Possible World War Looms On The Horizon

[UnitedStatesOfAmerica-]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/ma ... gentina-un

While British ownership of the Falklands and other islands in the area has been settled for centuries, Argentina is claiming ownership of other people's territory even though they had their &&&& handed to them in the early 80's. I think if it came this time, the UK would clearly win.

Also, "a dispute has emerged between France and Canada over claims to be presented for the seabed surrounding St Pierre and Miquelon, a small archipelago off the coast of Newfoundland. The French have also raised hackles by claiming the seabed near their Pacific island territories."

though war between those two is very unlikely.

Southeast Asia is disputing claims by China. And Japan is disputing claims by Russia.

This does not affect the US which has not signed the treaty. But with the Europeans, the Russians, China, and third world nations claiming the same portions of the world's oceans, conflict is pretty inevitable. The worst case scenarios, or most likely flash points for war: the Falklands (the Argentines go stupid and launch an ill advised invasion. The US being allied to both would be neutral.), the South China Sea (China attacks Vietnam and Phillipines which would bring in the US since the Phillipines are allied with the US in a mutual defense pact.)

What do you think?

[Ferrous Oxide]

Nobody's going to be dumb enough to start a WW.

[1-800-SOCIALISM]

...the Falklands (the Argentines go stupid and launch an ill advised invasion. The US being allied to both would be neutral.)...

You mean just like last time? President Reagan allowed the British ships to refuel at a US Navy-controlled port on their way to the Falkland Islands/Malvinas.

The government of Argentina at that time was attempting to shift public attention away from its own domestic failures when they invaded the disputed territory. It was a desperate and foolish move. Would the current government repeat that mistake? They have no logical reason to attempt it, at least not today.

Long before most of the "flash points" mentioned in the Guardian article actually flashed there would be some negotiations. If Argentina again invaded the Falkland Islands/Malvinas, which is highly unlikely given politics at present, the British military would "liberate" the territory again with their vastly superior forces, and the US government would not stop them in any way.

[Colonic Immigration]

Not gonna happen again.

[UnitedStatesOfAmerica-]

More likely to see a war in the south china sea you think?

[1-800-SOCIALISM]

More likely to see a war in the south china sea you think?

More likely than what, a battle for control of the Moon? In that case yes.

[UnitedStatesOfAmerica-]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 02358.html

"Britain lodged a claim to a large swath of South Atlantic seabed around the Falkland Islands on Monday, setting the stage for a battle with Argentina for control of potentially rich oil and gas reserves in the area.

The dispute over mineral rights could further embitter a long-running row between Britain and Argentina over sovereignty over the islands, known as the Malvinas in Spanish, which led to war in 1982.

The claim covers an area of about 1.2 million sq km (463,300 square miles), according to Lindsay Parson of Britain's National Oceanography Center, who helped prepare the filing.

Argentina filed its own claim with the U.N. commission last month which encompasses the same area claimed by Britain.

But a British Foreign Office official said that, in cases where countries make competing claims, the U.N. Commission is likely to shelve the issue until the states settle the dispute.

"We're essentially putting this submission in as a safeguard for the future," the official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said.

He said British and Argentine officials had held talks some years ago to look at working together on the issue but had failed to agree.

The Guardian newspaper quoted seismic surveys in January as saying there could be around 18 billion barrels of oil in the Falklands area and that exploration companies planned to start drilling later this year. "

Sounds like both want the oil.

"In March, Britain dismissed a fresh Argentine demand for sovereignty talks over the islands."

So much for Argentina not stirring the pot a bit.

"Britain has not made a filing covering the continental shelf of the British Antarctic Territory, but has said it reserves the right to do so in future."

How can they do that if they have no soveriengty over any part of Antarctica? At least according to the Antarctic Treaty.

[UnitedStatesOfAmerica-]

Looks like things are not so quiet between Canada and France after all.

http://www.canada.com/news/Newfoundland ... story.html

Even the Africans are doing it.

http://www.theeastafrican.co.ke/news/-/ ... rgjdl1z/-/


The US needs to submit its claims or it will lose its 200 mile economic exclusion zone.

[Veblenia]

Weren't you chicken-littling about a lethal flu pandemic a couple of weeks ago?

