Michael C. Davies

Edit: “If the US and SEA…”

My kingdom for an edit button!

Yes. All war games about this scenario are coming to the same conclusions, the the IS and SEA mobilise and get there quickly enough, the allies have a strong chance of winning, but it will be brutal. In most other scenarios, China wins, often by default. And trump will likely sell Taiwan for a Nobel

This is something that needs to end by fiat with consequences for any one who disobeys.

For a Taiwan-China war, there are different variables that’ll define it. If Taiwan fights to the death, it’ll be like Okinawa in WW2; if Taiwan fights until the military is defeated it’ll be like Japan taking the Philippines in WW2; if they surrender after minimal combat at sea, the Russo-Japan war.

Glad I’m not the only one who thought that../

I gift you this meme as well for when you need it in the future.

Don't forget attaching 'strategic' to every concept as well--'strategic bombing', etc.

But yes, we do need an moratorium on the use of 'strategy' generally.

"Successfully protecting our Hemisphere also requires closer collaboration between the [USG] and the American private sector. All our embassies must be aware of major business opportunities in their country, especially major government contracts."
For the corporations, by the corporations....

Well, its official. The 'Race War' side won the debate inside the Administration.

It is a total minefield, but it can be navigated.

Moreover, if you’re in a bad space because bad things keep happening to you, which is why you’re looking for help, especially cheap help, your intellectual space is more constrained.

It’s why early intervention is vital to stop any slide downward

You will find valuable advice for men on the internet, provided your algorithm isn’t cooked.

Also, when you don’t know bad from good, you’ll often just listen to the first thing that gives you some valued answers, and that’ll mess with your views from there.

Sorry, but much like SIGAR's final report released yesterday, this is a little more than problem admiration.

The best he offers is 'slow down rotations and training'.

That ain't even close to the key innumerable causes of the problem he's barely identified yet hinting at.

Alt-Blobish nonsense.

Yes. If the GO corps wants to walk away from this moment as clean as it can, they have to start demanding they be fired publicly, preferably with an Congressional and military investigation that comes with it.

At least we might get another Tom Ricks book out of it.

Time to start watching Seaquest for ideas...

All of which went against stated policy goals.

I totally agree the Pentagon didn't plan for the 'Day After'. That's why it was defeated.

Just because one side sucks at war doesn't mean they aren't coded as the loser.

Nope. Wrong.

Operation Iraqi Freedom officially ended on December 15, 2011. Meaning the invasion cannot be considered separate. Its one big war.

And the US skipped out of town under the cover of darkness leaving behind an Iraq dominated by other states and groups all with their own militias.

"the objectives for the invasion in early 2003 (destruction of Iraq's conventional military forces, toppling of its government) were fulfilled."
A) So what? The invasion was an operation, not the war.
B) That wasn't all the objectives outlined. The most important of which was never fulfilled.

Saying we won the Iraq War is like saying the Nazis won WW2 because they defeated France in 1940.

There are times I genuinely want 'we won the Iraq War' to be considered an act of treason since you're openly advocating for actions that wholly and truly help other and enemy states and groups.

No. No. No.

We did not win the Iraq War in any way shape or form. We destroyed the Iraqi state under Saddam. Good for us. That's all we did. We didn't win squat.

Not just that the US defeated itself. Its own policies and their execution is what helped caused that defeat.

Yup. But like now, the same people who preach peace are always the most violent because its about controlling non-whites

Also, keep in mind that Marc Thiessen got his start as an apologist for the GWOT torture program and he's still running strong, having suffered no consequences but getting richer

Thank you! Yes!

What’s more, it takes away any incentive to join an American fight, even in your own country.

Especially if everyone understands the US is going to inevitably lose it via their own stupidity.

Basically, yes.

Are we taking bets on Sabrina Carpenter doing a cover of 'Winds of Change'?

‘War crimes win wars’ is a hell of a theory, but here we are.

Hot take: If the Cuban soldiers had made an organised defensive stand, the US probably would’ve lost about 1k soldiers.

Are we taking bets on how long before someone publishes her family tree and points out her entire family were immigrants at some point?

I just want to throw in that I’ve never understood why the Brits didn’t declare unrestricted warfare against all Arg naval vessels and just let the subs go hog wild.

Because the Brits never got the Argentinians to formally agree to give up on the Islands.

The UK won the war certainly, and got the Argies to surrender. But it was never politically agreed the Islands were the Brits moving forward.

“Restoring deterrence” I have particular hate for.

On the quote, "victory is a social construct," it is only true at a conceptual level which only has some valence once you know how to talk about the concept in highly tangible terms only.

Simply, its circular reasoning, born of swimming in thought-terminating cliches in order to build a dolchstoss.