Quote:While the progressive left sees a Russian spy around every corner, there is a very real possibility that Washington and Moscow will collude for a very big reason—and soon.

Both nations have a reason to fear a coming change in the international order that will impact them both. And as history shows us time and again, a rising power that seeks to overturn the international system can make the most dedicated enemies join forces—and fast.

I can only be talking about one thing: a growing and more powerful China.

No one should be shocked by such an assertion. The simple fact is that we could very well be at the start of a colossal shift in how America and Russia view each other as they gear up to take on a much bigger foe. And we should be clear: if projections hold, the Chinese economy will someday surpass America’s and Russia’s—combined. As economic power translates into clear military strength, the writing could be on the wall for what may come.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/a...nst-china/

I said that this was what's in the works the day after the MSM went ape-shyt over the Helsinki summit.

Who's likely to make a serious challenge to us first? A country with an economy the size of Texas, or one with an economy bigger than ours and Russia's combined?

Which culture more closely matches ours, Russia's or China's?

Wouldn't be the first time we teamed with Russia to take out a bigger problem.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

it's a gimme putt why this is REALLY happening.....

all the other fluf and ruffled feathers is horse puckey.....

Why would Russia be against China? They sell more oil to China than anyone.

(07-20-2018 05:58 AM)hawghiggs Wrote:  Why would Russia be against China? They sell more oil to China than anyone.

that won't change unless one border moves west.....

There will be hundreds (if not thousands) of other factors at play, but if the question of world dominance really did come down to “China” or “America + Russia”, then China will almost definitely have the upper hand.

(07-20-2018 06:20 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  There will be hundreds (if not thousands) of other factors at play, but if the question of world dominance really did come down to “China” or “America + Russia”, then China will almost definitely have the upper hand.

world dominance is about currency and commerce today....

ground warfare is for the pigs at this point.....

controlling trade is where dominance has always slept in the bed....

this would be something where ZERO had zero clue in understanding....

(07-20-2018 06:20 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  There will be hundreds (if not thousands) of other factors at play, but if the question of world dominance really did come down to “China” or “America + Russia”, then China will almost definitely have the upper hand.

The intelligence you show in this forum compared to all of the Trump lovers is equal to that same equation ---- "Native Georgian" > "All (other) Trump Supporters"

+3

(07-20-2018 06:20 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  There will be hundreds (if not thousands) of other factors at play, but if the question of world dominance really did come down to “China” or “America + Russia”, then China will almost definitely have the upper hand.

As it stands now, you are probably correct. The real question is how China reacts to a potentially strong US-Russia military and economic alliance in a hypothetical future.

From a military perspective, Russia has already proven they can at least occupy the attention of a superior military force and hold their own. Would China be less likely to try to radically expand their sphere of influence if they were worried about Russia feeling threatened - maybe not. China's military might be large and growing in technological advances, but they severely lack experience of any kind since WWII.

Economically, a stronger US-Russia-European relationship would strengthen all countries involved and put more pressure on China's fragile economy. Right now China isn't competing on a level playing field. Pressure from an alliance that included pretty much everyone except South American despot countries and smaller Pacific Rim countries that don't have enough influence to really make a difference could force China to address currency manipulation, wages, working conditions, and pollution if they wanted to be a major player in the world economy.

(07-20-2018 06:56 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  

(07-20-2018 06:20 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  There will be hundreds (if not thousands) of other factors at play, but if the question of world dominance really did come down to “China” or “America + Russia”, then China will almost definitely have the upper hand.

The intelligence you show in this forum compared to all of the Trump lovers is equal to that same equation ---- "Native Georgian" > "All (other) Trump Supporters"

+3

We all love Native Georgian, no need to be hurtful.

Lol

The economy of the EU dwarfs the Russian economy. Trump’s “strategy” of distancing the US from the EU and even cheering for its demise, makes no sense if he’s trying to chart some long term order to take on China.

(07-20-2018 08:26 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  The economy of the EU dwarfs the Russian economy. Trump’s “strategy” of distancing the US from the EU and even cheering for its demise, makes no sense if he’s trying to chart some long term order to take on China.

If you think that’s it, you’ve missed the mark by a Mensa mile!

Damn, just damn. Wow

(07-20-2018 05:58 AM)hawghiggs Wrote:  Why would Russia be against China? They sell more oil to China than anyone.

It's not about anyone being against anyone else at the moment, it's about strategic longterm planning.

Many of you may not remember it, or perhaps weren't even born then, but during the 1960's, the late 60's in particular, the Soviet Union and People's Republic of China were bitter rivals with Soviet troops even being amassed along China's border.

