China pushing their power

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
China is also attempting to assert more control over the south China Sea.
Perhaps THEY observed how Russia has been so bold and are acting before 2016 electioons...

Perhaps?
But I dont think there is anything much in coincidence

I have a feeling these countrys plan these things years out, maybe only months, but plan they do.

a reply to: cavtrooper7

Or china is pissed Russia played the card first, putting china into a forced position.

a reply to: paraphi

So the US has no right to support allies and friends in the region who are being bullied around by an unreasonable neighbor?

Us being the "supporter" and China the "bully" in your book….

Does the US "support" other nations like in the Middle East?

Destroying whole nations in order to save them. Then crying bully at some other country for hardly the same thing.

You play hypocrite all you want…

a reply to: Xcathdra

Yah, the Soviets and Nazis were bad… lets try to keep up, shall we?

]Nor did they when they occupied most of Europe as the USSR. Nor did they in Afghanistan.

But now its okay because NATO occupies those countries.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Interesting considering Russia never bothered with the UN when they invaded Ukraine and illegally occupied Crimea.

You mean like the US began bombing Syria after the mandate was vetoed three times in the UN? How about Yemen? The vaunted "coalition" of the proxy states run that by the UN either?

How about ongoing drone campaigns in numerous countries, all that with UN "approval"?

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Xcathdra

Yah, the Soviets and Nazis were bad… lets try to keep up, shall we?

]Nor did they when they occupied most of Europe as the USSR. Nor did they in Afghanistan.

But now its okay because NATO occupies those countries.

Let's get one thing straight.... NATO occupies absolutely nothing. These countries are merely member states of NATO. They have to supply a certain amount of troops to various endeavors and are required to spend a minimum on their military whilst also adhering to the NATO defense charter. There are some nations that are not member states but allow for NATO to operate from (NATO pays a nice fee to these countries) like Kazakhstan but they do not fall under NATO defense charter.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
China is also attempting to assert more control over the south China Sea.
Perhaps THEY observed how Russia has been so bold and are acting before 2016 electioons...
www.spacewar.com...

Haven't the Chinese being doing that for a little while? I feel like the other countries in Southeast and East Asia have been saying that about China for a while now. Do you mean that they are accelerating it?

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: intrptr
"Pushing it", huh? On those same little islands in their backyard?

The problem with China is that these Islands are not in their backyard, unless you have no grasp of geography.

These are China's claims in the South China Sea.

originally posted by: intrptr
The US complaining about regional stability… lol

As usual, some people are so quick to blame the US, like their view is meaningless. In fact everyone with a beach in proximity to the South China Sea is worried about China's unreasonable assertion that the whole sea is theirs. Anyone with half a brain can work it out (see map above).

Source of map image

While I am against all empire, China is basically just doing what growing powers do. The US does this. Russia has done this. Rome did this, etc ad infinitum.

It's important to remember that it was only really from about 1800 to 2000 that China lost its status as world superpower. They actually have a point when they say "we are only reasserting our influence over areas we already had influence or control." Read Taiwan, Tibet, etc. This doesn't make it necessarily right. Its important to realize that excepting the Japanese, a lot of China's losses in these areas were caused by the European and American powers in the 1800's and early 1900's. This is what caused the cause of the Emperor/Empress, as well as their power over most of Asia. So they may feel that they are just getting it back now.

If you don't believe it a large portion of countries in east and southeast Asia are considered "sinitic," meaning that going back to ancient times China exerted a strong influence on them, ranging from economic to linguistically. For example, both Korea and Japan got their original written languages from China. Japanese is still based on the ancient form of Chinese.

a reply to: Bearack

Let's get one thing straight.... NATO occupies absolutely nothing. These countries are merely member states of NATO

Yes empires always say that. Its what the "Pact" meant in Warsaw Pact as well. Organization, treaty, pact, all disguising the true intent.

Is that straight enough on your "ruler"?

It doesn't apply since an EEZ only came into existence after the founding of the UN. An eez secures resources in those areas to one nation however it still guarantees freedom of navigation.

China views an EEZ as sovereign territory when in reality its not. Trying to build islands won't work either as that issue was clarified long time ago.

This is why china went bonkers over the Philippines filing complaints with the UN. China views this as an internal issue to try and run it in their favor.

originally posted by: bullcat
Land grabbing, you mean like America did to Hawaii?

1. No I don't. Try to at least research some history before you fire from the hip.
2. Hawaii is totally off-topic.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Bearack

Let's get one thing straight.... NATO occupies absolutely nothing. These countries are merely member states of NATO

Yes empires always say that. Its what the "Pact" meant in Warsaw Pact as well. Organization, treaty, pact, all disguising the true intent.

Is that straight enough on your "ruler"?

Straight as a slinky..

Unlike nations like the Soviet Union and the Warsaw pact, the nations were signers of a defense agreement but more so forces to adhere to the Soviet charter. NATO was meant to protect nations from further expansionism of communism. NATO members asked to join to fall under the umbrella of protection. Article 5 of the charter basically states "an armed attack upon one...shall be considered an attack upon them all." which was meant as a deterrent for further aggression from states like Russia. Hence why EVERY (accept Belarus that is) Baltic nation begging to enter the alliance.

Other than Bosnia (which I didn't agree with mind you as this should have been a UN mission), what military action has NATO done?

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Bearack

Let's get one thing straight.... NATO occupies absolutely nothing. These countries are merely member states of NATO

Yes empires always say that. Its what the "Pact" meant in Warsaw Pact as well. Organization, treaty, pact, all disguising the true intent.

Come back to reality. 1956 and 1968 shows the essential difference: USSR sending tanks to support totalitarian Communist governments against domestic protest. And France left the NATO command for a while. What did the rest of NATO do? Nothing.

Who built the Berlin Wall? Why? Who was going from which side to the other? Who was shooting whom?

a reply to: mbkennel

What did the rest of NATO do? Nothing.

NATO "defended" western Europe. At that time the claim was defense from the Warsaw Pact invading 'Western' Germany. Guess what the Soviets used as an excuse for occupying the Warsaw Pact nations? To defend from NATO. They called their occupation an alliance too, just like NATO does now. They claimed they had permission to do this, just like NATO. The Warsaw pact disbanded, now NATO is filling the vacuum, to defend against Russia, as part of an alliance, with permission, blah, blah.…

The Soviets are gone dinkums, NATO is the Empire now.