Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown has said he is “fully confident” that the US could beat China in a war that breaks out over Taiwan.
When asked at the Aspen Security Forum last Friday if he thought the US could defeat China, Brown said, “Yes, I’m fully confident in our force. We are the most lethal, most respected combat force in the world.”
He continued, “Now, it’s going to take all the nation if we go to conflict with the with the PRC [People’s Republic of China], and I’m confident, if we’re challenged, we will be there.”
Brown acknowledged the war would be a major conflict and said the US was working to build up military logistics in the Asia Pacific by stockpiling weapons, ammunition, and other types of supplies.
“These will be major conflicts akin to what we saw in WWII, and so we’ve got to come to grips with that,” he said. “Two, the PRC knows where our advantages are and the combat capability we can bring to bear. My sense is they’ll want to go quick so they can do it before we can bring capability there.”
Brown framed the US military buildup in the region as an effort to deter a war. But as the US has been beefing up its presence in the Asia Pacific and increasing support for Taiwan, tensions between Washington and Beijing have risen significantly.
Brown’s comments reflect a growing trend of US military officials openly discussing that they’re preparing for a direct war with China even though Beijing is a nuclear-armed power. The risk of nuclear escalation doesn’t appear to be factored into the plans since it’s rarely mentioned by US officials.
War games have shown that in a conventional battle, thousands of American troops would be killed in just the first few weeks of a war with China over Taiwan.
Our lives are in the hands of these delusional morons?
The people that rule this world are insanely evil!
I published my math on this in the past. For someone to be that "insanely evil," they must be also stupid.
Of all the Charlie Browns in the world, he's the Charlie Browniest.
Charlie Brown was benign.
He was peanuts.
that's what he wanted you to think. All that time he was nursing a grudge against the Chinese, blaming them for his baseball team's losing record and his own inability to kick the football
Lol
THAT was Lucy's doing.
I applied for the job. Although I'm a moron, I was rejected because I'm not delusional enough.
You are not a moron. You are my favorite bad pun master. 😉
Thanks, man!
Actually the USA has really never “won” a war .. Vietnm , Iraq, Afghanistan and so many other places the USA has only collected body bags but never a win.. a war with China while the target is between 9500 and 100 miles looks like the American will be on the loosing path…
Is it the same general who was "fully confident" that U.S. would beat Russia in Ukraine?
And yes, after we "win" a war with China then we can fight World War IV with stones and sticks on a devastated planet full of nuclear craters. That is, if ANYONE survives at all. How about we NOT fight a war with the world's other nuclear armed superpower (who is also one of our largest trading partners AND the world's largest manufacturer and supplier) instead? Taiwan is an island full of Chinese people who speaks Chinese off the Chinese coast, and is 100% NOT America.
Yes. Sounds like "Taiwan & the DPRC" is an issue best solved by, and between, Taiwan & the DPRC.
That's what we're saying and until the last Taiwanese.
Official name of Taiwan govt is Republic of China(ROC). If mainland China(PRC) attacks it, it would be China 1 attacks China 2. Actually many many years ago, ROC was trying to attack PRC. It is an unfinished civil war.
As is the civil war between North Korea and South Korea. We killed many innocents during our "police action".
We like numbers like 3 million per war before it becomes a frozen conflict. Unless they're willing to spend another million to finish it like Vietnam did. We like round numbers like 4 million better.
You set yourself up perfectly for "What about Freedom and Democracy?" But don't worry. It doesn't really matter since we'll all be dead.
Taiwan even considers itself part of China… It’s an absurd situation.
In a war over Taiwan the US knows it would have to keep all its ships out of range of Chinese anti ship missiles.
Same story for Iran, Korea and Russia.
And that range is muuuuch further than most people realise. Guam might be far enough.
The US is a military empire with eternal war as the guiding budgetary policy.
China is the only country big enough to support a totally unprovoked attack based on increasing military budget growth. It would have been easier to attack China after defeating Russia using Ukrainian troops. Russia has so far been able to keep the war outside its border despite an attack by the US plus all former European colonial powers.
“Russia has so far been able to keep the war outside its border”
Hard to tell what you’re claiming there.
