Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Curval on July 01, 2002, 10:17:51 AM
-
This is interesting:
Most people are aware that the Chinese government made it law in 1979 that couples were allowed to have only one child. Like many societies worldwide, the Chinese tend to favor boy over girl babies for a multitude of reasons. This governmental policy has created a situation in China that may cause a legion of social and political troubles in that region during the coming 20 years.
After the most recent census conducted in China in 2000, the discovery was made that the ratio of boys born to girls born had reached 116.9 boys born to 100 girls. In the poor region of the Hubei Province the ratio has gotten to a startling 130.3 boys for every 100 girls. For the purposes of comparison, the ratio in the United States was 104.8 boys per 100 girls during 2000.
What this all leads to is a terrifying imbalance in the population as
these groups approach the age where they would normally meet and marry their mate. The estimates about this imbalance range from the very conservative 29 million to a more realistic 40 million Chinese men who will NEVER be able to meet anyone to marry due to these very simple mathematics. Worse still is that many other countries within that region of the world are suffering similar imbalances. Here is the current "surplus" of men expected by 2020 in several countries:
China - 40,600,000
India - 37,100,000
Bangladesh - 3,500,000
Pakistan - 3,300,000
Afghanistan - 800,000
Taiwan - 600,000
Nepal - 600,000
If you are wondering why in the heck you should care about such a thing, then you have never spent any time around a bunch of young, single men who are unable to locate a girlfriend or wife. There is just too much energy and testosterone to sit around idle and play cards. These men are also likely to be the social outcasts who are too poor, ugly, unlucky or stupid to hook up with one of the highly sought after women. If you can imagine that they might be a little irritable and angry then you understand the basis for my concern.
Similar situations have occurred throughout history before and
governments scramble to quell the unrest before civil war breaks out. The methods that these governments use are surprisingly standard and predictable:
1) Start a war. During the Middle Ages Portugal found themselves in similar situation and sent all the unmarried, landless men off to North Africa to plunder and conquer during the Crusades. If anyone thinks this tension between India and Pakistan is going to just go away, then they are simply kidding themselves. Some sort of major conflict will grow increasingly inevitable, as years pass and it now appears that any such conflict may very well be a nuclear one.
2) Impose some sort of martial law. It unlikely that the government will allow any situation to become more unstable and will clamp down on any uprising with an iron fist. The idea that any of the countries listed above will become wonderful, peaceful democracies is an unlikely daydream.
3) Begin massive public works projects away from the majority of the population. China has already begun some huge programs in the vast Western region in an effort to keep these single men busy and away from anywhere they might start trouble.
4) Make them all police officers. This idea is along the same idea as the public works projects, but instead these men can be used to crush any uprising or social unrest. China is already well into making this a reality in the recent growth of the People's Armed Police, which is a paramilitary group used to react to riots or other disturbances. This strategy goes part and parcel with the prospect of martial law.
The United States and Europe have been spoiled with prosperity and peace for decades and the prospect of continued unrest around the world might be unsettling but it will continue. Worst of all is that many of these countries view us as immoral and their enemy, which could mean we may end up a target of their rage when they seek someone to blame for their misfortune. At the very least it is something to keep careful watch of.
-
Its only a matter of time before they invade Taiwan, should be interesting to see what the US does in retaliation, economically or brute force...
Related:
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020701-95731060.htm
-
I always figured that China and India would eventually go to war to kill off their extra men. The US is to far away from them. Plus they really don't have the Navy or the Airforces to safely transport these guys across the Pacific.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
I always figured that China and India would eventually go to war to kill off their extra men. The US is to far away from them. Plus they really don't have the Navy or the Airforces to safely transport these guys across the Pacific.
That could be a likely scenario...you DO know what China's Gov't doctrine is don't you?
To rule the world, by whatever means it takes.(Lately, they're taking the economic route, as many overseas Asian investors are now turning toward China rather than the Western countries) At least they get right to the point.
-
12255
Sheeit Rip, I'm gonna report you to your employer for thousands of wasted man hours.
And then try to get your job.
BTW, does this mean that males are the more likely offspring than ladies?
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKSWulfe
BTW, does this mean that males are the more likely offspring than ladies?
-SW
No, it means that female offspring are either aborted or killed soon after being born.
-
Originally posted by AKSWulfe
12255
Sheeit Rip, I'm gonna report you to your employer for thousands of wasted man hours.
And then try to get your job.
BTW, does this mean that males are the more likely offspring than ladies?
-SW
Hehe, I just did the equivlent of 12 man hours of work with a push of a button this morning...did I tell you how much I love scripts?
-
Ah, okay. I thought it might mean males were the more common offspring, cuz in the US in 2000 it was 104.8 to 100.. or something like that.
That is of course a very small difference, but it just made me wonder.
-SW
-
Biologically speaking, females should be more common. All embryos are female, and require hormonal input to become male.
-
I am surprised there are more males than females in the US . So when we learned in biology class that female offspring are more common in our species than male that is untrue ? Or is this a result of parental selection ?
-
Right midnite, the Y chromosome .
