Is China & Pakistan friendship leverage on American's World Order?
831567
Do you really think that they have to ask permission to the Americans? I think they too have the right to make their own political alliances.\n___\n\n"Many experts predict the new closeness between the world's only superpower and Islamabad's fiercest rival will prompt Pakistan to develop even closer ties with its longtime strategic security partner, China.\n\nPakistan needs a deterrent against India.\n\nThe animosity between the two countries dates to partition in August 1947, when the British divided their former colony into two states. India was meant to be a secular democracy and Pakistan, a homeland for South Asian Muslims. More than six million Muslims migrated to Pakistan, and more than four million Hindus and Sikhs moved to India. Tremendous violence and upheaval during the partition process left more than one million people dead.\nIn the half-century since, Pakistan and India have fought three wars and come close a few other times. The unresolved issue of the disputed territory of Kashmir and periodic military buildups on both sides have kept tensions high. Many Pakistanis still worry that India wants to reunite the territory under its control. Both countries tested nuclear weapons in 1998".\n\nQuoted from: \nChina and Pakistan: A Deepening Bond\nAuthor:Esther Pan\nMarch 8, 2006\nhttp://www.cfr.org/publication/10070/china_and_pakistan.html
499748
It seems as if Pakistan is definitely vague, in true terms, as far as it's stand on Afghanistan is concerned. yes, it seems to be playing a two sided role with Afghanistan, but then again that's POLITICS isn't it?\n\ni feel both are dangerous up to some extent. Pakistan may be more though. Osama quite possibly is in Pakistan...
678592
Of course!!! US would be scared of retaliation. That is why it is not attacking pakistan even though the world knows that Osama is in Pakistan and one of there scientist has been selling nuclear technology.
810116
Does not look like it.\n\nWe are on the brink of the collapse of the post 1989 efforts by the US to prevent nuclear proliferation.\n\nThere is no consensus over a strategy in the US over the issue, other than the declarations by all Politicians that proliferation will not be tolerated. \n\nAmerica rhetoric has been shown to be toothless. \nIn the case of Pakistan and India.\n\nIt is entirely possible that Pakistan either instigated or allowed 9/11 as a response to the puny sanctions imposed after their nuclear test. \nThe sanctions threatened the long term, Cold War, alliance between the US and Pakistan. \nAn alliance which blocked India's ability to invade and occupy Pakistan as a response to Pakistan's continual terrorist provocations in Kashmir.\n\n"See what we can do if you try to isolate us"\n\nPressure and carrots on N. Korea have proven equally futile.\n\nForce was not considered an option by policy makers, as action against the 1 million strong NK army with Seoul within artillery range would have ensured massive destruction \n\nThe only levers of power are held by China, which has chosen not to exercise them until after N K recent test.\n\nAnd then only to push them into the interminable six party talks. No doubt designed by the Chinese to further split the US allies and weak US influence in the region.\n\nBush's efforts in Iraq should in my view be seen as a belated attempt to use US force as a way to intimidate Iran into giving up ite nuclear ambitions.\n\nIraq was rightly seen as an easy target to make this point.\n\nIt worked on Colonel Muammar Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi.who admitted and ended his non-declared nuclear programme in 2003 \n\nIn Iraq the indiscriminate sectarian wanton destruction engaged in by those opposing US policy, has tied down the US army in a quagmire with no seeming option but to admit impotence and leave.\n\nThe US political establishment has still not taken a final decision on what it's stance will be\n\nHence the timely Question.\n\nIs there another possible solution?
619714
"It takes two to tango"... so, both really, but as for any one faction, verses any other... the US, is definately the most dangerous... where Israel comes in, is provocation, to put it simply, Israel (vs Iran), or Iran (vs the US directly) is the spark, and the US is the proverbial "powderkeg". Iran is, however, a HUGE threat to the world economy (in particular, the fragile US economy), but to be such a threat, it needs a cause to "unite" its people, that is where we (the US under republican or democrat leadership), and Israel (under virtualy any leadership), come in to play... by itself, without direct combat Iran is possably the most dangerous power on this earth (due to its economic signifigance)... but as far as direcly killing/destroying the world, and creating unecisary death, and combat, the US takes the "blue ribbon"... but never fear, if the partisan bickering continues, and socialist government systems continue to rise at there current rate (here in the US), the democrats and republicans that currently ocupy this country will colapse its economy, rendering the US relatively powerless, and making way for the evil empire of China to rise... of coarse when this happens (and it will, if we do not signifigantly change our course in the next 15-25 years, the economy will undergo another "crash", like in the nineteen thirties), China will be the biggest military threat...\n\nDoesn't make you very optomistic about the future of our world does it? I just hope this new "crash" doesn't happen within my lifetime... Even with the idiodic (not patriotic) red white and stupid general public at the relm, eventualy (hopefuly soon), we will get an inteligent president, who will guide us away from this path of self-destruction (after all, if you have enough monkeys typing on enough typewriters, for a long enough time, they may eventualy type something intelegent, right?)...
79879
Economically, yes. Oh yes.\n\nIndia is not threatening to us. China is in many ways, but they're too smart to smite us all together, we're good for business.
