Dumaguete Info Search


F-35Bs…West Philippine Sea

Discussion in 'Military and Veterans' started by Obliged Friend, Aug 2, 2021.

  1. Notmyrealname

    Notmyrealname DI Forum Luminary Highly Rated Poster Showcase Reviewer

    Messages:
    4,939
    Trophy Points:
    386
    Ratings:
    +5,610 / 2,892
    China, NK, Iran all have something in common. They don' have any form of Democracy and so IMO their rulers have no validity. They persuade their people that everyone else is bullying them and use that to further suppress their people. Let them (along with a few other countries) join the Free World and then ALL the world becomes free and international threats and disputes will decline rapidly. Countries like China need to agree with World arbitration or suffer the consequences. This path of toleration and downright appeasement is making the world a more dangerous place day by day. Do people really think it is going to get better???
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. Jens K

    Jens K DI Senior Member

    Messages:
    551
    Trophy Points:
    250
    Ratings:
    +765 / 47
    Blood Type:
    AB+
    There’s many shades of grey in the way different countries are governed, there’s no clear right or wrong and certainly no ultimate authority to decide which govt is legitimate and which isn’t. Certainly I don’t think the US or NATO should decide that. Maybe the UN? They however won’t, due to vetoing parties on either side.

    We’ve seen how well it works to bomb democracy and a foreign (western) mindset into countries a number of times now. It just doesn’t. It would be a mistake to try with the biggest possible target. Generals who probably spent their life in the armed forces obviously advocate war, coz everything looks like a nail if the only tool you know is a hammer.

    Reciprocity is fine, push back where China pushes the boundaries, but that means to actually be there and do it, not only with military, but with better ideas and economic force. escalating by getting out the nukes is a game where everybody will lose, especially the people you want to “free” from their government. See Iran, see Syria, see Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq.

    China is clever, they use money and economics to gain influence all over the world. The west would do good to do the same, instead of getting out the nukes. If that’s all we can, we actually don’t deserve to lead the world.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. Rye83

    Rye83 with pastrami Admin Secured Account Highly Rated Poster SC Connoisseur Veteran Army

    Messages:
    13,106
    Trophy Points:
    451
    Occupation:
    FIRE
    Location:
    Valencia
    Ratings:
    +16,069 / 3,795
    Blood Type:
    O+
    You have to be careful with democracy in this region. They just might elect an even more religious extremist government into power...which has what been proven to happen. Sometimes a brutal strong man dictatorship is the best for stability in the region.
     
  4. Notmyrealname

    Notmyrealname DI Forum Luminary Highly Rated Poster Showcase Reviewer

    Messages:
    4,939
    Trophy Points:
    386
    Ratings:
    +5,610 / 2,892
    The authority I would choose to define a legitimate country is one where the people have freedom - I know freedom is on a spectrum but China = free, Canada =free? My answer would be a very clear NO/YES.

    The UN is inadequate (useless, in fact) and the free world needs to make decisions (just as they came together in WW2 for freedom from a horrible future). I am aware of military people wanting war (for the reason you gave plus links to the arms-industry) but that makes certain countries even more dangerous (btw, I have no shares in weapons' companies!).

    Economic force does not work. Sanctions are a form of economic force and they don't work. Do we get China off their fortified stolen islands by refusing to sell them fence panels (I quote this as an example because once they bought up the world supply)? They own a lot of the USA's debt, so who holds the Aces? Perhaps the west could help out more in Africa and other regions where China is stealing influence - but will that get China off the local stolen islands?

    If getting out the big weapons and opposing tyranny means the west does not "deserve to lead the world." then I am pleased that Great Britain and allies did not think that in the 1930s or the USA in 1941.
     
  5. john boy

    john boy DI Forum Luminary Highly Rated Poster

    Messages:
    2,694
    Trophy Points:
    376
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Wirral near Liverpool UK
    Ratings:
    +1,155 / 230
    An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind ( Mahatma Gandhi )
    What man can't do, nature will do for us and that will be to unite this world in a final fight for survival.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  6. Notmyrealname

    Notmyrealname DI Forum Luminary Highly Rated Poster Showcase Reviewer

    Messages:
    4,939
    Trophy Points:
    386
    Ratings:
    +5,610 / 2,892
    I respect Gandhi but it really depends who takes the eye out first! My saying would be "Blind your enemy before he blinds you".

    Will nature unite the World? Are wealthy countries doing enough to help vaccinate the rest of the world? It seems not - in spite of the fact that any new very lethal variants will come back to hit most of those wealthy countries. They still seem to prefer to triple vaccinate their own populations than to donate vaccines in sufficient numbers to other countries. Will water shortages (due to climate change) unite the world or cause wars to retain supplies (e.g. destroying dams holding back water in the country upstream)? Will food shortages unite the world or cause wars between countries? I would like to think the world will unite but when China (as an example) steals most of the South China Sea to plunder its resources, not caring about the cost to the other Asian countries affected, then I see no evidence. And man is programmed to take care of itself selfishly rather than others - that fits ''survival of the fittest' (the ones who can grab most for national or personal survival).
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. Rye83

    Rye83 with pastrami Admin Secured Account Highly Rated Poster SC Connoisseur Veteran Army

    Messages:
    13,106
    Trophy Points:
    451
    Occupation:
    FIRE
    Location:
    Valencia
    Ratings:
    +16,069 / 3,795
    Blood Type:
    O+
    Not China. They could bluff but they would likely get called on it. International politics and finances are far too complicated and intertwined to worry about such a thing. They have also been reducing the amount of US debt they own over the years. If owning all that debt was holding aces they wouldn't be selling it off.
     
  8. john boy

    john boy DI Forum Luminary Highly Rated Poster

    Messages:
    2,694
    Trophy Points:
    376
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Wirral near Liverpool UK
    Ratings:
    +1,155 / 230
    I agree with that, but when nature acts out it's path and many countries experience " permanent global flooding" then and only then, will we see if humanity
    will change for the better. Sadly like you I have my doubt's.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. Dutchie

    Dutchie DI Senior Member Showcase Reviewer Veteran Army

    Messages:
    951
    Trophy Points:
    306
    Location:
    Dumaguete
    Ratings:
    +1,743 / 123
    Blood Type:
    A+
    I read about and remember similar arguments (about appeasement and such) being made in Western Europe after Hungary '56 and the Prague Spring in '68 about the bullies in the Sovjet Union and the repression they imposed on eastern Europe. At the height of the cold war in the early seventies there were not many people thinking "it would get better". Yet we all know how that ended. A lot of countries enjoying a much better life now, and we got there without bloodshed.

    While I am in no way a supporter of the ruling "sect/dynasty/would be communist party" in any of those three countries, I do think Iran has a point when they argue there was an international agreement in place with regard to their nuclear facilities that was unilaterally axed by one of the parties to the agreement for no good reason, and against the wishes of all the other signatories.
    If I would need to award a Bully Trophy in that one it would definitely go to the guy who still might end up in jail for attempted insurrection (somewhat undemocratic wouldn't you agree?).

    NK, it would seem to me, is in serious trouble economically as well as politically, exacerbated by Covid induced hardships (for the general population) in ways we can only guess at beyond the negative impact on what little trade they used to have with China. I'm thinking we can just wait for implosion of the regime in Pyongyang at some point in the not too distant future, hopefully followed by a german style reunification.

    China will be a harder nut to crack obviously. The western world has allowed itself to become dependent on China in many sectors of industrial production, which in turn has fueled the phenomenal economic growth in China over the past decades. That dependency limits the options in dealing with China's "badboy politics".
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Notmyrealname

    Notmyrealname DI Forum Luminary Highly Rated Poster Showcase Reviewer

    Messages:
    4,939
    Trophy Points:
    386
    Ratings:
    +5,610 / 2,892
    I read he intends to run again in 2024 - and who would bet against him winning! :(

    This would be the ideal - it is impossible not to feel sorry for the brainwashed NK people and just imagine what a country a united Korea would be. The worry is whether Kim-the-haircut (or his crazy sis) take down the temple with them or the Chinese decide to move into NK rather than have a united Korea on their borders.

    I think those living between just after WW2 and to this point (plus a little beyond ) have maybe had the best of it.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
Loading...