Why the US May Go to War in the SCS

[ChennaiDude]

"US can defeat anyone, anywhere" -those were your words, right? and the bold part in quote?

You my dear are surely confuse whether to defeat or bleed your enemies?

Yes I agree what I said was a little overboard!...The days of fighting a war where # of dead or destruction is not the only way to win the war ..there are other ways as well....as long as the major currency in use is dollars...I will put my money on the US to win the war ultimately!

 

[Neemo neemo]

Well tbh bro, vietnam isnt really a good example, since it was more of a fight between the U.S.S.R /China(together with their ally north Vietnam soldiers) and the U.S/with its South Vietnamese allies being fought in Vietnam.
Without the U.S.S.R and China , The U.S/south Vietnamese soldiers would have long run over the north in a matter of weeks.

US landed it's troops, so it became their fight.

 

[mike2000]

Naah,maybe britain if at all its was a supa powa

hmmm....now you are trying to question our past super powerdom? remember we ruled half the world and even PAPA U.S copied/learned alot from us to get where it is today.

So now jokes aside which of the countries where you refering to?

 

[cnleio]

U.S go to War with China for SCS ... u mean U.S.A soldier life is cheaper than ur ppl ?

If WWIII happen in SCS or China, no any neighbor nation can avoid it like past WWII in European nations, Millions of Asian will die in a big world nuclear war.

 

[ChennaiDude]

Dude, Vietnam?

Ok let me rephrase....Imperial Japan and AQ attacked the US DIRECTLY....where are they....In Vietnam the US went in...the Viet Cong did not have a choice. They did not take on the US directly

 

[Neemo neemo]

Yes I agree what I said was a little overboard!...The days of fighting a war where # of dead or destruction is not the only way to win the war ..there are other ways as well....as long as the major currency in use is dollars...I will put my money on the US to win the war ultimately!

As for the superpower $ currency. 10 points to guess who has the largest stock of it in Asia and which country is doing business in currency other than $ in large volumes to degrade $.

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOM. It's China my friend. So long for the monopoly in economical war as well.

 

[gambit]

Well tbh bro, vietnam isnt really a good example, since it was more of a fight between the U.S.S.R /China(together with their ally north Vietnam soldiers) and the U.S/with its South Vietnamese allies being fought in Vietnam,

The Vietnam War is an excellent example of how people confuse political goals with military objectives.

The politicians said: 'We need to defeat X country.'

The military said: 'In order to defeat X, we need to take this and that cities, blockade these ports, etc.'

In the Vietnam War, the US military achieved all of its military objectives. The US Air Force needed to gain absolute air supremacy and done it. The US Navy needed to control the sea off Viet Nam and done it. The US Army needed to control the ground wars and done it. After the disastrous 1968 Tet Offensive, the VC ceased to be an effective combat force. Before 1968, the VC can field battalion level strength, but after 1968, never more than squad and those squads were usually on the run.

The point from the Vietnam War is that despite all the successful military objectives, the politicians can throw those victories away. In a manner of speaking, the American politicians, pressured by internal dissatisfaction, did quite that -- threw those military victories away when they voted no funding for the war so the US had no choice but to leave the country.

 

[mike2000]

U.S go to War with China for SCS ... u mean U.S.A soldier life is cheaper than ur ppl ?

If WWIII happen in SCS or China, no any neighbor nation can avoid it like past WWII in European nations, Millions of Asian will die in a big world nuclear war.

No need to go over those hilariously again bro. I already made it clear it will never happen, and most members here do agree with that. So chill down man.

 

[ChennaiDude]

As for the superpower $ currency. 10 points to guess who has the largest stock of it in Asia and which country is doing business in currency other than $ in large volumes to degrade $.

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOM. It's China my friend. So long for the monopoly in economical war as well.

It will take the US 48 Hours to print the same $ and BOOM send it to china or any other country...like we care...and BOOM we will do it again and Again....so yeah its paper let them keep it!.

As far as doing business in currency other than the dollar...its still in infant stage, lets see how that works out.

