Will Washington Forment War Between China And India?

Discussion in 'China' started by roma, Jun 8, 2011.

  1. roma

    roma NRI in Europe Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,249
    Likes Received:
    1,864
    article given after introducing the author with title as above by:

    Dr. Paul Craig Roberts :
    was Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury in the Reagan Administration, Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal, Senior Research Fellow in the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and held the William E. Simon Chair in Political Economy, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University. He is the author or coauthor of nine books and has testified before committees of Congress on thirty occasions.


    06 June, 2011
    Countercurrents.org

    What is Washington's solution for the rising power of China? The answer might be to involve China in a nuclear war with India.

    The staging of the fake death of Osama bin Laden in a commando raid that violated Pakistan's sovereignty was sold to President Obama by the military/security complex as a way to boost Obama's standing in the polls.

    The raid succeeded in raising Obama's approval ratings. But its real purpose was to target Pakistan and to show Pakistan that the US was contemplating invading Pakistan in order to make Pakistan pay for allegedly hiding bin Laden next door to Pakistan's military academy. The neocon -- and increasingly the US military -- position is that the Taliban can't be conquered unless NATO widens the war theater to Pakistan, where the Taliban allegedly has sanctuaries protected by the Pakistan government, which takes American money but doesn't do Washington's bidding.

    Pakistan got the threat message and ran to China. On May 17, Pakistan's prime minister Yousaf Raza Gilani, as he departed for China, declared China to be Pakistan's "best and most trusted friend." China has built a port for Pakistan at Gwadar, which is close to the entrance of the Strait of Hormuz. The port might become a Chinese naval base on the Arabian Sea.

    Raza Rumi reported in the Pakistan Tribune (June 4) that at a recent lecture at Pakistan's National Defense University, Husain Haqqani, Pakistan's ambassador to the US, asked the military officers whether the biggest threat to Pakistan came from within, from India, or from the US. A majority of the officers said that the US was the biggest threat to Pakistan.

    China, concerned with India, the other Asian giant that is rising, is willing to ally with Pakistan. Moreover, China doesn't want Americans on its border, which is where they would be should Pakistan become another American battleground.

    Therefore, China showed its displeasure with the US threat to Pakistan, and advised Washington to respect Pakistan's sovereignty, adding that any attack on Pakistan would be considered an attack on China. I do not think China's ultimatum was reported in the US press, but it was widely reported in India's press. India is concerned that China has stepped up to Pakistan's defense.

    The Chinese ultimatum is important, because it is a WWI or WWII level of ultimatum. With this level of commitment of China to Pakistan, Washington will now seek a way to maneuver itself out of the confrontation and to substitute India.

    The US has been fawning all over India, cultivating India in the most shameful ways, including the sacrifice of Americans' jobs. Recently, there have been massive US weapons sales to India, US-India military cooperation agreements, and joint military exercises.

    Washington figures that the Indians, who were gullible for centuries about the British, will be gullible about the "shining city on the hill" that is "bringing freedom and democracy to the world" by smashing, killing, and destroying. Like the British and France's Sarkozy, Indian political leaders will find themselves doing Washington's will. By the time India and China realize that they have been maneuvered into mutual destruction by the Americans, it will be too late for either to back down.

    With China and India eliminated, that leaves only Russia, which is already ringed by US missile bases and isolated from Europe by NATO, which now includes former constituent parts of the Soviet Empire. A large percentage of gullible Russian youth admires the US for its "freedom" (little do they know) and hates the "authoritarian" Russian state, which they regard as a continuation of the old Soviet state. These "internationalized Russians" will side with Washington, more or less forcing Moscow into surrender.

    As the rest of the world, with the exception of parts of South America, is already part of the American Empire, Russia's surrender will let the US focus its military might on South America. Chavez will be overthrown, and if others do not fall into line, more examples will be made.

    The only way the American Empire can be stopped is for China and Russia to realize their danger and to form an unbreakable alliance that reassures India, breaks off Germany from NATO and defends Iran.

    Otherwise, the American Empire will prevail over the entire world. The US dollar will become the only currency, and therefore be spared exchange-rate depreciation from debt monetization.

    Gold and silver will become forbidden possessions, as will guns and a number of books, including the US Constitution.

    end of article
    source url : The Archers of Okcular

    my comments:-
    Frankly i cant see how such a senior member of the US govt could write such a simplistic article - i thought there should have been a lot more to international politics - it's too simple to be real for me - but i readily admit i could be mistaken here.
     
    A.V. likes this.
  2.  
  3. mayfair

    mayfair Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    2,585
    Likes Received:
    1,763
    Location:
    India
    One big fat fishing expedition and a poor one at that.
     
