Philippines government learns that it has only one ally to back it against China.

Discussion of current events
neverfail
Posts: 6718
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Philippines government learns that it has only one ally to back it against China.

Post by neverfail » Sat Apr 10, 2021 6:37 pm

cassowary wrote:
Sat Apr 10, 2021 4:11 pm

All Europeans have to do is to simply ask the US to leave, and the US troops will leave. France did ask the US troops to leave after WWII and US troops left French soil. But Europe does not, which proves that majority of Europeans want US forces to remain. Why? It because they are afraid of Russia.
Exactly right.

Don't you find it strange cass that historically and going back centuries: regardless of what regime of government the Russian state produces to live under; Tsarist, post-Bolshevik Communist or post-Communist authoritarian they always conduct their foreign policy in ways that arouse the fears and misgivings of others; especially of their near neighbours. The Russian urge seems always to dominate and rule; not to build bonds of empathy and trust.
The same goes for Asia. As I pointed out the Filipinos asked the US to leave and they left. So what you said, Sertorio, is nonsense. Or at least, the majority of Europeans don’t agree with you. US forces are in Europe because most Europeans desire US protection.
Also right!

Why does Sertorio have so much difficulty in visualising the Western alliance as a voluntary alssociation of states who group together in their own mutual best interests? :lol: He seems to be fixated with the misleading vision of a Western replica of the Soviet Union's subservient Warsaw Pact empire of servile satellite states bound together only by the coercive power exercised by and from Moscow.
.....................................................................................

I would like to add to that.

While Australia has had a formal Alliance with the United States since 1951 (and a more informal, defacto one even longer than that) : after the departure of the last WW2 US GI's based in Australia in 1944 for MacArthur's Philippines campaign there was not even a single platoon of US soldiers based anywhere in Australia - until just a decade ago.

In November 2011 during an official visit to Australia President Barrick Obama persuaded the Australian government to allow the rotation of US marines through our northern port of Darwin for the puropse of conducting joint training exercises with units of the Australian Army. It still means that the US has no permanent military bases in Australia - the visiting marines are housed in borrowed Australian barracks while they are here. However the Australian government led by Julia Gillard readily agreed to the proposal for she and her government like Obama's viewed evident signs of growing PRC assertiveness with disquiet.

If any Australian government were to say "no more visits by US marines" the US would stop sending them here.

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 4825
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Philippines government learns that it has only one ally to back it against China.

Post by cassowary » Sat Apr 10, 2021 11:16 pm

neverfail wrote:
Sat Apr 10, 2021 6:37 pm
cassowary wrote:
Sat Apr 10, 2021 4:11 pm

All Europeans have to do is to simply ask the US to leave, and the US troops will leave. France did ask the US troops to leave after WWII and US troops left French soil. But Europe does not, which proves that majority of Europeans want US forces to remain. Why? It because they are afraid of Russia.
Exactly right.

Don't you find it strange cass that historically and going back centuries: regardless of what regime of government the Russian state produces to live under; Tsarist, post-Bolshevik Communist or post-Communist authoritarian they always conduct their foreign policy in ways that arouse the fears and misgivings of others; especially of their near neighbours. The Russian urge seems always to dominate and rule; not to build bonds of empathy and trust.
The same goes for Asia. As I pointed out the Filipinos asked the US to leave and they left. So what you said, Sertorio, is nonsense. Or at least, the majority of Europeans don’t agree with you. US forces are in Europe because most Europeans desire US protection.
Also right!

Why does Sertorio have so much difficulty in visualising the Western alliance as a voluntary alssociation of states who group together in their own mutual best interests? :lol: He seems to be fixated with the misleading vision of a Western replica of the Soviet Union's subservient Warsaw Pact empire of servile satellite states bound together only by the coercive power exercised by and from Moscow.
.....................................................................................

I would like to add to that.

While Australia has had a formal Alliance with the United States since 1951 (and a more informal, defacto one even longer than that) : after the departure of the last WW2 US GI's based in Australia in 1944 for MacArthur's Philippines campaign there was not even a single platoon of US soldiers based anywhere in Australia - until just a decade ago.

