View Full Version : China wants to build a city in the USA (thanks USA for all your debt) SAY NO!!!
DemonMonger
06-16-2011, 04:24 AM
Thanks to the trillions of dollars that the Chinese have made flooding our shores with cheap products, China is now in a position of tremendous economic power. So what is China going to do with all of that money? One thing that they have decided to do is to buy up pieces of the United States and set up "special economic zones" inside our country from which they can continue to extend their economic domination. One of these "special economic zones" would be just south of Boise, Idaho and the Idaho government is eager to give it to them. China National Machinery Industry Corporation (Sinomach for short) plans to construct a "technology zone" south of Boise Airport which would ultimately be up to 50 square miles in size. The Chinese Communist Party is the majority owner of Sinomach, so the 10,000 to 30,000 acre "self-sustaining city" that is being planned would essentially belong to the Chinese government. The planned "self-sustaining city" in Idaho would include manufacturing facilities, warehouses, retail centers and large numbers of homes for Chinese workers. Basically it would be a slice of communist China dropped right into the middle of the United States.
According to the Idaho Statesman, the idea would be to build a self-contained city with all services included. It would be modeled after the "special economic zones" that currently exist in China.
more can be read in the link below
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/china-wants-to-construct-a-50-square-mile-self-sustaining-city-south-of-boise-idaho
List of the treasures of Idaho
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_the_natural_resources_of_Idaho
DemonMonger
06-16-2011, 04:42 AM
So this is bad because?
feels alot like the basic starcraft takeover...
USA have no natural population anyway...except indians - which they exterminated at the beginning. More or less chinese have small "towns" in every big american city. :D
m4cgregor
06-16-2011, 05:05 AM
Maybe USA should think about remove all the militar bases that have planted around de world...
Don't you think ?
DemonMonger
06-16-2011, 05:23 AM
......... I almost forgot that this game was full of :facepalm3: players
Hmm I doubt the USA would let them take over. I honestly think it's a stupid idea I mean sure let the Chinese have some shops over there but to have a whole 'economic zone', well it seems ambitious. What purpose would it serve? I'm trying to look at how it would benefit the Chinese or USA. Say it got built..give it 6 months a year and it would just become run down.. a novelty.
It's not just a community. It is basically like putting a little vatican city in the USA. What ever happened to democracy?
VandaMan
06-16-2011, 05:35 AM
Maybe USA should think about remove all the militar bases that have planted around de world...
Don't you think ?
Most places don't want the military bases removed actually. They stimulate the local economy quite a bit by providing job opportunities and bringing in men with money to spend.
It's not just a community. It is basically like putting a little vatican city in the USA. What ever happened to democracy?
I didn't read up on it, but it doesn't sound at all like that. The vatican is its own country, these communities are owned by a company that is owned by China... but that doesn't mean the community is no longer under U.S. law, right?
m4cgregor
06-16-2011, 05:59 AM
Most places don't want the military bases removed actually. They stimulate the local economy quite a bit by providing job opportunities and bringing in men with money to spend.
I didn't read up on it, but it doesn't sound at all like that. The vatican is its own country, these communities are owned by a company that is owned by China... but that doesn't mean the community is no longer under U.S. law, right?
You mean people in other countries like to have a foreing armed soldiers in his own territory...
What make you think that ?
There is a word for that: Imperialism. Just like the romans.
-Logan-
06-16-2011, 07:14 AM
Maybe USA should think about remove all the militar bases that have planted around de world...
Don't you think ?
You seem to be forgetting how many countries have plead to the US to have American boots on their soil. You seriously over-exaggerate when you talk about colonialism and imperialism Luca, just like that time when you were talking about the Falkland Islands.
I'm trying to look at how it would benefit the Chinese or USA.
China's SEZ's are one of the many reasons it's an economic giant today. Just think of them as giant [living] foreign investments. It would obviously benefit them to have an SEZ there because it could give them another huge foothold in America for the future.
When a country opens it's doors to foreigners to sell it's resources instead of investing in it's own people imo it's pretty much selling out. Then a decade into the future they complain about how they have so few industries and markets of their own and how the foreigners have everything; her der, because you sold it.
OT: I don't expect this specific case to come to life, overreacting much.
What ever happened to democracy?
If you think democracy still exists in US you surely do not have a good look a things. More or less ppl in every country are under some influence and propaganda which forms their opinions. Democracy in US is one of such things put to you to believe in.
The cake is a lie. :D
VandaMan
06-16-2011, 08:13 AM
You mean people in other countries like to have a foreing armed soldiers in his own territory...
What make you think that ?
Yes, they do. Most of these places are not like what you see on the news in the middle east, and they are welcomed by the other country. A military base isn't necessarily there for a hostile reason. Often times they're leftovers from past conflicts, and were there to help the country they're in. Removing them would save the U.S. some money from our bloated defense budget, but we keep them there in the interest of diplomacy because their host nations don't want them removed, due to the economic boost it gives to the local area.
-Logan-
06-16-2011, 08:29 AM
Yes, they do. Most of these places are not like what you see on the news in the middle east, and they are welcomed by the other country. A military base isn't necessarily there for a hostile reason. Often times they're leftovers from past conflicts, and were there to help the country they're in. Removing them would save the U.S. some money from our bloated defense budget, but we keep them there in the interest of diplomacy because their host nations don't want them removed, due to the economic boost it gives to the local area.
Exactly.
Like Poland, which for years has been asking the USA to come over. Recently they finally agreed on moving F-16 rotations here, amid mother Russia's warning. :cuac:
The US wasn't the one that wanted that, by all means they tried to stall that for as long as possible.
andres81
06-16-2011, 08:49 AM
The chinese are doing the same in Spain, they are going to build a chinese town in some village near Madrid xD
This is supposed to be (apart of interests in Spain) their headquarter for latin america as there are many spanish companies with contacts there that are in problems and the chinese take the whole company or their workers over. That is also the reason why everybody is happy with this solution; the spanish government is not able to provide employment but the chinese do it ;)
Topogigio_BR
06-16-2011, 08:50 AM
Yes, they do. Most of these places are not like what you see on the news in the middle east, and they are welcomed by the other country. A military base isn't necessarily there for a hostile reason. Often times they're leftovers from past conflicts, and were there to help the country they're in. Removing them would save the U.S. some money from our bloated defense budget, but we keep them there in the interest of diplomacy because their host nations don't want them removed, due to the economic boost it gives to the local area.
