India needs to ally with US to counter China: Fareed Zakaria to India Today at Davos

[nahtanbob]

Your reading comprehension needs some work. I said, and I quote, "militarily crush the US in Asia". That qualifier is very important. Let me explain why that is and why your non-sequitur about what the US can do with nuclear weapons (which, incidentally, China can reciprocate) is irrelevant.

A country's hard power is a product of two factors: its resolve and its physical capability. The US has a surfeit of physical capability - although it is important to note that China is rapidly closing the gap - but severe structural deficits in resolve. Why? First, being a democracy, it has no love for protracted conflicts. Sure, knocking over the occasional tinpot dictator and coming home in time for Christmas is fun (though the US can't even do that right); but a protracted conflict against a very heavily armed and very dangerous nation-state isn't.

Second - and this is more important - since it is economically self-sufficient and geographically isolated, its survival is assured; hence, there's no existential reason for it to engage in serious warfare against a strong adversary. This is also why it will never use nuclear weapons against China: states only use nuclear weapons when there is no risk of retaliation or when their survival is threatened. China can inflict horrific retaliation and it cannot threaten America's survival without resorting to its own nuclear weapons, which it won't do because it's in the same MAD bind.

America is not going to use its nuclear weapons to prevent its prestige from being dinged for losing primacy in Asia. Make no mistake, that's all the US has on the line here: prestige and ego. It's doubtful it would even put up a fight with conventional weapons alone. China has much more on the line: survival and the righting of grievous historical wrongs. China's resolve suffers no lack, and everybody knows it.

America's allies know all of this. Their strategic planners are perfectly capable of going through the arguments I've outlined. That's why the US has to constantly signal that it stands by them, and why the American foreign policy establishment is apoplectic at Trump's banal and minor objections to the US alliance system. America is always trying to convince its allies that its resolve is greater than it actually is.

Is USA self-sufficient ? Not completely

American power is built upon the network of allies - Latin America, Middle East, Europe and Asia. Countries have tested American resolve in the past with disastrous consequences.

You are assuming an military showdown with China will be protracted. As they say assumption is mother of all fuckups.

China has no survival issues. No one is threatening the existence of China.

If China thinks she can bully her powerful neighbors she is mistaken. Everyone has noted that china has renounced her claims over Siberia. We know how many hydrogen bombs the owner of Siberia has. you are assuming south korea, japan and taiwan cannot build nuclear arsenal to deter china. Add Indonesia and Vietnam to the watch list. if your clown Kim can make nukes they can make weapons several orders of magnitude more powerful.

 

[UKBengali]

Get off your ivory tower.
If that's the case, Vietnam need not stop Repco from drilling in the South China Sea.
Like it or not, co-operation with the elephant in the room is the best option.
Small countries have to do balancing acts to survive or to gain more leverage.

See how the US bullies its Allies and neighbors, not the other way around.
Compared to the US, China is an angel to her neighbors.
.

Dude, you are talking like China is a developed country and has powerful allies.

It has neither. There is a massive question mark as to whether it will reach anywhere near it's potential as it has so much population(4x USA) and also is being encircled by the USA-Japan-Korean alliance in E Asia,

Your reading comprehension needs some work. I said, and I quote, "militarily crush the US in Asia". That qualifier is very important. Let me explain why that is and why your non-sequitur about what the US can do with nuclear weapons (which, incidentally, China can reciprocate) is irrelevant.

A country's hard power is a product of two factors: its resolve and its physical capability. The US has a surfeit of physical capability - although it is important to note that China is rapidly closing the gap - but severe structural deficits in resolve. Why? First, being a democracy, it has no love for protracted conflicts. Sure, knocking over the occasional tinpot dictator and coming home in time for Christmas is fun (though the US can't even do that right); but a protracted conflict against a very heavily armed and very dangerous nation-state isn't.

Second - and this is more important - since it is economically self-sufficient and geographically isolated, its survival is assured; hence, there's no existential reason for it to engage in serious warfare against a strong adversary. This is also why it will never use nuclear weapons against China: states only use nuclear weapons when there is no risk of retaliation or when their survival is threatened. China can inflict horrific retaliation and it cannot threaten America's survival without resorting to its own nuclear weapons, which it won't do because it's in the same MAD bind.

America is not going to use its nuclear weapons to prevent its prestige from being dinged for losing primacy in Asia. Make no mistake, that's all the US has on the line here: prestige and ego. It's doubtful it would even put up a fight with conventional weapons alone. China has much more on the line: survival and the righting of grievous historical wrongs. China's resolve suffers no lack, and everybody knows it.

America's allies know all of this. Their strategic planners are perfectly capable of going through the arguments I've outlined. That's why the US has to constantly signal that it stands by them, and why the American foreign policy establishment is apoplectic at Trump's banal and minor objections to the US alliance system. America is always trying to convince its allies that its resolve is greater than it actually is.

China will not be facing USA alone in Asia.

It will be China versus USA, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Australia combined and the UK may also join in as they are allied with USA and Australia.

Know your place and all will be well.

 

[sinait]

Dude, you are talking like China is a developed country and has powerful allies.

It has neither. There is a massive question mark as to whether it will reach anywhere near it's potential as it has so much population(4x USA) and also is being encircled by the USA-Japan-Korean alliance in E Asia,

China will not be facing USA alone in Asia.

It will be China versus USA, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Australia combined and the UK may also join in as they are allied with USA and Australia.

Know your place and all will be well.

Know your place and all will be well.

I agree, that's why Bangladesh cannot do anything about the Teesta River sharing.
Your UK White master knows their place as well.
They quietly hand over Hong Kong even though it is only the New Territories that are under 99 year lease.

Wannabee nations have to depend on powerful allies and White Masters.
I agree, except China is not like your wannabee nation.
I am afraid Japan, Korea, Vietnam will decline to be involved.

Maybe you want UK and Bangladesh to join in the Nuclear Cloud festivities.
Japan plate is already full with 2 Atomic mushrooms.
.

 

[ZeEa5KPul]

American power is built upon the network of allies - Latin America, Middle East, Europe and Asia. Countries have tested American resolve in the past with disastrous consequences.

I give a geopolitical analysis tiers in quality above anything found here and you're just regurgitating idiotic platitudes. You really are incapable of understanding. A shame.

you are assuming south korea, japan and taiwan cannot build nuclear arsenal to deter china. Add Indonesia and Vietnam to the watch list. if your clown Kim can make nukes they can make weapons several orders of magnitude more powerful.

You seem strangely enamoured with nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons aren't some panacea - if they were, North Korea wouldn't be in the shape it's in. All these countries you mentioned (with the exception of Taiwan, which isn't a country and whose nuclearization would engender a much more violent response from China) would become the next North Korea if they moved toward acquiring nuclear weapons. Actually, that's wrong; North Korea enjoys some measure of Chinese support since it shares a border with China and has a quasi-alliance with it. These countries don't, so their ruin would be total.

Know your place and all will be well.

I know that British whites calling you names like "p*ki" and "smelly darkie" all the time has engendered a slave mentality within you, where you think that it's natural to bow and scrape to whites - but China and its proud people don't share your repugnant servility. You can assume your natural posture to your heart's content:

Bowing is not in China's nature, you pitiful creature. Word to the wise: China actually does know its place - its place is at the top. This obviously terrifies whites and their slaves.

 

[UKBengali]

I agree, that's why Bangladesh cannot do anything about the Teesta River sharing.
Your UK White master knows their place as well.
They quietly hand over Hong Kong even though it is only the New Territories that are under 99 year lease.

Wannabee nations have to depend on powerful allies and White Masters.
I agree, except China is not like your wannabee nation.
I am afraid Japan, Korea, Vietnam will decline to be involved.

Maybe you want UK and Bangladesh to join in the Nuclear Cloud festivities.
Japan plate is already full with 2 Atomic mushrooms.
.

Coming back with the "white master" jibe again? Try something more original for once

This is all about keeping China boxed into E Asia as it has gotten too big for it's boots. No Asian country apart from maybe Pakistan wants a too powerful China. Think why this is.

If certain Western countries also find it is in their interest to assist E Asian countries like Japan, Korea and Vietnam to contain China then so be it.

Yeah UK may not be as powerful as China but try eating a few dozen warheads from one of it's SSBNs and see how good it feels.

Japan not being interested in containing China? It will convert it's two upcoming 27,000 tonne aircraft carriers into platforms that can operate the F -35B platform. This is a direct response to the Chinese threat. They only spend 1% of GDP on defence and if they just increased this to 2% and the extra went into the Japanese Navy, they will be a formidable Navy with 4-6 large carriers and dozens of cutting-edge destroyers.

 

[sinait]

Coming back with the "white master" jibe again? Try something more original for once

This is all about keeping China boxed into E Asia as it has gotten too big for it's boots. No Asian country apart from maybe Pakistan wants a too powerful China. Think why this is.

If certain Western countries also find it is in their interest to assist E Asian countries like Japan, Korea and Vietnam to contain China then so be it.

Yeah UK may not be as powerful as China but try eating a few dozen warheads from one of it's SSBNs and see how good it feels.

Japan not being interested in containing China? It will convert it's two upcoming 27,000 tonne aircraft carriers into platforms that can operate the F -35B platform. This is a direct response to the Chinese threat. They only spend 1% of GDP on defence and if they just increased this to 2% and the extra went into the Japanese Navy, they will be a formidable Navy with 4-6 large carriers and dozens of cutting-edge destroyers.

It is rather SILLY of you to think that nations want powerful neighbors.
They ONLY want to be POWERFUL themselves and NOT their neighbors if they can help it.

Then again every nation should try to be as powerful and prosperous as they can get.
But you would rather roll over, spread your legs and let the Whites dominate over you forever.
That's ONLY you, not the Chinese, not the Japanese, the Koreans or Vietnam.

I really admire the Chinese DARED to rise up to the challenge.
Nobody thought it would be easy or bloodless and the US plus its wannabee allies is formidable.
But the ambition and the drive of a China daring to achieve the Chinese Dream against the overwhelming odds is to be applauded.
The chance to have a Multipolar or Bipolar world may not come again if China fails.
Who would have guessed 30 years ago, what China could achieve with their economy and production of military equipment.

You are welcomed to continue to serve your White Masters.
To Each His Own.
.

 

[nahtanbob]

I give a geopolitical analysis tiers in quality above anything found here and you're just regurgitating idiotic platitudes. You really are incapable of understanding. A shame.

let us list China's "allies" - North Korea, Pakistan, Myanmar
Feel free to educate us

 

[somsak]

let us list China's "allies" - North Korea, Pakistan, Myanmar
Feel free to educate us

Last time I check, it was a "North Vietnam" that was a China allies. When I ask older Thai, they said the different version of history, except the fall of Saigon.

 

[nahtanbob]

Last time I check, it was a "North Vietnam" that was a China allies. When I ask older Thai, they said the different version of history, except the fall of Saigon.

the truth is any of China's friends & allies would dump her in a instant if the payoff is higher

 

[somsak]

the truth is any of China's friends & allies would dump her in a instant if the payoff is higher

Last time it was Thailand that got dump by US's domino theory. Older Thai told me US refused to sell any weapon to us fearing the Vietkong would take them once they conquered us. That never happened. But flying her troops back to US, the US left Thailand to alone in front of very well armed Vietkong with captured American weapons. And now US is about to leave her allies alone again? Said Mattis.

