Classic military blunders...

I used to be in the carbon offset business, and while I'm sure they're potentially making money in that market, I doubt it's the single thing responsible for their success...the system just isn't that big.

 

Tesla Earned $428 Million With Carbon Credits In Q2 2020: Why That's Bad

 

I think the best "MAD" we have with China isn't the nukes, but the fianacial nukes. If we block all imports from China and nationalize their US asseets, that would be ruinous to their economy. Conversely, China holds more US currency than anyone in the world, if they suddenly dumped that on the market, it would radically de-value the dollar and wreck our economy. I think both sides fear the financial nuke more than the actual one...Or at least I hope they do.

But like I said before, wars are rarely started by people who are rationally thinking everything through.

 

Hmmm...finance can be existential...and can rely on human behaviour to decide a financial outcome. Economies contract if people stop spending, they can stop spending on assumption and perception, that perception can change or be manipulated. Certainly financial wars can hurt (just look at Australia with Trump's economic war with China) We are still being financially punished now from China, its been going on for over a year...The US has stepped up to the plate and told China in no uncertain terms that they will not take any steps to better their relationship until they back off Australia...That's a genuine ally right there (one Chinese journalist wrote "Has the US gone from America first to Australia first?)
Your point is spot on, but I suppose what i'm saying is i'd rather financial nukes to the real ones. Whatever happens Australia will always have food on its plate.

 

China has been putting up its dollars (T-bonds) as collateral for loans and buying tangibles. They're paying nothing for something! Hey, no fair! Only we can do that!

So while China technically holds dollars, it's not as much as the books seem.

 

There's always the old standby, "planning for the last war instead of the next one."

 

yes, I thought I read one time a ''rule'' is to prepare for what the enemy is capable of doing, not what you think they will do....

 

disregard

 

Funny but almost always the seeds of the next war are planted in the peace demands of the previous wars.

 

....I was listening to WW2 Podcast with an author of the Battle of France...I think his book was called Case Red....he stated the Maginot line accomplished its mission..... yet, they really skimped on the ML.....in men and materials.....the bigger problem was tactics/strategy/etc with the rest of the military

 

That's an interesting trope, but it defies logic.

You prepare for what your intelligence and analysts determine is the threat. You can ONLY prepare for what you have determined is the threat. You very specifically CAN'T prepare for what you don't know. So it's an interesting trope, but it doesn't make any sense.

 

The idea is valid, but the saying just doesn't make sense.

The Maginot line was just a bad idea any way you slice it...but the people who knew that just didn't have enough data to support their position, and the decision was made. But it was a VERY flawed decision based on the last war.

 

....I disagree---Pearl Harbor is a perfect example--you prepare for what the enemy is capable of doing.....at PH, intel and analyst did not directly determine that the IJN carriers were going to attack PH ...so, going by your logic, PH should not have prepared for a carrier strike---yet, the IJN carriers did attack
...that's why for land, sea, and air,[ all three ] you send out patrols and recon--to gather intel on what you don't know..especially after Taranto
....at Midway, to my knowledge, the Japanese did not think the US carriers would be there so quickly--yet, they were

 

Its funny...I posted this not even a whole month ago.

And two big thing are in the news this week. Russia massing forces on the border of Ukraine, and China stepping up the rhetoric against Taiwan.

The US has sent a Ticonderoga class cruiser and a Burke class destroyer to the Black Sea where they are EXTREMELY vulnerable to Russian attack...almost like they're bait. I wouldn't want to be on either of those ships...they won't be getting ANY sleep until they leave the Black Sea.

Just a couple days ago, an entire attack flight of warplanes from China invaded Taiwan airspace. The US has an awkward diplomatic relationship with Taiwan, and I really worry about that relationship.

 

No, that's not my point, and that's not my logic.

My point is, the saying defies logic. How do you prepare for something you have no knowledge of?

And you’re right, you have to have contingencies for the capabilities of your enemies, not what YOU would do, or what YOU think they will do…on that we heartily agree.

My point is, you can only prepare for what you know…If you don’t know, then you can’t prepare for it.

 

Maybe not as crucial as the ones mentioned but for an allied country: "Don't join in until the US does."