OK...lets go a little deeper.
Quote:
Originally posted by TheJimmy
...however we must admit to being big hypocritical pussies to some extent if we are to force this premptive strike policy on little weak countries that we can defeat with relative ease...which includes like almost everyone...
|
Lets say that country A presents a percived problem...then the mission oriented decision making comes into play...can the problem be successfully corrected by military force...at what cost/benefit? The cost/benefit factor may be considered to be not viable. Country B presents a percieved problem and the same mission oriented decision making comes into play and in this case it is decided that the problem can be corrected by military force and the cost/benefit factor is considered to be viable. Bottomline...viable or not viable.
Quote:
|
Russia is too disorganized atm therefore China is really the only remaining threat/superpower with significant numbers and tools that would and could wear us out a bit...
|
China is not currently a threat to the US and currently cannot project its military into our hemisphere other than via nukes and their leadership is not into committing suicide. China is not a superpower and is probably 40-50 years away from being a superpower...if it has that goal.
Quote:
they should be handled different but it's just an admission of 'we only beat down little fucks that we can get away with beating down..."
that is the point I'm getting at....
do I think it's wrong? ok, that's another discussion....
Question:
...if Hitler's Nazi Germany was as big as China would it be ok to not 'push the issue' with them because they were too large & powerful???
|
Once again the answer to all of the questions posed...viable or not viable.