Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


+49
franco
SeigSoloyvov
Big_Gazza
flamming_python
nomadski
elconquistador
lyle6
calripson
Hole
PhSt
AlfaT8
LMFS
Kiko
Isos
Godric
Nibiru
Svyatoslavich
Kimppis
miketheterrible
andalusia
max steel
Mattke
DerWolf
Project Canada
Resistance
KiloGolf
par far
andrewlya
PapaDragon
Captain Nemo
Rodinazombie
Zacch-07
kvs
George1
Austin
Sujoy
Werewolf
sepheronx
nemrod
Palestinian
GarryB
mack8
Hannibal Barca
magnumcromagnon
Regular
etaepsilonk
russianumber1
chenzhao
SOC
53 posters

    Cold War II

    avatar
    slasher

    Posts : 197
    Points : 197
    Join date : 2015-09-28

    Cold War II - Page 10 Empty Re: Cold War II

    Post  slasher Thu Jun 24, 2021 10:35 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    This is an article I saw saying that the Russia and China is not a strong military alliance.

    It does not need to be...

    Exactly, people need to get away from this ridiculous habit of comparing what the US/West does or how they do things. There is no need for any one to one correlation. Russia and China are both unique and centuries old civilisations to be thinking so petty. It's like comparing how many aircraft carriers the US has, or comparing different economies using GDP at current prices, or asking what is the equivalent to NATO. These are ludicrous and childish endeavours. Each country finds itself in its own unique set of circumstances which they themselves would assess how best to secure and improve.
    Both the Russian and Chinese leaderships are well aware of the realities their respective countries face and do not need to be told how best to secure their national interests. The relationship between Russia and China is in an evolving and developing state, which is happening much faster than anything that would have been assumed, and both countries are weighing and adjusting how best this relationship can work to their mutual benefit. NATO likewise was a creation born out of a unique circumstance that served the benefit of the states involved.

    On another point, this is a well written article that neatly identifies the root of the current conflict.
    https://www.rt.com/russia/527334-america-supremacy-world-power/

    By Glenn Diesen, Professor at the University of South-Eastern Norway and an editor at the Russia in Global Affairs journal. Follow him on Twitter @glenndiesen

    Earlier this week, Russian President Vladimir Putin said the end of the Cold War should have been a victory for humanity. Instead, it was just the start of a renewed cycle of bitter hostilities between Moscow and the West.
    Now, recent efforts by Putin and his US counterpart, Joe Biden to develop stable and predictable relations are being weighed down by long-running questions over how the last major cycle of tensions ended. Who won, who lost, and who is reneging on the deals struck?

    By failing to address the underlying sicknesses driving current tensions, Moscow and Washington are stuck simply treating the symptoms. Both sides’ inability to agree on why the Cold War ended is behind their present impasse over how to live together in a post-Cold War era.

    A heavy history
    When did the Cold War end? Some say 1989, with the fall of the Berlin Wall. Others insist it wasn’t until 1991, when the demise of the Soviet Union was cemented.

    Disagreements over this basic question are a source of continued hostilities between the US and Russia. If the decades-long standoff ended in 1991, then Russia can be viewed through the lens of a nation trying to challenge the outcome. However, if the Cold War ended as a negotiated outcome two years prior, then NATO expansionism is a revisionist policy and a betrayal of the peaceful status quo.

    Gorbachev’s “new political thinking” aimed to end the long-running rivalry based on the simple principle that one nation’s security could not be achieved at the expense of another nation. By abandoning notions of security through dominance, the Soviet Union could reduce its military power and thus expect that the West would reciprocate.

    During his UN speech in 1988, these words were turned into action, as Gorbachev announced that the Soviet Union would unilaterally demilitarise, reducing its forces by 500,000 troops, with the withdrawal of 50,000 soldiers from the states of the Warsaw Pact.

    Then, at the Malta Summit in December 1989, Gorbachev and Bush declared the Cold War had come to an end. Drawing a line under the conflict was sold as the result of a negotiated peace, rather than there being one victor and one loser. President Bush even instructed his administration not to dance on the ruins of the Berlin Wall to avoid provoking Moscow and unravelling the peace.

    Two years later, in December 1991, the Soviet Union collapsed and the narrative quickly changed. One month later, in January 1992, President Bush declared in his State of the Union Address that “the Cold War didn’t ‘end’ – it was won… By the grace of God, America won the Cold War.”

    The implications of the victory were also made explicit by Bush, who said that “we are the United States of America, the leader of the west that has become the leader of the world, and as long as I am president, I will continue to lead in support of freedom everywhere.” With a severely skewed balance of power, modesty was replaced with hubris.