In November 2011 during an official visit to Australia President Barrick Obama persuaded the Australian government to allow the rotation of US marines through our northern port of Darwin for the puropse of conducting joint training exercises with units of the Australian Army. It still means that the US has no permanent military bases in Australia - the visiting marines are housed in borrowed Australian barracks while they are here. However the Australian government led by Julia Gillard readily agreed to the proposal for she and her government like Obama's viewed evident signs of growing PRC assertiveness with disquiet.

If any Australian government were to say "no more visits by US marines" the US would stop sending them here.
The same is true for Singapore. When the dumb Filipinos kicked the Americans out in 1991, Singapore welcomed them with open arms.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and US President Donald Trump have renewed a key defence pact which allows American forces to use Singapore's air and naval bases, extending it by another 15 years to 2035.

Both leaders lauded the close relationship between Singapore and the United States as they signed an amendment to the 1990 Memorandum of Understanding Regarding United States Use of Facilities in Singapore, a landmark agreement that underpinned America's security presence in the region for almost 30 years.
Oh, actually I got it wrong. It seems that we welcomed the Americans in 1990 before the Filipinons kicked them out in 1991. The Filipinos demanded more rental money than what the Americans wanted to pay.
The Imp :D

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 4963
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Philippines government learns that it has only one ally to back it against China.

Post by Sertorio » Sun Apr 11, 2021 2:34 am

neverfail wrote:
Sat Apr 10, 2021 6:37 pm

Don't you find it strange cass that historically and going back centuries: regardless of what regime of government the Russian state produces to live under; Tsarist, post-Bolshevik Communist or post-Communist authoritarian they always conduct their foreign policy in ways that arouse the fears and misgivings of others; especially of their near neighbours. The Russian urge seems always to dominate and rule; not to build bonds of empathy and trust.
Such as?...
neverfail wrote:
Sat Apr 10, 2021 6:37 pm
The same goes for Asia. As I pointed out the Filipinos asked the US to leave and they left. So what you said, Sertorio, is nonsense. Or at least, the majority of Europeans don’t agree with you. US forces are in Europe because most Europeans desire US protection.
Let's see:
Many Germans want U.S. troops to withdraw from their country, where nearly 35,000 American servicemembers are stationed, according to a new poll.

The YouGov survey, commissioned by the German Press Agency DPA, found 42 percent of respondents want U.S. troops out, while 37 percent want them to stay and 21 percent are undecided or didn’t answer. The margin of error was plus or minus five percent.

https://www.stripes.com/news/poll-42-of ... y-1.537230
Also:
More than four Europeans out of ten (43 %) consider that the decisions concerning European defence policy should be taken by the European Union. Only 17 % of the respondents think that NATO should take them while 24% think that the national governments should be entrusted with them.

https://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/pu ... umm_en.pdf
neverfail wrote:
Sat Apr 10, 2021 6:37 pm
Why does Sertorio have so much difficulty in visualising the Western alliance as a voluntary alssociation of states who group together in their own mutual best interests?
I guess what I posted above should answer your question...

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 4825
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Philippines government learns that it has only one ally to back it against China.

Post by cassowary » Sun Apr 11, 2021 2:55 am

Doc wrote:
Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:34 am
cassowary wrote:
Sat Apr 10, 2021 8:15 am
Doc wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 8:24 pm


I am pretty sure he isn't a communist. A socialist certainly. But not a communist. Every Communist I have ever known was not at all sincere. They would tell the most outrageous lies about the fantasy world of Communism and communist economics. Granted they were all Maoists. When I say sincere I mean no sane person would actually believe the things they said they believe.
That's exactly like Sertorio. He said things no sane person believe. He tells outrageous lies and lives in a fantasy world. There is only a thin line between a Socialist and a Communist. In fact, the two words are almost interchangeable.
Just the same Sertorio is not a "True Believer"(See below) if he was he would be insisting that Al Qaeda was a freedom movement and constantly calling Israel an apartheid state. If he was a communist his ideology would be much more consistent with communism. I take it his gripes about the west is more anti west than pro-communism.
The communists vary in their beliefs. For the younger communists, their propaganda lie is that Al Qaeda is a freedom movement or that 911 was caused by the CIA or Israel is an apartheid state. But Sertorio came from an older generation. At that time, Commie propaganda lie is that the US is an imperialistic power controlling their allied countries whose democracies are but shams. Over here, the commie lie was that Indendence from the British is false and we were still controlled by the British. They called it neo-colonialism. Yuo might say he is caught in a time warp where Sertorio still believes in Cold War era Communist propaganda.

