Category: Cybersecurity

Posted on

The War on Warriors: What We Can Learn About the China Threat

A Book Review from Americans for a Stronger Navy

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

A Note on Staying in Our Lane

Pete Hegseth’s 2024 The War on Warriors has ignited fierce debate across America. As I write this, decorated veterans like Senator Mark Kelly and Pete Hegseth—both men who’ve served with distinction—are in public conflict.

Americans for a Stronger Navy is not going to adjudicate those battles.

What started as an effort to understand Pete Hegseth’s perspective through his book and interviews evolved into something else entirely. As I watched his past interviews and listened to the three-hour conversation with Shawn Ryan, I found myself repeatedly pulled back to our core mission: the urgent need for a Navy capable of deterring China and defending American interests.

While I agree with many of Hegseth’s principles about building a stronger fighting force and improving resources for veterans, I also recognize that his book and interviews reflect a specific moment in time—the period leading up to and following publication. The debates they’ve sparked are important, and good people disagree on the solutions.

But while we debate internally, China doesn’t pause its carrier production.

Our lane is clear: advocating for the naval power necessary to protect America’s future. While others debate military culture, we’re compelled to focus on what both Shawn Ryan and Pete Hegseth spent significant time discussing in their three-hour interview: the existential threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party.

Our veterans deserve better care than they’re receiving. When the VA is failing the warriors who already served, spending defense dollars on elective procedures while vets wait months for basic care is unconscionable. This isn’t a cultural position—it’s a resource management position. Every dollar matters when China is building carriers faster than we can.

With that stated, let’s focus on what should unite all Americans regardless of political persuasion: “China has us by the balls,” says Hegseth. And by our best estimates, we’re running out of time to do something about it.

The Strategic Reality

The most critical parts of the Hegseth-Ryan interview aren’t about DEI or pronouns. They’re about strategic vulnerability to an adversary that’s been playing the long game while we’ve been distracted.

Here’s Pete Hegseth’s unvarnished assessment:

“When they’ve already got us by the balls economically, with our grid, culturally, with elite capture going on around the globe, microchips, everything—why do they want Taiwan? They want to corner the market completely on the technological future. We can’t even drive our cars without the stuff we need out of China these days. They have a full-spectrum, long-term view of not just regional but global domination, and we have our heads up our asses.”

Here’s the short 50 second YouTube clip, watch it for yourself.

Let’s break down what “by the balls” actually means:

Economic Leverage: Our Grid is Their Weapon

China produces all of our electrical transformers, solar panels, and wind turbines. Not most. All. They’re already embedded in our power grid infrastructure. FBI Director Christopher Wray has publicly confirmed Chinese operatives have pre-positioned malware in our electrical grid and water treatment facilities.

As Wray stated, “the dashboard is flashing red and smoking.”

Think about what this means: In the opening hours of a Taiwan conflict, before a single shot is fired at a carrier strike group, China could potentially darken American cities, shut down water systems, and cripple our ability to mobilize.

Our Navy can’t sortie from ports without power. Our sailors can’t fight if their families are in crisis at home.

Naval Asymmetry: We’re Losing the Numbers Game

Hegseth reveals what Pentagon insiders know but rarely admit publicly:

“In the past 10-15 years, the Pentagon has a perfect record in all of its war games against China. We lose every time.”

Every. Single. Time.

Why? Multiple factors:

Numerical Inferiority: China’s Navy now exceeds the U.S. Navy in sheer hull numbers. They’re building aircraft carriers and advanced destroyers at a pace we cannot match with our current industrial base.

Hypersonic Missiles: China has developed hypersonic weapons specifically designed to defeat our carrier strike groups. As Hegseth notes: “If 15 hypersonic missiles can take out our 10 aircraft carriers in the first 20 minutes of a conflict, what does that look like?”

Our primary tool of power projection—the carrier strike group—may be obsolete on Day One of a Pacific conflict.

Supply Chain Dependency: When Shawn Ryan mentions defensive technologies like directed EMP weapons (from companies like Epirus) that can counter drone swarms, even he expresses concern: “I don’t know if anything’s coming from China. I don’t know what other weapons we have and what’s manufactured in China or what IP they’ve stolen from us.”

We can’t even be certain our most advanced defensive systems aren’t compromised by Chinese components or stolen intellectual property.

The Microchip Chokepoint: Taiwan is Everything

Why does China want Taiwan? Not reunification nostalgia. Taiwan is the beating heart of the global economy and modern civilization.

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) doesn’t just produce “the majority” of advanced microchips—it produces over 90% of the world’s most advanced semiconductors. These aren’t chips for smartphones and laptops. These are the chips that power:

  • Every advanced weapon system – F-35s, guided missiles, radar systems, naval combat systems
  • Every AI system – From civilian applications to military command and control
  • Every modern vehicle – Cars, trucks, tractors, commercial aircraft
  • Every hospital – MRI machines, CT scanners, surgical robots, monitoring equipment
  • Every communications system – Cell towers, satellites, internet infrastructure
  • Every financial system – Banking, stock markets, payment processing

If China controls Taiwan, China controls the technological backbone of human civilization.

This isn’t hyperbole. During the COVID chip shortage, automobile production halted worldwide. Factories sat idle. Dealership lots emptied. That was a supply chain hiccup. Imagine China with a monopoly, deciding who gets chips and who doesn’t.

American weapon systems would depend on Chinese approval for components. American hospitals would need Chinese permission to operate. American banks would require Chinese consent to process transactions.

This is why Taiwan isn’t just another regional territorial dispute. Taiwan is the strategic fulcrum upon which the entire 21st century will turn.

And China knows it. That’s why they’re building a military specifically designed to take Taiwan before we can effectively respond. That’s why every hypersonic missile, every carrier, every amphibious assault ship they build is calculated toward this single objective.

Salt Typhoon: They’re Already Inside

In late 2024, U.S. intelligence agencies revealed that Chinese hackers operating under the codename “Salt Typhoon” had achieved deep, persistent access to American telecommunications infrastructure.

Not a probe. Not a test. Deep, persistent access.

They’re inside AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile networks. They can intercept phone calls, text messages, internet traffic. They’ve targeted senior government officials, military personnel, critical infrastructure operators.

This isn’t theoretical preparation for future conflict. This is active intelligence collection happening right now.

Combined with their penetration of our electrical grid (FBI Director Wray’s “flashing red dashboard”), their control over our transformer supply chains, their dominance in 5G infrastructure, and their positioning in our water treatment systems—China has achieved the infiltration necessary to paralyze America without firing a shot.

When the Taiwan crisis comes—and it will come—our response will be shaped by what China has already positioned to cripple us from within.

The Indo-Pacific: Where Our Future Will Be Decided

The Indo-Pacific region isn’t one theater among many. It’s THE theater where American prosperity and security will be won or lost.

Consider the stakes:

Economic: Over 60% of global maritime trade flows through the South China Sea. $3.4 trillion in trade passes through the Taiwan Strait annually. If China controls these waters, they control global commerce.

Alliance Structure: Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Australia, India—our entire network of Pacific allies depends on American commitment. If we cannot or will not defend Taiwan, why would anyone trust American security guarantees?

Resources: Critical minerals, rare earth elements, advanced manufacturing—the Indo-Pacific is the industrial and technological center of the 21st century. Ceding this region to Chinese dominance means accepting permanent economic subservience.

Naval Power Projection: If China controls the First Island Chain (Japan-Taiwan-Philippines), American naval power is effectively contained to Pearl Harbor and San Diego. Our ability to operate globally collapses.

This isn’t about the military-industrial complex wanting another war. This is about the economic and security future of our children and grandchildren.

This is Nothing Like Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan

I understand the skepticism. Both Pete Hegseth and Shawn Ryan expressed it in their interview—they’re both “recovering neocons” who supported Iraq and Afghanistan and now recognize those were strategic disasters.

Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan were wars of choice built on questionable premises:

  • Nation-building missions in societies we didn’t understand
  • No vital national interests at stake
  • No clear victory conditions
  • Counterinsurgency in impossible terrain against irregular forces
  • Decades-long occupations with no end state
  • Trillions spent with nothing to show for it

The potential Taiwan conflict is fundamentally different:

1. Vital National Interests: Taiwan semiconductors aren’t optional. Modern civilization depends on them. This isn’t about abstract concepts like “democracy promotion”—it’s about maintaining access to the technology that runs everything from hospitals to power grids.

