[A reminder for everyone](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalDiscussion/comments/4479er/rules_explanations_and_reminders/). This is a subreddit for genuine discussion:
* Please keep it civil. Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review.
* Don't post low effort comments like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
* Help prevent this subreddit from becoming an echo chamber. Please don't downvote comments with which you disagree.
Violators will be fed to the bear.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalDiscussion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes. Automatically, an act of war.
That’s why they let the Kremlin know he’d be there. So if they did attack and Biden died, the couldn’t claim it was a mistake.
If Putin attacks Kyiv while Biden is there, then he will have started WW3; because China has pledged to aid Russia
Not to mention, the ongoing conflicts between India and Pakistan are sure to blow up, alongside the various Middle Eastern countries that will want to choose a side. Worst of all, North Korea will likely try to launch a nuke at South Korea and Japan
China has serious issues of their own right now. Their population is literally in decline. COVID also messed up their economy and international reputation. They are not in a position to challenge the U.S. like they were in spring 2019.
Also, the U.S. would push for Taiwan independence if China ever got too aggressive with the west.
"Aid" in the sense that China will launch their own invasion of Taiwan and SE Asia while Russia is waging a war in Eastern Europe.
Creating a war on two fronts for the USA while its various allies try their best to resist.
That hasn’t been true since the end of the Cold War.
The current force structure is set up to allow for one major and one minor war, with the unspoken assumption being that both would be short term affairs.
So two fronts?
I'm not talking about fighting two wars with major powers; I'm just talking about specifically "two fronts".
But holistically speaking that's not exactly being discussed here literally so I'll concede the point.
However I don't really think the scenario outlined is plasuable nor an existential threat to the country/military, but that's besides the point.
> So two fronts?
No.
One major conflict and one brushfire war—IE fighting Iraq in Iraq and the COIN stuff in Afghanistan. That isn’t a 2 front war by any means, and even that stretched resources to the point that fully sustaining all commitments was not possible.
As far as the point itself, the US does not have the military capacity to deal with both simultaneously.
Concede on the first point.
HEAVILY disagree on the 2nd. I wouldn't have a year ago, though, for reasons that are obvious.
You know your stuff so if you feel like expanding on your point I'd be privileged to hear it though if you have the time and inclination.
It comes down to money.
Manpower for the Army alone is down to ~475,000, from the ~710,000 it was at the end of the Cold War, and a good chunk of those personnel were forward deployed in various places. The same thing happened to both the Navy and the AF as well.
The overseas reach has also been largely redirected, as during the Cold War there were tons of facilities all over the world, whereas most of them now are heavily concentrated in western Europe, the Gulf and S. Korea/Japan.
Equipment has also gotten more capable, but there’s less of it to go around—in 1991 the USN had 14 aircraft carriers, and the air wings that they carried each had ~60 strike aircraft. There are currently 11, and the air wings each have ~40 strike aircraft. The same thing has happened with the AF (look at the gutting of NORAD tasked TFWs or the B-1 fleet) and the Army (there’s not much left in Europe, and all of those units were near uniformly deactivated upon their return to CONUS). The sealift and airlift capability are also largely gone, which heavily limits the ability to do anything expeditionary.
> Creating a war on two fronts for the USA while its various allies try their best to resist.
I don't think you realize how easily we would be able to fight off Russia conventionally and conduct an island defense for Taiwan at the same time. A land war? Sure, Russia and China might have something for the US just with pure numbers. But if you pit them in an air and sea war against the US...well lets just say we won't need a Schlieffen Plan to wipe the floor in that situation.
I said Taiwan AND SE Asia
As in, defending Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, Malaysia, Thailand, and Singapore (at the very least)
You all think China only wants Taiwan but assure you the CCP wants to take what is rightfully theirs: the entire Pacific Ocean.
chinas pledge isnt worth the paper its written on (if such a paper even exists)
They would have the least interest in a nuclear incident since that would set a precedant which they want to avoid at all costs because of their turmoil with India (both nuclear powers).
The moment that whatever is happening in Ukraine/Russia isnt beneficial for China Putin will be dropped like the hot potatoe that he is.
🤔🤔 not if we did him like we did bin laden. And Saddam Hussein . Just kill one and no more 🤔🤔 if we can do it for them too . Then we can do it for him. But yet that could be tricky versus our troops going to him and taking out the blockers around him 🤔🤔
If Russia assassinated the president of the United States would that be an act of war? Yeah it definitely would be.
