Quite the ego to assume that. I'll let you be happy with it.
Thanks, but not assumed. A very serious question was posed...and an exploration of your understanding, and seeking to get at why you believe the way you do. I've proffered a few reasons why I am skeptical of the china-taming trade entanglement thesis. It is a contention of the hyper-liberal Thomas Barnett who wrote the "The Pentagon's New Map." Clinton had fast-tracked him into a teaching position at the USN War College. From which perch, for more than 8 years, he lectured at Generals and Admirals telling them how it was impossible for China to go to war with us because of their (a) need for our trade and, (b) fear of our naval superiority. (Fortunately, he was terminated this December, and has lost his bully pulpit. Probably not for the right reasons, however. He probably became too obnoxious in his support for John Kerry, and Rumsfeld settled his bacon.)
This kind of Thomas Barnett/Strobe Talbott thinking must be braced if "we are to disenthrall ourselves", as Abraham Lincoln once said.
Oh, my idea of a truly healthy ego, one of my personal heroes, flaws and all:
Look, I was posting to another FReeper and the entire context of our posts was strictly economic. Then you bust in with an attitude about foreign entanglements. I pretty much ignored what you wrote in that one and this one. See ya.