2. Deterrence, Not Occupation: We don’t need to occupy Chinese territory or rebuild their society. We need to make the cost of taking Taiwan prohibitively high. That’s classic deterrence, not nation-building.

3. Conventional Warfare: This would be state-on-state naval and air conflict where American technological advantages matter, not counterinsurgency in urban terrain where they don’t.

4. Clear Objectives: Maintain Taiwan’s de facto independence and semiconductor production. That’s it. No “hearts and minds,” no transforming societies, no endless occupation.

5. Alliance Structure: We’d fight alongside Japan, Australia, potentially South Korea and others with shared interests. This isn’t America alone trying to remake a foreign society.

6. Existential Stakes: If China controls Taiwan’s chips, they control the global economy. If they demonstrate American security guarantees are worthless, our entire alliance system collapses. If they dominate the Indo-Pacific, American prosperity ends.

The lesson from Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan isn’t “never fight wars.” It’s “don’t fight stupid wars based on lies about stupid objectives in stupid ways.”

Deterring China from taking Taiwan is none of those things. It’s the most strategically vital mission American naval power faces.

This is about ensuring our grandchildren grow up in a free, prosperous America—not one subordinated to Chinese Communist Party dictates because we couldn’t muster the will to maintain our position when it mattered most.

Economic Warfare: The Crypto Scam Example

Hegseth and Ryan discuss an underreported aspect of Chinese strategic operations: systematic economic extraction through crypto scams.

Chinese operatives run sophisticated confidence schemes:

  1. Approach target with small crypto investment opportunity ($15,000)
  2. Deliver real returns quickly ($45,000) to build trust
  3. Escalate to larger investments ($200,000)
  4. When target invests life savings ($1,000,000+), disappear with everything

This isn’t individual crime—it’s organized economic warfare to extract American wealth before potential conflict.

Ryan’s local sheriff’s department just tracked one operator across multiple states to Las Vegas. “It’s happening all over the place,” Ryan notes.

Cultural Infiltration: TikTok and Beyond

As Hegseth observes: “We let in TikTok where they can trans our kids and they don’t trans their kids.”

Whether you agree with his framing or not, the strategic point is valid: China operates TikTok to influence American youth while banning it domestically. That’s not cultural exchange—that’s information warfare.

The CCP understands something we’ve forgotten: The side that controls what the next generation believes controls the future.

The Long Game: China’s Strategic Patience

Here’s what separates China’s approach from ours:

China’s Strategy:

  • Multi-decade planning horizon
  • Systematic IP theft and technology acquisition
  • Economic positioning for future conflict
  • Military buildup specifically designed to defeat the United States
  • Cultural and political elite capture
  • Infrastructure positioning (ports, 5G networks, supply chains)

America’s Strategy:

  • 2-4 year election cycles driving policy
  • Letting China manufacture our critical infrastructure
  • Outsourcing our industrial base for quarterly profit margins
  • Assuming the international rules-based order will protect us
  • Internal political warfare consuming our attention

As Hegseth puts it: “China is playing chess while we’re arguing about pronouns.”

The Timing Question: When Will They Strike?

Both Ryan and Hegseth wrestle with a critical strategic question: When will China make its move on Taiwan?

Ryan’s analysis is chilling:

“If I was them, I would put in the scenario into war games and see what the probability is that we’re going to come out on top. I wouldn’t make a move until after this election because they know what’s going on. They see it. Nobody made any weird moves under Trump that I’m aware of. As soon as they got in—Russia went after Ukraine, tensions with Taiwan getting stronger, the border, Israel—everybody that wanted to make a chess move on the board did it as soon as Trump was out of office.”

“If I was them, I would make my move the first day that Trump is in office because that would be the weakest point before we start to see an incline. And if Kamala gets in there, I would wait another four years, just let it keep declining, and that would just let this place get as weak as it possibly can, and then I would pull the trigger.”

Think about that logic:

  • China runs the scenarios through their war game simulations
  • They update the probability matrices with current data
  • Every year we decline, their probability of victory increases
  • They wait until the optimal moment

The clock is ticking. And we’re not on it.

What This Means for the Navy

Everything Hegseth discusses in the Army context applies with even greater urgency to naval forces:

Recruitment Crisis: The Navy can’t crew the ships we have, let alone the fleet we need. If patriotic families from military traditions are second-guessing service, where do future sailors come from?

Retention Problems: Experienced petty officers and junior officers are leaving. Institutional knowledge walks out the door with them.

Technical Expertise Gap: Modern naval warfare requires STEM-educated personnel. Our education system is producing activists, not engineers.

Readiness vs. Rhetoric: Hegseth mentions sailors in the DMZ in Korea reporting they have “basically enough artillery for 3 days—the rest of it’s in Ukraine.” How many naval munitions have been drawn down? How many maintenance dollars diverted?

Close Quarters Reality: Destroyers, cruisers, submarines—these platforms require maximum unit cohesion in confined spaces over extended deployments. Any policy that complicates that dynamic affects operational capability.

Industrial Base Collapse: We can’t build ships fast enough. China launches a new carrier while we’re still arguing about shipyard contracts.

Why the Navy? Why Not Just “Military” Generally?

Americans for a Stronger Navy focuses specifically on naval power for a fundamental reason: The China challenge is inherently a maritime problem.

Consider the geography:

70% of Earth’s surface is water. The Indo-Pacific theater is defined by vast ocean expanses, island chains, and sea lanes. This isn’t the deserts of Iraq or the mountains of Afghanistan—it’s a maritime domain where naval power is decisive.

Taiwan is an island 100 miles from mainland China. Any conflict over Taiwan is fundamentally an amphibious assault/defense scenario. China must cross water. We must defend across water. The Air Force matters, the Army matters, but the Navy is the primary deterrent.

The First Island Chain is maritime. Japan, Okinawa, Taiwan, the Philippines, Indonesia—the strategic barrier that contains Chinese power projection is a series of islands. Controlling this chain means controlling maritime access. Losing it means Chinese naval dominance from the South China Sea to the Pacific.

Global trade flows through water. Over 90% of global trade moves by ship. The South China Sea handles $3.4 trillion annually through the Taiwan Strait alone. If China controls these sea lanes, they control global commerce. You can’t secure maritime trade with land forces.

Distance matters. The nearest U.S. territory to China is Guam—3,000 miles from California. You can’t project power across the Pacific with the Army. The Navy is how America reaches the theater. The Navy is how we sustain operations. The Navy is how we defend allies. Without naval dominance, we’re not even in the game.

China understands this. That’s why they’re building the world’s largest navy. Not the world’s largest army (they already had that). They’re specifically building carriers, destroyers, submarines, amphibious assault ships—naval power to challenge American naval power.

They’ve studied American carrier strike groups and designed hypersonic missiles to sink them. They’ve built artificial islands in the South China Sea to extend their naval reach. They’re developing a blue-water navy capable of operating globally.

The Indo-Pacific challenge is a naval challenge. China’s threat is a naval threat. Our response must be naval.

That’s why Americans for a Stronger Navy exists. We’re not generically “pro-military.” We’re specifically focused on the domain where the 21st century’s decisive competition will be won or lost: the sea.

The Resource Allocation Question

Here’s where Americans for a Stronger Navy takes a clear position:

Military resources must be allocated to maximize readiness and deterrence. Period.

That means:

This isn’t about culture. It’s about math.

If we’re losing every war game against China, if our carriers are vulnerable to hypersonic missiles, if our grid can be darkened remotely, if Taiwan is the strategic prize of the century—then every resource decision matters.

The Education Pipeline: Tomorrow’s Sailors

Hegseth spends significant time in both the book and interview discussing education, and this directly impacts naval readiness.

The Navy needs:

  • Nuclear-trained operators for submarines and carriers
  • Electronics technicians for advanced systems
  • Engineers for damage control and propulsion
  • Cryptologists and cyber warriors
  • Aviators with complex technical training

This requires:

  • Strong STEM education
  • Rigorous academic standards
  • Technical aptitude
  • Problem-solving capability
  • Discipline and work ethic

What’s happening in K-12 education:

  • Math and science proficiency declining
  • Reading scores dropping
  • Grade inflation masking actual competency
  • Social-emotional learning replacing academic rigor
  • Anti-American narratives that discourage service

The pipeline is broken. Even if we solve every other problem, we can’t crew a technically complex fleet with graduates who can’t do algebra.

