Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 10/23/2003 8:28:18 PM PDT by Ooh-Ah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Ooh-Ah
And soon London will be renamed 'Airstrip One'.
2 posted on 10/23/2003 8:42:43 PM PDT by Tench_Coxe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ooh-Ah
Three powers: United States, Eurasia, and Eastasia.

Ominous.
3 posted on 10/23/2003 8:50:18 PM PDT by dr_who_2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ooh-Ah
Oceania is at war with Eurasia. Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.
4 posted on 10/23/2003 8:51:46 PM PDT by Loyalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ooh-Ah
I'm not convinced though that Russia isn't on the same team with China. Same goes for France, really. If nothing else, Eurasia is just "anti-US".
5 posted on 10/23/2003 8:53:51 PM PDT by dr_who_2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ooh-Ah
Needless to say, if this Paris-Berlin-Moscow entente were ever to crystallize, the countries of "New Europe," sandwiched in between these far greater powers, would likely fall into line, as they always have in the past.

Rubbish.
6 posted on 10/23/2003 8:57:46 PM PDT by dr_who_2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ooh-Ah
The strength of the 'Eurasian' bloc is greatly overrated. Many of the smaller countries in Western Europe (The Netherlands, Denmark, Portugal, and occasionally even Sweden and Norway) along with the medium powers of Italy and Spain and virtually all of those in Eastern Europe will want the US to stay deeply involved as a counterweight to French, German, and Russian arrogance. Britain, for historical and linguistic reasons, will maintain its close relations with the US, even though we may differ more often when Blair is gone. Even Germany's current pro-Euro army position hangs on the outcome of the next general election, because the CSU/CDU has publicly stated that its security policy is firmly Atlantic. There's also the fact that the Europeans (except France and Britain) continue to reduce military expenditures, a trend which is unlikely to be reversed in most of Europe as its population falls and its pension and healthcare expenditures balloon.

There is also the open question of the ultimate disposition of Europe's growing Muslim population, most of whom, as far as I can tell, live in virtual ethnic ghettos (Germany) or real, filthy disgusting ones (France) where they are both feared and despised. How and whether the Europeans can integrate such a dissimilar population into the existing Volk is an interesting question.

As for Russia, Putin is willing for the moment to appear to be all things to all men: helping us in Afghanistan while siding with the Europeans diplomatically in Iraqand selling massive quantities of weaponry to the Chinese to pay for Russia's own debilitated armed forces. Russia should become a very wealthy country in a generation or so, given both her enormous natural resources and her well educated population. But even that is somewhat in doubt given her political history of squandered opportunities. Right now she can barely hold herself together, and her attempts to reassert an imperial presence in Central Asia or Bielorussia, Moldova, etc., may backfire badly. And, ultimately, as Putin must realize, China is the only potentially serious security threat (besides Islamofascism) that Russia will face.

As for China, I'm actually optimistic that as material conditions and education improve, the Chinese people will themselves demand more accountability from their own government. The Chinese, while fiercely nationalistic, are not idiots (unlike the Arabs). But this will be gradual, with the big change coming when most Chinese can no longer accept the threat of violence to maintain a one-party state. It will simply become too face-losing to try force when the majority will no longer accept the bald face lies of the Communist Party. China will also face a major retiree problem exacerbated by its one-child policy in the next 50 years.

All bets are off, however, if there's a big economic meltdown, which causes Beijing to try to seize Taiwan a la Galtieri in the Falklands.

What about the US? By the end of the century, the US should reach population parity with China and India. And we have a lot more options to play than most others, including the one telling the rest of the world to kiss off and withdrawing behind our Pacific and Atlantic moats if we choose. A lot will depend on whether we get nuked by the Islamofascists, or whether the current struggle turns into an all out war between the US and the Arab/Muslim world.

My best guess is we'll muddle through, with our current preeminence somewhat diminished but still quite high.

9 posted on 10/23/2003 9:23:50 PM PDT by pierrem15
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ooh-Ah
bflr
14 posted on 10/23/2003 10:06:12 PM PDT by Captainpaintball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ooh-Ah
Well, this is pretty hot geopolitical thought...if the year is 1948 and your name is George Orwell. Otherwise it's a leetle out of date, IMHO.

If one looks at the balance of economic power in Asia, there are three main foci: India, China, and a historically anomalous axis running from Taiwan through Japan to South Korea. The latter two hate each other's guts in theory but all three are more or less liberal democracies and wealthy to boot. Nor are they fools. They know perfectly well that China considers them potential puppets, an attitude stretching over a thousand years of futility and illusion. To outsiders it may appear the Asians versus the white foreign devils; in fact, it is anything but.

Old Europe is a combination of theme park and retirement home, and it still fancies it's in charge. Everyone it listens to thinks so, principally because it only listens to itself. Russia is in a race between economic renescence and demographic catastrophe. New Europe is finding out that it is strong, and is scratching its collective head at the quaint notion that the French are driving. Whither? Why, in circles around Paris, of course - doesn't the whole world? What they are trying to build militarily at the moment is a cheap union army commanded by bureaucrats. There is nothing in the world that is both cheap and union, and command by bureaucrats is a notion too horrible for any military man to contemplate.

The Americas are two continents, not one. That they will remain. Despite decades of exploitation propaganda to the contrary, the South really doesn't have anything the North covets and the North will, at some point, tire of the neighbors moving into the rec room and begin to conrol immigration once more.

In short, a mess it is, a mess it always has been, and if it ever becomes anything other than a mess it will be because we're all dead. Seeding the world with a number of relatively independent, noisy, contentious elective governments is the best guarantee against the sort of monolithic zombie march Orwell predicted in 1984. That may be one reason we're trying it.

16 posted on 10/23/2003 10:32:19 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson