Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: China - Page 5







Post#101 at 04-05-2005 02:55 PM by Zarathustra [at Where the Northwest meets the Southwest joined Mar 2003 #posts 9,198]
---
04-05-2005, 02:55 PM #101
Join Date
Mar 2003
Location
Where the Northwest meets the Southwest
Posts
9,198

Quote Originally Posted by Andy '85
Surprise attack a possibility

China Plans Surprise Attack on Taiwan
by James Dunnigan
April 4, 2005

China is apparently planning an ?out-of-the-blue? (OOTB) attack on Taiwan, that will initially consist mainly of missiles, warplanes, paratroopers and troops out on "training exercises". What this means is that, during what appears to be peacetime maneuvers, the troops involved will suddenly move against a nearby nation and invade. This tactic was developed by Russia during the Cold War, but never used. They prepared for it by holding large scale training exercises twice a year, near the border with West Germany. The Russian troops were all ready to practice, or go to war. An OOTB attack could be ordered by having the troops to cross the border and attack NATO forces, who would have insufficient warning to deal with the sudden offensive. NATO finally caught on to this plan, and put the troops on alert during the Russian field exercises. The OOTB was most noticeably used, and successfully at that, when the Russian trained Egyptian army surprised the Israelis and recaptured the Suez canal in 1973.

If everyone is on to OOTB attacks, how does China expect to get away with it? Especially when it would involve an amphibious operation involving at least ten hours time at sea for the ships of the amphibious force. The exact details are kept secret, but the plan involves using over 600 ballistic missiles, and several hundred warplanes, which China has stationed within range of Taiwan. Within an hour, the missiles could hit Taiwanese anti-aircraft missile launchers, radars, airbases, ships in harbor and army barracks and combat vehicles. Launch the attack in the pre-dawn hours, and you catch most of the troops in their barracks, and the ships, warplanes and tanks lined up and vulnerable. Amphibious troops would already be on their ships, for an amphibious exercises, escorted by numerous warships. As the amphibious fleet headed for Taiwan, hundreds of Chinese warplanes would return to hit whatever targets had been missed.

Taiwanese commanders have responded with plans to keep warships at sea and some aircraft in the air at all times during Chinese exercises. Even 900 ballistic missiles, which the Chinese will have in place during the next few years, would not be sufficient to shut down the Taiwanese armed forces. But if the missiles, and air strikes soon thereafter, could do enough damage to prevent the first wave of amphibious ships from getting hit bad, Taiwan would be in big trouble. In fact, if the Chinese could get control of the air over Taiwan for a day or so, three Chinese airborne divisions could be dropped on Taiwan as well.

Taiwan has always expected assistance from the U.S. Navy and Air Force. But without advance warning to get a carrier or two into the area, and a few hundred U.S. Air Force planes alerted for movement to Taiwan, Japan and Guam, the American assistance would be too late. Thus, for Taiwan, an OOTB attack, which the Chinese appear to be preparing to carry out, is something to worry about.
Damn China to hell if they pull such a brazen action.
Not that I wouldn't put this past them, but didn't that US Naval exercise last year teach the Chinese that we could have 2 aircraft carrier battle groups there in a week and seven in a month? Or something like that?

Capt. Eagan, are you out there???
Americans have had enough of glitz and roar . . Foreboding has deepened, and spiritual currents have darkened . . .
THE FOURTH TURNING IS AT HAND.
See T4T, p. 253.







Post#102 at 04-05-2005 10:35 PM by cbailey [at B. 1950 joined Sep 2001 #posts 1,559]
---
04-05-2005, 10:35 PM #102
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
B. 1950
Posts
1,559

Report: China faces severe water shortages
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

SHANGHAI, China -- China's already severe water shortages are worsening due to heavy pollution of lakes and aquifers and urban development projects with a big thirst for water, such as lawns and fountains, state media reported.

More than 100 cities have inadequate water supplies, with more than half "seriously threatened," the official Xinhua News Agency cited Qiu Baoxing, a vice minister of construction, as saying.

"The uneven distribution of the limited resource and serious pollution further deteriorate the situation," Qiu said.

In Beijing, for example, each resident has access to only 10,593 cubic feet of water a year, compared with the world average of 35,310 cubic feet, Xinhua said in a separate report.

Recent urban greenery projects have only worsened the problem due to widespread planting of lawns and construction of fountains that consume large amounts of water, he said.

Meanwhile, experts warned that more than 300 million rural Chinese lack clean drinking water since most waterways are fouled by industrial effluent, untreated sewage and runoff of agricultural chemicals from fields.

A survey in January found that only 47 percent of water in major rivers is drinkable, while half of all lakes are heavily polluted. And 35 percent of ground water is undrinkable due to pollution, Xinhua reported.

"Hundreds of thousands (of) Chinese are afflicted with various diseases from drinking water that contains too much fluorine, arsenic, sodium sulfate or bitter salt," it cited Wang Shucheng, minister of Water Resources, as saying.

Wang said the government planned to boost spending on water treatment. He called for better enforcement of often-ignored environmental protection standards.

A five-year, 18 billion yuan ($2.1 billion) program to improve the drinking water supply in the countryside, home to three-quarters of China's 1.3 billion people, has already ensured safe water for 57 million people, Xinhua reported.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt







Post#103 at 04-07-2005 08:26 AM by Virgil K. Saari [at '49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains joined Jun 2001 #posts 7,835]
---
04-07-2005, 08:26 AM #103
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
'49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains
Posts
7,835

See you at the CU

Confucian Union

Quote Originally Posted by Jan Krikke in the [i
Asia Times[/i]]Taub said several factors will make the formation of a Confucian Union
inevitable, among them a shared cultural heritage and growing international
competition. "Despite a turbulent past and lingering animosity, the three
countries speak the same cultural language, and their economies are
increasingly integrated. Last year, China replaced the United States as Japan's
largest trading partner. With the largest dollar reserves in the world, Japan
and China resemble two mountain climbers linked by a rope. Technological
cooperation between China, Japan and Korea is growing. Over-reliance on US-made
software has fueled concerns about national security and industrial espionage
and led to an initiative to develop CJK Linux, an Asian version of open source software."







Post#104 at 04-07-2005 09:36 AM by Steven McTowelie [at Cary, NC joined Jun 2002 #posts 535]
---
04-07-2005, 09:36 AM #104
Join Date
Jun 2002
Location
Cary, NC
Posts
535

Re: See you at the CU

Quote Originally Posted by Virgil K. Saari
Confucian Union

Quote Originally Posted by Jan Krikke in the [i
Asia Times[/i]]Taub said several factors will make the formation of a Confucian Union
inevitable, among them a shared cultural heritage and growing international
competition. "Despite a turbulent past and lingering animosity, the three
countries speak the same cultural language, and their economies are
increasingly integrated. Last year, China replaced the United States as Japan's
largest trading partner. With the largest dollar reserves in the world, Japan
and China resemble two mountain climbers linked by a rope. Technological
cooperation between China, Japan and Korea is growing. Over-reliance on US-made
software has fueled concerns about national security and industrial espionage
and led to an initiative to develop CJK Linux, an Asian version of open source software."
"Thinking the unthikable" is Krikke's title. Asian nation's want to form a union, and it's the unthinkable? Is it just me, or is that not rascist paranoia? BTW, when you get to the site, click on the red miniskirted rear end. You won't be disappointed.







Post#105 at 04-07-2005 09:40 AM by Virgil K. Saari [at '49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains joined Jun 2001 #posts 7,835]
---
04-07-2005, 09:40 AM #105
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
'49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains
Posts
7,835

Re: See you at the CU

Quote Originally Posted by Steve Barrera
Quote Originally Posted by Virgil K. Saari
Confucian Union

Quote Originally Posted by Jan Krikke in the [i
Asia Times[/i]]Taub said several factors will make the formation of a Confucian Union
inevitable, among them a shared cultural heritage and growing international
competition. "Despite a turbulent past and lingering animosity, the three
countries speak the same cultural language, and their economies are
increasingly integrated. Last year, China replaced the United States as Japan's
largest trading partner. With the largest dollar reserves in the world, Japan
and China resemble two mountain climbers linked by a rope. Technological
cooperation between China, Japan and Korea is growing. Over-reliance on US-made
software has fueled concerns about national security and industrial espionage
and led to an initiative to develop CJK Linux, an Asian version of open source software."
"Thinking the unthikable" is Krikke's title. Asian nation's want to form a union, and it's the unthinkable? Is it just me, or is that not rascist paranoia? BTW, when you get to the site, click on the red miniskirted rear end. You won't be disappointed.
It is you.







Post#106 at 04-07-2005 10:13 AM by Steven McTowelie [at Cary, NC joined Jun 2002 #posts 535]
---
04-07-2005, 10:13 AM #106
Join Date
Jun 2002
Location
Cary, NC
Posts
535

???

Well, I didn't even get the title right. It's unthinkable, and it really seems likes Krikke is making an Asian Union out to be an abomination. Why? It sounds like a perfectly reasonable development to me.







Post#107 at 04-09-2005 09:12 AM by Virgil K. Saari [at '49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains joined Jun 2001 #posts 7,835]
---
04-09-2005, 09:12 AM #107
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
'49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains
Posts
7,835

Willing to die?

They are not so inclined what of America's Millie's


Quote Originally Posted by Bevin Chu
According to the results of a scientific poll conducted in late March by the Chinese Culture University on Taiwan, 65% of the university students on Taiwan would be unwilling to defend the island if the Chinese Communists were to attack; only 35% would be willing. Released on April 7, 2005, the poll surveyed 1161 students enrolled at National Taiwan University, National Chengchi University, and nine other major universities in northern Taiwan.







Post#108 at 04-09-2005 03:08 PM by Zarathustra [at Where the Northwest meets the Southwest joined Mar 2003 #posts 9,198]
---
04-09-2005, 03:08 PM #108
Join Date
Mar 2003
Location
Where the Northwest meets the Southwest
Posts
9,198

This doesn't look too good.

http://reuters.myway.com/article/200...-JAPAN-DC.html


**For Discussion Purposes ONLY**


China Protesters Attack Japanese Targets
Apr 9, 2005
By Emma Graham-Harrison

BEIJING (Reuters) - Thousands of Chinese smashed windows and threw rocks at the Japanese embassy and ambassador's residence in Beijing on Saturday in a protest against Japan's wartime past and its bid for a U.N. Security Council seat.