    Jack Matlock, the last American ambassador to the USSR, was taken aback by the changing narrative. After negotiating the end of the Cold War, Matlock warned that “mythmaking began almost as soon as the Soviet Union fell.” The former envoy warned that “too many American politicians looked at the end of the Cold War as if it were a quasi-military victory rather than a negotiated outcome that benefitted both sides.” He feared that the wrong lesson was learned and would contribute to an American political culture that believes peace is only achieved through military power and victory rather than compromise and diplomacy.

    George Kennan, the author of the ‘Long Telegram’, which introduced the concept of ‘containing’ Moscow in 1946, went on to express his contempt over half a century later due to the fact his original containment strategy was being prolonged past its natural life with the expansion of NATO. “I think it is the beginning of a new cold war,” he said. “There was no reason for this whatsoever. No one was threatening anybody else. This expansion would make the Founding Fathers of this country turn over in their graves… Of course there is going to be a bad reaction from Russia, and then [those expanding NATO] will say that we always told you that is how the Russians are – but this is just wrong.”

    Former US Secretary of State James Baker similarly cautioned in 2002 against using NATO as a security guarantee for possible future conflicts with Russia. This, he felt, would become a self-fulfilling prophecy. “The best way to find an enemy is to look for one, and I worry that that is what we are doing when we try to isolate Russia,” he said.

    How one war ends, another starts
    Three decades after Bush’s belligerent 1992 State of the Union Address, American ideas of the role their country should play in the world have hardly changed. The Cold War was “won” and the US is forever more the leader of the world. Washington’s mission, so this doctrine goes, is to “lead in support of freedom everywhere,” cementing its hegemony.

    In line with Gorbachev’s “new political thinking,” Moscow continues to fiercely reject this concept of security through dominance and the US’ use of ideology to exempt itself from international law. Much like Kennan predicted, Russia aims to counteract American revisionism and expansionism that undermined the 1989 principle of a negotiated peace. Washington interprets the Russian challenge to US hegemony as revisionism and a threat to liberal democratic norms that undermines the peace achieved.

    Those currently working on both sides to repair the seemingly vast gulf in relations between Russia and the US would do well to remember their history – and the fact that they may not even agree on the fundamentals.

    andalusia likes this post

    avatar
    andalusia

    Posts : 356
    Points : 416
    Join date : 2013-10-01

    Cold War II - Page 10 Empty Re: Cold War II

    Post  andalusia Fri Jun 25, 2021 10:54 pm

    Just saw this article today about Russia and China military capabilities:

    https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/russia-china-war-gaming-fashionable-040015621.html

    lancelot likes this post

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 30961
    Points : 31487
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Cold War II - Page 10 Empty Re: Cold War II

    Post  GarryB Sat Jun 26, 2021 10:48 am

    Just saw this article today about Russia and China military capabilities:

    Looks to be to be more about the problems of judging the power a country has based on the various measures the west loves to use like the amount spent on weapons and equipment etc etc etc...

    The funny thing is where they mention some American official claiming if you normalised the amount spent that China and Russia together spend about the same as the US... which is just hilarious... Russia can't afford to piss away money like that and China is too smart to do something that stupid.

    It is like the US is the wife of a president of some third world country trying to explain why in such a poor country she has about 400 million dollars worth of expensive western shoes in the three houses she owns... of course she will claim if you normalise the value then the American and British first ladies probably have a similar value of shoes in their closets... yeah right...

    Then it bollocks on about how Ukraine might not be able to beat Russia in a fight but that they would be very able to create a Chechnya or Afghanistan type situation for them to make them suffer so much they wouldn't bother... which is hilarious... Russia has no intention of invading... the land and the people don't want to be saved... let them use their HATO training to create a rich powerful democracy and teach Russia a real lesson.... Hahahaha.
    lancelot
    lancelot

    Posts : 476
    Points : 478
    Join date : 2020-10-18

    Cold War II - Page 10 Empty Re: Cold War II

    Post  lancelot Sat Jun 26, 2021 11:54 am

    If Russia did invade Ukraine it would likely just be a repeat of the Georgian invasion.
    Russia has better things to spend money on than to prop up a failed state like Ukraine.

    GarryB, kvs, slasher and Finty like this post

    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 10847
    Points : 10992
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Cold War II - Page 10 Empty Re: Cold War II

    Post  kvs Fri Jul 02, 2021 4:06 pm



    Rogozin told Russia's NATzO "partners" that they have a choice. Either drop sanctions against Russian aerospace companies
    or no more cooperation with the ISS.

