posted
They already are throwing BILLIONS at it, which has Donald Rumsfeld and many others very nervous. The only thing stopping me from being wary is that those billions aren't being spent in the US or Europe, where the serious technical hardware is. Still, Russia is making a bundle off the deal.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not that I would dream of criticising - bah, who am I kidding? Trillions is actually more than billions. Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know that. My point is that they're only a step away from trillions, as they are already at billions, above millions.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Why should Rumsfeld be nervous? The us spends over 400 billions dollars a year, if the Chinese want to do the same and are able to do so its their right.
But ya, i don't think you got the connection. dollars, the Chinese from the money they make off of trade are doing 3 things with it, investing into their companies both privet and state owned, investing into infastructure and rural aid, and into their military.
IP: Logged |
posted
Which is why I still say we need to concentrate on China as the most obvious and dangerous enemy of the free world.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Personally I say, Just give America some time... Another 50 years and it'll have efficiently destroyed itself.
The American household has deteriorated to the point that in states like California 2 out of every 1 person is divorced. That is to say that there are 2 divorces for every person in the state.
America's new found lifestyle choices will effectively diminish its population's unity and create a society where promiscuous sex, increased drug use (both prescription and mindaltering), and corruption take its toll on anyone living there.
InEfficency is already reaching new heights. The people have observed that those who show themselves to be incompetent will receive less work but equal wages, because they can't be trusted. No longer can you fire someone for being ineffective and useless, for fear of law suits.
In a recent report, sadly I do not have the article, but a manufacturing company reported that for an 8 hour work day, they were having problems with workers using the bathrooms. The average amount of time used was over 45 minutes. FOR A 8 HOUR SHIFT! That's roughly 10% of their day right there.
America needs someone who will actually take on the problems that exist. Stop the corruption and promote responsibility.
Johivin Ryson
Those who watch rarely speak up.
Those who speak rarely hear all.
Those who listen see all there is.
Posts: 119 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Tom, all evidence points towards The United States of America as the greatest threat to liberty and world peace.
For the following reasons:
-Overthrows democraticlally elected governments and installs right wing dictatorships
-Gives WMD's to said dictatorships
-The only nation that has used Nuclear weapons and developed doctrines stating to use said weapons immiediatly should the Warsaw Pact invade NATO. "Nuclear Umbrella"
-maintains 10,000+ atomic weapons and refuses to sign international treaties that would decrease that size drastically ei: SALTII.
-Has been refusing to live up to their trade agreements ie: softwood lumber (5,000,000,000$) w/ Canada.
-Invaded Iraq for no sufficiently valid reason.
-considers itself to be the worlds world policeman.
-Short sighted enough to have given terrorist groups weapons, and training, and money to fight a current enemy only for them to become enemies themselves a decade later.
I think those are pretty good reasons to point to America to being the worlds greatest threat, not to mention the position of US corporations and how they're sucking the world dry of resources (oil).
IP: Logged |
posted
Do you seriously mean to suggest that you would personally prefer Chinese global hegemony to American global hegemony? America is by no means perfect, but if it's to be one or the other then I'll start singing The Star-Spangled Banner from up here in Canada right now.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I dn't prefer one hegemony to another I just want a more multipolar world."
I think the belief that China will be content with a "multipolar world" is a bit naive. And if I had to choose, I'd much rather go with the USA.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Why should Rumsfeld be nervous? The us spends over 400 billions dollars a year, if the Chinese want to do the same and are able to do so its their right.
Oh! Well my bad, we should all just smile and look the other way.
Be serious Blayne. An up and coming world power starts sinking billions of dollars into military hardware, making an OBVIOUS effort to militarize themselves even further than they already are, and you think it's all well and good? If our Secretary of DEFENSE wasn't at least a little worried or cautious about it, he wouldn't be doing his job.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
And please explain to me how its even close to feasible to launch a cross ocean invasion? Why should he be worried? The US Navy will probly remain on top for several decades yet.
