11
   

China finally comes to the dance....with Putin.

 
 
Lash
 
Reply Sat 21 Nov, 2015 05:33 pm
China has practiced military isolationism - for the most part - at least during my life. We may be seeing a departure from that.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/610286/China-preparing-to-team-up-with-Russia-in-Syria-Boost-for-Putin-in-battle-against-ISIS

I'm pretty damned unhappy about the possibility of this new alliance.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 11 • Views: 5,014 • Replies: 97

 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sat 21 Nov, 2015 06:01 pm
@Lash,
I said that over a year ago. Few people have noticed yet. They will.

It is as of right now Russia/China/Iran . They are trying to get the Saudis. I think they will get India but so far the efforts seem half hearted. It is them against the West, and I dont like our chances. The West has way too much dry rot.
Lash
 
  0  
Reply Sat 21 Nov, 2015 06:15 pm
@hawkeye10,
I've noticed you mention an alliance, but I never saw any evidence of it until now.

:/
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sat 21 Nov, 2015 06:36 pm
@Lash,
It was clear when Putin did the energy deals with China that they had an understanding. Putin sold cheap, you knew that he was getting a kickback just not financial because Putin is not about money, he is about rebuilding the Russian Dynasty just as Beijing is about rebuilding the Chinese Dynasty. Russia and Chna have tons in common, and there is room enough for both, so long as Russia understands that they are the junior partner. And they do. The fact that Putin is all about power and knows power intimately, not about money, is why almost no one in the West can fathom him. Which is why he keeps being able to do things that completely shock us (like Trump).

We had better catch up to reality PDQ, because we face China trying to do the same thing, and they have 20 times the raw power of Putin's Russia. If we dont learn now we are toast, and it will happen quickly.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sat 21 Nov, 2015 07:17 pm
Quote:
It could have been a scene straight out of "Dr. Strangelove" when President Vladimir V. Putin stepped into the Russian Ministry of Defense's brand new, three-tiered, multibillion-dollar control center this week, for a war briefing that had its fair share of movie-like pageantry.

The fortified National Control Defense Center was Putin's first stop after officials confirmed that the Russian charter jet crash that claimed 224 lives last month was the result of an act of terror.



On movie-theater-size screens, live broadcasts showed long-range strategic bombers taking off from Russian air bases to fly sorties over Syria. Putin instructed commanders in Syria to "make contact with the French and work with them as allies" as Russia seeks a central role in a proposed anti-terrorist coalition.

But the real star of the show may have been the building itself, which is designed to be a new nerve center for the Russian military that will coordinate military action around the world, including ballistic missile launches and strategic nuclear deployments.

The building is roughly the equivalent of the U.S. National Military Command Center used by the Pentagon, but as one Russian state news agency noted in a breathless headline this week, "Russian Defense Data Center Outperforms US Facility Threefold: Official."

The center, which is fortified and said to sit on top of a maze of underground tunnels, is on the Frunze Naberezhnaya on the left bank of the Moscow river, a little over two miles from Red Square.

It was finished in 2014 and is part of a massive, decade-long modernization of Russia's army, which has cost hundreds of billions of dollars, but has also produced noted improvements, from the expertise of Russian troops deployed during the Crimea operation to the recent cruise missile strikes launched from the Caspian Sea.

The new national defense center also includes a helicopter pad that was deployed on the Moscow River late last year and can accommodate Russia's Mi-8 transport helicopter. In case of a war, it would be the country's premier communications center, and one Russian commander compared it to the military headquarters of the Soviet Union during World War II


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/11/21/vladimir-putins-massive-triple-decker-war-room-revealed/
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2015 04:53 am
"Battle with ISIS . . . " --crap like that cracks me up. Putin did not send troops and planes to Syria to battle ISIS. If ISIS gets hurt, that's a side issue. He sent troops there to prop up Assad's regime, just as the Soviet Union propped up his father. More than anything else, Putin's a contrarian, who takes a road divergent from Europe and the United States for reasons of his political prestige at home, and to reassure former Soviet clients. Putin doesn't give a rat's ass about ISIS.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2015 05:02 am
@Setanta,
Quote:
Putin doesn't give a rat's ass about ISIS.


