It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The New Great Game

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

+42 more 
posted on May, 24 2009 @ 05:50 PM
With all the has been going on in the Middle East and central Asia over the past few years. I've noticed that some members here at ATS are very well read and command a very good understanding of the situation. I've also noticed that many here do not. So You know me I'll try to bring it all together in one location.

So lets begin

Before 1991, the states of Central Asia were marginal backwaters, republics of the Soviet Union that played no major role in the Cold War relationship between the USSR and the United States, or in Soviet Union's relationship with the principal regional powers of Turkey, Iran, and China. But, in the 1990s, the dissolution of the Soviet Union coincided with the re-discovery of the energy resources of the Caspian Sea, attracting a range of international oil companies including American majors to the region. Eventually, the Caspian Basin became a point of tension in U.S.-Russian relations. In addition, Central Asia emerged as a zone of conflict. Violent clashes erupted between ethnic groups in the region's Ferghana Valley. Civil war in Tajikistan, in 1992-1997, became entangled with war in Afghanistan. Faltering political and economic reforms, and mounting social problems provided a fertile ground for the germination of radical groups, the infiltration of foreign Islamic networks, and the spawning of militant organizations like the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU). The IMU first sought to overthrow the government of President Islam Karimov in Uzbekistan, later espoused greater ambitions for the creation of an Islamic caliphate (state) across Central Asia, and eventually joined forces with the Taliban in Afghanistan. With the events of September 11, 2001 and their roots in the terrorist groups operating in Afghanistan, Central Asia came to the forefront of U.S. attention

(click to open player in new window)

The Great Game.

The Great Game was a term used for the strategic rivalry and conflict between the British Empire and the Russian Empire for supremacy in Central Asia.

The new Great Game

Crude oil, once seen as a wealth-creating blessing for mankind, is fast turning into the “devil’s tears”. The struggle to control the world’s remaining energy reserves increasingly culminates in bloody conflicts and the killing of innocent civilians, with the war in Iraq only being the latest example. In The New Great Game, Central Asia, known as the "black hole of the earth" for much of the last century. The Caspian Sea contains the world’s largest amount of untapped oil and gas resources. It is estimated that there might be as much as one hundred billion barrels of crude oil in the former Soviet republics of Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan alone.


The Taliban initially enjoyed enormous good will from Afghans weary of the corruption, brutality, and the incessant fighting of Mujahideen warlords. Two contrasting narratives explain the beginnings of the Taliban.[12] One is that the rape and murder of boys and girls from a family traveling to Kandahar or a similar outrage by Mujahideen bandits sparked Mullah Omar and his students to vow to rid Afghanistan of these criminals.[13] The other is that the Pakistan-based truck shipping mafia known as the "Afghanistan Transit Trade" and their allies in the Pakistan government, trained, armed, and financed the Taliban to clear the southern road across Afghanistan to the Central Asian Republics of extortionate bandit gangs.[14]

Alhough there is no evidence that the CIA directly supported the Taliban or Al Qaeda, some basis for military support of the Taliban was provided when, in the early 1980s, the CIA and the ISI (Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency) provided arms to Afghans resisting the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and the ISI assisted the process of gathering radical Muslims from around the world to fight against the Soviets. Osama Bin Laden was one of the key players in organizing training camps for the foreign Muslim volunteers. The U.S. poured funds and arms into Afghanistan, and "by 1987, 65,000 tons of U.S.-made weapons and ammunition a year were entering the war."[15]

Almost 70% of Afghanistan is controlled and ran by regional chieftains who don't care for the Taliban or the New Government. They were the ones who helped the US over throw the Taliban in the first place. They remembered when we helped them fight off the Soviets. So they returned the favor. The problem is that many of our generals and troops don't know that history and end up making new enemies of the ones who helped us in he first place. The same goes for Pakistani Tribal Chieftains they don't want the Taliban there either!

Pakistan tribe agrees to hand over Taliban

KHAR, Pakistan (AP) — A tribe in a Pakistani region where the military has fought insurgents has agreed to stop sheltering foreign fighters and hand over local Taliban leaders, authorities said. Pakistan has previously signed such pacts with tribes in its northwest regions bordering Afghanistan, and they tend to unravel.

