[sparky]

.
And now for a real headache !
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/m ... nniversary

China is going to lay a parade , yeepee ! a big military one ..Bummer !
one of the main object will be to rub rectal waste in the face of Japan , and again and again !
everybody is invited to do it ,as Frank Zappa would have said " in a circular motion "

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Xuqa1xKxOs
at the 5.32 minutes mark there is the girls in pink

since the not so democratic , not so human rights , people republic is the global finance darling
Europe bright hope of making a buck , the US bond holder extraordinaire and everybody buyer or seller of something
politics are going to be tricky ,Obama standing between Putin and the Kim scion ? bad picture , very bad
that what I like about diplomacy , finessing those things in a creative way
the foggy bottom crowd are going to get dire headaches , how to be upright on principle while crawling
or the art of arrogant surrender , just can't wait !

[Sixstrings]

since the not so democratic , not so human rights , people republic is the global finance darling
Europe bright hope of making a buck , the US bond holder extraordinaire and everybody buyer or seller of something
politics are going to be tricky ,Obama standing between Putin and the Kim scion ?

This is ironic:

China’s insular military will invite foreign armed forces to take part in a lavish parade in Beijing this autumn marking the 70th anniversary of victory over Japan in the second world war.

Essentially, they're celebrating liberal democracy's victory over right wing fascism.

During which time, they were communists.

And now they have morphed into something closer to capitalist nationalist fascism -- celebrating victory over liberal democracy Japan.

I will note that it's unfortunate that there's so much national pride bound up in militarism, among these rising developing countries, nowadays. It's sad. That's the road to war.

Japan is responding in kind, to defend themselves. This sh*t's just going to get really old.. Brits, Americans, we're culturally older (modernity wise). We've already had all these growing pains in our past. And now we will just have to watch the same old sh*t all over again, out of these new rising powers.

Hoorah, look at us and our marching armies, aren't we all so proud.

(Russia and China should pour money into space instead, asteroid mining is within grasp -- be the first to do that and make trillions off it, more money than any war will ever bring. Of course, then we'll all just have space wars over the asteroids, it never ends I guess..)

[sparky]

.
Essentially they are celebrating military power over military power
all the rest is massaging of the message

[Sixstrings]

Essentially they are celebrating military power over military power
all the rest is massaging of the message

Well.. speaking of WW2 Victory Day shows of force, we've seen this song and dance before.. growing Asian nation spreads its wings, wants to expand, Uncle Sam is in the way..



Australia's also in the way, of the aforementioned rising Asian 21st century hegemon..


(and no it won't be Japan next time)



A question to consider: what's that big military buildup they're doing, for, exactly?
People don't usually spend a lot of money ramping up on something like that, unless they plan to use it.

But -- maybe with China Bank and more Chinese involvement in the UN Sec council will just mean Chinese UN troops in the Sudan enforcing Chinese oil interests. And stuff like that. Empire stuff, but not really hostile to America or Australia.

If they get too nationalist crazy though then they're going to spook people, you can't whip a billion people up like that. It's like a hive mind of bees, gets out of control. You have to really watch that stuff, whatever country we are talking about, whether it could be Russia one day and patriotic militarism just boiling out the pot and out of control, or like old Argentina and their dictatorship and how worked up they got, in a frenzy, wanting the Falkland Islands.

What if the economy turns, in China.

And then people are angry, less money in their pockets than before, and looking for someone to blame. Then what if Chinese nationalists do what all dictators do, and find some foreign power to blame for it all and point to something that needs annexed. To distract the people.. it's an old story.. I hope it doesn't happen.

Can America just stay out of this one, let Japan and Oz deal with it? Would that be okay? We need a rest.

[sparky]

.
Military projection is a direct consequence of needs , China would rather if everything was cool
but their hunger for resources and markets will drive them into a projection of power .
their military budget/ GDP is quite small ,
by the way , they have naval exercises in the Mediterranean , the first time a Naval group has crossed the Suez
under the anti piracy agreement they have standing forces patrolling the northern Indian ocean and are developing naval bases in Pakistan and Shri-lanka

[Shaved Monkey]

China want to make stuff to sell as long as the resources keep coming they will be fine.
They need customers and the suppliers of resources need money and stuff.
I dont think its in their interest to damage this great little business they have going,but military would be there in case their competitors wanted to damage it.

[Sixstrings]

China want to make stuff to sell as long as the resources keep coming they will be fine.
They need customers and the suppliers of resources need money and stuff.
I dont think its in their interest to damage this great little business they have going,but military would be there in case their competitors wanted to damage it.

