Current war threat level?
Posted by No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit | PrepperIntel | View on Reddit | 340 comments
What is the real current threat of open war involving US? You can argue we already are - providing weapons, limited strikes in Middle East, material support to Ukraine and Israel - but I mean a large scale mobilization of US troops. After that, what is the current threat to the actual US?
There are 2 big fires right now, Middle East (Iran) and Eastern Europe (Ukraine). Along with that, there is smoke from East China Sea (China) and Korean Peninsula (N. Korea).
Two of those countries are quite open about their malevolence towards the US, and the other two are clearly aligned as unfriendly adversaries (gentle way of saying enemy I suppose) geopolitically and economically.
Any one of these situations on its own is concerning but not emergent. Our military has long planned for war on multiple fronts against near peer adversaries, but not 4 (arguably 3, or even 2 based on proximity and dependent on how other nations along and then stand after it goes south) at once. And they’ve all flared at one time or another pretty consistently for decades, but again not all on the brink at the same time. It’s really starting to feel coordinated and building to something.
How worried are we, really? Let’s try to leave team T and K arguments out of it as much as possible, really just asking about the situation - not what lead to it or what anyone’s favorite is going to do to save the world.
falsecrimson@reddit
I would say the internal security situation after the election is far more concerning than what is happening in Ukraine or in the Western Pacific.
Fabulous_Force9868@reddit
Or maybe Americans can try logic and separate identity and politics but that's wishful thinking for them.
American_Brewed@reddit
Misinformation will make people do and think extreme things. Just assume the common man is uneducated and motivated for self preservation at all means necessary
Fabulous_Force9868@reddit
Self preservation is a very strong motivator for what can outwardly be seen as crazy good point
peace_peace_peace@reddit
Huh
Many-Ganache79@reddit
especially with this in mind:
The U.S. military has granted itself permission to unleash “lethal force” on the civilian population in cases of “national security” emergency.
https://www.esd.whs.mil/portals/54/documents/dd/issuances/dodd/524001p.pdf
In the 2016 version, the directive primarily focused on intelligence collection and ensuring civil liberties protections for U.S. persons. It emphasized strict oversight and the need for authorization before collecting U.S. person information.
However, the 2024 version expands the military's role, particularly in assisting civil law enforcement, and authorizes lethal force under specific conditions:
(c) Assistance in responding with assets with potential for lethality, or any situation in which it is reasonably foreseeable that providing the requested assistance may involve the use of force that is likely to result in lethal force, including death or serious bodily injury. It also includes all support to civilian law enforcement officials in situations where a confrontation between civilian law enforcement and civilian individuals or groups is reasonably anticipated.”
The_Dude-1@reddit
That is scary as hell as the definition of when to call in the military is flexible. It’s not supposed to be that way.
Brokentoaster40@reddit
If you read the authority on which it resides, it’s effectively a non-starter. No SECDEF would ever authorize that shit.
Raleighgm@reddit
Secretary of Defense Michael Flynn probably disagrees with you.
Brokentoaster40@reddit
At what time was Michael Flynn the SECDEF?
BayouGal@reddit
He will be in the next Trump administration. Pootin’ says it shall be so.
Brokentoaster40@reddit
No you’re wrong. It will be Barney. Because Xi says it shall be so.
I can play the rhetorical what ifs if you want but I don’t see the point.
Raleighgm@reddit
The point being that you have no idea who might be appointed under a Trump presidency. And to say that there is no SECDEF that would ever approve that is also something we can’t know. But there’s not much doubt that Trump won’t make the same mistake as last term and will make sure there’s no one to tell him “no” this time around. No Pence, Barr, Esper, Miley, etc.. Hardcore MAGA only this time.
Brokentoaster40@reddit
It’s going to have to be one hell of an insane person to pick tyranny and trump over the country. The SECDEF also has to be confirmed by the senate…so yeah it sounds more far fetched than possible tbh
Raleighgm@reddit
Have you seen what Flynn is up to? He is insane enough to choose trump over country. I’m not sure why you have so much faith that the guardrails held last time so they will again. They tested the weak points last time and will probably do much better this time. The SC ruling on his presidential immunity on official acts and he’s gonna be unleashed. Believe Trump when he talks about retribution against his enemies both political and eventually the “enemies within”. It’s just crazy that we are gonna let these fascist back into government.
Brokentoaster40@reddit
Just because you don’t understand how the government works doesn’t mean you get to make up an entire scenario where you skip over actual formal processes Congress is involved with.
The nomination of the SECDEF requires senate approval.
I think my only actual question I have for you is, what do you think should be done to resolve your concern? Talking about it won’t do shit, so what do you suggest needs to happen?
Raleighgm@reddit
Sure I’m the one that doesn’t understand how the secdef position can sit unfilled without Senate confirmation for an extended period of time with an acting SECDEF installed by Trump. Like he did for many positions including SECDEF during his first term. I’m good on the American civics lesson comrade but thanks.
Brokentoaster40@reddit
So if we have an acting SECDEF appointed by Trump without the nomination confirmed by the senate and the acting SECDEF is issuing authority to kill Americans on behalf of the president, that Congress would just be complete incapable of acting?
I see you’re taking 50 leaps forward in logic here, but I just don’t see this based on any grounded basis of reality.
The way Congress already appropriates funding at the rate it does (last minute) there would be no release of funds to make your myopic act of tyranny last any longer than 3 months…without intervention.
IF you can find a person evil enough to assassinate political opponents with the understanding and ideology to act such an absurd and asinine idea.
Also…who carries these orders out dude? Other American. You think there isn’t someone along the line that would just say no?
Please stop with the doomerism. You just look really uneducated, and are participating in a conspiracy theory.
Raleighgm@reddit
You’ve already shown that you don’t have a ton of knowledge about the previous Trump term, and how many positions sat unconfirmed with someone acting as the head. I might sound uneducated to you, but at least on this topic I seem to have a firm or grasp. Again, you’re probably not the one to give me an American civics lesson.
Brokentoaster40@reddit
Yeah this is where I’m going to respectfully inform you that you’re an idiot. I had worked for the DoD for over 17 years and know how all this works well beyond your cursory google searches.
Like I said, you’re playing a fantasy in your mind. You should probably wake up hoss.
ExoticCard@reddit
Election is coming up.... are they expecting something?
Awkward_Ostrich_4275@reddit
I mean it’s reasonable to expect an insurrection redux from the right. It happened last time.
The_Dude-1@reddit
I mean 3 people died, 2 killed by cops, one of which was a cop and 1 cop died from a heart attack. Yea there was trespassing and damage done but nothing like the riots in MN and MD
StrCmdMan@reddit
Now replay that without the cop leading away the group that almost breached the inner chambers. Or if the secret service did not hold back Trump from leading the insurection imboldening their resolve. Hundreds could have died that day including key elected officials in charge of the transfer of power. With a hostile possibly long term occupation.
To add another another level of complexity the president now has complete immunity in his duties. No one really knows what that means entirely yet. If things crescendo it could lead to serious civil unrest or forced military involvement.
The_Dude-1@reddit
If I had lived closer I would have been in the audience. Not stupid enough to enter but maybe very our flag
Impressive-Citron277@reddit
i really don’t think you could consider jan 6 an insurrection if it was it may be the most peaceful one of all time
Popular_Chocolate159@reddit
Dude. Enough with the “January 6 wasn’t that bad” crap. The last time we had an insurrection, it sparked a whole civil war killed over 400,000 Americans. It doesn’t matter how little people died or got hurt, what matters is the very fact that they tried to overthrow the fucking government when they lost an election fair and square. There was no concrete evidence of fraud in 2020. Trump appointed judges even said so.
And people’s lives were ruined by Jan 6. Thousands of Americans who would otherwise be free and maybe not have a record of federal charges no longer have those opportunities because they decided to listen to a wannabe fascist, incontinent baby, and downright sociopathic and completely self interested megalomaniac. It is absolutely a huge issue no matter how many or how little Americans died or how much damage was done.
sg92i@reddit
DAE remember when the right was saying Jan6 was that bad, and that it was committed by antifa? Pepperidge Farm Remembers!
elite0x33@reddit
The mere principle of the matter should be the concern dude. Thank goodness it wasn't "worse". If those people decided to show up and exercise their 2nd amendment rights this time, it would've been an absolute nightmare.
Ok-Apricot-452@reddit
They are getting things ready for the mark of the beast.
Honest-Lunch870@reddit
Very interesting:
So they have carved themselves out 72h to engage in wide-ranging intelligence assistance (within the bounds of US law, protecting the constitutional rights of US citizens etc etc) without the permission of the rest of the executive branch. Lack of oversight for operations of this nature is terribad idea.
Wulfkat@reddit
Posse Comitatus limits the powers of the federal government in the use of federal military personnel to enforce domestic policies within the United States. To suspend PC, you need to cite both an ongoing active threat of violence and enact the insurrection act while declaring martial law. The DoD does not supersede federal law.
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
Haven’t read it yet, but it is a frightening thought. I think it’s more posturing though than anything… a sort of FAFO message from the gov’t. Also, it would require invocation of posse comitatus or the insurrection act to be legal anyway, wouldn’t it?
Brokentoaster40@reddit
Can you actually correctly cite whom that authority resides with? Because you’re glossing over all other Executive Orders and DoD policies there…it’s actually literally just a cherry picked quote from the whole memo.
TheBklynGuy@reddit
This is worrying me too. Election day and post election day chaos. The palpable anger and anxiety is obvious. One person getting stupid at a voting site is enough to trigger others.
I've said this to some other people and got the cliché "nah it will be fine."
It may not be.
analog_panopticon@reddit
The coming election ratfuckery will leave us vulnerable in ways that keep me up at night. I'm not nearly as worried about the pussy-ass gravy seals as I am a cyber attack on critical infrastructure between 11/5 and 1/20. Both sides blaming each other for an outside attack intended to "steal" an election is nightmare fuel for a country as polarized as ours.
TheOneTruBob@reddit
I need a gravy seals morale patch.
irrespoDecisions@reddit
Next to meal team six
TheOneTruBob@reddit
You are correct sir!
IWantAStorm@reddit
There is some batshit stuff going on this election cycle. They aren't even TRYING to hide how bad this is going to be.
I honestly feel like they want us to go feral. Just look at how it's being set up. States have changed and changed back laws. Some states ID some don't. Mail arriving saying to reply to it to get a mail in ballot addressed from a different state. Mail ins. Polling stations destroyed due to weather.
Our choices are abysmal. I've lost all faith in the democrats. Also, guess we just appoint candidates now because she wasn't placed by a primary. She checks every single box for the social issue platform they always run.
Trump. Don't want him either considering the loonies and yes men whispering in his ear.
Both sides are becoming more militant.
I am becoming Homer Simpson sinking into the bushes behind me.
-Coleus-@reddit
I am surprised at the down votes. I agree with you, IWantAStorm
IWantAStorm@reddit
I don't even specifically know what I said wrong.
HapaSure@reddit
This is spot on. Not sure why you got downloaded
Redditisforloonies@reddit
Because it goes against the hive mind
Wonderful-Impact5121@reddit
Probably because it’s an unfounded claim that has repeatedly been shown to be so and the utter lack of willingness or ability of people making these claims to provide a shred of hard evidence is borderline pathetic at this point.
some evidence wouldn’t even be surprising as normally there’s bad actors in some minority on most sides of an issue.
But Jesus Christ, constantly asserting these beliefs with nothing to point to as far as legitimate verified evidence is pathetic.
HapaSure@reddit
Yep
IWantAStorm@reddit
Well I mean it's quite clear when you look at the forest and forego the trees.
As a nation, most vote heart not mind. We aren't just voting for womens healthcare or schools turning into a church.
The president doesn't make all decisions nor any decision without advisors.
All I want is someone who can not get us nuked for a cocktail party joke gone wrong.
strings___@reddit
You still won't admit Trump lost the last election. And then people like you tried to stop the constitutional transfer of power. And now you're whining about this election already.
Let me spell it out for you. If it's only rigged when you lose and not win you win. Then you are the problem.
IWantAStorm@reddit
I voted for Biden.
But if you think any deeper discussion of an election or process means I am some bootlicker, you're wrong..
What you're doing right here is akin to the militant right. I'm not telling anyone who to vote for. I'm not inciting violence.
Just because I am trying to look at this all with some critical thinking does not mean I would participate in an insurrection.
So how many people have you convince to change their vote or even get them to vote by immediately insulting them?
No_Run5338@reddit
You genuinely believe people voted for Biden?
working-mama-@reddit
Absolutely. And I am a swing voter with perpencity to vote third party. We need to get out of this 2 party polarized mess.
mightyowlXD@reddit
my entire family of 6 voted for Biden in a swing state and we are all voting for Kamala first day of early voting 🇺🇸
helloitsme1011@reddit
Yes, Trump was not even popular in 2016. Hilary won the popular vote big time. It is no surprise that even more people came out in support of Biden in 2020.
