Ian in his last post mentioned that our Asian allies are slipping away from us. While we pretend to strategically re-orient the Japanese are engaging in massive rearmament begun by Abe and being continued by the current government. Japan has lost confidence in the American security umbrella because of the deceit we’ve displayed in foreign relations. The Koreans? I lived in Korea. They’re simply apoplectic. Some are even at the point where they are willing to consider a loose confederation with the north, an entente of sorts so the South has the protection of the North’s nuclear umbrella and the North gains goods and services from the South.
This is simply unheard of. When I talked to one of my former students who now works in the foreign ministry and he told me this I was gobsmacked.
Ian’s correct. For 400 years the balance of payments from the rest of the world went to the Littoral seapower states. For the last 50 years the balance of payments has been reversed. All that gold is going back home. In one generation the United States has squandered all the goodwill and wealth it received during WWI and WWII. China in the last 50 years has lifted more people out of poverty than the rest of the world did during all of recorded history. Chew on that stat for a moment.
I will be visiting China and South Korea to do a 20 year retrospective tour and a 30 year retrospective tour on the former and the latter. I don’t know what to expect, but I remember China 20 years ago and being blown away.
The USA is in deep strategic shit. For 200+ years our power has been based on our complete hegemony of this hemisphere. For 75 of the last 100 years our main strategic goal has been the prevention of one power or an alliance of powers attaining hegemonic power over the Eurasian landmass. In the last six years we’ve abandoned that VITAL national interest for what? We’ve driven Russia into the arms of China. India lost all confidence in us. Now East Asia has.
If a single power or coalition of powers dominate the Eurasian landmass our two oceans will not protect us.
It appears I might have been wrong about the Israeli-Iran pissing contest being the opening act of WWIII. Good. What it really feels like is the first Balkan War in 1912. The calculus is being made in Beijing. And Tokyo. And Seoul. And Taipei. We lack the ability to protect our allies conventionally. And no one wants nukes.
I don’t have any smart quip to conclude with except a Spanish expletive, “la puebla es jodida.”
You get the idea.
cc
In this post by Sean Paul Kelley:
> “For 75 of the last 100 years our main strategic goal has been the prevention of one power or an alliance of powers attaining hegemonic power over the Eurasian landmass. In the last six years we’ve abandoned that VITAL national interest for what?”
Are you suggesting that it’s somehow a “VITAL national interest” for the US to constantly interfere with the sovereignty of the countries of Eurasia? That it’s a vital national interest for the US to maintain its global hegemony?
Is it your view that the US and the West – the Golden Billion – must seek to maintain global hegemony over the Global Majority? That 400-500 years is not enough and must be prolonged indefinitely? Isn’t seeking global hegemony a zero-sum game that will only end in the end of humanity?
> “If a single power or coalition of powers dominate the Eurasian landmass our two oceans will not protect us.”
Are you suggesting that Russia and China would attack North America? Just why would they do that unless we constantly seek to hold them down, to hold them back, to “contain” them?
Are you projecting the Anglo/European/Western mindset of hegemony onto other countries and peoples?
Feral Finster
Japan is rearming because they expect that they’ll be pressed to fight in America’s wars and as a payment of tribute to ensure US protection.
SK is an interesting case, especially as it seems plain that, even if the US hadn’t directly sponsored the coup last year, they Americans at the same time wouldn’t have minded, if it had been successful.
Mark Level
Thank you, cc! You said it quickly and succinctly.
“Are we the baddies?” Most of us know the answer.
Projection is hard to avoid for many people. The thing about “the West” as the UK ruling the majority of the world showed was that they were right out in the open about their need for CONTROL (as William S. Burroughs put it). Control of the “Eurasian Land Mass” the leadership thought and said ad nauseum would guarantee control of the World. Thus the importance of Russia, even part of Ukraine, the Caucuses and large areas of China.
I believe up to a point that human nature doesn’t vary much over time, not even in many respects (apart from technology development and use) since ancient times. So any Empire that runs for a decade or more will have a Leadership Class that will inevitably gravitate toward greed and evil, pillaging and war. An apex predator creates a predator state and culture, Leviathan.