But that is not the essense of Communism. All that was just communist propaganda to discredit the US. The crux of Communism is state ownership of the means of production. If that is your ideology, then I consider you a communist or socialist.
The socialist mode of production, also referred to as the communist mode of production, the lower-stage of communism[1] or simply socialism as Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels used the terms communism and socialism interchangeably, ...
Why do you think the Chinese Communist Party claims to be practicing Socialism with Chinese characteristics? Why do you think the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) called the Soviet Union, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics?

That's because Socialists/Communists believe that Socialism is the stage just before Communism. That is why I prefer to the ideology as Socialism/Communism. The two are too closely intwined to separate.
Sertorio isn't wrong about everything he says. I would like to know how he came to believe the things he is wrong about. That might be an interesting story. But that is his business so if he doesn't want to share I wouldn't hold it against him.
Well, so do I. I have said many times before Sertorio is the most fascinating person here in this forum. I have some speculations:

1)Maybe he mispent his youth on Socialist/Communist activities when he could have used his intelligence on persuing a lucrative career like his peers. So, in his old age, it is painful to admit to himself that he is wrong. So he clings to Socialism and anti-Americanism just as oBUMa accused conservatives of clinging to guns and religion.

2)Maybe he is a troll working for the IRA.

3)Maybe he is the illegitimate son of an American serviceman who abandoned his mother and himself when he was young. So he has a resentment at Americans which found ideological expression in his Socialist/Communist activism.
https://www.academia.edu/21464682/The_T ... ric_Hoffer

THE TRUE BELIEVER
_____
Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements


ERIC HOFFER

This book deals with some peculiarities common to all mass movements, be they religious movements, social revolutions or nationalist movements. It does not maintain that all movement share identical, but that they share certain essential characteristics which give them a family likeness.

All mass movements generate in their adherents a readiness to die and a proclivity for united action; all of them,irrespective of the doctrine they preach and the program they project, breed fanaticism, enthusiasm, fervent hope, hatred and intolerance; all of them are capable of releasing a powerfulow of activity in certain departments of life; all of them demand blind faith and single hearted allegiance.

All movements, however different in doctrine and aspiration,draw their early adherents from the same types of humanity;they all appeal to the same types of mind.

Though there are obvious differences between the fanatical Christian, the fanatical Mohammedan, the fanatical nationalist,the fanatical Communist and the fanatical Nazi, it is yet true that the fanaticism which animates them may be viewed and treated as one. The same is true of the force which drives them on to expansion and world dominion. There is a certain uniformity in all types of dedication, of faith, of pursuit of power, of unity and of self-sacrifice. There are vast differences in the contents of holy causes and doctrines, but a certain uniformity in the factors which make them effective. He who,like Pascal, finds precise reasons for the effectiveness of Christian doctrine has also found the reasons for the effectiveness of Communist, Nazi and nationalist doctrine.However different the holy causes people die for, they perhaps die basically for the same thing.

