War games suggest the US will lose fast if it confronts China

Can link be changed to the referenced source which has much more information: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.yahoo.com&#x2F;amphtml&#x2F;news&#x2F;were-going-to-lose-fast-us-air-force-held-a-war-game-that-started-with-a-chinese-biological-attack-170003936.html?__twitter_impression=true" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.yahoo.com&#x2F;amphtml&#x2F;news&#x2F;were-going-to-lose-fast-...</a>

My half-cynical take: The US Air Force successfully conducted a PR exercise designed to argue why it needs more budget.

China is engaging in fifth generational warfare (information, hacking, economics) against the US. How can you win a war if you don&#x27;t even know it&#x27;s happening?

The Clausewitzian Trinity[1] ain&#x27;t lying. The military, societal, and elected leadership isn&#x27;t united, (stipulating competence).<p>What is more astounding is that we could be surrounded by foes devouring us, and our media would assure us that everything is just hugs and cupcakes.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.clausewitz.com&#x2F;readings&#x2F;Bassford&#x2F;Trinity&#x2F;TrinityTeachingNote.htm" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.clausewitz.com&#x2F;readings&#x2F;Bassford&#x2F;Trinity&#x2F;Trinity...</a>

&gt; <i>&quot;The future confrontation would continue for more than a decade&quot;</i>?<p>[Edit: I should say this sentence is in the originally posted article, not the longer one from Yahoo]<p>Pretty sure one or both sides would launch nuclear weapons long before then, resulting in a swift (albeit very unhappy) end to the war.

Is this written by GPT-3? The text is incongruent.

Unless I missed it in the article what exactly is the simulated attack? Are they flying real planes over US targets? Wouldn’t that in and of itself be considered an act of aggression?

The war mongering here is so silly.<p>Let China reassert itself as the dominant power in Asia. That&#x27;s none of our concern.