'US-Bangla military diplomacy up'

[Zabaniyah]

9) USA wants BD to be a part of SE Asian collective defense system under its sponsor whereby both China and india are not to be included. All these countries are small and are vulnerable in front of these two regional powers.

10) USA is willing to sell equipments to BD. The visiting dignitary said about providing/selling warships to BN.

USA is supplying India with C-17 Globemasters, AH-64 Apaches, C-130 Hercules, P-8Is, was willing to offer the F-16 block 60 and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and apparently willing to offer the Aegis Combat System.

These are powerful platforms.

Strange huh?

 

[Yogi]

USA is supplying India with C-17 Globemasters, AH-64 Apaches, C-130 Hercules, P-8Is, was willing to offer the F-16 block 60 and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and apparently willing to offer the Aegis Combat System.

These are powerful platforms.

Strange huh?

The reason is simple a strong India will automatically act as a counter weight to China

+ with defence budget cuts all over the world n India is the biggest importer n going to spend around $100 billion in next 10 years for imports so it ain't some small some

As suggested by many but i don't think that US is gonna have a base in BD as it'll hamper Indo-US relation even China won't be constructing military bases in there as it'll result in more Indian interference in scs as well as increase in Indo-US partnership

I my opinion the sole reason of increase in US-BD relation is to reduce the growing Chinese influence in BD as well as help India to sablise its neighbourhood n focus more towards China...

 

[eastwatch]

USA is supplying India with C-17 Globemasters, AH-64 Apaches, C-130 Hercules, P-8Is, was willing to offer the F-16 block 60 and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and apparently willing to offer the Aegis Combat System.

These are powerful platforms.

Strange huh?

India cannot certainly entertain a prospect of antagonizing USA, the only superpower with a global reach, due to the ensuing India-China cold war. It cannot produce sophisticated weapons like China does. It imports these. In a separate game plan USA also takes care of Indian worries about China and supplies the war machines that India requests. US needs also an expanded export market for its sophisticated weapons systems.

However, I believe US wants to avoid a real war in the region. A war is more possible between a strong and a weak enemy such as India vs BD or Pakistan, China vs Vietnam, Taiwan or even India. But a real war is preceded by a long psychlogical or cold war which is going now after China has seized many Vietnamese and Phillipine offshore islands in the Pacific to drill for oil.

If US takes a weak role in the region it will cause China to intimidate the countries of east and SE asia. China is already doing so by unilaterally capturing sea areas of Vietnam and Phillipines in the central pacific.

In case of BD China has a different face than the one it has with the SE Asian countries. China is disliked and feared by these countries. It is the reason that USA has finally come up with a new plan to contain China, and uder this plan it is encircling China from all around. India is also a pawn in the game plan of the USA. But, a matured and wise USA has not tied BD in that game because BD population will go against any direct US sponsored ties with India against China. So, USA is taking a little detour to take BD in its fold.

 

[BanglaBhoot]

India cannot certainly entertain a prospect of antagonizing USA, the only superpower with a global reach, due to the ensuing India-China cold war. It cannot produce sophisticated weapons like China does. It imports these. In a separate game plan USA also takes care of Indian worries about China and supplies the war machines that India requests. US needs also an expanded export market for its sophisticated weapons systems.

Again the point is being missed. For India to acquire these powerful platforms it will have to submit to American dictation. Only the USA can supply the necessary expertise and spare parts to operate these platforms. There are also restrictions on end use and technology transfers. By acquiring these weapon systems India will fall into the grip of the US. So far India has resisted this as well as having refused American inducements to contain China. India has its own strategic interests that do not necessarily coincide with the USA.

 

[Zabaniyah]

In case of BD China has a different face than the one it has with the SE Asian countries. China is disliked and feared by these countries. It is the reason that USA has finally come up with a new plan to contain China, and uder this plan it is encircling China from all around. India is also a pawn in the game plan of the USA. But, a matured and wise USA has not tied BD in that game because BD population will go against any direct US sponsored ties with India against China. So, USA is taking a little detour to take BD in its fold.

It's way too early to conclude that.

