Russian and Chinese military reaching out

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Astronuc
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Military Russian
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the military interactions between China, Russia, and the West, particularly focusing on recent events involving Chinese warships and Russian aircraft. Participants explore the implications of these military maneuvers, the potential formation of alliances, and the geopolitical landscape moving forward. The conversation includes theoretical considerations, historical context, and speculative future scenarios.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note the significance of Chinese warships docking in Iran and U.S. jets intercepting Russian aircraft, questioning the implications of these actions.
  • Others argue that such military displays are not necessarily tests of defenses but rather acts of provocation, with context and motive being crucial to understanding their significance.
  • A participant expresses skepticism about the effectiveness of these military displays, suggesting they are weak and do not pose a serious challenge to Western military superiority.
  • There are discussions about the potential for a military alliance between China and Russia, with some participants speculating on which countries might join this bloc and the areas in which they might compete.
  • Concerns are raised about the long-term viability of a China-Russia alliance, particularly regarding China's ability to build coalitions and its historical tensions with neighboring countries.
  • Some participants highlight the uncertainty surrounding technological advancements and military capabilities, suggesting that China's reliance on Russian technology may not be sustainable in the long run.
  • Speculation about the geopolitical landscape in the next century includes references to historical shifts in power dynamics and the potential for countries to evolve in ways that challenge current alliances.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no clear consensus on the implications of the military actions discussed. Some agree on the potential for a China-Russia alliance, while others question its strength and future viability. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the effectiveness and significance of military posturing by these nations.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge various assumptions and uncertainties, particularly regarding the future geopolitical landscape and the technological capabilities of China and Russia. The discussion reflects a complex interplay of historical context, current events, and speculative future scenarios.

  • #121
China just made yet another provocative move in the disputed South China Sea, according to Business Insider
http://news.yahoo.com/china-just-landed-first-plane-192200315.html

On January 4th, Vietnam formally accused China of violating its sovereignty and a recent confidence-building pact on Saturday by landing a plane on an airstrip Beijing built on an artificial island in a contested part of the South China Sea, according to Reuters.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #122
I don't see how landing a plane on a runway is any more provocative than building a runway in the first place.
Why would they build a runway if there was no plan to use it?
(I gather it was a civilian aircraft which landed, although that's probably not very relevant.)
 
  • #123
"Currently five countries with competing claims in the region have built airstrips in the contested Spratly Islands."

I bet you won't see sensationalist articles about those other countries though. These articles are so amazingly biased. Compared to the damage the US has done to world-stability, those artificial islands are doing next to nothing.

A breakdown of the US moral code:
Morally justified and necessary for world stability: What we and our allies do
Heinous acts of brutality detrimental to world stability: What everyone else does
 
  • #124
HomogenousCow said:
"Currently five countries with competing claims in the region have built airstrips in the contested Spratly Islands."

I bet you won't see sensationalist articles about those other countries though. These articles are so amazingly biased. Compared to the damage the US has done to world-stability, those artificial islands are doing next to nothing...
What in particular do you find sensational or biased about this Reuters article? Do you have a preferred reference on the disputes over the islands in the S. China sea?
 
Last edited:
  • #125
Chinese military aircraft trespass into Japan, Korea airspace
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-N...pass-into-Japan-Korea-airspace/6781454430627/

SEOUL, Feb. 2 (UPI) -- Two Chinese military aircraft flew into South Korean and Japanese airspace, and Japan's Self-Defense Force fighter jets scrambled to intercept the planes.
The South Korea-identified airspace overlaps with China's, and China did not notify Seoul of its flight plans, South Korea said.
The two planes flew southwest of South Korea's Jeju Island, and after leaving KADIZ entered Japan's Air Defense Identification Zone, or JADIZ.

So now Japan and Korea will have to reciprocate.
 
  • #128
I'm beginning to see a pattern developing here. :frown:
 
  • #129
1oldman2 said:
I'm beginning to see a pattern developing here. :frown:
Yeah, look on Jane's and see who else is buying Sukhoi's .
 
  • #130
Russia wants to fly over US with advanced digital camera
http://news.yahoo.com/russia-seeks-fly-over-us-high-powered-digital-083532712--politics.html

"One of the advantages of the Open Skies Treaty is that information — imagery — that is taken is shared openly among all the treaty parties," she said at a joint hearing of the House Foreign Affairs and Armed Services committees in December. "So one of the advantages with the Open Skies Treaty is that we know exactly what the Russians are imaging, because they must share the imagery with us."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #132
HomogenousCow said:
"Currently five countries with competing claims in the region have built airstrips in the contested Spratly Islands."
I had no idea.

China's claim seems bogus to me. But since the most powerful nations consistently disregard international "law," it appears that force of arms will carry the day.
 
  • #134
Quiz: Without looking at a map or other aid, how close were the recent NATO military exercises in Estonia to St. Petersburg?
 
  • #135
Hornbein said:
In 2003 US warplanes flew over Indonesia. It was front-page news there. The US claimed it was an accident.
Not the same thing. The US asked permission, and the US and Indonesia relationship is not hostile.
http://articles.latimes.com/2003/jul/05/world/fg-indo5
 
  • #136
Hornbein said:
Quiz: Without looking at a map or other aid, how close were the recent NATO military exercises in Estonia to St. Petersburg?
Relevant quiz: how many times have NATO forces transgressed the Russian mainland, and how many times in the 20th and 21st centuries have Russian forces invaded eastern europe, attacked Finland in division strength, attacked Georgia, annexed territory, cyber attacked Baltic neighbors?
 
Last edited:
  • #137
  • #138
Astronuc said:
... Beijing Claims
...
Well, the Guardian claims that Beijing claims. Other sources, as reference in the article, claim China does not yet have the capability.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 71 ·
3
Replies
71
Views
11K
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 133 ·
5
Replies
133
Views
28K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
5K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
6K