Chilling World War III 'wargames' show US forces crushed by Russia and China

Oct 2010
66,948
27,015
Colorado
#31
head line

Chilling World War III 'wargames' show US forces crushed by Russia and China (this indicates world wide)

body of text ..... only "in certain hotspots..."
If it's nitpick time, the headline didn't say: Chilling World War III 'wargames' show all US forces crushed by Russia and China

Did it?

And besides, and I'm a little surprised no one has pointed out this, the article, a Fox article btw, is really a fear-based advertisement for the military-industrial complex, and justification for Trump's $750,000,000,000 defense budget.
 
Nov 2012
40,545
11,692
Lebanon, TN
#32
If it's nitpick time, the headline didn't say: Chilling World War III 'wargames' show all US forces crushed by Russia and China

Did it?

And besides, and I'm a little surprised no one has pointed out this, the article, a Fox article btw, is really a fear-based advertisement for the military-industrial complex, and justification for Trump's $750,000,000,000 defense budget.
sabcat did not say it was untrue he said it was misleading

it just said US forces would be Crushed... it did not LIMIT when where they would be Crushed.

SO THE HEADLINE WAS MISLEADING.. NOT untrue. it lends to give to WRONG IMPRESSION.

mis·lead·ing
[ˌmisˈlēdiNG]

ADJECTIVE
  1. giving the wrong idea or impression



 
Mar 2013
9,575
10,286
Middle Tennessee
#33
I doubt it you see they have the same logistical problems we would have if we invaded China.

Do you honestly believe the military leaders around the world haven't already figured out the "logistics" of pretty much every conceivable conflict scenario ??

All I'm saying is once the shooting starts, no matter where it is, we no longer have the ability to sustain a long term major conflict. We've sold most of our factories to China and much of our technology depends on resources not found in the the US. Eventually we would simply run out of people and arms. After 15 years of conflict in the middle east the chicken harks in congress are telling us the current military isn't "up to standards". That we need hundreds of billions of dollars to fix it. This is minor skirmishes against a mostly rag tag poorly armed and poorly lead opponents. How long do you think we could sustain a major conflict with a country that could put unlimited men and weapons on the field ??
 
Likes: imaginethat
Oct 2010
66,948
27,015
Colorado
#35
sabcat did not say it was untrue he said it was misleading

it just said US forces would be Crushed... it did not LIMIT when where they would be Crushed.

SO THE HEADLINE WAS MISLEADING.. NOT untrue. it lends to give to WRONG IMPRESSION.

mis·lead·ing
[ˌmisˈlēdiNG]

ADJECTIVE
  1. giving the wrong idea or impression


Sabcat? You have quite a time with accuracy, like, you were totally wrong about the Pershing missiles.

I asked noonereal why the headline was misleading, and of course you had to reply, and then falsely accuse me of saying the headline was untrue. You can't quote, of course, because it's just another example of your tenuous connection to reality.
 
Oct 2010
66,948
27,015
Colorado
#36
Do you honestly believe the military leaders around the world haven't already figured out the "logistics" of pretty much every conceivable conflict scenario ??

All I'm saying is once the shooting starts, no matter where it is, we no longer have the ability to sustain a long term major conflict. We've sold most of our factories to China and much of our technology depends on resources not found in the the US. Eventually we would simply run out of people and arms. After 15 years of conflict in the middle east the chicken harks in congress are telling us the current military isn't "up to standards". That we need hundreds of billions of dollars to fix it. This is minor skirmishes against a mostly rag tag poorly armed and poorly lead opponents. How long do you think we could sustain a major conflict with a country that could put unlimited men and weapons on the field ??
It's true. Ironically, we now are similar to WWII Japan.
 
Nov 2012
40,545
11,692
Lebanon, TN
#37
you are correct there was an error type of missile removed.. Pershings were not removed from turkey, Jupiter Missiles were removed in 1963 from turkey in the agreement.

PGM-19 Jupiter - Wikipedia

By the time the Turkish Jupiters had been installed, the missiles were already largely obsolete and increasingly vulnerable to Soviet attacks. All Jupiter MRBMs were removed from service by April 1963, as a backdoor trade with the Soviets in exchange for their earlier removal of MRBMs from Cuba.
I knew the missiles removed were Obsolete systems, RB lead me down the path that it was the Pershings removed.... ...

now all is well in the world.
 
Dec 2018
1,151
667
Unionville Indiana
#38
you are correct there was an error type of missile removed.. Pershings were not removed from turkey, Jupiter Missiles were removed in 1963 from turkey in the agreement.

PGM-19 Jupiter - Wikipedia



I knew the missiles removed were Obsolete systems, RB lead me down the path that it was the Pershings removed.... ...

now all is well in the world.
That was initially YOUR error, like so many others. From now on, I'm fact checking every last thing you post.
 
Last edited:
Jun 2018
5,321
1,241
South Dakota
#39
China has 1.4 BILLION people and nearly unlimited resources And they have massive manufacturing capabilities. Most of it formally US manufacturing. In anything resembling a conventional war, they would do to us what we did to Germany and Japan. They would simply grind us down until we were out of people and equipment to prosecute the war.
China has the same problem the Japanese had in the late 1930s. They have a dynamic production machine but their oil is virtually all imported. Oil is still the blood of industry and the military no matter the dreams and musings of the Socialists in our Congress.
 
Apr 2013
37,135
25,340
La La Land North
#40
China has 1.4 BILLION people and nearly unlimited resources And they have massive manufacturing capabilities. Most of it formally US manufacturing. In anything resembling a conventional war, they would do to us what we did to Germany and Japan. They would simply grind us down until we were out of people and equipment to prosecute the war.
If they had a decisive first strike. If not, in a war of attrition, they would suffer the same fate that defeated Germany during WWII, a lack of energy.
 

Similar Discussions