PDA

View Full Version : Quickly, buy defense contractors shares.


Fingon
Oct 19th, 2007, 07:00 PM
I read in the newspaper (too lazy to find a link, it's the Canadian National Post if you want to check it) that Putin has said that the Americans want Russian natural resources and that the only thing that prevents Russian from having Iraq's fate is its military might.
He said that Russia will develop new nuclear weapons, submarines, strategic bombers, etc.
Maybe he said that just for Russian consumption, but the fact is that the Russians are rebuilding their military capability (recently they started to send nuclear armed long range bombers (the "bear") again near western countries airspace, forcing them to scramble fighter jets to intercept them).
Whatever the intentions are, it looks it's cold war all over again. The folks at Boeing, Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and other could not be happier.
They no longer need small wars, to sell a few cheap missiles and bombs, the big items will come back.
The Pentagon scaled down the procurement of advanced aircraft such as the F22 and the B2B on the grounds they weren't necessary for the type of wars the US was fighting and were too expensive. I guess new orders for the F22A Raptor and the B2B bomber will come soon, military satellites, ICBMs, submarines, research for the next generation fighter jet, you know, the kind of big items the defense boys make a living of, no those discounted cruise missiles that sell for a mere half million dollars a piece, no, get a few Raptors for 100 million +, or a B2 for 1.5 billion.
Maybe Putin owns Lockeed-Martin shares? (I am not sure this is a joke).

samsung101
Oct 19th, 2007, 09:15 PM
Putin is determined to go back to the KGB good old days.

Buy stock in China.
China is pulling all the strings these days with Iran, North
Korea, and probably even Russia, and Venezuela. They buy
the bulk of the world oil, and produce the bulk of the
worlds cheap manufacturing nowadays.



Putin silenced his opposition.
Had them arrested.
Note the odd 'spy' deaths around the world,
reporters killed, etc., in and out of Russia.

He's pretty much put his dummy replacement in
the top job.
But, somehow created it so his 'new' job is
really the leader of the nation (again).
Putin didn't really step down at all.

He's been busy building up the Russian arsenal.
Cementing ties to China and Iran and North Korea.
Using an iron fist to fight the Chechnya rebels,
especially after the theater attack and the
massacre of the school kids. All things which
would get the American media in a tizzy if tactics
like his were used here.

He's done all of this w/o much American news media
reporting on his scams and deals and Cold War tactics.

The world has fixated on Bush Hating.
Ignoring what he was saying about Iran and North Korea,
and their allies. Like China. Hopefully, we can make
more headway w/North Korea on the nuke plans. As they
have lately.

All the while China and Russia have tried to reinvent the
Cold War, with more muscle, oil, and financial power in China.

Fingon
Oct 20th, 2007, 02:45 AM
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/f22/f22_09.jpg



http://www.pisahistory.it/aviazione/images/bombs001.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/60/Usaf.b2.spirit.750pix.jpg/729px-Usaf.b2.spirit.750pix.jpg

The pentagon will be adding a lot of these.

Sam L
Oct 20th, 2007, 05:17 PM
Fingon, I think I read this too.

Pathetic. This comes at a time when there are people in western countries protesting against their own governments and chastising them for defending the country. Meanwhile, Russia and China continue to build their armies of doom.

BUBI
Oct 20th, 2007, 07:15 PM
War is good for the business, bad for the people.

Expat
Oct 20th, 2007, 07:19 PM
america is too bankrupt to buy anything
a country that cannot win a war in iraq cannot even dream of invading russia

the next century will be of china's domination over first asia and then the globe

BUBI
Oct 20th, 2007, 07:29 PM
america is too bankrupt to buy anything
a country that cannot win a war in iraq cannot even dream of invading russia

the next century will be of china's domination over first asia and then the globe
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/bizchina/2007-10/18/content_6187965.htm

tenn_ace
Oct 21st, 2007, 01:00 AM
well these days you either turn your ass US way and let it do what it wants with it or get called names, invaded and divided into small insignificant countries nobody pays attention to (and then you have to turn the ass...).

to samsung

1.Putin has 80% support among Russians (according to non-russian think tanks), Bush has 20% in USA - something to consider when you talk on who doesn't deserve to be the president