But Monday's agreement in the Bajur tribal area came after the army said it had defeated insurgents there after six months of fighting. Bajur is a rumored hiding place of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden, and the offensive there has earned praise from American officials who are concerned that militants use Pakistan as a base from which to plan attacks in Afghanistan.

US sacks top military commander in Afghanistan

The top US military commander in Afghanistan was sacked today after both the Pentagon and the White House decided that “fresh thinking” was needed to win the war. General David McKiernan, who has spent just 11 months in charge of Nato forces in Afghanistan, will be replaced by Lieutenant-General Stanley McChrystal who previously led the special operations command and is credited with killing the leader of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Lieutenant-General David Rodriguez will be handed a new position of deputy commander of US forces in Afghanistan.

So instead of learning from our mistakes and making the changes needed to bring stability to the region. We do what is exactly the opposite of whats needed. We bring in a big gun so to speak and replace one General with another. I wonder if he understands the history? Who is the new guy?

General Stanley McChrystal

No one would have mentioned his name at all if President George W. Bush hadn't singled him out in public. Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, West Point '76, is not someone the Army likes to talk about. He isn't even listed in the directory at Fort Bragg, N.C., his home base. That's not because McChrystal has done anything wrong—quite the contrary, he's one of the Army's rising stars—but because he runs the most secretive force in the U.S. military. That is the Joint Special Operations Command, the snake-eating, slit-their-throats "black ops" guys who captured Saddam Hussein and targeted Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi.

Why is Central Asia so important?
I'll tell you it's not for peaceful means. It's a power grab. Nobody's hands are clean. All the powers that be have their hand in this mess. The US is just the most obvious.

Undoubtedly Central Asia's strategic importance in international affairs is growing. The rivalries among Russia, China, United States, Iran, India, and Pakistan not tomention the ever-changing pattern of relations among local states (five former Soviet republics and Afghanistan) make the region's importance obviously clear. Central Asia's strategic importance for Washington, Moscow, and Beijing varies with each nation s perception of its strategic interests. Washington focuses primarily on Central Asia as an important theater in the war on terrorism. Additionally, it is viewed as a theater where America might counter a revived Russia or China, or a place to blunt any extension of Iranian influence. Moscow and Beijing view the region as a vital locale for defending critical domestic interests. This asymmetry of interest is a major factor in the competition among states for influence in the region.


Oil and gas is the leading economic sector. Production of oil and gas condensate in Kazakhstan amounted to 67.2 million tons in 2007, an increase from 64.5 million tons in 2006. Kazakhstan exported 60.2 million tons of oil and gas condensate in 2007. Natural gas production in Kazakhstan in 2007 amounted to 16.6 billion cubic meters. Kazakhstan holds about 4 billion tons of proven recoverable oil reserves and 3 trillion cubic meters of gas. Industry analysts believe that planned expansion of oil production, coupled with the development of new fields, will enable the country to produce as much as 3 million barrels per day by 2015, lifting Kazakhstan into the ranks of the world's top 10 oil-producing nations. Kazakhstan's 2005 oil exports were valued at $17.4 billion, representing over 70% of overall exports. Major oil and gas fields and their recoverable oil reserves are Tengiz (7 billion barrels); Karachaganak (8 billion barrels and 1,350 billion cubic meters of natural gas); and Kashagan (7-9 billion barrels).

The Great Game Revisited

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 06:26 PM
reply to post by SLAYER69

I will support your attention and I will bring to you some of my findings, and joining discussions in this very nicely opened thread.

I fully agree that "The Great Game" has started to heat up - mostly under blackout in MSM (at least in my country) ... I see, that we are heading now fast to WW3, and decissions from it has already done.

I want to ask from you - shall we concentrate here to geopolitical facts, I mean Oil&Gas deals, summits, agreements and disagreements (1) - Or to signs of coming wars, threats, drills, military movements, diplomatic issues? (2)

Or even both... You open "Great Game" - So let us know what is your target for gathering information. I think you are after geopolitics, not every missile threat and angry statement... For those I think we should open thread called something like --- "The Signs Of Coming Great War" ???


Iran, Pakistan sign gas export deal - media

Putin warns outsiders over Ukraine

Or... (2)

Barack Obama pledges to keep U.S. 'dominance'

Iran general says could stop Israel in 'one strike'

... You get my point? - Issue is huge and urgent, and I am willing to co-operate.

