China's President Tells Army to Be Prepared for War

enhance our capabilities to cope with crises, safeguard peace, prevent wars and win the wars if any," Hu Jintao my a$$

:evilgrin:

peace

We may have to start a war to safeguard peace.

Power does this.

Perhaps not.

Don

Unless the Red Army can walk on water...how are they crossing ?

Are the Red Navy subs being tracked ?

Anyone like the smell of napalm in the mornings ? Didn't think so.

PRC has both flavors, nuclear and conventional. Taiwan has a lot of good equipment, we were happy to sell it to them! Our sub tracking capabilities are world class (fair).

All four are diesel-electric. Two are old US boats that are only used for training and minelaying. The other two are recently built Dutch subs, and are top of the line. It would be a mistake to discount a diesel boat's combat ability in those waters. A diesel boat is quieter than most nukes when operating sumerged, it just doesn't have the endurance.

They have US made wire guided/homing torpedos. They could do serious damage to an invasion fleet before they were destroyed. If their attacks were coordinated with an air attack, they would probably be able to get away after their attack, to attack again.

that we made that they didn't like would result in a phone call "Hey US, back off and shut up or we won't show up at the next Treasury auction" which would put our economy into a tailspin that would make the Great Depression look like a surplus budget.

Chimpy can crow about keeping 'Murka' safe, but what they've done with these reckless fiscal policies is to put our entire future into another country's hands. And all they could crow about was "Kerry would sell us out to the UN"? Bullshit, we've all ready been sold to China and Japan - the payments are something like $4,000,000,000 each month on the current financing schedule.

You're post is right on the dime, which is all we'll be left with!

Nothing? I thought not. They're not defenseless and they aren't afraid of you, or at least the armaments and military that you use to make yourself feel like a 'warrior president'.

There will be no 'let freedom reign' crap here I'd be willing to bet.

2.5 million. Gulp.

Chinese say it's Hu's army
AFP, Reuters
March 14, 2005

BEIJING: China's parliament has approved President Hu Jintao as the country's military chief, completing the handover of power from former leader Jiang Zemin.

Mr Hu, 62, was selected by 2886 votes at a meeting of China's National People's Congress yesterday, with six votes against and five undecided, the Xinhua news agency said.

He replaces Mr Jiang, 78, as chairman of the Central Military Commission, a largely ceremonial role.

The move was widely expected as Mr Hu had succeeded Mr Jiang in September as chairman of the Communist Party's CMC, which holds the real power over the world's largest military.

http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/redir.php?jid=6d250930314856ab&cat=c08dd24cec417021

...been preparing for this event for some time now:

<snip>

Shooting War in 2005

The Commission's report painted a deadly and growing picture of the Chinese threat with a possible conflict only a year away.

"The China Affairs Department of the Democratic Progressive Party published a report on China's basic military capabilities in which it said that Beijing had developed a 'sudden strike' strategy to attack Taiwan. This story discussed a scenario in which an attack would consist of an initial seven-minute shock and strike missile barrage that would paralyze Taiwan's command system, followed by seventeen minutes in which Taiwan's air space will be invaded by fighter jets. Within twenty-four hours of the strike, 258,000 Chinese troops could be deployed in Taiwan. China's fast-growing military modernization and expansion is aimed at a possible war between 2005 and 2010, according to the report," stated the Commission report.


In early June the Pentagon released a Congressionally mandated report on Chinese military developments. The Pentagon report outlined the double-digit increases in Chinese defense spending and major weapons purchases from Russia.

China currently is third in total defense spending, behind the U.S. and Russia, with nearly $100 billion a year now budgeted for the PLA. The Pentagon report noted that the PLA double-digit increases are expected to continue through 2010.

<more before and after>
<link> http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/6/17/135930.shtml

How will this affect the U.S. consumer's appetite for Chinese produced goods and service I wonder?

China's appetite for US debt?

...U.S. in a hurry wouldn't it!

US would cancel the goddamn obligation. The other world nations would also call in their debt out of fear of having it cancelled. The fucking dollar goes into freefall on the world currency markets. The Dow Jones, NASDAQ, and other indices take a shit.

No fucking good.

That would be the dumbest fucking thing possible.

A war with Iraq was the dumbest fucking thing possible, and Monkeyboy did it.

War with Iran and/or North Korea would be the dumbest fucking thing possible, and we're all bracing for Bush to invade Iran.

Just because China is our biggest trading partner, is armed to the teeth and has a huge army of good-enough quality doesn't mean Bush wouldn't go to war against them.

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

If we don't bring Freedom and Democracy to China Whether They Want It Or Not we're shirking on our global responsibilities.

</freeper>

Look, the village idiot thinks invading country after country is a great idea! Just because he's out of soldiers is beside the point.

defense spending. It's all offense spending, and anyone who says different is a liar. I hope Ronald Dumbsfeld understands just how stupid he looks in front of the rest of the world when he uses words he barely understands. Egomaniacs all... leading us to the brink of WWIII.

Stupid fokkers.

...eventually gets used for war. The accelerated spending following Bush's assumption of power was the lead-in to the wars we are in or about to engage in.

I guess if priests can molest children, people who espouse Christian beliefs can molest the rest of the world... I mean, what's fair is fair.

May the lord have mercy on these one dimensional thinkers.

In the article.

I wonder if Bolton's appointment as foreign affairs chief is responsible for the show of force to Taiwan.

John Bolton is decidedly pro-independence for Taiwan and has said so in no uncertain terms.

A year ago Buxh was telling Taiwan to cool it's jets on that democracy talk because the Iraq war was in focus.

The status quo has prevailed in the Republic Of China since Buxh has been in charge. Perhaps there's a change in policy now, but I can't imagine even Buxh choosing this high stakes fight. It's a "lose/lose" situation.

By the way, I've noticed a BIG reduction in Taiwan crap, and a BIG increase in Chinese crap in stores the last ten years.

That should tell who's side we're on, but the message sent by Bolton's appointment is mixed indeed.

:eyes: I don't know about others, but I've never heard anyone say they wanted the Army to be prepared. After all, are they Boy Scouts?

Whacha gonna do???? About it....

(just like Ventilator) (Rolling Stones, Exile on Main Street...)

For an army to do anything to Tiawan, they need to get there.

Air assault won't work in this case. Airborne troops are too lightly equipped and Tiawan has a large well equipped army too.

So they will have to have a naval assault, and China doesn't have a lot of amphibious assault equipment.

Further, the economic consequenes for China would be rather drastic. Tiawan and China, despite their political problems, do a LOT of trading with each other. This is just posturing on China's part.

