• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. admiral raises alarm over Russian military threat

humbolt said:
You could check out the Russian actions in the Arctic right about now, and ask yourself precisely what claim they are attempting to make with their military. You could also ask yourself what the Chinese air exclusion zone over Japanese Islands is all about, as well as the intimidation of the Vietnamese, Philippines and other nations in the South China Sea is all about. You probably won't, but you could.
Click to expand...

Like I said, what sea lanes have either of those countries closed, or threatened to close, hmm?
 
donsutherland1 said:
From CNN:



U.S. admiral raises alarm over Russian military threat - CNN.com

It should be noted that this is but one geopolitical development albeit by one of the world's major powers. With various other countries increasing their military strength, it makes little sense for the U.S. to be on fiscal path that could reduce U.S. military power, including but not limited to combat manpower, in relative and perhaps even absolute terms. In the 21st century world, power matters, just as it has in earlier periods. The notion that hard power can be supplanted by rules or international institutions is little more than a hollow rationalization that makes little or no constructive national security contribution.
Click to expand...

*yawn*

If you've just gotta worry about something, worry about cyberwar capabilities. The Russians don't want to risk their cities being turned to ash, just like we don't want that - such is the perverse beauty of MAD. Besides, the Russians know down deep inside that there's an economic behemoth to their south, and they worry a heck of a lot more about China than they do about us.

But when it comes to cyberwar, this can be done without an obvious smoking gun - which is why that's what needs top priority.
 
Montecresto said:
What does that mean Grant?
Click to expand...
The Chinese are building a canal across Central America which will dwarf Panama, which Carter gave to the Panamanians during his presidency, and this is a pretty big deal. And your response concerned land owners on the Panama Canal over a century ago, which had nothing to do with the present or the future. Debating present events from the past can be interesting but there's also a time to reflect on the future and what this might mean for Central America, America, shipping lanes, trade and world hegemony.
 
Huge shock, a career military warhawk arguing for more funding. He's me ignoring anything he has to say
 
Grant said:
The Chinese are building a canal across Central America which will dwarf Panama, which Carter gave to the Panamanians during his presidency, and this is a pretty big deal. And your response concerned land owners on the Panama Canal over a century ago, which had nothing to do with the present or the future. Debating present events from the past can be interesting but there's also a time to reflect on the future and what this might mean for Central America, America, shipping lanes, trade and world hegemony.
Click to expand...

Yes I see. China building a new and improved exchange between the Gulf and pacific doesn't bother me. If the rights of property owners that are in its path aren't being treated fairly in the process, that does. Looking at the events during the founding of the Panama Canal through the northern extent of Columbia, and the numbers of peasants that suffered its fate, is more than interesting, it's evidence that there's nothing new under the sun.
 
Montecresto said:
Like I said, what sea lanes have either of those countries closed, or threatened to close, hmm?
Click to expand...

You are of the position that unless the worst happens, then why concern yourself. I don't imagine you treat your own personal health in that manner because it's not a rational position. Much the same applies to world events. If you can read the links below and tell me that such an effort isn't under way, then you aren't treating what I've described in a rational manner.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/07/us-china-seas-fishermen-idUSBREA4603C20140507

english.vov.vn/Politics/East-Sea/China-keeps-intimidating-Vietnamese-law-enforcement-ships/278641.vov

touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-80365797/

[url]www.stratfor.com/weekly/china-tests-japanese-and-us-patience

thediplomat.com/2015/01/chinas-military-parade-a-warning-to-japan-and-the-us/[/URL]
 
humbolt said:
You are of the position that unless the worst happens, then why concern yourself. I don't imagine you treat your own personal health in that manner because it's not a rational position. Much the same applies to world events. If you can read the links below and tell me that such an effort isn't under way, then you aren't treating what I've described in a rational manner.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/07/us-china-seas-fishermen-idUSBREA4603C20140507

english.vov.vn/Politics/East-Sea/China-keeps-intimidating-Vietnamese-law-enforcement-ships/278641.vov

touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-80365797/

[url]www.stratfor.com/weekly/china-tests-japanese-and-us-patience

thediplomat.com/2015/01/chinas-military-parade-a-warning-to-japan-and-the-us/[/URL]
Click to expand...

Defending ones territory, even if such is disputed, is not blocking "shipping lanes" do you know what shipping lanes are, and where they are?
 
Montecresto said:
Defending ones territory, even if such is disputed, is not blocking "shipping lanes" do you know what shipping lanes are, and where they are?
Click to expand...