Fair enough, but I'm just curious if people will criticize future resource wars and interventions, that will now led by China, that are really about oil and resources for China, and Chinese business interests.

It will just be interesting to see, if the same people that criticized America all the time will start criticizing China once they start it.

Why else do you think China "wants to start playing a bigger role in the world." Do they really want to bring peace in Sudan, or is it about Chinese oil interests in Sudan. etc., etc.



They look pretty hardcore, for UN peacekeepers:

[Shaved Monkey]

I would have thought China would not want to upset its customers by "stealing" resources to make stuff to sell them.
They need to keep everyone happy for their business model to work.
Their new Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank will do what the World Banks been doing but in Chinas favour.(to 3rd World country we lend you money to build a mine/port/ rail link we get some resources to pay the loan)
That would include manipulating supply through monopolies and buying the farm and the mine over military intervention,its cheaper and doesnt scare the sheeple into not buying.

[Sixstrings]

(to 3rd World country we lend you money to build a mine/port/ rail link we get some resources to pay the loan)

Right. Which is what the USA / USA-led West used to do (and does).

That's the only point I'm trying to make, is that okay now it will be China.

So, in the future, there will be some country in Africa or the middle east or Eurasia that's having political problems and that threatens the resource flows / loan payments to China Bank -- and the Chinese Army will intervene and regime change and do all these same things that everyone was always complaining about America.

I agree a lot with Noam Chomksy / Naomi Kline type stuff, but my real sticking point is they are curiously silent if China does it.

And about anti-Americanism -- really, every country does this stuff. All the corporations take advantage of foreigners. Look at what BP and Shell have always done around the world.

Look at that one big French company that sued Egypt, because they raised their minimum wage.

And even Australia -- I read about some Apache native ancestral land that got given or sold to some Australian mining company. This was national forest land, protected by Eisenhower if I recall. It's some kind of massive deep copper mine thing. Environmental impact is questionable. So Obama approved that too -- it's not even an American company, it's Australian, this was national forest land so wtf is this for.

The only point I want to get out there is just that people should have a broader big picture view, that if you tear America down then actually it's just China and others doing all the same sh*t you were complaining about America before.

One big difference though is that Chinese aren't ever going to listen and bend so much as Americans do. Because they are a very different culture, and "their time is now" and they are nationalist and on the rise and that's just that, you can complain to Chinese all you want to but they will not care.

[Shaved Monkey]

The point of difference between the US and China on resources is China is a cheap factory that sells stuff so needs happy customers .
The US is really just interested in returning the profits to its share holders they dont care about happy customer (compliant scared dictators are easier to control).
This will/could change when China starts making stuff for its people and doesnt need to worry about customers

This is the scary part.
Corporations dot likes to see it competitors get stronger.
Unfortunately it drags it all back to Australia
http://www.theage.com.au/world/b1-bombe ... h23zl.html

[Sixstrings]

Unfortunately it drags it all back to Australia
http://www.theage.com.au/world/b1-bombe ... h23zl.html

From your linked article:

Assistant Defence Secretary Shear made it clear on Wednesday that the US intends to challenge China's claims to sovereignty over large parts of the South China Sea.

"We claim the right of innocent passage in such areas, and we exercise that right regularly, both in the South China Sea and globally," Mr Shear told the Senate Foreign Relations committee.

Similar views were expressed by Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Daniel Russel, who also told the Senate committee "No matter how much sand you pile on a reef in the South China Sea, you can't manufacture sovereignty."

The Chinese Foreign Ministry has voiced "serious concern" about the US officials's remarks.

Spokeswoman Hua Chunying told a press conference on Wednesday that China supported freedom of navigation in the South China Sea but "freedom of navigation does not give one country's military aircraft and ships free access to another country's territorial waters and airspace."

She said China would "resolutely safeguard its territorial sovereignty" and urged the US "not to take any risks or make any provocations."

Well..

There's no doubt that's correct, a country can't just "manufacture sovereignty" and claim new territory by piling sand onto a coral reef.

Meanwhile China says it respects freedom of navigation, but freedom of navigation doesn't include territorial waters. But they are expanding their territorial waters.

The thing going on in Asia is just that Japan is very worried about Chinese expansion, and then South Korea is too. These are all US allies, so we're dragged in by default. The US aim here would be containing China. Geopolitically, someone has to or else China will just start annexing some things.

