Sino-Russian military alliance dwarfs US in military power

[Tractor]

This alliance will only make it more effficent for Russia to gain profit for itself,for example central Asia.

I think greater security-defence partnership is beneficial for both countries. Meaningful alignment between armies (drills) and platforms (tech share) will benefit the two sides especially in the hypothetical case of a war against a superpower.

Ideologically (in terms of their perception of the world governance), China and Russia look more and more eye to eye. The number and level of official visits and other contacts are unprecedented. On many key issues from Libya to Syria, China and Russia think pretty much similar. This is a de facto strategic alignment.

I guess further China-Russia security partnership is a check on the US; therefore, contributes to stability by decreasing the likelihood of a war. Now that Russia has weathered the US-led sanctions which ended up further straining Russia-West relations, China-Russia partnership is poised to get more comprehensive.

You should know that Gaddafi was killed by Putin and Obama just defused the US intervension in Lybia.

 

[Place Of Space]

Alliance or not, there is plenty room for China-Russia cooperation, both are lagging behind in technologies and economy to US. if China and Russia want to play catchup with US, we need to cooperate and that's one of the economicall way and the fast way to achieve both national objectives and interests.

Let take an aircraft carrier as example, if both can cooperate to share the burden (financial and/or economy) and build 75% of commun body parts, the remaining of 25% to be specific to each nation's needs: Russia can customize the remaining of 25% works (communication, radiar, electronic) same go for China. This will greatly reduce the financial burden, of course we need to have a sophisticate structure and organisation similar as EU consordium to manage all contractual works then we can certain affort to play catch up and arm race with US.

On of the reason why US is technological sophisticated it's because it has access to Japan and EU technologies through cooperations, if China and Russia don't know how to cooperate, we're just condamned ourself.

@ptldM3, what you think of this...any better suggestion?

I oppose, I prefer trusting American to Russian. In the whole history, Russian never completed any of an Agreement, with China, with Japan, with Germany, with Mongol, with Vietnam, with Finland, with Ukraine,....................

 

[TaiShang]

This alliance will only make it more effficent for Russia to gain profit for itself,for example central Asia.

You should know that Gaddafi was killed by Putin and Obama just defused the US intervension in Lybia.

I guess that was a strategic mistake on part of Russia which, along with China, was one of the five absentees during the voting. Some official later admitted that they misinterpreted the no-fly zone resolution. It was supposed to be enforced against the Libyan air force but, in the end, NATO tracked and bombed any moving army unis on the ground. Gaddafi himself was captured and killed because his convoy was hit by NATO forces, if I remember right.

Before the NATO intervention, Libyan Army was about to root out the terrorists.

But, you know, it was early Arab Spring and democracy and Middle Eastern girls crying for democracy was all over the place. History was about to change.

I was a master student at the time and, albeit all my skepticism, I was quite optimistic and sincerely wanted both Gaddafi and Mubarak to go. How wrong was I. My professor, who knew the region very well and could speak several ME languages, kept telling me the Arab Spring is a facade for further religious radicalization in bed with western imperialism.

Both China and Russia learned from the Libyan book and prevented any UN military action against Syria.

 

[Martian2]

Never fight a two-front war. Especially against Russia and China.

A fundamental tenet of warfare is to avoid a two-front war whenever possible. The reasons are obvious. A two-front war requires a division of military power in half. It creates a logistical nightmare. Also, it places an enormous strain on a military due to a lack of reserves in military forces.

During the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, we saw the United States and the Soviet Union try to persuade China to join its side. At a minimum, both the US and the Soviets were determined to ensure that China stayed neutral.

Today, there is an undeclared war in Europe. The West (ie. US and Europe) want to bring Ukraine into NATO. In response, the Russians are threatening to nuke NATO members (see citation below).

The current geo-political environment is not unlike 1962. The West-Russia standoff leaves China as the swing vote.

Thus, it is truly perplexing to hear the admiral of the US 7th fleet suggest a new way to provoke China. Walking down this road, it will lead to a two-front war for the United States.

The admiral of the 7th fleet has violated a fundamental principle of warfare. He should be removed as soon as possible for incompetence.
----------

Russia threatens to aim nuclear missiles at Denmark ships if it joins NATO shield | Reuters
"In an interview in the newspaper Jyllands-Posten, the Russian ambassador to Denmark, Mikhail Vanin, said he did not think Danes fully understood the consequences of joining the program.

'If that happens, Danish warships will be targets for Russian nuclear missiles,' Vanin told the newspaper."

 

[ptldM3]

and they are just going to land in enemy terrority??
don't have the foreign bases or the naval power to sustain them.


nice try though.


you could use charter planes as well you know

How did the Germans manage to have air bases throughout Europe in ww2? How did the US have air bases in the pacific in WW2? Obviously both sides captured territory and then erected airbases.


You do not need to land men, weapons and supplies either, you can drop them from air...

 

[jhungary]

Are you saying the divide between Russia and China was the direct result of you guys being manipulated like little puppets by US Intelligence? If that is the case they should all get medals for outsmarting you guys!!!

Bravo to our mighty mighty puppet masters!!!
I always thought it was ideological differences..oh well.

lol, you should not mind them that much, it just a post, some word said by people who know nothing about politic and economy. lol

Watch a few of their post, laugh a little then move on, let those people have their dream scape, lol concern only if any of these crown were choosen for the Chinese government.

 

[TaiShang]

Never fight a two-front war. Especially against Russia and China.

A fundamental tenet of warfare is to avoid a two-front war whenever possible. The reasons are obvious. A two-front war requires a division of military power in half. It creates a logistical nightmare. Also, it places an enormous strain on a military due to a lack of reserves in military forces.

During the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, we saw the United States and the Soviet Union try to persuade China to join its side. At a minimum, both the US and the Soviets were determined to ensure that China stayed neutral.

Today, there is an undeclared war in Europe. The West (ie. US and Europe) want to bring Ukraine into NATO. In response, the Russians are threatening to nuke NATO members (see citation below).

The current geo-political environment is not unlike 1962. The West-Russia standoff leaves China as the swing vote.

Thus, it is truly perplexing to hear the admiral of the US 7th fleet suggest a new way to provoke China. Walking down this road, it will lead to a two-front war for the United States.

The admiral of the 7th fleet has violated a fundamental principle of warfare. He should be removed as soon as possible for incompetence.
----------

Russia threatens to aim nuclear missiles at Denmark ships if it joins NATO shield | Reuters
"In an interview in the newspaper Jyllands-Posten, the Russian ambassador to Denmark, Mikhail Vanin, said he did not think Danes fully understood the consequences of joining the program.

'If that happens, Danish warships will be targets for Russian nuclear missiles,' Vanin told the newspaper."

I guess China-Russia security partnership has been effectively set up and that's in part thanks to US reckless foreign policy.

Near history verifies this observation empirically:

1. China has sided with Russia against the US-led sanctions (although the EU remains divided).

2. Russia has backed China, voicing its concern toward the proposed missile defense system in South Korea.

US Missile Defense Systems in S Korea Could Spark Asian Arms Race - Moscow / Sputnik International

The two front cold war is already here. China may not be the swing state, in that regard. The EU is.