Monday, September 26, 2016

U.S. Navy's Top Pacific Admiral Wants To Confront China. White House Says No

Adm. Harry Harris. YouTube

Navy Times: 4-star admiral wants to confront China. The White House says not so fast.

The U.S. military's top commander in the Pacific is arguing behind closed doors for a more confrontational approach to counter and reverse China's strategic gains in the South China Sea, appeals that have met resistance from the White House at nearly every turn.

Adm. Harry Harris is proposing a muscular U.S. response to China's island-building that may include launching aircraft and conducting military operations within 12 miles of these man-made islands, as part of an effort to stop what he has called the "Great Wall of Sand" before it extends within 140 miles from the Philippines' capital, sources say.

Harris and his U.S. Pacific Command have been waging a persistent campaign in public and in private over the past several months to raise the profile of China's land grab, accusing China outright in February of militarizing the South China Sea.

Read more ....

WNU Editor: The pundits are now getting involved .... US and China need more soft power, not military hardware, to resolve their differences (Tom Plate, South China morning Post). More here .... How The US Should Respond To China’s ‘Secret’ Weapon (Ryan Pickrell, Daily Caller).

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

Pussy Obama

Anonymous said...

Pussy Obama

B.Poster said...

China is the second most powerful country in the world militarily behind Russia. If the US was going to confront China militarily, the time to have done so would have been in the late 1990s. At that point, the US might have actually had a chance at prevailing in an armed conflict. That window has long since shut and is shut tightly.

Furthermore, if US leaders felt it in US interests to take a confrontational attitude toward China, it would have been a good idea not to have run up so much national debt as to hamstring our ability to make the necessary investments in our military to remain competitive, it might have been a good idea to eliminate corruption within the Pentagon and the defense contractors,, and it definitely would have been a good idea to have allowed ourselves to become so dependent upon "made in China."

In short, it's time to back off. While I'm no fan of team Obama, if he has said "no" here, he is absolutely correct and probably should go a step further and sack this Admiral forthwith.

Mr. Trump recognizes we are going to need to renegotiate the one sided trade deals we are currently under, including the ones with China. Confrontational approaches to China are going to make this very difficult if not impossible. Perhaps team Obama understands this. This may be why he is saying "no" while having the admiral push a confrontational approach. By saying "no" he gets to help his "legacy" as the peace president and by the admiral being confrontational they get to poison the well for the Trump Administration making negotiations much harder.

While the official polls that are seen by the public indicate a tight race, I suspect the internal polls that the candidates have that are telling them the real picture are painting a very, very bleak picture for Mrs. Clinton. I would hope that these people are not so vindictive as to try and undermine the incoming president before he takes office. Unfortunately it would not surprise me if they are.

Actually renegotiating the trade deals is only the start. The next POTUS is going to be dealing with the loss of the US dollar aw world reserve currency in their first term. This cannot be prevented. We are going to want a "soft landing" as opposed to a "hard landing" from this. The assistance of major powers like China and Russia is going to be vital in achieving this. As such, again confrontational approaches to China re not going to be a good idea for us.

RRH said...

"Furthermore, if US leaders felt it in US interests to take a confrontational attitude toward China, it would have been a good idea not to have run up so much national debt as to hamstring our ability to make the necessary investments in our military to remain competitive, it might have been a good idea to eliminate corruption within the Pentagon and the defense contractors,, and it definitely would have been a good idea to have allowed ourselves to become so dependent upon "made in China."


An excellent appraisal B.,

But neither the Demopubs nor the Trump Republicans have what it takes to turn it around. The interventionist Liberals, the Alt Right, neoconservatives and other assorted crazies are in the driver's seat. The whole thing is set to go right off the cliff. The next war just may be a 1861 redux complete with riots, pogroms against "others", assassinations, and marches to the sea.

I wouldn't expect your enemies to sit this one out either.

Jac said...

Avoiding confrontation with China is doing the same thing France and Great Britain did with Hitler in 1938.
Hitler himself recognized later that is was not ready yet in 1938 and would have to back down. We are learning nothing from history. Sad.

B.Poster said...

RRH,

I'm pretty sure the Democrats do not have what it takes to solve these problems. As for Mrs. Clinton, there is nothing in her past record or anything she or her team are doing now to give any indication that they are going to be doing anything different.

As for the alt right and the neoconservatives, they have been pretty much neutralized and the interventionalist liberals have taken a serious hit and have lost much influence. As for Mr. Trump, in many instances, he has correctly diagnosed many of the problems.

As to whether he can solve them, is not known at this time. He will probably get the chance. I estimate the chances at 70% that he can and 30% that he can't. Even if he can, it may be to late. In any event, it is a mistake to put to much faith in a politician or want to be politician.