Most people do not want Trump back in office, but his base (small amount of people) has recently gotten a lot more politically active so the polls are looking like it will be a close race. But the polls only reflect opinion of a sample of people who are more interested in politics than the average person.
Most people don’t give a shit about participating in those polls, they only care about voting in the actual election. So despite the current polls saying “it will be a close election” Harris will win big time, especially if there is turnout like 2020
OpinionDirect7632@reddit
Yep. The threat is internal.
Then_Bar8757@reddit
Additionally, the imported battalions of single, military-aged men may mobilize too. Ammo up, Americans, be keenly aware.
RyseAndRevolt@reddit
Why is this being downvoted? It’s absolutely true.
Then_Bar8757@reddit
Prolly commie bots.
taterthotsalad@reddit
Insider threats are always overlooked. Not where I work. They are my mission.
Source:security engineer.
YodaCodar@reddit
These rapscallions!
Own a musket for home defense, since that's what the founding fathers intended. Four ruffians break into my house. "What the devil?" As I grab my powdered wig and Kentucky rifle. Blow a golf ball sized hole through the first man, he's dead on the spot. Draw my pistol on the second man, miss him entirely because it's smoothbore and nails the neighbors dog. I have to resort to the cannon mounted at the top of the stairs loaded with grape shot, "Tally ho lads" the grape shot shreds two men in the blast, the sound and extra shrapnel set off car alarms. Fix bayonet and charge the last terrified rapscallion. He Bleeds out waiting on the police to arrive since triangular bayonet wounds are impossible to stitch up. Just as the founding fathers intended.
GiraffeRedZamboniCan@reddit
Trump has to win or it's all rigged. I am Canadian and daddy Trump should win or the whole hemisphere is fucked.
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
I thought this for a while, and political discourse is certainly heated right now, but at a daily living “on the streets” level right now I just don’t see it happening. Disturbances, even major events? Sure. But as you’re alluding to, civil war? Nah, I don’t think we are there yet. In general, on average, people aren’t suffering enough yet, either rich and their interests or the poor day to day.
iridescent-shimmer@reddit
Yeah I just watched that movie Civil War and people had told me it was amazing, super accurate, etc. I didn't get that at all. So many Americans still have a lot to lose tbh. But, I'm extremely liberal and felt nauseous today hearing that Kamala Harris has raised $1 billion for her campaign in the last 3 months. Election reform is needed ASAP. That level of donations from billionaires simply cannot go on and democracy be maintained. I'm leaning toward a slow decline and erosion over time before any kind of acute civil war.
syynapt1k@reddit
Billionaires are funding BOTH candidates. Harris also has a record number of grassroots donors - over half of which are first-time donors. That is a stark difference.
AcanthisittaEarly983@reddit
Billionaires with small hats and dual citizenship.*
px7j9jlLJ1@reddit
That want a trump victory btw
iridescent-shimmer@reddit
Oh 1000%. I'm not saying her campaign is the problem by any stretch. The billionaires funding trumps campaign are so problematic. But, a billion dollars for just one side of a campaign?! That's a record amount that should concern everyone. No limits on political donations due to Citizens United will take a massive coordinated effort for people to claw back that power.
XXFFTT@reddit
If things got bad then it would be rednecks with a few FFL holders against the US military.
Only the dumbest of the dumb would go out to fight.
00 buck won't do shit against a tank and the kill dozer guy is dead.
WSBpeon69420@reddit
Tell that to the viet cong and Taliban/insurgents. All who beat us with tech decades behind the US military
ApizzaApizza@reddit
The k/d ratio in Afghanistan is like 40:1. They didn’t “beat” the us. They just couldn’t rebuild the country.
WSBpeon69420@reddit
K/d doesn’t matter. Who owns the country now? The same people we spent 20 years fighting and we aren’t there anymore. Looks like they beat us
elite0x33@reddit
Goalposts, the "loss" was never having a political end game/strategy. It changed 4 or 5 times. You can't send a military that is trained in winning the nation's wars to build a nation. That's not how it works.
Militarily? We occupied and operated in a foreign country un-impeded for two decades with the lowest number of losses compared to any other conflict against an enemy that doesn't wear a uniform.
You can downplay all you want, if it was imperial, we'd have a 51st state in the Middle East a long time ago.
WSBpeon69420@reddit
You’re not making any counterpoints youre just explaining why we lost. No clear or concise objectives, trying to be national builders. In reality the only objective we achieved was getting OBL. Did we stop a terrorism threat? No. Did we remove the taliban from power? No. Did we make Afghanistan a democracy to help serve our cause? No. As soon as we left it was right back to 2001 again as if we weren’t even there. And it was not in impeded or we wouldn’t had had to spend 20 years there. It was a drawn out quagmire. The fact is we didn’t do anything we intended to and left it exactly how we got there except now OBL’s son is in charge of the terror camps and terrorists are now all under one roof
Impossible__Joke@reddit
They had intelligent leaders... MAGA extremists do not.
XXFFTT@reddit
They also had lots of jungle and weren't in the US (y'know... where our military and other government agencies are based out of)
improbablydrunknlw@reddit
Okay, how about the Chechens in 1996?
WSBpeon69420@reddit
Regardless of location a smaller guerrilla force with even primitive tactics can always put up a fight against a superior conventional force
thedelphiking@reddit
LOL
Very-Confused-Walrus@reddit
Insurgencies (for the lack of a better term) and Guerilla warfare are hard for conventional forces to fight without a lot of civilian casualties. Not to mention the sheer amplitude of bodies that the population has to throw themselves at the military. Also, who the fuck do you think supplies us with our stuff? We still rely on non dod for a lot of things. Our equipment needs to be maintained and if we lose access because of a revolt, its game over
Sunaverda@reddit
Guerrilla tactics might not be as effective against a home army. I think. I’m not an expert. Plus the level of tech and surveillance the military has.
Rasalom@reddit
I would think guerrilla tactics would be more effective against a home army. Jebediah down the street knows where the tank driver's parents live, etc.
ExoticCard@reddit
Can you elaborate on that last part? Shipping people across the country for the military?
Rasalom@reddit
If a civil war breaks out, you want the guys in your base to be relying on the military structure for purpose, food, etc. If they are in their hometown, they could just desert and go to their homes/friends.
ExoticCard@reddit
Wow. Interesting stuff, thank you.
Rasalom@reddit
Boot camp is purpose-built to break down your previous social ties and remold you into a killing machine. Logistics is part of that.
Sunaverda@reddit
Ok I could see that. I think there would be immediate segregation of the different sides into guarded cities/areas. But of course rural areas and farmers would be hard to move around…
TiredMan123@reddit
Why wouldn’t it be effective against a home army? The level of tech and ISR hasn’t helped us in any none conventional right we have been in since korea
Hesitation-Marx@reddit
I would suspect that if it came to full military deployment against the civilian population they’d send forces from another area so they had less compunction about obeying orders to fire.
Dunno if tech would make that moot, but it’s something to consider.
Advanced-Depth1816@reddit
I think it would have to be the military coming and taking peoples land. I don’t see people going out for a fight. And With the tech they have they’d know every building and basically every little thing you have done to your property and probably more. You would be toast unless a community of people really teamed up big and held down some spots. And you would still get outnumbered or outgunned. But I still don’t think most areas have close communities like that. Doesn’t seem like it anyway.
hockeymaskbob@reddit
Please spend five minutes to look at what small insurgent style teams are doing in Ukraine with civilian grade drones and 3d printed munitions.
Malcolm_Morin@reddit
Timothy McVeigh bombed OKC and killed 168 people.
Stephen Paddock killed 60 people in 10 minutes in Las Vegas.
They can do a lot of damage and killing long before the military shows up. Hell, long before the COPS show up.
Dultsboi@reddit
White supremacist groups send recruits to serve in the military to train. You’d be surprised at how good far right groups have become at training and preparing for an insurgency. There are entire sections of the PNW that are already basically militant strongholds
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
It isn’t one sided. Rednecks haven’t rioted or set any cities on fire yet…. But I agree, only zealots would flare up at present.
XXFFTT@reddit
They did try to take over our nation's capitol, too bad the capitol police didn't fire
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
Yeah you lost me there. Yes it was a horrible thing… but too bad they didn’t fire? That’s like saying “too bad it was the Stazi or Gestapo on duty that day”. Or like “some redneck” saying too bad the cops didn’t open fire in St. Louis or Minneapolis. If you want better on either side, be better. On either side.
XXFFTT@reddit
I don't see how a violent mob that is invading our nation's capitol with the goal of overturning election results not getting fired upon is a good thing
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
Well, and that’s a problem in my opinion. One could just as easily say that a mob setting a city on fire should’ve been fired upon as well.
XXFFTT@reddit
They do get fired on.
CS gas, non/less-lethal, water cannons, etc.
We've even used bombs in the past.
tjlll33@reddit
They did fire, and it was brought under control without any more firing… you’re just an evil person lol. Wait until you’re on the receiving end
ExtraBenefit6842@reddit
Also, they didn't actually try to take over the capital if you want to be real about it. You dint have a coup in the US without guns
PennyForPig@reddit
Every one that was at the riot is a traitor.
Reward_Antique@reddit
I think you're forgetting a very special riot.
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
Riots are riots. Some are more violent than others. I don’t think either side has much wiggle room to throw stones here.
spartyftw@reddit
Was Jan 6 a riot?
Reward_Antique@reddit
It was both a riot and an attempted coup
The_Dude-1@reddit
Eh good ol’ boys with hunting rifles are essentially low buck snipers, and they can be everywhere. Can they take on a tank? No, but they can make life hell anywhere they are, if they are in anything less than an armored vehicle. Ukraine has shown what university students can do with drones, and what farmers can do with tractors.
Quick_Step_1755@reddit
I would say civil war (including undeclared forms of it) is the most likely to affect daily living for a US civilian. For the multiple issues around the world, the US is sticking to shipping arms and giving intelligence. No nation state is likely to directly attack the USA for those actions alone. A new administration is unlikely to increase beyond that but might disengage. If you work for a military contractor, you might have a lot of overtime. If you are in active military poop can hit the fan anytime, but you kinda signed up for it. For a prepper things other than war are more likely to occur in MHO. Of all war possibilities, I think civil is most likely by a long shot.
Sammoo@reddit
Can you explain ?
emseefely@reddit
Another Jan 6th if Trump loses
CartridgeCrusader23@reddit
Or mass rioting across the country is Trump wins
JayV30@reddit
If Trump wins fairly, I think we might see a little bit of protest, but not much initially.
If he cheats and/or uses shenanigans to win... Massive riots. And rightfully so.
Mysterious_Donut_702@reddit
The optimistic voice in my head is telling me that we're talking about Jan 6th or 2020-style protests again.
I think unrest is likely, but it probably won't be horrible or widespread
!RemindMe 10/17/25
YodaCodar@reddit
RemindMe! 1/21/25
anarchanoidist@reddit
You're going to be a few months late getting the information if you keep that reminder the way it is.
MrD3a7h@reddit
He has a packed schedule
RemindMeBot@reddit
I will be messaging you in 1 year on 2025-10-17 00:00:00 UTC to remind you of this link
CLICK THIS LINK to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) ^(delete this message to hide from others.)
ritmoon@reddit
This. There is no foreseeable outcome of Nov 5th that doesn’t involve a shitstorm in the days and weeks after.
SpecialistOk3384@reddit
I don't know how I completely forgot about this. Yeah. This is the most likely immediate source of problems domestically.
GrandKnew@reddit
I think the idea of war with China and Iran is laughable. Iran has had nuclear power for... 5 years? China can't even feed its populace.
theRealLevelZero@reddit
I wouldn't say we have planned all that well for a war on multiple fronts to be honest with you. With GWOT came a huge paradigm shift on where defense spending went. Our big near-peer warfighting capabilities took a back seat somewhat, and our focus was on intelligence and counter-insurgency operations. Door kickers were getting all the money they needed, while things like the F-22 program and other big projects like it got the axe.
Now all of a sudden more countries are developing nuclear programs, our established nuclear adversaries are ramping up their technology AND production, and we are watching our own attempts at modernization (sentinel) get fumble fucked all over the place.
All three legs or our triad are weak as fuck right now. The Ohio's are getting long in the tooth and the Navy's procurement of new vessels is bone chilling bad across the entire fleet.
Military recruitment is dogshit, including aviators...who unfortunately are dealing with training pipelines that are not as thorough as they used to be. Not to mention the US has so many aircraft they are trying to sunset (A-10, Bones, Eagles etc) but can't because the F-35 hasn't turned out to be quite the jack of all trades they hoped it would and is nowhere near the budget and timeline originally promised.
