by Okeefenokee » Thu Aug 11, 2011 6:50 am
by Fangz » Thu Aug 11, 2011 8:29 am
by AgentX » Mon Aug 15, 2011 10:25 pm
Fangz wrote:If you want to throw around Nazi germany comparisons (which are seriously silly anyway), the closest comparison would be probably the US, actually.
1. Military tradition, disproportionate spending and political deference to military goals? Check
2. Unstable government with substantial xenophobic/racist wing? Check
3. Long term projected resource shortfall requiring acquisition from somewhere? Check
4. Interventionist foreign policy with battle experience from a contained Spanish civil war-style conflict under one's belt? Check
5. Strategic picture showing current advantages but risk of being eclipsed by other powers in the long term? Check
6. Vastly inflated sense of global importance? ...
Well if President Bachmann proposes an Anschluss with Canada, I'd be pretty concerned. In the historical picture pre-WWII, China would seem closest to the Soviet Union or the US.
by Gregg » Wed Aug 17, 2011 9:42 pm
Okeefenokee wrote:What are the odds that in a century people will say about china in 2011 what we now say about germany in the 1930s. Will it really come to pass that anxiety about their rise to power is misplaced or will we look back in hindsight and ask ourselves, "how did we not see their violent aggression coming and why didn't we take action to stop them like we should have taken action to stop hitler before it got too bad."
What are the odds that this gets added to the list of lessons that weren't learned from history? Or is it more likey that it will simply get added to the much more shameful list of xenophobic fear mongering to keep the masses clinging to their protectors' apron strings.
by skengman » Thu Aug 18, 2011 8:06 am
by exposno1 » Thu Aug 18, 2011 8:21 am
Gregg wrote:I think that it is more likely that 10 years from now we will say about China what we currently say about Japan.
by Lie Seeking Missle » Thu Aug 18, 2011 10:32 am
by Gregg » Thu Aug 18, 2011 8:44 pm
by Witten » Fri Aug 19, 2011 3:48 pm
china is not expansionist because it is enormous already
by Fangz » Sat Aug 20, 2011 11:54 am
by Gregg » Sat Aug 20, 2011 12:34 pm
Witten wrote:china is not expansionist because it is enormous already
If China becomes a global superpower of US proportions it will be.
Eventually, China's existing resource problems will reach a point where desperate realpolitik kicks in. China is becoming hungrier, make no mistake. And there will be a time when it comes across a nation with a regime unwilling to give it the resources it needs. History will remember the US the same way it remembers any of the other empires of western civilization.
by Gregg » Sat Aug 20, 2011 12:36 pm
China's real problems are internal . . ..
by Witten » Sat Aug 20, 2011 2:03 pm
I think we've grown out of the age of resource acquisition based expansion. It's generally not efficient, and frequently backfires.
What seems to work better is the construction of diplomatic and economic relationships, and China has done this very well. If there will be resources shortages in the future, China has positioned itself a lot better than say, India, and with its growing relationship with Europe, is well placed to survive the decline of the US. The difference with China and realpolitik is that China has embraced realpolitik from day one. That its foreign policy is so transparent and predictable, instead of the media/ideology driven strategy of the west, is refreshing to its partners.
China's real problems are internal, and I see little reason, or really little way they can solve them by invading countries XYZ.
by Dr. Strangelove » Sat Aug 20, 2011 2:05 pm
by Gregg » Sat Aug 20, 2011 2:26 pm
Dr. Strangelove wrote:China will either collapse or attempt to do what Japan failed to do in the twentieth century. There really is no other outcome for them. Worse than the Empire of Japan, their greater threat is food, not oil and other resources. They face a starvation event that has no parallel in human history.
Their natural aversion to conquest may put them at a disadvantage. So too is the relative strength of Japan and South Korea. It may be the case that the future entails *us* trying to save as many people as possible. Or perhaps a combination of America and Russia, who together control most of the world's arable land. But if peak oil hits before then, or it is triggered by peak oil, I don't think we will be capable of doing much. We will face our own food shortages due to distribution costs and having to adapt to agriculture without fossil fuel-based fertilizers and pesticides.