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 06:40 PM
Good Morning/Afternoon,

To begin with i would like to thank you on a personal level for creating such a thread. I also was at a dead end at repeated post's which were obviously directed into enticing an area of the public without the publics knowledge on how such politics are performed and agreements between organizations without any direct implications on the political structure.

As this is thread has many resources that could be quoted but unfortunately the general public either does not care or has not been exposed into the mechanics of international politics and negotiations behind the scenes. If we are to embark on such a thread i do feel that it must be monitored heavily as there are obvious pitfalls involved. By monitoring i do not mean that it should not be available to the public but what content does go into the thread should be screened as to its validity and sources that are to be quoted.

If simple guidelines are enforced then i do feel that such a thread will gather its momentum and perhaps inform the viewers on how country's negotiate without any direct talks.

This is my opinion and my opinion alone, as i do not represent any person(s).


posted on May, 24 2009 @ 06:40 PM
reply to post by JanusFIN

Oh by all means it's a very wide and varied topic but one I think needs to be discussed frankly and openly.

In the end it's too important of a topic to simply let it die since the MSM doesn't think or doesn't want the masses to know.

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 07:05 PM
reply to post by JanusFIN

I found this very interesting in one of the links you provided.
I'm wondering if Pakistan and India would actually cooperate. India will be demanding much more oil over the next few decades much more than people realize.

Iran, which sits on the world's second-biggest gas reserves, imports roughly about as much gas as it exports. U.S. sanctions have been a factor hindering Tehran's export plans, which tries to become a major gas exporter.

An Iranian Oil Ministry official has said he hoped that the commencement of gas delivery would start five years after the contract was signed, adding both Iran and Pakistan would welcome India if it decided to join the project.

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 07:10 PM
reply to post by SLAYER69

I could not agree with you more, but i guess a time line would need to be established so as viewers can follow and keep track of events leading up to current events.

We are all aware that each nation has its own media source which represents the then political ideology as to promote its ideas and to transmit its intended moves without involving political binding decisions. As a previous post i had begun but allowed it to subside for personal reasons was to quote existing media sources which were an extension of political intentions.

In closing we or who ever would like to post here after should start or post a comment stating at which time line we should begin the introduction to this post. If we are to tackle the middle east then we should have some form of information or documentary in allowing the public to view what has been limited or not available in perhaps many other nations.

Also, if videos are to be used then they should be uploaded into the ats media section as to limit what in the near or distant future may or may not be available through media censorship as we have and are aware off as you tube is systematically applying.

Such a thread would require the cooperation of as there are videos which are obviously way above the allowed megabyte upload regulations. A prime example would be the following videos. I am always open to open minds as we are a product of our environment.

Google Video Link

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 07:22 PM
What I have learn from situation in "The Great Game" ... Situation today is this: SCO has challenged NATO, and that means China and Russia has alligned against USA, Israel and EU.

The Shanghai Cooperation Organization: Prospects For A Multipolar World

Worlds countries has to choose their sides - this developement begun in sad, but historical speach from George Bush "You are with us - or against us" ... That has bring us to situation, where the "...against us" - party has driven world to two different blocks.

In the others side there are Zionist Elite - "British Imperium" - Axis of Washington-London-Western Rome-Jerusalem ("You dont have to be Jew to be a Zionist) - and in other side there is "Eastern Elite" (Eastern Rome-Moscow-Beijing) Trophy of this "great game" is support from third ruling elite - muslim world. What has happened in recent years, is that fourth worlds ruling elite - Hindus - has openly taken side of Zionists (US), and the unbalance has started to heat up now in Indian-Pakistan situation.

I see that SCO (Eastern Elite) has been alarmed from maybe losing their influence in Great Game (Pakistan is most important ally of China), and if Iran gets under attack - there is a possibility that whole Muslim Elite is forced under Zionist forces... Thats why momentum to world war is raising again - and fast.

Caucasian triangles

My eyes are concentrating daily to Double Headed Eagle - Heart of new born Eastern Rome in mother Russia - and its decissions and signs from that very clever governance of Putin-Medvedev, which are driving multipolarism and strengtening country to be a superpower again. Alliance with China seems to be very tight, and together China and Russia owns majority of worlds wealth and resources - and manpower.

There is no question, that elite of Russia doesnt know what really happened in October Revolution (USSR) - murder of Czar was bad mistake from rulers from "british Imperium" at 1918, and has caused deep untrust between Elites in Europe. Russia is seeking its past - and has find out that Russia is the one who has unfairlt paid all the greatest sufferings from Zionist agenda - why would they trust bankers, their will in this new situation?

