Posted on 12/13/2013 2:57:59 AM PST by markomalley
This is precisely what is being advocated for by 1rudeboy, C.Edmund Wright, et.al.
Along with American workers being reduced to the standard of living afforded your rank and file Chinese.
They simply want to get there by a different route. Rather than central government planning, they prefer unlimited greed as the vehicle.
Capitalism is a good way to run an economy, but a piss poor way to run a nation. That’s why we have a Constitution designed to limit government powers. So that the powerful and wealthy can’t manipulate the levers of government to their financial advantage.
It is a lie that “liberals” caused the current levels of government spending, when jobs were being exported wholesale, in pursuit of more money for wall street, without regard to the health and security of the nation.
Just as it is a lie that the unions and environmentalists must be neutered before any manufacturing can return to the U.S.
Unless business and national policy are guided by Christian morality and Constitutional restraints, our country loses. We’re here debating which disease should kill us most effectively. Trade with the Chinese didn’t cause this situation, but neither did liberalism and unions.
Only God’s morality and libertarian constitutionalism will ever resolve it.
It’s considered bad form to mention someone without pinging them. Even worse to misrepresent them.
Wow! That’s some footage. The captain of that Soviet destroyer was an idiot. Was there any sort of protest filed over this?
BING..! I can think of no finer analogy then that.!! It's what the "left" continuously does to the conservatives...Change the name and thereby change the argument..!
Not a slam on you Lurker...... just an observation.....
I fully agree...NO one can abide a "Robert Mugabe" with 10,000 nuclear weapons...Sooner or later, they will be forced to act...
I think this is exactly correct.
To maintain stability in the face of Chinese military assertiveness, Fisher said the United States and Japan should seek an armed peace in the region by heavily fortifying the Senkaku Islands and the rest of the island chain they are part of.
Again, I agree.
The problem is that the US is so indebted to China--in fact, it is almost a wholly owned subsidiary of China--that it has placed itself in a very weak position.
Plus, the Obama administration seems to believe in the (rather dubious) principle of peace through weakness; so it has been busily hollowing out the US military, while China has been fervidly ramping up its own--thereby making confrontation less plausible, from the American perspective.
The Pentagon and U.S. Pacific Command have sought to develop closer ties to the Chinese military as part of the Obama administration’s Asia pivot policies.
However, China’s military has shown limited interest in closer ties.
Which goes to show that Chinese officials have a better grasp of the real situation than our own president does...
Good idea, but while we try to roll back FedGov™ tyranny we don't sell out to Commies and third world fascist regimes in the process.
To my knowledge..it never happened. The Soviets used unarmed fishing trawlers..they posted no threat...I was referring to the tactic used to shoo them off. You are correct that a GM cruiser is a whole different animal..
Although I am not eager for another war--either with China or with any other country--I do find myself wondering: Why might any such war "destroy [the] western monetary system" and/or destroy "capitalism in general"?
I asked the question because most libertarians believe that there should be a free flow of labor. Judge Napolitano wrote an article almost a year ago advocating that employers should be allowed to import any workers they needed and the government should stay out of it.
Nope. I'd happily eliminate 95% of the regulations added in the last 30 years while booting 95% of the illegals who came here in the last 30 years.
We don't need illegals nor do we need 1.2 million LEGAL IMMIGRANTS a year while over 20 million Americans are unemployed or underemployed.
Not everyone on this thread arguing against higher tariffs on this thread is a libertarian. Some simply might be applying supply-side economics. And one does not have to be a libertarian to believe that higher taxes are a bad idea, or believe in free(r) markets.
Did I say that?
You stated, “I asked the question because most libertarians believe that there should be a free flow of labor.” The implication being that you are arguing with libertarians.
I'm sure they were, but I doubt it was pushed very hard. We made our point (that the Black Sea was not a Soviet internal water and was subject under international law to the same right of innocent passage as any other open sea) just conducting the transit and the USSR collapsed shortly afterwards anyway.
I conducted quite a few Freedom of Navigation (FON) transits when I was active duty. They are all about establishing precedent.
If I ever see a libertarian posting that, I'll point out his error.
We don't need illegals nor do we need 1.2 million LEGAL IMMIGRANTS a year while over 20 million Americans are unemployed or underemployed.
Sounds good.
That's wrong. In peacetime, in international waters, ships are allowed to go where they please. That's the source of much of the naval jockeying during the Cold War - both sides were well within their rights. It was psychological gamesmanship. Neither side's officers were cleared to open fire (and would have faced sanctions if they had).
It should be interesting to find out if China's military officers have been given the discretion handed over the Imperial Japan's officers in the run-up to the Second Sino-Japanese War. Ultimately, the Chinese government may have handed control over the decision to go to war to a bunch of junior officers, in hopes of low-cost territorial gains.
It's kind of funny that China would pick non-Muslim or moderate Muslim countries to expand against. Would anyone care if China made either Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan a Chinese province? Maybe you should counsel your co-ethnics about the folly of encroaching upon the territory of Dar al-Harb.
Well yeah....I agree if the Cowpens could have laid off and used her weaponry. the way I read the article the chicom LST stopped dead in the Cowpens path and she had to change course abruptly.
She can also call in a B-52 Strike, but you know that ain't gonna happen...
“Why might any such war “destroy [the] western monetary system” and/or destroy “capitalism in general”? “
Money is a zero coupon debt instrument. It is a debt where you present paper, they give you something of value in return. If the USA and China, the two world’s largest economies shrink dramatically, the paper is no good as there is no longer anything of value. That would be the death of western monetary system and of capitalism.
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.