No it isn't blocking. It's an attempt to do that, which indicates pretty clearly the intention if allowed to go unchecked. So when the Vietnamese assert their territorial rights in the face of military force to deny them that internationally recognized right, you're okay with them having to forfeit that right. Interesting. At what point would you object to the Chinese action?
 
humbolt said:
No it isn't blocking. It's an attempt to do that, which indicates pretty clearly the intention if allowed to go unchecked. So when the Vietnamese assert their territorial rights in the face of military force to deny them that internationally recognized right, you're okay with them having to forfeit that right. Interesting. At what point would you object to the Chinese action?
Click to expand...

I realize you enjoy an all powerful America, based about the globe to assert US interests, always at the ready to use the military to enforce them, while continually denying the same of anyone else and demonizing them for doing the same. US FP is driving Russia and China closer to an alliance that will not be favorable for the US in the end. The Project for a New American Century isn't working out too well, and US hegemony is waning. I suppose you'd favor a war with China due to their insistence that a few islands and resources in the SCS belong to them. But I'm not.
 
Montecresto said:
I realize you enjoy an all powerful America, based about the globe to assert US interests, always at the ready to use the military to enforce them, while continually denying the same of anyone else and demonizing them for doing the same. US FP is driving Russia and China closer to an alliance that will not be favorable for the US in the end. The Project for a New American Century isn't working out too well, and US hegemony is waning. I suppose you'd favor a war with China due to their insistence that a few islands and resources in the SCS belong to them. But I'm not.
Click to expand...

No, I don't enjoy an all powerful America with military force ready to enforce our interests at my whim. I don't direct US foreign policy. Were I the one doing that, it would be vastly different than it currently is. You have no particular idea what my views are on that issue. And no, your supposition that I favor war with China and or Russia is grossly in error. I am not in the business of blaming the US for all the worlds woes, either, in spite of the ham-handedness of the current administration's conduct on the foreign policy front.
 
donsutherland1 said:
From CNN:



U.S. admiral raises alarm over Russian military threat - CNN.com

It should be noted that this is but one geopolitical development albeit by one of the world's major powers. With various other countries increasing their military strength, it makes little sense for the U.S. to be on fiscal path that could reduce U.S. military power, including but not limited to combat manpower, in relative and perhaps even absolute terms. In the 21st century world, power matters, just as it has in earlier periods. The notion that hard power can be supplanted by rules or international institutions is little more than a hollow rationalization that makes little or no constructive national security contribution.
Click to expand...

Because the "smart" Obama-followers believe that no one wants to hurt the US. They think "sure, let's reduce the US armed forces, then people we'll see we're peaceful!". Meanwhile, Russia and China are laughing hysterically.
 
humbolt said:
No it isn't blocking. It's an attempt to do that, which indicates pretty clearly the intention if allowed to go unchecked. So when the Vietnamese assert their territorial rights in the face of military force to deny them that internationally recognized right, you're okay with them having to forfeit that right. Interesting. At what point would you object to the Chinese action?
Click to expand...

He doesnt care about anyone elses actions only those of the US. He'll object to those anytime any place and anywhere be they justified or not.
 
flogger said:
He doesnt care about anyone elses actions only those of the US. He'll object to those anytime any place and anywhere be they justified or not.
Click to expand...

For some, as long as things are fine at your house, the rest doesn't matter, and anything that might offer to infringe on that self-contained happiness is suspect. I understand and appreciate that viewpoint, but I don't endorse it.
 
humbolt said:
For some, as long as things are fine at your house, the rest doesn't matter, and anything that might offer to infringe on that self-contained happiness is suspect. I understand and appreciate that viewpoint, but I don't endorse it.
Click to expand...

Thats a longhand explanation of isolationism.
 
flogger said:
Thats a longhand explanation of isolationism.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but there are caveats depending on exactly what is threatened. That which one holds sacrosanct does not necessarily conform to another's.
 
humbolt said:
No, I don't enjoy an all powerful America with military force ready to enforce our interests at my whim. I don't direct US foreign policy. Were I the one doing that, it would be vastly different than it currently is. You have no particular idea what my views are on that issue. And no, your supposition that I favor war with China and or Russia is grossly in error. I am not in the business of blaming the US for all the worlds woes, either, in spite of the ham-handedness of the current administration's conduct on the foreign policy front.
Click to expand...

The US isn't to blame for all the worlds woes, and you'd be hard pressed to find a quote of mine suggesting that strawman. The US is responsible for the woes it has created, and partisans such as yourself have no problem pointing them out either, so long as it's diminishing of the other party. Pointing to problems that the US has created during times that our FP was under the direction of either party is what earns one the anti-American label from the frustrated partisan.
 
