Miscellaneous News

BoraTas

Captain
Registered Member
The US couldn't get China to do what it wants so it resorted to carrot and stick again. Though neither its carrot nor stick is big enough this time. How can NATO increase its cooperation with Asia-Pacific more? 70% of the US Navy is located in the Pacific. Similarly, the US has 90000 troops in East Asia, more than what it has on NATO members. The vast majority of NATO members still don't have force projection capabilities adequate for operating in Asia-Pacific despite all the vanity projects they have been funding. "Global Britain" could only place 2 patrol boats, and apparently they aren't even capable of having any effect on illegal fishing.
 

Appix

Senior Member
Registered Member
A small part of the speech of Jens Stoltenberg. We need to make sure Russia wins in Ukraine with significant support. Enough is enough with the US and their vassal states. Daily provacation after provacation and we are still reluctant to do someting about those vile bloody imperialists.

Allies will also discuss our work to develop NATO’s next Strategic Concept in time for the Madrid Summit in June.
It will guide the Alliance as we adapt to a new security reality.
It will address the implications of Russia’s aggressive actions, and our future relationship with Moscow.

For the first time, it will also need to take account of China’s growing influence and coercive policies on the global stage.
Which pose a systemic challenge to our security, and to our democracies.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

gelgoog

Brigadier
Registered Member
So if you believe Friedman then Germany dropped Russia out of consideration because they exported more to the US. Well, if Europe cuts trade with China, they will lose trade with a country which they export to about as much as the US, since Germany conducts about as much trade with China than the US, as does most of Europe with only a couple of exceptions. So they will lose trade not just with their largest supplier of commodities i.e. Russia, but one of their largest export markets i.e. China, and one of their largest import sources i.e. China as well. Brilliant.

The US couldn't get China to do what it wants so it resorted to carrot and stick again. Though neither its carrot nor stick is big enough this time. How can NATO increase its cooperation with Asia-Pacific more? 70% of the US Navy is located in the Pacific. Similarly, the US has 90000 troops in East Asia, more than what it has on NATO members. The vast majority of NATO members still don't have force projection capabilities adequate for operating in Asia-Pacific despite all the vanity projects they have been funding. "Global Britain" could only place 2 patrol boats, and apparently they aren't even capable of having any effect on illegal fishing.
Europe's economies will implode thanks to the decoupling from Russia. NATO will be of even less less help to the US in a conflict in the Pacific than they would be today.
 
Last edited:

pmc

Major
Registered Member
Turkey inflation at 61%. Turkey exposed to Europe. if this trend continnue wealthy Turks from Europe will migrate back to Turkey for cheaper living and less wealthy will move to Europe to escape higher cost of livng.
Turkey signed free trade agreement with Ukraine just before the crises. They really are clueless.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

4Runner

Junior Member
Registered Member
So if you believe Friedman then Germany dropped Russia out of consideration because they exported more to the US. Well, if Europe cuts trade with China, they will lose trade with a country which they export more towards than the US, since Germany conducts more trade with China than the US, as does most of Europe with only a couple of exceptions. So they will lose trade not just with their largest supplier of commodities i.e. Russia, but their largest export market i.e. China, and one of their largest import sources i.e. China as well. Brilliant.


Europe's economies will implode thanks to the decoupling from Russia. NATO will be of even less less help to the US in a conflict in the Pacific than they would be today.
Let me try to add a few cents to your post.

Let me take the example of auto business, specifically BBA. Disclaimer: I used drive an Audi A6 for 10 years. So I somewhat know BBA.

As we all know that China is the single biggest market to all BBA, a.k.a, Benz, BMW, Audi. If you trace back to the history of Audi from an also-ran to a tier-one premium brand, it is China that has made what Audi is today, hands down, period.

In the global cut-throat competition in the auto eco-system, China is actually way more important than just the biggest market to BBA. Take Audi for example, China provides experimental ground that Audi cannot get from US or even its own home market. The efficiency Audi gains on A6 design, for example, is way way way higher with the current China eco-system than if Audi lost its China market (for everything Audi related, buy or sale or service or engineering or support). As a result, Audi has some great competitive advantages built into every new model development than its competitors, such as Lexus, Infinite, Acura, Cadillac, Jaguar, Volvo, BMW, Benz, etc. etc. etc. And BTW, developing a new model of premium car is a very expensive undertaking. Therefore, Germany would never server its economic tie to China unless German politicians can escape from Volkswagen (Audi parent) wrath. And BMW. And Benz.

Especially in the current transition from ICE to EV, Germany is already behind US and China in all aspects of the EV eco-system. If China is gone, it would effectively kill the entire competitiv value proposition of the German automotive industry.

As we all know, the essence of the German industrial power rests in the auto industry as well as in the chemical industry. The current war already inflicted significant damages to the Germany chemical industry from raw materials to markets.

That is, in a nutshell, I said early that the mighty German industrial machine would be doomed if Russian energy and China market are closed for good to Germany.

......

Go figure
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Just ask Ukraine how well NATO is doing in repelling Russia. All the threats to China just shows how weak NATO is. Cooperation in Asia...? You mean that doesn't exists already? Does it mean they wouldn't come to Taiwan's aid if China were to take military action...? The US has all these military pacts with countries meaning once the US gets involved and retaliated against, it's suppose to mean every country the US has pacts with are suppose to come help the US. Their threats now means that wouldn't have happened despite treaties. Despite the West's united front against Russia, it's still not enough and they think they can gang up on China, a country they are in fact more dependent on. They're in panic because we haven't yet seen the full effects of their own sanctions against Russia on them which will really show how weak Europe is. They want the world to not see that so they have to make threats to China to use its influence to stop Russia.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
This is what the West is all about. Make threats first, i.e. decoupling, that they can't follow through and then when they don't work they go back to whining about the same things before the threats.
 

Overbom

Brigadier
Registered Member
Just ask Ukraine how well NATO is doing in repelling Russia. All the threats to China just shows how weak NATO is. Cooperation in Asia...? You mean that doesn't exists already? Does it mean they wouldn't come to Taiwan's aid if China were to take military action...? The US has all these military pacts with countries meaning once the US gets involved and retaliated against, it's suppose to mean every country the US has pacts with are suppose to come help the US. Their threats now means that wouldn't have happened despite treaties. Despite the West's united front against Russia, it's still not enough and they think they can gang up on China, a country they are in fact more dependent on. They're in panic because we haven't yet seen the full effects of their own sanctions against Russia on them which will really show how weak Europe is. They want the world to not see that so they have to make threats to China to use its influence to stop Russia.

This is what the West is all about. Make threats first that they can't follow through and then when they don't work they go back to whining about the same things before the threats.
Yeah.they couldn't even delete Russia because of some damage to their own economies. Now imagine China which controls the whole world with its manufacturing industry.

Actually this is a positive for China. Even with the oil/gas depot Russia they couldn't do that much
 

weig2000

Captain
The US couldn't get China to do what it wants so it resorted to carrot and stick again. Though neither its carrot nor stick is big enough this time. How can NATO increase its cooperation with Asia-Pacific more? 70% of the US Navy is located in the Pacific. Similarly, the US has 90000 troops in East Asia, more than what it has on NATO members. The vast majority of NATO members still don't have force projection capabilities adequate for operating in Asia-Pacific despite all the vanity projects they have been funding. "Global Britain" could only place 2 patrol boats, and apparently they aren't even capable of having any effect on illegal fishing.

Except that these days they're all sticks, or at least all sticks supposedly.
 
Top