George Yeo Kena Blasted By China Foreign Minister - The Washington Post

[pocoyo]

Georgie should have shouted "Kwa simi lanjiow, knn "?:o

I believe when Georgie kena stared by the china minister, his lanjiow don't know fly where already..

 

[Ramseth]

For the past 10 years, the US has been held to a stalemate in Iraq/Afghanistan. They have not had the resources to confront North Korea or Iran over their nuclear programs which notably are a much greater threat to US interests than China. It seems highly unlikely that the US can seriously commit to confronting China over the South China Sea.

First, I think I clearly said naval power and owning the seas. Fighting on lands is anothing matter. Anyway, with the exception of China and Russia, the US could beat the hell out of any country on land if they want to and make up their mind to be cruel enough to forget casualty count.

No country can transport troops to the US. That's the difference. That's power. Al Qaeda found a loop hole though. Hijack some planes within.

 

[aurvandil]

Fighting on lands is anothing matter. Anyway, with the exception of China and Russia, the US could beat the hell out of any country on land if they want to and make up their mind to be cruel enough to forget casualty count.

Time and time again, history has shown that it is impossible for the US to defeat a well funded, determined guerilla resistance.

The tactic to take on the US military on land is therefore to preserve your forces and melt away.

You then provke the US by repeated terror/hit and run attacks so the US forces are pinned to a number of bases.

Eventually frustration will build and the US forces will start getting brutal with the civilian population.

The more civilllians they harass/kill, the more recruits you have for your guerilla army.

The recent documents that surfaced in Wikileaks show that for every US$1 billion the US spent in Iraq/Afghantistan, the insurgents fighting them spent less than US$ 1 million to hold the US to the current stalemate.

This very impressive spend ratio means that US defeat in Iraq/Afghanistan is all but certain.

 

[Ramseth]

Time and time again, history has shown that it is impossible for the US to defeat a well funded, determined guerilla resistance.

The tactic to take on the US military on land is therefore to preserve your forces and melt away.

You then provke the US by repeated terror/hit and run attacks so the US forces are pinned to a number of bases.

Eventually frustration will build and the US forces will start getting brutal with the civilian population.

The more civilllians they harass/kill, the more recruits you have for your guerilla army.

The recent documents that surfaced in Wikileaks show that for every US$1 billion the US spent in Iraq/Afghantistan, the insurgents fighting them spent less than US$ 1 million to hold the US to the current stalemate.

This very impressive spend ratio means that US defeat in Iraq/Afghanistan is all but certain.

As I've mentioned, the US are handicapped by their qualms and political cost considerations over overkill. Also, from Korea to Vietnam to Iraq to Afghanistan, there's been no real objective to conquer and occupy, just to install friendly governments. It may sound cynical, but there's also political motivation to maintain some balance of chaos in some regions.

 

[longbow]

The issue is Chinese harrassment of ships and oil exploration activities in the South China Sea. Added to that its claims of sovereinity of far away islands and the seabed.

The Alliance and the renewed exercises militarily are to twart any ambition of steam rolling the smaller countries.

If you drop by countries in Africa such as Tanzania and Kenya, you can see their presence and influence. You can see Chinese construction workers together with locals building roads. All done with Chinese aid.

The younger generation can't be bothered with might and the show of force. They are more interested in where innovation occurs, the manner in which you conduct yourself and your ability to hold your own in any dialogue and interactions. There is also an element of style and culture that is added. China and India are nowhwere in this space. They are associated with cheap labour, counterfeit foods, entrepreneurship in exploiting their own countrymen and building weapons of mass destructions and spending a fortune in defence to keep their mandate intact.

The best sign of a country's progress is where the young are and what the country can contribute. Look at Nokia and LG. Instead the best chinese and Indian brains are in Mountain View and in top Universities in the States. Both these countries have never developed anything of quality or substance over the last 100 years. Their accumulation of wealth is a result of cheap labour, cheap goods and substandard quality.

Countries like Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia can only watch and smile while they have no doubt which wagon they should rely on.

For christ sake, they only have to compare themselves to the Koreans who turn out good stuff in many sectors. Have you ever seen anything of value that comes out of China/India that is local. These clowns can even build a decent tv or car but live on the backs of cheap and exploited labour. Sure they have impressive growth in national reserves. To me no different to human traffickers.

While China's growth may be due to cheap labor for some, but in China these are considered well paying jobs which is why you see the largest migrantion of labor from country to cities. You have to start somewhere after all. And you cannot expect them to suddenly demand 1st world wages over night.

