That agument only bites as long as the costly defence works in preventing a war in the first. But if the opponent knows he can afford higher losses better than you can even mild losses due to low numbers of your costly platform, you get after the costly dfeence the even more costly war nevertheless. And yes, the scenario here is China, sooner or later - and as long as the US does not run then.



Tech superiority compensating for lower own numbers works only so and so far - and not further. And China closes the technology gap faster than was considered possible just ten years ago. And btw: "gap"? That sounds like two things hopelessly apart. They aren't anymore.



I cannot help it but both Chinese determination to get what they want (Taiwan, for example) and their technological development level get notoriously underestimated here in the West (I did that, too, until maybe ten years ago). Plus that one still mostly assumes their best intentions.



Watch Honkong, how they take it out. They will do the same wiht the South Chinese Sea, and with Taiwan. And if it does not work "peacefully" (which means not more than "without war", but not necessarily "peacefully"), they will wage war. Mark my words. They want Taiwan, and they will move heaven and hell to get it.

China's technological development level is what it is because they're all a bunch of thieving spies.

Yes, and because we voluntarily made them strong and transferred technology and knowhow to them - for money. What is more outrageous here? Their impertinence and determination and long breath, our our stupidity and shortsightedness? They surpass us - and we must blame ourselves for that.