U.S. aircraft carrier joins military drills with S Korea and Japan

Good to see free countries working together.

Good stuff. Sends a strong messgae to China, Russia and North Korea.

Mess around and find out.

Even though there is no actual evidence to support NK troops in Russia, Moscow is full within its right to enter into a military alliance with whoever it sees fit (particularly a UN recognized country), totally consistent with international law.

It is further entitled to invite said ally onto the territory of Kursk of the Russian Federation to conduct military drills, live fire exercises or even participate in border security duties and hunt down insurgents.

Tokyo and Seoul need to put up or shut up: they host offensive US forces that project power throughout the worldwide US empire and threaten peace loving states. They are cogs - and not a benign, innocent ones - in that racketeering cartel.

JJEToday 05:17 pm JST

I think we can take a page from the arguments regarding Israel and say that supporting war criming russia is also a war crime. And the whole war is a crime of aggression.

Not sure what you are asserting there - but now that you mention US-ally Israel, who annexes and war crimes, you must agree the former and its other cogs are all equally culpable as the latter.

So is the crime of aggression against Syria, not solicited or authorised by the UN.

Let's be consistent.

JJEToday 05:27 pm JST

Not sure what you are asserting there - but now that you mention US-ally Israel, who annexes and war crimes, you must agree the former and its other cogs are all equally culpable as the latter.

Yes russia is as bad or worse than Israel. This I will allow.

So is the crime of aggression against Syria, not solicited or authorised by the UN.

Let's be consistent.

No attempt at annexation, terrorists still using Syria for international attacks. Nothing to compare.

If Russia is as bad as Israel - that means the latter's ally and sponsor is fully culpable for it.

That's right - US shielded and armed separatists in eastern Syria are launching attacks.

Nothing to compare because US has no legal UN mandate to be there doing what they are doing.

The US administration is the responsible of the ongoing war in Gaza supporting the State of Israel, the main provider of weapons in Ukraine, and simultaneously trying to destabilize Asia with the continuous hysteria about China. Enough said. And yet we have to reprimand the warmongering sentiment for the sake of peace and diplomacy.

Double standards and sheer hypocrisy is what really defines Washington. The election in Japan spoke clearly, no expenses for the American made weapons. The US election will define the future of the nation, and the rest of the world can only celebrate :)

There was no problem during the first Trump administration other (for pro military industrialists❩ than the fact the weapons sales declined due to Trump making peace with Kim.

FosToday 05:58 pm JST

The US administration

Is not responsible for the aggression around here, no matter how many times you try to shift the blame. The blame lies with China, North Korea, and Russia.

The election in Japan spoke clearly, no expenses for the American made weapons.

It said nothing of the sort. The result was a rebuke to the LDP for the slush fund scandal (and, to a lesser extent, the Unification Church scandal), and other domestic concerns like low wage growth and high cost of living.

Even if the CDP gets in next time (and they may well do), they will continue the US alliance and weapons purchases.

Again you are trying to manufacture blame on the US where there is none, and again you are talking nonsense.

@Isabelle

Accurate and astute comment as always, very impressive.

JJENov. 13 05:48 pm JST

If Russia is as bad as Israel - that means the latter's ally and sponsor is fully culpable for it.

That's right - US shielded and armed separatists in eastern Syria are launching attacks.

Nothing to compare because US has no legal UN mandate to be there doing what they are doing.

Far more mandate than russia has for its war of aggression.

FosNov. 13 06:02 pm JST

The US election will define the future of the nation, and the rest of the world can only celebrate :)

You are celebrating the installation of Israel friends and China hawks? An interesting choice.

Isabelle

The US is not responsible for the aggression around here, no matter how many times you try to shift the blame. The blame lies with China, North Korea, and Russia.

You have a very limited and simplistic perspective of all of this, there seems to be no nuanced and layered appreciation for the history and cultural/historical fabric of this region. The US is very a recent imposter to this region - one who utilized the famous 'gunboat diplomacy' to force its way in and begin imposing a hegemonic agenda in places like Japan. Korea and China to exploit the region for wealth. I think we touched on the multitude of big wealthy American families whose fortune was established in the trade of Chinese Opium of the 1800s.

They have subsequently interfered heavily in the politics of the region ever since - far more than any other country has. Of course, that continues to this day, now having ringed China with military bases under the simplistic pretext that they are the 'bad guys', which certain people just accept as the reliable meta narrative and swallow hook, line and sinker.