-
if I remember corectly (and I sometimes do) from science/health class. more male babys are born than female but by the time you reach adulthood there are more females than males.
mostly because- afirmitive action aside- men are more likely to get involved in activitys that will get them killed prematurely.
-
5) Open more brothels.
-
Or, kill off the spare men.
fair's fair.
Originally posted by Fatty
5) Open more brothels.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
That could be a likely scenario...you DO know what China's Gov't doctrine is don't you?
To rule the world, by whatever means it takes.(Lately, they're taking the economic route, as many overseas Asian investors are now turning toward China rather than the Western countries) At least they get right to the point.
Ahhhhh. So presumably they've just been biding their time all these years... lulling us into a false sense of security? And their enormous military spending of 1.2% of their GDP ($12.608 billion) far outstrips the peace loving USA's 3.2% ($276.7 billion), and shows they're well on track to take over everything.... :D
Nope, I don't buy into the China wants to take over the world nonsense. They want Taiwan, and that's it. Hey - Taiwan's ruling dictatorship wanted China back for most of it's rule. The rest of the world is full of horrible foreign devils - why on earth would they want it?!?! They won't let foreigners become Chinese citizens. You may recall that earlier on they actually built a big wall trying to keep everyone out. They also discovered Africa long before the Europeans had got to exploring stuff. Did they take over Africa and enslave everyone? Nope. They went home thinking "Barbarians! It's nothing but barbarians out there! Build a wall, quick!" That's not to say they want the horrible foreign devils dead, either - who they going sell stuff to if the foreigners are all dead?
My 2 kuai's worth :D
-
I'm speaking since "1949", the communist regrime. Mark my words.
-
Here's something I wrote that covers some of the Chinese buildup. (http://home.earthlink.net/~acesarz3/papers/silerchina.htm) It focuses on the Naval aspect of the Chinese Military buildup, but I think that is the most important aspect with regards to US Policy.
Also: (From the Washington Post, full article is not available on-line, but was pretty cool)
China to Buy 8 More Russian Submarines
$1.6 Billion Deal Would Aid a Blockade of Taiwan, Challenge U.S. Power in Region
Article 2 of 40 found
John PomfretWashington Post Foreign Service
June 25, 2002; Page A15
Section: A
Word Count: 981
China has begun negotiations with Russia to buy eight more submarines in a $1.6 billion deal that will significantly boost its ability to blockade Taiwan and challenge U.S. naval supremacy in nearby seas, Western and Russian sources said. Four Russian producers are bidding to build the diesel-powered Project 636 Kilo-class vessels, which will be equipped with Klub long-range, anti-ship missile systems, defense experts said. China has already purchased four Kilo-class subs
The China Vs. Taiwan arms race is a facinating demonstration of Modern Deterrence theory in action.
-Sikboy
-
Communist China doesnt deserve Taiwan. Taiwan is the modern day icon of the work done by people like the Flying Tigers of WWII. Its a symbol of freedom and a better way for a region that is unwilling to change due to its corrupt leaders. They dont get Taiwan. If anything the US owes Commy China a few black eyes for their meddling and involvment in Korea and Vietnam. Mao now theres a baby that shouldnt have ever been.
-
Originally posted by senna
If anything the US owes Commy China a few black eyes for their meddling and involvment in Korea and Vietnam.
Just wondering... If China was meddling in Korea and Vietnam, what was the US doing?
-Sikboy
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
Just wondering... If China was meddling in Korea and Vietnam, what was the US doing?
-Sikboy
Well in Korea weren't we enforcing a UN mandate?, er.. ah... um... fighting for freedom/democracy? er.... stoping a bunch of North Korean (COMMUNIST) from murdering a bunch of South Koreans?
Vietnam, protecting democracy? Fighting against communism? Oh wait I forgot we were just there to kill thier babies :rolleyes:
-
Obviously Korea and Vietnam were two conflicts which were derivatives of WWII. You and I we are differernt in mind and thought. Yippy!!! :) These two conflicts were proxy wars so that two world competetors could hash out their rivalries without pushing the big red button. Stupid China dumb shreck uncle Ho went red. What more do you want me to say?
Heres a modern FT for ya.
-
china is buying russian DIESEL powered subs?? are they new subs or rusting surplus subs?
reminds me of the drug dealers that tried to buy a russian diesel sub to smuggle drugs with , they thought they were buying a fully working sub , it turned out to be a hulk, it not only would not dive , it would not even run under it's own power, and had to be towed, the deal was dropped
china and tiawan will reach an agreement just like hongkong, there will be no war , no profit
-
Originally posted by john9001
china is buying russian DIESEL powered subs?? are they new subs or rusting surplus subs?
Don't underestimate diesel powered subs. In fact they are diesel/"electric" submarines...and when running on the 'juice' they are much quieter than nuclear submarines. The downside, of course, is that they need to surface (or snorkle) to run the diesels so they can re-charge their batteries again.
-
Originally posted by Udie
Well in Korea weren't we enforcing a UN mandate?, er.. ah... um... fighting for freedom/democracy? er.... stoping a bunch of North Korean (COMMUNIST) from murdering a bunch of South Koreans?
Vietnam, protecting democracy? Fighting against communism? Oh wait I forgot we were just there to kill thier babies :rolleyes:
Wow, holy dipshit!
