Military Review

Not a union, but a collaboration. The prospect of a relationship with China

113
Not a union, but a collaboration. The prospect of a relationship with China

As far as I can judge, it is generally quite difficult to talk about any alliances with China. After all, China itself in my memory never intended to enter into alliances with anyone. He was always, one might say, a thing in himself. Even when he seemed to be in alliance with the USSR, anyway, in fact, he was, as they say, on his mind.


This is primarily a long-standing cultural tradition. China for many centuries in a row considered all countries, of which he knew at least something, his vassals, even if in fact the situation was completely different. It is known that the ambassadors of King George III of England (George William Fredericovich Hannover) received a similar message from the Chinese emperor: we kindly release the king, your ambassadors, and wish you to streamline your affairs in the future, being in constant loyalty to us and citizenship to us. Naturally, in fact, nothing like loyalty, not to mention citizenship, then there was not and could not be.

In addition, China is under pressure from the consciousness of its own abundance. China is such a large country that it understands: for the time being, it can in principle do without any allies at all.

I am afraid that with such a psychology of China itself, other countries are also hardly eager to enter into long-term alliances with it. As for the short-term, situational unions, that is, arising from the current situation, China, like any other country, can join such unions. But here it is necessary to look: and to what extent this union is beneficial to other parties.

I believe that now long-term alliances with China are hardly profitable, because, as in the advertising known now, it “thinks too much of itself”. That is, it may wish from partners much more than it gives them.

So it seems to me that it is unlikely to count on a long-term alliance with China in the foreseeable future. Nevertheless, we must bear in mind the possibility of short-term interaction. For him, China is quite suitable, because with all its traditions of imperial grandeur, he understands perfectly well: a particular agreement may be no less advantageous to him than to his partners. That is, I would not count on long-term cooperation with China, but nonetheless I would look for the slightest opportunity for short-term mutually beneficial cooperation. Well, in my opinion, long-term unions can now be purely commercial. For example, if we build a pipeline to China, then such a pipeline may well work for many decades in a row precisely because it is equally beneficial for both us and China.

It is clear that situational alliances are always difficult, always require continuous study of changing circumstances. But in the end, the continuous study of continuously changing circumstances is the responsibility of any sane politician.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.odnako.org/
113 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. mirag2
    mirag2 23 January 2014 08: 09
    +6
    Wow!
    The most important thing here is "that China may want more from partners than it will give itself" - yes, that's right, to the point.
    And in China, after all, now, against the background of economic growth, huge construction projects and "all that", nationalism has grown (national pride and pride in oneself).
    1. sledgehammer102
      sledgehammer102 23 January 2014 08: 48
      +1
      Quote: mirag2
      And in China, after all, now, against the background of economic growth, huge construction projects and "all that", nationalism has grown (national pride and pride in oneself).


      What is interesting has grown in Ukraine, that they have shown such self-awareness! Straight Fire !!! In the literal and figurative sense.

      From the article I liked this:
      Well, long-term unions now, in my opinion, can be purely commercial. For example, if we are building a pipeline to China, then such a pipeline could well work for many decades in a row precisely because it is equally beneficial for us and China.


      As time shows, economic unions are much stronger than political ones.
      1. Ingvar 72
        Ingvar 72 23 January 2014 10: 44
        +3
        Quote: sledgehammer102
        As time shows, economic unions are much stronger than political ones.

        So it is true, but they are easily shaken off from them, for the sake of political ambitions. Indeed, the temptation to get resources and territories for nothing is very great among many politicians. China is very actively developing and arming itself. But against whom? Pakistan and India are densely populated, few resources, and also possess nuclear weapons. In Vietnam, too, there is no real benefit to China from the conflict, in the long run a protracted war with heavy losses and a controversial result. I do not believe about the impending conflict with the United States, here it is necessary to build on the possible benefits obtained in case of victory in the conflict. And the benefit is controversial. And even the possibility of victory is excluded here. China has different goals, although they threaten the US. As a result of the war, they will receive real benefits only from us.. We all went through this in the 40s of the 20th century. Germany at that time was almost our best ally and economic partner. And the development went according to a similar scenario. Conflict with China is just a matter of time.hi
        1. Scorpio
          Scorpio 23 January 2014 10: 55
          -1
          Quote: Ingvar 72
          As a result of the war, they will receive real benefits only from us.

          If these creatures snarled at the Russian empire and attempted to encroach on the USSR, then at least a thousand times they will tell me how good they are, I will still wait for a knife in the back from them.

          I think no one will dispute that for a successful invasion somewhere one must first have an advantage in military power over the attacked, if possible in all directions.
          To fight the United States, they need air defense, aviation, missiles, and a fleet of foppish sizes (and certainly more than the United States). That is, not soon they will even catch up with America, unless they spread mountains with their corpses, so that the NATO equipment does not pass, does not float, does not fly.
          But they have already bypassed Russia. Conclusions on the face.
          1. AK-47
            AK-47 23 January 2014 11: 34
            +5
            Quote: Scorpio
            But they have already bypassed Russia. Conclusions on the face.

            An erroneous statement, the qualitative indicators of the Russian army are incomparably higher.
            1. sledgehammer102
              sledgehammer102 23 January 2014 11: 53
              0
              Quote: Ingvar 72
              But against whom? Pakistan and India are densely populated, few resources, and also possess nuclear weapons. In Vietnam, too, there is no real benefit to China from the conflict, in the long run a protracted war with heavy losses and a controversial result.


              Quote: Ingvar 72
              As a result of the war, they will receive real benefits only from us.


              These two phrases do not contradict in any way? Not??? We have no nuclear weapons? Or are we on our knees in Beijing crawling, begging us to take the Far East from us? In general, I don’t imagine how you can hide the preparations for a general offensive with the crossing of the Amur River .... tanks, infantry, mobile air defense systems ... all this must be refueled, fed and maintained ... In short, fairy tales ...

              Quote: Scorpio
              If these creatures snarled at the Russian empire and attempted to encroach on the USSR, then at least a thousand times they will tell me how good they are, I will still wait for a knife in the back from them.


              If not for narcissistic Khrushchev with his envy of the successes of Stalin (which actually pushed him onto the path of de-Stalinization) there would already be a very strong alliance with China, and here this corn-maker comes, spoils relations with China on all fronts, which results in a conflict on Damansky and puts China in the orbit of the United States ....

              Quote: Scorpio
              But they have already bypassed Russia. Conclusions on the face.

              What the hell is the difference, how many bayonets do the enemy have when you have a SWEET?
              What is the difference how many tanks he has, when they still need to be relocated, moreover secretly, and then still force the river several kilometers wide (we already have enough forces to destroy the bridges)
              What difference does the enemy have in terms of weapons and other things, when there are tactical and strategic nuclear weapons for any aggressive attack.

              Those who still believe in the traditional war with China are at least stuck in time.
              1. Scorpio
                Scorpio 23 January 2014 12: 18
                -3
                Quote: sledgehammer102
                What the hell is the difference, how many bayonets do the enemy have when you have a SWEET?
                What is the difference how many tanks he has, when they still need to be relocated, moreover secretly, and then still force the river several kilometers wide (we already have enough forces to destroy the bridges)
                What difference does the enemy have in terms of weapons and other things, when there are tactical and strategic nuclear weapons for any aggressive attack.

