Jump to content

Russia, US, the West vs ??? WWIII! (Part I)


Recommended Posts

For the past several years I have been studying the world political structure. It is quite different than the propaganda we receive in the U.S through the (control) party system in the U.S. What is happening in the Ukraine is to be expected. A flag, a action to start something bigger. While many of you sit back and hope nothing comes of it. The reality is this is WORLD WAR III. In all aspects, both militarily, and economically.

 

Before I go into more detail about why this is WWIII. I have decided to bring up earlier studies from years past. One of my studies was to see how Russians view the rest of the world. I am curious about them as much as they are curious about us. I started reading the Pravda in 2010. I continue to do so. As it lets me see a different perspective besides what our bias, infomercial media shows us here in the states.

 

As I watch things unfold and escalate in Ukraine, I remembered a past article in the Pravda. I decided to share it with you. As I feel you should know! The date is from Mar 03 2011, Here is the link http://english.pravda.ru/society/anomal/25-03-2011/117328-third_world_war-0/

 

Now this may be a bit disturbing to many of you. But I have known this for a long time. The happenings in Ukraine are to be expected. And as you may have guessed. The Russian government was expecting it too! Here is a small excerpt from that article. Since I figure some of you do not like to click on links!

 

RU,Pravda Mar 3 2011,

 

"The participants of the meeting also unveiled the date for the beginning of Third World War. The new war is said to begin in March of 2014, during the Olympic Games in Sochi. It is also possible that the war may start five days after the Games end"

 

Now to us who prefer scientific methodology. How the Russians came up with this is to me phenomena. But here, its right in front of our face!

 

 

1. WHY WORLD WAR III?:

 

A serious question with serious consequences. Where to start! Well before any war goes military. There is a war economically. When did this war start? Why in 2008 of course! With the formation of four countries Brazil, Russia, India, China or BRIC with South Africa added later(BRICS) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRICS. The objective for this formation is to compete and win against the Wests economic structures. WBA, IMF ect. It has been highly successful!

 

As shown as example from the beginning of this group! http: http://triblive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/columnists/Browne/s_568075.html#axzz2uoN03sH1

and http://www.economist.com/debate/overview/257

 

For the past 5 years the BRICS nations have produced most of the worlds overall GDP. Those countries in the west have been in decline! One would wonder why a war militarily if a economic war is being won? Well, this year is where the Brics trend has grown stagnant, or has come to a standstill. You see, us in the west have been in decline for a while now. Austerity measures were incorporated to slow the decline down. I did say slow down, not stop! The U.S has been in austerity policy since last July. We are the last country in the west to go through such. That is also the last call before our own economic collapse.

 

So, what options are left? Only one? To boost a economy the country only needs to make war! As shown through history! Prescott Bush, founder of the First National Bank of NY held Nazi currency and assets til late 1942. Money from our own country was used to fund the Nazi war machine( http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar. ) How coincidental that Prescott Bush is George Bush's dad and G.W Bush's Grandfather!

 

As to the Japanese! In this case the U.S blockade of the Japanese in Indo-China played a significant role of why Japan went to war with us( http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1930!)

 

 

Now back to the current! The Wests decline has played a effect on the BRICs nations. You see, those BRICs nations own much of our debt. Kinda like a debt collection agency which can no longer collect. As such, it has brought BRICs to a slow or no growth. So the economies are at a stand still or going negative. This leaves only one solution left. As all economic cards have been played out! Military options and WAR!

 

The same reasons WWI and II were created over!

 

This is my first part to this. In the second I will bring the reasons closer to home. The U.S, Europe, our President. The reality of our economy. The people here!

 

Cheers! I need to go to sleep!

Edited by jduff
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

For someone slagging off the western style media in the USA you seem to have fallen hook line and sinker for a falsely-named woo-peddling "informercialized" rag. Pravda.ru is a bottom-feeding tabloid

i am glad to hear that. Unfortunately, when governments decide that a conflict has arrived, people fight, not governments.

