Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Fri 07/15/2005 View Thu 07/14/2005 View Wed 07/13/2005 View Tue 07/12/2005 View Mon 07/11/2005 View Sun 07/10/2005 View Sat 07/09/2005
1
2005-07-15 China-Japan-Koreas
Chinese general warns US over Taiwan: newspaper
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Steve White 2005-07-15 00:03|| || Front Page|| [1 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 "Hundreds of [American?] cities" - unless US-Allied INTEL estimates are way way off, the Chicoms only have a comparative handful of ICBMS in relation to the US, MIRVed or not. Methinks Da General, iff serieuse', is actually referring to BATTLEFIELD/TACTICAL devices or weapons, in support of the "Active Defense" of its conventional forces and "Local War/Battle Zone/War Zone", etc strategems which emphasize POLITICAL VICTORY [read - the Clintons and anti-USA]in collusion with local forces'NUCLEARIZED SELF/AREA DEFENSE - IOW, region-specific, asymmetric-limited linear conventional warfare with limited nuclear escalation, or at worst local-global limited nuke war!? Both Communist-controlled Fascist Russia and Commies-for-Fascism/Rightism China have notsomuch demobilized their once massive Ground-Tactical Forces, although some demobilz has ocurred, as rendered them "Militarily Inactive". In any case, I believe the Commies at this point in time still prefer conventional conflict while their State economies are in the throes of modernization. North Korea, Iran, Syria, Taiwan, Chechyna, Cuba, Africa, etc. - these can be considered as PC HOLDING FRONTS/ACTIONS to contain and keep America's volunteer Milfors engaged overseas while Russia-China preserve their warfighting manpower and assets.
Posted by JosephMendiola 2005-07-15 02:01||   2005-07-15 02:01|| Front Page Top

#2  a major general in the PLA who said he was expressing his own views

Yeah, right. His own unoffical views and not the offical Party line. What a masterpiece of diplomatic misdirection! Someone must be copying plays from Boy Assad's Big Book of International Sneakiness.
Posted by SteveS 2005-07-15 02:13||   2005-07-15 02:13|| Front Page Top

#3 It's been 1,000 years since I was neck-deep in this topic, but I would think that the US would have a very credible counter-force capability against Chinese strategic delivery systems, given the limited number of same and the accuracy of our current arsenal. The ability of China to even think of "going there" with nukes to try and intimidate the US would seem nil -- assuming a moderately competent US leadership team. We can hope that events offer up an event to humiliate the Chinese fascists and remind them that they're not even a medium power, and shouldn't talk trash with adults.
Posted by Verlaine in Iraq 2005-07-15 03:20||   2005-07-15 03:20|| Front Page Top

#4 I'm not sure this statement is entirely wise. It's an obvious bluff, and could certainly make the Euros less willing to sell conventional arms to China. I think it's pitched at American public opinion, the idea being to scare ordinary Americans into abandoning Taiwan (which may not necessarily be all that tough, since most Americans probably have no idea what Taiwan is, let alone where it is).
Posted by Zhang Fei">Zhang Fei  2005-07-15 07:23|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com]  2005-07-15 07:23|| Front Page Top

#5 If he's trying to scare Americans, he should have waited till they find the body of that girl in Aruba and they put Rove in prison. Nobody is paying attention to this wind bag and so far all he's done is kill the CNOOC deal. Not only is it not wise. it's dumb.
Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-07-15 08:17||   2005-07-15 08:17|| Front Page Top

#6 According to the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists (if anything, you'd think them prone to exaggeration) the Chinese only have about 30 liquid fueled ICBMs capable of hitting the US. These are the kind that are most vulnerable to a US first strike. I'm no expert in this field, but it sounds like the general is blowing smoke out his fourth point of contact.
Posted by 11A5S 2005-07-15 08:56||   2005-07-15 08:56|| Front Page Top

#7 MD: Nobody is paying attention to this wind bag and so far all he's done is kill the CNOOC deal.