                Those who still believe in the traditional war with China are at least stuck in time.


                And you have it all on the border with China? Or should I also relocate? and what faster than the Chinese will we put together an army to guarantee?
                1. sledgehammer102
                  sledgehammer102 23 January 2014 12: 20
                  +2
                  Quote: Scorpio
                  And you have it all on the border with China? Or should I also relocate? and what faster than the Chinese will we put together an army to guarantee?


                  For the first time I hear that ICBMs need to be relocated closer to the border. And yes, recent exercises have shown that, if desired, half of the central military district can be transferred to the Far East.

                  Moreover, it would be nice of you to tell about weapons and the number of personnel of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation in the territory of the Primorsky Territory, so as to add objectivity.
              2. Ingvar 72
                Ingvar 72 23 January 2014 12: 26
                -2
                Quote: sledgehammer102
                We have no nuclear weapons?

                What are the contradictions? I wrote about prizes as a result of the war, and China can get real prizes only from us. They also have nuclear weapons.
                Quote: sledgehammer102
                In short, fairy tales ..

                It’s very easy to cut the lines of communication with the Far East, things are much worse with the supply chain. BAM cut - just spit. Previously, defense was supported by a permanent deployment of troops in the area, but now many units have been deployed to other regions. And China builds roads mainly to the north, and we help him in this by building bridges across the border together. Yes, and pontoon bridges are deployed within five hours.
                Quote: sledgehammer102
                What the hell is the difference, how many bayonets do the enemy have when you have a SWEET?
                What is the difference how many tanks he has, when they still need to be relocated, and secretly,

                China now also has multiple launch rocket systems. And the number of troops in the border strip is many times greater. One T-50 will not cope with hundreds of analogs of the SU-24 and Mig 21. All that we can oppose them is only nuclear weapons. But there is a risk of running into the return line. And from all sides, especially from the west, a howl will begin about the inadmissibility of using nuclear weapons, and our democratic government may well not use it, ostensibly for the sake of preserving peace on earth. hi
                1. sledgehammer102
                  sledgehammer102 23 January 2014 13: 16
                  +3
                  Quote: Ingvar 72
                  The routes of communication with the Far East are very easy to cut; in our case, supply is much worse. BAM cut - just spit. Previously, defense was supported by a permanent deployment of troops in the area, but now many units have been deployed to other regions.


                  It would be interesting to see specific figures for the number of weapons and equipment and the actual plan of covert preparation for the attack.

                  And yes, nuclear weapons are a very big problem for China, I would even say cross-cutting, since playing blackjack with Russians is obviously a stupid undertaking, especially when everything is at stake.
                  1. Scorpio
                    Scorpio 23 January 2014 13: 41
                    0
                    Quote: sledgehammer102
                    It would be interesting to see specific figures on the number of weapons and equipment

                    Quote: sledgehammer102
                    , it would be nice of you to tell about the weapons and the number of personnel of the RF Armed Forces in the territory of the Primorsky Territory

                    Well, startle us - give these numbers, which will overshadow all Chinese power
                  2. Ingvar 72
                    Ingvar 72 23 January 2014 13: 57
                    +1
                    Quote: sledgehammer102
                    It would be interesting to see specific numbers.
                    All you would have graphics. Is an excerpt from an interview with Shurygin?
                    As many experts note, the troops of the districts are now intensively reducing. Previously, there were two dozen motorized rifle and tank divisions. But soon in the region of the Russian-Chinese border, which is more than four thousand kilometers, at best there will be 20 tank and motorized rifle brigades, about 10 artillery and anti-aircraft units and other auxiliary units, the total number of which will not exceed 100 thousand people. Two Air Force and Air Defense armies cover the air from the okrug - these are about 20 aviation regiments of fighter, assault, bomber and army aviation. But they are not armed with the latest aircraft technology. “If our military thinks that with such forces they are able to resist the Chinese, who can transfer about 500 thousand people to the border in a short time, then they are deeply mistaken,” says Vladislav Shurygin.
                    1. sledgehammer102
                      sledgehammer102 23 January 2014 14: 13
                      0
                      Quote: Ingvar 72
                      Is an excerpt from an interview with Shurygin?


                      In an interview with Shurygin (the passage that you cited) there is not a word about how the Chinese manage to crank up such an operation covertly. He also did not mention nuclear weapons. And he did not mention anything about the PLA formations directly at our borders at the moment.
                      1. Scorpio
                        Scorpio 23 January 2014 14: 20
                        -1
                        Quote: sledgehammer102
                        how the Chinese manage to crank up such an operation covertly

                        Under the guise of exercises suitable? I think that people who understand are still going to name at least 500 ways.
                        Quote: sledgehammer102
                        He also did not mention nuclear weapons

                        It was 50 years ago that it was possible to rattle nuclear weapons, but now it can only be done before the countries of the 3go world that do not have it.
                      2. sledgehammer102
                        sledgehammer102 23 January 2014 16: 09
                        0
                        Quote: Scorpio
                        Under the guise of exercises suitable? I think that people who understand are still going to name at least 500 ways.


                        So how do they solve the problem? The exercises at the training grounds are carried out ... and they always cause genuine interest.

                        Quote: Scorpio
                        It was 50 years ago that it was possible to rattle nuclear weapons, but now it can only be done before the countries of the 3go world that do not have it.

                        Iran, the US is trolling and does not blush, although it most likely does not have nuclear weapons. So is the USA a third world country?
                        Once again, in black - a jack with Russian playfulness - a disastrous affair that can come back very strongly
                      3. Scorpio
                        Scorpio 23 January 2014 16: 26
                        0
                        Quote: sledgehammer102
                        So is the USA a third world country?

                        And what, they do not attack Iran only because they allegedly pulled with their entire missile? Invalid example.
                        Quote: sledgehammer102
                        Once again, in black - a jack with Russian playfulness - a disastrous affair that can come back very strongly

                        Yea Yea. China put it in his pants when it was on Zhelanashkol and Damanskiy per. They screwed up there, but nuclear weapons? Do not scare the hedgehog with a bare ass.
          2. avg
            avg 23 January 2014 13: 38
            +1
            Quote: sledgehammer102
            If it were not for the narcissistic Khrushchev with his envy of the successes of Stalin (which actually pushed him on the path of de-Stalinization), there would already be a very strong alliance with China,

            And how was this union expressed? In the fact that we built factories for the Chinese, transferred technology and trained specialists. Moreover, they were armed in exchange for thermoses and towels. Since then, the world has not known such a freebie. And the Chinese hawali while it was profitable for them, and then we arranged "Damansky". this is exactly what the article says.
            I would also add that pipelines to China are not constructive, and that they should be pulled only to their ports with oil terminals and gas liquefaction plants, and the Chinese, if they want, let them build branches. Otherwise, we stumble upon a revision of the agreements, as has happened more than once.
            1. sledgehammer102
              sledgehammer102 23 January 2014 14: 11
              -1
              Quote: avg
              And in what way was this alliance expressed? The fact that we built factories for the Chinese, transferred technology and trained specialists.