Well Russia's actions could well be described as a breach of the Budapest Memorandum of Nuclear Assurances signed by the United States in 1994. The USA (along with the other Nuclear powers - Russia e

For the past several years I have been studying the world political structure. It is quite different than the propaganda we receive in the U.S through the (control) party system in the U.S. What is happening in the Ukraine is to be expected. A flag, a action to start something bigger. While many of you sit back and hope nothing comes of it. The reality is this is WORLD WAR III. In all aspects, both militarily, and economically.

 

Before I go into more detail about why this is WWIII. I have decided to bring up earlier studies from years past. One of my studies was to see how Russians view the rest of the world. I am curious about them as much as they are curious about us. I started reading the Pravda in 2010. I continue to do so. As it lets me see a different perspective besides what our bias, infomercial media shows us here in the states.

 

...

 

For someone slagging off the western style media in the USA you seem to have fallen hook line and sinker for a falsely-named woo-peddling "informercialized" rag. Pravda.ru is a bottom-feeding tabloid that has queried the veracity of the moon-landings, is anti-evolution, and anti-science / just wrong about science. It's name, which perversely and wrongly means "truth", is the only thing that connects it with the august and very much faded old Soviet newspaper Pravda.

 

This is the disgusting rags website http://english.pravda.ru/

This is the old communist organ's website http://www.gazeta-pravda.ru (I don't believe they accept the need for a decadent English version)

1. WHY WORLD WAR III?:

 

A serious question with serious consequences. Where to start! Well before any war goes military. There is a war economically. When did this war start? Why in 2008 of course! With the formation of four countries Brazil, Russia, India, China or BRIC with South Africa added later(BRICS) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRICS. The objective for this formation is to compete and win against the Wests economic structures. WBA, IMF ect. It has been highly successful!

 

As shown as example from the beginning of this group! http: http://triblive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/columnists/Browne/s_568075.html#axzz2uoN03sH1

and http://www.economist.com/debate/overview/257

...

 

The countries were very successful before 2008 and continue to be - emerging economies with vast natural resources, cheap labour, relaxed regulations, and massive internal growth potential are more often than not going to be growing quicker than established economies. There is not a lot of ideological foundation nor agreement for the future. It's not a conspiracy to unseat the west, nor to change the mood of international finance - let's face it they are all members of the G20 anyway.

...For the past 5 years the BRICS nations have produced most of the worlds overall GDP. Those countries in the west have been in decline! One would wonder why a war militarily if a economic war is being won? Well, this year is where the Brics trend has grown stagnant, or has come to a standstill. You see, us in the west have been in decline for a while now. Austerity measures were incorporated to slow the decline down. I did say slow down, not stop! The U.S has been in austerity policy since last July. We are the last country in the west to go through such. That is also the last call before our own economic collapse....

 

Are you sure about that GDP figure? I ask because I am pretty sure that the G7 account for about 50% alone. I also seem to remember reading that if you add the EU, the US, and Japan you get to abut 55 percent. I struggle to see how the BRICS could be as much as the EU or the US alone - let alone more than 50percent of Global GDP. On the change in growth - figures for 2014 are going to be guesswork. I haven't yet seen nice tabulated and compared figures for last year - could you direct me to the figures for this year?

 

 

...

So, what options are left? Only one? To boost a economy the country only needs to make war! As shown through history! Prescott Bush, founder of the First National Bank of NY held Nazi currency and assets til late 1942. Money from our own country was used to fund the Nazi war machine( http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar. ) How coincidental that Prescott Bush is George Bush's dad and G.W Bush's Grandfather!

 

As to the Japanese! In this case the U.S blockade of the Japanese in Indo-China played a significant role of why Japan went to war with us( http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1930!)..

 

The original combatants of the world wars were very nearly, and in some cases actually, bankrupted by them; even the gains in territory did little to assuage the mountains of debt that were run up. Austerity measures (and these were really biting austerity measures including the rationing of food, clothes, and fuel) continued in UK for many years after WW2

 

...