With support of China - Russia can seek their sovereign identity - its long history from Eastern Rome, and politics - And they have woken up to stand for multipolar future... By loosing support of Russia, Zionist goals (NWO) are threatened. I see that only obstacle for banksters to achieve their goals is Russia and its SCO members --- and every day will strenghten that alliance - which has openly now announced that greatest threat to Russias security is NATO and USA. (And China does agree with Russias point of views)

Medvedev Uses NATO Threat to Reform Military

What will happen in near future, I expect that Georgia will heat up to civil war, Iran will be invited to full SCO membership with Pakistan, and Syria will open common NAVY base with Russia. I think freemasonry will be outlawed in both countries: Russia and China - and all secret societies will be banned in SCO countries under the legistlation of anti-terrorism.

Medvedev invites Ahmadinejad to SCO summit

This progress will finally spark WW3.

I hope that I am wrong.

[edit on 24-5-2009 by JanusFIN]

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 07:37 PM
reply to post by SLAYER69

Like remembered, its only few months that was highly waited if tensions between India and Pakistan will flame to all out war. Pakistan was moving troops to its borders, India started to evacuate people from Pak --- I think we were in the close edge after Mumbai "False Flag" attacks.

And those tensions has not gone anywhere - but only thing what stop those ideas of new war, was Indian afraids from Pakistani missiles. Few months ago, after the crisis US offered Patriots to India - unfair Iron shield - and inside some huge pact including Nuke secrets, arms deals, and only god knows what - India has fallen more and more to banksters side.

U.S.-India to study missile defense system

India and the US talk missile defense

There is lots of rumors, (only rumors) that India is the force behind Taliban uprising in Pakistan - Soldiers are openly asking natural questions - "who is funding those extremists?" - and their eyes turns to India and USA... Destabilizing region is great concern - and something what Obama is willing to do. Drones above Pakistan has fuel situation to breaking point.

I dont believe that India is interrested from any co-operation with Pakistan - but to catch Balochistan under their banksters hands - and that is what China is most afraid too. This deal between Pakistan and Iran is huge news and sign, because those countries has stood in totally different sides before, because post 911 US-Musharraf politics --- Now Pakistan government is looking to its neighbour - and both countries are taking common steps to SCO.

In "great game" cooperation with Pakistan can offer for Iran a great nuclear armed ally - and Israels warnings from "time is running out" means really that when these governments will find each others - and Islamabad is again part of Islamic world - then nukes and dangerous latest armament will fall in hands of Muslim elites, threatening Zionist superiority in region.

Indian govt likely to move on US mily logistics pact
Indian Govt likely to move on U.S. military pact

[edit on 24-5-2009 by JanusFIN]

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 07:49 PM
reply to post by SLAYER69

WoW. Nice job on this thread Slayer!

That was some decent footage too, on that short video.

I'm not sure where to begin.

Today, is a really important day, because tomorrow can get really ugly, reall fast. This is no joke.
I'm really concerned. As you mentioned a revived China or Russia in the picture and we're talking a full blown WW3 scenario. Scary indeed.
Glad you pointed out the significance of this area. Crude oil (largest remaining source), pipelines (Caspian Sea) etc., the struggle to control it.
The strategies from different countries to gain upper hand.......Russia already learned it's lesson here.
For the US, it was one of the best wars fought.
The best wars won can be the ones you don't fight in. To win.
I wish we can lean more towards a similar strategy.
But the picture is alot different 2day than the early 80's.
There's obviuosly major interest in the area, from the Big Players.
(US, China, Russia)
The struggles and coflicts over this (geografical) region in the past few decades, also prove the conditioning, and difficulty of winning a war here.
It's the perfect environment (and breeding ground) for guerilla warfare, which we all know can last forever, as you can never win against.
I think it's why there's mostly SF units to monitor, occupy,and neutralize the area. Better intelligence gathering will (also) give major advantage.

