Because nations tend to avoid starting wars they'll obviously lose.
If the US military falls behind technologically, other nations might start thinking defeat isn't so obvious any more.
If the US military falls behind technologically, other nations might start thinking defeat isn't so obvious any more.
The only one that falls into your threat category is Russia. Is Russia really about to invade the US at the first sign of air supremacy weakness? You still have enough nukes to cause literal worldwide armageddon 20 times over.
Why even leave a shadow of a doubt that the enemy could win in a dogfight?
I think that's the rationale presented here
While that wouldn't hurt the average American in the short run, the long-term consequences of it in geopolitical terms would be extreme.
and it was once a beacon of democracy and free world...
also, US has no greater claim to be the ruler of pacific region compared to China. in fact, if you look at the map, opposite is true.
No country's ever been a beacon of democracy and freedom, that's just propaganda. You will not get a world where unconstrained powerful nations do not act amorally. A better hope is that multilateral organizations like the UN and World Court gain more strength and legitimacy.
The US might be tired of playing 'world cop', but it's a role it chose itself, and it's been getting plenty of tasty kickbacks for doing so. I don't have a problem with that - nations have a right to think of themselves first in any deal - but it's still funny that so many people ignore that US military projection heavily protects it's economic muscle.