WORLD WAR III
See other WORLD WAR III Articles
Title: Turkey Has Declared War On Syria – Does This Mean That World War 3 Is About To Erupt In The Middle East?
Source:
The Economic Collapse
URL Source: http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/ ... ut-to-erupt-in-the-middle-east
Published: Nov 29, 2016
Author: Michael Snyder
Post Date: 2016-11-30 07:45:06 by U don't know me
Keywords: None
Views: 9976
Comments: 36
Turkey Has Declared War On Syria – Does This Mean That World War 3 Is About To Erupt In The Middle East? By Michael Snyder, on November 29th, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has just announced that the only reason Turkish military forces have entered northern Syria is to “end the rule of the tyrant al-Assad”. By publicly proclaiming that Turkey intends to use military force to overthrow the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Erdogan has essentially declared war on the Syrian government. Of course this puts a member of NATO in direct military conflict with Russia, since Russia is working very hard to prop up the Assad regime. If all-out war breaks out between Turkey and Russia, could that be the spark that causes World War 3 to erupt in the Middle East? And once Turkey and Russia start fighting, would the United States and the rest of NATO be dragged into the conflict? The big mainstream news networks in the western world are almost completely ignoring what Erdogan said on Tuesday, but without a doubt this is major news. The following comes from a Turkish news source… The Turkish military launched its operations in Syria to end the rule of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, President Recep Tayyip Erdo an said Nov. 29. “In my estimation, nearly 1 million people have died in Syria. These deaths are still continuing without exception for children, women and men. Where is the United Nations? What is it doing? Is it in Iraq? No. We preached patience but could not endure in the end and had to enter Syria together with the Free Syrian Army [FSA],” Erdo an said at the first Inter-Parliamentary Jerusalem Platform Symposium in Istanbul. Turkish military forces initially invaded northern Syria on August 24th, and at the time we were all told that the purpose of the invasion was to “fight ISIS”, but now Erdogan is telling us something completely different. Breitbart is one of the few U.S. news outlets that is reporting on this story, and I want you to read the following quotes from Erdogan that come from a Breitbart article that was posted on Tuesday very, very carefully… “Why did we enter? We do not have an eye on Syrian soil. The issue is to provide lands to their real owners. That is to say we are there for the establishment of justice. We entered there to end the rule of the tyrant al-Assad who terrorizes with state terror,” Erdogan continued, insisting his forces were not in Syria for “any other reason.” The Daily Sabah notes that Erdogan spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin about Syria during two telephone calls last week. Since Russia launched a massive military operation to secure Bashar Assad in power, Putin would presumably have been interested in anything Erdogan had to say about toppling the regime in Damascus, and probably would not have kept quiet about it. If the Turkish military is only in Syria to end the Assad regime, then presumably they will stay there until the job is done. And this puts Turkey into a direct military conflict with Russia, Iran and Hezbollah since all three of them are already fighting very hard to help the Assad regime. Of course there is another reason why Turkey is in northern Syria, and that is to fight the Kurds. In fact, the Kurds and Turkey are both rushing to capture a little city northeast of Aleppo called al-Bab which is currently controlled by the Islamic State… Their immediate challenge is securing al-Bab, an Islamic State-held city northeast of Aleppo which Kurdish-led fighters are racing to take, and which lies close to the front lines of Assad’s allies. Turkish-backed forces have made rapid gains since August, but largely through less heavily populated areas. Urban warfare around al-Bab is already taking a heavier toll. Five Turkish soldiers have been killed in the past week alone, three of them in a suspected Syrian government air strike. “Right now the question is whether Russia will allow Turkey to seize al-Bab,” said the Muntasir Billah Brigade official. But most people in the western world don’t know that Turkish soldiers are already dying in Syria. Here in the United States, tens of millions of Americans are hailing a new era of “peace and prosperity” now that Donald Trump has won the election, but the truth is that one false move in Syria could easily raise tensions between the United States and Russia to the highest level that we have seen since the Cuban missile crisis back in the 1960s. If Erdogan would have just stayed out of Syria we wouldn’t be in such a precarious situation. Unfortunately, the president of Turkey is a narcissistic lunatic, and he dreams of a day when the old Ottoman Empire will once again be restored. But his delusions of greatness threaten to make the Middle East even more unstable than it already has been. In addition to his remarks above, on Tuesday Erdogan also called on all Muslims globally “to embrace the Palestinian cause and protect Jerusalem”… Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has urged Muslims to defend the Palestinian cause, striking a tough stance on Israel despite improved ties between the two nations. The president of majority Muslim Turkey said Tuesday that “it is the common duty of all Muslims to embrace the Palestinian cause and protect Jerusalem” and that safeguarding the Al-Aqsa Mosque should not be left to children armed with nothing but stones. Located in the Old City of Jerusalem, the hilltop compound is sacred to Muslims and Jews. Most people in the western world pay very little attention to Erdogan, but the truth is that he is a madman that is often referred to as “Turkey’s version of Adolf Hitler”. He is extremely ambitious, extremely nationalistic, and he is a warmonger. That is a very dangerous combination, and I believe that it is only a matter of time before he starts a major war in the Middle East. Somebody needs to get this guy under control, but unfortunately the Obama administration has been very hesitant to confront Erdogan about his outrageous behavior. When Erdogan openly stated that the Turkish military is in Syria to overthrow the Assad regime on Tuesday, that was like lighting a match in a room that has already been doused with propane. He needs to immediately retract those comments, because his unique brand of lunacy has now brought us dangerously close to the start of World War 3.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: U don't know me (#0)
But wait - I thought that "regime change" was also the goal of the Obama administration.
Erdogan and Obama are working together to overthrow Assad and establish a jihadist islamic caliphate in Syria. Russia stands against it.