And how many of these countries are really democratic? I mean how many are not submited to an authority government that in any case the military presence of US army maintain this so called "peace", Afghanistan was helped by USA to "free from communism", look at the and of story, USA just moved army there when oil investments were in risk, about not much different in Iraq.
USA still today holds parts of another countries like PANAMA.
The great difference is that USA is no longer in position to hold China imperialism. Have no doubt if China cant bring that to USA they will bring to another country like in the Mexican border or the Canadian Border.
Leadoffhitter
06-16-2011, 11:07 AM
"China wants to build a city in the USA (thanks USA for all your debt) SAY NO!!!"
Can I ask for an exercise, please? Not trying to hurt anybody, don't feel ofended, please.
Let's switch the word "China" in this sentence for "USA", and the word "USA" for the name of any other country with U.S. military bases on their soil.
I think maybe it is easier to understand the "others" that way.
Please, think that in this case some U.S. government representative had must to ask China to bring those bases on U.S. soil, just like it was commented in previous posts about U.S. ARMY bases coming to other country soil because someone over there asked for it... China is trying to use the same trojan horse U.S. has been using for decades, maybe?
Info related that can enlighten a bit:
Most of the sources of information on this issue (especially C. Johnson, the Audit Committee of NATO, the International Network for the abolition of foreign military bases, etc.). Show that Americans (sic) own or occupy between 700 and 800 military bases worldwide).
Designed by Hugh de Andrade and Bob Wing by Map 1 entitled "American Military Troops and Bases around the World," "The Costs of Permanent War" published in 2002 can confirm the presence of U.S. troops in 156 countries, its presence at U.S. bases in 63 countries, newly built bases (after September 11, 2001) in seven countries and a total of 255,065 troops. This presence that translates into a total of 845,441 different plant covers in fact a land area of 30 million acres. According to Gelman, based on official data supplied by the Pentagon in 2005, the USA would own 737 bases overseas. With the national territory and their own territories cover a total area of 2,202,735 hectares, which would make the Pentagon one of the largest landowners in the world (Gelman, J., 2007). <--- Sorry, Google translation.
Le réseau mondial des bases militaires US
Les fondements de la terreur des peuples ou les maillons d'un filet qui emprisonne l'humanité (http://www.mondialisation.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=DUF20070409&articleId=5314) for more data (in french. Sure some of you can read or translate via Google). By Jules Dufour (http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_Dufour_(géographe))
asterisk
06-16-2011, 11:10 AM
What drugs are you into when believing people wanting military bases in their ground? Since when US had democracy? And since when world put US to global officer position? China is a country doing the same shit US did past years, they just don't have the experience and "manners" to make it look good.
Minorian
06-16-2011, 11:39 AM
China is playing it smart. Their economy was about to crumble, they forged some numbers giving temporary balance, then got the US so far in debt to them that they cant fall.
Could be interesting to see a series of factories not bound by US labor laws, could be a crippler to the US economy IMO.
Seher
06-16-2011, 11:48 AM
Yes, they do. Most of these places are not like what you see on the news in the middle east, and they are welcomed by the other country. A military base isn't necessarily there for a hostile reason. Often times they're leftovers from past conflicts, and were there to help the country they're in. Removing them would save the U.S. some money from our bloated defense budget, but we keep them there in the interest of diplomacy because their host nations don't want them removed, due to the economic boost it gives to the local area.
Fun fact about this: Most Germans don't know very much about it. (foreign military? here? what? :cuac:)
Anyway...
http://www.wiredchristianity.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/homer-end-is-near.jpg
andres81
06-16-2011, 12:08 PM
Fun fact about this: Most Germans don't know very much about it. (foreign military? here? what? :cuac:)
Everybody knows it but they don't want to speak about it xD
standistortion
06-16-2011, 12:22 PM
What drugs are you into when believing people wanting military bases in their ground?
Defence is probably the USA's biggest export, -Logan-'s post above is a good example. It's something rarely considered when discussing the US national debit, foreign defence is part of the issue but doesnt get deducted from the total, it gets lost in that hazy area where economics and diplomacy meet.
Its easy to be outraged by the US with the theft of Iraq's natural resources, the 'war on drugs' in Afganistan (check the difference in the annual opium output under taliban rule and now), the tolerance of Israel's actions, the lies, the propaganda etc etc.
But it's also easy to forget how bad things could be for all of us. Here in Ireland our pissant little army couldn't protect us from an invasion of enraged chickens. If Korea decided they want this cold, damp island for its strategic importance there is nothing we could do about it without the assistance of foreign defense.
So there are good and bad reasons for US military presence on foreign soil.
China wants an economic presence on US soil.
China isn't just selling the world 'cheap rubbish'. This propaganda was believed when Japan was rising too, despite the obvious fact that they where using better production techniques, quality control, market analysis etc to sell the world what it wanted at the best price.
China's weak economy gave them a huge advantage on their home soil, that advantage is falling as their economy is rising, it now makes sense for them to take production to the demand. China setting up production zones all over the world is the easy option, if they aren't allowed to do this they will have to continue buying up companies or starting new companies as needed to cover all areas of production and marketing to maximize their profits.
In turn native companies will either keep up or die. Of course they could advance and leave China behind but the trend stays the same and if continued will result in global corporate government.
m4cgregor
06-16-2011, 01:08 PM
Yes, they do. Most of these places are not like what you see on the news in the middle east, and they are welcomed by the other country. A military base isn't necessarily there for a hostile reason. Often times they're leftovers from past conflicts, and were there to help the country they're in. Removing them would save the U.S. some money from our bloated defense budget, but we keep them there in the interest of diplomacy because their host nations don't want them removed, due to the economic boost it gives to the local area.
:O
Turn off FOX News. They don't see like that in the rest of the world.
Militar Bases are for war. They don' help nobody. Maybe some dictator, o some elite in the power, prefers or need to have marines protecting them. But not the people.
USA has been involved in wars the last 50 years. And are the bigger weapon builder and seller.
¿ Can't you see the pattern ?