Protesters pushed their way through a paramilitary police cordon to the gates of the Japanese ambassador's residence, throwing stones and water bottles and shouting "Japanese pig come out."

Some 500 paramilitary police holding plastic shields raced into the compound and barricaded the gates. Protesters threw stones and bricks at the residence, and shouted at police, "Chinese people shouldn't protect Japanese."

Anti-Japanese sentiment has been running high in China since Tuesday Japan when approved a textbook critics say whitewashes atrocities committed during World War II, and many Chinese feel the country has not owned up to its wartime aggression.

Demonstrators, who said they had been organized mostly through e-mail and instant messaging, had been marching peacefully under heavy police guard.

One group began throwing bottles and stones when they passed a Japanese restaurant, smashing windows with tiles they had ripped from its roof before police stopped them.

A second Japanese restaurant was targeted later in the evening, with bricks thrown through the window, terrifying kimono-clad waitresses.

"We are all Chinese in here and were just minding our own business," one told Reuters minutes after the attack. "This is terrifying."

She said some of the protesters had helped them clean up and advised them not to wear such sensitive uniforms.

Protesters also attacked a Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi branch and smashed windows before police moved in.

Another group outside the embassy in southeast Beijing threw stones and plastic water bottles smashing windows in the compound, a Reuters photographer said. Some demonstrators scuffled with police.

The violence prompted an official protest in Tokyo by Japanese Vice Foreign Minister Shotaro Yachi who asked Chinese Minister to Japan Cheng Yonghua to strengthen security, Kyodo news agency said.

By 7.30 p.m. (7:30 a.m. EDT), the main crowd just outside the gates to the Japanese ambassador's residence had dispersed, but hundreds of others, many of them marchers who arrived late, remained at the corner of the compound.

Police used loudspeakers to try to persuade the students to go back to their universities.

LARGE PROTESTS RARE

The demonstration started in the Beijing neighborhood of Zhongguancun, known for its electronics shops and home to a large student population, and comes less than a week after anti-Japanese protests in other Chinese cities turned violent.

"Japan doesn't face up to its history," said Cheng Lei, a 27-year-old information technology professional. "We want to express our feelings so the Japanese government knows what we think."

Police declined to say how many protesters were on the streets, but the official Xinhua news agency put the number at more than 10,000. Onlookers thronged the streets, cheering on the demonstration and snapping photos as scores of police looked on.

Large-scale protests are rare in China, where the Communist leadership is concerned about maintaining stability at a time of wrenching social change and a widening gap between rich and poor.

Past demonstrations outside the Japanese embassy have typically been heavily policed, choreographed events involving about 50 people, with short speeches, some singing and petitions or letters being presented to the mission.

Last week, protesters smashed windows at a Japanese supermarket in the southwestern city of Chengdu after a demonstration there against Japan's bid for a permanent Security Council seat turned violent.

Demonstrators also took to the streets in Guangzhou, Chongqing and the southern city of Shenzhen, where two Japanese department stores were vandalized.

Domestic media said 20 million Chinese had signed an online petition opposing the U.N. seat bid.

KICKING A TOYOTA

Many Chinese harbor deep resentment of Japan's wartime aggression and what they see as its failure to own up to atrocities.

Some protesters wore red signs pasted to their chests bearing a traditional Chinese dragon and reading "Reject Japanese goods." Others began kicking a Toyota car caught in the middle of the crowd before it managed to drive away.

"Across the country, the mood to refuse Japanese goods is high, but nothing has been done about this. Therefore, patriotic students have organized themselves," said a notice circulated by e-mail on Friday urging people to protest.

On Saturday, the mostly student protesters carried signboards with lists of Japanese brand names crossed out and chanted slogans outside an electronics plaza urging the boycott.

Police guarded the entrance to the electronics plaza to stop demonstrators from pushing inside, and at least 20 police vans stood by to prevent the protest from escalating as the group chanted "Rise up, rise up, rise up."
Americans have had enough of glitz and roar . . Foreboding has deepened, and spiritual currents have darkened . . .
THE FOURTH TURNING IS AT HAND.
See T4T, p. 253.







Post#109 at 04-09-2005 09:10 PM by Andy '85 [at Texas joined Aug 2003 #posts 1,465]
---
04-09-2005, 09:10 PM #109
Join Date
Aug 2003
Location
Texas
Posts
1,465

Good grief, the spirit of Mao still seems to emanate from China. All this fanfare nationalism and overblown patriotism. Already targeting an ethnic group . . . along with attacks and vandalism . . . hmm . . . what does that remind me of?

Japan doesn't face up to its history," said Cheng Lei, a 27-year-old information technology professional.
Oh, this is rich. Why doesn't China face its mistake the Communists created since 1949? These people are dupes only being fed what their Big Brother government gives them.

If worse comes to worse, and something big happens there that will put the world in conflict with it. I would not hesitate to renounce all ties of Chinese ancestry from my family. The China today is not the China I heard of from my parents (who are Taiwanese by birth, but given the full traditional education expected in pre-Communist China). This China is a chimera of Western ideals corrupting an otherwise ordinary society that would have come to terms with things such as democracy and modernization if they weren't so factionated in between the two World Wars.
Right-Wing liberal, slow progressive, and other contradictions straddling both the past and future, but out of touch with the present . . .