[UnitedStatesOfAmerica-]

Weren't you chicken-littling about a lethal flu pandemic a couple of weeks ago?

So was the rest of the world. Your views are only based on the information available. The information available at the time said, "New virus creating global pandemic."

Even the WHO and CDC were advising that the virus had pandemic potential and had raised the pandemic risk level not once but twice. Mexico and the US both closed schools where the virus was found. Actually Mexico shut down businesses. The Europeans and the Asians were both quarantining people, as was Canada and Australia.

[Orwelliad]

I only like my wars online, outside the web they are just........nasty

The probability of war with China is zero, there is no interest by anyone(except nutjobs), China is winning the world by economical power, not military, and the EU are preparing to drop the US and adopt a better relationship with China.
In the other cases, war is probably only going to occur in tiny-pot african countries, and not the big bad ones.

Finaly, the US is still the Nº1 superpower in terms of military, any nation that defies it KNOWS that it will lose, even Europe would fall under the US might, of course this is for now, as in a few years the US will be the 3º or 4º largest GDP, behind China, The European Union, and India is also a possibility(although far-fetched).

[UnitedStatesOfAmerica-]

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=46755

China quietly threatening war over the South China Sea.

[UnitedStatesOfAmerica-]

Finaly, the US is still the Nº1 superpower in terms of military, any nation that defies it KNOWS that it will lose, even Europe would fall under the US might, of course this is for now, as in a few years the US will be the 3º or 4º largest GDP, behind China, The European Union, and India is also a possibility(although far-fetched).

If commie Obama has his way, that will happen sooner than you think.

[Orwelliad]

China would´nt be that stupid to do an all-out attack on the US, this is just their way to assert their power in the region, to "rattle the saber" to show the world they are in control, they do this because they are becoming more and more powerfull, and like all humans, especially those who lived a horrible story like the Chinese, they are now living their "big-day", like the US lived in the 90´s, Britain lived in the XIX century and Portugal and Spain in the XV and XVI centuries, if you didnt want this to happen, you should have boycotted the Olimpics.

I wouldnt be insane to say its harmless, it certainly deserves atention, China is, to all intents and porposes, a Totalitarian State with power hunger, and we dont know for 100% certainty what its foreign policy plans are, however, its also no reason to go to DEFCON 1 and start sounding AA Alerts, and start building bunkers.

I stay on the moderate side, neither right-wing paranoia nor left-wing extreme pacifism, give it a bit of attention, but not that much.

Also, consider this, of this is in fact a manover so that thay make themselfs visible, a cry for attention, than by almost ignoring them(at least on the surface) its a win, if you Americans go balistic over this, then they have achieved their goal, its the same as terrorists, dont get terrorized, and you win!

[Velkya]

I wouldnt be insane to say its harmless, it certainly deserves atention, China is, to all intents and porposes, a Totalitarian State with power hunger, and we dont know for 100% certainty what its foreign policy plans are, however, its also no reason to go to DEFCON 1 and start sounding AA Alerts, and start building bunkers.

You sad little man. China is highly unlikely to start a war with the west, because that's where the money comes from. Had China and the West not established one of the most massive trading relationships the world has ever seen, you can guarantee they wouldn't have made good on their threats. Plus, to add to that, they're in a terrible position to invade, given the less than optimal state of their Navy and Air Force compared to that of the US and her allies in the region.

[UnitedStatesOfAmerica-]

You forgot just one little thing. The West has no money anymore. The money that used to be in the West in now in China. So China has the money and has been using it to modernize and build up it's offensive military capacity while western nations like the US and Europe are having to not only cancel weapons procurements but also lay off soldiers. The recession is also hurting national defense in the west.

[Exilia and Colonies]

China isn't invading the US any time soon (read:50 years) unless the Pacific Ocean mysteriously dries up. I'd be more concerned for Japan though. Australia gets away because of all those raw materials its selling to China.

[Zavizar]

If commie Obama has his way, that will happen sooner than you think.

Commie? Please. He is by far not a Communist. Just an idealistic Democrat.

Secondly, I highly doubt there will be another World War over something as small as this, but I could be wrong, for WW1 started over something stupid as well. If anything, it'll just be another conflict and if it lingers into the column of world war, then the US may once again play an isolationist role.

