China warns US on Asia military strategy

[Jimbuna]

Looks like cuts in the military, similar but larger in size to those the UK have already had whilst maintaining a quality effectiveness should the requirement to act become a reality.

The Chinese don't appear all that concerned....simply biding their time I should imagine.

China's state media have warned the US against "flexing its muscles" after Washington unveiled a defence review switching focus to the Asia-Pacific.
In an official news agency Xinhua said President Barack Obama's move to increase US presence in the region could come as a welcome boost to stability and prosperity.
But it said any US militarism could create ill will and "endanger peace".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16438584

[magicstix]

I'd say China's blatant bullying of its neighbors, causing them to come to us and ask for help, is creating plenty of "ill will" and "endangering peace."

I'd like to see Japan change its constitution to allow a real military, then the US give them Kitty Hawk... I'm sure the Chinese would *love* that.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Looks like cuts in the military, similar but larger in size to those the UK have already had whilst maintaining a quality effectiveness should the requirement to act become a reality.

We've been here before. The Carter years wreaked havoc on military size and readiness. The Reagan administration reversed that dangerous trend. I believe somewhere soon down the road, we will have no choice but to reverse the action taken by the current administration.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

We've been here before. The Carter years wreaked havoc on military size and readiness. The Reagan administration reversed that dangerous trend. I believe somewhere soon down the road, we will have no choice but to reverse the action taken by the current administration.

So you believe there will be an increase in military spending?

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

So you believe there will be an increase in military spending?

Yes. I think eventually (next few years). And the spending will be allocated differently from what it's being focused on now. Costs aren't going to decrease, military hardware will continue to age, and commitments aren't going to change. It's inevitable. It wouldn't be the first time we've seen this dynamic.

[CaptainHaplo]

My view on the current administration is that about 98% of what they do is wrong.

So when they get something RIGHT - I do my best to say so.

This is a very good move.

Our military has always been geared to fight major ground conflicts on 2 fronts. Its were we found ourselves in WWII, and the overall focused never changed. Its why we were able to successfully keep deterrent forces in place throughout the world while still fighting conflicts that absorbed significantly more manpower and treasure than we though in 2 countries.

But the reality is that this policy has been what has caused us to become the self-appointed "world police". When a country has the forces to exert, it is much more apt to exert them. Even the Art of War teaches this. It is a path (one of many) to ruin.

Asia will be the focal point for some time in geopolitics due to perceived economic strength (which is a house of cards in many ways - but I digress). The middle east is a focus for one reason - energy. Asia is a focus for both energy and economics. As resources dwindle in the middle east, as further energy sources are found and used, the focus changes. We need to be able to start preparing for what the future may hold.

Its important to realize that this isn't gutting the ground game. Its simply letting it no longer be the major game in town.

For all the "defense" hawks that scream about military cuts - yes we will spend less. But we are also not going to be fighting 2 wars - so we don't need to spend as much. Those same hawks would yell if every conflict ended today and we cut a single dime because of it.

Its important to note - we as a country have to shift our priorities and our way of thinking when it comes to fiscal policy. NO program, no entitlement, and no special interest - including military spending (which is driven for contractors primarily) should be off the table. We will all share in the sacrifice - and nothing should be untouchable to right the ship.

Just the view of someone that spend 8 years in a funny green suit, and never wants to go to the middle east again - unless its to Israel for a visit.

[TarJak]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

My view on the current administration is that about 98% of what they do is wrong.

So when they get something RIGHT - I do my best to say so.

This is a very good move.

Our military has always been geared to fight major ground conflicts on 2 fronts. Its were we found ourselves in WWII, and the overall focused never changed. Its why we were able to successfully keep deterrent forces in place throughout the world while still fighting conflicts that absorbed significantly more manpower and treasure than we though in 2 countries.

But the reality is that this policy has been what has caused us to become the self-appointed "world police". When a country has the forces to exert, it is much more apt to exert them. Even the Art of War teaches this. It is a path (one of many) to ruin.

Asia will be the focal point for some time in geopolitics due to perceived economic strength (which is a house of cards in many ways - but I digress). The middle east is a focus for one reason - energy. Asia is a focus for both energy and economics. As resources dwindle in the middle east, as further energy sources are found and used, the focus changes. We need to be able to start preparing for what the future may hold.

Its important to realize that this isn't gutting the ground game. Its simply letting it no longer be the major game in town.

For all the "defense" hawks that scream about military cuts - yes we will spend less. But we are also not going to be fighting 2 wars - so we don't need to spend as much. Those same hawks would yell if every conflict ended today and we cut a single dime because of it.

Its important to note - we as a country have to shift our priorities and our way of thinking when it comes to fiscal policy. NO program, no entitlement, and no special interest - including military spending (which is driven for contractors primarily) should be off the table. We will all share in the sacrifice - and nothing should be untouchable to right the ship.

Just the view of someone that spend 8 years in a funny green suit, and never wants to go to the middle east again - unless its to Israel for a visit.

Not a bad analysis. I certainly agree that the Asian economic "power" is simply a rotten structure waiting for a strong enough wind to blow it away. People seem to have forgotten that China's "strength in the 2008 GFC was simply money printing. They got away with it so far but somewhere they will have to pay the piper.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

My view on the current administration is that about 98% of what they do is wrong.

So when they get something RIGHT - I do my best to say so.

This is a very good move.

Our military has always been geared to fight major ground conflicts on 2 fronts. Its were we found ourselves in WWII, and the overall focused never changed. Its why we were able to successfully keep deterrent forces in place throughout the world while still fighting conflicts that absorbed significantly more manpower and treasure than we though in 2 countries.

But the reality is that this policy has been what has caused us to become the self-appointed "world police". When a country has the forces to exert, it is much more apt to exert them. Even the Art of War teaches this. It is a path (one of many) to ruin.

Asia will be the focal point for some time in geopolitics due to perceived economic strength (which is a house of cards in many ways - but I digress). The middle east is a focus for one reason - energy. Asia is a focus for both energy and economics. As resources dwindle in the middle east, as further energy sources are found and used, the focus changes. We need to be able to start preparing for what the future may hold.

Its important to realize that this isn't gutting the ground game. Its simply letting it no longer be the major game in town.

For all the "defense" hawks that scream about military cuts - yes we will spend less. But we are also not going to be fighting 2 wars - so we don't need to spend as much. Those same hawks would yell if every conflict ended today and we cut a single dime because of it.

Its important to note - we as a country have to shift our priorities and our way of thinking when it comes to fiscal policy. NO program, no entitlement, and no special interest - including military spending (which is driven for contractors primarily) should be off the table. We will all share in the sacrifice - and nothing should be untouchable to right the ship.

Just the view of someone that spend 8 years in a funny green suit, and never wants to go to the middle east again - unless its to Israel for a visit.

As a former blue suiter in the USAF (both enlisted and officer) I agree with alot of what you say here. I'm not knocking cuts in general. The administration is correct to call for streamlining, but from a perspective of readiness and preparedness we will need to spend more in the coming years. It's inevitable. Unless our priorities change. Which I wouldn't mind at all. The current administration has outlined a vision of focusing on the Asia Pacific Rim. You can't do that with boots on the ground. We aren't going to challenge China in a ground conflict. That's simply not an option. It's Naval and Air and it doesn't come cheap.