The operational impact of America’s greatest strategic failure

Vambram

Born-again Christian; Constitutional conservative
Dec 3, 2006
2,402
889
59
Saint James, Missouri
✟66,263.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The United States has made two fundamental and interrelated strategic mistakes. The first is the failure to comprehend the threat from the People’s Republic of China (PRC). The second, and pertinent to this article, is the failure of the U.S. government to balance against this threat and to have prepared the defenses required to deter or, in the worst case, defeat the People’s Liberation Army (PLA).

This past week, additional evidence supporting this later point was revealed in a report by the Navy Times entitled “Supplier bottlenecks threaten US Navy effort to grow arms stockpiles”. The article describes how the U.S. Department of Defense, specifically the U.S. Navy, allowed itself to be put into the position of being unable to deter or defeat a PRC invasion of Taiwan or any other major military operation in the Western Pacific, all because of its willful blindness to perceive the true, hard-power threat built by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) over the past 30 years.

The Navy Times article outlines how this failure to understand the threat from the PLA impacted the most basic function and purpose of having a military—having enough ammunition to destroy the enemy. Specifically, in this case, a navy that was powerful enough to fight and win a war at sea. Shockingly, the article reports, “the Navy stopped building torpedoes after the Cold War. Service officials, facing tighter post-war budgets, decided they had sufficient inventory for a fleet without a real threat. Missile programs continued as the Navy upgraded to newer and more capable systems over time, but missile procurement plans often faced outsized cuts during tight budget years, including in the mid-2010s. Later in the decade, however, when the Defense Department recognized China as a top adversary that would drive the armed services’ planning and spending, the Navy restarted torpedo production.” Recognizing the magnitude of this revelation, the U.S. Department of Defense had become so conditioned by the fall of the Soviet Union and the so-called “end of history” that they could not even contemplate the PRC being a threat.
 

Matt5

Well-Known Member
Jun 12, 2019
885
338
Zürich
✟133,588.00
Country
Switzerland
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You know the US no longer has an effective nuclear deterrent. It's gutted too much of its nuclear forces and let most of it rot. It's just starting to upgrade but that'll take a decade or two. Plus, it needs 10x more nuclear tipped missiles. So it's vulnerable to a nuclear Pearl Harbor at night. It can retaliate one time then nothing. America will lose, and Russia and China will win.

Interestingly, the effects of a fatal dose of radiation on the body look a lot the descriptions of hell in the Bible: weeping, lots of pain, gnashing of teeth due to the intense pain, thirst, general torment. Saying intense pain kind of understates the problem. It's really unimaginable. Death comes in 3 days to 3 weeks.
Source: What radiation does to the human body | HBO's Chernobyl - YouTube

Shortly after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, I remember reading an article about how the Kremlin was spending a lot of money to upgrade the Kremlin nuclear fallout shelter. Given that Russia was relatively broke at the time, I was stunned. I now knew that nothing had really changed. The Cold War was still on, except it went underground. Meanwhile, everybody was falling asleep. And then we got 9/11.

The actual 1991 so-called Russian Revolution wasn't a revolution at all. Nobody died. The rats just scurried to different parts of the ship and waited to regroup. We were always going to end up back at the same place with Russia as enemy. And now Russia wants its empire back.

On 17-Dec-2021 shortly before the Ukraine started, NATO got a demand from Russia: NATO out of Eastern Europe and America reduced to regional role only, or there was going to be a military-technical response. And then we got war. Russia wants its empire back, and America out of NATO. Putin expected to roll through Ukraine and on to other countries.

What Does the Russian Ultimatum to the West Mean? | Desk Russie

IMO, we are headed for WW3 with Russia and China. They just need some kind of Sarajevo event as an excuse.

Back in the 90s I would call into talk-radio and rage about trade with China. It was obvious that the West was being incredibly stupid.

[4-Dec-2010 ] Brushwood and gall | Special report | The Economist
"China insists that its growing military and diplomatic clout pose no threat. The rest of the world, and particularly America, is not so sure, says Edward Carr"

"The story itself is known to every school child in China -- the King of Yue was defeated and enslaved by the King of Wu. He waited on the King of Wu hand and foot, and proved himself such a loyal and devoted slave that the King of Wu eventually freed him to return to his country. The King of Yue spent the next twenty years effecting his revenge, sleeping on a mattress of thorn and tasting gall so he would never forget the bitterness of his humiliation, until he conquered the Kingdom of Wu, and forced its king to his death."
Source: Sleeping on sticks and tasting gall: 卧薪尝胆

What kind of freaks teach that story to every school child? Freaks who want revenge for western humiliation.
 