Cheers! I need to go to sleep!

 

I think that might be wise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Previous World Wars might have economic roots but if anyone thinks a real World War wouldn't escalate into A nuclear nightmare when one side saw it's self on the losing end doesn't have any oars in the water. Large scale war is not the economic game it once was and i think everyone who could be involved knows that.

 

It's worry some it might get out of hand by accident but by design is insane...

Link to post
Share on other sites

For the past several years I have been studying the world political structure. It is quite different than the propaganda we receive in the U.S through the (control) party system in the U.S. What is happening in the Ukraine is to be expected. A flag, a action to start something bigger. While many of you sit back and hope nothing comes of it. The reality is this is WORLD WAR III. In all aspects, both militarily, and economically.

 

Before I go into more detail about why this is WWIII. I have decided to bring up earlier studies from years past. One of my studies was to see how Russians view the rest of the world. I am curious about them as much as they are curious about us. I started reading the Pravda in 2010. I continue to do so. As it lets me see a different perspective besides what our bias, infomercial media shows us here in the states.

 

As I watch things unfold and escalate in Ukraine, I remembered a past article in the Pravda. I decided to share it with you. As I feel you should know! The date is from Mar 03 2011, Here is the link http://english.pravda.ru/society/anomal/25-03-2011/117328-third_world_war-0/

 

Now this may be a bit disturbing to many of you. But I have known this for a long time. The happenings in Ukraine are to be expected. And as you may have guessed. The Russian government was expecting it too! Here is a small excerpt from that article. Since I figure some of you do not like to click on links!

 

RU,Pravda Mar 3 2011,

 

"The participants of the meeting also unveiled the date for the beginning of Third World War. The new war is said to begin in March of 2014, during the Olympic Games in Sochi. It is also possible that the war may start five days after the Games end"

 

Now to us who prefer scientific methodology. How the Russians came up with this is to me phenomena. But here, its right in front of our face!

 

 

1. WHY WORLD WAR III?:

 

A serious question with serious consequences. Where to start! Well before any war goes military. There is a war economically. When did this war start? Why in 2008 of course! With the formation of four countries Brazil, Russia, India, China or BRIC with South Africa added later(BRICS) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRICS. The objective for this formation is to compete and win against the Wests economic structures. WBA, IMF ect. It has been highly successful!

 

As shown as example from the beginning of this group! http: http://triblive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/columnists/Browne/s_568075.html#axzz2uoN03sH1

and http://www.economist.com/debate/overview/257

 

For the past 5 years the BRICS nations have produced most of the worlds overall GDP. Those countries in the west have been in decline! One would wonder why a war militarily if a economic war is being won? Well, this year is where the Brics trend has grown stagnant, or has come to a standstill. You see, us in the west have been in decline for a while now. Austerity measures were incorporated to slow the decline down. I did say slow down, not stop! The U.S has been in austerity policy since last July. We are the last country in the west to go through such. That is also the last call before our own economic collapse.

 

So, what options are left? Only one? To boost a economy the country only needs to make war! As shown through history! Prescott Bush, founder of the First National Bank of NY held Nazi currency and assets til late 1942. Money from our own country was used to fund the Nazi war machine( http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar. ) How coincidental that Prescott Bush is George Bush's dad and G.W Bush's Grandfather!

 

As to the Japanese! In this case the U.S blockade of the Japanese in Indo-China played a significant role of why Japan went to war with us( http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1930!)

 

 

Now back to the current! The Wests decline has played a effect on the BRICs nations. You see, those BRICs nations own much of our debt. Kinda like a debt collection agency which can no longer collect. As such, it has brought BRICs to a slow or no growth. So the economies are at a stand still or going negative. This leaves only one solution left. As all economic cards have been played out! Military options and WAR!

 

The same reasons WWI and II were created over!

