Posted on 12/05/2021 11:50:34 PM PST by blueplum
The articles may seem stupid.
The intent behind them isn’t.
We outsourced victory to our enemies...
Free Republicans don’t seem to play the long game very well.
BTTT.
“And they would sink a great deal of ours. “
Oh REALLY? Why on earth would we have to engage them ship to ship? ANSWER - We dont. You are the poster boy for a toxic DEFEATIST, LOSER type thinking and mentality.
Ok we all of their Atlantic fleet. Then the PLAN come back 3 years later with 500 warships. Get it.
Have many shipyards does China have. One small nuke for each leaves a big smoking hole. Same for Chinese Atlantic bases. Same for us. Once the shooting starts production centers go bye-bye. We are not going to be the arsenal of fredom we were in WWII. Everyone is going to hVe to fight with what they’ve got. We should have at least eight ssbms at sea at all times. We should have at 500 mo ile missle icbm launchers travelling at all times; actuals - 0. Bomber force? What’s left of our ragtag oh so politically correct Air Farce will be lucky to get three nukes on China and two on Russia. We have been nibbled and piecemealed to death, with intent. Why do you think the democrats have wanted to keep us tied up in ground wars? To burn up the budget and stifle research and advanced planning while eroding the will to fight from our command structure. And it is way deeper than what you see.
Get happy, fly over there and surrender now.
Kinda meaningless ‘threat to Eastern Seaboard’ when China has a hypersonic missile now that can release another missile in hypersonic flight.
To pull that off Chinese gonna have to buy a lot more of Hunter’s paintings - kick in some girls for the Big Gug - cough up more diamonds for left-wing traitors living in DC obsessing bout ‘gender equality’... It’s a big order.
He added: 'By militarily useful I mean something more than a place that they can make port calls and get gas and groceries.
'I'm talking about a port where they can rearm with munitions and repair naval vessels.' Two months later, Maj. Gen. Andrew Rohling, commander of the U.S. Army Southern European Task Force—Africa, said that the U.S. concern 'is that the Chinese would develop a naval base in Equatorial Guinea, which would then give them naval presence on the Atlantic.'
China 'has likely considered' African bases in Kenya, Seychelles, Tanzania and Angola.
'China doesn't just build a military base like the U.S.,' said Paul Nantulya, research associate at the Pentagon-funded Africa Center for Strategic Studies. He told the paper: 'The Chinese model is very, very different.
China's playing to win - we're playing to see how many billions of dollars worth of weapons we can leave behind when we cut and run...and how many 'Generals' we can add to the bloated roster of fools running the Pentagon.
Ok, nobody is gig to nuke anyone. Get it? 1945 was one off event in human history.
I am trying to think strategically. You are the dumb a$S that can’t. Globalism has destroyed a lot of out industrial base we need to sustain a fleet in a long war and we need to get it back ASAP. Tariffs now and forever.
China has the management contract for the Panama canal..so they won’t have to go around the cape...but none the less your observation is valid.
Stop being stupid. This thread is about a specific topic. Your replies do not apply.
Back at you.
Is his son named Hunter?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.