China Ready To Use Military Force If US Violates Its Territorial Waters

a reply to: cavtrooper7

Pak milked, blackmailed and backstabbed the US on the Taliban and AQ issue.
It sheltered the fleeing AQ inside its borders.

The money that US gave to Pak to clean out AQ went mostly to military top wigs and their foreign accounts.

Obama was left with no other option than to use drones to kill off AQ sheltered inside Pak.

However, these drones also killed more than 100K civilians inside Pak.

It is a failure of US foreign policy which
a) abandoned Afghans after Soviet defeat with whole country in economic shambles
b) winked at Pak in creating Taliban inside Afghan in the 90s
c) did not do anything substantial against both Taliban and AQ until 911 happened.
d) even when it did something it did not prove to be long lasting. Now Obama wants to stay longer in Afghan.


In many a ways US foreign policy should be given a Nobel Prize for "obsessive stupidity" criteria.

a reply to: victor7

IIlustrating agin how they are our best pals.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: victor7

I don't think we worry alot about that since we pissed off MOST of our VALUABLE assets with our loser leader.We have droned the hell out of that place so any friends would be fair weather types only.

I dont think people who believe in BRICS can see the obvious problems they have. Russia has a track record of stabbing allies in the back when its convenient. The Indians despise the PAkistanis and would most likely if anything be neutral IF Russia or china started anything first. Remember defense pacts have conditions and usually one is If its to defend them defensively if they get attacked first. If it covered offensive operations there would be INDIANS in SYRIA but there arent.

ALso @Victor. Show me th e death counts of 100.000 dead due to drones in pakistan. death certificates. prove your numbers.

a reply to: yuppa


80,000 Pakistanis killed in US 'War on Terror': report

tribune.com.pk...

It added that one million people were killed in Iraq and 220,000 in Afghanistan as a result of the war.

originally posted by: victor7
a reply to: yuppa


80,000 Pakistanis killed in US 'War on Terror': report

tribune.com.pk...

It added that one million people were killed in Iraq and 220,000 in Afghanistan as a result of the war.

Ahh so no evidence then ok. One million didnt die in Iraq. thats numbers been debunked plenty of times. th e total in both wars was closer to 400k on BOTH SIDES thats Friendly fire/collatorral and Insurgents.

a reply to: yuppa

Remember defense pacts have conditions and usually one is If its to defend them defensively if they get attacked first. If it covered offensive operations there would be INDIANS in SYRIA but there arent.

May be Russians have not asked them yet.

Regarding defense pacts, according to wikipedia, both India and Russia will come into consultations at the time of war from a third party and decide upon a course of action. This can also mean that either side can back out of helping other as per own choosing.

I think Russia also has similar pact with Syria and what we are seeing today is action by Moscow after consulting with Assad, who also formally requested the help.

One Russian guy with contacts in Ru Armed forces back in 2012 told me that Russia will get involved in Syria if needed but would not do the same in Iran and be helpful only in diplomatic or economic sense to the Persians. Seems that information was true atleast regarding Syria.

Russia does not have formal military pact with China but under the cover, I think, they have more than a formal pact as they both know that if one goes down then another will go down much quicker.

China has already officially stated the military power, in its opinion, is not a solution to Syria. That pretty unambiguously suggests both Russia and US are in the wrong. I imagine this is more of a line for their domestic audience than anything - those special-governed states and Thaiwan might be amused if they suggested hostile resistance is a legitimate tool by an oppressed minority.

As for Russia-China - While I'm sure they have a quiet agreement about matters involving the U.S., they are geopolitical rivals and would likely rather weaken one another passively - assuming no benefit to the U.S. - than anything. You can see this uncomfortable shifting happen every time someone reaches out to India, whose partnership would definitely shift the balance of power definitively in one direction or another. Russia needs them as a hedge against China and China wants them to stop cooperating with Russia militarily, quite a bit. To say nothing of contested regions.

a reply to: victor7

Consultation only comes into play when one of the nations requests it. It is not a requirement.

a reply to: victor7

You left out the most important reason why the U.S. wanted to stop the Taliban. The Taliban stopped all the drug trade that was not controlled by them. The U.S. CIA is the biggest drug dealer in history. The Clinton's are ass deep in it.

U.S. Special forces were inside A-stan long before 9/11. Don't get me wrong, the Taliban sucks but they are a product of Pakistan ISI and A-stan is quickly being lost right back to them while the ANA are more worried about were they are going to rape their next boy then protecting anything from the Taliban.

If it was really about 9/11 and real terrorist Pakistan's military bases should have been turned into a sheet of glass.

a reply to: Patriotsrevenge

So the same reason Russia went into Afghanistan and lost?

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: Patriotsrevenge

Depends. With a bully in the backyards it's just a question of time that tensions rise, doesn't matter who we are up to perceive as the bully in this scenario though.

Dare to find out how bad the Chinese arsenal really is? Hmm...

We have a whole line of weapons nobody will ever know about till they have to be used and against China or Russia they would be used.

The Russians told them not to screw with the U.S. because they will be destroyed in 24 hours time. That is a huge statement coming from Russian Generals.

Once again Obama is only making matters worse by dragging his chicken feet. I wish someone would get through to him that being a wussy is not the way to make the Commies respect you.

thediplomat.com...

a reply to: Patriotsrevenge

That was an interesting read, thanks!

I would still disagree with you as we don't know about all the crap China has ready to use either. Let's ask the General if it would be that easy as well, if one was up to take out China and Russia at the same time.
Besides from that I would rather like to see such a statement myself before I recognize it as valid.

Russia and the US should have COMBINED forces after the cold war.
We both aren't too crazy about the chinese and Russia has vast unused minerals to be discovered but US tech and we need to rebuild our infrastructure along with industry if we are going to survive.
I think there was a book about Codominion a while back.

a reply to: cavtrooper7

Russia had multiple options to join NATO purposed on both sides when it was the USSR and after the cold war.

I am guessing that could be part of the problem now.

You are in the tent or outside.

Ha!!! US just entered the waters....and China did NOTHING

originally posted by: princeofpeace
Ha!!! US just entered the waters....and China did NOTHING

What else did you expect. China is all talk. They will never dare to touch the US, heck they wont even dare to attack Vietnam. One sanction from the US will collapse their economy.

a reply to: asen_y2k

Not to mention China doesn't have a leg to stand on when it comes to their sovereign water bs.

originally posted by: princeofpeace
One sanction from the US will collapse their economy.

Lol yeah right...

Nuff said.

a reply to: XyZeR

yup...

5 Myths About U.S. Government Debt