 

[kalu_miah]

If USA was a really responsible global power, it would strive towards a more stable global system, which is also in its own interest and for the interest of entire humanity. Since it emerged as a major power more than a century ago and as one of two preeminent powers in 1947 and finally defeated its competitor in 1991, it has done a lot of bad in many parts of the world, like any powerful country or empire did in the past, sometimes to protect its national interest but more often for its financial and business elites' short term interest and sometimes out of sheer idiocy like invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan after 9/11. But the US is now in decline and in a few decades will become just one of the big guys in a multi-poloar world. But this emerging multi-polar world will be dominated by three main players, US led West, China and India, while the other half of the world will remain as victims of this new global order.

If I were asked to work on a long term strategy for the US in this juncture of history, I would recommend for the US to pursue a strategy that will increase global stability and peace, by removing as much power imbalance from the world as possible so major wars can be avoided, because imbalance of power is the biggest reason for instability and war. Currently two of the largest countries, who are also like ancient regional unions of older neighbor nations, have more than a billion population. This creates a fundamental imbalance on the global scene. To gradually remove this imbalance, my recommendation would be to create regional unions to bring together smaller nations. The justification for creating these unions are covered in these academic papers on the newly emerging field of New Regionalism Approach (NRA):

Theory Talks: Theory Talk #19: Fredrik Söderbaum
The New Regionalism Approach «

If the US cannot provide this leadership, smaller countries who are victims of the current global order should take it up on their own to change the current system to a more just, equitable, stable and peaceful global order, where the world is divided into 7 major blocs, so no small nations remain on their own and have to fight for survival against a large nation in the neighborhood or from far away. So instead of standing on 3 legs, the future of the world will stand on 7 legs, an inherently more stable structure that cannot be toppled easily.

But many of you already know these ideas as I promoted them in the closed thread:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/164048-kalu_miahs-new-world-order-road-map-future-16.html

 

[PlanetSoldier]

Every big power has its concerns about small countries with no power. Entire SE asia, japan, taiwan and South Korea are under US security umbrella. Entire Europe, Arab world and Israel are under US protection.So, you cannot say US does not care. Latin America used to be America's backyard. Noreiga wanted to free Panama Canal. So, he faced a US Court that sentenced him to jail. Had he not been for a free Panama Canal US would have seen the other way about his link with the drug cartels.

India is not friendly with the US. India worries about China, this is why it is seeking US friendship. USA understands that Indian themselves are not India friendly. India is stretching towards Myanmar and Vietnam, and will contest with China for putting influence on other SE countries. Indians are numerous in some of these countries.

USA may not want a tug of war between two asian big countries. So, this can be sited as one reason that US wants to emphasise a good relationship with BD, a small country but vital for keeping a watch on these big countries. Myanmar may next be influenced by USA under the same security game plan. It is more vital because it has direct border with China.

USA started its tyranny starting from Hiroshima, Nagasaki. They used atom bombs there not because it was world war, it was because they wanted to teach Japan a lesson for attacking Pearl Harbor. Starting from that one after one they've destroyed countries, killed innumerous people only because US had power and they didn't go with USA. Whatsoever Noriega is USA has no right to invade in Panama and arrest their President breaking sovereignty of a nation. Same applies for Iraq, it was the most prosperous nation in Mideast and USA didn't have any right to destroy the nation for one dumb as$ Saddam. One lady holding Ph. D from Harvard was detained by US forces in Iraq because her brother was a rebel. This lady was raped and tortured randomly by US soldiers in the cell who later lost her mental balance and became a dumb person. Her fault was her brother was a rebel. Funny thing is her brother became rebel loving motherland.

Please consider the bad sides as well. A country protecting israel can't be real friends of its foe Arab people. USA made Arab people its subservient and selling its weapons of huge amount...last year only Saudi Arabia had a defense budget of 42 billion $ completely dependent on USA. The same thing applies for far-east where USA is selling billions of its weapons. They never leave Japan even after huge protest in Okinawa after an incident of rape of a Japanese girl probably because US is skeptical about this nation as they used atom bombs their once which is one of the best nations for a century anytime Japan might develop sort of WMD. But they act they are protecting Japan. I don't know about Japanese peoples' sentiment about foreign troops' presence on their land but it's negative in Germany. Once one German told me that they dislike the presence of allied forces in their land. Though they hate Nazi, it never means they love allied forces there. Now if Japan the most advanced nation in the world has to be subservient, what could be the scenario for a nation like Bangladeshi? Did you ever play football in your childhood with big brothers of your locality who allowed your entry in the team (you were dying to play) but later acted hegemonic with you throughout the play time?

