United States has

I’m sure we have plenty enough to end the world as we know it

 

[VolStrom]

Perhaps.... but that sht is still made in China

We could screw them so badly by giving them some bogus tech details. I'm pretty sure we would never do that.

 

[37L1]

That isn't weakness. That is simply pragmatism. The entire world is in poor economic shape. The US is no different. This is an open secret at this point. And truth be told, China is not much better off. So if there was anytime for us to pull back when the playing field is level, it would be now. It isn't going to get much better then right now. Australia, Japan, South Korea, India and the Gulf States all have China as a trading partner. China, on the other hand is the regions largest exporter and importer, so of course they have a desire to keep the waterways open, as well. There is plenty of room for negotiation and cooperation if we stood out of the way and let them resolve this amongst themselves.

Can we all now hold hands and sing Kumbaya?

If only that pesky United States would just get out of the way.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Can we all now hold hands and sing Kumbaya?

If only that pesky United States would just get out of the way.

We simply can't afford to keep up this worldwide patrolling. At some point, these other nations need to step up and pull their own weight.

 

[Pepe_Silvia]

Yep, the last time we played the role of isolationism it did not work out very well. The Japanese were not going to stop. Australia was on their radar. The fleet was at Pearl Harbor because that is where they belonged. If we did not have a presence at Pearl Harbor (which was a U.S. territory at the time), Japan would have easily taken Hawaii and we would have wound up with a 3,000 mile supply line to try and take Hawaii back. The Japanese screwed up when they did not hit the fuel farms. Them we would have had to pull back.

Non-interventionalism =/= isolationism

 

[Pepe_Silvia]

Are you really telling me that Japan, South Korea, Australia, India and the Gulf States couldn't collectively deal with China without our help?

Sure makes you wonder who is getting more out of the alliance between us and them.

 

[LouderVol]

We didn't mind our business in Asia and instead got involved in an oil embargo directed at Japan. Had we minded our business, there would not have been a need for Japan to attack Pearl Harbor.

But of course, that begs the question of why was the Pacific Fleet even in Pearl Harbor to begin with, but we can save that for another debate. But had the Pacific Fleet been in San Diego instead, then the Japanese wouldn't have been able to do squat even if we did still engage in an oil embargo.

And when they took Hawaii?

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Yep, the last time we played the role of isolationism it did not work out very well.

It is like you all ready from the same script. I'm not promoting isolationism. we can still engage with and have commerce with these countries. But with regards to these military entanglements and spreading our resources halfway around the world, it simply makes no sense, not to mention expensive.

The Japanese were not going to stop. Australia was on their radar.

Well, that would have been an interesting escapade for Japan to go after Australia. I would be interested to hear your explanation of how that would have been taken place. I suppose the question I would really like to know is why would Australia be on their radar? Or, why would Japan have not stopped?

The fleet was at Pearl Harbor because that is where they belonged.

No, they did not.

If we did not have a presence at Pearl Harbor (which was a U.S. territory at the time), Japan would have easily taken Hawaii and we would have wound up with a 3,000 mile supply line to try and take Hawaii back.

Leaving the Pacific Fleet left them open to those very same supply line issues you pointed out above, in addition to the fact that now the fleet was vulnerable from attack from 360 degrees as opposed to being in San Diego where not only were they further way, but it would have limited the attack angle to just coming from the west. Leaving the fleet in Pearl harbor left them as sitting ducks. This was all revealed in Adm. Husband Kimmel's trial where they tried to blame him for the Pearl Harbor fiasco about 5 years later.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Sure makes you wonder who is getting more out of the alliance between us and them.

Exactly. We are burdened with the expense and of putting our blood on the line to protect their shipping lanes. What do we get in return?

And then these same people get pizzed off when we have had troops stationed in Germany since the end of WWII and Germany decides to repay us back by cutting economic deals with Russia.

 

[82_VOL_83]

In China's defense, they thought they were covering up a leaf barrier with sand.

Halldy hall hall...

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

China Says It Chased US Warship Out Of Its "Territorial Waters" | ZeroHedge

The Southern Theatre Command of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) accused the USS Benfold of "illegally" sailing into its waters without permission, resulting in PLA naval and air forces tracking the ship and warning it away. A US Navy statement pushed back on the claim, saying that China's expanding assertions of sovereignty around the islands "pose a serious threat to the freedom of the seas."

 

[NorthDallas40]

China Says It Chased US Warship Out Of Its "Territorial Waters" | ZeroHedge

The Southern Theatre Command of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) accused the USS Benfold of "illegally" sailing into its waters without permission, resulting in PLA naval and air forces tracking the ship and warning it away. A US Navy statement pushed back on the claim, saying that China's expanding assertions of sovereignty around the islands "pose a serious threat to the freedom of the seas."

Lol! “Chased US warship out of its territorial waters”. China considers the South China Sea, the Indian Ocean, and the Pacific Ocean it’s “territorial waters”

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Lol! “Chased US warship out of its territorial waters”. China considers the South China Sea, the Indian Ocean, and the Pacific Ocean it’s “territorial waters”

That's funny, the US Navy has been the world navy (replacing the Brits) since WWII. But you're saying that the Chinese are the ones bullying people in the Indian and Pacific Oceans?

 

[NorthDallas40]

That's funny, the US Navy has been the world navy (replacing the Brits) since WWII. But you're saying that the Chinese are the ones bullying people in the Indian and Pacific Oceans?

They’re definitely the ones terraforming and claiming land in international waters. Which absolutely nobody else acknowledged as valid. So it’s pretty clear who the bully is here.

And no they aren’t bullying anybody in the Indian or Pacific Oceans with their current Navy of 500 Bass Trackers. I said they claim those territorial waters. It remains to be seen if they will be forced to defend that claim.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

They’re definitely the ones terraforming and claiming land in international waters. Which absolutely nobody else acknowledged as valid. So it’s pretty clear who the bully is here.

And no they aren’t bullying anybody in the Indian or Pacific Oceans with their current Navy of 500 Bass Trackers. I said they claim those territorial waters. It remains to be seen if they will be forced to defend that claim.

I need to see that. Show me the link. I'm not disputing that some official may have said that, but I would be interested to know if that came out of Xi's mouth.