When will the US decide to devote its military resources to the Indo-Pacific region?

[Julie07]

[RavVid]

I'm inclined to think recent geopol is angled towards US facing China down and dissuading it from launching a Taiwan invasion.
1. Forcing Europe to deal with Russia
2. Kicking China out of Panama
3. Cutting China off from Venezuela.
4. Disabling Iran currently

At this point China can't look to Russia and Iran as useful allies. But the US is building allies in the indo pacific. Japan is sort of joining AUKUS. Philippines bases are being enhanced.

India is in a state of flux. It has fought "wars" with China though it has a nonaligned policy. It seems to want to take world factory status from China. At this point it still looks non-aligned.

Australian bases are being enhanced and AUKUS is proceeding. Three of our guys were on USS Minnesota when it torpedo'ed IRIS Dena.

It also seems that Chinese military hardware hasn't performed well in Pakistan or Iran.

So I think some precursor steps are completed/underway. And hopefully a "To The Death" Taiwan invasion does not happen.

[OneViewpoint]

Depriving a tier 1 economy like China of the use of the Panama canal boule be a bonehead move. Why not partner with them to do the badly needed repairs, maintenance, and upgrades needed to keep that key trade route operating?

Cutting off Chinese access to oil anywhere is a bonehead move. We tried that with Japan in the 1930's. How'd that work out? Remember Pearl Harbor? Why not continue to allow China to compete for that key resource in global free markets if we are indeed fans of Capitlaism?

Having global superpowers go to war over stupid dogma is a stupid approach. The world would be better off if we found ways to cooperate instead. Another "Cold War" would benefit no one.

[RavVid]

@OneViewpoint It was a bonehead move to give an adversarial state corporation a 99 year lease on the port of Darwin right next door to your naval yards as my country did. Giving control away is different to not allowing usage of. Didn't think I would need to explain that.

Ditto Panama.

The same comment applies to oil. China has little oil and transit through the Malacca straights would easily be interdicted. That would undesirable for them if they start a war so they have built a rail link to Iran.

I certainly agree a war is highly undesirable but I doubt it be over dogma but instead over hegemony. The Chinese aren't hiding that desire, nor Russia, nor Iran.

In WW2 we learnt that appeasement was a bad move. So too is allowing adversaries to build core advantages which is just as dumb as allowing Iran to build nuclear bombs.

Our best chance of avoiding a hot WW is to remove the possibilities of adversaries winning the same.

[OneViewpoint]

So your answer is the best way to prevent war is a series of preemptive wars justified by "what if". You're not the brightest candle on the birthday cake.

[RavVid]

@OneViewpoint We have the example of Hitler of course and how going with the flow appeasement didn't work. There were times when resolute action could/might have prevented Hitler initiating WW2.

Remilitarization of Rhineland, Sudetenland for a couple of options. Flourishing a piece of paper and claiming piece in out time in 1938 has looked pretty goddamn stupid from 1939 onwards.

It would seem not something to repeat unless you are sub 80's.

If you are referring to Iran there is hard evidence of their aggressive gray zone tactics and overt weapon development (incl nuclear) to justify military action. It is very far from a whatif. If in the process you make it more difficult for an adversary to attack that is good strategy.

[Zack-Bann]

I don’t think the US will go to open conflict with China


Because while it still has the upper hand in terms of military it will require a lot more casualties that the average American won’t be ok with


While in china they won’t get an opinion on the matter so they will fight on

[exitseven]

Hopefully after Iran Trump will turn his attention back to the economy and other domestic issues and leave foreign policies to somebody else.

[WhiteBoyChill]

He needs to get Cuba next then we’ll be good

[DryGermanGuy]

They already do, extensively: In Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Guam, Philippines...

[Cyfris]

Pretty sure that ship has sailed and is sinking other ships as we speak.

[BonzoInBitburg]

The US has over 300 bases in East Asia. How much more attention is needed?

[lightbulb27]

I would hope they minimize, but as it is doing war exercises in Korea not a good idea.

[Dargil]

If you pay attention to world news, we already are.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

Is already having army near Taiwan.
What do you mean?

[NewtoTheSouth]

For what purpose? USA already has a military presence on South Korea and Japan. The people there generally support this as it prevents Chinese incursions.

[RavVid]

Traditionally the defender has a 3 to 1 advantage. With missiles that is not so as there is a first mover advantage. Somewhat like Pearl harbor in WW2.

[Jeff51]

Aren't we there at all? Trump said his war is almost over so maybe after

[Anonymous]

It does seem like America is too northern focused, as an Aussie I feel.

[beefcakebradybatson]

When it discovers oil there.

[Jennz6]

Why?