In South Asia USA is outsider, it's responsibility of the people here to keep external power away in first hand. For Bangladesh it has a warm relationship with USA which is good but greater military attachment with USA might make it vulnerable to many things later. With geopolitical perspective BD needs to look in its neighborhood, find out who are friends, foes and balance the relationship accordingly in the neighborhood. Besides, BD isn't a chessboard that big powers want to play here and we have to let them in. And when they leave it'll have nothing with possibility of Taliban like Frankenstein. External players will come play, eat everything of their taste (for us oil/gas of BoB) and leave without any responsibility. But the players in the neighborhood will think that they have to coexist later.

Bangladesh basically lacks a powerful leadership. If it has one strong leadership, it can easily balance its relationship with regional friend and foe and deal smartly with external power as well. With current type of leadership playing with big external power BD will bring more danger in future for its people.

 

[PlanetSoldier]

There is no doubt about that.

I'd like to complement some more details here.

Bangladesh's exports to India are usually met with the so-called "hidden tarrifs" in the Indian market.

Another thing is that Indian consumers are highly ethnocentric. So much so, they'll buy a locally made product even though it is low quality than an imported one. Not a very attractive market if you ask me.

On another note, many in India, particularly in the media are saying that Bangladesh is on its way to become another Pakistan. They've been saying this ever since the 90's. They do claim that Bangladesh is a hotbed for terrorists.

True, or not, there are reasons why they do this. See, many American firms rely on India's IT industry to a significant extent. If the Indian IT firms stop providing service to the Americans, it'll create global losses worth billions.

Not saying that they are going to do it, but it does give them some leverage to tell the American public: "Hey, we are taking care of things in our neighborhood". It's a form of psychological warfare and media propaganda. Although, opinions of American public are of little relevance.

But however, if the US stops importing goods and services from India, China, or any country for that matter - their economies will collapse in 24 hours. So, Indians have little leverage even with their IT industry. We mustn't underestimate the power of American consumerism. It is huge and significant upon which many third-world/developing nations are very dependent.




The commitments of many smaller countries do matter. The thing is that with India and China rising, it'll undoubtedly make the "little guys" uncomfortable.

The US does officially support more regional connectivity within South Asia and South East Asia. But how will this happen? Who will pay $7.5 billion for the transit infrastructure in Bangladesh? What people don't see is that trade within SAARC is very little compared to the likes of ASEAN or even GCC.
Reserve Bank of India
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2006/september/tradoc_113489.pdf
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2006/september/tradoc_113471.pdf

And yet, we are dreaming about having this 'transit' all the way to Thailand and Malaysia.

Small countries individually do not really matter. But what should matter are many small countries. Little things do matter. If we make a mistake in a mathematical calculation, the result will turn out wrong. If we make a mistake in a programming project, it won't compile. If we make a mistake in a business deal, the client would not be happy.

When many little things come together, it becomes something big. And that matters.

It's possible to somehow rally those "little guys". Be it India or China. But the process is going very slowly. The US would need to adjust its strategic equation. Suffice to say, those sagols ruling Bangladesh simply won't go anywhere.

This is the part we need to consider first. Having a strong leadership we might prove that we are actually not small with population more than Japan, Russia. Only then we can join the chessboard game.

 

[Hammer-fist]

I do not have time to go in to too much depth on this issue but here are some points for now.

1. Bangladesh's first and historical enemy is India and then secondarily Burma, though Burma is far more brutal and vicious, whereas India is at least a democracy, has free speech and civil society unlike fascist Burma which is a genocidal and racist state.

America is not an enemy as it has no hatred of Bangladesh however the issue is reconciling our different interests which conflict at times.

China is an ally.

China and India are physical permanent realities, the USA is a political transient reality i.e. if US power decreases they have less ability to pressure us though for the next few decades they will still be important.

2. Though India sponsors the anti-Bangladeshi Awami League in the way that Iran sponsors its proxy Hezbollah, there are limits to what the anti-Bangladehi Awami League can do due to

i. Muslim character of the Bangladeshi people.

ii. Islamic scholars (some of whom actually support the Awami League e.g. Tableeghis)

iii: Army

Thus there is only so far that India can go in Bangladesh and India's state terrorist organization, "RAW" (led by terror chief, Sanjeev Tripathi) is making mistakes when in what seems to be an act of gratifying their own delusions of grandeur and displaying their power and an "impotent" Bangladesh it murders Bangladeshi civilians on the border, thus increasing anti-India feeling in Bangladesh.

