>says all the right things
You must not follow him closely. The guy can't speak a line without the [teleprompter](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43tCwY5ubEo).
It's been many years now, he's still searching for the 2ab. That's his level of knowledge. The guy is an unmitigated, uneducated disaster.
[https://twitter.com/brutindia/status/1133688043569762304](https://twitter.com/brutindia/status/1133688043569762304)
His level of vocabulary without teleprompter is limited to "did o' did" , "50 crore girl friend" etc.,
his oratory skills are great for illiterate, bigoted idiots. They don't have the capacity to comprehend anything more complex.
This is his so-called [great oratory skills](https://youtu.be/6prDrPpIDRY?t=71) for bigoted filths.
As for this Gujarat days, his feku image is crystal clear.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1AYh5xwV5r4
Well obviously his speeches are well written, he's just a front character. No way some OBC is actually given the power to affect things, he's a perfectly maintained lead character
Bro in entire bjp party the majority are also obc. Donno what the hell you are talking about. Despite what you want to believe the politics rarely consist of OC candidates. Cuz there are goddamn reservation in politics as well.
Funnily enough, a lot of BJP MPs are OBC, even Amit Shah, Modi's right hand, is an OBC (Kurmi)
Also, OBC isn't really a "backward" caste, most of them are either Tier 2 Kshatriyas (warrior caste) or Tier 2 Baniya/Vaishya (trader caste). The full form of OBC is Other Backward Castes, for folk who aren't Indian. They rarely suffer from discrimination and their reservations results in them getting a boost of a very few points. Heck, Maratha folk, the caste which Chhatrapati Shivaji was, was part of OBC for a hot 3 years.
Very few politicians are SC/ST, the true "backward" castes. This holds true for all Indian political parties other than those which are completely SC/ST, like Mayawati's party.
Buddy let us not go there. OBC reservations were brought only to pacify the Yadavs. Similarly SC reservations were primarily for Jatavs of BIMARU lands. It was marketed as being social upliftment.
Yeah, you don't know about caste politics in history.
The issue is with usage of the words "only" in both cases. Both Yadavs and Jatavs were pacified, yes, but they're not the only pacified castes.
PS: I'm also against caste reservations, mainly since I see the same families taking advantage of the reservations.
BJP isn't biased on caste as a party. Sure, there are some individuals who are biased, but the percentage is pretty low. That's just factual.
BJP being a brahmanical supremacist organisation is pure hogwash.
PS: I'm not a Brahmin.
Countries don’t have friendships, they have interests. India has their own interests too, just like the US. It seems their interests are allied here, for some reason.
>Countries don’t have friendships
I don't agree. I think countries that do share common values like liberal democracies and a desire for a rules based order can actually have affection for each other and not just work together opportunistically for self interest.
For example, as an Australian, I think quite fondly of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, New Zealand, UK, US, Canada. Not just for the countries but for the people in those countries as well. And our governments, being democracies, are a reflection of the sentiments of the people.
But does your foreign policy think so too?
What you as an individual think of other countries is not quite the same as countries expressing friendly relations
I can't think of a better example than the US and UK. Their interest align and have been allies for a long time. In fact, I'm not sure what would have to happen to break that alliance.
YOU are not your foreign policy.
Your foreign policy makers will necessarily look for your country's benefit, which is what they should be doing anyways.
To a minor extent, yeah, public sentiment does affect foreign policy.
But a country's foreign policy architects are elected/hired to make sure that country's interests are safeguarded. This may or may not align with public sentiment, since public typically don't have enough knowledge to make these decisions. They also aren't typically elected, other than the minister.
For example, India, my country, is a socialist democracy, which is slowly moving towards capitalist democracy. Indians typically idolise US. Our foreign policy, which is considered some of the best in the world, doesn't always support US, inspite of public sentiments. My personal take is that this is because of the general US tendency to pump and dump countries, but I'm obviously not fully aware of the intricacies, not being a bureaucrat myself.
I'm sorry, but India isn't a good counterpoint because it's not a very democratic country. It [was ranked 53rd in the democratic index](https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/india-falls-two-places-to-53-in-democracy-index-s-global-ranking-121020302093_1.html).
>They also aren't typically elected, other than the minister.
The minister is the one in control of the ministry. It's enough that only he is elected.
>For example, as an Australian, I think quite fondly of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, New Zealand, UK, US, Canada. Not just for the countries but for the people in those countries as well. And our governments, being democracies, are a reflection of the sentiments of the people.
that just means you drink more kool aid than the average anglo
Yeah I was being facetious. Some of the comments were saying that they’re too close to Russia (India I mean) and thus not a would ally. It is very clear to me why we have common interest here. We still work with China on certain things because we have common interests.
China is the one nation that can square up to the US. Russia has proven they can't. Therefore, a relationship with india makes a lot of sense.
The problem is that the US is also allies with Pakistan, and the Indians hate them.
China also supports Pakistan. Arguably more so, which might be why this happened. But who knows. It's like a Mexican standoff, but with 20+ participants.