¿ Why a country must have soldiers in other 156 ?????
Read about Latin America history, and you will see no help.
Just invasions, resource stealing, dictator supports.
Face it. It's not you.
It's the millonaire elite tha's control your country.
The owners of the war, and oil.
The ones who pays the campaings of the two candidates.
But don't lie no more about the rest of the world, wants to have marines in their lands. It's just not true.
Go to irak an ask. Go to guatemala and ask.
Torcida
06-16-2011, 01:27 PM
Maybe USA should think about remove all the militar bases that have planted around de world...
Don't you think ?
Oh my god! +100
andres81
06-16-2011, 02:17 PM
I personally prefer 10 chinese towns instead of the US bases here...
But my opinion might not be very neutral on this topic as a drunken US soldier from the occupation base here killed my grandpa driving through a small town like crazy. And guess what happened after that? Nothing - you can not demand them, they have their "own law" in other words they can do what they want here, even kill people and nobody can do anything about it - great! :facepalm3:
DemonMonger
06-16-2011, 02:30 PM
Think about it.
China has grown alot and used up most of it's land space (approx 99.9%).
Now they want to use up land space across the globe to obtain more natural resources and continue to expand.
Consider these things.
What will happen when they want to push the 50mile border to 60 miles.
What will be flown in to those cities?
Some of you complain about the US bases. US bases are not 100% self reliant (first of all). These cities china wants to build are. Thus, the cities will be draining the land and country like leeches and sending all profits back to china. This to me is worse than sending our US business / companies out of the contry.
Reality of the matter.
The USA owes china a buttload of money due to the bailouts.
This is a semi non hostile takeover though.
They could all be mini take over stations, mass polluting zones, nuke spots or more.
This should not happen in Spain, the US, or anywhere.
Torcida
06-16-2011, 03:52 PM
Think about it.
China has grown alot and used up most of it's land space (approx 99.9%).
Now they want to use up land space across the globe to obtain more natural resources and continue to expand.
Consider these things.
What will happen when they want to push the 50mile border to 60 miles.
What will be flown in to those cities?
Some of you complain about the US bases. US bases are not 100% self reliant (first of all). These cities china wants to build are. Thus, the cities will be draining the land and country like leeches and sending all profits back to china. This to me is worse than sending our US business / companies out of the contry.
Reality of the matter.
The USA owes china a buttload of money due to the bailouts.
This is a semi non hostile takeover though.
They could all be mini take over stations, mass polluting zones, nuke spots or more.
This should not happen in Spain, the US, or anywhere.
Dude China will not build their friggin cities in the USA every self respecting nation wouldn't allow that....
Torcida
06-16-2011, 03:55 PM
:O
Go to irak an ask. Go to guatemala and ask.
We could become very good friends XD
tjanex
06-16-2011, 04:11 PM
Think about it.
China has grown alot and used up most of it's land space (approx 99.9%).
I think you should wait a century before they accomplished that.
Now they want to use up land space across the globe to obtain more natural resources and continue to expand.
Consider these things.
Wrong!
What will happen when they want to push the 50mile border to 60 miles.
What will be flown in to those cities?
Some of you complain about the US bases. US bases are not 100% self reliant (first of all). These cities china wants to build are. Thus, the cities will be draining the land and country like leeches and sending all profits back to china. This to me is worse than sending our US business / companies out of the contry.
C'mon man do you really think your gouvernment would let it be this way? And c'mon what the heck do you think of the Chinese... Discrimination on the forums! And now China has a better economic position you gonna whine? :P
Reality of the matter.
The USA owes china a buttload of money due to the bailouts.
This is a semi non hostile takeover though.
They could all be mini take over stations, mass polluting zones, nuke spots or more.
This should not happen in Spain, the US, or anywhere.
PFFF! lol I don't think any of this will happen...
DMC do you know USA used "dirty" bombs in Serbia war? I do not know how that polluted land in Serbia, but that summer i was in vacation to my village(which is 30km from Serbia border) and there was a RED rain. It burned all plants. Nearly all leafs fall down and all vegetables and fruits fell.
I keep no sympathy to USA as country!
I got nothing against people of that country. People are not guilty for sh*t politics and military do.
Leadoffhitter
06-16-2011, 04:51 PM
Just some clarification:
Some of you complain about the US bases. US bases are not 100% self reliant (first of all).
Some of them are.
And basically they do what they want. In some of them you have laundry shops, pizza hut, little cinemas, sport fields, McDonald's, etc to make more profitable the business. The little money soldiers could spend goes to U.S. anyway. So, some of them are a piece of US in other country soil.
Feel free to avoid reading a more in-depth post from now on if you don't like to read too much on this forum or History posts
In my country (Spain), U.S. bases were accepted to be installed when a dictator was in place (Franco (http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_Franco)). In 1953, Franco got support from U.S. and then from international organisations on. He died holding all the power at 1975, while people defending democracy got shot or jailed by Dictatorship police and Army (22 years of U.S. support to that system).
In 1966 there was a plane accident with nuclear weapons that tried to be silenced near Almería (South of Spain). During "The Palomares Incident" (http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incidente_de_Palomares) both administrations tried to silence to population what happened. A B-52 and a KC-135 had a collision and 5 termonuclear weapons B-28 (1,5 megatons, each) fell between land and sea. Two of them stayed intact, one at the sea, another one on the land. Another one fell to mediterranean sea and recovered later in a huge rescue operation (secrets shouldn't be stolen); the other 2 fell near the village of Palomares and spread 20 Kgs of radiactive plutonium around the place.
Those bases were not self reliant. But it was like a colony; almost no contact and forbidden to enter/visit. Neither restaurants, baseball fields, basketball halls, golf fields, etc. It was like teletransporting to U.S. (Went once to Rota around 1990 with special permission and went to the States on 1991) Spain earned almost nothing in economic terms, but dictator got a huge backup and increased military power.
Today just one of them is still active.
Sure it's not easy to read this about your country. I'm not trying to offend/attack anybody. I don't hate U.S. But History deserves to be told too.