"We also know there are known unknowns.
That is to say, we know there are some things we do not know." - Donald Rumsfeld







Post#110 at 04-10-2005 01:09 AM by Zarathustra [at Where the Northwest meets the Southwest joined Mar 2003 #posts 9,198]
---
04-10-2005, 01:09 AM #110
Join Date
Mar 2003
Location
Where the Northwest meets the Southwest
Posts
9,198

Andy, I basically agree with you. Here are some previous posts I've made on the topic of China:

Quote Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons
Quote Originally Posted by Rick Hirst
Welcome to T4T! 8)

Quote Originally Posted by Harv
Quote Originally Posted by Rick Hirst
Every single foreign and domestic policy decision should be oriented toward eliminating the need for oil imports within 5 years. Otherwise, we're going to be fighting, and losing, a war with China within 10 years.
why on earth would we be fighting a war against China at all? Yes, in case of a sharp drop in oil production as a result of the oil peak, both countries would be badly needing oil to operate their massive economies, and a war between them would only waste more oil for both. The "winner" of the war wouldn't be in control of any more oil, either. And don't think such a war could be fought in the middle east...the Chinese don't have the capability to project force that far abroad.
Short answer: it's the way of the saeculum.

Long answer: tensions have been escalating with China for some time. Oil supply is one issue; there's also outsourcing and the current account deficit, not to mention Taiwan and Tibet. We're on a collision course, and nothing I see in the current Administration's policies is moving us away from that collision.

Yes, of course it would collossally stupid to wage war with China, not the least because we are both nuclear powers. But we both have self-images that are explicitly imperialist, and that trend is only strengthening. Once the credit bubble bursts, tensions will continue to ratchet up until the unthinkable becomes thinkable. To be honest, I'm with the Frog on this one.
Agreed. We see ourselves, even without neocons, as the (at least last) guarantor of freedom in the world. Furthermore, one of our most fundamental global policies as a hegemonic power is to not allow any one Eurasian power to dominate the old world so as to best leverage our tremendous naval advantage. What's more again, we will be loathe to allow another power challenge us again navally in the Pacific. Taiwan fits into all this above one way or another.

China historically sees itself as the "Primary Nation", sometimes translated euphemistically as the "Middle Kingdom". That's what "Joong-gwoh", Chinese for "China", literally means. Their worldview puts China in the center of the universe in a sense more embedded than other nations when they do the same.

Indeed, for much of history China has been the largest, richest, and most powerful nation/kingdom/empire on the planet. From this long perspective they see the last few centuries of inferiority as superficial and temporary. They are becoming more confident that they are inevitably returning to their proper place as China now grows economically, technologically, and militarily.

Also there are growing tensions within their society that are worrisome. Fantastic economic growth has left in it's wake demographic and environmental stresses of an astounding nature. It is well known in environmental circles that China is courting disaster with deforestation, dessication, pollution, etc . . . . And hundreds of millions are moving from the rural areas into cities per decade. The cities are not able to handle the strain. With the "One Child" policy having been in place now for over a quarter century, the significantly lop-sided number of young males is a recipe for social instability even without the problems above exaccerbating the problem.

With Communism in de facto disrepute, the Communist party has ironically morphed into a nationalist party in all but name. All of the above leads me to believe a "Galtieri mentality" (think: Malvinas) is very, very possible. That is, keep the people distracted with nationalist pursuits.

I could go on. But for the reasons stated above and the facts that both nations are heading into 4T's soon, I see the potential for some kind of confrontation as very high.
Quote Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons
I agree with you that China and the Islamic world are natural allies in the coming 4T. I've been ridiculed for saying it but there it is.

The Islamic World simply does not work and play well with others and has hostile relations with every other civilization is borders. China has the most to gain from disrupting the status quo as a growing Great Power, much like Germany and Japan in the 20th century. I'm sure mutual goals would be strong enough for them to overlook the Xinjiang Uyghur Turk problem between them.

Now add this "we have the oil, you need the oil" component. Marriage made in heaven. I say let's follow Mike Alexander's recommendation and do a Manhattan Project to get rid of our need for petroleum, perhaps following Praetor's model to some degree, and let the Chinese deal with the Middle East.
Quote Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons
Quote Originally Posted by Titus Sabinus Parthicus
I have thought of the situation between Russia and China in somewhat the same light, at least short-term ('we have modern weapons, you need modern weapons'). Of course, should Russia give in to the temptation to sell China all the modern weapons they want, they could find themselves regretting it further down the road.
No, I see Russia and China's relationship as more analogous to Russia and Germany's in the last cycle. Then it was just as obvious that the two were not natural allies, either idealistically or in long-term Realpolitik terms. Yet Russia stupidly aided Germany anyway and lived to regret it.

Russia should NOT want a stronger China, esp. with all those resources and low population density in Siberia. This time it's not so much an issue of Lebensraum as Naturresourcen. :wink:
Americans have had enough of glitz and roar . . Foreboding has deepened, and spiritual currents have darkened . . .
THE FOURTH TURNING IS AT HAND.
See T4T, p. 253.







Post#111 at 04-10-2005 11:10 AM by Prisoner 81591518 [at joined Mar 2003 #posts 2,460]
---
04-10-2005, 11:10 AM #111
Join Date
Mar 2003
Posts
2,460

Quote Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons
Andy, I basically agree with you. Here are some previous posts I've made on the topic of China:

Quote Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons
Quote Originally Posted by Rick Hirst
Welcome to T4T! 8)

Quote Originally Posted by Harv
Quote Originally Posted by Rick Hirst
Every single foreign and domestic policy decision should be oriented toward eliminating the need for oil imports within 5 years. Otherwise, we're going to be fighting, and losing, a war with China within 10 years.
why on earth would we be fighting a war against China at all? Yes, in case of a sharp drop in oil production as a result of the oil peak, both countries would be badly needing oil to operate their massive economies, and a war between them would only waste more oil for both. The "winner" of the war wouldn't be in control of any more oil, either. And don't think such a war could be fought in the middle east...the Chinese don't have the capability to project force that far abroad.
Short answer: it's the way of the saeculum.

Long answer: tensions have been escalating with China for some time. Oil supply is one issue; there's also outsourcing and the current account deficit, not to mention Taiwan and Tibet. We're on a collision course, and nothing I see in the current Administration's policies is moving us away from that collision.

Yes, of course it would collossally stupid to wage war with China, not the least because we are both nuclear powers. But we both have self-images that are explicitly imperialist, and that trend is only strengthening. Once the credit bubble bursts, tensions will continue to ratchet up until the unthinkable becomes thinkable. To be honest, I'm with the Frog on this one.
Agreed. We see ourselves, even without neocons, as the (at least last) guarantor of freedom in the world. Furthermore, one of our most fundamental global policies as a hegemonic power is to not allow any one Eurasian power to dominate the old world so as to best leverage our tremendous naval advantage. What's more again, we will be loathe to allow another power challenge us again navally in the Pacific. Taiwan fits into all this above one way or another.

China historically sees itself as the "Primary Nation", sometimes translated euphemistically as the "Middle Kingdom". That's what "Joong-gwoh", Chinese for "China", literally means. Their worldview puts China in the center of the universe in a sense more embedded than other nations when they do the same.

Indeed, for much of history China has been the largest, richest, and most powerful nation/kingdom/empire on the planet. From this long perspective they see the last few centuries of inferiority as superficial and temporary. They are becoming more confident that they are inevitably returning to their proper place as China now grows economically, technologically, and militarily.

Also there are growing tensions within their society that are worrisome. Fantastic economic growth has left in it's wake demographic and environmental stresses of an astounding nature. It is well known in environmental circles that China is courting disaster with deforestation, dessication, pollution, etc . . . . And hundreds of millions are moving from the rural areas into cities per decade. The cities are not able to handle the strain. With the "One Child" policy having been in place now for over a quarter century, the significantly lop-sided number of young males is a recipe for social instability even without the problems above exaccerbating the problem.

With Communism in de facto disrepute, the Communist party has ironically morphed into a nationalist party in all but name. All of the above leads me to believe a "Galtieri mentality" (think: Malvinas) is very, very possible. That is, keep the people distracted with nationalist pursuits.

I could go on. But for the reasons stated above and the facts that both nations are heading into 4T's soon, I see the potential for some kind of confrontation as very high.
Quote Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons
I agree with you that China and the Islamic world are natural allies in the coming 4T. I've been ridiculed for saying it but there it is.

The Islamic World simply does not work and play well with others and has hostile relations with every other civilization is borders. China has the most to gain from disrupting the status quo as a growing Great Power, much like Germany and Japan in the 20th century. I'm sure mutual goals would be strong enough for them to overlook the Xinjiang Uyghur Turk problem between them.

Now add this "we have the oil, you need the oil" component. Marriage made in heaven. I say let's follow Mike Alexander's recommendation and do a Manhattan Project to get rid of our need for petroleum, perhaps following Praetor's model to some degree, and let the Chinese deal with the Middle East.
Quote Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons
Quote Originally Posted by Titus Sabinus Parthicus
I have thought of the situation between Russia and China in somewhat the same light, at least short-term ('we have modern weapons, you need modern weapons'). Of course, should Russia give in to the temptation to sell China all the modern weapons they want, they could find themselves regretting it further down the road.
No, I see Russia and China's relationship as more analogous to Russia and Germany's in the last cycle. Then it was just as obvious that the two were not natural allies, either idealistically or in long-term Realpolitik terms. Yet Russia stupidly aided Germany anyway and lived to regret it.

Russia should NOT want a stronger China, esp. with all those resources and low population density in Siberia. This time it's not so much an issue of Lebensraum as Naturresourcen. :wink:
I've just thought of a possible (bad) 4T joke: a world so fixated on America as the world's villain that they don't see the rapidly emerging Chinese threat until it's, perhaps, too late for many of them. :shock: :evil:







Post#112 at 04-11-2005 10:23 AM by Mikebert [at Kalamazoo MI joined Jul 2001 #posts 4,502]
---
04-11-2005, 10:23 AM #112
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Kalamazoo MI
Posts
4,502

Quote Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons
Not that I wouldn't put this past them, but didn't that US Naval exercise last year teach the Chinese that we could have 2 aircraft carrier battle groups there in a week and seven in a month? Or something like that
You mean the Navy that the Chinese currently pay for? If the Chinese want Taiwan all they have to do is stop underwriting US miliary power and it will collapse.

The Chinese think ahead and right now it serves them to continue to support the US empire. Once they have gained all they can by paying our bills, they will stop doing so and perhaps sell some of their US Treasuries. The US, unable to support its worldwide military infrastruture without politically impossible tax increases will withdraw, largely mothballing its fleet. In due time the Taiwanese will choose to jump ship to the Chinese and reunion will be achieved without firing a shot.







Post#113 at 04-11-2005 10:38 AM by Prisoner 81591518 [at joined Mar 2003 #posts 2,460]
---
04-11-2005, 10:38 AM #113
Join Date
Mar 2003
Posts
2,460

Quote Originally Posted by Mike Alexander '59
Quote Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons
Not that I wouldn't put this past them, but didn't that US Naval exercise last year teach the Chinese that we could have 2 aircraft carrier battle groups there in a week and seven in a month? Or something like that
You mean the Navy that the Chinese currently pay for? If the Chinese want Taiwan all they have to do is stop underwriting US miliary power and it will collapse.

The Chinese think ahead and right now it serves them to continue to support the US empire. Once they have gained all they can by paying our bills, they will stop doing so and perhaps sell some of their US Treasuries. The US, unable to support its worldwide military infrastruture without politically impossible tax increases will withdraw, largely mothballing its fleet. In due time the Taiwanese will choose to jump ship to the Chinese and reunion will be achieved without firing a shot.
In your scenario, the next logical step would be for a multinational coalition to attack us while we're down, and finish us off.







Post#114 at 04-11-2005 10:44 AM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
04-11-2005, 10:44 AM #114
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by Mike Alexander '59
Quote Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons
Not that I wouldn't put this past them, but didn't that US Naval exercise last year teach the Chinese that we could have 2 aircraft carrier battle groups there in a week and seven in a month? Or something like that
You mean the Navy that the Chinese currently pay for? If the Chinese want Taiwan all they have to do is stop underwriting US miliary power and it will collapse.

The Chinese think ahead and right now it serves them to continue to support the US empire. Once they have gained all they can by paying our bills, they will stop doing so and perhaps sell some of their US Treasuries. The US, unable to support its worldwide military infrastruture without politically impossible tax increases will withdraw, largely mothballing its fleet. In due time the Taiwanese will choose to jump ship to the Chinese and reunion will be achieved without firing a shot.
Here is another point of agreement. The Chinese think in centuries; we think in decades - at best. They'll win at this game if we let them, and it appears, at this point, we are not just letting but encouraging.

Just last month, pillars of American capitalism like Bill Gates were gushing all over themselves over the success of the Chinese economy. Of course, their version would be even more familiar to Il Duce, but then ...
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#115 at 04-11-2005 10:52 AM by Prisoner 81591518 [at joined Mar 2003 #posts 2,460]
---
04-11-2005, 10:52 AM #115
Join Date
Mar 2003
Posts
2,460

Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon
Here is another point of agreement. The Chinese think in centuries; we think in decades - at best. They'll win at this game if we let them, and it appears, at this point, we are not just letting but encouraging.

If that is the case, then there's no point in talking about the Homeland Generation's prospects, as either Silents or Boomers will be the last American generation to live out a full lifespan. :cry:







Post#116 at 04-11-2005 11:35 AM by Mikebert [at Kalamazoo MI joined Jul 2001 #posts 4,502]
---
04-11-2005, 11:35 AM #116
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Kalamazoo MI
Posts
4,502

Quote Originally Posted by Sabinus Invictus
Quote Originally Posted by Mike Alexander '59
Quote Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons
Not that I wouldn't put this past them, but didn't that US Naval exercise last year teach the Chinese that we could have 2 aircraft carrier battle groups there in a week and seven in a month? Or something like that
You mean the Navy that the Chinese currently pay for? If the Chinese want Taiwan all they have to do is stop underwriting US miliary power and it will collapse.

The Chinese think ahead and right now it serves them to continue to support the US empire. Once they have gained all they can by paying our bills, they will stop doing so and perhaps sell some of their US Treasuries. The US, unable to support its worldwide military infrastruture without politically impossible tax increases will withdraw, largely mothballing its fleet. In due time the Taiwanese will choose to jump ship to the Chinese and reunion will be achieved without firing a shot.
In your scenario, the next logical step would be for a multinational coalition to attack us while we're down, and finish us off.
No, the next logical step would be to do nothing as the US will have become an irrelevant has-been.

The opposite of love isn't hate, its indifference. The US has been either loved or hated because what we did mattered to other nations, whereas what they did mattered not at all to us. Once we stop mattering, the world will view us with indifference.

The average Chinese won't know who the US President is any more than most of us know who the Indonesian Prime Minister is.







Post#117 at 04-11-2005 11:42 AM by Prisoner 81591518 [at joined Mar 2003 #posts 2,460]
---
04-11-2005, 11:42 AM #117
Join Date
Mar 2003
Posts
2,460

Quote Originally Posted by Mike Alexander '59
The opposite of love isn't hate, its indifference. The US has been either loved or hated because what we did mattered to other nations, whereas what they did mattered not at all to us. Once we stop mattering, the world will view us with indifference.
So you honestly think that once we're down, a world that hates us with every fiber of their being would not seek vengeance for all of our collective offenses, real and imagined - including the worst one of all - our very existence?