Is it Japan and South Korea forces that join U.S. forces for joint military exercises or is it the other way round?

TamaramaToday 07:02 am JST

You have a very limited and simplistic perspective of all of this

You do not know me, so have no idea of my expertise or experience.

history and cultural/historical fabric of this region

Regardless of what that history is, it does not alter (and certainly does not excuse) the current aggression from China/North Korea/Russia.

having ringed China with military bases under the simplistic pretext that they are the 'bad guys'

No, having installed military bases due to agreements with/requests from the countries in question, who rightly view China as a severe threat.

All US bases are there legally, in contrast to China's illegal island building and subsequent militarization.

No, having installed military bases due to agreements with/requests from the countries in question, who rightly view China as a severe threat.

Wonderful! I think that the agreement between Russia and North Korea on strategic partnership does not cause negative emotions in you either. This treaty will bring nothing but benefits and tranquility to the Korean region.

PrimusinterToday 11:30 am JST

I think that the agreement between Russia and North Korea on strategic partnership does not cause negative emotions in you either.

You mean North Korea joining an active, unprovoked, illegal war of aggression under the command of an accused war criminal?

Very different to building a defensive military base.

I think that the agreement between Russia and North Korea on strategic partnership This treaty will bring nothing but benefits and tranquility to the Korean region.

And death to Ukrainians who have been defending against Russian aggression for 10 years and a full on invasion for the better part of 3 years. That being your idea of "tranquility" you must be hoping your own country is invaded asap. Correct?

They have subsequently interfered heavily in the politics of the region ever since - far more than any other country has. Of course, that continues to this day,

Including the defence of China in WWII but amazing that always slips the minds of pro-China hawks. Its ok when they defend you, but not ok to defend against you when your the aggressor. I understand completely. The US lost over 111,000 dead and 250,000 injured military personnel in the pacific conflict which not only defended America but also most nations in the region including China. America being the good guys doesnt rate a mention or acknowledgement from the likes of some posters.

Hardly being balanced in your arguments, so what does that make your content? Unreliable and inaccurate I would say.

You mean North Korea joining an active, unprovoked, illegal war of aggression under the command of an accused war criminal?

Very different to building a defensive military base.

I suspect that you don't understand what you've written yourself. In the style of Taiwan. It's a good thing that verbs in English do not have a gender identity, because every time I strain to imagine which one of you with Peter is "he". Not the point. I meant that your entire coalition will eventually leave North Korea alone. And it will become quieter in that region. And on your peaceful "defensive"military bases, all your scrap metal will rust and trees will grow. Not more.

And death to Ukrainians who have been defending against Russian aggression for 10 years and a full on invasion for the better part of 3 years. That being your idea of "tranquility" you must be hoping your own country is invaded asap. Correct?

What do Ukrainians have to do with North Korea? Peter14, you have copied the wrong paragraph from your instructions :)

Peter14, do you remember I wrote that Russians broke into Kupyansk? But then it was unknown if they had managed to hold at position. So now, telegram channels report that they could take a position! Now the gradual liberation of the city from the Ukrainian military begins. No details yet.

Now the gradual liberation of the city from the Ukrainian military begins.

Sorry but you seem to have your facts mixed up yet again. Let me correct you.

The gradual subjugation of Kup'yans'k city in Ukraine, by the Russian military is about to begin.

What do Ukrainians have to do with North Korea? Peter14, you have copied the wrong paragraph from your instructions :)

Ukraine is where many North Korean solider have been sent to die gruesome deaths along side their Russian masters. But you already knew that. Just feigning ignorance you faker you.

And here we are again: Ukraine, Middle East, now China, tomorrow Taiwan.

Instead of sending a diplomatic envoy to make any attempt of dialogue and peace in the region, the mighty US administration sends a nuclear warships to flex their muscles, and involve partners like Japan and South Korea who have more important issues to deal internally.

We have been discussing conflicts and wars where objectively 90% of the weapons being used are American-made, call it a coincidence, less so the fact that financial market overseas are on all time high and the the top five weapons manufacturers are all based in the US. Go figure.

We mention agreements, expertise, UN mandate. I would just say 'Elementary Watson'

FosToday 05:57 pm JST

And here we are again: Ukraine, Middle East, now China, tomorrow Taiwan.

Yes, Free Ukraine and Free Taiwan need protecting.