Somewhere at CNOOC headquarters, dealmakers are going "Arrrrgggggghhhhhh".
Posted by Zhang Fei">Zhang Fei  2005-07-15 09:10|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com]  2005-07-15 09:10|| Front Page Top

#8 The Chinese have 2 ballistic missile subs with 6 and 12 missiles. They are also building 8 SSBNs with 16 SLBMs each.
Posted by ed 2005-07-15 09:14||   2005-07-15 09:14|| Front Page Top

#9 Most probable targets are west coast major metro areas. So what's the problem? Yeah, go ahead, make my day.
Posted by Pheng Glolung9905 2005-07-15 09:40||   2005-07-15 09:40|| Front Page Top

#10 Like the early Russian SSBNs, I would imagine that these two subs never leave home without a US sub tailing them.
Posted by Laurence of the Rats">Laurence of the Rats  2005-07-15 09:42|| http://www.punictreachery.com/]">[http://www.punictreachery.com/]  2005-07-15 09:42|| Front Page Top

#11 Maybe one of those SSBNs should have a little "accident".
Posted by Dar">Dar  2005-07-15 10:17||   2005-07-15 10:17|| Front Page Top

#12 An 'accident' would raise the stakes too high right now. But a good active sonar lashing would remind the PLA-Navy where they are in the pecking order ...
Posted by Steve White">Steve White  2005-07-15 10:34||   2005-07-15 10:34|| Front Page Top

#13 When the invasion of Taiwan begins, those two Chinese subs will be scrap metal within minutes.
Posted by Neutron Tom 2005-07-15 10:41||   2005-07-15 10:41|| Front Page Top

#14 Are those the same subs that had "accidents" a few months ago? Seems like it was their "high-tech, brand new" subs that were having issues. Like I asked last night (not asserting, just asking, as there are Rantburgers far more knowledgable on China than I), ARE we beginning to see the downfall of commies in China. Several sub accidents, yesterday's news that their energy consumption is down a lot and now this threat. Anyone for deflection of problems at home to keep the locals busy?
Posted by BA">BA  2005-07-15 10:42||   2005-07-15 10:42|| Front Page Top

#15 "We Chinese will prepare ourselves for the destruction of all of the cities east of Xian."

Yeah...the cities east if Xian. In other words, the entire productive part of China. The rest is desert and mountains and huge numbers of poor people. Great war plan you have there, General.
Posted by gromky">gromky  2005-07-15 11:00|| http://communistposters.com/]">[http://communistposters.com/]  2005-07-15 11:00|| Front Page Top

#16 gromky: Yeah...the cities east if Xian. In other words, the entire productive part of China. The rest is desert and mountains and huge numbers of poor people. Great war plan you have there, General.

That's exactly why this threat can't be taken seriously. It's like threatening to kill an entire town because someone from there scratched your car. Back in the early days of nukes, American planners used to think that nukes would deter proxy wars like Korea and Vietnam. Not exactly. The Chinese will learn that nukes are of much more limited utility than many aspiring nuclear powers realize.
Posted by Zhang Fei">Zhang Fei  2005-07-15 11:24|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com]  2005-07-15 11:24|| Front Page Top

#17 but I would think that the US would have a very credible counter-force capability against Chinese strategic delivery systems, given the limited number of same and the accuracy of our current arsenal. The ability of China to even think of "going there" with nukes to try and intimidate the US would seem nil -- assuming a moderately competent US leadership team. We can hope that events offer up an event to humiliate the Chinese fascists and remind them that they're not even a medium power, and shouldn't talk trash with adults.