              He expressed himself clearly after a terribly unfriendly country with the same ideology appeared at our side .... a paradox ...

              Well, as for subsidies, much more was spent on the countries of Latin America and Africa than came. I will not be surprised that the Russian Federation has earned more from one trade with China over the past 10 years than the entire USSR over 60 years of trade with "friendly countries"
              1. Scorpio
                Scorpio 23 January 2014 14: 22
                -1
                Quote: sledgehammer102
                I will not be surprised that Medvedev and Putin over the past 10 years have earned more from the same trade with China than the entire USSR in 60


                I have no doubt. Land to trade profitable business
              2. avg
                avg 23 January 2014 14: 53
                +2
                Quote: sledgehammer102
                Well, as for subsidies, it took far more than it came to the countries of Latin America and Africa.


                We helped the Chinese fight with Japan, and then transferred all the property of the Kwantung Army, property acquired by Soviet economic organizations from Japanese owners, and then the Chinese Eastern Railway, South Ural Railway, Port Arthur, and Dalniy, built the Sary-Ozek-Urumqi-Lanzhou road (about 3000 km) for delivery of assistance. We built the aviation, automobile and defense industries, you can’t list everything. However, take an interest in a question if there is a desire. So Africa is resting.
                Yes, and do not confuse trade with non-repayable help.
        2. Scorpio
          Scorpio 23 January 2014 12: 14
          -2
          Quote: AK-47
          the quality indicators of the Russian army are incomparably higher.

          In the Far East?
          1. AK-47
            AK-47 23 January 2014 12: 47
            +3
            Quote: Scorpio
            In the Far East?

            Generally!
            1. Scorpio
              Scorpio 23 January 2014 13: 43
              -1
              Quote: AK-47
              Generally!

              and to whom is it generally interesting? In general, the army of the Roman Empire was a bogeyman. Yes, only the country is big, and it’s a hell of an army you’ll save it. Moreover, the quality also suffers from the territory, because you can’t set all the borders with new products and the best troops
              1. avg
                avg 23 January 2014 13: 55
                +4
                Quote: Scorpio
                In general, the army of the Roman Empire was a bogeyman. Yes, only the country is big, and it’s a hell of an army to save it.

                To explain the difference in the possibilities for the transfer of troops and the delivery of ammunition to the target?
                1. Ingvar 72
                  Ingvar 72 23 January 2014 14: 04
                  0
                  Quote: avg
                  To explain the difference in the possibilities for the transfer of troops and the delivery of ammunition to the target?

                  The fact of the matter is that there is one hope for nuclear weapons. But I don’t have confidence that our honorable leader will give the go-ahead. hi
                  1. Scorpio
                    Scorpio 23 January 2014 14: 25
                    -2
                    Quote: Ingvar 72
                    I am not sure that our honorable leader will give the go-ahead

                    And God forbid anyone ever gives.
                  2. Ingvar 72
                    Ingvar 72 23 January 2014 14: 49
                    0
                    Quote: Scorpio
                    And God forbid anyone ever gives.

                    Unfortunately, I see the only way out in the event of Chinese aggression is to strike a TNW in its own territory occupied by China. request
                  3. Scorpio
                    Scorpio 23 January 2014 15: 06
                    +1
                    Quote: Ingvar 72
                    strike nuclear weapons against its own territory occupied by China

                    How's the world in conflict? Well, the current if you hold back their troops, someone else send and shoot at their own, yes. But something about Chernobyl the size of Siberia scares me.
                  4. Ingvar 72
                    Ingvar 72 23 January 2014 15: 52
                    +1
                    Quote: Scorpio
                    But something about Chernobyl the size of Siberia scares me.

                    No, the radius of destruction of TNWs is much smaller, several tens of kilometers, but a barrier will be created for land aggression. This is the only way to preserve the territory without starting a large-scale exchange of nuclear strikes. From my point of view. hi
                  5. Scorpio
                    Scorpio 23 January 2014 15: 57
                    -1
                    Quote: Ingvar 72
                    TNW destruction radius is much smaller, several tens of kilometers

                    Somehow, I doubt that the main forces of the Chinese army of current will couple for a couple of tens of kilometers. I’ll probably need a few rockets.
              2. Dazdranagon
                Dazdranagon 23 January 2014 15: 55
                +1
                What for? There is Beijing.
              3. Scorpio
                Scorpio 23 January 2014 15: 58
                -2
                Quote: Dazdranagon
                What for? There is Beijing.

                This is what and what? Should I call chtol? Norilsk
              4. Dazdranagon
                Dazdranagon 24 January 2014 10: 03
                0
                Quote: Scorpio
                This is what and what? ....

                Quote: Ingvar 72
                Unfortunately, I see the only way out in the event of Chinese aggression is to strike a TNW in its own territory occupied by China.
                - to that.
              5. Scorpio
                Scorpio 24 January 2014 10: 38
                -1
                Quote: Dazdranagon
                to that.

                And then they’ll also launch a rocket, maybe even at your mother’s house?
              6. Dazdranagon
                Dazdranagon 24 January 2014 11: 27
                +2
                Talk about why bomb your territory if war is already going on ?! It is necessary to disable industrial centers, and not to bomb the forests! And the exchange of blows will be in any way! (Yes, and we have a better missile defense).
              7. Scorpio
                Scorpio 24 January 2014 11: 58
                0
                Quote: Dazdranagon
                And the exchange of blows will be in any way!

                not necessarily

                Quote: Dazdranagon
                why bomb your territory if war is already going on ?!

                to stop and damage the enemy army

                Quote: Dazdranagon
                Yes, and we have better missile defense

                is not a fact. And it’s not a fact that it will save even if it’s better
              8. Dazdranagon
                Dazdranagon 24 January 2014 15: 30
                +3
                Quote: Scorpio
                Quote: Dazdranagon
                And the exchange of blows will be in any way!
                not necessarily
                - they may not follow on their part, I agree, they have problems with the delivery of nuclear weapons.
                Quote: Scorpio
                Quote: Dazdranagon
                why bomb your territory if war is already going on ?!
                to stop and damage the enemy army

                - but not nuclear weapons!
                Quote: Scorpio
                Quote: Dazdranagon
                Yes, and we have better missile defense
                is not a fact. And it’s not a fact that it will save even if it’s better
                - a fact that even the Americans recognized. Maybe of course 100% of the missiles will not stop, but still ...
              9. Scorpio
                Scorpio 24 January 2014 15: 41
                0
                Quote: Dazdranagon
                but not nuclear weapons!

                It is to them. Nothing else will stop.
                Quote: Dazdranagon
                on their part may not follow, I agree, they have problems with the delivery of nuclear weapons

                and unas or refuel or not sent there. or maybe they’ll forget to insert a warhead
                In fact, not one of the rulers will press a button for fear of receiving an answer. And the delivery problems are even bigger than ours, go to the mail.
              10. Dazdranagon
                Dazdranagon 24 January 2014 16: 36
                +1
                Quote: Scorpio
                In fact, not one of the rulers presses a button because of a fear of getting an answer
                - that’s why there will be no war with China.
              11. Scorpio
                Scorpio 24 January 2014 18: 36
                0
                Quote: Dazdranagon
                that's why there will be no war with China

                not a fact, there was a war with Georgia, although that one had no nuclear weapons at all.
                The Chinese forces may well go on the offensive just because of the presence of nuclear weapons themselves, which will stop the Russians from nuclear attacks on China.
              12. Albert1988
                Albert1988 24 January 2014 21: 48
                0
                Quote: Scorpio
                not a fact, there was a war with Georgia, although that one had no nuclear weapons at all.

                Firstly, Georgia did not attack us, but South Ossetia, and secondly, it sincerely hoped that the Americans would stand up for it.
                And then - the Chinese nation is pragmatic and can easily calculate the damage - for us they crash nuclear weapons there will be terrible damage, but it’s only because considering their crowded population and features of the territory, then if we crave for them, then ALL OF China WILL DIE GUARANTEED!
                so think - is it profitable for them or not ...
              13. Scorpio
                Scorpio 25 January 2014 11: 15
                -1
                Quote: Albert1988
                taking into account their crowded population and the peculiarities of the territory, if we crave for them, then ALL OF China WILL DIE GUARANTEED!

                and Nitsche that we have even greater crowding? Siberia is almost empty. we'll still die earlier.

                Quote: Albert1988
                nuclear weapons are craving for us

                Damage will be 99,9%
                Quote: Albert1988
                she sincerely hoped that the Americans would stand up for her

                And China doesn’t even have to hope, he has enough strength
              14. Albert1988
                Albert1988 25 January 2014 11: 33
                0
                Quote: Scorpio
                and Nitsche that we have even greater crowding? Siberia is almost empty. we'll still die earlier.

                Take the trouble, comrade, to see how the population is distributed in China and how MUCH it is there, and how it is distributed with us ...
                And then China can be destroyed even without nuclear weapons - it’s enough to cover three platinum in the mountains with accurate charges and about 500 million people will simply wash it off, destroy the entire infrastructure, the country will be left without electricity, communications, in general there will be a global catastrophe without nuclear weapons, so I repeat: Kitpets not such fools to decide on such damage FOR YOURSELF.
              15. Scorpio
                Scorpio 27 January 2014 15: 04
                0
                Quote: Albert1988
                China can be destroyed even without nuclear weapons - it is enough to cover with accurate charges three platinum in the mountains and about 500 million people will simply wash it off

                So you suggest killing civilians? Maybe you will go in the forefront to destroy the dams, and then rape the survivors? and strangle children so that exactly 500 million get killed?
        3. Dazdranagon
          Dazdranagon 24 January 2014 21: 56
          +1
          War is when the losing side of the victor gives something away. There was peace enforcement, the pacification of animals that attacked civilians, including our peacekeepers. And plus
          Quote: Albert1988
          hoped that the Americans would stand up for her.
  2. AK-47
    AK-47 23 January 2014 17: 17
    +2
    Quote: Ingvar 72
    strike TNW in its own territory,

    Why, in its own way, that the stranger is small, a preemptive strike.
  3. Scorpio
    Scorpio 24 January 2014 09: 56
    0
    Quote: AK-47
    Why, in his own way, that a stranger is few,

    Striking foreign territory is a nuclear war, if that. Therefore, there will be no blow to a stranger.
  4. Scorpio
    Scorpio 23 January 2014 15: 51
    -1
    Quote: Scorpio
    And God forbid anyone ever gives.

    ETOGES necessary? to jam this message? what kind of exchange ... to even throw nuclear weapons?
  • Scorpio
    Scorpio 23 January 2014 14: 25
    -2
    Quote: avg
    To explain the difference in the possibilities for the transfer of troops and the delivery of ammunition to the target?

    specify the details of your ammunition? Chtol chtol?
  • Ingvar 72
    Ingvar 72 23 January 2014 12: 32
    +3
    Quote: AK-47
    the quality indicators of the Russian army are incomparably higher.

    If you take into account that the term of service in the army is only one year, then I would not say. And there are not so many professional military men there. If we admit the fact that our planes and tanks are better, the quantitative question remains, they have many times more active equipment. The only brake for China is their confidence in our determination to use nuclear weapons. And China seems to have doubts about it. hi
    1. AK-47
      AK-47 23 January 2014 13: 01
      +2
      Quote: Ingvar 72
      ... military service is only one year ...
      I agree, there is little hope for them, but there are also reservists and contract soldiers.
      they have operating technology many times more ...
      But she still needs to get to the border with Russia.
      The only brake for China is ...
      Including.
      1. Scorpio
        Scorpio 23 January 2014 13: 46
        -2
        Quote: AK-47
        there are also reservists and contract soldiers

        who will rush to the front to save all the oil of the oligarchs, and yes!
        For mother oil! For Putin, the father of peoples! For Abramovich, the golden man of Russia! For Serdyukov, honor and conscience of Russia! For Chubais-nanorossia!
        Quote: AK-47
        But she still needs to get to the border with Russia.

        Well, somehow closer there than to Alaska
        1. AK-47
          AK-47 23 January 2014 17: 55
          +2
          Quote: Scorpio
          For mother oil! For Putin, the father of peoples! For Abramovich, the golden man of Russia! For Serdyukov, honor and conscience of Russia! For Chubais-nanorossia!

          And it is probably difficult for you to understand such a concept as Homeland.
          1. old rocket man
            old rocket man 23 January 2014 22: 33
            +1
            Quote: AK-47
            Quote: Scorpio
            For mother oil! For Putin, the father of peoples! For Abramovich, the golden man of Russia! For Serdyukov, honor and conscience of Russia! For Chubais-nanorossia!

            And it is probably difficult for you to understand such a concept as Homeland.


            What does he need to understand for such Homeland where the level of benefits is higher
          2. Tersky
            Tersky 23 January 2014 23: 07
            +4
            Quote: AK-47
            And it is probably difficult for you to understand such a concept as Homeland.

            He does not know this word, not to mention the meaning ..
          3. Scorpio
            Scorpio 24 January 2014 10: 00
            -2
            Quote: AK-47
            And a concept like homeland is probably hard for you to understand.

            My homeland is my mother, family, wife and home, and not your Putin-Serdyukov-oligarchs. And I don’t think that there will be clouds of people who will go there to die for them. Rather, all people who have brains at least a drop with their family will be at such a moment and not go to Siberia.
            1. Dazdranagon
              Dazdranagon 24 January 2014 10: 06
              +2
              Quote: Scorpio
              Rather, all people who have brains at least a drop with their family will be at such a moment and not go to Siberia.
              - sit and wait when they come and cut everyone and everything? .. The logic is iron.
            2. Scorpio
              Scorpio 24 January 2014 10: 40
              -1
              Quote: Dazdranagon
              to sit and wait for them to come and slaughter everyone and everything?

              They will not go to Europe, because there is nothing to take here, and if they come here and so the troops are against NATO, so I will not be the only one to guard my house.
            3. Dazdranagon
              Dazdranagon 24 January 2014 15: 23
              +2
              Quote: Scorpio
              They will not go to Europe
              - that of course! They have problems with fertile land! Where are the most fertile lands? I'll give you a hint - ends with "oops", starts with "Heb."
            4. Scorpio
              Scorpio 24 January 2014 15: 47
              -1
              Quote: Dazdranagon
              that of course! They have problems with fertile land!

