The problem is that you cannot prove yourself against someone who is much weaker than yourself. They are in a lose/lose situation. If you are strong and fighting the weak, then if you kill your opponent then you are a scoundrel... if you let him kill you, then you are an idiot. So here is a dilemma which others have suffered before us, and for which as far as I can see there is simply no escape.

As history since Hiroshima shows, the best, perhaps the only, way to curb war is to deter it with such overwhelming force as to turn it from a struggle into suicide.

War is the greatest fun man can have with his pants on.

The problem is that you cannot prove yourself against someone who is much weaker than yourself.

Assuming China does not become destabilized and continues to grow, it will no doubt develop a military program in proportion to its resources.

It is simply not true that war is solely a means to an end, nor do people necessarily fight in order to obtain this objective or that. In fact, the opposite is true: people very often take up one objective or another precisely in order that they may fight.

In the future as in the past, both Clausewitz and Sun Tzu will undoubtedly have a lot to offer.