If going all in against Daesh will embarrass the US and Europe that would change in a heartbeat:

Quote:
Ali Alfoneh, senior fellow at the Foundation for the Defence of Democracies, said: “President François Hollande, who cannot count on Washington deploying ground forces in Syria, is now reaching out to Iran and Russia to form an alliance in the fight against Daesh [Isis].

“This in turn legitimises Iran’s military engagement in Syria, which Washington considers as one of the root causes of emergence of Daesh in that country. In that sense, the terrorist attacks in Paris came as manna from heaven for Tehran.”

http://www.theguardian.com/world/iran-blog/2015/nov/19/paris-attacks-iran-strengthen-rouhani-isis-assad

Lash
 
  0  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2015 05:06 am
@hawkeye10,
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/1576896
China and Russia, increasing collaboration.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2015 05:18 am
@hawkeye10,
Whoever wrote that wouldn't be very very damned bright, if that's what they were actually saying--it isn't. First, this administration, albeit unwittingly, helped to create ISIS when they sent American military adivsers to Syria to train the anti-Assad rebels. For those who actually know what's going on in Syria, the United States is already embarrassed. Second, American presidents only have limited war powers, absent a declaration of war by Congress. Upon whom would the United States declare war, even if one made the silly assumption that Congress would cooperate with such a request from Mr. Obama? Third, although it may have slipped your notice, there's an election coming up. Mr. Obama is unlikely to create a situation in which the Democratic candidate has to run in the midst of an unpopular military adventure. Even Putin is not so stupid as to put Russian ground troops in danger of heavy and mounting casualties, and he doesn't have to worry about elections in the Russian fantasy democracy. Finally, the thrust of the article you quoted and linked concerns Iran's position vis-à-vis the situation in Syria, not anything to do with Putin.

The attacks in Paris have not changed the unwillingness of the United States and the other members of NATO to involve their ground forces in Syria.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2015 05:37 am
@Setanta,
Quote:
The attacks in Paris have not changed the unwillingness of the United States and the other members of NATO to involve their ground forces in Syria.


Putin is in Iran Monday and Hollande is in Moscow Thursday....we shall see. Europe does not want to do anything more and Obama does not want to do anything more, maybe France teams up with putin and Iran.

I am not really expecting it, but it could happen, which is a stunning concept, no one would have considered it 60 days ago. It would be the ultimate rebuke of Obama.

EDIT: there are reports the Daesh has moved their capital to Mosul....I have a feeling that Putin thinks now is the time to finish the job in Syria, that he and France has them on the run. You know he will be sweet talking Hollande, who has pretty much no experience in this sort of thing but no one else is helping and Obama is being a first class prick again so why not Russia?If the iranians were willing to supply more ground troops this will get real interesting real fast.
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2015 05:47 am
@hawkeye10,
You're an idiot . . . but we already knew that. You run off and grab the first article you can find about Syria, and quote and link it. The article has nothing to do with French, or Russian or Chinese involvement in Syria, or a possible alliance of China and Russia--which is, in case you've forgotten, the subject of Sofia's thread. You are always so eager to portray yourself as wise and possessed of a sophisticated knowledge of current events, and all you do is make yourself look like a fool.
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2015 06:00 am
@Lash,
That article specifically says that the central Asian conference opposed military intervention. Apart from that, the article is more than three years old. The first article you linked suggests that Russian ground troops may be sent in, and that Chinese troops may join them. But it is speculation at best, they present no reliable evidence that it will happen. ISIS has, or once had, about 15,000 fighters. That's the equivalent of a light infantry division. It would take s significant commitment of ground troops to hunt them down and eradicate them, which is very likely why no one has yet made such an effort. Since the beginning of the 20th century, Russia and France have often been allied--whether or not that tradition means anything to Putin is another matter, and in my opinion, doubtful. This is a case in which i will believe it if i see it.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  0  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2015 06:10 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

"Battle with ISIS . . . " --crap like that cracks me up. Putin did not send troops and planes to Syria to battle ISIS.