11Bravo said:
Because the "smart" Obama-followers believe that no one wants to hurt the US. They think "sure, let's reduce the US armed forces, then people we'll see we're peaceful!". Meanwhile, Russia and China are laughing hysterically.
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with no one wanting to hurt us and more to do with combating this hardcore interventionist foreign policy. How many times in the past 60 years has military action been used against countries that want and have the means to hurt the US?
 
11Bravo said:
Because the "smart" Obama-followers believe that no one wants to hurt the US. They think "sure, let's reduce the US armed forces, then people we'll see we're peaceful!". Meanwhile, Russia and China are laughing hysterically.
Click to expand...

Sorry, Russia and China are laughing about nothing. Russia's suffering under US led economic war, and both Russia and China are being driven together by failed US foreign policies, of which both parties have advanced. With a military budget of eight times that of the nearest competitor, if you can't defend your borders, then you're stretched far too thin as a result of military adventurism. This will not last forever. Indeed, you're seeing a deliberate push back against US hegemony . Better prepare to deal with it.
 
iliveonramen said:
It has nothing to do with no one wanting to hurt us and more to do with combating this hardcore interventionist foreign policy. How many times in the past 60 years has military action been used against countries that want and have the means to hurt the US?
Click to expand...

That's the nature of the beast. We can't be geopolitical and downsize the military. Sure we don't need to intervene in some things, but that doesn't mean we should downsize the greatest military in the world when others are boosting theirs.

If we want to be 'noninterventionalists' we need to pull out of every nation. That will never happen. So with that notion that we will not pull out of every nation, we should NEVER downsize. That's the incorrect solution. History will show. We're witnessing it.
 
Montecresto said:
Sorry, Russia and China are laughing about nothing. Russia's suffering under US led economic war, and both Russia and China are being driven together by failed US foreign policies, of which both parties have advanced. With a military budget of eight times that of the nearest competitor, if you can't defend your borders, then you're stretched far too thin as a result of military adventurism. This will not last forever. Indeed, you're seeing a deliberate push back against US hegemony . Better prepare to deal with it.
Click to expand...

US Hegemony?...LOL.. where?...
 
Montecresto said:
TPointing to problems that the US has created during times that our FP was under the direction of either party is what earns one the anti-American label from the frustrated partisan.
Click to expand...

Well if it walks like a duck etc .... Your myopic anti US bigotry is unprecedented here and you derail virtually every current affairs thread you can with it :roll:
 
Travis007 said:
US Hegemony?...LOL.. where?...
Click to expand...

Are you denying the present sole hegemon?? Lol. Or the two hegemons of the second half of the 20th century. Maybe it's just because you don't know what one is.

Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 the United States was the world's sole hegemonic power, a position which, after the financial crisis, may be coming to an end.[28]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegemony#20th_century
 
flogger said:
Well if it walks like a duck etc .... Your myopic anti US bigotry is unprecedented here and you derail virtually every current affairs thread you can with it :roll:
Click to expand...

Been catching up on your beauty sleep. Pffff
 
Montecresto said:
Are you denying the present sole hegemon?? Lol. Or the two hegemons of the second half of the 20th century. Maybe it's just because you don't know what one is.

Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 the United States was the world's sole hegemonic power, a position which, after the financial crisis, may be coming to an end.[28]

Hegemony - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Im denying that your posts are anythng but the usual liberal anti american drool..

Trust me I know what it is.. LOL and I also recognize posts of garbage and ignorance..

I also recognize what 'wiki" is also...LOL..
 
Montecresto said:
Sorry, Russia and China are laughing about nothing. Russia's suffering under US led economic war, and both Russia and China are being driven together by failed US foreign policies, of which both parties have advanced. With a military budget of eight times that of the nearest competitor, if you can't defend your borders, then you're stretched far too thin as a result of military adventurism. This will not last forever. Indeed, you're seeing a deliberate push back against US hegemony . Better prepare to deal with it.
Click to expand...

Russia's economy has certainly taken a hit. But you must be ignorant of their military spending in the last year. Let me educate you. They begun AT1 Manu's in every regiment. They've stacked each line with B9 Cali's and invested in Geospatial imagery components over future sats.

They are certainly laughing at us, as we will be doing the exact opposite thanks to Obama's cuts. China? Don't get me started on why China is laughing at us. If what you've posted is your only argument, then quit while you think you're ahead. If you'd like, we can privately debate that....I'd be more than happy to :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom