Why won't the US end issues and take some names.

I was not referring to how they treat their own citizens, although of course that's pretty bad too, but to how they treat other countries.

What's wrong with India? I don't see them threatening their smaller neighbors. I'd much prefer India to be the world superpower than China. Which, if we're lucky, should happen by the turn of the 22nd century or so.
How is engaging in a few minor border disputes "threatening their smaller neighbors" who were reacting in essentially the very same way? How is China being a "world superpower" when they haven't really engaged in any imperialistic activities? Nor have they built a military which is capable of projecting power any place but near their own borders?
 
So, you don't like China and don't care about Chinese...

They don't like my country or my people either, so... :rolleyes:

How is engaging in a few minor border disputes "threatening their smaller neighbors" who were reacting in essentially the very same way? How is China being a "world superpower" when they haven't really engaged in any imperialistic activities? Nor have they built a military which is capable of projecting power any place but near their own borders?

Unsurprising that you'd turn up here. You don't appear to be informed about the situation at all.
 
They don't like my country or my people either, so...

That must be why China is holding up the US by providing all their needed credit then... because 'they' don't like you or your country.

Unsurprising that you'd turn up here. You don't appear to be informed about the situation at all.

Actually, Formy's post pretty much sums up what China is compared to the US, who still spend more on defense then the next 5 countries put together.
 
That must be why China is holding up the US by providing all their needed credit then... because 'they' don't like you or your country.

Did I say I'm American? Funny how quickly you assumed that.

Anyway, do you actually believe that China is providing credit for the US because they like them? :crazyeye: It's just business, and China is doing it for their own benefit. If you're going to make an argument, try something less absurd next time.

Actually, Formy's post pretty much sums up what China is compared to the US, who still spend more on defense then the next 5 countries put together.

Won't be the case in a few more years if China keeps up its 12% increases in military spending every year. (For comparison, China's current GDP growth rate is 7% per year.) Hmm...wonder what they're spending for?
 
Did I say I'm American? Funny how quickly you assumed that.

Well, you didn't mention any country, so my bad. I noticed you're in the Filippines. You are aware the Filippines have a Chinese minority, I'm sure. They must have moved there 'because they don't like you or your country'.

Anyway, do you actually believe that China is providing credit for the US because they like them? :crazyeye: It's just business, and China is doing it for their own benefit. If you're going to make an argument, try something less absurd next time.

I guess sarcasm is lost on you... As is the irony that China is actually financing the US deficit spending (including their oversized military budget).

Won't be the case in a few more years if China keeps up its 12% increases in military spending every year. (For comparison, China's current GDP growth rate is 7% per year.) Hmm...wonder what they're spending for?

They can keep doing that (as they have been), it still won't amount to much. Even when the USSR was still around the US were the only true superpower. But that aside, the USA - after reductions - still have 11,000 nuclear missiles compared to the Chinese 200. The Chinese have no fleet to speak of. The US could reduce their military spending by 12% per year, it still wouldn't make any difference globally.
 
Well, you didn't mention any country, so my bad. I noticed you're in the Filippines. You are aware the Filippines have a Chinese minority, I'm sure. They must have moved there 'because they don't like you or your country'.

I would certainly be aware that there is a Chinese minority here, since I am part of it, at least partially. There is also a distinction between the Chinese here and the Chinese back on the mainland. Most Chinese-Filipinos, including myself, do not support the Chinese government. And I daresay that most of us find the traditional Chinese attitude of cultural and racial superiority a little disgusting.

Oh, and by the way, I somehow doubt that one of the reasons that the Chinese immigrated here was that they "liked the people". Historically that hasn't been very high up on the list of reasons to immigrate somewhere.

I guess sarcasm is lost on you... As is the irony that China is actually financing the US deficit spending (including their oversized military budget).

That's a good way to cover your tracks, calling it sarcasm. And it's a good thing that the US military budget is "oversized", as you call it, when we have dangerous revisionist powers like China and Russia around.

They can keep doing that (as they have been), it still won't amount to much. Even when the USSR was still around the US were the only true superpower. But that aside, the USA - after reductions - still have 11,000 nuclear missiles compared to the Chinese 200. The Chinese have no fleet to speak of. The US could reduce their military spending by 12% per year, it still wouldn't make any difference globally.

Debatable whether the US was the only true superpower while the USSR was around. It's true that economically the USSR was no match for the US, but militarily they were around even.

Far from having "no fleet", the PLAN is quite large, though I'll grant you that most of the ships are older and on the smaller end of the scale, and I could even be wrong on that part. The nuclear subs are pretty new and pretty threatening, however. The PLAN wouldn't stand a chance against the USN, and I think they'd struggle even against the JMSDF, but they can certainly handle the small Southeast Asian nations who are China's primary targets right now.

Your claim that the US reducing their military budget by 12% every year (or conversely, China increasing their military budget by 12% every year) would make little difference is at odds with both basic mathematics and the predictions of experts such as IISS and SIPRI.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2013/03/daily-chart-11
http://www.economist.com/node/21552193

The first article says that at the rate they're going, China's military spending will equal America's by 2023 at the earliest and 2032 at the latest. It also says that China's military spending has actually been increasing by an average of 15.6% per year, even higher than the 12% I mentioned. Whoops, my bad.

Now add to that the fact that while China increases its military spending at double-digit rates, the US is proposing defense budget cuts through sequestration, and what do you get?

Double-digit percentage increases annually would be some cause for concern even if the country in question were not actively alienating most of its neighbors. When that country is alienating its neighbors, then it becomes downright alarming.
 
Sorry if somewhere in this thread, I sound a little angered and I'll try to make this an intelligent topic, not a rant, but this kind of upsets me.

So Obama's approval rating is at an all time low with the recent exchange of 5 Taliban... leaders for the release of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl. I'm not to sure whether they were leaders or not, but they were in Guantanamo Bay so they weren't just the average grunt.

It's not hard to tell how that was a bad idea. A horrible idea. Wow that was just moronic.

Let's get started. Our man was a traitor. He abandoned his post. He assumed the risk of being captured and he was. I don't feel bad for him because of that. He is a traitor. Now, I know the media has spun it a little to make him look like he wasn't a traitor and such, and if that's true then I might be wrong to not feel bad about him. And if we want to get him back, that's OK. Get him back. But we can't baby these other countries with a juicy offer of 5 Taliban higher ups. The US is the leading in military technology around the world. Why was this issue resolved with a trade when it should have been the US threatening to FLATTEN Afghanistan if they didn't give us our man back. What's the problem with America taking some names to end issues like this? Why wasn't America telling Afghanistan that we'd nuke the stuffing out of them if we didn't get our man back? It worked with ending our conflict with Japan. We know if some country tried to nuke us, we'd unleash all hell on them back.

I know we could never justify blackmailing other countries to get what we want, but if someone messes with us, why can't we just end them? Why is it that we have to put up with that?

We didn't threaten to "flatten Afghanistan" because we are not at war with the nation of Afghanistan. We are at war with the various insurgent groups active within Afghanistan.

Also the reason we don't outright threaten countries in the way you suggest is because we at least try (not always competently or successfully) to set a good example and show restraint when it comes to using our immense power. Remember: just because you can do something doesn't mean you should do it.
 
Back
Top Bottom