Af/Pak & Other News (4/22/2012)

[dump...@hotmail.com]

Afghanistan and U.S. agree on strategic pact text:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47135161/ns/world_news/#.T5Rdj9X7HIU



Pakistani militant Hafiz Mohammad Saeed seeks protection from bounty
hunters:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/pakistani-militant-hafiz-mohammad-saeed-seeks-protection-from-bounty-hunters/2012/04/22/gIQAhyQJaT_story.html



Opiates killed 8 Americans in Afghanistan, Army records show:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/21/us/afghanistan-soldier-drug-overdoses/



The Rest Of The World Is Running Out Of Patience:

http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/india/articles/20120422.aspx





Iran says it recovered data from captured US drone:

http://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Iran-says-it-recovered-data-from-captured-US-drone-3500790.php




Iran says copying US drone, senator says 'bluster':

http://news.yahoo.com/iran-says-copying-us-drone-reveals-codes-131259447.html



'20 Qaeda suspects' killed in Yemen air strikes:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gSqZkYdspB_wFyKFNWpTLzRCJBvw?docId=CNG.9b1ccd8db409c30832573d72fddc109a.81



Syria hotspot enjoys lull with UN monitors present:

http://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Syria-hotspot-enjoys-lull-with-UN-monitors-present-3490223.php



Republicans eye $680 mln for Israel's 'Iron Dome' shield:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/20/israel-usa-irondome-idUSL2E8FKBP820120420



Britain releases historic code papers:

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Britain_releases_historic_code_papers_999.html



Secret U.K. report cast doubts on F-35B:

http://alert5.com/2012/04/22/secret-u-k-report-cast-doubts-on-f-35b/



Taiwan plans to buy 'four warships from US':

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iJ2CFXtYbBaUweMjBsLj1d4imLXg?docId=CNG.9922e0830a95d9799cc6c6a39c06f0ab.231



Fighting The Quiet War With China:

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htlead/articles/20120422.aspx



China and Russia hold first navy exercises:

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/China_and_Russia_hold_first_navy_exercises_999.html



Study Highlights Importance Of Directed-Energy Weapons:

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_04_20_2012_p0-450308.xml



USAF Considers Extending Huey 30 Years:

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120422/DEFREG02/304220002/USAF-Considers-Extending-Huey-30-Years?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE



Military Industrial Complex? Eh! Walmart's Twice As Big As DoD's Big
5:

http://defense.aol.com/2012/04/20/military-industrial-complex-eh-walmarts-twice-as-big-as-dods/

[Andrew Swallow]

On 22/04/2012 22:19, dump...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Fighting The Quiet War With China:
>
> http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htlead/articles/20120422.aspx

Some thoughts about the Chinese military

[Dan]

With China's insistence on single children and the resultant
preference for male children I wonder who much longer before they fall
behind the power curve. At some point their population will start to
drop at the same time as it ages. This will lead to a situation similar
to other nations where fewer people are in the work force.

Another situation that will cost in the long run is their use of
dirty coal. Medical costs and eventual clean up will be horrendously
expensive. So will the human costs.

It will be interesting to see although I doubt I will live long
enough to see the tipping point.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Dean]

On Apr 22, 8:22 pm, Dan <B24...@aol.com> wrote:
> On 4/22/2012 6:08 PM, Andrew Swallow wrote:
>

They are already at the tipping point.

[Dennis]

Dan wrote:

> On 4/22/2012 6:08 PM, Andrew Swallow wrote:

>> On 22/04/2012 22:19, dumpster4 wrote:
>>> Fighting The Quiet War With China:
>>>
>>> http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htlead/articles/20120422.aspx
>>
>> Some thoughts about the Chinese military
>>
>
> With China's insistence on single children and the resultant
> preference for male children I wonder who much longer before they fall
> behind the power curve. At some point their population will start to
> drop at the same time as it ages. This will lead to a situation similar
> to other nations where fewer people are in the work force.
>
> Another situation that will cost in the long run is their use of
> dirty coal. Medical costs and eventual clean up will be horrendously
> expensive. So will the human costs.
>
> It will be interesting to see although I doubt I will live long
> enough to see the tipping point.

How have nations with an excess of males historically addressed it? Not
encouraging!

No, the other things aren't encouraging either.

