In two-war scenario, could U.S. forces prevail against powerful enemies?

... If the United States were drawn into simultaneous conflicts, would American forces prevail?

Scenarios include major flare-ups with Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, and transnational terrorists, mixed in with regional conflicts in Africa, the Arctic, and elsewhere. The threats are complex, according to an April assessment from the U.S. Director of National Intelligence, and carry a "potential for cascading events."

Engaging in two simultaneous large scale conflicts would present a problem for U.S. forces, according to one Washington, D.C.-based think tank.

"As currently postured, the U.S. military is only marginally able to meet the demands of defending America's vital national interests," wrote analysts from the Heritage Foundation in its annual Index of U.S. Military Strength. The military could handle one major conflict, the analysts wrote, but "it would be very hard-pressed to do more and certainly would be ill-equipped to handle two nearly simultaneous" major regional conflicts...




https://justthenews.com/government/security/two-war-scenario-could-us-forces-prevail-against-powerful-enemies





This is an interesting study. The current world situation is dangerous. The potential for multiple simultaneous conflicts exists. The question is how prepared we and our American military is to meet the various potential threats.

 

Fortunately the USA is good at having regional allies in Europe and Asia to assist in dealing with potential threats there.

 

A war with Russia over the Baltic’s 3 NATO allies and defending South Korea from the north after we commit to helping Taiwan defend itself from China would be a worst case scenario.

 

Nukes tend to cease hostilities pretty quick....

 

With two super power allies like Canada and Mexico the US has nothing to fear. It's like we're impossible to invade from either the north or south.

 

Aren't you talking about the military that was built by the former president or has all this changed in 3 months?

 

lol, the Snow Mexicans will save us!!!

 

I didn't read the study, but wondering if it takes into account the affect on the US financial situation. The high debt, low productivity, over leveraged banks and pretty much everybody....war will crash the stock market & the US$ with it....all hail Bitcoin!

 

After we kill most the Muscovite invaders in Alaska I'm sure Canada can take care of the stragglers.

 

They cease most or all life where used as well. They are only used when national existence and survival is at grave risk, not for some temporary tactical advantage.

 

Clearly I seeded too serous and thoughtful an article for many here...

 

If our worlds most expensive ship the aircraft carrier Gerald Ford is any indication, launched in 2017 the $14 BILLION dollar ship is virtually useless, a complete and total waste of taxpayer money as is much of the military equipment our corrupt Defense Department buys. I don't know about our current man/woman power in our forces but a lot of the equipment doesn't measure up.

 

That's what NATO is for, until Trump almost destroyed it. There is a lot of trust to rebuild with our NATO allies.

 

Actually he made them increase their defense spending and rebuilt ours. NATO is primarily designed to deal with Russia. Our alliances with the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, and India will be crucial in facing China.

 

nukes tend to end life on the only habitable planet that we know of. their use is, and must remain, unthinkable.

 

if we use nukes, it greenlights others doing the same though

 

1. we don't have enough people in the armed forces, nor can we call them up quickly, nor are many of them in physical shape to be trained.
2. our military equipment is not reliable enough to risk using, and is too expensive to procure ands maintain.
3. we do not have the industrial base to replace aircraft, ships or tanks lost in an initial attack.
4. our civil defense system is a joke. do kids even know what an air raid siren sounds like?
5. what industry we have is vulnerable. underground bases are reserved for high command and civilian leadership (which is mostly useless and counterproductive)
6. our allies can not depend on us, and will not respond when we need them. possible exception uk.
7. our population is divided., many would never believe one war, much less 2, necessary.
8. you may have heard that the usa is in debt. we can not afford a war.
9. etc etc etc

the usa has not won a serious war since 1945. war is too serious to contemplate without a mobilized and united population. i think we should avoid war at all costs.

my perspective = former naval officer and retired dod civilian.

 

So should we just give up and surrender to the 1st nation that attacks us or our interests anywhere?

 

What makes you say that? Specifics please.

 

I was kind of curious about that as well.

 

this may call for a redefinition of "our" interests. who in donbass or crimea has attacked "us?"

at any rate my point is that war is a serious business, and if we do not take it seriously we should leave it alone.

 

Some wars you have to fight even if you can't commit strongly enough to them to win.

 

i'm sure he is talking about the elevators and catapults, without which a carrier is not really functional.

carriers are impressive for "showing the flag", but in the 21st century they are expensive targets

 

I agree. The point of the article though wasn’t about us going out and looking for wars to start. I don’t think we should go to war with Russia over Ukraine. Provide them military aid yes but not our soldiers and their equipment. We are obligated to defend all NATO members and must follow through on that. While we along with Australia and Japan should defend Taiwan if they are attacked, I expect that China will attempt to get North Korea to attack South Korea first so that we are preoccupied when they do invade the Republic of China on Taiwan.

 

To the latter, pretty bold claim given than no supercarrier has ever been damaged by enemy fire (much less sunk or heavily damaged).

To the former, every major weapons system has major teething problems when it enters service.