Bottom line, don't frighten an opponent with first strike capabilities.
Posted by Shipman 2005-07-15 13:45||   2005-07-15 13:45|| Front Page Top

#18 "They are also building 8 SSBNs with 16 SLBMs each." So you have to wonder about the BRAC commssion wanting to lower the number of US subs to 30 - 40, when the Pentagon is complaining tht it can't adequately do it's job with the 55 - 60 it has now. Each one of those little gems will need to have an escort riding a couple thousand yards behind it each time it leaves chicom waters.
Posted by Weird Al 2005-07-15 14:27||   2005-07-15 14:27|| Front Page Top

#19 You guys are all missing the point and thinking that China would be stupid enough to attack US cities.

The main forseeable Chinese nuclear option is to detonate a nuke in the middle of a US carrier group sent to protect Taiwan (a tactical nuclear attack on military targets). Hence the current willingness of the Chinese government to abandon the "no first strike" policy. This general's comments certainly reflects the general trend of thought in the PLA and the Chinese government (he is not alone and is serving as a mouthpiece), his comments were held in a foreign press session hosted by the Foreign Ministry. A sea level detonation of an A-bomb near US carrier groups can easily (cheaply and instantly) cripple the US navy in the Pacific without afflicting civilian casualties.

The problem is, it wouldn't solve their problem. Sure, the US navy's intervention on Taiwan's behalf would be neutralized, but the US military would retaliate in kind - which has been their hinted-at nuclear policy for years. For example, they would simply wait until PLA invasionoccupation forces attempted a crossing of the straits, then nuke their troop transports. Or, if an invasion never put to sea, they would probably choose something like a port with a naval base as the target.

Once the nuclear genie is out of the bottle it is hard to control, but most experts agree that if a conflict begins with tactical strikes, US retaliation will also be tactical - in order to give the diplomates some time to strive for a political solution before a major escalation can develop.
Posted by naus 2005-07-15 15:05||   2005-07-15 15:05|| Front Page Top

#20 naus: You guys are all missing the point and thinking that China would be stupid enough to attack US cities.

We're not thinking it - he explicitly said that China would attack American cities. And there are practical reasons for this. US carrier fleets would shoot down anything the Chinese sent their way. Theater ballistic missile defenses work and they work well. It's the national missile defense that needs work, because of coverage issues.
Posted by Zhang Fei">Zhang Fei  2005-07-15 15:21|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com]  2005-07-15 15:21|| Front Page Top

#21 In order to detonate a nuclear device in the middle of a carrier group, first you have to get it there. Not terribly easy when surrounded by Aegis cruisers and american hunter-killer subs ready to shoot down &/or sink anything that gets within troublesome range. Not to mention that the attempt alone would be enough to bring about fairly unpleasant results for the people doing the firing.
Posted by Weird Al 2005-07-15 15:24||   2005-07-15 15:24|| Front Page Top

#22 Beijing Peking (fuck 'em) Weather Forecast: 32,000 F and Partly Cloudy.
Posted by .com 2005-07-15 15:24||   2005-07-15 15:24|| Front Page Top

#23 Beijing Peking (fuck 'em) Weather Forecast: 32,000 F and Partly Cloudy.

Peking and Beijing are just different romanizations of the same pronunciation. In fact Peking is the Imperial spelling.
Posted by naus 2005-07-15 15:34||   2005-07-15 15:34|| Front Page Top

#24 if a conflict begins with tactical strikes, US retaliation will also be tactical - in order to give the diplomates some time to strive for a political solution before a major escalation can develop.

naus, please describe what constitutes a major escalation.

I hope we have indicated to the ChiComs that a strike of that nature would not result in a direct strike against any Chinese civilian population; but that's all that wouldn't be struck.
Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-07-15 15:35||   2005-07-15 15:35|| Front Page Top

#25 naus, please describe what constitutes a major escalation.
I was thinking indiscriminate civilian attacks involving nuclear weapons, not localized within the Taiwan conflict, instead more of an existential conflict.
Posted by naus 2005-07-15 15:40||   2005-07-15 15:40|| Front Page Top

#26 Bottom line, don't frighten an opponent with first strike capabilities.
And the Chinese are frightened by the US. The US has never promised no first strike and are the only nation to have used nuclear weapons in war. Let's get our context straight.
Posted by naus 2005-07-15 15:43||   2005-07-15 15:43|| Front Page Top

#27 The grand result of this posturing is to make it more likely that the US pushes Japan into becoming a nuclear power.