I hope you are right.

Don

on the Red Coastline get hit once the first missile goes off. Anti sub and missile defense systems on Taiwan with similar tactics on the Red side ... just all around dumb.

China got back HongKong simply by waiting. But the top-heavy party must be realizing that by waiting democracy will overtake them. Why have a communist party class elite when the ideology is so clearly hypocritical ?

>Why have a communist party class elite ...

Because it's transforming it's croney communist system into a croney capitalist one. Communist party connections now gets your buisiness perks, and land deals. It's like an armed version of the Rotary club, on its face. The prisons are still there and folks still get disappeared, and alot of these human rights abuses have even less ideological cover than a few years ago, when this repression was justified with state control of the society.

When you and your friends are flush with cash your society tends to be less introspective, remember the dot com boom days of the late 1990s? ;-)

I am concerned about what others have said about the possible effects of overt war with China over Taiwan...
What typically happens to the treasury bonds markets between warring countries? Is there a precedent for this kind of thing? I mean a potential conflict between such huge players with such huge market capitalization.

Clear out 20 square miles for the drop zone with missile artillery and cruise missiles, drop in about 20,000 to secure a landing zone, move ships across the channel with Chinese fighters providing air cover. Not too fucking hard.

Tiawan is very far from defenseless. What you propose would be very difficult against Tiawan's military.

All defense assets are well within China's goddamn reach with bombers and fucking missile artillery.

If I was to bet who'd take the loss, my money would be on China.
Taiwan's air defense is built into the mountains there, heavily fortified. They have state-of-art C-and-C. There's 20MM Taiwanese awaiting any invasion force. Every man in Taiwan goes through mandatory military service. They spend as much on defense/offense as China does...and they've got US satellite access, too. And So. China is well within Taiwan's reach. China attacks, Taiwan retaliates.

But who'd really win? My guess is neither. Why would China do something that would set their economy back decades? And Taiwan needs trade with China to survive.

Absolutely no upside for China and Taiwan to attack each other. All downside. And Taiwan is more than capable of repelling a Chinese attack. The whole island is an armed fotress. Every citizen is a soldier.

I don't recall that our submarines are doing a whole lot in Iraq. To get heavy troops to Tiawan, the Chinese need to cross over 100 miles of water with an amphibious assault force.

...not the submarines.

WWIII

China could cripple us economically, they hold so much of our debt, tying their currency to the euro instead of the low artificle rate it ties to the dollar now would bring us to our knees.
That and the huge dependency on goods now made in China, thanks ever so much walmart for leading the charge. I wonder why walmart hate amerika so much.
They could start an oil war with us too, if they went to the oil producing countries and offered ten dollars more per barrel, we would have to match it, then if they kicked the price up another ten.
They could take back Taiwan anytime they want.

to "cripple us economically" - or so the media told us.

I'm getting more cynical and grouchy by the day.

isn't the yuan currently sinking in the world market too?

How long before they start getting upset about their currency sagging due to our bass ackwards economic policies?

Tiawan IS a democracy. Just because China may be an adversary of W, does NOT mean that we should be cheering China (A genuine dictatorship) against Tiawan.

The enemy of my enemy may also be my enemy too. If China moves militarly against Tiawan, that will be an agressive war by a dictatorship against a democracy.

China 1989: nuff said

I don't feel that any Dems here are cheering for China. It seems that China could very well prevail in a war against Taiwan given their miltary numbers and their weaponry. The great concern is what would the U.S. Govt. do about an attack upon Taiwan.

See my sig line.

:eyes:

I just read through the entire tread and could not find one. Maybe I missed them all?

Don

Take a look at posts 3, 4, 21 & 29.

I will let those posters speak for themselves, but if you consider discussing theoretical possibilities concerning the subject of this thread as cheering for China I guess we had better all watch we say. Perhaps we should all just tune into Fox news or log on to Freerepublic so we can find out just exactly what we are allowed to discuss and exactly how it should be discussed from here on out.

Take no offense here, but I think you may be reading more into these posts than is actually there. Have you even taken the time to consider that possibility? Or do you think there are certain subjects that should not be discussed? Or do you think that all the posters here have to agree with your personal opinion on everything?

And just a little advice for you. This is not the first time you have tried to read something into someones post that is not there in an attempt to make yourself appear morally superior to others here. Just so you know, people are noticing this game of yours you seem to be playing around here. And it is real obvious too. Think about what I just said for a while. I hope it does you some good.

Don

I tried opening an account at FR once, and was banned on my first post. (It was about Asian Bird Flu. I was careful to make my post nonpolitical, but ABF is a banned topic there.)

You may note that some posters also agreed with me. I am not alone.

Now lets look at what was posted.

#3. The tone is definitely pro-Chinese. Remember, they are threatening a democracy as well as causing so problems for W. Just because they are causing problems for W does NOT make them good guys.

#4. Same thing. He "gulps" about a 2.5 million man army? What are they going to do? Walk on 100+ miles of water. "Gulp"ing about and army that is powerless to project itself, and should easily be known to be so, sound like cheerleading to me.

# 21. This guys posits a no problem invasion under the cover of the Chinese Air Force. He hasn't even taken the time to look up line up, and he is confident of an easy Chinese victory. When I pointed out the problems of such an invasion he responded that Taiwan's air defenses could be easily suppressed. Again he spoke without knowledge. That sounds exactly like cheerleading, not analysis. Analysis first gathers facts.

What does any of this have to do with FOX? And you seem to consider me an RW because I think we should back a democracy against a genuine dictatorship? Since when do progressives back dictators? We are supposed to love liberty.

Just because China may be giving W a hard time does NOT automatically make them the good guys. Among the mafia the families sometimes go to war with each other. Does that make some of the families good? Nope. Often the bad guys make life difficult for each other.

Has everybody but a few people here forgotten 1989?

And what game am I playing? Just because I sometimes point out bullcrap? Well, bullcrap is bullcrap, whether it is of the left or the right, it is till bullcrap and should be pointed out.

Your analysis of the posts above is clearly RW. Let me see if I can help you re-analyze them.

#3. The Bush Administration is a bunch of hypocrites who will do nothing against a nation that can defend itself. If pointing out the fact that the Chinese can defend themselves is pro-Chinese then is saying that Russia has the second largest stockpile of Nuclear weapons on Earth, pro Russia?

#4. The US should be concerned about a dictatorship with a 2.5 million man army that is rattling it's saber. Is saying you should be concerned about the flu, pro flu?

