US bears costs of Afghan war while China reaps the profits

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Skynet, Nov 18, 2009.

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. From The Times
    November 19, 2009
    Conern mounts as US bears costs of Afghan war while China reaps the profits

    Jeremy Page in Kabul

    Thirty miles south of Kabul there is a complex of blue and white bungalows, ringed by a blast-proof fence, that bears testament to the new Great Game in Central Asia.

    Inside, several hundred Chinese engineers are renovating the Aynak copper mine, rights to which were bought by the state-run Metallurgical Corporation of China (MCC) in 2007 for $3 billion.

    Outside, however, it is US troops from the 10th Mountain Division who keep the Taleban away from one of the world’s largest untapped copper deposits. To some, this is welcome co-operation between the US and China which, despite mutual suspicion, share an interest in ridding Afghanistan of militants and drugs.

    To others it shows how China is poised to profit from Afghanistan’s abundant natural resources, while the US expends hundreds of lives and billions of dollars on fighting the Taleban insurgents.

    The issue was thrust into the spotlight yesterday when Mohammad Ibrahim Adel, the Mining Minister, was accused of taking a $29 million bribe to award Aynak to MCC. Mr Adel denies taking bribes — which industry insiders say were offered by several bidders.
    More
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/Afghanistan/article6922395.ece?
     
  2. Is the alternative to have Chinese soldiers guarding the place? It'd be interesting to see just how the the PLA responded to a suicide bomber... :wink:
     
  3. This has been known about for 2 years
    Afghanistan has some seriously impressive mineral reserves that have long been known about.

    I believe it was mentioned right here on Arrse well over a year ago.
     
  4. Well, America was profiting whilst Britain was bearing the cost of war 68 years ago...
     
  5. Re-education?
     
  6. The US goes to war to make profit, screwing the invaded country over in providing equipment for its new military and in civil contracts.

    It is now stamping its foot at not being given the mining rights at knock down prices.

    The UK on the other hand goes to war because the US tell it to.

    When Afghans take bribes and non-US companies prosper it is evil. When US companies do the same it is all fair and square.

    I refuse to believe that any contract is awarded in this sh1t hole without someones palm being greased. I am pretty sure it is the same the world over.
     
  7. The US wanted the war in Afghanistan, did it expect to do it for free? Oh maybe that's why it involved every nation it could, so it could reduce the cost in money and lives. The US stated it wants democracy in Afghanistan...well its Afghanistan's democratic right to choose who they give mining rights too.
     
  8. Would that be the same America that dug us out of the poo and helped us win a war that just might have gone the other way??
     
  9. I was thinking more the obliteration of villages/goats/large groups of people associated with anyone stupid enough to take them on.
     
  10. Have you ever actually read a history of World War 2? By the time the Yanks stopped making as much cash as possible and joined in (not by choice either, you'd think they chose to go to war with Germany the way Yanks talk about their charge to our rescue), Britain was completely safe from German invasion and Germany had already begun the course to their defeat by invading the Soviet Union.
     
  11. 'Thought-work'. As in "Think I got him, but just to be on the safe side..."

    I keep telling you, folks. They're better at this than we are. They can plan 'long term interest of the nation' instead of just 'must get re-elected at all costs'. They're also a lot smarter and more capable than any of the media-friendly talking heads we send to Parliament.
     
  12. hardly a shocker....hence i have my investments and bonds tied up in china and east pacific funds....

    next
     
  13. This is how things work out in the world.

    More interesting question: Where did the money go?

    Philosophical question: Does China believe that offering inducements in order to secure contracts is wrong?

    Silly question: If the Chinese felt that their leaders were out of order on this one, what could they do about it?

    B
     
  14. My bet is it’s now all Swiss Francs and quietly sunning itself in the Caymans, in normal Karzai fashion.

    Philosophically… oooh, ow you’re talking. There can be a fine line in China between outright bribery and normal business relations that isn’t always obvious to Western eyes. Treating and hosting are just an accepted part of social life as is offering gifts. It’s a guanxi thing.

    Handing money over isn’t automatically considered bribery either, it’s all in how you do it and why. I can't say as how I've ever got a handle on the subtleties, so I just avoid it as far as is possible.

    Rather academic in this case: why would they feel that securing the necessary resources to give them a better life would be out of order?

    But, assuming they did ever feel their leaders were out of order, they‘d probably follow the traditional Chinese route of making their disagreement with the bloke in charge known. I think you could call it ‘dynamic tension’ between the people and state. :twisted:
     
  15. I take it you support Labour. Did you know that the US came out of WW2 2.5 times richer? The US never dug us out of the poo. Did you hear of the battle of Britain? That was the point at which Hitler decided that he could not invade the UK. This along with battles in North Africa showed Germany that invading us was not an option, oh yes and of course Hitlers mistake of invading Russia. This was before the US entered the war.

    It charged us for all the weaponary and supplies that it sent to us, which is reasonable (kind of like going to Sainsburies and buying food etc, do you say the supermarkets dug you out of a hole when they sell stuff to you? No of course not.). So all this they saved us crap..is exactly that..a big pile of doggy doo.

    The US also entered the war due to events at Pearl Harbour and Germany declaring war on it. It entered WW2 for its own reasons and not to save anyone or dig anyone out of a hole.
    I think it is safe to say that the outcome of WW2 would have been the same had the US not entered the war, however, had the US not entered it would have lasted a damn sight longer.