Advertisement
by Organized States » Thu May 15, 2014 6:31 am
by Brutland and Norden » Thu May 15, 2014 6:34 am
Benuty wrote:Brutland and Norden wrote:True. It's not actually the USA that is surrounding China with hostile neighbors, it's actually China who is surrounding itself with hostile neighbors. Look at all the territorial disputes China has with most of her neighbors, and how China acts aggressively towards them.
Well given the territorial baiting they and other nations in the region tend to engage in due to petty historical rivalries it is unfortunate.
by Gigaverse » Thu May 15, 2014 6:36 am
Brutland and Norden wrote:Benuty wrote:
Well given the territorial baiting they and other nations in the region tend to engage in due to petty historical rivalries it is unfortunate.
Full disclosure: I come from a country China has a dispute with.
It depends on which country. With Japan and Vietnam, China has had a complex relationship with both countries, most of the time adversarial. Ditto with Korea. So there is some historical basis for an antagonistic with them. But with Malaysia? the Philippines? Indonesia? There is nothing stirring the previously calm pot except the new adventurism from the PRC which it is engaging during the past few years. Even Taiwan is smart enough to know not to destabilize the waters. When China starts to act aggressively, it can expect a reaction from its neighbors.
With or without historical antagonism, China's initial moves is the root cause of the present turbulence in the waters. It doesn't even want to accept an international tribunal to rule on the dispute - because either it wants to rely more on its newfound might, or it knows its claims have no basis.
China and some of its neighbors are still stuck in 19th century thinking, in brinkmanship, and in whipping up raw nationalism. (My country, for better or worse, fails in all three.) China, with its size and influence, needs to act more like a modern country. Like modern France and Germany, China and its neighbors need to put historical enmities aside. Like modern Spain and Portugal, territorial disputes does not need to be always resolved by force or immediately. Or else, Asia will go down like Europe did in the 20th century.
Art-person(?). Japan liker. tired-ish.
Student inlinguistics???. On-and-off writer.
MAKE CAKE NOT stupidshiticanmakefunof.born in, raised in and emigrated from vietbongistan lolol
Operating this polity based on preferences and narrative purposes
clowning incident | clowning incident | bottom text
can produce noises in (in order of grasp) vietbongistani, oldspeak
and bonjourois (learning weebspeak and hitlerian at uni)
by United Marxist Nations » Thu May 15, 2014 6:38 am
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.
by AiliailiA » Thu May 15, 2014 6:40 am
Ethel mermania wrote:Ailiailia wrote:I think it's up to powers on China's own scale to deal with China's illegal offshore drilling. I think small but closely targetted trade sanctions would be appropriate, and yes of course the Chinese government will massively over-react but so what? The West needs to stop being so easily bluffed by China.
i don't think the prc is bluffing.
Cannot think of a name wrote:"Where's my immortality?" will be the new "Where's my jetpack?"
Maineiacs wrote:"We're going to build a canal, and we're going to make Columbia pay for it!" -- Teddy Roosevelt
Ifreann wrote:That's not a Freudian slip. A Freudian slip is when you say one thing and mean your mother.
by Brutland and Norden » Thu May 15, 2014 6:41 am
Gigaverse wrote:Unfortunately, a lot of idiots in this entire part of the continent just don't get that.
by Ethel mermania » Thu May 15, 2014 7:22 am
Ailiailia wrote:Ethel mermania wrote:
i don't think the prc is bluffing.
The PRC is always bluffing, and they'll keep doing it until called to account. Sanctions from the West would hurt China more than the West (sanctions do always hurt the nation applying them) but China counts on the West to be lazy and self indulgent.
The sort of sanctions I'm thinking of are specific to offshore drilling. Certain Western (and particularly US) commercial interests would be harmed, but overall it would hurt China much more to be deprived of equipment, expertise, and foreign workers for offshore drilling.
As I said, small but closely targetted sanctions. We can do it.
by Ethel mermania » Thu May 15, 2014 7:23 am
Brutland and Norden wrote:Gigaverse wrote:Unfortunately, a lot of idiots in this entire part of the continent just don't get that.
That is why I applaud my government's decision to refer the dispute to an arbitration tribunal. Either they know at least there my country has a chance at winning, or they prefer diplomacy to resolve disputes. Which is the modern way of doing it, IMHO.
by Tel » Thu May 15, 2014 7:24 am
The New Lowlands wrote:Despite the fact that these riots have nothing to do with American meddling- Nilfgaard, why are you against the US having a sphere of influence? You seem to support the idea well enough with any other state.
by Confederate Nordenkaltian Nations » Thu May 15, 2014 7:27 am
by Ostroeuropa » Thu May 15, 2014 7:27 am
by The New Lowlands » Thu May 15, 2014 8:01 am
Ostroeuropa wrote:The calculation the west will make here:
1. Can we afford to piss off china given the recent climate with russia. (Probably not.)
2. Will we benefit from a Chinese-run vietnam. (Yes.)
3. Will we benefit from a busy china. (Yes, this assumes a second vietnam war.)
4. Will China benefit from running Vietnam enough to shift the balance of power. (Maybe. Probably not.)
And so:
5. The west will covertly support China, or may publically decide that the ethnic attacks are a legitimate reason for China to intervene. They will do this to:
A. Bring vietnam further into the Capitalist sphere of economies.
B. Make china happier with us, and less likely to back Russian shenanigans
C. Potentially weaken China if it fucks up the war, but that isn't necessary. If it happens, we'd be happy. if it doesn't, we don't care.
by The Scientific States » Thu May 15, 2014 8:03 am
Imperial Nilfgaard wrote:Riots and Violence against Chinese citizens is spiraling in Vietnam. Reports of factories being burned and ethnic Chinese businessmen fleeing is the unfortunate byproduct of this situation.
20 people have been killed thus far in the past day.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/m ... in-vietnam
It is sad to see such hostility against the People's Republic of China. I feel like the West is purposefully trying to stoke tension in the region by pitting China's neighbors against Beijing in a thinly veiled containment policy.
"Pivot to Asia" as they like to call it.
Obama's Sino-phobic Asia tour last month as a good example of this policy.
Vietnam must immediately work to contain this nationalist outburst, or bad things may come.
by The Scientific States » Thu May 15, 2014 8:05 am
Confederate Nordenkaltian Nations wrote:Vietnam has always been a puppet state to Russia or now China, they have good reason to be upset.
by Ostroeuropa » Thu May 15, 2014 8:07 am
The New Lowlands wrote:Ostroeuropa wrote:The calculation the west will make here:
1. Can we afford to piss off china given the recent climate with russia. (Probably not.)
2. Will we benefit from a Chinese-run vietnam. (Yes.)
3. Will we benefit from a busy china. (Yes, this assumes a second vietnam war.)
4. Will China benefit from running Vietnam enough to shift the balance of power. (Maybe. Probably not.)
And so:
5. The west will covertly support China, or may publically decide that the ethnic attacks are a legitimate reason for China to intervene. They will do this to:
A. Bring vietnam further into the Capitalist sphere of economies.
B. Make china happier with us, and less likely to back Russian shenanigans
C. Potentially weaken China if it fucks up the war, but that isn't necessary. If it happens, we'd be happy. if it doesn't, we don't care.
what
by The New Lowlands » Thu May 15, 2014 8:28 am
Ostroeuropa wrote:The New Lowlands wrote:what
Essentially, the West lacks the strength and strategic security at this time to help Vietnam.
We do however, have much to gain from encouraging China to sort the mess out, and writing them a blank cheque in that regard.
While it sucks for Vietnam, the world is at stake. The needs of the many and such.
by Ostroeuropa » Thu May 15, 2014 8:30 am
The New Lowlands wrote:Ostroeuropa wrote:
Essentially, the West lacks the strength and strategic security at this time to help Vietnam.
We do however, have much to gain from encouraging China to sort the mess out, and writing them a blank cheque in that regard.
While it sucks for Vietnam, the world is at stake. The needs of the many and such.
If there's any lack of strength, it's purely imaginary. How the heck do you figure that it's in the West's interest to be seen as encouraging China?
by The New Lowlands » Thu May 15, 2014 8:32 am
Ostroeuropa wrote:The New Lowlands wrote:
If there's any lack of strength, it's purely imaginary. How the heck do you figure that it's in the West's interest to be seen as encouraging China?
It isn't purely imaginary. We're in a bit of a pickle economically right now, and we can't even deal with Russia invading Ukraine.
Do you honestly think we'll give a shit about China invading Vietnam?
We need to keep China our ally. If China begins to shift out of it's neutrality into a pact with the Russians, we're fucked. It'll be a new cold war, and we may lose.
by Ostroeuropa » Thu May 15, 2014 8:35 am
The New Lowlands wrote:Ostroeuropa wrote:
It isn't purely imaginary. We're in a bit of a pickle economically right now, and we can't even deal with Russia invading Ukraine.
Do you honestly think we'll give a shit about China invading Vietnam?
We need to keep China our ally. If China begins to shift out of it's neutrality into a pact with the Russians, we're fucked. It'll be a new cold war, and we may lose.
The situation with Russia is different from that with China. If we go into a head-on conflict with Russia, there's the potential a direct and immediate response from Moscow in terms of cutting off the gas to Europe. China's economy, while larger, doesn't have that same power.
China is our ally just as much as Russia was before they invaded Ukraine: not.
by Hurdegaryp » Thu May 15, 2014 8:39 am
Alyakia wrote:
It is sad to see such hostility against the People's Republic of China. I feel like the West is purposefully trying to stoke tension in the region by pitting China's neighbors against Beijing in a thinly veiled containment policy.
"Pivot to Asia" as they like to call it.
Obama's Sino-phobic Asia tour last month as a good example of this policy.
lol. do you think vietnam and china would be holding hands in harmony if it wasn't for the west? do you even know why things like this are happening?
