Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
It's one of the many reasons why I feel a lot of the conventional warfare Taiwan scenarios are really kayfabe being pushed for budgetary reasons. "We need more of X, unless Taiwan falls." "If my office doesn't get an upgrade the PRC will roll right through."
The thing is, ideally, you want weapon sales to both demonstrate resolve by showing you will commit resources but you want them to also drive up the cost of PRC intervention. A2/AD and lots of missiles do that better than high-cost, hard-to-sustain prestige systems.
It's a value added question, though. If the PRC has taken the step of deciding on attempting an armed intervention, it means something has gone *drastically* wrong within the Politburo and they're going all in. There's very little added costs will change.
And in that case, A2/AD, mines, missiles and infantry training are going to do a lot more to make any US intervention in the conflict likely to succeed (by there being a military presence we can support there, rather than a fait accompli) than prestige systems.
Because those systems both reinforce the security umbrella, but also raise the cost of intervention with or without it. It's, in essence, a deterrence two-fer.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