What we have in Syria is a "Mare's Nest" a proxy war in which everyone is saying look over there while attacking someoneelse. Noone in the region has more military forces at their immediate disposal than Turkey and no one has more enemies/friends than Turkey. The real situation between Turkey and Daesh is unclear, sort of like the rabid family dog you have to put down. Turkey opposes Assad and has used the rebel factions against that regime. America needs Turkey to base its operations close to the theatre and to secure supply routes but this is tenuous because of American support for the Kurds, who oppose both Daesh and Turkey, and seek to carve out a homeland out of Syria and northern Iraq. The puppet manipulators in this are Iran, Saudi Arabia and Russia and the common goal maybe to bleed America while seeming to be allies
Russia is not interested in bleeding America. Russia is focused on making damned sure that Syria remains their ally, as that is their only naval base in the Mediterranean. They CANNOT permit the Syrian government to be overthrown. The Russians have more skin in this game than any external power. The best answer, then, is to see that, recognize that the Russians are not going to lose, and cooperate with them to secure the Syrian government as quickly as possible, to stop the bloodshed. Do that, and a grand bargain can be struck with the Russians to stabilize the region. Continue to act as though it is possible to overthrow the government of Syria - which means knocking the Russians completely out of the Mediterranean, is just throwing good money after bad, and guaranteeing that more and more lives will be chewed up in a meatgrinder.
You have been listening to Vlad, I listened to a recent interview and I could almost hear Hitler saying "Britain is not our traditional enemy". Essentially that's what Vlad said,"america is not our enemy" if so then he should face his missiles the other way. You must understand that Russia and america have diametrically opposed points of view, one values individual freedom over community while the other believes in community first as Vlad put it "the collective", surprisingly there are other societies that are like this and not all are communist there is no indication Russia would lose its naval base with regime change, because there is no clear alternative government and no american forces to put a puppet in power. Russia knows the true meaning of being an ally and having a respect for law. Insurrection is not an answer, but the rebels have shown no indication of caring for civilians and stopping the bloodshed, they hide in the ruins and continue to fight while the civilians get slaughtered becuase it is hard to tell a civilian from behind a wall. It is convenient for Russia to get a little payback and see america bleed as america made them bleed in Afghanistan
Old school domino effect. This was another proxie war sanctioned by the US_CIA via Ronald Reagan, a loathsome US President that hid the secret US funding of the "FREEDOM FIGHTERS" from the publick. The freedom fighters were, of course, the Taliban (morphed from the Mujaheddin) which later splintered off into al-Qaida and ISIS, all thanks to the US_CIA bullshit brigade in Washington DC.
Isn't it about time that the US government gets its ass out of foreign entanglements? How many military bases do we have open, 700+? The PTB cannot use the United States mercenary army to do the job that the Mafia does for organized crime any longer. In war, the vast numbers of casualties are innocent civilians. If we keep kicking over hornets nests, sooner or later those innocents will be Americans by the millions. Bring em home Trump, and engage only when necessary for defense of strategic assets or homeland. Or we could close the Federal Reserve, force Congress to coin money, and get it out of the hands of the Banksters. One way or another, THEY will have their world war. I for one would like this nation of people to say "no more".
Exercising rights is only radical to two people, Tyrants and Slaves. Which are YOU? Our ignorance has driven us into slavery and we do not recognize it.
AMEN to that. Corporations continue to use the military for their police force around the world. I understand they want Assad out so a pipeline can be built through that region. I don't understand who benefits but I bet it is some american corporation. We are nearly out of business as a country. I just read that 6 million people have quit paying their car loans. (www.dailyjobcuts.com) I do not go to church every time the doors are opened, but I love Jesus Christ. I am only human and fail Him daily. I believe Jesus is the Son of God, was born of a virgin, was crucified on a cross, died for my sins and rose from the dead and that He loves us dearly, and is faithful to forgive us of our sins. But He says that if you deny me in front of your friends I will deny you in front of my Father. Can I get an Amen!
It has been the goal of every administration going back to at least 2000. Apparently with his choice of General Flynn, it is also the goal of Donald Trump. I reject that in totum. Russia is just another country. A big one, with particular interests. Those interests are not particularly in competition with our own. We have generated conflict with the Russians in recent years by deciding to inject ourselves into places where we have no discernible or historical interests, but where they have vital interests. OF COURSE that will cause them to resist us, but it's our choice to create the conflict. We need a President who is going to choose to not do that. We are careening towards national bankruptcy. We do not have the wealth to give us the luxury of going out of our way to provoke the other nuclear superpower, and then engaging in an arms race with them. The Soviet Union did that, and went bankrupt and fell apart on account of it. So will we. It's unnecessary.
