WWIII - Taiwan?
-
@xenon said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
@jolly said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
@xenon said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
@jolly said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
The Biden stuff is horseshit. We are rapidly heading into the zone where out military spending as a percentage of GDP is the lowest it has been in many, many years. You can't throw trillions of dollars at butter issues without it coming back to bite you in the ass.
We are behind on chip manufacture. We ae behind on steel manufacture. We are behind on hyper-sonic missile manufacture. We are behind on warship manufacturing and our merchant fleet (sealift capacity) is a joke. Our counter espionage efforts are a joke, our borders leak like a sieve and our foremost law enforcement agency has spent six months of man hours and millions of dollars to chase down doofuses taking selfies in the Capitol rotunda.
We have proven once again in Afghanistan that even when we walk away from a bad situation, anybody that supported us, is thrown to the wolves.
And we have a doddering, frail, senile fool as our Resident-In-Chief.
The Japanese economy and military were in worse shape comparatively in 1940, and they damn near cleaned our clock for us. If the carriers had been at Pearl on December 7th, they probably would have.
Nah, Biden ain't got the guts. Taiwan is nothing but a speed bump and will be treated as such...
Everything - except for the Biden factor and his health concerns - are pretty much exactly the same as they were during the Trump years.
Au contraire, mon cher. Trump had increased military spending over Mr. Obama and he had a yuge point in his favor...Would you like to bet that Donald J. Trump wasn't just crazy enough to not give up Taiwan, and would go to the mattresses over the island?
I have no idea what Trump would have done with Taiwan. He has no consistent stance on engaging in wars overseas (though generally doesn’t like large overseas troop deployments).
Obama’s spending on military was also higher than Trump’s initially, but drew down as our presence in the Middle East drew down.
From Trump’s statement, I would have thought he’d aim for lower military budgets (fewer deployments).
I know a big part of his military budget increase was pay - dunno what else he actually “rebuilt”. I don’t think procurement and capital spend increased a huge amount.
You come from such a point of utter ignorance that it is impossible to even begin to correct your errors. Jesus H. Crisp.
-
I think the U.S may have ceded territories such as the Phillipines, to keep the Japanese out of Australia and to protect the U.S. west coast. Remember, ours was a Germany first policy and we moved production mountains as it was.
More strain for the Pacific meant something had to take a backseat or not be addressed at all. For instance, what would have happened to the Red Army, without Lend/Lease?
@jolly said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
I think the U.S may have ceded territories such as the Phillipines, to keep the Japanese out of Australia and to protect the U.S. west coast. Remember, ours was a Germany first policy and we moved production mountains as it was.
More strain for the Pacific meant something had to take a backseat or not be addressed at all. For instance, what would have happened to the Red Army, without Lend/Lease?
That's possible about the Philippines although I think it would have been a short term retreat. As to the Germany first policy that was because Roosevelt and Marshall agreed along with Churchill that Germany was the strongest most dangerous of the AXIS powers. Even then not everyone agreed with the policy; certainly Admiral King opposed the Germany First policy and felt the US should focus on the Pacific theatre.
As for what would have happened to the Red Army in the absence of Lend Lease? There are books written on that topic and few are in agreement with how events would have unraveled. Suffice to say that without Lend Lease, in my opinion, the Soviets would have continued to lose men and materiel at an unimaginable rate. Meanwhile the Nazis would have continued to stretch their supply lines as the front expanded and Russians retreated destroying and moving any industrial capacity. Stalin probably would have even made a serious attempt at an armistice to buy time and regroup. It may have even lasted a few years. Eventually and when ready however, he would have counter attacked en mass and driven the Germans back at least to the 1939 USSR Polish border. Either way Germany was toast, simply because Hitler had declared war on the US following Pearl Harbor.
Elbows up!
-
@xenon said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
@jolly said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
@xenon said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
@jolly said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
The Biden stuff is horseshit. We are rapidly heading into the zone where out military spending as a percentage of GDP is the lowest it has been in many, many years. You can't throw trillions of dollars at butter issues without it coming back to bite you in the ass.
We are behind on chip manufacture. We ae behind on steel manufacture. We are behind on hyper-sonic missile manufacture. We are behind on warship manufacturing and our merchant fleet (sealift capacity) is a joke. Our counter espionage efforts are a joke, our borders leak like a sieve and our foremost law enforcement agency has spent six months of man hours and millions of dollars to chase down doofuses taking selfies in the Capitol rotunda.
We have proven once again in Afghanistan that even when we walk away from a bad situation, anybody that supported us, is thrown to the wolves.
And we have a doddering, frail, senile fool as our Resident-In-Chief.
The Japanese economy and military were in worse shape comparatively in 1940, and they damn near cleaned our clock for us. If the carriers had been at Pearl on December 7th, they probably would have.
Nah, Biden ain't got the guts. Taiwan is nothing but a speed bump and will be treated as such...
Everything - except for the Biden factor and his health concerns - are pretty much exactly the same as they were during the Trump years.
Au contraire, mon cher. Trump had increased military spending over Mr. Obama and he had a yuge point in his favor...Would you like to bet that Donald J. Trump wasn't just crazy enough to not give up Taiwan, and would go to the mattresses over the island?
I have no idea what Trump would have done with Taiwan. He has no consistent stance on engaging in wars overseas (though generally doesn’t like large overseas troop deployments).
Obama’s spending on military was also higher than Trump’s initially, but drew down as our presence in the Middle East drew down.
From Trump’s statement, I would have thought he’d aim for lower military budgets (fewer deployments).
I know a big part of his military budget increase was pay - dunno what else he actually “rebuilt”. I don’t think procurement and capital spend increased a huge amount.
You come from such a point of utter ignorance that it is impossible to even begin to correct your errors. Jesus H. Crisp.
@larry said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
@xenon said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
@jolly said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
@xenon said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
@jolly said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
The Biden stuff is horseshit. We are rapidly heading into the zone where out military spending as a percentage of GDP is the lowest it has been in many, many years. You can't throw trillions of dollars at butter issues without it coming back to bite you in the ass.
We are behind on chip manufacture. We ae behind on steel manufacture. We are behind on hyper-sonic missile manufacture. We are behind on warship manufacturing and our merchant fleet (sealift capacity) is a joke. Our counter espionage efforts are a joke, our borders leak like a sieve and our foremost law enforcement agency has spent six months of man hours and millions of dollars to chase down doofuses taking selfies in the Capitol rotunda.
We have proven once again in Afghanistan that even when we walk away from a bad situation, anybody that supported us, is thrown to the wolves.
And we have a doddering, frail, senile fool as our Resident-In-Chief.
The Japanese economy and military were in worse shape comparatively in 1940, and they damn near cleaned our clock for us. If the carriers had been at Pearl on December 7th, they probably would have.
Nah, Biden ain't got the guts. Taiwan is nothing but a speed bump and will be treated as such...
Everything - except for the Biden factor and his health concerns - are pretty much exactly the same as they were during the Trump years.
Au contraire, mon cher. Trump had increased military spending over Mr. Obama and he had a yuge point in his favor...Would you like to bet that Donald J. Trump wasn't just crazy enough to not give up Taiwan, and would go to the mattresses over the island?
I have no idea what Trump would have done with Taiwan. He has no consistent stance on engaging in wars overseas (though generally doesn’t like large overseas troop deployments).
Obama’s spending on military was also higher than Trump’s initially, but drew down as our presence in the Middle East drew down.
From Trump’s statement, I would have thought he’d aim for lower military budgets (fewer deployments).
I know a big part of his military budget increase was pay - dunno what else he actually “rebuilt”. I don’t think procurement and capital spend increased a huge amount.
You come from such a point of utter ignorance that it is impossible to even begin to correct your errors. Jesus H. Crisp.
So you’re saying my position is air tight. Nice!
-
@jolly said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
I think the U.S may have ceded territories such as the Phillipines, to keep the Japanese out of Australia and to protect the U.S. west coast. Remember, ours was a Germany first policy and we moved production mountains as it was.
More strain for the Pacific meant something had to take a backseat or not be addressed at all. For instance, what would have happened to the Red Army, without Lend/Lease?
That's possible about the Philippines although I think it would have been a short term retreat. As to the Germany first policy that was because Roosevelt and Marshall agreed along with Churchill that Germany was the strongest most dangerous of the AXIS powers. Even then not everyone agreed with the policy; certainly Admiral King opposed the Germany First policy and felt the US should focus on the Pacific theatre.
As for what would have happened to the Red Army in the absence of Lend Lease? There are books written on that topic and few are in agreement with how events would have unraveled. Suffice to say that without Lend Lease, in my opinion, the Soviets would have continued to lose men and materiel at an unimaginable rate. Meanwhile the Nazis would have continued to stretch their supply lines as the front expanded and Russians retreated destroying and moving any industrial capacity. Stalin probably would have even made a serious attempt at an armistice to buy time and regroup. It may have even lasted a few years. Eventually and when ready however, he would have counter attacked en mass and driven the Germans back at least to the 1939 USSR Polish border. Either way Germany was toast, simply because Hitler had declared war on the US following Pearl Harbor.
@renauda said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
@jolly said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
I think the U.S may have ceded territories such as the Phillipines, to keep the Japanese out of Australia and to protect the U.S. west coast. Remember, ours was a Germany first policy and we moved production mountains as it was.
