Obama and danger of World War - Plans for a Permanent Military Base in Australia

[Captain Con O'Sullivan]

Any linked source for the Russian-Siberian thing?

The NATO powers are expert at painting their victims as aggressors and to what they can to provoke. "Strategy of tension..."

Youtube pictures from a Chinese TV broadcast on the joint exercises in 2009. A few years before they were exchanging artillery fire.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4DL5UQy5yw"]Chinese army battle group ready for Russia China joint military exercise 2009 - YouTube[/ame]

Joint Military Helicopter development between Russia and China http://www.ainonline.com/?q=aviation...re-helicopters

By the way- that Phobos launch from Baikonur which went awry last week where a probe to Mars for samples ended up stuck in orbit because of a comms glitch was jointly funded by Russia and China.

[Captain Con O'Sullivan]

Probably. The Americans and Chinese aren't nuts enough to get into a faceoff. Mostly because the US military is on its arse in terms of resources and people unsurprisingly and China aren't stupid enough to fall for an American time schedule ... they've got all the time in the world to watch the US spin itself down the toilet due to overcommitments all over the world.

[Captain Con O'Sullivan]

Just noticed this piece which is recent ...

' Reviewing various areas of energy cooperation, Putin mentioned oil and gas, saying that things have reached the "final stage" before agreement on beginning to sell Russian natural gas to China. He especially went into nuclear power: "We shall develop closer cooperation in nuclear power, and I emphasize that this will be on the basis of the most advanced, modern technologies in the world, so that we shall reduce potential risks practically to zero. Our cooperation is not limited to just building plants. We have outlined coopeation in scientific research, and in preparing and implementing promising projects." Hydroelectric and "alternative" power were also on the agenda.

Both prime ministers welcomed the increasing use of the yuan and the ruble in bilateral trade.

According to Rossiyskaya Gazeta, the investment fund project has been in the works since last winter, when Medvedev at the Davos World Economic Forum announced plans to create a sovereign fund to "share risk with foreign investors through joint investment in projects to modernize our economy." In May the Russian State Duma allocated 62.2 billion rubles (~ $2 billion) to establish the Russian Direct Investment Fund. The head of the China Investment Corporation sits on the RDIF's advisory board (as do representatives of the Korea Investment Corporation, the Kuwait Investment Authority, and various money-center investment funds including Apollo Global Management, Warburg Pincus, and the Blackstone Group).

Voice of Russia radio's web site, citing Kommersant daily, reported that the new, joint Russian-Chinese investment fund would be worth up to $4 billion. Kommersant reported, citing a memo from organizers of the new fund: "Contributions of $1 billion to the Russian-Chinese Investment Fund (RCIF) will be made by the Russian Direct Investment Fund, a new $10 billion state fund set up to attract foreign direct investment into Russia, and China Investment Corporation, a sovereign $410 billion fund. The rest will come from outside investors, mainly Chinese, in the next 18 months."

Xinhua reported that Wen "raised a six-point proposal to reinforce Sino-Russian ties," details of which are not available at this writing.'

http://www.larouchepac.com/node/19813

(By the way don't worry about the link- I'm not a closet Laroucher... they've just printed a silobreaker distributed piece without attribution)

[rebellin]

Don't worry I am an uncloseted LaRouche reporter and we're following this very closely, including in Australia, where our associates are called the Citizens Electoral Council.
For those of you who are still pushing Kissinger's crazy policy of MAD, and that "it can't happen here",take note of the Russian Chief of Staff's statement in Pia Novosti today:

Russia could be involved in a nuclear conflict is the title of a Ria Novosti article from today, citing statements made by the chief of staff of the Russian Army, General Nikolaï Makarov, as he intervened at the Russian civilian chamber (a consultative body of the Kremlin).The short news is illustrated with a picture of Russian employees working on an underground nuclear missile. “Russia could be involved in a conflict where weapons of mass destruction could be used”, stated Nikolai Makarov last Thursday in Moscow, states the agency. “If you look closely at what is happening at our borders at this point, it becomes evident that the risk of involvement of Rùussia in local conflicts has increased”, said Makarov speaking about “attempts to integrate Ukraine and Georgie in the Atlantic Alliance.” “And under certain conditions, regional conflicts can degenerate in major conflicts with the possible use of nuclear weapons”.