This is where Hegseth’s education critique directly intersects with naval readiness. China is graduating millions of STEM students. We’re graduating activists who think America is irredeemably evil. Who’s going to win that competition?

What We Learned From a Destroyer Sailor

I served on a U.S. Navy destroyer in the 1970s. Several shipmates reached out over the past few years expressing concerns about changes in today’s Navy. I’ll admit I was initially skeptical—were they exaggerating? Were they just resistant to change?

After reading Hegseth’s book and listening to the three-hour Ryan interview, I realize I should have listened more carefully to the warnings. But I also realize something else:

We’re spending so much energy fighting each other that we’re not focusing on the actual threat.

My shipmates on both sides of these cultural debates all agree on one thing: China is the threat. They disagree on solutions to internal problems, but they all recognize the external danger.

That’s where Americans for a Stronger Navy needs to focus.

Let the cultural debates happen. Let good people like Senator Kelly and Pete Hegseth have their disagreements. Our job is to relentlessly advocate for:

  1. Sufficient naval hulls to match China’s growing fleet
  2. Advanced weapon systems that counter hypersonic threats
  3. Industrial base that can actually build ships at competitive speed
  4. Recruitment and retention of qualified personnel
  5. Training and readiness focused on war-fighting
  6. Supply chain independence from Chinese manufacturing
  7. Electrical grid hardening so our bases can operate
  8. Cybersecurity that prevents Chinese infrastructure penetration
  9. Educational reform that produces STEM-capable recruits
  10. Budget prioritization toward capabilities over social experiments

The Three-Hour Wake-Up CalIf the warnings from Ryan and Hegseth about the CCP don’t shake you to the core, I don’t know what will.

Here’s what should terrify every American:

  • Pentagon loses every war game against China
  • China’s Navy now exceeds ours in numbers
  • Hypersonic missiles can sink our carriers in minutes
  • Chinese malware already embedded in our grid
  • Taiwan’s semiconductor monopoly is China’s target
  • Economic warfare extracting American wealth daily
  • Our sailors report ammunition shortages
  • Recruiting and retention in crisis
  • Industrial base can’t build ships competitively
  • Education system failing to produce technical talent

And while all this is happening, Americans are fighting each other instead of the actual enemy.

Our Call to Action

Americans for a Stronger Navy has a clear mission: advocating for the naval power necessary to defend America and deter aggression.

After reviewing Hegseth’s book and the extended Ryan interview, here’s what we’re calling for:

Immediate Priorities:

1. China Threat Education We will dedicate equal or greater time to educating Americans about the CCP threat as we spend on internal debates. The Ryan-Hegseth interview should be required viewing for anyone concerned about national security.

2. Resource Allocation Focus Every dollar matters when you’re losing war games. We support policies that maximize readiness and deterrence, including ending taxpayer funding for elective medical procedures that render service members non-deployable.

3. Industrial Base Revival We cannot have a strong Navy without shipyards that can build ships. This requires industrial policy, workforce development, and political will.

4. Grid Hardening Naval bases can’t operate without power. American families can’t support deployed sailors if they’re in crisis at home. Chinese control of our infrastructure must end.

5. Supply Chain Independence We must stop buying critical military components from our primary adversary. Yes, it will be expensive. No, we don’t have a choice.

6. Education Pipeline Repair Supporting classical education, STEM focus, and programs that produce technically capable recruits is a national security imperative.

7. Bipartisan Unity on China This is the one thing that should unite Americans across political divides. China is not Republican or Democrat. They’re our adversary, and they’re winning.

What You Can Do:

1. Watch the Full Interview The three-hour Shawn Ryan Show interview with Pete Hegseth contains more strategic analysis than most national security briefings. Share it widely.

2. Contact Your Representatives Demand they prioritize naval shipbuilding, infrastructure hardening, and China competition over internal political warfare.

3. Support STEM Education Whether through donations, volunteering, or advocacy—we need the next generation capable of operating advanced naval systems.

4. Spread Awareness Most Americans have no idea how vulnerable we are or how aggressively China is positioning for dominance. Change that.

5. Stay Focused on the Mission Don’t let internal debates distract from external threats. We can disagree on culture while agreeing on China.

Conclusion: The Enemy Gets a Vote—But So Do We

There’s a military axiom: “The enemy gets a vote.”

While America argues about pronouns, DEI, and cultural issues, China is voting with carrier launches, hypersonic missile tests, infrastructure infiltration, and economic positioning.

While good Americans like Senator Kelly and Pete Hegseth have their necessary debates about military culture, China is running war game simulations and updating their probability matrices for success.

While we fight over what makes someone qualified for military service, China is building the fleet that will challenge our ability to defend Taiwan, Japan, Korea, and the Philippines.

The clock is ticking.

But here’s what the alarm shouldn’t become: despair.

What started as a book review to understand Pete Hegseth’s perspective became a stark reminder of what actually matters: our children’s future. And that future is not predetermined. China’s rise is not inevitable. American decline is a choice, not a destiny.

We Have Advantages China Can’t Match

American Innovation: When we freed American energy production, we became energy independent within years. When COVID hit, we developed multiple vaccines in record time. When we commit to solving problems, we still lead the world in innovation.

Emerging Technologies: Directed energy weapons, autonomous systems, AI-enabled targeting, hypersonic defense systems—American companies are developing technologies that can offset Chinese numerical advantages. The Epirus directed EMP system Ryan and Hegseth discussed is just one example.

Alliance Structure: China stands largely alone. We have Japan, South Korea, Australia, the Philippines, and emerging partnerships with India and others. China has no equivalent alliance structure. Authoritarian systems inspire fear, not loyalty.

Economic Strength: Despite our challenges, the U.S. economy remains the most dynamic, innovative, and resilient in the world. Our capital markets, universities (when focused on STEM), and entrepreneurial culture are unmatched.

Geographic Position: China must project power across oceans to threaten American territory. We’re protected by two vast moans and friendly neighbors. They have hostile or unreliable neighbors on every border.

The WWII Precedent: In 1940, America had the 17th largest military in the world. By 1945, we had built the arsenal of democracy and defeated two major powers simultaneously on opposite sides of the globe. When America gets serious, we can mobilize faster than any nation on Earth.

This is Winnable—If We Act Now

The Pentagon may lose every war game against China today, but war games assume current capabilities. We can change those capabilities.

We can build more ships. We built 175 ships in two years during WWII. We can revitalize our shipyards.

We can harden our infrastructure. We built the Interstate Highway System, the Hoover Dam, put men on the moon. We can protect our power grid.

We can secure our supply chains. We can reshore critical manufacturing. We can incentivize chip fabrication in America.

We can fix our education system. Classical education is growing. Homeschooling is expanding. STEM-focused alternatives exist.

We can restore deterrence. China only moves on Taiwan if they believe they’ll win. Make the cost prohibitive, and they won’t move.

This requires political will, not miracles. It requires Americans to stop fighting each other and focus on the actual adversary. It requires leaders who prioritize national security over political advantage. It requires citizens who demand action.

And it requires a Navy capable of controlling the seas.

Pete Hegseth’s The War on Warriors contains valuable warnings about institutional problems. The debates his book has sparked are important, and good people disagree on solutions. But the most critical warning in both the book and the Ryan interview isn’t about wokeness—it’s about China.

“They have a full-spectrum, long-term view of not just regional but global domination, and we have our heads up our asses.”

I understand the weariness from Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Both Hegseth and Ryan express it—they’re “recovering neocons” who supported wars they now recognize as mistakes. But the Taiwan situation isn’t another optional nation-building adventure. It’s about the semiconductor supply that powers modern civilization, the alliance structure that maintains global stability, and the economic future our grandchildren will inherit.

This isn’t about the military-industrial complex wanting another war. This is about whether America remains a free, sovereign nation or becomes economically subordinated to Chinese Communist Party control.

Americans for a Stronger Navy exists because we understand that naval power is not optional in a maritime century against a maritime threat. We exist because someone needs to focus relentlessly on building the fleet, supporting the sailors, and educating Americans about what’s at stake.

We need a stronger Navy. We need it now. We need the tools, resources, training, personnel, and industrial base to match the threat.

Our veterans who already served deserve the care they earned—not to see their VA benefits delayed while billions go elsewhere.

Our sailors need ammunition, not just for three days, but for sustained operations.