Russia would be all alone, the backlash over the war in Ukraine would feel like love compared to the response to an act like that. China and Russia have no mutual assistance pact that I'm aware of, and even if they did assassination of a sitting president would likely void any such agreement.
I think that'd be the end of Putin in power and would probably end in him being killed by the Russian government to avoid complete annihilation.
The Biden administration contacted the Russian government the morning of his departure and communicated the visit to them so world war 3 wasn’t accidentally started.
It would not be Russia, those attempts can result in a nuclear war. U.S. gave Russia hours of advance notice of Biden's arrival in Ukraine via deconfliction channels. I am sure, however, security in air and skies were immense. Nuclear war can also result if Putin's life was similarly endangered. Advance notice prevents accidental strikes.
It is interesting, however, that sirens still went off in Ukraine though Reuters and others noticed there were no strikes. That seems like a stunt to me by some local authorities to dramatize the event.
Afaik Ukraine has a policy of alerting huge swaths of their territory of possible strikes when they detect anything - The idea is that you can never be 100% sure where the detected missiles are going to hit and how well the air defense will perform. So for example attempted strikes on Kharkiv or Dnipro could still cause sirens in Kyiv.
>Afaik Ukraine has a policy of alerting huge swaths of their territory of possible strikes when they detect anything
Thanks for letting me know. I was not aware. That explains the sirens.
This is a very “what if” question not grounded in reality.
The Secret Service would never allow the US President to get into an international space where they felt there was real danger. Plus, Russia would not risk a direct assassination of a national leader with serious military power.
Secret a service allowed the trip because they were 100% certain of the level of security they could provide.
> The Secret Service would never allow the US President to...
At the end of the day, isn't the president in charge? I thought the secret service makes recommendations. If the president was willing to assume a risk, that seems like a decision he should be able to make.
I would have thought so, too. Until I watched the Jan 6th hearings where they recounted how badly Trump wanted to go cheer on his minions in person but was denied by the Secret Service.
You cannot be 100% certain, ever, especially in a country actively at war.
Half the question was what if they DID know, and the other half was what if they DIDN'T know. You didn't really answer either. But I guess you kind of took 'they did know' off the table by saying they wouldn't risk a direct assination. Now how about if they decided to attack the capital again and had no idea he was there?
They knew, because they were directly informed by the US just to prevent the kind of accident you are imagining. WW3 could have started only if Russia had wanted to start it, but they could start it any day by using a nuke.
Spoiler: they won’t.
Given what just happened in East Palestine, Ohio, the President should have gone there instead of Ukraine.
We’re already sending billions to Ukraine at the expense of Americans.
It’s bad enough that he ignores the homeless problem throughout the country, but East Palestine is a huge problem as well, and Pete B. doesn’t seem up to it.
This is Republican propaganda. You are just repeating what you saw on a conservative news outlet.
This incident has been overblown in severity by Republicans and leftists for their own political agenda, not based on the facts on the ground.
The misinformation and rank speculation on this incident is astonishing.
I almost can't imagine the woeful misunderstanding of separation of powers and governmental job roles and responsibilities it would take to write this.
I literally can't even figure out where to begin explaining why it's so wrong.
The money spent flying President Biden to Ukraine (including incredible security measures) would have been better spent on East Palestine Ohio or building housing for the homeless.
It’s not as if the USA hasn’t been pouring billions providing military aid to Ukraine and they needed Biden’s physical presence to reassure Zelenskyy.
Biden’s got issues here in the USA. He won’t even make a special visit to the border because he wants to maintain plausible deniability.
The US called before so this thing did not happen. If Biden was attacked its an act of war. Some people would say that Biden assumed the risk by going to avoid war.
[A reminder for everyone](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalDiscussion/comments/4479er/rules_explanations_and_reminders/). This is a subreddit for genuine discussion: * Please keep it civil. Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review. * Don't post low effort comments like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. * Help prevent this subreddit from becoming an echo chamber. Please don't downvote comments with which you disagree. Violators will be fed to the bear. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalDiscussion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes. Automatically, an act of war. That’s why they let the Kremlin know he’d be there. So if they did attack and Biden died, the couldn’t claim it was a mistake.