2. Bush dad- bill clinton-bush the idiot- hillary clinton --- that's to your argument about replacements. so you need to talk more about that

3. NATO (read USA) promised to Gorbachev many years ago to never move its boarders closer to Russia if Russia breaks USSR. They started moving it even when Russia was a puppet and was no threat to ANY European country let alone USA. Moreover, it was explicitely said that the most Russia could hope is to have a special partnership with NATO and not membership (so another bs). This is to your argument on Russia starting a cold war. It has never been over in minds of those in the Western world who make money selling/making weapons

4. As for Bush hating, he is hated for what he did in Iraq. As much as you hate China and Russia as evil doers, they have a long way to go to match Bush's "achievements" in the "evil" department. Also, it's not Russia's or China's fault that Americans elect the dumbest president in the world in a looooong time (or let him steal the elections).

So get your facts straight before spitting bullsh*t here

Fingon
Oct 21st, 2007, 01:05 AM
america is too bankrupt to buy anything
a country that cannot win a war in iraq cannot even dream of invading russia

the next century will be of china's domination over first asia and then the globe

America will never invade Russia, are you dreaming? that's not happening.

It's about keeping the balance of power, that was what the cold war was all about, American and Russians knew if they attacked each other the world would be destroyed.

I never said a word about war, I talked about rebuilding the military capabilities.

And China won't dominate, mark my words, it's too uncontrolable and it's starting to show problems, my prediction is that in several years China will be split in several pieces, I can't see it continuing holding together a 1.3 billion people country just by keeping people in the dark, the great majority of Chinese are seeing no benefits from the economic boom and that will be trouble soon, there is a point the communist goverment won't be able to control the country, but it's uncontrolable.

Expat
Oct 21st, 2007, 01:17 AM
America will never invade Russia, are you dreaming? that's not happening.

It's about keeping the balance of power, that was what the cold war was all about, American and Russians knew if they attacked each other the world would be destroyed.

I never said a word about war, I talked about rebuilding the military capabilities.

And China won't dominate, mark my words, it's too uncontrolable and it's starting to show problems, my prediction is that in several years China will be split in several pieces, I can't see it continuing holding together a 1.3 billion people country just by keeping people in the dark, the great majority of Chinese are seeing no benefits from the economic boom and that will be trouble soon, there is a point the communist goverment won't be able to control the country, but it's uncontrolable.
i guess invading went too far
it cant even confront Russia currently
as for china you are talking the same way as people did when they were referring to japan in the 60s before it went on to become a economic superpower
the only difference is that china will become a military superpower as well
btw : just to make it clear i am thankful for democracy that allows me to express my opinion
but i am also a realist that sees that a dictatorship can achieve great things ( yes a dictatorship china is only a communist nation in name)

Fingon
Oct 21st, 2007, 01:20 AM
america is too bankrupt to buy anything
a country that cannot win a war in iraq cannot even dream of invading russia

the next century will be of china's domination over first asia and then the globe

in addition, and this hypothetical because it won't happen a war against Russia would be very, very different.

First, the US did win the war in Iraq, and did it very quickly, what it has failed is in stabilizing Iraq, like the Russians in Afghanistan, they have been unable to contain the insurgency, but their target, what the military planners targetted was the Iraqui army, and they won that.

Coming back to Russia, they would not be facing a poorly trained and poorly equiped army and an unexistent air force, but one that can match their own, the Russians have satellites, awacs, advanced air to air missiles, cruise missiles, a power fleet and let me emphasize this nuclear weapons
not like North Korea or even China, the Russians are perfectly capable of reaching any part of the continental United States, it's not a matter of just the west coast or Hawaii being in danger as the most pessimistic evaluations of North Korea's capabilities have stated, but the whole territory, including Washington, New York, Chicago and every other american city.

The Russians are in the same situation, every square inch of Russian territory is within range of American missiles and bombers, that's why both sides made huge efforts in times of crisis to solve it (e.g. Berlin 1948, the missiles crisis, etc.).

During the cold war, each country was hoping they would get a temporary advantage that would allow them to strike first, that's why the Americans panicked when a Russian pilot defected to Japan with a Mig 25, the result was the rush development of the F15.

