History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedChinese Security and Geopolitics

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Author
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4232
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Jun-2008 at 21:01
Sparten,
 
Thanks for the clarification "on the ground." Smile
 
I had read about two historic passes that are close enough together to be one route down into the plains of the subcontinent.  One was "killak ?" and I understood that, although unpaved it was passable all year.  Both these passes I think were close to Indian Kashmir.
 
The way over the pass you mentioned is relatively modern and recently paved, etc.  If the others are passable, what is the strategic thinking about their usability, or development for strategic purposes?  Was Khujarab finished because it is further away from Indian Kashmir?
 
As far as Nepal, until the Hindu kingdom was abolished, I hadn't thought much about it.  Now things may be viewed with some concern by the Indian general staff.  I don't know the passes there at all.  Help us!
 
 


Edited by pikeshot1600 - 14-Jun-2008 at 21:19
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4232
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Jun-2008 at 21:17
Originally posted by Leonidas Leonidas wrote:

Originally posted by Leonidas Leonidas wrote:


  1. Remaining in power. The CCP will always put itself first and do anything to remain on top.
  2. Securing their periphery. Strong centralist understanding of power. Otherwise it could lose territory. Think Taiwan and Qing legacy (non Han) holdings on their periphery.
  3. Securing resources and their transport routes. South China sea <> Straights of Malacca <> Bay of Bengal <> Indian ocean and as well as the Pacific.
  4. Projecting regional power/influence, via economic, diplomatic and militray means. So to neutralise any other competing power *1 USA 2 India 3 Russia*and help all of the previous points remain so


for point three


this is a bit of point three but also about the next point. They don't want to be hemmed in by the USA and its allies japan. Therefore they rather project back over the pacific; open up routes towards Latin america and the  south pacific and deny the USA control from 'their' sea lanes and approaches.




http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/2007/2007-prc-military-power.htm
 
What is described in these two maps is China's drive to dominate southeat Asia for their security needs.  From Burma to the Straits to Taiwan is a geographic crescent that is not unlike the Japanese sphere during WW II.
 
As we are all frustrated historians, I see in this whole concept, a rhyme in historical meter.
 
An Asian nation, homogeneous in population, bereft of much in the way of natural resources, needing to control key geographical features, (and to block out the United States with a defensive perimeter) for perceived security needs.
 
Hmmm....can anyone say "co-prosperity sphere?"  The game doesn't change, but the roster of players does.
 
Unlike the 1941 Japanese, the Chinese lack the naval muscle, but 50 years from now, it may be otherwise.
 
 


Edited by pikeshot1600 - 14-Jun-2008 at 21:43
Back to Top
Sparten View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar
Totalitarian Iconoclast

Joined: 18-Mar-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 5009
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sparten Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Jun-2008 at 21:23

Oh they have lots of passes into and out of China. The ones which are useful militarily, meaning can be used for operations, only exist in either Pakistan or in Nepal. There is one or two which causes concern, but niether can support a full fledge military operation. By this I mean a corps plus operation (or an army plus in Chinese parlance).

 
By the way I noticed I mispelled Khunjerab. here is the obligatory wiki link.
 
 
It connects a Chinese province (whose name escapes me now) with the territory of the N Areas.
 
It is the main route from the Sub Continent (though the N Areas is on the Eurasian plate it is still considered sub-continent) to China. The old silk route. There is one in Nepal.
 
There is a strategic road which connects the pass to China, called the Karakorum Highway, the worlds highest road.
 
It is scray, the bridges, a ten thousand foot drop. Like being in an airplane. I had some pics. If I can find them I'll post them.
 
 
 
 
The Germans also take vacations in Paris; especially during the periods they call "blitzkrieg".
Back to Top
Sparten View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar
Totalitarian Iconoclast

Joined: 18-Mar-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 5009
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sparten Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Jun-2008 at 21:29
Nepal, a lot depends on the new government. Maoists and communists are an anorchism generally, and especially in the region. If they can improve standard of living etc and offer some properity (ordinarily a long shot for Maoists, but Chinese cash may help) then India may see it being lost for good. If the act like predictable Maoists, which is destroying the source of wealth in their zeal to distribute it more equally, then its anybodys guess what happens.
The Germans also take vacations in Paris; especially during the periods they call "blitzkrieg".
Back to Top
Leonidas View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 4617
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Leonidas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Jun-2008 at 06:48
 
Originally posted by pikeshot1600 pikeshot1600 wrote:

[An Asian nation, homogeneous in population, bereft of much in the way of natural resources, needing to control key geographical features, (and to block out the United States with a defensive perimeter) for perceived security needs.
 
Hmmm....can anyone say "co-prosperity sphere?"  The game doesn't change, but the roster of players does.
funnily enough the same perimeter is used by the USA to protect the pacific (USA) from the east and project into Asia. Its the same logic in reverse.

One item that comes up in CCP language, is the introverted  belief of china's of traditional rights over external disputed territories. This has more to do with CCP legitimacy and authority (inc on its own internal periphery), by the way of nationalism and is more related to the first point i made. That is the moral right dimension in the logic of Beijing
 
Originally posted by pikeshot1600 pikeshot1600 wrote:

Unlike the 1941 Japanese, the Chinese lack the naval muscle, but 50 years from now, it may be otherwise.
 
 
The Chinese navy building is accelerating every year. I think the first island chain they are looking at is realistic within a much shorter time frame. I guess, Taiwan would be the first move,  south china sea would be next, they wont aggressively push the claims over the Japanese until after those two have been secured (in any order). Japan has the navy to match them for quite a while yet, other Asian powers don't.

Holding Taiwan would put them in the box seat for any future projections and punch through any US cordon. Its also can cut the same maritime supply routes (it depends on) from the Japanese and Koreans who are even more reliant on it for their energy needs. While the sweetener is , it also makes it more problematic for Russia to reassert in SE Asia. Taiwan adds to both their defensive position and gives them an advantage over their east Asian rivals with a powerful choke hold.

The second island chain would require a massive and advanced blue water fleet to match the USA which will not happen anytime soon, nor without a real fight.

Back to Top
Aussiedude View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 16-Mar-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 28
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Aussiedude Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Jun-2008 at 07:53

My own analysis of the Chinese geopolitical situation:

Their are 6 major trade and resource zones that will predominate Chinese concerns in security concerns:
1)The Red Sea/Suez(Europe)
2)The Persian Gulf (oil)
3)Central Asia(oil/gas)
4)Australia(numerous mining resources)
5)Siberia(Oil, mining resouces etc)
6)And, of course the Pacific trade routes, paticularly within the 2 island chains(Taiwan/Japan, the Americas)
 
These are all massively threatened.
1/2)The Red Sea/Suez trade route have the Strait of Aden and Hormuz respectively as choke points. Besides that, they both need to cross south of India. From their, the trade route can reach China via Burma, the Malay strait of the Java-Sumatra strait. The former is exposed to India. The second to India. The last is the most secure, so long as Indonesian/Chinese relations are not hostile
 
3/5) Are secure so long as Russo-Chinese relations are amicable.
 
4)Is secure so long as the Chinese can cross through the first island chain, and Indonesian and Australian relations are not hostile. Unfortuanately, Australia is firmly under Americas wing. 
 
6.1)The trade with other East Asian nations. Easily secured so long as Japan, Taiwan and South Korea are amicable.
 
6.2) The trade accross the greater Pacific, primarily with the Americas... totally dependant on the US for the forseeable future.
 
In conclusion, China cannot afford outright hostility with both the US or Russia, as hostility with the India is almost certain. The three combined can totally annihiliate China's economy. Fortunately, Russia and China have a secure position as allies, while the US cannot afford the annihiliation of China's economy- itr would collapse its own... the biggest threat to China is that the US may be forced to deny the other nations oil lest its own economy collpase. Fortunatley, in such a scenario, the US will have to face the combined might of much of the world powers....
 
China's foreign policy, assuming the US will shirk from conflict except in the most extreme energy crisis, is thus twofold- limit the intake of foreign resources, paticularly oil resources taken from along sea routes. And focus on encircling and isolating India- which will be China's primary rival for the forseeable future, not the US or Russia. 
 