 

Cheers! I need to go to sleep!

This is an interesting analysis of the economic and psychological factors which may have historically driven, or at least encouraged, wars such as WW1 and WW2

 

But are you taking sufficient account of a radical post-1945 scientific innovation - nuclear weapons. These are so destructive that any WW3 fought with them, would surely not boost economies, but quickly reduce them to ruins?

Previous World Wars might have economic roots but if anyone thinks a real World War wouldn't escalate into A nuclear nightmare when one side saw it's self on the losing end doesn't have any oars in the water. Large scale war is not the economic game it once was and i think everyone who could be involved knows that.

 

It's worry some it might get out of hand by accident but by design is insane...

I don't think a new World War would necessarily escalate into terminal nuclear nightmare, provided:

 

1. The war was conducted between rational "responsible" countries such as the USA and Russia

2. The losing side still retained sufficient nuclear weapons (eg on SSBNs at sea) to deliver unacceptable further punishment to the other side, if they wouldn't negotiate a reasonable termination of the war.

3. The losing side had not already been so much destroyed, that it adopted a kind of swashbuckling Goetterdaemerung attitude, where it thought - our families, our towns, our cities, our country have gone, so what the hell matters now - let's fire everything we've left at the enemy, in a last spasm of destructive revenge, and go down fighting.

 

The real danger of nuclear nightmare lies in irresponsible irrational countries, dominated by religious fanatics, getting the weapons. Such leaders might stop at nothing if thwarted. Thankfully both Obama and Putin are sane.

 

I can't see President Putin, exhibitionist though he may be, actually wanting to take some action which might result in the nuclear destruction of Moscow, At least, not over the Ukraine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but I cannot see any political or economic gains for the BRIC(S) countries if they would start WWIII (especially not if that would be a nuclear war, with a nuke on each of their big cities).

 

The trade imbalance with the EU/USA can only be solved by a reverse of the production: EU/USA start to produce goods for those BRIC(S) countries. This is exactly the way the world is turning too: EU/USA economies are going worse, which essentially makes us cheaper... so that we can export our stuff cheaper. WWIII would not exactly make the EU/USA better at producing/exporting goods, and it would gain the BRIC(S) countries nothing.

 

Frankly, the only similarity I see with this conflict, and the early developments in any previous war, is the dumb and stupid enthusiasm in some people to go to war.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but I cannot see any political or economic gains for the BRIC(S) countries if they would start WWIII (especially not if that would be a nuclear war, with a nuke on each of their big cities).

 

The trade imbalance with the EU/USA can only be solved by a reverse of the production: EU/USA start to produce goods for those BRIC(S) countries. This is exactly the way the world is turning too: EU/USA economies are going worse, which essentially makes us cheaper... so that we can export our stuff cheaper. WWIII would not exactly make the EU/USA better at producing/exporting goods, and it would gain the BRIC(S) countries nothing.

 

Frankly, the only similarity I see with this conflict, and the early developments in any previous war, is the dumb and stupid enthusiasm in some people to go to war.

Captain, BRICs is not the ones starting it. It has been started by the west. BRIC members are just following suit. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Captain, BRICs is not the ones starting it. It has been started by the west. BRIC members are just following suit. :)

 

Western nations are loud and clear what they want: no armed conflict. I disagree with your views.

 

Also, I think your smileys and enthusiasm about a potential WWIII are a little frightening.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For the past several years I have been studying the world political structure.

Let us know when you have completed that study and have something meaningful to contribute.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I have been challenged elsewhere in no uncertain terms to provide my references

 

The countries were very successful before 2008 and continue to be -...

 

http://seekingalpha.com/article/2052803-mexico-an-emerging-market-bright-spot - only a few points in the last decade below 6pct annual growth.

 

Are you sure about that GDP figure? ..

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29 - my 55% estimate for EU, US and Japan was out by almost 1.2% apologies.

 

It's not a conspiracy to unseat the west, nor to change the mood of international finance - let's face it they are all members of the G20 anyway.

