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.

 

Battle of the Titans: The New Great Game II

page: 1
19
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 03:25 PM
link   
Well the Games alive and active in Central Asia. We have Obama warning the American people the other day about No Victory in Afghanistan. The global powers are positioning themselves to be players in the New Great Game


Kyrgyzstan: At the Crossroad of Empires, a Mouse Struts

BISHKEK, Kyrgyzstan — The first high-level customers to arrive at this stop on the Silk Road in July were two of Vladimir V. Putin’s confidants. Got some land for stationing Russian troops — say, something with a nice long runway? Soon after, a senior American diplomat dropped by. Can we put the final touches on that deal to keep our own military base here? (Oh, and by the way, anything else we can do for

ON THE GROUND A KC-135 tanker plane at Manas Transit Center, once called a “base.”

Kyrgyzstan, a mountainous nation in Central Asia that has long been a contender for the title of most obscure former Soviet republic, has suddenly become prime real estate, like a once-homely neighborhood that all the A-listers now covet.

Its unexpected emergence onto the international stage says much about how the war in nearby Afghanistan, the struggle for political influence in the former Soviet Union, and the competition to control Central Asia’s bountiful oil and gas reserves are reshaping priorities of the world’s military and economic titans.

The other major player in Central Asia is China, which is also wary of the spread of Muslim fundamentalism. The Chinese concerns were underscored in recent weeks by the uprising by Uighurs, a Muslim ethnic group, in the Chinese region that borders Central Asia. Chinese companies are also investing billions of dollars in Central Asia.

“Everyone, all these powers, have a vital interest in this region,” said Andrei V. Fedorov, an analyst at the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy in Moscow. “It is not just economic. It is also stability. If something goes wrong in Central Asia, it will hit everyone around — Pakistan, Afghanistan, China — and will have great repercussions.”



www.foxnews.com

President Obama has put securing Afghanistan near the top of his foreign policy agenda, but "victory" in the war-torn country isn't necessarily the United States' goal, he said Thursday in a TV interview.

"I'm always worried about using the word 'victory,' because, you know, it invokes this notion of Emperor Hirohito coming down and signing a surrender to MacArthur," Obama told ABC News.


Central Asia The oil reserves there shrink the gulf states to nothing. It will be the flash point of the future.

Undoubtedly Central Asia’s strategic importance in international affairs
is growing. The rivalries among Russia, China, United States, Iran, India,
and Pakistan not to mention 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.




If you look closely at the above map you will notice the surrounding countries. Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Russia, China, and Pakistan. Stay tuned this will become the international play ground.



Your comments?

Slay




posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 03:37 PM
link   
I completely agree Slayer S&F.

It just goes to show that the Great Game IS being played by multiple players and the winner will surely start to surface over the next couple of years.

This topic deserves more attention that we've been giving it. Obama as you said, keeps using rhetoric that leaves the door open for more troop enforcement in that part of the world, and prolonged tours of duty for your troops.

On a side note, I would love to see an actual "Great Game" forum in the works, I think alot of work that's done here could go there instead of War On Terrorism and such.

~Keeper



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Well the Sheople will wake up when in about 5 or 10 years when they see us still hunting the YAWN "Taliban" .

As far as a separate forum for the New Great Game.
Dont get your hopes up so far I've received only dead silence.




posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Yes, I think this has been in the works for quite a while.. although down the line I am wondering how this will play out if the push for "clean energy" keeps coming..

That keeps going through my mind, especially since everyday you hear about a new way to run xxx amt of miles extra with this and that clean alt. energy.

At this point, if anyone thinks we were really after sadaam h. or BL check yourself before you wreck yourself

Anyone up for a game of Axis and Allies? lol



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 03:56 PM
link   
What have I been saying?

Anybody?

Hm?

OK if you're not up on the situation check out the two links below in my signature. The ultimate goal is to stay in the region and be a player in The Great Game.