              Where does this information come from? in order to grow rice they have enough land. Ukrainu will be populated at the extreme. Ip specifically need resources and specifically sebir they call their northern territory temporarily occupied by Russians.
            5. Dazdranagon
              Dazdranagon 24 January 2014 16: 37
              +2
              From there, that they already rent from Kazakhs.
            6. Scorpio
              Scorpio 24 January 2014 18: 45
              0
              Quote: Dazdranagon
              they are already renting from the Kazakhs.

              This means the country is developing and there is money, not that it is starving.
            7. Dazdranagon
              Dazdranagon 24 January 2014 21: 57
              +2
              Starve there. There are living witnesses who have recently been there.
            8. Scorpio
              Scorpio 25 January 2014 11: 17
              0
              Quote: Dazdranagon
              Starve there. There are living witnesses

              Well then, we too are starving, and full blind people are not witnesses of this.
              And huddle is full - a paradox.
        2. Scorpio
          Scorpio 24 January 2014 18: 46
          0
          And we are buying from China other boards and other logging - does this mean there are few trees in Russia?
        3. Dazdranagon
          Dazdranagon 24 January 2014 21: 58
          +2
          Maybe not boards, but products made from them - that's another question! The inscription "Made in China" pisses me off myself. I try to bypass as much as possible.
  • AK-47
    AK-47 24 January 2014 10: 40
    +3
    Quote: Scorpio
    My motherland is my mother, family, wife and home, not

    That's right, here they are - we, you and all who will go to protect it dearly.
  • Scorpio
    Scorpio 24 January 2014 10: 42
    -1
    Quote: AK-47
    here we are them, you and all who will go to defend it dearly.

    And there is nothing mine and yours. and the Chinese do not need us there and do not interfere. If they hypothetically come then the current for what already belongs not to the people but to the oligarchs.
  • AK-47
    AK-47 24 January 2014 11: 05
    +2
    Quote: Scorpio
    It belongs not to the people but to the oligarchs.

    These oligarchs have been given to you, they come and go, and the homeland is forever.
    Do not be pessimistic.
  • Scorpio
    Scorpio 24 January 2014 11: 33
    -1
    Quote: AK-47
    These oligarchs were given to you, they come and go

    And the property, as was theirs and not national, will remain so. Because there is nothing to die there. And do not lose the thread of the conversation that we are talking about reservists.
  • old rocket man
    old rocket man 24 January 2014 16: 43
    +1
    Quote: Scorpio
    And the property as it was theirs and not national will remain


    So the real "face" came out, you are not disgusted by the oligarchs, you are disgusted that this is not yours. And how are you different from them?, Only that you have less money
  • Scorpio
    Scorpio 24 January 2014 18: 38
    -2
    laughing do you have a brain? my and national things are different, if you are not able to understand this, then please do not strain your gyrus.
  • old rocket man
    old rocket man 24 January 2014 19: 32
    +1
    Quote: Scorpio
    laughing do you have a brain? my and national things are different, if you are not able to understand this, then please do not strain your gyrus.

    You are also a boor, like all the shopkeepers
  • Dazdranagon
    Dazdranagon 24 January 2014 15: 25
    +4
    Quote: Scorpio
    belongs not to the people but to the oligarchs
    - But what about jobs? Believe me, oil-gas workers get good! Enough for a decent life! But they are ordinary people!
  • Scorpio
    Scorpio 24 January 2014 15: 45
    -1
    Quote: Dazdranagon
    But they are ordinary people!

    I am happy for the oil workers, honestly, but what about the other categories of our people? Can the whole world go to the oil industry? Let’s set up a tower next to each house and maybe we’ll start earning? By the way, the bosses of these oil workers receive incomparably more.
  • Dazdranagon
    Dazdranagon 24 January 2014 16: 47
    +2
    Well, but what about the stabilization fund, which was formed thanks to petrodollars and helped more or less survive the crisis? Oligarchs-oligarchs, but I do not agree that it is not necessary to protect Siberia. Russia now has a path to becoming, thanks to raw materials, money is piling up, new enterprises are opening up, kindergartens and schools are being built ...
  • Scorpio
    Scorpio 24 January 2014 18: 42
    -2
    Quote: Dazdranagon
    which due to petrodollars formed

    Quote: Dazdranagon
    thanks petrodollars

    Quote: Dazdranagon
    petrodollaram

    Why not
    Quote: Dazdranagon
    new businesses open

    It is as if we live in different countries. Everything is closed in my city, people are sitting without work, and everything is opening in your country, like some petrodollars are found.
    If it were not for the oligarchs, Putin, Serdyukov we would have lived in production and not petrodollars.
    And rightly, let China take Siberia, maybe the government will take it by head, maybe to the level of Europe we will grow when we open plants.
  • samoletil18
    samoletil18 23 January 2014 16: 23
    +1
    Quote: Ingvar 72
    The only brake for China is their confidence in our determination to use nuclear weapons. And China seems to have doubts about it. hi

    Why seize territory with radiation contamination?
  • Vasek
    Vasek 24 January 2014 00: 52
    +1
    Quote: AK-47
    An erroneous statement, the qualitative indicators of the Russian army are incomparably higher.


    About the quality of technology - I agree. But with discipline, a moot point.
    It seems to me that only DPRK and Japanese are more united and fanatical.
    But then again, these are all speculations and impressions. Only a real conflict can show a factual state (I don’t wish anyone).
    Anyway, the article is about the alliances of China with others in the broad (not only military) sense of alliances.
  • Blackmokona
    Blackmokona 25 January 2014 08: 38
    +1
    The Chinese themselves think differently, but for the war this is the most important thing.
    Hitler also thought that he was stronger, although in fact his intelligence was very miscalculated.
    1. Scorpio
      Scorpio 25 January 2014 11: 21
      0
      Quote: BlackMokona
      Hitler also thought that he was stronger, although in fact his intelligence miscalculated very much

      So you don’t miscalculate thinking that you can overcome China, otherwise Hitler got out of the way.
  • Bigriver
    Bigriver 23 January 2014 13: 20
    +1
    Quote: Ingvar
    ... they are easily shaken off for the sake of political ambitions. Indeed, the temptation to get resources and territories for nothing is very great among many politicians. China is very actively developing and arming itself. But against whom? ...China has other goals, although they are threatening in the direction of the United States. As a result of the war, they will receive real benefits only from us....