You really can't deny that.. a nation doesn't push on borders, building airstrips on coral reefs and seizing fisheries, unless it would like to do even more of that, if they are allowed to.

Right? It's common sense.

Australia could actually just be neutral. Although I would argue that one day, Oz would be taking orders from Beijing, and you really don't want that.

Ultimately, Australia can't side with China. It's just not culturally lined up for that. Australians are anglo, bottom line, you can't just sign all up with communist China, that's just not going to work.

From a sovereignty / independence standpoint, Australia's wise to have US marines there and B1 bombers. You don't ever have to worry about an invasion or getting messed with too much, if you've got a US military base on your soil.

From an American standpoint -- I'm not really for this. Japan and South Korea, then Australia added in too, can well afford enough defense for China deterrence. Especially Japan.

A good strategy for the future would be to have regional allies working with each other more, and US just sort of hanging back and being backup but otherwise cut back on all these bases and troops.

Get a new paradigm going like what's happening in the ME now, where those allies are working with each other and we're sort of just supporting a bit but not taking a big role.

And then do the same in Europe -- EU ought to increase its military, take on more of their own defense.

And then same in the Pacific, with the Pacific allies.

Then the US can draw down its military a bit to something we can better afford -- and maybe give all our diabetics insulin and such and not have to throw old folks off of their social security. US would still have the best military in the world, but just step it back a bit, more of a support role / call in the cavalry.

[Shaved Monkey]

Australia is a part of Asia
China is our biggest trading partner

In 2009, it is estimated the trade and investment with China brings benefits under $4000 per Australian household, in 2011, this is estimated to be A$10,500 per household per year.
Australia is one of the few countries in the world during the Global financial crisis that was not in recession and experienced economic growth due to large demand and long term strong fundamentals from China.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia ... _relations
The 2 biggest cities Sydney and Melbourne are nearly 1 in 5 from Asian decent.
In some suburbs its 1 in 3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Australian

In the decade from 2001 to 2011, the proportion of our overseas-born population who originate from Europe shrank from 52 per cent to just 40 per cent.

Meanwhile the proportion of foreign-born Australians who were born in Asia increased from 24 per cent to 33 per cent.

Asia is the future.

[Sixstrings]

Australia is a part of Asia
China is our biggest trading partner

Well.. the only thing I know about Australians are the few I've actually known (in real life ) and then impressions from the media / culture zeitgeist.

Look at the comments from the article you posted:

Left wing australian:

How many countries has China invaded in the past 50 years? History shows us China is more interested in keeping other our than growing it's borders. The USA on the other hand has bombed pretty much every second country on earth since the 2nd World War. I for one are much more concerned at the gun toting war mongers in Washington than any Chinese threat.

Right wing australian:

Typical whining from the extreme left peaceniks that want appeasement at any cost.
Not surprising really...weak soft individuals that have never had to stand up for anything and so have no concept of being a string nation in an uncertain world.
Thank god national security matters are left to you.

Polarized, left-right thinking. You guys are anglos.. Brits are like this too in their discourse but a bit more refined element in there too, overall I'd say Aussies are a lot closer to Americans than Brits. And then Canadians are a bit more reserved and not so loud, as a lot of Brits are.

You're a lot like Americans. Very brash. These are real cultural differences, from even how Europeans are and others around the world, and certainly very different from Asians.

Lot of individualism with Australians, moreso than Brits, moreso than Canadians. Frontier cowboy culture. Similar to us in that way.

Culturally, Australia could never be subservient to China, it's just not possible.

Here's a neat article exploring some aspect of Chinese culture versus Australian:

For the Chinese, face is very important, not only for themselves, but also for their dealings with others. Often they refrain from expressing their true feelings because they do not want to strip someone of their dignity. This makes China a very friendly place to visit. Chinese tend to be very complimentary towards the visitors, and want the visitor to leave with a good impression of their country. Even if the visitor is rude and obnoxious, the Chinese will usually refrain from expressing their true feelings and pretend to be respectful.

For historical reasons, face is not important for Australians. For the first 80 years of its urban existence, Australia was a penal colony. This naturally elicited ridicule from foreigners, migrants and Australian civic leaders. That ridicule has never really gone away. Consequently, Australia remains a place where people freely criticise others and are criticised themselves. This makes Australians quite thick skinned, and not very sensitive to causing offence in others. For example, when former Prime Minister Paul Keating referred to the Malaysian Prime Minister, Mahathir Mohamed, as a "recalcitrant", he didn't really have any idea that his remark would cause problems. However, rather than ignore the comment, Mahathir Mohamed viewed Keating's remark as indicative of the country he came from and subsequently said:

"We can't do anything. If people have no manners, I mean children we can smack them I think that a whole nation, or there generally is one nation who have no manners. It's very difficult, who resort to personal vilification and all that."

