Should the US devote the majority of its resources to the Indo-Pacific, to face or deter China?

[Julie4]

[RavVid]

It depends on whether the US wants to cede it's position as the premier economic and military power. Or not.

China has an inherently contradictory position of seeking to have dominant military power and at the same time to sell a lot of shit to it's main competitor who is only a competitor because China chooses to view it as such

Commercial power is just as much a force as guns and missiles. China quite ruthlessly exploits monopolistic practices which would not be tolerated from a commercial body. Only if the world is unwise will it tolerate it from a state.

A lot of companies got into China because they expected the Chinese consumer market to become THE market to be in. That's a bust because China hasn't allowed that to happen and has recently doubled down on being an export driven market

So I think the US and it's Allies need to adopt a commercial and military response to China. Sufficient military presence to dissuade military adventurism against Taiwan, South korea and Japan... and ultimately the US. All the while degrading China in a trade war.

Europe has made a good start with recent trade tariffs on EV's.

[lightbulb27]

if we lose control of asia, you haven't seen inflation.. until USA starts manufacting all the stuff they do for cheap using cheap labor and minimal environmental laws.

there is no choice, but eventually the power shifts to china anyways. so no sense in dying for no reason.

manufacture here. invest in Americas...

Asia... have you seen asia? It's impressive... and we were a party to build it.

do not give your life to what is pointless waste. learn how to be friends.

[DryGermanGuy]

They don't have to, really. The United States is historically set up and equipped to handle two global conflicts at the same time. And China will turn from a passive enemy to an active enemy over time, every U. S. strategist has this on their radar already.

[DJB72]

Carrier groups are vulnerable to ballistic attack. Controlling the air hasn't been effective in decades but the US insists on building them and putting around 20,000 troops in danger every time they're sent to a conflict zone.

All military spending - not just US - should be for defensive measures against terrorism at home. Realistically a major war would begin with ballistic missiles.

[Anonymous]

The next 5 years will be the best time for China to star a war with the USA. Demographically, economically, and militarily they will be peaking. While we have general been in decline since 2009 demographically, and struggling economically for most of that time.

Our allies are in even worse shape with even older populations and worse economic situation.

[exitseven]

The US needs to start manufacturing its own chips and electronics. We have to stop relying on foreign countries

[DrPepper12]

Yes. Gradual withdrawal of resources from Europe as they build their NATO capabilities. The South China Sea is going to be a global flashpoint only rivaled by the border in Kashmir between India and Pakistan.

[Anonymous]

The USA should devote all its military resources to the DEFENSE of this nation ONLY. OFFENSIVE actions, including the supplying of weapons to other nations for them to militarily use against their "enemies" is unacceptable. We should wise-up, and mind our OWN BUSINESS.

[Avicenna]

I think we need to devote resources to growing our own economy and protecting our borders.

[Pterodon]

We have to. 25% of our trade is in their control thanks to obama’s cut backs which traded the balance of power in that region for no gain.

[KostasKouvalis]

That would be nice, but considering what China is capable of, that's a bad idea

[OddBeMe]

I don’t think provoking China is the right move, when we rely on them for cheap manufacturing.

[Anonymous]

Yes! I agree!