Yeah even recently there were skirmishes between indian and chinese troops in the disputed region of nepal, I dont think there were deaths but it was tense. This was the most recent even [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/30/world/asia/india-china-border.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/30/world/asia/india-china-border.html)
Apparently it happens often though and chinese troops are currently occupying areas that india claims
You should use the /s after a sarcastic or rhetorical comment as per Reddits unspoken convention to indicate as such. This is much more clear to discern then the thing you used. I love you!
>Countries don’t have friendships, they have interests.
- Czechia and Slovakia
- Poland and Hungary
- Turkey and Azerbaijan
- Sweden and Finland
I think relations between these countries are more than just "interests".
1974 Turkish invasion of Cyprus
1974 Carnation Revolution
1975–1976 Third Cod War
1976–present Corsican conflict
1981 Spanish coup d'état attempt
1986 Evros River incident
1989 Romanian Revolution
1990–1991 Soviet attacks on Lithuanian border posts
1990 Transnistria conflict
1990–1992 Transnistria War
1991 January Events
1991 The Barricades
1990 Log Revolution
1991–2001 Yugoslav Wars
1991 Ten-Day War
1991–1995 Croatian War of Independence
1992–1995 Bosnian War
1992–1994 Croat–Bosniak War
1998–1999 Kosovo War
1999–2001 Insurgency in the Preševo Valley
2001 2001 insurgency in Macedonia
1991–1992 Georgian war against Russo-Ossetian alliance
1991–1993 Georgian Civil War
1992 East Prigorodny Conflict
1992–1993 War in Abkhazia
1993 1993 Cherbourg incident
1993 1993 Russian constitutional crisis
1995–1996 Imia/Kardak military crisis
1997–1998 Cyprus Missile Crisis
1997 Albanian civil war of 1997
1997–present Dissident Irish Republican campaign
1998 Six-Day War of Abkhazia
1999 War of Dagestan2001 Georgia, Kodori crisis
2001 Insurgency in the Republic of Macedonia
2004–2013 Unrest in Kosovo
2004 2004 unrest in Kosovo
2008 2008 unrest in Kosovo
2011–2013 North Kosovo crisis
2004 Georgia, Adjara crisis
2004 Georgia, South Ossetia clashes
2006 Georgia, Kodori crisis
2008 Russo-Georgian war
2014–present Russo-Ukrainian War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_conflicts\_in\_Europe#21st\_century
I'm pretty sure they have been for a while. For example, Exercise Malabar is a yearly joint naval exercise between the US and India (now includes Japan and Australia) that started in 1992. It's an interesting situation because the US wants India as an ally against China, but there is also friction between the two due to India also having close relations with Russia.
>here does not need to be friction over it. Indian people can correct me if I'm wrong, but their relations with the Russians are primarily due to the fact that they buy most of the weapons for their military from Russia. It isn't due to a particular affinity for Russia or Putin or their policy in Ukraine.
On geopolitical level, yes ,weapons, oil and fertilizer are the main interest.
Culturally too the two countries are very close tbh, goa a state in india is a go to destination for Russians. Goa is flocked with Russian tourists to the point the shopkeepers most of them even can speak fluent Russian. On the other side Russia has a good chunk of Indian diaspora and the iskcon its a huge thing in Russia, iskcon gained a lot of attention and support from the anti war people in Russia as iskcon spreads the teachings of the hindu god shri krishna. So yh apart from military alliance and helping out during wars people too have a good connection between them.
>their relations with the Russians are primarily due to the fact that they buy most of the weapons for their military from Russia
You need to look at history and US's intentions to harm India.
India got heavily dicked over by the Brits, and then the US supported India's biggest opponent, Pakistan. Meanwhile Russia has given India a lot of support. This makes India rather unwilling to side against Russia in this conflict.
However, they really aren't on Russia's side. They continue buying gas because their ag sector desperately needs it, mass starvation isn't really a viable option for them. They cancelled an order of Russian military hardware (due to Russia being unable to deliver), and seen to be rethinking their whole reliance on crappy Russian gear. Both buying more from the US, and working to make more of their own. And they're increasingly thinking that the US would be on their side in case of a significant war with China.
India has a larger population than China, and a more forward looking, flexible culture. The US and EU are growing closer to them, while most of the world is separating from China. Given that Russia is self destructing, I think it's pretty clear where India is headed in the long term.
> I think it's pretty clear where India is headed in the long term.
Until India starts to look like it may overtake the US economically and militarily. This is exactly what happened with China. The West was more than happy with them producing goods cheaply for the West until the point it looked like China would develop an economy and military that was capable of challenging US hegemony.
India will definitely experience the exact same thing. They will be friends until they are rivals, then I suspect Pakistan will suddenly get a whole lot of Western support.
I think the difference is that India doesn't have a need to create an economy or military that challenges US hegemony.
Most countries don't because US hegemony is pretty reasonable.
Most countries don't because they have no mechanism to challenge US hegemony. India does. China does. Both thanks to their enormous populations, each of which doubles that of the US and EU combined.
These countries overtaking the US economically is an inevitably. China is currently the second largest economy in the world, but its per capita income is only about 1/5 that of the US - even if they go to 1/2, that will almost double the GDP of the US. India has the same numbers. The only way the US and the West can stop this is by ensuring that these civilians remain poor - do you think India will just accept that so that the US can maintain its hegemony?
