What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Which hostile country should the US be more worried about? (1 Viewer)

and more of a threat?


  • Total voters
    73
How about neither one? Sure there is always some saber rattling from the Russians but in the end they already lost the race. As for the Chinese they don't want to make the kind of military investment necessary to do anything but stay within striking distance. They'd rather try to win the economic war. Which the way things are going they aren't as prepared to do as the forecasters thought they would be.

 
How about neither one? Sure there is always some saber rattling from the Russians but in the end they already lost the race. As for the Chinese they don't want to make the kind of military investment necessary to do anything but stay within striking distance. They'd rather try to win the economic war. Which the way things are going they aren't as prepared to do as the forecasters thought they would be.
:goodposting:
 
How about neither one? Sure there is always some saber rattling from the Russians but in the end they already lost the race. As for the Chinese they don't want to make the kind of military investment necessary to do anything but stay within striking distance. They'd rather try to win the economic war. Which the way things are going they aren't as prepared to do as the forecasters thought they would be.
Didn't say it had to be a military threat. It could be a cyber or economic one.
 
China's going to be getting on the "wrong" side of a lot of conflicts in the name of their ever-growing appetite for resources. The oligarchs will tear down anyone in Russia who becomes a net minus due to geopolitical aspirations.

 
How about neither one? Sure there is always some saber rattling from the Russians but in the end they already lost the race. As for the Chinese they don't want to make the kind of military investment necessary to do anything but stay within striking distance. They'd rather try to win the economic war. Which the way things are going they aren't as prepared to do as the forecasters thought they would be.
Didn't say it had to be a military threat. It could be a cyber or economic one.
Well on the cyber side I think we give as good as we get. On the economic side everyone is too interconnected for there to be any real trade wars. Plus you can't be the dominant economy shutting out everyone else. And China is sitting on a real estate bubble that makes ours look like a walk in the park. Lastly the one child policy in China, which they insist they are sticking to, is aging China rapidly. In 25 years or so our workforce will be one of the youngest in the world. Younger than China's definitely. That's where economic power is going to come from in the long run.
 
China is loaning Washington DC the money to buy the rope they're going to hang us with.
You do know that China holds just 8 percent of US debt right? Of our 14 trillion dollar debt about 10 trillion is owned by American investors and the US government. China holds a little over a trillion. The Japanese own a little less than a trillion. Panic over Chinese debt holdings seems silly.
 
How about neither one? Sure there is always some saber rattling from the Russians but in the end they already lost the race. As for the Chinese they don't want to make the kind of military investment necessary to do anything but stay within striking distance. They'd rather try to win the economic war. Which the way things are going they aren't as prepared to do as the forecasters thought they would be.
:goodposting:
 
China is loaning Washington DC the money to buy the rope they're going to hang us with.
You do know that China holds just 8 percent of US debt right? Of our 14 trillion dollar debt about 10 trillion is owned by American investors and the US government. China holds a little over a trillion. The Japanese own a little less than a trillion. Panic over Chinese debt holdings seems silly.
Stop shooting holes in his right wing talking points!
 
China is loaning Washington DC the money to buy the rope they're going to hang us with.
You do know that China holds just 8 percent of US debt right? Of our 14 trillion dollar debt about 10 trillion is owned by American investors and the US government. China holds a little over a trillion. The Japanese own a little less than a trillion. Panic over Chinese debt holdings seems silly.
My favorite lie or I guess I should say exaggeration about China owning us.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
China is loaning Washington DC the money to buy the rope they're going to hang us with.
You do know that China holds just 8 percent of US debt right? Of our 14 trillion dollar debt about 10 trillion is owned by American investors and the US government. China holds a little over a trillion. The Japanese own a little less than a trillion. Panic over Chinese debt holdings seems silly.
My favorite lie or I guess I should say exaggeration about China owning us.
:goodposting: China's threat to us isn't in the debt we owe them.It's their potential to bring an end to the petro dollar that is.
 
I voted China simply because they have a huge army. Still, neither nation is poised to make serious threats since all are in possession of nuclear weapons, and nobody wants to set that little shindig off. But if China's economy heads south, bad things could happen in the region, but the US should remember well the words of Vizzini.

