Soldato
Nobody wants to join the forces and nobody wants to pay extra tax to spend on them
Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar
- Thread starter areksnumbr1sxylady
- Start date
- Status
Nobody wants to join the forces and nobody wants to pay extra tax to spend on them
Soldato
I wonder how much "mad max additions" like that are ordered by the command structure as a substitute before an official kit is issued or if its just individual crews doing whatever the hell they like with whatever they can get hold of.
Soldato
A weak Russia has a lot of advantages to China. If anything a Russia causing war in Europe if it were to be successful would be a negative result for China. Russia being excluded from the world plays well into China’s hand. It’s a fine balance for them as they can’t disassociate from Russia as that will prevent the cheap supply of resources but they are causing more paranoia of China from the West by being associated. I expect it’s causing a lot of tensions within the Chinese leadership too.
Really.....
Have ever seen prisoners of war ,say from ww2 and Japanese captivity....
Obviously not.
Last edited:
China has always been interested in reliving Vladolf of Russian territory. China has maps, military tactics and everything. Seems like China mainly want the Forrest areas of Russia. Ping loves a bit of Russian wood.
Last edited:
Soldato
Plus all that lost land in Manchuria. Very resource rich that the Russians took.
Soldato
I'm kind of with you here. Russia is sounding and acting more like the religious zealots we've seen in radical Islam trying to create their caliphate. Speaking about non Russians in the same way Islamists or German Nazis speak/spoke.
Soldato
The eyes to me look the same. I wouldn't be surprised if its the same person. Seems a bit silly to fake it as I'm sure journalists will be looking to interview her as that contrast is shocking.
By the short one’s standards Russia should return Manchuria and those Japanese islands.
I'm sure they will claim it was technically Chinese wood originally.
Exactly. China comes out ahead either way, and a weaker Russia opens up a lot of 'diplomatic' options to leverage that would have been unviable otherwise.
Well, China has already pretty much claimed areas of Russia for deforestation. Maybe the Americans will send in its Navy to protect Russian interests. After we fire StormsShadow missiles at the tree stumps of course…
Last edited:
Associate
This is possibly one of the more stupid things that I've read on this forum. You want a more competent aggressive superpower to be able to waltz over a retarded easily taken over resource rich (never mind size of landscape which also neighbours europe) state? This would hand the 21st century to the Chinese as shock horror with 1bn+ people they will be able to expand into Africa and Russia and are in dire need of natural resources....which happen to be on their border.
Incredible.
Soldato
Once Russia fails then the probability of it breaking back up into its regions goes up.
Some of your own posts are pretty spectacular.
It’s likely China will move on Russia in some capacity either way, so ridding the world of one tyrant is at least a start. News flash, China is already expending.
Caporegime
We don't own Africa. If African nations want to sell out to China because they're fed up with white people, how do you propose to stop them? Harsh language? It's going to happen whether we like it or not.
Better to beef up our military and industry while China plunders the world's most dysfunctional continent (and has to grapple with all the internal problems that make it so dysfunctional; good luck with that). China is not powerful enough to defeat the US, let alone the combined might of the Us + the rest of the West. In the event of a war, we'd still win.
Not only that, but China has an aging population that's going to cost her tens of trillions of yuan by 2040, and that's a downward spiral with huge implications for her economy.
The island dispute between Russia and Japan gets mentioned quite frequently in this thread as above, but I just noticed that I don't believe anyone has ever explained it so those who don't already know about it may be a bit confused.
Basically, between the top of Japan and the bottom of Russia there's a chain of ~56 islands (not in a line, mostly staggered in double/triple file). Historically (relatively speaking) the bottom four belonged to Japan and the rest to Russia, however that changed in the late 1800s when the Empire of Japan annexed the entire chain. Then during WW2 the USSR liberated them on it's way down to Japan, and continued to annex the bottom four. The Empire of Japan then accepted this via peace treaties and relinquished all claim to the islands in the chain. However later the new country of Japan would claim that they never considered the bottom four islands of the chain to actually be part of the chain and so did not surrender them with the rest of the chain. The USSR offered to give them the bottom two if they would surrender their new claim to the rest of the bottom four but they refused and that's where the dispute has been at for the past 60 years.
It's an odd situation as, lets be honest you would need to be a bit special to believe Japan's excuse that Imperial Japan surrendered all of the islands by mistake and didn't realise they were giving up the bottom four. Then you have the kicker that the islands were lost/surrendered by one of the aggressor empires of WW2 as part of the war's end, and so allowing the idea of them taking it back even if it is to spite Russia has it's own unfavourable connotations, similar to the idea of Kaliningrad being reclaimed by Germany (although that's even more messy as Germany only held it in the first place as a successor of the Prussia Empire, so it would actually make more sense for Lithuania to have it than Germany).
Last edited:
Come on, don't stop your monologue there!
Associate
Nice whataboutism doesn't change the fact it's pretty stupid. Destabilising one country to make it easier for a super power to take it over is still dumb, even "if they were going to to move on it anyway". Don't have to be a genius to see that.
I don't care what the Africans do. If they are stupid enough to let the Chinese colonise them (which they are happily doing as can be seen in commodities) in a different way that's on them. My comment was directly in relation to your comment about crushing Russia somehow means China won't be interested in absorbing their literal neighbour who has tons of resources, low population density, already contested borders and a partly asiatic population.....because they would be forced to just continue colonising Africa...........because why exactly?
edit: lol just saw you're in Australia, guess you know already about a nation selling out.
Last edited:
Associate
Hopefully so! I don't particularly like the American hegemony but would infinitely prefer one based on greedy ******** than Chinese ideology which is significantly more dangerous.
- Status