#21. Is in response to your military theory that an assault on Taiwan is futile. The author gave an example of how it could be done. It's called a discussion.

So there you have it. Three examples and three RW interpretations. I hope I clarified things for you.

BTW, WTF is it to you even if they are pro-China?


Jay

Those posters are framing the Chinese/Taiwan tension as a Chinese/Bush tension and because of their hatred of Bush are cheering for China.

But it isn't a China/Bush conflict. It is a China/Taiwan conflict, and China is a genuine dictatorship and Taiwan is a democracy with real elections.

If supporting a democracy against a dictatorship make me RW to you, then so be it. If you will notice there are others here at DU that are pointing out that our values are supposed to be for democracy.

Sometimes the enemy of my enemy is also my enemy too.

However, the balance of local forces is such that Taiwan would easily defeat any invasion attempt. That 2.5 million man army can't march on water.

the one China policy? BTW I also support Democracy for Taiwan, just not at the expense of everyone who lives there.

Jay

My posts themes are:

1. Taiwan is a democracy and we should be cheering for democracy against a dictatorship, even if the dictatorship is also hostile to W. (Sometimes the enemy of my enemy is also my enemy too.)

2. Taiwan can kick China's butt without US help, if China tries to invade.

3. The over extension of our Army has very little effect on our ability to intervene is W decides to. An invasion of an island begins with sea & air battles, not with land battles. You have to win those battles before you can invade.

If you want to say that our foreign policy if a mess, I can not argue with you on that - it is a mess.

cheering for a countries self-immolation in the face of an emerging Super-Power is another. I also highly doubt Taiwan can "kick China's butt without US help". If they really, really wanted to, China could win simply based on attrition. I think if it came to blows, without US intervention, Taiwan would sue for peace or surrender outright. That doesn't mean I'm pro-China, it means that China can send cannon fodder over the straight forever and a sustained missile bombardment by China would simply devastate Taiwan. All of the air-defenses in the world cannot stop surface-to-surface missiles or air-launched stand-off weaponry. The point of the One China reference is to show you that the United States is hypocritical in it's foreign policy and it makes things tough. Why Independence for Lebanon but not Taiwan? Why Independence for Kuwait but not Taiwan? If China wants Taiwan they will take it. They are old and millions dead and a few decades more of poor economic conditions don't mean shite to them.

Jay

Missile bombardment from China would do very little military damage. It would be like Hitler's V1 & V2 campaign, or Iraqs scuds in the Gulf War. Headlines aplenty, but little to no military damage. Their old bombers don't have a stand off capability.

In a few years, the power balance may change. But for right now, Taiwan would win very handily.

And you have to factor in the international reaction if China were to attack Taiwan.

Not only that, but Taiwan is a major trading partner with China. Yes that's right. For all the rhetoric, there is a huge amount of trade between the two, and that means money. China will not want to lose that.

This is just bluster on the part of the Chinese. They do it from time to time. If they didn't, it would appear like they were giving in to there being two Chinas. The purpose of the bluster is to keep the claim of one China current.

military assessment of the situation. Have a look at this page

http://globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/index.html

with an eye toward China's surface-to-surface and theater missile systems. As far as the trade angle, I don't think China gives a crap. Why trade with a country that you see as your property when you can just take it? In a hundred years (maybe even less) things will be all good again anyway. I agree on the bluster part. As big as China is, it (I hope)does not want to risk a direct confrontation with the US, even if our backing of the one China policy makes such a confrontation unclear.

Jay

Nixon and Kissinger were the architects of the one China policy...


Maybe given the fact that China has twenty times as many people as Taiwan Nixon and Kissinger were bowing to reality but it still sucks for Taiwan...

"Those posters are framing the Chinese/Taiwan tension as a Chinese/Bush tension and because of their hatred of Bush are cheering for China."

It looks to me like some of them are saying that China could easily crush Taiwan, others are saying there's nothing we could do about it, and most are conveying a snide "I told you so" towards Bush for helping to put us in a situation where we can't respond, as they see it. You can call them out on that if you want, but our standing internationally has been damaged, our economic stature has been diminished, and our economic vulnerabilities have been highlighted for everyone to see.

It is the Bush Doctrine's reckless, disregard of the established diplomatic order (which had been hard won after centuries of struggle toward enlightened respect between nations) that now comes back to bite Bush and the entire world in the ass.

Bushco has set the pattern and precedent for preemptive war.

In emulation of it, China will simply tell the world: "Everything has changed since the election of Chen. The old rules no longer apply. We are a great nation that is simply acting in our own best interests. Taiwan's military might and political system are a threat to our sovereignty. We have every right to act preemptively."

Great points....

Its one thing to attack a country that was in shambles from ten years of sanctions. Its another thing to go to war against a country that is intact and strong.

IF we can do a pre-emtive strike to protect our interests.... so can China.

I see this as the reason to start up the draft .... if we can't handle a country that was decimated with our military... how in the hell are we going to actually fight a real army?

Many lost their property and had their assets confiscated when the Nationalists arrived in '49. It's a lot more militarist than China. If it is a democracy, it's certainly a hard right society. I've been to both places and I find the mainland Chinese people to be a lot less xenophobic or nationalistic than the Taiwanese. But that's only my opinion.

With The South Korea or Taiwan Of Fifty Years Ago...


Both are liberal democracies with standards of livings that dwarf their communist counterparts...


If China attacked Taiwan the best they can hope for is a Pyhrric victory....

Yes, the SOL is better in Taiwan....does that mean the rights of 1.3 billion people on mainland China are secondary to the 49MM on Taiwan?
Personally, I really hope we stay neutral in this issue. It really is none of our business. And given our precedent with invading countries of which we have no real interest in, I don't see how anyone could fault China if they decided that it was in their national interest to reclaim what it sees as its territory. I sure as hell don't want to see the Seventh Fleet caught in the middle...

Not only that, but it would be better for us if they did win on their own.

You said that Taiwan is not a liberal democracy. Please provide more information. I was under the impression that they had elections there. I am not arguing with you. If I am wrong about them having elections, or of the elections being meaningful, I would like to know about it.

They are a democracy, they hold elections. I would not categorize them as liberal. Taiwan is a very RW country. 50 years of xenophobia and authoritarian military culture will do that to you.

eventually their society will move. I would also suppose that living so close to a country that constantly threatens to attack you will do things to the national attitude.

The Nationalists are mainlanders and their evacuation to Formosa was, at that time, only temporary, until they could mount another offensive to take back control of the Mainland. I think there's still a good number of Taiwanese that would like to see that occur. Both governments see the other as a threat to its survival.