    China's goals are simple - to become the core of the future leading global economy, which is now emerging in the Asia-Pacific region. Arms and politics follow this economic goal. As well as social obligations given to the people - by 2050 to become a state of wealthy and prosperous people. Not the richest and greatest, but secured.
    With the stated US mission, as the hegemon of the whole world, this policy and economy contradicts precisely the USA, as well as India, Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, Pakistan, Australia, all those who are afraid of the economic strengthening of China. Therefore, there is potential for the alliance, and it is slowly gathering around the United States for the third year already.
    Around the United States, I will note that in January 2012 the doctrine of "America's Pacific Age" was declared.
    Thus, they are arming themselves not for war, but in order not to merge their chance, not to surrender their positions under simple pressure and blackmail.
    The immediate goal of China is the project of Greater China, or the China Common Market, which will include China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau and Singapore.
  • Arhj
    Arhj 23 January 2014 17: 48
    +1
    China will not get real benefits from the war with Russia. The Chinese are well aware that Russia has no way to withstand them in a classic war. The only way out for us is "the blow of the last hope." What China will get is a huge unpopulated area rich in natural resources. But these resources must be mastered, and how and with what. Here is the main thing.
    Despite the huge population and powerful industry, most of this population and industry are located quite compactly. To destroy the bulk of the population and industrial power, all of China’s nuclear weapons do not need to be plowed.
    All that China needs from us, he receives for money, most often for American unsecured candy wrappers, which China has in abundance. He gives us candy wrappers, and receives real valuable raw materials. Why risk losing everything if you already get everything and it costs you almost nothing.
    In the world, global wars have long been waged not by weapons but by the economy. So more productive.
  • Geisenberg
    Geisenberg 23 January 2014 22: 26
    +1
    Quote: mirag2
    And in China, after all, now, against the background of economic growth, huge construction projects and "all that", nationalism has grown (national pride and pride in oneself).


    It has grown by far, but the size of the genital organ and brain has decreased, so inappropriately here to plant horror stories.
  • makarov
    makarov 23 January 2014 08: 17
    +4
    "It is clear that situational alliances are always difficult, always requires continuous study of changing circumstances ..."

    Just like in the hit of the 80s "Nothing lasts forever under the moon, Learn this simple truth."
  • Name
    Name 23 January 2014 08: 25
    +2
    Wasserman is a great clever one, annoying on the part of the PRC, his quiet, quiet expansion of the border territories. hi
    1. Bigriver
      Bigriver 23 January 2014 13: 31
      +1
      Quote: name
      Wasserman is a great clever one, annoying on the part of the PRC, his quiet, quiet expansion of the border territories. hi

      You are talking about agricultural workers from China, working in Amurk, EAO and beyond.
      Such an economic Chinese expansion there are many where: from Indonesia, the Philippines and Burma to Africa, Ukraine and Latin America.
      1. Kasym
        Kasym 23 January 2014 17: 36
        +2
        "China is like a thing in itself." Exactly . That's just all the Great Powers were strong in their colonies (according to history), or allies (modern times). And China throughout history has isolated itself (built walls, restrictions on trade) and led human expansion. "Its own method". But it seems to me that soon China will have to decide on its allies. hi
  • Humpty
    Humpty 23 January 2014 08: 50
    +5
    "For many centuries in a row, China generally considered all countries about which it knew at least something, its vassals, even if in fact the state of affairs was completely different."

    In the Middle Ages, Chinese "geographers" believed that the origins of the Yellow River were somewhere near Persia or India. For most Chinese people, their knowledge of the world has not changed much.
  • Semurg
    Semurg 23 January 2014 09: 10
    +1
    China has two allies - this is its army and navy laughing
    1. AVV
      AVV 23 January 2014 10: 09
      +1
      Like ours !!! There should be everything for the fleet, everything for the army !!!
      1. Scorpio
        Scorpio 23 January 2014 10: 35
        -1
        Quote: AVV
        Like ours !!! There should be everything for the fleet, everything for the army !!!

        And not x ... ra for the people! Give militarization !!! Potsriotsizm !!!
        1. Dazdranagon
          Dazdranagon 24 January 2014 16: 56
          +3
          Do you know how people live in China? For example, they have no pensions ...
    2. AK-47
      AK-47 23 January 2014 11: 39
      +1
      Quote: Semurg
      China has two allies - this is its army and navy

      But two opponents - the army and navy of Russia. yes
  • Stiletto
    Stiletto 23 January 2014 09: 24
    +3
    A huge plus for the author and his article! Here, as they say, you can’t argue - each bast is a line!
  • pahom54
    pahom54 23 January 2014 09: 58
    +9
    I fully agree with the author of the article. However, China, even in short-term alliances, most of which are economic, takes exactly more than it gives to an ally (partner). Wasserman speaks of a pipe (gas pipeline or oil pipeline - it doesn’t matter), everything is clear with it, it is a long-term contract, beneficial to both parties. BUT forgets about the many short-term and supposedly small in terms of purchases of our latest technology, especially weapons, which are taken in several copies, are studied by Chinese engineers and then unlimitedly replicated ... So China remains China and in short-term transactions ...
    But about "friendship forever" with the USSR, Wasserman did not say a little (even I'm afraid to correct him). Even V. Vladimirov, being the representative of the Comintern under Mao during the battles with the Japanese and the Kuomintang, in his documentary book "Special Region of China" writes that Mao easily and more than once said in conversations with his comrades-in-arms that "the SSSS for us - this is a cash cow. As long as she gives milk - we will be friends with him ... "
    So there was no friendship as such, and even more so now it cannot even be mentioned. Here is a short-term ally in the struggle to weaken the influence of the States and NATO, an alliance with China may be, BUT !!! However, in this alliance, both Russia and China will pursue purely their geostrategic goals, and subsequently, most likely, they will turn into direct geopolitical and strategic enemies. Most likely, in the future and it will be so.
    1. AK-47
      AK-47 23 January 2014 11: 45
      +2
      Quote: pahom54
      Mao easily and more than once said in conversations with his comrades-in-arms that "CCCC for us is a cash cow. As long as she gives milk, we will be friends with him ..."

      How much water has flowed, but the thesis has not lost its relevance.
  • Corsair5912
    Corsair5912 23 January 2014 10: 23
    +4
    The alliance with the Chinese is a fiction, the Chinese despise all non-Chinese people, considering them barbarians and the EU, but do not consider it necessary to abide by the agreement if it is not beneficial for them.
    The ostentatious politeness of the Chinese means nothing; they are treacherous, arrogant, vindictive and vindictive. For them, any European "bok gui" is a white devil.
    In their worldview, the Chinese are extremely conservative, for them China is a Middle or Celestial country, outside which inferior people, barbarians and devils live, and international laws are empty for Chinese. What, in general, is clear after the Opium Wars, the Japanese occupation and the Nanking massacre.
  • Standard Oil
    Standard Oil 23 January 2014 10: 35
    +2
    Oh yes, an alliance with anyone, even with the infernal legions if offered, even with the Martians, even with the Chinese if it is profitable. Well, in general, all this is temporarily profitable now, tomorrow is unprofitable, at the moment the enemy is the USA, we will eliminate this threat, another - the same China, so it is also unprofitable to bring down the United States, otherwise who will help us against China. So who will become a threat to Russia tomorrow is unclear, today is the United States, tomorrow it may be China, and the day after tomorrow Poland will suddenly acquire "superpower" laughing
  • polkovnik manuch
    polkovnik manuch 23 January 2014 11: 03
    +4
    Wasserman, as always, is right. You can’t argue with him. All unions, as history proves, should be primarily economically beneficial and, as they say for the time being. The Far East needs to be urgently populated and strengthened!
    1. Vasek
      Vasek 24 January 2014 01: 05
      0
      Quote: polkovnik manuch
      Wasserman, as always, is right. You can’t argue with him. All unions, as history proves, should be primarily economically beneficial and, as they say for the time being. The Far East needs to be urgently populated and strengthened!