No really. My point was that China was doing the same thing we were doing, namely, looking out for their interests in the region. I found it ironic that one could consider China's actions to be "meddling" but not the US. In the context of George Kennan's domino theory I fully understand and support our actions in the region. Of course like many Americans I believe that the Johnson Administration dropped the ball in prosecuting the war in Vietnam, but that's some hindsite analysis.
So anyhow, unclench dude. Really, you're going to blow and O-ring.
-Sikboy
-
No wonder they're all over here. They're just looking for some p___y.
-
Originally posted by senna
Communist China doesnt deserve Taiwan. Taiwan is the modern day icon of the work done by people like the Flying Tigers of WWII. Its a symbol of freedom and a better way for a region that is unwilling to change due to its corrupt leaders. They dont get Taiwan. If anything the US owes Commy China a few black eyes for their meddling and involvment in Korea and Vietnam. Mao now theres a baby that shouldnt have ever been.
ROFLMAO!!!! Taiwan's a symbol of freedom? Yeah rrright - they got democracy in 1992. So 10 years of democracy, and 43 years of Military Junta rule (37 years under Martial law banning opposition parties) is your symbol of freedom. Hmmm not my idea of freedom. And Taiwan has its share of corrupt leaders - see the accountancy fiasco over the French Frigate purchase.
Here's a quote from the Guardian on the KMT losing to Chen Shui Bian:
The death warrant of the Kuomintang (KMT) - the Chinese Nationalist Party which ruled the mainland for more than three decades and then Taiwan for another five - was signed at the weekend, when Chen Shui-bian won the presidency.
This militaristic machine, modelled on the Soviet Communist Party in the 1920s, has been forced to yield ground to the opposition over 15-20 years to the point where Taiwan is a free society with free elections. But it failed to reform its own political practice while becoming mired in corruption.
Full story (http://www.guardian.co.uk/taiwan/Story/0,2763,184262,00.html)
Meddling in Vietnam & Korea, eh? Whereas, of course, the US has borders with both these countries and therefore is perfectly justified in taking an interest... :rolleyes:
-
Ripsnort - I was just giving you a overview of the Chinese attitude to the rest of the world. I know you were talking post 49. ;) But my point stands - if the Commies want to take over the entire world, why haven't they started? Mongolia for instance. They'd be a pushover. Or North Korea - they'd be easy too. Nepal? Pakistan? India? Kazakhstan? Burma?
Here's what Vietnam's Secretary General, Le Duan wrote about China's Foreign relations attitude in 1979 (after China attacked Vietnam in response to Vietnam's invasion of Cambodia).
Although the Chinese helped [North] Korea, it was only with the aim of protecting their own northern flank. After the fighting had finished [in Korea] and when the pressure was on Vietnam, he [this appears to be a reference to Zhou Enlai as the text soon seems to suggest] said that if the Vietnamese continued to fight they would have to fend for themselves. He would not help any longer and pressured us to stop fighting.
When we had signed the Geneva Accords, it was precisely Zhou Enlai who divided our country into two [parts]. After our country had been divided into northern and southern zones in this way, he once again pressured us into not doing anything in regard to southern Vietnam. They forbade us from rising up [against the US-backed Republic of Vietnam]. [But] they, [the Chinese,] could do nothing to deter us.
Full document (http://cwihp.si.edu/tonviet.htm)
Ooo the filthy war mongers! ;)
World conquest is not in China's interest - its not even in the PLA's interest. Stability is better for the PLA - that way the PLA can sell more stuff (the PLA owns a lot of civilian manufacturing factories). They don't take kindly to people meddling in their own affairs though - which maybe a kick back from the hard time they had at the hands of Western colonial powers.
The Chinese attitude to world conquest? I reckon it goes along the lines of: "The world? Pah! You can keep it - we got the best bit already." Attitude to the US? "Wanna buy some US flags? I can get them for you wholesale..."
-
China doesnt deserve to be a country at all actually. It would be better if centralized control vanished, and the people would degenerate back to some 500AD warlord level.
China is an agressive nation, a warmongering nation, a nation without any respect whatsoever of human rights. China is the enemy.
-
Tibet anyone?
Hey there's a nation inhabited by Budhist monks. They pose no threat to anyone anywhere. Lets invade them and annex them.
%&¤# Chinese
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Tibet anyone?
Hey there's a nation inhabited by Budhist monks. They pose no threat to anyone anywhere. Lets invade them and annex them.
%&¤# Chinese
You're fogetting the British - they invaded Tibet twice. And the Nepalese (who were repelled by a Chinese army). The filthy swine.
The official Chinese line is that Tibet was liberated from the harsh feudal system in place under the rule of the monks - which I don't buy for a nanosecond... My guess is it was seen as a good buffer against India & Russia, and its annexing was a return to the glory days of the Manchu dynasty's realms....
So are we to assume that world domination has merely been put "on hold" for 52 years after it's great start in Tibet, by this "agressive, warmongering nation"? If so what's the hold up? Or is this 52 year "time out" because they just don't want those other bits?
-
On hold for 52 years?
