4 ms·

The Pakistan-India conflict is orthogonal to America and China's.

slt2021 1y ago
It is useful for the US to isolate China from Iranian oil resources. Currently Iranian oil can go via Pakistan to China. Thats how Us operates: exploits old conflicts for its own immediate benefit, like it did with Ukr-Rus war. If some people die on both side it is acceptable for the Us, because these are not Us citizens dying
- maxglute 1y ago
  CPEC isn't viable energy coordidor yet - no completed oil/gas infra from Iran to Pak to PRC. Which only leaves trucks, and the roads not designed to support 5000+ trucks per day for Irans 1m barrels per day.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > Thats how Us operates: exploits old conflicts for its own immediate benefit, like it did with Ukr-Rus war. This is realpolitik 101, and every powerful society does it. Like, India didn't help sever Bangladesh f/k/a East Pakistan from Islamabad because it was being nice. (I'm not saying every society exploits every old conflict. Just that if you need to do something, you start with extant fault lines. Like, if you're going to war with Nazi Germany you don't sideline the Soviets and British because that's mean or whatnot.) Also, the problem with Pakistan isn't that its ports could be used to import oil. It's that the ports are being configured for Chinese blue-water operations.
  - slt2021 1y ago
    I can understand seizing opportunities in situations like this, however I cannot support instigating and creating these situations in the first place. https://m.economictimes.com/news/defence/pakistans-defence-minister-admits-support-for-terror-groups-says-did-this-dirty-work-for-us/amp_articleshow/120608504.cms https://m.economictimes.com/news/defence/pakistans-defence-m...
    - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
      > cannot support instigating and creating these situations in the first place With all due respect, what you and I support isn’t super relevant to what will happen over the coming weeks.
- lazyeye 1y ago
  It doesn't matter what it is, or where it's happening in the world, some people will always make it about the US. Always. It's tiresome.
  - shadowgovt 1y ago
    The US is the third largest country on the planet with the second largest nuclear arsenal and controls the currency that other countries denominate their international debt in. There's very little that happens in the world that does not touch or get touched by the United States. The USA doesn't have much choice in this.
JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> Pakistan-India conflict is orthogonal to America and China's India is negotiating trade deals and weapons purchases with the West. (Historically, Moscow was its security source.) Pakistan got some F-16s in 2022, but otherwise has been deepending ties with Beijing. It's wild to suggest America's cold war with China is orthogonal to this conflict.
- sandspar 1y ago
  Ask a random Indian in India whether he'd be willing to die for the US. The US and China have interests in the area, so maybe I shouldn't have said the word "orthogonal". But the original commenter said a conflict between India and Pakistan would be a "US-China proxy war". Come on. India and Pakistan have enough reasons to hate each other. They don't need America or China's goading. And neither India nor Pakistan would accept their conflict being characterized as a US-China war.
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > Ask a random Indian in India whether he'd be willing to die for the US Not how proxy wars work. > India and Pakistan have enough reasons to hate each other. They don't need America or China's goading Not how proxy wars work. The backers enable. The proxies fight. > neither India nor Pakistan would accept their conflict being characterized as a US-China war This is how proxy wars work. They literally don’t if the proxies realise they’re fighting a foreign war on their homeland.
    - sandspar 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
        I'm really not claiming anything that requires more than a cursory review of the history of proxy wars. Or, like, talking to someone who lives in a country we've recently proxy warred. The people fighting in the wars we proxied were fighting for a domestic cause. Outside powers then glommed onto that dispute. Nobody thought they were dying for the superpowers' ends; they were fighting a local civil war or rebellion or reconquest.

slt2021 1y ago

It is useful for the US to isolate China from Iranian oil resources. Currently Iranian oil can go via Pakistan to China. Thats how Us operates: exploits old conflicts for its own immediate benefit, like it did with Ukr-Rus war. If some people die on both side it is acceptable for the Us, because these are not Us citizens dying

maxglute 1y ago
CPEC isn't viable energy coordidor yet - no completed oil/gas infra from Iran to Pak to PRC. Which only leaves trucks, and the roads not designed to support 5000+ trucks per day for Irans 1m barrels per day.
JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> Thats how Us operates: exploits old conflicts for its own immediate benefit, like it did with Ukr-Rus war. This is realpolitik 101, and every powerful society does it. Like, India didn't help sever Bangladesh f/k/a East Pakistan from Islamabad because it was being nice. (I'm not saying every society exploits every old conflict. Just that if you need to do something, you start with extant fault lines. Like, if you're going to war with Nazi Germany you don't sideline the Soviets and British because that's mean or whatnot.) Also, the problem with Pakistan isn't that its ports could be used to import oil. It's that the ports are being configured for Chinese blue-water operations.
- slt2021 1y ago
  I can understand seizing opportunities in situations like this, however I cannot support instigating and creating these situations in the first place. https://m.economictimes.com/news/defence/pakistans-defence-minister-admits-support-for-terror-groups-says-did-this-dirty-work-for-us/amp_articleshow/120608504.cms https://m.economictimes.com/news/defence/pakistans-defence-m...
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > cannot support instigating and creating these situations in the first place With all due respect, what you and I support isn’t super relevant to what will happen over the coming weeks.
lazyeye 1y ago
It doesn't matter what it is, or where it's happening in the world, some people will always make it about the US. Always. It's tiresome.
- shadowgovt 1y ago
  The US is the third largest country on the planet with the second largest nuclear arsenal and controls the currency that other countries denominate their international debt in. There's very little that happens in the world that does not touch or get touched by the United States. The USA doesn't have much choice in this.

JumpCrisscross 1y ago

> Pakistan-India conflict is orthogonal to America and China's India is negotiating trade deals and weapons purchases with the West. (Historically, Moscow was its security source.) Pakistan got some F-16s in 2022, but otherwise has been deepending ties with Beijing. It's wild to suggest America's cold war with China is orthogonal to this conflict.

sandspar 1y ago
Ask a random Indian in India whether he'd be willing to die for the US. The US and China have interests in the area, so maybe I shouldn't have said the word "orthogonal". But the original commenter said a conflict between India and Pakistan would be a "US-China proxy war". Come on. India and Pakistan have enough reasons to hate each other. They don't need America or China's goading. And neither India nor Pakistan would accept their conflict being characterized as a US-China war.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > Ask a random Indian in India whether he'd be willing to die for the US Not how proxy wars work. > India and Pakistan have enough reasons to hate each other. They don't need America or China's goading Not how proxy wars work. The backers enable. The proxies fight. > neither India nor Pakistan would accept their conflict being characterized as a US-China war This is how proxy wars work. They literally don’t if the proxies realise they’re fighting a foreign war on their homeland.
  - sandspar 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
      I'm really not claiming anything that requires more than a cursory review of the history of proxy wars. Or, like, talking to someone who lives in a country we've recently proxy warred. The people fighting in the wars we proxied were fighting for a domestic cause. Outside powers then glommed onto that dispute. Nobody thought they were dying for the superpowers' ends; they were fighting a local civil war or rebellion or reconquest.