 

https://www.g20.org/about_g20/g20_members

 

On the change in growth - figures for 2014 are going to be guesswork. I haven't yet seen nice tabulated and compared figures for last year - could you direct me to the figures for this year?

 

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD

 

The original combatants of the world wars were very nearly, and in some cases actually, bankrupted by them; even the gains in territory did little to assuage the mountains of debt that were run up. Austerity measures (and these were really biting austerity measures including the rationing of food, clothes, and fuel) continued in UK for many years after WW2

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_British_national_debt#World_War_II

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationing_in_the_United_Kingdom#After_World_War_II

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think Imatfall gets it. Keeps referencing west statistics and figures. When BRICS decides to cut the Wests financial system. Which they can as the Yuan alone has more value than the euro or dollar. Then whatever statistics, facts, or records concerning the wests financial institutions are worthless. Because the west financial system is no longer used!

Edited by jduff
Link to post
Share on other sites

You cannot simply dismiss numbers that you dislike. The trade volume (both ways) between China and the EU is about 433 billion euro, between Russia and EU 335.9 billion euros in 2012 (in goods only). The respective BRICS volume are lower (total volume of all trade within the same year was about 300 billion USD).

Cutting off the European trade (US trade is much lower for Russia, but is much more significant for China and Brazil) would create a huge deficit that the BRIC countries would simply not be able to absorb, unless they suddenly triple or quadruple their trade with each other. And it does not really matter if the values are given in Yuen, USD, Euro or Pesos. You just use the thing called conversion factor (which incidentally put one Yuen at 0.15 USD).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think Imatfall gets it. Keeps referencing west statistics and figures. When BRICS decides to cut the Wests financial system. Which they can as the Yuan alone has more value than the euro or dollar. Then whatever statistics, facts, or records concerning the wests financial institutions are worthless. Because the west financial system is no longer used!

 

LOL... so, I you dismiss statistics and figures just like that, how are we supposed to discuss with you? I get the feeling you're not interested in any discussion. You just write down your part of the story, and then you look around triumphantly, after which you cover your ears, and shout loudly "LALALALA I CANNOT HEAR YOU", when other people are giving their counter arguments.

 

Anyway, BRICS are not exactly allies. The don't have much in common - at least, not more or less in common with each other than with the USA or EU countries (except that they're fast-growing large economies). I don't see why they would cooperate against the Western countries (EU and NATO).

 

I am sorry, but you are not convincing me. Your arguments are weak, and not supported by any facts. And the way you dismiss other's arguments (which come with handy references) does not increase my confidence in your theory.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Many of us fear this. I know I do. But the current escalation is bringing east vs the west to inevitable military conflict. As I mentioned in part I. Russia, China, Brazil and South Africa formed BRICS. This is a counter to the west bankers and controlling families. In the media we see spun portrayals of Ukraines new government being the victim. Those poor Ukrainians! We are told that it is Russias fault. They are the big bad guy! The reality though is quite different.

 

Prior to Ukraines new government. Which was not elected, but rather by coup. Ukraines old government was elected and pro Russia. One has to question why did such a event take place? Who were the ones behind the demonstrations, the coup. And now the new western puppet government? The reality is Russia has no choice but to save what it can. The Crimea is about 10% of all Ukraine. In reality, it is a loss for Russia. Putin is doing what he can to save what he can for his country.

 

Why did all this start to begin with?

Lets start with Gazprom. For those who dont know or have never heard of them. They are Russian main natural gas supplier. They also supply about 30% of all the E.Us natural gas supply. Those pipelines of course go through(You guessed it) Ukraine. Now to Gazprom, it maintains a monopoly in the E.U. Much of what we see in the E.U in the past few years has much to do with Gazprom. The west does not control it. In the past 5 years Gazprom has been under attack by western brokerages and financial bankers. The first took place in Cyprus. For the past 5 years it has been Russian and Gazproms primary HQ in the west. Russia also used Cyprus as a one stop shop for gold bullion. Of which Russia has bought much!