Hence focus should not be on the Pacific island chains. but on developing the capacity along with Burma and Pakistan to essentially smother India's foreign trade, should need be. Critical in ensuring this will be prising Iran and Bangaldesh away from their ties to India, as well as focusing on building ties with the Maldives, Ceylon, and the states of other trade chokepoints(of both India and China) to ensure that China and co has the capacity to both secure its own resource routes and cut India's. In essence, China must ensure that it, not India, dominates the Indian Ocean, while securing either the Burma of South China Sea trade route as "safe" from being cut by another nation. The Pacific Ocean is of secondary importance.


Edited by Aussiedude - 15-Jun-2008 at 07:57
Back to Top
Sparten View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar
Totalitarian Iconoclast

Joined: 18-Mar-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 5009
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sparten Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Jun-2008 at 09:36

The Chinese solution to 1 and 2 is to ship it to Pakistan meaning Gwader, then send it overland.

 
 
The Germans also take vacations in Paris; especially during the periods they call "blitzkrieg".
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4232
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Jun-2008 at 15:26
Aussiedude:
 
It is difficult to visualize China being able to isolate India.  India holds the strong geographic position at the center of trade routes across the Indian Ocean.
 
It is even more difficult to see China being able to dominate the Indian Ocean.
 
China, it seems to me is the power in the more disadvantageous position geopolitically:
 
As Sparten has explained, the physical barrier of the Himalayas precludes more than mostly low intensity capability in the high mountains.  This is the case for both powers, and their conflict there will most likely remain a matter of positioning for future influence (over river headwaters; proximity to the few transport routes, political influence in the barrier states, etc.). 
 
China's ability to project power down into the subcontinent, as India's the opposite way, seems minimal along the mountain barrier.  Too many logistical, distance and infrastructure issues for more than low intensity operations.  That leaves a peripheral approach.  
 
China's prospect of dominating oceanic trade routes anywhere other than the South China Sea seems very unlikely.  The expansion and modernization of PLA naval assets has been heavily concentrated in short endurance, defensive systems, at the expense of longer range systems that might facilitate power projection.  Under this cover, gradual consolidation of PRC influence over the route from Malaya to the Koreas can be conceived.
 
However (big however), Without the ability to control the Straits (Malacca/Jombok/Sunda) that does not put them in any strong position in event of a crisis that might require a military response.  That ability does not seem likely in view of China's previous failed attempts to affect both Malaya in the 1950s and Indonesia in the 1960s.
 
Canal proposals and pipeline proposals across Thailand's isthmus may at some future time mitigate those chokepoints, but will not eliminate the need for their control.  Also, man made shortcuts can be put out of commission in times of conflict.
 
China's access to the Indian ocean will remain through Pakistan over the high mountain route, and Burma over the "Burma road."  Both of those can be impacted by India's military capabilities.  Indian Ocean island chains, far detached from the mainland, and Ceylon's choke point, close by India, cannot bypass the two land access routes.
 
China's major source for oil is more likely to be addressed by overland routes from central Asia, which can be more secure.  China's trade routes to the Western hemisphere are totally dependant on relations with the US.  Their resource routes from Africa, and as long as necessary from the Gulf, will be dependant on both US and Indian interests.    
 
China has too many geostrategic issues to be able to dominate other geographies.  This is to say nothing of the domestic, non-traditional security issues she faces at home.
 
 


Edited by pikeshot1600 - 15-Jun-2008 at 15:34
Back to Top
Bankotsu View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 27-Feb-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 511
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bankotsu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Jun-2008 at 15:39
Quote China's major source for oil is more likely to be addressed by overland routes from central Asia, which can be more secure.  China's trade routes to the Western hemisphere are totally dependant on relations with the US.  Their resource routes from Africa, and as long as necessary from the Gulf, will be dependant on both US and Indian interests.
 

Here is an analysis of the competition over oil in Africa:

Darfur? It’s the Oil, Stupid…
http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/Geopolitics



Quote China has too many geostrategic issues to be able to dominate other geographies.


I agree. China's geographical position is not favourable for superpower status.

