Nobody here "wants" our boys to die for anything. I know you didnt mean anything by this but I just wanted to point out our great intent is to make the enemy die instead of our boys and were pretty good at it. Our casualties sadden us, as do the ones of our allies, and I'm sure you Brits feel the same. Warriors "choose" their lives and with it the risks. Its been like that since the first spear was chucked.Musashi_kenshin said:They want them to die for Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. So of course they would want them to die for a strategic ally facing off against a long-term rival.
And as far as super power confrontations go this regional Pacific naval war would cost far less in blood then a clash of armies on land. And Im sure it makes the Chinese pause, this getting into "our" kind of high tech naval war. If I can warn them now I'd say its the wrong kind of war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time, and against the wrong enemy. Maybe one day they will cross a thresh-hold of capability where such a confrontation might pay some dividends but it wont be for a long, long time.
If we want to prevent such a conflict in the future we'd better not run our navy down and our naval air arm.