As for free elections, yes, Taiwan has had them for 20 years. I think China's authoritarian regime will also fade away, at some point. It really is anarchronistic to have a Party of communists who are running a capitalist enterprise.

then the problem will resolve itself. The Chinese communist party will wither away and be replaced by a democracy and Taiwan will eventually rejoin China peacefully.

War is becoming increasingly expensive for nations to engage in.

They have free elections... The leaders are accountable to the people. They have a largely free press....

I don't understand your point about the Chinese on the mainland...


Taiwan is not a threat to them... The Taiwanese don't want to impose their will on the mainland. They just want to be left alone which in the final analysis is the greatest right of all....

Yes, the mainland Chinese are evil, freedom hating people. Forget that only a very tiny % are actually card-carrying communists. Forget that a nation of 1.3BB spends the same on military weapons that a nation of 50MM spends. And certainly, Taiwan...70 miles from the mainland with, as Silverhair so clearly describes, significant air superiority, would pose no threat to the mainland. And, of course, because they have elections, they are a liberal democracy.

I'll remember to tell myself, the next time I visit, that Taiwan is not the Republican vision of American, on steroids.

We have free elections. And we are a liberal democracy, too.

I never said the Chinese on the mainland were freedom hating people... I said the Chinese governmemt wants to force the Taiwanese to reunify on their terms... The Taiwanese would prefer not to...

Taiwan's weapons are defensive in nature... I can't imagine a scenario where Taiwan would attack the mainland... If you know of one I would be happy to look at it...


Yes, Taiwan is a liberal democracy... They have free elections, a free press, and freedom of religion and have habeas corpus; all elements of a liberal democracy...



But don't take my word for it...http://www.freedomhouse.org/research/freeworld/2005/table2005.pdf

Curious, what would your definition of a RW, authoritarian democracy look like?

Look, I'm not trying to advocate one over the other here....but this defense/offense issue is most definitely a fine line. When does defense for one become preceived as an offensive threat by the other?

Let me try to explain my point this way. Let's say there was an island nation of 5MM people (vs. the mainland US population and in relative terms to the size of Taiwan to China, people wise), that was founded by the losers of our last Civil War. Let's say this was an island 70 miles off our coast, say between NYC and Washington. Let's further postulate that their "defensive" capabilities were roughly equal to our capabilities. Let's say our #1 trading partner (China) was supplying this island nation with the latest technology, strictly 'defensive' in nature.

I wonder how we mainlanders would feel about that situation?

An authoritarian democracy would be an oxymoron like compassionate conservatism for instance...


I don't think Taiwan, South Korea, or even Japan are perfect democracies but the people are largely free and the leaders answerable to them...


I am well aware of the genesis of the dispute between China and Taiwan which China considers a renegade republic but I sympathize with Taiwan's desire not to reunify under the present conditions.

Obviously your experiences differ with mine.

As far as "authoritarian democracy" goes, I only found 633,000 oxymoronic references to that term on Google.

I will grant that Taiwan is "freer", that it is more democratic than China if you measure that in terms of government organization. But I think both have significantly different situations/histories that reflect the progress each has made in becoming more democratic. When I was graduating from college, China was behind the Bamboo Curtain, firmly in the grip of a repressive totalitarian regime. The country couldn't feed itself. It was 3rd world. In 30 years, they have made a remarkable evolution into the 21st century. There is no comparison between where they were then and where they are now. As the per capita income and educational levels increase, I have no doubts that their government will change and adapt in the process. Is it perfect? No. Is it changing? Undoubtably. OTOH, the Nationalists who fled to Formosa were but a few million people who took a lot of China's wealth with them. So their situation was entirely different. And they only started having "free" elections 20 years ago.

While you might hate the Chinese government, you ought to know that the Chinese people value freedom just as much we do. I would suggest that the rights of 1300 million people might be at least equal to the rights of 25 million. I think we really should stay nuetral in what amounts to a Chinese Civil War of words.

Taiwan can defend itself today and I hope they maintain a sensible defense plan that signals neither weakness nor saber rattling. Reapproachment, vis a vis trade/investment is happening today and is the best way to insure that a final amicable solution can happen in the next 20-30 years, as the current mainland government gives way to a more progressive, democratic rule of law. Seems this would be a better outcome than another war where 10's of millions are killed trying to stop the inevitable.

Intelligently About It...

are personally familiar with both countries.

You implied that one has to visit a country or region to discuss it intelligently. If that was the case I'd bet my last dollar that few here have the standing to discuss the current situation in Iraq as I am confident that a majority of DUers have never visited the region..
The same goes for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and many other international disputes...

However in a would of books, the internet, and higher education one can inform themselves on a broad array of topics without the benefit of direct experience...


For the record I have a B.S. in Social Science, a Master Of Arts in Political Science and have done post graduate work in Government at Florida State University with a minor in International Relations....

Can I discuss China with the authority of a Winston Lord?

Definitely not but one doesn't have to be an authority to know all the Taiwanese want is to be left alone...

nt

Democracy Is...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_democracy

Liberal democracy is a form of representative democracy where elected representatives that hold the decision power are moderated by a constitution that emphasizes protecting individual liberties and the rights of minorities in society, such as freedom of speech and assembly, freedom of religion, the right to private property and privacy, as well as equality before the law and due process under the rule of law, and many more.

Such constitutional rights (also named liberal rights) are guaranteed through various controlled institutions and various statutory laws. Additionally the constitution of most of the contemporary liberal democracies protects the rights of individuals and minorities, and prohibits the will of the majority (majoritarianism), by almost eliminating that rule in practice.

Liberal democracy is also based on the notion of tolerance and pluralism. This means that differing political views within society are permitted to exist and compete for political power. Liberal democracies are also characterised by periodic elections, in which the competing political views possess the opportunity to achieve political power.

They would eventually prevail but the United States would cancel it's obligation to repay their debt and stop trading with it... Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, and Europe would stop trading with China too...

That would be my recommendation. I don't think I would intervene militarily but would starve the beast...

I mean, think of Wal-Mart.

eom

China would get too keep all the factories we borrowed money from them to build on thier soil. Those factoriese don't just go poof. It's not like they couldn't sell those nikes to some of their Billion plus citizens. What's nike going to do sue for copyright infringment during WWIII?

The US economy needs China much more than the Chinese economy needs us.

And I doubt with a $5,000,00 per capita GDP the Chinese have much money for discretionary spending...


The American market is still the most coveted market in the world... No people consume more than Americans...

