All wars are for control over local resources.  China's explosive growth and large population is unsustainable with their own sovereign resources (raw materials, energy, food, etc).  Their strategic concerns are valid.  The US influence is significant and there is historical precedence.  Set the way back machine for 1941 and how Roosevelt manipulated Japan into attacking to change public opinion towards the US entering an unpopular war.... an oil embargo.  Here is an interesting link... http://www.threeworldwars.com/world-war-2/ww2.htm
 
The next major war will be fought in the Asian theater, but it will not be between India and Pakistan, or US and China, or Japan and North Korea....  it will between China and Russia.  It will be over the Siberian territory and the natural resources there China will desperately need to prevent and economic collapse.  All saber rattling aside, the US needs China and China needs the US.  Publicly I expect outrage from the state department should any such act of aggression take place, but privately I expect to see the US to fail to "act in time" to prevent it.  It will be in the economic interests of the US to allow it.  China is and will continue to be for a long time to come the silent partner of the US in the world economy.
 
-john
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 7:19 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: Will future war be fought over energy?

In a message dated 1/24/05 11:50:07 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


."
    
   China believes the U.S. military will disrupt China's energy imports in any conflict over Taiwan, and sees the United States as an unpredictable country that violates others' sovereignty and wants to "encircle" China, the report said.
    
   Beijing's leaders see access to oil and gas resources as vital to economic growth and fear that stalled economic growth could cause instability and ultimately the collapse of their nation of 1.3 billion people.


Whoever controls the oil can also use it against the USA.  So if Bush and other Middle Eastern oil barons should decide to ally with China, the Middle East, or any other power the USA could be helpless unless the USA becomes more energy self sufficient at home also.    Another advantage that the USA citizen's have over China and other Third World nations presently, is that the USA can very quickly upgrade its society to a solar, wind and corn fueled ethanol society much faster than China since the average USA citizen is still wealthy enough to buy and upgrade to solar, wind and ethanol, so that the USA is not dependent on oil as much as China and other Third World nations will be.  The Average Chinese and Third World citizen does not have the funds to pay for solar or room to grown corn for ethanol.  The key in the USA will be to get enough USA citizens to upgrade to solar, wind and ethanol quickly enough while they still have a chance.  

The solar cells have just recently improved by 30 percent efficiency and are more durable to last longer and can collect infrared sunlight at night to make them 60 percent more efficient than present solar cells to make them cost effective and competitive with oil and other energies.  It is very likely that solar cells will improve their efficiency and durability every 10 years.  The James Bond movie, The man with the golden gun, showed that a solar cell with 95 percent efficiency had been invented by 1973, but is kept classified, so that we can be assured that solar cell efficiency will improve, to make solar cells a good energy investment.

Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\baron, Email: www.rhfweb.com\emailform.html
President Thomas D. Clark, Email: www.rhfweb.com\emailform.html,
Personal Web Page: www.rhfweb.com\personal
New Age Production's Inc., www.rhfweb.com\newage
Star Haven Community Services, at www.rhfweb.com\sh.
Radiation Health Foundation Trust at www.rhfweb.com

Making a difference one person at a time
Get informed. Inform others
.

Reply via email to