That was one of the reason the soviet union fell, the americans under Reagan raised the bets with the so called star wars and the Russian economy simply couldn't keep up.

One thing should be noticed is that also in absolute terms the US invest more on defense than the Russian or Chinese, Both Russia and China spend a lot more as a percentage of their gross product. American military technology is often later used for commercial purposes and gets a return on investment (e.g. the new Boeing 787 uses a lot of technologies developped for the F22, something that rarely happens in China and Russia.

the cold war was always my favourite geopolitical topic, I always predicted it would be back eventually, and it may surprised many, but I think the world was a much safer place during the cold war than after it, maybe we are heading back in that direction.

Expat
Oct 21st, 2007, 01:27 AM
in addition, and this hypothetical because it won't happen a war against Russia would be very, very different.

First, the US did win the war in Iraq, and did it very quickly, what it has failed is in stabilizing Iraq, like the Russians in Afghanistan, they have been unable to contain the insurgency, but their target, what the military planners targetted was the Iraqui army, and they won that.

Coming back to Russia, they would not be facing a poorly trained and poorly equiped army and an unexistent air force, but one that can match their own, the Russians have satellites, awacs, advanced air to air missiles, cruise missiles, a power fleet and let me emphasize this nuclear weapons
not like North Korea or even China, the Russians are perfectly capable of reaching any part of the continental United States, it's not a matter of just the west coast or Hawaii being in danger as the most pessimistic evaluations of North Korea's capabilities have stated, but the whole territory, including Washington, New York, Chicago and every other american city.

The Russians are in the same situation, every square inch of Russian territory is within range of American missiles and bombers, that's why both sides made huge efforts in times of crisis to solve it (e.g. Berlin 1948, the missiles crisis, etc.).

During the cold war, each country was hoping they would get a temporary advantage that would allow them to strike first, that's why the Americans panicked when a Russian pilot defected to Japan with a Mig 25, the result was the rush development of the F15.

That was one of the reason the soviet union fell, the americans under Reagan raised the bets with the so called star wars and the Russian economy simply couldn't keep up.

One thing should be noticed is that also in absolute terms the US invest more on defense than the Russian or Chinese, Both Russia and China spend a lot more as a percentage of their gross product. American military technology is often later used for commercial purposes and gets a return on investment (e.g. the new Boeing 787 uses a lot of technologies developped for the F22, something that rarely happens in China and Russia.

the cold war was always my favourite geopolitical topic, I always predicted it would be back eventually, and it may surprised many, but I think the world was a much safer place during the cold war than after it, maybe we are heading back in that direction.

assuming that you are canadian
you would know as well as i do that the war in iraq was about oil and in that sense the US has failed in the war
i mean whats the use of a war without gaining some war booty

as for a new cold war yes it will happen between china and the USA
primarily fought over asia as USA keeps on ceding space to china in the asia pacific region
japan and india will try to balance china but will fail
however a few things are in order
taiwan will go back under chinese control
asean countries will come under china's influnce
india , japan and usa will form some sort of alliance
russia wil blow hot blow cold with both USA and china

Fingon
Oct 21st, 2007, 01:52 AM
i guess invading went too far
it cant even confront Russia currently

neither Russia can confront the US, they have nuclear weapons, remember.

as for china you are talking the same way as people did when they were referring to japan in the 60s before it went on to become a economic superpower

you can't even dream of comparing Japan with China. Japan has 10% of China's population, and does not have a fraction of social problems China has.

Just feeding everyone is a huge problem in China, the more the economy grows, the more difficult it will be for the government to keep control, they can block the internet only for so long.

One reason why China was never under the control of a foreign power (with the exception of the Mongols), despite being very weak at time was its size, they could not digest it. Japan or Great Britain controlled parts of the country but never the whole of it.

the Chinese goverment is having increased problems to keep people uninformed so they won't go to claim their part, we are talking about 1.3 billion people, I repeat, 1.3 billiong people.

In addition, they are accumulating a huge amount of reserves, some think that gives them a lot of power, it does not.