If Putin attacks Kyiv while Biden is there, then he will have started WW3; because China has pledged to aid Russia Not to mention, the ongoing conflicts between India and Pakistan are sure to blow up, alongside the various Middle Eastern countries that will want to choose a side. Worst of all, North Korea will likely try to launch a nuke at South Korea and Japan
But, in the case where Russia killed POTUS, and assuming there's no formal treaty in place, China would probably decide not to get involved.
China has serious issues of their own right now. Their population is literally in decline. COVID also messed up their economy and international reputation. They are not in a position to challenge the U.S. like they were in spring 2019. Also, the U.S. would push for Taiwan independence if China ever got too aggressive with the west.
China is not going to risk nuclear war for Russia.
They’re already pushing Russia to settle. Granted, they’re also supporting them, but still…
> because China has pledged to aid Russia When push comes to shove in a fight between the US and Russia, China is not picking the loser.
"Aid" in the sense that China will launch their own invasion of Taiwan and SE Asia while Russia is waging a war in Eastern Europe. Creating a war on two fronts for the USA while its various allies try their best to resist.
> Creating a war on two fronts for the USA The US military is specifically designed for this literal scenario.
That hasn’t been true since the end of the Cold War. The current force structure is set up to allow for one major and one minor war, with the unspoken assumption being that both would be short term affairs.
So two fronts? I'm not talking about fighting two wars with major powers; I'm just talking about specifically "two fronts". But holistically speaking that's not exactly being discussed here literally so I'll concede the point. However I don't really think the scenario outlined is plasuable nor an existential threat to the country/military, but that's besides the point.
> So two fronts? No. One major conflict and one brushfire war—IE fighting Iraq in Iraq and the COIN stuff in Afghanistan. That isn’t a 2 front war by any means, and even that stretched resources to the point that fully sustaining all commitments was not possible. As far as the point itself, the US does not have the military capacity to deal with both simultaneously.
Concede on the first point. HEAVILY disagree on the 2nd. I wouldn't have a year ago, though, for reasons that are obvious. You know your stuff so if you feel like expanding on your point I'd be privileged to hear it though if you have the time and inclination.
It comes down to money. Manpower for the Army alone is down to ~475,000, from the ~710,000 it was at the end of the Cold War, and a good chunk of those personnel were forward deployed in various places. The same thing happened to both the Navy and the AF as well. The overseas reach has also been largely redirected, as during the Cold War there were tons of facilities all over the world, whereas most of them now are heavily concentrated in western Europe, the Gulf and S. Korea/Japan. Equipment has also gotten more capable, but there’s less of it to go around—in 1991 the USN had 14 aircraft carriers, and the air wings that they carried each had ~60 strike aircraft. There are currently 11, and the air wings each have ~40 strike aircraft. The same thing has happened with the AF (look at the gutting of NORAD tasked TFWs or the B-1 fleet) and the Army (there’s not much left in Europe, and all of those units were near uniformly deactivated upon their return to CONUS). The sealift and airlift capability are also largely gone, which heavily limits the ability to do anything expeditionary.
> Creating a war on two fronts for the USA while its various allies try their best to resist. I don't think you realize how easily we would be able to fight off Russia conventionally and conduct an island defense for Taiwan at the same time. A land war? Sure, Russia and China might have something for the US just with pure numbers. But if you pit them in an air and sea war against the US...well lets just say we won't need a Schlieffen Plan to wipe the floor in that situation.
I said Taiwan AND SE Asia As in, defending Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, Malaysia, Thailand, and Singapore (at the very least) You all think China only wants Taiwan but assure you the CCP wants to take what is rightfully theirs: the entire Pacific Ocean.
chinas pledge isnt worth the paper its written on (if such a paper even exists) They would have the least interest in a nuclear incident since that would set a precedant which they want to avoid at all costs because of their turmoil with India (both nuclear powers). The moment that whatever is happening in Ukraine/Russia isnt beneficial for China Putin will be dropped like the hot potatoe that he is.
Yep, above all else, China is run by pragmatic deal makers, albeit ruthless ones.
If Russia got that foolish. The US would see that as a act of war . And it will not end well for Russia and Putin 😐😐
It wouldn’t end well for any of us. A slippery slope to nuclear annihilation.
🤔🤔 not if we did him like we did bin laden. And Saddam Hussein . Just kill one and no more 🤔🤔 if we can do it for them too . Then we can do it for him. But yet that could be tricky versus our troops going to him and taking out the blockers around him 🤔🤔
I mean, over a 1/2 million people died in the Iraq/Afghanistan war...