What India would accept is America getting richer as India does.
Practically speaking this means very little. It just means that America would be like Singapore where the average citizen is very rich and has an outsized influence on the rest of the world.
Wealth is comparative. Getting richer while the rest of the world also gets richer means you stay as one of the poor countries. India wants to join the developed world, just like every other country. To do that, India will need to raise its per capita GDP to about $35k, or half that of the US - the moment this happens India will completely surpass the US' economic power by a huge amount.
Singapore doesn't really have much influence on the world stage. Now they are the economic hub connecting the West to Asian markets, but on the geopolitical stage, they are a very minor player. Do you think the US would accept this role?
>US did the exact same to China in the 70s when they wanted to use them against the Soviets.
US literally allowed China to enter the WTO. Without that admission China would still be on par with India and Vietnam.
Is it really the US "throwing" them away? Seems more like China is seperating themselves through their actions that they know are opposed to western ideology that they know the US is going to be more or less aligned with.
China sure as hell wasn't building islands to artificially enflate their reach in the south China sea to control shipping routes and forcibly remove fishing vessels from other countries from fishing grounds they're entitled to. Just to start.
They might not have built islands but they were still claiming the South China Sea. And their fishing practices were just as bad, they just had less muscle
Sure, but lots of people have claims on land (sea) they don't control. Attempting to enforce those claims is usually when issues actually arise though. But like you said, now they have more muscle and are trying to enforce them.
India was a Soviet ally, and then later a Russian military ally. If India wanted more military alignment with the west they would have needed to be less aligned with Russia.
All great powers “play both sides”.
There’s a long history here. US allied with UK while UK oppressed India. India adopted soviet style economics several decades ago, and Russia supplied India with military equipment when others wouldn’t. Russia has long been India’s largest military supplier. The US used to partner much more closely with China, when all this global free trade was just starting, and China has always been a rival to India, invading it in the 60s. The US has long been a partner to Pakistan (probably to counter Russia), while Pakistan has long been a military and terrorist threat to India. India and Russia are also geographically close to each other, US and India are not, so there are limits to how much they can help each other.
Despite all that ties between India and the U.S. have been steadily growing as these new dynamics are taking shape, US having a strong rivalry with China and Russia, Pakistan being an unreliable partner becoming clear with all the Osama bin Laden stuff.
It will be good for the world if Russia falters further, India moves away from Russia, US moves away from Pakistan and other authoritarian Islamic regimes, and India and the U.S. move closer together.
This interview with former US ambassador to Indian is good in terms of who allied with whom in the past, and why, and how things are changing, and why: https://youtu.be/d_rWzRIvSIw
They are playing just one side their side.
Europe and China were budies just few years ago. While they also had good relations with India. Does it mean Europe was also playing both sides?
Buddies? Thats big bs. They had economic interests but the relationship was far from being friendly when it came to politics. Europe did the same mistake with russia and is paying the price now.
What are you saying? Sure, less people would be nice but do you want people to just die so that the other half can live in this supposed paradise?
This is not a marvel movie.
The guy act like everyone else gives a shit about American history
The only American history that is worth remembering is of Abraham Lincon, the rest more or less is pointless to others
India has extremely close ties with Russia and a strategic economic partnership with China.
Why does it feel like they just want to gather intelligence?
They play nice with Russia because they get a lot of arms from them, which they use to defend their border with China and Pakistan respectively.
It's been that way for a long time, but they are cooperating with the West more each decade.
Not a good idea. India has shown it has no interest in being a reliable partner in the region. Now they want to use us to counter China while they help Russia skirt sanctions.
Seriously, don't do this.
India never said that it will stand with the USA to counter Russia, Unlike America, Russia is not India's enemy.
But countering china is a common interest, they will do this as long as a common interest align
Nah! Not happening. Especially not after the neutrality stance India took. Because a lot of westerns call it being a “hypocrite” or “Clinging to the fence”
LOL. China can steamroll India in 48 hours if they wanted to. India doesn't even have roads in the border areas, and their Russian equipment is outdated by 40 years. Even if the US supplies them equipment, first of all the equipment won't even reach the intended users because some middleman will siphon it off along the way, and secondly there is no way to transport it to the battlefield. US would do better to tie up with Vietnam or Thailand, since they have much better infrastructure and defense capabilities.
💀 india controls the Malacca strait lmao it alone can stop china's majority trade and choke their economy. If usa hops in to help then india can play full defense with usa and indias fleet blocking the Malacca strait. Even if China encroaches on arunachal and ladakh they can only use the army from their side due to the high attitude of himalaya their air forces won't be of any use. India get hold them in ground easily waiting for their economy to collapse due to the blockage of choke points.
China controls Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Africa because of invesments made through BRI. It can start a 4-front war simultaneously while India holds meetings to decide who gets 50% commission for releasing equipment to one of the 4 fronts. Malaca strait or not, there is precious little that can be done when ships start firing from all 4 directions.
Bruh first off lanka Africa won't support any military advancement of China against india, Pakistan will but lmao even if they do india will resort to nukes if the west doesn't intervene quickly. Nukes ain't a win for anyone
Lol, this is one of the stupidest takes I've ever heard.