 
I voted China simply because they have a huge army. Still, neither nation is poised to make serious threats since all are in possession of nuclear weapons, and nobody wants to set that little shindig off. But if China's economy heads south, bad things could happen in the region, but the US should remember well the words of Vizzini.
HE DIDN'T FALL? INCONCEIVABLE
 
In 25 years or so our workforce will be one of the youngest in the world. Younger than China's definitely. That's where economic power is going to come from in the long run.
This is true.Getting to 2038 is going to be pretty rough for us though.
It's going to have some sucky moments.
That's also about the time the boomers will have substantially died off and maybe a little more equilibrium is regained for social security. Of course, medical technology and declining birth rates could offset this gain.
 
I voted China simply because they have a huge army. Still, neither nation is poised to make serious threats since all are in possession of nuclear weapons, and nobody wants to set that little shindig off. But if China's economy heads south, bad things could happen in the region, but the US should remember well the words of Vizzini.
HE DIDN'T FALL? INCONCEIVABLE
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
 
Crap, I failed to address the thread's question. Neither concerns me very much and it's time to implement a steady and gradual decrease in defense spending.

 
North Korea
I didn't know Kim Jong Un frequented these boards under the alias Tremendous Upside. :lmao: The only threat North Korea poses is in the delusional mind of Kim Jong Un. If it came down to a real war, we'd clear out their military in a few weeks, very much like we did to Iraq in Desert Storm. They aren't a real threat. Sure they have nukes, but they have yet to show any real capability of delivering them across the Pacific. The biggest threat concerning NK is their relationship with China.
 
China is loaning Washington DC the money to buy the rope they're going to hang us with.
You do know that China holds just 8 percent of US debt right? Of our 14 trillion dollar debt about 10 trillion is owned by American investors and the US government. China holds a little over a trillion. The Japanese own a little less than a trillion. Panic over Chinese debt holdings seems silly.
The Fed is buying the vast majority of our debt through QE. China still owns a lot, but they don't need to go out of their way to devalue our currency anymore. We're doing it to ourselves attempting to stay afloat now.
 
North Korea
I didn't know Kim Jong Un frequented these boards under the alias Tremendous Upside. :lmao: The only threat North Korea poses is in the delusional mind of Kim Jong Un. If it came down to a real war, we'd clear out their military in a few weeks, very much like we did to Iraq in Desert Storm. They aren't a real threat. Sure they have nukes, but they have yet to show any real capability of delivering them across the Pacific. The biggest threat concerning NK is their relationship with China.
No the biggest threat from North Korea is the massive military presence they have aimed at the south. They have 750k troops, 8k artillery systems and 2k tanks within 60 miles of the DMZ. They don't need nukes to kill a lot of people. And there would be very little warning. That's how you know the nuke things is kind of for show and pride really. If they wanted to get it going they would let the shells fly, start the invasion and level heavily populated areas of the South in minutes. Of course once that card has been played then the US would have nothing to hold it back and we would level the place. We have plenty of fire power on carriers close by to bring it hard.
 
China is loaning Washington DC the money to buy the rope they're going to hang us with.
You do know that China holds just 8 percent of US debt right? Of our 14 trillion dollar debt about 10 trillion is owned by American investors and the US government. China holds a little over a trillion. The Japanese own a little less than a trillion. Panic over Chinese debt holdings seems silly.
The Fed is buying the vast majority of our debt through QE. China still owns a lot, but they don't need to go out of their way to devalue our currency anymore. We're doing it to ourselves attempting to stay afloat now.
:loco:
 
North Koreans are prejudiced against women with big boobs. If that isn't a threat to civilized society and democracy, I don't know what is.

 
North Korea
I didn't know Kim Jong Un frequented these boards under the alias Tremendous Upside. :lmao: The only threat North Korea poses is in the delusional mind of Kim Jong Un. If it came down to a real war, we'd clear out their military in a few weeks, very much like we did to Iraq in Desert Storm. They aren't a real threat. Sure they have nukes, but they have yet to show any real capability of delivering them across the Pacific. The biggest threat concerning NK is their relationship with China.
No the biggest threat from North Korea is the massive military presence they have aimed at the south. They have 750k troops, 8k artillery systems and 2k tanks within 60 miles of the DMZ. They don't need nukes to kill a lot of people. And there would be very little warning. That's how you know the nuke things is kind of for show and pride really. If they wanted to get it going they would let the shells fly, start the invasion and level heavily populated areas of the South in minutes. Of course once that card has been played then the US would have nothing to hold it back and we would level the place. We have plenty of fire power on carriers close by to bring it hard.
:goodposting:
 
The answer is North Korea. China and Russia may be thuggish powers that we disagree with and yell at each other once in a while, never really fighting it out. North Korea is the crazy hobo in the alley ready to shank you for no good reason.

