U.S. Would Lose War vs. China, Celente Says

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • CarmelHP

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 14, 2008
    7,633
    48
    Carmel
    Don't come at me with specific knowledge and factual information. It makes it very difficult to argue with you when you present actual information. The silly emotional arguments are much easier for me to dissect, and thereby make myself look brilliant.

    Neg rep coming your way.
    ;)
     

    SemperFiUSMC

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jun 23, 2009
    3,480
    38
    Unfortunately, we are no longer the nation that won WWII, in terms of our industrial capacity, societal outlook, and national will-to-win. During WWII our whole national effort was bent towards winning; we no longer can muster that near-unanimity, thanks, largely to our "institutions of higher learning".

    But before WWII we were withering sissies who wanted nothing to do with their war. It wasn't until we were attacked that the national outrage was spun up and mobilized. Our manufacturing base was already set up and producing war materials for our eventual allies, so all we had to do was increase production, and voila - we're in the war business.

    The same thing happened after 9/11 as far as our national resolve. I think where the two situations diverged dramatically were fourfold. First, WWII presented a villian of national proportions - Japan (and Germany and Italy) instead of a puny little old man. Second, there was universal and genuine outrage that we were attacked during WWII. In the US there was a contingent on the left that engaged in hand wringing that our actions caused the attacks on us. Third, our rules of engagement for WWII was "Kill Japs, Kill Japs, Kill more Japs!" (Adm Bull Halsey), and we didn't care if we offended the enemy or not. We wanted to kill them all becasue afterall they were the enemy. Our rules of engagement in Afganistan are basically don't fire until fired upon, and then call in the FBI to read Miranda rights before engaging. Oh, and don't offend the sensabilities of our brothers on the other side of the conflict. And finally, we set out to take care of business in WWII, and got it done in less than four years. We have no resolve to do what it takes to win in Afganistan; consequently there's no end in sight.
     
    Rating - 100%
    22   0   0
    Dec 29, 2008
    3,747
    113
    Danville
    I don't think our national resolve was as strong in WWII as everyone believes. They had a real struggle in the last year of the war selling war bonds to pay for it, and America was tiring quickly. If victory wasn't in sight at that point, our resolve would have been sorely tested.

    We only really had 3 years of fighting before this started to become an issue. I think we stomached Iraq and Afghanistan far better than I would have predicted.

    Just my 2c, but much of this comes from talking with family and friends who were here on the home front. (They very much supported the war, but they agree that it was wearing thin. Of course, we had much greater casualties than anything since, so it's understandable.)

    Also, don't tell me America had much in the way of resolve during the Revolutionary War. That's too well documented with the "Sunshine Patriots" and "Summer Soldiers." Thank God for the few that held it together at Valley Forge and other places.
     

    ruger17hmr

    Shooter
    Rating - 97.1%
    33   1   0
    Jun 13, 2008
    648
    16
    Indy
    What will be the outcome of war between US and China if the war was waged today for six months duration based on the military strength alone disregarding the resolves, politics, and logistics? I suppose it will be somewhat like the Faulkland conflict between England and Argentine.

    If it was conventional warfare?

    If it ever expanded to the nuclear warfare?
     

    SemperFiUSMC

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jun 23, 2009
    3,480
    38
    What will be the outcome of war between US and China if the war was waged today for six months duration based on the military strength alone disregarding the resolves, politics, and logistics? I suppose it will be somewhat like the Faulkland conflict between England and Argentine.

    If it was conventional warfare?

    If it ever expanded to the nuclear warfare?

    You can't ignore those three things. The will to fight, will to win and ability to supply your military is a huge part of executing a war.

    It's like asking which is tougher - a lion or a tiger. Answer: Liger.
     

    Duncan

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 27, 2010
    763
    16
    South of Indy
    In a war with China .. and uhh we already are in one .. it just does not involve bullets yet .
    We may not lose .. but that does not mean we would win either .

    Thanks
    Duncan
     
    Top Bottom