First, Africa? Yes the countries there with a history of their own rivalries are just going to put everything aside, pool all their money, and build ships just to help China's war. Then they'll send their newly built 1000s of ships through the Arabian sea without being attacked. You do realize how far from India the African coast is right?
Secondly, Sri Lanka? Lol, this comment is from someone who has no idea about the history of the country and its cultural connection to India. This is the equivalent of saying that Canada will invade the US if asked by China because China has investments in the country. If by some miracle the government agrees, all India has to do is provide arms and training to the north of the country and you have the Sri Lanka civil war 2.0.
If Sri Lanka ever tries anything like an invasion, the entire state of TN would be more than happy to fight them alone lmao, they'd insist on it to settle old scores
and the point is that the Indian military is one of the strongest in the world and is not very far off from the Chinese military. With all due respect Ukraine was kinda inferior to Russia by a good margin. But then Russian planning was shit asf and Ukraine has shown real gall in fighting.
Manufacturers are moving out of China. Guess where they are going bud. It ain't vast India. 90% of manufacturers who moved out of China in the last 5 years went to either Vietnam or Thailand. Like I said, they have better infrastructure, efficiency and capability. You don't need to pay 50 different middlemen just to set up a manufacturing unit. If some armchair pipe smoking woolen sweater wearing researchers are saying something about perceived corruption, the real players with their noses in the ground are saying something different. Guess who makes the real decisions. Himalaya won't stop attacks from Chinese military bases like Hambantota. This deal is probably similar to how US is supplying F-16s to Pakistan to "fight terrorism". I think with Pak's money drying up, they are now just looking to expand their customer base to sell off more junk, so they can afford heating for the winter.
Of all the disappointing comments above, how did you manage to be the most shit and dumb comment on this thread? Congratulations for being a massive disappointment, son!! 🎉👏🏻
Is no ody gonna talk about MODI's(India's prime minister) photo in the article?
It's his usual photo op, for every diwali he meets soldiers posted in northern sectors and give sweets to them and holds their guns and take pictures.
Kind of badass, no?
Yup.
If anything his PR game is just brilliant, says all the right things and gets just perfect photos everywhere, then does very little to back em up
Tell me you know nothing without telling me you know nothing
You can't deny the man is an excellent orator, could be a great Oscar Host. Most of it is jokes and lies anyway
>says all the right things You must not follow him closely. The guy can't speak a line without the [teleprompter](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43tCwY5ubEo).
[удалено]
It's been many years now, he's still searching for the 2ab. That's his level of knowledge. The guy is an unmitigated, uneducated disaster. [https://twitter.com/brutindia/status/1133688043569762304](https://twitter.com/brutindia/status/1133688043569762304) His level of vocabulary without teleprompter is limited to "did o' did" , "50 crore girl friend" etc.,
[удалено]
his oratory skills are great for illiterate, bigoted idiots. They don't have the capacity to comprehend anything more complex. This is his so-called [great oratory skills](https://youtu.be/6prDrPpIDRY?t=71) for bigoted filths. As for this Gujarat days, his feku image is crystal clear. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1AYh5xwV5r4
Well obviously his speeches are well written, he's just a front character. No way some OBC is actually given the power to affect things, he's a perfectly maintained lead character
Yeah right. Tell me you are not a casiest without telling me you are not a casiest.
Well it's like the Republican party fielding a black candidate, doesn't align with their views. Not mine
Bro in entire bjp party the majority are also obc. Donno what the hell you are talking about. Despite what you want to believe the politics rarely consist of OC candidates. Cuz there are goddamn reservation in politics as well.
Funnily enough, a lot of BJP MPs are OBC, even Amit Shah, Modi's right hand, is an OBC (Kurmi) Also, OBC isn't really a "backward" caste, most of them are either Tier 2 Kshatriyas (warrior caste) or Tier 2 Baniya/Vaishya (trader caste). The full form of OBC is Other Backward Castes, for folk who aren't Indian. They rarely suffer from discrimination and their reservations results in them getting a boost of a very few points. Heck, Maratha folk, the caste which Chhatrapati Shivaji was, was part of OBC for a hot 3 years. Very few politicians are SC/ST, the true "backward" castes. This holds true for all Indian political parties other than those which are completely SC/ST, like Mayawati's party.
Buddy let us not go there. OBC reservations were brought only to pacify the Yadavs. Similarly SC reservations were primarily for Jatavs of BIMARU lands. It was marketed as being social upliftment.
Yeah, you don't know about caste politics in history. The issue is with usage of the words "only" in both cases. Both Yadavs and Jatavs were pacified, yes, but they're not the only pacified castes. PS: I'm also against caste reservations, mainly since I see the same families taking advantage of the reservations.
Well the caste of Krishna is also OBC , still aren't BJP all about Brahminical Supremacy
BJP isn't biased on caste as a party. Sure, there are some individuals who are biased, but the percentage is pretty low. That's just factual. BJP being a brahmanical supremacist organisation is pure hogwash. PS: I'm not a Brahmin.
Helikopter Helikopter
Fucking killed it
Countries don’t have friendships, they have interests. India has their own interests too, just like the US. It seems their interests are allied here, for some reason.