 

Before a military conflict takes place there is usually a economic war prior to it. Such is the case here. Cyprus, was under economic war 2 years ago. That was the first attack in which Gazprom was the primary target. The second attack of Gazprom interests came with Syria. Now we have the current, which is Ukraine. Now who would want to undermine and destroy Gazprom interests? Who would intentionally send paid protesters to Ukraine? Who would intentionally stir the pot just to make war?

 

The answer of course is the U.S!

Why now, why Ukraine? Because the U.S needs to make sure that Ukraine does not become the central transit point for the fast moving and developing Eurasian Trade Zone. The U.S and the E.U both believe they can control the flow which provides Poland, Romania and Hungary. Also, the U.S believes it will provide opportunity for its natural gas providers in contract with Europe.

 

In the U.S, it is to the breaking point economically. With the U.S dollar projected to be devalued by 80% within the next 2 years. The U.S itself is desperate.

 

Obama is weak? That is far from the truth. The reality is the financial controllers which he abides by want him to look weak. Has the media spin such. Make the U.S a victim! Obama himself has given orders along with German Chancellor Merkal to put forth the operations that are taking place in Ukraine. The truth is the U.S and E.U controllers have a concerted effort to destabilize the Ukraine. Which fits well into the financial paradigm.

 

For those in the U.S "Have you ever known someone truly desperate, who has no options, that did stupid things? That’s what we are seeing now.".

Our country is very close to a economic collapse.

 

In fact at a current G-20 meeting both China and the Australians in concerted statements to the U.S" You are living off fumes. You are living off the printing press with no justifiable income. Your economy is a fake." .

 

There is a reason both Russia and China are buying all the gold they can. What would happen if either or both decided its currency will follow the GOLD STANDARD?

 

So now you know why WWIII has started. The provocations by both the U.S and the E.U to save its economy. Is the real reason this is to be!

 

If it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, it is most likely a DUCK!

 

Links :

http://russias-rich-dominate-cyprus-largest-bank/a-17146540?_ga=1.3165753.883006148.1395202958

http://www.cyprusgasnews.com/archives/2660

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-10/putin-turns-black-gold-into-bullion-as-russia-out-buys-world.html

http://opinion.financialpost.com/2013/05/23/lawrence-solomon-why-russia-is-in-syria/

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/02/17/us-eu-paying-ukrainian-rioters-protesters-paul-craig-roberts/

Edited by jduff
Link to post
Share on other sites

As I mentioned in part I. Russia, China, Brazil and South Africa formed BRICS. This is a counter to the west bankers and controlling families.

You imply that BRICS is some form of political, economic or military alliance. BRICS is simply a convenient grouping, coined by a journalist, to describe countries with certain similarities in their current economic condition and development trajectory.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You imply that BRICS is some form of political, economic or military alliance. BRICS is simply a convenient grouping, coined by a journalist, to describe countries with certain similarities in their current economic condition and development trajectory.

You can call it convenient, call it whatever you want to call it. Regardless this group of countries are linked financially, socially, politically and are more likely to back each other up than other countries not in this organization. Also on a note. The G-7 seems a bit incompetent. But that is just opinion.

 

On the side: Russia took over a Ukraine naval base today

 

Also to clarify what BRICS is I will give you a reference and link from Wikpedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRICS

Edited by jduff
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but the world just isn't so black and white. It's more like a school class full of kids. Some are best friends. Some absolutely hate each other. And in most cases, kids just don't really care. There is no alliance of BRICS countries.

 

When I did a search for support for the Crimea to connect to Russia, I found that:

 

Brasil seems to criticize everybody: The USA, the EU, but also Russia. They're also economically involved with everybody.

Russia - we can skip that in this analysis. Too obvious.

India backs Russia, but they are no fans of a referendum, according to this source.