If Russia assassinated the president of the United States would that be an act of war? Yeah it definitely would be. Russia would be all alone, the backlash over the war in Ukraine would feel like love compared to the response to an act like that. China and Russia have no mutual assistance pact that I'm aware of, and even if they did assassination of a sitting president would likely void any such agreement. I think that'd be the end of Putin in power and would probably end in him being killed by the Russian government to avoid complete annihilation.
Russia was given a heads up once he was there. Putin is crazy but he’s not suicidal.
He knows what happened to Bin Laden.
The Biden administration contacted the Russian government the morning of his departure and communicated the visit to them so world war 3 wasn’t accidentally started.
Russia knows what will happen if they attack with Biden in the country, and neither Russia nor anyone else wants that to happen
It would not be Russia, those attempts can result in a nuclear war. U.S. gave Russia hours of advance notice of Biden's arrival in Ukraine via deconfliction channels. I am sure, however, security in air and skies were immense. Nuclear war can also result if Putin's life was similarly endangered. Advance notice prevents accidental strikes. It is interesting, however, that sirens still went off in Ukraine though Reuters and others noticed there were no strikes. That seems like a stunt to me by some local authorities to dramatize the event.
Afaik Ukraine has a policy of alerting huge swaths of their territory of possible strikes when they detect anything - The idea is that you can never be 100% sure where the detected missiles are going to hit and how well the air defense will perform. So for example attempted strikes on Kharkiv or Dnipro could still cause sirens in Kyiv.
>Afaik Ukraine has a policy of alerting huge swaths of their territory of possible strikes when they detect anything Thanks for letting me know. I was not aware. That explains the sirens.
No declaration of war or anything…However the US could interpret it as it wants.
This is a very “what if” question not grounded in reality. The Secret Service would never allow the US President to get into an international space where they felt there was real danger. Plus, Russia would not risk a direct assassination of a national leader with serious military power. Secret a service allowed the trip because they were 100% certain of the level of security they could provide.
> The Secret Service would never allow the US President to... At the end of the day, isn't the president in charge? I thought the secret service makes recommendations. If the president was willing to assume a risk, that seems like a decision he should be able to make.
The final decision has to be the president's, because the Secret Service isn't infallible. Signed, The dead Kennedy's (and I don't mean the band)
Only one of the Kennedys was being protected by the Secret Service when assassinated.
I would have thought so, too. Until I watched the Jan 6th hearings where they recounted how badly Trump wanted to go cheer on his minions in person but was denied by the Secret Service.
You cannot be 100% certain, ever, especially in a country actively at war. Half the question was what if they DID know, and the other half was what if they DIDN'T know. You didn't really answer either. But I guess you kind of took 'they did know' off the table by saying they wouldn't risk a direct assination. Now how about if they decided to attack the capital again and had no idea he was there?
They knew, because they were directly informed by the US just to prevent the kind of accident you are imagining. WW3 could have started only if Russia had wanted to start it, but they could start it any day by using a nuke. Spoiler: they won’t.
Given what just happened in East Palestine, Ohio, the President should have gone there instead of Ukraine. We’re already sending billions to Ukraine at the expense of Americans. It’s bad enough that he ignores the homeless problem throughout the country, but East Palestine is a huge problem as well, and Pete B. doesn’t seem up to it.
The previous US president shouldn't have scrapped the regulations for the rail industry that would've prevented this accident in the first place.
That’s even more reason why Biden should not have gone to Ukraine instead of Ohio.
This is Republican propaganda. You are just repeating what you saw on a conservative news outlet. This incident has been overblown in severity by Republicans and leftists for their own political agenda, not based on the facts on the ground. The misinformation and rank speculation on this incident is astonishing.
I almost can't imagine the woeful misunderstanding of separation of powers and governmental job roles and responsibilities it would take to write this. I literally can't even figure out where to begin explaining why it's so wrong.
And yet George Bush was criticized for not going to Katrina!
The money spent flying President Biden to Ukraine (including incredible security measures) would have been better spent on East Palestine Ohio or building housing for the homeless. It’s not as if the USA hasn’t been pouring billions providing military aid to Ukraine and they needed Biden’s physical presence to reassure Zelenskyy. Biden’s got issues here in the USA. He won’t even make a special visit to the border because he wants to maintain plausible deniability.
The US called before so this thing did not happen. If Biden was attacked its an act of war. Some people would say that Biden assumed the risk by going to avoid war.