  4. The Messiah

    The Messiah Bow Before Me! Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    10,788
    Likes Received:
    4,552
    It may be simplistic but the undertones need to be more closely examined.

    Because afterall it is in america's interest if India and china are at each others throats and the chinese govt are idiots to fall into that trap and make India its enemy needlessly.
     
    A.V. likes this.
  5. Tianshan

    Tianshan Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Messages:
    675
    Likes Received:
    249
    USA wants G-2, but China wants multipolar world.

    Still, very important to cooperate between USA and China.
     
    A.V. likes this.
  6. kickok1975

    kickok1975 Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,538
    Likes Received:
    350
    keep dreaming, we won't have a Nuclear war with our India brother, never.
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2011
  7. cw2005

    cw2005 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Messages:
    199
    Likes Received:
    45
    I've got to love the Americans. They are the bad guys and behave as bad guys. Unlike some Europeans that behave as good guys but in reality are as bad as or even worse than the Americans.

    The only way to "Terminate" an enemy is to make him your friend, not fighting him.
     
  8. ganesh177

    ganesh177 Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    863
    Likes Received:
    295
    Location:
    Pune, Incredible India
    BS.
    US has been cultivating pakistan in most shameful ways, and not india. India is paying a every penny for any weapons from US or anyone in world.
    Author says about cultivation and weapons sales in same breath which is not same. It is pakistan which is cultivated and india is made a customer.

    Sacrificing jobs ?ahhhhl same old song. He shud spend some time in calculating how many new jobs are created by defence deals with india.
     
  9. asianobserve

    asianobserve Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    7,308
    Likes Received:
    2,976
    The 1962 war and the skirmishes since were not a result of US "fomenting" that war. The animosity between Indian and China runs deep and there's hardly any need for an outsider to foment a war between them for these countries would be at each other's neck. They'll be at each other's neck in no time for the flimsiest justification.
     
  10. Tianshan

    Tianshan Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Messages:
    675
    Likes Received:
    249
    USA are very clever.

    In 1970 they support China against Soviet Union. After 1991 collapse of Soviet, now USA worry about Middle east.

    USA change their alliance all the time. Very tricky.
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2011
  11. Virendra

    Virendra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2010
    Messages:
    4,674
    Likes Received:
    2,923
    Location:
    Delhi, India, India
    To add on that, the C17s ordered by India recently will save 23000 jobs in American defense industry. The figure comes from US administration.
    Anyways, back to topic. Those who sell arms to the whole world cannot be expected to work extensively for global peace all the time :)
    They've placed distractions for everyone, Pakistan for India, India and Taiwan for China, China for India and Japan, Central Asia for Russians and the list goes on.

    Regards,
    Virendra
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2011
  12. asianobserve

    asianobserve Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    7,308
    Likes Received:
    2,976
    USA is indeed very clever. That's why it's "the" superpower. But you could also say that Japan and South Korea have been very clever. By riding with the US both these countrires punched above their peers. Singapore has also learned how to thrive under US' shadow. It has recently inked a closer military deal with the US. In fact, I think they have finalized deals to station at least 2 new LCSs in Singapore.

    Don't you think India will gain more from closer partnership with the US? Anti-US rants as I have witnessed here doesn't look very promising. They're more reminiscent of feelings from the old USSR than of modern realities (losers rantings really).
     
  13. RedDragon

    RedDragon Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2011
    Messages:
    536
    Likes Received:
    69
    I think Chinese goverment is wise enough. You should wish the India goverment not be that idiot.
     
  14. Dark_Prince

    Dark_Prince Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Messages:
    374
    Likes Received:
    79
    If Indian govt. were an Idiot like failed state pakistani govt (or whatever slave and mercenaries they have) or like autocratic CCP....we would have already Nuked China and Pakistan!!
     
  15. roma

    roma NRI in Europe Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,249
    Likes Received:
    1,864
    nice one there - tend to agree . IN the early sixties and indeed before , the usa was actualkly reaching out to india and if they ( i suopose it would have been nehru actually ) had realised that non-aligned wouldnt work in the sense that you cant be aligned to a vacuum , they would have chosen one or the other , ie either the usa or ussr... with ussr being so beligerent it may have been more likely to have chosen the usa and the '62 war with china might have been avoided.

    you called for a " close partnership with the usa " i might modify that to an "appropriate " friend ship with the usa whatever that might mean , as defined by the goi. thanks for your post .
     
  16. civfanatic

    civfanatic Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,562
    Likes Received:
    2,526
    Location:
    తెలంగాణ
    Allying with the US does not equal economic advancement. Otherwise, Haiti and Colombia would be first world countries.