So while Tier 1 and other SOF units are probably at the height of their game right now, unfortunately our next conflict isn't likely to be a counter-terrorism/insurgency type of conflict.
If I were to guess, the reason the US is supporting these countries by proxy is so they can play catch up on Intel & data collection both on weapon systems and near peer capabilities. People don't realize the millions of valuable data points being collected every time a Ukrainian F-16 or Abrams engages Russian hardware. Or missile intercept technology in Israel. That's not even taking in to account the upside of having non-americans force attrition in the ranks of America's potential adversaries.
So who knows man...I'd like to believe that the US is ready to fight and dominate if we find ourselves at war soon but part of me is a little wary of believing that. I think the US is going to avoid direct conflict as long as possible, considering how long it takes the bureaucracy to take any concept from R&D to being a deployable asset.
It just all feels a little fucked.
Our_World_is_on_Fire@reddit
we are reliving Vietnam. We learned NOTHING the first time.
Dave_A480@reddit
Essentially none.
Russia has the military capabilities of 1991 vintage Iraq, Iran has its hands full trying to avoid a full scale war with Israel....
Although it rises the more people push decoupling from China.
You don't go to war with your biggest trading partner....
Druid_High_Priest@reddit
Basically you are looking at civil war in the US. Matters not who wins as neither side will accept the outcome.
Druid_High_Priest@reddit
That is if we dont catch an EMP from somebody first.
Cytopleb@reddit
Here is a good discussion on that https://www.youtube.com/live/cNnuYTwV2pk?si=qYWMDVSn4OHnVP5B&t=3319
AcanthisittaEarly983@reddit
The jews want war, they will pull the US into war with Iran. Trump has already been setting it up with the whole "Iran tried to assassinate me" and his never ending jew glazing
FATGAMY@reddit
USA is the main evil here, but its a hard pill to swallow. But they will turn up lil jon to rap about spreading democracy with holy eagle and everybody fall into lies again, where USA is the galaxy savior.
Obvious_Key7937@reddit
Ukraine is by far more concerning. Russia and N Korean actions iare only increasing.
Vegetaman916@reddit
So far, most of what I predicted almost three years ago has played out, especially regarding the middle east...
https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/s/cCTFq79KfP
No reason to think it won't continue. Not really much of a prediction on my part, since Putin and Xi publicly laid out the plan in 2022, but still...
At the moment, major players are waiting to see how the election shakes out, as that will be two polar opposites when it comes to US reactions...
SoFierceSofia@reddit
I remember saying 5 years ago about how N. Korea was most definitely a low(high?)key the East's Area 51 and getting soooo many weird side eyes. When Ukraine got hit, I said it wouldn't be long till NK was involved. Now look. It's insane how predictable it is even with very little context.
That being said, we got a few years I think. But this is a very important time because we are seeing how certain allies and enemies are utilizing what they've created since WW2.
Vegetaman916@reddit
I know, it drives me nuts when people can't see it. Like back before Russia actually dropped the hammer on Ukraine, every other person was saying it wouldn't happen, it was just "saber-rattling..."
And there I am, like brah, those are field hospitals being built in satalite images! You don't build those for a show of force...
coastguy111@reddit
The US stole Russias money via illegal sanctions and then turned around to fund Ukraine with Russias money.
Vegetaman916@reddit
That is probably not wrong.
coastguy111@reddit
All wars are bankers wars!
VirginiaRamOwner@reddit
Holy hell, I hope you work somewhere where they value you and pay you adequately for your intelligence and insight, not to mention creativity (the Monopoly analogy was brilliant). That was spot on. I hope you’re wrong about Taiwan though, for all our sakes.
Vegetaman916@reddit
I hope I am wrong too.
And I gave up the employment trap back in 2019, so now I work for myself, lol. Doing much better that way, and failing to realize "working" was a bad idea until my 40s is probably my greatest failure, lol.
I do have the advantage of an Admiral for a father, and I literally had dinner with Richard Seif the same week I wrote that piece. Both were also "unnamed advisors" for my book as well. The European stuff I am intimately familiar with, but when it came to China and Taiwan, I can only take the credit for about half of my prediction. The rest is straight from COMSUBPAC, and that is someone who has "South China Sea" for breakfast, lunch, and dinner every day...
This is a very dry-ass read, but if you want to look at some specifics around the PRC's current activity and intentions, this was a 2023 government briefing on the subject:
https://media.defense.gov/2023/Oct/19/2003323409/-1/-1/1/2023-MILITARY-AND-SECURITY-DEVELOPMENTS-INVOLVING-THE-PEOPLES-REPUBLIC-OF-CHINA.PDF
Just so you know, that link is a PDF download, not a page, so...
At any rate, it is all crap I summarized before, just a verification.
One thing for sure, regardless of my predictions proving true or not, the world is about to become unstable in a lot of ways. And I wonder if all this uncertainty is how people felt before ww1 and ww2...
InStride@reddit
I got like…forty paragraphs in and still wasn’t anywhere close to the bottom and hadn’t seen a definitive “prediction” outside of saying China’s economy is great (it isn’t) so I gave up.
Got a tldr?
Vegetaman916@reddit
That is the tldr. The book is quite a bit longer and more detailed, published around the same time.
And I can tell from your conversation below that you didn't understand much of it and are blinded by your own biases, so I will just thanknyou for reading and wish you a happy day.
VirginiaRamOwner@reddit
You’re kidding, right? Dude predicted the Hamas attack into Israel. He also predicted the flood of migrants into both the US and Europe.
InStride@reddit
So the guy predicted two things that had been happened for years already?
Wow!
VirginiaRamOwner@reddit
Those are just a couple of the concrete examples, there are tons more, sorry you were too lazy to do a bit of reading.
InStride@reddit
Like I said, I got like 40 paragraphs in and my eyes had glazed over as OP rewrote the same thing in different ways without making any definitive prediction. Seriously, how many different ways can someone say, “Ukraine is just the beginning and China is going to use this as an opening to reorder the world!”
And if your best examples are two generic predictions about things that were already ongoing…that’s not boding well as a convincing argument.
Go find me one definitive and specific prediction, not a generic one that happens every other Tuesday, that came true.
VirginiaRamOwner@reddit
I’m not going to waste any more time after this post other than to say he predicted the Hamas attack way before it happened… not something that was ongoing. More impressive than his predictions though were just all of the analysis and insight… the fact that Ukraine is just an opening move in a much larger chess game. I also really liked his Monopoly analogy. Anyway, I found it fascinating, and you didn’t, nothing wrong with that.
InStride@reddit
So he specifically predicted the attack on 10/7?
Or did he predict a generic attack by a terrorist group known for routinely attacking Israel?
The former would be impressive. The latter would be as boring as predicting LA to have bad traffic sometime next week.
indranet_dnb@reddit
Damn, you nailed it. I guess we'll see about the election and whether China is going to put up.
Vegetaman916@reddit
We certainly will.
OutlawCaliber@reddit
At the moment, our biggest odds are Iran. Russia is one of those situations where it's a moot point, but at some point, that straw could be added that sets everything off. There's no real telling there. China says they will take Taiwan by 2027 if memory serves me right. The chips that Taiwan produces are considered a national security product. That means we'll go to war over them. North Korea is being skippy right now, but it doesn't feel like a full-blown situation yet. Personally, it looks like they're working together, straining the US military/arms/ammunition. They communicate, have meetings, etc. Can we really stop them if they all move at the same time? As far as the home front is concerned, they're already here. That's not even getting into the issues we already have here, and the upcoming election. That's also ignoring crop problems, which we won't feel immediately, but poorer countries will, as well as energy problems, fuel problems, economic problems, etc.
All that said, if you spend your time worrying about it, you will fry yourself out. Do what you can to prepare for the possibilities, but don't focus on it. Live your life, work, have fun, play, etc. The world is pretty fubar right now, but don't let yourself join in the fubar conference.
devadander23@reddit
There are no military threats to the US. America falls from within, and has been ignoring an information war that’s been waged for the past decade. One party is compromised to its core and will destroy America far worse than any military projection from overseas
coastguy111@reddit
You don't see how China had killed half a million US citizens indirectly through their Fentynl poison?
devadander23@reddit
This is not a military threat to the nation, which was the question
coastguy111@reddit
China virus, that's another one. You don't know how China works
theheierpower@reddit
https://open.substack.com/pub/bariweiss/p/usa-germany-world-war-three-weapons?r=v9q8b&utm_medium=ios
As we have seen in Ukraine armor isn’t as effective as it was when drones can take out tanks. Our superior technology might not be as much of an edge as was once thought.
YozaSkywalker@reddit
The way Russia and Ukraine use tanks isn't how we would. In fact, we wouldn't put our tanks in a situation where they could be picked off by the hundreds at all.
theheierpower@reddit
Regardless the point is that a $3000 drone can disable and destroy and a multimillion dollar piece of machinery that takes months to produce. This isn’t a discussion of battlefield tactics. No one actually reads, just comments, not sure why I bothered.
devadander23@reddit
And how many of those drones can make it across an ocean to terrorize a continent?
theheierpower@reddit
They come in shipping containers to the US every day. It would be pretty easy to send here and be operated by someone already here.
devadander23@reddit
Then what? Harass a power plant? Try to target a dam? These aren’t existential threats to the country
theheierpower@reddit
Not by itself but in tandem with something else? Things just aren’t as cut and dry as people that five years ago.
Multinightsniper@reddit
It’s more like outside influence to try and get some politician in that puts “America” first, and have them become and isolationist country like they did before WWII
Human9651@reddit
Not being snippy but “a bit” isolationist wouldn’t hurt.
As in Western Hemisphere.
No, todays communist powerhouse was rice paddy’s and bayonets several decades ago but our very own greed put us where we are at today.
Unless there is some rare earth resource not found in our third of the world, we should have focused development and security closer to home.
SumthingBrewing@reddit
The U.S. can’t afford to be isolationist, even a little bit. We are the world’s superpower and benefit greatly from that status. We have huge influence over other countries because we uphold the peace and world order that we’ve all benefited from post WWII.
If the U.S. steps back/ becomes isolationist, there will be a power void. Someone will fill that void, guaranteed. Probably China.
Human9651@reddit
Not arguing the betterment for world commerce.
Just the ability to sustain ourselves if bad times come instead of being cut off at the knees overnight.
Raddish3030@reddit
LOL, as opposed to having our politicans recruit overseas with our porous open border.
The gaslight by democrats about the border is hilarious if it wasn't for the fact they would deny deny deny while everything burns around us.
Human9651@reddit
If every communist oversees factory that “feeds” America was established south of our border, not so sure there would be an immigration problem near this level.
They could be making a survivable dollar an hour and be going home to their families every night.
angrystan@reddit
Reality is already ahead of you
devlafford@reddit
Yeah I'm sure the Mexican and Haitian migrants work for Iran and Russia and China. It just makes sense. They are spies here to destroy America. I am not schizophrenic.
improbablydrunknlw@reddit
I have no dog in this fight as I'm not American but there is definitely terrorists and people coming across the border, or trying to
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/fbi-director-warns-dangerous-individuals-coming-southern-border/story?id=108024830
https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/18/us/lebanon-migrant-terror-claims/index.html
https://www.nbcnews.com/investigations/man-terror-watchlist-remains-us-released-border-patrol-rcna147192
https://nypost.com/2023/09/15/160-people-on-terror-watch-list-stopped-at-us-border-in-2023/
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/736-known-or-suspected-terrorists-apprehended-at-us-border-in-fiscal-2023/ar-AA1iHibd
It's not all south Americans looking for a better job
Multinightsniper@reddit
Your point would have even an inch of standing, if it wasn't for the BI PARTISAN (AKA WRITTEN BY BOTH SIDES DEMS AND REPUBLICANS) Border bill that got shot down, from some weird person who isn't in office right now.
Super_Bag_4863@reddit
America by default cannot function as an isolationist country, most western countries can’t. I would love to see it happen but it’s pretty much a pipe dream.
Flat_Boysenberry1669@reddit
We talking about the party that openly spread CCP propaganda during the trade war during COVID and who fully supported a rouge general conspiring with the CCP against the commander and chief right?
Top-Inspector-8964@reddit
Easy fellah, I've called an orderly. Just relax.
Flat_Boysenberry1669@reddit
I'm just pointing out only one party in mass conspired with a foreign hostile nation against America's best interests and even national security.
hispaniccrefugee@reddit
Don’t bother these people with what has been publicly known for years.
Blissful ignorance in Reddit-Narnia is the happy place.
Flat_Boysenberry1669@reddit
I just think it's so sad what their echo chambers have done to them they need to be called out.
Top-Inspector-8964@reddit
Okay grandpa, back to Fox News.