It's unnecessary when did that stop the military industrial complex that is the US? You spend more on the military that the rest of the planet while complaining that other nations are arming or more likely buying weapons elsewhere. Now your illustrious new leader wants his new friends to contribute more to the alliance, which is shorthand for buy more weapons, one of his plans to "make america great". The fact is america is the greatest threat to world peace. Russia is tiny in comparison and like america almost bankrupt and would be unable to sustain a large conflict, but they have learned from history, strong fences make good neighbours
America is the linchpin of the world system. The world system since World War II has been built around America. There have been brush fires and problems on the periphery, as there always have been and always will be, but there has been no pan-European or pan-Asian war for three quarters of a century, and there won't be another one either, as long as the Pax Americana holds. Resentment of America is natural, both for reasons of envy, and also because America does not always act wisely, or kindly. But consider well the alternative. The notion that if the United States faded from the scene, pulled back its power and retreated into isolationism the world would be a better place is a foolish fantasy. The world was never, ever, as peaceful and generally marching - ah slowly! - towards a more pluralistic, democratic and free space as it has under the Pax Americana. Americans really believe in democracy, in freedom, and in individual freedom. We have not always practiced it perfectly, but as a major imperial nation at the center of the world system, we have advances those causes more than any other people or empire in history. It is simply a fact. No other empire believed in those things, and no other empire tried as hard. Nor has any other empire been as successful at keeping the world largely (not perfectly) peaceful, and NOT colonizing whole continents and forcing them into peonage like the British, Spanish, Russians, Romans and every other dominant power in history. No other power was ever as globally dominant as America, and that's a good thing, because no other dominant power was ever half as good, morally, as America. Americans actually believe in freedom for Indians and Hottentots. We may practice it poorly, and our institutions may be subject to political capture, but compared to anybody else we are light years ahead. And the whole system of peace, the worldwide peace we have enjoy under which everyone - INCLUDING THE RUSSIANS AND THE CHINESE - have been able to grow in stability, is not something that can be replaced. Nor is it something that will police itself, or survive at all, if America retreats from the scene. It is expensive to maintain the world system, to be the linchpin of it. We are no longer the super- dominant economy we once were, mostly THANKS TO that peace that we have brought to the world by our invincibility. Under the wings of the American Peace, China has grown, and Europe, and Australia, everywhere. And everywhere competes with us. We cannot bear the cost of the world system alone, we need more help. Your answer is that the world does not need us. You are wrong. If we go home, broke or defeated, what will happen in the world is exactly what happened the last time we did that, in 1918, after we were ignored at the Peace of Versailles. Instead of the open peace we believed in, a vengeful peace of empires was restored. We went home and stayed there, our ideals rejected. And the world raged in World War afterwards, as different ideas - old style British and French imperialism, confronted new-style Japanese, German and Italian militarism and fascism. Without the United States, China would have been a vassal state of Japan. So would Australia. Without the United States, the Third Reich would have eventually triumphed in Europe. We entered at last, and won the war, and set up a different world system. And the system we set up has kept the peace since 1945. There has never been anything else like it, and there is nobody else in the world will the wherewithal, the will or the ideals to carry it forward. In any case, your theory won't be tested. We're not going to withdraw from the world system we have set up. You may not like us, but you nevertheless need us. If we don't keep the peace and operate the world system at its center, no-one will. And that will be bad for everybody.
Candidly your theory is untested, but the evidence suggests otherwise. The US is no longer, if it ever was, a moral society. In fact it may actaully be a police state. The British did reasonably well and certainly didn't make slaves of their subject populations. The US not only condoned slavery long after Britain had declared it illegal but undertook a genocide of their native races, something the British didn't do, even though there were wars with native races As to vassal states, the US would have gladly allowed others to be taken into vassalage but for their confrontation by Japan and The US was content to profit from the war with Hitler until they realised that the Axis powers would and did attack them The US has rewritten the history of WWII and it is true might of arms prevailed, but it was the might of soviet arms that prevailed in Europe, the US tended to be bogged down by logistics. China has not thanked you for defeating Japan and liberating them and you might wonder why. They were very threatened by Mcarthur's incursions into Korea
Your attitude is the attitude of the world, particularly the English- speaking parts of the world. For my part, I am an isolationist. I think that what the US did after World War I was brilliant. We won that war in 1918 - it was the US Army's arrival on the Western Front that saved France after the line was broken, and it was the preponderance of US arms that forced Germany back. Had the Americans not come, France would have fallen, and Germany would have been master of Europe. The US saved the West, but we were ignored at Versailles, so we went home and retreated back into our isolationism. We decided to protect our own employment and raised the Smoot-Hawley tariffs. This touched off a worldwide depression which destabilized Europe and Asia. The US also suffered, to be sure, but Europe politically imploded and went to war with itself. Japan invaded China. You point out, rightly, that the USSR bore the worst casualties in the European fighting, and inflicted the most damage on Germany. Without US Lend Lease, both Britain and Russia would have collapsed and been conquered by the Germans. And perhaps that was the better answer. Perhaps the Americans should have NEVER gotten involved in Europe, and should have maintained the oil trade with Japan. Nobody was in any position to invade us, and Germany was not interested in a war with America. So, the Germans would have conquered Europe and put the Europeans at heel, slaughtering the Jews and the Slavs and taking such tribute as they needed from the British and the French. Japan would have conquered China and the British Empire in the East, and would have spent its time and effort trying to hold together an impossible mess. And the US would have continued to develop itself and its continent. The US would have still obtained the atomic bomb and would have been secure. We would simply have two other nations to deal with, each dominant in its sphere: Germany in Europe and Africa, and Japan in the Western Pacific. We would have dominated the Americas as we always have. Japanese, Germans and Americans would be prosperous. And as long as Americans are prosperous why should we really give a fuck about people on the other side of the ocean. Every single resource that we need is in our own hemisphere, and neither the Germans nor the Japanese