Compared to Chinese, Australians don't really care what foreigners think of their country because they are so accustomed to hearing negative things about it anyway. So much so, Australians will even join with the foreigners in criticising it. Even when they want to give a compliment, Australians might mask it as an insult.
http://www.convictcreations.com/culture/australiaasia.html

I know you have your opinions SM, and I know about how nice of a socialist system Australia has, but otherwise you guys are really brash and a lot like Americans. Most similar to us of any other culture, I think. Your right wingers are even more right winger, your left wingers are even more left winger. Look at Rupert Murdoch, as an example.

I'm just saying -- if China ever got a serious yoke on Australia, I think Aussies would rebel against it. Same as we would.

You're just too culturally different, to ever become too enmeshed / subservient to China.

[Sixstrings]

Australia Urges China Not to Create South China Sea Air Zone

“The Asean countries have been discussing this and I believe they’ve made their position quite plain that they would be deeply concerned if there was any attempt to impose an air defense identification zone over the South China Sea,” Bishop said in an interview in Canberra on Monday, referring to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-05-11/australia-urges-china-not-to-create-south-china-sea-air-zone

'If there were no Chinese, Australia couldn't survive': Chinese property developer who has lived in Australia for 27 years says economy depends on migrants 'buying all the luxury housing and expensive cars'

Chen Guo Jing is a property developer based in Melbourne
He first opened a supermarket when he moved to Australia 27 years ago
He spoke out in an interview for Hong Kong TV station TVB on May 10
The show detailed how the Chinese diaspora is impacting life in Australia
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3079117/Without-China-Australia-views-one-property-developer-Australian-market-says-Chinese-investors-buying-luxury-housing-expensive-cars.html

Situation Report: More on bombers to Australia

One Pentagon official told FP that the deployment of bombers and spy planes are “in the plans, but it’s not yet planned.” Implication: talks are ongoing but nothing has been finalized.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/05/15/situation-report-more-on-bombers-to-australia-chinese-drones-to-jordan-and-european-forces-to-libya/

Japanese and Chinese UN diplomats argue over whether to mention the atomic bombings of Japan, with China saying that Japan is trying to paint themselves as the victim and not the aggressor (presumably China is saying that if you mention Hiroshima then you should mention the rape of nanking etc. etc.):

“There were discussions in one of the main committees as to whether or not there should be specific mention of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and an invitation to visit those cities in the draft report of that group,” said Ewen Buchanan, spokesman for the U.N.’s Office for Disarmament Affairs. “Some objected to it, saying that there were other aspects of the Second World War that might deserve mention too.”

The Chinese U.N. delegation’s Ambassador for Disarmament Affairs, Fu Cong, told Japan’s Kyodo News agency that he opposed the remarks on the bombings because Tokyo is “trying to portray Japan as a victim of the Second World War, rather than a victimizer.” The Chinese Mission to the U.N. had not responded to a request for further comment at time of publication.

A spokesman for the Japanese delegation told Al Jazeera on condition of anonymity that, contrary to the Chinese ambassador’s statement, “there’s no intention other than to just let people know what happened that year. That’s very important toward realizing a world without nuclear weapons.”

“This is the aim of our proposal,” the spokesman said. “That’s our aim. That’s it.”
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/5/13/china-japan-clash-at-un-over-hiroshima-commemoration.html

Here's my concern about China -- just that there's a bit of a Russia vibe to this nationalist frenzy that's brewing.

It's just not good.

No government should get its people worked up, to this extent, angry at neighbors.

The nationalist tone, as in Russia, is becoming increasingly shrill. The concern you have, when you see this kind of thing, is that you have to wonder IF THEY ARE WORKING THEMSELVES UP to go do something. You can't just annex something overnight, you have to get everyone ramped up and worked up to do it, first.

And they've got a billion people in China. And they are essentially a new, young rising power -- you get a billion people all fired up and nationalist and on the march for something and that can fly out of control pretty fast. It's like group-think / hive mind thing, it could be a tsunami.

We've seen this before, in history, if you take a look at nazi Germany and the nationalists there and how it got to a frenzy.

More recently, in Russia.

In the 1980s, in the nationalist dictatorship of Argentina. On and on, it's and old story.