I was in high school then and clearly recall our discussions of the topic.

Quote:Meanwhile, during 1968, the Soviet Army had amassed along the 4,380 km (2,738 mi.) border with China—especially at the Xinjiang frontier, in north-west China, where the Soviets might readily induce Turkic separatists to insurrection. Militarily, in 1961, the USSR had 12 divisions and 200 aeroplanes at that border; in 1968, there were 25 divisions, 1,200 aeroplanes, and 120 medium-range missiles. Furthermore, although China had detonated its first nuclear weapon (the 596 Test), in October 1964, at Lop Nur basin, the People's Liberation Army was militarily inferior to the Red Army.

Concerning the 4,380 km (2,738 mi.) Sino-Soviet border, Soviet propaganda agitated against the PRC's complaint about the unequal Treaty of Aigun (1858) and the Convention of Peking (1860), which cheated China of territory and natural resources. To that effect, in the 1972–73 period, the USSR deleted the Chinese and Manchu place-names—Iman (伊曼, Yiman), Tetyukhe (野猪河, yĕzhūhé), and Suchan—from the map of the Soviet Far East, and replaced them with the Russian place-names Dalnerechensk, Dalnegorsk, and Partizansk, respectively.[39][40] To facilitate social acceptance of such cultural revision, the Soviet press misrepresented the historical presence of Chinese people—in lands gained by Tsarist Russia—which provoked Russian violence against the local Chinese populaces; moreover, politically inconvenient exhibits were removed from museums,[39] and vandals covered with cement the Jurchen-script stele, about the Jin Dynasty, in the Khabarovsk Museum.

After Mao Zedong broke bitterly with the Soviet Union in the late 1950s, he launched a world-wide rivalry.[42] Mao set up a network of pro-Chinese, anti-Soviet parties and Communist fronts that directly challenged the pro-Soviet organizations in many countries.

By 1970, Sino-Soviet ideological rivalry extended to Africa and the Middle East, where the Soviet Union and China funded and supported opposed political parties, militias, and states, notably the Ogaden War (1977–1978) between Ethiopia and Somalia, the Rhodesian Bush War (1964–1979), the Zimbabwean Gukurahundi (1980–1987), the Angolan Civil War (1975–2002), the Mozambican Civil War (1977–1992), and factions of the Palestinian people. In Thailand, the pro-Chinese Communist fronts were organized with a violent revolutionary goal in mind, but they were based in local Chinese enclaves and failed to connect with the larger population.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_split

As poster bullet here mentioned here the other night, all of Siberia with its huge natural resources is inhabited by only about 15 million Russians and many of them, via culture and ethnicity, are more closely tied to the east than the west.

Some of you guys who scoff at the concept of a future military square-off with China need to better inform yourselves about they're up to these days in the seas of SE Asia.

I see plenty of similarities to the activities of the Japanese in the run-up to WWII.

It's a different world. Eastern cultures in general have always expanded outward from their current territory. What that has meant militarily is that conflicts with them generally are confined to areas contiguous their national holdings.

That basic train of thought seems to still be true. It must be a cultural thing.

The difference is that modern warfare, cyber warfare particularly, can turn a push to occupy a few thousand miles next door into a global conflict. The time lines are vastly smaller now than they were even 20 years ago.

I think the world will have to see a global cyber conflict before we understand it. We may blow each other up before we figure out what happened.

Great so we're going to prop up an old super power foe that is on hard times to take on another super power foe. Then we get to have 2 strong super power foes, one of which is pretending to like us for now and one of which has us by the trade ropes.

Lose.

(07-20-2018 09:37 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(07-20-2018 05:58 AM)hawghiggs Wrote:  Why would Russia be against China? They sell more oil to China than anyone.

It's not about anyone being against anyone else at the moment, it's about strategic longterm planning.

Many of you may not remember it, or perhaps weren't even born then, but during the 1960's, the late 60's in particular, the Soviet Union and People's Republic of China were bitter rivals with Soviet troops even being amassed along China's border.

I was in high school then and clearly recall our discussions of the topic.

Quote:Meanwhile, during 1968, the Soviet Army had amassed along the 4,380 km (2,738 mi.) border with China—especially at the Xinjiang frontier, in north-west China, where the Soviets might readily induce Turkic separatists to insurrection. Militarily, in 1961, the USSR had 12 divisions and 200 aeroplanes at that border; in 1968, there were 25 divisions, 1,200 aeroplanes, and 120 medium-range missiles. Furthermore, although China had detonated its first nuclear weapon (the 596 Test), in October 1964, at Lop Nur basin, the People's Liberation Army was militarily inferior to the Red Army.