If China were to help Russia with its Chechnya "problem" with troops, and Russia were to help China with its Taiwan "problem" with its strategic bombers, missiles, and navy, I don't really see what the USA or anyone else could do about. I don't think the USA would put even one of our carrier battle groups within a 1000 miles of Taiwan. It would just become an easy target. It appears Russia and China are becoming pretty good friends lately too.

Don

http://vn.vladnews.ru/News/upd11_2.HTM

China, Russia to hold joint anti-terrorism drills

<snip>According to Vice-Minister of Defense Colonel-General Alexander Belousov, the drills will include two stages. The first one includes drills in Russia, possibly in the city of Ulan-Ude, where the former General Headquarters of the Soviet Army in the Russian Far East used to be located. The second stage will take place on land, sea and air near the coast of North and South Korea, Japan and Taiwan, and also near American military bases on the Korean Peninsula and the Okinava Island.

At present, three large anti-submarine vessels and one landing ship are preparing to sail to the Yellow Sea. The Pacific Fleet’s flagship ‘Varyag’ may take part in the drills as well. During the drills, a landing-assault detachment of marines is expected to lay mock siege to the coast while Pacific Fleet artillery and missile ships provide artillery covering from the sea.

The pilots of modern ‘Su-27SM’ fighters and ‘Tu-22M3’ missile carriers will show their mastery in the sky over Chinese territory. According to the Chief General of the Air and Anti-Aircraft Defense Forces Vladimir Mikhailov, the Chinese are interested in buying this aircraft technology from Russia. ‘Il-96’ military-transport aircraft will also appear at the drills and will transport air landing forces and military equipment to the drill site.

During last week’s visit to Khabarovsk Chief Commander of South Korea’s Army General Chon Su Chon suggested to Chief Commander of the Russian Far East’s Military District General Yuri Yakubov that S.Korea and Russia hold joint drills as well. The suggestion has been approved by Russia’s Ministry of Defense but the place and time of the drills are yet to be considered. Both countries will provide infantry, tank, missile, army and frontline aircraft, as well as anti-aircraft and artillery units. The drills may be held in Primorye.

more

If China attacked Taiwan it would be cut off from the rest of the world...


Russia can't afford to buy even a twentieth of the dreck China has to sell....

Russia need soldiers. China has plenty.

Don

For their economy to continue to grow they need to sell their dreck to America and Europe...

just much ado about nothing. Folks, leaders of all stripes like to avoid apocalyptic situations. Taiwanese know there's an upper limit on what they can say, the Chinese know there's an upper limit on what they can do. Everybody that would be very negatively affected by a superpower clash over Taiwan knows it.

It will never happen, the world wouldn't allow it, the congress wouldn't support it, the public wouldn't go along, it will cost a hundreds of billions, thousands of military would die, it will divide the country, everyone would realize it would be a quagmire...

Let's hope the Chinese know their limitations better than Bush did. Leaders are funny, though, sometimes it seems like they do stupid things just to prove they can.

consequences than Iraq has had thus far.

Well, in a way I think a superpower confrontation will be the consequence of the Iraq war. Everyone is saying that China wouldn't *dare* start a war because there would be horrible consequences. Horrible consequences never stopped wars from happening before, why is today any different? If China's leaders see war with the US as inevitable(which some of their leaders have stated publicly). It would be to their advantage to pick the time.

I'm not saying I think China would be right to start a war. I'm just saying it may be in their best interest to start a war when we clearly have a poor leader and a weakened military.

Others are trying to argue that China needs us to sell what they make to get wealthy. Well, guess what they already did it as much as they can. With the dollar falling they may think they can no longer sell to us anyway so now is the time for a new strategy.

China's Three Gorges dam is filling as we speak. When it starts to generate power China will be at it's strongest. They can risk the rest of the world not selling them oil because of the dam producing the energy to make up for the decrease in imported energy.

If war with China and the US happens it very well could mean the end of civilization as we know it. The problem is by the US starting an unjust war in Iraq, a geopolitical environment has emerged which opened the door for China to invade Taiwan, and the US not get involved militarily. That is the real problem. Before the war in Iraq, there was no doubt that the US wasn't bluffing about getting involved if China were to act. While I believe we would still get involved. China's leadership might be thinking *exactly* the same thing you are "A superpower confrontation would have much worse consequences than Iraq has had thus far." With one unfortunate afterthought, "So the US won't get involved if we invade Taiwan"

the Chinese with a relatively good time to try something stupid. And it is useful to keep in mind that their view of Taiwan is different than ours, which is to say that there is disconcerting cognitive dissonance at play. You've made the case well; I'm still very skeptical that they would actually pull the trigger, so to speak.

We would not need to invade China. All we would want to do would be to repel the invasion of Taiwan. The Navy is doing very little in Iraq now, and our submarines are doing even less.

The Air Force fighting strength is only slightly engaged in Iraq. A few squadrons and AWACS could be easily sent to Taiwan. And don't forget our satellite support.

Just an example. You never know what will happen when the genie is let out of the bottle.

China would have to have the permission of Kim to do that, and he probably would not take lightly to any foriegn army in North Korea. And if he did, then they would have to deal with the South Korean forces, and they are first rate.

Not gonna happen.

I bet it seemed silly then too.

NK was begging for military help back then, and was much closer to China than now. Back then they were "brothers in the worldwide worker's revolution" bullcrap, and all that. Now China wants to make money. NK probably views China as having sold out.

and it wouldn't be our first time


peace

the U.S. in an all-out strategic (i.e. nuclear) war.

nothing to see here, move along...

http://images.globalfreepress.com

peace

You must understand that the world to protect itself from the affect of the coming collapse of the US Economy is dividing itself into three large trading blocs and has been doing this for over a decade. The three groups are as follows:

The First is Europe.
The Second is China and Japan.
The Third is the North America.

At first the emergence of the trading blocs was an attempt by the members of the trading bloc to protect themselves from the strength of the US Dollar in the 1990s but since 2000 the blocs have become even stronger to protect themselves from the coming collapses of the Dollar. Do to the stress caused by the Dollar's weakness (and to a lesser extent the upward price of oil) the US, Europe China and Japan are all demanding more loyalty of their main trading partners against the other trading blocs (Mostly the US). At the same time the smaller members of the trading blocs are demanding from the major Countries of their trading bloc input into where the bloc will go. The smaller countries are using the existence of trade with the other trading blocs (Mainly the US) as a level with the main countries of their trading bloc.

