quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY


China is attempting to have it's cake and eat it too: A capitalistic economy, with restricted human rights. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

I think you are disagreeing with a point I never made. The point I made, is that China is no threat to Taiwan (which was Merc's question), because they simply don't have the military capability. Assuming China isn't stupid, they wouldn't even try. I actually think China and the United States are very unlikely to have a large war. Perhaps smaller affairs ... who knows. Right now, China isn't involved in playing those games of alliances with small nations.
 
No offense intended, but I think using localized examples with questionable goals, as a measure of manpower and stomach, is reasonably flawed. I would counter your position by pointing out how amazing it is, that the American military will keep fighting, even when it has unclear motives. I would point to this as a measure of greater stomach and staying power ... if the military will fight so well in a situation like Iraq, imagine how it will fight when objectives and motivations are obvious.

caitlyn,

I was under the impression that you didn't consider China's militarily to be capable of enforcing their political ambitions.  It may well be a moot point; the only country the US would permit to attack China would be.... well... the US.

I do agree with you, that the military will fight whether there is an objective or not.  The trouble with this particular discussion, is we're debating the possibility of a hypothetical war when we've already agreed, such a war would be unlikely to occur.  My comments aren't in terms of the effectiveness of the US military, but rather the stomach of the people who pay their salaries.  I don't think anyone has mentioned the possibility of simply annexing Iraq, for example; yet this was exactly what would have happened one hundred years ago.  The US presence in Iraq is a stabilizing force; the clamoring for 'bring the troops home' is the worst thing that we can do, now that we've opened Pandora's box.  I'd bet dollars to dimes that when we leave, we will be leaving the country to the wolves; Iran and Syria will cut the country and half, and move in, within the next twenty years. 

The US simply doesn't take well to conquering land that isn't adjacent.  Any sort of military action against China would likely be on par with the objective of elbowing the guy standing next to you, for stepping on your foot.  We've no desire (and quite fortunately) to attempt to assume power over China or any other country, for that matter.  I suspect Mexico and Canada are extremely glad for that fact

Tal Bull,

Thanks.  Actually, I do play sax a lot better than guitar, but pot just doesn't do it for me.  Whiskey on the other hand....  

Stephan Robert Johnson




Stephan

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY


China is attempting to have it's cake and eat it too: A capitalistic economy, with restricted human rights. 

We make a mistake if we think the majority of Chineese are crying out for freedom, most are happy to have a full stomach and a roof over their heads. Chineese intellectuals might be saying what the west wants to hear but it is just the west listening to what it wants to hear. While the China has to manage the wealth distribution problem it is now having, most Chineese will be happy for the increased wealth. There are a lot of poor people in China who will eagerly take the place of any affluent disident.

quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

I think you could turn a post about kittens born at the Houston zoo, into a whiney boi post about the evils Americans.
 
Have you considered that President Bush is just one President ... in office for a few more years, and for all that, rumor has it that we poor souls over here will probably pull through.
 
As far as friends ... I'm still waiting for your answer about what friends we would want, that will really matter in the end? China wants our money ... Russia wants to talk smack, but wants the same thing ... Europe ... who the fuck cares. You guys will switch sides and love us again the day after the election. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

I think you could turn a post about kittens born at the Houston zoo, into a whiney boi post about the evils Americans.

quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn
 
As far as friends ... I'm still waiting for your answer about what friends we would want, that will really matter in the end? China wants our money ... Russia wants to talk smack, but wants the same thing ... Europe ... who the fuck cares. You guys will switch sides and love us again the day after the election. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stephann

China is also a country that, technically, never left the feudal age.  In Communism, they simply went from one form of the feudal system to another.

It stands to reason that sooner or later, once people have full stomachs and a roof over their heads, they will want to do more with their time and money.  Their children will grow up with educations, and in their educations they will become curious about the world.  No amount of Marxist thought can prevent this curiosity, and in time the country will slowly march out of feudalism into capitalism.  Assuming there's any human life on the planet by 2050, of course (said tongue-in-cheek.)

Stephan

quote:

ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave

Firmhand: me again. I had a quick skim thru the post about why the US is still likely to be the only superpower in 2030. Amongst the points I saw was the pre eminence of tertiary ie university education  in the US and that old hack saw "growth"

My answer is the University systems in the West by and large produce 
graduates who  need to be financed out of taxation, then believe it or not the salaries of such people show up as increased growth.

Even more important China is growing by producing "things" that people want and can afford to buy. Thats real growth.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY
Nations have interests ... not friends.

Friends ... go stand next to Alice in Wonderland.

quote:

ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave

Firmhand; as a rule you post very sensible if hard line posts with the US perspective and interest in mind.

Then what happens, you go all namby pamby wibbly wobbly and start worrying about human rights in China. It may well be advantageous or "nice" if every Chinaman were free, whatever that really means, but it aint going to happen soon and has very little to do with the likely, increasing, success of China.

What do you think about that ?

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

If all of the Chineese population lived to a standard of the average westerner, there isn't enough resources to go round. Add Indians to that and there are less resources to go round. As it is now, as a planet we are living beyond our means. It is estimated that if everyone in the world lived to the standard of the average westerner, the human race will need the equivalent resources of five planet earths. Something has to give somewhere. It's pointless thinking about the average  Chineese living like your average affluent westerner and wanting freedom and capitalism, it is a waste of time, tongue in cheek or not, whether through war or an over harvested earth, we are heading for a crash. Unless there is something over the hill that we haven't foreseen or we all have to change our life styles and consume less (which doesn't meaning a return to poverty). Capitalism is a passing phase, a delusion and we are happy to be deluded and aren't really thinking about leaving any inheritence to succeeding generations.

quote:

The US really has no plans or desire to control his country

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave

Firmhand; as a rule you post very sensible if hard line posts with the US perspective and interest in mind.

Then what happens, you go all namby pamby wibbly wobbly and start worrying about human rights in China. It may well be advantageous or "nice" if every Chinaman were free, whatever that really means, but it aint going to happen soon and has very little to do with the likely, increasing, success of China.

What do you think about that ?

First time I've been accussed of being namby pamby, seeks.  A first for me.  Thanks. 

I think "human rights" is an issue with China because of the sociology aspects of increased material wealth, and what is generally called "rising expectations".

Stephann covered it pretty well in his post.

The bottom line is the question of the internal stablity of China, and the affect on the rest of the world when it reaches the point that it's population's demands causes it to become unstable and a threat to the rest of the world as its government attempts to maintain political control.

One of the oldest, and most effective methods to maintain, or gain control by an totalitarian regime is through the identification and war against an outside power.

Look at Chavez, and his campaign against the US.  The US really has no plans or desire to control his country, but it certainly is a distraction in order for him to impose his dictatorship on his population.  Look at Argentina and the Falklands.  Look at the Middle East countries and their identifying Israel as the fountain of evil in their world.  Look at Iran and the "Big Satan" and "Little Satan".

One of the possible paths of a strapped Chinese government, that is attempting to "explain" an economic collapse due to their own policies is the identification of an external enemy that is responsible for their problesm.  Tawian comes easily to mind, as does Japan and the US.

So the lack of human rights in China, combined with it's rising economy is an important issue to the US, regardless of any "moral" reasons to be concerned about it.

So ... not namby pamby at all. 

FirmKY

quote:

original FIRMHANDKY
One of the possible paths of a strapped Chinese government, that is attempting to "explain" an economic collapse due to their own policies is the identification of an external enemy that is responsible for their problems.  Taiwan comes easily to mind, as do Japan and the US.