Hawkeye never lets facts get in the way of wishful thinking. He also thinks Turkey will support the Kurds in their fight against IS.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2015 06:27 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

You're an idiot . . . but we already knew that. You run off and grab the first article you can find about Syria, and quote and link it. The article has nothing to do with French, or Russian or Chinese involvement in Syria, or a possible alliance of China and Russia--which is, in case you've forgotten, the subject of Sofia's thread. You are always so eager to portray yourself as wise and possessed of a sophisticated knowledge of current events, and all you do is make yourself look like a fool.

When you run out of things to say on the thread topics you do have the option to stay quiet...mumbo-jumbo is not required.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2015 06:36 am
Quote:
But Beijing knows that China cannot play an active military role at the moment and is therefore in favor of negotiations. The country's chances of boosting its influence in global political terms are good. Its basic argument is that the Syrians should decide about Syria and the country has to maintain its unity and integrity. This position is surprisingly close to that of Germany. The US, on the other hand, wants regime change at all costs, even if this is achieved through military means. Russia wants to maintain the regime at all costs, even if this is achieved through military means.
Since Putin started letting weapons speak, the two sides have had to be extremely careful that an American does not end up shooting a Russian and vice versa.
With Beijing's entrance in the game, the chances of a negotiated solution have been improved.
Merkel and Beijing
The Germans in particular are hoping that Beijing will play a constructive role, as it did in the nuclear negotiations with Iran. China ended up being an important mediator between Tehran and Washington, for which it has received repeated praise in German government circles, albeit quietly so as not to upset the US.
Angela Merkel would be glad if China took over the reins as soon as possible. She is under extreme pressure because of the refugees. Stability and peace in Syria are now far more important to her than regime change or punishing Assad. Berlin's interests are therefore more in line with those of Russia and China than those of the US. However, Merkel does not want to position herself openly against Washington and does not want to be seen whispering with Putin.
However, she can definitely make it clear that peace is not possible without the UN veto powers Russia and China, without upsetting Washington. That's what she meant last week in Beijing when she said it was "high time" a "political and diplomatic solution" were found.
The problem for her now is that as long as Assad is sitting more safely in his seat Beijing is under less pressure and will therefore wait patiently for a more opportune constellation and a simpler solution. Beijing wants to avoid playing a different role for as long as possible. Putin has also got time. He wants his seat at the negotiating table to be as big as possible. If the price for this is that he will have to continue bombing for a few months, so be it.

http://www.dw.com/en/sierens-china-no-fast-peace-in-syria/a-18829095

Obama is increasingly out of step on the question of Assad. Pretty much only the US and the Sunni Arab states are determined that Assad has to go now. For Obama to say as he did a few hours ago that we will not consider the question was a prick move. Then there was this:

Quote:
The president said there was increasing awareness on the part of the Russians that Islamic State represents a greater threat to them "than anything else in the region." He has criticized President Vladimir Putin for being more interested in propping up President Bashar Assad than combating a terrorist threat that he said took down a Russian airliner; on Sunday he reiterated that Assad could not play a role in any solution to the Syrian civil war.

"There are large numbers of members of this coalition including President Hollande who agree with me on that," he said.


http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-obama-news-conference-20151122-story.html

I dont know that Hollande ever had a position on Assad, I assume he did, but these days what he cares about is Daesh. Obama knows this. He was lying. As for Obama's opinion of what Putin is thinking that is ******* Hilarious...Obama has a near flawless record of being wrong about Putin. For obama to even pretend that he does at this point takes balls.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2015 06:58 am
Quote:
Crocker had said: “This is your legacy. Look what’s happened in Iraq in the four years since we pulled out, militarily and politically. Who’s in our space? [Isis] is in part of it. Iran and their proxy militias, who are commanded by men who murdered American servicemen, are in other parts of it. That’s not good.”

