Because France doesn't need to care about China but they do need to care about Russia, and they don't have the ability to counterbalance Russia without the US. This is part of why their nationalist movement to rebuilt their military is growing strength, but they're far from being capable of being independent from the US.

Europe and China are much more naturally aligned in not wanting to see Russia as a dominant military power. Review the history of the cold war if reference is needed.

The sino-soviet split was not an inevitable result of geography.

US is able to output harm while China doesn't have that ability.

Seeing how the Afghanistan war ended I don't think so. The last time the USA properly won a war was when they nuked cities and civilians, whereas China and Russia never went this far. Now given that USA is definitely the more belligerent of the 3, it might happen again.

Sure, but if the US command had for some reason been psychopathic enough, Afghanistan could have been leveled into a barren desert. Wars of occupation are messy and often inherently unwinnable. But the US can absolutely "output harm" anywhere on earth.

Untrue, USA won the Gulf War.

David against Goliath? IRL, Goliath wins.

Could you rephrase your question?

The parent was suggesting basically that the US is not a Goliath (in expeditionary war).

This was not a question but statement. IRL = In Real Life.

You think it would be pragmatic for them to turn away from USA, UK, other EU and Anglosphere states, Japan, etc., and instead start forming military alliances with a genocidal communist dictatorship?

Interesting strategy.