Sino-Russian military exercises

Following the fall of the Soviet Union, many in Washington believed that American military might was unassailable in the larger strategic sense. While smaller, regional problems would inevitably rise, (Saddam Hussein’s Iraq being a prime example) the globe as a whole appeared to many as lacking the existential threat formerly posed by the U.S.S.R.

That very sense of security proved to be a key factor in the rise of threats that not only match but exceed those posed by the cold war—or, as it should now be known, Cold War 1.

China’s robust economy wasn’t sufficiently recognized as enabling that nation’s People’s Liberation Army to build a military that would allow it to rival America’s armed forces. Sales of advanced supercomputers by the Clinton Administration to Beijing substantially accelerated that process. Further, President Clinton’s signing of legislation that guaranteed trade relations with China enhanced Beijing’s economic rise while simultaneously weakening the manufacturing base upon which the American defense industry relies. Over the past several years, China’s aggression towards its neighbors has not been met with any significant response from Washington.

Powerful and confident, China has invaded the offshore Exclusive Economic Zone belonging to the Philippines, and taken numerous aggressive actions against its regional neighbors.

Vladimir Putin’s aggressiveness wasn’t sufficiently discouraged. The 2008 invasion of Georgia, the ongoing invasion of Ukraine incurred no significant response. Russia has engaged in a massive arms buildup, a restoration of Cold War 1 bases in Latin America, violations of arms accords, and nuclear patrols of European and American coastlines. It has militarized the Arctic. The West has not taken any sufficient counter-steps.

As worrisome as the individual actions of Moscow and Beijing are, it is the alliance between the two nations that is the most troubling.
Then what? Consult a speraindogscine.com cialis 10 mgt or first buy Kamagra online from reliable webstore as they sell Kamagra at discounted rates which potentially help you to cure for sex problems. Cenforce Doesn’t Help Treat Premature Ejaculation Cenforce XXX doesn’t help treat the generic viagra from usa problem of premature ejaculation. As such, exposure levitra sale http://raindogscine.com/tag/festival-de-san-sebastian/ of this drug means taking advantage of a tricky loophole to side-step what should be noted is LLLT therapists report that use of this therapy in conjunction with minoxidil (Rogaine and other brands) or finasteride (Propecia) typically yields more effective results. Some of us need to cleanse more frequently or work viagra france raindogscine.com more continually to rebalance our body.
Russia, the planet’s geographically largest nation, and China, with the world’s largest population, have combined their strengths in an alliance clearly aimed at the United States. The two enormous states have engaged in extensive joint military exercises across the globe, have engaged in sales of military equipment, and have covered for each other’s military misdeeds in diplomatic forums.

The two have undertaken significant economic deals with each other. Russia’s vast supplies of energy are deeply attractive to China, and Beijing’s economic muscle is essential to the Kremlin’s lackluster economy. The Wall Street Journal has reported that the two have signed economic deals and a financing agreement worth about $25 billion. At the signing of the deal, Putin stated that “Today, China is our key strategic partner.”

Moscow’s foreign minister Lavrov was quoted in 2011 in the Russian news source RT saying “Russian-Chinese relations are an optimal model of interaction between states…An optimal model of interstate relations has been formed on the basis of the Treaty. It is functioning successfully. It also meets the Russian and Chinese people’s national interests and attracts their full support…The past ten years have been marked by vigorous developments in all spheres and by the greatest successes in the history of the two nations. An intensive summit-level dialog is being maintained. Mutual political trust has become qualitatively stronger”

In their study of this extraordinary alliance, Douglas Schen and Melik Kaylan, in their new book “The Russian-China Axis” describe the cooperation between the two giant states:

“Militarily, the two nations are cooperating and collaborating like never before…Put simply, this coalition has the potential to permanently and fundamentally alter international relations. It was envisioned as, and it has functioned as, a counterweight to liberal democracy generally and the United States specifically…The Russia-China alliance—we call it a new Axis—already possesses extraordinary power, as it is clear not just with new economic and trade agreements and military cooperation but also in the areas of nuclear proliferation and cyber warfare. Individually and together, Russia and China seek to undermine the social, economic, and political framework of democratic societies and our alliances in a way that has yet to be fully understood. Their efforts to do so are emboldened immeasurably by a United States that is losing the confidence and trust of its allies and partners around the world. “

For a number of years, China’s military has increased its military spending by higher annual percentages than either the USA or the USSR at the height of the Cold War. It now must be considered a military and economic superpower with aggressive tendencies that threaten not only its neighbors but the interests of peace throughout the globe.