Are you saying that Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporzhzhia are outside Russia’s border, or are you denying the Ukrainian attacks on various targets well within Russia’s border (excluding those aforementioned areas)?
Ukraine has been able to launch long distance attacks inside Russia's prewar border. A few Ukrainian attacks have hit airports and oil refineries, yet most have been inconsequential militarily and directed at civilians.
My point is that the colonial western powers have repeatedly attacked Russia and this is the first time Russia has been able to keep them outside it's borders.
The four Oblasts which voted to join Russia and create a new botder had fought for a measure of autonomy after the US backed coup and were mostly armed by local soldiers switching sides. The local Ukrainian troops defending Russian speaking Ukrainians were gradually losing ro the Nato backed coup government so Russia quite reluctantly began helping directly. This is the way most of the world views the Ukrainian war.
I’m pretty sure Russia was also concerned NATO would build bases in Ukraine, and it wanted a land bridge and water for Crimea. There were lots of motives.
It’s pretty stupid that Ukraine wouldn’t just do what Russia wanted. Russia is even fine with it joining the EU.
Especially since Russia was treating Ukraine so favorably with natural gas and other fuels.
Most of the world see the war in Ukraine as a war between Christian/Muslim/Socialist world represented by Russia and anti-Christian, anti-Muslim, globalist oligarchy world represented by NATO.
However we accent it, most of the world does not look at oligarchic colonial wars the way US military big shots do.
"after defeating Russia"??? No one has managed to defeat Russia for centuries beyond taking a few peripheral territories. It's the largest country on the planet, they can retreat for years and not run out of room.
"We can't win–we are behind" –The story told to pump up spending on arms
"We can win–We are exceptional" –The story told to pump up testosterone.
Cognitive Dissonance is America's greatest export.
Until we start manufacturing it in China.
Outsource to Wuhan.
Worked splendid last time.
😆
Foodoo, well said, man! Respect.
I think and indeed, do believe, there are never truly winners in any wars, though, at times, it may appear, things do get accomplished, including peace…. I suppose there is a certain redundancy to the entire processes.
If war comes the general will have a big ocean to cross.
Oh, HE'S not going there.
The serfs will do the fighting!
Mere hubris and bluster, American generals have not fought a war to the win since 1945. So why listen to these incompetents continue to brag?
Besides, the stakes of a war vs China and Russia would be too high.
But they don't teach them that at West Point, do they?
Ooh-rah, and simper fie.
Semper fi and ooh – rah are Marine related. West Point is the military academy for the Army.
Warmongering is all the same to me.
And I know the distinction.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/499e74a8c9ee64b8f9f217c00aa41eeb847a9bc74749a17fe1deaf71100ecc8b.jpg
Classic, thank you, for helping us to smile just a little bit, with the Peanuts gang! ;-}
Well the quoted general's name is Charles Q. Brown so I couldn't resist. Haha
Good grief !
"Charlie Brown, he's a clown, that Charlie Brown, he's a clown…" Leiber and Stoller song by the Coasters, 1959. Fits even better, perhaps. 🙂
Talk as much Ego as you want… Not gonna happen…!
Hey, that General played the scenario out TWICE in Sid Meier's Civilization VI, without cheat codes mind you, and both times the USA won a Science Victory. A win's a win, right ?
As the US still officially claims to recognize one China, what the general is stating is that we will fight and win against China over China.
That must be DC logic, because it don't make sense here …
Well, you remember how the US invaded Iraq to prevent influence by the IRI, only to have Iraq cosy up with the IRI politically and for internal security ?
Um, the US didn’t enter to stop Iran. People actually warned that Saddam was a secular Sunni, that Iraq was majority Shia, that removing him would empower Iran.
The US entered because Saddam supported Palestinians.
I prefer the dual theory that a) Saddam was setting up an oil bourse to sell petroleum in something other than $$USD, and b) Bush II wanted to impress Bush I.
Also there was deep irony in my statement about US intent, and real world outcome.
OK, on your last point, the irony didn’t apply. I really don’t think they removed him due to Iran. The rest that you say is solid. You’re clearly knowledgeable, likely more so than I.