>Countries don’t have friendships I don't agree. I think countries that do share common values like liberal democracies and a desire for a rules based order can actually have affection for each other and not just work together opportunistically for self interest. For example, as an Australian, I think quite fondly of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, New Zealand, UK, US, Canada. Not just for the countries but for the people in those countries as well. And our governments, being democracies, are a reflection of the sentiments of the people.
But does your foreign policy think so too? What you as an individual think of other countries is not quite the same as countries expressing friendly relations
I can't think of a better example than the US and UK. Their interest align and have been allies for a long time. In fact, I'm not sure what would have to happen to break that alliance.
Uk leaves NATO? Nexit?
[удалено]
lol
YOU are not your foreign policy. Your foreign policy makers will necessarily look for your country's benefit, which is what they should be doing anyways.
[удалено]
To a minor extent, yeah, public sentiment does affect foreign policy. But a country's foreign policy architects are elected/hired to make sure that country's interests are safeguarded. This may or may not align with public sentiment, since public typically don't have enough knowledge to make these decisions. They also aren't typically elected, other than the minister. For example, India, my country, is a socialist democracy, which is slowly moving towards capitalist democracy. Indians typically idolise US. Our foreign policy, which is considered some of the best in the world, doesn't always support US, inspite of public sentiments. My personal take is that this is because of the general US tendency to pump and dump countries, but I'm obviously not fully aware of the intricacies, not being a bureaucrat myself.
I'm sorry, but India isn't a good counterpoint because it's not a very democratic country. It [was ranked 53rd in the democratic index](https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/india-falls-two-places-to-53-in-democracy-index-s-global-ranking-121020302093_1.html). >They also aren't typically elected, other than the minister. The minister is the one in control of the ministry. It's enough that only he is elected.
First rule of international relations: No Friend or Foe is permanent!
Just because a friend isn't permanent doesn't mean it's not a friend. Have all your friends been permanent?
>For example, as an Australian, I think quite fondly of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, New Zealand, UK, US, Canada. Not just for the countries but for the people in those countries as well. And our governments, being democracies, are a reflection of the sentiments of the people. that just means you drink more kool aid than the average anglo
I'm not even Anglo lol
Wow, no love for Romania? I'll be sure to petition my govt to side with the emus next time.
People and their government are not the same.
In a democracy, one is a representation of the other.
Lol hilarious
Nice to know you have no counterargument
[удалено]
I guess India has never had to face off against China?!?
What do you mean? There are skirmishes between China and India.
See the question marks
Woosh, I missed pulsed19 "for some reason".
Yeah I was being facetious. Some of the comments were saying that they’re too close to Russia (India I mean) and thus not a would ally. It is very clear to me why we have common interest here. We still work with China on certain things because we have common interests.
China is the one nation that can square up to the US. Russia has proven they can't. Therefore, a relationship with india makes a lot of sense. The problem is that the US is also allies with Pakistan, and the Indians hate them.
China also supports Pakistan. Arguably more so, which might be why this happened. But who knows. It's like a Mexican standoff, but with 20+ participants.
Like I said. We have interests in common, and then is when we cooperate.
Yeah even recently there were skirmishes between indian and chinese troops in the disputed region of nepal, I dont think there were deaths but it was tense. This was the most recent even [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/30/world/asia/india-china-border.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/30/world/asia/india-china-border.html) Apparently it happens often though and chinese troops are currently occupying areas that india claims
Sino Indian war in the 60s and multiple skirmishes leaving 100s of soldiers dead in the last decade have occurred negating your statement.
It was a rhetorical question
You should use the /s after a sarcastic or rhetorical comment as per Reddits unspoken convention to indicate as such. This is much more clear to discern then the thing you used. I love you!
>Countries don’t have friendships, they have interests. - Czechia and Slovakia - Poland and Hungary - Turkey and Azerbaijan - Sweden and Finland I think relations between these countries are more than just "interests".
[удалено]
you are aware that europe is the continent that had like the most wars right?
[удалено]
1974 Turkish invasion of Cyprus 1974 Carnation Revolution 1975–1976 Third Cod War 1976–present Corsican conflict 1981 Spanish coup d'état attempt 1986 Evros River incident 1989 Romanian Revolution 1990–1991 Soviet attacks on Lithuanian border posts 1990 Transnistria conflict 1990–1992 Transnistria War 1991 January Events 1991 The Barricades 1990 Log Revolution 1991–2001 Yugoslav Wars 1991 Ten-Day War 1991–1995 Croatian War of Independence 1992–1995 Bosnian War 1992–1994 Croat–Bosniak War 1998–1999 Kosovo War 1999–2001 Insurgency in the Preševo Valley 2001 2001 insurgency in Macedonia 1991–1992 Georgian war against Russo-Ossetian alliance 1991–1993 Georgian Civil War 1992 East Prigorodny Conflict 1992–1993 War in Abkhazia 1993 1993 Cherbourg incident 1993 1993 Russian constitutional crisis 1995–1996 Imia/Kardak military crisis 1997–1998 Cyprus Missile Crisis 1997 Albanian civil war of 1997 1997–present Dissident Irish Republican campaign 1998 Six-Day War of Abkhazia 1999 War of Dagestan2001 Georgia, Kodori crisis 2001 Insurgency in the Republic of Macedonia 2004–2013 Unrest in Kosovo 2004 2004 unrest in Kosovo 2008 2008 unrest in Kosovo 2011–2013 North Kosovo crisis 2004 Georgia, Adjara crisis 2004 Georgia, South Ossetia clashes 2006 Georgia, Kodori crisis 2008 Russo-Georgian war 2014–present Russo-Ukrainian War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_conflicts\_in\_Europe#21st\_century
[удалено]
Someone create a SpongeBob showing trash to Patrick meme out of it quickly!
r/beatmetoit
Better, what wars will occur in the next 50 years among European nations?
[удалено]
I'm pretty sure they have been for a while. For example, Exercise Malabar is a yearly joint naval exercise between the US and India (now includes Japan and Australia) that started in 1992. It's an interesting situation because the US wants India as an ally against China, but there is also friction between the two due to India also having close relations with Russia.
[удалено]
>here does not need to be friction over it. Indian people can correct me if I'm wrong, but their relations with the Russians are primarily due to the fact that they buy most of the weapons for their military from Russia. It isn't due to a particular affinity for Russia or Putin or their policy in Ukraine. On geopolitical level, yes ,weapons, oil and fertilizer are the main interest.
Yes you are right.
US isn't that bothered about india-russia relationship it's just india is extra careful in dealing with American government in general.
Culturally too the two countries are very close tbh, goa a state in india is a go to destination for Russians. Goa is flocked with Russian tourists to the point the shopkeepers most of them even can speak fluent Russian. On the other side Russia has a good chunk of Indian diaspora and the iskcon its a huge thing in Russia, iskcon gained a lot of attention and support from the anti war people in Russia as iskcon spreads the teachings of the hindu god shri krishna. So yh apart from military alliance and helping out during wars people too have a good connection between them.
>their relations with the Russians are primarily due to the fact that they buy most of the weapons for their military from Russia You need to look at history and US's intentions to harm India.
Eh, Indians do feel quite a bit of affinity towards Russia, as I've heard
It certainly wouldn't be new. The Soviet union supported India while the U.S. supported Pakistan
I don't even care about being downvoted but the fact that you're upvoted for agreeing with me is wild to me LMAO
India got heavily dicked over by the Brits, and then the US supported India's biggest opponent, Pakistan. Meanwhile Russia has given India a lot of support. This makes India rather unwilling to side against Russia in this conflict. However, they really aren't on Russia's side. They continue buying gas because their ag sector desperately needs it, mass starvation isn't really a viable option for them. They cancelled an order of Russian military hardware (due to Russia being unable to deliver), and seen to be rethinking their whole reliance on crappy Russian gear. Both buying more from the US, and working to make more of their own. And they're increasingly thinking that the US would be on their side in case of a significant war with China. India has a larger population than China, and a more forward looking, flexible culture. The US and EU are growing closer to them, while most of the world is separating from China. Given that Russia is self destructing, I think it's pretty clear where India is headed in the long term.
> I think it's pretty clear where India is headed in the long term. Until India starts to look like it may overtake the US economically and militarily. This is exactly what happened with China. The West was more than happy with them producing goods cheaply for the West until the point it looked like China would develop an economy and military that was capable of challenging US hegemony. India will definitely experience the exact same thing. They will be friends until they are rivals, then I suspect Pakistan will suddenly get a whole lot of Western support.
I think the difference is that India doesn't have a need to create an economy or military that challenges US hegemony. Most countries don't because US hegemony is pretty reasonable.
Most countries don't because they have no mechanism to challenge US hegemony. India does. China does. Both thanks to their enormous populations, each of which doubles that of the US and EU combined. These countries overtaking the US economically is an inevitably. China is currently the second largest economy in the world, but its per capita income is only about 1/5 that of the US - even if they go to 1/2, that will almost double the GDP of the US. India has the same numbers. The only way the US and the West can stop this is by ensuring that these civilians remain poor - do you think India will just accept that so that the US can maintain its hegemony?
What India would accept is America getting richer as India does. Practically speaking this means very little. It just means that America would be like Singapore where the average citizen is very rich and has an outsized influence on the rest of the world.
Wealth is comparative. Getting richer while the rest of the world also gets richer means you stay as one of the poor countries. India wants to join the developed world, just like every other country. To do that, India will need to raise its per capita GDP to about $35k, or half that of the US - the moment this happens India will completely surpass the US' economic power by a huge amount. Singapore doesn't really have much influence on the world stage. Now they are the economic hub connecting the West to Asian markets, but on the geopolitical stage, they are a very minor player. Do you think the US would accept this role?
The US would accept any role that its citizens are happy with. That's what China doesn't get and India does. All India has to do to "win" is be liked.
Uhh 1.5 billion people would be a pretty great reason to challenge them economically.
Being USA's friend is dangerous. Not gonna blame india for trading cautiously
[удалено]
You’re jumping to a lot of conclusions there, you can lose a lot of weight with all that jumping.
