Here we go over under on huge war under trump?
- Thread starter HighStickHarry
- Start date
Tempermant issues. I so wish the wash po had some credibility. They are not above lying so what to think. Oh well.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...0e57e57e05d_story.html?utm_term=.93b2f36f9d75
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...0e57e57e05d_story.html?utm_term=.93b2f36f9d75
Trump believes we're involved in enough fracases as it is. I hope and pray he finds a way to get us out of some of them. That may be easier said than done.
How about ground troops. You definition is only a limited war with only missiles and fighters. Not sure this meets the definition of huge. Chances would be pretty good that would happen. Every president since at least 1980 would meet that criteria. Suggest at least ground troops with fighters, bombers, and naval launched cruise missiles. That would drastically change the odds.
I said several years ago I thought the US and China would be engage in a major military confrontation by 2030, now I think it will be by 2020........when I say major, I mean to the point of at least a serious threat of Nuclear weapons
Won't happen! China has much more to lose then the US and our area allies. China can not possibly defend all their national interests worldwide (especially the need for oil) and sustain an offensive war.
They have one new (used) aircraft carrier and aside from nuclear weapons no real chance to transport needed supplies, troops and munitions on extended forays in the Pacific and beyond.
Japan, South Korea, Philippines and Australia (even Vietnam) would serve as a buffer from much western movement and I can't believe Russia would want to see anyone threaten their power projection in Asia.
UK, I'm willing to put $500 on it vs your 2020 prediction that it won't happen then.
They have one new (used) aircraft carrier and aside from nuclear weapons no real chance to transport needed supplies, troops and munitions on extended forays in the Pacific and beyond.
Japan, South Korea, Philippines and Australia (even Vietnam) would serve as a buffer from much western movement and I can't believe Russia would want to see anyone threaten their power projection in Asia.
UK, I'm willing to put $500 on it vs your 2020 prediction that it won't happen then.
There are two issues that have a good chance at setting off a US-China conflict, Taiwan, and the disputed South China sea islands.........President Trump has already questioned the "One nation" policy which is absolutely non-negotiable to the Chinese government, and now he has threatened to stop all access by China to their 7 bases on the disputed islands...... there are only so many ways we can do that, and the Chinese would not allow us to implement any of those without a fight
China can be bold and provocative but they are not stupid. If the sh!t hits the fan the US military would gut them like a koi pond gold fish.
I'm not saying they wouldn't cause a lot of pain to us but they know at least for next 30 years they are way behind us in capability.
I'm not saying they wouldn't cause a lot of pain to us but they know at least for next 30 years they are way behind us in capability.
^^^^^^^^watching too much CNN^^^^^^^^
You obviously don't know much about the Chinese military capabilities, they are no longer "way" behind us, their technology has improved tremendously over the last 15 years, in part due to their emphasis in their Space program ...........they have more than enough capability to defend those islands
We won't got to war against China in my lifetime. Now we may have a trade war or a cyber war, but not a troop war. There's no benefit for either side in doing so. As for Iran, I don't see us having a major war against them, but I could certainly see the use of cruise missiles to target very specific locations to cripple Iran's capability to develop a nuclear arsenal.
Its primed for a conflict, its going to depend a lot on whether President Trump is all talk and no action, or if he backs up his words , but if his first 10 days are any indication, I would bet on the latter
We are far beyond the point of being able to use a few cruise missiles to cripple their nuclear development
No they do not. For every technological advancement they have stolen from us we are years ahead of them. Do really think our military publicises all our abilities.
They have ONE modern aircraft carrier and it would be at the bottom of the sea in the blink of an eye in a real shooting war along with their entire navy. We've got subs sitting off their military sites not only with nukes but super deadly non-nuke missiles they have no clue of where they are.
Like I said if conflict breaks out it would be painful for both sides but the Chinese know they would be crushed. The Russians are the ones with the problem cause the real threat of the Chinese military is they could over run anyone with the shear numbers they can throw on a battlefield. We would not engage on their turf.
They have ONE modern aircraft carrier and it would be at the bottom of the sea in the blink of an eye in a real shooting war along with their entire navy. We've got subs sitting off their military sites not only with nukes but super deadly non-nuke missiles they have no clue of where they are.