Our children need semiconductor access that doesn’t depend on Chinese permission.

Our grandchildren deserve to grow up in a free America, not one bowing to Beijing because we couldn’t maintain our naval power when it mattered most.

But they also deserve to grow up knowing their parents and grandparents didn’t give up. That when faced with a determined adversary, America remembered who we are and what we’re capable of achieving.

Everything else is secondary to this mission.

Let’s stop fighting each other and start focusing on the actual enemy. Let’s stop despairing and start building. Let’s stop the internal warfare and restore the external deterrence.

The Salt Typhoon hackers are already inside our telecommunications systems. Chinese malware is pre-positioned in our electrical grid. China controls our transformer supply. They’re building carriers while we argue about culture. They’re war-gaming Taiwan scenarios while we debate pronouns.

But we can still win this. We have time—barely—to restore deterrence, rebuild capacity, and secure our position.

The question isn’t whether we can. It’s whether we will.

Americans for a Stronger Navy is committed to this fight. We’ll continue advocating for the naval power our nation needs. We’ll continue educating Americans about the China threat. We’ll continue supporting the sailors who keep us safe.

Join us. The future our grandchildren inherit depends on what we do right now.

Note: In future posts, we’ll address specific topics including:

  • Detailed naval force structure requirements and shipbuilding timelines
  • The shipyard and industrial base crisis—and how to solve it
  • Allied burden-sharing and the AUKUS partnership
  • Economic warfare beyond military competition (ports, Belt and Road, fentanyl, elite capture)
  • How to pay for naval expansion and why we can’t afford not to
  • Concrete legislative actions and how to engage your representatives effectively

Stay focused on the mission. The Navy we need is within reach if we have the will to build it.

About Americans for a Stronger Navy

Americans for a Stronger Navy is dedicated to promoting peace through strength by supporting a robust, modern, and capable United States Navy. We advocate for the resources, policies, and personnel necessary to ensure American naval dominance and the security of our maritime interests.

Our mission is focused, non-partisan, and urgent: Build the Navy we need to deter the China threat.

This review reflects the analysis of one destroyer sailor who served in the 1970s and believes Americans on all sides of cultural debates can unite around the China threat. We encourage readers to form their own opinions on internal military debates while maintaining absolute clarity on external threats.

The War on Warriors: Behind the Betrayal of the Men Who Keep Us Free
By Pete Hegseth
Published 2024

Recommended for: Anyone concerned about national security, China competition, and America’s strategic position

Key Takeaway: Stop fighting each other. Start focusing on China.

Rating: ★★★★ (Important Strategic Warning)

Posted on

U.S. Senate Hearing on China’s Gray-Zone Tactics: Full Video Now Live

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

As founder of Americans for a Stronger Navy, I’m posting the full hearing video from the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on East Asia & the Pacific on the People’s Republic of China’s gray-zone/IAD tactics—actions that are illegal, coercive, aggressive, and deceptive but stay below the threshold of open war. This is one of the most consequential national security issues of our time. If you want the complete context, watch it here

What This Hearing Covers
This bipartisan session, led by Sen. Chris Coons (Chair) and Sen. Pete Ricketts (Ranking Member), examines how Beijing is reshaping the regional order through maritime intimidation, disinformation, economic coercion, and lawfare. Expert witnesses include:
• Craig Singleton (Foundation for Defense of Democracies)
• Ray Powell (SeaLight maritime transparency initiative)
• Ely Ratner (The Marathon Initiative; former ASD for Indo-Pacific Security Affairs)

Why Americans Should Care
A stable Indo-Pacific underwrites U.S. jobs, supply chains, and everyday commerce—from energy prices to the goods on our shelves. When the rules at sea are bent or broken, our economy feels it. This isn’t distant geopolitics; it’s about freedom of the seas, the arteries of global trade that American families rely on. That’s why this debate is one of the most consequential for American prosperity and security.

Key Themes to Watch For
• Escalation by inches: How “salami-slicing” and constant pressure attempt to create a new normal in the South and East China Seas and around Taiwan.
• Energy as a pressure point: Taiwan’s thin LNG reserves and what resilience looks like (stockpiles, diversified imports, hardened infrastructure).
• Information advantage: Why assertive transparency—exposing incidents quickly and credibly—helps free societies push back.
• Allies matter: How Japan, Australia, the Philippines, and others factor into deterrence—and what coordinated posture and planning should look like.
• U.S. resolve: The need to signal costs early, test Beijing’s risk tolerance, and align policy, industry, and public support at home.

Implications for the Navy
The Navy operates on the front line of these challenges every day. Sustained gray-zone pressure demands presence, readiness, logistics, and shipyard capacity—and public understanding of why those investments matter. Deterrence at sea is cheaper than crisis later.

Implications for Our Allies
Allies are stepping up, but coordination is the difference between piecemeal responses and collective deterrence. Shared planning, interoperable command and control, resilient bases, and joint information efforts are how we keep the peace.

What We’ll Do Next
For convenience, we’ll post clean sectioned clips—opening statements and the strongest Q&A exchanges—so you can grab the segments you need. If you’re a supporter with video skills, volunteer editors are welcome to help accelerate the turnaround.

How You Can Help
Americans for a Stronger Navy exists to educate, connect the dots, and build civic support for the fleet our economy and security require. If you find this valuable, share the video and invite a friend to subscribe. Public engagement is the missing link.

That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter — a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.
Let’s roll.

Posted on

An Open Letter to War on the Rocks: Protecting Supply Chains Starts with a Stronger Navy

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

To the Editor and Mr. Jesse Humpal,

Your recent commentary, “Supply Chains Are Critical Infrastructure. It’s Time U.S. Policy Caught Up,” correctly identifies supply chains as battlefields targeted by America’s rivals. But while you focus on new legislation and bureaucratic reforms, the real lesson of Maersk, Colonial Pipeline, and Nord Stream is not just a lack of resilience—it’s that corporate offshoring created a moral hazard. For decades, profits were privatized while risks were socialized. Now taxpayers are being asked to underwrite the fallout.

The True Cost of Externalized Risk
Maersk, Colonial Pipeline, and Nord Stream all exposed the same vulnerability: companies prioritized efficiency and profit over redundancy and security. When their fragility became a national crisis, it was the government—and by extension, the American taxpayer—that had to absorb the cost. Legislation like the CHIPS Act or a pharmaceutical reserve may help, but these measures are ultimately subsidies for corporate strategic failures.

The Navy as a Necessary Public Good
The U.S. government should not exist to de-risk private balance sheets. Its mission is to deter adversaries. And only the U.S. Navy has the reach, capability, and mandate to secure the sea lanes, ports, and subsea infrastructure that underpin 90 percent of global trade.

  • The inherent conflict of interest: CEOs answer to shareholders, not to national security.
  • The Navy as the ultimate hedge: no private firm will pay to safeguard global commerce; that burden falls on the fleet.
  • Deterrence through capability: a dominant Navy ensures freedom of navigation, secures subsea lifelines, and guarantees the supply lines needed for both commerce and force projection.

Congress Must Do More
Congress should pass the Promoting Resilient Supply Chains Act, but it must not mistake legislation for deterrence. Protecting the arteries of our economy requires a stronger, larger, and better-resourced Navy. Anything less is subsidizing failure.

That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter — a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our mission is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.

Posted on

250 Years of Standing Watch: A Destroyer Sailor’s Take on Why the Philippines Partnership Defines Our Future

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

Somewhere in the South China Sea right now, a Filipino coast guard crew is preparing to head back to Second Thomas Shoal. They know what’s waiting—Chinese vessels that will shadow them, harass them, maybe hit them with water cannons or attempt to ram their boats.

They’re going anyway. They’re bringing supplies to their troops stationed on a rusting ship grounded on a reef that lies well within Philippine waters, recognized under international law.

They’re going because some things are worth standing up for. Because sovereignty matters. Because the rule of law at sea isn’t optional.

As the United States Navy marks its 250th anniversary, there’s no better example of why we exist than the U.S.–Philippine partnership—complicated, hard-won, and stronger than ever.

The Long Road to Partnership

Our relationship with the Philippines began painfully. After defeating Spain in 1898, America annexed the Philippines. Filipinos who had fought for independence resisted fiercely. The Philippine–American War was brutal—thousands of U.S. service members killed, tens of thousands of Filipino combatants lost, and many more civilians dead.