That said, it takes time. And as Pogo said long ago, “We have met the enemy and he is ourselves.” A more likely dystopia will come from Collapse here and Civil War. An external enemy is not on the immediate horizon. We’d better get our own house somewhat in order before looking for sinister, lurking, “inscrutable” enemies from the East or the South.
Sean Paul Kelley
“Are you suggesting that it’s somehow a “VITAL national interest” for the US to constantly interfere with the sovereignty of the countries of Eurasia? That it’s a vital national interest for the US to maintain its global hegemony?”
No, I am not suggesting that. Was WWII worth fighting? Was it in our vital national interest to do so? I believe so. If such a situation should arise again, I’m saying it is in our vital national interest to prevent it. Not by meddling. By being smart.
I’m a realist in foreign policy situations. Every intervention we’ve made in my lifetime except Grenada, and Desert Storm has been a failure. We’ve left the countries worse off than before. That’s not smart foreign policy.
Fact: we are the hegemon of the Western Hemisphere. We will be for the foreseeable future.
But a hostile coalition, as FDR said, could harness the resources of Eurasia and put us at risk. That’s reality too.
The key is to prevent a hostile coalition by being smart, not arrogant duplicitous shitheads like we have been since, oh, say, 2003. Really even before when we fucked Serbia out of Kosovo. The Russians begged us not to do it, to break precedent of partitioning a nation, that had been established with the UN in 1945.
shagggz
The so-called West have been “arrogant duplicitous shitheads” for the entire time after they stole Russian valor in WW2 to puff themselves up and proceed to piss away the largest material advantage in world history. The fourth reich has run its course.
Sean Paul Kelley
You obviously do not know me well or my view of Russian history at all or you would not have said something so childish. And I am not going to waste time explaining it in the comments. Go search the site and read my essays on Russia.
shagggz
I stand by my assessment, and am more interested in Ian’s opinions on Russia and its history than yours, to put it politely. I submit that the basic shape of how WW2 and subsequent history played out bolsters my case: that the USSR did the preponderance of the dying to defeat Nazi Germany, that America falsely claimed they were behind in the “missile gap” to justify endless military spending and adventurism, that America quietly rehabilitated and absorbed various Nazi battalions and personnel, and that America’s goal has been permanent global dictatorship that it euphemistically calls “the rules-based order.” Better understood as a ghouls-based ordure, this pointed deference to “rules” rather than law is structurally identical to what the Nazis were going for, if all the support for aggressive wars and genocide hadn’t made that clear enough.
Sean Paul Kelley
I will put it very unpolitely. You wrote. “I submit that the basic shape of how WW2 and subsequent history played out bolsters my case: that the USSR did the preponderance of the dying to defeat Nazi Germany, that America falsely claimed they were behind in the “missile gap” to justify endless military spending and adventurism, that America quietly rehabilitated and absorbed various Nazi battalions and personnel . . .” Well no fucking shit. Dip me in a vat of melted cellophane. I’ve said all of this multiple times. It’s like fucking duh. Where we differ is America went off the rails when the so-called unipolar moment occured. Instead of being wise and creating a new Marshall Plan for the third world with peace dividend after the Cold War we focused on the Rubinomics–as James Carville famously said, “when I am reborn I want to come back as the bond market.” We all went shopping. Then came 9/11 and all the ugly angels of the spoiled Baby Boomers came out and the rest is history.
When it comes to Russia Ian and I are pretty much of like mind. So, I encourage you to educate yourself a little about me and my opinions before you shoot your mouth off in ignorance.
And I am happy you are more interested in Ian’s opinions. It’s his blog and he is much smarter than me. As it should be.
shagggz
I agree with your assessment of the squandering of the unipolar moment. But you also agree with my assessment of the preceding history, dismissing it as obvious. Well, then, on what grounds do you disagree that the entirety of post-WW2 Western history can be fairly called the work of arrogant, duplicitous shitheads? The unipolar moment being an increase in intensity of it does not negate the preceding era falling into the same bucket. I find your irritation puzzling.