Central Asia is the new play ground and everybody wants a part of it. We will be there for Years possibly decades. Russia and China and the US will be the major players.



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 05:42 PM
link   
Thanks again, SLAYER69, for the continued topic/invite.


One thing that might save us to some extent (short of total regional military domination, which seems a pipe-dream to me at this point) is the fact that every major oil/gas producer in the region wants to DIVERSIFY its customers. For example, currently Iran's biggest customer for oil is JAPAN, not CHINA. They do not want to be controlled completely by Russia or China any more than they want to be controlled by the USA or the big Western oil majors. So they are trying to balance their customers. Pretty much every other oil/gas power in Central Asia and the Middle East has a similar policy, or would like to.

So...Rather than seeing China, Russia, or India as a new regional hegemon to replace the Western oil majors and their gov'ts, one could conceive of a multipolar petrochem policy becoming the defacto regional orthodoxy. This isn't is great for the USA as some other possible outcomes, and things won't be as cozy as in the old days, but its better than being squeezed out entirely.

Don't forget, also, as most of you are aware, the "proven" petroleum and natty-gas reserves of these various nations are wildly overstated and have been for decades. Additional exploration may bring new resources but we can't count on it for sure. Ominously for the US, a lot of the recent exploration in the region is being done by the state-owned Russian and Chinese petrogiants. The old Western oil majors ("the seven sisters") are dropping the ball. Although Western petrogiants still show up near the top of the Fortune 500, ahead of Gazprom or Sinopec, much of their stated income may be based on financial shenanagans or simply coasting on old glory and resting on their laurels. Not good.




[edit on 7/25/09 by silent thunder]



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 06:10 PM
link   
I am surprised you didn't include a discussion on Tajikistan. We've been there along with the French and Indian since 2001 and much of the Northern Alliance, who don't seem to get much press these days are Tajik.

I think this Game you postulate is more likely to be completely dominated by the United States with key roles being played by the Chinese and Russians and the Indians. Europe, Africa and the Middle East can probably come off the bench in key support roles. South America is just along for the ride.

Obama doesn't want to use Victory in Afghanistan because he doesn't want to have to come up with new excuse to justify the increased American presence in the region. If the average American realized that the Taliban had already been defeated, then they would start asking when the troops are going to come home.

We are there to stay...Forever. Or did everyone think something else was the desired outcome? Come home...for what...we're about to get some wives and start a family.

When I look at a map, I see that the borders of America have extended to the borders of China in the East. Any leader in History would have vomited in envy to see what has occured here.

I don't really know what Al Qaeda was, but whatever's left of it can only be considered pockets of light resistance at worst.



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by IDK88
 


Yeah I still have some more to add. Sorry for taking so long RL you know how it is.
I'm working on an addition.

Stay tuned.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 12:57 AM
link   



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 06:11 AM
link   
Good thread,i also agree about a new forum for all this.Much if not all of subjects to do with oil,terrorism,politics,finance are all linked together in some way or another.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 06:22 AM
link   
As we're discussing things going on in the real world, I'd say it's a bit simplistic to reduce things to country rivalries lie the US, Russia, China, etc.

The so-called enemies will play ball with each other depending on the "qui bono" principle - Who Benefits.

Right now there is jockeying among the oil companies to ladn exploration and exploitation rights. The US does not want Russia to try to take advantage of it's proximity and previous alliances to these break off former Soviet states.

Bringing in the 'stans into the Western sphere of influence is a mounting strategy. Offers of lucrative deals and kickbacks to unsophisticated regimes and opportunities for those wanting to take their place.

Notably little is written on who is in power in these countries and what are their goals. They are maturing form shot term grab the money and run policies to longer term goals.

Russia and China are really stretched this year financially and militarily. The US mammoth budget for arms and technology will play to in spades in this arena.




Mike



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael


As we're discussing things going on in the real world, I'd say it's a bit simplistic to reduce things to country rivalries lie the US, Russia, China, etc.