 

[gambit]

US did not defeat Vietnam. Period.

If you think US did, please explain me your definition of 'complete success'.

I can tell that you already made up your mind. So debating this point to you would be useless. You are not here to debate in an objective manner but to simply put -- troll.

 

[Neemo neemo]

U.S go to War with China for SCS ... u mean U.S.A soldier life is cheaper than ur ppl ?

If WWIII happen in SCS or China, no any neighbor nation can avoid it like past WWII in European nations, Millions of Asian will die in a big world nuclear war.

No my dear. There won't be any world war now. But there will be wars nonetheless. War is the best way for western arms manufacturer to earn $. You give someone a threat and he will buy weapons for sure. It's all about economy, money, hegemony and ego for some extent. Nobody is starting any war for a piece of land.

It will take the US 48 Hours to print the same $ and BOOM send it to china or any other country...like we care...and BOOM we will do it again and Again....so yeah its paper let them keep it!.

R.I.P. Economics.
You my dear, really have no idea how economy and currency market works.

 

[Nova2]

hmmm....now you are trying to question our past super powerdom? remember we ruled half the world and even PAPA U.S copied/learned alot from us to get where it is today.

Hello it's 2014 remember

So now jokes aside which of the countries where you refering to?

It was not me ,@ashol mourya was the guy ,only he can this question

 

[Neemo neemo]

I can tell that you already made up your mind. So debating this point to you would be useless. You are not here to debate in an objective manner but to simply put -- troll.

I was debating here in an objective manner my friend, until this @ChennaiDude came all chest thumping and boasting about how US is almighty and defeat anyone, anywhere. Would you call that objective debate or trolling?

 

[gambit]

R.I.P. Economics.
You my dear, really have no idea how economy and currency market works.

And YOU do ?

Whenever I see 'my dear' on an anonymous Internet forum, I imagine a teenager trying to be condescending in order to get out of a genuine debate about the subject matter.

 

[mike2000]

The Vietnam War is an excellent example of how people confuse political goals with military objectives.

The politicians said: 'We need to defeat X country.'

The military said: 'In order to defeat X, we need to take this and that cities, blockade these ports, etc.'

In the Vietnam War, the US military achieved all of its military objectives. The US Air Force needed to gain absolute air supremacy and done it. The US Navy needed to control the sea off Viet Nam and done it. The US Army needed to control the ground wars and done it. After the disastrous 1968 Tet Offensive, the VC ceased to be an effective combat force. Before 1968, the VC can field battalion level strength, but after 1968, never more than squad and those squads were usually on the run.

The point from the Vietnam War is that despite all the successful military objectives, the politicians can throw those victories away. In a manner of speaking, the American politicians, pressured by internal dissatisfaction, did quite that -- threw those military victories away when they voted no funding for the war so the US had no choice but to leave the country.

Well though i agree with some of your points, i have to say there was no way the U.S was going to win the war in Vietnam, as far as Vietnam had the support of U.S.S.R and more importantly China. Since the border with China was always open through out the war, through which Chinese and russian personnel and advisers/weapons/ammunitions/supplies/logistics etc flowed day in day out until the end of the war. Its like the situation in Syria where the neighbouring countries Turkey, Saudi arabia, Iraq all have a porous/open border where fighters can seek shelter/refuge/supplies/ammunitions/arms/logistics etc to keep the war going for however long it might take doesnt matter how strong the syrian army might be as long as the rebels get support/open border to move their weapons/supplies/manpower freely then the war will keep going.

Moreover the huge mistake the U.S made was not launching full scale land assault/attack/inavsionin the north for fear of a Chinese reaction(like in Korea), the day they made that decision, the war was already lost. So i agree with the point that it wasnt the U,.S military who lost the war it was because of the politicians and their stupid decisions. Since i doubt launching a vast land assault/invasion of the north closing off the border with China, would have made the Chinese to get involve directly like in Korea, it wouldnt have happened, since the conditions here was different. U.S officials/planners indeed miscalculated.