US Is Starting WW3 All By Herself!!

Judged:

1

Leonard 68 wrote:

<quoted text>
nope---China was lost and almost gone---hope was fading fast---the country was falling and was almost part of Japan and then wait, listen, what is it, it's Uncle Sam---the Americans are coming to the rescue, we are saved, we are saved, China is saved, God Bless America, China is saved

Judged:

1

1

Leonard 68 wrote:

<quoted text>
I partially agree. USA use to be isolationist until we were drawn into WWII by Japan. Since then we have been involved with the world. Our policy since WWII has been one of engagement.
You think if USA did not exist the world would be a utopian paradise? Hardly---one tragic example without the USA----China would no longer exist---as it totally would have been taken over by Japan per WWII so, don't hate us too much

Judged:

1

Leonard 68 wrote:

<quoted text>
well this is the meaning of dispute I guess, Japan and the Philippines saw the rocks as theirs---they really did---it wasn't some cruel trick---they really believed it was theirs but China really believed it was theirs hence the dispute,
I believe China had the weaker claim in both of these instances but many Chinese disagree so there you have it.

Judged:

1

Leonard 68 wrote:

<quoted text>
it was where most of the Al Qaeda training camps were as well as Bin Laden himself, the Taliban were harboring him and many Al Qaeda members---you know this

Leonard 68 wrote:

<quoted text>
nope---China was lost and almost gone---hope was fading fast---the country was falling and was almost part of Japan and then wait, listen, what is it, it's Uncle Sam---the Americans are coming to the rescue, we are saved, we are saved, China is saved, God Bless America, China is saved

old china wrote:

<quoted text>
I think as far as the Philippines are concerned they didn't have a claim at the same time China restated theirs after the Chinese Civil War. Their claim only came about recently when the Philippines changed their Constitution to accommodate it. So regardless of the strengths or weaknesses of the Chinese claim, the Chinese got their claim in first so win by default.
However, considering that the Chinese have demonstrated themselves to be very patient when dealing with these opportunists and haven't blown them out of the water as they might well have done considering that Chinese territory has been invaded. The Philippines, on the other hand and seemingly the Japanese have decided to up the stakes in the belief that their defence treaties with the USA will come to their rescue if they push the Chinese too far.
As for using the services of an arbitrator - the UN has clearly demonstrated that their decisions are not necessarily made on the basis of justice, morality etc but on the basis of political alliances and deals behind closed doors so the Chinese could expect no hope from that quarter.
China is obviously apprehensive about the prospect of engaging the USA in warfare because her military isn't strong enough. But conversely, the USA must be apprehensive about engaging China in warfare because, if for no other reason it would finish the USA economically and her society would no longer be the same regardless of whether China got desperate enough to use nukes. So what we now have, courtesy of the USA, is an arms race in the region as everybody ramps up their stock piles one side in fear of American objectives and the other side mistakenly seeing themselves as targets for China’s defence strategy.
Fear breeds fear and the USA are playing on that.

Leonard 68 wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes I know. We are drawing down our assets there. We will likely keep some bases there for many years.
I think Pakistan is the biggest problem in that region.
I could say more but...USA military folks I've talked to all, without exception, tell me Afghanistan is a hopeless country. They all say Iraq has lots of potential, etc. but that Afghanistan is hopeless.

Judged:

1

RayH wrote:

<quoted text>
That's the Hollywood version anyways. China did just fine holding off the Japs in their "China Quagmire" for 4 years before Pearl Harbor.

old china wrote:

<quoted text>
I think as far as the Philippines are concerned they didn't have a claim at the same time China restated theirs after the Chinese Civil War. Their claim only came about recently when the Philippines changed their Constitution to accommodate it. So regardless of the strengths or weaknesses of the Chinese claim, the Chinese got their claim in first so win by default.
However, considering that the Chinese have demonstrated themselves to be very patient when dealing with these opportunists and haven't blown them out of the water as they might well have done considering that Chinese territory has been invaded. The Philippines, on the other hand and seemingly the Japanese have decided to up the stakes in the belief that their defence treaties with the USA will come to their rescue if they push the Chinese too far.
As for using the services of an arbitrator - the UN has clearly demonstrated that their decisions are not necessarily made on the basis of justice, morality etc but on the basis of political alliances and deals behind closed doors so the Chinese could expect no hope from that quarter.
China is obviously apprehensive about the prospect of engaging the USA in warfare because her military isn't strong enough. But conversely, the USA must be apprehensive about engaging China in warfare because, if for no other reason it would finish the USA economically and her society would no longer be the same regardless of whether China got desperate enough to use nukes. So what we now have, courtesy of the USA, is an arms race in the region as everybody ramps up their stock piles one side in fear of American objectives and the other side mistakenly seeing themselves as targets for China’s defence strategy.
Fear breeds fear and the USA are playing on that.

old china wrote:

<quoted text>
Err, the attack came from one of your 'allies'(Egypt) and the evidence for Bin Laden being involved is pretty weak. Al Qaeda are an informal alliance of interested groups - the organisation, if there is such, doesn't run training camps. The Taliban might but they are a local organisation aren't they - not projecting themselves globally? As for Al Qaeda - that's like suggesting that A National Association of Plumbers exist to send you a skilled plumber when your tap is leaking.
So who, apart from the CIA, are bankrolling these people you call terrorists and what are you doing about them?

RayH wrote:

<quoted text>
Those Doomsday Preppers in the U.S. will finally get their wish.

dzhou wrote:

<quoted text>
"Afghansitan is a hopeless country" is no reason to invade it, why do you want to invade a "hopeless country" in the first place? I can only see weapon manufacturer are the beneficiaries of such actions

Judged:

1

Leonard 68 wrote:

<quoted text>
the usa has no such wish, the perspective from here is that as China has grown more powerful China has become much more aggressive---this seems very obvious and clear from here, the aggressiveness seems outrageous and mystifying
countries from that part of the world feel under siege from giant china and feel like china is being a bully and trying to steal their land....which from here seems crystal clear.
these countries are asking the USA for help in the face of what they see and in the face of what we see as chinese aggression, we are trying to be morally supportive of them while trying not to get too deeply involved, it is absolutely china's behavior and outrageous claims that are causing ALL of this---is is totally clear
the world is hoping that China will back down from their outrageous claims to the territory of other countries---there is no ulterior motive other than wanting to protect and support people from what is viewed as a crazed and predatorial China
China should back down. Why isn't Tibet enough? I've asked this question a number of times and no one has answered. China picked up a HUGE chunk of land per taking Tibet. Why is this not enough? Hong Kong was returned also, Why is Tibet not enough? China's greed in the face of picking up an immense chunk of territory with Tibet seems so outrageous, leave these small islands and rocks alone and be happy with Tibet and Hong Kong

Leonard 68 wrote:

<quoted text>
it is very clear and obvious to me, because it is such a god forsaken country it was easy for the Taliban and Al Qaeda to take advantage and to use it as a base of terror training, etc. This is old news.
USA invaded to attack the Al Qaeda training camps and to get rid of the Taliban, Bin Laden was there while we were attacking but slipped away.
we kicked the Taliban out of power in just a few days and destroyed the primary terror camps in just a few days,
the invasion was in response to the 911 attacks---why this is not clear to you seems odd to me
The Taliban were given an ultimatum to hand over Bin Laden and a few others and they refused.
it is still a hopeless country though

Judged:

1

1

1

Leonard 68 wrote:

<quoted text>
the usa does not want conflict in this regard.
the arms race is absolutely a result of China's more aggressive behavior in the past few years---
the philippines and Japan really believe that territory is theirs and if the USA didn't exist they would still be strongly resisting and disagreeing---my analysis is against China on both claims
I agree what you say about the UN

Judged:

1

Leonard 68 wrote:

<quoted text>
it is very clear and obvious to me, because it is such a god forsaken country it was easy for the Taliban and Al Qaeda to take advantage and to use it as a base of terror training, etc. This is old news.
USA invaded to attack the Al Qaeda training camps and to get rid of the Taliban, Bin Laden was there while we were attacking but slipped away.
we kicked the Taliban out of power in just a few days and destroyed the primary terror camps in just a few days,
the invasion was in response to the 911 attacks---why this is not clear to you seems odd to me
The Taliban were given an ultimatum to hand over Bin Laden and a few others and they refused.
it is still a hopeless country though

Judged:

1

old china wrote:

<quoted text>
Agression is when you send 100,000+ troops to invade a country. Agression is when you target a countries infrastructure and level it to the ground remotely. Agression is when you send your gunboats to parade up and down a small nations coasts with guns blazing in the company of their neighbour.
Can you think of any countries that currently match that in terms of agression?

Judged:

1

Leonard 68 wrote:

<quoted text>
it is very clear and obvious to me, because it is such a god forsaken country it was easy for the Taliban and Al Qaeda to take advantage and to use it as a base of terror training, etc. This is old news.
USA invaded to attack the Al Qaeda training camps and to get rid of the Taliban, Bin Laden was there while we were attacking but slipped away.
we kicked the Taliban out of power in just a few days and destroyed the primary terror camps in just a few days,
the invasion was in response to the 911 attacks---why this is not clear to you seems odd to me
The Taliban were given an ultimatum to hand over Bin Laden and a few others and they refused.
it is still a hopeless country though