Neither side is the right side in Syria. We never should have gotten involved there at all.

The fight with China is over the South China Sea and Taiwan. In a strictly military setting, China is tremendously outgunned - and they know it. The only way they can win is a non-conventional war either by trying to nuke our fleets or cybrewarfare to go after our economy or power grid.

I'm just curious what "trends of the times" China wants us to "get with"...

As an aside, this is straight out of "Art of War" by Sun Tzu. You never go into a military battle with someone unless you know you are going to win, and winning is all about mindset. This should be completely ignored from a psychological warfare aspect but should greatly concern us from an actual warfare aspect.

the best to you and yours...

so would China and there would be massive riots in both countries...that will be mild compared with what is coming if we do not something NOW!...trust me...China will blink immediately...this will be solved quickly...we are only where we are at due to "cowards" no acting in the past...and today will become the envied "past" all too quickly...

While we worry about DACA people, our country is deteriorating and we arent paying attention to keeping it strong. I think the democrats are basically evil statists and have and will cause the destruction of what was a great country

Our economy would crash immediately. if imports from china were stopped. Prices would skyrocket here, and sales would plummet as a result. Unfortunately, its too late for this kind of action. I agree China would be hurt also, but they would not fall as far as we would.

Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean that they aren't out to get you

yes...Obama, Bush, & Clinton were cowards...I sent Trump an email suggesting he immediately embargo all "made in China" products...China would correct problems immediately...Rocket Man would be gone...and "dumping would stop or China would collapse...

Nothing so far from Trump...until then, he is also a "coward"...

The US military is overextended, but that's mostly a result of bureaucratic inertia that Trump ought to do something about. There is no longer any good reason for us to be in Afghanistan, for instance, and we're helping the wrong side in Syria and should pull out of there, too. End those needless conflicts (and of course, the war on drugs) and the military doesn't need to be expanded.

Prolong them and we merely ensure that, when somebody eventually does force us into a major war, we'll already be at war with so much of the world that we'll lose. Send troops into more of them (as China is trying to make us do in the Pacific) and it's even worse.

China's attacks on the US are not subtle.

China has no reason to feel insecure about the reckless rocketeering fat boy across their border who they keep propped up while lying to Trump about that.
So far me dino has discerned from photos and videos that Kim Jong-un is the only obese person in the half-starved so-called "Democratic People's Republic of North Korea."

"Frankly, the United States is under attack."
"Coats noted that US adversaries and “malign actors”, including Russia and China, would use several tactics, including cyber and information warfare to challenge US influence around the world."
Coats is saying if Country C uses various tactics to stop Country A's (in this case the US) from influencing Country B, that is tantamount Country C attacking Country A. Suppose it's people in Country B trying to undermine Country's A influence, is that an attack? How do you know who is the aggressor? Suppose China wants to influence Nepal to arrest and repatriate Tibetan separatists but India wants Nepal to allow the separatists to be there. Who attacked whom? Is it who started trying to influence foreign countries first?

Could be the Chinese are insecure when considering all the wars the US has created in direct opposition to America's claimed goals and philosophy, and theChinese want to make it clear to the numbnuts neocons that such scheming will not work with a well armed adversary.

The Chinese could have been responding to any of various statements. It is their statement that is interesting to me.

On one hand, they are clearly continually attacking us, and building up weapons. On the other hand, we are afraid of a hangnail, much less a real conflict.

I only wish that he was right about insecurity in the way he meant it. Daniel Coats is a lying sack of rubbish. Daniel Coats is a looter who seeks our economic enslavement and cares nothing about our security except as it adds to his power and wealth.