687320
If you want to label Pakistan as a terrorist state, please also include the US for their support to the Mujaheddin during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan and their support for Israel in Palestine. Please also include India for their support to East Pakistan (Bangladesh) during the 1971 crises. An irony of history is that the winning side is always the one to decide who the terrorists are. In Pakistan's case, that question has not been decided as yet so lets not get hasty with our conclusions!\n\nIf you are comparing the leadership of Pakistan with Saddam Hussain's leadership, I am sorry, but either you are trying to exaggerate an issue out of proportion or you have no idea what you are talking about. Its because of thinking like this why peace can never be achieved. Why not engage your time constructively rather than by trying (and failing miserably) to create rifts?
122507
I think you are trying to ask if the US should let the Chinese influence US politics.  If that is what you are asking, then the answer is yes; no one should be involved in US politics except Americans.
166981
Definite NO! If that were to happen, then freewill would be forfeited to that power. If one disagrees with that power, it could mean death for that person.\n\nThis is going to happen though, in the not-too-distant future. America is that Superpower. You've already witnessed what happened in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. Soon America's going to just overrule the UN Security council & do what she pleases with the world. I say overrule in the assumption that 1 or 2 countries may disagree with this but most of them will agree with being ruled by America.
700962
Most likely. They are double dealing and they will get burned for that. Look what happened when Afghanistan not only supported but protected the Taliban. Pakistan needs to stop being friendly to terrorists while pretending to support our war on terror. I dont know why they are allowed to have nuclear weapons.
844571
China is still quite far off from becoming the next superpower.  The American military hegemony is still by far the strongest on the face of the earth.  China really can't compare.  However, by mid-century the notion of China as another superpower is a legitimate query.  The answer to if they will dictate world policy like the US - is NO. Although both China and America's economy will both serve as dominate powers, foreign policy is one of the biggest differences between China and the US.  China has, for hundreds of years...(going back to Genghis Kahn and the Mongols) been a very protectionist country.  It is ingrained in them to stand up against foreign invaders, and to keep the motherland strong - through its people.  The US has not been invaded, pillaged, looted in its history...hardly at all actually.  Therefore,  American aggression stems out of having nop empathy to what it is like to have a war happen in your own country.  Insofar as China will be a superpower, it will be a superpower that respects all countries and does not meddle in the internal happening/politics...which the US has become notorious for (esp. latter 20thc.)  \nRight now, Beijing has 48 African leaders in its capital to discuss: investment, trade and politics.  While China does not support terrorism, or fund it in any way, they do respect soveriegn nations right to develop in a peaceful way, with a government chosen by their people.  \nOn the though of an American/Chinese war.  While the 20thc century was a century of large nation states fighting for imperialist reasons, the 21st c. will be characterized more by large nation states combatting terrorism/nuclear proliferation and other uprisings around the world that seek to change the status quo.  China and the US's economies today are so interdependent, that any war between the two, would have debilitating effects on both countries.  Something that neither country wants.  Whether you like it or not, China and the US are allies. I know this is difficult for most Americans to except...especially with the trade blockade still in effect against Cuba...but communist China is now an ally to America.  The USA supports the one-China policy of Taiwan, Tibet, and scores of other issues that could potentially strike a rift between the two. Likewise, China has said it is commited to fighting terrorism.\nChina and the USA will never go to war with each other. \nIt is simply not in their interests, and would be catastrophic for both countries.
115250
i guess in a way it does but now the blocs with america have greatly reduced\nrussia although not against USA but it does mind the US intervention in its affairs\nwith many opposing US including countries like france n germany n russia to some extent\nbut the cold state actually is prevalent in relations between washington n beijing\nUS advice is simply not welcome in the land of the dragon
899999
America is a tool for the new world order and global domination of course it's all a facade... i cant count the number of times that bush and the other politicians have stated a... "New world order" under the auspices of the united nations... "we are just puppets pulled by the strings of the world"!
1161815
Right now, there are two global powers: US and China, though US has more military might, both have extensive international influence and contacts. There are three military superpowers: Israel is number one, followed by US, then Russia. There are several economic superpowers: Europe, China, US. There are many regional powers: Brazil, Australia, Japan.\n\nIt would be a good thing for the US to have competing powers. One major bully in the world causes instability (as it does in any group--village, city, state). There needs to be a balance of powers, else you end up with dictatorship and totalitarianism, as you now have in the US internally with no checks on the administraive branch from a one-party government and a Jelly Fish Congress and Judiciary--and a totally kowtowed press.\n\nEurope could emerge in the next twenty years as a military and economic superpower, but China will get there first.
41514
I don't know. They haven't involved in military activities since WW2 until recently. But I think we can give them a chance, besides do you think we can fully trust USA? It's a good way to make a balance of power (without having a cold war).
547748
Yes!!Take a closer look!! Through economics or politics, the U.S.already controls the world.Anyone who speaks out against them( Bush Administration)-France,Iraq,Iran,Venezuela-face invasion or some other form of retaliation. China is being courted,Cuba is being paid,Mexico has the illegal immigrant thing going on and there is no balance of power left. It would take the other countries banding together to stop this and they are kept distracted with internal turmoil or an unwillingness to put aside their long standing differences.What was your question again??Peace.
425430
China's past is certainly not reassuring.\n\nAside from becoming an economic powerhouse and their increased  military spending, their population figures alone make it unlikely that any one nation could resist China's imposition of it's will. \n\nI remember, during the Vietnam War, it being calculated that China could supply the North Vietnamese with an uninterrupted fighting force.  I don't think a "carry a big stick" attitude will work in this scenario. \n\nYes, we should be wary of China's military potential, and we need to elect leaders prepared to deal with the changing world with a mindset focused on cooperation and diplomacy rather than go it alone and shoot from the hip.