What China has done after the communists came to power are mainly two things.
1) Get an iron grip on the domestic situation (this has been in waves, with some periods more active than others), and
2) Identify desirable territories outside the nations borders and try to get control over them using whatever means neccesary.
If you look at chinese history since 1945 you will see that China has been doing either 1) or 2) at any given moment in time.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
1) Get an iron grip on the domestic situation (this has been in waves, with some periods more active than others), and
2) Identify desirable territories outside the nations borders and try to get control over them using whatever means neccesary.
Sounds like alot of other countries
-
Originally posted by Wingnut_0
Sounds like alot of other countries
Yeah, Germany 1934 comes to mind, or Japan 1936 or the Soviet union, or Iraq, or Iran...
-
reason , why people of chinna can have only 1 child were their population. they were over 1 000 000 000 ... that restriction was need
Why do they like boys more that girls ?
its quite simple.. because boys can do Hard work, girls cant
this problem is related to their country side not towns
and my sources are people of chine whitch live in czech rep.
130 boys and 100 girls...... well whats wrong ??
when 1 Guy can live with 6 wifes in the middle east, 1 chinesse girl can live with 2 boys at far east ......
they are people , they will find some way if you will not solve their problems by this way http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020702/ts_nm/afghan_usa_bombing_dc_21&e=3&ncid=578
<--------- no comment
-
Originally posted by -dead-
World conquest is not in China's interest -
I beg to differ...
A U.S. Congressional Report states, "Worldwide, China
appears to be progressively positioning itself commercially and
militarily along the key naval choke points between the Indian Ocean,
the South China Sea; the Straits of Malacca; the central Pacific; the
coast of Hawaii; the Caribbean; and now the Panama Canal."
In addition, continues the report, "China’s flagship commercial
shipping fleet China Ocean Shipping Company (COSCO), is directly
connected to the Peoples’s Liberation Army and Chinese communist
government. COSCO ships have served as [carriers] for massive
smuggling operations...of weapons, drugs and illegal aliens...,
missiles and components of weapons of mass destruction...."
This activity appears to be part of a plan to implement what China refers
to as "unrestricted war." The plan theoretically levels the playing field
with the vastly superior U.S. military. It calls for strategic positioning of
China’s military, while employing terrorism, computer sabotage,
financial strangulation, drug trafficking, propaganda and other
destabilizing schemes to weaken the U.S. and create political upheaval.
Part of this strategy includes flooding the U.S. with low cost products
produced by a PLA front called COSCO. These products are made with
slave labor, undercutting competition in the American marketplace.
Income from these profits are then used to modernize the Chinese
military.
COSCO’s recent attempt to purchase the Long Beach Naval Yard
would have allowed the PLA a beachhead on U.S. soil. Although that
failed because a public outcry, China has is having resounding success
in taking over the Panama Canal through a company called
Hutchinson-Whampoa Ltd. The U.S. withdraws from Panama on
December 31, this year. (See side-bar).
Like COSCO, Hutchinson-Whampoa Ltd. has direct ties with the PRC
and the PLA. It is owned by Hong Kong billionaire Dr. Li Ka-shing, who
in turn, is in partnership with COSCO. Hutchinson-Whampoa already
controls the port facilities of Balboa on the Pacific and Cristobal on the
Atlantic, and will control the entire Canal next January.
Control of the Canal permits a military base for the PLA. China can also
open the door to drug trafficking and terrorists—all while imposing a
potential choke-hold on U.S. Atlantic/Pacific shipping and naval
operations. And thanks to the technology China either bought or stole
from the U.S., much of the southeastern U.S. is now within reach of
increasingly accurate Chinese mid-range nuclear missiles.
With its willingness to use terrorism and other nonmilitary means within
U.S. borders to neutralize U.S. superiority in the Western Pacific, China
has become a real threat to every American citizen. Especially if China
truly believes it must retake Taiwan now, before global governance is
legally imposed in September, 2000. V mc
Source: http://www.discerningtoday.org/members/Digest/1999Digest/August/The%20Growing%20Chinese%20Threat.htm
-
oh my..err your God....
can't you find a better source than some wacked out spin off of the 700 doomtimes website.
Love their other story's:
Just how much did the U.S. intelligence agencies know and when did they know it?
What role did oil play in this tragic event and the subsequent attack on Afghanistan?
Did the international cable of global elitists play a role in creating or allowing this tragedy to happen so as to justify the abdication of civil rights for Americans and the elimination of those national governments that oppose world government?
Will this be a war between civilizations?
I don't know what bothers me more, the website or that you apparently have it bookmarked.
{ooh and I like this quote too: The vast majority of Americans refuse to believe that world government is being formed right before their eyes. Even Christians and Jews who are warned in the Bible to look for such a government are being deceived. Through never before experienced global delusion, many people, pastors, churches, rabbis and synagogues are helping to pro-mote the agenda! They refuse to believe that an absolute totalitarian government steeped in mystic pantheism will soon dictate the actions of every human being on earth. While Americans are denying it, it is being openly discussed in Europe, and in the inner governmental circles of Russia and China. Read in this highly referenced and explosive book how this plan is being implemented step by step} {added at the bottom: 100 pages; deliberately short so it can be read quickly}
LMFAO
-
Originally posted by Wingnut_0
oh my..err your God....
can't you find a better source than some wacked out spin off of the 700 doomtimes website.