We should begin to forget a little about the old way to perceive the words "Country" or "Nation", and forge other meanings. If economists allows us!! :superpusso: (No offense)
Regards :)
My humble opinion. Sure there must be tons of people with more knowledge and wisdom to present the whole pic. Sure huge load of them pass around this forum too. I know almost nobody shares and nobody cares, but i enjoy these things. Dunno why
DemonMonger
06-16-2011, 05:10 PM
DMC do you know USA used "dirty" bombs in Serbia war? I do not know how that polluted land in Serbia, but that summer i was in vacation to my village(which is 30km from Serbia border) and there was a RED rain. It burned all plants. Nearly all leafs fall down and all vegetables and fruits fell.
I keep no sympathy to USA as country!
I got nothing against people of that country. People are not guilty for sh*t politics and military do.
I am aware of it.
I do not approve of it.
Just because I live in the USA does not mean I approve of their methods.
I have many friends that have lived through this war... volim te puno.
But back to the issue.
This is beyond insane.
-Logan-
06-16-2011, 05:11 PM
[...]
Wow, that's pretty ignorant. Do you wear a tinfoil hat to go along with some of those theories :facepalm3:
Once again, most of the time (and now more then ever) the USA isn't the one that looks for strategic military positions, other countries ASK them for that because they care about their own security and defense. Look at Libya and what's happening right now, most of the actions you see from the USA are only there because of pressure from NATO, because other countries rely on the USA to do something.
And you're talking as if a US military outpost had the manpower to take over an entire country, which is completely unrealistic. Military bases don't exist only for wars, in many countries they still exist to train local armies, which you're going to say isn't helpful?
VandaMan
06-16-2011, 05:14 PM
Afghanistan was helped by USA to "free from communism", look at the and of story, USA just moved army there when oil investments were in risk, about not much different in Iraq.
What happened in Afghanistan has nothing to do with communism, and as I already said, most of our international military presence isn't like what it is in the middle east.
Turn off FOX News. They don't see like that in the rest of the world.
I don't watch network news, and especially not FOX. In fact I lean further left than either major political party in the U.S.
Militar Bases are for war. They don' help nobody. Maybe some dictator, o some elite in the power, prefers or need to have marines protecting them. But not the people.
Bases were for war. After the base is no longer needed however, it has often already become integrated into the local economy in such an important way that removing it would hurt the locals. I'm by no means saying we should go plant some more bases in the countries that we missed, nobody wants that. I just mean to say that it is a much more complex situation than you make it out to be.
While the national governments may be opposed to keeping the U.S. military bases (some are not, and want them, to help with their own security) in their land in general, local representation is usually against removing them, and is often able to prevent them being removed by intentionally keeping the issue off the agenda. Back on our side of the fence, most of these bases aren't even useful; their positions are no longer of any strategic benefit to us, and they drive our ridiculous defense spending even higher. So while I, as a U.S. citizen, would be more than happy to see them removed, it isn't going to happen until our parties agree to cut defense spending. This will likely never happen because our brilliant conservatives have decided to intentionally sabotage our national government through poor fiscal policy and supply side economics, in a "starve the beast" attempt at forcing liberals to opt for smaller government... but I won't go there because this short post will very quickly turn into a huge rant.
That was long ago - 10 years or more. :) Now things are ok. No worries.:D
Cluster bombs, graphite bombs to destroy/blackout civilian electric network, destroying city bridges, bombs with depleted uranium, just a few stuff they did. I remember quite well that period, watching every night that shit from 4th floor of hospital I was in. You can still see ruins in the middle of capital city, after 12 years.
I am fine with USA people, but I really do not care if China is going to own your country in any way. "Big fishes eat smaller ones" is maybe bouncing back.
tjanex
06-17-2011, 11:20 AM
Cluster bombs, graphite bombs to destroy/blackout civilian electric network, destroying city bridges, bombs with depleted uranium, just a few stuff they did. I remember quite well that period, watching every night that shit from 4th floor of hospital I was in. You can still see ruins in the middle of capital city, after 12 years.
I am fine with USA people, but I really do not care if China is going to own your country in any way. "Big fishes eat smaller ones" is maybe bouncing back.
Nicely spoken :*O and yes I agree with you, it's a though world nothing will change and btw that 'China taking over USA' is absolutely bullshit.
asterisk
06-17-2011, 11:36 AM
But it's also easy to forget how bad things could be for all of us. Here in Ireland our pissant little army couldn't protect us from an invasion of enraged chickens. If Korea decided they want this cold, damp island for its strategic importance there is nothing we could do about it without the assistance of foreign defense.
Since when Ireland threatened by Korea and since when a european country needs allies from the other end of world?
Since when US (not citizens of course) decides to interfere, decide and act as a world police force? They go wherever there is interest for them.
Its disappointing people failing to see the obvious, for hundreds of years US try to dominate the world either by brute force either by economic war. What grieves me most is that they find allies in european greedy leaders.
standistortion
06-17-2011, 01:10 PM
Did you read -Logans-'s post? The reason for a European country requesting a US military presence is quite clear and easily supported by a little research.
Like Poland, which for years has been asking the USA to come over. Recently they finally agreed on moving F-16 rotations here, amid mother Russia's warning.
The reference to Ireland you quoted me on is hypothetical and meant to reflect on how most nations armies would be unable to stand up to heavily militarized nations without foreign support.
Its disappointing people failing to see the obvious, for hundreds of years US try to dominate the world either by brute force either by economic war.
It's disappointing how people fail to see the obvious, brute force and economic war (in global terms) are the same thing. The days of taking possession of countries and empire building (in the traditional sense) are over, economics make corporations more powerful than governments and they are only interested in managing populace and infrastructures if they can make a profit doing so.
Like I said, China's request to create economic and production zones in the US is the easy option with clearly defined borders and with clearly defined imports and exports. If this proves efficient it will benefit the US economy. If its cheaper to export goods to, say, Europe form the US than the same goods from China then it should boost US exports.
The world already has the hard option, foreign companies either buying out or taking the market from national companies, government contracts going to overseas tenders etc etc. For most nations the majority of the money spent by every individual goes to foreign companies or is spent on foreign goods. There are still wars being fought in every country, the wars are purely economic now, the body count has become the consumer count.
Leadoffhitter
06-17-2011, 02:05 PM
Security speech is often used to gain economic power, strategic power or to avoid losing it.
That happens since first social structures.
