posted
I'd like to think so too. Here's a typical 'Blayne on the subject of China' thread though: China on the move.Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The problem with MAD stragegy in regards to Korea, is that it takes two rational parties for it to work.
The leader of NK is not rational.
Why would he nuke LA? Because he's a paranoid lunatic who would imagine it as a premptive strike for an invasion he mystically knows is gathering there, so since we are coming for him anyway he might as well get in one good shot.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Excuse me, the Republic of China was on the Security COuncil in 1952, the People's Republic of China was nto cosndiered the sole representative of the Chinese nation until ~1979.
Its the Pentagon that says that China is spending 90,000,000,000$ Several European Agencies however put the figure at around 30-40 billion not the 90 billion suggested by the USA and I think the EU is in a far better position to be neutral.
China's armed budget also includes dual use technologies, essentially a laptop that is dependable enough to be used by ECCM/ECM forces on the ground is also mass produced for public consumption, the PLA has per tradition of "livng off the land" owns part of or wholly of a great many industries and firms that allows it to develop the R&D for advanced electronics and etc procure them for the army and then sell it to the public, although alot of this has been stripped away to fight corruption.
China's nuclear production capacity is slowed due only to 1 thing that all fissile production has capped either due to the inablilty to mine more uranium safely or due to government pressure to limit the construction of nuclear weapons, they built newer replacements sure, such as the DF-41's and the new cruise missiles they got but those are meant to keep the 2nd Artillery more survivable and more mobile.
Saying that the current gov't needs to be toppled is retarded, who will topple them? The people from all regards appear to be on average content with the way things are running, reforms are reaching the people, agricultural taxes have been abolished the economy is booming, fighting pollution is now a priority China is strong again and is reclaiming its place as a world power why would the people want to "violently" topple them as you are suggesting?
And frankly your jerk at Tibet is absurd, Tibetans are the majority within Tibet, their cultural icons and monestaries are being rebuilt and monks and nuns are being trained again. Tibet according to international law was still recognized as being part of the Republic of China, replaced by the People's Republic of China under the sucession fo States theory the PRC has every legitmate right to Tibet as the ROC did and quite frankly every US military expert ont he subject agreed that either faction would've done the same.
And finally China's military budget is still far far FAR from the USA's 400,000,000,000$ and the 30 or so billion spent each year on Iraq which surprisingly enough they also are deceptive in elavuating the cost of the war lower then it actually is.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: Excuse me, the Republic of China was on the Security Council in 1952, the People's Republic of China was nto cosndiered the sole representative of the Chinese nation until ~1979.
You can thank Chiang Kai Shek (jiang zhong zheng) for accomplishing that significant feat. He was forced into exile in the 1950's and attempted to control China in exile. He had little to no success within China and he was only really recognized as the real government of China by western nations. He had virtually no control over China the moment he stepped onto the boat he took to Taiwan. It was not until 1971 after Carter finally recognized the PROC as the legitimate government of China that they then claimed their UN seat that had been held by the ROC. [/quote]
quote: Its the Pentagon that says that China is spending 90,000,000,000$ Several European Agencies however put the figure at around 30-40 billion not the 90 billion suggested by the USA and I think the EU is in a far better position to be neutral.
Why would the EU be "MORE neutral?" not only that what makes you think the pentagon does not have greater fact finding abilities then the EU in this regard? Even if we get past those two questions, anyway you slice it, China is NOT honest as to how it is spending its money and to what extent it builds up its military with it.
quote: China's armed budget also includes dual use technologies, essentially a laptop that is dependable enough to be used by ECCM/ECM forces on the ground is also mass produced for public consumption, the PLA has per tradition of "livng off the land" owns part of or wholly of a great many industries and firms that allows it to develop the R&D for advanced electronics and etc procure them for the army and then sell it to the public, although alot of this has been stripped away to fight corruption.
It works both ways my friend. If China develops something for the "Civilian Sector." and it in fact has GREAT perhaps even GREATER military value and is subsequentially used within the military it is not written as part of military spending. So if a wonderful laptop is developed for the civilians and it just happens to be great at launching missiles you do not hear it reported in Chinese governmental reports.
quote: China's nuclear production capacity is slowed due only to 1 thing that all fissile production has capped either due to the inablilty to mine more uranium safely or due to government pressure to limit the construction of nuclear weapons, they built newer replacements sure, such as the DF-41's and the new cruise missiles they got but those are meant to keep the 2nd Artillery more survivable and more mobile.
I do not think China is trying to covertly build up stockpiles of nuclear weapons. But as America has demonstrated twice now in Iraq, nuclear weapons are not the end all weapon for a military.
quote: Saying that the current gov't needs to be toppled is retarded, who will topple them? The people from all regards appear to be on average content with the way things are running, reforms are reaching the people, agricultural taxes have been abolished the economy is booming, fighting pollution is now a priority China is strong again and is reclaiming its place as a world power why would the people want to "violently" topple them as you are suggesting?