So the question is why? I'd love to think the Commies were in trouble but there are far better ways to rally the populace than committing suicide.
Posted by rjschwarz 2005-07-15 15:50||   2005-07-15 15:50|| Front Page Top

#28 ChiCom is a Chinese satellite (China Communications Satellite 1). The usage of referring to Chinese Communists is highly derogatory.
Posted by naus 2005-07-15 15:51||   2005-07-15 15:51|| Front Page Top

#29 The grand result of this posturing is to make it more likely that the US pushes Japan into becoming a nuclear power.
So the question is why? I'd love to think the Commies were in trouble but there are far better ways to rally the populace than committing suicide.

The Chinese government is more dynamic than most people think. There are several factions, most notably: 1. the more free market oriented right-wing "Shanghai Faction", 2. the ruling left-wing "Hu-Wen Faction", 3. the old school "Prince" faction.

This general is speaking for the more hawkish Prince faction (named so because of their family and relationship ties with the original Chinese Communist revolution).

The left and right factions are both anti-war and highly pragmatic in their goals. The left wing sees European socialist policies as its model of government and the right wing sees American and British laissez-faire economics as its model. Both groups follow a policy of open doors.

In the US, politicians and generals often make all kinds of non-policy comments that are often offensive, ignorant and arrogant. We have learned to respect their opinions as just that. The problem is that there is always a tendency to squeeze a highly complex situation into one viewpoint and label that as "China's stance". This is something people should avoid and instead look more for a dynamic.
Posted by naus 2005-07-15 16:01||   2005-07-15 16:01|| Front Page Top

#30 naus: Once the nuclear genie is out of the bottle it is hard to control, but most experts agree that if a conflict begins with tactical strikes, US retaliation will also be tactical - in order to give the diplomates some time to strive for a political solution before a major escalation can develop.

That's the Chinese hope. The traditional American posture has been that any nuclear attack on American forces will be met with the nuclear annihilation of the attacker.
Posted by Zhang Fei">Zhang Fei  2005-07-15 16:03|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com]  2005-07-15 16:03|| Front Page Top

#31 naus: In the US, politicians and generals often make all kinds of non-policy comments that are often offensive, ignorant and arrogant.

The Chinese have a pretty broad definition of what is offensive, ignorant and arrogant. It pretty much includes anything that challenges China's view of itself as the center of the world.
Posted by Zhang Fei">Zhang Fei  2005-07-15 16:05|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com]  2005-07-15 16:05|| Front Page Top

#32 The Chinese have a pretty broad definition of what is offensive, ignorant and arrogant. It pretty much includes anything that challenges China's view of itself as the center of the world.

Your comment is ridiculous. The Chinese have long relinquished its view as the center of the world. People in China either look up to the US, Western Europe or Japan. No sane Chinese today admires North Korea or Vietnam.
Posted by naus 2005-07-15 16:10||   2005-07-15 16:10|| Front Page Top

#33 The Chinese have a pretty broad definition of what is offensive, ignorant and arrogant. It pretty much includes anything that challenges China's view of itself as the center of the world.

Anyone who has been to both China and Japan will realize that the Chinese are far more open and tolerant of foreigners than the Japanese.
Posted by naus 2005-07-15 16:12||   2005-07-15 16:12|| Front Page Top

#34 naus: No sane Chinese today admires North Korea or Vietnam.

