Pre-emptive strike on China?

Sound like Russian apologism...What US army is camped on the Russian border?

Russia really does not have a "blue water" navy anyway. So, that is a moot point. Not that a navy...any navy...can remotely threaten Russia.

They don't need to. They have these things called "intercontinental ballistic missiles", that means that they don't need to ring the USA with missiles & airbases.

As to the missile shield...Even if only 10% of the Russian nuclear missiles get through...We are all screwed.

That is a very argumentative statement.

 

It can be argued that NATO is US as it will never make any decisions on its own nor will be allowed do anything without US approval.

As for army on Russia's border, are you aware of what's stationed in the Baltics? Sure, it's no "army" but it's there none the less and it can't go unnoticed. As of today there has never been so many enemy troops stationed on Russian border since WW2. Russia has to respond and it did.

Have you even bothered to watch the video I posted? What Putin speaks of is not fiction. Russia is concerned. No attention is being paid. This isn't being discussed in the mainstream media. Russia, again has to respond...

 

Sounds like more usa exceptionalism
NATO is an extension of the usa corporate army.
Look at THOSE borders.
Look at the recent NATO backed coup in Ukraine.
The usa proxy war in Afghanistan that many like to call "Russia's Vietnam"
For many years, the cia was the world's biggest publisher of Dr Zhivago.
Turkey India Japan etc etc etc etc
The usa has had an "army" camped at the USSR/Russia borders for decades.
Very few countries of the globe are not culpable Corporate/Military lieutenants of the usa.
Gott mit uns
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zPchc2dM1M

 

1) Why yes we are, we have the NFL and NASCAR!

2) Hardly, its like herding cat's!

3) They are shapely, almost as good as Viagra!

4) Your absolutely right, we should shell and bomb them to get them to do as we want just like Russia!

5) You didn't watch the Star Trek episode 'A Private Little War'? If the Great Bird of the Galaxy Roddenberry said it was so, then it must be so!

6) We're also the greatest publisher of Harry Potter and Catcher in the Rye, one must have a well balanced library!

7) Syria, Libya, Cuba, Angola, Iraq, Uganda, North Korea, etc, etc, etc.

8) Don't forget Grand Fenwick, we're watching them like a hawk!

9) We gotta be doing something right if only a few countries are not 'culpable' Corporate/Military Lieutenant's of the USA! USA! USA!

10) Well he does vacation in Texas during Spring Break!

 

In regards to #4, the US has been spreading Democracy in just the same fashion. Yugoslavia, Bosnia, Samalia, Panama, Haiti, Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq (3 times if you now count the anti Daesh operation) Libya. Drone strikes in Yemen and Pakistan. These have all been military interventions since the fall of the Soviet Union.

Now South China Sea and THAAD missiles in South Korea. China is also worried. Anti US alliances are in fact being formed in response.

For better or worse this is a fact.

China and Russia have lots of catching up to do when it comes to "shelling and bombing to get them to do what they want" just as the USA

The other side of the coin at least.

 

I love Catcher In The Rye...!!
You have an awesome library indeed.!
I heard an interview with Joanne Rowling on NPR.
I guess Bloomsbury and Levine tried to yank her Vermont/Ireland/Cayman tax status, when it was discovered Harry Potter was donating a lot of profits to some kind of Edward Snowden patriot fund.?
Did not hear the whole thing...sounded kind of bizarre, but i guess the "rebalance" laws were picked up on by Amnesty International and used against a few, wealthy arms manufactures of the 20774 zip code.
It seems, even in absentia, Mr Snowden was able to stick it to The Man.
No doubt the conspiracy theorists will be lining up with this for the Rush Limbaugh comedy hour.

No Chung was Wanged in the creation of Mr Limbaugh's broadcast.

 

You can scratch Panama(1989), and one time in Iraq(Gulf War I (1990-91)) since the Soviet Union had not yet fell.

IIRC, the US is not the one claiming almost the entire South China Sea for itself...

THAAD missiles in South Korea? Perhaps China should keep a tighter leash on it's little brother, you know, the one that treats nuclear weapons like fire crackers...

Anti-US alliances? Well, they have formed and broken up, formed and broken up.

Well, half fiction, half fact anyway.

Well, China does. Russia is actually better at it than the USA.
Let's see...
Abkhazia, Transnistria, Prigorodny, Tajikistan, Georgia - Twice, Chechnya - Twice, Dagestan, North Caucasus, Crimea, Donbass, and Syria.