Oakchair
What concrete actions has any of America’s Asian “allies” taken that suggest America is losing them?
The only thing remotely close is that “some” South Koreans are “considering” a “loose confederation with the north”
Canada’s new prime minster campaigned –to put it bluntly and crudely– as an “anti-American”. Yet he still decided to fork over a few more billion to assist America’s proxy war against Russia.
—–
We lack the ability to protect our allies conventionally.
——
That is one way to look at it. Another way is that America’s insistence on them being proxies in our forever wars is why they need protection at all.
Donald
The linked article
https://www.businessinsider.com/us-warships-fire-top-missile-interceptors-alarming-rate-admiral-says-2025-6
reports that the Navy is running low on interceptor missiles. So that supports both what Sean is saying and bolsters the theory that the U.S. and Israel agreed to a ceasefire because they were afraid more Iranian missiles would get through.
I had been wondering about that because one gets diametrically opposed views of how the war was going, depending on who one reads, but if the Navy is concerned about this that tips the balance in my mind.
Eric Anderson
Great work Sean.
“May you live in interesting times.”
— Ancient Chinese Curse
“May you live in hegemonic times.”
— Modern American Curse
cc
You call for preventing a “hostile coalition by being smart”. So it sounds like you support the long-time Anglo stratagem of divide-and-conquer, only please be smarter and more cunning about it than how the West has done so in the recent past. I have trouble seeing how “being smart” about poisoning or sabotaging relationships between other states is not foreign meddling or duplicitous right off the bat …
How do you define “hostile”? Is a country that refuses to bend the knee to the West, but seeks to maintain sovereign independence in a multi-polar world “hostile”? Must they be subjugated militarily-occupied vassals like Japan, South Korea, or the Philippines, that bend the knee – euphemistically called “allies” – to be considered non-“hostile”? Must their elites and institutions have been bought off and captured by the West to be considered non-“hostile”?
If Japan or South Korea or the Philippines were to one day regain their sovereignty and eject the US military bases occupying their countries, would you consider them to be “hostile”?
Do you deem Russia or China or Iran or Korea or India (or any other Eurasian country) to be “hostile” to the US or the West at the moment? Based on what definition and what credible evidence? Is that evidence from the CIA, MI6, Mossad, or Five Eyes Plus One?
Do you also call for preventing a “potentially” hostile coalition by being smart? If so, must all the Eurasian countries be forever controlled by the US and the West, just on the off-chance that one of them could some day potentially become “hostile”?
Eric Anderson
Interesting thread ya got going on here Sean.
Rule #1: Everybody is smarter than the guest poster.
I remember the days long past now when I’d do the same. Alas, being on the other end lends some perspective. And alack, I miss it. But just too busy being a lawyer these days to pen the posts.
cc: just because you preface your comment with “are you suggesting” does not make it ok to then make up facts that Sean didn’t argue so you can beat your own strawman.
Argue the facts as written. There are multiple prosocial ways to influence foreign policy outcomes without “interfering.” Indeed, your comment disclosed *your* default inability to think outside the box … just like those Sean decries. And, you may note what I did there. I challenged *your* argument. Not one I made it up my head predisposed to beating.
shaggz: “We all went shopping. Then came 9/11 and all the ugly angels of the spoiled Baby Boomers came out and the rest is history.”
Pretty sure he answered you but you were too thick to see it. That response is the chef’s kiss.
Curt Kastens
A potporri of thoughts from this thread and the previous one about the middle east hastening the downfall of Ukraine.
1.) The US does not need to care one bit about what goes on in the Eurasian Land Mass.
It should be obvious that as long as undustrial civilzation continues even if the entire planet were to untie against the United States an invading planetary army would never reach the Ohio River let alone the Colorado River. The idea that they could is absurd. It is absurd even if there was no such thing as nuclear weapüns. But it is even more so in a world with nuclear weapons.