Instead of sending a diplomatic envoy to make any attempt of dialogue and peace in the region, the mighty US administration sends a nuclear warships to flex their muscles, and involve partners like Japan and South Korea who have more important issues to deal internally.

They can take time out of their schedules to do a military exercise. Different people involved anyways.

We have been discussing conflicts and wars where objectively 90% of the weapons being used are American-made, call it a coincidence, less so the fact that financial market overseas are on all time high and the the top five weapons manufacturers are all based in the US. Go figure.

Still 1% of gdp. Still 6-10 Chinese.

C. Powell

It is a fairy tale which might work for some naive diplomats in Washington, to convince them that what they are doing is ethical for the world, instead of making them realize they are instead destabilizing countries and generating havoc for the sole reasons linked to covetousness. The US spends 43% of global military spending, more than the next 26 countries combined, 25 of whom are allies. Go figure. You've got to believe it yourself first :)

more than the next 26 countries combined, 25 of whom are allies.

Fake. As both China and Russia are in the "next 26 countries" 25 of whom are allies, can you tell us is it China or Russia that is allied with the US? Interested to know.

Careful, pirates!!..

Peter14

Can you tell us.... Interested to know.

The data refers to countries who are allies and to whom United States of America sells weapons to. Also is worth considering that the White House contributed 68% of Nato's total expenditure with $860 billion in 2023.

On the same year, military spending by the USA rose by 2.3 per cent to reach $916 billion in 2023

China, the world’s second largest military spender, allocated an estimated $296 billion to the military, an increase of 6% from 2022. 

Russia’s military spending increased by 24% to an estimated $109 billion in 2023.

The data is from Sipri, the authoritative Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. 

Not China or Russia propaganda.

Also worth noting that in 2024 alone the US administration has allocated over $18 billion dollars to the IsraelI IDF, to conduct the war in Gaza and Lebanon.

Ukraine is a different account, you don't want to go there. Furthermore in the last month the Pentagon has approved orders for weapons to be shipped to Japan, Taiwan and South Korea worth at least $7 billions dollars. We can provide links for that should you wish, all coming from Western news agencies.

@Fos No surprise with those numbers as China is building a regional defense to counter USA aggression. The USA needs a dozen nuclear aircraft careers "to police" the world.

Certain quarters continue to be unable to refute the 1% per gdp defense industry figure. They declare that the US supplying its allies is unethical. Actually, the US being able to reach across the world and throw back China and russia is profoundly ethical. Clearly the Ukraine war shows us the US does not spend enough.

C. Powell

Us spends 1% GDP in weapons

Just when you think they’ve learned a lesson.

I can sense a bit of déjà vu. As if we witnessed this situation before….

“Every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions”.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyyhvgZpleo

The data refers to countries who are allies and to whom United States of America sells weapons to.

Still doesnt make 25 of the top 26 defensive spending nations allies. Just a fake assertion to push a false narrative.

1, Selling weapons to a nation does not make them in an alliance or allies.

India, Columbia, Ukraine, Singapore, Pakistan, Brazil, Algeria, Taiwan, Mexico, Indonesia and Iran are all in 2023 list of top 27 nations for defense spending. None of which are treaty allies of America, some or most have defense equipment from Russia, China and/or America in their arsenals. Your bogus claim is just that, bogus. This from the source you mentioned.

https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/2024-04/2404_fs_milex_2023.pdf

This from the source you mentioned

Apart from China (12%, less than one third of the military expenditure of US) and Russia, I can see in the list countries like India, Saudi Arabia, UK, Germany; Ukraine, France, Japan, South Korea, Italy, Australia, Poland, Israel…. And I can go on.

All these countries are allies of United States of America, are they not? 

What is striking in the same graph you choose is that Taiwan (Washington’s peer) spent more than Iran in 2023, a country considered from the US administration a threat. 

Australia (another ally of Washington), spends more than double of Turkey in 2023. I will spare you the size of population of these countries cause I think you already know them.

Military expenses in 2023 in $ b.

Taiwan 16,6

Iran 10,3

Australia 32,2

Turkey 15,8

This is the deterrence Made in USA which will create a peaceful world, perhaps in your mind.

All these countries are allies of United States of America, are they not?

Not.

Perhaps some have a different idea of allies. And there may be some surprises.