He added: “With the president and with his inner circle of advisers ... there’s a profound allergy to in any way getting re-engaged with Iraq, even politically ... They got elected on getting out of Iraq and that’s just hardwired into them.
.
.
.
Crocker added that a large-scale Isis attack on America was likely. “The probability is so high, we should be planning our day-after strategy the day before. With that apocalyptic vision now in front of us, how are we going to respond?”

He bemoaned the lurches in US policy under Bush and Obama.

“I learnt two things in a foreign service career [of 30 years],” he said. “The first is: be careful what you get into because unintended consequences are always in force.

“The second is: be careful what you get out of because the consequences of disengagement can be as grave as those of intervention ... In Iraq we screwed it up at both ends.”

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/paris-attacks-look-at-obamas-junior-team-now/story-fnb64oi6-1227618595323

If we will not do it someone else will. That is why Putin in in Syria. And Iran. Iran even has fighter jets working with Putin's force. And China has some people on the ground too ....running radar stations for putin/assad.
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2015 07:11 am
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
Iran even has fighter jets working with Putin's force.


News alert Iran cooperates with Russia, just like it's always done since the Shah was overthrown.

They're propping up Assad, the guy who released all the Islamic militants in the first place.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2015 07:47 am
Consider the source.

Quote:
There is bullshit, utter bullshit and Daily Express headlines. Reading the paper on Wednesday 1 April, I hadn’t the faintest idea which stories were supposed to be serious and which were April fools.

As the website expressbingo.org.uk points out, the paper has only about 12 front pages:

Benefit Cheats/Immigrants/Criminals Will Eat Your Babies

A Miracle Cure for Alzheimer’s/Diabetes/Cancer/Arthritis is Just Around the Corner

Madeline McCann is ... About To Be Found/Still Missing/Somewhere Even More Improbable Than Last Time




House Prices Soar Beyond Your Wildest Dreams ... etc.

The same themes come round and round, the wording marginally altered. But the story that fills more front pages than any other is the weather.

Express weather is not like normal weather. It’s not the weather we experience, or at least not yet. Express weather is what you might encounter on Mars or Venus: extreme heat or extreme cold interspersed with wild storms.

That its predictions are as contradictory as they are bizarre and that they seldom come to pass seems to deter their repetition not one jot. The newspaper appears to assume that its readers have thistledown memories: no recollection of the predictions it made even a few days before. Given that people continue to buy this rubbish, it may, unfortunately, be right.


http://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2015/apr/09/daily-express-weather-warning-beware-a-shower-of-extreme-inaccuracy

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GGeWfb1wCB8/TVXJDvC0oaI/AAAAAAAAC_E/cmkM-lkRngI/s1600/Daily-Express.jpg

https://hotterthanapileofcurry.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/15406009.jpg?w=500

http://www.septicisle.info/uploaded_images/1596101-711422.jpg

http://www.septicisle.info/uploaded_images/1595579-711413.jpg

http://www.anorak.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Daily_Express_6_2_2014.jpg
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-YdMasunEuew/UGbFLYNPQfI/AAAAAAAAUFg/XSgpxH-_82Q/s1600/0.JPG
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2015 08:42 am
I welcome any articles or fact-based opinions speaking to trends toward China-Russian alliance.

The 2012 article interested me because it records the previous policy agreement and consequent vote from both countries to defer punitive actions against Syria. They're obviously allies to counter the US. I'm interested to see how far that alliance goes.

Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2015 01:26 pm
Perhaps i'm too cynical, but i'd say that Putin's only interest is self-interest, and China considers and has considered for thousands of years that all foreigners are barbarians, little better than animals. I'd think it would take a matter much more crucial to both nations to get a genuine alliance upon which both are willing to act. China has no stake in the middle east.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » China finally comes to the dance....with Putin.
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 08/18/2019 at 05:00:19