Clark Griswold

Just watched the presser, even if they do take hostages I have no confidence they would do anything or could if inclined to do Op Cluster Fornication continues Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wonder if this was an A-29 trying to get the hell outta Dodge Uzbekistan’s Air Defense Forces Shoot Down Afghan Military Jet https://www.breitbart.com/asia/2021/08/16/uzbekistans-air-defense-forces-shoot-down-afghan-military-jet/ Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Concur Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am Eddie - I'm not for exclusion or expulsion from our country or any other Western country but a realistic and honest approach to the threats and problems interacting and integrating individuals from other cultures that have or do express values anti-thetical to ours. That can include native communities in our country also, it is not exclusive to foreigners or immigrants. Profiling is sometimes a necessary evil, if you carry a the black flag of Isis or a Nazi swastika flag, you need to be watched. The Bataclan Attack of 2015 and the subsequent capture of some of its perpetrators is an example, those terrorists that escaped the attack and were later captured in another country weeks later had help in their community enclaves or at least willful ignorance / neutrality to assisting them as they escaped. We can integrate others into our societies only slowly, in measured amounts and with the resolve that they will assimilate to us not us to them, anything less and we are proving ourselves unworthy of what was fought for and created by others. As to option 2, methinks even if we doubled the budget (military) to both deter Russia/China and continue operations in the ME the Law of Diminishing Returns would kick in and we would get more military capability than now but not really enough or double to actually do all of those missions in the manner and with the expected low risk of failure that we think a 1.5+ trillion dollar DoD appropriation would get. Without STRONG military legal and policy reform / modernization, MILPERS growth and parochial interests in antiquated, obsolete or irrelevant MDSs / capabilities would drag down the effort. If we want long term humanitarian, stabilization missions it's time for an American Foreign Legion military force. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/we-need-an-american-foreign-legion/2016/05/19/9a04d24e-176e-11e6-9e16-2e5a123aac62_story.html Reports directly to the President, separate funding vehicle / appropriation, separate UCMJ but coordinates with the DoD. Winning wars are the responsibility of the DoD, winning the peace (if that's possible) is their responsibility.

Entirely possible but concur with @jrizzell that it was inevitable, the end of a non-Taliban dominated Afghanistan, but the implosion and ignominious retreat was preventable. What I am 10,690% in agreement with you is the utter and total shit show the evac has been. In July there were assurances that things won't fall apart immediately when we fall back, they knew that was bullshit so why weren't we ready? Why wasn't the last month(s) just a stream of airlifters and ground convoys getting our people and shit out? If there is no accountability for this we are even worse off culturally and spiritually than I feared. Returning to your point on violence exporting from a renewed Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, while this is a risk the counter terrorism fight now has to focus mainly on the homeland(s) of the what remains of the West. We tried making their societies like ours, that has not worked. We need to affirm and protect ours, that is a feasible strategy. Super tight borders, extreme vetting to prevent infiltrators, visa requirements and internal tracking of travelers from suspect regions, heavy exchange of intel with trustworthy nations and no squeamish-ness on profiling of communities that whether we want to admit or not sometimes and some in them harbor, nurture, support or spawn terrorists who attack the nations that took them in.

Concur with you on your point(s). I would add that I respect @ClearedHot's opinion and read it and mulled on it for a while, I don't agree with it but I could not figure the why and I think I have it now. The argument for remaining is to defend an order, an idea for a world that no longer exists, that is a Pax Americana world order where we are the guarantor in many places for ideas, values, systems that we like and promote and want others to embrace but can't take root. It's the order we thought would last forever plus a day at the end of the Cold War beginning of the 90's when we believed our power was infinite. Serbia and the ethnic wars of South-Eastern Europe with our mixed results for what we were willing to commit to and convince our Allies to do should have warned us that there is only so much you can do, even as rich and as powerful as you are. The world where we go anywhere and bear any burden is gone, not because that is not a good or noble idea just one that we as a nation, not as individuals, are not willing to pay for, to sacrifice for, to discipline ourselves for. We are just not that nation, not saying we are a bad nation now, we've changed. We have less cohesion, spiritual reserves and excess material resources to use to help others when it is not in our material national interest. The Serenity Prayer is what we need now and going forward as we deal with the world. That is not proof of no major attacks in the US because of Iraq / Afghanistan / Libya / Syria. There were attacks in the UK and Europe and attempts in the US with some minor attacks. Is it because they were all "over there" or because the FBI plus others were using the Patriot Act plus much more aggressive technological means to disrupt cells & plots before they grew to fruition? The wars following 911 distracted some terrorists but not all to attempting to attack the US homeland, it surely dissuaded some nations from overtly / tacitly supporting them and or neutrally allowing them to operate / prepare on their territory but