 
Russia being really underestimated here.
Russia's Fading Army Fights Losing Battle to Reform ItselfVOLGOGRAD, Russia—Sergei Fetisov, a 23-year-old welder, signed on for one of the most ambitious projects in Vladimir Putin's Russia: rebuilding the remains of the once-mighty Soviet Red Army.A cornerstone of that effort was the creation of special combat-ready units staffed entirely by professional soldiers, not conscripts. Mr. Fetisov volunteered to be one of them. He enlisted for a renewable three-year stint, enticed by higher pay and the chance to learn new skills.One of his first tasks, he recalls, was toiling past midnight shoveling snow and ice from a football-field-size parade ground. The work that followed was menial, humiliating and of little practical use, he says. Combat training consisted of two firing exercises a year, he says, and a chunk of his paycheck was routinely withheld by corrupt officers."When I realized that being a professional soldier was just the same as serving as a conscript, I wanted to tear up my contract and get out of there," he says. He quit when his commitment ended in July, he says, "but we had guys who simply ran away."With volunteers like Mr. Fetisov leaving in droves, the Defense Ministry has abandoned the initiative altogether. The program's failure shows the limits of Mr. Putin's grand plan to transform the army from a cumbersome machine designed for European land war into a lithe force capable of fighting regional wars and terrorism.Russia's struggle to rebuild its armed forces comes as the world's military balance is in flux.Two decades after the Cold War ended, China is engaged in a military buildup that has many of its neighbors, including Russia, scrambling to bolster their defenses. The U.S., still the world's dominant military power, is trying to rein in defense spending—while simultaneously keeping a wary eye on China, projecting power in the volatile Middle East and dealing with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's persistent concerns about Moscow.Currently, Russia is at odds with NATO's air assault in Libya. Moscow has stayed out of the military conflict, despite its stakes in weapons deals and oil-exploration ventures with Col. Moammar Gadhafi's regime. But Mr. Putin said last month that the bombing in Libya is part of a "steady trend" of U.S. military intervention around the world and "a timely indicator that our efforts to strengthen [Russia's] defense are justified."In February, Russia outlined a $650 billion plan to acquire new warplanes, ships, missiles and other arms over the next decade, the Kremlin's biggest spending spree since the Cold War.Mr. Fetisov's account of poor morale in the army's ranks, however, raises questions about Russia's long-term ability to assert power abroad.The Defense Ministry declined to comment on Mr. Fetisov's complaints, but has acknowledged that widespread discontent among volunteers undermined its enlistment campaign. Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov has said that the program had been poorly managed and would cost too much to fix."We cannot afford to create a fully professional army," he said in October. "If we save funds elsewhere, we will certainly go back to this idea, but well prepared."The setback has the Kremlin in a bind. Counting on volunteers to make up nearly half of all soldiers, Mr. Putin had bowed to public sentiment and shortened the draft from two years to one. Now, the dearth of volunteers and a drop in Russia's draft-age population have prompted the Defense Ministry to cancel some deferments and step up conscription of men 18 and older, risking discontent over a twice-yearly ritual that began anew on April 1 and is widely evaded.Russia relies mainly on its nuclear arsenal to project power and protect its territory. Tensions with the West have eased, but Mr. Putin sought a revival of conventional forces, which had been weakened by budget cuts, to put muscle behind his push for influence in former Soviet republics that are now independent.The army's decline became evident in the mid-1990s with its battering by separatist rebels in Chechnya. The land, air and naval forces Mr. Putin inherited when he became president in 2000 were a pale shadow of the Red Army, five million strong at the time of the Soviet Union's breakup in 1991. They stand at one-fifth that size today.Under the enlistment program, launched in 2004, officers were to train volunteers as career specialists and make the new combat-ready units fully operational by 2010. The shift to professional soldiers was supposed to better enable the army to operate the high-tech weaponry Russia plans to acquire.The U.S. abolished the draft in 1973, attracting volunteers through advertising, pay increases, educational benefits and re-enlistment bonuses. By the time of the Persian Gulf War of 1991, the move was widely viewed as a success.Russia's campaign to attract volunteers, by contrast, was not as well funded or