2.) But it is even more absurd that the rest or the world would even contimplate an invasion of the US. That would require a massive diversion resources which could not be kept secret. It is clearly not an option for all of the nations put together let alone one nation. Anyone who says otherwise is either not being honest or they have fallen victim to letting criminals define the terms of the debate.
3.) I think that by now the leaders of the rest of the world know that the greatest threat to the American People comes from the American people. The rest of the world has no need to threaten the US except with nuclear distruction to maintain some kind of nuclear balance of power.
4.) The US has always been a continuing criminal enterprise. It did not go off the rails in 1991.
5.) The United Kingdom and obviously Israel have always been continuing criminial enterprises. (Added for emphasis)
6.) Western civilization has always been a collection of continuing criminal enterprises until all of them were subordianted to the United States after WW2. (Though it would be reasonable though wrong to believe that all of them are subordinated by Israel through the United States)
7.If China gets 14 percent of its oil from Iran that would make Iran Very important to China, not unimportant.
8: Someone sent me a video recently to try to shame me for my support for Iran. The video was all about how Iran is an oppressive regime and how itt treats women badly.
How women get raped in prison and how people get tortured, and executed.
I was not at all impressed. Waging a war of aggression is by far the most serious human crime there is because all other human crimes are pieces of a war of aggression. Therefore Iran, Russia, and China are clearly the lesser evil compared to the collective west. Which by the way one should not forget is also oppressive, its oppression is just a more sophisticated form of oppression.
9. I cheer for Russia, Iran and China not so that I will be economically less well off if they should achieve victory over the collective west, although that is likely to be a result. I cheer for the these countries because another result fo such a victory might be that those that have been leaders of of western aggression get tortured to death with or with out a trial, it makes no difference to me. And I will be delighted to publically take part in the torture to set a good example. Torture is not always wrong.
Ethical Rule number one is to treat other people the way you would like to be treated. But Rule number two is to treat other people the way that they treat other people. This rule is neccessary to enforce discipline on human behavior.
10. Much vaunted Thorium energy will solve none of humanities problems medium to long term even if turns out to be as good as advertised. It will just delay the collapse of industrial civilization until some other input runs out. Not only that even if it were to provide 100% of the economies energy tommorrow it is far far to late to prevent a melt down of the planet due to global warming.
11. There will be no empires beyond 2040. It is unilkely that there will be any people beyond 2050. The century of China or Russia is not approaching. Even if Israel is victoriuos over Iran and its neighbors its achievements will be ground to dust very quickly This is not a century for empires. This is the century of death. Wars and pandemics will only be an inconvience on the road to that destination. Long term strategies at this point are just totally ignorant.
12, Either people in general everywhere seem to have a massive problem updating their thinking based upon new information, or they are, possibly with good reasons, deliberately not saying what they really think.
someofparts
Well, as a Boomer, I caused our current problems, so that let’s me out of the conversation.
Jan Wiklund
According to Dale Copeland, https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691161594/economic-interdependence-and-war, almost all great power wars are started by the great power that feels itself losing the economic contest. So China has no interest in wars. The Nato countries may have, but they have no ammunition and don’t seem to be able to get any.
So we can be quite safe, it seems.
The only thing we have to be afraid of is that some stupid politicians start a suicide mission. And that seems not to be impossible. At least the Europeans seem to be ruled by their reptile brains.
Mark Level
Thanks to shaggz, cc, Oakchair and others for a shared skepticism about the author’s clear bias.
Despite the defensive claims to the effect that “I’m pro-Russia and anti-hegemon, my past writing will show that”, I think what it really comes down to is an old cliche (and interestingly, this factors into what mago posted regarding Taibbi, who I at one time also admired, on the last thread):
“It is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism.” Substitute the words “US Empire” for capitalism, and the author’s myopia is evident.