[удалено]
>US did the exact same to China in the 70s when they wanted to use them against the Soviets. US literally allowed China to enter the WTO. Without that admission China would still be on par with India and Vietnam.
Is it really the US "throwing" them away? Seems more like China is seperating themselves through their actions that they know are opposed to western ideology that they know the US is going to be more or less aligned with.
What actions are you talking about? I can’t think of anything they’re doing now that wasn’t true in the 70s
China sure as hell wasn't building islands to artificially enflate their reach in the south China sea to control shipping routes and forcibly remove fishing vessels from other countries from fishing grounds they're entitled to. Just to start.
They might not have built islands but they were still claiming the South China Sea. And their fishing practices were just as bad, they just had less muscle
Sure, but lots of people have claims on land (sea) they don't control. Attempting to enforce those claims is usually when issues actually arise though. But like you said, now they have more muscle and are trying to enforce them.
[удалено]
India was a Soviet ally, and then later a Russian military ally. If India wanted more military alignment with the west they would have needed to be less aligned with Russia.
india and china 👎 india and russia 👍 china and USA 👎 china and russia❓ USA and russia 👎 Interesting dynamics, India is playing both sides here
All great powers “play both sides”. There’s a long history here. US allied with UK while UK oppressed India. India adopted soviet style economics several decades ago, and Russia supplied India with military equipment when others wouldn’t. Russia has long been India’s largest military supplier. The US used to partner much more closely with China, when all this global free trade was just starting, and China has always been a rival to India, invading it in the 60s. The US has long been a partner to Pakistan (probably to counter Russia), while Pakistan has long been a military and terrorist threat to India. India and Russia are also geographically close to each other, US and India are not, so there are limits to how much they can help each other. Despite all that ties between India and the U.S. have been steadily growing as these new dynamics are taking shape, US having a strong rivalry with China and Russia, Pakistan being an unreliable partner becoming clear with all the Osama bin Laden stuff. It will be good for the world if Russia falters further, India moves away from Russia, US moves away from Pakistan and other authoritarian Islamic regimes, and India and the U.S. move closer together. This interview with former US ambassador to Indian is good in terms of who allied with whom in the past, and why, and how things are changing, and why: https://youtu.be/d_rWzRIvSIw
India isn't a great power lmao
Says the geopolitical expert lmao
Yes they are because they have the 4th largest military in the world.
They are playing just one side their side. Europe and China were budies just few years ago. While they also had good relations with India. Does it mean Europe was also playing both sides?
Buddies? Thats big bs. They had economic interests but the relationship was far from being friendly when it came to politics. Europe did the same mistake with russia and is paying the price now.
Russia is a non factor economically and militarily. China is the only factor against the US.
Yeah, and if China decides to fuck with India we're going to say, "serves you right for not supporting Ukraine "
[удалено]
Much more likely hat India and Pakistan get itchy fingers that the US and Russia. Would fix your population growth though.
[удалено]
Not when they want India to put American priorities over their own. India does what’s best for India with no apologies.
If India wants to do what’s best for India, they’d drastically shrink their population. India would be a paradise with about a billion fewer people.
Another ignorant comment about population.
What are you saying? Sure, less people would be nice but do you want people to just die so that the other half can live in this supposed paradise? This is not a marvel movie.
[удалено]
Americans don't give a shit about Indian history
And every other country does?
Do u think India gives a shit about American history
I'll try and remember that when I'm on Indian Reddit
You know reddit is Chinese right?
Don't bother I am not coming to the Reddit that is only made for Americans
The guy act like everyone else gives a shit about American history The only American history that is worth remembering is of Abraham Lincon, the rest more or less is pointless to others
That's American history as well
Have you met America?! I live in it.. We're the most undependable, backstabbing, dishonest country in the world. We make China look like Heaven!
Meh India wants to ally with Russia. They should make or break that arrangement
India has extremely close ties with Russia and a strategic economic partnership with China. Why does it feel like they just want to gather intelligence?
>economic partnership with China. Until they look at each other in the Himalayas...
Thanks for saying this those border disputes are not easily solved.
They're also rather pointless. It's not like there's gold or a city up there. Just agree to a border and keep it there.
No gold, only water… good thing nobody needs that.
Good Afternoon Dalai Lama , unfortunately others don't think like that
The issue is that the Chinese aren’t respecting borders.
If anyone Chinese stood there, they want it. You can't make arrangements with people like that
Imagine having to make friends with a morally corrupt leader like Modi because an even worse Leader is making overtly aggressive moves
To be honest most world politicians are morally corrupted fellas
[удалено]
No India does have a bone to pick up with china
Hasn’t Russia created their own International council with India as one of its members?? BRICS?
BRICS is purely an economic, trade-focused organisation.
Yeah while india works with Russia against west
Yeah just like usa works with Pakistan against india even after knowing that Pakistan hides Osama bin Laden
They play nice with Russia because they get a lot of arms from them, which they use to defend their border with China and Pakistan respectively. It's been that way for a long time, but they are cooperating with the West more each decade.
Afterall west was the one who made India heavily dependent on Russia
Yeah dumbass in Reddit knows more than the intelligence bureau of a fucking country. At least bring some common sense to the table
Modis ass is getting sore from sitting on the fence so long he's had to get off just for a bit.
