It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

North Korea/USA Vs Russia

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2018 @ 08:07 AM
link   
a reply to: 3n19m470
All right. Fair question.
Getting more industrialised has made them more outgoing strategically. They will want to protect their communications with their sources of raw material and their trading partners. This gives them an interest in sea-power, and it's possible to see a sea-power arms race coming up similar to Britain and Germany in 1900. But since they are likely to be stubborn about protecting their trade, friendship might be a better way of coping with their global interests than hostility. Less likely to set up World War 3.

The big difference from Russia is that they are not really an expansionist state, in terms of territory. The reconquest of Tibet, the periodic "adjustment" of the Himalayan frontier, the refusal to accept the ultimate loss of Taiwan, are all about recovering traditional borders. We may also see an interest in recovering the traditional spheres of influence, in Indochina and Korea.
And their large investment in American debt is the best guarantee that they would not even want to see America destroyed. How would they get their money back?

The old Byzantine foreign policy (I got this from Toynbee) was "If you have barbarians on the frontier, make allies of the people living on the other side of them." Adopting this policy, it does make sense for Europeans to make friends with China over the heads of Russia (and for the Australians to make friends with China over the heads of Indonesia).
Perhaps it is more difficult for Americans to see a common enemy "between" America and China. I still think Russia fits the bill morally, if not quite geographically (except when Asia is approached over the North Pole).

Failing that, we might note that China also has troubles with Muslims.
And consider this; the apparent growth of Chinese interest westwards, into the Middle East, is actually cutting across and potentially frustrating the traditional Russian drive southwards. It is a version of the Russo-British "Great Game" of Victorian times. It was already beginning in the Sixties; "The Russians are close friends with India? Then we will be close friends with Pakistan." If Russian influence grows, especially if it spreads into Iran, we might yet see China giving substantial support to Israel. So there again, perhaps, America and China ought to be on the same side.










edit on 14-6-2018 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 09:09 AM
link   
Currently there are 4 tigers. The EU, China, Russia, America. Each of them has its own GPS constellation, its own in house defense industry.

If one becomes too powerful, the other three unite against it.
edit on 15-6-2018 by yomstrat because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2018 @ 09:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: TruthsSword
The change of name did nothing to change their spots.
They have been the aspirant "gendarmes of Europe" for two and a half centuries (three, if we count the foundations laid by Peter the Great), and making light of that permanent threat just shows ignorance of history.



And the empress of Russia, Catherine, was from Germany. What's your point? Russian claim on German land is the same as English claim on French land because English king was Plantagenet from France.
edit on 15-6-2018 by yomstrat because: (no reason given)



 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join