LMFAO
I'm sure I can find as many holes in your liberal agenda websites. :D
-
Sry but I don't subscribe to the Republican or Democrat automated response systems.
-
Originally posted by Wingnut_0
Sry but I don't subscribe to the Republican or Democrat automated response systems.
Ahhh, A "CNN--I get all the info I need from 5 min. of news each evening" type. :D
-
I read to many news sites. But I put alot less credit to any of those 1 step removed from Heaven Gate sites than I do CNN.
-
Yeah Ripsnort, and Hutchison Port Holdings are an evil communist plot to strangle the Panama Canal.... :rolleyes:
I told the PR department of HPH about one of those "HPH is a branch of the PLA" websites (newsmax I believe it was)... they enjoyed :).
The 3 head honchos of HPH make unlikely PLA recruits: - a Brit, an American and a Kiwi.
Directors of China's Evil Plot (http://www.hph.com.hk/corporate/directors.htm)
BTW You should worry much more:
HPH also runs: Freeport in the Bahamas; Ensenada International Terminal in Mexico; Buenos Aires Container Terminal; International Ports Services, Dammam, Saudi Arabia; Europe Container Terminals in Rotterdam; The Ports of Felixstowe, Thamesport (London) and Harwich in the UK; Jakarta Container Port in Indonesia; Korea International Terminals, Kwangyang Port; Hutchison Busan Container Terminal (HBCT) and Hutchison Gamman Container Terminal (HGCT) both in Busan Port, Korea; Westport Malaysia; Myanmar International Terminals Thilawa; Karachi International Container Terminal, Pakistan; Thai Laemchabang Terminal in Thailand.
Worse still!
The Evil Li Ka Shing is also a Knight (Commander of the Order) of the British Empire in the UK, a Grand Officer of the Order Vasco Nunez de Balboa in Panama, and The Commander in the Leopold Order in Belgium!
So by the same logic - (shock!horror! multinational port corporation buys ports!) - what then are we to make of McDonald's stranglehold on the world's Airports? An evil insidious US government plot?
Keep the tinfoil hat on, Rip or they'll know what you're thinking! ;)
Edit:
ROFLMAO - Just noticed Rip's hyper accurate "discerning" website can't even spell: it's Hutchison Whampoa not Hutchinson-Whampoa
-
2) Identify desirable territories outside the nations borders and try to get control over them using whatever means neccesary.
Gee Hortlund - care to give some examples? Don't forget they've got to be aggressive, warmongering ones! :D
(they'd better not include the HPH thing though - we're covering that)
-
I thought I recognised the prose that was quoted in that "Congressional Report" So I went looking for it. I went back as far as 1995, and I can find no record of such a report. It would be nice if it had been better identified. I guess it was classified :)
But really, I don't know what to do with this information. I mean, I'm not convinced that China is out to take over the world. But I don't think they are just trying to be nice to everyone either. I believe that China is a bad place. Perhaps they aren't too bad by Autocratic Dictator standards (by wich I mean: They actually give a damn about most of their people) Respect for Human Rights and basic freedoms are a grave concern. Respect for Taiwan is also a grave concern. We are addressing both of these issues with our foreign policy. We are trying (and I can see how some people have a problem with this one) to encourage an increase in the respect for human rights and freedom by helping China reform her economic policies. This goes back to Maslov's Heirarchy of needs that we discussed earlier. Give them food and Shelter, and only then will the people demand freedom. Poverty is a great motivator for keeping people under a communist regime. Especially if you can blame the US for your poverty (rightly or wrongly). with regard to Taiwan, we have set a pretty hefty deterrence plan into action (as I mentioned before).
I think we have China well in hand. Does China have a defense plan pertaining to the US? I'm sure they do. Is it mean and nasty? Probably. But so is ours. I guess drug smuggling and computer hacking sound pretty low, but pointing a couple hundred nukes at someone is pretty low too. Not that I'm against a strong defense policy, I guess I'm just saying that we need aims and objectives that are clear and obtainable. I don't think that viewing China as a warmongering death machine contributes to such aims and objectives. Mostly becuase I believe that it is inaccurate.
-Sikboy
-
If China tries to take Taiwan, then its a war mongering nation, she knows its what the US considers a key to peace in the region:
It is the policy of the United States to consider any effort to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means, including by boycotts or embargoes, a threat to the peace and security of the Western Pacific area and of grave concern to the United States; to provide Taiwan with arms of a defensive character; and to maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people of Taiwan.[/i]
The United States takes its obligation to assist Taiwan in maintaining a self-defense capability very seriously. This is not only because it is mandated by U.S. law in the TRA, but also because it is in our own national interest. As long as Taiwan has a capable defense, the environment will be more conducive to peaceful dialogue, and thus the whole region will be more stable. The United States actively monitors the security situation in the Taiwan Strait, and provides articles and services to Taiwan to ensure it can maintain a sufficient self-defense capability.
Also, old news below, but its military build up in the area not only shows that it intends agression, but will do it soon.
Better pick a side Dead, its not a matter of "if", its a matter of "when".
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/3/12/214624.shtml
-
Darnit Sikboy! We need someone to pin the devil mask onto, or the Book of Revelations is doomed!
Rip, that source is really beneath you bud. All I can say is ewwwwwwww.
-
Belittling sources is as old as the Spanish Inquisition, find another play ground ploy Midnight, it will not erase the fact that there is a clear and present danger lurking on the horizon.
-
So if your source is no better than the World Wide Globe or the Enquirer and I point that out, I have violated some sort of BBS rule? Please!
This ain't your personal playground Rip.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
So if your source is no better than the World Wide Globe or the Enquirer and I point that out, I have violated some sort of BBS rule? Please!
This ain't your personal playground Rip.
The quote above is from the Congression records, is that not a valid source?
Re:
It is the policy of the United States to consider any effort to determine the future of Taiwan by other
than peaceful means, including by boycotts or embargoes, a threat to the peace and security of the
Western Pacific area and of grave concern to the United States; to provide Taiwan with arms of a
defensive character; and to maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or
other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the
people of Taiwan.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
It is the policy of the United States to consider any effort to determine...[/i]
The United States takes its obligation to assist Taiwan in maintaining a self-defense capability very seriously...
Yes, this is a rational plan that has been developed not by looking at the Chinese as warmongerers or being bent on global domination, but rather by looking at the Chinese who have never disguised the fact that they want Taiwan back. I read a good deal on the policy, and agree with it. Makes me wonder if we contract to sell Aegis next year (which would be in line with my paper of 2 years ago I believe).
Also, old news below, but its military build up in the area not only shows that it intends agression, but will do it soon.
Cool
From the Article Posted by Rip
Taiwan is virtually defenseless against the 250 missiles now deployed by Beijing," noted Al Santoli, senior foreign policy adviser to Rep. Dana Rohrabacher
There he is! That's who I figured was responsable (in part) for the "Congressional Report" mentioned by the godwatch website. Mr. Rohrabacher is instrumental in our deterrence policy agaist China with regards to Taiwan. I respect the man very much, but I don't think he believes everything he says. But someone has to say it in order to get things done. He used to piss me off, but I think I have a better understanding now that I've pulled back and looked at the big picture.
Oh, and he's from California, so Hahahaha! take that all you Right Wing California Haters!
-Sikboy
-
OK let me try to sort this out.
1. Rip says that China is bent on World Domination.
2. He uses sources that are dubious at best to back up this claim.
3. Included in those sources are quotes from the Congressional Record.
4. Rip claims that I am questioning the Congressional Record instead of his sources. (smooth)
5. The quote from the Congressional Record is a policy statement regarding our commitment to protect Taiwan.
6. This has nothing to do with WORLD DOMINATION, just China & Taiwan.
-
Well, we did stray from the original topic, (what thread does not?)
I am saying that Taiwan is at risk, so is the US at an economic level at this point, vs China. Might be at a military level later... Lets see what happens.
I'll consider your post a "I stand corrected" post.
-
No, it's a You stand corrected post. ;)
BTW Here's Dana the Congressional Surferboy:
-
Oh No! You mean the PRC has much more military stuff than Taiwan: How can that be unless they're planning an invasion...?
Might it possibly be because:
Taiwan...
Area: total: 35,980 sq km
land: 32,260 sq km
water: 3,720 sq km
Population: 22,370,461 (July 2001 est.)
Area - comparative: slightly smaller than Maryland and Delaware combined
Land boundaries: 0 km
Coastline: 1,566.3 km
Maritime claims: exclusive economic zone: 200 NM
territorial sea: 12 NM
... is just a little bit smaller than...
...China
Area: total: 9,596,960 sq km
land: 9,326,410 sq km
water: 270,550 sq km
Population: 1,273,111,290 (July 2001 est.)
Area - comparative: slightly smaller than the US
Land boundaries: 22,147.24 km
Coastline: 14,500 km
Maritime claims: contiguous zone: 24 NM
continental shelf: 200 NM or to the edge of the continental margin
territorial sea: 12 NM
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
No, it's a You stand corrected post. ;)
BTW Here's Dana the Congressional Surferboy:
Dana is my local Congressman, much to my embarrassment.
I don't doubt that he actually surfs, but I have never seen him out at any of the local breaks.
-
Originally posted by Montezuma
Dana is my local Congressman, much to my embarrassment.
I don't doubt that he actually surfs, but I have never seen him out at any of the local breaks.
Haha! Take that ACLU Boy!
:)
There may be Junkies Whinos Pimps and potatos in Orange County, but they all vote Republican I guess lol.
-Sikboy
-
quote: -dead-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROFLMAO!!!! Taiwan's a symbol of freedom? Yeah rrright - they got democracy in 1992. So 10 years of democracy, and 43 years of Military Junta rule (37 years under Martial law banning opposition parties) is your symbol of freedom. Hmmm not my idea of freedom. And Taiwan has its share of corrupt leaders - see the accountancy fiasco over the French Frigate purchase.
