this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2025
301 points (98.4% liked)

Progressive Politics

2827 readers
535 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

He told the New York Times that he thinks the U.S. will “very likely” find itself in a three-front war with China, Russia, and Iran. As a result, he said, the Pentagon should continue developing autonomous weapons at full speed, pointing to big mismatches in how far the U.S. would be willing to go while fighting a war compared with other countries.

Source

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Hello_there@fedia.io 11 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Because 3 way wars are easy to win.

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Especially when one of the opponents has several times our population and all opponents are oceans away, besides two of the three being nuclear armed and the third being close. Even with the size of our military, I don't think that's a war we would stand a reasonable chance in.

[–] Hello_there@fedia.io 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Imo, we are fucked. Ukraine drones show that our aircraft carriers, planes, and tanks are worthless when a 1000 dollar drone can carry munitions to cripple them.
It's a new world and we aren't prepared for it.

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I wasn't even thinking about that kind of thing, since drones are something I'm sure we could utilize as well. It's mostly the sheer production capacity and population that China in particular has. I expect an actual large scale war against them, that both didn't turn nuclear (since that renders the whole concept of a victor a bit moot) and wasn't some very quick defensive action like an attempt to defend Taiwan might be (which might end fast enough for production capacity to not matter as much as existing inventory), would end up looking something like Japan's war against the US during ww2: we might be able to cause a great deal of damage to their military assets at first, but if they can replace their losses much faster than we can, then all they have to to is drag things out enough for the numbers to swing decisively in their favor.

[–] Pieisawesome@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 days ago

Taiwan invasion is something we should be able to see coming way in advance.

China lacks the amount of landing vessels they would need to mount an invasion.

If they start building hundreds/thousands of landing ships, then we should be concerned

[–] Hello_there@fedia.io 2 points 2 days ago

Offshoring all our factories isn't going to work out well. If only trump wasn't an idiot, he could have made progress on that over next 10 yrs

[–] bassomitron@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Iran would be a non-issue in an actual war with us. Occupying it would be a far different story. Same with Russia. China, on the other hand, would be extremely devastating to both sides.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

The United States military strength has, until very recently, been focused on the ability to successfully prosecute war on two major fronts and one minor front.

[–] match@pawb.social 3 points 2 days ago

Especially ones with no obvious win conditions

[–] entwine413@lemm.ee 3 points 2 days ago

They are with a nuclear arsenal. And Trump is stupid enough to use it.