Is Pelosi's coming visit to Taiwan good or bad?

[Sertorio]

Then they invaded the wrong country, because US forces are stationed in NATO countries, not Ukraine. Whoops!

They are not there as occupation troops either, like the former Soviet troops stationed in several of these countries previously but are there to send a clear message to Moscow "if you try to do to our countries what you are presently doing to Ukraine you will have a war with the United States on your hands".

A war the US wouldn't be able to win and therefore which will never be waged...

[Doc]

Then they invaded the wrong country, because US forces are stationed in NATO countries, not Ukraine. Whoops!

They are not there as occupation troops either, like the former Soviet troops stationed in several of these countries previously but are there to send a clear message to Moscow "if you try to do to our countries what you are presently doing to Ukraine you will have a war with the United States on your hands".

A war the US wouldn't be able to win and therefore which will never be waged...

KEEP TELLING YOURSELF THAT

[neverfail]

Then they invaded the wrong country, because US forces are stationed in NATO countries, not Ukraine. Whoops!

They are not there as occupation troops either, like the former Soviet troops stationed in several of these countries previously but are there to send a clear message to Moscow "if you try to do to our countries what you are presently doing to Ukraine you will have a war with the United States on your hands".

A war the US wouldn't be able to win and therefore which will never be waged...

KEEP TELLING YOURSELF THAT

Well, think about it Doc. US fights a war of China's doorstep? Supply lines long and costly; vulnerable to interdiction. China = supply lines short, cheap and relatively interdiction proof. Tactical advantage to China from start to finish.

[SteveFoerster]

China and Russia are not the same situation.

China is uninvadable. Russia, however, has gone far out of its way to prove to the world how unexpectedly weak it is militarily and to weaken itself further in the process.

But does it matter when we live in a world with nuclear weapons? No one wins a third world war. No one.

[Sertorio]

China and Russia are not the same situation.

China is uninvadable. Russia, however, has gone far out of its way to prove to the world how unexpectedly weak it is militarily and to weaken itself further in the process.

But does it matter when we live in a world with nuclear weapons? No one wins a third world war. No one.

Steve, you are in no position to assess how strong or how weak the Russian armed forces are. Just remember that Russia has used no more than 12-15% of its present armed forces in the war in the Ukraine, having preferred to keep the rest as reserve in case NATO did something truly stupid. Destruction of the Ukrainian armed forces may thus take a bit longer, but Russia is in no hurry. In the end Russia will have around 200,000 men with combat experience, which may come very handy in dealing with the NATO amateurs. And Russian weapons will have had a real combat experience, namely the precision missiles and the hypersonic missiles.

[SteveFoerster]

China and Russia are not the same situation.

China is uninvadable. Russia, however, has gone far out of its way to prove to the world how unexpectedly weak it is militarily and to weaken itself further in the process.

But does it matter when we live in a world with nuclear weapons? No one wins a third world war. No one.

Steve, you are in no position to assess how strong or how weak the Russian armed forces are.

Why, because I don't read TASS?

[Sertorio]

China and Russia are not the same situation.

China is uninvadable. Russia, however, has gone far out of its way to prove to the world how unexpectedly weak it is militarily and to weaken itself further in the process.

But does it matter when we live in a world with nuclear weapons? No one wins a third world war. No one.

Steve, you are in no position to assess how strong or how weak the Russian armed forces are.

Why, because I don't read TASS?

No, because you are very ignorant of all military matters.

[SteveFoerster]

China and Russia are not the same situation.

China is uninvadable. Russia, however, has gone far out of its way to prove to the world how unexpectedly weak it is militarily and to weaken itself further in the process.

But does it matter when we live in a world with nuclear weapons? No one wins a third world war. No one.

Steve, you are in no position to assess how strong or how weak the Russian armed forces are.

Why, because I don't read TASS?

No, because you are very ignorant of all military matters.

That would bite harder if your definition for that weren't just "anyone who disagrees with you".

Besides, if anyone here has an overinflated sense of their own expertise, it's you.

[Milo]

It is never been more important that the US support Taiwan.

[Sertorio]

No, because you are very ignorant of all military matters.

That would bite harder if your definition for that weren't just "anyone who disagrees with you".

Besides, if anyone here has an overinflated sense of their own expertise, it's you.

Military things do not require great intelligence, but they do require a particular frame of mind which can only be acquired through experience. My three years in the military, two of which in the middle of a guerrilla war, gave me that frame of mind. Contrarily to you, I know what makes sense strategically, tactically and operationally. I understand what the Russians are doing in the Ukraine, while you don't. I probably would be a bit more radical operationally than they are, but I understand why they have chosen to take a less aggressive posture. Every civilian they injure or kill is likely to be a future citizen of Russia, or a family member of someone who is. If avoiding hurting them means more time before they defeat the Ukrainians, so be it. That doesn't mean Russians are not militarily competent, only that they are not as heartless as the British and American military.