"The Pentagon Is Split On How To Fight A War Against China" Topic

"The Joint Chiefs keep ordering up ambitious new war plans. But their biggest battle might be with each other.

At first, it's hard to see Operation Desert Storm as anything less than an unparalleled American military victory. The battleship U.S.S. Missouri began the campaign to forcibly remove Iraqi forces from Kuwait by firing four Tomahawk cruise missiles at military command and control centers in Baghdad in the early morning hours of January 17, 1991. "I'll never forget the day we launched these," a Missouri crew member who witnessed the Tomahawk attack later wrote. "We listened to CNN radio from Baghdad after we had launched our birds. For an hour, everything was calm, but we knew sorties were on the way. Then all hell broke loose."

In all, the United States fired 297 Tomahawk missiles from ships and submarines during the Gulf War, of which 282 reached and destroyed their targets. Nine of the missiles failed to fire, six fell into the water after their launch, and two were shot down. The Tomahawks' carefully tabulated success rate of 94.94 percent was revolutionary, the most precise delivery of munitions on target in the history of warfare. And the Tomahawks were just one of an array of air assets used in the war's earliest days to destroy Iraq's military and leadership infrastructure…"
Full article here
link

link

This is a long read, but it gives an insight into how Pentagon planners go about planning to fight the next war.

Amicalement
Armand

The whole thing is silly. If it wasn't feeding the military industrial complex and the fact that we have too many generals and admirals, it would be a good comedy skit.

What the hell is the army going to do invade China? Defend Vietnam? The Navy and Air Force don't have to do anything but choke off shipping to China and they can do that from far away from the mainland. There are a few restricted spaces that all shipping has to pass through, at least the last time I looked at the map.

What are we going to war over anyway? You don't go to war with your leading trade partner. That is like shooting yourself in both feet and then playing Russian roulette with the remaining 4 bullets. Do we send anyone to DC with any brains anymore. My family and neighbors have bigger problems then wasting money on beating China in the South Pacific. I have potholes and schools that need fixed.

The whole thing is silly.

Agreed … it's all about the bottom dollar … $$$ … No one wants to risk their piece of the action. However, it would be negligence for militaries to not plan for all options, etc. …

Never said you can't plan. We used to have war plans for Canada and England too. But there is a difference between planning and trying to get more money for your branch of service.

Maybe the shot became from Japan…

USA ought to support them.

Amicalement
Armand