Upvote 0

com7fy8

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2013
13,720
6,139
Massachusetts
✟586,675.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
So, if this is true, this could mean China should already have invaded Taiwan, before the U.S. has a chance to catch up. But they have not done this.

Even so . . . Russia has been pretty ready-to-go to invade. And there is an issue about if there will be enough ammunition to stop Russia. So, may be Vladimir sees that the U.S. is behind and he is taking action on this, but not China.

Possibly, China is feeding economically off of the United States, and they don't want to jeopardize this; while Russia is already so sanctioned that they might feel they have nothing to lose.

So, I would say weapon supplies are not all there is to it.

Of course, in Gaza they were getting "humanitarian" money and supplies . . . which maybe was supposed to soften up the people in power there. But the stuff got used by Hamas to build tunnels and prepare for attacking Israel . . . instead of things being used to build hospitals and other helpful things. And weapons did not scare Hamas into not attacking Israel, in their timing.

So, weapons and ammo might affect things, or not exactly, I consider.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vambram
Upvote 0

SMTA

Active Member
Jul 28, 2023
60
33
65
Ohio
✟15,318.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
So, if this is true, this could mean China should already have invaded Taiwan, before the U.S. has a chance to catch up. But they have not done this.

Even so . . . Russia has been pretty ready-to-go to invade. And there is an issue about if there will be enough ammunition to stop Russia. So, may be Vladimir sees that the U.S. is behind and he is taking action on this, but not China.

Possibly, China is feeding economically off of the United States, and they don't want to jeopardize this; while Russia is already so sanctioned that they might feel they have nothing to lose.

So, I would say weapon supplies are not all there is to it.

Of course, in Gaza they were getting "humanitarian" money and supplies . . . which maybe was supposed to soften up the people in power there. But the stuff got used by Hamas to build tunnels and prepare for attacking Israel . . . instead of things being used to build hospitals and other helpful things. And weapons did not scare Hamas into not attacking Israel, in their timing.

So, weapons and ammo might affect things, or not exactly, I consider.
Rusdis cannot even get past Ukraine after 2 years. No worries for us there.
WWIII still explode in the ME before anywhere else. We should not be there at all.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Vambram
Upvote 0

Arcangl86

Newbie
Dec 29, 2013
11,164
7,524
✟347,448.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
You know the US no longer has an effective nuclear deterrent. It's gutted too much of its nuclear forces and let most of it rot. It's just starting to upgrade but that'll take a decade or two. Plus, it needs 10x more nuclear tipped missiles. So it's vulnerable to a nuclear Pearl Harbor at night. It can retaliate one time then nothing. America will lose, and Russia and China will win.
The US currently has somewhere around 1400 deployed nuclear warheads. That's enough for 7 warheads for every single country in the world. Against one or two countries that's literally hundreds of nukes for each country and at least 2 or 3 for each major city. That is more than enough.
 
Upvote 0

Vambram

Born-again Christian; Constitutional conservative
Dec 3, 2006
2,402
889
59
Saint James, Missouri
✟66,263.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The US currently has somewhere around 1400 deployed nuclear warheads. That's enough for 7 warheads for every single country in the world. Against one or two countries that's literally hundreds of nukes for each country and at least 2 or 3 for each major city. That is more than enough.
The biggest concern about our nuclear weapons, if God forbid, those weapons actually have to be used, is that many of the ICBMs are on older rockets which the Pentagon ain't certain are still viable and effective rockets.
 
Upvote 0

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
26,217
11,445
76
✟368,212.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
This past week, additional evidence supporting this later point was revealed in a report by the Navy Times entitled “Supplier bottlenecks threaten US Navy effort to grow arms stockpiles”. The article describes how the U.S. Department of Defense, specifically the U.S. Navy, allowed itself to be put into the position of being unable to deter or defeat a PRC invasion of Taiwan or any other major military operation in the Western Pacific, all because of its willful blindness to perceive the true, hard-power threat built by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) over the past 30 years.
Actually, China lacks the means to safely move an invasion army across the straits to Taiwan.

The lessons of sea drone and cruise missile warfare on large naval vessels in the Black Sea have not been lost on Taiwan; the crossing of nearly 80 miles of rough sea would be a bloody business for the Chinese.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vambram
Upvote 0

Kokavkrystallos

Well-Known Member
Jan 1, 2024
718
341
Farmington
✟23,346.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Widowed
Actually, China lacks the means to safely move an invasion army across the straits to Taiwan.