Flat_Boysenberry1669@reddit
You know fox has been anti trump for almost 4 years now right lol?
Top-Inspector-8964@reddit
The only thing I know about Fox is how gullible it's viewership tends to be.
Flat_Boysenberry1669@reddit
I mean CNN had you spreading CCP propaganda for almost a decade and supporting a rogue general taking over the nuclear arsenal while colluding with China and most likely Russia lol.
Probably the biggest breach to American security and world security there ever was.
wyocrz@reddit
Outside of the nukes that are aimed at us right now.
Oh yeah: Ukraine has a predilection for attacking Russian long range radar assets.
Not saying anyone will "press the button" but mistakes happen in war, and we're one mistake away from an unlivable hellscape.
devadander23@reddit
Our pointed right back have given the world almost 80 years of peace.
wyocrz@reddit
Sure. Ask the Iraqis, Afghans, Ukrainians, Egyptians, Koreans, Vietnamese.......and on and on.
devadander23@reddit
And through all that the threat of nukes has kept them from being deployed on any battlefield.
wyocrz@reddit
I named societies which have been shattered by war.
Who do you mean by "them?"
devadander23@reddit
What. I meant ‘nukes’ by ‘them’.
As in there have been zero nukes deployed. They are not a realistic threat because anyone who uses them (nukes) will be obliterated
wyocrz@reddit
You said:
Our pointed right back have given the world almost 80 years of peace.
I say: Iraq. Afghanistan. Gaza. Somalia. Ukraine.
On the bright side, Russia is winning so they won't resort to nukes in Ukraine. It's widely reported that the Biden administration put the chances of Russian nuke use at 50/50 back when Ukraine stood a chance of pushing them back.
By the way, the only way the Iranian nuclear program could be stopped by force is with nukes.
We're not out of the woods yet.
Nuclear weapons were literally the worst idea in human history.
devadander23@reddit
I feel like you’ve lost the point of the post and discussion; the question was about current threats to America, and we’re discussing nukes. We are not discussing proxy wars
wyocrz@reddit
Nukes are a current threat to America.
There are ICBMs on display next to the interstate not 2 miles from where I sit.
The last couple years have been more dangerous than the Cold War, short of the Cuban Missile Crises itself.
devadander23@reddit
They aren’t. That’s my point. We can disagree about that, but that’s the crux of my argument. Nothing has changed (pending November’s election)
wyocrz@reddit
I bring data.
Ukraine, with US help, has literally destroyed Russian strategic radars.
Ukraine, with US help (or not), has literally invaded Russia and pressed towards a nuclear power plant (along with alleged nuclear weapons stockpiles) in Kursk.
We can disagree about it, sure, but.....I never get any real disagreement, I get insults.
You really don't think this moment is more dangerous?
devadander23@reddit
You think Russia is going to send their arsenal over anytime soon because of their difficulties in Ukraine? Thats not the sort of decision that’s a half-measure. So are they willing to suffer annihilation over a radar or two in Ukraine?
wyocrz@reddit
I don't think it would be on purpose.
By the way, if you don't want to feed into Russian efforts to undermine our democracy, fucking stop calling people who worry about what we're doing "Russian trolls" (not that you have, but those thoughts are doubtless part of your universe).
Quick_Step_1755@reddit
Those with nukes. All of your examples didn't have them. That was their mistake.
wyocrz@reddit
So not having nuclear weapons is a mistake?
Goddamn, the world is getting more and more dangerous as nuclear fears subside.
Madness.
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
I’d agree no individual threat, but 4? China has a lot of manpower, nukes, and a budding if immature Navy. North Korea has nukes and a lot of (old) firepower. Iran has baliistic missiles, extremely difficult geography (and let’s be real, very very close to nukes and working on it). Russia is… well Russia.
We certainly have a technological advantage, but numbers matter, and Europe is simply far too compromised already in terms of prep, material, manpower, and will.
-UnrealizedLoss@reddit
To my knowledge, the US military has been tasked with maintaining military readiness to compete against 2 world powers simultaneously for decades now.
Nuclear warfare is fairly unrealistic. There is constant surveillance on launch sites and the second they begin to arm sites that aren’t currently armed and begin the launch protocol for armed nukes, every nearby country will be sending non-nuclear warheads to the launch sites. If they manage to get a couple missiles off, or have bombers in the air we can’t intercept, damage will occur. However, it won’t be catastrophic. Radiation is actually far less an issue with modern nuclear weapons. The spreading of radiation, in terms of nuclear bombs, is a result of an inefficiency. It isn’t the goal. As for submarines, they are just too unknown for any outside comments about them to be useful. I know at least 2 nuclear subs trail all of our carriers and many other navy vessels, but that’s about it in terms of location and nuclear readiness.
North Korea is a weird threat. We really have no idea about their willingness to fight and military experience in modern warfare.
I’d say it’s highly likely China moves on Taiwan before 2030, and a Ukraine-esque war will follow, but open warfare between the world powers seems unrealistic to me. Too much economic and trade risk. I think the new norm will be using proxies, unverifiable attacks, and information control. It’s much more profitable and less risky to cripple a nation by paying 20,000 low wage workers to spread misinformation, steal intellectual property, etc vs spend just as much to research and manufacture weapons to destroy targets that you otherwise could take advantage of.
Other than that, Russia has proven to be relatively the same as always, a meat grinder with a few advanced weapons.
China hasn’t really fought in decades, and if history has taught us anything having experience is vital in war.
Iran has less of an interest in harming the US.
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
Interesting comments, thank you. Couple thoughts.
Radiation (experience in this area) - radiation and contamination spread isn’t an inefficiency - fission/fusion products (and activation) are simply the result of any nuclear reaction. And yields have increased exponentially since the last time one was used (ignoring tests conducted in places intentionally selected to limit spread effects).
Yes, doctrine has been to plan and prepare for two fronts for a while now. But, I’d argue this would be two fronts but rather two dynamic theatres, and with that many players involved it’s difficult to predict. Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face, etc.
No one except Russia (and for them, it’s only recently really) has any experience in large scale modern warfare except us. BUT, even ours is getting dated as drone tech, AI, cyber warfare, etc are advancing at a very rapid pace. Drones and their effects are a lesson we are learning in real time. Every war in history is an example of planning based on experience, and every time that tactics change rapidly as every adapts to the new reality. I think k we are in good shape, but it’s important not to get cocky based on experience.
-UnrealizedLoss@reddit
Ty for the reply. I was fairly confident about the radiation, perhaps I misunderstood and/or misrepresented what I heard. Excuse any inaccurate vocabulary please, but is it possible that nuclear weapons in the past didn’t completely… combust the radioactive material and that material was then dispersed in the atmosphere at the altitude of detonation?
I agree. I am fairly confident in the US, but I also love the history of war and there are many times throughout it where an “obvious” flaw in someone’s military is exploited, then becomes the new norm. The world has had a lot of time, resources and exposure to counter plan. While I don’t want to die or want my country to be destabilized, I would be a little disappointed if we just kept mollywhopping everyone with air superiority.
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
Thank you! Kinda. It’s more than just the original material in the warhead. That material undergoes its own nuclear reaction, big boom, but it breaks apart (or fuses) into new material as it does so… much of that new material is just as radiologically harmful (or even more so, depending on activity and half-life) as the original warhead (just not a bomb anymore as it’s spread out and not conducive to achieving a critical mass for weapons). Much of the development of these weapons has been about improving efficiency as you describe, yes, but the resulting products of the underlying nuclear processes are unavoidable statistical realities.
No_Extent207@reddit
It’s the corporate greed that may destroy the US.
CraftsyDad@reddit
You forget to add “also” to that sentence
Human9651@reddit
And they have completely compromised “both” of our shitty choices.
eveebobevee@reddit
100%. Corporatocracy in the illusion of choice.
HybridVigor@reddit
And the global ecosystem.
devlafford@reddit
It is not one party, it's both. They're codependent.
Raddish3030@reddit
Correct.
Snowden was the first major battle that was a common person was able to percieve on the info war.
If you ever need to see how murky and disgusting the war front truly is. Look at Snowden and Julian Assange.
BringbackDreamBars@reddit
So will preface this with that I'm just an enthusiast, nothing more.
Ukraine-
I personally see this as a fundamentally almost frozen conflict. There´s a big outlier in the Kursk invasion, but if you look at the day to day fighting in the east, there is very much slow,slow gains, measured in streets and kilometers in some places.
In terms of major escalation here, there are two main options I see for escalation:
There's a significant internal event in Russia, such a much bigger scale Wagner rebellion, or sustained open resistance.
Don't look at this as pro Russian thinking, but I can Ukraine taking some very big actions if it feels abandoned by NATO. A Ukraine that isn't beholden to any alliance or Nation is going to start hitting Russia hard, regardless of the meaning for the rest of us.
China
-Not as familar here, but I can't see China taking Taiwan without at least five years of serious build up and disengagement from the west.
stonecat6@reddit
On Taiwan, you're right. I'd say more like 7-10 years. The issue is that we're a good five years into that, on both Western disengagement and Chinese build up. And right now we've uncovered Taiwan to move an extra carrier to the ME.
I don't really see the Ukraine war spreading unless thee west forces it to. Russia has wanted ports for centuries, this isn't some endless Soviet style expansion. And Ukraine was part of Russia within living memory. And mostly treated horribly; some of my best friends growing up were Ukrainian refugees. They are somewhere between plutocrat and nazi politically, but we're allied with the Saudis and they're worse. Still, not really comfortable bedfellows.
Even in a complete Ukrainian collapse, which would be humanitarian nightmare, Russia isn't likely to be invading anyone else for a long time. I guess they could militarize their society level up their army, and hit someone else, but the only options are China and Poland (Nato). The Poles could likely take them unsupported, and China would eat their lunch. Worst case selfishly is probably a long war, building the bitterness on both sides, followed by a Russian collapse and Ukrainian atrocities (real or imagined, but every war has them, and they get worse the longer the fight lasts). That could prompt nukes.
BringbackDreamBars@reddit
Agree on both points thank you,
Will read further on China as definitely further a lot than we expected.
stonecat6@reddit
Issue with China is they've backed themselves into a corner with rhetoric, they don't really have a face saving way to back down, and "face" matters to them in a way westerners don't really get. They have major economic troubles brewing internally, and the government has to blame someone external since they have no mechanism for peaceful transfer of power.
As a result of the one child policy and aborting way more girls than boys, they now have a huge population of angry young men, who can't get jobs or find wives. Which again, matters even more culturally there than it would in the west. And they've about finished ethnic cleansing their Muslims and digesting Hong Kong.
And the world did nothing when they seized Hong Kong in violation of law and treaty, which both Taiwan and China noticed.
If they take and garrison Taiwan, we'll never get it back. We'd have to gain complete naval supremacy first, which is really hard so close to their cost, and land based missiles and aircraft. Ours are slightly better, theirs are much closer and they have unbelievable production capability.
If Taiwan could hold out until we got massive relief there, that'd be different, but realistically that only happens if either we preposition troops or if China is too reluctant to damage Taiwan's economy. If they just want the land and the win to gain domestic credit, they can go scorched easy, launch tens of thousands of missiles, level the place, and waltz in. Which both our and the Taiwanese military admit- China is just too big and too close.
If they really think they need to take it intact, rather than conquer a wasteland, and if there's at least one carrier close enough to support and far enough to survive, Taiwan might hold out long enough for the marines on Okinawa to get there. And maybe then we can get more troops in from the states by air, add a few more carriers, and block their seaborne reinforcements. At which point it's a hugely expensive stalemate.
So China really hopes to pull off another Hong Kong, taking it intact by convincing Taiwan they can't win and shouldn't fight. Or that America won't help (or by actually ensuring that we won't, which is why they've invested so heavily in US politics).
But if they get desperate on the internal front, and they seem to be getting there, they might either accept a scorched earth approach, or roll the dice on breaking through before we got there.
Potential-Brain7735@reddit
Agree with most of your point, just want to add something about the carriers and the Navy.
It’s correct that the USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72) and the USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71) were sent from the Indo-Pacific to the Middle East, the USS George Washington left from San Diego a couple weeks ago to head to her new home port at Yokosuka Naval Base in Japan.
The Washington is carrying Carrier Air Wing 5, which just completed comprehensive wing wide tactical training at NAS Fallon.
The Roosevelt is back in San Diego, where she will undergo post-deployment repairs and maintenance. The USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70) is also in San Diego.
The USS Nimitz (CVN-68) has recently been in the Eastern Pacific conducting work ups before she deploys in the next month or two.
The USS Boxer (LHD-4) and the Boxer ARG have been operating in the 7th Fleet AOE around Japan, and the USS America (LHA-6) and the America ARG are forward deployed to Japan.
There’s also quite a few Air Force assets in Japan and South Korea. I can’t remember the total, but between the US, Japan, and S Korea, there’s a solid number of F-35As in the region (not counting B’s from the Marines and C’s from the Navy). Plus Australia as well.
So yes, there was a short period where the US carrier presence in the Western Pacific was lacking, but it’s not like there was absolutely nothing in the region, and the Washington is heading their now. Invading Taiwan is not something China can do on a whim, we would be able to see the build-up coming, and the Navy would definitely surge extra assets to the region in response.
stonecat6@reddit
Agreed, and thanks for the detailed info. I'm primarily concerned with the massed missile and drone attack scenario. China has the ability to launch literally tens of millions with a little prep. Ukraine is currently building about four million military drones per year; imagine what China could turn out, and hide fairly easily.
The default plan people imagine is a massed amphibious assault. That's possible, and hard to defend on the scale they could execute, but as you say, it takes a lot of pretty visible prep.
Imagine instead a drone swarm. Taiwan has roughly 170k active duty military, and 10x that in reserves according to Google. One hundred drones per active duty member is only 17 million, or just over 4x Ukrainian annual production. And China's factories are... somewhat more extensive than war-torn Ukraine.
Imagine wave one of, say, 1,000 small drones per Taiwanese solder, each carrying maybe 24oz of C4. That's the content of a standard claymore, for perspective. Launched from a dozen or so of the thousands of ships that leave China and pass Taiwan all the time, with simple GPS coordinates targeting every military facility or residence with, essentially, hundreds of claymores. Mid-size civilian drones can easily carry a couple of pounds and fly to a GPS location at 70+ mph. Military could do way more, but it's not needed. Even if launched from international waters, 12 miles out, they could reach targets in less than ten minutes. If they start three miles out, Taiwan has a quarter of that.
They wouldn't get everyone, but they could likely delete a huge portion of the defenders in the first few minutes. And land a few million drones to swarm any defensive strong points. Simultaneously launch a couple thousand missiles at hard targets. Unmask a couple thousand tourists and sleepers, plus a few civilian airlines filled with spec ops that are landing right as the drones launch, and seize key targets like airports as the drones come in. At the same time, launch heavy airlift capacity to bring troops into the fully functional international airport. While jets and drones finish suppressing any air defense ready stations that were hardened, manned, and survived the drones and missiles. And as this week proved, they cups have hundreds of attack planes a few minutes out without drawing fire.
Within ten to fifteen minutes they could be unloading the first wave of thousands of troops, having eliminated most of Taiwans active military. And they have more strategic airlift than anyone but the US, and it's a very short hop. Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport alone is sized for 90 million passengers per year, or about 250k daily. A military blitz could land several times faster; theoretically landing 60k troops per hour from pure civilian craft, which could be staged from anywhere in China, and which we'd have trouble distinguishing and engaging with the countless actual civilian craft in the area. Before Taiwanese reservists can respond, their command and control are gone and a thousand troops a minute are spreading out from the airport, with heavy air cover, ordering all civilians to accept the completion of the one China policy, and taking up defensive positions against any US counter invasion.
All this is purely theory, and plenty could go wrong with such a plan, but it's possible, and wouldn't trip the same wires that massing on the beaches would. And even if they were only, say 30% effective on the drones and only got a couple hours of landings in before we cleared the skies, you'd still have a gutted defense and tens of thousands of Chinese troops in the city, and then they could launch the seaborne invasion.
We might still win, but it would be really, really messy. And if China thinks they have a strong chance, they might go for it. We might consider it crazy, they might disagree. If they delivered a war declaration a minute before, like the Japanese tried to do on 12/7, they could even argue it was legal and they only hit military targets. And they'd have Taiwan.
This is a thought experiment, and I don't think it's likely, but you plan for what's possible.
Potential-Brain7735@reddit
It’s a possibility that needs to be considered for sure, but it does rely on nearly impeccable timing execution….something we don’t actually know if the PLA are capable of. Plan for the worst, hope for the best.
Something else to consider about the carriers as well.
While it’s true that having the TR and Lincoln in the Middle East left a carrier gap in the eastern pacific for a short period, for most of that period, the USAF had F-22s and B-2s in Australia for training exercises. There’s always multiple pieces to move around.
Additionally, having the Lincoln in the Middle East may be by design, because it offers opportunities that the Pacific theatre currently doesn’t.
Consider the following.
When the USS Eisenhower returned from her Middle East deployment, various members of the command staff described the deployment as, “the most intense carrier deployment since WW2, in terms of Ops tempo.” It’s also the first time since WW2 that the US Navy has really placed carriers within firing range of the enemy.
What makes the Lincoln special is that she is carrying F-35Cs from VMFA-314 “Black Knights”. This deployment is only the fourth time F-35Cs have deployed, and is the first time they have been anywhere near anything resembling a kinetic environment. Neither the TR or the Ike carried F-35Cs, and neither does the Harry S Truman (CVN-75) and CVW-1, which recently deployed from Norfolk.
The point is, the Navy may want the Lincoln in the Middle East to get additional testing and training with their F-35Cs. As tense as the Middle East situation is, in certain respects, it can be viewed as an enhanced training ground with live fire ammunition. Tooling around the Pacific making port calls doesn’t quite offer the same opportunities.
stonecat6@reddit
Another good point.
And I personally doubt the PRC could pull off good enough timing on that scale. Their military is huge, but hasn't had large scale engagements in several generations. But a plan like that that leverages their production strength, and gives at least a chance for an overwhelming win without damaging production facilities would be attractive, especially since they have essentially political desk jocky senior leadership and fundamental belief in Chinese superiority.
If they are convinced, and try, whether with this plan or any other, even a failure would cause extreme and lasting damage in both human and long term economic terms.
KoalaMeth@reddit
This is not true, they've got probably the same percentage of Nazis in their country that the US has. They've been highly westernized, (Google "The Orange Revolution") and the majority of Ukrainians support democracy. Functionally, though, it's a lot more complex than that, as the remnants of Soviet oligarchy and political structure and corruption still exist, while at odds with a younger, more democracy-positive population.
Oh ok, so you're just gonna ignore all the Balkans and the Baltic states who NATO likely wouldn't support in order to prevent war with Russia?
biggestlarfles@reddit
Zelenskiy said he was thinking of making nukes if not extended a timely invite to the alliance🤷
BringbackDreamBars@reddit
I dont think he could have them even if he was serious, not without a 50 year timescale.
improbablydrunknlw@reddit
I was reading a report earlier that estimated Ukraine could make nukes within two years. With the biggest hurdle being able to make fissable material without Russia bombing the reactors.
biggestlarfles@reddit
You might not be aware that Ukraine not only built a majority of soviet nuclear weaponry but also has 15 nuclear reactors.
BringbackDreamBars@reddit
Thank you for the correction honestly.
I need to read up on this more as I was aware of the reactors but assumed it was going to be a dirty bomb sort of route.
flaginorout@reddit
I think Russia has what it really wants in Ukraine. They have Crimea and have gained the ground and fresh water supply they need to sustain it.
I don’t see Russia making any serious push for the rest of it unless the West basically lets them have at it.
Sort of the same with Taiwan. China doesn’t make a move unless the West indicates that they won’t make much fuss over it. And we shouldn’t forget that Taiwan is aligned with the West because it’s currently in their best interest to be. A day might come (soon) that things change and an alignment with PRC becomes in their best interest.
BringbackDreamBars@reddit
Agree with you on both points
. Its clear with the reaction to Kursk that Russia knows that they win in the attrition front. Ultimately, Russia will probably shore up their gains. The west wont come back for 5-10 years though.
AquaStarRedHeart@reddit
Anyone who thinks that first world countries in the throes of a birth crisis are going to send their precious few children off to die like in the 70s is not looking at the larger picture
Sultanambam@reddit
There is always the Ukraine model, their 40's and 50's are prime targets.
UnderwaterParadise@reddit
Not sure US decisionmakers are capable of such rational long term thought.
AquaStarRedHeart@reddit
There's no stomach for it here, whatever saber rattling (remember that old trope) may go on in the press.
Nasil1496@reddit
If war breaks out it’s the USA’s fault. The whole point of the BRICS alliance is to give an alternative to western hegemony they’re not trying to rule the world they’re doing quite the opposite. They want the world to be free and open and each country allowed to develop as it sees fit not under what the US wants. US is the sole provocateur here and so far they’re continuing down this path.
We’d need a Bernie sanders type to get in there and unilaterally end the wars and withdraw the troops ending hegemony but CIA would probably try to assassinate them in the process. It may well come down to the people carrying out a coup/revolution but not the maga freaks. The socialists who want actual peace freedom and equality would have to be the ones to carry it out. Ultimately if neither one of those pans out yeah we’re probably fucked.
Federal-Software-372@reddit
I'd say about 5 years out.
regjoe13@reddit
Why 5? Or is at most 5? Or at least 5?
Federal-Software-372@reddit
NK just officially joined the war in Ukraine. They blew up bridges and roads connecting SK to NK along the DMZ. This prevents SK invasion to some degree. Knowing this, if you look back at previous world wars, it took US multiple years to get involved. If you consider that modern warfare is more about rockets and drones than Navies and Armies, then a significant mobilization doesn't help when you could have just made a million suicide drones. A significant mobilization would mean that the drones weren't enough. It would take a change to the status quo to bring about mobilization. Perhaps significant disruptions in ME, significant destruction in Israel, Russians conquer all of Ukraine, Serbia and Moldova. Something like this, best guess, I'm honestly just a dumb ass reddit arm chair poster so...
consciousaiguy@reddit
NK has been relatively stable since Lil Kim took over, but what we are seeing now was just par for a Tuesday in the 90s. Those roads and bridges have been destroyed and rebuilt repeatedly. Its important to remember that Kim Jung Un was educated in Europe so, despite the fact that he serves the Kool-Aid, he didn't drink it. He knows what the real world looks like and everything he does in for internal consumption. If he were seriously planning to move on SK, he would be shipping literally millions of artillery rounds and personnel to Ukraine. He is posturing.
Federal-Software-372@reddit
they drafted 1.4 million into their army and there is also reports of NK tanks on Ukrainian soil. Also, it was never NK's intention to invade SK as much as it would be to destroy it. They're more worried about SK invading them than they are about invading SK. If you ask me anyways.
consciousaiguy@reddit
Did they though? What is the NK definition of "drafted" (I think they called it "mobilized"). Their resources are extremely limited. The only people that are actual fed properly are the ruling class and military and they suddenly can feed, train, and arm an extra 1.4 million people? Things that make you go, hmmmm.
NK doesn't have the means of transport heavy equipment to a foreign battlefield. They have almost no transport aircraft and none that are designed to transport heavy equipment around the globe. They can barely fly the Dear Leader around the country much less project military power to another continent. IF they were actually considering attacking SK, they wouldn't be shipping tanks, personnel, and millions of artillery rounds to the Ukraine front. These moves are an attempt to project strength to US/SK because they know they are compromising their forces in an attempt to get in the good graces of Putin. China hasn't been as helpful of late as they have historically been so they are looking for a new Sugar Daddy.
NK's stated objective is re-unification. Practically, they need to south's resources. Destroying the people and wealth of the south doesn't help them at all, it makes their situation more dire. Again, Kim has seen the real world and isn't as deluded and the rest of the country. His objective is self preservation just like his father before him. The tactic that works is stirring up enough trouble to look strong so your people see you as a strong leader while not stirring up so much trouble that you catch a JDAM in your face hole.
Federal-Software-372@reddit
you keep talking about NK attacking SK when my post said that's not the point, they're worried about SK attacking them.
consciousaiguy@reddit
They aren't though. Again, Kim was western educated. You think he isolates himself from the international media? He's well aware of whats going on in the rest of the world. Don't confuse internal propaganda for reality. NK has nothing SK or the US wants or needs and Kim knows that. In fact, one of SK's major concerns is how to deal with the millions of starving NK's in the country collapses or a war breaks out. China is highly concerned about this as well. Kim may tell the people that its big scary time but he knows as well as you and I do that nothing has changed. Well, besides the fact that he has sent a lot of munitions to another continent in an effort to attract a new benefactor.
Federal-Software-372@reddit
I respect the prep in ya buddy
improbablydrunknlw@reddit
(https://themedialine.org/top-stories/north-koreas-key-role-in-supplying-artillery-to-russia-revealed-amid-ukraine-war/)[Is 1.5 million enough to reach that threshold?]
Check_your_6@reddit
British perspective - I reckon you are right, from I’ve here it will take at least a couple of years to escalate public opinion to the point that there is support and willingness to fight, we have no real sized armed forces any more - not for proper full scale war and it will take a few years to spool up for this, including sorting supply chain. Things may go quicker if others unite and take advantage of unpreparedness but I believe unprepared western governments will use delay tactics to get spooled up. 5 years or less before things gets really hot.
Quigonjinn12@reddit
I’d say at most 5.
beavertonaintsobad@reddit
High. The world is multipolar yet the U.S stubbornly refuses to accept it. Since they can't compete economically or even diplomatically at this point they've turned entirely to military projection to try to hold onto power. Ironically, the more war-thirsty they become the more international standing they lose.
China is all too happy to sit by as we trash the very international order and norm we spent decades building.
LowBarometer@reddit
I was really worried a couple days ago, and then the Chinese just ended their military exercise around Taiwan, so I don't think things are ramping up too much right now. North Koreans blowing up the road and sending troops to Russia is a big deal though. I'd agree with others, that we're still 5 years out for a serious war.
CopulaVV@reddit
One Rabbi definitely doesn't speak for the Jewish community as a whole or in any way. The majority of Jewish people believe Israel is one of the most safe places for Jews.
Source (am a Jew, who knows a lot of Jews, and Israelis, etc).
I'm curious to know which Rabbi you heard say this.
LowBarometer@reddit
I did not say he spoke for the Jewish community.
Is Israel safer for a Jew than the UK? Than the US?
BTW, what the Rabbi said was a video on Reddit and on YouTube. Maybe try searching for it.
CopulaVV@reddit
You didn't directly. More than half the point you were making, and basing your opinion on, is one person. Inadvertently you were.
Also, telling someone to Google something isn't the "gotcha" you think it is. Providing the exact source in which you get your information, especially when asked by someone curious, is paramount in sourcing integrity and confidence.
Since you refused to provide a simple link, I will assume that it's some "Rabbi" who is an extremely reform/secular Jew with who is part of JVP. If not, I wouldn't know!
LowBarometer@reddit
Is Israel safer for a Jew than the UK? Than the US?
Quigonjinn12@reddit
I’d say we’re at most 5 years out. Maybe even less but this is pretty solid sentiment OP
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
What, in your opinion, are the off-ramps for this course? Or are they already behind us?
Crosssta@reddit
The only off-ramp is if we end up with a sea-change in our government that starts to favor diplomacy over kinetics. However that manifests.
It’s no secret they want to instigate war with Iran, Syria, Russia, and/or NK—and the Chinese are likely to start one themselves over Taiwan if they become too frustrated, or if they no longer fear US intervention.
The only likely chance to avert or reduce the scale of the coming World War is if over the next couple of elections we end up with people in positions of power who are war-hawks like most of the Establishment Uniparty.
Quigonjinn12@reddit
Personally? I feel that we’ve passed them. One of them would have been to cut Israel off from any more weapons transfers, as to avoid getting the Middle East involved, but at this point if we stop sending them money they’ll either find another country to invest, or they’ll just attack everyone with their Samson doctrine. Russia and China can realistically only be dealt with by Russia and China as that is a leadership issue, and they’re not gonna just compromise with NATO. North Korea has already gotten involved in Ukraine, and they’re not gonna rebuild the roads they blew up anytime soon. Things are just not looking great in terms of war no matter what we do now
iridescent-shimmer@reddit
I thought I read recently that China is essentially getting fed up with Russia's inability to pay their bills? If those two can't stay aligned, then I don't have many immediate worries for an all out war. The population/demographic cliffs coming for all developed nations make large scale war also less likely as each year passes. As others have said, I'm much more worried about internal political instability.
9n223@reddit
With China and Russia's relationship, I feel like the two are only going to be friends for so long. I think China is waiting for Russia to wear itself out. Russia will do the dirty work, and China will clean up. That way, China can reap the rewards. If you want to call it that, I guess.
I also agree on the domestic front. My prediction is the election will further divide the country and cause turmoil that we've never seen before on our soil.
iridescent-shimmer@reddit
Agreed. It's unfortunate, but I do think we've allowed the disinformation train to run way too rampant with no consequences for far too long. But, the systemic issues that reinforce it won't go anywhere anytime soon without major reform and I just don't see that happening within the current system. It's going to be messy.
9n223@reddit
Very messy. Either which way the election plays out, there's bound to be an uproar. But let's hope it doesn't go any farther than protesting. I mean, I guess that's why we're preppers though. Just in case things take a turn for the worst, we're prepared for it. Just buy your toilet paper beforehand, and we should be golden.
iridescent-shimmer@reddit
Exactly. Last time, I had a little bug out bag packed (I have dual Canadian citizenship.) But, I feel like that's more of a long term thing anyway, not so much an acute need to leave in this current environment. But, I'll probably pack it again anyway. It really just had our fire box of important documents, paper road maps, and family heirlooms/photos organized in one place. It's nice in general to feel prepped to leave if needed.
I'll never forget our neighbor in Canada who fled her home in Africa and had to sew her jewelry into the lining of her clothes so she wouldn't lose it/get robbed while in transit. It's just alway stuck with me that there may be a time where home isn't safe. I just hope I never have to experience that.
9n223@reddit
That is definitely a smart move on both of your ends. I would go ahead and pack something in the trunk for a quick getaway. That's mainly due to disasters like Helene, Milton, East Palistine, and the chemical company in Georgia catching fire recently. Just some food, water, and extra cash for hotel rooms and food.
I don't know your whereabouts, but if you live in a big city, you'll have a headstart on those who didn't prepare.
It's also sad to think that someone can take advantage of someone who's running from trouble. There's bad actors in this world. Just make sure to prepare for them as well.
TheOneTruBob@reddit
I live by the 50/50 rule about these kinds of things. 50/50. It's going to happen or not, so you can prep or not, but worry doesn't accomplish anything.
IndicationFluffy3954@reddit
Here in Canada our former national security advisor and a panel of people involved in international affairs placed our risk of becoming involved in war at a 50-50 chance within the next couple years (Reported by the CBC Sept 26). Their point was that we need to up military spending significantly though so they may have had a motive to make the risk sound worse than it was (we do very, very much need to invest in our underfunded military though).
I’d imagine any war Canada gets pulled into, the US almost certainly would too.
rockinrobbins62@reddit
In the very early Sixties Kennedy sent US "advisors" to Vietnam....50,000 dead Americans later, we were out. 100 advisors have been sent to Israel with a super-weapon. You finish the story......
PokeyDiesFirst@reddit
Russia and China simply do not have a way to beat the US militarily without the employment of nuclear weapons, and they know this. China would hurt us on the water, and depending on how things go it's entirely plausible that we lose a carrier battlegroup, its air wing, and many attack submarines. But in the end, we have the ability to mass more air, sea, and land forces at a time and place of our choosing globally, than our enemies ever could.
I really don't think we'll see nuclear weapons used by nation states against each other. I'd say the odds are less than 10%, but it's not impossible. It's a very contentious election year and will be a very contentious and dramatic term for both candidates, regardless of who wins. Causing as much chaos as possible during an election year is Russia's MO.
coastguy111@reddit
They aren't looking to hurt us militarily. But financial= BRICS
tommydeininger@reddit
I'm just waiting for AI to decide it's had enough of human wastefulness and death
coastguy111@reddit
BRICS+
theciaissouncool@reddit
the threat there is right now is exactly the same as it was in may following russia's deployment of tactical nuclear weapons to multiple platforms which include land based mobile launch vehicles, aircraft, and submarines. the threat was calculated to be fifty percent*, the highest it has ever been.
the scenario is simple, and plays out like putin has said it will a dozen or so times. ukraine will deliver an attack on russia, likely in moscow, that crosses the destruction threshold of what is permissible.
russia fires a single tactical nuke into ukraine, likely in a sparsely habitated region. it's purpose is to force immediate surrender of ukraine.
if the united states responds by attacking russia with either conventional or nuclear weapons, russia wil immediately deploy around 500 icbms without as so much as a flinch. about ten percent of these may be intercepted. we then go down the playbook and initate a nuclear counterstrike. russia then fires their remainder.
*the wildcard is NHI's response. send out some chill vibes to our bros from space and let'em know how dope you always thought they were.
9n223@reddit
The only thing I will say about politics is that I don't think it will matter who will win. I think that either way, we will be at war in the near future with one or more of those countries.
I am no expert in any of this either, btw. But I predicted Russia invasion of mainland Ukraine back in 2014 after they annexed Crimea. I was also right about Isreal being attacked by other Middle Eastern countries back when Russia launched their attacks into Ukraine in 2022. My next prediction was that China would invade Tiawan.
Now, I didn't know any of the time lines of when these would occur. I simply read the room and kept up on world events. I knew that these things were bound to happen.
I feel that China will not invade Tiawan until they feel the time is right. Whether that's political turmoil in the US, the US depleting our stockpile of munitions trying to supply other countries, or a worldwide event that will cause our gaze to look elsewhere.
Whatever it may be, China will be precise and strike Tiawan with everything they have while keeping current infrastructure intact.
Now, trying to guess when, not if, the US will have boots on the ground will be hard. Personally, I'd say the next World War is already in play. But soon, someone will drop a match into the gas. We will sit it out as long as possible (just like the other world wars) just to be able to increase our troops size and munition stockpiles, but I have a feeling we're in that stage right now, just because of all the recruitment advertisements I'm seeing and because my work deals with companies who produce vehicles and machinery for the military. We have been seeing a huge uptick within the last year and a half.
I would give it 2 years before we start deploying our troops into these zones to actively fight. This can be sooner. The 2 years is a max.
If I can also add, I feel like there will be a terrorist attack on US soil soon. I feel like it will be multiple small-scale attacks around the country. Mostly in big cities but some in smaller cities of a population of 100,000+. Groups of 10-20 individuals at different cities. This would cause a greater divide of our nation and would instill fear into everyone inside the US. Look up the terrorist attack of Mumbai in 2008. This will give you a better idea of what I'm talking about.
I hope everyone stays safe during these coming times, and just remember that we're all human. Let's try and treat each other like we are. Stay prepared and help those who need it.
catsdelicacy@reddit
The war that seems most likely to me at the moment involving the USA is a second Civil War. I'm surprised you didn't mention it.
If Trump wins, there will be a war because I don't see Americans accepting a Nazi-style government quietly. If Trump loses, but any part of the US armed forces sides with him, that would cause a war.
I do not think this is likely, especially given the old age and general infirmity of the American population. It's hard to imagine Americans leaving their couches and video games and comfort in great numbers.
But it would be a staggering global economic disaster. America is the arch stone of the international economy, Wall Street is the dominant market on Earth. Having the US dollar lose a lot of value would likely start an international depression.
And if Americans spend the next 5 years killing each other in American cities, China is going to invade Taiwan. The Middle East is going to explode. We've been living in a kind of Pax Americana since WWII, but if Americans put that down, the entire international balance of power crumbles.
Chances are best that this will be like 2020 and that Trump lacks the mental acuity to actually walk America off the cliff. But there's enough of a chance of it happening that this Canadian is deeply concerned!
LitterBoxGifts@reddit
As a retired army soldier with multiple combat deployments and lots of DoD experience, and no love for more war, I feel like a new war is definitely brewing or at least we have very intricate plans already drawn up. Our current strategic posture, the fact that our economy has become addicted to defense manufacturing and is suffering right now, and long time plans we couldn’t commit to because we didn’t want to look like the aggressor, but now would be able to commit to with less backlash….yeah I could see something large but contained occurring in the next year. It’s very Meh
No_Biscotti_7258@reddit
The fact that this sub takes it seriously as a prepper sub but still thinks Jan6 was serious in a prepping sense shows that, no, this sub is not filled with serious preppers. Down vote me but you know I’m right. I’ve seen what you up vote
Soonerpalmetto88@reddit
The longer we give weapons we know will be used against children and our allies the more likely war becomes for us.
Styl3Music@reddit
I'm mainly concerned with 2 wars. The 1st is all the hacks. Especially against utility companies and health care related fields. I don't think this threat is going away any time soon. I'm of the opinion that WWIII has already started. It's just waged in cyberspace and proxy wars.
The other threat I worry about is the mass casualty shootings and arsons becoming an insurgency instead of just sporadic terrorism. This i believe to start ramping up the day after election day. I doubt the intelligence agencies let any group(s) become coordinated, but they don't need coordination to just bomb things and commit terror attacks more often. If Trump loses, then we're fucked. Either the extremists start attacking more often, or Trump performs a successful coup and the nation immediately starts balkanizing. If Trump wins legally, there will be protests and maybe even a few riots, but we'll make it to the election.