You probably have a reason to believe what you said; it just conflicts with the little I know. That obviously doesn’t mean you’re wrong. I’m wrong all the time.
Well, I mean, Bush II & co. came in with a wish-list of "swamps to drain" and it was just a matter of getting the right Thing To Happen to 'justify' a bunch of Middle East regime changes.
Saddam was an easy and familiar target to most Americans. Some say his nutball sons were close to offing their Da and assuming power but why wait when 9/11's impact could have a shelf-life ?
May also be the USA wanted to off the IRI because the US still owes Iran one (1) F-14 Tomcat to complete the purchase order signed with the former Shah; and the US wanted a sequel to "Top Gun" much sooner (late '80s, 1995 at latest) than one was eventually delivered, but having to control '14s and their repair parts meant Hollywood couldn't be lent the tech.
That last bit is my fan theory.
What would a "win" look like? I suspect we might get our hair mussed.
In forums full of stupid people I often see the claim that we should just embargo China and stop buying their products, that the country would implode overnight. A country would implode, but it wouldn't be China. The US is less than a quarter of China's export market, the rest of the world would be happy to buy what we don't. China on the other hand is our second-largest importer and critical to the functioning of the entire US economy (much of what comes from #1, Mexico, is petroleum and food). Even many of our weapons systems now rely on Chinese components.
Amen. I see this all the time. They even have a "replacement" in mind for a new leader of China after it "implodes" with the ouster of the CCP. LOL! They (MAGA/Bannon affiliates) have it all figured out. Not.
most respected combat force in the world
Uh, huh, after the world just witnessed us getting our asses handed to us by goat herders armed with Kalashnikovs and leaving Afghanistan with our tail between our legs.
Russian soldiers described them as fighters, going in the hills, barefoot, not afraid to die.
Graveyard of Empires.
When the Afghan war began, everyone said it was impossible to beat them. It was actually possible if we treated them like Palestinians, but the US wouldn’t go that far.
If the US had, for example, imported millions of Afghans to the US and exported millions of Americans to Afghanistan while encouraging intermarriage; that would have helped make them loyal. That’s the sort of thing Alexander the Great would have done.
But that would be cruel.
Wars are just population control.
Why do we have wars?
Because we are ruled by an elite group of psychopaths who own the banks that control the governments and media. They fund both sides of war for profit and they manufacture the consent of the people through the propaganda of the media.
We conduct wars against countries who cannot fight back. When we do, surprise, surprise, we lose.
How do people like this exist? I mean so deep in dark holes of meeting rooms meeting people like you,straight out Dr. Strangelove? Still i drove by a house with backing trump and his nightmare all over the yard and windows!
i am no genius
i sure aint no saint
but im not
some raving
lunatic
spewing insanity
like its cool
bittersweet sympathy
not a Symphony
this cant be Real life…
TDS on display. USA is at an end, and not because of Donald T.
True. Trump is just a symptom, not the cause.
The patient is terminal, far beyond simple “symptom”.
What does not, once created decay, inevitably even one so heavenly devined as the us?
"We are the most lethal,"
Yes.
"…most respected combat force…"
Oh goodness no. The Vietcongese, Talibani'i, and other territorial guerilla forces, plus the Houthinese, have been embarrassing the US Military longer'n I've been alive.
Vietnam. 58,000 young men sacrifices for nothing. 2.2 million Vietnamese sacrificed.
Rest assured this won’t be a Vietnam. The Chinese won’t be serving Orange Chicken if this war brakes out.
Assuming it didn’t go nuclear, China would win. But it would end quickly I expect. It would just cause so much damage. Ships are too vulnerable. The US would just sue for peace.
US V. China
Day 1 30,000 Americans killed, 300,000 Chinese killed.
Day 2 100,000 Americans killed, 100,000,000 Chinese killed.
Day 3 500,000 Americans killed, 300,000,000 Chinese killed.
Day 4 America surrenders and sues for peace
Brannigan: "You see, killbots have a preset kill limit. Knowing their weakness, I sent wave after wave of my own men at them until they reached their limit and shut down. Kif, show them the medal I won."
