Pentagon refocusses on Russia and China

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by Kneza_Milosa_29, Feb 10, 2007.

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:

  1. Yesterday, local daily newspaper here in Belgrad contained article about refocussing of US military's attention away from so called "War on Terror" operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and taking longer view that Russia and China are real threats.

    The first 'premise' behind story is that US military, with Robert Gates' agreement (or vice-verca) has given up on GWOT, Iraq and Afghanistan as 'unwinnable' and just getting out as soon as possible is recommended. Then, as Middle East security deteriorates due to (lack of) security in Iraq, China and Russia start to exert their influence - in competition with US - to secure oil reserves and supply.

    Second 'premise' is that both Russia and China see that US 'single superpower' status has been severly damaged by recent neo-conservative adventures. In effect, they see a 'power gap' has closed and that they feel they can now flex their mussels once again. Although the Whitehouse refuses to acknowledge this, a military is out of blocks and making preparations.

    Sorry, no internet link to the story, hence my summary.

    I now hear Putin has been unruffling some feathers in Munich.

    Any thoughts?
     
  2. The whole thing's a smokescreen. Look to South America, in particular Venezuela and north to Cuba.

    Castro's on the way. Chavez has oil, a democratic mandate, popular appeal and is snubbing the oil companies and spending the proceeds of the nation's wealth improving the lot of the people of Venezuela. That sort of scurrilous behaviour is an affront to capitalism - and will be seen as threatening to America's interests abroad. Expect trouble here.
     
  3. Hmm. China and Russia in cahoots? I doubt it - the Russkies see China as a place eyeing up Siberia and all of its resources - various low level engagements on the Sino - Sov border in the 60' and 70's etc.

    GWOT unwinnable and refocussing? USA always had its eye on both Russia and China.

    frenchperson, its a point of view its a point of view>

    Anyway, why are you in Belgrade - Crni Gora surely?
     
  4. Hard to justify F22, F35, DDG1000, Virginia SSN etc on the basis of fighting low-tech terrorists.
     
  5. The Sino-Soviet split was so obviously a fake. China has always been dependent on the Soviet Union/Russia's massive arms industry, and now both nations are leading the new SCO trade association/military alliance.
     
  6. http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/02/08/news/fighter.php
     
  7. Nonsense, the split was all too real in the 60's and 70's. The Bushies have fumbled the ball enough to drive them back into each other's arms. Twenty years ago the Chinese were dancing with us, ten years ago the Russians were. I'm sure the music won't stop anytime soon.
     
  8. Is there enough tinfoil and are there sufficient aluminium milliners?
     
  9. No it isn't and wasn't. You may as well say tha Chinas' nuclear weapons programme was dependent on a Chinese spy working in the US ERW programme. One was (allegedly) but it wasn't the be all and end all and

    the US Courts cleared him of the offence.

    Tinfoil hats on frenchperson
     
  10. Both nations have always been allies, Soviet trains were allowed through Chinese territory to supply the North Vietnamese. Had the US bombed the Chinese supply routes they would have prevailed easily.
     
  11. You appear to be the gullible one, for believing a bunch of Communist mass-murderers.
     
  12. No it proves that the USSR and China had a common aim - helping N Vietnam. Had the US bombed the Red River Dykes they would also have won by turning everyone in N Vietnam into a fish. However they limited their actions for many reasons.

    Oh and the USSR and China had nukes!
     
  13. Yes. And that destroys your argument rather, doesn't it.
     
  14. No. Having a common aim in one area of foreign policy doesn't make for an alliance. It makes for limited co-operation in that sphere. The reverse is also true; some alliances won't fully co-operate where individual members feel it detrimental to themselves.
     
  15. The US focus on Latin America is more of an incredulous double take. Chinese and Iranian 'technicians' abound in Cuba. Venezuela stocking up on Russian weaponry, Ortega back in power in Nicaragua etc, etc. Deja Vu!

    The main focus will be on China who are expanding their influence everywhere in an effort to monopolise oil and other raw materials to sustain their economic momentum, they'll soon be 'stabilising' Nigeria and operating a naval base out of South Africa's Simonstown. Russia, once again schmoozing India, threatening to cut off Europe's oil and gas supplies. A new, though infinitely more economically debilitating (for the USA), Cold War.

    It'll be quite interesting to see a new Asian alliance between a nuclear Japan, Vietnam and the USA with Europe twisting in the wind left to the tender economic mercies of the USSR err.. Russia.