07-07-2017, 02:56 PM
(07-07-2017, 11:33 AM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:(07-07-2017, 10:22 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: > Yes. It's in the US interest to preserve NATO, but the EU, which
> has become a tool for European protectionism rather than for free
> trade, works against US interests. A breakup of the EU would help
> facilitate a period of American domination after the
> crisis.
There's no way that I'm aware of to reach those conclusions from that
assumption. At any rate, it's a moot point, since the EU will not
survive the war in its present form. After the war, there will be a
big international conference, where international boundaries will be
redrawn, losers will be condemned, and winners will be write the
history of what happened. At that time, the EU will be reconstituted
in some way to take advantage of "lessons learned" from the war.
If you're interested, I can explain the logic.
Quote:(07-07-2017, 10:22 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: > Or, perhaps, the danger is from Russia rather than - or in
> addition to - China, and you're also being oblivious to it. Based
> on Trump's speech, he's not.
> It's also to be noted that Churchill couldn't actually have done
> much more than Chamberlain, since the UK hadn't really rearmed at
> the time of the Sudeten crisis. We may be facing a similar issue
> with North Korea - which incidentally is currently on better terms
> with Russia than with China.
Apparently you aren't up to date with the latest news.
Trump did criticize Russia by saying, "We urge Russia to cease its
destabilizing activities in Ukraine and elsewhere, and its support for
hostile regimes -- including Syria and Iran." But also, Trump and
Putin are giving the appearance of being very friendly -- though that
could change, as they're still meeting.
On the other hand, relations between Trump and Xi have been changing
dramatically, since their friendly meeting in Florida. In just the
last week, the administration has imposed sanctions on a Chinese bank
for helping NK, has sold arms to Taiwan, has met with Modi, has
criticized China's human trafficking, and has conducted freedom of
navigation operation in the South China Sea.
So I would say that Trump's relations with Xi are far more hostile
than his relations with Putin.
You're extrapolating from month to month variations in rhetoric. As you yourself point out, that's not a valid approach.
My position is that both Russia and China are potential adversaries for us and for each other in the crisis war, but we don't yet know for sure how things will play out. Your justifications for your projected alignments are based on multiple layers of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" logic, and the potential for error compounds with each layer, making your projections of very low confidence and unconvincing.
Trump is maintaining engagement with the leaders of both, but also acknowledging our differences with both. That flexibility, to me, is a good thing.