Looks like Russia is doing a pretty good job of "shelling and bombing to get them to do what they want"

A plugged nickle no doubt.

 

Yes, China is claiming most of it. The US, however; has no claim at all, yet is very active in the area with war ships. As far as I have read China's claim to the "South China Sea" wasn't even looked at by The Hague prior to its decision. This is according to China that is...

These so called alliances seem to come out of necessity and mutual interest according to some. Alone, countries such as Russia or China or India (for example) are vulnerable... Together not so much. Which broken alliances are you speaking off?

North Korea isn't stupid. It's leaders know that as soon as they launch a nuclear strike, there will be no more North Korea. These tests are annoying yes, and China too has issued warnings to the stubborn state. The argument is why now? These tests have been going on for some time and less in number than those compared to France, Soviet Union or the US...

China just like Russia claims that these missiles are aimed at her not North Korea.

This is factually incorrect. Russia never shelled Abhazia or Transnistria or Tajikistan. Chechnya and Dagestan are border republics within the Russian Federation. When speaking of the "North Caucasus", these are the two republics which are generally mentioned. These are not foreign lands and military operations there (Chechnya especially) were to stop terrorists which were responsible for thousands of Russian deaths. The majority of the inhabitants within these republics wanted to remain with Russia, which is why Russia was successful. Virtually everything is rebuilt and peace has reached the regions. The remaining "jihadis" fled to Iraq, Aghanistan and joined Daesh where they are regarded as special forces and instructors for soldiers the so called Caliphate. Some US politicians such as Madeleine Albright referred to them as "freedom fighters". I call them terrorists.

Crimea? Really? Are you under the impression that the majority of the population was forced into Russia when in reality they all wanted to stay with Ukraine?

EU has already established and publicly stated that Georgia STARTED an illegal and unjustified war. Why does this keep popping up?

Just in case you forgot...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8281990.stm

American and NATO officers are in Kiev, training the military. US dollars financed the coupe. There are US equipment being used in Ukraine along with US mercenaries. This has all been revealed and the information is actually fairly easy to obtain. Yes, Russia sent equipment and intelligence to Donbas. Russian volunteers are also there. To repeat the Ukrainian defense minister, "We are not facing regular Russian army units". This statement came after German intelligence contradicted Breedloves statement and also said there are no "thousands of regular Russian troops with hundreds of tanks" operating in Ukraine.

Syria? Not only was Russia INVITED by the recognized Governemnt of that country but was also given the green light by the UN Security Council which unanimously voted "yes" (including the US) for operations in that country.

Who allowed the US to operate in Syria?

According to many, the US has been doing anything it wanted for the last 2 decades with impunity. Certain countries are worried and concerned with US foreign policy and the direction it is headed with its so called "exceptionalism". US isn't the only country with national interests but acts as if it is and no others matter. This is the consensus in many countries. China is amongst these countries.

 

Well said.
But you are talking to some people, on this forum, with a Very Narrow definition of "terrorism".
You are dealing with some people suffering from a huge dose of American Exceptionalism.
They do not realize that people in a US Marine or US Army uniform are often part of the biggest State Sponsored Terrorism the world has ever known.
Now that they are on the side of the aggressor(s), they want to think that They Are The Good Guys.
Look at the situation in The NFL. Some people are saying there is a Big Problem with systemic violence and inequity, others are crying that flag and a song are being disrespected.
Blind obedience to a flag and a song.
At the risk of repeating myself.........
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zPchc2dM1M

 

Come now Sloniksp, I know for a fact that you are not that obtuse. Every nation has claim to international waters and the right to freely traverse them. China seems to think otherwise.

AFAIK, it was never brought to the Hague's attention before, because, China has never been as militant about the area before, but with the building of their island bases, and the PLAN chasing off other nations' vessels, has brought this to the forefront.

That being said, the Hague's decision will have little, if any, effect on China's conduct in the area, while it's ruling is considered binding, it is essentially unenforceable. Further, China has stated more than a few times that it will ignore the ruling.

For the most part, all alliances come out of necessity and mutual interest.

All the broken alliances since the United States was founded. Necessities and mutual interests are transitory, as they come together, so will they come apart.

North Korea isn't stupid...That's argumentative.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/north-korea-defied-world-with-nuclear-test-now-it-seeks-aid-for-flood-disaster/2016/09/12/3e710483-476f-4f04-aae4-52af58064e91_story.html

Why now? Given the rather decrepit state of North Korea, Why at all?

