Replies

Oh, they are. Much better than Clinton's failed national security/intelligence teams ever did. According to more than a few Army MI officers I know, in the 90s it was a career killer to even suggest looking at China's actions and keeping an eye on them at the strategic intell level. Bush changed all that and now we are learning more and more.

The left, of course, accuses Bush of all sorts of nonsense about this, just as they have about the war against terrorist Islamics. The leftist (be they Dems or RINOs), state that Bush caused China to behave this way. Just as they say that Bush "caused" the terrorists to attack us and if he had just "stayed the Clinton Course", we would only be losing a few thousand civilians a year... Though they keep failing to stress that we had thousands of terror attacks from the Islamics in the 90s, but I digress.

Just because one ignores a problem and offer sacrifices to the enemy ( pro-freedom activists slaughtered in China or civilians lost to terrorists) does not mean the problem does not exist and will not get worse. Europe did the same with NAZI Germany. "They only want the Sudetenland and then they will stop". Then Europe sacrificed Czechoslovakia to the NAZIs, then Poland... Then it was too late. The left even blasted seers like Winston Churchill, who, in 1938, was shouted down in Parliament for questioning Chamberlain's continued talking to and appeasing Hitler. Chamberlain, unlike the modern left, had enough sense to support Churchill when the danger became apparent to all (about the time Belgium fell).