China to US: Butt out!

[mota bhai 2,675]

The creation of an "Air Defense Identification Zone" by China comes amid increasing tensions between Beijing and Tokyo over competing claims to disputed islands in the [East China Sea], which are believed to be situated near large reserves of natural resources.

...

Washington warned that the latest Chinese move creates the risk of potentially dangerous miscalculations in the sensitive region, where Chinese and Japanese ships and planes have already been involved in tense encounters.

"This unilateral action constitutes an attempt to change the status quo in the East China Sea. Escalatory action will only increase tensions in the region and create risks of an incident," U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said.

...

Chinese officials dismissed the U.S. comments as unjustified interference.

...

The United States should stop taking sides on the issue, cease making "inappropriate remarks" and not send any more "wrong signals" that could lead to a "risky move by Japan," he said.

Beijing demands that the United States respect Chinese national security, stop making "irresponsible remarks" about the air defense identification zone and make "concrete efforts" for peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region, Yang said.

The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it had lodged a representation with U.S. Ambassador Gary Locke asking the United States "to correct its mistakes immediately."

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/25/world/asia/china-japan-disputed-islands/

Edited November 25, 2013 by mota bhai

[luckytxn 2,265]

Japan needs to rearm.

[Dakine10 5,452]

All this over tiny islands in the middle of nowhere. Imagine if this were to escalate to the point of an embargo on cheap crappy goods. I can't afford to buy overpriced American consumer goods for Christmas.

[mota bhai 2,675]

All this over tiny islands in the middle of nowhere.

Not really. This is about the nine dotted line. These little islands are just chapter 1.

[GandD 5,966]

This is all about who owns the shipping lanes in the South China sea.

[GandD 5,966]

Japan needs to rearm.

I think the isolationists miss out on several key strategies. By being the dominant force in the world militarily, other nations that ally themselves with us have little to no need to militarize themselves. This gives us a strategic advantage to international shipping and local government policies. And it keeps nations from building up arsenals that will eventually lead to wars. The amount of influence we have on the world stage is directly related to our ability to project power anywhere on it with little to no resistance. You want us to stop being world police? Be ready to be just another voice in the global arena.

[mota bhai 2,675]

I think the isolationists miss out on several key strategies. By being the dominant force in the world militarily, other nations that ally themselves with us have little to no need to militarize themselves. This gives us a strategic advantage to international shipping and local government policies. And it keeps nations from building up arsenals that will eventually lead to wars. The amount of influence we have on the world stage is directly related to our ability to project power anywhere on it with little to no resistance. You want us to stop being world police? Be ready to be just another voice in the global arena.

Excellent argument, but here's a question. Of what use is our "strategic advantage to international shipping" if the economic benefits that result from them go solely to the top 1%?

Would we be a happier society if the power of the 1% were stripped?

[GandD 5,966]

Excellent argument, but here's a question. Of what use is our "strategic advantage to international shipping" if the economic benefits that result from them go solely to the top 1%?

Would we be a happier society if the power of the 1% were stripped?

I wouldn't say stripped. At this point though the distribution trends are closer to a rape of the 99%. I think some common sense (from the perspective of the 99%) legislation would be in order. I'd say reducing private/corporate campaign contributions and more strenuous tax codes would be in order. Realistically an argument could be made to not even increase the tax on the 1% assuming you could crack down on off shore holdings and loopholes.

[mota bhai 2,675]

What you call loopholes, they call exemptions and deductions. They would call that an increase in their taxes.

[GandD 5,966]

This is true. But the life of the country is not exactly what they're worried about here. They would likely present tons of arguments showing how much it will destroy the country. I need only one graph, the trend of distribution in this country over the last 25 years. Its not going to work forever,

Edited November 25, 2013 by GandD

[mota bhai 2,675]

No, they aren't worried about the country at all. They're members of a new international elite that has no loyalty to the nation-state. What's funny is how they wrap themselves around the flag in every country. They're a cancer, but I'm a nice guy so instead of the guillotine which they deserve, I only advocate higher tax rates and reduced deductions/exemptions.

Edited November 25, 2013 by mota bhai

[Ontarkie 14,512]

~~Offensive Post removed~~

[Pooky 3,840]

China is betting that the USA has no political will or financial capacity to deploy assets in the general area to support its allies.