I remember reading a comment by John D. Rockefeller once, he said, if you owe a bank 1 million dollars, you have a problem, if you owe 100 million, then the bank has a problem.

That's precisely their problem, they have to hope the US economy keeps going otherwise their currency reserves are worth nothing and they won't have a market to sell, it's the very same problem Japan and Germany faced before. The Chinese economy is growing very fast, but it is very, very far from being a developed economy, their infrastructure is far from ready and several parts of the country haven't advanced to the 21st century, Shanghai, Beijing and Guanzhou are not China.

Saying that just because some people were wrong predicting Japan's dismissal that China will follow the same patter is , to put it mild, streching it, more than a bit, you can't say that because some people misjudged an Asian country years ago the same will happen now.

And btw, there were a lot of predictions that Japan would dominate the world when they started to accumulate a lot of reserves and they started to see Japanese made goods all over the place, that never was the case.

Nobody denies that China will be one of the most important economic powers, but it will not be a dominant power, not in its current form, maybe if they split the country, the eastern part could become a superpower, but right now, it has too much to drag on.

the only difference is that china will become a military superpower as well

China is a military superpower, and has been for a while, they have nuclear weapons and it's one of the few countries capable of striking with them effectively (India and Pakistan could not strike the US or Great Britain for example). They have the most numerous army and it has been like that since the times of Mao, so what else is new?

btw : just to make it clear i am thankful for democracy that allows me to express my opinion

I am as well

but i am also a realist that sees that a dictatorship can achieve great things ( yes a dictatorship china is only a communist nation in name)

hmm, yes, for a short period of time, as history shows, it's beyond the topic but there are reasons why dictatorships cannot maintain their power for too long, particulary true in the 20th century (I am talking of a truely global power, not just over their own country). Look at the nazis, the Japanese, the Soviet Union, even China had to relax its rules at least in the economic front.

Fingon
Oct 21st, 2007, 02:04 AM
assuming that you are canadian
you would know as well as i do that the war in iraq was about oil and in that sense the US has failed in the war
i mean whats the use of a war without gaining some war booty

that's not the point. First of all, I am not too sure it was something that simple, it wasn't IMO about just taking Iraq's oil, that would have been too obvious and wouldn't work. It was more about strategic control of the region, not just Iraq, about asserting US influence in the area. Had the US been succesful in quicky pacifying Iraq, then when they asked Syria for example to do something they would rush to do it otherwise they would be next.
but again, you are confusing the political objetives of the war with the war itself, the US generals were asked to defeat the Iraqi armed forces, and they did it very efficiently, and I am sure the Russian and the Chinese took note of that, the problem is that the army is not designed to control territory, it is not a police force, or a political force, it's a military force. If they could use their fire power at will, trust me, there wouldn't be Iraq's insurgency, but the cost in civilian lives would be astronomical.
Whether winning the war achieved its objectives, or was good or bad is beyond the point, that's not the generals' fault, they are soldier, they win battles and wars, they don't achieve political objectives.

as for a new cold war yes it will happen between china and the USA
primarily fought over asia as USA keeps on ceding space to china in the asia pacific region

I don't understand why you keep Russia out of it. the US never had too much "space" in Asia anyway, only Japan, Israel, Thailand and a few others were on its side, the main scenario of the cold war was Europe, not Asia.

japan and india will try to balance china but will fail

and you say that based on ...

however a few things are in order
taiwan will go back under chinese control

wishful thinking, again, I don't know what you base that on, IMO other parts of China will separate as well, if China had the power to get Taiwan back they would have done it by now.

asean countries will come under china's influnce
india , japan and usa will form some sort of alliance
russia wil blow hot blow cold with both USA and china
India will follow its own interest, so will Japan and Russia.

In fact, at some point during the cold war the Americans and the Russians thought the Chinese could be more dangerous than each other.

The Russians were keeping more troops in the Chinese border than in Europe, they knew Nato would not attack but weren't sure about the Chinese.

The US submarines in the Pacific Ocean have been more intended to target China than Russia, again, the American knew the Russian would likely not attack them, but weren't sure about the Chinese.

BTW, the American will follow their own interest as well, they will get close to China or Russia, or India or Europe according to what benefits them the most.

There is not such a thing as a friendship in international politics.

Expat
Oct 21st, 2007, 02:11 AM
neither Russia can confront the US, they have nuclear weapons, remember.

you can't even dream of comparing Japan with China. Japan has 10% of China's population, and does not have a fraction of social problems China has.

so todays china is somewhat similar to 1960s Japan
I am sure that it also had the same level of inequality that we see now in China

Just feeding everyone is a huge problem in China, the more the economy grows, the more difficult it will be for the government to keep control, they can block the internet only for so long.

One reason why China was never under the control of a foreign power (with the exception of the Mongols), despite being very weak at time was its size, they could not digest it. Japan or Great Britain controlled parts of the country but never the whole of it.

Excuse me , india is also a huge country with 1.1 billion country and it was ruled by the britishers as recently as 60 years ago as was canada for a large part of history
nothing that hasnt been done already

the Chinese goverment is having increased problems to keep people uninformed so they won't go to claim their part, we are talking about 1.3 billion people, I repeat, 1.3 billiong people.
it would have been far harder during the great famine and they still managed to do it



In addition, they are accumulating a huge amount of reserves, some think that gives them a lot of power, it does not.

I remember reading a comment by John D. Rockefeller once, he said, if you owe a bank 1 million dollars, you have a problem, if you owe 100 million, then the bank has a problem.

That's precisely their problem, they have to hope the US economy keeps going otherwise their currency reserves are worth nothing and they won't have a market to sell, it's the very same problem Japan and Germany faced before.
this is something i agree with


The Chinese economy is growing very fast, but it is very, very far from being a developed economy, their infrastructure is far from ready and several parts of the country haven't advanced to the 21st century, Shanghai, Beijing and Guanzhou are not China.

Saying that just because some people were wrong predicting Japan's dismissal that China will follow the same patter is , to put it mild, streching it, more than a bit, you can't say that because some people misjudged an Asian country years ago the same will happen now.

And btw, there were a lot of predictions that Japan would dominate the world when they started to accumulate a lot of reserves and they started to see Japanese made goods all over the place, that never was the case.

i knew this was coming when i quoted japan

Nobody denies that China will be one of the most important economic powers, but it will not be a dominant power, not in its current form, maybe if they split the country, the eastern part could become a superpower, but right now, it has too much to drag on.

only time will tell



hmm, yes, for a short period of time, as history shows, it's beyond the topic but there are reasons why dictatorships cannot maintain their power for too long, particulary true in the 20th century (I am talking of a truely global power, not just over their own country). Look at the nazis, the Japanese, the Soviet Union, even China had to relax its rules at least in the economic front.
look i am no fan of hitler but history would have judged him differently had he won the war as for the japanese they were silenced only because america had the bomb not because they were dictators
their losing had nothing to dictatorship or democracy

Fingon
Oct 21st, 2007, 02:37 AM
so todays china is somewhat similar to 1960s Japan
I am sure that it also had the same level of inequality that we see now in China


you are only guessing, and you are guessing wrong, Japan may be an Asian country but it's and it has always been very, very different from China, they are completely different, in population, in culture, history, territory. Not because Japanese looks similar to Chinese to westerners it means we are dealing with the same country, big, big mistake.

Excuse me , india is also a huge country with 1.1 billion country and it was ruled by the britishers as recently as 60 years ago as was canada for a large part of history
nothing that hasnt been done already

First, the British neve had full control of India.
Second, they controlled it for a short period of time.
Third, Canada has nothing to do with it, because Canada was a small country (in terms of population, not territory) it could be assimilated and they could imposse British culture and institutions, something they couldn't do in India.

Fourth, not because they could have been able to partially control India they meant they could do it with China, they tried it, they tried hard, the Japanese, the British, they weren't unable to do so, so it's moot to put Indian example because history shows they weren't unable to do it with China, it's not speculation, not if, they tried, they failed.

it would have been far harder during the great famine and they still managed to do it

they did because they had a strong dictatorship that keep people in the dark, they controlled the press, very few people in China even had a tv or a radio, there wasn't an internet, China has an army of a few million people, how would they control 1.3 billion? only by keeping them in smaller groups, separated.

