Posted on 05/27/2015 10:08:15 PM PDT by Altenkrug
A Chinese state owned newspaper warns of a conflict with the US, unless Washington stops demanding that China halts land reclamation and construction projects in the South China Sea.
The Global Times says ‘War is inevitable’ unless the US backs down on Chinese land reclamation and the consequent rights to territorial boundaries of such man made islands. The islands that are man-made are in disputed waters of several regional nations. Some of these nations have close ties with the United States.
The US maintains that it is also maintaining the free passage of the waters of the South China Sea for all shipping. China maintains that she has historical claims on the Spratly islands.
The creation of the artificial islands from a patch of rock or land in the middle of the high seas, and the follow-up construction and the territorial claims over water, land and air, is a new phenomenon that is a game changer. China wants the United States to accept her as an equal, if not a stronger player on the world scene, and she is changing the rules of the game.
(Excerpt) Read more at yournewswire.com ...
Obama = Incoherence. This gives our enemies time to gain a foothold and fortify. When the war comes, our losses will be higher than what they should have been, unless we adopt total war, and with Obama, he should not be given that temptation under any means.
Total War, for a malignant narcissist, means “Everybody else but me”.
Great. Just great.
....”We screwed ourselves over when Bill Clinton was POTUS through non fair trade agreements and most favored nations status for the Communist Chinese”....
You got that absolutely right!
I daresay it just might work. They figure maybe they’ve got less than 2 years to do whatever. Same with a lot of nations.
BS. You stand up to the Chinese, you dare them do a Pearl Harvor and wake the sleeping Us-Japan giant. But we are lead by antiUS pu$$ies.
I know they feel they have these less than two years before a likely President Cruz or something comes in.
The Chinese have always been bullies and abusers of their own people as cheap labor. No one holds them accountable for their massive pollution. They are the world’s worst nightmare and have already made some 50+% if their drinking water toxic already. They have to land grab for both water and raw materials or die.
War is a matter of when not if.
Well Obama isn’t operating in the interests of the US to begin with....and I could easily say most in Washington aren’t either except in regard to being re-elected and or holding onto their seats. Aside from that their interests are operating on an entirely different plain then we are informed of, rather we are spoon fed what they want us to believe.
Good question...and that is why there will be no war. We should go in deep debt with Russia, North Korea, and Iran. No more wars can happen after that hahaha! If they want their money back, they can’t go to war with us.
But we are in record national debt already! Who will lend us money to go to war with the Chinese? Oh, wait a minute, we can borrow more money from China to go to war with them!
Millions voiced outrage against Free Trade proponents who sent American technology and hundreds of thousands of American jobs and entire industries to Communist China. All while the U.S. gov waved in tens of millions of low wage illegal aliens. We were told it would improve our lives when in reality only a few made the big fortunes, while much of the middle class was decimated or on the decline.
Those voicing the outrage at this wholesale sell out and transfer of industry were mocked and called isolationist.
Profits regardless of consequences. This could end up really bad, exactly as predicted.
The process of ‘opening up’ China began with RIchard NixOn and Dr. Henry Kissinger. Nixon said we couldn’t ‘run the world’ without China.
Commodore Perry ‘opened up’ Japan to trade and business activity in the 1850’s and we all know what that led to....
So I guess history is on its way to repeating itself with a different nation this time.
If we get into a military conflict with PROC, we can finally us all those munitions 0bama/Jarrett refused to use on isis. A twofer!
Ugly thought. Realistic, though. But blood-soaked money isn't fungible and is of no good to the recipient, at least in an open society ...... oh, wait, I forgot. LSM. Right you are.
Maybe if we could somehow get them to the mat, all those piles of U.S. stash under their mattress would turn to trash. Maybe?
Maybe put the Fed out of business, too.
Of course he does, he's been fighting against America ever since he was a boy, and and his KGB tovarisches and his good friend Vladimir Putin.
Ping
Think twice, citizen. Obama's been tearing our nuclear arsenal down to nothing. I think he's trying to make our strategic arsenal go away by the time he leaves office. It would be the first "tetrafecta" defeat of a great nation by a traitor in all human history: No economy, no strategic forces, two lost wars in place of two victories, and subjectin to Internationalism that must always hate and fear America because of the idea of America, and Americans because of who we are and what we've shown we can do.
They will always hate our guts and pound us mercilessly because that is the logic of Empire.
Mao's Long March culminated in the 1949 victory followed by aggression in Korea.When the Soviet Union affected a reformation China chose to Strike Hard at Tiananmen killing 2,000.
In 1997 Bernstein and Munro published The Coming Conflict with China.
In 1999 Unrestricted Warfare forecast asymmetrical warfare with the U.S.
China is a menace to every regional neighbor and to every nation depending upon freedom of navigation.
The current POTUS evinces a clear and unmistakable Muslim-Marxist bent.
Such a figure will stack U.S. national interest at the bottom of a list, or in an opposite column of null set priorities.
In the interest of the future existence of a United States it is vital to elect a non-Hillary.
Such an anti-American figure capable of selling U.S. uranium to an aggressive Russia will surely accept Chinese bribes.
We need only recall the 1995 200-page fax sent to PLA by Loral (Bernard L. Schwartz) and Hughes (C. Michael Armstrong) deemed a threat to national security by the May 1997 DOD report counteracted by the 1998 Clinton waiver to know that money not patriotism figures with these people.
In the event of a Hillary presidency the money will overshadow the Huang-Chang-Trie era by worlds.
I posit a China in resurgence on a trimillenial warlord continuum.
There is no Munich bargain, only a strategic stance.
Bolton, not Kerry would clarify the issue, for the Middle Kingdom sees earth as its world; we are allowed to live in it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.