What the hell is Russia doing? - Page 2

I think the EU's still finding its way (witness the Constitution debacle). On the other hand, I think America's major strategic challenge for this century is the inevitable rise of China. The goal is for it to develop into a superpower with which we can continue to do business. The concern is that it may develop into a serious adversary.

Some people believe that wars spring from religious differences. I believe that wars spring from the competition for resources and wealth. If the US & China can't figure out how to compete for resources and wealth in a nonviolent way, we're heading for a clash of civilizations that will make Western secular humanism v. Islamic fundamentalism look like child's play.

Right now I wouldn't consider the EU a major superpower. As a unified entity it's not that much better than the US after the civil war. Its size makes certain it shall become one but not for another 20 or 30 years.

But China is a whole other story. I'm nervous about China. Its ascension to a global superpower could throw the whole balance of power way off. I think only a very committed coalition between the EU and Russia can balance the system.

Interesting. Why not a tighter EU/US paradigm? NATO and SHAPE seemed to work out pretty well, after all.

Proximity and shared natural resources, mostly. Also Russia is right next to China which makes it easier to put the squeeze on them if there is a need. Secondly, although the Atlantic has done wonders for your national security over the years, it also poses a psychological barrier between Europe and the US (the English are excluded).

You make it sound like 20 to 30 years is so far in the future that we needn't think about it. As slowly as the wheels of politics spin, 20 to 30 years is tomorrow.

I just don't see the UE ever being more powerful then it is now. China is the big threat to the US with India becoming a third superpower a big possibility.

What about Iran?

I see them eventually getting the nuclear weapon they want, but only to goad their own population into an uprising. Think of a secular Iran, sick to death of the restraints of radical Islam, wealthy, and hungry for regional influence.....

Nukes a superpower do not make!

Whatever you say, Yoda.

That's a great point, Greg. In the world of military procurements, 20-30 years really is tomorrow. Think about it: it takes about 15 years for a new-generation aircraft carrier to go from concept to keel. Once built, that ship can expect to stay in service for upwards of 50 years. Military planners have to be forward thinking, just to minimize the odds that they're building a military force that will be useless in the future.

Of course, no one can tell the future, so the best you can do is project alternate futures and try to sell Congress on authorizing funding for the ones you find most probable and/or threatening.

War with China is inevitable, at least that's what I'd assume one would learn if you were a fly on the wall of a top-tier Chinese government meeting. These guys have had us on a leash since the 90s and have been making serious military advances since then. I remember reading an article recently talking about how while the US is slashing their submarine fleet, the Chinese are cranking subs out by the bushel. For what reason?

What I see is something very similar to what people describe when talking about the common sci-fi concept of machines gaining sentience and rising up. We have this massive, powerful entity out there working its ass off for us, and we're giving more and more of our dependence to it and making it more and more refined and capable. And someday, after it gains self awareness it's gonna realize it doesn't need us anymore, and then we're targets for the machine we've created. I'd say that moment of self-awareness came in Clinton's years, if not earlier. These guys are smarter than us by far.

My question is this: is India more likely to stick by the US or by China?

Don't get me wrong, I don't think that 30 years is that long. It will just be too late, I think, to act as a check to China's power. By then Taiwan will be annexed and the rest of S.E. Asia will be under an overbearing Chinese diplomatic and cultural influence.

And in regards to India, the US will be forced eventually to pick a side in the whole India - Pakistan conflict. Otherwise you cannot expect full support from India.

Oh, I don't think they'll make an effective check to China either. My original point was that they will eventually make for another economic threat to America's dominance. In the modern world, economic threats should be taken as seriously as military ones.

I, for one, welcome our new Chinese overlords...

I am way ahead of you I am moving to China. it is were the future is at you know what they say about rats and sinking ships

Reminds me of Eric Nylund's Signal books.

"My question is this: is India more likely to stick by the US or by China?"

Depends on who we're offshoring to at the time.

The Chinese fleet is the only one in the world specifically configured to go toe-to-toe with U.S. carrier fleets. This is a fight both sides are going to be itching for very soon: the US needs a solid enemy to focus it's efforts on (it cured the malaise of the Great Depression, certainly); the Chinese want Taiwan back. This is why I see this thing as pretty much unavoidable.

This I don't quite understand. Should the United States' seek to depress the standard of living in other (very large) countries? Economic threats like floating US debt or imposing damaging tariffs: those are economic threats. General GNP growth doesn't really qualify as such. A bigger, healthier trading partner generally means greater trade opportunity. Of course, it's easy to see threats everywhere because the fact is, many of those threats are very real. I just don't think India is one of them (aside from a potential Pakistani-Indian conflict; our cards are already on the table there).

Well, after Putin extended the hand of cooperation to Bush in the face of weeks of rhetoric, will America work with their Russian allies in the War on Terror?

U.S. Won't Drop Czech Radar Site After Russian Offer

By James G. Neuger

June 14 (Bloomberg) -- Russia's offer to let the U.S. use a radar site in the Caucasus won't lead to a scaling back of the planned American missile-defense installations in eastern Europe, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said.

The U.S. still wants to build an anti-missile radar in the Czech Republic and station interceptors in Poland, and won't replace the system with a radar in Azerbaijan that Russia has offered to share, Gates said.

``I was very explicit in the meeting that we saw the Azeri radar as an additional capability, that we intended to proceed with the radar in the Czech Republic,'' Gates told a press conference after a NATO gathering in Brussels.

Russian President Vladimir Putin offered the missile- defense cooperation last week, in a departure from months of rhetorical assaults on the U.S. for extending its influence into the former Soviet sphere.

From Bloomberg.com.
That's great. Way to work together, guys.