NATOs counterbalance?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Devil_Dog, Jun 15, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:


    The emergence and reinvention of this grouping should raise a red flag with western powers.Seems to me the world is on the verge of a new revamped better organised Warsaw Pact that not only has a majority of the worlds population within its borders but also a significant bulk of the world's energy supplies. The next logical step for the SCO would be closer economical ties and greater military cooperation.This at a time when it's key players China and Russia are awash in cash and it's perceived rival NATO is beset with internal divisions mainly the conduct of the Iraqi conflict.
    If I were to make a prediction I would say that unless NATO drastically changes course within the next ten years it will lose its dominant spot as the premier security group to this cartel of unaccountable nations.
  2. Even though I think the analyst is right and that Shanghai Co-operation Organisation will not prove to be a military threat to NATO in terms of a rival alliance, in the short term. The Americans dare I say it are worried about the rise of such organisations - so their application to join to the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation as observers, a status which China has and Russia soon apply for.

    He said the armed forces of member states "should, if needed, help neighbouring states block and possibly destroy large armed groups".

    Other than deterring NATO forces I dont really see the need for large scale interAsia war games.This exercises are obviously meant to synchronize an Asian response to a large scale conventional assault from the only organisation that has the capacity to carry out such an operation.Also the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation is more an agricultural organisation than anything.Pretty tame organisation compared to the SCO.
  4. To be honest both are only talk shops with the SCO only being cooler because you get to do 'out door activities' :wink:
    The only reason I mentioned the SAARC, is that if you look at the observer status list for the SCO - you have India, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Key members of the SAARC, while China has observer status in SAARC . The americans will never get observer status for SCO, so SAARC is the next best thing. Its the Northern Tier, all overagain!
  5. How long before the Chinese need more oil..? Or other low stock, high value assets for High Tech cultures..? Trade, or the stopping of trade, was one of the major reasons the Japs kicked off in 1941. The danger points come as oil stocks run down, which is increasingly going to be sooner rather than later.
  6. A multi-polar world can only be good for world peace and security.

    Single power hegemony only ever leads to irresponsible unilateralism, as we've just seen.
  7. NATO, isn't Tone and his Euroscroats getting rid of this Yank inspired mob and going to replace it by a Euro Army financed by the Massed Wealth of this ever increasing body.
  8. Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2006 7:23 am Post subject: Re: NATO's counterbalance?


    NATO, isn't Tone and his Euroscroats getting rid of this Yank inspired mob and going to replace it by a Euro Army financed by the Massed Wealth of this ever increasing body.

    Ive had this argument before but can Europe realistically replace NATO with an army that does not include the breadwinning abilities of the US? A unified Army that does not include the US will have only half its capabilities and ,(I could be wrong) half the funds it needs to operate at current levels.Best way forward would be to restructure NATO without getting rid of it and to reassess the threats posed by an ever dangerous Chinese menace that is moving closer to Russia which I suspect still harbours illusions of grandeur.
  9. I wuz being sarcastic. Onest
    Ya Yank knows how to win a Major war against a 'Formally' organized army.
  10. the above statement seems to be a bit too close to one of Clancey's plot lines for comfort (the Bear & the Dragon). I reckon that Russia should be wary of her possible big Eastern Allie. a couple of points from history:
    Russia & Hitlers Germany were allies up to 1941, when Germany launched a surprise attack on Russia.
    Russia & China have never seen eye to eye on a lot of things, I think I remember reading about boarder skirmishes between Russian & Chinese troops on more than one occasion & the two countries have feared each other for a lot longer than they have been friends.

    We should have got Russia fully into NATO before now. Lets do it now & offer them full membership before it is too late & this SCO thing really takes off.
    It would be a much better situation (thou still far from ideal) to have NATO with Russia as a full member in a stand-off with China than Russia & China together in a stand-off against NATO.
  11. It can only be a good thing. Can you imagine the technological
    advances of a new cold war, we'll be all living the life of Star trek. :eek:

    With all this tension and insecurity over natural recources I dono why
    Britain is not investing more in Hydrogen power.

    I mean hydrogen is taken from water, we have no shortage of that :eek:
    lots of hydrogen generators creatin electricty, even running vehicles

    This means no nasty nuclear waste plus no emissions.

    This kills to birds with one stone, no 3 headed babies and no greenies :eek:
  12. "no greenies "
    Ah someone eles who has suffered, The Curse of the Greenslime Empire.