https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...avf?ocid=socialshare

21,000 American casualties, millions of civilians trapped, and the world on the brink of war
Story by Nick Allen • 11h •
5 min read

Trump is not invited.

Excerpt:

Meanwhile, Xi welcomed Russia's Vladimir Putin and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi for talks in Beijing on Monday.

Xi, Putin, and North Korea's Kim Jong Un are set to attend a massive military parade in the Chinese capital on Wednesday.

U.S. intelligence believes a first step toward taking over Taiwan may be a Chinese naval blockade and it could happen within two years.

China is currently building three warships for every one the U.S. is producing.

First, how would you handle it or for that matter anyone of us?

quote:

Originally posted by M.Shy:
First, how would you handle it or for that matter anyone of us?

It may be too late to handle it.

IF, I had any say in it that counted, I wouldn't put the country in this situation where Trump had any say in the matter.

What could go wrong? He has demonstrated his skills with Putin. They know. We know. AND they know that we know.

Trump and Hegseth have fired many top brass, and maybe replaced them with yes men.

I'm sure Hegseth's qualifications to be a leader are fortified with his experience as a Fox News celebrity.

I mean, Trump's whole admin is fine tuned to handle crisis, or maybe I'm confusing that with make crisis.

Just think, Trump could usher in a new world order, on the fumes of his incompetency, where the dollar and the US economy isn't enough any more to make sanctions meaningful.

And I'm sure our historic allies are all in with whatever Trump stands for and dreams up in his alt-reality fog.

IMO, Trump doesn't have the skill, fortitude or strategic savvy to sway this situation. And he's got no backup advisory, even if he would listen.

Whatever cracks have opened up in the historic strategy over years and several admins, giving opportunity to the axis + 1, stated above, is a direct result of Trump's belief that he alone can fix it. No prior admin has ever been so arrogant and so wrong. We're seeing cause and effect running wide open amuck.

Maggie, still watching snl for "news"⁰ oh wait I am on her ignore list. Wait for it

China has already beaten the shit out of America in Vietnam!

Made you run away in cowardly disgust off the roof of your embassy!

That was a trial run for what you did in Afghanistan!

China had little to do with it.

Heck they and the Vietnamese had a little shooting squabble not that long after we abandoned the ARVN’s.

It’s easier to arm and claim victory for an insurgency than to actually solve something.

Do you honestly think anything improved for the afghanis or their neighbors by us conceding to the Taliban?

Was it worthwhile to keep giving money to the Afghan government and getting our soldiers killed? Probably not… but the Taliban are no great deal to the rest of the region.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
China has already beaten the shit out of America in Vietnam!

Made you run away in cowardly disgust off the roof of your embassy!

That was a trial run for what you did in Afghanistan!

I remember when the USSR sought our permission to nuke the Chinese.

A Soviet Embassy official inquired with a U.S. State Department officer about the U.S. reaction to a possible Soviet attack on China's nuclear facilities.

A similar topic was raised when Soviet officials visiting the U.S. reportedly asked about the American reaction to a Soviet need to destroy China's nuclear arsenal.

The U.S. did not acquiesce to that request.

Instead, Dick Nixon chose to move the U.S. to China to keep Russia more isolated. Maybe we should have picked the Russians to keep China restricted.

To answer the question by M. Shy, the die is cast.

The alliances are forming. The tariff situation is much to blame. I would not have engaged in tariffs; especially, not unilateral imposition by a president.

Now, if I were Trump I would return to ratified treaty trade policy with South Korea. I would enter a similar trade treaty w Taiwan.

I would ask Congress to sell, not give, but sell arms and hardware to Taiwan. I would start major intelligence sharing w Taiwan. The legality of tariffs notwithstanding, I would begin negotiations w China to remove tariffs in exchange for a treaty recognizing the status quo in Taiwan.

In the event China balks, I would go to Taiwan and ask them to hold a national referendum on joining China or independence with the US recognizing the outcome of that vote. This would be the red button.