More strain for the Pacific meant something had to take a backseat or not be addressed at all. For instance, what would have happened to the Red Army, without Lend/Lease?
That's possible about the Philippines although I think it would have been a short term retreat. As to the Germany first policy that was because Roosevelt and Marshall agreed along with Churchill that Germany was the strongest most dangerous of the AXIS powers. Even then not everyone agreed with the policy; certainly Admiral King opposed the Germany First policy and felt the US should focus on the Pacific theatre.
As for what would have happened to the Red Army in the absence of Lend Lease? There are books written on that topic and few are in agreement with how events would have unraveled. Suffice to say that without Lend Lease, in my opinion, the Soviets would have continued to lose men and materiel at an unimaginable rate. Meanwhile the Nazis would have continued to stretch their supply lines as the front expanded and Russians retreated destroying and moving any industrial capacity. Stalin probably would have even made a serious attempt at an armistice to buy time and regroup. It may have even lasted a few years. Eventually and when ready however, he would have counter attacked en mass and driven the Germans back at least to the 1939 USSR Polish border. Either way Germany was toast, simply because Hitler had declared war on the US following Pearl Harbor.
You're forgetting the Japanese. Without the U.S. to occupy them, there certainly is no love lost between the Japanese and the Russians. The Chinese may have bogged them down, but it certainly would have been interesting....
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
@renauda said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
@jolly said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
I think the U.S may have ceded territories such as the Phillipines, to keep the Japanese out of Australia and to protect the U.S. west coast. Remember, ours was a Germany first policy and we moved production mountains as it was.
More strain for the Pacific meant something had to take a backseat or not be addressed at all. For instance, what would have happened to the Red Army, without Lend/Lease?
That's possible about the Philippines although I think it would have been a short term retreat. As to the Germany first policy that was because Roosevelt and Marshall agreed along with Churchill that Germany was the strongest most dangerous of the AXIS powers. Even then not everyone agreed with the policy; certainly Admiral King opposed the Germany First policy and felt the US should focus on the Pacific theatre.
As for what would have happened to the Red Army in the absence of Lend Lease? There are books written on that topic and few are in agreement with how events would have unraveled. Suffice to say that without Lend Lease, in my opinion, the Soviets would have continued to lose men and materiel at an unimaginable rate. Meanwhile the Nazis would have continued to stretch their supply lines as the front expanded and Russians retreated destroying and moving any industrial capacity. Stalin probably would have even made a serious attempt at an armistice to buy time and regroup. It may have even lasted a few years. Eventually and when ready however, he would have counter attacked en mass and driven the Germans back at least to the 1939 USSR Polish border. Either way Germany was toast, simply because Hitler had declared war on the US following Pearl Harbor.
You're forgetting the Japanese. Without the U.S. to occupy them, there certainly is no love lost between the Japanese and the Russians. The Chinese may have bogged them down, but it certainly would have been interesting....
The Soviet Red Army under Zhukov gave the Japanese a sound drubbing in the battles of Khalkhin Gol in 1939. The Japanese lost face and quite willingly agreed to a subsequent neutrality pact with Moscow. There is no reason to think that they would have reneged on it in the absence of fighting the US. There was really nothing in vast expanses and forests of the Russian far east they wanted for their empire.
-
@renauda said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
@jolly said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
I think the U.S may have ceded territories such as the Phillipines, to keep the Japanese out of Australia and to protect the U.S. west coast. Remember, ours was a Germany first policy and we moved production mountains as it was.
More strain for the Pacific meant something had to take a backseat or not be addressed at all. For instance, what would have happened to the Red Army, without Lend/Lease?
That's possible about the Philippines although I think it would have been a short term retreat. As to the Germany first policy that was because Roosevelt and Marshall agreed along with Churchill that Germany was the strongest most dangerous of the AXIS powers. Even then not everyone agreed with the policy; certainly Admiral King opposed the Germany First policy and felt the US should focus on the Pacific theatre.
As for what would have happened to the Red Army in the absence of Lend Lease? There are books written on that topic and few are in agreement with how events would have unraveled. Suffice to say that without Lend Lease, in my opinion, the Soviets would have continued to lose men and materiel at an unimaginable rate. Meanwhile the Nazis would have continued to stretch their supply lines as the front expanded and Russians retreated destroying and moving any industrial capacity. Stalin probably would have even made a serious attempt at an armistice to buy time and regroup. It may have even lasted a few years. Eventually and when ready however, he would have counter attacked en mass and driven the Germans back at least to the 1939 USSR Polish border. Either way Germany was toast, simply because Hitler had declared war on the US following Pearl Harbor.