India's state terrorist organization, RAW, and their evil terror chief, Sanjeev Tripathi, have miscalculated as India is weak on this flank seeing that there are Christian fundamentalist groups sponsored by the US and west in the north-east of India, China (which wants to regain Arunchal Pradesh) and of course Muslim Bangladesh, whom many of the hate-filled Indian posters on this forum have openly said is the country they hate the most.

Terror chief, Tripathi also miscalculated when he instigated an Awami League backed campaign of attacks against the Buddhist minority in southern Bangladesh as the internet and newspapers have exposed the involvement of terrorist organization, RAW in this and also western diplomats will not fall for the RAW trick of viewing Bangladeshis as inherently anti-non Musim bigots.

RAW and its current terror chief, Sanjeev Tripathi are doing nothing but causing more trouble for themselves in their weak and volatile north-eastern flank by pissing off the Chinese, Bangladeshis, Christians and Americans at the same time and India where 14,000 farmers commit suicide every year thus 0.1 million per decade is in no real position to cause too much trouble in Bangladesh and the north-east.

3. America also needs to behave itself as they too have suffered lots of humilitation over the years for their mischief and their own acts of state terrorism, genocide and illegal invasions.

- Defeat by China over North Korea. A North Korean commando even once killed an American soldier bare handed in the NK-SK border.

- Defeat by the Vietnamese in Vietnam

- Defeat by the Cubans in the bay of pigs fiasco

- Defeat by Somali milita men in Black hawk down.

- Defeat and expulsion from Lebanon in 1982 by a Shia suicide bomber

- Defeat in Bangladesh in 1971 when they failed to keep East Pakistan with the pro-American and US trained Pakistan army, and were threatened with possible war by the Soviets. The existence of Bangladesh is in itself a living remainder of American defeat and humiliation.

- Humiliation in Iran when US embassy staff were captured and a US helicopter was shot down.

There are also other defeats that the brutal and trigger-happy Americans who have murdered far more than the Indians or Chinese ever have, have experienced.

Suffice to say the people of Bangladesh will not permit the American regime or the brutal and hated American military to ever have a US base in Bangladesh.

The American regime tried to ask Dhaka to send Bangladeshi troops to Afghanistan but were basically told to f*** off.

The American regime - though it denies it - does seem to have been involved in some attempts to gain a military base in Bangladesh and used media leaks to test public reaction, and Bangladeshis as a people have basically told the American regime to f*** off.

So America cannot try and bully Bangladesh too much as Bangladeshis though generally peaceful can become ferocious at times, even Bhashani warned the Pakistani regime quite a few years before 71 that Bengalis were like the Vietnamese, something that the racist and genocidal Pakistani army found out the hard way when they suffered defeat and humiliation in 1971, a bitter and painful humiliation they are still angry over even now in the same way their American allies are angry over Vietnam.

Whilst not going in tot the complexities and nuance of geo-strategic relations in south-east Asia all I can say is that the US needs to behave itself in the region and not cause any mischief or it will suffer the consequences.

3. China has no major clash of interests with Bangladesh and is a dear and respected ally.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

3. America also needs to behave itself as they too have suffered lots of humilitation over the years for their mischief and their own acts of state terrorism, genocide and illegal invasions.

- Defeat by China over North Korea. A North Korean commando even once killed an American soldier bare handed in the NK-SK border.

- Defeat by the Vietnamese in Vietnam

- Defeat by the Cubans in the bay of pigs fiasco

- Defeat by Somali milita men in Black hawk down.

- Defeat and expulsion from Lebanon in 1982 by a Shia suicide bomber

- Defeat in Bangladesh in 1971 when they failed to keep East Pakistan with the pro-American and US trained Pakistan army, and were threatened with possible war by the Soviets. The existence of Bangladesh is in itself a living remainder of American defeat and humiliation.

- Humiliation in Iran when US embassy staff were captured and a US helicopter was shot down.

There are also other defeats that the brutal and trigger-happy Americans who have murdered far more than the Indians or Chinese ever have, have experienced.