China's view of itself today has nothing to do with communism and everything to do with the traditional sense of China's special place in the world. In that worldview, North Korea and Vietnam are not China's communist brethren, but Chinese provinces that were wrested from Chinese rule by Japanese and French imperialists. No self-respecting communist state would allow the production and broadcast of TV programs venerating its imperial past, as China's government currently does. The security threat from China has nothing to do with communism and everything to do with a Chinese state that has never failed expand its territory in times of strength. China's time of strength is drawing near.
Posted by Zhang Fei">Zhang Fei  2005-07-15 16:17|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com]  2005-07-15 16:17|| Front Page Top

#35 Japan, a first world nation with half the population of the US, receives about as many tourists in a year as Malta or Poland. There is a reason for that, and it isn't because of cost and language.
Posted by naus 2005-07-15 16:17||   2005-07-15 16:17|| Front Page Top

#36 Thailand, a country with a tiny fraction of China's territory, receives several times more tourists than all of China, despite the fact that costs in China are far lower. Japan gets few tourists for the same reason that Korea doesn't get all that many tourists - it is (horrendously) expensive and remote from the major places from which tourists come - the US and Europe.
Posted by Zhang Fei">Zhang Fei  2005-07-15 16:25|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com]  2005-07-15 16:25|| Front Page Top

#37 China's view of itself today has nothing to do with communism and everything to do with the traditional sense of China's special place in the world.
China wasn't even united traditionally. Most of China's history involved invasions, splitting apart, civil war, religious and popular rebellions, uniting. The Chinese state today is the most united it has ever been for 2 millennia. If anything, the future we will see greater Chinese regionalism leading to perhaps a federation of Chinese states modeled closely after the United States or the EU.


The security threat from China has nothing to do with communism and everything to do with a Chinese state that has never failed expand its territory in times of strength. China's time of strength is drawing near.
Chinese expansionism will not come when the majority of its population are more interested in getting a cell phone, an apartment and a moped. The only country that China still has a beef with is Japan (which over time will naturally be resolved as China becomes richer itself, just as South Korea did).
Posted by naus 2005-07-15 16:27||   2005-07-15 16:27|| Front Page Top

#38 Thailand, a country with a tiny fraction of China's territory, receives several times more tourists than all of China, despite the fact that costs in China are far lower. Japan gets few tourists for the same reason that Korea doesn't get all that many tourists - it is (horrendously) expensive and remote from the major places from which tourists come - the US and Europe.

Economic deflation in Japan has made it no more expensive than Europe and the US today. Gone are the days of the 4 dollar cup of orange juice in Narita airport. In fact travelling to Japan is a lot more cheaper than Europe for an American.

And you are wrong, the bulk of Japan's already non-existent tourism comes from Asian countries (mainly South Korea and Taiwan).

Japan doesn't get tourists because it is notoriously hostile to tourists and foreigners, the discrimination is incredibly blatant. This does not just extend to tourism, it is very difficult for foreigners (and I mean Americans or Europeans) in Japan to find a good apartment, and even harder to find a job that would accept foreigners even if they have excellent credentials and speak impeccable Japanese. Consequently, Western expats in Japan are flocking to China en masse.
Posted by naus 2005-07-15 16:34||   2005-07-15 16:34|| Front Page Top

#39 Are you guys talking at cross-purposes?

naus seems to be talking about the average Chinese and ZF about the ChiCom Central Committee.

No one on the planet compares to the ChiComs when it comes to petty insecurities. No slight is too small for a major hissy fit. In fact, here's what I think of China and her grand history, naus, since you're new 'round here:

"...Not Chi-Comm-style, which has evolved from pure Imperial dictatorship into communist centralized command economy dictatorship-by-committee into a bastard communist centralized dictatorship-by-committee with some free-trade zones, totally controlled by the cabal's pet kleptocrats. If the Chinese had any trace of honor or justice or guts or gumption or even masculinity left in their genes - after millenia of being yes-men, patsies, servants, suckers, tools, and fools - they'd toss this cabal, this tiny group of a few dozen wankers, into the dog-pits for a snack and get their asses into freedom and capitalism - in a big way. What potential. What waste. Wotta buncha fools. A few dozen wannabee ChiCom dictators holding hostage a billion people. But it's been this way since the dawn of China. And endless stream of kow-tows. This example, China's thousands upon thousands of years of history, is the height of cowardice, the pinnacle of stupidity, the peak of weakness, the pluperfect example of the failure of man's will and sense. China is the ultimate example of the failure of man, thus far. No wonder they're so fucking sensitive. The shame of their perpetual failures is mind boggling. History's perfect losers."