Dennis

[Dan]

Expansionism, read war, is the usual method, but against whom? The
usual direction is towards the west. A brief exchange of nuclear devices
will solve the population problem. Due to area a Chinese - Russian
nuclear exchange leaves the Chinese in worst of of the two when it comes
to recovery.

The only other option possible large scale is mandatory sterilization
for the males. Even if they tried that it would make the ratio of older
to younger much worse.

I suppose they could do what Mexico has done for years by encouraging
emigration, but to where? Again, the ratio of workers to retirees will
suffer.

One of the drawbacks to most successful economic models is they rely
on expanding economies.

[Brian Colwell]

"Dan" <B24...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:_cOdnYR9b99YPQnS...@giganews.com...

The worlds population increased from 2.5 Billion to 6.6 Billion, in 50
years, the biggest increases in Africa and Asia, shortage of water is
becoming critical in many areas.

I think we are already, rapidly reaching the tipping point !

bmc

[dav...@agent.com]

Dan <B24...@aol.com> wrote:

> Expansionism, read war, is the usual method, but against whom? The
>usual direction is towards the west. A brief exchange of nuclear devices
>will solve the population problem. Due to area a Chinese - Russian
>nuclear exchange leaves the Chinese in worst of of the two when it
>comes to recovery.
>
> The only other option possible large scale is mandatory sterilization
>for the males. Even if they tried that it would make the ratio of older
>to younger much worse.

Stop suppressing influenza, malaria, and tuberculosis.

[Andrew Swallow]

One child policy first applied in 1979. So it has been active for
2012 - 1979 = 33 years. That is one and a half generations. Since you
have to be a grown up to have children every one under about 50 has been
personally effected.

In a country using peace time conscription not many privates are 33 so
the military consists of single children. This will also be effecting
recruitment to offices and factories.

This is the decade when the side-effects become obvious. It is also the
decade in which China will run out of peasants to turn into factory workers.

The PLA may run out of soldiers but that does not mean the Chinese
Government will become pacifist. It could panic and take the
traditional 'cure' for internal unrest - start an external war.

Andrew Swallow

[Andrew Swallow]

On 23/04/2012 04:03, Dan wrote:
{snip}

> Expansionism, read war, is the usual method, but against whom? The usual
> direction is towards the west. A brief exchange of nuclear devices will
> solve the population problem. Due to area a Chinese - Russian nuclear
> exchange leaves the Chinese in worst of of the two when it comes to
> recovery.
>

{snip}
Assuming the Chinese leaders are thinking rationally to gets lots of
women they will have to invade countries with large populations (greater
than 100 million). That is Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Japan,
Pakistan and the Philippines. Pacific coast Russia is also a possible
source.

Assuming that the West lets them, China could raid Africa. Although
they do tend to be racist against blacks.

Andrew Swallow

[Dan]

That's assuming women are the resource the Chinese government want. I
was thinking in terms of taking land and physical resources with a
certain percentage of their own men dying in combat. Acceptable losses
and all that.

[Bill]

In article <BIWdnfCMV70cWwnS...@giganews.com>,
B24...@aol.com says...

Their urban population is rich.

They can 'buy' women from poor countries by offering them a better
lifestyle.

--
William Black

When you hear the words 'Our people are our greatest asset' then it's
time to leave.

[Keith W]

Bill wrote:
> In article <BIWdnfCMV70cWwnS...@giganews.com>,

>>
>> The only other option possible large scale is mandatory
>> sterilization for the males.
>
> Their urban population is rich.
>

Part of their urban population is rich, most are wage slaves being
paid less than their counterparts in Taiwan , Japan or South Korea
which is why China is an attractive place for manufacturers.
The average monthly wage for factory workers is around $ 320
As labour shortages force wages up this may change.

Apple recently made a big deal of the fact that its local workers
got a pay increase from $300 per month to $400

> They can 'buy' women from poor countries by offering them a better
> lifestyle.

Chinese Mandarins buying concubines is hardly new.

Keith

[Dean]

North Korea has women....

[Bill]

In article <C9blr.16253$_Q....@fx01.am4>,
keithnosp...@demon.co.uk says...

>
> Bill wrote:
> > In article <BIWdnfCMV70cWwnS...@giganews.com>,
> >>
> >> The only other option possible large scale is mandatory
> >> sterilization for the males.
> >
> > Their urban population is rich.
> >
>
> Part of their urban population is rich, most are wage slaves being
> paid less than their counterparts in Taiwan , Japan or South Korea
> which is why China is an attractive place for manufacturers.
> The average monthly wage for factory workers is around $ 320
> As labour shortages force wages up this may change.
>

I doubt it.

