Skip to comments.
China's military and Sun Tzu: What every American should know
brookesnews ^
| 01.19.04
| James Henry
Posted on 01/19/2004 6:19:22 AM PST by Dr. Marten
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-92 last
To: John H K
I was focusing on lies and exaggeration, not minutae. No you were focusing on the use of the term orbit -- a trivial issue, but it served to change the subject and avoid the issue of improved reliability of Chinese ICBM's.
Just as now you are attempting to change the subject to Israel or Russia etc.. from improved reliablity of Chinese missiles and delivery ability that occurred in the 1990's.
81
posted on
01/19/2004 9:49:28 AM PST
by
tallhappy
(Juntos Podemos!)
To: sharktrager
Bingo.
Comment #83 Removed by Moderator
To: HankReardon
Part of the problem with Clintion (and even beyond) is many have a fantasyland view of China. One of the top people in Clinton's circle regarding China was a bona fide lefty loon case.
He was very much hippiefied and total a 1960s anti war person.
While I am not 100% sure of his exact role, this professor set the tone of the Clinton Admin.
He saw China in all kinds of interesting ways. Among them: China is the next big thing. They have the best economy, they are going to surpass the the US, he used the idiotic vision of 'purchase power parity' to an extent it should never be used...
He also totally took on the victim mentality of China to some extent. Sympathizer wouldn't be a strong enough term.
Of course he thought all this to be morally correct and that the US should atone for its sins in harming China. Seriously. That includes our stance on Taiwan.
Hence we ended up with people like Admiral Pruher, as well as a gas station attendant being named to the AIT in Taiwan.
China was instutionally viewed as a benign place with no bad intentions (on top of supposedly being OUR economic savior). Its all rediculous.
If though you challenged any of their basic assumptions though you would PAY. Yes you would.
The Chinese saw this and took advantage. They knew he wasn't being realistic. Certain events though shook the table regarding the Clinton's. When the 'benign' Beijing starting shooting missiles over Taiwan they probably had a meeting "I thought you said they were harmless???!!!"
The answer to that was probably "its the US's fault...we must have done something....let me go talk to them...."
Clinton's China policy from tip to tail was incoherent and full of problems. BIG problems. The framework which he believed in was flawed from the start.
The thing is the table shaking events didn't take place until relatively later in his Admin. Even after that though they still didn't change anything.
When our businesses started looking at the laws like 'look at this outdated piece of crap... I am NOT going to follow that...' Clintion actually agreed.
He approved so many technology transfers without so much as a security review.
The Clintonites were bound by a non reality based ideology.
To: maui_hawaii
One of the main cornerstones of America is the advocacy of the advancement of individual human rights, Freedoms and Liberties. Any nation that does not share this advocacy is our enemy, let there be no mistake about this, China is the enemy of the USA. The USA has been at war with China since the Korean war. China is waging war against the USA now economically, financially, with espionage, and many other different ways, has been for many years. We have strong allies in the western Pacific, South Korea, Japan, Tawain. China wants us out, when policy is made in that area China wants to be these countries main influence, they do not want their main influence to be the USA. This would be wrong because, we are the good guys, they are the bad guys.
To: HankReardon
And, the NKs do little without the approval of the PRC. Understand that, and you can see one portion of the Red Chinese strategy to get the US out of the Pacific.
To: John H K
All Israeli military sales to China are subject to American veto.
87
posted on
01/19/2004 11:32:01 AM PST
by
rmlew
(Peaceniks and isolationists are objectively pro-Terrorist)
To: notorious vrc
Known world or at least what mattered. Of course, none of them ruled the Mayans or the Aboriginal tribes in Australia
Nope, wrong again. The Greeks under Alexander came close, but never conquered main Indian Empires on the Gangetic plains or Chinese Kingdoms, so that's a major chunkn of the ancient world left out and of course they didn't conquer the Celtic regions but those were underdeveloped portions in comparision. the Romans didn't conquer Persia, but conquered the parts of Europe that mattered, but again never reached the centres of Indic or Chinese cultures.
88
posted on
01/19/2004 1:42:58 PM PST
by
Cronos
(W2004!)
To: Jeff Head
You got that right pal.
BTTT!
89
posted on
01/19/2004 4:51:42 PM PST
by
martian_22
(Hey Joe! You good fella Joe. How many ships in your harbor? I like pretty ships. Tell me more.)
To: martian_22
Thanks my friend.
On a related note, I found out today that the Independent American Party saw and published my recent article that O posted here on FR:
The Rising Sea Dragon in Asia
To: Eric in the Ozarks
All warfare is based on deception.
91
posted on
01/19/2004 5:59:45 PM PST
by
TheFrog
To: TheFrog
Sun Tzu said that.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-92 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson