What's new

Russia & China to challenge NATO

Russian three times in their history at war with the united forces of Europe (the modern equivalent of NATO.
1. The invasion of Napoleon's army brought together all the forces of continental Europe in 1812 (the victory of Russia).
2. The Crimean War. In fact, in view of the colonies resisted Russia, more than half of the world 1853-1856, the (formally the defeat of Russia. In fact, all ended in a draw..)
3. The German invasion of the Soviet Union 1941-45, the whole economy of Europe against the Soviet Union. (Victory of the USSR)
In all three cases, Russia was not ready for war. In all three cases, we spit on the equivalent of NATO. In Europe there is a fear of Russia. Russia has never experienced fear in Europe. :chilli:
 
.
Russian three times in their history at war with the united forces of Europe (the modern equivalent of NATO.
1. The invasion of Napoleon's army brought together all the forces of continental Europe in 1812 (the victory of Russia).
2. The Crimean War. In fact, in view of the colonies resisted Russia, more than half of the world 1853-1856, the (formally the defeat of Russia. In fact, all ended in a draw..)
3. The German invasion of the Soviet Union 1941-45, the whole economy of Europe against the Soviet Union. (Victory of the USSR)
In all three cases, Russia was not ready for war. In all three cases, we spit on the equivalent of NATO. In Europe there is a fear of Russia. Russia has never experienced fear in Europe. :chilli:

Lol, to show off the glorious ancestors, then no one can compare and China. That is history, and now it does not matter.

Well, I'm a bit tight aggressive, because you are rude earlier. but it is over, I feel out of this tone. :wave: In any case, let us get along. By the way, also welcom Russia new members, hope to share more Your opinion in the future.:cheers:
 
.
I do not think can compare the five Central Asian States to Tibet or Xinjiang. You are Russia, but Soviet. Of course, every country needs to respect the bear site, but the bottom line is that bears need to have sufficient strength, then this are different, because the five Central Asian countries is an independent country, if Russia can provide satisfactory conditions, then there will be no big problem, but if Russia can not pay good condition, then the five Central Asian countries will use other countries to balance Russia control. This is the reason for the U.S. influence in Central Asia. In other words, in such conditions, if Russia still wants to keep control, need to transactions and other countries. Even the five Central Asian countries, Russia can not so simple just depends on your own thoughts.

China's advantage is that we do not challenge Russia in the security and internal affairs, China's goal is only resource, and we will provide sufficient investment. Therefore, China and Russia's cooperation is mutual interest. However, it is for this reason that Russia has can not completely as the five Central Asian countries as fully dependent state. you still want to keep your own goals, need to pay.



1. Russia is not against the Central Asian countries trade relations with other countries (even partial cost recovery is to reduce the burden on the Russian budget).

2. U.S. present in the region only by permission. Look at the map. This is a closed region. As you know Russia, China and Iran do not have much desire to indulge in this region the United States. From Afghanistan, the U.S. will fly like a cork from a bottle. Enough to help the right people. U.S. strength in this region tend to zero.

3. Russia has a direct economic aid to the region, both direct and indirect. (A large number of "cheap" labor from Central Asia working in Russia. This is often the only way normal life of their families.)
We compare the British and Russian colonies.

a) England plundered their colonies and grew rich. Along the way, destroying unwanted ethnic groups. (Receive the income from greatness).

b) Most of the colonies of the Russian Empire was losing money. Russia often had to spend money metropolis. To raise the standard of living colonies. Russia did not destroy any nation. As a part of Russia and the Soviet Union lived more than 150 nationalities (with its own culture, religion and language). (Russia had to pay extra for his greatness).

4. Russia provides military support to the Central Asian republics. (Including help with border security).
5. If China wants to replace Russia in the region (in the military sphere). It would deal a blow to the security of the southern borders of Russia. (The whole point of joining the Russian Caucasus and Central Asia. They are:

a) The obstruction of military attacks from these territories (which has brought substantial economic loss to Russia).

b) Removal of the possibility of establishing a military base potential enemies of Russia.

In the case of the transition region under military influence of China. China automatically becomes an enemy of Russia. In this case, the question may arise about the independence of Inner Mongolia, Tibet and Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region. Russia currently does not consider China as an adversary. The cost of conflict is very high. However, there are certain limits beyond which China needs to behave cautiously. Sometimes, potential risks are higher than expected profits.
The five-day war with Georgia was a warning of NATO. NATO has gone too far to the east. Sooner or later, NATO will be forced to leave the number of occupied regions. This will be a painful process.
 
.
1. Russia is not against the Central Asian countries trade relations with other countries (even partial cost recovery is to reduce the burden on the Russian budget).

2. U.S. present in the region only by permission. Look at the map. This is a closed region. As you know Russia, China and Iran do not have much desire to indulge in this region the United States. From Afghanistan, the U.S. will fly like a cork from a bottle. Enough to help the right people. U.S. strength in this region tend to zero.

3. Russia has a direct economic aid to the region, both direct and indirect. (A large number of "cheap" labor from Central Asia working in Russia. This is often the only way normal life of their families.)
We compare the British and Russian colonies.

a) England plundered their colonies and grew rich. Along the way, destroying unwanted ethnic groups. (Receive the income from greatness).

b) Most of the colonies of the Russian Empire was losing money. Russia often had to spend money metropolis. To raise the standard of living colonies. Russia did not destroy any nation. As a part of Russia and the Soviet Union lived more than 150 nationalities (with its own culture, religion and language). (Russia had to pay extra for his greatness).