Their workforce is effectively enslaved.

The people making the money are Party functionaries and their kids.

A very few people are making money outside the party owned companies,
but as soon as they get big enough to consider incorporation they're
more or less nationalised.

[Keith W]

Bill wrote:
> In article <C9blr.16253$_Q....@fx01.am4>,
> keithnosp...@demon.co.uk says...
>>
>> Bill wrote:
>>> In article <BIWdnfCMV70cWwnS...@giganews.com>,
>>>>
>>>> The only other option possible large scale is mandatory
>>>> sterilization for the males.
>>>
>>> Their urban population is rich.
>>>
>>
>> Part of their urban population is rich, most are wage slaves being
>> paid less than their counterparts in Taiwan , Japan or South Korea
>> which is why China is an attractive place for manufacturers.
>> The average monthly wage for factory workers is around $ 320
>> As labour shortages force wages up this may change.
>>
>
> I doubt it.
>
> Their workforce is effectively enslaved.
>
> The people making the money are Party functionaries and their kids.
>
> A very few people are making money outside the party owned companies,
> but as soon as they get big enough to consider incorporation they're
> more or less nationalised.

Wage rates ARE rapidly rising in China and this is in line with
Chinese Government policy which wants to see increased internal
consumption. A prosperous people with a good standard of living
are rather easier to rule. The Chinese government has a policy of
wanting a 13% rise in minimum wages per annum.

These policies are exacerbated as the Chinese one child policy
is producing a rapidly ageing population and reducing the
number of available workers.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703849204576302972415758878.html

Keith

[Dennis]

Dan wrote:

> On 4/22/2012 9:46 PM, Dennis wrote:
>> Dan wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/22/2012 6:08 PM, Andrew Swallow wrote:
>>>> On 22/04/2012 22:19, dumpster4 wrote:
>>>>> Fighting The Quiet War With China:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htlead/articles/20120422.aspx
>>>>
>>>> Some thoughts about the Chinese military
>>>>
>>>
>>> With China's insistence on single children and the resultant
>>> preference for male children I wonder who much longer before they
>>> fall behind the power curve. At some point their population will
>>> start to drop at the same time as it ages. This will lead to a
>>> situation similar to other nations where fewer people are in the
>>> work force.
>>>
>>> Another situation that will cost in the long run is their use of
>>> dirty coal. Medical costs and eventual clean up will be horrendously
>>> expensive. So will the human costs.
>>>
>>> It will be interesting to see although I doubt I will live long
>>> enough to see the tipping point.
>>
>> How have nations with an excess of males historically addressed it?
>> Not encouraging!
>>
>> No, the other things aren't encouraging either.
>
>

> Expansionism, read war, is the usual method, but against whom? The
> usual direction is towards the west. A brief exchange of nuclear
> devices will solve the population problem. Due to area a Chinese -
> Russian nuclear exchange leaves the Chinese in worst of of the two
> when it comes to recovery.

China could pick on SE Asia with somewhat more impunity, though the
Vietnamese don't take things lying down. Rather like the Soviets vs.
the Finns. India has only a few nukes, and its delivery vehicles aren't
that great.

The article rightly notes that wars between nuclear powers need to be
over quickly, or they go nuclear; the Chinese are more geared towards a
long war of attrition.

> The only other option possible large scale is mandatory
> sterilization
> for the males. Even if they tried that it would make the ratio of
> older to younger much worse.

Who's the Chinese incarnation of Indira Gandhi?

> I suppose they could do what Mexico has done for years by
> encouraging
> emigration, but to where? Again, the ratio of workers to retirees will
> suffer.

There are already plenty of overseas Chinese. But no, not many places
accept immigrants. Africa? The Chinese already do quite a bit of
business there.

As another poster mentioned, you can also 'buy' women by offering them a
better lifestyle. Again, Africa. The Chinese gov't could offer
payments of some kind.

>
> One of the drawbacks to most successful economic models is they
> rely
> on expanding economies.

Yup.

Dennis

[Bill]

In article <XnsA03E8F6B034FFts...@130.133.4.11>,
tsalagi...@hotmail.com says...

>
> China could pick on SE Asia with somewhat more impunity, though the
> Vietnamese don't take things lying down. Rather like the Soviets vs.
> the Finns.