I appreciate US fight against Communist. What was wrong was that only relatively small casualty could deter US from continue fighting. In the history of Asia, fighting a war means at least 100,000 casualty.

 

[nahtanbob]

Last time it was Thailand that got dump by US's domino theory. Older Thai told me US refused to sell any weapon to us fearing the Vietkong would take them once they conquered us. That never happened. But flying her troops back to US, the US left Thailand to alone in front of very well armed Vietkong with captured American weapons. And now US is about to leave her allies alone again? Said Mattis.

It is not easy to conquer a country of the size of Thailand. What makes you think USA would look the other way at Vietnamese invasion of Thailand ? It is not just Thailand on the line. Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia would insist on a robust response. Probably Japan would ask for one. What makes you think the USSR would permit Vietnam to do such a thing ?

Look at 1950 attack on South Korea, 1990 invasion of Kuwait. There were covert responses to Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

The Vietcong did invade Cambodia. They got bogged down fighting the Khmer Rouge

Refusing to sell weapons is one thing. If Thailand was rich she could buy weapons from Europe or Israel. In 1970s Thailand was poor. That was the real issue.

 

[ZeEa5KPul]

Feel free to educate us

I already have, and I don't like to repeat myself. Go back and read my previous posts; carefully this time.

the truth is any of China's friends & allies would dump her in a instant if the payoff is higher

See, here you're starting to understand. You're showing some promise, champ!
Your understanding will be complete once you internalize that any of America's allies would also dump it in an instant if the payoff is higher.

 

[somsak]

It is not easy to conquer a country of the size of Thailand. What makes you think USA would look the other way at Vietnamese invasion of Thailand ? It is not just Thailand on the line. Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia would insist on a robust response. Probably Japan would ask for one. What makes you think the USSR would permit Vietnam to do such a thing ?

Look at 1950 attack on South Korea, 1990 invasion of Kuwait. There were covert responses to Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

The Vietcong did invade Cambodia. They got bogged down fighting the Khmer Rouge

Refusing to sell weapons is one thing. If Thailand was rich she could buy weapons from Europe or Israel. In 1970s Thailand was poor. That was the real issue.

Read Domino Theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domino_theory

Do you understand? US has left Thailand to fight the enemy that even Saigon had fallen to.

https://www.matichonweekly.com/column/article_151426
translation: Saigon has fallen, Bangkok is afraid.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnamese_border_raids_in_Thailand

 

[nahtanbob]

Read Domino Theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domino_theory

Do you understand? US has left Thailand to fight the enemy that even Saigon had fallen to.

https://www.matichonweekly.com/column/article_151426
translation: Saigon has fallen, Bangkok is afraid.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnamese_border_raids_in_Thailand

The conduct of the Vietnam was mired in domestic politics. Iraq was the only real analogy in recent times.

I would ignore Lebanon in 1983, Syria in 2018, Somalia in 1991. they were minor intrusions.

If you look at other major American entanglements it is clear USA stands by its allies

I already have, and I don't like to repeat myself. Go back and read my previous posts; carefully this time.

See, here you're starting to understand. You're showing some promise, champ!
Your understanding will be complete once you internalize that any of America's allies would also dump it in an instant if the payoff is higher.

I listed China's friends - North Korea, Pakistan, Myanmar
feel free to add anyone to the list

 

[sinait]

the truth is any of China's friends & allies would dump her in a instant if the payoff is higher

When payoff is higher, INDIANS will be the first to jump ship.
That's how the East India Company enslaved a whole continent with JUST 3000 soldiers.
Indians will betray and assist the invading force to enslave their own in a jiffy.
THIS IS FACT, qualities engraved into their DNA.

They respect POWER and would rather help the invaders when that side shows signs of being the winning side.
Compare that with a weakened China who fought 8 LONG YEARS against a more modern and overwhelmingly superior militarily Japan of a million soldiers strong in China.

Best wishes to China in their endeavor, alone or otherwise, to break the Shackles of White Power.
.