[Void Templar]

Finaly, the US is still the Nº1 superpower in terms of military, any nation that defies it KNOWS that it will lose, even Europe would fall under the US might, of course this is for now, as in a few years the US will be the 3º or 4º largest GDP, behind China, The European Union, and India is also a possibility(although far-fetched).

I wouldn't think of it like that. I doubt America would ever attempt an invasion of Europe, due to it not being strategicly viable. Russian and Chinese relations to America are pretty much always strained. An invasion of Europe (especially for Russia) would likely raise them to boiling points. I'd also reckon that the armies of Europe combined would be able to overcome whatever force the Americans throw at it, especially if the other big boys of the world join in. /bias

Also, is anyone else suspiciously of Germany going for a hattrick?

[Orwelliad]

I doubt America would ever attempt an invasion of Europe

Its actualy something that i belive the Americans would not dream of doing (well, at least now that Bush is gone anyway,"we know for a fact that andorra has WMD´s" ), i only gave it out as an example of the supremacy of the US armed forces, which could effectivily take on the second best military in the planet(the EU combined forces) and win! you must have misread what ive said, my English is mostly self-learnd, so sometimes my writing is a bit on the bad side.

WW1 started over something stupid as well

Never underestimate the sheer power of complete stupidity and fanatism, we saw what happened in 1939 and 1914, let that be, especially for us Europeans, a lesson, be diplomatic, but always be ready for war.

China is highly unlikely to start a war with the west, because that's where the money comes from.

As i said, China is a fanatical state, and in a few years, their ENORMOUS potencial domestic market will ensure their continued economical progress, so the really dumb thing would be adopting a "it will never happen" posture, and then one day you wake up "DUDE! WHERES MY ROOF?!DUDE........WHY ARE THOSE CHINESE IN RED UNIFORMS MARCHING ON THE STREET! DUDE! WHERES MY BUDWEISER? (A bit of American Steriotyping).
Just to insure you, ive read Hobsbawn, ive read Diplomacy by Kissinger, i know a bit of how things work, we cannot say that China is not a menace, and we cannot say it is, to tell you the truth, China disturbs me a lot because of their secretism over their real long term plans(on another side, it may just be a paper tiger like the URSS in the 70s-80s)

[H N Fiddlebottoms VIII]

Also, is anyone else suspiciously of Germany going for a hattrick?

They already did that one. Like a lot of surprise trilogies, the plots of the second two were closely connected, done on a much bigger budget, and released in quicker succession than the gap between the first and second.

Is there some kind of award for most wikipedia links in a single post, because I really think that there should be. And that I should win it.

[Orwelliad]

The West has no money anymore

Complete truth, were broke, completly and utterly broke, if we were still on the gold standart we would have filled for Bankrupcy by now.
No one is to blame actualy, because we are all to blame, the rampant run to the stores based on credits was devastating, but the problem, at least in Europe (dont actualy know about the US) is that people just stoped working, its not the goverments fault (although a few less subsidies would have incoraged people to get off their asses), people were virtully engolfed in a life of luxeries, and consumerism, which was based on credit, people also believed that this golden age of the 90s would last forever, so everything broke down, our research was overpassed by the asians, our industry was outsourced to give fatcats more profit, and no one got off their asses to form movements to stop this, the trade unions lost power, organized labor colapsed, and the only thing people cared was to consume, the more the merrier.

Now........yep, we do not have large empires to pay our bills anymore, we are not the center of world industry anymore, and the rest of the world arent organized in tribes like in Europe´s golden age, Europe gave away its possibility to be a Superpower in a few decades, when we ate away all our reserves in massive consumerism, in conformism, and in ENORMOUS and often ineficient nanny states.

The blame for this all? the people, do not ilusion yourselfs, the bankers? dont use their banks and they will go bankrupt(ok a bit utopic i admit), the government? you elected them, ever considered the fact that that little non-mainstreem party might be right? the outsorcing industrialists? you didnt fight them!