Suffice to say the people of Bangladesh will not permit the American regime or the brutal and hated American military to ever have a US base in Bangladesh.

The American regime tried to ask Dhaka to send Bangladeshi troops to Afghanistan but were basically told to f*** off.

The American regime - though it denies it - does seem to have been involved in some attempts to gain a military base in Bangladesh and used media leaks to test public reaction, and Bangladeshis as a people have basically told the American regime to f*** off.

So America cannot try and bully Bangladesh too much as Bangladeshis though generally peaceful can become ferocious at times, even Bhashani warned the Pakistani regime quite a few years before 71 that Bengalis were like the Vietnamese, something that the racist and genocidal Pakistani army found out the hard way when they suffered defeat and humiliation in 1971, a bitter and painful humiliation they are still angry over even now in the same way their American allies are angry over Vietnam.

Whilst not going in tot the complexities and nuance of geo-strategic relations in south-east Asia all I can say is that the US needs to behave itself in the region and not cause any mischief or it will suffer the consequences.

3. China has no major clash of interests with Bangladesh and is a dear and respected ally.

Banglar_Lathilal , is that you?

 

[BanglaBhoot]

I do not have time to go in to too much depth on this issue but here are some points for now.

1. Bangladesh's first and historical enemy is India and then secondarily Burma, though Burma is far more brutal and vicious, whereas India is at least a democracy, has free speech and civil society unlike fascist Burma which is a genocidal and racist state.

America is not an enemy as it has no hatred of Bangladesh however the issue is reconciling our different interests which conflict at times.

China is an ally.

China and India are physical permanent realities, the USA is a political transient reality i.e. if US power decreases they have less ability to pressure us though for the next few decades they will still be important.

2. Though India sponsors the anti-Bangladeshi Awami League in the way that Iran sponsors its proxy Hezbollah, there are limits to what the anti-Bangladehi Awami League can do due to

i. Muslim character of the Bangladeshi people.

ii. Islamic scholars (some of whom actually support the Awami League e.g. Tableeghis)

iii: Army

Thus there is only so far that India can go in Bangladesh and India's state terrorist organization, "RAW" (led by terror chief, Sanjeev Tripathi) is making mistakes when in what seems to be an act of gratifying their own delusions of grandeur and displaying their power and an "impotent" Bangladesh it murders Bangladeshi civilians on the border, thus increasing anti-India feeling in Bangladesh.

India's state terrorist organization, RAW, and their evil terror chief, Sanjeev Tripathi, have miscalculated as India is weak on this flank seeing that there are Christian fundamentalist groups sponsored by the US and west in the north-east of India, China (which wants to regain Arunchal Pradesh) and of course Muslim Bangladesh, whom many of the hate-filled Indian posters on this forum have openly said is the country they hate the most.

Terror chief, Tripathi also miscalculated when he instigated an Awami League backed campaign of attacks against the Buddhist minority in southern Bangladesh as the internet and newspapers have exposed the involvement of terrorist organization, RAW in this and also western diplomats will not fall for the RAW trick of viewing Bangladeshis as inherently anti-non Musim bigots.

RAW and its current terror chief, Sanjeev Tripathi are doing nothing but causing more trouble for themselves in their weak and volatile north-eastern flank by pissing off the Chinese, Bangladeshis, Christians and Americans at the same time and India where 14,000 farmers commit suicide every year thus 0.1 million per decade is in no real position to cause too much trouble in Bangladesh and the north-east.

3. America also needs to behave itself as they too have suffered lots of humilitation over the years for their mischief and their own acts of state terrorism, genocide and illegal invasions.

- Defeat by China over North Korea. A North Korean commando even once killed an American soldier bare handed in the NK-SK border.

- Defeat by the Vietnamese in Vietnam

- Defeat by the Cubans in the bay of pigs fiasco

- Defeat by Somali milita men in Black hawk down.

- Defeat and expulsion from Lebanon in 1982 by a Shia suicide bomber

- Defeat in Bangladesh in 1971 when they failed to keep East Pakistan with the pro-American and US trained Pakistan army, and were threatened with possible war by the Soviets. The existence of Bangladesh is in itself a living remainder of American defeat and humiliation.

- Humiliation in Iran when US embassy staff were captured and a US helicopter was shot down.