I don't worry much about the USA getting involved in a physical confrontation with Russia or China, but I do see the USA stepping up involvement in the ME. The USA may have left Afghanistan, but they're still operating in several nations like Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, etc. The USA even still bombs Afghanistan from time to time due to different radical groups. Israel really throws in several wrenches. It really does remind me of early WWII, watching Japan and Germany expand while testing the boundaries of their allies and neutral countries. Israel is going to be a war zone for the foreseeable future and the USA will likely be involved further at some point. I believe that the USA citizens will force the USA to pull out their troops from that war at some point, though. Doubly so if a draft is called for or Israel pushes past Lebanon, Palestine, and Iran.
War with China specifically won't happen until China's businesses don't depend on US consumers. As long as we continue to trade heavily with them, that war will be postponed. A war between China and the USA may not even happen if the USA continues to crumple on its own. I don't think we'll see a war with China until 2027, at least. I think that date is the earliest US companies can divest away from manufacturing in China, and China can find enough consumers in Africa to no longer need American consumers.
Thanks for reading my rants, and feel free to add your own or ask why.
WSBpeon69420@reddit
This sounds like it was written by a high schooler who almost wants to join the military but not bad enough that they wanna die for it so they are testing the waters. Almost kinda knows what’s going on but not really
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
Sorry but no. Bad assumption.
WSBpeon69420@reddit
Well in that case the fire in the Middle East isn’t in Iran. We (the US) absolutely does have peer competitors. We have not been planning multiple fronts because we cannot fight multiple fronts by ourselves. These haven’t just flared up now. Palestine and Israel has been going since the 1940s Ukraine was invaded in 2014. This isn’t just a “oh look things popped off in 2024” all of this has been brewing for some time. If you think this is gnarly you should wait until the terrorist start their shit again.
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
Brother, I’m from NY and watched the planes hit the tower while deployed and sitting in a ready room. Please stow away this assumption of experiential superiority thing you have going on…
You’re correct things have been brewing for quite some time, but really not paying attention if you think they aren’t at an elevated level, simultaneously and among relatively advanced nations explicitly aligned against us at that. That’s the whole point… brewing has an eventual result. And the level of world participation in actually doing anything to avert it is astonishingly low (reminiscent of Europe circa 1914 and 1939, they never learn.)
WSBpeon69420@reddit
Easy now shipmate all I’m saying is you write at a lower grade lower than your body is. If you were on a ship during 9/11 you’re probably in your early to mid 40s now so congrats you have a young mind
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
Ok, maybe I took it the wrong way, the initial comment set me off. I mean, I wasn’t submitting a thesis, just a casual call for thoughts and perspectives while grabbing a beer. 🍻
ExtremeSet1464@reddit
I’m a veteran and the current news events I’ve been constantly tracking, are concerning. I’ve started upping my prep.
Druzhyna@reddit
Reddit is a cesspool of presumptously arrogant know-it-all know-nothings.
notlancee@reddit
L lol
WSBpeon69420@reddit
Great input.
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
Brother, I’m from NY and watched the planes hit the tower while deployed and sitting in a ready room. Please stow away this assumption of experiential superiority thing you have going on…
You’re correct things have been brewing for quite some time, but really not paying attention if you think they aren’t at an elevated level, simultaneously and among relatively advanced nations explicitly aligned against us at that. That’s the whole point… brewing has an eventual result. And the level of world participation in actually doing anything to avert it is astonishingly low (reminiscent of Europe circa 1914 and 1939, they never learn.)
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
I mean, if you want a drafted, checked, phd level analysis maybe you are looking I. The wrong place. But it’s just a plain “how I feel and what I see with casual news watching” question from someone who was 8 yrs Navy, 3 in combat zone (whatever that means for blue Navy anyway).
Also, pro-tip; anyone with those credentials doesn’t flaunt it to responding to someone else’s sincere question, regardless of how plebeian they think it is. Unless you’re just a tool, unfortunately we have those too.
schlongtheta@reddit
limited
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
From the US directly? Yes, limited.
schlongtheta@reddit
Elaborate?
Sxs9399@reddit
On Russia and Iran, I truly believe that both countries are victims to strongmen despots, I think once Putin and Khamenei die both countries will prosper. Neither have the real ability to be a significant threat to the US. China on the other hand is a whole other story, I don't think the Chinese are evil or anything, but like Weimar era Germany I think they have immense societal and structural issues that make it so the population would respond patriotically to a state started war.
I've seen 2027 reported many times as the most likely year for China to try to take Taiwan. There's a few factors at play, around then their "military aged males" will start to decrease (in other words it will be at it's peak) and it will likely be the lowest gap in terms of munitions industrial capability. The US massively de-industrialized post 1992 but has been tooling back up, meanwhile china has been slowly ramping up. The best period for china to take Taiwan would be 2027-2035 or so.
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
The longshoreman strike “panic” was somewhat eye opening on this. The panic over shit we either don’t need or shouldn’t need for day to day life was concerning.
People ran out to buy toilet paper and water en masse. I mean… if we are dependent on international imports for toilet paper and water, for any or whatever convoluted world economy reason, then we have a serious problem.
improbablydrunknlw@reddit
Both domestic products, people are just idiots.
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
Right, exactly what I mean. Now imagine that same panic over things we actually need. It’s not a pretty picture
Potential-Brain7735@reddit
Water and toilet paper are domestically produced. People are just morons.
OpinionDirect7632@reddit
“The only thing worse than going to war with America is going to war without her” -some European guy
Don’t fall victim to fear mongering about world war. Save all of that for when the grid is attacked and everyone eats each other. Holy shit it’s terrifying!
Aggravating-Dig2022@reddit
We are at war now.
tommydeininger@reddit
Feel like we've been at war all my life. I'm 44
sprinklecow@reddit
Wars have been ongoing all around the world since the beginning of civilization. We just know more about them now because of advances in technology. Remember what it was like before the internet?
Brokentoaster40@reddit
Uhhh war requires Congress to get their shit together enough to actually commit the military force.
I’d say short of an escalation of hostilities from adversaries it’s nearly non-existent. Most conflicts the U.S. deal with is mowing the grass of adversarial proxy groups and keeping American service members out of wars, by largely letting other people who have a dog in the fight do the dirty work themselves. So I wouldn’t lose sleep over it.
NeverSeenBefor@reddit
Thirty years young here. If you are American then the threat is almost zero unless enlisted. There would never be boots on the ground in America and if there is that means so much has gone wrong. It's highly improbable.
Terrorist attacks, bombing, or civil war are the only real threats to Americans. If you have a bunker then maybe you'd have more to worry about but currently, most people do not have a plan for a war going nuclear. America likely has defences not known to the public for if a war goes nuclear.
In the event a nuclear war breaks out the survivors will be one of three types of people.
First. Those that survived the blast and now live on what's left of the surface. Likely near zero chance of survival unless earth has some tricks up it's sleeves. Some government officials would be located in strategic areas to avoid the blasts but that's out the window after a few years.
Second. Those with bunkers. They live underground now and you would need idk. Four generations minimum of food and genetics to prevent inbreeding. The government has many MANY underground bunkers not open to the public.
Third and most importantly. Space flight. Those that make it to space will continue advancing as a species as long as they've done their due diligence when engineering these things. Like it or not private companies, government contractors, and maybe even a handful of billionaires have likely been working on something to get off planet in the event of Armageddon. This would be the ONLY way to ensure the human race isn't destroyed completely.
tommydeininger@reddit
They seem to be doing lots up there already their not telling us about. Out here in the country sometimes you can see it late at night
Zestyclose_Emu_1942@reddit
China is the largest threat the world has ever seen.
If I was the USA, I'd poke the bear now.
Assassinate Xi and his inner circle when they're traveling.
Start a revolution.
Let the people be free again.
xm45-h4t@reddit
USA will keep everyone at bay
mojogoshow@reddit
I think an attack on American soil will be more likely. Way too many terrorists here due to an unsecured border.
ThisIsGreatMan@reddit
This is where I see things getting bad in the US. If the party with the guns wins, all hell is going to break loose against people with a non-white look to them. Look at how quickly Springfield escalated, and it was more of a comedic than terrorizing headline. That pot's ready to boil. A la your comment. And if the guns end up having to pledge allegience to a woman of color, they're going to need a scapegoat. And if it isn't a torrent of lawsuits going after all the people they have beef with (it's a lot) it'll be militia-type NORA hunters looking for all the illegals that voted when they shouldn't-a and this place is going right back to Mayberry
ForsakenDust7@reddit
Damn you got it all figured out. Pass this up the chain of command asap, champ
ThisIsGreatMan@reddit
To who? The government?!? I'm investing in my future. Building an arsenal. It's not a matter of if but when, and we have to be always ready.
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
Yes. It is extremely concerning to me how many unknown and unvetted people have entered. To be clear, I’m very pro-immigration. My wife is an immigrant, and our child is racially mixed. It’s not about that.
I think every single person who is not a criminal or malicious foreign actor should be welcomed with open arms. Every. Single. One. It’s what our country is built on and our real strength. BUT, unaccounted for? Unverified? Recipe for disaster, and I think we are going to learn that lesson the hard way very soon.
Responsible-Annual21@reddit
Russia: I think Putin wants out of Ukraine. I think if Trump wins he uses that as an opportunity to let Trump broker a peace deal which of course he wants anyway. If Kamala wins, I’m more concerned about an escalation because I see no desire by her administration to deescalate the war and I also don’t think Putin’s going to allow himself to go down in history with a massive “L.” Which leaves only room for escalation in the latter scenario.
China: it’s going to happen. Just a matter of when. I think if Trump wins they wait (think 3 carrier strike groups to NK). If Kamala wins, I think they move on Taiwan sooner rather than later. But, there is somewhat of a case for China to invade regardless of who wins.. We’ve been depleting our military stocks and oil reserves for years now. Why allow us the opportunity to rebuild before attacking Taiwan?
Iran: I think if we get involved in a conflict here it’s against our will. Like we get dragged into it somehow.. Likely because of Israel..
But who knows. The landscape is changing everyday.. We’ll see…
OneCupTwoGirls69@reddit
Up until recently I was in the camp that everything was fine but recent developments in the Middle East and Ukraine have changed my mind. It has been clear for some time that the four amigos (China, Russia, Iran and North Korea) are colluding together to challenge the western led world order. The extent to which they’re willing to push is becoming greater and I see the odds of the US along with its Allied partners “putting boots on the ground” increasing.
It’s clear that we’re now entering one of the most monumental times of this century. Who we elect to power and how we react to changing developments will be talked about for the next 100 years. Let’s hope we make the right decisions.
SpecialistOk3384@reddit
What is the current threat to the US and are we worried.
I will worry more when diplomats stop trying to de-escalate or leaders capitulate. That is when we need to worry most, and be aware of the possibilities now.
My biggest worry, is nuclear deterrence. I think it has been so long since nuclear weapons were used, that the fear is gone. We need to rebuild that fear, and it can either be a reboot of The Day After/Threads watched globally, or a regional conflict involving the real thing, and we might get another two to three generations until we forget all over again.
If Ukraine capitulates or loses, it's what comes after that should worry you most. Russia will eventually attack an eastern NATO country. If Russia loses and breaches core containment + intentionally setting a meltdown on the ZNPP, that could become a NATO conflict. Russia has devastated their military with just Ukraine. Nuclear bombs don't need as much morale to work.
Taiwan, strategic ambiguity ended. That would be manufacturing supply and economic devastation at the very least. It could be quite bad and genuinely affect us at home.
An Iran war? Exceedingly likely. Aside from increased expenses to support military efforts and fuel prices going up, I don't think it would lead to much difference than what we lived with from 2001 to 2021. I don't see the other countries banding together against Israel.
Korea? I don't know enough, and I don't think that North Korea can afford an attack on South Korea at all.
As for a formation of axis and allied powers? No idea.
Corrupted_G_nome@reddit
Russia will be forced ro stop and spend years rebuilding before they can contest Europe. I suspect rheir play is to fight a regional war on EU territory, without the US.
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
Of those, I think what China does is going to be the real “tell” of how much a problem we have. The other three could all go at once, and it would be horrible but manageable. It’s what China does after the other 3 that concerns me.
Vegetable-Bobcat-992@reddit
It's been a conspiracy theory for years that war (or catastrophic war conditions) would start on US soil after a bad enough long-range literal missile strike that will be blamed on Iran (to the US public). Supposedly, global context of said attack would make this claim easy enough for the average person to buy into, though in reality it would happen with internal approval.
If there was ever any truth to this theory, obviously "they" could've modified tactics since then.
show-mewhatyougot@reddit
Midnight
EatMoarTendies@reddit
The U.S. is essentially bank rolling the dawn of WWIII. We are March 1941 aiding our Allies (Israel, Ukraine) who are currently engaged in hostile combat. On the cusp on internal strife post-election, could be a good time for opposition (NK and China) to make more conspicuous moves for their own allies (Iran, Russia), opening up more fronts to combat and possibly draw the U.S. into direct combat.
