Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

South China Sea: The Ignored powder keg?

page: 5
37
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 01:51 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


America had many allies on the European front and I'm not sure they would have the support of other countries as much this time around. France and Germany both seem to go against the US recently, Russia would likely be an enemy and not an ally and becoming involved in a conflict with China seems like a logistical nightmare, though I don't doubt the US resolve here. One handy ally will be India, going to need a lot of cannon fodder to take on the Chinese!




posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 02:28 AM
link   
These words always crack me up.

"The US calls for peace"

I hate that this is happening because the east needs cohesion. I'd love to think they were just fluffing their feathers a bit in case the west does start major conflicts. All are kind of saying they are ready to rumble.

I'd hate to see them actually start pounding on each other.

I also tend to think India is not the ally some think it is. They are notoriously neutral but I honestly believe that there are quite a few things that India is just not going to have our back on... things they should NOT have our back on though.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 02:33 AM
link   
reply to post by NotAnAspie
 


It's not a case of whether India will support the US or have it's back. It's a case of India among many in the region standing up to the Chinese themselves. For some reason people keep forgetting the fact that there are other countries in the region which are apposed to China's moves and have on their own moved to counter it.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 03:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by NotAnAspie
 


It's not a case of whether India will support the US or have it's back. It's a case of India among many in the region standing up to the Chinese themselves. For some reason people keep forgetting the fact that there are other countries in the region which are apposed to China's moves and have on their own moved to counter it.



When you say "moves" if you are talking solely about this territory stuff, I don't really see this as action. It's basically just show right now.

For all we know someone ever there is thinking some other country is going to strike against the US or Israel and really get something started and they are already mobilizing. What if this territory dispute was really just a cover to explain why they all look ready to go.

What if they are "ready to go" because of some rumor we know nothing about?

We don't really "know" anything at this point so how can we really take what India is saying as a "stand"... it could very well be more like a "lie"


If I was India, I would get ready too... look how close they are to Iran and look what's proceeding in the Zionist plot.

If I was india, I would totally be getting ready for all kinds of possible hell to break loose and if the US asked what I was doing I'd have no choice but to make up some excuse... or else look at them and say "well, US, it appears you and your cronies want to start WW3"

If ONLY political communication was that direct in real life.

I'm not ready to take military readiness over seemingly small isolated incidents as a stand against China that started with a small uninhabited island that's really not going to affect India either way.

It just doesn't quite have that feel to it.

Also... even if this issue WERE completely as it reads.... it still has little to do with India being our ally. Just because they are protecting their assets (so they say) that's no indication that India will actually tussle with China especially over any US interest. I think anyone who reads western loyalty into that is very hopeful. It also kind of sends a message that people in the US are actually concerned we will soon have to deal with China in global involvement and are counting their allies for a big ol grand slam and that's a rather unattractive perspective in my opinion. It also serves as pretty confusing equation if you consider that this information is entirely true. It means people BOTH believe the story, but still think China wants to start bigger problems as in WW3. If it's just a territory dispute that they are so engrossed in, do we really think they are the ones who are going to be starting WW3?

If you believe the story, they are all up in arms over an island and some fish, not starting war with the west.
...but if you are worried that no ones going to stand up to China, you must be talking about the upcoming globalization, because there are plenty of other powers that currently need someone standing up to them. Why does it have to be "standing up to China" that is a concern... unless being in debt makes you THAT uncomfortable. Do you believe BOTH interests are going down simultaneously? BOTH are true... not only does China want that little island but afterward they are going to come kick our ass. What are the chances BOTH are true at the very same time if it's no cover.

I mean really.... why are we so badly in need of an ally in the face of China?

If it's solely about Countries in THAT region standing up to China, then again... the term "ally" has very little to do with anything.

No matter how you slice it, this incident with India says nothing about their relationship with the US.
edit on 14-12-2012 by NotAnAspie because: (no reason given)





new topics

 
37
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join