this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2023
63 points (86.2% liked)
World News
2302 readers
140 users here now
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
All of the mighty US Wanderwuffe were destroyed or didn't cause much in terms of advancing, and as all of you liberals like to say, Russia was using shitty goatherder Soviet weapons. Furthermore if you actually read the article you would see that the US is highly deindustrialised and cannot sustain a prolonged war and that's not going to change because those are the effects of neoliberalism.
Guess what happens after a week? Besides if the US would invade China there would be no reason for Russia, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, and plenty of other countries to provide support, I'd like to see how much your wunderwaffe will do there.
Sorry, forgot I was replying to a totally badass amazing military strategist big brain boi. I’ll take my librul tearz and go home :(
Will you address the claim made in the article which you clearly only read the headline of:
You seem to just assume that the US can somehow magically appear missiles into existance, but I mean think about it, is it the US or China that deindustrialized? Also, why does the US wargame conclude that at least two US aircraft carriers would be downed in the first two weeks?
Where did I say that? There’s a whole lot of conjecture in your statement. Nothing in the article gives the vastly different rules of each of the war game scenarios they ran. Also, congressional war games are often utter and complete bullshit, run by people that have no idea how the American military and its supply chain and contractors operate. All I ever said was that I think this shit would be worse for China than for us.
How does the US losing two aircraft carriers and running out of missiles way before China equate to China being worse off than the US?
You understand that what I said implies that I don’t take at face value the validity of a CONGRESSIONAL war game run, right?
Even if I grant that whatever game or simulation they ran isn't entirely accurate, I'm still not willing to go to war based on the gut feelings of some guy on the internet. Especially since a lot of people, speaking on similar "gut feelings" and a good ol' conservative distrust of the "experts," were confidently telling me just a few months ago that Ukrainian troops would absolutely be in Crimea by now.
I tried to change my display name to "a totally badass amazing military strategist big brain boi" for the meme reply but I guess that was too long...
In seriousness though, do you really think we're responding to you for your "librul tearz"?
That would have been an amazing name. And in serious? The person I responded to used ‘you liberals’ and ‘neoliberalism’ towards me, I was just mocking them.
Are you operating under the assumption that we are using "liberal" like american conservatives? Because that isn't what we mean when we call you a liberal, which you absolutely seem to be.
Huh, I guess that's why liberals try to conflate us with the right wing so much. I have needed to explain to an absurd amount of Americans that my country's Liberal party is the further right wing party, as they tend to be everywhere except the US, where they are the "right but pretends to be left by comparing themselves to the borderline fascist conservative party."
Imagine how many pointless internet arguments would cease to exist if Americans were just fucking educated on the world outside their borders.
Back on my reddit GenZeDong and SLS days, it probably came up like once a day. People assumed that our complaints about liberals meant we were american republicans who hated democrats. Not leftists who hated both facets of their one political party. Liberal was synonymous in their head to the left, which is a bizarre idea to me.
It makes sense on reddit, where the userbase is predominately American, but here I think it is much more global (or at least used to be before the reddit exodus).