Comments on: Failure of new U.S. weapons systems may be more than science fiction http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/07/01/failure-of-new-u-s-weapons-systems-may-be-more-than-science-fiction/ Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: mnhsty http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/07/01/failure-of-new-u-s-weapons-systems-may-be-more-than-science-fiction/#comment-1079399 Fri, 10 Jul 2015 00:59:52 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=41737#comment-1079399 A war started over a misunderstanding or a miscalculation probably wouldn’t work for a novel, unless the miscalculation unless the plot revolved around the miscalculation itself. So somebody had to be the bad guy.

]]>
By: mnhsty http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/07/01/failure-of-new-u-s-weapons-systems-may-be-more-than-science-fiction/#comment-1079398 Fri, 10 Jul 2015 00:59:51 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=41737#comment-1079398 A war started over a misunderstanding or a miscalculation probably wouldn’t work for a novel, unless the miscalculation unless the plot revolved around the miscalculation itself. So somebody had to be the bad guy.

]]>
By: moriganti http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/07/01/failure-of-new-u-s-weapons-systems-may-be-more-than-science-fiction/#comment-1077528 Tue, 07 Jul 2015 08:27:26 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=41737#comment-1077528 An interesting story. However, Can we talk about no bullets,guns, drones, missiles etc., and no wars just like Mahatma Gandhi?? He achieved more than Lenin, Hitler, Roosevelt, Churchill without firing a bullet, brought down British Empire to its knees and back to a small Island.

]]>
By: WorldlyPatriot http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/07/01/failure-of-new-u-s-weapons-systems-may-be-more-than-science-fiction/#comment-1077456 Tue, 07 Jul 2015 05:14:06 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=41737#comment-1077456 Mr. Gault’s article is interesting. But, one glaring oversight, common to many similar articles, is that the USA would never fight China, unilaterally.

A nation’s strength and power is all too often solely judged in the context of military capability, only. An often overlooked element of power is diplomatic power, or the power of diplomacy.

The USA’s advantages from diplomatic power are overwhelming when compared to China. This diplomatic power has resulted in numerous formal collective-defense treaties with several nations in the Pacific Region, as well as NATO and many South American nations.

Accordingly, if the USA is attacked by China, the Chinese will likely find themselves in a simultaneous brawl with Japan, Australia, Canada (and other NATO nations), South Korea, Singapore, Vietnam, the Republic of the Philippines, et. al.

I have every reason to respect China’s recent and near-future military improvements. However, China will never be able to win a simultaneous engagement against so many capable nations.

]]>
By: pros54 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/07/01/failure-of-new-u-s-weapons-systems-may-be-more-than-science-fiction/#comment-1076347 Fri, 03 Jul 2015 22:13:45 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=41737#comment-1076347 Written in the typical America manifest destiny trope.
Just like reading a typical Zane Grey novel. The evil Chinese attack the God appointed Americans and we weather the storm and use our old equipment to be beat those evil Chinese.

American arrogance is just so unbelievable. I hope those who make decisions for the sake of all of us are more rational than these so called defense experts.

]]>
By: SaigonQ2 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/07/01/failure-of-new-u-s-weapons-systems-may-be-more-than-science-fiction/#comment-1076064 Fri, 03 Jul 2015 09:13:16 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=41737#comment-1076064 It would be interesting to speculate what could have been bought with half the development and acquisition budget, if new weapons systems were planned and managed in a realistic and disciplined way. So half a generation systems improvement instead of F-35, Littoral, Osprey type fiascos that really bloat and cannibalize the defense budget. The Pentagon purchasing bureaucracy is manned by the equivalent of a small countries army 29,000, but they run dysfunctional tendering processes, where the winner promises the sky in to-be-developed technology and can never come in close to budget or schedule. China needs more allies like that.

]]>
By: Macedonian http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/07/01/failure-of-new-u-s-weapons-systems-may-be-more-than-science-fiction/#comment-1075889 Thu, 02 Jul 2015 23:12:05 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=41737#comment-1075889 Yak 141

]]>
By: Macedonian http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/07/01/failure-of-new-u-s-weapons-systems-may-be-more-than-science-fiction/#comment-1075888 Thu, 02 Jul 2015 23:09:27 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=41737#comment-1075888 F-35 is just a copy of Russian Yak-144 design from the 80’s.

]]>
By: Jingan http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/07/01/failure-of-new-u-s-weapons-systems-may-be-more-than-science-fiction/#comment-1075533 Thu, 02 Jul 2015 13:59:43 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=41737#comment-1075533 pathetic infomercial, pathetic

]]>
By: Neurochuck http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/07/01/failure-of-new-u-s-weapons-systems-may-be-more-than-science-fiction/#comment-1075509 Thu, 02 Jul 2015 11:27:09 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=41737#comment-1075509 It does seem silly to project the culture/politics/history of Japan on to China. Japan had a samurai/militaristic approach to the world through 1895 war with China and seizure of Taiwan, defeat of the Russians in 1905, etc.
Big case of European Empire envy, and Nazi like superiority to enslave.
Quite different to the “Mandate of Heaven” for prosperity, security, social order etc of Chinese dynasties, including the current post 1949/1990.
As the author suggests, more likely that the USA gets involved in a conflict between China and a neighbor, close to Chinese territory.
And then one might expect to see next generation autonomous/intelligent/stealth missiles take out the definitely non-stealth carriers and airfields that F35s, F16s etc depend on, as well as naval surface vessels. Sort of New Great Wall.

]]>