SPK kind of admits the incoherence by calling himself “a realist”, by which one assumes he is aligned with Mearsheimer’s views. JM in my opinion (others are free to disagree) started out as a conventional voice, the voice of wise empire, warning against the worst, self-destructive excesses thereof in hopes the machine would chug along more efficiently. But they (bipartisan, every admin starting in this century whether supposedly “liberal” or full on Reactionary and more openly white-Supremacist) keep screwing the pooch harder and digging the quagmire deeper, more commitments, more societies entirely destroyed for shits and giggles of the Boss Men:
Serbia was the test case, as noted (pre-Bush Jr.) but add in occupied Iraq which the US refuses to leave, the strongest cases such as Libya, now Syria, Haiti (fucked over and over, never allowed to recover), Honduras, and all the little hellhole puppet countries the US now runs in Latin America: El Salvador, Argentina, etc. Venezuela made a basket-case with sanctions. Pakistan gets a competent leader who refuses to be a full-on Western puppet, Imran Khan, and he’s thrown in jail on complete BS charges, US runs it, badly, again. (They just nominated Trump for the Nobel Prize, claim he negotiated “Peace” with India, which India 100% denies.) Egypt and Jordan are tottering on the edge of dissolution due to US Client regimes that have zero credibility with the majority of their populaces, and only Force to survive. There’s more, of course, I’m just mentioning their biggest “triumphs.”
Mearsheimer now shows the awareness that the US Empire is Failed, and beyond redemption. There are zero Adults or Realists among the Neo-Con Tards, they are all like demented Sith-Lords in a cult of Impunity for endless destruction and war. Meantime their beloved (ignored, actually) “homeland” (a word they took straight from the Reich) falls to pieces and they don’t even pretend to care.
Oakchair’s point that only Japan has made a tentative step AWAY from the Empire of Chaos conceptually at the moment is true as far as it goes, BRICS could be (& will be) much stronger beyond a purely economic arrangement as it currently is. Even one break in the dam leads to others. With Trump’s minute-to-minute 180 degree turns, no Leader in their right mind will commit to continued, long-term support. But they suffer from the same lack of imagination I note above (just as one would expect of a local Ruling Class.)
Stepping over to Eastern Europe and Eurasia for a moment, there are Realists in power who want to be on the winning side and will be, very soon (in fewer than 2 years at most): Orban’s Hungary, Slovakia’s Fico (shot by an assassin multiple times for daring to deviate), the current Georgian leadership, sick of the west, Belarus for obvious historical and cultural reasons, and likely others. “Everybody loves a winner.”
I’ll quote Pogo Possum again (correctly this time) and note that “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”
If one thinks that post-Trump/ Biden/ Trump again, the Empire can coast along on momentum and fumes, one is severely deluded. And with “Coalition Allies” hated by their own populaces for reasons almost beyond counting, like Starmer (who distracts himself fucking rent-boys), Slap-face Macron, the German reincarnated Nazi-banker Merz, etc., well, this crew could kick a crippled nation like Haiti or Honduras around, but the goal of maintaining a Unified West is an illusion that has already slipped away. (And note I haven’t even until now mentioned the Zionist Entity and the now codified Elite dogma that Zionism must be an international standard for ALL countries, which will never be accepted by at least 90% of the world’s populace.)
To the current Hellscape, SPK opposes this: “If a single power or coalition of powers dominate the Eurasian landmass our two oceans will not protect us.” That is a pretty fucking giant IF there!! IF you think after the last 8 decades plus RoW wants or will blindly go along with that, you are deeply foolish and the slave to your own conventional black-and-white thinking. I have more immediate fears, as do 90% of the Global population. Frankly you seem like a throwback, like some John Birch member in the late 1940s looking under the bed for a Red at the start of every morning.
I hope the tour of China and South Korea brings you out of the 2-dimensional reality (Good/Evil) you seem to inhabit and into a 3 (or even 4) dimensional world where something positive can be achieved and not just a mirror inversion of Fukuyama’s End of History into an equally bleak hypothetical reflection. I hope it is a palate-cleanser that gets your mind right, best of luck.
Forecasting Intelligence
America’s vital interests is focused on North America, not Asia.
