So if Iran goes full monty and China invades Taiwan while Russia is grinding down its population on the Ukrainian front, we'd have WW3 on our hands I reckon.
That war is already underway, we just won't be calling it that until after..
We won't be calling it that until the US has a draft.
Drafts have not won recent wars. Wars are not PVP.
The US has made an effort to maintain a highly trained and extremely specialized fighting force. It can take over a year of training in certain specialities before you even get to the last school house.
There's a focus on making advanced weapon systems easy to use through human factors analysis and that's slowly transitioning into killbots that do everything but pull the trigger and need a human in the loop to authorize the kill.
During WWII there was a massive increase in manufacturing which was beyond the enemies reach. If you got drafted to do anything it'd likely be work in a plant making drones or something logistical such as transporting drones.
Yes the US tries to make soldiers the operators of weaponry, not the weapons themselves as in earlier times. Treasure spent on weaponry stokes the military industrial complex. Benefits to dead veterans families, not so much. Also civilian deaths undermine public support for whatever bullshit they are doing.
Not really a world war until 10 countries are actively involved with 2 of them USA and China.
Right now usa is passive and china is not involved.
We're in the lend and lease phase right now
I could see it being called a proxy world war. There's enough concentration of where support is coming from.
I think that’s just called a Cold War. We didn’t invade Vietnam because we actually give a shit about Vietnamese people, it was a proxy war with the USSR
Well not so quiet anymore
It was never meant to be covert. That doesn't work as a deterrent. The headline means quiet as in not announced, not as In nobody knows.
Like, if you quietly left a party. It just means you didn't say goodbye, it does not mean that you're still hiding in the building.
Oh but I DO hide in the building after I “quietly” leave. Then I just like sit at the breakfast table in my “borrowed” jammies and ask what’s for breakfast as my gracious host rounds the corner in the morning
Ah, that explains your confusion.
Is there any active or potential war the US isn't paying for?
The US is paying because it needs Taiwan. If Taiwan didn't have value for the US, it would have been overrun by China a decade ago
israel and ukraine as well. it's no coincidence that right next to a powerful country (or, in israel's case, a bloc of countries) that the US is unfriendly with there is a client state whose entire existence depends on Western funding.
The bulk of the US economy is based on taking money from working people and then consolidating it to billionaires that run defense corporations. So "paying for" it's basically just an engine for making rich Americans more rich.
Well Taiwan can either go with the US or China. They've been wanting to stay independent from China for a while now so I don't think it's much of a surprise.
Almost all countries other than USA, Russia, and China have to pick a side.
Good. Even if nobody likes 'murica, their weapons work well enough to deter China from doing something stupid.
Quietly? They have been doing so for at least 40 years. Everybody knew and knows.
BBC found out about it. It aint that quiet.
Give them a bunch of nukes and biological weapons and after they arrive send a message to the PRC
"Just a fyi, we sent them a 100 but they only received 80. Be a real shame if Taiwanese operators had planted them in randomly selected cities on the mainland."
It will be hilarious way to end the world.
...and Israel, for that matter.
I mean, yeah, why wouldn't they?
Should we just let China carpetbomb Taiwan instead?
This is the best summary I could come up with:
When US President Joe Biden recently signed off on a $80m grant to Taiwan for the purchase of American military equipment, China said it "deplores and opposes" what Washington had done.
It is sending a clear message of strategic clarity to Beijing that we stand together," says Wang Ting-yu, a ruling party legislator with close ties to Taiwan's President Tsai Ing-wen, and to US Congressional chiefs.
He says the $80m is the tip of what could be a very large iceberg, and notes that in July President Biden used discretionary powers to approve the sale of military services and equipment worth $500m to Taiwan.
But Dr Lai says it's possible to make educated guesses: Javelin and Stinger anti-aircraft missiles - highly effective weapons that forces can learn to use quickly.
A war-gaming exercise conducted by a think-tank last year found that in a conflict with China, Taiwan's navy and air force would be wiped out in the first 96 hours of battle.
The focus will switch to ground troops, infantry and artillery - repelling an invasion on the beaches and, if necessary, fighting the People's Liberation Army (PLA) in the towns and cities, and from bases deep in the island's jungle-covered mountains.
The original article contains 1,687 words, the summary contains 202 words. Saved 88%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/