Our administration has made it clear that there is major interest and strategy here in Afhganistan/Pakistan, and has put in a vintage SF candidate to run the show.
Personally, (McChrystral) is a better candidate for the job.
I hope he proves right.
However, Slayer you did bring up a good point on not learning from past mistakes. Did our administration jump the gun?
I think we're relying on Pakistan to play ball here. Really relying.
What if they don't? This is where it can start getting real ugly.
Can we trust Pakistan? Can we rely on them to win with Taliban?
DO THEY WANT to be in accordance with US?
Well, we heard what that guy had to say in the video with Pakistan's gvt. and the Taliban.
I mean, one thing that keeps bothering me is the simple fact that no other countries (besides) UK are involved here. I think (on our Administration's end) we could've made effort and request to get some help from other nations, afterall crude oil will benefit Eurpoean countires, as well.
Where's the UN nations?
If we had more help there, the job would be easier, bottom line.
Thing is, every country wants a piece of the pie. Seems US, UK are doing all the dirty work.
I am really curios, or worried rather into the financing of the Taliban.
If they become capable, of winning with Pakistan forces, this will prolong, and long and prolong some more.
We (US) are not financially stable to afford a prolonged war there.
If it gets ugly, we'll have to stretch ourselves even thinner. Spend billions more!
I think it's what China wants. And what Russia tasted, they want us to taste to. Sit back, then make a move when we're vulnerable, and broke.
Very scary.

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 08:20 PM

Originally posted by tristar
If simple guidelines are enforced then i do feel that such a thread will gather its momentum and perhaps inform the viewers on how country's negotiate without any direct talks.

This is my opinion and my opinion alone, as i do not represent any person(s).

Great suggestion.
What exactly do you recommend?

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 08:27 PM
Let's not forget that China has interests within the area itself.

Somewhere beneath the valley’s floor lies one of the world’s biggest untapped copper deposits, estimated to be worth up to $88_billion (£44 billion) – more than double Afghanistan’s entire gross domestic product (GDP) in 2007. In November, a 30-year lease was sold to the China Metallurgical Group for $3 billion, making it the biggest foreign investment and private business venture in Afghanistan’s history. Last week the Afghan Government approved the contract, clearing the way for the revival of an industry that dates back to Alexander the Great.

That is a lot of money.

Then there is the possibility that the Taliban may be getting some of there funding and weapons from Russia and China, along with rich Arabs sympathetic to there cause.

Shahzada Zulfikar, a Quetta-based political analyst, said Taliban commanders continue to receive support from Pakistan¡s powerful and secretive intelligence agencies, as they did openly during the time of the Taliban government.

"Pakistan ditched the Taliban due to American pressure, for a while, but now there are fears that their relationship might be restored."

While Pakistan still provides a safe haven for the anti-government Afghan fighters as it did when the Mujahedin were fighting the Russians, there is now a new twist to the Great Game. The Russians, it appears, are on the same side, not on the receiving end.

That article is an older one but it does bring up the possibility.

Then there is the natural resources of the area; not just the ones we want.

=34928&cHash=39d6075765]Gems, Timber and Jiziya: Pakistan's Taliban Harness Resources to Fund Jihad

The Taliban resurgence in Pakistan’s lawless provinces and its unhindered march towards the heartland of the restive country is fueled by an ever increasing economic life-line. Unlike Afghanistan’s Taliban, which depends on the poppy trade for revenues, the robustness of the Pakistan Taliban’s financial strength depends on a variety of sources, ranging from the timber trade, precious stone mining and now, the imposition of a religious/protection tax collected from minority religious communities.

I would like to know what role Iran is playing in this as well. Information isn't that easy to come by but they have to be smuggling weapons and material goods for both Afghanistan and Pakistan through there.

Elements in the Iranian state are sending weapons across the border to the Taleban in Afghanistan, a BBC investigation has uncovered.

Taleban members said they had received Iranian-made arms from elements in the Iranian state and from smugglers.

Then there is all the former Soviet Republics , which are mostly Muslim nations. Many of their nationals have been found amongst the dead after battles. Many of these soldiers have been fighting Jihad since the 90's in the Balkans and some even in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation.

And the biggest elephant in the room is Pakistans Nuclear Arsenal. I don't believe we are getting a true account of the Pakistani War right now. If any of those nukes fall into Taliban or other groups hands, the entire playing field is altered.


The link to the Jamestown article won't link directly. Just Google some of the text in the article, it'll be the first hit.

[edit on 24-5-2009 by GAOTU789]

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 08:41 PM
reply to post by GAOTU789

Great point.
BATTLE FOR OIL investigates the new world geopolitics that is emerging around the needs of both the world's leading superpower and the world's fastest growing economy to secure future supplies of oil.