You seem to forget Tian A Men square, where the entire government WAS almost toppled by the people a mere 16 years ago. We can thank Deng Xiao Ping (Mao's successor) for finally using the military option to crush those pro democracy protestors. It is agreed by MANY (I can show you the reports) scholars that had he not made that decision the communist experiment would have ended there.
Oh and what about the Fa Lun Gong oppression of the mid 90's? Where thousands of people were hearded off to camps to be, "Reeducated?"
Mainland China has seen what has happened in Hong Kong since 1997 and believe me they have not kept to their 50 year agreement they made with the UK. I lived there until 2001, many of my friends still live there, I KNOW.
People in China are now deftly afraid of discussing politics because of the vile tactics used by Mao to detect desenters. Children being told to report their parents, husbands reporting wives to avoid execution. But in spite of this, disent still flares up. Geographers estimate that within 30 years there will be 1 female to every 20 males in China due to their one child policy.
Men with families often try to stay out of harms way and so spare their family from the hardship of them dying. What do that many men have to lose when there are so few women? They will demand reform, the government will crack down on it, and when 95% of your population are unhappy how do you crack down on that?
Nobody believes what China says anymore. They have such a long history of distorting the truth especially when it comes to numbers that it almost warrants a twist on an old phrase, "Fool me 30 times, you must be China."
quote: And frankly your jerk at Tibet is absurd, Tibetans are the majority within Tibet, their cultural icons and monestaries are being rebuilt and monks and nuns are being trained again. Tibet according to international law was still recognized as being part of the Republic of China, replaced by the People's Republic of China under the sucession fo States theory the PRC has every legitmate right to Tibet as the ROC did and quite frankly every US military expert ont he subject agreed that either faction would've done the same.
Your "military experts" are as good as mine. The fact remains the ROC did nothing to interfere with Tibets way of life, or their culture. The PROC cited some ancient loose royal claim to Tibet as an excuse to mow them over and force Tibet into subjection. You can't say the ROC would have done something years down the road just because their opponents did it. What evidence do you have that their monastaries are being rebuilt? And why, if they are, must they be rebuilt? Oh wait, because Chinese soldiers burned them to the ground, forced the monks to fornicate with nuns at gun point, forced monks to shoot priests, lit them on fire, and commited all manner of atrocities. It was not very hard, those same people had been raised by Mao to obey without hesitation or face, "Reeducation."
Monks and Nuns are being retrained you say? Trained to do what? The Dalai Lhama's picture is illegal within Tibet. My best friend smuggled just a few into the country when he went there last year and people weep with joy when they get them. If their training is in the same vein as the Catholic priets and nuns that are also trained in Mainland China, then we can expect the same black, rotten, bastardization of the religion.
quote: And finally China's military budget is still far far FAR from the USA's 400,000,000,000$ and the 30 or so billion spent each year on Iraq which surprisingly enough they also are deceptive in elavuating the cost of the war lower then it actually is.
Imagine that, I can agree with that entire quote. Now show me what China has done on the international scene with its military that warrents such spending? The constant threats to Taiwan that they will level their island to the ground if they try to officially declare what is already a reality? The annual crying and screaming they do to Japan when the Japanese Prime Minister visits the WW2 war memorial? I know lets make Japan officially apologize for the "Rape of Nanjing." Ignore the fact they have officially apologized JUST to China for WW2 attrocities 7, count them, 7 times. I suppose the rape of Tibet was a bit of a hardship and so increased military spending = smoother conquest in the future. China's military has done NOTHING but suppress the human rights of others. They have no enemies at their boarder. No countries that are hostile to them. The only people Chinese soldiers have had to shoot at, were their own people, merely asking their voices be heard.
They have not commited their forces to any sort of peace keeping op that I know of. Bill Clinton said that not stopping the genocide in Rwanda was the singled biggest regret of his administration. China does not even have to explain why its military never did or does anything helpful.
It would scare the hell out of me if a terrorist attack was perpetrated in China as its already horrible how much military spending they justify without any cause at all. Think how truely terrible it would be if there WAS a real threat to China's safety.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry for double posting, but does anybody else after posting a lengthy post get ansy about receiving a reply, as one cannot be sure their post was read until its responded to? Or do you all just stoically continue to post in other threads?
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
I'm just making sure I fully read your post not missing any information and stoically doing my research before responding, dont wanna look like an idiot afterall.
IP: Logged |
posted
Firing a nuclear weapon on North Korea would kill innocents who had nothing to do with the decision to launch the initial strike. It would also likely have unpredictable environmental effects, likely ones effecting, at the least, its immediate neighbors (China and South Korea, and possibly Japan and Russia as well.)
It would be far more prudent, to my mind, to take the initial strike on the chin and retaliate with devestating but conventional force. Preferably multinational force. The United States could use the reputation as a fair and just superpower far more than it needs to further its reputation as an overwhelmingly well-armed one; the latter is more or less evident to everyone.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