That legacy still shapes Filipino attitudes toward foreign military presence. Their wariness isn’t ingratitude—it’s rooted in history.

But World War II forged a different bond. Filipino and American forces fought side by side at Bataan and Corregidor. An estimated one million Filipino civilians died during the occupation. General MacArthur’s promise—“I shall return”— and the liberation that followed forged bonds in blood that endure.

After independence in 1946, Clark Air Base and Subic Bay Naval Base became crown jewels of U.S. power in the Pacific. During Vietnam, Subic Bay handled over 200 ship visits a month. These bases were economic engines but also symbols of resentment. By 1992, rising nationalism and environmental damage forced the U.S. military to leave.

For two decades, the alliance drifted. Then China changed the equation.

What Brought Us Back

Beijing’s growing assertiveness—seizing Scarborough Shoal in 2012, building militarized artificial islands, and harassing Filipino fishermen—forced Manila to turn again to Washington.

The 2014 Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) provided rotational access to Philippine bases without creating new U.S. installations—a distinction that matters for Filipino sovereignty. By 2023, the Philippines had opened nine EDCA sites, facing both Taiwan and the South China Sea.

Today, U.S. and Philippine forces conduct more than 500 joint activities each year. The Balikatan exercises now involve 14,000 troops in full-scale scenarios. New U.S. funding—$500 million in 2024—underscores how central this partnership has become.

The Risks We Should Acknowledge

No alliance is without risks.

The 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty could pull the U.S. into conflict over reefs or shoals. Americans could find themselves at war in disputes they barely understand.

Some argue we should fix our own maintenance backlogs and shipbuilding delays before investing abroad. Others warn our expanded presence could accelerate Chinese militarization instead of deterring it. And Philippine politics—sometimes turbulent—carry reputational risk for the U.S.

These are real concerns. But the alternative—a South China Sea dominated by Beijing, where international law collapses and small democracies are swallowed by larger neighbors—is far more dangerous.

The Bigger Picture: China’s Campaign

The Philippines is not the issue—it’s the line in the sand. Incidents at Second Thomas Shoal are part of a systematic campaign of Chinese aggression.

  • Harassment of U.S. forces: Military lasers aimed at U.S. aircraft, fighters buzzing within feet of American planes, warships cutting across our destroyers.
  • Rapid naval buildup: The PLA Navy is on track to field over 395 ships by 2025—outnumbering our Navy in its own region.
  • Encirclement of Taiwan: Beijing rehearses blockades and missile strikes, preparing to coerce neighbors and challenge U.S. access.
  • Cyber warfare: Groups like Volt Typhoon have penetrated U.S. power grids, water systems, and telecom networks. These intrusions aren’t hypothetical—they’re pre-positioning for conflict.
  • Disinformation and espionage: From spy balloons to propaganda campaigns, Beijing is shaping the information battlefield.

The message is clear: this is not about a shoal, it’s about the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific.

Why Americans Should Care

  • Freedom of Navigation: Nearly a third of global trade flows through the South China Sea. If Beijing can dictate access there, every sea lane becomes vulnerable.
  • Economic Security: This isn’t just about faraway reefs. Those sea lanes carry the fuel that powers your car, the medicine in your cabinet, and the goods that stock your shelves. During COVID, Americans got a hard lesson in what happens when supply chains break—higher prices, empty shelves, and uncertainty.

If China controls those routes, disruption won’t be temporary. It would mean sustained leverage over the American economy: higher grocery and gas prices, layoffs in U.S. factories, and rising costs on everything from mortgages to credit cards.

Control of the South China Sea isn’t an abstract problem overseas. It’s leverage over the American economy—and your family’s budget.

  • Alliance Credibility: Our 1951 treaty with Manila sends a message to allies everywhere—do U.S. commitments mean anything?
  • Democratic Solidarity: Manila is modernizing, partnering with Japan and Australia, and standing up to pressure. Supporting them means supporting a network of democracies.

The Choice Ahead

For 250 years, the United States Navy has defended freedom of the seas. At its best, it has enabled smaller nations to prosper without massive militaries of their own.

Today, Filipino coast guard crews at Second Thomas Shoal embody the courage and loyalty of a steadfast ally. They aren’t backing down, even when outnumbered.

The question is whether America will do the same.

As we celebrate our Navy’s 250th anniversary, we face a choice:
Do we stand with democracies under pressure?
Do we defend international law at sea?
Do we maintain a Navy strong enough to prevent wars rather than fight them?

I know my answer. It’s why I write. It’s why Americans for a Stronger Navy exists. Because a strong Navy is what allows the world to prosper under the rule of law—not the rule of the biggest bully.

Fair winds and following seas.

Posted on

Why China’s Cyber Warfare Capabilities Make a Stronger Navy More Critical Than Ever

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

China’s cyber warfare escalation proves the need for a stronger Navy. For two years, we’ve warned that adversaries were already inside our homeland; today’s revelations confirm it and raise the stakes. Cyber defenses matter, but only forward-deployed ships provide the physical presence, analog resilience, and immediate deterrence that malware can’t erase. As we argue at home, Beijing prepares—time is running out to rally behind our sailors, our civilian maritime industry, and the shipbuilding surge America needs.

The Vindication No One Wanted
This morning’s New York Times revelation should serve as a wake-up call, but for those paying attention, it reads like an inevitable conclusion. Despite CIA Director William Burns confronting China’s Minister of State Security in May 2023 with evidence of malicious code embedded in America’s critical infrastructure, China ignored the warnings and escalated operations.

As we’ve written before: “Most people don’t realize it yet. We are already in a quiet war. Not with bombs. Not with missiles. But with fentanyl, with financial schemes, and with cyber attacks.”

Today’s reporting proves we were right. The question is: why did it take a CIA director’s secret mission and a massive intelligence failure for mainstream media to acknowledge the obvious?

Silicon Valley’s Role in America’s Vulnerability
Before we talk solutions, we must address culpability. Silicon Valley—the same industry that promised to “connect the world”—has systematically created the vulnerabilities that China now exploits.

  • Supply Chain Sellout: Manufacturing moved to China, transferring critical knowledge of hardware vulnerabilities.
  • Backdoor Bonanza: Even solar panels and batteries carry hidden back doors that could one day flip a switch against us.
  • Data Harvesting: Social media platforms collected massive datasets, much of which inevitably found its way into Chinese intelligence.
  • Infrastructure Integration: Cloud services created single points of failure that adversaries can exploit across sectors simultaneously.

Executives got rich while selling America’s digital sovereignty. They dismissed security concerns as “protectionism” and prioritized market access over national security. Where is the accountability?

The Secret Meeting That Changed Nothing
The Times reveals that Burns’ confrontation with Chen Yixin was professional but meaningless. When presented with evidence of cyber intrusions, China’s intelligence chief “gave nothing away.”

China’s real response came later: Salt Typhoon—a massive, yearslong intrusion targeting “nearly every American” and dozens of countries. This was not diplomacy failing. It was China demonstrating that cyber warfare is a strategic pillar, not a negotiable issue.

As Rear Admiral Mike Studeman warned: “The reality is that adversaries have insinuated themselves in our homeland… and continue to exploit our society from the inside out.”

Why Naval Power Matters More After Cyber Escalation
Cyber warfare doesn’t eliminate the need for naval power—it makes it more critical.

The Infrastructure Hostage Crisis
We warned that adversaries target our banks, pipelines, and power grids. Today’s reporting confirms it. But there’s one thing they can’t hack: ships already forward-deployed.

The Communications Blackout
Modern naval operations rely on networks China has proven it can disrupt. The solution isn’t cybersecurity alone—it’s having more ships already in position when networks go dark.

The Logistics Nightmare
China can disrupt ports, fuel, and supply chains simultaneously. Forward-deployed naval power bypasses these vulnerabilities.

The Taiwan Test Case
China’s cyber strategy aims to create an impossible choice: accept aggression or risk massive retaliation against U.S. infrastructure. But this calculation changes with a larger forward-deployed fleet:

  • Ships on station can’t be cyber-attacked out of position
  • Redundant communications across multiple vessels mitigate disruption
  • Immediate response capability denies China consolidation time
  • A visible presence deters aggression before it begins

The Call to Action
We’ve argued for 24 months that the future of America depends on our sailors, our civilian maritime industry, and a Navy that protects them both. Today’s revelations make this argument irrefutable.