      Indeed, Anatoly Aleksandrovich almost leaves no room for objections.
      But:
      For many centuries, China generally considered all countries of which it knew at least something to be its vassals, even if in fact the state of affairs was completely different.
      ... somehow it’s hard to imagine, for example, Genghis Khan as a Chinese vassal.
      Although, there are no rules without exceptions.
  • Al_lexx
    Al_lexx 23 January 2014 11: 23
    +1
    Quote: Ingvar 72
    Quote: sledgehammer102
    As time shows, economic unions are much stronger than political ones.

    <...>
    Conflict with China is just a matter of time.hi

    That is what the Yankees are seeking.
  • Boa kaa
    Boa kaa 23 January 2014 11: 47
    +3
    A good, balanced, thoughtful analysis of the current state of affairs. A cautious hint of momentary benefits. Where is the forecast? After all, this is his job!
    It seems to me that the situation in the coming 10 anniversary will develop as follows.
    1. The PRC war for the unification of the Motherland (The capture and annexation of Taiwan). The action can be justified by the historical roots, aspirations of the people and other husks. And everything seems to be logical.
    2. After a couple of years, after licking his wounds, provocation and conflict (with escalation) in relation to Japan. Thus, the debts for the genocide of the Chinese by the Japanese militarists in the 40s of the 20th century will be repaid. Both of these options are well supported by the historical grievances and "rights" of the Chinese to a common homeland. The ideological basis is ready. The army and the economy are the same.
    In both situations, there will be States behind Taiwan and Japan. Therefore, China is vitally interested in friendship (neutrality) with the Russian Federation in this situation. Again, the product pipeline from Russia will ensure their independence from sea energy supplies, past the USer fleet. (Signing of a new supply agreement - May 2014 during a GDP visit to China).
    Our position should be simple: business, nothing but business, because an alliance with both the PRC and the United States is equally dangerous in drawing Russia into a big war. We do not need this, because our interests, except for energy supplies, are not here. The conflict will lead to the weakening of our rivals in this region.
    The states will try to drag us to their side, intimidating us with the Chinese threat, possibly provoking another way. The main thing is not to get into a showdown between the PRC - Japan - the USA.
    The emerging situation is seen to me from such an angle. Maybe I'm wrong. Time will tell.
    1. Scorpio
      Scorpio 23 January 2014 15: 10
      +1
      Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
      business, nothing but business, because an alliance with both the PRC and the United States is equally dangerous in drawing Russia into a big war. We do not need this, because our interests, except for the supply of energy resources, are not here. The conflict will lead to the weakening of our rivals in this region.
      The states will try to drag us to their side, intimidating us with the Chinese threat, possibly provoking another way. The main thing is not to get into a showdown between the PRC - Japan - the USA.

      Yes, and yes again. Plus. Maybe they can figure it out without us. And the longer they bite among themselves, the better.
    2. 222222
      222222 23 January 2014 15: 27
      0
      Boa KAA (1) RU Today, 11:47 AM New
      1.About Taiwan. unsinkable aircraft carrier usa ...
      2. about Japan .. unsinkable aircraft carrier usa ..
      ....... behind the back of the usa and taiwan and japan .. right?
      The union of the United States and China is not possible -different political systems and strategic competitors in the Asia-Pacific region .. This is also Russia and the PRC ..
  • old rocket man
    old rocket man 23 January 2014 12: 12
    +1
    Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
    A good, balanced, thoughtful analysis of the current state of affairs. A cautious hint of momentary benefits. Where is the forecast?


    I agree that Anatoly’s article is somewhat pale today, some kind of incompleteness is felt.
    But with your forecast, Alexander, I completely agree.
    I just want to add that between the leading countries there are no long-term alliances and can not be, they are, by definition, always rivals, but sometimes interests coincide.
    Our joint interest with China is to contain America, to pluck it as much as possible, without bringing the matter to a direct collision, and then "we will have a look" when the Naglo-Saxons are sufficiently weakened, we may not have to beat it, - let's push it aside and move on bully
  • negeroi
    negeroi 23 January 2014 12: 17
    0
    The main thing is not to get involved in a conflict with China and to unambiguously indicate the only possible outcome of such a conflict, the Absolute total destruction of the Planet. Russia is constantly drawn into conflicts. Conflicts are not profitable and deadly. The conflict with China will be the last. Therefore, under no circumstances should we fight with China. We don’t benefit either victory, much less defeat. Victory is only possible by destroying the main forces of the Chinese army, and we only have nuclear weapons for this. A nuclear war of this magnitude at its borders, when in such a conflict is inevitable, partners will join in the last stages the winner ... in general, they won’t let us defeat China. They didn’t let the Turks beat them up, they won’t give China either. Germany was given only because they really underestimated Stalin, who at the end of the war had moderated not only to become strong, but also able to repel the Allied strike .China will not let us win. The nuclear aggressor will inevitably be bombarded by the rest of the nuclear club. And we have nothing to fight against China, n Our army will be enough, perhaps for a week, while it will be chased in the seaside taiga, in small groups of 20 million each. Any tactics and preparations will not work against numerical superiority. For China, the war with Russia is just as deadly. Besides, Russia will use nuclear weapons, half the world will attack China, wanting to have Chinese nishtyaks all over the world, and demonstrate deflection in front of the USA. Even the Chinese army will not fight against ALL, the more so the thinning nuclear weapons hacked. Many here speak so confidently about the war with China, such direct analysts. Either with confidence that China will take advantage of us more strongly and will certainly, either from capriciousness, or from lack of thought. China is suicidal to China. China can provoke regional conflicts, taking advantage of the multi-vector interests of different countries. But for the Great War. ..it’s like Hitler in China.
    1. Scorpio
      Scorpio 23 January 2014 15: 17
      -1
      Quote: negeroi
      It’s suicidal for China to go to Russia. China can provoke regional conflicts, taking advantage of the multi-vector interests of different countries. But to the Great War ... it seems that Hitlers were not noticed in China.