China, just like Russia, can overcome THAAD with countermeasures and/or saturation attack. But, why pass up an excellent opportunity to appear indignant.

Russian exceptionalism at it's finest.

Abhazia was bombed, and Transnistria was shelled. Chechnya and Dagestan are "border republics within the Russian Federation"? So, it is OK to bomb and shell your own people? Do tell.

Amazing, how you go to great lengths to excuse the actions of Russia, but take exception to those of the United States which has used the very same excuses that you have advanced for their military actions?

That is immaterial. We are talking about military interventions and bombing and shelling to get your own way. You were not concerned with US reasoning when you gave your list...So, why should I be concerned with Russian reasoning for mine.

So...The Americans are doing the exact same thing as the Russians. But, America's actions get you all irate, while you give Russian actions a free pass. Nice , real nice.

No, no...German intelligence did say that there were "thousands of regular Russian troops" on the border - less than 30,000, and possibly less than 20,000, but not Breedlove's claim of 40,000. That is still "thousands of regular Russian troops."

Any way, this is, for both sides, just another of what Hyman Rickover called a "Say Do".

 

Well thank you for that. What is the US claim to the "South China Sea"? Not being a smart as either. I'm genuinely curious.

I think we agree here.

It's not about overcoming. Yes they both can but if stability is the concern why target these nations? Why ignore their concerns? Also there is nothing within the bills passed concerning these missile which would prevent the number from increasing. These missiles can be switched from defensive to offensive with virtually a "flip of a switch". Finally the countries in which these missile sit have no control over them. It is the US troops and Governemnt which controls the missiles in Romania, Poland and now South Korea not the countries in which they are stationed.
These concerns are very real and no one seems to be taking these concerns to heart. May I recommend you watch the video that I have posted in which Putin speaks of just this issue.

When was Abhazia bombed? Transnistria shelled? Chechnya and Dagestan were anti terrorist operations AFTER the fact. Who was going to go after the terrorists in Russia if not Russia? After Sept. 11th the US went to war with Afghanistan. This was done in retaliation for the terrorist attack. This intervention was supported by the world. Why isn't Russia allowed to go after terrorists within its own borders?

Im afraid this is incorrect. Aside from Afghanistan, the Unites States has made all decisions to use its military abroad unilateraly. It has bipassed the UN Security Council (the very same which has been created to prevent such acts) on every intervention since Afghanistan. When speaking of Russian military intervention, aside from Syria, it has all been reactionary. Russia has not been the aggressor (regardless of how often the mainstream media paints Russia as) and has abided by the security council.

I'm afraid that is a discussion that you have started. Russia isn't bombing anyone to get something it wants. Not a single shot was fired in Crimea. Instead a referendum was held. A referendum is perfectly legal. I still find it amazing that so many in the US find it difficult to believe that Crimeans voted for Russia because they consider themselves Russian. As for the whole of Ukraine, again this was Russias REACTION to a NATO/US coupe.

America is not doing the same thing as Russia. No country is doing what the US is. Aside from Afganistan, by law every US military intervention has been illegal. Syria included. I've asked before, who allowed the US to bomb Syria? One would think that Iraq would be enough but no Libya came next. Who allowed that? Why is the United States not condemning Saudi Arabias invasion of Yemen with the same ferocity as it is Russia in Ukraine (and it's an actual invasion)? Where are the sanctions?

Every military intervention that I have mentioned has been unilateral and without the approval of the UN Security Council. This is NOT the case with Russia (at least since the fall of the Soviet Union).

Breedlove stated that there are thousands of regular Russian army troops operating inside Ukraine. German intelligence contradicted his claim. Russian troops stayed in Russia. They never entered Ukraine. Breedlove lied.

http://m.spiegel.de/international/world/a-1022193.html

 

Sloniksp; any Navy or ship is supposed to be able to sail unhindered across international waters. That huge chunk of water between the Spratlys and the Paracels... international waters. It is a segment of water through which enormous amounts of ship-bourne trade flow. The US navy has every right to ensure that international trade is unhindered in international waters. So does any other navy.

China are trying to prevent other nations using international waters, claiming them for themselves, and further, claiming territory in contention with other nations, unilaterally using violence, and in contravention of what was established practice in the area.

 

Thank you Green Slime. Do we know more another the desputes islands? It seems some are artificial while others are claimed by other nations? It would seem that until these islands are sorted out, nothing will be resolved concerning the despite's water?

