A Sino-Soviet conflict?

[Segestan]

http://www.infoshop.org/inews/articl...60215180623912


interesting analysis.



regards,

[Sean Osborne]

Actually I think the author's premise "that China is preparing to launch a war against Russia to seize Russian far-east oil reserves" is as wild-eyed and ludicrous as the day is long, and has to possibilities of actually oming to pass: slim and none. Lefty disinfo.

[Ryan Ruck]

I agree with Sean.

Besides there being a number of other errors in the article (belief that peak oil exists, thinking that unemployment numbers are high, etc.) the base premise of it is wrong.

China does not and will not have any problem obtaining the oil or other resources it needs from Russia. I have addressed this in the TAA's FAQ section since this is one thing that comes up quite often when discussing the TAA. As it stands, Russia and China have drawn up many trade treaties that include natural resources. You see, Russia has ample natural resources and China has ample hard currency. Russia needs the hard currency and China needs the resources.

One may argue that China may not want to spend its currency and chose to take the resources from Russia. But, this is incorrect because both China and Russia realize that their infighting would only leave the US in a position of power. As such they mutually cooperate with the ultimate goal being our demise.

Also, as stated in the FAQ, it is doubtful that the Chinese would want Siberian land for anything but resources (which they do not have any problem getting right now). The Siberian land would not solve any of their food supply problems or overpopulation problems because the land is quite inhospitable. On the other hand United States land is not only rich in natural resources, it is very hospitable and fertile.

This whole Russia-China tension/enmity thing is a large disinformation campaign that has been pushed by both since the 1960s in hopes that the US would believe both countries to be thinking that each other and not the US is the threat, that the worldwide Communist movement suffers from a lack of unity and cohesion, and that the US would support China to use as leverage against Russia (which we have done with all of our manufacturing off-shoring to them). You can read Anatoliy Golitsyn's New Lies For Old (linked in our "Suggested Reading" section for a better understanding of the situation.

[Segestan]

Thanks Sean and Ryan for your views. What about the global oil consumption ? ; Will this cause such a scenario as this author depicts to actually develope or is all that just nonesense? I do agree the the Communist ideaology is just as AntiWestern-anti Capitalist as is ever has been. Ryan ; How will China go about defeating the US Military? How will they actually defeat the US mainland and conquer it's lands if they intend on using American resources? Seems to me; The moment the fighting begins , the Chinese trade and currency reserves are going to be worthless notes measured in US paper notes. And if Russia and China join in an open resource Alliance what about Europes needs being met?regards,

[Ryan Ruck]

What about the global oil consumption ? ; Will this cause such a scenario as this author depicts to actually develope or is all that just nonesense?

In my opinion, Russia and China will make sure that they always have enough oil for themselves. Global oil consumption may drive fair market prices up on oil but, these two will always have enough. Russia will always have enough because it has so many deposits and, China because of their strategic relationship with Russia (Russia would sell to them at steep discounts) and the fact that they can afford to buy so much.

Ryan ; How will China go about defeating the US Military?

Well, firstly, it will be both Russia and China. Secondly, this is my opinion and others' opinions may differ from this but…

I believe that we will be drawn into various firefights around the world that the TAA has helped start which include the Middle East, Korea, Taiwan, and could likely include South/Central America. All of these conflicts will strain our armed forces while at the same time, if we do not respond to them, they will erupt into full-blown conflagrations. And all the while having to fight these brushfires, the Liberals/Socialists in our government are working to cut our military (we are already 1/3 of what we were under Reagan) to near impotence.

I also believe that with the TAA's blessing Mexico and other South/Central American countries are sending hoards of illegal aliens to our country. This in turn not only puts massive strain on our social resources but also helps (for the TAA) to inject a revolutionary minded group (La Raza/Aztlan types) into our society. A group that potentially numbers around 20 million with an additional million coming in per year.

The above are compounded by our efforts to off-shore our industrial base to China. The same industrial base that helped us fight and win WWII.

It is only after we have sufficiently strained ourselves militarily, economically, and industrially and, Russia and China have built up sufficiently that we will see the final blow.

I believe that this final blow will include direct nuclear strikes on major 2nd strike-type military targets like missile silos, submarine pens, naval yards, bomber bases, etc. There would likely be limited nuclear strikes on only major cities (possibly only 3 or 4) including Washington DC in a decapitory strike. Other WMDs used on other targets could likely include biological weapons that may kill or just severely incapacitate and, also enhanced radiation nuclear weapons (neutron bombs) which would kill living things but leave infrastructure intact.