[Sixstrings]

Japanese PM Shinzo Abe's idea of a "security diamond" for Pacific defense:

China Absent as Japan Parades Gear at First Defense Show

In his opening remarks, Admiral Tomohisa Takei, head of Japan’s Maritime Self-Defense Force, referred to an Abe essay in 2012. Abe set out plans in the article for a “democratic security diamond” stretching between Japan, Hawaii, Australia and India, and enlisting help from the U.K. and France to counterbalance China’s growing power.

“Problems between countries must be solved by peaceful means in accordance with international law,” Takei said. “If one country imposes its own interpretation of international law, other countries’ freedom of navigation” may be threatened.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-05-15/china-absent-as-japan-parades-military-gear-at-first-trade-show

[Shaved Monkey]

Even ex conservative Prime Ministers see the problem

Malcolm Fraser warns Australia risks war with China unless US military ties cut back

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politi ... 8463567327
http://www.smh.com.au/national/people/m ... 36ze8.html

[Sixstrings]

Even ex conservative Prime Ministers see the problem

Well.. just think strategically.

Australia is caught between two power blocs. With China being so overwhelmingly heavily invested in Australia, plus Chinese nationals owning so much property there, and then however many resident alien Chinese and Chinese immigrants -- that's a WHOLE LOT of influence and potential for control right there.

So what's the only possible hedge for that?

Two things: Australia pays the money to build a credible military that can stand on its own, as Japan is doing.

or

You go ahead and have the 2500 marines there and a few b1 bombers. This latter option is obviously cheaper. Look, I'm into Noam Chomsky stuff lately so okay I get it, but still there are certain realities in the world.

Just look all around the Pacific. Everyone is arming, and building up. So Australia just has to think about things, in that context.

China's never going to invade darn Australia, but what WILL happen is without uncle sam in the back pocket then straight away you'd just be a total Chinese dependency. You can ask the Taiwanese about that. You can ask the dalai lama, about that.

The reality is that the US really ought to pull out of some places, to save some money. And as we've been doing less under Obama, actually all the regional allies have been complaining that we aren't doing enough, we aren't there as much. Eastern Europe complained. The middle east allies complained -- Saudi Arabia even offered to PAY for a war on Syria.

And Japan is worried about China -- I saw Shinzo Abe's speech to congress a few weeks ago. I noticed he mentioned Japan is actually paying to renovate some US bases in the Pacific.

To be clear -- I'm not convinced we should be there at all, but, I'm just saying the people do seem to want us there. South Korea, Japan, they never want to lose their US troops. That would obviously weaken their position, versus China.

So how does that make any sense. To just give up strategic deterrence. That would be foolish (I'm just talking strategically, objectively).

At the end of the day, "murica" doesn't order Australians around -- but China will, one day, if the opportunity is there.

If Oz doesn't have a defense pact with the US, then who else would be there. UK wouldn't even say anything about Hong Kong, Britain's too wrapped up in China Bank. And the UK doesn't really have much of a navy anymore. If Australia threw away defense pact with the US, then Oz would literally be all on its own. With nobody, except China and Indonesia staring at you.

This is just realpolitik SM, if China already owns so much of Australia, then of course if there is no other power backing Australia up then China would really start calling the shots down there and bossing you around. And you'd have to do whatever they say, if you've built no real military, if you've cast away your defensive allies, if you haven't made any new ties with Japan etc.

[Sixstrings]

Just to note -- I'm not arguing for US forces in Australia, other than just making an objective strategic observation.

Just being cynical, the reality is that Australia could side with China and then jump ship at the last minute and the USA / Japan would be there for them.

Unless China has gotten too powerful, then it would be like a Tibet situation, and nobody would want to cross China too much.

Just objective strategy wise -- it's like that video game "Tropico," where you play a cold war era banana republic dictator. If you want to keep your independence then the best thing to do, in that game, is keep relations up with BOTH sides and you keep it about equal.

Which is exactly what Australia does, so whoever's in government down there knows what they are doing.

[sparky]

.
Some more news on the parade and if it will rain or get urinated on .
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/07/0 ... UE20150703
I'm sure it will be swept to the back pages with chairman Xi much wroth about the slight
in ordinary language it means "we love your money but love a militaristic Japan even more"

the only real suspense is , how will Taiwan play this very tricky hand,
it's not like if they had much love for Japan either

[sparky]

.
well , well , well , some snubbing of the Chinese should send a strong message
"we don't like you very much , in fact not at all ! "
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/08/2 ... 9M20150825