Frankly, the US could withdraw from East Asia tomorrow and it wouldn’t be the end of the world. Presumably the South Koreans and Japanese would arm up and get nukes for self-defence.
Australia would get closer to India, Japan and Vietnam to protect themselves from the Chinese. Between the four of them they should be capable of that.
Bottom line, the Americans can leave and the house won’t fall in and America still has the vast resources of the Americas to fall back on.
Sean Paul Kelley
I completely disagree.
Question: which island chain do we retrench to? The Second or the Third?
Sean Paul Kelley
GenerationX is the first generation since the Civil War to inherit a lower standard of living and a lower life expectancy. Those are facts. I’m not blaming anyone per se, just pointing out the cycyle of history.
Sean Paul Kelley
Wow, that was a well thought out testament. There is very, very little I disagree with in your comment. The Littoral powers have always been rapacious states. They discovered tobacco in the the new world and immediately profited off of massive addiction in their populations. Same with the sugar plantations. We really have no idea how terribly addictive and psychoactive it is for us because it is so pervasive. Then came coffee and tea. All addictive. Products that create inelastic demand. After sugar came the opium wars. England had a negative balance of trade with China bought more than the Chinese bought from Englands incipient industrialism. So, they got the entire population of China hooked on opium. That’s plain fucking evil.
I don’t know how to be more clear when I say that I am disgusted by the behaviour of my country. We’re arrogant. Duplicitous. Liars. Undiplomatic. Bullies. We leave carnage in the wake of our every intervention.
A quick story just to prove my realist bona fides: in 2003 I was in Georgia–the nation. I met with some very high level people, one man ended up being the Georgian Ambassador to the US. He and I vehemently disagreed about Georgia becomnig a part of NATO. He was in love with the success of America’s expeditionary warfare–the insurgency had not begun. I told him. Your model should be Mexico, not NATO. Find a modus vivendi to secure your independence from Russia so you can unify your nation–meaning Abkhazia and Ossetia. His name was Timur Yakobashvilli. And I told him flat out, quoting the French, the US is la perfidé Albion. Direct translation: Perfidious England. But the meaning was clear: we will betray you the moment we no longer need you as a proxy, or we will use you as a proxy and destroy you. Make your peace with Russia.
He didn’t listen. But he did become ambassador to the US.
Sometimes it just hard being the smartest guy in the room. One must hide it, as Schopenhauer said.
Sean Paul Kelley
A true rapier’s wit. I love being intellectually challenged. That’s why I’m here. But your kind of elegant response deserves the credit it is due. 🙂
Mark Level
The first time ever on this site that “Forecasting Intelligence” & I have been on the same page, quite a surprise.
If I were more superstitious, I would buy a lottery ticket.
Feral Finster
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/china/southeast-asia-starting-choose-khong-liow
Art
If you are going to China I suggest you get out into the poorer countryside and well away from the more prosperous cities. It would be grand if you could visit provinces deep inland but few people are allowed to see the work camps.
China is not a single entity. Ghost cities and profound poverty are not rare exceptions.
Curt Kastens
i decided that I should post a comment as a resident of Germany, and one of the last legitimate Germans in Europe. Yes legitimate is the right ward for me. I am way more legitimate than Merz, or Schultz.
First of all Germans are not having children. And huge numbers of legitimate German women will continue not having Children. Even if Germans were not about to go extinct due to disfunctional climate Germany would soon be empty anyways. So why should anyone give a rats ass if Muslims move in to the abandon nation? Is it reasonable that Germany should just sit empty while themps in say Algeria are 45° at 5 am?
2nd of all it was clearly in the best intrests of the German people to maintain their close energy ties with Russia. That makes the ruling class of Germany flat out traitors.
3)rd to say that moving away from Russian Energy will help Europe or Germany create its own carbon free energy system is a complete bullshit line of reasoning. There is clearly ever going to be an energy transition. That boat sailed a long time ago. That is clearly a bad faith arguement.