[Count Bobulescu]

Do we have a conspiracy theory thread or should I start one?

[C. Flower]

Captain Con, I can't see what that has to do with the new US military base in Australian.

Rebellin, the US is encroaching on Russia with the anti-missile shield and US bases. I can't see any signs of Russia doing anything remotely similar.

Overwhelmingly, at present, firepower is in the hands of the US. Russia has been shattered as an economy and military power.

[rebellin]

Captain Con, I can't see what that has to do with the new US military base in Australian.

Rebellin, the US is encroaching on Russia with the anti-missile shield and US bases. I can't see any signs of Russia doing anything remotely similar.

Overwhelmingly, at present, firepower is in the hands of the US. Russia has been shattered as an economy and military power.

Yes, the firepower IS in the hands of the US. The point of the Russian quote is that on this and the whole basis of Obama's Asian tour, the Russians and Chinese realize that it is they who are in the target sites. This is very dangerous.

[C. Flower]

Some assessments of US military strategy.... it seems that the problem is that they don't have an enemy...

What future does the United States Army face? During eight years of operations in Iraq and 10 years in Afghanistan, the Army has shifted from being a force focused on high-intensity conventional operations to one more comfortable fighting a dispersed enemy intermingled with the population. However, operations are winding down in Iraq, and an endpoint seems to be nearing in Afghanistan. Armed with the collective experience developed in the War on Terror, how will the Army move forward to face new challenges and threats? The answers involve political and military considerations that may contradict each other.

The fact that the Army lacks a clear opponent to define itself against complicates its ability to make a case for its future role. The Navy and the Air Force may face difficulties explaining their roles to a skeptical public, and they may also have problems developing a cooperative doctrinal framework, AirSea Battle, for potential hostilities with China. Nevertheless, they both seem to have an identifiable mission against a peer competitor opponent. Moreover, they both potentially have a big-picture story to tell about the role that they play in the world. The Navy acts as the guarantor of world maritime trade and American prosperity, while the global reach and global power of the Air Force serve as a deterrent to potential wrongdoers worldwide. ...

Air-sea battle is currently being touted about as an alternative strategy to land-based wars. Libya might be taken as a trial of it.

http://www.informationdissemination....f-tactics.html

[fluffybiscuits]

Some assessments of US military strategy.... it seems that the problem is that they don't have an enemy...



Air-sea battle is currently being touted about as an alternative strategy to land-based wars. Libya might be taken as a trial of it.

http://www.informationdissemination....f-tactics.html

With the dwindling dollar and the wars winding down the US imperialist forces really have to prove their worth these days. If Wikipedia is anything to go by there level of spending is through the roof. They have a procurement budget of 135 billion dollars, that is nearly half of what we owe in blood debt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militar..._United_States). Gearing up to attack Iran and painting them out to be a threat gives them an excuse to flex military muscle and justify spending billions on their new toys.

[Count Bobulescu]

With the dwindling dollar and the wars winding down the US imperialist forces really have to prove their worth these days. If Wikipedia is anything to go by there level of spending is through the roof. They have a procurement budget of 135 billion dollars, that is nearly half of what we owe in blood debt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militar..._United_States). Gearing up to attack Iran and painting them out to be a threat gives them an excuse to flex military muscle and justify spending billions on their new toys.

Occasionally, even sometimes, it helps to read the source you cite. US military spending depending on what you include/exclude is between $700B and $1.4T a year. Citing an inaccurate $135 billion procurement figure is meaningless. The article you cite says procurement, which is just one component, was $140B in 2010. What's $5B between friends?