Additionally, it's a lot easier to contain a problem during a famine than during economic bonanza, during a famine, people are dying, you give them food, even a little and you will control them.

Economic bonanza is different, they want more, they want their part.


this is something i agree with

good.


i knew this was coming when i quoted japan

well, it is true.

only time will tell



look i am no fan of hitler but history would have judged him differently had he won the war as for the japanese they were silenced only because america had the bomb not because they were dictators
their losing had nothing to dictatorship or democracy

hmm, no, Hitler never had a chance of winning the war, not when the United States were involved, nevermind the Russians. Even with his strong dictatorship and terror reign, he was having problems keeping control, there were numerous plots to assassinate him. Many generals and even many Hitler loyalists were starting to get nervous about Germany's future. They were too scared to do anything but at the end, they did try to kill him, the only reason why he survived until the end is because the allies and the Russians saved the Germans the trouble of getting rid of Hitler.

The Japanese weren't silenced by the nuclear bombs, that's precisely why many people decried their use as unnecessary, because the Japanese were already defeated before that, their fleet had been destroyed, Japan was being reduced to rubble by the American bombers, they had lost all their posessions in the Pacific Ocean and Asia and even Japanese territory in Okinawa, and nobody expected them to succesfully defend their country from an American invasion.

There have been speculation on why Truman decided to drop the boms in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the official version was that it was to save American lives, even though the Japanese were defeated, they still fought very hard, the invasion of Okinawa had been very bloody and the analysts were expecting it to be much worse in Japan itself, but the Japanese did not have a chance to win, only to cause a lot of american casualties.

But some say the bombs weren't directed to the Japanese, but the Russians. Stalin had promised Russia would declare the war to Japan some months after the war in Europe had ended, that was because they needed time to move their army to the east, and he kept his promise, the Soviet Union declared the war to Japan on August 7, a day after the Hiroshima bomb was dropped, the Americans then dropped another bomb on Nagasaki, partly to force an inmediate japanese surrending, making clear the Americans had won the war without Russian help and so the Russians did not have any rights to any bounty, second, they showed the Russians they had a power weapon and were willing to use it, it didn't work for long because the Russians developed their own nuclear weapons, but that was the central idea.

Expat
Oct 21st, 2007, 03:11 AM
you are only guessing, and you are guessing wrong, Japan may be an Asian country but it's and it has always been very, very different from China, they are completely different, in population, in culture, history, territory. Not because Japanese looks similar to Chinese to westerners it means we are dealing with the same country, big, big mistake

as an asian myself i would guess that i know the difference between china and japan and the hostility between them

First, the British neve had full control of India.
Second, they controlled it for a short period of time.
Third, Canada has nothing to do with it, because Canada was a small country (in terms of population, not territory) it could be assimilated and they could imposse British culture and institutions, something they couldn't do in India.

Fourth, not because they could have been able to partially control India they meant they could do it with China, they tried it, they tried hard, the Japanese, the British, they weren't unable to do so, so it's moot to put Indian example because history shows they weren't unable to do it with China, it's not speculation, not if, they tried, they failed.
and after knowing that only i have voiced my opinion
first i am an indian residing in the US so i would know better about this than you and the domination that they had in india was total
second 190 years is not a short period of time
third assimilation is not the same as control
fourth u are mistaking the current map of china with historic china
no one ever had any interest in the hinterland or tibet or xinjiang
everyone only wanted control of the coast
the present one is a creation by the peoples army

they did because they had a strong dictatorship that keep people in the dark, they controlled the press, very few people in China even had a tv or a radio, there wasn't an internet, China has an army of a few million people, how would they control 1.3 billion? only by keeping them in smaller groups, separated.

Additionally, it's a lot easier to contain a problem during a famine than during economic bonanza, during a famine, people are dying, you give them food, even a little and you will control them.