Seems to me; The moment the fighting begins , the Chinese trade and currency reserves are going to be worthless notes measured in US paper notes.

That money will largely be worthless. But, so will all the other world's countries. There is a reason why Russia and China are using that currency right now to buy and hoard gold and other prescious metals…

And if Russia and China join in an open resource Alliance what about Europes needs being met?

In my opinion, Russia and China want the world to be beholden to them. And, they will decide what Europe "needs" even if that means that Europe will live in Third World type conditions.

[Segestan]

OK. Seems like a series of logical deductions on your part. But with all that said; What is your ideas of America recovering a true national security? I mean what does America need to do in order to remain .....free? Or is it already to late?

Thanks in advance.


regards,

[Ryan Ruck]

OK. Seems like a series of logical deductions on your part. But with all that said; What is your ideas of America recovering a true national security? I mean what does America need to do in order to remain .....free? Or is it already to late?

We are rapidly closing in on the point of no return, in my opinion.

I think that the real time to watch out for is around 2015-2020 time frame. I've thought for a while that this is when things will go down and, barring any major changes in geopolitics, I stand by that.

As for what America needs to do to remain free, I outlined a plan that would accomplish much of that on Anomalies (in fact, you may not remember but you posted to that thread!). I'll repost the relevant portion here (with some minor editing):

Our only hope of turnaround at this point is:

• Recognition of the Trans-Asian Axis and their implementation of The Final Phase as a significant threat.
• A complete reform of our tax code (i.e. a NRST) to allow growth in the national economy.
• A DRASTIC decrease in government largesse and social welfare programs.
• A major crackdown on illegal immigrants (and those who employ them) and an effort to fortify our southern border.
• A return to the personal rights / freedoms that the Founding Fathers intended us to have (especially in terms of the Second Amendment).
• Tariffs, if not outright embargos, on trade with any country with a Communist / Socialist government or any country acting against the national interests of the US (i.e. supporting terrorism).
• Major education reforms including voucher programs and government support of home schooling to provide our children the best educations possible.
• Reduced dependence on foreign oil by drilling extensively in areas such as ANWR, California coast, Florida coast, and Gulf Coast.
• Build numerous nuclear power plants for a cheap and clean source of energy (which also expands the feasibility of using Hydrogen in our society).
• Massive elections of Conservative representatives and placement of Conservative judges willing to abide by, as opposed to “interpret”, our Constitution and Bill of Rights.
• Return of the HUAC.
• Massively revamped Intelligence and Counterintelligence programs with focus on Russian, Chinese, and Arabic aspects.
• Complete withdraw of US money and manpower from the UN and, complete removal of the UN from any and all US property / territory (even if they claim it is international territory…).
• And last but not least, a MAMMOTH increase (i.e. ~15-20% GDP) in spending for our military and increase in military forces including:
  • A 2 million man full-time military force with 4-5 million man reserve force.
  • A reverse in the trend that seems to be taking place which is refocusing our military largely on terrorism as opposed to conventional warfare.
  • A renewed nuclear weapons program with a new MIRVed, MARVed, FOBS-capable ICBM system for rail-mobile, road-mobile, silo-based, and sub-based use.
  • Development and implementation of space based weapons systems (laser and missile).
  • Development of and implementation of ASAT capability.
  • National, nuclear-tipped ballistic missile defense systems.
  • Revival of SAC (Strategic Air Command)
  • A revived supersonic bomber program (XB-70 Valkyrie).
  • A revived supersonic reconnaissance aircraft program (SR-71).
  • A revived supersonic interceptor aircraft (YA-12A)
  • Significantly increased F-22 orders
  • Develop and implement nuclear-capable X-44 (a.k.a. FB-22 Strike Raptors, to fill the role the F-111 had).
  • Revival of the Comanche helicopter for surveillance and attack roles.
  • Significantly increased F-35 orders.
  • Widespread Civil Defense measures including public education, shelter programs, and government survivability.
  • A newly designed BB (Battleship Class) ship that includes classic 16” guns and modern cruise missile VLS.
  • A newly designed SSBNs closely resembling that of the Soviet Typhoon-class.
  • Revival of the Seawolf-class SSN (with our own rocket-powered torpedoes).
  • Revival of the Crusader artillery system.
  • Revival of the F-14 or development of sea-based F-22
  • Finalization and increased orders of the V-22 Osprey.
  • Re-adapt B-1s and B-52s to nuclear weapons delivery, increase numbers.
  • Government sponsorship of civilian militias (i.e. easy availability of military surplus weapons and equipment).
  • A boost to the CVNX (Next generation nuclear-powered aircraft carrier) program with an eventual 24+ carriers.
  • Improvements to and increased orders of Strykers.
  • Increased numbers of Bradley IFVs.
  • Increased numbers of M1A2 MBTs
  • A newly designed “Ontos”-type of IFV.
  • A newly designed “Zippo”-type IFV.
  • Development and implementation of the M1C1 Modular Combat Vehicle concept
  • Increased LAV-AD orders.
  • Modernized M163A2 PIVADS
  • Increased improvements to and significant orders of A-10C Warthogs
  • Increased orders of AH-64 Apache Longbows.
  • Development and implementation of a heavy-transport helicopter resembling the Soviet Mi-26.
  • Development and implementation of a combat / transport helicopter resembling the Soviet Mi-24.
  • Development and implementation of heavy and extra-heavy transport aircraft resembling the Soviet An-124 and An-225.
  • Development and implementation of a high-speed transport vehicle resembling a Soviet Erkanoplan.
  • Revival of hydrofoil-based high speed attack boats.
  • Increased development and implementation of laser based ABMD.
  • Development and implementation of THAAD and TAD ABMDs.
  • Development and implementation of a nation-wide network of OTH radar sites.
  • Rescind US ban on assassinations of heads of state and take full advantage of the “new” capability.