This is what China and Taiwan is "fighting" over, NOT Taiwanese Independence (it has been de-facto independent for over 50 years) but what will be Taiwan's position within the emerging Japan-China Trading bloc. The heart of this bloc is Japan and China. The next group of country that are essential to the trading Bloc are are Korea (Both North and South, through more South Korea than North Korea) and Taiwan (With Hong Kong thrown in for good measure).

Outside this bloc are the country that are peripheral to the bloc, part of it but not essential to its health. These nations include the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam (Laos and Cambodia are back waters and not a factor in trade, Burma has so isolated itself that it is also backwater). Russia is part of the bloc, but as a source of natural Gas and Oil not as a true part of the bloc.

Thus Taiwan wants to have a say over how the Far-East trading Bloc forms up and wants as big a say as it can get. Saying it can Declare Independence from China is saying that it is a sovereign nation and as such can say "No" to China.

China's saying to its Army to plan to take Taiwan is China telling Taiwan don't push to hard on this substitute for the trade issue. While it is possible for both sides to miscalculate and end up in a war that neither side really wants, the real issue is trade. As long as what Taiwan is demanding is less than what China will lose if it went to war with Taiwan you will NOT have a war.

Taiwan knows the above and realized its main source of economic growth in the Future is in trade with China not the US. China and the US also know this but the US wants to weaken the China-Japan Trading bloc as much as it can. Taiwan knows this and willing to use the US to strengthen its position within the China-Japan Trading bloc.

Thus you have the maneuvering between Taiwan, China and the US. The US trying to weaken the Emerging Far Eastern Economic Bloc, while Taiwan is using the US to strengthen its position within that Far Eastern Economic Bloc. That is what is happening NOT some fight over whether Taiwan is part of China or an Independent Nation.

To a more limited extent the problem with North Korea is also part of the US plan to disrupt the formation of a Far Eastern Economic Bloc. South Korea is as important as Taiwan to the emerging bloc. North Korea is a back water, but so close to China, Japan and South Korea that it can NOT be ignored by them (Unlike Laos, Cambodia and Burma which can be ignored by the Bloc). In many ways North Korea is using its ability to produce Missiles and Nuclear bombs to increase its position within the Trading bloc and like Taiwan is using the US as leverage against its main trading partners. The US is using North Korea's Missiles and Nuclear bombs to break up the Emerging Bloc but that is NOT how North Korea wants. Like Taiwan North Korea is positioning itself for the best position it can have in the emerging economic bloc and is using the US for that Purpose. Like the situation in Taiwan, the situation in Korea may spin out of control and into war, but that is the last thing North Korea wants. North Korea like Taiwan will be part of the Far Eastern Economic Bloc but with a position lower than Japan and China, but above every other member of the bloc (Except for South Korea which will be at the same level as Taiwan and North Korea). The real issue is what will be the Position of these "Second Tier" countries (North and South Korea and Taiwan) to the first tier of Japan and China.

South Korea is also part of this game, it wants both Taiwan and North Korea to have as much power within the Trading bloc as they can get knowing that South Korea will also raise to that level. South Korea has long maintained support for Taiwan and for North Korea in these negotiations. The US has tried to use all three to break up the emerging Economic Bloc. The US ploy is failing for the US main "weapon" is trade with the US and with the decline in the Dollar that "Weapon" is almost gone.

One of the reason the US has refused to address its trade deficient is because to do so meant reducing the US's ability to influence Taiwan, North Korea and South Korea. Once that trade is restricted (either by statute to avoid Economic Collapse or economic collapse) than you will see a de-facto bloc in the far east. Like Germany and France being the main forces behind the Euro, Japan and China will be the main force behind the Far East Trading Bloc. On the other hand, like the rest of The European Union, Korea (both North and South) and Taiwan will also be part of the Far East Trading Bloc.

Thus the "dispute" between China and Taiwan is NOT one of Independence for Taiwan but what will be Taiwan's position within the emerging Far East Trading Bloc.

At the beginning of your post you called the 2nd bloc China and Japan. At the end you called it the Far East Trading Bloc. I guess the latter is more accurate as China builds a major trade relationship with India, ASEAN, and even Iran.

I guess even Australia is starting to see their future in the Asian trading bloc. I wonder about other Middle Eastern countries besides Iran.

GNP
Japan...... 4.357 trillion
China...... 1.325 trillion
India........ 507 billion
Korea........ 480 billion
Hong Kong....344 billion
Taiwan ...... 321 b
Indonesia.... 153 b
Thailand..... 124 b
Myanmar....... 93 b
Malaysia...... 87 b
Singapore..... 87 b
Philippines... 85 b
Vietnam...... 36 b

GNP stats from: http://www.studentsoftheworld.info/infopays/rank/PNB2.html

In the Developing China-Japan Bloc you have the first level tier of China and Japan, then you have the Second Tier, Korea (Both North and South) and Taiwan (And you can throw in Hong Kong at this level). Than you have the third tier, the rest of the countries you mention except for India (Which may become an equal to Japan and China in the future but ts present economic situation prevents it from being equal to China and Japan today, distance means it is NOT a second tier country and it is to big to be a third tier, thus like Australia independent from the bloc BUT affected by the Bloc).

The difference between the three tiers is how much each country is essential to the bloc. Japan and China are the big boy, but they need South Korea and Taiwan (With North Korea in the same group do to Geography). The Third tier represents those countries that are part of the trading group but not essential to it. As such they have a much weaker negotiating position with Japan and China than the Second Tier countries do. On the other hand the third tier will not be threaten with war if they want to break out of the bloc. Thus the third tier to benefit from the bloc must listen to China and Japan and if they do NOT, they will lose trading rights within the bloc. Thus the third tier must follow the lead of Japan and China to maintain trade relations but retain the ability to act independent but at the cost of the lost of trading rights.

Now there is a fourth tier to this Far Eastern Trading Bloc, Russia, Australia and the mid-east (And other a equally distant countries). These are countries where raw resources for the bloc can be obtained and as such where any fights between the bloc and other countries and blocs will occur. In many ways Bush's move into Iraq is an attempt to take the Mid-east out of this tier and to control this part of this tier.