Post#118 at 04-11-2005 04:10 PM by Mikebert [at Kalamazoo MI joined Jul 2001 #posts 4,502]
---
04-11-2005, 04:10 PM #118
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Kalamazoo MI
Posts
4,502

Quote Originally Posted by Sabinus Invictus
So you honestly think that once we're down, a world that hates us with every fiber of their being would not seek vengeance for all of our collective offenses, real and imagined - including the worst one of all - our very existence?
Here you are projecting your own hatred of America to "the rest of the world".







Post#119 at 04-11-2005 04:40 PM by Zarathustra [at Where the Northwest meets the Southwest joined Mar 2003 #posts 9,198]
---
04-11-2005, 04:40 PM #119
Join Date
Mar 2003
Location
Where the Northwest meets the Southwest
Posts
9,198

Quote Originally Posted by Mike Alexander '59
Quote Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons
Not that I wouldn't put this past them, but didn't that US Naval exercise last year teach the Chinese that we could have 2 aircraft carrier battle groups there in a week and seven in a month? Or something like that
You mean the Navy that the Chinese currently pay for? If the Chinese want Taiwan all they have to do is stop underwriting US miliary power and it will collapse.

The Chinese think ahead and right now it serves them to continue to support the US empire. Once they have gained all they can by paying our bills, they will stop doing so and perhaps sell some of their US Treasuries. The US, unable to support its worldwide military infrastruture without politically impossible tax increases will withdraw, largely mothballing its fleet. In due time the Taiwanese will choose to jump ship to the Chinese and reunion will be achieved without firing a shot.
Good point. But since the Chinese-bought T-Bills don't go directly to our military, but rather to the whole shebang, I don't see it as that simple in the short-run; we could still win, but it would be a pyrrhic victory (assuming no one gets careless and unleashed nukes -- then it will be beyond even pyrrhic).

Longer term I see your argument quite well. We may have little choice but to go isolationist in the coming years -- do a Fortress America kinda thing.
Americans have had enough of glitz and roar . . Foreboding has deepened, and spiritual currents have darkened . . .
THE FOURTH TURNING IS AT HAND.
See T4T, p. 253.







Post#120 at 04-11-2005 05:02 PM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
04-11-2005, 05:02 PM #120
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by Sabinus Invictus
Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon
Here is another point of agreement. The Chinese think in centuries; we think in decades - at best. They'll win at this game if we let them, and it appears, at this point, we are not just letting but encouraging.
If that is the case, then there's no point in talking about the Homeland Generation's prospects, as either Silents or Boomers will be the last American generation to live out a full lifespan. :cry:
They're likely to take charge not take over. We may be a lesser power, but we will be a power for as long as the advantage of being a continental nation sitting on vast natural resources continues to exist.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#121 at 04-12-2005 09:47 AM by Prisoner 81591518 [at joined Mar 2003 #posts 2,460]
---
04-12-2005, 09:47 AM #121
Join Date
Mar 2003
Posts
2,460

Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon
Quote Originally Posted by Sabinus Invictus
Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon
Here is another point of agreement. The Chinese think in centuries; we think in decades - at best. They'll win at this game if we let them, and it appears, at this point, we are not just letting but encouraging.
If that is the case, then there's no point in talking about the Homeland Generation's prospects, as either Silents or Boomers will be the last American generation to live out a full lifespan. :cry:
They're likely to take charge not take over. We may be a lesser power, but we will be a power for as long as the advantage of being a continental nation sitting on vast natural resources continues to exist.
Ever heard of Carthage? The Romans acted in 149-146 BCE to 'make sure' of their already defeated #1 rival. Why should we assume that China would not do likewise, given half a chance?

BTW, it's funny how Michael Alexander sees fit to accuse me of thinking like a hard line left-winger where America is concerned. :wink:







Post#122 at 04-12-2005 10:46 AM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
04-12-2005, 10:46 AM #122
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by Sabinus Invictus
Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon
Quote Originally Posted by Sabinus Invictus
Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon
Here is another point of agreement. The Chinese think in centuries; we think in decades - at best. They'll win at this game if we let them, and it appears, at this point, we are not just letting but encouraging.
If that is the case, then there's no point in talking about the Homeland Generation's prospects, as either Silents or Boomers will be the last American generation to live out a full lifespan. :cry:
They're likely to take charge not take over. We may be a lesser power, but we will be a power for as long as the advantage of being a continental nation sitting on vast natural resources continues to exist.
Ever heard of Carthage? The Romans acted in 149-146 BCE to 'make sure' of their already defeated #1 rival. Why should we assume that China would not do likewise, given half a chance?

BTW, it's funny how Michael Alexander sees fit to accuse me of thinking like a hard line left-winger where America is concerned. :wink:
Why would China do that? It's not on their interest to crush us, anymore than it's in ours to crush them. The follow-on problems far exceed any potential benefit. In this day and age, maximum benefit accrues when the winner-state gets to do as it pleases, and the loser-state is placed in a reactive postition.

