You don't seem to understand what "project power" means in this context. It refers to a country's ability to send its military forces well outside of its borders to fight, and to keep them resupplied in the field. The fact that the U.S. was able to invade Afghanistan--a landlocked country that was literally on the other side of the planet--and occupy it for 20 years demonstrates an outstanding ability to project power.>believe China's ability to project military power is weaker than most people think.
And so is America's ability to project power. America already failed in Afghanistan to obliterate a bunch of goat herders with 1970s military equipment after 20 years of fighting. Taiwan right now is operating with only 60-80% of its military roles being filled (https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/02/15/ch ... low-shell/). What readiness does Taiwan actually have? I mean do you really think a country that produces a significant amount of the worlds arms and has a very efficient manufacturing process with over 60x the population of taiwan would lose? It would be like America fighting Jamaica and betting that Jamaica would win. Its asinine. You are very brainwashed, sir.
U.S. forces never lost a significant battle in Afghanistan. The war was "lost" for political reasons (namely, the failure to create a central government in Kabul that the Afghan people supported, and a loss of will among America's ruling class to continue the occupation). But that has nothing to do with "power projection."
And I actually HAVE concerns about Taiwan's ability to defend itself, which I expressed in a recent post elsewhere on this forum:
viewtopic.php?p=8722#p8722If a conflict happens, I think it's likelier that Taiwan will "deflate" by bungling its own defense and surrendering to China even though further resistance was possible. America would be able and willing to help, but we'd question whether it was worth it considering that the Taiwanese were too cowardly to fight hard for themselves.
Your Jamaica comparison is flawed because it leaves out the fact that U.S. forces would have to fight with a powerful third party and probably coalition of third party nations that would send forces into the Caribbean to block U.S. ships and planes from reaching the island. And even if U.S. troops established a beach head on Jamaica, it might be impossible to adequately resupply them due to Jamaica's allies blowing up U.S. ships and planes en route to the island.
I don't think I'm brainwashed at all. Quite the opposite, in fact. I think Westerners in general and Americans in particular have a habit of succumbing to declinist thinking and overreacting to threats of all sorts. The news media is extremely skilled at doing this, as spreading alarmism and fear boosts their profits, and so are military and intelligence agencies. China has become the new boogeyman that generates ad revenue and voter support for increased defense and spy agency funding. If you're parroting the standard line that China is a growing threat and will inevitably defeat and replace the U.S., you're more likely to be the "brainwashed" party in the discussion.
In reality, while China is certainly growing stronger by the day, they still probably lack the ability to conquer Taiwan. Reading extensively about this and related subjects has made me less "brainwashed" than the average person.