747 still the champ but the Moose no doubt is nipping on its heels for pax record https://www.google.com/amp/s/simpleflying.com/el-al-operation-solomon/amp/ Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To get out of Afghanistan with my family, pack us in and punch it Bishop Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I hear ya but they’ve got different goals Them - Acquire wealth and power without giving a shit about anything else or how Us - Fix everything and make everyone nice immediately We’re kinda at a disadvantage Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yup They lead with soft power then gradually get harder (sts) - first sample by the dealer is always free Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just a guess but I think it’s possible they may propose a pipeline thru Afghanistan to link Iranian petroleum exports to the PRC Throw in further potential rare earth minerals mining, weapons, utilities, telecom sales and funding them as a useful proxy to harass, disrupt, attack Western / US interests / forces when beneficial to the overall interest of the PRC you can see the utility of the PRC’s efforts to court the Taliban. Belt-n-Road may get another partner Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Blow it up as the last helicopter flies clear Start planning the B-2 round the world strike now Enjoy your rubble… Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ha - I wish they would admit that and get with the program

Negative Ghostrider They (PRC) would just then give them to Iran as a retort to our move and runs counter to the overall strategy of non-proliferation. They could arm or deploy nukes just to threaten us to piss us off other areas also, Cuban Missile Crisis 2.0 would be my choice if I were the PRC, you've nuclearly armed Taiwan, I just put 100 hypersonic nuclear tipped missiles on Cuba, enjoy. That might be a pipe dream (non-proliferation) but we are trying to stick with it so conventional deterrence it is.

True - they have numbers but the going is not the best for them assuming a somewhat conventional amphibious invasion of Taiwan Articles on the subject / conjecture of how the PLA et al would carry out an invasion, one article is a bit dated considering the growth in the size and capabilities of the PRC but the fundamental points (terrain, a phased operation, limited windows of opportunity) remain relevant. https://thediplomat.com/2021/05/why-a-taiwan-invasion-would-look-nothing-like-d-day/ https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2535&context=nwc-review Reading the second article I found this particularly interesting since we both agree that timing is the secret sauce if you wanted to carry out this aggression: The Chinese would also have to contend with two monsoon seasons, from August to September and from November to April; it would be restricted to two “windows” of attack, from May to July and the month of October. The month of October particularly towards the end of the month would be intriguing to me if I were a PLA military strategist to begin as the US would be going into a major electoral period every two to four years and the political competition would likely become another impediment to quick resolve and decisive action to intervene and assist the Taiwanese.

Legitimate points, I would further contextualize my sober assessment of our odds at 50/50 with further growth in their direct military capabilities and indirect capabilities (cyber, info, diplomatic, financial, etc) - give it 3 years on this trajectory and they would be foolish not to try particularly with the cowardly and weak kneed responses to their recent major provocations and outrages (Uighurs, Hong Kong, COVID, etc..). They know the world is intimidated by them and the US is hamstrung by it's own business community that sold the farm to China years ago and would likely try to pull back the government of the US from a forceful response. Hence my belief that breaking the current situation of strategic ambiguity is actually short term provocative and risky to be fair but long term actually stabilizing. Rip the Band-Aid off, hurts like hell initially but settles the problem quickly and permanently. But what do the Taiwanese think or want? Doesn't look like they want Mill's (Deterring the Dragon article author) proposal but if they really really start to believe the PLA is coming this time, they might change their tunes. https://www.chinausfocus.com/peace-security/returning-american-troops-to-taiwan-will-only-entrap-the-us-20514 https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4015784 By then I think unless we are on the island hopefully to deter thru some serious pucker factor brinksmanship, I don't know how we stop them once they establish a naval blockade, have CAPs over the island and have taken the small islands of Penghu just west of Formosa, massing troops and ships for invasion. They would insist we are aggressing and escalating as we started our response, my bet is the rest of the world would navel gaze and we would keep assets at the ready and near but not engage while the financial markets go into cardiac arrest. Our CAPs and surface fleets at least would stay outside of whatever quarantine zone they would declare while the cyber, financial, diplomatic and information war would start. Just my uneducated yet to finish AWC guess but if we didn't respond kinetically within 72 hours of their first actions, we would not fire a shot ever. They would have shifted environment, the chatter would move to acceptance and de-escalation. At some point, the free market, rule of law, representative democracies will have to defend the "red lines" they have said exist that the autocracies are pushing and crossing, weakness encourages aggression and they smell weakness with our inability to decisively end conflicts in our favor morality aside, with our tepid responses to cyber attack and disinformation, our cultural self-immolation and our reckless debt accumulation. This to me is way to say no further.