For instance, in the event Australia were attacked, the ANZUS treaty does not require America to defend Australia. In the event one party is attacked, the treaty requires immediate "consultations" between parties. There is no clause that locks participating members into a military response in defense of another.

ANZUS has been activated only once, by Australia when the US was attacked on 9/11. PM John Howard was visiting the US at the time of the attacks and activated it immediately and informed the US that Australia would militarily aid the US.

In my mind a defense treaty where nations defend each other, as article 5 of NATO promises, is the only type of treaty that means anything much. Other treaties may stipulate friendship, training, technology and intel sharing, but if the members will not defend each other then it falls short of a true defensive alliance.

Bearing that in mind, the US is not allied to India, Columbia, Iran, Singapore, Taiwan etc and though the US supports Israel, no Israeli troops have ever joined in any large conflict the US has been involved in, perhaps any at all. One way defensive alliances are also questionable in my mind.

As for why America has a large % of defense spending from the world, their systems are more expensive and generally better made, longer lasting, easier to get parts for and with many nations friendly to each other, makes supporting them easier. Many poor nations rely on cheaper Russian and even cheaper Chinese weapons that are of inferior design and less robust. Notable exceptions are the Kalashnikov assault rifle that is cheap reliable and robust, and the readily available T-72 tanks that have proven vulnerabilities with turrets being blown off when hit in battle.

Suffice to say that other than NATO and one or two other defensive treaties the US has with Japan and Israel etc, they may be friends in many ways, but it does not mean they would get US boots on the ground to defend them when needed. Especially with Trump favoring Autocratic nations over Democratic ones.

Pray tell, which country is attacking Australia in the Southern Hemisphere far to the south? Indonesia? Which country is attacking the USA surrounded by large oceans on both sides? Mexico? This is the fundamental contradiction of the Anglo-Saxon world, feeling threatened for little reason and projecting power across oceans, thus wars.

For instance, in the event Australia were attacked,

For instance, in the event Australia were attacked,

Pray tell, which country is attacking Australia

Pray tell, where didn't you learn to read?

This is the fundamental contradiction of the Anglo-Saxon world, feeling threatened for little reason and projecting power across oceans, thus wars.

The Anglo-Saxon world isn't invading anyone. Your Russian boy is though, bigly.

The starting point of this conversation was NOT whose country is manufacturing the best weapons, but why the top producer of arms in the world, United States of America, decides to send nuclear war ships, time and time again to a continent where it don’t belong, to incite tensions in the region, involving allies that have more pressing domestic issues, instead of sending a diplomatic envoy to Beijing?

We also noted that the two bloodiest conflicts in the world today, Ukraine and the Middle East, see 90% of weapons made in America being used, and no sign of a peace accord. 

Hence the consideration, American masterminds and their fellows have all the interests to divert attention to the wrong of China and Russia.

Pray tell, which country is attacking Australia in the Southern Hemisphere far to the south? Indonesia? Which country is attacking the USA surrounded by large oceans on both sides? Mexico? This is the fundamental contradiction of the Anglo-Saxon world, feeling threatened for little reason and projecting power across oceans, thus wars.

For instance, in the event Australia were attacked,

An overly simplistic view and incorrect.

Nations have defense forces in case they need them, for defense.

Australia could be attacked by any nation in the future. Unlike some I do not suggest I have the power to see the future. Current trends would mean a "possible" future foe could be a small number of nations that are either directly unfriendly to us or hostile to our friends or "allies". And that could change, as nothing is certain.

Long range missiles are in the arsenal of growing numbers of nations. Those nations with ICBM missiles may or may not choose in the future to use them against Australia or an ally prompting a response for Australia.

Everyone knows how it goes, the examples in the middle east of tit for tat attacks is recent and well documented. A couple of years ago there was relative peace there. Things change.

As for your direct question

Pray tell, which country is attacking Australia in the Southern Hemisphere far to the south?

Thankfully, nobody. But as with all nations we must remain vigilant and prepared at all times. It is rare these days to receive a declaration of war beforehand. Attacks are a surprise (it makes them more effective I guess) and must still be defended against where possible.

You are seeing ghosts. The Chinese will be lobbing conventional ICBMs on Australian ports to destroy Australian ports that receive Chinese goods? King and Country. Off you go.

Long range missiles are in the arsenal of growing numbers of nations. Those nations with ICBM missiles may or may not choose in the future to use them against Australia or an ally prompting a response for Australia.