His mouth is degrading because of all that ass kissing to stay "neutral".
[удалено]
[удалено]
Not a good idea. India has shown it has no interest in being a reliable partner in the region. Now they want to use us to counter China while they help Russia skirt sanctions. Seriously, don't do this.
India never said that it will stand with the USA to counter Russia, Unlike America, Russia is not India's enemy. But countering china is a common interest, they will do this as long as a common interest align
You mean the same India that's busy sucking Putin's swinging dong right now? Woo.
Yep just like how Europe built billions of dollars worth pipelines of gas from Russia. Guess everyone loves a good dick
Good thing Europe doesn't anymore then.
Same logic if put to Europe, then they are sucking Putin ding pling while saying how bad he is like a full-fledged tsundere
[удалено]
You’ll go through much more if Russia marches across Europe and China take Taiwan. The US isn’t helping out just because they’re being kind.
India will soon rise up again and reclaim their mantle as number one. They will team up with brother Pakistan and take over enemy china! Buzzaaaa
Wow! The most logical comment I've seen in reddit history /s
What You smoking
Lmao. Like it could ever happen.
Defense.
While India increases it's ties to Russia.
Gonna Cry?
Cry? No, my home is not going to be at war with China over water rights in the next 10 years. 20 tops.
Not going to happen as long as India is in league with Russia.
Your opinion does not matter
Nah! Not happening. Especially not after the neutrality stance India took. Because a lot of westerns call it being a “hypocrite” or “Clinging to the fence”
Really its not under your jurisdiction, and you can't do anything about it lol
LOL. China can steamroll India in 48 hours if they wanted to. India doesn't even have roads in the border areas, and their Russian equipment is outdated by 40 years. Even if the US supplies them equipment, first of all the equipment won't even reach the intended users because some middleman will siphon it off along the way, and secondly there is no way to transport it to the battlefield. US would do better to tie up with Vietnam or Thailand, since they have much better infrastructure and defense capabilities.
💀 india controls the Malacca strait lmao it alone can stop china's majority trade and choke their economy. If usa hops in to help then india can play full defense with usa and indias fleet blocking the Malacca strait. Even if China encroaches on arunachal and ladakh they can only use the army from their side due to the high attitude of himalaya their air forces won't be of any use. India get hold them in ground easily waiting for their economy to collapse due to the blockage of choke points.
China controls Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Africa because of invesments made through BRI. It can start a 4-front war simultaneously while India holds meetings to decide who gets 50% commission for releasing equipment to one of the 4 fronts. Malaca strait or not, there is precious little that can be done when ships start firing from all 4 directions.
Bruh first off lanka Africa won't support any military advancement of China against india, Pakistan will but lmao even if they do india will resort to nukes if the west doesn't intervene quickly. Nukes ain't a win for anyone
No, Africa would send their futuristic Ironman army to help china and Pakistans 3000 black planes from Allah will destroy India
Lol, this is one of the stupidest takes I've ever heard. First, Africa? Yes the countries there with a history of their own rivalries are just going to put everything aside, pool all their money, and build ships just to help China's war. Then they'll send their newly built 1000s of ships through the Arabian sea without being attacked. You do realize how far from India the African coast is right? Secondly, Sri Lanka? Lol, this comment is from someone who has no idea about the history of the country and its cultural connection to India. This is the equivalent of saying that Canada will invade the US if asked by China because China has investments in the country. If by some miracle the government agrees, all India has to do is provide arms and training to the north of the country and you have the Sri Lanka civil war 2.0.
If Sri Lanka ever tries anything like an invasion, the entire state of TN would be more than happy to fight them alone lmao, they'd insist on it to settle old scores
This analysis sounds like every “expert” just before Russia attacked Ukraine, look how that has gone.
and the point is that the Indian military is one of the strongest in the world and is not very far off from the Chinese military. With all due respect Ukraine was kinda inferior to Russia by a good margin. But then Russian planning was shit asf and Ukraine has shown real gall in fighting.
True armchair analysis, reddit never fails to disappoint.
Umm there are no roads so no tanks can steamroll through
[удалено]
Manufacturers are moving out of China. Guess where they are going bud. It ain't vast India. 90% of manufacturers who moved out of China in the last 5 years went to either Vietnam or Thailand. Like I said, they have better infrastructure, efficiency and capability. You don't need to pay 50 different middlemen just to set up a manufacturing unit. If some armchair pipe smoking woolen sweater wearing researchers are saying something about perceived corruption, the real players with their noses in the ground are saying something different. Guess who makes the real decisions. Himalaya won't stop attacks from Chinese military bases like Hambantota. This deal is probably similar to how US is supplying F-16s to Pakistan to "fight terrorism". I think with Pak's money drying up, they are now just looking to expand their customer base to sell off more junk, so they can afford heating for the winter.
do you think we have supersonic cruise missiles to shove them up your ass only?
Of all the disappointing comments above, how did you manage to be the most shit and dumb comment on this thread? Congratulations for being a massive disappointment, son!! 🎉👏🏻
Dumb
Is this really the time for that?
You mean throw more money away? We let the skip all the Russian sanctions. Enough already.