LETHALFORCE
Mod
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2009
- Messages
- 29,923
- Likes
- 48,706
This is not a new view this is the same view for the last 50 years through the cold war.
The same view? What about different contexts? Collapse of Soviet and rise of China and India?This is not a new view this is the same view for the last 50 years through the cold war.
Lohman said he thought it was "crazy" to support India's permanent seat on the UN Security Council.
The convergence will not fade in the next 20 years.As an egghead in a "think tank" Mr. Lohman has an acute observation:
He asked, "How do we know India won't take its strength in 20 years and be a problem for us? We are betting somewhere on a strategic relationship, we are betting somewhere on a strategic convergence, and unless we start seeing those convergences, it may be a bad bet."
Don't flatter yourself kissinger only wanted to prevent a Russian Chinese block from forming.The same view? What about different contexts? Collapse of Soviet and rise of China and India?
When Chairman Mao met Nixon he said he preferred to deal with "rightist" who were honest and outspoken.
You underestimate the Chinese and actually you are using the Chinese way to 'disarm' antagonists.The same view? What about different contexts? Collapse of Soviet and rise of China and India?
When Chairman Mao met Nixon he said he preferred to deal with "rightist" who were honest and outspoken.
Recall Mr Mattster has given insights into why US will remain No.1 superpower in the decades to come and those who play requiem for her supremacy would be proven wrong."The Indians should know that we have many ways of dealing with the Chinese -- our alliances, our forward-deployed military, are chief among them. But we also have a lot of diplomatic channels with the Chinese," he said.
"We can talk to the Chinese directly about our issues. We don't really need the Indians as much as they may think that we need them and as much as we sometimes lead them to believe that we need them," he said.
Pfft! What! Ok. What have you done in order to develop India? Your immigration policies and anti-outsourcing laws are detrimental to India. you are doing the exact opposite of what you said.'We don't need the Indians as much as they think we do'
"Moving beyond what's good for India, moving beyond talk and a strategic relationship and them doing something for us, they know they don't have to because out interest is in developing India regardless of what they are able to do for us," he said.
Also being the only country among the BRIC that your country actually planned to use military force to achieve objectives. How myopic.This is a country that has voted against the US -- in 2010 -- and voted against the US 44 times out of 71.
Agreed. But let's see your country change Afghanistan for the better before we talk about handling China militarily."The Indians should know that we have many ways of dealing with the Chinese -- our alliances, our forward-deployed military, are chief among them. But we also have a lot of diplomatic channels with the Chinese," he said.
Quite like how you failed to see the China problem in 2012 when you made the same friendly overtures in 1976.How do we know India won't take its strength in 20 years and be a problem for us?
You were the one who invited us into this group. It is a case of cutting the cake and eating all of it. Sure, we are grateful, but don't expect us to sell our sovereignty over it.We were the only country in the world that could get them the waiver in the Nuclear Suppliers Group. Not only were we the only one that could do it, we were the only one willing to do it."
This indirectly helps reduce a major oil competitor in the future anyway. So, it is a win win for all. It would not be funny for your countrymen if India ends up owning 30-40% of the world's resources by 2020. Some economists are of the belief both India and China already own 50% of the world's resources.That was a huge thing that we did for India -- it was much more in their interest than it was in our interest."
Pfft! We voted against Iran in the UN and even agreed to place the Iran-India oil pipeline on hold because of the deal. If not for the nuclear deal we would have had our pipeline by now.And, the Indians can't even deliver on the one transaction that is most specifically associated with that deal
As an American (read Lohman) he'd prefer others (allies / partners / friends /proxies) to do the job for America, not America getting its own hands dirty.Chinese are not usa's partner just a low cost trade partner that has reached a point where they
Are the biggest economic threat to USA this takes precedence over anything Chinese may view
Themselves as a partner but there is only one number one historically and always will be. Many
Hawks in USA take the view war with China is inevitable and preparing for this.
China has taken no territory of the US nor are they saying Alaska is NE China/ Overseas territory of China.and China, instead of exhausting itself by "taking on" China while those so-called allies are standing on the sidelines waiting for a freeloading.
India US relations cannot be judged in isolation because US is the Middle Kingdom of the world, whether we like it or not.As an American (read Lohman) he'd prefer others (allies / partners / friends /proxies) to do the job for America, not America getting its own hands dirty.
and the subject is USA Thinktank: We don't need the Indians as much as they think we do how was it derailed to a US-vs.-China one? again?
As an American (read Lohman) he'd prefer others (allies / partners / friends /proxies) to do the job for America, not America getting its own hands dirty.
and the subject is USA Thinktank: We don't need the Indians as much as they think we do how was it derailed to a US-vs.-China one? again?
I've seen this attitude among quite a few Indian-Americans, that the Republican party is more pro-India than the Democrats.This seems to be the view by the democrats and the Obama administration. And all
Foolish Indians all 3 million will still vote democrat.stupid think tank viewing India as an
Adversary. If any talk of the India-russia_-china alliance start in the future it may
Change things and USA may not have their whipping boy pak with them.
Jesse Helms...didn't he support the Khalistan movement?advising Sen. Jesse Helms (R-NC), the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on issues affecting East Asia.
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
S | Robot "Figure-01" for heavy work is shown in the USA | Science and Technology | 0 | |
Saudi Arabia Drifting away from USA Influence | International Politics | 2 | ||
S | New planning bomb "Hatchet" USA | Americas | 0 | |
S | Promising BMP Stryker X shown in the USA | Americas | 0 |