Every day Congress delays emergency shipbuilding, China gains ground. Every month without new investment deepens our vulnerability. Call your representatives. Demand they fund emergency naval expansion now.

Beyond China
Russia, Iran, and North Korea are studying these techniques. Naval power provides what cyber defenses cannot: physical presence immune to digital attack.

Ships can’t be deleted by malware. Naval gunfire doesn’t require Wi-Fi. Sailors can’t be hacked out of existence.

Silicon Valley’s Reckoning Day
Congress must investigate how U.S. tech companies:

  • Facilitated Chinese access to critical technologies
  • Ignored warnings in favor of market access
  • Enabled mass data collection for foreign intelligence
  • Built cloud infrastructures that created systemic single points of failure

Executives who sold out American sovereignty should be held to the same scrutiny as defense contractors.

The Validation We Didn’t Want
Being right about China’s cyber warfare escalation brings no satisfaction. We would rather have been wrong. Instead, today proves China is pursuing cyber warfare and naval expansion simultaneously. America must respond with both—better cybersecurity and a stronger Navy.

Conclusion: The Time for Half-Measures is Over
For 24 months, we’ve warned that America faces adversaries already inside our homeland. Today proves they didn’t waste those 24 months—they dug in deeper.

The question is no longer whether we can afford emergency naval expansion. The question is whether we can afford another 24 months of delay.

That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter — a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.
Let’s roll.

Posted on

Naval (Maritime) Statecraft: Brent Sadler on Rebuilding America’s Maritime Power

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

Introduction
As a former U.S. Navy destroyer sailor from the ’70s and founder of Americans for a Stronger Navy, I’ve seen firsthand how sea power isn’t only about ships—it’s about people, industry, and the trade that keeps America moving. This isn’t a Beltway debate; it touches your grocery bill, your job, and the undersea cables that carry your paycheck.

In this interview, Captain Brent D. Sadler, USN (Ret.), discusses the ideas from his book U.S. Naval Power in the 21st Century: A New Strategy for Facing the Chinese and Russian Threat. He calls this framework naval statecraft. In Washington circles, the same concept is often referred to as maritime statecraft—a term meant to highlight the economic and commercial side of sea power. As Sadler makes clear, the two are essentially the same. What matters is the substance: reconnecting America’s Navy with shipyards, supply chains, and allies.

If we want peace, prosperity, and fewer crises, we must rebuild the muscle behind the flag—logistics, repair, and a maritime workforce. This interview is a practical roadmap. —Bill

Overview
Captain Brent D. Sadler, USN (Ret.), argues that America must reconnect military power with economics, industry, and trade—what he calls naval (or “maritime”) statecraft. It’s not a new strategy so much as a return to our roots: the Navy as a warfighter, a shaper of peace, and a protector of commerce. That means rebuilding ships and shipyards, restoring sealift and logistics, re-wiring alliances for industrial capacity, and aligning innovation with both commercial and military needs.

What Is Naval/Maritime Statecraft—and Why It Matters

  • More than combat: the Navy deters war, protects trade, and shapes the environment in peacetime.
  • Break the silos: integrate defense, diplomacy, and economics so China can’t “triangulate” between them.
  • Update the structure: organize like it’s a long competition again—industry, ports, sealift, and policy working together.

Lessons from History

  • Avoid a “Phony War”: weak industrial bases turn short crises into long wars.
  • Operate where you may have to fight: know the people, ports, and waters before a crisis.

Today’s Pressing Challenges

  • Industrial shortfall: workforce gaps, thin supply chains, and insufficient naval architects and yards.
  • Logistics as Achilles’ heel: too few tankers, dry cargo/ammo ships, and assured fuel storage after Red Hill.
  • Economic leverage: China’s dominance in shipbuilding, shipping fleets, and port stakes shapes global trade on its terms.
  • Undersea infrastructure: seabed cables and pipelines are targets; cyber and space resilience are now core to sea power.

A Practical Path Forward

  • Demand and Shipyards: use smart incentives (e.g., Jones Act demand, allied capital) to expand U.S. yard capacity.
  • Human Capital: rebuild the trades—welders, pipefitters, naval architects—and grow maritime education pipelines.
  • Innovation with Purpose: from advanced logistics to modular cargo, small modular reactors, and data-driven supply chains—commercial breakthroughs that also serve military sustainment.
  • Allied Muscle: tap allied shipping and yards (Japan, South Korea, Europe, Canada) to scale capacity fast and politically sustainably.

Why Americans Should Care
Everything from groceries to phones rides ships and undersea cables. If adversaries control ports, fleets, and repair yards—or cut our cables—prices spike, jobs suffer, and crises last longer. Maritime strength keeps daily life predictable.

Implications for the Navy
Prioritize logistics ships, fuel resilience, dispersed Pacific access, and contested-environment sustainment. Tie operational concepts to a revitalized industrial base so the fleet you plan is the fleet you can build, crew, repair, and keep at sea.

Implications for Our Allies
A stronger U.S. maritime sector reduces dangerous dependence on Chinese shipbuilding and sustains shared deterrence. Joint investment in yards, sealift, and pre-positioned stocks turns alliances into real capacity.

Call to Action
Citizens should press leaders—local, state, and federal—to support maritime education, shipyard expansion, and logistics recapitalization. Industry and investors should pursue maritime tech and U.S. waterfront projects. Policymakers should align defense, commerce, and diplomacy to grow capacity at home and with allies.

For readers who want to go deeper, Captain Brent D. Sadler, USN (Ret.), expands on these ideas in his book U.S. Naval Power in the 21st Century: A New Strategy for Facing the Chinese and Russian Threat. It offers a detailed blueprint for how America can reconnect its Navy, industry, and diplomacy in the new era of great power competition.

For deeper dives, we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter — a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.

Let’s roll.

Posted on

Adversaries Inside Our Homeland: A Call to Strengthen the U.S. Navy

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

Introduction
Most people don’t realize it yet. We are already in a quiet w@r. Not with bombs. Not with missiles. But with fentanyl, with financial schemes, and with cyber attacks. These are not random hacks — they are deliberate intrusions aimed straight at America’s lifelines.

Targeting America’s Core Systems
They target our banks — draining trust from the financial system.
They map our pipelines — threatening the flow of oil and gas that heats our homes.
They burrow into our power grids — carrying the ability to shut down American cities.
They test our hospitals and emergency networks.
They infiltrate our communications — preparing to cut the way America speaks, trades, and defends itself.

And now, they even target our homes and businesses. The devices we plug in. The networks we rely on. Even solar panels and batteries made overseas — carrying hidden back doors that could one day flip a switch against us.

Banks. Grids. Solar.

Why Americans Should Care
This is not only about us. Our allies are targeted too. These attacks seek to divide, to weaken the bonds that keep freedom strong. A crisis in one corner of the world can ripple across oceans — and into our own homes.

The Navy and the Nation
Our strength rests on both our sailors and our civilian maritime industry. Civilian ships move the goods America needs. Our Navy protects those ships and the sea lanes they travel. Together, they keep our nation alive and our economy moving.

As Rear Admiral Mike Studeman, U.S. Navy (Retired) has said:
“The reality is that adversaries have insinuated themselves in our homeland… and continue to exploit our society from the inside out.”

A Call to Action
That’s why today I am asking you: Call Congress. Tell them to support our sailors. Find your Representative or Senator at USA.gov. Use your voice. Every call is logged. Every message counts.

Demand that Congress fund emergency shipbuilding. And strengthen the Navy’s fleet.

Conclusion
The future of America depends on us — on our sailors, on our civilian maritime, on our citizens, and on a Navy that protects them all.

That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter—a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.

Let’s Roll.

Posted on

The Quiet War We’re Already In: Cyber, Fentanyl, and the CCP’s Strategy of Attrition

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

Introduction

As a former destroyer sailor from the ’70s, a Navy veteran who served on the Henry B. Wilson (DDG 7), and later a telecom and web technology executive, I don’t take words like “war” lightly. But we need to face facts: the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has already launched a quiet war against America and our allies.

It doesn’t look like Pearl Harbor or Midway. Instead, it comes as millions of cyberattacks, poisoned streets, disinformation campaigns, and infiltrations into our critical infrastructure. The weapons are different, but the intent is the same: weaken America from the inside out until resistance collapses.