"The next war may just be a 1861 redux..." I'm not sure to what you are referring. The current situation is unlike the Civil War. While the nation may well break apart, there is no possibility of those from state such as TX, LA, OK, AR, GA and other "southern" states are going to fire on those from places like NY, CA, NJ, ME, PA, etc to keep them in the union and I don't think the reverse is correct either. Furthermore I'm not sure who the "others" you refer to are. There is of late an "open season" in America against whites and Christians who just want to be left alone to live their lives in peace. Perhaps pogroms and marches to the sea are to be carried out against them. There is no one else who it would be directed against. Also, the nation faces a well armed, military trained, well organized, and lethal group coming at it from the south. To meet this are people who barely know the business end of a firearm from the non business end let alone have any such training. Perhaps those Americans are going to be "marched to the sea" by the invaders.

"I wouldn't expect your enemies to sit this one out either." You are correct here. Hopefully we would have allies. If Canada were invaded, the US would assist. Americans look up to and admire Canadians aspiring to be more like them. As such, America would almost certainly come to the aid of Canada in such a situation. Hopefully others would but the bottom line is America is probably completely alone and will have help from no one. Furthermore some enemies of the country have all but called for genocide against 300+ million people. If this is the attitude of the leadership of America's enemies, then there would seem no possibility of negotiation. In this case, the talents of a "deal maker" would be of no benefit. In this case, the only option would be to properly deploy forces and make the inevitable victory by the enemies costly enough that they would not consider the attack in the first place. If this truly is the case, a breakup of the union would definitely be something we would want to avoid as it would only make it easier for the invaders.

fazman said...

China would sit as worlds number 3 militarily and still well behind the number one power which is the u.s followed by the regional power russia.
Now IS the time for the USN to put the geni back in the lamp whilst they still have a large materiel and technical edge, not in 20 years when China has caught uo (which is how long most experts agree it will take)

RRH said...

B.,

Please forgive my hyperbole,

When I mention an 1861 redux, it is to say that it appears the U.S. has not been as divided and ripe for civil conflict as it has been since that time. Further to that, depending on the locale, it may be white christians, black christians, Latino christians, muslims of any colour, or just about being marched to the sea, or doing the marching. In a sense, it may just be everybody versus everybody, while few if any will be left to "live in peace".

What did Pogo say?

"We have met the enemy, and he is us"

B.Poster said...

Jac,

I'm not sure if you read my post or not. In any event, the current situation is unlike WWII. The time to have stood up to China assuming someone wanted confrontation would have been sometime between 1996 to 1998. It's to late for that now. Furthermore, as stated, assuming someone really wanted that option it might have been a good idea to have not become dependent upon "made in China and not run up such massive national debt while allowing our infrastructure to crumble.

The best way to avoid confrontation, at this point, is going to be to deploy our forces properly so that the Chinese would deem military confrontation with us to costly for them to consider it. In other words, the benefits of victory would not outweigh the costs of achieving it. Essentially trying to challenge China in the South China Sea or pretty much anywhere else is going to be a fools errand and we need their help in a number of areas so much so that it makes confrontation with them unwise at best and at worst down right foolish.

We can address the need for "made in China" but it will take time. Doing so would at least give us some leverage.

Fazman,

The top two military powers are Russia and China. The US is, at best, a very different third. The US would be hard pressed to handle Iran right now let alone major powers like Russia and China. This is already the case and not something that is going to be the case some mythical twenty years from now. As for the "experts", they have a maddening tendency to overestimate American capabilities while underestimating those of adversaries and potential adversaries. Also, given their lousy track record, I would be very circumspect before trusting anything they have to say.

Ignoring reality will not change it. Russia and China are the world's most powerful countries. As for the leaders of the various nations of the world especially the US, adjust and act accordingly. This sort of thing is not hard. Humans have been doing it for centuries. Act according to reality and good outcomes for America are still possible.

As I have stated before, the only way to "know" the outcome would be to actually fight the war. Even if you are right "on paper," the US economy is struggling badly. Most people can barely feed their families or provide shelter or clothing for their families, healthcare is horrible, the infrastructure is crumbling, and the country is under virtual invasion from multiple sources. As such, even if it were possible to "put the geni back in the lamp" as you put it, the American people are not going to allow resources to be diverted from their needs to do this. Additionally, the casualties would be massive on the US side in such a conflict. It'd be unethical to ask Americans to die for the likes of Japanese, South Koreans, Filipinos, etc who are NOT going to return the favor should we ever need it especially while America faces a multitude of existential threats from many fronts.