Japan, the titan of business, challenged the us, and failed
SK sought to challenge the US on steel, and failed
The CCP thinks that holding production contracts will allow them to challenge the us is a winning strategy, paired with IP theft from hackers, is on the verge of middle class collapse.

One thing about aging, it's supposed to bring wisdom on past actions. Some folks have it

Just because someone failed on the past does not mean they fail today. The alliances are forming.

There are no guarantees. It would be a mistake to assume winning. It would be a mistake to allow the environment of competition to become the environment for war.

Especially, as a challenging order takes shape, and the U.S. removes itself from its allies and world economic engagement as we have.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
China had little to do with it.

Heck they and the Vietnamese had a little shooting squabble not that long after we abandoned the ARVN’s.

It’s easier to arm and claim victory for an insurgency than to actually solve something.

Do you honestly think anything improved for the afghanis or their neighbors by us conceding to the Taliban?

Was it worthwhile to keep giving money to the Afghan government and getting our soldiers killed? Probably not… but the Taliban are no great deal to the rest of the region.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
China has already beaten the shit out of America in Vietnam!

Made you run away in cowardly disgust off the roof of your embassy!

That was a trial run for what you did in Afghanistan!

Your AI fact check:

China provided extensive economic and military support to North Vietnam during the Vietnam War, including arms, ammunition, food, medicine, fuel, and approximately 320,000 troops who served as engineers, advisors, and anti-aircraft crews. This aid, particularly in the form of manpower for infrastructure and anti-aircraft defense, allowed North Vietnamese forces to focus on combat, making the war impossible to continue without it.
Economic and Material Aid
Total Aid:
From 1950 to 1970, Chinese aid to North Vietnam was estimated at $20 billion (not adjusted for inflation).
Specific Supplies:
This included weapons, artillery, ammunition, trucks, planes, and uniforms, as well as essential resources like food, medicine, and fuel.
Reconstruction:
China also provided significant resources and expertise for reconstruction, including support for the construction of Vietnam's first modern steel enterprise.
Military and Personnel Support
Manpower:
China deployed over 300,000 troops to North Vietnam between 1965 and 1971, with peak deployment in 1967.
Engineering and Infrastructure:
A large portion of Chinese troops were engineers responsible for building and repairing roads, railways, airstrips, and other crucial infrastructure.
Anti-Aircraft Crews:
Chinese troops manned anti-aircraft guns, which were responsible for shooting down many American aircraft, and also engaged in coastal defense and minesweeping operations.
Logistical Support:
Chinese troops provided direct support and manpower, freeing up North Vietnamese soldiers to fight on the front lines.
Chinese Perspective
Geopolitical Buffer: China wanted a communist buffer state on its southern border.
Revolutionary Comrades: China viewed the Vietnamese as revolutionary comrades and saw their cause as its own.
Defense: China promised to defend North Vietnam if the United States attacked.
Impact
Crucial to North Vietnamese Survival:
The aid and manpower provided by China were crucial for North Vietnam's ability to sustain the war against the French and the Americans.
High Casualties:
Chinese forces also suffered casualties, with estimates of 1,000 deaths in North Vietnam from American bombing and other hazards in the late 1960s.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
China had little to do with it.

Heck they and the Vietnamese had a little shooting squabble not that long after we abandoned the ARVN’s.

It’s easier to arm and claim victory for an insurgency than to actually solve something.

Do you honestly think anything improved for the afghanis or their neighbors by us conceding to the Taliban?

Was it worthwhile to keep giving money to the Afghan government and getting our soldiers killed? Probably not… but the Taliban are no great deal to the rest of the region.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
China has already beaten the shit out of America in Vietnam!

Made you run away in cowardly disgust off the roof of your embassy!

That was a trial run for what you did in Afghanistan!

Bloody hell!

That is even worse!

Rice paddy farmers giving you a real kick up your arse!

I like your response, Mr. LHeym.

It takes a competent team to do what you suggest, and steady strategy. My point is that IMO Trump doesn't have the savvy, the team nor would he listen anyway.

This is going to play out, somehow, while we watch.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

To answer the question by M. Shy, the die is cast .