You're the strong man of the tribe, a conflict against other tribe happens. People on your tribe gives you more food to be ready to fight if needed; suddenly you have more success in social terms because everybody wants you to be happy to defend them; you get favors from bosses from tribe because you can keep it together with your physical abilities; you get more ressources and you get used to it while you begin to know how to use the other's fears that has other kind of abilities (not physical)... At last, you finish to think you deserve it, and they have to pay the tax. Even if there's no final combat because of the initial conflict.
Conflict is over and you begin to talk about the "danger possibilities". Even to create them in secret to regain your preferential treatment, to shout "wolf is coming, wolf is coming!", "we have to defend ourselves" and you finish to have trillions of your currency in military budgets...
This is as old as war is.
Words that have been used to create fear: Communists! Terrorists! Muslims! Christians! Nazis! Fascists! Jewish! Yellow! Red! Blue! and on, and on...
Every conflict is full of this propaganda. And when there's no conflict... too.
Sure it happens in Korea, sure it happens in Ireland. It happens all around the world. So we all need more and more weapons because of the fear. And we finally use them...
Korea never had a conflict with Ireland but I can hear already: Wolf is coming, wolf is coming!
I think that system just helps stronger to get stronger.
last big conflict, WW II, was full of it. Germany had a huge army way before the war began... Jews! Homos! Polish! Communists! Anarchists!
Dunno man. I know war does exist, but I've always asked myself if war would exist if man wouldn't have any weapon. If it's the way I clumsily draw it (Not sure, just writing and thinking about it with your help) spending more and more money on military budget goes against the real security.
It's disappointing how people fail to see the obvious, brute force and economic war (...) are the same thing. ----> IMHO it's not that way, You can use strength to produce but it's harder. (Japan and Germany after WW II facing big debts without using army. It even helped!!)
asterisk
06-17-2011, 02:27 PM
Did you read -Logans-'s post? The reason for a European country requesting a US military presence is quite clear and easily supported by a little research.
If you are talking about the 2006 request with a little research you can find out why Poland wanted US help.
From 2006 Reuters: "Poland will ask the United States to back efforts to reduce its dependence on Russian energy supplies in exchange for agreeing to allow a U.S. anti-missile defense system on its territory, a Polish newspaper reported Monday."
It's disappointing how people fail to see the obvious, brute force and economic war (in global terms) are the same thing. The days of taking possession of countries and empire building (in the traditional sense) are over, economics make corporations more powerful than governments and they are only interested in managing populace and infrastructures if they can make a profit doing so.
I do not disagree in terms that are same but tell that to Libyans and Iraqi people not to mention Yugoslavs 10 years ago. It's not the same fighting missiles with fighting the IMF.
Like I said, China's request to create economic and production zones in the US is the easy option with clearly defined borders and with clearly defined imports and exports. If this proves efficient it will benefit the US economy.
If you check about Special Economic Zone (SEZ) (that is what China is requesting) you will find out that hosting country has minimal or no benefits at all.
Torcida
06-17-2011, 02:56 PM
Most places don't want the military bases removed actually. They stimulate the local economy quite a bit by providing job opportunities and bringing in men with money to spend.
Name 1 country that actually likes being invaded by foreign soldiers
standistortion
06-17-2011, 03:19 PM
Poland will ask the United States to back efforts to reduce its dependence on Russian energy supplies in exchange for agreeing to allow a U.S. anti-missile defense system on its territory, a Polish newspaper reported Monday.
Maybe I've got this wrong but that sounds like Poland is for requesting US protection from Russia. I've no idea what else they gave in return and it sounds like signing a pact with the devil, but it is a justified reason for US military presence in Europe.
It's not the same fighting missiles with fighting the IMF.
No, it isn't which is why I say most of us are very fortunate to live in the times we do with few of us being exposed to the horrors of war.
If you check about Special Economic Zone (SEZ) (that is what China is requesting) you will find out that hosting country has minimal or no benefits at all.
That depends on which news is doing the reporting. Considering other economic zones throughout the world I would expect the educated US populace to be important to China meaning more jobs for US citizens. Even if there isn't a single US citizen employed in these zones, would it be cheaper to fly food in or buy from the US considering the US food production surplus and to fly in raw materials or buy from the US?
After reading through a lot of news articles on this its obvious there are a lot concerns in the US over this issue, mostly economic concerns but also over the potential for China to stockpile arms and weaponry within the US. A few years ago the dollar was on the brink of collapse, if China wanted dominance over the US they would have pushed the dollar over the edge then. China is also the only country to have successfully and relatively humanely addressed my biggest worry for future world peace, overpopulation.
asterisk
06-17-2011, 04:43 PM
Maybe I've got this wrong but that sounds like Poland is for requesting US protection from Russia. I've no idea what else they gave in return and it sounds like signing a pact with the devil, but it is a justified reason for US military presence in Europe.
:facepalm3:
No, it isn't which is why I say most of us are very fortunate to live in the times we do with few of us being exposed to the horrors of war.
So you prefer die from starvation and poverty than bullets? And remember it is way easier for population to understand war and fight back than economic hostage.
That depends on which news is doing the reporting. Considering other economic zones throughout the world I would expect the educated US populace to be important to China meaning more jobs for US citizens. Even if there isn't a single US citizen employed in these zones, would it be cheaper to fly food in or buy from the US considering the US food production surplus and to fly in raw materials or buy from the US?
After reading through a lot of news articles on this its obvious there are a lot concerns in the US over this issue, mostly economic concerns but also over the potential for China to stockpile arms and weaponry within the US. A few years ago the dollar was on the brink of collapse, if China wanted dominance over the US they would have pushed the dollar over the edge then. China is also the only country to have successfully and relatively humanely addressed my biggest worry for future world peace, overpopulation.
SEZ is SEZ anywhere in world, hiring cheaper labor from low wealth countries is a standard method, but US is not one of them especially compared to Chinese labor.
Chinese cusine is completely different in ingredients that US and most of western world don't produce or have surplus and raw ingredients.
China happens to be the bigger buyer of complete instalations (mines etc.) of raw materials the last years, so big even european union had a meeting about that matter only.
As for dollar collapse, yes there was a so called "crisis" so that they can empty taxpayers money and give it to banks.
-Logan-
06-17-2011, 05:58 PM
If you are talking about the 2006 request with a little research you can find out why Poland wanted US help.
From 2006 Reuters: "Poland will ask the United States to back efforts to reduce its dependence on Russian energy supplies in exchange for agreeing to allow a U.S. anti-missile defense system on its territory, a Polish newspaper reported Monday."
Dude, you don't live in Poland. You're not going to learn much from a generic media outlet article from 2006. Moreover the original anti-missile shield concept has been totally scrapped. In CURRENT events, the USA bailed out on the idea of an anti-missile system in Poland and Czechoslovakia amid concerns from Russia. Instead Poland received a Patriot SAM system last year, and there's even some more fun behind that (It wasn't functional). Things looked different when Bush was in town.
This is just one example that I can vouch for, and to me it's obvious that the US is distanced when it comes to these things; THEY are the ones that don't want to start military operations here. The Polish government is responsible for US actions on their territory. And leaked cables from Wikileaks even show the surprised reactions to that. These are Poland's defense interests, not US "war" interests. The F-16 rotation that was recently agreed upon is mostly an opportunity for American pilots to teach Polish pilots.
There are plenty of countries in Europe that are concerned in their defense and well being, and so THEY turn to the US for help.
Name 1 country that actually likes being invaded by foreign soldiers
You look at things from the high horse perspective. There are plenty of people that are grateful for foreign intervention in their countries, it's just that you never hear their voices. A country as a whole cannot "like" anything, there are people that will be against it and for it, but you're only looking from one side.
standistortion
06-17-2011, 05:59 PM
Firstly, the facepalm doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.
So you prefer die from starvation and poverty than bullets? And remember it is way easier for population to understand war and fight back than economic hostage.
With our current production capabilities no one need die from starvation. They do by being held economic hostage, ie. their country cant afford either current production methods or to buy from overseas. I would prefer the whole economic structure to collapse, though I have no idea what would take it's place and wouldn't like to be around for its dying struggle.
SEZ is SEZ anywhere in world
Yes, but the rules controlling them are vast and varied.
hiring cheaper labor from low wealth countries is a standard method, but US is not one of them especially compared to Chinese labor.
By current western standards US citizens work long hours for low wages. Add to that the weakening of western currencies, in particular the dollar, and the strengthening of eastern currencies and we're heading towards the US being a source of cheap labor closely followed by many European states. For instance, Ireland was recently a source of cheap labor and may soon be one again. That might sound foolish in light of sweatshop labor rates but raw materials have to brought in and goods shipped out. Remove the costs of those from the overheads by manufacturing at both the source of materials and demand for goods and there will be a point of greater profits despite higher labor costs.
Chinese cuisine is completely different in ingredients that US
Maybe the US doesn't have a great stock of 100 year old eggs but they have plenty the average oriental can metabolize. There would be a market for more rice etc, if US farmers don't adapt to fill that market then they only have themselves to blame if the Chinese start farming US soil to supply it.
and most of western world don't produce or have surplus and raw ingredients.
Recently there was famine in several countries supplied by the western surplus due to extra production of conventional crops being changed to production of oil crops used for fuel manufacture for higher profit.
China happens to be the bigger buyer of complete installations (mines etc.) of raw materials the last years, so big even European union had a meeting about that matter only.
Ahh, raw materials, the real reason so many Iraqis died. I'm just glad Ireland doesn't have many so its unlikely anyone will be accusing us of developing sheep of mass destruction and bringing us 'freedom and democracy'.
As for dollar collapse, yes there was a so called "crisis" so that they can empty taxpayers money and give it to banks.
There was a very real crisis. OPEC was discussing moving away from the dollar for oil transactions shortly before the invasion of Iraq, by sheer coincidence the main OPEC member pushing to drop the dollar was Iraq. If that had happened the dollar would have had the main foundations for its global economic strength removed. More recently when the price of oil was rising dangerously there where similar discussions and discussions of different prices for different markets. For many years there has been talk of an eastern currency in the same way Europe has the euro, if this was introduced the dollar would suffer badly.
I don't think any of us will ever know how much of this is truth and how much is FUD to keep us afraid as per Leadoffhitter's post, but as unstable as the dollar is it's very unlikely the global economic system will allow it to simply collapse. There isn't much point in selling to the worlds largest consumer if their money isn't worth anything.
DemonMonger
06-17-2011, 07:55 PM
Glad to see so many responses on this issue.
This event has gotten little to no media attention at all.
Hopefully you have talked about this with your friends and family also.
Cuchulainn
06-17-2011, 10:52 PM
[...]
There are plenty of countries in Europe that are concerned in their defense and well being, and so THEY turn to the US for help.
You look at things from the high horse perspective. There are plenty of people that are grateful for foreign intervention in their countries, it's just that you never hear their voices. A country as a whole cannot "like" anything, there are people that will be against it and for it, but you're only looking from one side.
You "plenty of countries" is just speculation and IMHO ridiculous. I believe the share of European people who fear a military threat of Russia or China is very very low. Maybe there are still some people in Poland and former Soviet countries who fear Russia, but who can say if this people are a tiny minority or not. IMHO it's crap to believe that these countries need inside of their country special protection from the US. So many much destruction weapons on the world. With the amount of mass destruction weapons Earth could be made uninhabitable dozens of times if there would be war between Russia, China or US.
There was a very real crisis.
This crisis is still ongoing and will become much worse. So many countries are almost bancrupt. And some or probably even all of them cannot decrease their dept growth. The compound interest which these countries have to pay to banks is increasing always in our nice bank system.
F.E.D and European Central bank have not less power than politicians have.
With our current production capabilities no one need die from starvation.
maybe it would be right if we distributed the foods fairly plus if we replaced bioethanol production areas with food production areas. But this will not happen in the near future. With economy crisis and bankruptcy crisis it's quite possible that starvation will be also a issue in western countries.
m4cgregor
06-18-2011, 12:07 AM
Wow, that's pretty ignorant. Do you wear a tinfoil hat to go along with some of those theories :facepalm3:
Once again, most of the time (and now more then ever) the USA isn't the one that looks for strategic military positions, other countries ASK them for that because they care about their own security and defense. Look at Libya and what's happening right now, most of the actions you see from the USA are only there because of pressure from NATO, because other countries rely on the USA to do something.
And you're talking as if a US military outpost had the manpower to take over an entire country, which is completely unrealistic. Military bases don't exist only for wars, in many countries they still exist to train local armies, which you're going to say isn't helpful?
I am pretty, but not ignorant. ;)
I live in latinoamerica, and i have read a lot about history. I recomend you to do the same.
You repeat the old Hollywood script: the poor people oversees than can not figth the evil dictator until the American Hero arrives to build and army and defeat him.
It's a nice tale. But have no connection whith real facts.
All USA's militar interventions were to preserve economic or political interest, beyond of what the population of those countries haven chose.
Here is a list ( in spanish, but you can sure easily translate ) of some of them.
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intervenciones_de_los_Estados_Unidos (http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intervenciones_de_los_Estados_Unidos)
In this forum, you have people from several countries.
Try to open your mind beyond the propaganda that surrounds you, and listen what the rest of the world think about it.
m4cgregor
06-18-2011, 12:12 AM
It's worst in englhish...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_history_events (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_history_events)
Constant WAR !!!!
asterisk
06-18-2011, 10:39 AM
Dude, you don't live in Poland. You're not going to learn much from a generic media outlet article from 2006. Moreover the original anti-missile shield concept has been totally scrapped. In CURRENT events, the USA bailed out on the idea of an anti-missile system in Poland and Czechoslovakia amid concerns from Russia. Instead Poland received a Patriot SAM system last year, and there's even some more fun behind that (It wasn't functional). Things looked different when Bush was in town.
"Dude" yes, i don't live in Poland and if i must put the whole bibliography i read to start commenting on an issue then i'm sorry i didn't do it. Usually when you talk about a matter you refer to the more or less historical start of it. If you think US didn't wanted a missile base in Poland (just behind the back of Russia) you're completely wrong, it's the same fear of Russia that made Poland ask for US help that prevent US to such a move. Things was always the same no matter who was US president.
This is just one example that I can vouch for, and to me it's obvious that the US is distanced when it comes to these things; THEY are the ones that don't want to start military operations here.
The whole recent US history is about trying to establish military bases all over the world, wake up.
The F-16 rotation that was recently agreed upon is mostly an opportunity for American pilots to teach Polish pilots.
Yes so you can get rid of "bad" Russian equipment you use all those years and buy from US industries so that they can make more profit. And after all why join US JSF program and not buy from a neighbor european country?
There are plenty of countries in Europe that are concerned in their defense and well being, and so THEY turn to the US for help.
No comment
You look at things from the high horse perspective. There are plenty of people that are grateful for foreign intervention in their countries, it's just that you never hear their voices. A country as a whole cannot "like" anything, there are people that will be against it and for it, but you're only looking from one side.
Maybe the owner of the super market next to a military base is grateful because he gets huge profit but that does not mean foreign intervention is good. NEVER in the world history foreign interventions lead to good no matter it was military or political/economic one.
dejan
06-18-2011, 11:38 AM
I suppose the problem under the hood is - USA can't invade China like it did with over 15 sovereign countries in the past 2 decades. ;P
Go China, go! \o/
Seher
06-18-2011, 05:36 PM
Go China, go! \o/
\o/
I speak Chinese, do you, too? :naughty:
Nils_Dacke
06-23-2011, 03:38 PM
So what is China going to do with all of that money?
Maybe they can (finally!) teach you how to brew a proper beer?
China making money means chinese citizens make money means these citizens will have impact on Chinese politics means China will have to reform. It was the same with Japan 60 years ago. Look at it now.
ljrossi
06-23-2011, 03:59 PM
Didnt the USA promotes the FREE MARKET rules ??
If China has the money and buy lands to build what ever is allowed , in a capitalsim culture should be allowed??
Or what up? Usa doesnt like capitalism if somebody else make the money?
andres81
06-23-2011, 04:28 PM
Didnt the USA promotes the FREE MARKET rules ??
The "free market" is a oneway thing, if for example a european country want to protect their homemarket from US products they go directly to the "international" organizations, implement sanctions and force the government inmediately to remove any kind of customs -
on the other hand if the USA think that european steel or other goods are to cheap compared to their own market they just put customs of 40% over european steel and laugh about the complaints of our ridiculous governments.
Always the same, and now you can imagine what position the poor countries have in this game :facepalm3:
They just abuse the whole world and the chinese are currently the only hope that somebody will break this ;)
blood-raven
06-23-2011, 05:39 PM
The role of the US in the world is about to end, they have no financial power nor influence left, it's time for new powers to rise such as china, india and brazil.
Europe will probably start dominating trade again now our coin has a bigger valeu on the market then the dollar.
More and more countries allready prefer euro's over dollars, there is a reason why china solled all it's spare dollars.
I also think we need to start looking to the other eastern tiger, Russia, which has increasing financial means and a vast amount of raw material.
Seher
06-23-2011, 06:14 PM
Bwahaha. The euro is just about to fail, too. All representative "democracies" (no representative democracy is actually democratic) are about to fail, sooner or later. China WILL dominate the world, just because their government is good. Well, for the economy, that is.
(I don't want to say democracy isn't good, just that ours are crap :P)
blood-raven
06-23-2011, 06:31 PM
democracy doesnt work, look at belgium, we have democracy but after more then a year we still don't have a governement because both the walloons and flemish had it with eachother.
there is no deal and no governement.
and see, our economy is still ok, only some whinners at a desk far away warn about the "unstable situation" in our country.
Arafails
06-27-2011, 11:39 PM
Democracy is funny. The will of the people, but most of the people care too little to have a will, so we get fundamentalists and zealots pushing their opinions on everyone. Still, no*one cares. Just like no*one cares about China building in USA. They thought about trying that stunt here until they realised that they'd be building a city in the desert, and no one cared (except the rednecks, but the less said about them the better).
tjanex
06-28-2011, 05:04 PM
Actually the Euro isn't failing, our Euro is still way more worth then the USD, also thanks to the EU our competitive possition is way better. Maybe the situation with Greece is making the Euro worth less, but I don't think the USD will be worth more then the Euro in the coming 5 years.
