The content of this article comes from the Internet, if it is inconsistent with the actual situation or there is infringement, please contact to delete.
As the situation around the mainland becomes increasingly tense, the changes on the doorstep become more and more noticeable. Behind all this is mainly rooted in a series of actions that are being brewed in the United States. For its part, the United States cannot stand idly by and watch the reality of the continent's flourishing, so it is actively building obstacles in the hope of casting as many stumbling blocks as possible before the continent's development. Even, in this context, we have to consider whether there will be a local conflict in the waters around the mainland, allowing the US military to fiercely clash with our military.
Not only do we have this view, but the United States is building a similar mindset. As mentioned earlier, senior U.S. military generals have long been carefully planning for potential great power conflicts, especially when discussing the possibility of engaging Chinese forces with the US Marine Corps, Admiral David Berger, especially emphasized that in the Pacific theater, the Marine Corps needs to rely on its own strength, because the supply of islands spanning hundreds or even thousands of miles will be of little help.
General David Berger called on Marines to think creatively about possible combat situations and remain combat-ready even in harsh conditions where communications and supplies are disrupted. The general operational principle is that in the face of the PLA, the US Marine Corps should do whatever it takes, fight as soon as it can afford to fight, retreat as soon as the war is over, try to avoid head-on confrontation, and resolutely avoid confrontation with hard heads.
This concept of warfare may make us feel familiar. In the harsh environment of running out of food and water and losing contact, adopting mobile and flexible tactics with the enemy and launching an attack when he is unprepared, isn't this the guerrilla war that we have experienced through vicissitudes?
The implication is that General David Berger predicts that in the future, the Marine Corps may use flexible tactics to engage our forces on the mainland's seas, islands, and even US military bases, and may even engage in guerrilla warfare in a lone and deep manner. This idea is calm and pragmatic, does not overestimate or underestimate the strength of the mainland, and bases the combat mode on the harshest environment and premises.
If the US military does formulate its battle plan according to such assumptions, it will undoubtedly bring great challenges to our military. However, my personal opinion is that even if the US military adopts guerrilla tactics, it will not be easy to win. First, when it comes to guerrilla warfare, the U.S. military may not be on the same level. Although the mainland's comprehensive national strength and military strength have been significantly improved, the bloody spirit of soldiers has not changed, and the spirit of mobility and sacrifice for combat is still passed down in all units.
Moreover, even if the Marines wanted to wage guerrilla warfare, the mainland would not necessarily give them a chance. It is predicted that future peripheral wars will focus on island battles, and our military will rely on rocket forces, air forces, and amphibious assault forces, rather than relying solely on land or land combat.
Guerrilla warfare tests the will to fight of soldiers and small units, and we firmly believe in this quality of the continental army. However, whether the US military also has this will to fight is actually unknown. Therefore, even if they send small-scale special forces, despite the tenacious tenacity of these units, it is difficult for local operations to turn the overall situation around, so in terms of guerrilla warfare, if the US military wants to learn and surpass, I am afraid it is extremely challenging. Is this a point you agree with?
To sum up, although the United States may adopt guerrilla tactics in the surrounding waters, its success is not inevitable. The mainland's gritty military qualities, flexible strategies for dealing with island battles, and the unknown will of the U.S. military to fight will all affect the future development of the situation. In an uncertain environment, only by closely observing the situation and strengthening national defense can we stabilize the tranquility of the maritime border and achieve the long-term goal of peace and stability.
The above content and materials are derived from the Internet, and the author of this article does not intend to target or allude to any real country, political system, organization, race, individual. The above does not mean that the author of this article endorses the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. The author of this article is not responsible for any problems arising above or related to the above and does not assume any direct or indirect legal liability.
Due to the rules of the platform, you will only be recognized as a fan if you have more interaction with me. If you like my article, you can click "Follow", and you can receive the article push as soon as you become an iron fan. This article is only published in today's headlines, please do not move.