Part 1 of 7

If you haven't seen them already I have all of them uploaded to the media section

(click to open player in new window)

[edit on 24-5-2009 by SLAYER69]

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 08:45 PM
... Like Ive posted earlier Indias moving to alliance with US - this interesting breaking news article gives us a hint maybe why!

China bigger threat than Pakistan: India

NEW DELHI: India faces a greater threat from China than Pakistan because New Delhi knows little about Beijing’s combat capabilities, India’s air force chief told a newspaper in an interview published on Sunday.

The world’s two most populous nations fought a brief but brutal war over their 3,500 km (Himalayan border in 1962, and both sides claim the other is occupying big but largely uninhabited chunks of their territory.

India has also been pursuing closer relations with the United States, something that worries China.

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 08:50 PM

As i am not able to know if and when you viewed the video i provided. It shows the fundamentals of how society was formed to embody an ideology of when it was only at an infant stage. If we fast forward into time we now see the results of what was sculptured and injected into every aspect of society.

We have countless examples of its results as this was thought out and executed just like a military battle. People often are ignorant into the mechanism's that are employed to attain such a level of consent that they do not pose any threat at this time nor in the future.

As i stated, if such a thread was to be established then it does need to be accurately time lined into world events so as the viewer(s) can have a understanding of the current world issues. By posting random quotes and inserting texts from various non affiliated political institutions that do not represent the political intentions of an existing government seems to be defying the actual intentions of creating such a thread.

If we are to embark on such a thread then one must have quotes form sites that are directly associate with current political administration regardless of which country they are originating from. Such a thread would perhaps shed a small fraction on how the intelligence community interacts throughout the world and allow viewers to have an insight into what has and never will be fully disclosed of obvious reasons.

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 09:03 PM
The consolidation of all that information is welcome. I only question some generalizations based on past history.

Much of what's being claimed is based on premises that aren't automatically solid or immutable.

Alliances may have been formed at times in the past, but the world turns. How Russia relates to China may be true on issues such as resources or defense as needed, but they're subject to change. China may welcome an alliance with Russia for the purposes of exporting oil, but not on their incompatible aspiratons with, say, Iran.

Also, the old notion of Western powers moving in on less developed countries for their resources is based on a colonial model of the past. Countries don't want colonies as they once did. Too many problems in costs of administration and managing infrastructures, as well as security.

Better to strike a deal with a co-operative and compliant autonomous regime than to take over a whole country.

The oil is there, and it will be for sale, no matter who is running the show.

The default perception is a rather simplistic Russia, China, Iran, etc against a solid alliance of the US and Europe. But there are separate arrangements made between countries over resources and other issues. And they are subject to change at any time.

It's not just about bringing down the West and the rise of an alternative axis.
The West has the buying power, now, and for the foreseeable future. They catch a cold, the rest of the world gets pneumonia.

The US could conceivably strike a deal with Iran in the near future - if there's a more rational regime in place. They have common interests and both have differences with Russia. China too has less to gain allied on all fronts with Russia, than it seems. Russia has oil, but is also still virtually a third world nation economically. With American's distanced from China and importing it's goods more from alternative developing countries, there's no more Chinese awakening.

It's all complex and perpetually shifting. There aren't competing in a sports playoff. It's not a gang turf war. It's more about mutually beneficial often temporary alliances that teams and loyalties.


[edit on 25-5-2009 by mmiichael]

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 09:13 PM
Slayer, you have some good info and for the most part I agree with your conclusions.

Personally, I always thought the great game, as you call it, was between the US/NATO and Russia.

Russia went into Afghanistan, the US sent stingers( gave them to pakistan who got them to Afghans) to shoot down the big Russian helicopters/jets.
(his was done mainly to cause issues for Russia, not to help the people who were being attacked/repressed)
(I think a good deal of payback to this is involved in Russia's assisting Iran with nuclear technology)
(whatever they can do to screw the west...)

To be honest, I don't think the US really cares who is in charge in Afghanistan, as long as they "play ball" with us.

To be honest, I don't think we really care who runs what country, as long as they "play ball" with us.

My reply lacks all your research and is only my opinion, based on your facts as well as other sources.

