“It is also the case that American fickleness regarding our ability to sustain our political will to support Ukraine that inevitably will watched closely by any potential coalition partners in Asia.”
Hell, my Taiwanese mom’s stance seems to be more or less “if America can’t stick it out against Russia, do they really have the stones to hold out against the Chinese?”
An insult to British 19th century colonial administrators! They at least tended to invest years into understanding the language and local contexts in which they operated.
It would appear that you’re asking them for a level of systems thinking beyond the capacity of the transactional mindset to encompass. (The DOD bureaucracy that I remember was best at playing the long game and avoiding open, immediate confrontation that would probably fail and be personally costly)
I find I often ask for deeply unachievable objectives in our national security policies. Like understanding that other countries are independent actors. But it wouldn’t be a bureaucracy if they didn’t know how to survive in the long term.
Could not disagree more. No, the US cannot manage multiple conflicts and our resources are not infinite. We must prioritize our interests … and our interests are in the Pacific.
The United States has significant and long-standing interests in the region, which includes the Pacific Ocean. These interests are multifaceted, encompassing economic, security, and diplomatic dimensions. The U.S. views the region as vital to its own security and prosperity, and actively works to maintain a free and open Indo-Pacific.
In this regard, China is consistently identified as a major threat, particularly due to its growing global influence and efforts to challenge US dominance. No other country has the capacity to be another regional hegemon and challenge US empire.
“It is also the case that American fickleness regarding our ability to sustain our political will to support Ukraine that inevitably will watched closely by any potential coalition partners in Asia.”
Hell, my Taiwanese mom’s stance seems to be more or less “if America can’t stick it out against Russia, do they really have the stones to hold out against the Chinese?”
An insult to British 19th century colonial administrators! They at least tended to invest years into understanding the language and local contexts in which they operated.
It would appear that you’re asking them for a level of systems thinking beyond the capacity of the transactional mindset to encompass. (The DOD bureaucracy that I remember was best at playing the long game and avoiding open, immediate confrontation that would probably fail and be personally costly)
I find I often ask for deeply unachievable objectives in our national security policies. Like understanding that other countries are independent actors. But it wouldn’t be a bureaucracy if they didn’t know how to survive in the long term.
Could not disagree more. No, the US cannot manage multiple conflicts and our resources are not infinite. We must prioritize our interests … and our interests are in the Pacific.
American interests are in America.
The United States has significant and long-standing interests in the region, which includes the Pacific Ocean. These interests are multifaceted, encompassing economic, security, and diplomatic dimensions. The U.S. views the region as vital to its own security and prosperity, and actively works to maintain a free and open Indo-Pacific.
In this regard, China is consistently identified as a major threat, particularly due to its growing global influence and efforts to challenge US dominance. No other country has the capacity to be another regional hegemon and challenge US empire.
Gee sounds like you better get your own United States there Emperor Gonzalo, or do you prefer Caudillo? .
this 🇺🇸 disagrees. Lol Atlanticist … ps that spiel reeks of bot 🤖. In a multifaceted way.
We agree to disagree. No bot just an observation.
Thank you, have a good evening.
“for a war that is yet to be fought “
My speaking of amoral.
Are you going to be in the fleet or on the ground in Taiwan?
Ukraine isn’t American soil, nor was it ever worth risking nuclear war… for a money laundering operation.
Money laundered in Blood.
And the shortage of shells isn’t vague, although it is true.
What’s vague are the production numbers of produced versus hand waves about capacity.
Then again we’re short everything, except contractors and McMansions in Virginia.