You don't think a conflict with China would exclude Europe? You think Europe's economy sits it out?

Of course not. But having tanks in the UK won't help that. A conflict with China is already taking place in non-military spheres - a global contest for influence, resources, and control. The spaces that the current Administration is withdrawing us from. Cutting off our international aid, pulling back from participation in global institutions, breaking trade alliances (even when we have formal treaties)....we're telling the world over and over again that we are undependable partners. Even to the point where we're being harsher with our ostensible friends than our enemies.

Uh, huh. Which institutions? The ones that routinely do weird things or act outside of US interests like UNRWA? Or efforts that are intended to bankrupt the west like the Paris Climate Accords?

How about WHO? Or the USMCA? Or NATO - where we weaken our leadership role by sowing conflict with our allies?

You know what they like even more? A europe that depends on Russia for all its energy and one that has zero means to defend itself. Or the will to do so.

Sure. There's nothing wrong with encouraging Europe to diversify their energy base. There are even some benefits (though serious downsides) to European nations increasing their defensive capabilities. Neither of which is advanced by idly speculating about seizing territory from a NATO ally, or starting a trade war with Europe, or launching the broadside attack that was Vance's speech.

If you want to thwart China, you need to win over the nations of the world to the side of the U.S. Destroying USAID, breaking down trade relationships and threatening massive tariff barriers, speculating about seizing territory or materials from weaker countries, and alienating the allies we do have is going to be counterproductive to that goal. No matter how many extra tanks it puts on the board.