I'm no China expert, but I don't have to be to see them for what they are.

My take.
Posted by .com 2005-07-15 16:36||   2005-07-15 16:36|| Front Page Top

#40 .com, the problem is that this doesn't reflect the reality of China's history, which is actually very violent and wartorn. For example, the Christian Taiping Rebellion (Taiping Kingdom of Heaven) during the mid-1800s left 40 million dead and wiped out nearly 15% of China's population. The stereotype of China being "yes-men, patsies, servants, suckers, tools, and fools" is really an image conjured partly by the Communists themselves to contrast the brutality and aggression of "foreign colonialists and imperialists."

There are 7 major "dialect" groups in China as different to each other as the Romance languages are. And they didn't become 7 different groups by accident, but they correspond directly to historical political lines that have continuously been repainted throughout China's history.
Posted by naus 2005-07-15 16:49||   2005-07-15 16:49|| Front Page Top

#41 naus: Economic deflation in Japan has made it no more expensive than Europe and the US today. Gone are the days of the 4 dollar cup of orange juice in Narita airport. In fact travelling to Japan is a lot more cheaper than Europe for an American.

No way. I can get a plane ticket to the UK for $350. A ticket to Japan is $800 easy. And the UK is 6 time zones away whereas Japan is almost 12 time zones. Not to mention that a flight to Japan is 14 hours minimum, where a flight to the UK is 6 hours.

naus: And you are wrong, the bulk of Japan's already non-existent tourism comes from Asian countries (mainly South Korea and Taiwan).

Actually, I am right. The bulk of the world's tourism dollars come from the developed markets of Europe and the US. The fact that Japan gets many of its tourists from South Korea and Taiwan has to do with their proximity to Japan, not the relative ranking of South Korean and Taiwanese tourists in total dollar terms. And what you stated is in itself telling, if most visitors to Japan are from South Korea and Japan. Why are these people traveling to Japan if they are the very foreigners that the Japanese look down upon? (The Japanese I know tend to be pretty deferential to Americans and Europeans).
Posted by Zhang Fei">Zhang Fei  2005-07-15 16:53|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com]  2005-07-15 16:53|| Front Page Top

#42 Sure, I'm aware of their clan-based society and history. Bloody, indeed - fighting for the power of the few, every time, never the freedom of the many. What I say is true. I am a free man, they are not. They could be. They should be. They lack that man who stopped the tanks in Tiananmen Square. That was a Man. Anywhere but there, he would've been lionized, and rightly so. There? Probably shot in the back of the head after he left the square.
Posted by .com 2005-07-15 17:02||   2005-07-15 17:02|| Front Page Top

#43 naus: There are 7 major "dialect" groups in China as different to each other as the Romance languages are. And they didn't become 7 different groups by accident, but they correspond directly to historical political lines that have continuously been repainted throughout China's history.

We know all that. In Europe, each of the Roman provinces overthrew their oppressors. None would live under the Roman yoke. If the people on the Chinese mainland are so brave, why have they submitted to imperial rule for thousands of years? Shouldn't each language group have its own state, as in Europe? Whatever happened to nationalism? Even during the days of the Roman empire, Roman citizens killed their emperors every dozen years or so. Rare was the emperor who died in bed. No Roman emperor could have gotten away with the kind of BS that Chinese emperors got away with, in terms of Oriental luxury (financed with punitive taxation), because Europeans were *men*, not sheep - they took crap from no one, not even kings.
Posted by Zhang Fei">Zhang Fei  2005-07-15 17:06|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com]  2005-07-15 17:06|| Front Page Top

#44 No way. I can get a plane ticket to the UK for $350. A ticket to Japan is $800 easy. And the UK is 6 time zones away whereas Japan is almost 12 time zones. Not to mention that a flight to Japan is 14 hours minimum, where a flight to the UK is 6 hours.