 

Some of the "islands" were mere reefs, submerged at high tide.

Look at the map. China claims them all. China has built massive runways on at least two of these islands, allowing them to fly jet fighters from them. This is a very dangerous escalation in a potentially volatile area, and completely needless.

 

Stability? I have serious doubts as to Putin's concerns for stability? I also have questions on China's desire for stability, given their "velvet glove" treatment of North Korea, and China's militarizing of their man-made islands in the South China Sea.

How does an anti-ballistic missile with no explosives translate into an offensive weapon at the "flip of a switch". Especially given their poor performance against jet aircraft?

I know this is what Russia and China are belly-aching about...The "theoretical" possibility that THAAD can be used to shoot down their aircraft within their borders. But, theoretically, THAAD shooting down an aircraft, let alone a maneuvering aircraft, is quite small - it is not the job the are designed to do, and is incredibly hard for them to do - and against a maneuvering aircraft, it is infinitesimal.

No one is saying who has actual firing control...The South Koreans state that they have it during peacetime, but with an inbound ballistic missile, is it a time if peace or a time of war. That is the grey area, where milliseconds count.

February, 1993.

https://www.hrw.org/reports/1995/Georgia2.htm

By the 14th Army during their offensive of June 19-22, 1992. From numerous sources.

Are you, and forgive me if you do not understand this term, Nucking Futs?

Remember! You called the United States out for their anti-terror intervention in Afghanistan back in post #25

So, No! If you are not going to give the United States a "pass" on their anti-terror interventions...Why do you think I should give Russia a "pass" on her anti-terror interventions. Your are welcome to drop the double standard at any time, preferably sooner than later.

Incorrect? You sure? Really sure?

Bosnia - False - Security Council Resolutions #743, #781, #816, and #836
Yugoslavia - True
Somalia - False - Security Council Resolution #794, US forces were part of UNOSOM I, UNOSOM II, and UNITAF
Haiti - False - Security Council Resolutions #841, #861, #862, #867, #873, #875, #905, #917, #933, and #940.
Syria - Open to debate under the UN Charter, Article 51.
Iraq(Gulf War II) - has been and will be debated endlessly. A case can be made for both sides.
Libya - False - Security Council Resolution #1970(as modified by #1973), and #1973.
Drone strikes in Yemen and Pakistan - Open to debate under the UN Charter, Article 51.

Seems that you are more incorrect than correct. Your batting average is only reaches 50% by including the debated areas as positives.

by law every US military intervention has been illegal...Bull, as I have shown above.

Sanctions against the Saudis? But, they are just fighting terrorists as you claim Russia often does...Fighting terrorism is supposed to be a good thing...I believe that you made that point earlier.

 

Actually, that was Rkline(#23) & Belasar(#24), then you chimed in with your list of US military interventions(#25), and I chimed in with Russian military interventions(#27).

Crimean Referendum? You mean that referendum they held while under control of Russian forces. Some might call that a "coup."

I think this is another article that you cite, but did not read.

You have confused statements from the article...

So, Breedlove stated that there were 40,000 soldiers on the border, when there were less than 30,000, and possibly less than 20,000.

and

So, Breedlove stated that there were 300-500, with NATO saying 1,000. Note, there is no mention from German intelligence as to the number they had.

Then again...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeWXs8fLC1I&index=1&list=PLGIldlPiHRX46kxTJAu3_eTzjfNCAB1mn
Putin does seem to revel in the fact that he controlled the whole thing.

 

Controlled "it" from when.?
After the NATO lead coup against Crimea's, elected, government.?
A coup participated in by the right-wing nut bag that will probably be our next president.
At least Trump, though he changes policy at random, has not spent the last few years demonizing Russia.

 

Could you at least get your conspiracy theories right...

Nah, he and Putin are to busy with their Bromance...

At least Mike Pence knows the score.

Hopefully, you do know who Mike Pence is.

 

Mike Pence.....
Didn't there use to be a big photo of his Father carrying a Peace Sign, at Stonewall in 1969, hanging at MOMA during one of those Mapplethorpe shows.?
Could be a different Pence.
I truly hope Trump wins.

 

Sorry for the delay. It would of seem that these islands have been claimed by China for quite some time. The reason this is making front page news is because huge gas deposits have been found in the area and China decided to finally do something about it. Right or wrong I do not see China giving them up. Also from my knowledge I havent heard anything about China not letting other nations to use the disputed waters for maritime trade....