CVT Temp wrote:I mean, we can actually create a mathematical definition for evolution in terms of the evolutionary algorithm and then write code to deal with abstract instances of evolution, which basically equates to mathematical proof that evolution works. All that remains is to show that biological systems replicate in such a way as to satisfy the minimal criteria required for evolution to apply to them, something which has already been adequately shown time and again. At this point, we've pretty much proven that not only can evolution happen, it pretty much must happen since it's basically impossible to prevent it from happening.
by The New Lowlands » Thu May 15, 2014 8:39 am
Ostroeuropa wrote:The New Lowlands wrote:The situation with Russia is different from that with China. If we go into a head-on conflict with Russia, there's the potential a direct and immediate response from Moscow in terms of cutting off the gas to Europe. China's economy, while larger, doesn't have that same power.
China is our ally just as much as Russia was before they invaded Ukraine: not.
China and Russia, if they act together, can crash the US dollar. (China refused to do this when Russia asked them to in 2008)
Russia can take on Europe, and China+Russia can take on the US.
We have to be careful not to anger both at once.
The New Lowlands wrote:
The Saudi AF has F-15s. The Saudi Army has Abrams and Amx-30s.
The EU's joint forces are considerable even without US forces stationed in Europe. They will act in their own self-interest regardless of popular opinion when push comes to shove.
Numbers: Wikipedia
Army AFVs Artillery/MLRS Combat Aircraft European Union 52,721 6,833 (+ 18,302 Mortars) 2,037 Russia 8,667 (+34,000 reserve - legacy?) 5,739 672 (+ 513 strike aircraft) Saudi Arabia 7,118 (not incl. armoured cars) 1,028 (+228 Mortars) 380 (Not including F-5s)
by Ostroeuropa » Thu May 15, 2014 8:40 am
The New Lowlands wrote:Ostroeuropa wrote:
China and Russia, if they act together, can crash the US dollar. (China refused to do this when Russia asked them to in 2008)
Russia can take on Europe, and China+Russia can take on the US.
We have to be careful not to anger both at once.
Are we talking military terms? Russia's military compared to that of the EU just isn't that impressive.
I made a table to illustrate this in the Ukraine thread:The New Lowlands wrote:
The Saudi AF has F-15s. The Saudi Army has Abrams and Amx-30s.
The EU's joint forces are considerable even without US forces stationed in Europe. They will act in their own self-interest regardless of popular opinion when push comes to shove.
Numbers: Wikipedia
Army AFVs Artillery/MLRS Combat Aircraft European Union 52,721 6,833 (+ 18,302 Mortars) 2,037 Russia 8,667 (+34,000 reserve - legacy?) 5,739 672 (+ 513 strike aircraft) Saudi Arabia 7,118 (not incl. armoured cars) 1,028 (+228 Mortars) 380 (Not including F-5s)
This is not including US forces stationed in the European Union. What the table also doesn't show is US strength in the Pacific, and that overall EU equipment and training is either equivalent or better to their Eastern counterparts.
by The New Lowlands » Thu May 15, 2014 8:47 am
Ostroeuropa wrote:The New Lowlands wrote:Are we talking military terms? Russia's military compared to that of the EU just isn't that impressive.
I made a table to illustrate this in the Ukraine thread:
This is not including US forces stationed in the European Union. What the table also doesn't show is US strength in the Pacific, and that overall EU equipment and training is either equivalent or better to their Eastern counterparts.
Ofcourse not in military terms, that's ridiculous.
The wars between the major powers these days are fought by economics, or through proxies.
The US+EU armies are entirely irrelevant to the issue, as is the Russian and Chinese army. What is important is the economic factors.
So long as all 4 army blocs are good enough to seriously fuck up the economies of the other countries and set them back decades, war will never come.
by Imperial Nilfgaard » Thu May 15, 2014 8:49 am
Organized States wrote:In my opinion, the oil rig should be the least of the region's worries, especially with the PLA building an airfield and expanding military facilities on the Johnson South Reef.
by Ostroeuropa » Thu May 15, 2014 8:49 am
The New Lowlands wrote:Ostroeuropa wrote:
Ofcourse not in military terms, that's ridiculous.
The wars between the major powers these days are fought by economics, or through proxies.
The US+EU armies are entirely irrelevant to the issue, as is the Russian and Chinese army. What is important is the economic factors.
So long as all 4 army blocs are good enough to seriously fuck up the economies of the other countries and set them back decades, war will never come.
You know, they first started saying stuff like what I italicized prior to the First World War, IIRC. But I digress; you're not interested in the military factors, and that's fair enough.
In that case, I should point out that the GDP of the U.S. and E.U. combined is approximately $32,264,000,000,000, while the GDP of China and Russia combined is $ 10,242,000,000,000. This is not accounting for other trade partners (e.g. Canada, Turkey) who in a hypothetical trade war would most likely align themselves in the Wests' favour. Our economic might is roughly three times that of our hypothetical adversaries.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Himmelland, Kostane, M-x B-rry, New Temecula, Soviet Haaregrad, Statesburg, The Two Jerseys, The Vooperian Union, Tiami, Verkhoyanska
Advertisement