      If you set the world against Russia, it’s not at all suicidal. Yes, they actually need a regional conflict in order to have a reason to enter Siberia and the Middle East. Our European part didn’t give them a fuck. Any conflict with them will only benefit them: they will decrease their mouths a bit (everyone knows that there is an overabundance of the male population in China) and resources are getting worse, and at the same time they will not depend on supplies from Russia.
      1. negeroi
        negeroi 23 January 2014 15: 27
        -1
        And it doesn’t matter to us whether it’s regional or small-town. At the moment, we are not a rival to China, if we are not considering nuclear forces. And what difference does it make for us what we like? What do you say exists in PRINCIPLE, but in isolation from the rest peace and reality. The world is full of power, which is even more beneficial for the conflict between us than China itself. There are no wars between the two states, there are always alliances and beneficiaries. Guided by your logic, China would have Africa and Asia for a long time what else. However ..?
      2. The comment was deleted.
  • old rocket man
    old rocket man 23 January 2014 14: 28
    +1
    Purely about the war.
    Fears of the Chinese population are greatly inflated. The distribution patterns of the population, industry and agriculture make China highly vulnerable even in the event of a non-nuclear war, attacks on dams and irrigation facilities in the Yellow River and the Yangtze River, in the valleys of which the bulk of the population and food production are concentrated, will lead to millions of losses among the population and subsequent chaos and famine. High population density leads to higher losses. Can you imagine what the loss of transport communications in a million city leads to? Remember the blockade of Leningrad. And there are thousands of such cities in China and they are quite compactly located small territory. In addition, do not flatter yourself
    By the unity and ideological devotion of the Chinese, a true Chinese is devoted only to his family. Not one army can fight without bread and supplies, and this is the weakest link in China.
    So the devil is not so terrible as he is painted. To destroy a million Russians, you need a million bombs to destroy a million Chinese. Thousands are enough. The ratio is clearly not in favor of the Chinese.
    1. Scorpio
      Scorpio 23 January 2014 15: 21
      -2
      Quote: Old Rocketman
      impacts on dams and irrigation facilities on the Yellow River and the Yangtze River, in the valleys of which the bulk of the population and food production are concentrated, will lead to millions of losses among the population

      That is, you propose, in response to the Chinese invasion, to transfer our troops to China shtol, so as to spoil communications there and destroy dams?
      Or deliver nuclear strikes against civilians in order to bring democracy to us, besides the Chinese, NATO has come, right?
      And who will press the button so that the rocket hits millions of people and dams? You?
      1. old rocket man
        old rocket man 23 January 2014 21: 43
        +2
        [quote = Scorpio] [quote = old rocket scientist]
        That is, you propose, in response to the Chinese invasion, to transfer our troops to China shtol, so as to spoil communications there and destroy dams?
        Or deliver nuclear strikes against civilians in order to bring democracy to us, besides the Chinese, NATO has come, right?
        And who will press the button so that the rocket hits millions of people and dams?
        You? [/ Quote]

        No need to demonstrate your humanity and wretchedness. Have you ever heard of the existence of bomber aircraft?
        And then, we are talking about retaliatory actions in the case of WAR.
        But what about the buttons? If they return to the army, there’s a knife, but without me, there’s the warand not about liberal disputes in the kitchen or in the Swamp fool
        1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Tersky
        Tersky 23 January 2014 23: 04
        +1
        Quote: Scorpio
        Or deliver nuclear strikes against civilians in order to bring democracy to us, besides the Chinese, NATO has come, right?

        And the Chinese will carry out nuclear strikes especially against the RF Armed Forces? They don't care who to smash and who to cut. Google at your leisure how they behaved (including in Russia) in the occupied territories. You will learn a lot of interesting things, the "humanities" note ...
        1. Scorpio
          Scorpio 24 January 2014 10: 37
          -1
          Quote: Tersky
          And the Chinese will deliver nuclear attacks purely on the Russian Armed Forces?

          the Chinese will not be the first to deliver your nuclear strikes to you, most likely their troops will simply occupy the Far East. And do not care who they cut it will only after you like a fire on Beijing and burn his family, he and your mother and sister then raped yours and then shot, just to take revenge.
    2. negeroi
      negeroi 23 January 2014 15: 36
      -1
      To the old rocketeer.

      You say I’ll panic and advise you to give mercy to such a big and formidable one, so that it doesn't get any worse. If the war comes, I don’t care if I’m stronger than American or not, we’ll see who is cooler and sell my weakness or not really. I'm talking about whether you know how to fight or not, brave or experienced, it doesn’t matter anymore. But you wave your sword, they say it’s not so scary, etc. Yes, nobody cries out of fear. Moreover, I’m sure that we will succeed in knocking China out. But this is not about that. And we won’t win the WAR. You can win China, but you can’t win this war. And what's the difference that you are brave and tactically literate? I speak with you politely and respectfully not because I am afraid of you. There are many other factors, reasons, motives and explanations for this circumstance.
      1. old rocket man
        old rocket man 23 January 2014 22: 40
        0
        Quote: negeroi
        You say if I panic and advise you to surrender to the grace of such a big and formidable, so that no matter how worse it becomes


        Well, firstly, I didn’t say that, I'm sorry I didn’t think about such an interpretation. And it seems to me that I did not express any disrespect to you hi
        1. negeroi
          negeroi 27 January 2014 10: 55
          0
          Well, here you are again about respect, when I mean that we will not fight with China, not because weaker, but because we won’t win this war. Like I am respectful with you not because I'm afraid.))
        2. The comment was deleted.
    3. The comment was deleted.
  • vlad.svargin
    vlad.svargin 23 January 2014 14: 59
    0
    Back in 2009, Premier of the State Council of the People's Republic of China Wen Jiabao delicately rejected the US-proposed "Bladder Two" -G2 project, the political alliance of the US and China (which is against Russia, it goes without saying). the Pacific region, hoping to create a hotbed of tension there. Nor do they want to leave Central Asia. Not only Iran is here, but Russia and China. For the same purpose, they "flirt with India. I will give some quotes from newspapers, which reflect the reaction of the Chinese, and our vision of a mutually beneficial alliance (albeit not on a permanent basis, but at the moment it is necessary)
    The Chinese newspaper People's Daily published an article with a loud headline: "China and Russia should create a Eurasian alliance." The author of the article points to the hostile, anti-Chinese strategy of the United States in the Asia-Pacific region (APR) and the Middle East and emphasizes the "extremely unexpected" position of Russia, which was not afraid to confront the US military power in Syria and Iran. Further, Comrade Dai Xu suggests that Russia and China merge in closer cooperation in order to jointly confront Western challenges. According to the Chinese scientist, the benefits of such an alliance are obvious: it will be self-sufficient in energy terms; its combined combat power will surpass that of any enemy, and its vast territory will serve both sides gloriously. US ambitions only push Russia and China into each other's arms.
    Such an alliance is undoubtedly a Western nightmare. Central Asia, possibly Pakistan and even Iran, automatically joins it. Obviously, the new union is becoming a superpower, and the United States and Europe, with this alignment of forces, come to an inevitable decline. ("The union of China and Russia - a myth or a real American nightmare?" Asia Report)


    All these talks about China posing a threat to Russia are extremely exaggerated (especially its demographic aspect). The Chinese do not inhabit the territory in this climatic zone. Not populated. There are three or four small pieces of land where one can really talk about some theoretically possible Chinese expansion. Usually, all talk about the "Chinese threat" has American roots - that is, it comes either from the Americans directly, or from specialists affiliated with them within Russia, of whom there are also a lot. Nevertheless, there may be problems with China, and in order for them was not, it is strategically necessary for us to have such a close interaction, such a close alliance that nothing could slip between us. Unfortunately, Russia has not yet matured before this. As, however, and China. And in this matter, the desire and consent of both parties is needed. ("The union of China and Russia - a myth or a real American nightmare?" Asia Report)
  • Panikovsky
    Panikovsky 23 January 2014 15: 26
    +2
    Yes, the Chinas are too introverted to ally with anyone.