It is only if such a bold and decicive national plan were enacted in the VERY near future (next 5 years) that we could hope to completely derail the TAA's plans and maintain "top dog" status.

Unfortunately, I doubt very much one will be as our trend seems to be toward weak-kneed moderate (or even outright Socialist in some instances!) politicians that wish to simply maintain the status quo (i.e. we keep marching down the same path to eventual destruction). It is only if we were to elect a Gen. George Patton, Ronald Reagan, or other Founding Fathers-esque type president that would have the courage to lead boldly and bring about the changes I outlined above.

There's a reason why I and others are arming up and preparing as best as we can while we still have the time.

[Segestan]

Thanks for the repost from Anomalies Ryan. I had forgotten that one.
After reading those ideas I can only agree with them. You have my Vote! It will require the same sort of dogged determination to retain Freedom of thought that was required to found it over 200 years ago. I believe most Americans still have that kind of will. When push come to shove , America will prevail. It must.
One more question.
I Recently read that the US Military has decided to fund foreign nations Military forces, don't have the link right now. I find this policy to be sound , a correct way of securing the ideas of Republican freedom in the world. However; What should be the real policy conditions for such American aid ? I mean, if -you- were a superior officer in a nation that needed an outside source of funds for domestic needs , or possibly foreign , to that nations leadership and officer corp , what sort of policy standards should be acceptable in both short and long term effects on that nations regional stability and security.? How should such policies apply?
Personally; I do not agree with multiculturalism as a fix or requirement of International responsibility. I feel a nation , any nation , has the rights of self-determination. Those rights should not become secondary to idealism or foreign demands.

Thoughts?

regards,

[Ryan Ruck]

I Recently read that the US Military has decided to fund foreign nations Military forces, don't have the link right now. I find this policy to be sound , a correct way of securing the ideas of Republican freedom in the world. However; What should be the real policy conditions for such American aid ? I mean, if -you- were a superior officer in a nation that needed an outside source of funds for domestic needs , or possibly foreign , to that nations leadership and officer corp , what sort of policy standards should be acceptable in both short and long term effects on that nations regional stability and security.? How should such policies apply?

I agree, foreign aid can be a very important diplomatic tool.

However, I believe it should be restricted to only the staunchest of US allies that most closely reflect our standards (at least the standards our Founders intended). Allies such as Britain, Australia, Israel, New Zealand, Canada (yes, even the Canuks… ), Japan, (the new) Iraq, (the new) Afghanistan, South Korea, and Taiwan. While there are other nations that are cordial with us right now, they have (in my opinion) not yet impressed me enough to warrant such close ties as giving them copious amounts of our money. Perhaps over time I can add other nations to my personal list but for now that is where it stands.

This giving money to places like Egypt, the "Palestinians", or billions of dollars to Africa for AIDS research is just asinine.

Money spent on places like that could be utilized for something useful such as building our military.

[Ryan Ruck]

See my latest thread in the "Middle East" section - China Rushes to Complete $100 Billion Oil Deal With Iran.

With Russia, Iran, and Venezuela being major players in the TAA, there is no way that there will be any infighting between member states over oil.