Like I said if conflict breaks out it would be painful for both sides but the Chinese know they would be crushed. The Russians are the ones with the problem cause the real threat of the Chinese military is they could over run anyone with the shear numbers they can throw on a battlefield. We would not engage on their turf.
If things went nuclear it would be be devastating for both sides. I don't think the Chinese are suicidal.
You keep believing what you want, I will just tell you that you are incorrect with your overall assumption, it would be a very competitive engagement
I said that I believe it could get to the point of a serious threat to use Nuclear weapons, actually using them is whole different level, there have been several instances in the last 30 years where the US and other countries ( mainly the USSR) have seriously considered the use , but neither side did ...obviously....and thankfully
Please let us in on the secret knowledge you have about the Chinese's amazing military capabilities. They got a giant laser up in outer space that's going to zap our far superior naval and air capabilities?
The Chinese are tough talkers but they are not going to wreck their entire economy and lose their navy engaging the US military. You are engaged in fear mongering, nothing more.
These are negotiating tactics. It's obviously about economic restructuring and leveraging. Trump is not a big foreign war guy unlike Hillary.
Look at it this way, I can promise you that if we blockade those islands, China will respond, they will not allow that. The Chinese military technology is not as advanced as what we can deploy, but, its still very, very good, a lot better than it was 10 or 15 years ago. They would have enough physical advantages to at least nullify any technological advantages we do have
So when did we jump to blockading the manufactured Chinese islands? Yes, if we make that move, then there's risk of engagement, but I think you are smoking crack if you think we're gonna blockade these 'disputed' islands.
I do expect the rhetoric to ramp up and it may even reach cold-war level tensions. But I expect the world leaders to negotiate and reach amicable agreements.
Do you think we would get into a nuclear war with China before we've executed any economic or trade sanctions with them? There are a lot of escalation steps available prior to one side or the other launching weapons at each other.
We don't know that..........As I said , there have been several times where we were on the brink of a Nuclear launch (either the US or against the US) over the last 30 years, most were misinterpretations , but could have very easily been escalated ....sometimes it can be one wrong statement, r in todays world , a tweet
There was a statement from the Whitehouse that said that if China does not leave those islands we would "deny them all access to those islands"..........kind of sounds like a blockade to me
"We're going to have to send China a clear signal that, first, the island-building stops and, second, your access to those islands also is not going to be allowed." maybe just talk....but who knows
Last edited:
China may only have 1 aircraft carrier but they are dumping a ton of money and research into subs. These things will be a major problem. I think UK is hitting on a little truth here. We may be ahead of them but they are catching up. They are second in the world on military spending. This is a war I personally wouldn't want to see happen because IMO it would be the two strongest military's going at each other. The sub program makes them capable of launching a nuke at any major US city. If it went to this we would all suffer much like China's peoples would suffer. This would be a nasty nasty war and I doubt Americans have the stomach it would take to win. To many snow flakes.
You would hope that if there is any military confrontation over these islands we could keep it conventional..........Nuclear weapons should only be used if your homeland is under threat, in this case neither would actually be......or at least wouldn't appear ti be
Well, if we do get into a conflict, we can just blame the past administration. These islands obviously weren't built in the last 10 days.
In reality UK, how would you handle this, given that not one lib on this board has raised this China concern for the prior 8 years. I would love to hear how Hillary would have handled this issue without concern yet Trump is pushing us to a possible nuclear war?
In reality UK, how would you handle this, given that not one lib on this board has raised this China concern for the prior 8 years. I would love to hear how Hillary would have handled this issue without concern yet Trump is pushing us to a possible nuclear war?
First, I am not a Liberal, I register independent but have always voted republican, until this past election,.......I would have stopped them as they were building them. Now, the US did try to stop them diplomatically through the World court, but they just ignored the ruling. You do have to try that first. If President Trump is serious about getting them out then he will have to use military force IMO. I am not against that, being a retired military veteran I agree with use of force when required , but he makes a lot of threats he either needs to do something or stop talking about it . My former position in the USAF o have a really good understanding of our opponents capabilities and it would not be easy against either China or Iran
The difference between Obama and Hillary on the issue of China is they could use trade and the global order as leverage against China. Trump comes in and announces he is going to wage a trade war on China as a matter of policy, now the only leverage he has left is military.
i think trump has indicated he wants a level playing field and to do what's best for america
far from declaring a "war"