The lessons of sea drone and cruise missile warfare on large naval vessels in the Black Sea have not been lost on Taiwan; the crossing of nearly 80 miles of rough sea would be a bloody business for the Chinese.

They could overwhelm the island with missiles to take out most of the defenses, then launch air strikes. It would come at a huge cost to China, but they have the manpower certainly, and quite a bit of equipment. I heard some military experts last year saying even if US got involved US would win, but would lose at least a carrier and several ships, many aircraft and personnel. And Taiwan would be a mess. And then there's the nuclear wild card, if anyone were to go there could change things drastically, and North Korea may also ally with China. Small country, lots of military hardware. That's about all they do is produce a war machine.

Then there's this from 2 years ago
"if China tries to take Taiwan, are the United States and its allies able to stop it?
And the alarming answer is: Quite possibly not. Analysts say China has more troops, more missiles and more ships than Taiwan or its possible supporters, like the US or Japan, could bring to a fight. That means that if China is absolutely determined to take the island it probably can.
But there’s a caveat; while China could likely prevail, any victory would come at an extremely bloody price for both Beijing and its adversaries."

 
  • Agree
Reactions: Vambram
Upvote 0

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
26,217
11,445
76
✟368,212.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
The lesson from Ukraine is not lost on Peking. Even if Putin could pull it out and win, he's destroyed his nation's future, and squandered his military resources for very little.

A key difference is, Russia's economy doesn't depend on the United States buying things from them. China has the same demographic issues that Russia does, but at least they didn't have huge numbers of educated males fleeing the nation.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
26,217
11,445
76
✟368,212.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
And then there's the nuclear wild card, if anyone were to go there could change things drastically, and North Korea may also ally with China. Small country, lots of military hardware. That's about all they do is produce a war machine
Regarding nuclear strikes, Xi is an engineer. Cost-benefit. He's corrupt, but he's far from stupid. And North Korea, except for nuclear arms, has no way to project its forces far from home. Kim wants to hold on to the family business, not to aid China.
 
Upvote 0

Kokavkrystallos

Well-Known Member
Jan 1, 2024
718
341
Farmington
✟23,346.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Widowed
The lesson from Ukraine is not lost on Peking. Even if Putin could pull it out and win, he's destroyed his nation's future, and squandered his military resources for very little.

A key difference is, Russia's economy doesn't depend on the United States buying things from them. China has the same demographic issues that Russia does, but at least they didn't have huge numbers of educated males fleeing the nation.

True, so they would improvise around the mistakes made by Russia. #1 would be, don't think you're going to roll over Taiwan in a week, as Russia felt confident with Ukraine.
Russia also tended to use older weapons systems, and when they put up the Su 57 fighters, it was to launch long range missile attacks from Russian airspace.
 
Upvote 0

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
26,217
11,445
76
✟368,212.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
True, so they would improvise around the mistakes made by Russia. #1 would be, don't think you're going to roll over Taiwan in a week, as Russia felt confident with Ukraine.
The biggest deal is crossing 110 miles of normally rough water. It's not like crossing a border. Drone technology has made this a much riskier business, (Russia had some impressive ships that are now on the bottom of the Black Sea) and it's almost impossible to take out such drones before they are deployed. The western coast of Taiwan has few areas good for military landings. And the U.S., which has pledged to defend Taiwan, has a much more capable navy, with more air power.

And China is not eager to go to war with it's biggest customer.

Xi may lose patience, but not for some time, I think. He's seen what reckless aggression did to Russia, where Putin's survival now depend on salvaging something from the war he began in Ukraine.
 
Upvote 0

Arcangl86

Newbie
Dec 29, 2013
11,164
7,524
✟347,448.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
The biggest deal is crossing 110 miles of normally rough water. It's not like crossing a border. Drone technology has made this a much riskier business, (Russia had some impressive ships that are now on the bottom of the Black Sea) and it's almost impossible to take out such drones before they are deployed. The western coast of Taiwan has few areas good for military landings. And the U.S., which has pledged to defend Taiwan, has a much more capable navy, with more air power.

And China is not eager to go to war with it's biggest customer.

Xi may lose patience, but not for some time, I think. He's seen what reckless aggression did to Russia, where Putin's survival now depend on salvaging something from the war he began in Ukraine.
Not to mention if China were to invade Tawain, Japan, Australia and the Republic of Korea will probably get involved and they all have nasty navys, especially Japan.
 
Upvote 0