51 responses so far ↓

• Ron

  Dec 20, 2009 at 7:00 am

  

  As for “reductions” first have the west completely de-industrialize in third world nation status, and then let them talk about “reductions”. When the west polluted while they were industrializing it was alright as it was only white man’s burden to do so. They are not coming from an even playing field. It is the same old imperialism, keep the third world (naturally non-whites) so that that the white man will be able to reign on planet earth and fulfill his burden until he dies out of course. Many corrupt third world leaders are going along with same program due to graft, regardless of the best interests of their people.

  A weakened China is not happening any time soon. As for India LOL you have to be kidding me. India cannot even deal with China’s puppet state of pakistan. India is not a major world power at all.

  No not some chinese, most chinese are living far better than how they had before. China was not even industrialized at all, until deng xaiopeng’s reforms. It was the definition of third world. During the 90s and this decade china has built up a lot more infrastructure and facilities to even make it more industrial. The purchasing power of the yuan will increase once the yuan is allowed to float, China doesn’t necessarily need the US. China is buying worthless treasuries now so that they can obtain the technology and expertise from the US to better improve their products. What is the US getting out of the relationship? Nothing. In fact the US standard of living has decreased dramatically in real terms, only to be subsidized by a ponzi credit bubble.

  As for “human rights”, well until westerners give repatriations to the the native americans and reparations to the blacks they have no business in talking about “human rights” Not to mention all of their imperialistic activities around the world.

  It is not just the horn of africa, there are also other parts in the south that china is building up in addition to se asia. Tribal groups can be controlled, the western imperialists pre-ww2 proved this. Of course post-ww2 the new westerern imperialists under america’s command proved to be incompetent naturally. All americans know about imperialism is genociding the native peoples and enslaving blacks, much less knowing about how to actually control far-away populations and keep them appeased in order to use them in a geopolitical strategic game.

  As for war with china, a direct nuclear war is not going to happen. Do you think obama or gates is going to risk the nuclear annihilation of at least populated areas in california and new york? I’m sorry to tell you, but the pentagon is not that competent. They cannot even control iraq or afghanistan. They couldn’t defeat vietnam, korea and now pakistan. Sure they have better technology for now, but that technology is scattered across the globe, underused and there is also much lower troop morale for the US. If the us could not even win mere proxy wars with china, it can’t be expected to win a direct war.

  As for russia, well russia has their own agenda right now they are only working with the west. They know who is in charge. Which nation has the world reserve currency again? The US. Putin is ex-kgb they have had long term goals for non-western supremacy in the world. In fact if russia were to get involved at a time when the US was fighting a civil war against its own citizens and a pacific war in china it would give them just the distraction to take out the US once and for all. China wants the asia-pacifc rim, oceania and south asia. Russia wants Europe, Central Asia and much of the middle east. These have been longterm goals for Russia. Anyway China doesn’t even need Russia for national defense, it can handle itself.

  As for gordon chang and his followers, they are more likely to see civil war in the US first after the dollar collapses. Do you think that Joe Schmo is going to enjoy not being able to afford his xbox or his flat screen tv anymore? No. The dollar is what gives the defense department its outrageous spending capacity. Once the dollar goes, so goes the spending. Americans have been proven to be terribly inefficient in any kind of spending post-1971 after the abandoned the american system of economics and replaced it with the chicago school/montearist/keynesian unproductive chimera. Both the Chinese and the russians have done more with a lot less funding. The US cannot even handle insurgents in iraq.