Great power in asia is more likely.
Back to Top
Leonidas View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 4617
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Leonidas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Jun-2008 at 12:15
Originally posted by pikeshot1600 pikeshot1600 wrote:

China's ability to project power down into the subcontinent, as India's the opposite way, seems minimal along the mountain barrier.  Too many logistical, distance and infrastructure issues for more than low intensity operations.  That leaves a peripheral approach.  
they still have a dispute over Arunachal Pradesh, this can be used as future trigger for an offensive into Assam and making Indian intervention in Burma a that much harder.
Back to Top
Aussiedude View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 16-Mar-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 28
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Aussiedude Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2008 at 06:15
Originally posted by Sparten Sparten wrote:

The Chinese solution to 1 and 2 is to ship it to Pakistan meaning Gwader, then send it overland.

 
 
Indeed, I had not thought of that. Indeed, it not neccesrily even be shipped: It could cross the Iran/Pakistan border.
Main issue- vulnerability of Kashmir region.
Back to Top
Aussiedude View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 16-Mar-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 28
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Aussiedude Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2008 at 09:53
Originally posted by pikeshot1600 pikeshot1600 wrote:

Aussiedude:
 
It is difficult to visualize China being able to isolate India.  India holds the strong geographic position at the center of trade routes across the Indian Ocean.
 
It is even more difficult to see China being able to dominate the Indian Ocean.
 
China, it seems to me is the power in the more disadvantageous position geopolitically:
 
As Sparten has explained, the physical barrier of the Himalayas precludes more than mostly low intensity capability in the high mountains.  This is the case for both powers, and their conflict there will most likely remain a matter of positioning for future influence (over river headwaters; proximity to the few transport routes, political influence in the barrier states, etc.). 
 
China's ability to project power down into the subcontinent, as India's the opposite way, seems minimal along the mountain barrier.  Too many logistical, distance and infrastructure issues for more than low intensity operations.  That leaves a peripheral approach.  
 
China's prospect of dominating oceanic trade routes anywhere other than the South China Sea seems very unlikely.  The expansion and modernization of PLA naval assets has been heavily concentrated in short endurance, defensive systems, at the expense of longer range systems that might facilitate power projection.  Under this cover, gradual consolidation of PRC influence over the route from Malaya to the Koreas can be conceived.
 
However (big however), Without the ability to control the Straits (Malacca/Jombok/Sunda) that does not put them in any strong position in event of a crisis that might require a military response.  That ability does not seem likely in view of China's previous failed attempts to affect both Malaya in the 1950s and Indonesia in the 1960s.
 
Canal proposals and pipeline proposals across Thailand's isthmus may at some future time mitigate those chokepoints, but will not eliminate the need for their control.  Also, man made shortcuts can be put out of commission in times of conflict.
 
China's access to the Indian ocean will remain through Pakistan over the high mountain route, and Burma over the "Burma road."  Both of those can be impacted by India's military capabilities.  Indian Ocean island chains, far detached from the mainland, and Ceylon's choke point, close by India, cannot bypass the two land access routes.
 
China's major source for oil is more likely to be addressed by overland routes from central Asia, which can be more secure.  China's trade routes to the Western hemisphere are totally dependant on relations with the US.  Their resource routes from Africa, and as long as necessary from the Gulf, will be dependant on both US and Indian interests.    
 
China has too many geostrategic issues to be able to dominate other geographies.  This is to say nothing of the domestic, non-traditional security issues she faces at home.
 
 
Your assuming China would need to maintain a oceanic link between the South China sea and Indian Ocean in wartime to blocakade India. Your wrong.
 
China need only build up its forces in Burmese, Pakistani(and any other Indian Ocean allies) naval bases in PEACE TIME, in coalition with Burmese and Pakistani fleets also built up with Chinese funds.
 
In otherwords, they can have an indirect presence on the Indian Ocean via Burma and Pakistan, and any other allies they can secure, while getting most of their own fleet to said nations harbours during peace time. Thus, they could keep open the Indian Ocean trade routes through Pakistan and Burma, who would both be the path the trade took and the base from which it is defended.
Back to Top
Sparten View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar
Totalitarian Iconoclast

Joined: 18-Mar-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 5009
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sparten Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2008 at 11:44
Originally posted by Aussiedude Aussiedude wrote:

Originally posted by Sparten Sparten wrote:

The Chinese solution to 1 and 2 is to ship it to Pakistan meaning Gwader, then send it overland.

