Home | About | Donate

Is War With China on the Horizon?


#1

Is War With China on the Horizon?

Michael T. Klare

On May 30th, Secretary of Defense James Mattis announced a momentous shift in American global strategic policy. From now on, he decreed,the U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM), which oversees all U.S. military forces in Asia, will be called the Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM).


#2

If these supposed military geniuses think that the United States can get out of it’s massive debt with China by going to war with that nation, this smacks of Trump, trying to skip out on what he owes.


#3

Only the insane would contemplate war with China so I would say it is quite possible.


#4

Let’s remember that Obama was tasked by TPTB with the stated initiation of the “pivot to Asia”. This pivot was telegraphed quite extensively through publications such as Foreign Affairs the leading periodical of the Council on Foreign Relations. This shit has been in the works for quite some time. Much as I despise Trump (and I think I have pretty good credentials on that), he is only playing his part; it’s not like he ever has any original ideas, just unique ways to screw them up.


#5

Whatever the U.S. can’t dominate economically they will do so militarily. They know they can’t compete with China’s current economic progress, at least not without getting rid of the kleptocracy that the U.S. has been dominated by. China isn’t a small country in the middle east though. If the U.S. does indeed go to war with China it will be the final nail in the coffin for the U.S. And unfortunately considering both these countries are nuclear powers, it could very well be the final nail for the world.


#6

Trump is crazy but I don’t think he’s that crazy. If other nations were that powerful, the USA, UK, France & Israel would leave them alone.The USA & its allies only target nations that can’t fight back.


#7

This is a continuation and extension of prior policies, certainly including Obama and his so-called “turn to Asia,” and very probably before.

Media has directed a lot of attention away from this sort of thing in recent years, but the moves have all the earmarks of the sort of realpolitik and “grand chessboard” sort of thinking of the last century.

It seems to work a bit like this------

If you assume that the very extensive human violence comes not from systemic problems but from some inherited aggression or stupidity of individuals, that creates ideas that favor top-down control and coercive punishment, generally based on some assigned “merit” that largely involves loyalty to group and to rulers. This is a sort of belief that comes out of trauma, pointedly including unjust punishment; but it is also a belief that flatters rulers and despots, so of course they are particularly susceptible to its errors.

Since our rulers live by this family of errors, they assume that any large-scale power conflict must resolve itself in conflagration. They imagine that they do not create violence when they act violently (because they imagine people will kill each other anyway) but that they direct it and deflect it from whatever group they imagine themselves to protect.

Because something like this must be roughly true, it is useless to imagine that rulers will make sensible and otherwise obvious decisions to avoid catastrophic violence. They are, as a group, insensible to it, as stupid in this regard as though they really were the simple morons we often imagine that they are.

Of course they must hope to avoid an actual full scale armed conflict, at least most of them. But they may imagine themselves steering some oddly metaphoric ship of state through an inconceivably narrow Scylla and Charybdis created by the supposed inevitability of the intrinsic treachery of most everyone except their royal selves.

This has to do with Trump’s inane handling of situations in East Asia, but it equally has to do with Obama’s “pivot to Asia,” the Clinton-pushed decimation of Libya and fascist coup in Ukraine, and a whole lot of our other unfavorite actions by Democrats and Republicans over decades.

We cannot continue to feed this mistake at greater and greater scale by supporting the power and wealth of large business entities and governments. We have to look to alternate economies and factions.

Meanwhile, for any who doubt the reality of the Democratic involvement in this or who want to see a good documentary that surely relates to the current administration strategies as well, here’s John Pilger, The Coming War on China, completed during the Obama administration.


#8

I think you underestimate the insanity of stupidity of this administration. That being said I hope you are right.


#9

That is a very interesting way of looking at things. And something I would love to see true. More cynical people like George Carlin would say otherwise. And history has shown that for one reason or another psychopaths tend rise to the top of empires. In any case this is a question humanity needs to ask themselves and overcome if we wish to survive. We already have a time limit with climate change that might already be too late to address, the last thing we need to do is go to war with ourselves. I believe that we can overcome this though, or at least that is what I tell myself to keep myself sane.


#10

Let me grant that I do not have anything like consensus. But the bears out well empirically, insofar as it can be witnessed.

Think of other traits that are intrinsic. The use of speech is one: most any human that we would regard as entire does it in some sense; no other species does it in the same way, though many other species communicate in one or another broader sense.

We have urges to speak with very little provocation. We cannot avoid human discourse for long periods without undergoing damage. This is why the extended solitary confinement of Chelsea Manning was widely regarded as torture, and of course why the CIA in particular has researched it extensively as a form of torture.

The same cannot be said for violence. People go long periods without being violent and do just fine. Conversely, when people are motivated to violence, for whatever reason or notion, we generally suffer. People directing drones have suffered from PTSD, for example, so it seems clear that while part of the trauma of combat is surely danger and personal loss, another part is the aftermath of having exercised violence and inflicted damage.

Furthermore, there is considerable resistance on the part of populations to war. Surely this is part of the reason that war is accompanied by so much propaganda. People must be convinced that they themselves or someone or something valued is under attack. And the form of the propaganda almost always assumes the same sort of category error: the Other to be attacked somehow can be terrorists, communists, fascists, Russians, gays, feminists, immigrants, Republicans, Democrats, Greens, or straight white males. And we are repeatedly told that this or that group cannot be placated and should not be appeased because they are this, that, or the other thing–because it is assumed that the cause of the violence is the nature of the other being and not usefully related to the circumstance. We get told that “You don’t negotiate with terrorists” because terrorists commit acts of terror because they are terrorists: it’s what they do–as though centuries of Western empire and depredation could not have anything to do with the matter.

So we have a clear and even extreme capacity for violence, and that capacity is intrinsic. But the violence itself is not and must be circumstantially driven. Since we are genetically more or less like our rulers, this must also be true of them.

I think this is a useful insight (if I may be excused for reaching so laboriously around to pat myself on the back) because it means that we can remove the violence by removing its systemic motivation–though not all at once, as I suspect seems pretty clear.

People and especially rulers do horrible, bloodthirsty things, so we must continue to guard against their violence and fraud. The actuality of horrifying behavior among the rulers is far more extensive than is generally imagined. They are cunning and calculating, but also nuts.


#11

"Imperialism?

That’s a copyright violation!"


#12

China doesn’t fight. It manages .
Today in sott.net, but of course not in other western news yet,

https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/06/next-level-putin-and-xi-sign-huge-declaration-on-russia-china-alliance/