There are also other defeats that the brutal and trigger-happy Americans who have murdered far more than the Indians or Chinese ever have, have experienced.

Suffice to say the people of Bangladesh will not permit the American regime or the brutal and hated American military to ever have a US base in Bangladesh.

The American regime tried to ask Dhaka to send Bangladeshi troops to Afghanistan but were basically told to f*** off.

The American regime - though it denies it - does seem to have been involved in some attempts to gain a military base in Bangladesh and used media leaks to test public reaction, and Bangladeshis as a people have basically told the American regime to f*** off.

So America cannot try and bully Bangladesh too much as Bangladeshis though generally peaceful can become ferocious at times, even Bhashani warned the Pakistani regime quite a few years before 71 that Bengalis were like the Vietnamese, something that the racist and genocidal Pakistani army found out the hard way when they suffered defeat and humiliation in 1971, a bitter and painful humiliation they are still angry over even now in the same way their American allies are angry over Vietnam.

Whilst not going in tot the complexities and nuance of geo-strategic relations in south-east Asia all I can say is that the US needs to behave itself in the region and not cause any mischief or it will suffer the consequences.

3. China has no major clash of interests with Bangladesh and is a dear and respected ally.

Welcome to PDF Hammer-fist. I am enjoying reading your posts. Keep it up and scare some Indians .....

 

[Axa-]

@banglar lathian fck you!! Hehehe

 

[eastwatch]

USA started its tyranny starting from Hiroshima, Nagasaki. They used atom bombs there not because it was world war, it was because they wanted to teach Japan a lesson for attacking Pearl Harbor. Starting from that one after one they've destroyed countries, killed innumerous people only because US had power and they didn't go with USA. Whatsoever Noriega is USA has no right to invade in Panama and arrest their President breaking sovereignty of a nation. Same applies for Iraq, it was the most prosperous nation in Mideast and USA didn't have any right to destroy the nation for one dumb as$ Saddam. One lady holding Ph. D from Harvard was detained by US forces in Iraq because her brother was a rebel. This lady was raped and tortured randomly by US soldiers in the cell who later lost her mental balance and became a dumb person. Her fault was her brother was a rebel. Funny thing is her brother became rebel loving motherland.

Please consider the bad sides as well. A country protecting israel can't be real friends of its foe Arab people. USA made Arab people its subservient and selling its weapons of huge amount...last year only Saudi Arabia had a defense budget of 42 billion $ completely dependent on USA. The same thing applies for far-east where USA is selling billions of its weapons. They never leave Japan even after huge protest in Okinawa after an incident of rape of a Japanese girl probably because US is skeptical about this nation as they used atom bombs their once which is one of the best nations for a century anytime Japan might develop sort of WMD. But they act they are protecting Japan. I don't know about Japanese peoples' sentiment about foreign troops' presence on their land but it's negative in Germany. Once one German told me that they dislike the presence of allied forces in their land. Though they hate Nazi, it never means they love allied forces there. Now if Japan the most advanced nation in the world has to be subservient, what could be the scenario for a nation like Bangladeshi? Did you ever play football in your childhood with big brothers of your locality who allowed your entry in the team (you were dying to play) but later acted hegemonic with you throughout the play time?

In South Asia USA is outsider, it's responsibility of the people here to keep external power away in first hand. For Bangladesh it has a warm relationship with USA which is good but greater military attachment with USA might make it vulnerable to many things later. With geopolitical perspective BD needs to look in its neighborhood, find out who are friends, foes and balance the relationship accordingly in the neighborhood. Besides, BD isn't a chessboard that big powers want to play here and we have to let them in. And when they leave it'll have nothing with possibility of Taliban like Frankenstein. External players will come play, eat everything of their taste (for us oil/gas of BoB) and leave without any responsibility. But the players in the neighborhood will think that they have to coexist later.

Bangladesh basically lacks a powerful leadership. If it has one strong leadership, it can easily balance its relationship with regional friend and foe and deal smartly with external power as well. With current type of leadership playing with big external power BD will bring more danger in future for its people.

1) No, USA was not a tyrant in WWII. It was Japan who was tyrant since early 20th Century. Read the history before you say Japan was a good country. Its tyranny was stopped at the end of war by USA.

2)Noreiga is a small peanut.

