Wars of the future

Discussion in 'Members' Club Room' started by Jones Henry, Sep 28, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. The_Zergling
    Offline

    The_Zergling Junior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Messages:
    953
    Likes Received:
    1
    What is the topic anyway? The only thing i saw that was related in this last page was something about China's potential wars, something about fighting Taiwan or Japan or something...

    As far as I know Japan does NOT have a stronger military than China, they are still under the restrictions of World War II... their military is strictly for defensive purposes, like Taiwan's. They're not interested in attacking anyone, it would be moral and economic suicide, and neither will Taiwan.

    Let's just face it. Japan hasn't been an aggressor since WWII. The country that will be the world's worst aggressor after the US will be China if it doesn't change paths. The marches against "Japanese Aggression" are simply bogus things set up by the CCP to blind people from the internal Chinese economical and moral problems within the Chinese mainland.

    Does anyone really believe Japan or Taiwan plans on attacking anyone?

    PS. About the "Give millions of dollars to every black" post... Apparently you haven't studied economics. That's simply not possible. And if you simply printed a LOT of paper money to do that, that would simply cause massive inflation, making the money as valuable as toilet paper.
     
  2. Schumacher
    Offline

    Schumacher Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Messages:
    1,310
    Likes Received:
    189
    Apologies to the others.
    I thought I've written the last of this off-topic subject, but since Mr economist here seems to have some difficulty understanding the line of arguments. This is for his benefit.

    I think it's already clear to most that there's as much chance of the US making significant compensation to the blacks for slavery as the US congress approving the sale of F-22s to China tomorrow.
    The debate was whether one thinks slavery contributed much to the US being the dominant economy today & whether the US as a nation owes compensation to the blacks.
    Let's hope Mr Economist here can think abt this while working on his thesis on how much money US needs to print before the US$ falls to the value of toilet papers. :)
     
  3. FreeAsia2000
    Offline

    FreeAsia2000 Junior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2005
    Messages:
    648
    Likes Received:
    1
    IDont don't compare Muslim-Han / Non-Muslim-Han relations with America's
    treatment of Muslims...

    In Muslim opinion ...Muslims have had differences with non-Muslims...
    but in the Muslim world at the moment America is regarded as virtually
    Demonic. You want to know why ? Abu Ghreib was just the public
    face...of American 'democracy'.

    If you want an example look at what happened in Uzbekistan...the
    tyrant there has been boiling muslims alive there...yet NO muslim group
    was willing to assist America in his overthrow and replacement with an
    American backed tyrant...what does that tell you about how Muslims
    regard America ?

    The good old days when you could get Muslims to fight America's battles
    are over...afraid you're going to have to ask the kansas lard-arses to
    fight the chinese on their own.

    Most muslims will of course be totally cheering for china....
     
  4. IDonT
    Offline

    IDonT Senior Member
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    1,091
    Likes Received:
    0
    I wasn't comparing CURRENT US treatment with muslims vs China's treatment with Muslims.

    What I was comparing was the West imperialistic designs in the 19th and 20the centuries vs China's imperialistic designs on central Asia during the 18th and 19th century.

    Sorry for the confusion.

    You may be right that the muslims are cheering for China. But you have to remember that the muslims were cheering for the US in the 1980's.

    I believe its the current Bush administration that further compounded this muslim hatred towards the US. Hopefully, the next administration will do what it can to reconcile.

    I have never approved America's support of tyrants who are friendly to US interests. That is one of its faults. Steps should be done to distance ourselves from those governments.
     
  5. H5N1
    Offline

    H5N1 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, Iraq (cooked), Iran (getting hot), China( military strong, not economical ), NK ( no Oil there) and what's next Venezuela.

    I think that next notable war would be Venezuela..if US has their way.. why ?
    While we are focusing on Iraq, Afghanistan then Iran. US has already had their sight of another target.

    1) Sitting on the world's 5th proven Oil Reserve. New gas field discovered last year.
    2) Has a so called dictator by the US, though democratically elected 3 times, survived 1 coup.
    3) Not friendly with US ( though supplies 15% of US consumption)
    4) US unable to secure any Nato support, few months back.
    5) US and Nato already has invasion plans since 1991.

    It seems this US president really loves OIL... Halliburton comes to mind. But the Iraq war drag on and prove troublesome than expected. If not, I would almost garrantee you, Venezuela will be the next big news.
     
  6. MIGleader
    Offline

    MIGleader Banned Idiot

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    3,563
    Likes Received:
    1
    the u.s might not invade, but will send in spec ops to try to sieze the government. i hope it does not fail. a columbia with no government leader will mean drug wars. i hope it turns to be a international incident tfor the u.s.

    china militarily strong and economically weak? what are u smoking?
    china is militarily strong and economically invincible. if its economy falls, the world pays the price.
     
  7. H5N1
    Offline

    H5N1 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    0
    MIGleader
    read my post carefully. I mean to say miltary too strong and not economical for us to cause a conflict. Perspective is put on us side.

    Thanks :)
     
  8. FreeAsia2000
    Offline

    FreeAsia2000 Junior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2005
    Messages:
    648
    Likes Received:
    1
    Hi

    Do you know that's the FIRST time you've apologized for not explaining properly ? Well done.

    China was interested in protecting it's borders from marauding turko/central asian tribes which had a history of plundering and destroying. This was done either by preventing formation of a horde or the circumstances for it's formation.

    My ancestors have experienced their activities at first hand. Thus arguing that this was an 'imperial' policy is incorrect. It relates to past Chinese (and other nations) experiences of some of the horrors that have emerged from Central Asia.

    In relation to Muslim perspectives of America your wrong. To be quite blunt.
    At the time most Muslims regarded the USSR as a greater threat however to say that Muslims were 'cheering' for the US is not true.

    Most Muslims apart from a few extremists believed that the 1980's war against tyrrany would open a new chapter in American-Muslim relations and that America was willing to listen to reason.

    However the Neo-Cons as part of their political creed, which is essentially that America can only be held together on the basis of a threat from outside destroyed the positive period of Reagans Presidency and the careful period of Clinton's.

    America has walked into a well-laid trap. The more it fights the more the resistance will increase. Osama is using these war(s) to mobilise muslims in opposition to America. The Neo-Cons are using these wars to justify american support for zionism.

    The best policy for America would have been to withdraw support from tyrants like Musharaf and Mubarak. To publicly invite the leaders of the larger islamic groups to america for a good hearty meal ( trust me those guys love a good meal :) ) and show them which policies would economically benefit their countries via aid or favoured trading status. I know this is a Military forum but sometimes economics is more important as means of altering policy than Missiles...because once America started raining down those missiles...most of those Muslims realised they didn't fear death anymore.

    Abu Ghreib wasn't just a mistake it was a catastrophe. I know some wise guy in America thought hey those guys don't fear death lets try humiliation or torture. You don't realise how America's image changed from being a murdering tyrant like the Mongols to something Satanic.

    Prolonged wars do not benefit a nation - Sun Tzu
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page