One would think but history has examples where trading partners eschew their economic relations to try to change the geo-political landscape to their advantage, ref the trading relations of pre-WW1 Europe https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/chimera-economic-interdependence Beating them to the punch is becoming more and more likely to me the best COA to avoid a shooting war with at best a 50/50 chance we prevent the conquest of Taiwan. I would lean extremely hard on others to participate also, UK-Aussies-SK-Indians-Germans-French-etc... but if necessary we go it alone There is risk, it won't be cheap and convincing the American public will take time but you stand up to Biff or you do his homework forever.

So this guy wrote a paper about an idea I had but expressed it about 369% than I could: https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/Military-Review/English-Edition-Archives/September-October-2020/Mills-Deterring-Dragon/ Had this same idea too, if everything you're doing is not working, try doing the opposite like Costanza did for a while and it worked out (sorta) So instead of them instigating provocation after provocation and thus driving the direction of changing the facts on the ground to their favor, we take the initiative and return the favor driving it to at least maintain the status quo Obviously the risk is there but not as high as letting the situation deteriorate further to their favor where we will not be able to meaningfully respond if they decide to take swift decisive action and initiate aggression against Taiwan and preemptive military strikes to keep the US out of theater or capable of using our in theater forces for likely for a month or more. Thoughts?

Thread restart: RB-8 proposal: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/40859/the-case-for-stripping-the-p-8-poseidon-down-into-an-rb-8-multi-role-arsenal-ship New Russian jet: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/41618/russias-checkmate-light-tactical-fighter-is-officially-unveiled

Make that 2 weeks No one ever wanted to admit what we were fighting after the initial defeat of the Taliban and in country elements of AQ / HN, the hyper conservative Islamic central Asian culture of Afghanistan that we found repulsive and wanted to eliminate and replace with something that practiced amenable values to Western societies (the treatment of women, minorities of various types, the ending offensive cultural practices, etc…) The majority of the country does not want what we want them to be, sure Kabul and some other urban areas might be ok with a much less restrictive interpretation of an Islamic society but they will always be the minority and always under siege The end will be ugly but inevitable, let’s get it over with. Whose values are practiced at the end of a conflict in a given territory are the ultimate form of victory and we will have to accept that ours will not be practiced there not because we didn’t try but that what would be required to implant them we were and are not willing to do, nor do I think we should, namely to absolutely obliterate the country even more than it already is and purposely target the fighting age male population for near severe culling. This is the only way you could then remake them as you willed, not advocating this just is so. Germany, Japan and South Korea worked out as they did because we had a clean slate to work from. My guess is that this is the last nation building attempt we will see for 20 or more years, maybe we’ll get sucked into another impossible situation like a post collapse Venezuela, North Korea, Zimbabwea, etc… I hope not. If so, I hope whoever is POTUS then is honest enough to say this will take several decades, cost billions and may not work but I think it is that important enough for these reasons to commit the USA to it on my watch Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In related news, the Tiger and Dragon are getting into more aggressive postures towards each other India Shifts 50,000 Troops to China Border in Historic Move | Financial Post

Could be both simultaneously, they’re not mutually exclusive What was and is really bad about CRT at the USMA and mil in general is that it is indoctrination being presented falsely or defended as by leadership as education When you walk into a briefing, presentation, class etc and are told you are this because of this with no objective examination of said theory it’s political / cultural indoctrination Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/41142/an-air-cushion-patrol-seaplane-was-once-in-the-works-with-the-u-s-and-japan Air cushion seaplanes

Culturally the democratization of fires is the last thing the CAF will ever support, just said for context and discussion but I agree the targeting problem forced on the enemy, the potential introduction of new long range weapons when the platform options expands and what I think would be good for the Air Force, every platform a potential shooter This is isn't that revolutionary, the Navy is seriously looking at distributing fires to traditionally non-combatant platforms https://www.forbes.com/sites/craighooper/2020/07/12/desperate-for-more-war-fighting-capacity-congress-asks-about-armed-logistics-ships/?sh=6d47408a1384 and the USMC are already adapting the Herc for short range fires ala Harvest Hawk No, not a flaw just a risk. Like most things in life if used properly it is a benefit if not a hazard. Probably a mix of the two ideas at some appropriate ratio is the right answer and adjusted as conditions change is least bad solution.