[Verdigroth]

You forgot just one little thing. The West has no money anymore. The money that used to be in the West in now in China. So China has the money and has been using it to modernize and build up it's offensive military capacity while western nations like the US and Europe are having to not only cancel weapons procurements but also lay off soldiers. The recession is also hurting national defense in the west.

If China goes to war with the US then all the cash they have of ours becomes just as much TP. At least their troops will have something to wipe with. The paper they hold only holds value as long as someone will take it. It is just paper, I would think people would realize that by now.

[Fjordinavia]

I don't see this happening. Territorial disputes happen all the time, that doesn't mean that they erupt into violence. And even if they do, that doesn't mean it's on the scale of a world war.

And yeah, the global economic situation is if anything a deterrent to large-scale wars.

[Brutland and Norden]

... the South China Sea (China attacks Vietnam and Phillipines which would bring in the US since the Phillipines are allied with the US in a mutual defense pact.)

That is somewhat laughable as the Philippine Armed Forces are mere pushovers*. This country's spineless government will most probably retreat to a corner and cry to the United States that its goods were stolen by China, and the United States will probably do nothing but protest... the US is pretty overstretched right now, it can't afford to have anther war, especially with China; and I don't think the US cares as much about the Philippines as it did during the Cold War. *shrugs*

*To quote:

RP will resort to diplomacy over renewed Spratlys row, March 16, 2009
But National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales said Monday they may also ask help from allies such as the United States and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) if needed.

[Before, our Air Force could have bombed structures of other countries in the disputed area. But now we don’t even have the resources to conduct the bombings. We may have to modernize our Armed Forces]

That had been an issue a few months back, with the government negotiating an agreement with China over the Spratly Islands... which understandably caused a public outcry over the perceived surrender of the islands and recognition of China's claims. But the country delineated its baselines as an archipelagic state by passing a law. That move caused the PRC to protest:

Govt seeks dismissal of petition vs Baselines Law, April 27, 2009
The Philippine Congress' approval of the measure [the Baselines Law] last February 17 prompted the Chinese Foreign Ministry to lodge a “stern protest" through the Philippine Embassy in Beijing, saying the bill violated China's "indisputable sovereignty" over the Kalayaan Island Group and the Scarborough Shoal.

AFAIK, the Spratly Islands are claimed by the PRC, the ROC, Vietnam, the Philippines, Brunei, and Malaysia. The Philippine case rests on the fact that the islands' nearest landmass is the Philippine island of Palawan, the islands lie on the archipelagic basin of the Philippines, that the San Francisco Treaty (at the end of WWII) which relinquished lands conquered by Japan specified no beneficiary for the Spratlys (effectively making it terra nullius).

Take note that the Philippines does not claim the entirety of the islands, but rather maintain that the Spratlys are composed of two archipelagos, only one of which they claim. China and Vietnam, on the other hand, are greedier and want the all of the islands. They base their claim that the islands were known to them in the ancient times (maps, etc.) [but then, by this logic, would everything that appeared in their maps belong to them too?]. We have even heard the more preposterous claim that the sea is called "South China Sea" and thus the islands belong to them. PRC is the claimant farthest from the island groups.

But then, war isn't that likely. China is focused more on soft diplomacy, its willingness to resort to force against its Southeast Asian neighbors is less likely. (I can't say the same over its East Asian neighbors, ie. Japan, Taiwan, South Korea) To quote:

China reaffirms commitment to peaceful settlement of Spratlys dispute, March 24, 2009
China has reaffirmed its commitment to a peaceful resolution of the Spratly Islands diuspute and said it has never wanted confrontation among claimants.

China’s envoy to the Philippines, Liu Jianchao, gave the assurance days after Beijing sent a patrol ship to the disputed waters, causing alarm among other claimant countries.

“China is committed to settling international disputes through peaceful means, and preserving international and regional security. In such a spirit we call on the parties concerned to engage in cooperation rather than confrontation in the South China Sea," Liu said in his speech at the Chinese Embassy’s diplomatic reception Monday night.
...
He further said that China considers “all countries, big or small, strong or weak, rich or poor equal members of the international community."

China and Vietnam are more likely to enter a war, but even then it's a minute possibility. The two countries have another dispute with the Paracel islands, they have entered into a war before, but I don't think they're willing to take the risk of another conflict.