had any realistic desire to muck around in the Americas. They each had their own continent to rule, and we ours. Playing alternate history is fun. But the way things are, we are in fact the linchpin of world security and world trade. You resent that, and I'm tired of bearing the burden. So, while the world really does need us - and I know it so I am willing to continue with the weary, thankless chore, I can dream of shrugging it off. Our budget would immediately go into balance. Pull out of Europe and end NATO - it's for the defense of EUROPE. Nuclear weapons defend America. Likewise, pull out of Korea and Japan. Pull the fleets out of Asia and the Indian Ocean. Withdraw to the Eastern Pacific. We get our raw materials from Canada and Mexico, and the US. What happens in Europe? Well, Putin is probably not aggressive, so maybe nothing happens for awhile. US forces are not needed, and Europeans don't spend nearly as much as Americans do, as a percentage of GDP, so maybe Europe will just remained disarmed and everything will go great. I'm certainly willing to take that chance, because if I turn out to be wrong, as an American I am not the one who pays for the error. The Europeans do, and really, who the fuck cares? I'm not European. They resent us, and folks like your equivalent say they don't need us there (but then fret over Trump for some strange reason). I would be fine ending NATO and evacuating all US forces from Europe, and ending all entangling alliances with Europe. Europe, you are on your own like you used to be. Good luck. I don't know what could go wrong. Maybe nothing. IF something did, oh well - not my problem anymore. In Asia, it's very clear what would happen. China's economy is already the biggest and strongest, and they have built a huge bluewater navy that is getting bigger all the time. Pulling back from Asia would massively reduce the pressures on the US. It would mean a swift end to the independence of Taiwan, but that's part of China anyway, so who cares? It would mean that the Chinese successfully assert their dominance over the South China Sea out to that dotted line they claim. Without a US security guarantee, who would stop them? Nobody is in any position to go to war with China alone. Besides, Chinese trade ties with the rest of the little countries of the Western Pacific - The Philippines, South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Australia, Indonesia, etc. - means that nobody there is really going to stand up to China. So, we pull back, and East Asia re-sorts. China becomes the militarily dominant nation, and trade agreements are managed primarily from Beijing. The sealanes of the East are kept open primarily by the Chinese Navy, not ours. OF course, the fact that the Chinese are not a liberal democracy, or a democracy at all, are in occupation of Tibet, sustain North Korea, and are willing to unilaterally claim most of the South China sea might cause SOME concern. But really, how could dealing with Communist nationalists be any different than dealing with the remote (arrogant, capitalistic, self- interested) United States? For our part, we would simply erect the trade barriers to wall our domestic market off from various countries we don't want to compete with (China, Indonesia), have "Most Favored Nation" status with countries we like, produce things in our own country, have better employment rates and more expensive goods, and go on in peace and domestic prosperity, like we did for much of our history. The unbridled contempt with which much of the rest of the world holds us - you are Exhibit A - makes it that much easier to contemplate just saying "Fuck it", throwing up our hands, and going home. If we do, a lot of people will suffer. The vacuum left by America's departure will be filled by other countries. In the East, Communist China. In the Middle East, Iran and Wahabbi Islam, and perhaps the Turks. In Europe, well, perhaps everything in Europe will be tickety boo, and fall in line behind Germany. But the Germans sure seem scared of Putin, so maybe Europe will end up falling in line behind Putin. Or maybe Europe will just fall apart and squabble, as before. What is that to us? I don't know where you live. I have the impression that it is Australia. You clearly resent us. You don't need us, you say. Obviously we don't need you. You want us to leave. Maybe we should. China is closer than we are. They are in the region, and they have built a Navy. Your trading future is with China - they are the dominant economy. Who are we to be complicating the Chinese drive to become the British Empire of our age in the East? We're the bad guys. Maybe they're the good guys. You know us, you know how we are. You're free, and have a world that is made peaceful by the United States. We don't demand a great deal from you. But you hate us. So maybe you would find the Chinese to be better imperial overlords. Or maybe you think that you are far enough from China that they'll just leave you alone. What's the worst that can happen? You'd trade a system in which you are at peace now, but have to deal with the thought of those goddamned Americans 10,000 miles away by sea, in which maybe you'll be at peace with the Communist Chinese running the show in your region, a lot closer, with their different concepts of things. You sure hate us. You're closer to China. Certainly if we weren't there as a defensive shield between you and them you could have better relations with them than you do now. Right now, our presence as a defensive force they cannot beat puts us as an irritant in their relations with you. Perhaps we should clear our, and let you deal directly with China, as sovereign equals, each relying on your own strengths and weaknesses, without "Big Brother" America there always over the horizon, pressuring and threatening. If we got out of the Western Pacific, our tensions with China would drop to nearly zero. And yours might improve too. Win win! Of course, if you're wrong, and the Chinese character is not democratic and essentially fair minded like the Americans are, you could find yourself bullied. But you hate us so much you're willing to take that chance, and for our part, we're tired. And I don't like being despised. So perhaps, just as God withdraws and leaves people to their fate when they reject him, we should pull back, pull out, and leave you to yours. It will save us a lot of money and headache, and you'll be rid of us. Maybe China will be a better local dominant power than our distant, intolerable dominance was. If not, oh well. We won't know, and you'll adjust to it.
The United States is already there and has been since we set up camp in 2005. www.sfgate.com/news/artic...ia-First-post-2651644.php
You fail to understand that it is your attitude that is resented, you are not the master race. Dump has had a dummy spit because the TPP doesn't give massive advantage to the US. He fails to realise that it is the trade itsself that gives advantage. The US in trade negotiations trys to force its laws on others. This is why you are resented, you are not the master race. Yes it would be better if you took a different course and stopped trying to dominate with military strength. If you are threatened it is because of your aggression. Only one nation on Earth is truely at enmity with you, but you see enemies everywhere If we don't like you it is because we have had first hand experience of you, the ugly american is an apt description