They already tried Vietnam in 1979.

The Vietnamese kicked their arses back to Peking.

> India has only a few nukes, and its delivery vehicles aren't
> that great.

The terrain they'd have to fight across is probably the most hostile
environment on earth.

The Indians have invested a lot of men and money on working out how to
fight in that environment and have already won one war at incredibly
high altitudes and almost unbelievably low temperatures.

When was the last time China won a war? (Invading areas inhabited by
pacifist priests doesn't count)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kargil_war

India maintains a number of units specially trained and equipped for
operation at high altitude and low temperatures, along with some 39
battalions (about 15,000 men) of Gurkhas.

Plus, as a general rule, tyrannical autocracies attacking democracies
tend to get thrashed, followed by the fall of the tyrant concerned.

> The article rightly notes that wars between nuclear powers need to be
> over quickly, or they go nuclear; the Chinese are more geared towards a
> long war of attrition.

There has never been a war between two nuclear powers that went nuclear.

The only war between nuclear powers was the Kargil War mentioned above.
(It is doubtful that the Chinese had an effective nuclear weapon
delivery system available during the Soviet Chinese nonsense in 1969)

The only real war the Chinese have fought since WWII is also mentioned
above, and was over in a month, ending in Chinese defeat.

Your quoted article denies the lessons of history.

[dott.Piergiorgio]

Il 23/04/2012 05:03, Dan ha scritto:

>
>
> Expansionism, read war, is the usual method, but against whom? The usual
> direction is towards the west. A brief exchange of nuclear devices will
> solve the population problem. Due to area a Chinese - Russian nuclear
> exchange leaves the Chinese in worst of of the two when it comes to
> recovery.

China's usual method was often internal (China's history is full of
civil wars and warlord eras...) but there will be the issue of
containment (with Japan already having bringed back the Junyokans and in
process of bringing back the Kokubokans, isn't exactly a pleasant
perspective from Malaya to California and from Alaska to Australia...)

Best regards from Italy,
dott. Piergiorgio.

[dott.Piergiorgio]

Il 23/04/2012 10:08, Dan ha scritto:

>> Assuming the Chinese leaders are thinking rationally to gets lots of
>> women they will have to invade countries with large populations (greater
>> than 100 million). That is Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Japan, Pakistan
>> and the Philippines. Pacific coast Russia is also a possible source.
>>
>> Assuming that the West lets them, China could raid Africa. Although they
>> do tend to be racist against blacks.
>>
>> Andrew Swallow
>
> That's assuming women are the resource the Chinese government want. I
> was thinking in terms of taking land and physical resources with a
> certain percentage of their own men dying in combat. Acceptable losses
> and all that.

you forget that detail, E asian peoples & countries still has a strong
racism; I can't see how they can accept the strains of vanquished people
in their "races"....

[dott.Piergiorgio]

Il 23/04/2012 21:05, Dennis ha scritto:

>> Expansionism, read war, is the usual method, but against whom? The
>> usual direction is towards the west. A brief exchange of nuclear
>> devices will solve the population problem. Due to area a Chinese -
>> Russian nuclear exchange leaves the Chinese in worst of of the two
>> when it comes to recovery.
>
> China could pick on SE Asia with somewhat more impunity, though the
> Vietnamese don't take things lying down. Rather like the Soviets vs.
> the Finns. India has only a few nukes, and its delivery vehicles aren't
> that great.
>
> The article rightly notes that wars between nuclear powers need to be
> over quickly, or they go nuclear; the Chinese are more geared towards a
> long war of attrition.

because PLA *is* a defensive army; coupled with the sheer dimension and
diversity of the national territory, debellation and/or unconditional
surrender isn't a viable war objective against China, even for USA or
Russia; hence the seriousness of the china issues.

(aside that garrisoning an occupied china is beyond the capabilities of
even all the world's military combined...)

[Andrew Swallow]

Total population of North Korean is 25 million.

Insufficient to keep the Chinese happy.

Andrew Swallow

[Andrew Swallow]

Men have few problems accepting the women of vanquished people into
their beds. However they are less inclined to marry their slave girls.

Andrew Swallow

[dott.Piergiorgio]

Il 24/04/2012 00:13, Andrew Swallow ha scritto:

> Men have few problems accepting the women of vanquished people into
> their beds. However they are less inclined to marry their slave girls.

looks like you never visited Italy ;)