The US/NATO is a far bigger threat to global peace and security than China

[striver44]

It depends, US+NATO presence in Asia Pacific for example help deter China starting a war with Taiwan which could affect the region.

 

[VCheng]

It depends, US+NATO presence in Asia Pacific for example help deter China starting a war with Taiwan which could affect the region.

What people like to forget in such discussions is the value of maintaining a world order, imperfect as it may be, that encourages economic growth on a global scale, from which all of humanity benefits, directly or indirectly.

 

[striver44]

What people like to forget in such discussions is the value of maintaining a world order, imperfect as it may be, that encourages economic growth on a global scale, from which all of humanity benefits, directly or indirectly.

Yup, and I'm not saying the US being a saint either.

Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Would China not do Iraq style intervention if they're powerful enough and capable to do so? No one can guarantee

 

[Taimoor Khan]

Or maybe it is just a lack of capabilities, not an issue of war-mongering policy? Or maybe the conclusion was arrived at first in a one-sided way to the exclusion of evidence to the contrary? Possibly.

China invading Tibet is like USA invading Canada. But let's ignore that.

Is that so?

What about invading the lands of native red Indians and creating a country called United states over it?

 

[CIA Mole]

it’s more that whites are a threat to non whites as history have shown repeatedly

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I would simply judge such interventions according to basic principles of international geopolitics, without a prejudged verdict in mind, but that's just me.

By the same set of basic principles of international geopolitics.

Translation: Destabilizing US interventions are good because the US is a 'God fearing, democratic country holding the fort against godless communists', even if said US interventions bring to power dictators and autocratic regimes and murderous occupations.

Apparently, if you slap a label of democracy and freedom on a pig, the pig might win the Miss USA contest.

 

[VCheng]

Yup, and I'm not saying the US being a saint either.

Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Would China not do Iraq style intervention if they're powerful enough and capable to do so? No one can guarantee

The bottom line will remain that ALL nations play by the same set of rules governing international geopolitics. No one is a saint or a sinner.

Translation: Destabilizing US interventions are good because the US is a 'God fearing, democratic country holding the fort against godless communists', even if said US interventions bring to power dictators and autocratic regimes and murderous occupations.

Apparently, if you slap a label of democracy and freedom on a pig, the pig might win the Miss USA contest.

Please read the above.

Is that so?

What about invading the lands of native red Indians and creating a country called United states over it?

Is that how the glory of the Mughal Empire was created for a 1,000 years?

it’s more that whites are a threat to non whites as history have shown repeatedly

Except when whites fight whites, or when nonwhites fight nonwhites.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Please read the above.

'Norms of geo-politics' as a justification is basically an argument that evil, death and destruction is acceptable so long as those perpetrating it are 'strong enough and have the capabilities to do so'.

Being somewhat familiar with your (domestic) political views, I'm not really surprised at the fact that you incessantly bring up this morally and ethically bankrupt argument on geopolitical issues.

 

[CIA Mole]

I’m fine with a multipolar world, more leverage for small countries

 

[VCheng]

'Norms of geo-politics' as a justification is basically an argument that evil, death and destruction is acceptable so long as those perpetrating it are 'strong enough and have the capabilities to do so'.

Being somewhat familiar with your (domestic) political views, I'm not really surprised at the fact that you incessantly bring up this morally and ethically bankrupt argument on geopolitical issues.

All I can respectfully suggest is to read history, and learn from it, if so inclined.

ALL nations play by the same set of rules, like them or not. Always have, and always will. There is no morality in international geopolitics. Never has been and never will be.

 

[Bilal.]

Is China a bigger threat to world peace & stability than the US? Historical data suggests the real threat is in fact from the US.

Nuclear Weapons:

US+UK+France: 6,065 Nuclear Warheads
China: 350 Nuclear Warheads

Military Spending estimates 2021:

NATO: $1.17 Trillion (2.77% of GDP cumulative, US 3.7% of GDP)
China: $209 Billion (1.3% of GDP)

Military Interventions:

China: Korean War (1950), Vietnam War (1950)
US:
View attachment 754258

The above does not include British and French military interventions post World War 2. If someone wants to compile a list of those, it would be helpful.

Not to mention, the two military interventions of China were in response to the the US led interventions.

 

[VCheng]

Not to mention, the two military interventions of China were in response to the the US led interventions.

when did USA intervene in Tibet?

 

[Bilal.]

when did USA intervene in Tibet?

It did in the capacity it could. Read about CIA ops that eventually failed.

Also counting Tibet is like counting US expansion within continental America including the decimation of indigenous people. Though Tibet was previously part of China while the parts annexed by US in continental America were not.

 

[VCheng]

It did in the capacity it could. Read about CIA ops that eventually failed.

Also counting Tibet is like counting US expansion within continental America although Tibet was previously part of China while the parts annexed by US in continental America were not.

Oh, so when China does the same thing, it is okay?

(China invaded first before any US intervention, and even that was not within Tibet.)

 

[GumNaam]

Is China a bigger threat to world peace & stability than the US? Historical data suggests the real threat is in fact from the US.

Nuclear Weapons:

US+UK+France: 6,065 Nuclear Warheads
China: 350 Nuclear Warheads

Military Spending estimates 2021:

NATO: $1.17 Trillion (2.77% of GDP cumulative, US 3.7% of GDP)
China: $209 Billion (1.3% of GDP)

Military Interventions:

China: Korean War (1950), Vietnam War (1950)
US:
View attachment 754258

The above does not include British and French military interventions post World War 2. If someone wants to compile a list of those, it would be helpful.

Rest assured, China has far FAR FAR FAR ☢ FAR ☢ more than 350 nuclear weapons...I mean PAKISTAN has around 350 nukes and we've been a nuclear weapons state since the mid 80s...China has been a nuclear weapons state since the 60s. Pretty sure they didn't keep themselves limited to a measly 350 nukes. Just cuz they talk softly don't mean they don't carry a big stick.