Also about China, china WILL be the new economic power in the world, I don't think we can deny they will. Also they are planning to spend 12.4% MORE money then they do atm for their army so I suspect China will be the new economic AND the new militairy power, but I don't think they will attack anyone, that would mean that probably the US is coming to fight them, I think the Australians will join the US because they are in the crossfire of the battle then, and Europe will help the US...
Torcida
06-28-2011, 05:19 PM
Actually the Euro isn't failing, our Euro is still way more worth then the USD, also thanks to the EU our competitive possition is way better. Maybe the situation with Greece is making the Euro worth less, but I don't think the USD will be worth more then the Euro in the coming 5 years.
Also about China, china WILL be the new economic power in the world, I don't think we can deny they will. Also they are planning to spend 12.4% MORE money then they do atm for their army so I suspect China will be the new economic AND the new militairy power, but I don't think they will attack anyone, that would mean that probably the US is coming to fight them, I think the Australians will join the US because they are in the crossfire of the battle then, and Europe will help the US...
Yes but what if the Muslims join China?
Seher
06-28-2011, 07:47 PM
Actually the Euro isn't failing, our Euro is still way more worth then the USD, also thanks to the EU our competitive possition is way better. Maybe the situation with Greece is making the Euro worth less, but I don't think the USD will be worth more then the Euro in the coming 5 years.
...
That's just like saying 'no, I'm no speed hacker, because that guy with an humongous headstart over there will still arrive before me'
And the yen has failed too, because one yen is almost valueless? :facepalm3:
UmarilsStillHere
06-28-2011, 07:50 PM
Yes but what if the Muslims join China?
The Muslims? Not that they're a country, but if you mean the group of worldwide people then the overwhelming majority wouldn't want to be involved, and if you're talking extremist groups, I don't see the motivation.
China probably will be the main 'power' in the world in years to come, but I don't think attacking anyone will benefit them, considering the freaking massive amount of stuff they export war, and the resulting loss in trade to European, American, (etc) markets would be huge.
If it did happen, I think Russia's stance would be hugely influential, with borders on Europe and China they could bring a huge amount of military force to bare on either side pretty quickly.
As for currency, Bottlecaps anyone?
Cuchulainn
06-28-2011, 09:08 PM
The euro will likely fail. It's only a question of time until some euro countries are bankrupt. And then it will be interesting to see how the euro, the economy, the people, governments etc doing.
You can compare the value of the euro to gold/silver, food, oil prices. Then it doesn't look so very well.
Even if China increases their military spending with +12.4% compared to the previous year it it is still tiny compared to the US military spending. In 2010 the military spendings of US were 42.8% of the whole world, China had the second highest share with 7.3% of the whole world (source) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures).
And surprise surprise :cuac: Guess which bankrupt EU state is the world’s fourth biggest arms importer? (http://www.spectrezine.org/guess-which-bankrupt-eu-state-world%E2%80%99s-fourth-biggest-arms-importer)... Greece.
We can assume that hardly anyone would survive WW3. So why even discuss about a war with China? :confused2:
Seher
06-29-2011, 12:36 AM
You can compare the value of the euro to gold/silver, food, oil prices. Then it doesn't look so very well.
Or the franc.
The euro was doomed to fail from the beginning. Something like this cannot work with countries that are used to paying their debts via inflation. I'm glad I've got no savings I could lose xD
I'm not afraid of China though. Their policy since Deng Xiaoping is very good and reasonable. (Apart from tian an men and such stuff of course) They won't run their country down, neither in the way European countries go down now nor through bigger wars.
tjanex
06-30-2011, 07:58 AM
The euro will likely fail. It's only a question of time until some euro countries are bankrupt. And then it will be interesting to see how the euro, the economy, the people, governments etc doing.
You can compare the value of the euro to gold/silver, food, oil prices. Then it doesn't look so very well.
Even if China increases their military spending with +12.4% compared to the previous year it it is still tiny compared to the US military spending. In 2010 the military spendings of US were 42.8% of the whole world, China had the second highest share with 7.3% of the whole world (source) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures).
And surprise surprise :cuac: Guess which bankrupt EU state is the world’s fourth biggest arms importer? (http://www.spectrezine.org/guess-which-bankrupt-eu-state-world%E2%80%99s-fourth-biggest-arms-importer)... Greece.
We can assume that hardly anyone would survive WW3. So why even discuss about a war with China? :confused2:
The US produces that many military stuff because they have to if they stop producing tanks/airplanes/weapons and all these other things the US will be bankrupt...
Arafails
06-30-2011, 10:49 PM
US is already bankrupt.
Lekarz
07-01-2011, 10:09 AM
For me USA is a big Terrorist who conquer and ruin countries with fossil fuels using method called 'fighing with terrorism'. What is their answer for not respecting human rights in North Korea ? Saviors .. lol
I wait for cancellation enter visas for Poles coz every time USA tell we are their friends... you are scared about friends and close the door in front of them? Stupid
About thread name - what is a problem with it? USA die slowly and I am happy about this.
Godot
07-01-2011, 04:46 PM
well... finally a place I get some decent lo mein.
on topic: I think Van sums it up quite nicely. US military bases are ecomomic
bastions as well as fortifications; example Subic Bay, PI. That local economy is poor and the US presence there helps support many Phillipino people.
The troops stationed there aren't at war; they do however have material needs that they satisfy by spending their money in the local economy, whether it be shoestrings, fried chicken or San Miguel beer, they spend spend spend... mostly to the profit of local merchants. I know...I was one of those soldiers and I'm glad the money I spent there helped keep those people going, because almost all of them I met were gracious, kind, and friendly
(you know; like at home)
Torcida
07-02-2011, 09:46 PM
The Muslims? Not that they're a country, but if you mean the group of worldwide people then the overwhelming majority wouldn't want to be involved, and if you're talking extremist groups, I don't see the motivation.
China probably will be the main 'power' in the world in years to come, but I don't think attacking anyone will benefit them, considering the freaking massive amount of stuff they export war, and the resulting loss in trade to European, American, (etc) markets would be huge.
If it did happen, I think Russia's stance would be hugely influential, with borders on Europe and China they could bring a huge amount of military force to bare on either side pretty quickly.
As for currency, Bottlecaps anyone?
Lol as a Muslim I would much rather fight for China then for the USA, 99.9% of the people would its not like we like China or something we just hate America XD
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.