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.
(visit the link for the full news article)
An arms race between the United States and China - reminiscent of the former Soviet Union Cold War - has already begun, a leading Australian academic says.
While Defence Minister Stephen Smith quickly ruled out a proposed US aircraft carrier battle group base near Perth, Australian National University (ANU) Associate Professor Ron Huisken said the fact the Americans were considering it was proof it was already locked in an arms race with rising superpower China.
Prof Huisken, attached to ANU's Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, told AAP on Thursday both nations were making military decisions exclusively to counter each other.
This was borne out in China's decision to build its own aircraft carrier fleet, and the US's increasing presence in the Asia-Pacific.
Originally posted by pacifier2012
Has begun.....??? Where have the reporters of this been hiding for the last 20 years.... in a hole?
This is another case of reporters being 20 years behind the public in actual knowledge
Originally posted by Haknow
Arab Spring". They will try it because, if they fail to break China apart, the Chinese will eventually surpass the US in military. economic and political might.
Originally posted by daaskapital
Originally posted by pacifier2012
Has begun.....??? Where have the reporters of this been hiding for the last 20 years.... in a hole?
This is another case of reporters being 20 years behind the public in actual knowledge
I agree. The Cold War may have 'ended' in the '90's, but it actually shifted elsewhere (now China, obviously).
Originally posted by Haknow
Good point - and for the most part, I agree with your analysis: the Chinese economy is artificially inflated.
Alas, this is also the case of the US and European economy, albeit through different routes (e.g. borrowing, financial speculation on inexistant or severly compromised financial products, the spread of toxic assets...etc).
What you have said of China is true for the US and the EU - their economies are bound to collapse as well.
But in my view, this sorry state of economic affairs makes a conflict more, not less, likely. After all, what better (for the victor) than a war to wipe the slate clean and start anew?
You derive your interpretation of this situation, it seems, form a traditional "supply-side"economics point of view; may I remind you this theory is based on more than a few assumption, few of which are actually realised in the real world. I wouldn't say it's irrelevant, but I certainly think it's limited as a way to understand the world and actual geopolitical dynamics.
Originally posted by rock427
Supply side economics is all based upon demand in a free market. It is the most efficient way, as well as the most sustainable economic model there is. You seem to almost be flirting with the idea that central planning has it right. I would disagree, as history has shown that central planning and fixed investment led growth always runs into a wall once credit diminishes and your left with a nonperforming loan problem. (debt)
Regards
edit on 2-8-2012 by rock427 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Haknow
There seems to be a misunderstanding here. What I said was that supply side economics rests on theoretical assumptions that are, in practice, never fully realized in the real world. Indeed, the idea of the free market itself is a theoretical construct which assumes an equality between players through comparative advantage, the absence of barriers to trade, the perfect correspondance between offer and demand - all of which do not exist in the real world.