Originally Posted by
rickair7777
With PRC of all nations, it's a little more complicated than just the global commodity price.
By purchasing oil directly from IR, presumably in violation of sanctions, they actually have a supply that is somewhat independent from both the global commodity price and also potentially from sanctions that might be levied against PRC in the event that *they* do something crazy.
I've stated ad nauseam that I don't know what the motive(s) were for this war, but there are a few objective fringe benefits, if not outright motives. With regard to PRC...
1. Shows US is willing to engage (at least some of their plans for ROC/SCS likely rely on US inaction).
2. Demonstrates that we can still execute large scale shock-and-awe in the maritime/air domains.
3. Reminds them that we can (and will) interfere with their interests in other parts of the world... they can't rely on a Taiwan situation being confined to the first island chain.
Regarding what lessons other countries have drawn from observing this war, my conclusions are quite different from yours.
You correctly point out that the US has stunning military capability and is willing to use it.
But the lesson this war has revealed is that the political/governing class of this nation is unable to ask any sacrifice of its people. Due to this, we are unable to commit to the level of efforts in both time, and levels of escalation, to actually achieve objectives that involve the commitment of the nation.
We have demonstrated, repeatedly, that anything that creates discontent in the stock and bond markets will cause changes in our behavior.
We are enthralled with the capabilities of our smart weapons and other hardware. We also get all excited about the seemingly movie-like capabilities of special forces and special ops.
And all of that amazing capability is by and large disconnected from society at large. Hence the comparatively small number of people who are actually carrying out the missions tend to be viewed by many leaders as pieces on a game board. Or props for "ain't we sumtin?" speeches and rallys.
As soon as it looks like using this military will require any sacrifice of the nation at large, or the wealth of the power class, we back off.
Adversaries and former allies alike know that we can do quick and violent actions across many areas of policy. (economic, military, etc), but if we encounter pushback that will cause sacrifice, particularly from the markets, we become silly putty.
That is what we have shown the world.
It is now over 65 years since JFK's inaugural speech where he said:
"Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country."
Such a sentiment is beyond the ken of our leaders. Hence they are unable to grasp the reality of an adversary that is willing to endure great suffering in order to wage battle with what to us seems unsurmountable odds.
In any fight we pick, we have demonstrated that we lack the ability to commit to a long struggle that asks anything from the ruling class or the nation at large.