The alliances are forming. The tariff situation is much to blame. I would not have engaged in tariffs; especially, not unilateral imposition by a president.

Now, if I were Trump I would return to ratified treaty trade policy with South Korea. I would enter a similar trade treaty w Taiwan.

I would ask Congress to sell, not give, but sell arms and hardware to Taiwan. I would start major intelligence sharing w Taiwan. The legality of tariffs notwithstanding, I would begin negotiations w China to remove tariffs in exchange for a treaty recognizing the status quo in Taiwan.

In the event China balks, I would go to Taiwan and ask them to hold a national referendum on joining China or independence with the US recognizing the outcome of that vote. This would be the red button.

People also ask
What is the Latin for the die is cast?
AI Overview
Alea iacta est: The die is cast. Philosophical latin saying ...
The Latin phrase for "the die is cast" is Alea iacta est or Iacta alea est, both meaning "the die has been thrown" or "the die is cast". This famous declaration is attributed to Julius Caesar by the historian Suetonius, who claimed Caesar said it upon crossing the Rubicon River in 49 BC, signaling an irreversible decision to start a civil war.

Here's a breakdown of the phrase:
Alea/Iacta: Means "the die" or "the dice".
Iacta: Means "thrown" or "cast".
Est: Means "is".

Significance
Irreversible Decision:
.
The phrase signifies that a decision has been made and there is no turning back, even if the consequences are severe.
Historical Context:
.
When Caesar crossed the Rubicon, he defied the Roman Senate and initiated a civil war against Pompey the Great.
Enduring Meaning:
.
The expression is still used today to represent any bold and irreversible action that changes fate forever.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

People also ask

No, no one you know ever did.
3,2,1

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

People also ask

No, no one you know ever did.
3,2,1

No, No, No - inquiring minds asked.

Shitheads post BS.



=========================================

Quiz:

What's worse than a troll and rhymes with fool and tool?

A stalker trool

Another factor in the OP scenario is what if Vance becomes POTUS?

https://www.newsweek.com/jd-va...p-succession-2122085

JD Vance Says He's Ready to Take Over From Trump: How VPs Assume Presidency
Published Aug 30, 2025 at 1:11 PM EDT
Updated Aug 30, 2025 at 1:53 PM EDT

What a mess he will inherit

=============================================

https://www.advocate.com/voice...-vance-trump-tragedy

Not to worry, JD Vance is ready to be your next president if there's a 'terrible tragedy'

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...Dgy?ocid=socialshare

NATO scrambles warplanes on Russian border as Putin launches 'biggest attack of the war'
Story by Will Stewart & Matt Clemenson & Michael D. Carroll • 17h • 2 min read

Excerpt:

The extensive offensive occurred even as Donald Trump expressed being "very disappointed" with Putin. He accused the three dictators viewing the largest military display in history in Beijing of plotting against the United States.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...Wns?ocid=socialshare

How does Trump react to show of strength from Putin, Modi and Xi?
Greeting his host as a “dear friend,” Vladimir Putin said Tuesday that relations between Russia and China had “reached their highest level in history” as they seek to challenge U.S. global dominance.

Would be fun putting Putin and THE ORANGE MAGA TURD in a ring and let them dish it out!

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Would be fun putting Putin and THE ORANGE MAGA TURD in a ring and let them dish it out!

I bet he'd last less than 15 seconds.

Short of nuclear involvement I have reservations about how effective our military would be against China and/or russia.

Conversely, I have no question that our military would do very well short term.

I do have questions about our ability to sustain the fight. Note that the increased reliance on outside contractors for logistic support.

We also have shown that our politicians are not very consistent with supporting an ongoing particular campaign.

We constantly change objectives and goals.

For instance, we have spent the last couple decades emphasizing counterinsurgency and preparing for peer/near peer conflict has been deemphasized.

As an example, our naval SAMs are very good… but we don’t have enough to defend against a large threat, and our ability to make them is very limited.

Looks like our adversaries have developed a taste for TACO salad.