As such, we end in the same place. China dominates/will dominate the South China Sea. Adjust to it. As for America, the main objective needs to be keeping the shipping lanes open so "made in China" can get through. challenging China in this area would seem a dumb idea right now or any time in the foreseeable future.

RRH,

Baring something cataclysmic the likes of which the world has never seen African Americans of any religion and Muslims of any color are never going to marched ANYWHERE. It's long past time for the media to stop fanning the flames on this. Sometimes it appears America is the second decade of the 21st century what the German Jews were to the 1930s. The messaging against them is eerily similar to what it is against the United States today. Let's hope and pray this ends better for America than it did for them.

Fuckisis said...

B.poster every time you post I fee like punching you in the face.

B.Poster said...

Fazman,

You could punch me in the face. Perhaps you'd feel better. If you fail to knock me out, I would probably hit you back. In which case, you might feel quite bad.

Furthermore such an action on your part would be unwarranted. To the best of my knowledge, I've never disrespected you nor have I ever been less than gracious to you.

I've pointed out numerous times the only way to "know" the outcome would be to fight the war. This is an admission, that while unlikely in my considered opinion you could very well be correct.

Very respectfully your feelings of wanting to punch me in the face seem rather unhinged somewhat like the campaign of Mrs. Clinton. In her case, I suspect her internal polls are indicating she's WAY behind in tbe polls and falling at an accelerating rate. In your case, I suspect you know I'm probably right and it bothers you. As such, you feel the need to "shoot the messenger" as we say in America. Operative word is "suspect", as I cannot be in your shoes and do not know what you are thinking.

Please keep in mind in such a conflict America is going to bear the brunt of a Russian/Chinese reprisal. I think you are from Australia. Even if the "genie can be put back in the bottle"(very unlikely) Americans would suffer 10s of millions casualties on the US mainland and that's the best case scenario. Most likely such an action would end in the complete destruction of America.

Australia will, in all likely hood, be untouched. Perhaps if your country, your family, and you were fscing this kind of risk you might be a bit more circumspect about confronting China in this manner.

At the very least, perhaps you would refrain from such wasted thoughts and energy as wanting to punch me in the face. Bottom line: China is the second most powerful country in the world, is closely allied with Russia the world's most powerful country, Australia is closer to China than America is, and you and Australia will need to act accordingly.

Don't like it? Australia has an "outback" or so I'm told. Perhaps you can go tbere and pound sand until you can come to terms with reality, maybe you can seek therapy, at the risk of being ugly I DON'T CARE!!

As an Aussie, this is a great puzzle to you. Unless I missed something which admittedly I could have. The survival of your family, your country, and you are not at stake. Americans have no such luxury as the survival of our country is at stake and we have no time for such puzzles.

I've enjoyed our exchanges and hope they can continue in an environment of respect. Before hitting me in the face for no good reason please understand 1.) Americans are very trusting. I had no idea you harbored such hatred toward me. 2.)While cultural Stockholm Sydrone is prevelant, many of us will defend ourselves and our families and recognize we've been wronged repeatedly. It would be prudent not to risk such confrontations. 3.) You cannot possibly understand the pressure Americans are under. Australians have a higher quality of life, better health care, are wealthier, have a better education system, and are more secure than most Americans could ever dream of.

As such asking them to fight a probably unwinnable fight against the likes of Russia and China to put a Chinese "genie" back in the bottle will seem down right insulting to them when they are going to bear rhe brunt of the enemy's reprisal and those "cheering in tbe stands" face no or very minimal reprisal.

I could go on. As stated, I meant no insult to you and have actually enjoyed our previous dialogues. I hope they can continue, however, the truth cannot be sacrificed.

Bob Huntley said...

Fuckisis no fighting. This is the war update site. Show some respect.

B.Poster said...

I've been very respectful. I don't see well. Somehow I read "Fuckisis" as "fazman." While I know I do not see well and I know this, I try to compensate sometimes there is an epic fail. I apologize to you fazman and hope and pray you will find it in your hrarg to forgive me for anything insulting to you that may have been typed.

As for you, Fuckisis, I have had no correspondence with you and frankly probably would have ignored you but read you as "fazman" who regularly posts here and whom .I have the utmost respect for.

Frankly it surprised me with the stupudity of your comment. Since I know Fazman is NOT stupid I thought I must be missing something. Tnank you for clarifying that I'm not missing anything. I would suggest reading remaining humble, reading the posts of WNU, and tne cooments. You might learn something.

Fazman, again I apologize and hope you will find it in your heart to forgive me. While I do not see well, this can be no excuse for mistaking "Fuckisis" for "fazman."