Forum Post: O-bomb-ya tries to dominate Asia
Posted 13 years ago on Nov. 12, 2011, 8:05 a.m. EST by bklynboy
(77)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
The US with 1000 bases around the world, spends money on war that takes away from the 99% to create jobs, lower taxes and save homes. He's on his way to a meeting in Bali with leaders of Vietnam, Australia, Myanmar, S. Korea, Japan, Taiwan, N. Zealand and others. He announced an expansion of a permanent huge military base in Australia for the US navy. More provocative US power projection in China's backyard, the next superpower to rival the US. What would Washington due if China called a summit in Columbia and announced a huge military base there? We already have large bases in Japan and Taiwan; rubbing China's nose in it.
Australia is a long way from China, and to be fair, China has been acting a bit obnoxious of late in the South China Sea. I mean, have a look at this map they're pushing researchers to use even in irrelevant publications ( http://www.nature.com/news/2011/111019/full/478293a.html ). If the Chinese government tried to push their "sea border" any further they'd need to mount wheels on their patrol boats! I'm not saying I approve of spending all this money - I don't want the U.S. starting some new, useless arms race - but the U.S. isn't really the one doing the provoking this time.
Everybody is looking after their interests. The US starts wars in the arc of instability to assure oil and resources (S. America, Africa and middle east wars) and China goes in without firing a shot and partners with countries around the world and extracts resources for its economy.
China has not been pure about these things either - consider some of their entanglements in Sudan ( http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/our-work/crimes-against-humanity/stop-arms-to-sudan/the-facts-chinas-arms-sales-to-sudan/ http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/2011/06/03/china-key-to-stopping-civilian-bloodshed-in-sudan/ ). That said, China's access to Sudan and South Sudan may have more to do with the U.S. embargo ( http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2011-09-20/China-US-South-Sudan-oil/50484994/1 ) and peaceful aid ( http://www.sudantribune.com/China-grants-South-Sudan-31-5-mln,40523 ) than with any military schemes.
An isolated instance. For the most part, they get all the benefits without war costs.
Well, just searching quickly...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norinco
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/03/26/switching-sides-pakistan-expands-arms-allegiance-china/
http://www.asiapacificms.com/articles/myanmar_chinese_connection/
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/army-chief-says-chinese-troops-present-in-pok/190536-3.html
http://www.pakalertpress.com/2011/01/18/chinese-troops-deploying-in-north-korea/
Obviously the Chinese don't presently have the kind of money to burn on transporting troops halfway around the world like the U.S., but they're not above such tactics. In time their currency is becoming far more valuable even as their incomes (and taxes) increase by heavy "inflation" - we can count on more visible interventions in the future.
That's an eye opener. Stay tuned.
[Removed]
There are truly psychos running the world.