Assuming the US and China went to war- over Taiwan or whatever- it's possible the US could 'win' in the sense of inflicting a military defeat of the PRC… but at what cost? In terms of manpower and material, regardless of the losses to the PRC, our military losses would be devastating- and this is assuming the conflict doesn't go nuclear, with mushroom clouds marking where our largest cities and infrastructure hubs used to be.
This isn't even taking into account the damage to our economy, which would be shaken to its core without China as a supplier. How many US cities, large and small, would absolutely panic when Wal-Marts close their doors for lack of inventory? How many pharmacies would have to close?
How many American youths would be crashing the doors of military recruiting offices wanting to sign up after the reports of thousands of casualties in the first days of such a conflict? Zero? How quickly would public support of such a war drop- regardless how it was sold to them- once the first nuke hits LA or New York?
In the end, the only real winners- as usual- would be the industries supplying our military needs which would be prodigious and expensive. I can imagine the heads of Washington war hawks exploding when footage of sinking US aircraft carriers hits YouTube- and the smiles in shipbuilder's boardrooms when calculating how much they can charge for replacements.
But, hey, we defended Taiwan- and that's what's important, right? RIGHT?
All wars are bankers wars! They finance both sides and charge exorbitant interest rates. No matter who wins, the bankers always win!
As Martyanov says daily, these clowns in the Pentagon have no concept of "Correlation of Forces." The US is no longer capable of winning a war against anyone, let alone Russia or China or Iran or the Axis of Resistance. All the US can do is bomb civilians and civilian infrastructure and assist in genocide.
Bullies are said to have good self esteem.
Does anyone in their right mind, think that if the USA attacked China, that Russia, Iran, NK would do nothing? What about Taiwan, do they want to be decimated?
Will someone please take this idiot for his last ride. We do not need warmongers like him. JFC.
Does this mean U.S. will be rolling out their interment camps against millions of Chinese? If this war spills into mainland China, Master Fong will be knocking on the door to mainland USA.
Fire that POS 2 bit General!
Top US General ‘Fully Confident’ the China Would Beat US in a War Over Taiwan
Hahahahahahaha! Riiiight!
What was he gonna say?! The big dog military general…
Or is he gonna tell the truth and say, “We couldn't beat the goat herders in Afghanistan, so we'll absolutely get our asses royally reamed if we try to take on China."
Puleeese!
The US Officer Corps is a school for yes men. In order to advance your career, to be promoted, you have to get the recommendation of your commanding officer, and you do that by kissing his ass, that is, agreeing with his every notion. By the time you get to the general officer level you've got the most talented yes men in the bunch.
Add that there's never been a war that the ass-kissing generals didn't love … even when they thought it was a hopeless cause. Because there's the good news and the bad news. If you lose, well, that's sort of the bad news. (Hopefully you can string it along until you can pass the stain on to the next general.)
The good news is that win or lose, every war consumes vast quantities of very expensive military gear, which then has to be replaced … joyfully and profitably … by the military industrial complex … which is going to reward the generals involved with the usual sinecure on the Corporate board. Big bucks.
It's never too late…
…. to do the right thing.
https://youtu.be/NCB7oUefPMg?si=ZWZ8t4PcS8JhaG4p
https://youtu.be/GVg8Oz2xqe4?si=Q_KXhUJrKcxowJ50
Another bottom of the bell curve warmonger heard from.
Nobody wins in a nuclear conflict, PERIOD!
Um, if I manage to survive as the last man in a Greenland bunker powered by wind/solar/something and filled with unvaccinated 20-something girls, I’m pretty sure I’ll have won the war.
"It would not be difficult, Mein Führer! Nuclear reactors could – heh, I'm sorry, Mr. President – nuclear reactors could provide power almost indefinitely. Greenhouses could maintain plant life. Animals could raised and *slaughtered*. A quick survey would have to be made of all the available mine sites in the country. But, I would guess, that a dwelling space for several 100,000 of our people could easily be provided."
It anticipates "Project 2025" with the heightening of the cyber- and space-war capability. So it may be they'er thinking the nuke era obsolesced. They can render an enemy blind and sunk in a vortex of chaos.