If we don't like you it is because we have had first hand experience of you, the ugly american is an apt description We are, in fact, the master race. The freedom you enjoy - the fact you are not slaves of the dominant power in your region - is because of us. THEY are, or were, aggressive militarists. But they were inferior to us. They were inferior at war. They were inferior at production. They were inferior at organization. So they lost, to us. We defeated Europe, and we defeated Asia, both, in the same war. We are the Master Race. Of course, one of the REASONS we're the Master "Race" is that, unlike Europeans and Asians, who are tribal, narrow-minded - and therefore stupider - people - we have embraced most races, and simply incorporated the best of each into our whole. The result is that this Mongrel Nation (as Hitler described us) is much superior to the various inbred nations we swept aside to become the masters of the world. Our mastery of the world is good for you. Japan would have conquered you in 1943 but for us. And if we leave, the Chinese will dominate you economically, and will restrict you in ways that we don't. You hate us and criticize us, and you are free to do so, because our power sits offshore, on ships. Yes, we have a world empire to run, and it is a burden you do not bear. It is expensive for us, so yes, we do take "tribute" from you, and all other people, in trade deals, and in demands of military support, but you get something from this - you get your political freedom, protected by us, and the whole world as an open market you you, because the oceans are held open and free by our Navy. You pay very little for this effort on our part. And what little you pay, you resent. You resent it because you are of English/ British extraction, and you folks really did tell yourselves you were the master race. You believed it. You believed yourselves the masters of the world, but you were not. In the end you had to rely on stronger powers - America and Russia, to save you, East and West, from being conquered by the Japanese and the Germans, respectively. America and Russia fought it out for mastery, and we won. Now China rises. And we are the primary force that keep you in check. The Middle Kingdom knows for sure, just like you English did, and like the Germans did, and like the Japanese did - like all of the broken empires did - that THEY are the master race. So there you sit, in your geographically large, demographically small country. You are "protected" by sea only insofar as those seas are held open by a friendly Navy. YOU don't have the industry, the economy or the population to master the Pacific Ocean, or to hold your home waters, in the event of a serious war with America, or a serious war with China - IF America is gone. But here's the thing, the real bottom line. You resent us, with that deep seated inferiority complex that all English-speaking peoples have vis-a-vis America and Americans, but you know deep down inside that we will never attack you, never invade you, never blow you up, never intern your people, no matter WHAT you say. You also know that if the Indonesians try to flood you, or the Chinese take their huge blue water Navy and attack you, that our Navy will come and save you, and you will remain free, just as we saved you from the Japanese, when they threatened to do the same thing. You know that, deep down. You resent us anyway, not because we are the master race - and we are - but because you're not and you think you should be. Well, you're not. Now wipe us out of the equation. Let us grant you your wish and leave. Do you really know that the Chinese will leave you alone forever? Do you trust the Chinese, or the Japanese, or the Indonesians, to permanently remain far away, to never, in the heat of political anger, use military muscle against you. The Americans will retain good relations with you AND with China, AND with Taiwan, in spite of all of your resentments, and we won't LET the Chinese invade Taiwan. We will allow a trade crisis, and fight a war, and blow that Chinese Navy out of the water, and save Taiwan from invasion. The Chinese know it, so while they puff and preen, they don't actually fight. If we leave, they will invade Taiwan. You are probably content to let that happen, as the price of peace. But you will also kowtow to them economically and politically. Now, they won't INVADE you, but they will cut off their markets if you anger them politically. We won't. And if the day came that they DID decide to take action against you, you would be unable to defend yourselves. So, if we, the Master Race, in all of our mongrelized liberty - leave, pull back, grant you your wish. You're still not going to the master of your neighborhood. You will have a new dominant power - China. And they also think they are the Master Race, even though they never have been (nobody has ever ruled the world the way America does - we are the real thing). You yourself are willing to take the chance. Your British inferiority complex vis-a-vis the Americans is so strong that YOU are willing to roll the dice with your nation's future liberty and very existence, just in order to "show us". But truth is, your LEADERS are not as hotheaded as you. They realize what is really at stake, and there is no way in hell that they want to see America, as distant (and real) world hegemon, disappear over the horizon and leave you with a new, empowered, emboldened, local hegemon, China, who has an even greater sense of supremacy than the Americans, and whose concept of supremacy is RACIAL, quite unlike us. We are superior BECAUSE we are a free, multicultural, liberal republic. That's WHY we beat everybody else and rule the world. All of our competitors past and present are all race-based authoritarian governments. You don't care about Taiwanese and Filipino liberty, really, because you are simply white, transplanted British. But we DO, because they are free people, and - unlike you - we Americans see PAST race, internationally - to higher concepts of liberty and democracy. You don't. You'd let Taiwan go and not fight, if it came to it. We will blow up China with nuclear weapons to keep totalitarian Chinese from conquering free Chinese. That's WHY we are world hegemon, and why it's good for you - even you - that remain so. English-speaking people without America are not powerful enough to do it, and don't CARE to do it. But you're ALL free because WE care about freedom. WE guard the sees and so all can use them. And it costs you very little - a ding to your tribal pride, some less than perfect trade terms, using our money to buy oil, and contributing some force to an alliance that also guards YOU. It's been this way for nearly 100 years, and will continue for as long as we are the world hegemon. What sort of deal do you think you're going to get from the Chinese? You can tell already, by looking at their vassals: North Korea, Tibet, Burma, Pakistan, and at the countries they menace: Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Vietnam. You think if we get our comeuppance everything will be tickety-boo. Actually, we will leave, and the Chinese will be your new hegemon. And you are just whites, an inferior race of the periphery. You're willing to throw caution to the winds in emotional and empty English tribalism. Your leaders are smarter than you, fortunately for you. Even the Chinese, many of them, are secretly relieved that we don't leave, because we are the thing that keeps the peace, and we're not aggressive the way their leaders are - and they know it. They are content to leave Taiwan be, because we are there. If we go, they have to fight and kill, and experience more repression at home. We're the master race - thank God.
You are an idiot, filled with the propaganda of a nation that thinks it rules the world. You are 5% of the world's population and 100% of its ego. Don't tell me you are not full of tribalism and simmering divisions. I have been to China, the chinese people are not as you describe.
I doubt we'll ever get to test your theory. And if we do, you'll find yourself like the British did in 1940.
How long were you in China and what did you do there? Are you adept at using chopsticks?