This book concerns itself chief with the active revivalist phase of mass movements. This phase is dominated by the true believer—the man of fanatical faith who is ready to sacrifice his life for a holy cause—and an attempt is made to trace his genesis and outline his nature. As an aid in this effort, use is made of a working hypothesis. Starting out from the fact that the frustrated
1
predominate among the early adherents of all mass movements and that they usually join of their own accord, it is assumed: 1) that frustration of itself, without any proselytizing prompting from the outside, can generate most of the peculiar characteristics of the true believer; 2) that an effective technique of conversion consists basically in the inculcation and fixation of proclivities and responses indigenous to the frustrated mind.To test the validity of these assumptions, it was necessary to inquire into the ills that afflict the frustrated, how they react against them, the degree to which these reactions correspond to the responses of the true believer, and, finally, the manner in which these reactions can facilitate the rise and spread of amass movement. It was also necessary to examine the practices of contemporary movements, where successful techniques of conversion had been perfected and applied, in order to discover whether they corroborate the view that a proselytizing mass movement deliberately fosters in its adherents a frustrated state of mind, and that it automatically advances its interest when it seconds the propensities of the frustrated.It is necessary for most of us these days to have some insight into the motives and responses of the true believer. For though ours is a godless age, it is the very opposite of irreligious. The true believer is everywhere on the march, and both by converting and antagonizing he is shaping the world in his own image. And whether we are to line up with him or against him,it is well that we should know all we can concerning his nature and potentialities.

It is perhaps not superfluous to add a word of caution. When we speak of the family likeness of mass movements, we use the word “family” in a taxonomical sense. The tomato and the nightshade are of the same family, the Solanaceae. Though the one is nutritious and the other poisonous, they have many morphological, anatomical and physiological traits in common so that even the non-botanist senses a family likeness. The assumption that mass movements have many traits in common does not imply that all movements are equally beneficent or poisonous. The book passes no judgments, and expresses no preferences. It merely tries to explain; and the explanations—all of them theories—are in the nature of suggestions and arguments even when they are stated in what seems a categorical tone. I can do no better than quote Montaigne: “All I say is by way of discourse, and nothing by way of advice. I should not speak so boldly if it were my due to be believed.”
Yes. Very true. Your aritcle is in keeping with what I said. I have always said in this forum that I see Socialism/Communism as a kind of religion, albeit a godless one. It is a religion because it depends on faith. You can throw all sorts of facts at Sertorio and he still believes in what he wants to believe. He believes, for example, the Cold War era Commie propaganda that the US military presence in Europe somehow is imperialism when the vast majority of Europeans see them as their defender against the threat of the USSR/Russia. I even pointed out that after WWII, France asked US troops to leave and they did. He won't accept that US troops are there at the request of democratically elected European governments to protect them from Russia.

I would like to add one thing. It is not just frustration that made people join mass movements. Another powerful emotion is envy. Socialism/Communism attracts the envious who failed to achieved their goals for whatever reason. In a capitalist society, there will be successes and failures. Failure could be due to bad luck, mistakes or your own character flaws. So failures become envious and they need to blame someone or something other than themselves.

For some, they blame capitalism and so they are attracted to Socialism/Communism. Your blacks blame racism when most of their failure to catch up is simply due to their own self inflicted problems. They suffer from family breakdowns. Kids from single parent homes don't usually do well in school and this has an impact in income later on. But of course, they blame the whites. Your democrats capitalise on this to win their votes. It does not help the blacks but it helps the Democrats to win power, money and girls.
The Imp :D

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 4963
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Philippines government learns that it has only one ally to back it against China.

Post by Sertorio » Sun Apr 11, 2021 3:01 am

cassowary wrote:
Sun Apr 11, 2021 2:55 am
You can throw all sorts of facts at Sertorio and he still believes in what he wants to believe. He believes, for example, the Cold War era Commie propaganda that the US military presence in Europe somehow is imperialism when the vast majority of Europeans see them as their defender against the threat of the USSR/Russia. I even pointed out that after WWII, France asked US troops to leave and they did. He won't accept that US troops are there at the request of democratically elected European governments to protect them from Russia.
YAWN!!!... Read my previous post to Neverfail...

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 4825
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Philippines government learns that it has only one ally to back it against China.