advertised. By 2008, the army said it had signed up 99,000 volunteers for the new units, about 40,000 short of the goal.Then the number began a sharp decline as most of them chose not to re-enlist or went AWOL. That trend was evident during Russia's clumsy but ultimately successful invasion that year of neighboring Georgia. Conscripts were sent to fight and die there, despite Mr. Putin's promise that only professionals would serve in hot spots.Despite the shortage of volunteers, Mr. Serdyukov, the defense minister, announced at the end of 2009 that Russia's ground forces had been reorganized into 85 brigades of "permanent combat readiness," doing away with bulkier divisions and making the army more mobile. Only later did officials acknowledge that the brigades were made up mostly of one-year conscripts, men with few combat skills.The enlistment drive's failure puts constraints on Russia's reach. When ethnic rioting in June threatened to tear Kyrgyzstan apart, its president appealed for Russian peacekeepers, the kind of force Moscow once deployed routinely as a political tool. This time the Kremlin demurred—in part, defense analysts say, because the army couldn't spare a full brigade of professional soldiers.Democratic reformers have lobbied for years to end the draft, arguing that a smaller, professionalized force could better defend the nation's interests. Opinion polls show majority support for the idea, and Mr. Putin endorsed it early in his presidency.But tradition-bound generals favored keeping a large conscript army. Mr. Putin opted in 2003 for a compromise: The Defense Ministry would continue to draft, but also would start recruiting for the combat units. The government budgeted $3.3 billion for higher pay and better housing for volunteers.By the time Mr. Fetisov received a draft notice four years later, the plan was faltering. Recruiting stations, unaccustomed to any task other than rounding up draft-age men, were given no blueprint for luring volunteers.The army was a tough sell, too. Salaries for contract soldiers averaged $270 per month at the end of 2007, about half the average salary for civilians. Housing construction at bases fell behind schedule. Residential buildings paid for by the military were turned over without running water, plumbing or electrical wiring, government auditors reported.Mr. Fetisov, who has dyed-blond hair and a passion for video games, had no interest in leaving his $370-a-month welding job. He lived with his mother and two brothers in Volgograd, a "hero city" once named Stalingrad and famed for resisting the Nazis in World War II, but he wasn't attracted to military life.Once he was drafted, however, an army contract seemed to offer advantages. Draftees at the time served 18 months, earning next to nothing. But they had the option to go professional six months after induction. Mr. Fetisov, who says he was offered $400 a month, thought a contract would raise his status in the army and enable him to master new skills.He reported to the 99th Artillery Regiment's base near Nizhny Novgorod in November 2007.His disillusionment began with midnight snow-shoveling duty. "We worked in cleaning, construction, regular things, not serving as soldiers," he says. "We didn't do anything that would help us in a combat situation."Mr. Fetisov and others who served in recent years say the army's search for contract servicemen centered exclusively on draftees already under its control.The 99th Artillery, for example, had 600 volunteers on three-year contracts, including Mr. Fetisov, and 300 draftees. Officers were under instruction to recruit as many new volunteers as possible.Mr. Fetisov says they resorted to an unusual recruiting technique: Nearly every night at 11 that first winter, conscripts were mustered on the parade ground and made to stand in formation for hours, facing superiors who sometimes were drunk."Finally an officer would say, 'Those willing to sign contracts, you're dismissed. The rest of you, stay at attention,'" Mr. Fetisov recalls. "A personnel officer would tell stories about the great treatment contract soldiers get.""They had to stand there in the cold until at least two or three men agreed to sign," Mr. Fetisov says. "This went on for weeks, but they never got 100%" of the regiment on contract.Volunteers under contract lived three to a room in new barracks with televisions and DVD players. Conscripts slept in bunk beds, 20 to a room.Beyond that, the distinction seemed to blur. Volunteers and conscripts alike were treated harshly, Mr. Fetisov says. Sometimes a soldier who broke disciplinary rules was ordered to dig a deep pit and stay inside for days, he says.His accounts were corroborated by two other contract soldiers, Artyom Pugach and Denis Pushkin, who served at the base and were interviewed separately.The three soldiers say they experienced arbitrary deductions from their paychecks of $20 to $135 a month for what they say an officer described as "needs of the regiment." Some contract soldiers had to forfeit their final month's pay in exchange for discharge papers, says Mr. Pushkin.A 2008 study by Citizen and Army, a Russian human-rights group, said such deductions were widespread, amounting to large-scale misappropriation. Mr. Fetisov says his commander had leeway with payroll money because his contract, like many others, didn't state the salary he was promised. He says the commander threatened to punish anyone who challenged the cuts."We were told there were some financial difficulties with the military reform," he says. "But we could see that the commanders got new cars.