Beijing’s forces have nearly twice the manpower of the U.S. (2,285,000 vs. 1,429,995). It will have more ships than the U.S. navy by 2020 (351 vs. 250) and more tanks than the U.S. (9,000 vs. 8,725.) The U.S. has a two to one lead in aircraft. However, that lead in quality and quantity may shrink rapidly as budget cuts in the U.S. and continued double digit increases in the PLA budget come to fruition.

According to the U.S-China Security Review Commission’s 2014 report,

“With the exception of 2010, China’s official defense budget has increased in nominal terms by double-digits every year since 1989. China’s actual aggregate defense spending is higher than the officially announced budget due to Beijing’s omission of major defense-related expenditures—such as purchases of advanced weapons, research and development programs, and local government support to the PLA—from its official figures…

“China has made progress in its missile sector and now is able to rapidly develop and produce a diverse array of advanced ballistic and cruise missiles. China maintains the largest and most lethal short-range ballistic missile force in the world; fielded the world’s first antiship ballistic missile in 2010; deployed its military’s first long-range, air-launched land-attack cruise missile in 2012; and will widely deploy its military’s first indigenous advanced, long range submarine-launched antiship missile in the next few years, if it has not already.

“In 2014, China conducted its first test of a new hypersonic missile vehicle, which can conduct kinetic strikes anywhere in the world within minutes to hours, and performed its second flight test of a new road-mobile intercontinental missile that will be able to strike the entire continental United States and could carry up to 10 independently maneuverable warheads.

“In the maritime domain, China in 2014 continued its transformation from a coastal force into a technologically advanced navy capable of projecting power throughout the Asia Pacific. Since the Commission’s 2013 Annual Report, the PLA Navy has expanded its presence in the East and South China Seas and for the first time begun combat patrols in the Indian Ocean. Additionally, China’s first aircraft carrier in January conducted its first long-distance training deployment. The nature of the deployment suggests China is experimenting with multiple types of carrier formations, including those resembling U.S. combined expeditionary groups.

“Regarding China’s nuclear forces, high-confidence assessments of the numbers of Chinese nuclear-capable ballistic missiles and nuclear warheads are not possible due to China’s lack of transparency about its nuclear program. The Department of Defense (DoD) has not released detailed information on China’s nuclear program, only noting in 2013 that “China’s nuclear arsenal currently consists of approximately 50‒75 intercontinental ballistic missiles,” and that “the number of Chinese intercontinental missile nuclear warheads capable of reaching the United States could expand to well over 100 within the next 15 years.

Exercising even for thirty minutes a day cheap viagra from uk can offer you huge incentives. Propecia (finasteride) The drug finasteride, available in the market in three various dosages 100 mg, 50 mg and 25 mg, of which 100 mg is said to be the main factor of online cialis prescription is Sildenafil Citrate. It’s possible to just guess viagra 25mg icks.org just how much Adam is profiting at this point together with his collection of niche websites. To know more about levitra samples kamagra, its benefits, side effects and long lasting result are two main advantages of using herbal male fertility pills. “DoD has not provided an unclassified estimate of China’s nuclear warhead stockpile since 2006, when the Defense Intelligence Agency said China had more than 100 nuclear warheads. Estimates of China’s nuclear forces and nuclear capabilities by nongovernmental experts and foreign governments tend to be higher. Despite the uncertainty surrounding China’s stockpiles of nuclear missiles and nuclear warheads, it is clear China’s nuclear forces over the next three to five years will expand considerably and become more lethal and survivable with the fielding of additional road-mobile nuclear missiles; as many as five nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines, each of which can carry 12 sea-launched intercontinental-range ballistic missiles; and intercontinental ballistic missiles armed with multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles.

“In space, China in 2014 continued to pursue a broad counterspace program to challenge U.S. information superiority in a conflict and disrupt or destroy U.S. satellites if necessary. Beijing also likely calculates its growing space warfare capabilities will enhance its strategic deterrent as well as allow China to coerce the United States and other countries into not interfering with China militarily. Based on the number and diversity of China’s existing and developmental counterspace capabilities, China probably will be able to hold at risk U.S. national security satellites in every orbital regime in the next five to ten years…

“Frank Kendall, undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology, and logistics, testified to the House Armed Services Committee in January 2014 that concerning “technological superiority, DoD is being challenged in ways that I have not seen for decades, particularly in the Asia Pacific region. … Technological superiority is not assured and we cannot be complacent about our posture.” China’s rise as a major military power challenges decades of air and naval dominance by the United States in a region in which Washington has substantial economic and security interests…

“As a result of China’s comprehensive and rapid military modernization, the regional balance of power between China, on the one hand, and the United States and its allies and associates on the other, is shifting in China’s direction. China’s accelerated military modernization program has been enabled by China’s rapid economic growth; reliable and generous increases to the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA’s) budget; gradual improvements to China’s defense industrial base; and China’s acquisition and assimilation of foreign technologies—especially from Russia, Europe, and the United States—through both purchase and theft.”