4. Russia provides military support to the Central Asian republics. (Including help with border security).
5. If China wants to replace Russia in the region (in the military sphere). It would deal a blow to the security of the southern borders of Russia. (The whole point of joining the Russian Caucasus and Central Asia. They are:

a) The obstruction of military attacks from these territories (which has brought substantial economic loss to Russia).

b) Removal of the possibility of establishing a military base potential enemies of Russia.

In the case of the transition region under military influence of China. China automatically becomes an enemy of Russia. In this case, the question may arise about the independence of Inner Mongolia, Tibet and Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region. Russia currently does not consider China as an adversary. The cost of conflict is very high. However, there are certain limits beyond which China needs to behave cautiously. Sometimes, potential risks are higher than expected profits.
The five-day war with Georgia was a warning of NATO. NATO has gone too far to the east. Sooner or later, NATO will be forced to leave the number of occupied regions. This will be a painful process.

Thank you for a good long article, but I remember I did not say that China's goal is to become Russia's enemy, so there may be a big waste in your article.:wave:

China's intentions in Central Asia, is not seeking a military presence, we also oppose all foreign military bases in Central Asia. China all needs economic intent. Of course, there is no free lunch in the world, we also provide a substantial investment, which is the basis for China and Russia cooperation. For some countries outside the region of malicious games, China and Russia can along with to oppose, because we do not want to interfere in each other's internal affairs.
 
.
Lol, to show off the glorious ancestors, then no one can compare and China. That is history, and now it does not matter.

Well, I'm a bit tight aggressive, because you are rude earlier. but it is over, I feel out of this tone. :wave: In any case, let us get along. By the way, also welcom Russia new members, hope to share more Your opinion in the future.:cheers:


China and Russia must respect and recognize each other's interests. This will avoid many of the conflicts in the future.

History is crucial to the understanding of nations. Example of China and Russia have repeatedly tested for durability. We passed the test. What will happen if the U.S. would face to face with a worthy opponent (I'm not referring to Grenada)? :wave:
 
.
China and Russia must respect and recognize each other's interests. This will avoid many of the conflicts in the future.

History is crucial to the understanding of nations. Example of China and Russia have repeatedly tested for durability. We passed the test. What will happen if the U.S. would face to face with a worthy opponent (I'm not referring to Grenada)? :wave:

Although I agree with your point in general.

However, technical discussion of a war to jump to history, sir, that is irrelevant to our discussion.:coffee:
 
.
Challenging NATO is almost impossible...

When US,UK,France,German fought on shoulder to shoulder its not easy to challenge them...

NATO has 28 countries as members... Any mess with NATO can suffer the economy...

When the entire NATO fought against China in the Korean war, the invincible US war machine that just came off of 2 victories in a row against Germany and Japan was brought to a grinding halt at the Yalu then completely rolled back to Seoul and beyond.

When Nazi Germany with the resources of all of Europe fought Russia, the end result was the raising of the hammer and sickle on the Reichstag.

Never underestimate China and Russia.
 
.
When the entire NATO fought against China in the Korean war, the invincible US war machine that just came off of 2 victories in a row against Germany and Japan was brought to a grinding halt at the Yalu then completely rolled back to Seoul and beyond.

When Nazi Germany with the resources of all of Europe fought Russia, the end result was the raising of the hammer and sickle on the Reichstag.

Never underestimate China and Russia.

Historical revision in this thread is sickening. The whole of Europe was never behind Nazi Germany in WW2, and it is absolutely horrifying to see people push such thought considering the lengths that the other major powers of Europe went to to defeat Nazi Germany.

Also omission of Chinese losing the initiative and being pushed north of the 38th parallel, " completely rolled back to Seoul and beyond" as Freezing puts it, to the north of the 38th parallel.
 
.
Russian three times in their history at war with the united forces of Europe (the modern equivalent of NATO.
1. The invasion of Napoleon's army brought together all the forces of continental Europe in 1812 (the victory of Russia).
2. The Crimean War. In fact, in view of the colonies resisted Russia, more than half of the world 1853-1856, the (formally the defeat of Russia. In fact, all ended in a draw..)
3. The German invasion of the Soviet Union 1941-45, the whole economy of Europe against the Soviet Union. (Victory of the USSR)
In all three cases, Russia was not ready for war. In all three cases, we spit on the equivalent of NATO. In Europe there is a fear of Russia. Russia has never experienced fear in Europe. :chilli:

WW1?

There was no such thing as the United Forces of Europe before NATO, but even assuming such a thing existed it wouldn't be a modern equivalent of NATO.
 
.
Historical revision in this thread is sickening. The whole of Europe was never behind Nazi Germany in WW2, and it is absolutely horrifying to see people push such thought considering the lengths that the other major powers of Europe went to to defeat Nazi Germany.

Also omission of Chinese losing the initiative and being pushed north of the 38th parallel, " completely rolled back to Seoul and beyond" as Freezing puts it, to the north of the 38th parallel.


Three categories
1. Direct participants. Germany, Italy, Hungary, Romania, Albania, Bulgaria (take a direct part in the war).
2. Neutral or sympathetic to fascism country (commodity + trading).
3. All other countries have been occupied (industry + materials + human resources).
UK?
1. After England was expelled from the continent (it has little that solved in Europe).
2. An integer is a relative concept. 1 or 0.999999999999 answer is clear?
Fully agree with your statement about the major forces in Europe. Fighting against fascism. This is Russia. Which is the main striking force of Europe.
 
.
WW1?

There was no such thing as the United Forces of Europe before NATO, but even assuming such a thing existed it wouldn't be a modern equivalent of NATO.

The only difference is one. Now the military significance of Europe tends to zero. The NATO force is the United States.
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom