Badly; Iran has spent decades preparing for an invasion. They are armed and trained for irregular warfare against a more powerful opponent, aka the US.
The main reason this won’t lead to WW3 is that there is nothing to get other big powers involved.
WW1 happened because of a web of alliances forcing one clump of nations to fight another clump of nations. WW2 was two aggressors, Japan and Germany, invading huge swaths of Asia and Europe, forcing other nations to participate in war whether they liked it or not.
This Iran conflict is likely to still stay confined to the Middle East because Russia and China have no appetite for direct fighting .
When you say “nothing,” what about NATO? Poland is already on edge because of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, and now Turkey is at the edge of the US/Israel-Iran conflict. Further, if Iran should attack the US, that would trigger NATO’s involvement (probably). Furthermore, the two wars aren’t THAT far from each other on a global scale; nor is the Pakistan-Afghanistan situation. It wouldn’t take much escalation to drag the Russian wars and the American wars into each other.
I presume there are forces of sanity in the world, including in Russia, working very hard to make sure this doesn’t happen, but when one of the great powers is as incompetent as the current American leadership, I’m less sanguine about things.
Rather than entitled and greedy, I think the above is more pragmatic and about control. There are a number of things beyond our control, perhaps even a despair-inducing amount, so doing the things you can (in a positive way) around you that bring no harm to self or others is a good response. If it’s not perishable, and you have the space, then fine. I too am indifferent to my getting snuffed out (not ready to go, no, but it doesn’t worry me) as I am about my wife and pets.
Putting their needs first? That is expected. Sure, I’ll continue to fund the ACLU, my local and federal Dems (even if I wish they would do MORE), and provide moral support for my friends (yes, including you folks!), but it’s a +0.00001 in the scheme of things. Not zero, and needed, but not a big difference.
Preparing for your needs, the critter needs, and those around you? That’s going to make a more immediate and tangible difference.
Being a little selfish, on the small things, gives you space to work and try on the big things. And to keep those around you doing the same. So don’t let the despair eat you alive, hope for the best, prepare (in the small ways) for the worst.
Back to the main thread. I think it’s unlikely that the USA/Israel’s actions in the middle east is going to be the precipitating factor. If I were China, I’d wait until Trump finishes exhausting the USA in multiple “pre-emptive aggressions” and finishing destroying any faith in the USA as a real partner. It got hit hard by Bush, with Obama buying us a moment of relief. Then Trump 1.0 and 2.0 proved that we can’t make good decisions about our leaders. That’s electing three absolute stinkers in five elections. I’d write us off as well.
Once that’s done, and Russia digs a grave for itself along with the Ukraine, then can calmly annex adjacent territories in bite sized pieces. As long as it doesn’t directly touch Russia, they aren’t going to use Nukes, and the chances they fall to Civil War themselves the moment Putin drops is high.
The USA is going to be too busy fixing itself for at least a generation if we don’t fall into a full on Fascist state (I would not give us better than a 50% chance of that). And if we do fall, I’m 100% positive that the circumstance will be “You don’t interfere in Greater Asia, and we won’t interfere in the Americas”.
As many in-thread have said, despite some economic woes, they’ve got far fewer self inflected wounds. Why should they stop the other World/Nuclear powers when we’re punching ourself in the balls so effectively?
I can keep insulin unopened in the fridge about 2 month.
Cannot freeze it.
I don’t use the Walmart insulin. I would have to do math to use it(could be done for me). It does not reassure me to know I’d have to use it. I’ve used analog so many years. My insurance doesn’t mind covering it.
Just so much you can do if the power is out for long. I have a tiny battery fridge for short term emergency.
Yeah, I know I’m screwed if the SHTF.
I’m ok with it.
Just rather my peeps don’t suffer.
For the last several years, China has been hinting very strongly that they want to be prepared for a military invasion of Taiwan by 2027. That would only move their timeline up slightly.
I have no clue how the orange buffoon will respond. However, Taiwan produces 90% of the world’s high-end microchips. That will make it very difficult not to respond, even though our defense treaty with them is deliberately very ambiguous on that point.
Ask your doctor, of course, but I’m pretty sure refrigerated unopened insulin will last at least as long as its expiration date (I have vials of Lantus and Novolin in my fridge with exp. dates in 2028)
Yes I meant 2 YEARS not months. Sorry.
Unopened and kept cold.
It’s definitely a lot more attractive for China to attack with Trump in the White House than with anyone else as POTUS.
However, the value of Taiwan’s chips is only relevant for deterrence purposes. Once war breaks out, even a US intervention probably would still not prevent the huge economic disruption from chips from Taiwan anyway.
Speaking narrowly to the chips issue, my wife is a senior chip engineer with multiple locations in the US. It had to close two of it’s locations in the last 3 years, though granted part of it was gross mismanagement from the prior leadership team.
Part of the problem though was though the CHIPS act was designed to “help” domestic production, what it did was require a major investment in capital, with a partial reimbursement at set stages in hitting required goals. So you had to spend money to get some money back. Conservative producers didn’t see any advantage to it, and that was before the political pressure to “de-Chinafy” and eventual massive tariffs further increased costs.
I have zero faith that this administration is going to invest a fraction of the funds needed to suddenly improve domestic options, and we’re talking years of lead up time. And that’s leaving out having the means of production (such a mothballed but still functional lines) but the supply chain and cost issues from resourcing making it unprofitable to produce a lot of chips.
