End the Lie

Hypocritical insanity: U.S. demands China explain need for aircraft carrier

Decrease Font Size Increase Font Size Text Size Print This Page

By End the Lie

America has the world’s largest military budget, with a black budget exceeding most industrialized nations and a continuous flow of taxpayer dollars into new equipment and research.

The United States has more foreign military installations than any other nation on Earth.

We are currently involved in no less than five conflicts: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and Libya. This does not include covert activity in nations across the globe and our involvement in the so-called “Arab Spring,” especially in Syria. This also is not taking into account our global cyber warfare agenda.

America represents the vast majority of NATO troops, equipment, and we carry out by far the most operations under the NATO banner.

To any remotely rational person, the United States demanding an explanation from China regarding their aircraft carrier acquisition should be laughable.

If America doesn’t have to explain the constant equipment purchases, military expansions, covert operations, and troop movements, why does any other sovereign nation?

Today Victoria Nuland, spokesperson for the United States State Department, said that the aircraft carrier acquisition “is part of our larger concern that China is not as transparent as other countries. It’s not as transparent as the United States about its military acquisitions, about its military budget.”

I nearly choked on my coffee when I read this quote. If a black budget of billions of dollars that are never accounted for, along with trillions of dollars that just happen to go missing from the Pentagon like Rumsfeld revealed on September 10th, 2001, is transparent, then how is it possible for China to be less transparent?

Nuland revealed the mindset behind this claim in her statements, claiming that because many countries feel the need to explain themselves to the United States, China has to as well.

She says that “with many countries around the world, we have the kind of bilateral dialogue where we can get quite specific about the equipment that we have and its intended purposes and its intended movements.”

Personally, it looks to me like the higher-ups in the United States are starting to worry that our meddling in the South China Sea territorial dispute could result in China taking some preemptive action.

We are picking sides, as per usual, and this is likely to annoy and perhaps instigate the Chinese.

Nuland’s statements came immediately after China’s first aircraft carrier set sail for the first time, raising already considerable fears in Washington regarding China’s military expansion and “growing territorial assertiveness.”

The aircraft carrier that seems to be causing such a hubbub is actually a refurbished vintage Soviet ship which China has said is only going to be used for research and training purposes.

AFP slyly characterizes it as the Chinese seeking to “play down the vessel’s capability” without providing a single scrap of evidence to support this.

If they are playing down the vessel’s real capability, then AFP must know something about the actual capabilities of this Chinese aircraft carrier that they have yet to reveal.

I would be interested to know if there is anything that backs up this word choice or if it is just the usual fearmongering surrounding China and their growing military.

6 Responses to Hypocritical insanity: U.S. demands China explain need for aircraft carrier

  1. morris wise August 11, 2011 at 3:49 PM

    The refurbished Chinese aircraft carrier might look like a pile of junk but it will soon be capable of launching 35 long range aircraft each carrying two nuclear armed missiles. Stationing it 500 miles off the Western coast of the US will make it a respected weapon. Its aircraft will deal a devastating blow to any nation that attacks this floating pile of junk.

    • denk August 12, 2011 at 3:04 AM

      amerikka nuclear carriers have been plying along china’s coastline for yrs n conducting *war games* with every country hostile to china at china’s doorstep, openly egging other claimants of the spratly to take a more gungho stance to china.

      there’s a chinese saying
      +it’s rude to take without reciprocating+
      me think an appropriate response from china should be along this line
      *we intend to pay a friendly visit to haiwaii, may be play some war *games* with cuba or venenzuela one of these days*

      sounds reasonable to me

      • ReasonResonating August 25, 2011 at 7:26 AM

        They already surface subs in the middle of american war games. So based on your logic, if China comes to play war games in our sphere then we should just bomb their entire fleet. Since they only have a one carrier…

  2. kelze August 20, 2011 at 9:43 PM

    I would love to hear the sound of 1.3 billion Chinese telling America to piss off and mind their own stinking business.

    • ReasonResonating August 25, 2011 at 7:23 AM

      You would love that. Your probably also love the access to under aged children in China as well

  3. Realist September 15, 2012 at 2:02 PM

    I love how people live a quiet, free life under the protection of these black ops budgets and don’t have the sense to understand what life would be without them.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>