…We saw what they were driving, and it was clear what was being spent on what."Crime and coercion plagued other volunteer units. Police in Russia's Far East broke up gangs that extorted cash from soldiers on paydays at three bases.In Kaliningrad, a military prosecutor's inquiry led to the annulment in 2006 of 83 contracts signed under pressure, according to that city's chapter of the Soldiers' Mothers Committee, an advocacy group. Elsewhere, commanders of soldiers who went AWOL kept them on the roster, pocketing their salaries, says Alexander Golts, a military specialist and deputy editor of Yezhedevny Zhurnal, an online Russian publication.In 2009, Mr. Fetisov was among 160 soldiers sent to form the all-volunteer artillery battalion of the new 6th Specialized Tank Brigade. There, he says, he injured his hand badly while cleaning the artillery barrel of a tank, and army doctors neglected it. When his three-year contract came up for renewal, Mr. Fetisov bailed out. At the time, he says, only 10 volunteers remained of the 160. The rest had been replaced by draftees."The army ran out of fools," his mother, Tatyana Fetisova, said recently as she listened to her son tell his story.And so it went at bases across Russia. The exodus left a handful of all-volunteer units, staffed by a few thousand contract soldiers, in an army made up overwhelmingly of conscripts, say defense officials and independent observers."It's no secret how the contract service was implemented," Mr. Serdyukov, the defense minister, told news magazine Odnako. "Active duty soldiers were induced to sign contracts by all means. Their [low] monthly salary and standard barracks life made them quit the armed forces as early as possible. There was no systematic preparation of military specialists."Mr. Serdyukov, a former business executive close to Mr. Putin, was appointed during the enlistment effort and felt cheated by officers who resisted or mismanaged it, says Vitaly Shlykov, a retired colonel who advises him. The minister, he says, concluded that Russia must change the culture of its officer corps before trying to switch to a professional army.Backed by Mr. Putin and the current president, Dmitry Medvedev, Mr. Serdyukov is slashing the number of officers and changing the way new ones are educated. He is training Russia's first corps of career sergeants since the czarist era, starting with a class of 300.But those leaders will take a generation to develop, Mr. Shlykov says, and meanwhile "Russia will have a conscription army for years to come."That is bad news for Russia, says Mr. Fetisov, the former enlistee, but at least those who serve will do so with fewer illusions."Now everybody knows you just put up with a year of hell," he says, "and then you're free."WSJ
They were overrated when they had a 5 million man standing army. They are a pale shadow of even that now.
 
That was a good read, NCC. Sometimes I think that endemic day to day corruption is really what separates the haves from the have nots around the world. Getting shaken down for every little service that government is supposed to provide is no way to build confidence and unity.

 
China is loaning Washington DC the money to buy the rope they're going to hang us with.
You do know that China holds just 8 percent of US debt right? Of our 14 trillion dollar debt about 10 trillion is owned by American investors and the US government. China holds a little over a trillion. The Japanese own a little less than a trillion. Panic over Chinese debt holdings seems silly.
The Fed is buying the vast majority of our debt through QE. China still owns a lot, but they don't need to go out of their way to devalue our currency anymore. We're doing it to ourselves attempting to stay afloat now.
The Bernanke Put.
 
Neither. Almost all great nations implode rather than are exploded. They run out of resources. They over extend their reach. Their governments become inept. They divide from internal strife. To a lesser extend they go broke or are ravaged by a disease. Being taken over or blown up doesnt happen to many large nations. Look inside if you want to see our problems. Overspending. Inept govt. both are already here. Only time is needed to make us a bigger version of Italy. It's not the worst thing in the world. All powers come to an end.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top