ne how ma. I travelled 2,800 km through China distributing leaflets over a two week period. I was able to observe much including their potemkin villages and both new and old parts of their cities and the infurstructure which was impressive. I visited their local cafe's and markets. I travelled on their trains and local busses. What I did note was the very small police presence and the friendliness of the people. Yes I use chopsticks (the chinese suggest I use the imperial method) and frequently have a Chinese meal but then I eat food from India, Thailand and other places too
what the British found in 1940, just as we did, is you can't successfully fight two wars at once, They recognised this by pulling back to India. Not their finest hour. After 1941 you were able to fight your war in the pacific and it took you a little longer to be actively involved in the european conflict.. I think you may have had the same lesson in Iraq and Afghanistan, you failed to fully pacify both, but you didn't make that mistake with Japan
We successfully fought two wars at once. Midway and Guadalcanal were fought in the Pacific in 1942. Torch swept through North Africa in 1942. In the first year of the war, America launched major offensives on both fronts, both of which began the rollback of the enemy. In 1943, the two-front war continued successfully. In Europe, Italy fell. In the Pacific, the Americans defeat the Japanese at sea repeatedly, and capture the Solomon and Gilbert Islands. In 1944, the Allies landed in France, and the Americans land in the Philippines. In May 1945, Germany surrendered to the Allies. In August 1945, Japan surrendered. And thus did America successfully conduct a victorious two-front war. What the British discovered in 1940 was that they could neither defeat the Third Reich nor Japan alone. Churchill understood that Britain was not going to win the war without American help. To quote a portion of his famous speech: "“We shall defend our island whatever the cost may be; we shall fight on beaches, landing grounds, in fields, in streets and on the hills. We shall never surrender and even if, which I do not for the moment believe, this island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, will carry on the struggle until in God’s good time the New World with all its power and might, sets forth to the liberation and rescue of the Old.” He understood the realities of power in 1940, and the reality of power was that Britain, and the West, could not defeat Germany alone. Of Pearl Harbor, Churchill said: “To have the United States at our side was to me the greatest joy. Now at this very moment I knew the United States was in the war, up to the neck and in to the death. So we had won after all!…Hitler’s fate was sealed. Mussolini’s fate was sealed. As for the Japanese, they would be ground to powder.” You don't like the United States, which is your prerogative of course. It is nevertheless true that the United States is the leader of the world, and the linchpin of the world system. If we withdraw, chaos follows, and what comes out of that is not as good as what you have now. Perhaps the only way to know that is true is to experience it, but cooler heads in your government and ours, and others all around the world, do not indulge in the experiment, for the result is a foregone conclusion. You live on Asia's doorstep. You resent faraway America. If we pull back, you will not find China to be an indulgent overlord. And your leaders aren't going to risk that, because everybody can already see what the Chinese do to Tibetans and Uighurs within China, who their support outside of China (North Korea), and how they treat their smaller neighbors in the South China Sea. We see the Chinese in a huff because the next President of the US talked to the President of Taiwan. We see it, and your leaders see it. You don't. You think that if we leave, China will not be aggressive, that we are not a restraint on China. Your nation's leaders are not going to roll the dice on that, in large part because America is simply not a very demanding overlord. We are far away, and our forces are over there, after all, acting as a restraint on people who will bother you.
Yes perhaps that is so and there are certain realities that come with that that a far away nation need not be interested in. we have 160 million muslims on our doorstep something that is far more concerning than china You say america is not a demanding overlord, take a look at their free trade agreements and Dump wants to pull out of the TPP because america isn't advantaged enough out of NAFTA for the same reason. China isn't interested in bothering us and the chinese leadership is ambivalent about Dump they know they can find common ground. What you see as a big deal isn't such a big deal to others sometimes but parking an aircraft carrier in someone's back yard is. The chinese mind works differently, they knew they couldn't build a fleet of aircraft carriers quickly so they created a number of island platforms for airfields, this extended their reach just as you do with aircraft carriers. Now we are having an argument about who owns the land, but has anyone argued with you about guam or okinawa you live in past glories but you are a different nation today
We're a better nation. Back then, we had fierce racism and racial segregation. Today, we are much more egalitarian. Present reality is that our military strength is what keeps the world's oceans open (from piracy, if nothing else), and that keeps the peace. Those carriers you don't like - they keep the peace, the Pax Americana. That is not the past. That's today. You have 140 million Muslims on your doorstep. That's a problem - a genuine problem. Their immigration pressure is real. But there is no danger of an outright armed invasion, because you live as part of an alliance system that will send in aircraft carriers to smash anybody invading you. You do have to police the peaceful immigration, but you don't have to worry about forceful invasion. Nor do you have to worry about having to face forceful invasion alone. The range of things you really have to worry about is constrained because you live in a world that is at peace and organized into a system. And the guarantor of that peace is those American aircraft carriers hovering over the horizon. Have those carriers cease to be, and your world will change, for the worse. You don't like us, but you need us more than you fully realize. Your nation's leaders realize it. Which is why nothing major is going to change. Stability and equilibrium, so that you and everybody else can build things, in peace. That is the gift of American power to the world. The Pax Americana is a good thing. And with Trump in the White House, it is likely to be in place for a long time to come, because HE is going to address the weaknesses and rot here at home. Shore up the American center, and the economic support structure that keeps those carriers and their battlegroups out there on patrol, keeping the peace, will continue.
The Spanish argued with us about Guam, and also the Philippines, Puerto Rico and Cuba. We took them and set two of them free. One of them we give the choice - they vote to stay. Guam is a small island dependent on the US military. It's ours for the same reason Australia is yours: you took it and hold it. Okinawa was taken from the Japanese in a bitter battle, the final grand land campaign of a bloody war they started. They attacked and started a war. And they lost. We came at them island by island across the Pacific. Okinawa was the last one we invaded. Then we developed the atomic bomb and didn't have to invade islands and fight anymore. We could just incinerate them from the air. So they surrendered. Of course we had to occupy their islands and police them, to root out the militarist leaders who caused the war and hang them, both as justice and as an example. Today, Japan is one of the most progressive and peaceful nations on earth, with a democratic constitution given to them by the United States. We conquered Japan, and we set it free. The Japanese are better off than any other people in Asia BECAUSE they were remade in America's image. It isn't an ACCIDENT that three "Americanized" Asian nations - Japan, South Korea and Taiwan - are modern and free, and that even a sprawling middle income nation, the Philippines, is free, and peaceful. Contrast that with the Asian nations that we did NOT conquer, occupy or fight for - China - North Korea - Vietnam - Cambodia - Laos - Mongolia. If you were banished to Asia, and had to live in one Asian nation for the rest of your life, subject to its laws, you would go to one of the Americanized Asian nations. Any free person would. Those nations are not free because of home-grown developments. They were MADE free by America. You say that China isn't interested in bothering you. That may be true. But China is interested in bothering all of its neighbors. It claims Taiwan. It claims pieces of Japan. It has already seized pieces of the Philippines and Vietnam. It supports North Korea against - what? - free, democratic, prosperous South Korea. China is a one party Communist state. It is not free. It is not going to be free anytime in the near future. But even China is China, and not a conquered colony of Japan, because the Americans kept China in the war in the late 1930s and during World War II, by sending in supplies over the Burma Road, while the US held the Japanese in a vice and tore into them from the East. You say this is ancient history. More recent history is that the US encouraged China's break from the USSR with Nixon's visit, and encouraged China's development as a market economy throughout the 1990s and 2000s. Today, the United States seeks to see China behaving as a normal nation in the world of trade, not manipulating its currency. And, of course, we are concerned about Chinese human rights abuses. Are you not concerned about such things?