Two voices recently captured this reality:

  • Retired Rear Admiral Mike Studeman, former Commander of the Office of Naval Intelligence, warned: “The reality is that adversaries have insinuated themselves in our homeland and continue to exploit our society from the inside out. This is the quiet and costly national crisis we have insufficiently mobilized to address.”
  • Another security analyst summarized it bluntly: “Massive list of aggressive actions against the US by China, but two stand out: 1) cyber attacks on critical infrastructure, and 2) subsidizing fentanyl to addict our citizens. The CCP is an existential threat to our democracy and we must treat it as such.”

These aren’t exaggerations. They’re the facts on the ground — and in cyberspace.

Cyber Siege: The First Strike of Modern Conflict

The Hudson Institute’s August 2025 policy memo makes it plain: Taiwan now faces an average of 2.4 million cyberattacks per day. These intrusions target energy grids, logistics, medical systems, and semiconductors. Hudson’s conclusion is chilling: in a crisis, Beijing could disable Taiwan’s systems “without expending a single missile.”

This isn’t theory. It’s the same playbook Russia used against Ukraine in 2022, starting with cyberattacks to degrade command and control. The difference is that Taiwan is at the center of global supply chains, producing 90 percent of the world’s advanced semiconductors. If its networks go dark, the shockwaves would slam every corner of the global economy — including the U.S. Navy’s shipyards and weapons programs.

Fentanyl: War in Our Streets

While Taiwan faces digital siege, America faces chemical siege. CCP-linked networks subsidize the production of fentanyl precursors that end up killing tens of thousands of Americans each year. This is not just crime — it’s a form of warfare. An addicted, divided society is weaker, less resilient, and less able to project power abroad.

Just as cyberattacks aim to paralyze a nation’s systems, fentanyl undermines its people from within. Together, they form a strategy of attrition: weaken the United States until it can no longer lead.

Why Americans Should Care

  • PRC-backed groups like Volt Typhoon have already penetrated U.S. critical infrastructure in places like San Diego, Norfolk, and Houston.
  • Our communities are flooded with fentanyl that is subsidized and trafficked through networks linked to China.
  • Our economic security hangs on supply chains that Beijing can disrupt with a few keystrokes.

The CCP doesn’t need to invade to weaken us. They’re already doing it.

Implications for the Navy
A Navy cannot fight if its logistics, communications, and supply lines are compromised. If Taiwan falls prey to a digital siege, our fleets in the Pacific will face an even harder fight — one fought without the semiconductor edge or the industrial resilience we’ve taken for granted.

The Navy will inevitably be tasked with cleaning up the mess: defending supply chains, securing sea lanes, and protecting American infrastructure from further exploitation. That means cyber resilience and industrial revival are as critical to naval readiness as shipbuilding or new destroyers.

Implications for Our Allies
Hudson warns of a dangerous ambiguity: there is no Indo-Pacific cyber alliance. Would Japan, South Korea, or Australia respond to a Chinese cyberattack on Taiwan? Would Washington retaliate in kind? The lack of clarity undermines deterrence — and gives Beijing confidence.

We need joint cyber defense drills, clear doctrine, and public-private coordination on resilience — not after a crisis, but now.

Conclusion
We are already at war — just not in the way most Americans imagine. The CCP’s cyberattacks, fentanyl subsidies, and influence operations are part of a long game of attrition. Admiral Studeman is right: this is a “quiet and costly national crisis” we’ve failed to mobilize against.

Hudson is right too: resilience is deterrence. America must strengthen its cyber defenses, rebuild its industrial base, and support Taiwan’s ability to withstand a digital siege. At the same time, we must recognize how Silicon Valley’s past choices — offshoring technology and handing Beijing the keys — helped create this vulnerability.

The sooner we admit the war has already begun, the sooner we can rally the Navy, our allies, and the American people to win it.

Posted on

The Hawks Were Right: China’s Drive for Tech Independence and U.S. Security Risks

Bill Cullifer, Founder
Bill Cullifer, Founder

Introduction
Thanks to Tom’s Hardware for spotlighting the latest chapter in U.S.–China tech tensions. Their reporting underscores a key point: America’s security is tied to technology policy. And those who warned about selling cutting-edge chips to Beijing in the first place—the so-called “China hawks”—are now watching these events unfold with an all-too-knowing smile.

What Happened
China recently ordered its top tech companies to halt purchases of Nvidia’s H20 AI chips. This comes after U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Washington’s goal was to make China “addicted” to U.S. technology. While blunt, his remark struck a nerve, evoking the painful history of the Opium Wars and China’s “Century of Shame.”

The Hawks Were Right
For years, U.S. lawmakers and analysts skeptical of Beijing’s intentions argued that selling advanced U.S. chips—even at a “watered down” level—would only fuel China’s ambitions. They warned that the short-term profits were not worth the long-term risk: once Chinese firms learned from U.S. technology, they would double down on building domestic alternatives and reduce their reliance on America. That is exactly what we are witnessing now.

At Americans for a Stronger Navy, we have been sounding the alarm on this same pattern. Just as the hawks predicted, the policies of short-term gain have fed into long-term vulnerabilities. Our mission is to ensure the American public understands these risks and rallies behind a stronger Navy — one prepared for the challenges of tomorrow.

China’s Long-Term Drive for Self-Reliance
It’s important to note that this isn’t simply a reaction to Lutnick’s remark or recent export bans. For more than a decade, Beijing has been methodically working to reduce exposure to Western technology:

  • Made in China 2025 (2015) — A state-led plan to dominate sectors like semiconductors, AI, robotics, and aerospace by producing up to 70% of key components domestically.
  • Semiconductors & Chips — Massive state investment in SMIC and the “Big Fund” to build a homegrown chip industry, with Huawei rolling out its own Kirin processors despite U.S. sanctions.
  • Cybersecurity & Data — Laws mandating that Chinese data be stored on Chinese servers, cutting Western firms out of core infrastructure.
  • “Dual Circulation” (2020) — Xi Jinping’s policy to insulate China’s economy from foreign shocks by prioritizing domestic supply chains and technology independence.

These moves show that dependency on U.S. technology was never going to be permanent. Beijing’s strategy has always been to learn, copy, and ultimately replace. The hawks knew it, and the evidence proves them right.

Why It Matters

  • Economic Competition: Nvidia initially saw huge demand for the H20. But Chinese regulators are now pushing data centers to buy 50% of their chips from domestic firms.
  • Historical Sensitivities: Lutnick’s “addiction” remark may have been casual in the U.S., but it hit raw nerves in Beijing—feeding nationalist backlash and accelerating decoupling.
  • Strategic Leverage: Technology is today’s high ground. If America cedes it, it cedes the ability to shape global security and commerce.

Implications for the U.S. Navy
The Navy’s edge rests on secure, reliable, advanced technology—from AI-driven analysis to unmanned systems. If China achieves independence from U.S. tech, the leverage America once had diminishes, narrowing our technological superiority at sea. Hawks warned this might happen—and now it’s becoming reality.

Implications for Our Allies
Allies across Asia and Europe rely on U.S. technology, but if Beijing succeeds in exporting homegrown chip alternatives, it could create cracks in the U.S.-led alliance system. China wouldn’t just compete militarily—it would compete by shaping the world’s tech ecosystem.

Why Americans Should Care
This isn’t just about Nvidia stock or quarterly earnings. It’s about whether America’s long-term security is sacrificed for short-term profit. The hawks who cautioned against empowering Beijing were pointing to this very moment. If China wins the tech race, it strengthens its military, weakens alliances, and challenges the Navy’s ability to keep the seas free and open.

Conclusion
Tom’s Hardware’s reporting shines a spotlight on a dangerous dynamic: America risks repeating past mistakes. Selling technology to Beijing may fill order books, but it also fuels the very rival we’re preparing to deter. The hawks warned us, and their concerns are looking more prescient by the day.

👉 Learn more and join the conversation at StrongerNavy.org

That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter—a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.

Let’s roll.

Posted on

Beyond Silent: The CCP’s Brazen Wrecking Ball Campaign

24 Months of Evidence Supporting Admiral Studeman’s Warning

How Americans for a Stronger Navy’s research reveals the CCP has escalated from silent infiltration to brazen assault

A Courageous Voice Speaking Essential Truth

When Rear Admiral Mike Studeman tweets about the Chinese Communist Party’s “silent invasion” of the United States, he demonstrates the courage and expertise that made him one of America’s most respected intelligence leaders. As the former commander of the Office of Naval Intelligence and director for intelligence (J2) of the Indo-Pacific Command, his assessment carries the weight of unparalleled access to classified intelligence and strategic analysis.