Economic bonanza is different, they want more, they want their part.
information travels even if it was not that fast during earlier eras also
and bad news particularly travels fast even if it does in the form of rumors

you are greatly deluded if you think a few million cannot control a billion people

as for economic bonanza it gives them greater leeway to create a carrots and sticks policy to keep people divided and rule them effectively

The Japanese weren't silenced by the nuclear bombs, that's precisely why many people decried their use as unnecessary, because the Japanese were already defeated before that, their fleet had been destroyed, Japan was being reduced to rubble by the American bombers, they had lost all their posessions in the Pacific Ocean and Asia and even Japanese territory in Okinawa, and nobody expected them to succesfully defend their country from an American invasion.
well whatever my point was that being a dictatorship had nothing to do with japan's loss
you could well argue than russia won WW2 because it was communist but we know that isnt the case

Fingon
Oct 21st, 2007, 03:45 AM
as an asian myself i would guess that i know the difference between china and japan and the hostility between them

it doesn't look like, as you are assuming both countries will have the exact same outcome.
And you are Indian, what gives you more knowledge of the matter than me? you are not Chinese or Japanese, as an Asian, you are actually encouraging an stereotype that all Asians are the same. Koreans, Chinese, Japanese are very different but somehow more similar to each other than Indians, they might be in the same continent but that is Geography, they have very little in common, and they have evolved in completely different ways. Many arabs are Asian and they are also completely different, so are many Russians as well, it does not mean anything.

first i am an indian residing in the US so i would know better about this than you and the domination that they had in india was total

You can be Indian, it doesn't mean the British ever had full control of India (which included Pakistan and Bangla Desh as well), they controlled strategic points and most of the economy, but simply did not have the men to control the whole country.

second 190 years is not a short period of time

that's relative, but to the point, the British did not have a significant control for that long, they were at the beginning competing with the French, the Portuguese and the Dutch, they were local Indian governors that were by the most part controlled by the British but not always, they controlled the part they wanted to control, not the large rural areas for example.

third assimilation is not the same as control

I never said it is.

fourth u are mistaking the current map of china with historic china
no one ever had any interest in the hinterland or tibet or xinjiang
everyone only wanted control of the coast
the present one is a creation by the peoples army

wrong, the Japanese in fact controlled Manchuria, and they tried to get farther from the coast but they couldn't, they simply did not have the resources.
the map of China has been very different throughout the years, but its current shape is pretty much what the communists got when they took power, they had added very little territory (pretty much like the Soviet Union). In ancient times, China used to be divided in North and South (not coast and innerland), the Mongols as I said, attacked Northern China first, and then invaded Southern China, they were succesful but it took them 30 years.

The Tibet was officially annexed by the communists, but it was under a heavy chinese influence before, and that hasn't been a very significant addition in terms of benefits for China, rather a source of trouble and I wonder if some Chinese leaders wouldn't like to get rid of it.

information travels even if it was not that fast during earlier eras also
and bad news particularly travels fast even if it does in the form of rumors

that's bullshit, it's just a made phrase, that was a basic problem of major empires, they took just too long to know things and to communicate, a lot of people in the centre of China would not even know about Shanghai or Beijing, they would never meet anyone from there, by the time news could arrive the situation could be completely different.

you are greatly deluded if you think a few million cannot control a billion people

fine, just explain how, just saying someone is deluded and taking it as real doesn't make it real.

as for economic bonanza it gives them greater leeway to create a carrots and sticks policy to keep people divided and rule them effectively

not necessarily, a big part of China's economy depends on the west buying Chinese products and investing in China, they can apply the carrot and stick to their own people, not to the rest of the world, and only in a limited fashion to their own people.

China's gross product, despite all the growing is still smaller than Japan's and Germany's, despite being countries with less than 10% of China's population, never mind the US whose gross products is more than 3 times the Japanese, the per capita income in China is still very, very low and that can be the root of their problems, they simply don't have enough to offer a "carrot" to even part of their population, about a billion chinese live in rural areas, not cities, and western China is like a different country, the Chinese goverment is trying desperately to send some investments there because the gap gets wider and wider.

well whatever my point was that being a dictatorship had nothing to do with japan's loss

has a lot to do, they got involved in a war they couldn't win, because their military rulers needed to keep the hawks happy, they attacked China and Korea and other countries because they were a militarized society and needed to keep their soldiers busy, and because they thought they could appropriate other countries' resources and made their people slaves because the US and the UK were too busy with Hitler, they miscalculated it and they lost, they never had a chance to win.

you could well argue than russia won WW2 because it was communist but we know that isnt the case

well, now you are not making any sense really, first, you are speculating what I could argue and making a case of it, I never ever said or thought Russia won WWII because it was communist.
Second, the Soviet Union was a dictatorship of the worst class, communist or not, being communist didn't make it liberal you know?