Remember trade include trading in oil and Natural Gas. Energy is what the three emerging trading bloc will fight over. Oil is in the Middle east (With Russia hold the largest amount of Natural Gas). Russia is still powerful enough to resist any attempt to be conquered, but it is clear that Bush believe otherwise for the countries of the Middle East. These are the areas where the three Blocs are coming into conflict and the reason the third tier of the Far East Bloc are willing to submit to China and Japan. Everyone will fight on the edges (Look at the recent agreement between Venezuela and China regarding oil). Russia also knows that oil and Natural Gas are the keys to the emerging bloc. With its Natural Gas Russia can be a member of Both the European and Far Eastern Trading blocs (and in effect merge them together). This seems to be Putin's long term plan. To do so Putin must keep both Europe and the Far East Happy, and both are unhappy about what is happening in the Mid-East. Thus Russia is interested in the Mid-East. Furthermore Russia being really NOT part of either trading bloc (and yet in both) can be used by both blocs as a substitute for themselves in the Mid-East. Thus Both Trading blocs approved the recent Sale of Anti-Aircraft equipment from Russia to Saudi Arabia (While the US was opposing the sale).

It will be an interesting situation over the next ten years as oil productions starts to drop. Will Bush's policy of Direct Military intervention succeed? Will Russia's policy of indirect support succeed? Will China/Japan continue to support Russia? Will Germany/France continue to Support Russia (Germany and France are the first tier of the Emerging European trading bloc, the rest of the EU is the Secondary tier)? We will be living in interesting times.

Just wondering if you see the Latin American trading block as part of the EU bloc or North American bloc in the long run?

<snip>
...China is Australia’s fastest-growing trading partner and fourth-largest export market. Trade between the two nations totalled 23 billion Australian dollars (£9 billion) in 2002.

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=4252039

Basically, if China tries anything they will get their butts handed to them on a platter, by the Taiwanese alone.

One poster contemplates that China could easily launch an airborne assault followed under cover of the Chinese air force. So lets look at the line up.

Any battle for Taiwan is going to center around air superiority. The side that can control the air over and near to Taiwan will win. WWII has proven that you can't launch and amphibious or an airborne invasion unless you first control the air.

China: No precision attack missiles at this time. That sould change in a few years. Aircraft: 2,200 F-6/FARMER fighters (Mig 19s made in China - obsolete even during Vietnam - now grossly obsolete)several hundred F-7/FISHBED and F-8/ FINBACK fighters (Mig - 21 and a Mig - 21 variant. Vietnam era fighter. Obsolete.)& 40 Su-27/FLANKERs. (Roughly equal to the F-15) In other words only 40 first line fighters. Bombers: B-6/BADGER and the B-5/BEAGLEs. Those are very old propeller aircraft with no stand off capability.

Taiwan: 130 IDF (Indigenous Defense Fighter)which is a Taiwanese design that is a first rate near cutting edge fighter, 150 F-16s, 60 French-built Mirage 2000-5s (Another first rate fighter)and 100 upgraded F-5s (Vietnam era fighter.)The Taiwanese pilots recieve more and better training than do the Chinese pilots. Taiwan will enjoy the advantage of fighting close to home with the Chinese having to approach over open water which makes for easier radar spotting and interception by Taiwan of the Chinese. Then factor in the Taiwanese air defense missile batteries. Lots of combat proven I-HAWKs and other proven systems. The Chinese air would suffer suicidal losses.

Airborne troops that did manage to get to Taiwan would land markedly below strength and disorganized, easy picking for Taiwan's land force that has over 1,500 tanks and other armor and heavy artillery.

China has an amphibious capability to land only one divison, about 10,000 troops. But they would not be able to attack into an air space controlled by Taiwan.

Taiwan does not need to attack China to win. All they need to do is to keep the Chinese out, and they can do that.

China knows this. For now, China is merely passing gas.

yeah, the rest of the world ain't shit, WE are the worlds ONLY super-power ain't NO-ONE gonna fuck with us, eh?

sounds like you need to get your gun and head to iraq, i heard they were looking for a few good men&women.

peace

Which of the facts that I listed do you dispute?

What does PNAC have to do with this? Taiwan can whip China's butt without US help.

And Taiwan IS a democracy. Aren't we at DU supposed to be on the side of democracies?

That doesn't make him a neocon....


And it was two Republicans who were the architects of the one China policy-Kissinger and Nixon...In fact Kissinger's firm is still pimping for the Chinese but that's another story...

They wanted China as a counterweight to the then Soviet Union...They also thought China could pressure Viet Nam into a peace settlement...


My take on this whole mess is that a war between China and Taiwan would leave no winners....

I hope and pray cooler heads prevail...

Another poster had it right... There are limits to what Taiwan can say and there are limits to what China can do...

Peace

Brian

i didn't call him a neoCON i just noted the coincidence and since their record is pretty dismal thus far i too hold your view that there will be NO winners after WWIII.


http://images.globalfreepress.com

peace

analysis of the opposing sides. Most people would probably assume, lacking any real knowlege on the subject, that China could easily dominate Taiwan--if the U.S. stayed out. Your analysis is an eye-opener. (However, a link or source reference materials would be helpful.)

:scared:

South Korea is NOT depending on a mere 30K US troops to defend them. The ROK armed forces are capable and have strong training and techological advantages over the North.

The South's economy is many times larger than that of the North, so they can buy more and better weapons.

If the North attacked, the problem, after the intial attack was dealt with, would be in keeping the South from deciding to end the problem by taking over the North.

becuase I think it's time to hit the back yard and dig that fallout shelter kids. Rough seas ahead mateys, Arrrrrr.

With a loose cannon in the White House, ready to attack and invade to protect oil interests. China will take the queue from Bush and attack Taiwan to protect it's interests as well.

Bush lead by example and has set the course for the rest of the world to follow.

Stupidity wins.

Why don't they let Taiwan be its own nation. Tibet should be free, as well. That government is a bunch of scumbags. :puke:

It's purely an issue of "status" and "ego" to the Chinese dictators who apparently feel that 1 billion+ peons are not enough people under their control(not to mention the poor Tibetans) and still more are required. Even at the risk of war.

China's desire to rule Taiwan and the Taiwanese desire to rule themselves has really nothing to do with the U.S. We should definitely stay out of it. (Though I would support selling advanced anti-missile systems to Taiwan.)

:nuke:

:kick:

the last millimeter then back off. This certainly isn't the first time they have raised the prospect of war. China like the bush admin has no idea what the word subtle means and also like the bush admin they are terrified of loosing control. However they are not stupid when it comes to holding on to power and know very well that actually going to war with Taiwan would be extremely unpopular and possibly could destabilize their economy, and that is the VERY LAST thing they want. Their economic success is the only thing holding the country together, the only thing preventing another Tienanmen Square. However China is also extremely nationalistic and headstrong when it comes to Taiwan, they really take it as a point of shame in some ways, and so may also be unpredictable. We can only hope that it is just more rhetoric.