3) USA protects Israel, but it also protected Kuwait from an agressive Iraq led by Saddam Hossain. Now, it is protecting other Arab states from the tyranny of Iran.

4) There is no reason for US Army to leave japan. US is protecting Japan from China and North Korea. After WWII USA protected Japan from USSR and from communism. Japan's entire development process started with selling cheap goods to US market, the same as we and China are doing now. Japan and the Japanese do not want US troops to leave.

5) USA is outsider also to Japan, S. Korea, taiwan and all other countries of SE Asia. But, it protects them from aggression or intimidation by big countries.

6) In south asia India is a bully that China cannot do anything about except to sell its weapons to BD. Note, Sikkim. Note also the case of Nepal and Bhutan. China has direct border with these countries. But, it does not pursue a policy of conflict to safeguard these countries from being forced to take a role of puppets of India.

7) China has never participated in any war that Pakistan fought against India. So, China wants to sell its weapons, but is not willing to intefere in the matters of south asian countries. It means China has accepted an Indian hegemony in south asia.

8) USA is the only power that is willing now to put a barricade between a bullying India and a sufferer BD. I think, after so many talks USA will not go back.

9) USA is not an external player, it is a global player. USA sees UN military missions by BD troops as an extension of its hand. When its own troops are not welcome in many countries, BD's are. So, BD has become a very useful tool to keep peace worldwide. This is compatible with American policy.

10) BD is not a chessboard of USA, but has become one at the hand of India. BD must neutralize Indian hegemony with US assistance. To do so, it is not necessary to become unfriendly with China.

11) USA is not seeking a military direct presence in BD, therefore, no way a tie-up with USA will only antagonize the Talibans. Without a US presence Talibans have already successfully demolished Budhist and Hindu temples. Why to blame USA?

12) Bangladesh needs a strong leadership, but it will not suffice if the country is not prosperous economically. What is the use of a strong leadership snake unless it can bite. BD needs US and EU markets to accumulate poison in its teeth. So, a friendly USA is what we need at this moment.

13) Bangladesh cannot afford to bite a friendly US hand and destroy its future, first economically and then by the Talibans. An economically poor BD is a recipe to invite the ignorant Talibans. Note how superstitious they can be. They have shot a 14 year old girl in Pakistan, Malala Yousufzai, in the head because she was always insisting on women's education.

 

[kalu_miah]

1) No, USA was not a tyrant in WWII. It was Japan who was tyrant since early 20th Century. Read the history before you say Japan was a good country. Its tyranny was stopped at the end of war by USA.

2)Noreiga is a small peanut.

3) USA protects Israel, but it also protected Kuwait from an agressive Iraq led by Saddam Hossain. Now, it is protecting other Arab states from the tyranny of Iran.

4) There is no reason for US Army to leave japan. US is protecting Japan from China and North Korea. After WWII USA protected Japan from USSR and from communism. Japan's entire development process started with selling cheap goods to US market, the same as we and China are doing now. Japan and the Japanese do not want US troops to leave.

5) USA is outsider also to Japan, S. Korea, taiwan and all other countries of SE Asia. But, it protects them from aggression or intimidation by big countries.

6) In south asia India is a bully that China cannot do anything about except to sell its weapons to BD. Note, Sikkim. Note also the case of Nepal and Bhutan. China has direct border with these countries. But, it does not pursue a policy of conflict to safeguard these countries from being forced to take a role of puppets of India.

7) China has never participated in any war that Pakistan fought against India. So, China wants to sell its weapons, but is not willing to intefere in the matters of south asian countries. It means China has accepted an Indian hegemony in south asia.

8) USA is the only power that is willing now to put a barricade between a bullying India and a sufferer BD. I think, after so many talks USA will not go back.

9) USA is not an external player, it is a global player. USA sees UN military missions by BD troops as an extension of its hand. When its own troops are not welcome in many countries, BD's are. So, BD has become a very useful tool to keep peace worldwide. This is compatible with American policy.

10) BD is not a chessboard of USA, but has become one at the hand of India. BD must neutralize Indian hegemony with US assistance. To do so, it is not necessary to become unfriendly with China.

11) USA is not seeking a military direct presence in BD, therefore, no way a tie-up with USA will only antagonize the Talibans. Without a US presence Talibans have already successfully demolished Budhist and Hindu temples. Why to blame USA?

