Anti-Japan protests in China spread.

[Mr Khan]

mrstickball said:

mai said:

Kasz216 said:

A) No, the quote metnioned practiced invasions.

B) I'd agree with cuting the ongoing wars and protecting half the countries we'd protect sure.  Though I don't think america's ambitions stem from imperilism.  As if given the chance I don't think the US Would want direct legislative control or ownership claims.

Lol, US invasion to anything even 10x smaller in scale than China military strength is failed reality check and potential fuck up of the immense size, a-la Vietnam 2. Even in cae of Yugoslavia it never came to onland operation (outside some troops in Croatia). Though sooner or later it's bound to happen, I mean failed reality check. It always happens to imperialist warmongers, especially when they're desperate :D

Kasz216 said:

Unlike say.... Russia, who keeps causing uprisings in adjacent countries and creating autonomous zones with pro russian governments who essentially wish to merge with Russia.

So you've learned smth from me after all? Do not defend - attack! This's the way of true forum dweller :D

Ok, let's take it from here. Even if we ignore the fact of how many bitches allies you have in the Americas and around the world, who aren't accountable to anyone but to the guy appointed from DoS (yeah, real sovereignty is rare beast today), or why do we want to merge with anyone in the first place (as if we do not have enough territories already, lol?), what are those zones to be specific? Just name them, and I'd kindly explain you everything you want to know.

Belarus and South Ossetia for starters. Then you have that whole Chechnya issue that has been dragging on for 20 years.

You also have a lot of interference and issues with the Ukraine as well. Those are just the ones I know of off the top of my head - I haven't even looked into Russia's former eastern holdings to see what's been going on with them lately.

Belarus is an interesting mixed case. It used to be that Alexander Lukashenka couldn't get enough of Russia, but later last decade he started backing off, and while Belarus is more in Russia's orbit than any other country, he's playing an interesting game of trying to keep from getting sucked too far in.

In Abkhazia and South Ossetia's case, their claim on independence is at least as legitimate as, say, Kosovo's. Chechnya would have had that right, had they not wedded themselves so completely to radical islam. After Beslan and the Moscow theatre thing, at any rate. If there was someone left to negotiate with in Chechnya that wasn't tied to the Caucasus Emirate (like, for instance, non-terrorist-aligned groups in Palestine that make them a viable negotiating partner), it would be a different matter.

Also Transdniestria in Moldova, which is in the same boat as Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

As for former Soviet Central Asia, they're all in the Russian orbit, but the degree of "interference" varies, most i can think of is that Russia prevents Turkmenistan from direct-selling it's natural gas to any outside markets (one of the theories floated out about why Bush was fixated on Afghanistan was to be able to build a natural gas pipeline from Turkmenistan to Pakistan, and so get a tap in that market outside of Russian control), and that Russia still takes a large hand in guarding Tajikistan's borders from drugs and terrorism.