You're forgetting the Japanese. Without the U.S. to occupy them, there certainly is no love lost between the Japanese and the Russians. The Chinese may have bogged them down, but it certainly would have been interesting....
@jolly said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
You're forgetting the Japanese. Without the U.S. to occupy them, there certainly is no love lost between the Japanese and the Russians. The Chinese may have bogged them down, but it certainly would have been interesting....
They would have occupied Canada and Mexico.
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/07/21/deter-china-taiwan-war/
Max Boots on how to deter China from invading Taiwan.
-
Biden vows to defend Taiwan in apparent US policy shift
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-61548531US President Joe Biden has warned China is "flirting with danger" over Taiwan, and vowed to intervene militarily to protect the island if it is attacked.
…
Mr Biden prefaced his remarks saying US policy toward Taiwan "has not changed". But his comments in Tokyo are the second time in recent months he has unequivocally stated the US would defend Taiwan if China attacked, in what has been seen as a change in tone.
… -
@xenon said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
@jolly said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
The Biden stuff is horseshit. We are rapidly heading into the zone where out military spending as a percentage of GDP is the lowest it has been in many, many years. You can't throw trillions of dollars at butter issues without it coming back to bite you in the ass.
We are behind on chip manufacture. We ae behind on steel manufacture. We are behind on hyper-sonic missile manufacture. We are behind on warship manufacturing and our merchant fleet (sealift capacity) is a joke. Our counter espionage efforts are a joke, our borders leak like a sieve and our foremost law enforcement agency has spent six months of man hours and millions of dollars to chase down doofuses taking selfies in the Capitol rotunda.
We have proven once again in Afghanistan that even when we walk away from a bad situation, anybody that supported us, is thrown to the wolves.
And we have a doddering, frail, senile fool as our Resident-In-Chief.
The Japanese economy and military were in worse shape comparatively in 1940, and they damn near cleaned our clock for us. If the carriers had been at Pearl on December 7th, they probably would have.
Nah, Biden ain't got the guts. Taiwan is nothing but a speed bump and will be treated as such...
Everything - except for the Biden factor and his health concerns - are pretty much exactly the same as they were during the Trump years.
Au contraire, mon cher. Trump had increased military spending over Mr. Obama and he had a yuge point in his favor...Would you like to bet that Donald J. Trump wasn't just crazy enough to not give up Taiwan, and would go to the mattresses over the island?
@Jolly said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
@xenon said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
@jolly said in WWIII - Taiwan?:
The Biden stuff is horseshit. We are rapidly heading into the zone where out military spending as a percentage of GDP is the lowest it has been in many, many years. You can't throw trillions of dollars at butter issues without it coming back to bite you in the ass.
We are behind on chip manufacture. We ae behind on steel manufacture. We are behind on hyper-sonic missile manufacture. We are behind on warship manufacturing and our merchant fleet (sealift capacity) is a joke. Our counter espionage efforts are a joke, our borders leak like a sieve and our foremost law enforcement agency has spent six months of man hours and millions of dollars to chase down doofuses taking selfies in the Capitol rotunda.
We have proven once again in Afghanistan that even when we walk away from a bad situation, anybody that supported us, is thrown to the wolves.
And we have a doddering, frail, senile fool as our Resident-In-Chief.
The Japanese economy and military were in worse shape comparatively in 1940, and they damn near cleaned our clock for us. If the carriers had been at Pearl on December 7th, they probably would have.
Nah, Biden ain't got the guts. Taiwan is nothing but a speed bump and will be treated as such...
Everything - except for the Biden factor and his health concerns - are pretty much exactly the same as they were during the Trump years.
Would you like to bet that Donald J. Trump wasn't just crazy enough to not give up Taiwan, and would go to the mattresses over the island?
I guess that the answer is a positive for President Biden.
Obviously big news in Taiwan and well received.
-
Explosive audio leak details China's plan to invade Taiwan
An unprecedented and explosive audio leak of a top-secret meeting of the Peoples Liberation Army has revealed China's detailed plan to attack Taiwan.
Experts say that the audio clip posted on the YouTube channel of Lude media appears authentic. This will be the first time since the formation of the People's Republic of China in 1949 that a recording of a top-secret meeting of a military command has been leaked.
Apparently, "allies" within the Communist Party of China (CPC), especially the military ( codename "Thunder") carried out the recording of the meeting that took place on May 14. No wonder the knives are out to nail the source of the leak. The Lude media recording was also posted on the twitter account of Jennifer Zeng @jenniferatntd.
The leak has surfaced when the CPC is apparently experiencing a bitter power struggle ahead of the 20th party congress later this year, which will deliver a new leadership, including the General Secretary of the CPC as well as the standing committee of the Politburo, comprising seven to nine members, forming the core of the party-state for the next five years.