Post by cassowary » Sun Apr 11, 2021 3:12 am

Sertorio wrote:
Sun Apr 11, 2021 2:34 am
neverfail wrote:
Sat Apr 10, 2021 6:37 pm

Don't you find it strange cass that historically and going back centuries: regardless of what regime of government the Russian state produces to live under; Tsarist, post-Bolshevik Communist or post-Communist authoritarian they always conduct their foreign policy in ways that arouse the fears and misgivings of others; especially of their near neighbours. The Russian urge seems always to dominate and rule; not to build bonds of empathy and trust.
Such as?...
neverfail wrote:
Sat Apr 10, 2021 6:37 pm
The same goes for Asia. As I pointed out the Filipinos asked the US to leave and they left. So what you said, Sertorio, is nonsense. Or at least, the majority of Europeans don’t agree with you. US forces are in Europe because most Europeans desire US protection.
Let's see:
Many Germans want U.S. troops to withdraw from their country, where nearly 35,000 American servicemembers are stationed, according to a new poll.

The YouGov survey, commissioned by the German Press Agency DPA, found 42 percent of respondents want U.S. troops out, while 37 percent want them to stay and 21 percent are undecided or didn’t answer. The margin of error was plus or minus five percent.

https://www.stripes.com/news/poll-42-of ... y-1.537230
Also:
More than four Europeans out of ten (43 %) consider that the decisions concerning European defence policy should be taken by the European Union. Only 17 % of the respondents think that NATO should take them while 24% think that the national governments should be entrusted with them.

https://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/pu ... umm_en.pdf
neverfail wrote:
Sat Apr 10, 2021 6:37 pm
Why does Sertorio have so much difficulty in visualising the Western alliance as a voluntary alssociation of states who group together in their own mutual best interests?
I guess what I posted above should answer your question...
Germany is only one country. 42% is a plurality and a narrow one with 37% wanting the US troops to stay in Germany. The Poles have a different attitude.
Poland wants a permanent U.S. military presence — and is willing to pony up as much as $2 billion to get it, according to a defense ministry proposal obtained by Polish news portal Onet.

The Polish offer reflects a long-standing desire in Warsaw to build closer security relations with the U.S. and put American boots on the ground. The push dates back to Poland’s entry into NATO in 1999, but has taken on added urgency in the wake of Russia’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea region four years ago and aggressive posture toward the alliance.
It seems the nearer to Russia you are, the more you want the US to protect you. Germany has Poland as a buffer. Portugal is so far away from Russia.
The Imp :D

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 4963
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Philippines government learns that it has only one ally to back it against China.

Post by Sertorio » Sun Apr 11, 2021 3:17 am

"Germany is only one country..." And quite an insignificant one too...

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 4825
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Philippines government learns that it has only one ally to back it against China.

Post by cassowary » Sun Apr 11, 2021 4:10 am

Sertorio wrote:
Sun Apr 11, 2021 3:17 am
"Germany is only one country..." And quite an insignificant one too...
I think the Americans would be happy to leave but the Europeans need a baby sitter. Why don’t they build an European army capable of defending themselves against Russia so that the US can focus on China?
The Imp :D

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 4963
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Philippines government learns that it has only one ally to back it against China.

Post by Sertorio » Sun Apr 11, 2021 5:03 am

cassowary wrote:
Sun Apr 11, 2021 4:10 am
Sertorio wrote:
Sun Apr 11, 2021 3:17 am
"Germany is only one country..." And quite an insignificant one too...
I think the Americans would be happy to leave but the Europeans need a baby sitter. Why don’t they build an European army capable of defending themselves against Russia so that the US can focus on China?
Baby sitter? It's more like a bully sitter...

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 4825
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Philippines government learns that it has only one ally to back it against China.

Post by cassowary » Sun Apr 11, 2021 6:34 am

Sertorio wrote:
Sun Apr 11, 2021 5:03 am
cassowary wrote:
Sun Apr 11, 2021 4:10 am
Sertorio wrote:
Sun Apr 11, 2021 3:17 am
"Germany is only one country..." And quite an insignificant one too...
I think the Americans would be happy to leave but the Europeans need a baby sitter. Why don’t they build an European army capable of defending themselves against Russia so that the US can focus on China?
Baby sitter? It's more like a bully sitter...
Then do what the french did after the war. Ask them to leave. Why don't they?
The Imp :D

Post Reply