Here's a quote from the Guardian on the KMT losing to Chen Shui Bian:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Dead-, sorry but nothing is perfect in this world. I consider this improvement and progress. Every Country has a bit of shadiness in its history and nothing good happens overnight. Considering that the KMT were the lesser of two evils emerging from a by gone era of oligarchy, then fought WWII against the invading Japanese, then against the local Chinese communist party, losing and fleeing to Formosa (Taiwan), I dont officially agree with all of their decisions made however I understand to a certain extent. So does the US Govt and their policies up to today as they are considered friendlies in that region.
------from the article---------------------------------------------------------
Official KMT propaganda presents the growth of democracy as a natural process. Improvements in literacy, economic growth and social mobility all created rising expectations. The turning point was the lifting of martial law and of the ban of political parties in 1986. Two rounds of constitutional reform culminated 10 years later when Lee Teng-hui won the first presidential election.
But this version ignores years of struggle and repression. Taiwanese had learnt to hate the KMT even before Chiang Kai-shek's flight from the mainland. In February 1948 a mass protest led to bloody suppression.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I consider this just the price of freedome for that nation as all nations have had to pay their own dues. Even the US with its Revolutionary war and Civil wars...
quote: -dead-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meddling in Vietnam & Korea, eh? Whereas, of course, the US has borders with both these countries and therefore is perfectly justified in taking an interest
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No the US does not have borders with these two countries however after world war II, emerging from that as the predominate world superpower vs the USSR, the issue of important borders and securities had become grossly vague and even more so today as the world is now high tech. The borders today are at the airport security check points and the battlefields are between 30 thousand feet over New York or another city and the side of a sky scraper. These battlefields the US is not fully capable of winning, thus the campaign in Afganistan. Everything else in between is gray now.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although the Chinese helped [North] Korea, it was only with the aim of protecting their own northern flank. After the fighting had finished [in Korea] and when the pressure was on Vietnam, he [this appears to be a reference to Zhou Enlai as the text soon seems to suggest] said that if the Vietnamese continued to fight they would have to fend for themselves. He would not help any longer and pressured us to stop fighting.
When we had signed the Geneva Accords, it was precisely Zhou Enlai who divided our country into two [parts]. After our country had been divided into northern and southern zones in this way, he once again pressured us into not doing anything in regard to southern Vietnam. They forbade us from rising up [against the US-backed Republic of Vietnam]. [But] they, [the Chinese,] could do nothing to deter us.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My opinion, they would rather have a split neighbor than a longshot unified communist neighbor. After Korea, they figured that the Communist party in Vietnam could not pull off a victory against the US in terms of general political outcome post war. My question is where did all of the fancy weapons come from. Where were the mig pilots and SAM operators trained. How were they funded through this war for so long against the US. After all this document comes from a public peoples library in a communist country. Thats what they want everyone to believe. I cant comment on what really happened however my opinion is that, of course they were involed in some way. They had their own changing interests and in general its called meddling.
-
Quote ripsnort:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That could be a likely scenario...you DO know what China's Gov't doctrine is don't you?
To rule the world, by whatever means it takes.(Lately, they're taking the economic route, as many overseas Asian investors are now turning toward China rather than the Western countries) At least they get right to the point.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No its not. Jeeze they have no overall goal to dominate the world however they do have the goal of remaining the strongest in the region.
-
Originally posted by Montezuma
Dana is my local Congressman, much to my embarrassment.
I don't doubt that he actually surfs, but I have never seen him out at any of the local breaks.
You think thats embarassing? My Rep is Sonny's Wife.
-
Originally posted by senna
They had their own changing interests and in general its called meddling.
I still don't get it Senna. How is China meddling when they support the communist side of these proxy wars, but the US not medling when they support the non-comunist side. You've mentioned that these were proxy wars, and I don't think that many would contest that. But these wars were fought between opposing ideologies, and not opposing nations. It wasn't the USSR and the USA that were fighting, but rather the idiologies of Communism and liberal democracy. At least in the minds of our Policymakers it was (Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" for example). China even had a regional interest in the outcome, being that its located next door.
-Sikboy
-
I never said the US wasnt meddling in some way. Thank god the whole communist thing vs the free world is for the most part over. That entire affair was really dangerous and things got very hot on serveral occasions. I personally believe that eventually China will succumb and revert from Communism. I'm less clear about North Korea and Vietam but I expect them to follow suit after China does and not before. Maybe Communism isnt so important of a factor anymore but I'm still old enough to remember when it was, which was most of my life till recent.
-
-Dead-, sorry but nothing is perfect in this world. I consider this improvement and progress. Every Country has a bit of shadiness in its history and nothing good happens overnight. Considering that the KMT were the lesser of two evils emerging from a by gone era of oligarchy, then fought WWII against the invading Japanese, then against the local Chinese communist party, losing and fleeing to Formosa (Taiwan), I dont officially agree with all of their decisions made however I understand to a certain extent. So does the US Govt and their policies up to today as they are considered friendlies in that region.
