And how does THAT prove your point? All it shows is that Deng Xiaoping was more astute than Stalin through Breznev. This temporary civilian industrial emphasis was by the long-term design...the expediency of a phoney "peaceful rise."
But that is changing now that the industrial "peaceful rise" is all but accomplished...we can just begin to see the signs of communist impatience as their goals come within reach... But then, suddenly (from their perspective), they see signs the West is having doubts about Chinese sincerity. The live frog in the pot on the stove is making energetic kicks and preparing to leap out before being fully cooked...
The Chinese communists are obviously mulling whether to dispense with continuing the charade, and debate whether the West has been milked of all the technology and capital that it will peacefully permit. Note the increasing strident communist displeasure the Politboro expresses about the EU's refusal to sell arms and dual-use technology. And the U.S. "interference" with Israel's illegal re-selling of U.S. technology to China. The wheels are turning. Time for the gloves to come off? The Dragon ready to bare its fangs and claws? Soon, perhaps, soon. Patience. That is the path of deception...Sung Tsu is integral to all their moves. Keep the enemy off-guard.
Oh, you should also be aware that much of the Chinese civilian economy is "dual-use" by their design.
Well, I guess if there's no threat to shipping, there isn't a need for any military in the Pacific or the Atlantic.
And meanwhile China also is deploying bases all around the U.S., in Cuba, and Xlinton lets them grab both ends of our Panama Canal, building the Bahamas Super-Port, and another in Jamaica, and let's not forget Venezuela and Brazil...and planning on a super-canal through Thailand to avoid the Malacca Strait...
Are you are suggesting that China is building full scale military base in those areas? I really doubt that.
Why do I get the sense you are one of these Xlinton-apologists? "Move along, nothing to see here..."
Nope, not. I did vote for Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. Bush Senior, who was our Republican President (88-92), didn't have a problem with China's rise. In fact, that was one of Clinton's criticism of him, was that he was soft on China.
And how does THAT prove your point? All it shows is that Deng Xiaoping was more astute than Stalin through Breznev. This temporary civilian industrial emphasis was by the long-term design...the expediency of a phoney "peaceful rise."
Interesting that you see that it doesn't prove my point, but then you turn around and make a statement that implies that all the civilian activity is a big giant plan towards a military build up. Really, don't you see how alarmist your statement really is? It's difficult for me to believe that all this civilian activity is ultimately geared towards a military build up.
But that is changing now that the industrial "peaceful rise" is all but accomplished...we can just begin to see the signs of communist impatience as their goals come within reach... But then, suddenly (from their perspective), they see signs the West is having doubts about Chinese sincerity. The live frog in the pot on the stove is making energetic kicks and preparing to leap out before being fully cooked...
Once again, don't you think you're being an alarmist to a point of being theatrical and dramatic in your comments?
The Chinese communists are obviously mulling whether to dispense with continuing the charade, and debate whether the West has been milked of all the technology and capital that it will peacefully permit. Note the increasing strident communist displeasure the Politboro expresses about the EU's refusal to sell arms and dual-use technology. And the U.S. "interference" with Israel's illegal re-selling of U.S. technology to China. The wheels are turning. Time for the gloves to come off? The Dragon ready to bare its fangs and claws? Soon, perhaps, soon. Patience. That is the path of deception...Sung Tsu is integral to all their moves. Keep the enemy off-guard.
Oh, you should also be aware that much of the Chinese civilian economy is "dual-use" by their design.
Well, just about everything is dual use. Textile industry can make uniforms, auto into tanks, freighter ships into military ships, civilian aircraft into military, video/electronics/computers into an integration system, etc.
Oh, you should also be aware that much of the Chinese civilian economy is "dual-use" by their design.
Well, just about everything is dual use. Textile industry can make uniforms, auto into tanks, freighter ships into military ships, civilian aircraft into military, video/electronics/computers into an integration system, etc.