[edit on 5/24/2009 by mrmonsoon]

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 09:35 PM
reply to post by mrmonsoon

I think mmiichael has expressed the partial answer. Relationships change what was the "Great Game" during the cold war is very different than what we currently are seeing. Alliances do change and similar interest are found now between formal rivals,

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 09:36 PM
Well on the side note of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, there is speculation as to whether or not if they might be expanding their program as of lately. Pakistan seems to be denying it while reports from DoD satellites say otherwise.

Satellites Expose Pakistan Arsenal Expansion

WASHINGTON: Satellite images issued yesterday show Pakistan has expanded two sites crucial to its nuclear program, as part of an effort to bolster the destructive power of its atomic arsenal, according to a US arms control institute report.

The images show a big expansion near Dera Ghazi Khan of a chemical plant complex that produces uranium hexafluoride and uranium metal, materials used to produce nuclear weapons, Institute for Science and International Security analysts said.

And at a site near Rawalpindi, photos suggest Pakistan had "added a second plutonium separation plant adjacent to the old one", according to the report.

It also says Pakistan has been building two new plutonium production reactors in recent years.

Pakistan Denies Expansion of Nuclear Arsenal

ISLAMABAD - Pakistan is denying U.S. claims that it's expanding its nuclear arsenal.

At a congressional hearing last week, the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff said there is evidence Pakistan is adding to its nuclear weapons systems and warheads.

A growing insurgency linked to al-Qaida and the Taliban is raising fears militants might get hold of Pakistan's nuclear weapons or material.

Pakistan's information minister, however, says his country doesn't need to expand its arsenal, but will "maintain a minimum nuclear deterrence" needed for its defense and stability.

He also assured the international community his nation's arsenal is safe, saying, "No one, no matter how powerful and influential" will succeed in capturing the weapons.

Meanwhile with American foreign policy being to send overseas funding to other nations like Pakistan, H. Clinton is claiming that the funding we send them will not go towards expanding Pakistan's arsenal of nuclear weapons.

US Claims aid won't go to Pakistani Nuclear Program

The U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs on Wednesday approved tripling U.S. economic aid to Pakistan to about $1.5 billion a year for each of the next five years, including money for Pakistani schools, the judicial system, parliament and law enforcement agencies.

The legislation, which will now go to the House floor and would ultimately have to be reconciled with a similar Senate bill, also authorized $400 million in annual military aid for the next five years.

"We are very clear, very firm and quite convinced that none of our aid will in any way affect the efforts of Pakistan regarding their nuclear stockpile," Clinton told U.S. lawmakers without saying whether Pakistan is expanding its arsenal.

"We are absolutely committed not to seeing any diversion of our money," she added.

However note that we are sending $400 million of that will be military aid which could qualify in my mind and the minds of others as potential for being used as funding for nuclear arsenal expansion.

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 09:46 PM
reply to post by spec_ops_wannabe

d-*#d3*#0D has no* such information in respect to what your saying and you can* take that to the bank.

oops edited not for no *, can *

[edit on 24-5-2009 by tristar]

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 09:47 PM

Originally posted by mrmonsoon

I always thought the great game, as you call it, was between the US/NATO and Russia.

Russia went into Afghanistan, the US sent stingers

[..] done mainly to cause issues for Russia

(I think a good deal of payback to this is involved in Russia's assisting Iran with nuclear technology)

[..] I don't think we really care who runs what country, as long as they "play ball" with us.

I agree on this very much.

As the Communist alternative to Capitalism, Russia drew much of it's image and prestige with struggling parts of the world.

We saw brief alliances with the West as Germany rose, and after the break-up of the Soviet Union Russia and the US kissed and made up.

Putin and his generation felt a slap in the face when the US started treating them as a has been power. The Russians still want respect - a sign of great insecurity. They lack the military might but can still make things uncomfortable for the US. Something they enjoy doing.

You are also right on the money about major powers being more concerned about compliance with new regime as opposed to ideology. A lunatic military dictator is as good or bad as a democratically elected socialist government.

The Chinese look at everyone, Russians, Americans, Europe, as a world constantly steeped in adversarial struggles. Relationships are formed with them out of necessity. But the Chinese take a longer term view. If the West and the Russian polarized axis annihilate each other somehow, they are there to pick up the pieces afterward.

China neither loves nor hates the Russians or Americans, they're just waiting to see what happens.


top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in