You are correct about not having decent cars but Chinese started from a low base. Hyundai started out with a Mitsubishi engine and look where they are now. I do not see why the Chinese cannot do it. After all they have this huge pool of Chinese engineers that are making transmissions, engines for VW, BMW, Audi, mercedes, etc. So they will climb up the learning curve really fast. the thing is that they have a huge world standard supply chain and that helps in making a quality product. And they have this huge market and fantastic road infrastructure. As for the brains being sucked into the US, there is a reverse brain drain as many chinese engineers are being hired back into the booming economy.

If you are an automotive engineer, I think China is the place for you. I agree with the software industry - the US is tops in this industry (US is not tops in terms of mfg or auto mfg). as such the brains will stay in the US. But the traditional electronics, mfg (great paying jobs) have moved to China and if you are a process engineer, automotive engineer, China is the place to me.

After for Singapore placing their bets with china vs US. Very tricky situation. Asia's economy is dominated by China. A large part of Australia, Indonesia and Malaysia economy is reliant on exports to China (Wilmar is a small example). It is tough to place bets on the US because malaysia and indonesia are Muslim countries so there is an issue there. then there is the big issue of US retreat from the region.

I think by the time the US is finally out of Afghanistan and Iraq, US would have spent another 10 years there, lose countless lives and drain their coffers of another 2 Trillion dollars. Public sentiment will demand a retreat from this policman of the world role.

It is great to have a nice huge military if you do not have to pay for it (borrow from foreigners) but when it comes to raising taxes and paying for military, I suspect that americans will balk. So question is whether US will still play a leadership role in the region.

So as US influence wanes in the region, it is a tough choice on where to place one's bets.

 

[manokie]

So as US influence wanes in the region, it is a tough choice on where to place one's bets.

When we asked US to enter the ASEAN talks with China recently, that already means that US influence is going to flourish in ASEAN in the near future. And of course ASEAN is also going to pick up the bill for US by buying their debt

 

[scoobyhoo]

if you would punch, kick, or even slaughter chinese, all they want is only an apologize and not do something to damage their faces, like visiting to war temple...

but if you would scold an ang mo, beware they may punch, kick or even kill you.

 

[longbow]

As I've mentioned, the US are handicapped by their qualms and political cost considerations over overkill. Also, from Korea to Vietnam to Iraq to Afghanistan, there's been no real objective to conquer and occupy, just to install friendly governments. It may sound cynical, but there's also political motivation to maintain some balance of chaos in some regions.

Very hard to determine what are their political motivation. But fact is that their army is worn out, tired, and most impt of all the rewards are no longer worth the risks.

Give them another 5 years and US public will demand pullout of Iraq/Afghanistan regardless of political motivations. Reminds me of the Europeans pulling out of their colonies. the cost to maintain force there not worth

 

[kensington]

Very hard to determine what are their political motivation. But fact is that their army is worn out, tired, and most impt of all the rewards are no longer worth the risks.

Give them another 5 years and US public will demand pullout of Iraq/Afghanistan regardless of political motivations. Reminds me of the Europeans pulling out of their colonies. the cost to maintain force there not worth

Hopefully war crimes will be awaiting them by that time.
Remember they tried to cover up My Lai too during the Vietnam's War.

America has never fought a good war since WW2


<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/20LkYvEZOZs&amp;hl=en_GB&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/20LkYvEZOZs&amp;hl=en_GB&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[aurvandil]

Give them another 5 years and US public will demand pullout of Iraq/Afghanistan regardless of political motivations. Reminds me of the Europeans pulling out of their colonies. the cost to maintain force there not worth

It is a given that the US will eventually pull out of Iraq/Afghanistan with their tail between their legs. The installed regimes will fall. In fact in Afghanistan, the current government should have falled via democratic vote. The US had to resort to allowing massive vote fraud so that their stooge stays in power.

When the US withdraws, what will then come of this coalition to contain China in the South China Sea?

For the old lion and his family, it is wothwhile political gamble as he has US choppers waititng to spirit him and his family to safety should the unthinakble happen. Ordinary Singaporeans have no such luxury and will have to live with the consequences of what happens.

Also given the recent behvaiour of our millionare Ministers, how many do you think will stay to defend Singapore? How many do you think will be on the first plane/boat out with their family?

 

[kirby]

What the yanks want is to destabilise China because as a matter of fact, only China and certainly Russia are the only powers strong enough to impede the USA's consolidation on their world's dominance. Destabilisation of the rivals' borders is what we are witnessing now. Remember Georgia ?

Presently the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq has strained the capability of the USA to fight on another front except maybe against a really small tin pot dictator. Even Hugo Chavez is giving those yanks a massive headache and the Iranians are giving them their middle fingers like this.:oIo:

But America exists on the availability of oil and the Iranian are targetting the oil installations of Saudi Arabia and those Gulf States, readying to cut off the lifelines of the America. Think about it, why all those sabre rattlings and no shows ?