Just adding details to @Velocity’s post on the huge economic disruption via the loss (temporary or otherwise) of Taiwan. Not to mention those providers are on the bleeding edge in both knowledge and experience. Even if Trump brought the best of the best back to the USA (claiming a win) the same issues with years of infrastructure analysis and training of domestic techs means years with a massive loss in building potential - and those existing lines are often being used to build chips that go into things like military munitions that are being used at a frightening pace.
The war in Ukraine looks pretty restrained and limited by this point. It’s basically slow-grind attrition. There is no sign that Russia is planning to suddenly go on an expanded adventure into Poland or the Baltics - and no real motive or incentive to do so, given that it would result in an epic smackdown and possible toppling downfall for Putin at a time when he’s already fully invested even just trying to keep things grinding slowly in Ukraine alone. So, no NATO-Europe war seems likely.
And it is getting there fast. The supplies of various ABMs being used in the conflict cannot be replenished quickly, at any price. And the price of this war is high.
A few months. The American public willingness to get engaged is a poisoned well. China recognizes that this is the best time they have to do something without response. The possibility of that being wrong is where this potentially spirals.
The problem is that we can’t just look at this from an international perspective. We have to also look at the domestic politics inside China.
The Chinese government has been able to establish a lot of governmental control with the argument that it’s necessary for China to be strong and an authoritarian government is part of the price. The regime says that if they were more relaxed, China would be weak and other countries would prey upon them. And they point back to the late imperial regime and the Nationalist regimes as examples of that happening.
So the Chinese people are willing to accept a dictatorship - but the implied bargain is that the regime has to produce results. And regaining “lost” territory like Taiwan is one of those promised results. The Chinese government can only postpone occupying Taiwan for so long before the people start protesting and saying “We were willing to give up freedom in order to regain our lost territory. But if you’re not strong enough to do that, then we want the freedom.”
As for the outcome of a military conflict between China and the United States, I don’t think our military supremacy is as assured as we like to believe. Our standard response when China threatens Taiwan is we sail a bunch of aircraft carriers into the region to intimidate China with the reminder that we have naval superiority, which is all important in an amphibious campaign.
But is our naval superiority real? Aircraft carriers might be an outdate technology. It’s happened before. Having a big fleet of galleys used to be important until sailing ships rendered them obsolete. Having a big fleet of sailing ships of the line used to be important until ironclad steamships rendered them obsolete. Having a big fleet of dreadnought battleships used to be important until aircraft and submarines rendered them obsolete. We now have a big fleet of aircraft carriers and we thing that’s what important. But have anti-ship missiles rendered them obsolete? China seems to think so; they’ve spent a decade or so building up a big anti-ship missile network along their coast. Our strategy of sending in a carrier fleet to intimidate China won’t work if China launches a few missiles and sinks the carriers. Then we’d have to pull back several hundred miles and leave Taiwan all alone.
I’ve long been of the opinion that the USA would be best off sending no carriers - or even any surface warships - and relying almost entirely on submarines in a Taiwan scenario. An amphibious invasion would be a situation where it is China putting its surface fleet out there at risk, not America, and all the American subs would have to do would be to sink a sufficiently high amount of Chinese shipping and the invasion is no longer succeed-able.
Is that a big concern of the Chinese people? I have no idea. My impression is they are willing to accept a dictatorship because of the rapid modernization and wealth creation over the past decades, not some abstract promise to unite Taiwan.
Yeah money, not territory is the expected result.
Now, if at some point the Chinese economy gets into a recession, (inevitable in the long run), THEN, Taiwan would be a good distraction/flag to rally about.
An historical precedent would be the Malvinas/Falklands war, Galtieri and his junta didn’t suddenly had a case of irredentism , the economic and political situation was deteriorating fast and they decided to try to get the islands as a hail mary to stay in power.
Though of course, their preference would be to be able to say “we’re ready for this, and you can’t count on the USA any more, you’ll be alone. Deal or no deal?”
As to the OP, hard to tell if a World War is starting — after all, does the invasion of China count? Or the taking of Ethiopia as an obvious “opening act”?
Arguing the other side … this could reduce risk. This operation as a technical thing is a success (in the sense of “the operation was a success and the patient died” old joke). And Chinese provided kit that Iran has used has reputedly underperformed. Xi may both recognize that the US has less hardware and likely less public support, but Trump is unpredictable and doesn’t care about public support. It may be a best possible time for China to move, or not. Do ya feel lucky?
The Chinese government has made it a big concern. They’re the ones who have been saying for decades that recovering “lost” territory is a primary goal. (It’s not just Taiwan. This also covers various small islands and land borders disputes. And in the past, it included Hong Kong and Macao.)
Imagine that occupying Greenland wasn’t just a passing whim that Trump talked about off and on. Imagine that every President since Truman had been saying that Greenland was part of the United States and we needed to get it back at some point. By now, most Americans would just accept that as a fact.
The problem with this argument is historic precedent does not support it. Never had the world, and in particular all big economic and military powers in Europe, been so closely integrated as just before WWI, in the spring 1914. [Quote, Quote 2, Quote 3] They all thought that this economic interdependence was a compelling argument to avoid a big war among them. Some skirmishes, sure, but a long, bloody war? Never!
You know how that turned out. Once shots start to fall the military arguments take primacy over economic or humanitarian considerations. Militarism is stupid, and China, Russia and the USA are militaristic nations, while Europe is fast becoming one.