Out cyber-war capability? How about our cyber-war defense? If China could ever team up with CrowdStrike we'd be done in a minute!
Good Grief!
Pro-Satanist censorship is deleting anti-Satanist comments as usual.
I probably let you take the gay-bashing, etc. farther than I should.
But if you want to push your luck and go for a ban, feel free.
Are you one of those who are delighted with obscene anti-Cristian ceremony in Paris?
Nope — I'm not a big sports fan, apart from supporting one American football team.
This obscene transgender blasphemous clown show has nothing to do with the sport. It is political. The purpose is to insult hundreds of millions of people and escalate the hatred. Obviously it was financed and organized by the same oligarchs who are pushing the world to the war. It is bizarre that "antiwar" is siding with those nasty clowns and their sponsors.
Or maybe not bizarre. Maybe it is your political choice.
How does me not following the Olympics constitute a "political choice?"
That said, I'm unaware that the Olympics are an "obscene transgender blasphemous clown show." In fact, I thought I saw a news story a little while back saying that transgender athletes aren't even allowed to compete.
Don't pretend you don't know what happened there.
I neither knownor care what happened there.
Nor do I care whether whatever it was offended your bizarre pseudo-Christian religious sensibilities.
You are not alone. Half of Americans, or maybe more than half, don't see the difference between good and evil. You only know what is profitable and what is not profitable. Your leaders are the same. They learned very well that the war is profitable, and you are following them pretending you are anti war.
Who gets to define "good" and "evil" ?
I mean, I've read the bible in its long and boring entirety. I really do think "God" is the bad guy in it.
I do see the difference between good and evil.
Which is why I'm actually anti-war instead of a pro-war follower of false prophet / anti-Christ / KGB agent Kirill like you.
Being anti-war doesn't explain why I don't give a tinker's dam about the Olympics, of course. I don't give a tinker's dam about the Olympics because I'm not a big sports fan other than the NFL (mainly for family reasons).
You may watch, for example, video on YouTube by Catholic blogger Queen of Peace M… "Satan's Olympic Ceremony Foretells the Destruction of Paris. Boycott the Olympics and its sponsors." She will explain to you why you are pro-Satanist.
Why would I watch a video I’m not interested in, on a subject I’m not interested in, by someone I’ve never heard of, just to have it “explained” to me that some whackjob “thinks” (term used loosely) I’m pro-Satanist?
Da Bears ?
What specifically was "anti-Christian" about it ?
If you don't understand, watch videos on YouTube about the Olympics opening ceremony. There are a lot of them with explanations. I mean the bloggers, not the mainstream. Mainstream in general is supporting Satanism.
Opening ceremonies suck as much as Olympic sport coverage does. Why would I waste my time ? Just save me the trouble and say the world's most populous religion, Islam, is offended at the swimsuits.
Which, maybe they are, maybe they aren't. I also don't care what THEY think.
What's not to support about Satanism? TST's "Samuel Alito's Mom's Satanic Abortion Clinic" is a brilliant concept.
https://thesatanictemple.com/pages/samuel-alitos-moms-satanic-abortion-clinic
There's a host of great works. Sober Faction; After-School Satan; TST Religious Reproductive Rights. Check it out !
https://thesatanictemple.com/pages/campaigns
"We are the most lethal …" Maybe so. "we are the most respected" also maybe true. But we (the USA) have little to show for it. Even with a budget of hundreds of billions over decades the US has been unable to provide Ukraine with the weapons needed to defend itself. We made open promises and boasted eternal support. But when it came time to deliver, where was the USA? Where was NATO? When those who have been at the short end of intimidation and contemtuous insult for decades find out the USA is a bag of wind, what is likely to be the result? The US won the WWII sweepstakes by being the last man standing; it left the heavy fighting to others. It looks like the US is trying hard for an encore by provoking others to fight and they can come in for the sweepstakes again.
Even if he's right (highly unlikely), I dedicate this song to General Charlie Brown.
"Most lethal and respected military force in the world." Tell us, general, when did the US last win a major conflict?