Excellent point...it is very important to remember that heavy competition in various forms takes place both within nations and between trans-national entities.

One fact to be aware of also is that in the West, the oil biz is basically run by COMPANIES. In the rising BRIC nations and elswhere, the new preferred model seems to be linking oil business with SOVEREIGN WEALTH FUNDS or other out-and-out governement-owned entities. So its not Shell or ExxonMobil versus some Chinese company...in essence, it is Shell versus CHINA ITSELF. The entry of Sovereign Wealth Entities into the game is a massively destabilizing move...how can a single company compete against an entire major nation?



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 12:43 AM
link   
thanks for this interesting thread. Someone posted an excellent thread on Khazakstan a while ago too. This sounds kind of similar.

Looks like all the big players know exactly what wealth these countries have under their grounds!!!

let the games commence!


Kazakhstan - The Most Important Country on Earth?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 27-7-2009 by grantbeed]



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 01:41 AM
link   
Some of you might find the following two articles from Asia Times interesting. In some ways I disagree with this author on certain aspects of his outlook and ideology (he has angered me in the past with some of his quite-pointedly anti-American articles), but this piece at least worth a quick look, and he does make a number of interesting points:

NEW GREAT GAME REVISITED, Part 1: Iran and Russia, scorpions in a bottle
Link:
www.atimes.com...

NEW GREAT GAME REVISITED, Part 2: Iran, China and the New Silk Road
Link:
www.atimes.com...



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 01:45 AM
link   
reply to post by silent thunder
 


Very good. Thanks for the links. Reading them now.



posted on Jul, 28 2009 @ 03:52 AM
link   


I think a congratulations is in order for all our New Great Game supporters maybe we caught somebodies attention!
Great work Everybody


The Great Game AND Battle of the Titans: The New Great Game II

Ambassador To Tajikistan Says U.S. Not Playing 'Great Game'


July 27, 2009
DUSHANBE -- U.S. Ambassador to Tajikistan Tracey Ann Jacobson denied that Washington is involved in a new "Great Game" in Central Asia with Russia or China, RFE/RL's Tajik Service reports.

Jacobson, who finishes her three years as ambassador in Dushanbe this month, told RFE/RL that she has read in the media about this "Great Game idea," but said "we are not playing any kind of game."



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 10:23 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 
The pieces are moving into place it seems that all three major powers are making their opening moves it will be interesting to see how this will play out considering the major push for alternative fuels.



posted on Jul, 30 2009 @ 09:40 PM
link   
Reminds me (unsettlingly) of the so-called "concert of Europe" that prevailed in the years between the Franco-Prussian war (early 1870s) and World War I (1914). This was the longest period of peace Europe had EVER known in its history at the time, and the Powers that Be thought they had it all figured out. What you had was a complex balance of bigger powers (The UK, France, Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Russia) and smaller ones (The Netherlands, Belgium, France, the Balkins, etc.). The image was one of extreme complexity and various balances of power like siniews that stretched from here to there.

In the days, various people argued that peace had prevailed for so long that war itself would never take place again, because the commercial ties would be too strong and a war would mean disaster to everyone. COMPLEXITY ITSELF was seen as a virtue and an antidote to a uni- or slightly-multipolar hegemonic setup.

Yeah, things were fine and dandy for 40 years or so...then you have World War I (arguably the most brutal and ridiculous war in history) set off by a hair-trigger...all that vaunted "complexity" that was supposed to be so great at preserving eternal peace turned out not to be well-packed insulatrion but rather bone-dry kindling, waiting for a single spark to erupt into a malestrom...



posted on Jul, 30 2009 @ 11:41 PM
link   



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 12:46 AM
link   
reply to post by IDK88
 


Well it begins.
Sad really. It was such a peaceful place. Oh well the game begins



new topics

top topics



 
19
<<   2 >>

log in

join