China & Russia's military ties are 'phony,' but there still isn't much they can do

As a result of the historical majority over 81 million voter kicking the lawlessly hacked China/Russian dog shit tRump out of the White House, along with his criminal garbage family and un Americana and crimes against humanity sewer administration, the U.S. has regained its global recognition as the most powerful military on Earth:

According to the Global Firepower estimates, United States has the powerful military forces, overall, in the world, ahead of Russia and China. ...
No 10 | Paksitan | Global Firepower PowerIndex: 0.208 (Image: Reuters)
No 9 | Brazil | Global Firepower PowerIndex: 0.204 (Image: Reuters)

https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/p...r-behind-here-is-the-top-10-list-4811271.html
 
dukkha said:
you sound like this guy


this dweeb totally misses the fact that realpolitik IS all based on transactional relations.
Further since that interaction helps both (or more) states - the likelihood of more and more cooperation is the logical outcome. no formal alliance needed.

However Putin has said that if pushed far enough, he would make a military alliance if no other recourse
Click to expand...

Never heard of "Scott Barrier", nor fathom why his opinion should matter to me.

Realpolitik was in its glory days in the 1930s.

The Nazi-Soviet non-agression pact was a preeminent example of realpolitik. Neville Chamberlain, Benito Mussolini, Josef Stalin all played some form of realpolitik.

I do not see realpolitik as the glory days of international relations.

For whatever its flaws were, we established a new world order after WW2 which was based on respect for international law and norms of conduct, and non-aggression except in self defence. Those principles were not always upheld, but the aspirational goals were exactly what we should aim for.

Natural law, natural rights, human rights, national sovereignty are all embedded in the UN charter, the International Declaration of Human Rights, and the canon of international law laid dowm subsequent to 1945.

Realpolitik undermines all of that hard won effort.

Realpolitik makes the world more dangerous, not less.

Vladimir Putin's invasion of Crimea, and the precedent it sets, in no way, shape, or makes the world a safer or more stable place.

Trying to place the blame on a British destroyer is a complete diversion.
 
Cypress said:
Never heard of "Scott Barrier", nor fathom why his opinion should matter to me.

Realpolitik was in its glory days in the 1930s.

The Nazi-Soviet non-agression pact was a preeminent example of realpolitik. Neville Chamberlain, Benito Mussolini, Josef Stalin all played some form of realpolitik.

I do not see realpolitik as the glory days of international relations.

For whatever its flaws were, we established a new world order after WW2 which was based on respect for international law and norms of conduct, and non-aggression except in self defence. Those principles were not always upheld, but the aspirational goals were exactly what we should aim for.

Natural law, natural rights, human rights, national sovereignty are all embedded in the UN charter, the International Declaration of Human Rights, and the canon of international law laid dowm subsequent to 1945.

Realpolitik undermines all of that hard won effort.

Realpolitik makes the world more dangerous, not less.

Vladimir Putin's invasion of Crimea, and the precedent it sets, in no way, shape, or makes the world a safer or more stable place.

Trying to place the blame on a British destroyer is a complete diversion.
Click to expand...
I just answered this. but to expound
https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...a-war-waiting-to-happen&p=4509870#post4509870

realpolitik is nations acting in their own best interest - and the interactions between nations towards that effort.

So when nations cooperate - even with other issues such as Crimea causing friction -it acts as a function for a path towards mutual desired results -de-escalating tensions
 
Gin Saké said:
It was his economic measures that took Russia from post-Soviet collapse to the Age of Putin. If you discount him, then you probably never see Russia make the kind of recovery that has enabled Putin to run his autocratic regime with a high degree of stability to rely upon.
Click to expand...

Yes, there was great progress, but could one argue that w/ his oligarchs & autocratic rule came stifling of growth, investment etc... & you add the "meddling"~:|
 
Bill said:
Yes, there was great progress, but could one argue that w/ his oligarchs & autocratic rule came stifling of growth, investment etc... & you add the "meddling"~:|
Click to expand...

Well, it was certainly never going to be an economic powerhouse once Putin took over.
 
Is fox news reporting something today?? :rolleyes:

You going to criticize biden for essentially maintaining the trump regime tariffs etc on china?? It is the trump china policy still
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top