Third, the reasons why Russia won have nothing to do with its ideology, or the topic. The argument was never the ability of dictatorships to win wars, but to keep power.

The Russians were fighting against another dictatorship, a country handled by a lunatic. Russia won for many reasons, the bravery of its people, Stalin's leadership (he was a murderer and a dictator, but did have good leadership qualities), Russian huge territory, the Russian winter, Hitler's stupidity, American help, never the fact it was a communist country had anything to do with it, except for the fact that it wasn't the chaotic country it was in WWI under the czars, but if the czar was Peter the Great it would have been different, the communists at least brought order, there were someone giving orders, during WWI some Russian generals would let their fellow generals be defeated because they hated them more than their enemies.

Expat
Oct 21st, 2007, 04:19 AM
it doesn't look like, as you are assuming both countries will have the exact same outcome.
And you are Indian, what gives you more knowledge of the matter than me? you are not Chinese or Japanese, as an Asian, you are actually encouraging an stereotype that all Asians are the same. Koreans, Chinese, Japanese are very different but somehow more similar to each other than Indians, they might be in the same continent but that is Geography, they have very little in common, and they have evolved in completely different ways. Many arabs are Asian and they are also completely different, so are many Russians as well, it does not mean anything.
just because i am assuming the same outcome doesnt mean that i think that the two countries are the same
just that their situations are similar
You can be Indian, it doesn't mean the British ever had full control of India (which included Pakistan and Bangla Desh as well), they controlled strategic points and most of the economy, but simply did not have the men to control the whole country.
the same reasoning that i am offering for a few million controlling china
they dont have to control each and every person
just keep general law and order under control and occasionally do a tianenmen(not sure if this is the correct spelling) square


that's bullshit, it's just a made phrase, that was a basic problem of major empires, they took just too long to know things and to communicate, a lot of people in the centre of China would not even know about Shanghai or Beijing, they would never meet anyone from there, by the time news could arrive the situation could be completely different.

i believe in it and you think its bullshit end of discussion

fine, just explain how, just saying someone is deluded and taking it as real doesn't make it real.
posted the reason above under britishers controlling india

not necessarily, a big part of China's economy depends on the west buying Chinese products and investing in China, they can apply the carrot and stick to their own people, not to the rest of the world, and only in a limited fashion to their own people.

China's gross product, despite all the growing is still smaller than Japan's and Germany's, despite being countries with less than 10% of China's population, never mind the US whose gross products is more than 3 times the Japanese, the per capita income in China is still very, very low and that can be the root of their problems, they simply don't have enough to offer a "carrot" to even part of their population, about a billion chinese live in rural areas, not cities, and western China is like a different country, the Chinese goverment is trying desperately to send some investments there because the gap gets wider and wider.
yes its true that china's economy depends a lot on the global economy but its not a one way street is it
the recent toy scares in the US only showed how vulnerable the US has become to a disruption from china
thats not a good thing for china i agree to be so dependent on exports but the fact is that it is making china more and more powerful across the world
also with being a huge exporter it is also a huge consumer of oil and other natural resources and has become in virtually all commodities either the largest or second largest buyer
so it has the impact to influence other countries
imho gdp isnt that accurate as ppp to determine relative levels of prosperity but even if we take gdp as per even the most conservative projections by 2030 it should overtake USA most definitely
having lived in canada i assume you have an expectation of bigger carrots than chinese but for a people having greater poverty smaller carrots should suffice
btw if you look at the chinese posting in this forum also all of them seem to be very happy with the chinese govt and dont really mind dictatorship as they have been fed the opium of nationalism

for the last 2 points about japanese and russian communists i was only arguing that dictatorship and democracy has nothing to do with winning or losing wars
but i do not have that much knowledge about WW2 so i better keep quiet