[Captain Con O'Sullivan]

Captain Con, I can't see what that has to do with the new US military base in Australian.

Rebellin, the US is encroaching on Russia with the anti-missile shield and US bases. I can't see any signs of Russia doing anything remotely similar.

Overwhelmingly, at present, firepower is in the hands of the US. Russia has been shattered as an economy and military power.

I should clarify- what I am saying is that Russia and China have never been closer than they are now in presenting a front against US encroachment on Chinese and Russian spheres of influence. The information I gave was a heads-up on increasing cooperation between those two superpowers and the dangers of the Americans doing something stupid like antagonsing one and not realising that they could push the Russians and Chinese even closer into an alliance- which the US is in no position to handle.

It has always been a part of US foreign policy to try to exacerbate differences between Russia and China and any kind of pact between those two powers threatens US hegemony in various parts of the world.

What we have now is a drastically weakened United States and its worst nightmare taking shape in a joint front by Russia and China. While the US was off stealing resources in the middle east and blowing its economy like Yeltsin on vodka the Russians and Chinese were quietly making arrangements for the US's funeral as a global power.

[fluffybiscuits]

Occasionally, even sometimes, it helps to read the source you cite. US military spending depending on what you include/exclude is between $700B and $1.4T a year. Citing an inaccurate $135 billion procurement figure is meaningless. The article you cite says procurement, which is just one component, was $140B in 2010. What's $5B between friends?

Oh so its even worse than I imagined, thanks for that

[antiestablishmentarian]

Some interesting analysis in the West Australian. Commentators seem to be of the opinion that any attempt to incur into Australia by either the US or China would fail the cost benefit test. Seems were safe for a while longer at least.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/bus...o-stay-strong/

[C. Flower]

Obama and Clinton visit to Myanmar -

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The first visit to Myanmar in a half-century by the top U.S. diplomat will open a door for that nation's military-dominated government to reduce its international isolation and dependence on China, a staunch but mistrusted ally.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton plans to travel to Myanmar, also known as Burma, on Dec. 1-2, to meet with government and opposition leaders. It is the culmination of a two-year effort to engage with a repressive government the U.S. long had shunned.

Washington hopes to encourage further democratic reform rose after Myanmar staged elections last year that ushered in a government of civilians, albeit one dominated by a military structure that had directly ruled the country since 1962.

The new government also freed and began high-level talks with Nobel laureate and opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.

The Obama administration's diplomatic overtures have a strategic intent, too, of seeking to expand U.S. ties in economically vibrant Southeast Asia as a counter to the growing influence of China

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...MPLATE=DEFAULT

[Count Bobulescu]

CF, Ah jus luuuv the way you highlight a passage that could be construed to portray the US in a negative light if you/someone else were ignorant of other facts. The funny thing is, there's NO SECRET about the passage you highlight. Fact of the matter is, US did not announce Hilary’s visit until after, (1) Aung San Suu Kyi had announced that she would accept the government invitation to participate in the political process, having earlier rejected it last year, and (2) Obama had spoken directly with ASSK, on the subject. The first WaPo piece says he called her from Air Force One. She rejects the process, Obama won’t talk. She accepts the process Obama talks. That’s generally how diplomacy works.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...ry.html?sub=AR

In making his decision, Obama consulted with Suu Kyi during a 20-minute phone call while en route to Indonesia — the first conversation between them. According to senior administration officials, the two compared thoughts on the new leadership’s commitment to reform in a country that has seen five decades of repressive military rule, isolation from the West and ethnic violence.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...N_story_1.html


Here’s a seven minute vid and transcript of a discussion between a representative of Human Rights Watch, and a former US Ambassador to Myanmar that took place on Friday’s Newshour. If you click part 1 at the bottom first, there’s a 2-3 minute set up piece that indicates that even the Burmese are wary of the Chinese who have long supported them. They just cancelled an agreement with China to build a dam.


http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/world...ar2_11-18.html