China doesn't support the Crimea independence. They just fear that Tibet, Xinjiang or Taiwan might get some ideas. But they try to keep a low profile, not to piss off any trade partners on either side.

South Africa... well, I failed to find any relevant news about South Africa at all. If they support the Russians through their mighty (sarcasm intended) BRICS network, they do so very quietly.

 

So, once again, I fail to see any overwhelming support for each other from the BRICS countries.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can call it convenient, call it whatever you want to call it. Regardless this group of countries are linked financially, socially, politically and are more likely to back each other up than other countries not in this organization.

It is not an organisation! And yes, I do call it convenient. It is a convenient way to discuss development trajectories.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not an organisation! And yes, I do call it convenient. It is a convenient way to discuss development trajectories.

Excerpts from Wikpedia.

 

The BRIC grouping's first formal summit, also held in Yekaterinburg, commenced on 16 June 2009.

] There was further discussion of ways that developing countries, such as the BRIC members.

In 2010, South Africa began efforts to join the BRIC grouping, and the process for its formal admission began in August of that year.[13] South Africa officially became a member nation on 24 December 2010, after being formally invited by the BRIC countries to join the group.

 

 

Perhaps reading comprehension class is in order for you Ophiolite. I highlighted relevant statements concerning BRICS. To further this discussion. I will give you the definition of organization.

 

or·gan·i·za·tion
ˌôrgəniˈzāSHən/
noun
noun: organisation
1.
an organized body of people with a particular purpose, esp. a business, society, association, etc.
That defines BRICS well. Here is the last excerpt from Wikpedia. At this point your argument is settled.
Last quote: The BRIC grouping's first formal summit, also held in Yekaterinburg, commenced on 16 June 2009,[9] with Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Dmitry Medvedev, Manmohan Singh, and Hu Jintao, the respective leaders of Brazil, Russia, India and China, all attending.[10] The summit's focus was on means of improving the global economic situation and reforming financial institutions, and discussed how the four countries could better co-operate in the future.[9][10] There was further discussion of ways that developing countries, such as the BRIC members, could become more involved in global affairs
Link to post
Share on other sites

China is totally stuck between two evils.

 

They oppose any revolutionists, and they say that any government reforms should always come from within.

At the same time, they oppose rebellious regions declaring independence, or joining with other neighboring nations.

 

So, they don't like how the new Ukrainian government came into place (revolution). They also don't like that the Crimea split off.

At the same time, they try not to annoy Russia as well as the EU, as both are important for trade.

 

China is very much focussed on its internal affairs (which still include 1.3 billion people, so I can understand). To predict China's response, you just have to ask yourself: If something similar would happen within China's own borders, would they accept it or fight it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

China is totally stuck between two evils.

 

They oppose any revolutionists, and they say that any government reforms should always come from within.

At the same time, they oppose rebellious regions declaring independence, or joining with other neighboring nations.

 

So, they don't like how the new Ukrainian government came into place (revolution). They also don't like that the Crimea split off.

At the same time, they try not to annoy Russia as well as the EU, as both are important for trade.

 

China is very much focussed on its internal affairs (which still include 1.3 billion people, so I can understand). To predict China's response, you just have to ask yourself: If something similar would happen within China's own borders, would they accept it or fight it?

China could always follow suit as Russia. It has a couple of areas it would love to make as part of China. Depends how you want to view it. In Chinas case, what could the west do? Propose sanctions on China?

Edited by imatfaal
fix quote
Link to post
Share on other sites

China could always follow suit as Russia. It has a couple of areas it would love to make as part of China. Depends how you want to view it. In Chinas case, what could the west do? Propose sanctions on China?

 

Are you talking about the territories in Russia, that China has lost in the past, which China viewed as unequal treaties? Or the more recent disputes between China and Russia?

 

I think that if China and Russia would get into some disagreements, the West would just protect its own interests, and mostly suggest that China and Russia sort everything out through diplomacy. (While selling weapons to both sides).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.