I am concerned about what I can directly observe, we have enough alleged human rights abuses at home to be concerned about without involving ourselves in what we cannot see otherwise we would be reviewing your record too. US human rights abuses are not reported in the MSM therefore you don't see them but look at your response to Syria, disgraceful Have you noted that there is no debate about real issues here just minor US stuff and of course the mighty Dump Let me ask you, how do you address acts of terrorism and insurrection? massive armed response? quiet negotiation? as to currency manipulation, what is quantitative easing? while your FED dicked around with interest rates and debt placement we saw our currency increase to $1.10 to the US dollar then fall to $0.70. we are waiting for your next manipulative act as you try to advantage yourselves. I expect the Chinese response was different. You americans think you can do no wrong but in fact you are responsible for a lot that is wrong in the world today. The men who won the peace in WWII are gone but you haven't continued their legacy. Instead you engage in your petty little wars where noone gets hurt but the civilians, and you actually think you are protecting someone by doing this. You have to ask would the outcome in the US be actually any different if you weren't doing this? We are living in the aftermath of your mistakes
I have noted that people here are generally quite hard over of one or two political persuasions, and hold to their politics with a religious zeal that precludes any deep discussion. Start crossing into their very large "no go" zones and they become belligerent and abusive and start insulting your intelligence. You can be the most brilliant scholar, with years of experience in the subject matter, and you're still an idiot because you don't see things through their particular loophole. So of course there is not much debate about real issues here. Try to have one! Try to have a civil discussion about a controversial issue here! You can't do it. I will have a civil discussion with anybody about anything, but my interlocutor here won't stay civil for very long. Soon, I'll be the "idiot", or the "liar" or any other damned insulting thing, just because I don't see it the same way that my interlocutor does, and because I'll start mustering facts, logic and reasoning to defend my view. I'm about as calm as there is here on this site, but it's very difficult to have a deep conversation about anything here. You want to have one about American and Australian policy? Happy to do it, as long as you stay civil. I always stay civil, but like Trump, I always hit back with ridicule whenever I am insulted. I don't insult any interlocutor first (I WILL insult historical figures for their evil and their hypocrisy, but I don't insult the living people with whom I am conversing - first. I don't insult first, I ALWAYS return insults, though). My experience is that every controversial discussion ends in an exchange of insults. And I never fire the first shot. Which means, to me, that I always win the debates, and my interlocutor is reduced to name-calling because that's all he's got. So, if we can avoid insult, we can go as deep as you like on anything. I would say that the first thing we have to decide is whether when we say "we", in reference to America and Australia, what we really mean here is "I think", or whether we are speaking objectively of the foreign policy and popular opinions of our respective people. Australians consistently poll as being quite favorable to the USA, and quite strongly in favor of the US-Australian alliance, so if "we" means public opinion, then "you" like us. If we're talking about our own personal views (which are much more interesting to me - otherwise why bother to have a conversation?), then clearly YOU are very critical of the United States, much moreso than your countrymen in general. I am not appealing to consensus gentium here. I do not mean to suggest that because you are in the minority in Australia in your view, that you are wrong. After all, I'm a Catholic. My religious views differ rather sharply from that of the majority of my countrymen, and my religion has always been the minority in America. I understand that the majority can have their heads planted quite firmly up their asses. So the fact that you're critical of America doesn't mean that you're wrong, just because most Australians aren't with you. But it does mean that you don't "speak for Australia" any more than I "speak for America". You speak for you, and I speak for me. That's the truth. It's a truth that doesn't bother me, but it should be admitted, because then the whole effort to frame things in terms of objective public opinion can be let be. You don't agree with the majority of the people in your country on many of the issues we could discuss, just as I don't agree with the majority of my countrymen on many issues. So, what shall the topic be? Human rights abuses? America was founded in a blizzard of human rights abuses, at a time when every government on earth was a horrorshow of abuse, domination and torture. Most of the world has gotten better. Australia has, and so have we. Things are not perfect, and we should be attentive to where the abuses remain. This does not mean, however, that Australia and China are equal, because both have horrid pasts and because officials do bad things in the present. There are degrees of abuse, and structural aspects of it. Abuses happen in Australia and America in spite of the overall ethos of human rights. Abuses happen in China as a routine aspect of one-party iron-fisted rule. These differences are not subtle, and totalitarian Communism cannot be morally equated with pluralistic democracy just because more than a few cops are small-minded abusive bigoted assholes.
I'm about as calm as there is here on this site, but it's very difficult to have a deep conversation about anything here. You want to have one about American and Australian policy? Happy to do it, as long as you stay civil. I always stay civil, but like Trump, I always hit back with ridicule whenever I am insulted. I don't insult any interlocutor first (I WILL insult historical figures for their evil and their hypocrisy, but I don't insult the living people with whom I am conversing - first. I don't insult first, I ALWAYS return insults, though). My experience is that every controversial discussion ends in an exchange of insults. And I never fire the first shot. Which means, to me, that I always win the debates, and my interlocutor is reduced to name-calling because that's all he's got. I too am happy to have a discussion, but be aware I will call when a point of view strays into the rediculous and I expect no less.. My point is no one is perfect and many policies are poorly formulated and counter productive. I see things through a particular prism which comes out of life's experience not just blindly following a political line. What was acceptable 50 years ago may not be acceptable now Human rights abuses is a question of definition needing in depth knowledge of circumstance, Similiarly interracial issues may need the same. There is a lot of incompetence and much of it is covered up. we are having issues here at the moment over conditions and treatment in juvanile detention
Nobody is perfect. But some people are better than others, and some things work better than other things. Nothing ever works perfectly. That is certainly true.
Do you believe in God?
Yes I am a pentecostal Christian and you could say also that my religious views differ greatly from most of my countrymen.
