Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ukrainian forces marginally advanced near Bakhmut and in western Zaporizhia Oblast on September 27. Geolocated footage published on September 26 indicates that Ukrainian forces advanced near Orikhovo-Vasylivka (10km northwest of Bakhmut). Additional geolocated footage published on September 26 indicates that Russian forces likely no longer control a roughly one-kilometer-long trench line west of Verbove (16km southeast of Orikhiv). The absence of Russian forces in this trench line could facilitate further Ukrainian advances in this area, as this trench line is no longer a significant obstacle for Ukrainian forces. Ukrainian Tavriisk Group of Forces Commander Brigadier General Oleksandr Tarnavskyi stated that “there will be good news” in the Zaporizhia operational direction and noted that Ukrainian forces are steadily advancing but did not provide additional information.
While true the Soviets weren't a match economically, in terms of political and military influence (the other two factors of power) they were a peer to the U.S. The U.S. did not pull out of Vietnam because communism ceased to be a monolith. It was because the war had reached a point of high unpopularity that it threatened the thing politicians love most (staying in power), and there was no end in sight. As for a signal to the entire world that the U.S. is in decline. News flash, they already think so. This war will not change that mindset. We pulled out of Afghanistan after all.
Again, the reason Nixon went to China to make a deal was because he wanted to separate China from Russia. If you watch the video I linked he says that exact thing. It was only after Nixon cemented the split that it was geopolitically safe to pull out of Vietnam. The question is, what did America promise China? What did America promise the Saudis?
Quote:
"Even if there were no Soviet Union, it was essential that the United States move now and move when it did in rapprochement with China, and the reason is that fundamentally 1/4th of all the people in the world live in the People's Republic of China, it has enormous natural resources, and the Chinese people, as Chinese are among the most capable people in the world. Look what they've done in Taiwan, look in non-communist areas, in Hong Kong, in Singapore, Thailand, San Francisco, you name it. And once that power is mobilized it is going to be an enormous force in the world, for good or for bad. I think DeGaulle hit it in 1969 most effectively when he said cryptically, better for you to recognize China when they need you than wait till later when their power is such that you'll need them. So in order to build the kind of world that we want our grandchildren to live in in the 21st century it was essential that the United States, the most powerful and prosperous in the free world, have a renewed relationship with the People's Republic of China. So I say to some of those who object to that initiative, had it not been undertaken, and if China, due to the fact that they did not have any guarantee of their security from the United States vis-a-vis the Soviet Union, had been forced back under the Soviet umbrella, the geopolitical relationship and balance in the world would be almost hopelessly against us at this time. It was necessary to do for that reason, but apart from that it was essential to do for the next century." - Richard Nixon
As it relates to Afghanistan, the war had been unpopular for 15 years. If the foreign-policy establishment had wanted to stay in Afghanistan forever, we would have stayed forever. We left Afghanistan a few months before the Ukraine War, and Joe Biden gave a speech that explained the motives.
"We’re engaged in a serious competition with China. We’re dealing with challenges on multiple fronts with Russia. We’re confronted with cyberattacks, and nuclear proliferation. We have to shore up America’s competitiveness to meet these new challenges in the competition for the 21st century. We can do both: fight terrorism and take on new threats that are here now, and will continue to be here in the future. And there’s nothing China or Russia would rather have, would want more in this competition than the United States to be bogged down another decade in Afghanistan." - Joe Biden, September 1st, 2021
Ukraine held joint-NATO exercises in Ukraine two weeks after Joe Biden's speech. Have you ever heard the term "Manufacturing Consent"? Democracy is fake and gay.
Last edited by Redshadowz; 09-27-2023 at 08:58 PM..
The only thing you've "proven" is that you make assumptions and jump to conclusions.
Everything has been said out loud. If you actually wanted to know the truth it is there. But you'd rather keep your head in the sand and your fingers in your ears.
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.
Russia claims to be able to make 2 million shells a year. But Russia soldiers report many of the new shells never explode because they have no explosive material in them. Indicative of the corruption endemic of the Russian military. Someone just kept the money himself.
Russian soldiers open a can of rations and find it is just filled with water. No one ever thought the rations would actually be used and the required contents were expensive, so they just filled them with water.
Corruption.
This would meet the criteria needed for a world war. Russia, China, Iran, NK alliance against US, Ukraine, NATO.
.. And a few others who are not NATO.
USA, Canada, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland, France, UK, Ireland, Belgium, Netherlands, Poland, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Czech Republic, Croatia, Portugal, Greece, Italy, Spain, Israel, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, and Japan make up the list, but there may be someone I forgot.
Japan has contributed the least with over $1B Euros to the effort.
China will not join into a world war alongside Russia. They would prefer Russia lose such a war and then step in to pick what they want under the guise of "assistance"..
The real winner of the Russia-Ukraine War will be Poland. They recently signed agreements to build large nuclear power plants
as well as Small Modular Reactors; The also signed arms agreements with the US and will buy F-35s and so on.
Germany has made some pretty serious mistakes and is closing its nuclear facilities in the interest of "safety". That action makes it more dependent on LNG since it has taxed its own coal and made it too expensive to use.
Since Poland will emerge much stronger than before, Ukraine (assuming the country prevails) will, by extension, also become very prosperous.
Last edited by Listener2307; 09-28-2023 at 08:27 AM..
China will not join into a world war alongside Russia. They would prefer Russia lose such a war and then step in to pick what they want under the guise of "assistance"..
.
China has been giving both Russia and NK supplies for a long time. They may in fact try to get a stake in Russia’s territory if Russia collapses when this is finished.
China will not join into a world war alongside Russia. They would prefer Russia lose such a war and then step in to pick what they want under the guise of "assistance".
While China does want to vassalize Russia, China needs Russia to remain intact. The balkanization of Russia would not be to the advantage of China over the long-term.
In fact, China would prefer the current arrangement forever. They get everything that want from Russia(and cheap), while their main industrial rivals weaken and bankrupt themselves.
In the event of a World War, China can't simply invade Russia without either joining the alliance against Russia(and making a Yalta-style deal), or as an enemy combatant against NATO.
China has no interest in helping Russia rebuild its empire but China cannot allow Russia to fall. It would shift the balance of power against China. As it stands, China has an ally(Russia) willing to fight NATO, which also sells them unlimited cheap resources. If Russia fell and China took half, it might give them direct control of half of Russia's resources, but it would give the other half to NATO. As it stands now, China gets all of Russia's resources at below-market rates and Russia keeps America distracted preventing a "pivot to Asia".
In short, China allowing Russia to lose would be a massive geopolitical blunder. It's not going to happen. For that matter, I'm sick and tired of you Ukraine shills pretending China isn't helping Russia. Only obtuse morons still believe that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