The next eight months are going to be interesting. Winter will slow the Ukraine-Russo War, the U.S. election will unfold. We won’t see much U.S. protesting until Spring ‘25— no one really wants to en masse in freezing temperatures to protest/riot. Mother Nature breaks feeble spirits.
tactical_soul44@reddit
Critical thought to when you go vote next to month... Think, am I to old to be drafted? I know I am. But I'll vote to keep you all here at home.
Corrupted_G_nome@reddit
NK made some agressive and what looks like preperatory manovers and troop movement. It could always be an exercise but they seem more and more serious. Even China is telling them to cool it.
Natural_Treat_1437@reddit
From the way it looks, all countries will be involved soon enough for war. Small proxy wars usually end up bad for one side or something else, total destruction.
Mysterious-Corner816@reddit
There will be no war involving the US, don’t let the media persuade you, they are just trying to get clicks.
The truth is that China and Russia and Iran aren’t going to mess with the US, they aren’t stupid. Going to war with the US isn’t a winnable war at this point in time.
Now with that being said, this is what matters most. As all of you Americans can surely notice, your country is falling apart. If China waits 10,20,30 or 40+ years they won’t need to even fight you guys. You will collapse from the inside out, leaving a gigantic vacuum that they can take advantage of and achieve all of their militaristic goals without a war. In 20 years time they will be able to walk into Taiwan and take it.
The Chinese leadership knows this, they know that the longer they wait the better their odds at winning are. If they or anyone else were to start a global conflict today the US would win but in 20yrs time you won’t get smoked.
I could go on and on but basically no there isn’t going to be a war, China will keep Russia and Iran in check until the time is right.
Snoo71448@reddit
There’s always a looming threat, but war comes when it comes. A regional war in the Middle East is always going to happen. It’s up to the US whether to get involved or not. As far as North Korea and China is concerned, that’s been ongoing for over 50 years.
Dysphoric_Otter@reddit
The people that could escalate things to a tragic level are aging, psychopathic, narcissistic, cruel, and insane tyrants. Honestly, I'm worried. Just look at history. They'll lose, but they could take the world down with them.
leo_aureus@reddit
Nothing like the modern mixture of tyrants and nuclear arsenals!
Human9651@reddit
nailed it
Common-Ad6470@reddit
It’s easy, take Ruzzia out of the equation as the malevolent force in the background pulling the strings on all of these tensions, and the situation is defused.
Leave Ruzzia in place to pull even more desperate stunts to try and leverage Ukraine and the situation will only get better.
NiceInvestigator7144@reddit
Threat level.... midnight.
Ordinary144@reddit
Honestly, I see Russia suprise attacking USA right after the election. Read my comment history for analysis if interested.
SpecialistOk3384@reddit
I did check your comment history. Do you think people are foolishly motivated by a fictional Bible prophecy, or are you thinking the Bible is true?
Prestigious_Yak8551@reddit
I asked AI: Based on the comment history of Reddit user Ordinary144, here are some key trends and themes:
Overall, Ordinary144 appears to engage deeply with themes of geopolitical tension, survivalism, and prophetic interpretations, all while maintaining a personal touch in their interactions.
SnooLobsters1308@reddit
you had 2 questions, (a) will something break out involving US troops large scale and (b) is there a threat to US domestically? real answer is we're just some peeps on the internet, so /whoknows but, I'll share some thoughts and data :)
1) History .... Iraq was the 4th most powerful army in the world, the USA mobilized and took Sadam out in a matter of months. /cough buh bye :) That was after when the world "freed" a grateful Kuwait from Iraqi occupation ...
2) Its unlikely there is "just" the USA, we have allies, reciprocal treaties, etc. etc. A THING TO NOTE in the middle east, is Saudi Arabia has had troops in Yemen, fighting a proxy war against the Houthis, backed by Iran. The ME is not really aligned right now, and likely some ME countries are cheering for the fall of Iran.
3) USA spends 900 BILLION $ per year on military. China is number 2 with $300B, Russia #3 at a far distant $100 Billion. or, the US spends 8 to 9 times what Russia spends on military, and has every year for a couple decades. USA vs China + Russa + Iran + North Korea is simply no contest in any conventional fight. UK, Germany, Ukraine, France, Japan, South Korea are 6 - 11 in largest military spending ... and they tend to have treaties with the US. Israel is 15th, with 27 Billion $ annual spending ... North Korea isn't even on the list. NOTE Iran isn't on the list of top 15 military spenders either. Saudi Arabia is 5th with 76 Billion in military spending.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/262742/countries-with-the-highest-military-spending/
4) China imports food. A LOT of food. Its top 3 imports (by far) are Brazil, USA, and Ukraine. Brazil is pretty close to the USA, might be hard to get food from Brazil to China in a war ....
https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/china-s-food-dilemma#:\~:text=Most%20imports%20came%20from%20the,the%20Middle%20East%20and%20Africa.
5) Yes, Ukraine is getting equipment form elsewhere, but, they have so far managed to repel Russia. So, Ukraine + support = Russia. Unlikely Russia has the forces or capability to seriously threaten the USA/Nato in any conventional troops vs troops situation.
6) All that said, nukes are nukes, China has some, Russia has some. So while its no contest USA VS them in a conventional war, nukes are bad either way, and someone could get crazy enough to use them. Maybe NATO could roll troops pretty easy through Russia ... but that's not really a good outcome with Putin with nukes.
So, to your questions:
a1) I think its mildly likely there is some escalation that involves greater amounts (Iraq level) of USA troop mobilization.
a2) I think its super unlikely there is a full out war by any party vs the USA that would lead to all out mobilization.
b) There is zero, nada, nil serious large scale threat to the USA from conventional warfare.
The real concern with all of this is that someone uses nukes, then we're all F'ed.
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
Agree nukes are the wild card. Someone else earlier commented that the world has forgotten the true horror and Pandora’s box they represent. They’re right. If used, a “good” scenario is unpredictable, and worst case is more likely, even if limited to “tactical” nukes. Once that threshold is crossed, a nuke is a nuke eventually.
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
Excellent answer. I really appreciate the thoughtfulness and sourcing.
Nicktrod@reddit
If Russia wins in Ukraine it will only be a matter of time before they invade a NATO country.
That will go badly for them. They may decide to go nuclear.
China is no longer relevant. They will have enough trouble just trying to stay a country in the next couple decades. Their demographics are terminal.
The US will not ultimately engage in the Middle East any more. We are beginning an isolationist stage. We are a major exporter of refined oil products.
So the question is Russia. Can Ukraine stop them? If not, will Russia go nuclear when their invasion of Poland and the Baltic Republics fail?
Time will tell on both of those questions.
therapistofcats@reddit
Current war threat level? Like...3
consciousaiguy@reddit
In regards to Iran and Ukraine, almost zero. Unless Russia or Iran breaks out a nuke the US is not getting directly involved and, if Russia uses a nuke, all bets are off and you should make sure that the people important to you know that you love them.
If North Korea were to attack South Korea and/or China go for Taiwan the US would be involved because such attacks would involve hitting US forces. Both of those are also low probability events but slightly more likely than Ukraine and Iran.
Don't let the doom porn pumped out by those desperate for clicks freak you out too much.
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
Currently, yes. But both are at stalemate/tit for tag right now (either militarily or politically). I’m not convinced that holds if there is a major breakthrough though.
consciousaiguy@reddit
In both situations, some sort of conventional "breakout" is highly unlikely. None of the parties have a conventional capability that they've just been sitting on. The only Black Swan event I can really see happening in either conflict is the use of a nuclear weapon but I don't see any of the parties in either conflict having the incentive to do so. Iran and Russia both know that the use of a nuke would draw the US in which they don't want. Thats an automatic whipping. Israel doesn't need to use one to accomplish their objectives and to do so would turn the world against them. This is kind of harsh wording, but Israel gets a lot of global deference by playing the holocaust/right-to-exist card. They sling an unnecessary nuke just as a flex and the playbook has to be completely rewritten.
MonarchyIsTheWay@reddit
So, pedantically, we didn’t declare war on Iraq, either time, we’re not going to declare war now. It’s highly unlikely that the US declares war in the near future, unless the country faces an existential threat - the last time Congress declared war was WW2. Declaring war triggers a lot of statutory stuff that doesn’t make sense in the modern military context the US finds itself in nowadays. It’s much more likely that Congress issues an authorization for the use of military force to post hoc approve of the President sending troops to respond to some hot spot.
All that being said - no, we’re not at risk of war escalating in a manner that brings the US into direct combat (more than we already are). Let’s go through the list:
Russia/Ukraine is the element that has the most danger of spiraling out of control, because if Russia takes military action against a NATO ally, the US is obligated to treat that as an attack on their own soil (as are all NATO allies). So far, nothing like that has happened, though the rhetoric around that has gotten more and more tense, as NATO members states are being used to train and supply the Ukrainian forces more and more. That being said, Russia knows that they’re not capable of defending against an attack by NATO, and have actually been stripping the garrisons that would be the first response to a NATO invasion. This is a case of lots of smoke, but not fire.
Middles East - going to look at Iran in particular here, there’s a lot going on and we do have a non-trivial number of boots on the ground in that region. Iran has done what every Arab/Islamic state has done, and assumed that THIS time they could take on Israel. Iran has been fighting a series of proxy wars, not with the US, but with Saudi Arabia in who is going to be the leader of the Islamic world. The issue is that because of the Shia/sunni split, and because Iran isn’t Arab, Iran hasn’t been able to capitalize on the downfall of its former regional enemy, Iraq, and has isolated its proxy forces (Hamas and Hizbullah) from their traditional allies (Egypt, Syria, Jordan). This is mostly due to strong US diplomatic pressure in the region going back the last two decades, along with those nations becoming less and less comfortable with the suicide tactics the Palestinians were taking. Part of this is also because those 3 nations saw how Hizbullah/Palestinian armed forces absolutely destroyed Lebanon as a nation in the 80s and 90s, and have since become much less gung-ho about the whole mess. Iran knows if it is directly involved with an American forces, the retribution will be swift and incredibly effective - the last time something like that happened, they lost 1/2 of their navy in an afternoon. The Iranians want this contained as much as possible because getting the US involved is very bad for them.
China - could talk for days about this, but a) china is a regional bully and isn’t interested in going to war with the US…right now. All its actions in the South China Sea are to make it harder for the US to operate diplomatically and to show to SE Asian nations that if you’re US aligned, China is going to make things hard for you.
Butterflyknipx@reddit
If I was an enemy of the US, I would see how unstable we are politically and make a move soon. I'm unsure of what is going to happen after Super Tuesday, but there will be some instability regardless of which way the votes go. Maybe I'm just being paranoid, but if I was an enemy and I saw a second Jan 6th starting, I would hit the red button immediately while my opponent is unbalanced.
Praying I'm just paranoid and I don't have to worry for 5+ years, because I am not prepared for WWIII starting in 3 weeks.
Emphasis_on_why@reddit
What do you mean by “the actual US”? ~~A nuclear~~ any airstrike would be suicide for anyone who would launch one.
Not even China if they had a thousand invasion size transports would put troops on NA soil, there is a .08% worry in my mind of that occurring.
An EMP or two to shut us off while they do other things? I’d say I have a 56.895% worry that this could happen in the next decade.
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
Within the boundaries of the
50 states or any territory. Initially, I agree. But world war is unpredictable, and 4 powerful adversaries, geographically dispersed, is a lot.
FloatMurse@reddit
Honestly, I think it's really going to depend on who the next president is. If it's Harris, we may see the US entering the Ukraine/Russia war in the next year or two through mild escalations that add up like straws on a camels back. Approval of strikes with long range weaponry into Russia will definitely make that more likely, especially if they start bombing Moscow.
If it's trump, I think we may see something happen in the next 4 years in the China/Taiwan/North Korea. He royally pissed off Kim, and his anti China stance is no secret. He may push them over the edge to starting something with Taiwan.
Trump may also hasten a war with Iran. He's not a big fan of Iran, and may push Israel to be more aggressive. I could definitely see at least air strikes on Iran under him, if not full on boots on the ground.
Those are my 2 cents, I could be way wrong but I'm open to critique!
eveebobevee@reddit
Didn't trump deescalate tensions with North Korea?
No-Breadfruit-4555@reddit (OP)
I absolutely agree it depends, and appreciate your answer. I just wanted to avoid the usual “X will cause/caused this problem and only Y will avoid/can solve it” pissing matches.
ILikeCoffeeNTrees@reddit
10/10
ComprehensiveLet8238@reddit
The day after the election, war will go out of control
Enzo-Unversed@reddit
Ukraine is basically cooked. Another Korean War is a possibility, but it's 50/50. China isn't invading Taiwan anytime soon. As for the Middle East, the US will likely put boots on the ground and it will lose the war over time again.