Ok. So we probably should start there, with God, because that's really where everything converges.
candidly I don't see much of God in what is happening in the world today and certainly anything the Lord is doing isn't reported. My nation used to be a godly nation and was greatly blessed but probably less that 20% are church goers today. Christianity is a thin veneer, Churches have been rocked again and again by pedophile scandals and I think they have lost their moral authority, particularly as they have allowed themselves to be infiltrated by gays.
Amen! Additionally, I have found no evidence that God intercedes in the affairs of men or any of his institutions. If we crap on ourselves or upon each other he is disinterested and we must live with the messes we create.
I don't think it is entirely one sided Rik but nothing is instant. There is purpose and we have been told how things will be, it is just hard for us to fit current circumstance exactly in the mold. What we have in the middle east is certainly an outworking of the anti-Christ but there are much more subtle things going on. There can be little doubt the church has be infiltrated and diverted from its true purpose
#2. To: U don't know me (#0)
one false move in Syria could easily raise tensions between the United States and Russia
#3. To: Vicomte13 (#1)
I thought that "regime change" was also the goal of the Obama administration.
#4. To: paraclete (#3)
#5. To: Vicomte13 (#4)
(Edited)
#6. To: paraclete (#5)
It is convenient for Russia to get a little payback and see america bleed as america made them bleed in Afghanistan
#7. To: U don't know me (#0)
#8. To: buckeroo (#6)
all thanks to the US_CIA bullshit brigade in Washington DC.
#9. To: Vicomte13, U don't know me (#1)
But wait - I thought that "regime change" was also the goal of the Obama administration.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."
#10. To: paraclete (#5)
You must understand that Russia and america have diametrically opposed points of view, one values individual freedom over community while the other believes in community first
#11. To: Vicomte13 (#10)
We are careening towards national bankruptcy. We do not have the wealth to give us the luxury of going out of our way to provoke the other nuclear superpower, and then engaging in an arms race with them. The Soviet Union did that, and went bankrupt and fell apart on account of it. So will we.
#12. To: paraclete (#11)
#13. To: Vicomte13 (#12)
In any case, your theory won't be tested. We're not going to withdraw from the world system we have set up. You may not like us, but you nevertheless need us. If we don't keep the peace and operate the world system at its center, no-one will. And that will be bad for everybody.
#14. To: paraclete (#13)
#15. To: paraclete (#3)
#16. To: Vicomte13 (#14)
we are in fact the linchpin of world security and world trade. You resent that, and I'm tired of bearing the burden.
#17. To: paraclete (#16)
You fail to understand that it is your attitude that is resented, you are not the master race. Dump has had a dummy spit because the TPP doesn't give massive advantage to the US. He fails to realise that it is the trade itsself that gives advantage. The US in trade negotiations trys to force its laws on others. This is why you are resented, you are not the master race. Yes it would be better if you took a different course and stopped trying to dominate with military strength. If you are threatened it is because of your aggression. Only one nation on Earth is truely at enmity with you, but you see enemies everywhere
#18. To: Vicomte13 (#17)
We're the master race - thank God.
#19. To: paraclete (#18)
You are an idiot, filled with the propaganda of a nation that thinks it rules the world. You are 5% of the world's population and 100% of its ego. Don't tell me you are not full of tribalism and simmering divisions. I have been to China, the chinese people are not as you describe.
#20. To: paraclete (#18)
I have been to China, the chinese people are not as you describe.
#21. To: rlk (#20)
How long were you in China and what did you do there? Are you adept at using chopsticks?
#22. To: Vicomte13 (#19)
you'll find yourself like the British did in 1940.
#23. To: paraclete (#22)
what the British found in 1940, just as we did, is you can't successfully fight two wars at once,
#24. To: Vicomte13 (#23)
(Edited)
You live on Asia's doorstep.
#25. To: paraclete (#24)
you live in past glories but you are a different nation today
#26. To: paraclete (#24)
You say america is not a demanding overlord, take a look at their free trade agreements and Dump wants to pull out of the TPP because america isn't advantaged enough out of NAFTA for the same reason. China isn't interested in bothering us and the chinese leadership is ambivalent about Dump they know they can find common ground. What you see as a big deal isn't such a big deal to others sometimes but parking an aircraft carrier in someone's back yard is. The chinese mind works differently, they knew they couldn't build a fleet of aircraft carriers quickly so they created a number of island platforms for airfields, this extended their reach just as you do with aircraft carriers. Now we are having an argument about who owns the land, but has anyone argued with you about guam or okinawa
#27. To: Vicomte13 (#26)
(Edited)
Are you not concerned about such things?
#28. To: paraclete (#27)
(Edited)
Have you noted that there is no debate about real issues here just minor US stuff and of course the mighty Dump
#29. To: Vicomte13 (#28)
(Edited)
I will have a civil discussion with anybody about anything, but my interlocutor here won't stay civil for very long. Soon, I'll be the "idiot", or the "liar" or any other damned insulting thing, just because I don't see it the same way that my interlocutor does, and because I'll start mustering facts, logic and reasoning to defend my view.
#30. To: paraclete (#29)
My point is no one is perfect and many policies are poorly formulated and counter productive.
#31. To: paraclete (#29)
#32. To: Vicomte13 (#31)
(Edited)
Do you believe in God?
#33. To: paraclete (#32)
#34. To: Vicomte13 (#33)
Ok. So we probably should start there, with God, because that's really where everything converges.
#35. To: paraclete (#34)
candidly I don't see much of God in what is happening in the world today and certainly anything the Lord is doing isn't reported. My nation used to be a godly nation and was greatly blessed but probably less that 20% are church goers today. Christianity is a thin veneer, Churches have been rocked again and again by pedophile scandals and I think they have lost their moral authority, particularly as they have allowed themselves to be infiltrated by gays.
#36. To: rlk (#35)
Additionally, I have found no evidence that God intercedes in the affairs of men or any of his institutions. If we crap on ourselves or upon each other he is disinterested and we must live with the messes we create.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]