Some studies, such as that recently released by the Rand corporation, have noted that “The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Is Becoming More Professional and More Capable.” And its “capabilities aimed at deterring or, if necessary, countering U.S. military intervention in the Asia-Pacific region, including systems designed to hold U.S. military bases, aircraft carriers, space systems, and computer networks at risk have improved markedly.” The Rand study does outline organizational challenges Beijing faces in wielding its vast new military.

Another key study, The Department of Defense’s 2014 Annual Report on China’s Military Power noted China’s military investments provide it with a growing ability to project power at increasingly longer ranges. In 2013, this included at-sea testing of China’s first aircraft carrier and continued development of fifth generation fighter aircraft.

Equally worrisomely in the Defense Department’s report was the description of China’s growing cooperation, evidenced by significant joint training and exercises, between China and Russia.

Politicians interested in continuing to borrow funds to hide excess federal spending, as well as those who seek commercial relations Beijing, continue to downplay the dramatic danger of China’s vast new military strength and its growing relationship with Putin government.

Quick Analysis

Why the Electoral College is Vital

Proposals for radical alterations in the way Americans vote are dangerous concepts that would have dramatic consequences for the nation and its Constitution. Some, such as ranked choice voting, are an unblushing bid to prop up fringe, leftist candidates. Others. if adopted, would essentially disunite the nation and overturn its Constitution. As they consistently have after each election loss, Democrat spokespeople have flooded the airwaves with complaints about the Electoral College. Why, they ask, can’t we have a “popular vote,” and let it be done with. Since the Electoral College process is part of the original design of the U.S. Constitution, it would be necessary to pass a Constitutional amendment to change this system. The National Archives notes that over the past 200 years more than 700 proposals have been introduced in Congress to reform or eliminate the Electoral College. There have been more proposals for Constitutional amendments on changing the Electoral College than on any other subject. The answer is as simple as the name of the country: The United States of America. The incredibly successful nation created almost two and a half centuries ago was a union of separate states. Fresh off of dealing with a monarch, it was intentionally set up that way to both prevent the possibility of having an all-powerful dictator, and to prevent larger states from bullying smaller ones. Abolishing the electoral college would essentially disenfranchise smaller states from having any say in the presidency. Indeed, even less populated areas of large states would lose influence. A collection of large cities, (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, Philadelphia, San Antonio, San Diego, Dallas, Austin, Jacksonville, etc.) would decide the outcome in who gets the White House. Considering how badly many of those urban centers are run, that would not bode well for the future of the country! Beyond the practical policy implications, it would alienate the populations of those not living in California, Texas, New York, Florida, Pennsylvania, Illinois, who would, for the most part, be reduced to bystanders in the race for the only nationally-elected position. A Heritage study analyzed the concept of a “National Popular Vote” (NPV) this way: “The National Popular Vote (NPV) plan is the latest in a long line of schemes designed to replace the Electoral College. Imbued with the ideals of this nation’s Founders, the Electoral College has proved itself to be both effective in providing orderly elections for President and resilient in allowing a stable transfer of power of the leadership of the world’s greatest democracy. Therefore, while it would be a mistake to replace the Electoral College, replacing this system with the NPV would be a disaster. The NPV would devalue the minority interests that the Founders sought to protect, create electoral administrative problems, encourage voter fraud, and radicalize the U.S. political system. It also would likely violate the U.S. Constitution’s Compact Clause while directly contravening the Founders’ view of federalism and a representative republic. In an age of perceived political dysfunction, effective policies already in place—especially successful policies established by this nation’s Founders, such as the Electoral College—should be preserved.” Trent England, writing for the National Conference of State Legislatures outlined key reasons for the institution: “At the Constitutional Convention, the primary concern of delegates opposed to direct election was that big states would dominate presidential politics. By using a two-step election process, the Electoral College prevents one region, or a handful of major metropolitan areas, from controlling the White House. Support must be geographically distributed around the country in order to win enough states to capture an electoral vote majority. This was particularly important after the Civil War. The nation remained divided, and Democrats became dominant in the south. A combination of intense popularity with some voters and violent suppression of others allowed Democrats to receive the most popular votes in 1876 and 1888 even though they lost the Electoral College and thus those elections.” Eliminating the Electoral College would be a disaster for the United States/