4.) Who gives a shit if Eruope is invaded by outsiders. There is no longer anything here to protect. Europe is not free, it is not democratic, it is not independent. Most of all Europe is not honest. It lies about everything important.
5.) Even before global warming starts to destroy Europe the European economy will be in tatters. So there is not reason to for workers to think that by defending Europe or the nations that they live in that they will be saving anything.
6&. Most importantly if Europe is conquored by an outside power. That outside power will be looking for local talent to serve as their puppets. Well I voluteer to do the job for free under the condition that I can over see the death sentences of the high level politicians that have betrayed their sacred trusts.
Sean Paul Kelley
Oakchair, I cannot give you any concrete actions because it is all diplomatic talk right now. Enraged diplomatic talk. In my mind that qualifies as concrete. But if you disagree, fair enough.
For the record: I vehemently disagree with your characterization of our Asian allies as mere proxies. And I know for certain they would be insulted to hear from someone that they were mere proxies. We’ve have treaties of mutual defense with ROK and Japan. We have absolutely nothing like that with the Ukraine. Ukraine is a proxy that we have used in the most heinous of ways.
Sean Paul Kelley
Agreed. I’ve been to China seven times. But have not been back in 20 years. I’ve been to Tibet, Qinghai’s capital Golmud, beene to Urumuchi, Kashgar, been south to Guilin and Yangshuo. Been central to rural Chengdu, been to Xi’an and of course Shanghai and Beijing. I saw Shanghai before there was anything on the island of Pudong in 1995. It’s should be a compelling trip.
shagggz
Eric Anderson: “Pretty sure he answered you but you were too thick to see it.” – No, he didn’t, actually. He offered that as if it contradicted what I said, but it didn’t. I still don’t even know what he thinks our disagreement is, and rather than clarify this, he’d rather let his “impolite” blowup fester, all the while posturing that he “loves being intellectually challenged.” Pretty unbecoming, I have to say.
As for your response to cc, that he shouldn’t make up strawmen to beat based on facts that weren’t argued, I would say that is a pretty spot-on description of how SPK has responded to my supposed challenge.
Mark Level, thank you. I always enjoy reading your clear and constructive responses.
elkern
SPK – I look forward to reading your “reports” (to us, here, as if you are so obligated) on your impending trip(s) to Asia.
SPK & all – given the limitations of this Comment section (straight chronological order, no indentation), plz make be clear about which Comment(s) one is replying to?
cc
Concur with elkern that there was no way to tell which comments some of SPK’s replies were to.
For EA’s unwarranted allegations, anyone can read my comments above and clearly see that no facts were made up or words put into anyone’s mouth, though he seems to have done just that while also throwing ad hominems at two commenters that had not addressed him. Questions are not facts. The author’s statements were clearly placed verbatim in double quotation marks and fair questions were asked about them to try to get clarification on their position.
I appreciated the author’s subsequent comment about “The Littoral powers have always been rapacious states” which I took to mean the littoral powers of Europe given the rest of the paragraph and his special mention of Perfidious Albion.
But that’s why I find it hard to reconcile with his statement that “the prevention of one power or an alliance of powers attaining hegemonic power over the Eurasian landmass” is apparently a “VITAL national interest”, and that “If a single power or coalition of powers dominate the Eurasian landmass” that would somehow “put us at risk” and in need of protection here in North America. He went on to say “The key is to prevent a hostile coalition by being smart”.
Those are the goals and tactics of Perfidious Albion, of Mackinder followers, and of the US/UK Anglo-American empire (Brzezinski, Wolfowitz Doctrine.) So the question that was never addressed is whether he projects the rapaciousness and perfidiousness of Perfidious Albion and its equally non-agreement-capable progeny onto Eurasian countries? That kind of projection is what serves to justify the behaviour that he finds appalling.
The world would be a much better place if nations collaborated and worked together to improve the lives of all, rather than constantly seeking to divide-and-rule for Anglo-led Western hegemony (behaviour also amply demonstrated to the world via Perfidious Albion’s latest progeny, the Anglo-American colony Israel.)