We already hold the position that China wants, and we are handing them an opportunity to claim it. Why should they risk a fight? They can just be patient and all things will align, unless we decide to reform our ways, of course. So far, they're doing just fine ... and we're not. :evil:
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#123 at 04-12-2005 11:26 AM by Mikebert [at Kalamazoo MI joined Jul 2001 #posts 4,502]
---
04-12-2005, 11:26 AM #123
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Kalamazoo MI
Posts
4,502

Quote Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons
Good point. But since the Chinese-bought T-Bills don't go directly to our military, but rather to the whole shebang, I don't see it as that simple in the short-run; we could still win, but it would be a pyrrhic victory (assuming no one gets careless and unleashed nukes -- then it will be beyond even pyrrhic).
Yes they do. Salaries must be paid. Vendors must be paid. If they are not fed or paid, soldiers won't fight for you. And if you don't get munitions there is nothing to fight with.

The effect of a withdrawal is faster than you'd think. Currently the US pays 320 billion in interest at about 4.5% or so. Were foreign central banks to stop buying our debt and start selling our debt the market rate would go up a lot. Since our government has rotated to shorter term financing in recent years (to lower interest payments) the effective rate would rise pretty pretty fast. Were it to reach 1980 levels of 11%+, interest payments would reach $780 billion on the already existing debt now, with no new net borrowing. The entire receipts from US individual income tax is in this ball park so all the income tax would go to pay interest on existing debt.

Payroll taxes go to pension and Medicare expenses. Eliminate these programs and you eliminate the payroll tax, unless you want a revolution.

All that is left is about $300 billion in corporate and excise taxes and this would have to fund the entire government. Even if we cut everything out, this still leaves us with only 60% of our current military expenditures.

Realitically you know that aren't going to close down Congress or the White House (Presidiential support and protection alone run to over $1 billion) Congress cost even more. We need the Internal Revenue service because we need the revenue it brings in. That's $10 billion. Are we going to close all our embassays? Shut down the NSA, CIA, FBI, Dept of Homeland Security? These would take at least half of the $300 million leaving a pretty bare bones defense establishment.

To have more we would have to raise taxes, run a deficit, or simply print currency and pay the troops with that. Borrowing more would simply increase interest payments on the existing debt requiring that the newly-raised fund be used to pay interest (it's called being in the bucket). The last would give hyperinflaiton in short order.

Raising income taxes would require hitting up the rich, since they are the only ones with surplus funds. That is off the table.

Within a couple of years our fleet would be mothballed, our armies withdrawn from around the world and most of the soldiers discharged. We cannot afford a big military and have low taxes on the rich. We had a big military in the 1950's and top tax rates were 90%. The military was smaller, but still big in the 1960's and top tax rates were 70%.

The miltary was smaller still, but still fairly big in the 1980's and we borrowed like crazy to pay for it.

The miltary became smaller still in the 1990's and top tax rate was 40%

Today the top rate in in the 30's and we are again borrowing like crazy, trying to grow the military a bit.

Falling interest rates helpd keep the 1980's deficits smaller and so we got away with it long enough to win the Cold War. Even then fiscal balance required, both tax increases and post-victory cuts in military.

Does anyone think interest rates are going fall from the 4.5% level we are paying now, if the Chinese pulled the plug?







Post#124 at 04-12-2005 12:41 PM by takascar2 [at North Side, Chi-Town, 1962 joined Jan 2002 #posts 563]
---
04-12-2005, 12:41 PM #124
Join Date
Jan 2002
Location
North Side, Chi-Town, 1962
Posts
563

Quote Originally Posted by Sabinus Invictus
Quote Originally Posted by Mike Alexander '59
The opposite of love isn't hate, its indifference. The US has been either loved or hated because what we did mattered to other nations, whereas what they did mattered not at all to us. Once we stop mattering, the world will view us with indifference.
So you honestly think that once we're down, a world that hates us with every fiber of their being would not seek vengeance for all of our collective offenses, real and imagined - including the worst one of all - our very existence?
STFU - I am tired of listening to your crap!

Offenses? Like saving the Chineese's ass from Japan during WWII

Like saving the world from the likes of Hitler?

Like spending buckets of cash to rebuild the nations of said enemies after the war is over?

Your right to speak trash like you do, hoping for our destruction was won by US service persons who died for PEACE and FREEDOM in this WORLD.

If you don't like it here, get the f*** out before someone throws you out by force, or worse.







Post#125 at 04-12-2005 01:31 PM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
04-12-2005, 01:31 PM #125
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by takascar2
Quote Originally Posted by Sabinus Invictus
Quote Originally Posted by Mike Alexander '59
The opposite of love isn't hate, its indifference. The US has been either loved or hated because what we did mattered to other nations, whereas what they did mattered not at all to us. Once we stop mattering, the world will view us with indifference.
So you honestly think that once we're down, a world that hates us with every fiber of their being would not seek vengeance for all of our collective offenses, real and imagined - including the worst one of all - our very existence?
STFU - I am tired of listening to your crap!

Offenses? Like saving the Chineese's ass from Japan during WWII

Like saving the world from the likes of Hitler?

Like spending buckets of cash to rebuild the nations of said enemies after the war is over?

Your right to speak trash like you do, hoping for our destruction was won by US service persons who died for PEACE and FREEDOM in this WORLD.

If you don't like it here, get the f*** out before someone throws you out by force, or worse.
H-m-m-m. I see you also have a problem giving your opinion.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.
-----------------------------------------