Singapore is just stupid to get entangled into this geopolitic games.

 

[Ramseth]

Singapore is just stupid to get entangled into this geopolitic games.

Singapore depend a hell lot on oil too. The economic data are usually reported in oil and non-oil categories. Singapore are a non-crude producer but among the top oil refinery and shipping centres in the world. That's the background as to why Singapore keep getting themselves concerned or somewhat involved with these geopolitical games.

 

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

It is a given that the US will eventually pull out of Iraq/Afghanistan with their tail between their legs. The installed regimes will fall. In fact in Afghanistan, the current government should have falled via democratic vote. The US had to resort to allowing massive vote fraud so that their stooge stays in power.

When the US withdraws, what will then come of this coalition to contain China in the South China Sea?
...

You are wrong to think that the USA will leave Iraq and Afghanistan in the manner you see.

What the USA has done is to show the middle eastern countries that if any one of them decides to side track from what the USA sees as decent behaviour, then they can count on the USA to come knocking on their doors with a huge missile.

The USA has a few large bases in the middle east, outside of Iraq and Afghanistan. When they pull out of these two countries, their bases in the other middle eastern countries will continue to exist.

Add to that the US naval presence in the area and you know that what the USA wants is more or less still in tact.

Iran is walking on a tightrope and it is a matter of time before it gets hit hard. Their only saving grace is YoMama is the US president. Any other president would already have sent Iran into the dark ages. But YoMama is going to lose the next presidential elections because he is nothing more than a piece of turd.

In due time, Iran will suffer Sadamm's Iraq fate. It's just a matter of time.

 

[Ramseth]

You are wrong to think that the USA will leave Iraq and Afghanistan in the manner you see.

What the USA has done is to show the middle eastern countries that if any one of them decides to side track from what the USA sees as decent behaviour, then they can count on the USA to come knocking on their doors with a huge missile.
.
.
.
In due time, Iran will suffer Sadamm's Iraq fate. It's just a matter of time.

I tend to agree with you. From a military strategic standpoint, few people noticed the significance of Iraq and Afghanistan. They may be troublesome but what the hell? More people die in US roadkills and shootings everyday. Iraq and Afghanistan form a pair of brackets around Iran.

 

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

I tend to agree with you. From a military strategic standpoint, few people noticed the significance of Iraq and Afghanistan. They may be troublesome but what the hell? More people die in US roadkills and shootings everyday. Iraq and Afghanistan form a pair of brackets around Iran.

Yes bro. And don't forget the other US bases in the middle east. They will still be there even when the US leaves Iraq and Afghanistan.

The US won the war. They may have lost battles but indeed, they won the war. You only have to open your mind and your eyes to know it.

 

[chowka]

bump~~~~~~~~

 

[aurvandil]

What the USA has done is to show the middle eastern countries that if any one of them decides to side track from what the USA sees as decent behaviour, then they can count on the USA to come knocking on their doors with a huge missile.

Lets see if the US can afford to stay another 10 years and spend another trillion dollars to achieve absoultely nothing.

 

[Received_by_Kings]

Georgie should have shouted "Kwa simi lanjiow, knn "?:o

If he does that from what you suggest, then he need not go back. And the people's army will overrun and destroy the island the very next day.

People of the rebellious province who see this, will also be more obedient towards their historical origins.

 

[manokie]

Lets see if the US can afford to stay another 10 years and spend another trillion dollars to achieve absoultely nothing.

Nah

US Companies now have cheap access to crude oil and minerals like lithium in Middle East. Also it is not like they are paying for it themselves. Other countries buy their debt to support the war. There might be some arrangements to eventually forgive these debts without public acknowledgement.

 

[aurvandil]

Nah

US Companies now have cheap access to crude oil and minerals like lithium in Middle East. Also it is not like they are paying for it themselves. Other countries buy their debt to support the war. There might be some arrangements to eventually forgive these debts without public acknowledgement.

Almost every country that joined the original coalition (Singapore included) have withdrawn their forces. The greatest revelation in the WikiLeaks documents is the US own estimate that from US$ 1 billion they spend, the insurgents fighting them spend less than US$ 1 million to achieve the current stalemate. The huge disparity in the spend ratio makes the current war unwinnable. A retreat to bases in "safer" countries like Saudi Arabia is unlikely to solve the problem either. It will simply shift the battleground to these countries which are ruled by a hodge podge of emirs and shieks who style themselves as benevelot fathers aka LKY (US has a history strategic alliances with petty tyrants !).

On US debt to finance their wars and government spending, the US has come under repeated attack on this front since the last financial crisis. More than once, China has mooted the idea of a global currency to replace US dollar as the reserve currency. If the US continues to incurr debt at the current rate, it is not a matter of if but when this will happen.