China can be invaded from Northern, as in late 70s, and Southwestern borders. Maybe that's why the Chinese leader said "safeguard peace, prevent wars and win the wars if any"?

examples elsewhere of similar situations.

That's why countries have fucking armies.

:mad:

I have read this thread and am kinda of amazed that post after post y'all keep dismissing China as some 3rd world power.(I don't know first hand,but rumor has it they are in possession of a sizable nuclear arsenal.)

Couldn't take Taiwan. Please.
This is not the pajama wearing folks of th 70's and 80's.This is a highly industrialized nation of 2 BILLION people!!! Shrub is completely ignoring them.And they him.

I have been of the opinion for years that this is where our Waterloo lies.



|

represent America's 'Waterloo'. But in terms of both GNP and military forces that day appears far off. The American economy (GNP)still dwarfs the Chinese economy. China has equivalent sized armed forces in terms of personnel, but in respect to hardware, conventional and nuclear, U.S. military power--once again--simply dwarfs China. If a U.S./China war went nuclear we would win. Period. If a war stayed conventional, we would not be stupid enough to even think of invading the Chinese mainland. We would not have to. China could not begin to stand up to the kind of naval and airwar we are capable of unleashing. (The Chinese 'navy' could not even begin to contend with America's gigantic naval forces. We would bottle them up within a few weeks. Their air force would go to ground or be destroyed, etc. We would have freedom of the skys and the worlds oceans. Not so, China.)

Perhaps some day......but don't hold your breath. We will all be a lot older first.

At least that's the hope. China would be incredibly foolish to invade Taiwan since it would probably result in a war with the US and close off the American market to Chinese goods, and if it has any sense at all will hold back. Of course similar arguments were made on the eve of WWI...

China would indeed be incredibly foolish to invade Taiwan, and China's leaders are well aware of that. Nonetheless, they want to retain their legal claim to Taiwan in the hopes of a later, peaceful reintegration. If Taiwan takes the step of formally declaring independence, it forces China to act immediately in order to retain that legal claim. Thus the saber-rattling, to prevent Taiwan from taking that one unacceptable step.

I agree, no upside, all downside to go to war. Neither Taiwan nor China win. They both lose.

Personally, I'd think China would be far wiser to just let Taiwan go. Why drain your defense budget and spend a lot of energy trying to regain an island of people that aren't interested in joining you today? Better to let them have their independence and worry about more pressing problems in the interior provinces.

Taiwan's problem is that they are going to be assimilated, whether they like the idea or not. If tensions are relaxed, that integration happens sooner, rather than later. Eventually, their economic well-being is going to tied to China's success. They can't compete with China labor costs and the cost of living in Taiwan is very high. Taiwanese businesses are moving back into China in a big way. There is already a lot of interaction at the cultural and business levels between the two countries. Cross-pollination should be a good thing for both societies.

If sanity can prevail over the next 20 years, I think the Communist / Nationalist animosities will begin to dissolve. Perhaps Taiwan can even have a positive influence in hastening China's evolution to a more democratic, multi-party system of government.

I mean, it can't be worse than the Japanese atrocities committed in China in the 30's? They seem to have reached a point of reconciliation.

I think that date is an overlooked piece of information in this whole debate. China will almost certainly not risk any stunts before the Olympics. Also, the more time that passes, the more advanced the Chinese forces become. They are likely to be very patient indeed.

On the plus side....until the Olympics, economic freedom will continue to expand in China. Their people are getting their first taste of prosperity...

Certainly talking to both Chinese and Taiwanese people here in Oz, it would appear that there would be no winners in a military confrontation between them, even if the US Navy was silly enough to position itself off the coasts of both. Economically the story looks a lot different. China is rising fast and Taiwan is struggling like South Korea. World investment is pouring into China at the expense of many of the old asian "tigers" like Taiwan and South Korea. In fact Taiwan and South korea themselves are investing huge sums in China. To lose that money would be a heavy blow to both countries. Manufactured products coming out of both these countries is slipping. Labour costs can't match China. Neither, has raw materials to supply to China unlike Australia,Russia,Canada,Brazil and dare i say it Venezuela and Iran. Chinese technology development is also racing ahead. Eventually all semi conductors will be made in China!
China also has a very different view to Taiwan's existance from us in the West. This is based on the history of Taiwan's creation from the old Formosa. Taiwan also was a dictatorship for decades under The Kuoimantang (i think i spelt this wrong). This dictatorship was only broken eventually by the young people of Taiwan who had been born in Taiwan and who rebelled against the Iron grip of the "old Guard" Nationalists who had originally fled from Mao's communists in 1946. This swing to a more liberal democratic government is still very young and susceptable to economic "hard times". China could certainly apply those "hard times" in the not to distant future. However China's obsession with Taiwan may well be causing it to take its eye off where it is really going to start experiencing internal trouble in the Western hinterland. The ethnic minorities and "Poor" agricultural Chinese in these areas are definately starting to cause political trouble for the communists. PLA action, although never reported, has at times been "brutal" in surpressing this growing dissent. However the word is that it is only increasing the growing discontent. Like many symptom's of "Capitalism" the breaking up of population's into winners and losers, the haves and the have nots is also being experienced in China. However this symptom is not being handled well by a political system that is not really adapted to this type of social dislocation, although democratic political systems also often struggle with these types of symptoms.

:-)

I think rising expectations between the "have nots" in the interior provinces and the "haves" in the coastal provinces is the real problem that Beijing faces today. Why they want to heighten tensions with Taiwan at this juncture doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. What does China gain in attacking/destroying Taiwan? Nothing I can see, except longterm economic setbacks and horrific damage to some of their major industrial and population centers.

Seems to me that there are more Aussies in China than about any other Westerners....lots of English teachers there. I've met a few Aussie 2nd generation Chinese; I have to say that their accents throw me when I hear them speak for the 1st time. :-)

I see China is also making overtures to Australia on regional security issues. I don't think China likes the US-Australian alliance much...I'd be interested in what you have to say on that issue.

Stephen Roach has written a piece that echoes some of your thoughts.

http://www.morganstanley.com/GEFdata/digests/20050314-mon.html#anchor0

As he succinctly puts it - 'The West never seems to get China right'.. He suggests that the Chinese leadership is probably more concerned about maintaining the internal stability of their country than either economic growth or imperial expansion. Unfortunately, China has also become a lightening rod for many of the troubles of the western world. As a consequence I fear it is going to be increasingly blamed for problems such as unemployment, energy shortages etc whose real source lies much closer to home. Expect it be cast as the villain in a new Cold War which will start when the next big economic recession hits.

edit for link