Dude, China and Thailand have longer flights than Japan.
Posted by Glineth Ebbomoque5354 2005-07-15 17:44||   2005-07-15 17:44|| Front Page Top

#45 Actually, I am right. The bulk of the world's tourism dollars come from the developed markets of Europe and the US. The fact that Japan gets many of its tourists from South Korea and Taiwan has to do with their proximity to Japan, not the relative ranking of South Korean and Taiwanese tourists in total dollar terms. And what you stated is in itself telling, if most visitors to Japan are from South Korea and Japan. Why are these people traveling to Japan if they are the very foreigners that the Japanese look down upon? (The Japanese I know tend to be pretty deferential to Americans and Europeans).

You don't know what you are talking about at all, and just making up bull based on your biased preconceived notions of the Japanese, Chinese, Koreans, Americans and Europeans. Your bias is pretty disgusting actually. The most high spending tourists in Japan are the Asian tourists, who spend incredible amounts on electronics, cosmetics and designer clothes while in Japan. The North American visitors are the most stingy whose sole purpose of going to Japan is either 1. business trip, 2. to get lucky, 3. see Mount Fuji. There is a public report done by the Japanese tourism sector that is available online, do a Google search.

And the entire comparison was with China and Japan. China (Shanghai) is 300 miles west of Japan; for an American, China would be a longer flight (often connecting in Japan).
Posted by naus 2005-07-15 17:54||   2005-07-15 17:54|| Front Page Top

#46 Like starting from where, Dude?

[mini-travelogue, lol!]
Heh, hey I don't care how long it takes to get to Thailand - it's worth it. Japan's pricey, but very interesting and very different from all of the other Asian destinations. I've set up week layovers there - while enroute to Thailand - same for Singapore. India was pretty boring, except for the gunfire on the beach during the Festival of Colours. Cambodia and Laos were fun, but pretty thin in the amenities dept - more a backpacker's paradise - they roll up the sidewalks at 9:00 PM in Laos, no nightlife, no shit. Myanmar's too stark, thin, rank, and corrupt. Wouldn't go to China for any amount of money, just as I won't buy shit made there. No interest in doing anything that supports the ChiComs. Fuck 'em.
[/mini-travelogue, lol!]
Posted by .com 2005-07-15 17:58||   2005-07-15 17:58|| Front Page Top

#47 Japan is high on my list for vacation.
Posted by Hank 2005-07-15 17:58||   2005-07-15 17:58|| Front Page Top

#48 GE: Dude, China and Thailand have longer flights than Japan.

As tourist destinations, China and Thailand are also way cheaper than Japan. Naus was saying that it was cheaper to go to Japan from the US than it was to go to Europe. No way.
Posted by Zhang Fei">Zhang Fei  2005-07-15 18:01|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com]  2005-07-15 18:01|| Front Page Top

#49 Naus: You don't know what you are talking about at all, and just making up bull based on your biased preconceived notions of the Japanese, Chinese, Koreans, Americans and Europeans. Your bias is pretty disgusting actually. The most high spending tourists in Japan are the Asian tourists, who spend incredible amounts on electronics, cosmetics and designer clothes while in Japan. The North American visitors are the most stingy whose sole purpose of going to Japan is either 1. business trip, 2. to get lucky, 3. see Mount Fuji. There is a public report done by the Japanese tourism sector that is available online, do a Google search.

As usual, naus is the guy who doesn't know what he's talking about. Marrying a gaijin (white foreigner) is fine, but marrying a Taiwanese or South Korean? Gimme a break. Japanese bias is against Asians, not Westerners.

Asians do a lot of shopping in Japan because their economies are extremely protectionist. Westerners have no reason to buy electronics in Japan - I can get electronics 25% cheaper in New York than in Hong Kong, let alone Japan. With the exception of Singapore and Hong Kong, every other major Asian exporter is protectionist to the hilt, which is why *some* find it worthwhile to buy electronics in Japan, despite the inflated prices prevailing there (which gives you an idea as to how protectionist most Asian countries are).
Posted by Zhang Fei">Zhang Fei  2005-07-15 18:09|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com]  2005-07-15 18:09|| Front Page Top

#50 My little sister took a trip to Japan to celebrate her 30th birthday. But then, she'd played Judo and Karate (one black belt, one brown, I can never remember which), studied the language for two years, and stayed over there with the sister of her sensei. Everyone else I know who went to Japan or China for pleasure was out in that part of the world as either as an expat or the spouse had a series of business meetings in the region. Europe is comfortable territory for Americans (as the U.S. is for Europeans); we can read the signs, easily grasp the rules of the road, and know where to go and what to see. Japan does not meet any of those criteria for most Westerners, and the jet lag is much greater (precisely 12 hour time change for those of us on Eastern Time, vs. 5-8 hours for Europe). On the other hand, I have friends who loved living as expats in Japan for American companies -- they really had the best of both worlds. And they vacationed in all the places .com mentioned. ;-)
Posted by trailing wife 2005-07-15 20:23||   2005-07-15 20:23|| Front Page Top

#51 FUCK china.
Posted by Tom Dooley 2005-07-15 20:50||   2005-07-15 20:50|| Front Page Top

#52 As usual, naus is the guy who doesn't know what he's talking about. Marrying a gaijin (white foreigner) is fine, but marrying a Taiwanese or South Korean? Gimme a break. Japanese bias is against Asians, not Westerners.

Asians do a lot of shopping in Japan because their economies are extremely protectionist. Westerners have no reason to buy electronics in Japan - I can get electronics 25% cheaper in New York than in Hong Kong, let alone Japan. With the exception of Singapore and Hong Kong, every other major Asian exporter is protectionist to the hilt, which is why *some* find it worthwhile to buy electronics in Japan, despite the inflated prices prevailing there (which gives you an idea as to how protectionist most Asian countries are).

Hey, genius, you just turned a 360 on the Asian spending in Japan and you tell me I don't know what I'm talking about?

Japanese discrimination of S Koreans, Taiwanese is a economic and social status discrimination, not a racial or civilizational one. It is equivalent to Shanghainese people swearing never to marry non-Shanghainese Chinese (most Shanghainese girls have this priority: 1. white man, 2. Shanghainese man, 3. Japanese/Korean man, 4. Other Chinese). A socioeconomic issue. Other East Asians are Japan's number one source of tourism revenue, most Americans when they go to Japan don't spend any more than they would in the States.

Also the number of Japanese national tourists TO China is nearly 2/3 of Japan's entire annual foreign tourism TO Japan.

All you can do, Zhangfei, is just think in national stereotypes, and it's pathetic.
Posted by naus 2005-07-15 21:48||   2005-07-15 21:48|| Front Page Top

00:00 Sock Puppet 0’ Doom
23:49 CrazyFool
23:44 Snineter Snert9343
23:44 CrazyFool
23:33 Barbara Skolaut
23:32 MunkarKat
23:30 Barbara Skolaut
23:30 JackAssFestival
23:22 Robert Crawford
23:15 whitecollar redneck
23:05 Frank G
23:02 Sock Puppet 0’ Doom
22:59 mac
22:53 Sock Puppet 0’ Doom
22:49 .com
22:42 xbalanke
22:40 JosephMendiola
22:36 JosephMendiola
22:36 Frank G
22:34 Frank G
22:33 Kalle (kafir forever)
22:32 Frank G
22:30 Frank G
22:27 JosephMendiola









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com