Jump to content

American Military Everywhere


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

With American military in over 164 countries is this really necessary. Is it the USA's job to police the world, or is it interference of one nation over another. Would it not be better for them to concentrate on their own affairs or is it to create distractions for the masses to have a common enemy somewhere at all times.

 

America continues to surround China with military bases, I'm pretty stupid so please explain it simply what has China done or they might do that worries America. Why do they always think they know what is right and the rest of the world is wrong in what they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I have a somewhat similar view to Ura Dick - except that instead of suggesting that the US Government "put all resources blown .... into domestic programs", I would instead suggest the US Government leave that money with the people and companies that earned it in the first place.

 

Productive people and businesses are being bled white to fund everything under the sun. The government is TERRIBLE at putting money to use effectively. Private enterprise is MUCH superior.

 

SS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bangkok Missy your statement : "what has China done or they might do that worries America" is a clear sign that you are either a shit stirrer or a total ignoramus.

 

Have you really not read any news in the past year or so? Right now I am more worried about China then about Putin

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Law doesn't matter in the South China Sea

 

...

 

Under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, countries are entitled to marine resources that lie within 200 nautical miles of their coastline or islands they own (in an area called the Exclusive Economic Zone). They also own mineral rights in the continental shelf that juts out from their territories. The smaller countries mostly follow these rules.

 

China, by contrast, ignores them to claim nearly the entire South China Sea. In 2009, the Chinese government filed a map of the South China Sea region with the UN. The map displayed a line, composed of nine dashes that followed the sea's outline all the way around, leaving only a thin band of water for China's neighbours along their respective coasts. This nine-dash line, as it came to be called, suggested that China claimed the marine resources in nearly the entire South China Sea.

 

China has never offered an official legal justification for the nine-dash line. Robert Kaplan, in his new book "Asia's Cauldron", quotes a high-level official of one of the neighbouring states: "The Chinese never give any legal justifications for their claims. They have a real Middle Kingdom mentality, and are dead set against taking these disputes to court." But China has hinted that its claims are blessed by "history". This seems to mean that China owns these resources because various Chinese governments in the distant past regarded all the islands in the South China Sea, and maybe the sea itself, as a part of its imperium. The argument echoes the Chinese position in its fight with Japan over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands in the north.

 

International law does not accept China's argument - one must occupy an island in order to own it. Countries, like people, can't take ownership of something just by saying so. The Law of the Sea Treaty limits China to 200 nautical miles plus its continental shelf just like everyone else.

 

...

 

 

http://www.nationmul...a-30235038.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't half the world in dispute with each over territorial waters and land ownership, not just China. Some of these countries are members of the United Nations as well.

 

Hasn't China signed a contract with the UN backed International Seabed Authority to gain rights to explore polymetallic sulphide ore deposit in Indian Ocean over the next 15 years in a 10,000-square-km of international seabed in the southwest Indian Ocean.

 

So some rights are ok with the UN and others are not ..... yes I'm beginning to understand this better.

 

My orginal post was really why the USA spends1 trillion dollars on defence and might this money be better used at home, than bases through out the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clearly your last answer contradicts with your earlier statement: "I'm pretty stupid so please explain it simply"

 

So you have answered my question. You are not an ignoramus, but a shit stirrer.

 

If you try to use a fake account to pose as someone you are not, please try to stay in your part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Waerth :

 

My point is what is America concerned about, surely not just a dispute over international waters. I really don't get it honestly, I'm just asking why the amount of soldiers and cost, I can't be the only person to ask this it's not a trick question.

 

So because I ask questions I'm trying to make trouble, maybe the USA might see it this way when other countries ask questions too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have dropped your mask, please do not try to put it on again.

 

You are one of those people on the net that:

*Ask a question claiming they do not understand.

*But in reality already know the answer in their mind.

*Then after someone falls for the bait you will have a heavy discussion.

 

This is borderline trolling.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...