Search results for query: *

I'm not sure these are the issues you think they are, but we'd have to look at specifics, of course. Sure, and those ways of defending them aren't 100% accurate, and more directly significantly will generally serve to undermine US operational tempo. Meaning you don't get to just delete...

We can kill 500 million of them and still lose, and I think they can impose more suffering on their people for the goal of Taiwan and ascending to full major power status, than we are willing to sacrifice for the good of the American Empire. Ability to endure suffering is quite valuable to...

Eh, I'm less certain not having political limits is going to be the giant power up you assume. Thus land invasions. If your under blockade. Your not exporting. This seems pretty obvious. Once you loosen the blockade, you just order the occupied people to continue producing what they...

I just don't agree it means particularly much. Well, it comes down to which is the limiting factor. If your politics won't allow the material one, then its the political one. And politics can generally push further or less on the material. Yes, thus the importance of preserving ships and...

Yes, and the US has had a Ticonderoga heavily damaged by a mine. 90s American Damage control is better than modern Russian damage control. I'm not sure this is a suprise to anyone. That's what I'm not sure what your argument here is. Sure, since it won. Sure, and we can say if only the...

Well, one, the US has not just lost minesweepers to mines, so, what? I can also call some arbitrarily small formation from Luxemburg to the American equivalent. Doesn't really make them equivalent as were talking here. So, what, cannibalism? WWII America was America too. I mean, South...

Maybe, but this doesn't really have anything to do with the issue you seem to be trying to refute. Is the black sea fleet equivalent to the Pacific Fleet though? Not really relevant unless you believe the US is going to escalate to a nuclear war. In which case you probably have better than...

It was made as a counter to a specific claim that the Chinese would perform worse than the Iraqis. That is hardly a read herring to respond to a specific claim. To change the analogy, confirming whether or not your playing against a middle school team, doesn't clarify whether its a high school...

I mean, the Iraqis had (relatively) modern Tanks, aircraft, and Scuds. Harmless babies with tanks and aircraft might indeed hurt someone else, occasionally, partially by accident. Infinite monkeys on typewriters kind of thing. Plus some ability to make up for total incapability of the Army with...

Me: So you believe x? You: No, I believe y. Me: But x=y. Thus believing y is the same thing as believing x. Or, on the specific argument of Iraqi vs Chinese performance. Premise1 (mine) : Iraqis are harmless babies Premise 2 (yours): Chinese are the same as Iraqis Conclusion: Therefore...

I did not call you a liar. I clarified what argument I was referring to as "communists are harmless babies". Didn't you argue that the Chinese were worse than Iraqis, the harmless babies of military competence and ability? Since Iraqis, especially Saddam Iraqis, are harmless babies who couldn't...

Obviously you wouldn't. Its part of deterrent for interfering in Taiwan, its important to the effect that they're presence is known. So several bases are under threat if the US gets involved. Otherwise, its 1-2 weeks of overland travel to get there, so the flow would have several weeks at least...

I was blunt and honest, not strawmaning. You said you did not make the argument that China were harmless babies, I pointed to and clarified what argument I was criticizing with that description. The most I was guilty there of was hyperbole. I obviously was not arguing you were saying the Chinese...

Well, Russia and Iran are the obvious ones. Pakistan is also a potentially useful staging area, though likely to just move troops into Iran, or naval operations into the Indian Ocean. India I guess could have some say in the matter if they invaded and tried to conquer Pakistan, but there are...

Correct, you did not claim it was a victory. You did however claim they were militarily incompetent. I do not see evidence of this. Your main proof of this seems to be that they did not fight like Americans (a way of fighting that ultimately lost) and instead fought like, well...

@LordsFire would the Chinese and allies suffering 3 million casualties while taking Taiwan, Singapore, Iraq, and South Korea while the US + allies suffer 1 million casualties be a victory or defeat for the US? Like I said, I don't right now care how likely you think this would be, just want to...

Yes, as I said above. My point was, even in a year where they launched a very poorly concieved offensive, they were able to recover from it, learn from it, and continue the offensive. Those are very good performance of a military. In the same way Cannae points to the virtue of the Romans and...

This is probably partly where the major disconnect is, because with the material deficiency and having to make up that difference with bodies, 3-1 in the Vietnam situation is pretty good performance. Especially given that the North Vietnamese were on the offensive. Its even less bad when the...

No, the fantasy is that the issue is just political incompetence. Its a stab in the back narrative that the only reason we lost was the politics. That's what I'm point to with the Union and Revolutionary war that the politics being extremely important doesn't negate the military performance. If...

Hm, I can't really think of a nicer way to say, this but this really sounds like the cope of everyone who's ever lost: we didn't really lose because the enemy didn't fight the war we wanted to fight, and instead fought the War the way they were going to win it. I'm sure southerners coped that...