    If India allied with the U.S. in 1947, we would end up as bad as African and Latin American countries.

    Third World countries are better off non-aligned.


    I think India should milk the Americans and get as much technology from them as possible. I'm talking civilian tech, of course, as the Americans won't give us ToT on military tech.


    An alliance with the strong is never to be trusted.
     
  17. asianobserve

    asianobserve Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    7,308
    Likes Received:
    2,976
    civfanatic, I think you're a communist romantic. Your blinded by your hatred (ok, contempt) for America. If you can only see through the fog of old USSR propaganda about the US then you will realize your folly. South Korea was very third world when it allied with the US. But the South Koreans worked hard to achieve were they are now under the security blanket (assurance) of the US. You see it's not the US' fault that countries allied to it did not prosper, it's the fault of these countries who seem unable to capitalize on the security provided by the US.

    Roma is right. It's either here or there, you cannot choose "or." When you chose "or" you get nothing and win no friends.
     
  18. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Craig, though a Reagan man, is associated with the Left (as is understood in the US).

    This is a most oddball of a commentary and a most unrealistic one at that, unless he thinks that apart from the Reagan administration, most US administrations have been staffed by the biggest idiots in the world (Craig has always found every administration after Reagan as offkey).

    He is the person who has stated that the collapse of the WTC buildings were scientifically doubtful.

    In fact, he is 'Mr Conspiracy Man'. He sees conspiracy everywhere.

    Therefore, the Osama killing is a charade, the US wants to invade Pakistan and lastly, US want India and China to be engaged in a nuclear war.

    Unfortunately for him, total fools do not sit in New Delhi and Beijing!!
     
  19. civfanatic

    civfanatic Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,562
    Likes Received:
    2,526
    Location:
    తెలంగాణ
    Why do you think I'm a communist romantic? Because I have Fidel Castro as my avatar, and Che Guevara before that? :D

    I have a long list of adjectives that I could use to describe people like you, but I would rather not use them!

    I don't support USSR from an ideological standpoint; I support them only because they helped India, and because they provided a global counterbalance to the USA. The same is true for many other Indians. How many Indians do you think support authoritarian socialism, the politics of the USSR?

    My point was not to undermine what the South Koreans or other Asians have done, which I think is truly commendable, but to point out that allying with the United States does NOT always equal socioeconomic advancement, as numerous examples from Africa, Latin America, and our own continent Asia show. If you know anything about the history of the subcontinent, you would know that the nation of Pakistan was a creation of the West, and that the West was not willing to abandon its creation by many means. At best, an alliance with America/West would mean rapproachment with Pakistan. But is this possible? Is Pakistan willing to abandon its anti-Indian rhetoric and objectives for the same of a 'common alliance'? I don't think it will, and this thorn of Pakistan will ensure that India and West never become allies.
     
  20. asianobserve

    asianobserve Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    7,308
    Likes Received:
    2,976
    "xxx you would know that the nation of Pakistan was a creation of the West, and that the West was not willing to abandon its creation by many means xxx"

    An attempt to lump the US with the traditional bad guys. The US did not engineer or participate in the partition of the Indian subcontinent, GB did it.

    BTW, you're USSR antics are showing through. "Counterbalance" the US, why do you need to counterbalance the US? The truth is India did not actually chose the "or" side during the Cold War. It was well inside the USSR's camp. That's why for USSR fans like you there's so much inmity against the US after the collapse of the USSR. This is the source of all this talk about "cannot be trusted" nonsense.

    Even you cannot dispute that more countries become properous during the time that the US was the most dominant power than at any other time in history. For me this speaks volume about the positive influence of the US. Yes, the US committed mistakes but I think the US by and large has been a global force of good. If given the choice to decie in behalf of any country I would hedge my bet on the side of the US just like how the South Koreans, Japanese, Singaporeans, and Chinese (to a lesser degree) have done. No way I am going to ally with the likes of Russia, Iran, Venezuela, Cuba and the likes. They're sore losers.
     
    ganesh177 and AOE like this.
  21. Phenom

    Phenom Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2010
    Messages:
    878
    Likes Received:
    401
    Actually the source of "cannot be trusted non-sense" is not the cold war, it is the aftermath of the 98 nuke test when US not only imposed sanctions but was also actively involved in trying to impose an UN sanction on India. Do you think anybody would trust a nation that tried to choke them just a decade ago?

    on topic:
    There was a good chance of Sino-Indian friendship before the 60s, during the time of hindi-chini bhai bhai, but all that is lost. US doesn't need to forment a war that may happen on its own, but it would most likely be a small border skirmish and not a large scale nuclear war like the article suggests.
     

Share This Page