My Take on a REALLY Good Spiegel Article:

...also-and this is based upon  ONLY anecdotal evidence: The shipping routes for the world's supply of oil depends on the US Navy spending a reported $160billion to protect the shipping lanes. As pressure builds for us to scale back on military spending and rely less on oil from the Middle East it may just be other countries preparing to pick-up the slack.
I am being overly-optimistic, but I think that there will be a point where the US need for long-distance importation of fuel will drop precipitously. That will make the obligation of our Navy to be a party to securing as much of the shipping lanes a financial favor that we don't need to pay for anymore. If we suddenly void patrols in certain parts of the world it would become a haven for even more piracy.
The reason why I bring this up is because there have been rumors-for a couple of years now- that US military contractors are guarding mining operation in Afghanistan.
Meaning: We are business partners on some level, not JUST potential adversaries.
This is just MY take, but I see that there is less actual animosity between us and China than is being sold, but neither the US or anyone else wants to admit we are 'drawing-down' on an international scale.

Financially, we have China by the balls. Their corrupt "Communist" leaders hold huge stakes in the banks. If we tell them to go pound sand on on our debt-we will be fine-their banks won't.
 We wouldn't do it without 'cause'. Their surplus would evaporate overnight and all of the infrastructure projects they are using to employ (and placate)peasants who would otherwise be unemployed AND they would have to borrow money to keep the peasants fed and housed.
We could also slow imports-or at the very least-force them to import what our treaties say (they currently aren't honoring the trade agreements on us importing goods there).

What I think is this: Since the end of the Soviet Bloc, I THINK (just a hunch) the West has been gradually hinting at this. I think the first Gulf War was an example: If memory suits me, we essentially CHARGED some of the coalition forces for our support role just so they could participate.
If we just maintained our present force, it would take decades for any other power to rival our abilities.
In short: We are shoring-up their power with ours for diplomatic means.
My HOPE is that this trend is for us to use our economic might to force other nations to carry their share of the burden.
The reason I say this is because of what I actually KNOW: N. Korea is evil (as a government) and they have made pacts with Burma to develop nuclear weapons and missile systems, and Burma has (since at least 2005) has been selling uranium to Iran.
If we extricate ourselves from NEEDING things that travel through those regions and no body takes up the slack...who foots the bill? Who actually does it?
 Is our Navy going to become a mercenary force to keep other nations' finances in order?
Another hope is that, we can stop acting as an empire in a way that grants everybody their own security by their own means.
Of course, I could be wrong and we could be hurtling inexorably towards WW III.
But I think that half a century of smart, well intentioned diplomats have been trying to head this off in advance. There are a lot of smart people working for our government (and others'). I think that they saw much of this coming.
Ant way...click the link, read the story. The translation might be bad and might have missed it, but this is my analysis-but I am just a citizen. I could be wrong.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/strengthening-of-chinese-navy-sparks-worries-in-region-and-beyond-a-855622.html#ref=rss

Countering the Argument that We are Headed for Nuclear War-My Take on: "WHILE AMERICA SLEEPS: Risking Nuclear Armageddon" By Stephen Lendman

" WHILE AMERICA SLEEPS: Risking Nuclear Armageddon » |: "By Stephen Lendman

Risking Nuclear Armageddon

Irresponsible leaders risk the unthinkable. Media scoundrels cheerlead mindlessly. So do neocon think tanks. Ordinary people are more concerned about mundane trivia than survival.   Nero didn’t fiddle while Rome burned. The violin wasn’t invented for another 1,500 years. Today’s officials go where earlier ones wouldn’t dare. They risk regional or global disaster. War on Syria and/or Iran may ignite more than leaders bargain for."

'via Blog this'

 I agree with the risks, but I am somewhat hopeful as far as the involvement of China and Russia are concerned.
   Russia talks a good game, but they have made constant excuses for years delaying promised missile and other technology to Iran. Russia has an Islamist extremist problem of their own and they don't want them to be just across the border from a nuclear-armed country with leaders who support the ideology of the extremists.
   We have China-specifically their leadership-over a barrel: Much of the banking industry in China is controlled by government  officials-we can blackmail them two-fold: By saying we won't pay back the $1+trillion we owe them and by closing our markets to them. One of the things about President Obama pushing an increase in exports is the rebuilding of our manufacturing base so as to threaten China. Our base has been on the down-slide for decades and is ripe for a bottom-up rebuilding. Such a rebuilding would make it the newest -and perhaps most current-in the world. On top of that, Mexico and Central America have also lost millions of jobs to China and Asia-they would greatly benefit from trade sanctions with China....or even an enforcement of current agreements. These things would harm the current leadership of China more than the people, the untapped consumer market in China is huge-they would recover, their leaders would not. That in combination with the fact that the two top Chinese banks recently did a huge survey of their millionaire customers and found that 60%  (that equates to approximately 600,000) want to move to the US because their money is safer here (from government confiscation and corruption) and they prefer our style of education for their children.
So, trying to look on the bright side these are the factual things I know about....I have limited time for footnoting, her, place a query in the comment box and I will source it for you or tell you where to look.
On the personal opinion front this is what I see:
The Chinese especially are competing with us for resources to fuel their economy Russia is less vulnerable, but still has needs. Philosophically as much older countries both nations take a much longer-term view of the world. They see how top-heavy we are in military spending and unwise fiscal and taxation decisions. They would prefer for us to collapse under our own weight and not have to actually fight any wars over it. As evidence the rumors that they are building hospitals and schools in Africa to curry favor instead of dumping boat and planeloads of cash into governments who's politicians just steal it.
Our long game consists of turning the Chinese into a foreign mining subsidiary of the US empire. Rumors that many US Forces and military contractors are guarding the Chinese mining operations in Afghanistan have been circulating for a while.

Volkswagen’s $600 car gets 258 mpg - National Trendy Living | Examiner.com

Volkswagen’s $600 car gets 258 mpg - National Trendy Living | Examiner.com:

"This $600 car is no toy and is ready to be released in China next year.

The single seater aero car totes VW (Volkswagen) branding.

Volkswagen did a lot of very highly protected testing of this car in Germany, but it was not announced until now where the car would make it's first appearance."