Fresh off of China’s warning of a “confrontation” in the South China Sea, the US Navy is once again talking about increasing its presence across the Pacific Ocean, saying that it is a key strategic goal of the Obama Administration.
US Pacific Command head Admiral Samuel Locklear discussed the “back to the Pacific” mission in considerable detail, insisting it is a priority “for the long run” and that North Korea’s failed satellite launch was a key reason.
North Korea’s navy isn’t a serious threat to the US, and the plan is mostly about maintaining overwhelming superiority over China as it modernizes their own navy.
Admiral Locklear’s comments suggested that there would not be new US naval bases in the Pacific but rather “bilateral agreements” for access to other ports. The US has been cozying up to Vietnam, Indonesia and the Philippines, using the ongoing maritime disputes between them and China in the South China Sea as a lever to force its way ever deeper into the region.
Display of most importent US export articels!!! Military bases, troops, weapons,and then….false flag terrorism, regime change and war,destruction and displacement of native population etc. O, I am sorry to "empty heads patriots "…It is exporting freedom and democracy
The US has yet to experience a real war against an adversary that can sink its aircraft carriers, and demolish its entire navy. China can do this, and will do it if its back is against the wall. The US military is so drunk in its delusions of power that it does not know its limitations. China, Iran, and Russia will glady expose those limitations as Vietnam did, Iraq, and Afghanistan, but in a much for brutal, and concise manner.
"The US has yet to experience a real war against an adversary that can sink its aircraft carriers"
The sailors of the USS Langley, Lexington, Yorktown, Wasp, Hornet, Liscomb Bay, Princeton, Block Island, Gambier Bay, St. Lo, Ommaney Bay and Bismarck Sea would likely disagree.
..Are you referencing WW2? The US Military has yet to face an adversary such as China, Russia, or Iran, and I mean in the last fifty years. The US military makes it a point to make certain whomever it is prepared to attack that they are weaker, or weakened by US economic terrorism. Funny how this strategy has never worked since Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan are smarter planners and fighters.
Japan was a powerful adversary, but unfortunately for them they had no counter to the atom bomb. On a personal note all of the war's of the last seventy years were wars of state terror instigated by the United States. They were pointless, and only degraded the US on the world stage.
Absolutely! And that is one of the main problems with the Empire that it has never had war waged in its own land. The day that happens, things may change. Having said that, China has already alerted them to stop. And don't forget, the US needs money from China…to attack China that is the best part and the one the warmongers seem to forget or overlook. This is going to be fun to watch.
"China military warns of confrontation over seas"
http://news.yahoo.com/china-military-warns-confro…
The most important war in Washington is the war between the services to see which can spend the most of your tax dollars. The Navy hadn't been doing well in this war during the age of the Terror Wars, as those were mainly land wars. Everyone's been talking about expanding Special Forces and ground forces.
Thus, it was quite interesting when Obama announced his new strategic focus away from the land wars in the Middle East and instead towards pushing the Navy to project power towards China. This was major victory of the Navy in the Budget Wars in DC. This is just the flowing implementation of that plan.
One thing to remember is that the Obama campaigns and the modern pro-war Democratic Party is that their electoral strength is on the coasts. Which is where the major shipbuilding jobs and the major bases (and jobs) for the Navy are.
I love it when the double-speak doesn't add up. This mass expenditure of billions of dollars is both something we are in 'for the long run', while one of the 'key reasons' for this long run effort is a short-term event by a country with an unstable government that might not even be there a few years from now. 2+2=17 …. Just a bit outside.
China got kicked out of the Mediterranean, now NATO needs to get out of the C-h-i-n-a Sea. The Han have rights, too, and I think they are going to stick together. Look at the mess Washington has gotten us into. They exported our jobs and technology and now their only hope to save the economy is to monopolize the earth's resources since they no longer have a monpoly on manufacturing.
Uh, huh. Whatever it takes to piss off China. Apparently, the psychopaths that run the MIC and Wall Street somehow think that they can win this one. Or, perhaps, they've figured that if the attack China, they won't have to pay what they owe the Chinese. Only problem with that is that they'll have to borrow more money from China in order to be able to attack China. I'd love to see how that goes for them. The Empire has gone truly mad.