Continuing with their determination to escalate tensions with China over the island building efforts in the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea, US officials today are complaining that in addition to building artificial islands, the Chinese are also putting buildings on those islands.
In an effort to take the existence of buildings as far as they possibly can, US intelligence officials say the buildings look like they could conceivably house anti-aircraft missiles, and declaring the “logical conclusion” is that such missiles must be inside those buildings.
China insisted the buildings were just “normal construction activities,” but did not rule out putting missiles on the islands, saying they would deploy “necessary and appropriate territorial defense facilities.” The Trump Administration has suggested several times they might militarily expel China from the islands.
Ownership over the Spratly chain is contested between China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia, and the Philippines, though Philippines president Duterte has complained about US interference in the issue, accusing them of trying to suck the Philippines into a naval war with China. The US backs everyone’s claims so long as they conflict with China.
Trump may not be interested in starting a war with Russia right now but the consolation prize for Americans who are disappointed is that it looks like he wants to start one with China.
Does anybody think the US could nuke China without China getting a few licks in on L.A. or one of the other big ones?
Or even the chance that Russia would join in on the festivities?
The USA sees every building anywhere as a threat, and cannot have any answer but violence. The USA seems to lack any diplomats or any sense of understanding for other people’s needs or history. Can the USA really not see why Russia worries about NATO expansion? why China feels threatened when it dares to advance by developing new ways of doing things (eg. Xi at Davos) rather than confrontation and invasion? why Iran gets annoyed when its strenuous effort to follow an international agreement are tossed aside?
Rosemary you are correct in all of that. But a question for you: Have you understood all those truths for a long time or did your understanding come out of the controversies that have been raised by the appearance of Trump on scene?
I’m especially interested in your answer as it pertains to Russia. It seems to me that very few Americans would be expressing those truthful feeling before the issue was raised by Trump’s bullshitting during his campaign speeches.
I have held these views for many years and certainly was surprised at Trump’s win, since not being American I knew nothing of the “reality TV” stuff which all Americans must know, and just knew of his business interests. I visited Russia in the USSR days and even then was not anti-Russia, and more recently have read many books on Russia including Putin’s autobiography available from the Book Depository: “First Person”, plus Diana Johnstone’s book on Kosovo :” Fools’ Crusade”. I do tend to disbelieve the official stories eg JFK , 9/11 and look for evidence for assertions eg the recent “Russian hacks” which seem to have no evidence, just “confidence” of nameless CIA officials.
Trump is terrible and unpredictable, while Hillary is all too predictable. Not much hope for peace!!
Thank you!
We are in agreement on a lot of that, save a few minor issues that I won’t get into. One I will for your consideration.
I think that the premise was built to demonize Russia for hacking emails and people were much too careless in accepting that demonization effort.
What should have happened is that it should have been accepted as just normal procedure on the part of the Russians, as it is just normal procedure on the part of the US and any other countries against those they perceive as their potential enemies.
Had that understanding been arrived at in the beginning, the entire demonization effort would have failed.
Is Putin’s autobiogrphy available in English?
Of course it is in English!!! It is interviews about his early life up to the time he became President, published in 2000. Three people ask questions, he answers, all translated into American English.
I do not agree about Russian “hacking”, first because it was leaked, not hacked (the NSA would easily detect who hacked if it happened) and also, why bother? They have dealt with Hillary Clinton as SoS and expected her to win, as did we all. Of course they were pleased that Trump was apparently wanting to be reasonable and stop the dangerous enmity between Russia and USA, so were well disposed to him, not realising his unpredictable nature and the power of the “intelligence agencies” and others behind the throne.
Thanks. I didn’t immediately assume that you read the book in English. No reason to.
I think everyone has solidified their positions on the hacking/no hacking question now so I won’t pursue alternate possibilities with too much conviction. Suffice to say, all countries hack as much as they can on their enemies or perceived possible enemies. And there’s no doubt whatsoever that Russia privately views the US as the enemy. Not at the level of the people though. Caution: Don’t mistake hacking with interfering in the voting or balloting.
Otherwise, I will suggest to you that Russia never did place too much stock in Trump. It would have showed on RT news and it never really did. And fwiw, if you follow RT you will see that it’s now become the opposite.