    The US and its lickspittles in U-rope are endlessly imposing petty and fake-pretext sanctions on Russian companies including those
    involved in the Russian space program. This "ultimatum" is basically an announcement of Russia's withdrawal from the ISS project
    and the start of its own space station program. Clearly Russia is not desperate to have the sanctions removed and NATzO blowhards
    will not stop with their attempts at economic harassment.

    GarryB and Hole like this post

    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 10847
    Points : 10992
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Cold War II - Page 10 Empty Re: Cold War II

    Post  kvs Sun Jul 04, 2021 2:46 am



    So the whole case for extradition against the Huawei executive to the US pivots around some BS claims about her supposedly
    keeping secret from HSBC that Huawei was involved with a company sanctioned through the ludicrous US anti-Iranian sanctions.

    1) So the US claims the right to apply its domestic sanctions laws around the planet as if it was some UN substitute.
    It then proceeds to "extradite", i.e. abduct citizens of foreign countries on the soil of foreign countries because it claims
    they "violated" these kangaroo laws.

    2) Even with this ridiculous overreach outside its territory, the US still has to lie in an attempt to get extraditions.

    The western media presented the case against Meng as if it was some actual case corruption and fraud. It never once presented
    it as the US engaging in a sanctions witch-hunt.



    GarryB, miketheterrible and lancelot like this post

    lancelot
    lancelot

    Posts : 476
    Points : 478
    Join date : 2020-10-18

    Cold War II - Page 10 Empty Re: Cold War II

    Post  lancelot Sun Jul 04, 2021 2:53 am

    From what I understand the "crime" is the US dollar was used in transactions to acquire telecoms equipment (well computers actually) to be used to run the Iranian cellphone network.
    This "crime" predates the US leaving the JCPOA to boot.

    All other companies accused of the same thing were simply fined. But they had to make an example of Huawei by jailing the daughter of the founder of the company extraterritorially. AFAIK what she did was not a crime in Canada itself. Plus the companies activities were not in USA soil either.

    The US government just wanted some kind of excuse to do a Mob like shake down of Huawei like they did with ZTE. In the case of ZTE the US government even put their own operatives inside of the ZTE administration. She is supposed to be extradicted to the US and then used as a hostage to extract concessions out of Huawei.

    GarryB, kvs and miketheterrible like this post

    George1
    George1

    Posts : 16730
    Points : 17237
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Cold War II - Page 10 Empty Re: Cold War II

    Post  George1 Fri Sep 17, 2021 2:17 am

    China officially applies to join CPTPP trade pact

    Bid comes day after U.S., U.K. and Australia announce new defense partnership

    https://asia.nikkei.com/Economy/Trade/China-officially-applies-to-join-CPTPP-trade-pact

    https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202109/1234550.shtml


    China condemns AUKUS pact, Tony Abbott flags a 'common danger', Kevin Rudd urges caution

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-09-16/aukus-china-foreign-ministry-condemns-agreement-abbott-rudd/100468900
    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 10847
    Points : 10992
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Cold War II - Page 10 Empty Re: Cold War II

    Post  kvs Fri Oct 01, 2021 12:11 am



    Hilarious, delusional nonsense. China was the leader in 5G networks and now it will fall behind in 6G because NATzO will deny it
    access to "technology".

    Retards.

    GarryB and Hole like this post

    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 10847
    Points : 10992
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Cold War II - Page 10 Empty Re: Cold War II

    Post  kvs Mon Oct 18, 2021 5:20 pm



    Russia is terminating the special NATzO mission in Russia operating from the Belgian embassy. It is recalling and
    dissolving its NATzO mission from Belgium.

    This is a response to the recent theater over 8 Russian representatives in the NATzO mission.

    GarryB, Hole, Scorpius and Kiko like this post

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 30961
    Points : 31487
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Cold War II - Page 10 Empty Re: Cold War II

    Post  GarryB Yesterday at 1:28 am

    They want to kick out 8 Russians for no specified reason, I rather suspect the remaining 10 would be enough to do a good job so it makes sense to close it at both ends... they don't talk with Russia anyway, they talk down at Russia... and don't listen for any replies...

    This would save them some money no doubt.

    They have done this with HATO... now they just need to do this with the EU and the US and give it a few years...

    Sponsored content

    Cold War II - Page 10 Empty Re: Cold War II

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed Oct 20, 2021 5:43 pm