Admiral Studeman’s characterization of a “silent invasion” accurately captures the sophisticated nature of CCP operations and Beijing’s remarkable success in suppressing American awareness of these threats. We deeply respect his expertise and his willingness to speak plainly about dangers that many prefer to ignore.

However, our 24 months of intensive research at StrongerNavy.org suggests the CCP has escalated beyond “silent” operations into something far more brazen and destructive. What we’re witnessing isn’t just sophisticated infiltration—it’s an increasingly overt wrecking ball campaign against American sovereignty, institutions, and security.

From Silent to Brazen: The Evolution We’ve Documented

From Silent to Brazen: The Evolution We’ve Documented

Since early 2023, Americans for a Stronger Navy has been tracking what appears to be a deliberate escalation in CCP operations. While these campaigns retain sophisticated elements that justify Admiral Studeman’s “silent invasion” framework, our evidence reveals increasingly brazen and openly destructive tactics.

The CCP seems to have calculated that they can operate more aggressively without meaningful American response—and unfortunately, they appear to be correct.

The Brazen Infrastructure Assault

Our documentation reveals systematic, increasingly bold attacks on America’s most critical systems. These aren’t subtle probes—they’re aggressive penetrations designed to establish persistent access and demonstrate vulnerability.

The infiltration of presidential communications represents just the most visible example of operations that have grown remarkably brazen. Our research indicates comprehensive targeting of government communications at all levels, conducted with a boldness that suggests confidence in American inaction.

Recent attacks on energy grids, transportation networks, and telecommunications systems show a pattern of escalating aggression. These operations extend far beyond intelligence gathering into active preparation for disruption and destruction.

Open Information Warfare

Perhaps most brazenly, we’ve tracked sophisticated information warfare campaigns that no longer attempt to hide their foreign origins. These operations openly work to disrupt American elections, amplify social divisions, and undermine public trust in democratic institutions.

The CCP’s information warfare apparatus has grown increasingly confident in conducting operations that would have been considered unthinkably brazen just years ago. They’re betting that Americans won’t respond effectively even to overt manipulation—and so far, they’re winning that bet.

Economic Wrecking Ball Tactics

Our monitoring reveals systematic efforts to damage American economic competitiveness through increasingly overt means. This goes beyond traditional espionage into active economic warfare designed to weaken American industrial capacity and technological leadership.

The brazenness of these operations reflects Beijing’s assessment that America lacks the will to respond proportionally to economic aggression, even when it’s conducted openly.

Congressional Validation: The Scope of Brazen Operations

Recent congressional investigations validate our assessment that CCP operations have grown increasingly bold and destructive:

  • More than 60 CCP-related espionage cases documented from February 2021 to December 2024 across 20 states
  • The FBI reports that roughly 80 percent of economic espionage prosecutions involve conduct that would benefit China
  • Despite congressional warnings 25 years ago, federal agencies continue to treat these operations as manageable rather than the existential threat they represent

These statistics represent only discovered and prosecuted cases. The true scope of brazen CCP operations likely extends far beyond public acknowledgment, precisely because their boldness makes them harder for American institutions to process and respond to effectively.

The Wrecking Ball Strategy: Why Brazen Works

Intelligence analysts have identified the six broad domains of Chinese political warfare that Admiral Studeman’s assessment encompasses:

  1. Intelligence operations – Now conducted with unprecedented boldness
  2. Cyber operations – Increasingly destructive rather than just penetrative
  3. Information and disinformation operations – Openly aggressive narrative warfare
  4. United Front work – Brazen influence operations in academic and political institutions
  5. Irregular military actions – Escalating gray zone operations testing American resolve
  6. Economic coercion – Open use of economic relationships as weapons

Our research shows escalating aggression across all domains. The CCP appears to have concluded that brazen operations work better than subtle ones because they overwhelm American decision-making processes and exploit our institutional reluctance to acknowledge the scale of the threat.

The Suppression Paradox: Hiding in Plain Sight

Here’s where Admiral Studeman’s “silent invasion” framework remains critically important: Beijing has achieved the remarkable feat of conducting increasingly brazen operations while maintaining effective suppression of American awareness.

This represents a sophisticated understanding of American psychology and institutional dynamics. By operating brazenly while simultaneously suppressing discussion, the CCP creates a psychological disconnect that paralyzes American response.

The suppression operates through:

  • Institutional capture – Leveraging relationships to discourage acknowledgment of the threat’s scope
  • Information overwhelm – Creating so much noise that clear signals get lost
  • Psychological warfare – Making the threat seem too large and complex to address effectively
  • Economic leverage – Using business relationships to discourage honest assessment

The result is that brazen operations continue while most Americans remain unaware they’re living through an unprecedented assault on American sovereignty.

Admiral Studeman’s Essential Service

Admiral Studeman’s willingness to speak publicly about this threat performs essential national service. His credibility as a former intelligence chief makes it harder to dismiss these concerns as partisan hysteria or threat inflation.

His “silent invasion” framework captures the sophisticated suppression campaign that keeps most Americans unaware of what’s happening. Our research builds on his foundation by documenting how these operations have escalated into increasingly brazen territory.

Together, these perspectives reveal the full scope of the challenge: sophisticated suppression campaigns enabling increasingly brazen destructive operations.

The Wrecking Ball Reality: Beyond Traditional Competition

What we’re documenting isn’t traditional great power competition or even sophisticated espionage. It’s a comprehensive wrecking ball campaign designed to weaken American society, institutions, and capabilities from within.

The “wrecking ball” metaphor captures several essential elements:

  • Destructive intent – These operations aim to damage, not just gather intelligence
  • Brazen execution – Increasingly overt operations that test American resolve
  • Systematic targeting – Coordinated assault on multiple critical systems simultaneously
  • Escalating aggression – Growing boldness as American responses prove inadequate

This represents something qualitatively different from the Cold War competition or traditional espionage. It’s political warfare designed to achieve strategic objectives through systematic destruction of American capabilities and confidence.

Our Continuing Documentation Mission

For 24 months, Americans for a Stronger Navy has been documenting this escalating campaign because we understand that naval readiness cannot be separated from broader threats to American sovereignty. A stronger Navy requires a society capable of recognizing and responding to unprecedented challenges.

Admiral Studeman’s courage in speaking publicly about the “silent invasion” creates an opportunity to educate Americans about both the sophisticated suppression campaigns and the increasingly brazen operations they enable.

Our research at StrongerNavy.org will continue documenting these operations, providing Americans with evidence-based analysis of threats that combine sophisticated concealment with brazen execution. This isn’t about creating panic—it’s about enabling the informed, strategic response that this unprecedented challenge demands.

Breaking Through: From Silent to Seen

Admiral Studeman’s public warnings represent a crucial first step in breaking through Beijing’s suppression campaign. His “silent invasion” framework helps Americans understand how sophisticated operations can remain hidden in plain sight.

Our “wrecking ball” analysis builds on his foundation by revealing how these operations have escalated into increasingly brazen territory. Together, these perspectives provide a comprehensive understanding of threats that are simultaneously sophisticated and destructive, subtle and brazen.

The silent invasion is real—and it has evolved into something even more dangerous. The wrecking ball campaign is underway. Thanks to leaders like Admiral Studeman, Americans are finally beginning to see what’s been happening on their home soil.

The first step in defending American sovereignty is recognizing that we’re facing something unprecedented: a campaign that combines sophisticated suppression with brazen destruction. Admiral Studeman has provided the framework for understanding the suppression. Our research documents the escalating brazenness.

Together, we can help Americans see the full scope of the challenge—and the urgent need for a response equal to the threat.

Americans for a Stronger Navy has been documenting evidence of escalating foreign political warfare operations at StrongerNavy.org since early 2023. Our mission is to educate Americans about the maritime and national security challenges facing our nation while advocating for the naval capabilities needed to address them.

That’s why we launched Charting the Course: Voices That Matter—a 24-part educational series breaking down how we got here, what went wrong, and what must happen next. Our goal is simple: educate the public, connect the dots, and build the support needed to close the readiness gap before it’s too late.

Let’s move beyond slogans. Let’s build understanding, accountability, and strength—before the next crisis comes knocking.

Follow our research at StrongerNavy.org and join the conversation on social media @StrongerNavy