Concerning the 4,380 km (2,738 mi.) Sino-Soviet border, Soviet propaganda agitated against the PRC's complaint about the unequal Treaty of Aigun (1858) and the Convention of Peking (1860), which cheated China of territory and natural resources. To that effect, in the 1972–73 period, the USSR deleted the Chinese and Manchu place-names—Iman (伊曼, Yiman), Tetyukhe (野猪河, yĕzhūhé), and Suchan—from the map of the Soviet Far East, and replaced them with the Russian place-names Dalnerechensk, Dalnegorsk, and Partizansk, respectively.[39][40] To facilitate social acceptance of such cultural revision, the Soviet press misrepresented the historical presence of Chinese people—in lands gained by Tsarist Russia—which provoked Russian violence against the local Chinese populaces; moreover, politically inconvenient exhibits were removed from museums,[39] and vandals covered with cement the Jurchen-script stele, about the Jin Dynasty, in the Khabarovsk Museum.

After Mao Zedong broke bitterly with the Soviet Union in the late 1950s, he launched a world-wide rivalry.[42] Mao set up a network of pro-Chinese, anti-Soviet parties and Communist fronts that directly challenged the pro-Soviet organizations in many countries.

By 1970, Sino-Soviet ideological rivalry extended to Africa and the Middle East, where the Soviet Union and China funded and supported opposed political parties, militias, and states, notably the Ogaden War (1977–1978) between Ethiopia and Somalia, the Rhodesian Bush War (1964–1979), the Zimbabwean Gukurahundi (1980–1987), the Angolan Civil War (1975–2002), the Mozambican Civil War (1977–1992), and factions of the Palestinian people. In Thailand, the pro-Chinese Communist fronts were organized with a violent revolutionary goal in mind, but they were based in local Chinese enclaves and failed to connect with the larger population.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_split

As poster bullet here mentioned here the other night, all of Siberia with its huge natural resources is inhabited by only about 15 million Russians and many of them, via culture and ethnicity, are more closely tied to the east than the west.

Some of you guys who scoff at the concept of a future military square-off with China need to better inform yourselves about they're up to these days in the seas of SE Asia.

I see plenty of similarities to the activities of the Japanese in the run-up to WWII.

Great post!

The Soviets and the PRC fought a border clash in 1969 that wasn't resolved until 1991, after the fall of the USSR. That clash and the resulting chill in relations between the two communist rivals was what led to Kissinger and Nixon establishing relations with the PRC.

China is the only country and culture in the world that would truly look to expand, violently, across the world. Not just to their immediate neighbors like Russia, but along the lines of "one day, Africa will be part of China."

(07-20-2018 10:37 AM)JDTulane Wrote:  Great so we're going to prop up an old super power foe that is on hard times to take on another super power foe. Then we get to have 2 strong super power foes, one of which is pretending to like us for now and one of which has us by the trade ropes.

Lose.

Even propping up Russia they would be little trouble in a conventional war and as close as we came to nuclear war with Russia, even Putin would probably cool things down before we got there. An unchecked China on the other hand would be something that neither the US or Russia want to deal with on their own.

(07-20-2018 11:00 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-20-2018 10:37 AM)JDTulane Wrote:  Great so we're going to prop up an old super power foe that is on hard times to take on another super power foe. Then we get to have 2 strong super power foes, one of which is pretending to like us for now and one of which has us by the trade ropes.

Lose.

Even propping up Russia they would be little trouble in a conventional war and as close as we came to nuclear war with Russia, even Putin would probably cool things down before we got there. An unchecked China on the other hand would be something that neither the US or Russia want to deal with on their own.

Too bad there aren't other lifelong alliances and organizations already in place that could do the same thing...

Oh wait. Trump is currently trashing all of those.

(07-20-2018 11:44 AM)JDTulane Wrote:  

(07-20-2018 11:00 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-20-2018 10:37 AM)JDTulane Wrote:  Great so we're going to prop up an old super power foe that is on hard times to take on another super power foe. Then we get to have 2 strong super power foes, one of which is pretending to like us for now and one of which has us by the trade ropes.

Lose.

Even propping up Russia they would be little trouble in a conventional war and as close as we came to nuclear war with Russia, even Putin would probably cool things down before we got there. An unchecked China on the other hand would be something that neither the US or Russia want to deal with on their own.

Too bad there aren't other lifelong alliances and organizations already in place that could do the same thing...

Oh wait. Trump is currently trashing all of those.

Assuming you are referring to NATO, what exactly do you think they could muster to counter China given their dismal financial contributions? Hell NATO isn't much more than an agreement allowing the US to put bases in Europe at this point.