IP: Logged |
posted
Japan invaded Alaska in World War Two, but that isn't the point. I can't imagine you are really that naive or dense Blayne.
If/When China becomes a superpower, they will more or less have dominion over Asia and the Middle East, not to mention Indo-China and Australia. It won't be as clear cut as an invasion, but that area of the world will fall under their direct sphere of influence. China spending billions on their military means anything we might want or need to do in that part of the world will fall under a Chinese umbrella.
How long will Russia last with a ravenous China to the south, armed to the teeth, loaded with nukes, and desperate for natural resources? If you think that sounds far fetched, it's not.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jeepers, whatever could China be improving its military for? I mean, everyone knows that a cross-oceon invasion from Big Bad America is impossible, and everyone knows that the PRC is just trying to do right by its peasants, and we've heard that its at peace with its neighbors...
...so why the increased militarization? Golly! The mind boggles at what a peaceful, friendly, non-threatening power at peace with its neighbors would want more guns, tanks, and planes for!
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks Rakeesh, those are the words I was looking for
I couldn't find the right level of sarcasm.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Because without a strong up-to-date military a nation is only a laughing stock in world politics. Look at Canada we're never taken serious except by the Dutch, Germans, and Terrorists. (We're insanely easy to attack yet not one single terrorist attack).
The USA is a nation that has proven to the world that it has no hesitation to attack nations when economic and political desire support it, China knows that for as long as it has a modern Army it can defend itself.
And I stress defence, why does America pour billions into their army? "Defence" they say.
Armies are easily instrument of prestige and if the Chinese know that they're army can play cribbage at the same level as anyone else then they know they are safe.
Also consider the psycological factor in the Chinese, they have been invaded and pissed on by foreigners for decades and decades and only recently regained they're soverignty (97% of it anyway) and national unity some 50 odd years ago.
Making sure that they are never invaded again I think is understandable, just as Israel arms itself to the teeth in order to insure what happen from 1941 onwards can and will NEVER happen again.
If a few bearocrats and careerists in Washington get a little nervious I don't care and definatly the Chinese don't care.
IP: Logged |
posted
Well, to be honest, it's easy for you to say that, you're not American, and those weapons as you said AREN'T pointed at you.
Do you really read the things you type out?
quote:The USA is a nation that has proven to the world that it has no hesitation to attack nations when economic and political desire support it, China knows that for as long as it has a modern Army it can defend itself.
If China wants to become THAT, then we and the rest of the world have every right to be nervous. Do they have the right to arm themselves? Sure. But does the rest of the world have to skip under a rainbow holding hands with them while they do it? Of course not, and it's silly for you to be so cavalier about it.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
As for dominion over south east asia... China already HAS that they have defencive treaties with Burma and Vietnam, Laos, and Camboida (Though I don't remember if the last two were still puppets to Vietnam or not).
Also when I mean multipolar I stress MULTI not BI-polar.
I don't want another coldwar between China and the USA, I want the world to be more or less divided up between 5-6 big nations, EU, Russia, Japan, China, US, and India. Maybe toss in a Crescent League and maybe a few future medium wieghts like Thailand and Venuzeula in too if its possible.
IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
"If China wants to become THAT"
They have shown no desire to attack foreign nations, they only wish to reach super power status because they (woah as type this I have 3 "they's" on top of each other) and I mean the Chinese people want to be powerful, they were the worlds leading civilization a few centuries ago and lost it.
Like a kid who lost his favorite toy they will move heaven and earth (a common chinese phrase btw) until they get it.
Its a matter of national pride, and wiping away past shames.
IP: Logged |
posted
You're incredibly naive when it comes to world affairs. And have a chilling vision for the future of world affairs. I won't continue this discussion.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
How am I naive? China has shown no reason to proove its belligerance, America has on numerous occasions have.
"I won't continue this discussion." My hands we're getting tired anyways, back to Civilization 4.
IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