12) Bangladesh needs a strong leadership, but it will not suffice if the country is not prosperous economically. What is the use of a strong leadership snake unless it can bite. BD needs US and EU markets to accumulate poison in its teeth. So, a friendly USA is what we need at this moment.

13) Bangladesh cannot afford to bite a friendly US hand and destroy its future, first economically and then by the Talibans. An economically poor BD is a recipe to invite the ignorant Talibans. Note how superstitious they can be. They have shot a 14 year old girl in Pakistan, Malala Yousufzai, in the head because she was always insisting on women's education.

Excellent post eastwatch.

planetsoldier, come to our site and talk to us, we can also use PM there. We will explain in more detail.

No powerful country is free from wrong doing, power always corrupts. That is how it was in the past, that is how it is today and that is how it will be tomorrow. To gain power you almost always have to go through unfair means.

Have you lived in any western country? It always helps to know the character of actual people before we judge them.

The US led West made some blunders in the past, but times change and interests change. For countries and nations, there are no permanent friends, but only permanent interests.

We really do not know the details of the US plan in Bangladesh and the region, but we should look at the details and then make up our mind, without paying too much attention to what happened in the past and in other parts of the world. Every situation, time (era) and place (geography) has its own unique geopolitics.

I support the US involvement in South East Asia, East Asia and greater GCC for the next few decades, as there is not much other alternative, but I think it is better that the US should get out of Afghanistan. Russia is no longer god-less communist and atheist and there is no reason to stop Russian influence to extend to Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Its a natural fit.

So geography plays a big role and in a way determines who should be active where.

Hopefully people do not misunderstand that just because I live in the US, I am a blind supporter of the US. I am just trying to recommend the right approach for a particular region, using my own theory.

 

[scholseys]

1) No, USA was not a tyrant in WWII. It was Japan who was tyrant since early 20th Century. Read the history before you say Japan was a good country. Its tyranny was stopped at the end of war by USA.

2)Noreiga is a small peanut.

3) USA protects Israel, but it also protected Kuwait from an agressive Iraq led by Saddam Hossain. Now, it is protecting other Arab states from the tyranny of Iran.

4) There is no reason for US Army to leave japan. US is protecting Japan from China and North Korea. After WWII USA protected Japan from USSR and from communism. Japan's entire development process started with selling cheap goods to US market, the same as we and China are doing now. Japan and the Japanese do not want US troops to leave.

5) USA is outsider also to Japan, S. Korea, taiwan and all other countries of SE Asia. But, it protects them from aggression or intimidation by big countries.

6) In south asia India is a bully that China cannot do anything about except to sell its weapons to BD. Note, Sikkim. Note also the case of Nepal and Bhutan. China has direct border with these countries. But, it does not pursue a policy of conflict to safeguard these countries from being forced to take a role of puppets of India.

7) China has never participated in any war that Pakistan fought against India. So, China wants to sell its weapons, but is not willing to intefere in the matters of south asian countries. It means China has accepted an Indian hegemony in south asia.

8) USA is the only power that is willing now to put a barricade between a bullying India and a sufferer BD. I think, after so many talks USA will not go back.

9) USA is not an external player, it is a global player. USA sees UN military missions by BD troops as an extension of its hand. When its own troops are not welcome in many countries, BD's are. So, BD has become a very useful tool to keep peace worldwide. This is compatible with American policy.

10) BD is not a chessboard of USA, but has become one at the hand of India. BD must neutralize Indian hegemony with US assistance. To do so, it is not necessary to become unfriendly with China.

11) USA is not seeking a military direct presence in BD, therefore, no way a tie-up with USA will only antagonize the Talibans. Without a US presence Talibans have already successfully demolished Budhist and Hindu temples. Why to blame USA?

12) Bangladesh needs a strong leadership, but it will not suffice if the country is not prosperous economically. What is the use of a strong leadership snake unless it can bite. BD needs US and EU markets to accumulate poison in its teeth. So, a friendly USA is what we need at this moment.

13) Bangladesh cannot afford to bite a friendly US hand and destroy its future, first economically and then by the Talibans. An economically poor BD is a recipe to invite the ignorant Talibans. Note how superstitious they can be. They have shot a 14 year old girl in Pakistan, Malala Yousufzai, in the head because she was always insisting on women's education.

What have you been smoking? Are you a paid awami league poster?