It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
Under what situations would Russia actually assist China in the invasion?
posted by Justin Oldham
1. The UN SecGen is the former President of South Korea. He may fear the PLA won't stop at the DMZ. He may pick up the phone and call Washington.
2. Members of the UN may not like the unilateral 'style' of PRC activity. this could present the US President with an opportunity to justify past American activities by getting on board the "bash China" bandwagon.
3. Concerns over human rights abuses may spark US anti-China rhetoric. Calls from Korean-Americans may escalate this diplomatic mud-slinging.
4. Existing US policy for the region may seem to dictate an immediate response.
5. If fleeing elements of the DPRK (North Korea) government were to end up in South Korea, they could ask for help to repel the Chinese invasion. this may spark a move on the part of South Korea to open its borders to refugees, which may risk a military clash with PLA forces.
6. If the Western media takes a dim view of America's "wait and see" attitude, international opinion could shift against China . . which might result in swift levying of sanctions by any number of non-combatant nations. this would force a US response of some kind.
7. U.S. forces in the region may be unintentionally affected by the PLA's movements into the DPRK. a) ECM may prevent surveillance. b) ASW may damage US vessels in the region. c) Possible FoF mistakes by DPRK naval units.
posted by sweatmonicaIdo
donwhite, The USSR was no paper tiger. It was not an overestimation by anyone. The USSR was as powerful as it was perceived to be, maybe even more powerful. It does not the CIA to figure that out. [Edited by Don W]
Originally posted by donwhite
Au contraire! If you ignore the 30,000 or so atomic bombs and the Red Army massed infantry and large number of tanks, the USSR could not “whip” the mountain men of Afghanistan. The USSR would never let ordinary tourists off the Intourist trails because, 50 km (30 miles) away it was only dirt say mud and gravel roads. The only land connection with the far east of the USSR was by the Trans-Siberian RR which was single track most of the way. Upwards of 14 days to traverse, if it did not snow. Since Ivan the Terrible its neighbors have thwarted its need for a warm water port onto the world’s oceans. Today’s Baltic Sea port of Kaliningrad - old German Konigsberg - is landlocked from the RF and either Belarus or Lithuania must be crossed to get to it. The Baltic Sea can be closed by a gunboat at the Straits of Denmark, which is not as wide as the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf. I’m not “knocking” the Russians, but I’m not giving them any credit they do not deserve. Fortunately, from Kruschev onward, no Soviet leader wanted to see his country annihilated and so, we never had that dooms-day nuclear exchange so many of us worried about for so long. The USSR a super-power? No way.
posted by sweatmonicaIdo
The question came to me today when I was looking on Wikipedia and discovered Peace Mission 2005. It was the first time the Peoples Republic of China and the Russian Federation actually participated in a joint military exercise. Let me point out how much things have changed in the last 20 years. It’s bewildering at times to actually look at the situation and think about it. 20 years ago, China and the USSR were the worst of enemies. [Edited by Don W]
But in 2007, 16 years after the Soviet Union died, we see a completely different world. The U.S. being the lone superpower, finds that friends are difficult to come by, but China, the country that once shared America's deep hostility with the USSR, is now a potential superpower as well as a potential enemy. The once-hostile superior, Russia, is now the best friend China could ever ask for. My my, things have indeed changed so much.
I ask has the fortunes of the U.S. gotten any better despite defeating the USSR? Being the lone superpower has its benefits, but it is also a curse, as we end up being responsible for just about all the happenings in the rest of the world. The country we once thought was gone for good, has only taken a different, albeit significantly weaker, form but can still dance with the big boys if necessary.
“ . . Peace Mission 2005 could test if Chinese and Russian forces could [work together to] stabilize North Korea in case of a leadership collapse in Pyongyang. If so, that means the North Korea problem may require further heartache and sacrifice from my country. Depends on how one looks at it.
I concede that America's Cold War survival was not the victory as we popularly see it, I still would not want it any other way. It is just that we are simply facing some troubling challenges and it is not clear how we will respond to them. [Edited by Don W]
posted by sweatmonicaIdo
posted by donwhite
Au contraire! The USSR a super-power? No way.
The U.S. lost in Vietnam. Does that mean the U.S. is not a superpower?
[Edited by Don W]
The USSR was very much a superpower . . many military experts would tell you the Soviets would have handed our asses to us if it came to that.