 
 
Indeed, I had not thought of that. Indeed, it not neccesrily even be shipped: It could cross the Iran/Pakistan border.
Main issue- vulnerability of Kashmir region.
 
The highway gose through the NWFP province and the N Areas territory, bypassing Kashmir totally. Its has never been threathened in 4 wars.
 
The Germans also take vacations in Paris; especially during the periods they call "blitzkrieg".
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4232
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2008 at 15:03
Blockading India seems to me to be not possible:
 
1)  This assumes that India's other trading partners and allies will just stand aside.
 
2)  This also assumes Burma and Pakistan as bases for naval forces (and any others) will accept Indian retaliation for what are essentially Chinese interests.
 
3)  The probability of China developing forward positioning in the rest of the Indian ocean littoral is not likely primarily because other powers already have access to all of it, or it is indefensible.  The Maldives, for example, are too close to India to be usable, and, with rising sea levels expected in the next half century, by the time China develops a useable blue water navy the Maldives will be mostly submerged.
 
Two points here:  First, In the 1980s (I think) Indian special forces prevented a coup in the Maldives that would have been unfavorable to Indian interests.  Just like US intervention in Grenada in anticipation of USSR positioning, the first hint of that will result in strategic response before the suspected event.
 
Second, I have heard the argument that "Oh, so it's underwater.  Just use submarines."  Confused  Well, navy yards require a lot of infrastructure and support which submerged Maldives within range of India won't have, and that is not counting the extremely long and, in times of conflict, unsustainable lines of supply such a distant place would entail.
 
I don't see it as realistic.  In the Indian Ocean, China has huge vulnerabilities that are not going to be addressed by normal capabilities, if at all.
 
 


Edited by pikeshot1600 - 17-Jun-2008 at 15:55
Back to Top
Sparten View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar
Totalitarian Iconoclast

Joined: 18-Mar-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 5009
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sparten Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2008 at 15:17
That coup collapsed due to lack of support, not cause of anything Indians did. India has big logistical problems, on land sea and air. In the last deployment in 2002, their armour heavy corps (I, II and XXI) took 6 weeks to move to the border, compared with one week for ours. And in their deployments overseas like Sri Lanka, their supply lines all but collapsed. They are working on it definatly, but then they have been working on it since '65.
The Germans also take vacations in Paris; especially during the periods they call "blitzkrieg".
Back to Top
Bankotsu View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 27-Feb-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 511
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bankotsu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2008 at 15:38
Originally posted by pikeshot1600 pikeshot1600 wrote:

Just like US intervention in Grenada in anticipation of USSR positioning,


Didn't know that was the motive.

Was that the real motive or just pretext?

http://libcom.org/history/1983-the-us-invasion-of-grenada
http://www.democracynow.org/2004/6/10/remembering
http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/history/2003/10grenada.htm
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Grenada_KH.html


Edited by Bankotsu - 17-Jun-2008 at 15:39
Back to Top
Sparten View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar
Totalitarian Iconoclast

Joined: 18-Mar-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 5009
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sparten Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2008 at 15:44
oh god not here.
The Germans also take vacations in Paris; especially during the periods they call "blitzkrieg".
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4232
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2008 at 15:45
Originally posted by Sparten Sparten wrote:

That coup collapsed due to lack of support, not cause of anything Indians did. India has big logistical problems, on land sea and air. In the last deployment in 2002, their armour heavy corps (I, II and XXI) took 6 weeks to move to the border, compared with one week for ours. And in their deployments overseas like Sri Lanka, their supply lines all but collapsed. They are working on it definatly, but then they have been working on it since '65.
 
Logistical problems for both, no doubt.  I just think China's are far greater.
 
 
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4232
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2008 at 15:47
Originally posted by Sparten Sparten wrote:

oh god not here.
 
No not here.  The topic is China's security concerns.
 
 
Back to Top
Bankotsu View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 27-Feb-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 511
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bankotsu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2008 at 15:53
Sorry, first time I heard that motive of USA invasion of Grenada was about  "in anticipation of USSR positioning", so got curious.

Edited by Bankotsu - 17-Jun-2008 at 15:54
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.