Well I always thought "a symbol of freedom and a better way for a region that is unwilling to change due to its corrupt leaders." meant it was fairly perfect, rather than (for the majority of it's history) a corrupt dictatorship - which would seem to be the opposite. You know, that's kinda why it's a symbol of freedom... because it's so free. But fine as long as you downgraded the epithet of "a symbol of freedom" to "the lesser of two evils" we're back out of mirth mode. Irony levels are much lower too.
I consider this just the price of freedome for that nation as all nations have had to pay their own dues. Even the US with its Revolutionary war and Civil wars...
Ahhhh... now a picture forms. Only Communist dictatorships have massacres and brutal suppression of political opponents. Right wing dictatorships are merely "getting people to pay the price of freedom" or doing a bit of "shadiness"(hmm ask Chen Shui Bian why his wife is in a wheelchair - I don't think he's gonna say it's just down to a spot of "shadiness"). Communist dictatorships are "evil", Right wing dictatorships we support are merely "not perfect" or "the lesser of two evils". I also like the way only the KMT fought the Japanese. New one on me, and most sinologists. :D
No the US does not have borders with these two countries however after world war II, emerging from that as the predominate world superpower vs the USSR, the issue of important borders and securities had become grossly vague and even more so today as the world is now high tech. The borders today are at the airport security check points and the battlefields are between 30 thousand feet over New York or another city and the side of a sky scraper. These battlefields the US is not fully capable of winning, thus the campaign in Afganistan. Everything else in between is gray now.
OK - so whereas Communists "meddle" to further their own agenda, the US "looks to protect important borders" for the world as a whole!? Despite those borders not really existing and the country being thousands of miles away.
My opinion, they would rather have a split neighbor than a longshot unified communist neighbor. After Korea, they figured that the Communist party in Vietnam could not pull off a victory against the US in terms of general political outcome post war. My question is where did all of the fancy weapons come from. Where were the mig pilots and SAM operators trained. How were they funded through this war for so long against the US. After all this document comes from a public peoples library in a communist country. Thats what they want everyone to believe. I cant comment on what really happened however my opinion is that, of course they were involed in some way. They had their own changing interests and in general its called meddling.
And MAAG and MAAGV and that Tonkin Gulf incident and those Ground troops and bombing campaigns - that was "assistance" not "meddling" because....? Are you telling me that in the event of Russians aiding the people of Southern Mexico with ground troops the US would ignore the threat altogether and refuse to sell them planes, train pilots and SAM operators because that would be meddling? That'll be why the US owes China a few black eyes for their meddling, we presume... ;)
Indeed - what the heck were all those US "advisors" doing in Vietnam during the 50s and 60s? Holidays was it? Working on their tans? Or training South Vietnamese troops? You decide. :D
And if the Chinese reckoned the Vietnamese wouldn't win, why didn't they send more aid later on?
As to the document being what they want you to hear - ahem - well you may not be aware of this, but the Vietnamese and the Chinese are not best buddies no more (if indeed they ever were best buddies) - they'd just seriously fallen out (fisticuffs) when the document was written. It's in a library in Vietnam, so rest assured, it's not going to be telling you what the Chinese want you to hear.
Here's another bit from the preamble of the Le Duan doc:
After the Chinese engineer troops and anti-aircraft artillery units had arrived, however, tension soon emerged between the two sides, and after Premier Alexei Kosygin committed the Soviet Union to substantially aiding Vietnam during a visit to Hanoi in February 1965, Vietnam assumed a more independent posture. The tone in the 77 Conversations turns more sour from that time onwards. What Le Duan says about the late 1960s and the 1970s is more in line with what Chinese sources tell. By 1969, Le Duan claims to have summoned the military cadres to warn them that China had joined hands with the US imperialists, and that they had to study this problem, i.e., prepare themselves for future conflicts with China. Concerning Beijing's new line towards the US, Le Duan makes the same accusation as the Vietnamese White Book: "During that time, China made the announcement [to the US]: `If you don't attack me, I won't attack you.' Thus they left the US with greater leverage in Vietnam." This, of course, makes sense. China really did emphasize its own great power interests to the detriment of North Vietnam.
Oh yeah, those meddling evil warmongering Chinese! Reckon the US would be as easy-going about commies in their backyard? Sure, just look at US-Cuba relations... mmmm warm and fuzzy. :D
-
Originally posted by senna
I never said the US wasnt meddling in some way. Thank god the whole communist thing vs the free world is for the most part over. That entire affair was really dangerous and things got very hot on serveral occasions. I personally believe that eventually China will succumb and revert from Communism. I'm less clear about North Korea and Vietam but I expect them to follow suit after China does and not before. Maybe Communism isnt so important of a factor anymore but I'm still old enough to remember when it was, which was most of my life till recent.
looks like You and I we are the same in mind and thought. Yippy!!!
Lol :)
I was raised to fight the Russians. Seriously, my youth was quite focused on defeating communism (I've grown less mature with age lol) But the Soviets threw in the towel before I had a chance to do anything. Instead I got into Intel just in time to listen to the Russian Navy rust to the pier. I still haven't figured out what to do with my life, despite the fact that it's been 10 years. :confused:
-Sikboy
-
Don't feel too lost Sikboy. I still remember "duck and cover" drills for when the Russkies attacked. We even had air raid siren tests when I was younger.