Article

2005-09-01 China-Japan-Koreas

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 Captain America 2005-09-01 01:48|| || Front Page|| [2 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Commie "WAR/BATTLE ZONE" strategems can, within the context of strategic wafare and geopols, be gener summed up as THREATENING NUKE WAR AT FIRST INSTANCE; or, in the alternate, that the USDOD -Allied CENTCOM NOT be surprised at "quick escalation" !? Rummy said it all - that China will never achieve the level of national econ dev or modernity it desires unless it allows more private individ and market freedoms, which are anathema to trad State/Party centric Commies - eerrrrr, I meant "Fascists" or Communist Fascists = Fascist Communists!? Don't a'fergit that the Lefties have given America to 2015-2020 to come under SNO and SWO/OWG, after which they reserve their unilateral and unconditional right to suborn and even destroy America by militarized violence/warfare! Enviro desertification is fast spreading, the econ despite "liberalizations" can't supp both the Party, the PLA, and the Masses, plus thanx to its failed "one-child" policies there will be new generations of restive young men with no women to marry, and no jobs to supp 'em or a family even iff they did find a babe(s). NO FOOD + NO JOBS + NO WOMEN + NO WOMEN TO COOK DA FOOD/SPEND ON > PISSED OFF ANGRY ARMED MALES WHOM HAVE NUTHING TO LOSE BY NUKE WAR OR FORCED TAKING FROM THE OTHER SIDE!?

Posted by JosephMendiola">JosephMendiola 2005-09-01 02:41|| n/a]">[n/a] 2005-09-01 02:41|| Front Page Top

#2 JM, I will run your comments through the Whiz-n-ator and see if it will make sense.

Posted by Captain America 2005-09-01 02:50|| 2005-09-01 02:50|| Front Page Top

#3 I'm starting to distrust activists. Chalabi told people what they wanted to hear figuring that all lies were justified if he could get the US to overthrow Saddam.

How do we know this Chinese activist isn't playing the same game?

Posted by rjschwarz">rjschwarz 2005-09-01 10:05|| 2005-09-01 10:05|| Front Page Top

#4 How do we know this Chinese activist isn't playing the same game?

Well, the public statements from Chinese officials threatening to nuke LA tend to make me think they're really serious about the idea.

I'm sure the Pentagon has, somewhere, contingency plans for the need to nuke Paris. However, our generals don't go around making public statements to that effect.

Posted by Robert Crawford">Robert Crawford 2005-09-01 10:10|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/] 2005-09-01 10:10|| Front Page Top

#5 RC - Imagine the hilarious fun that would ensue if they did, lol.

Posted by Laurence of the Rats">Laurence of the Rats 2005-09-01 10:17|| http://www.punictreachery.com/]">[http://www.punictreachery.com/] 2005-09-01 10:17|| Front Page Top

#6 I'm sure the Pentagon has, somewhere, contingency plans for the need to nuke Paris.

It's in the SALT II Treaty. The US and the USSR both pledged on all that is Holy to withhold 50 ICBMs each in case of a nuclear war to ensure the French didn't inheirit the earth by default. You can look it up.

Posted by Shipman 2005-09-01 11:28|| 2005-09-01 11:28|| Front Page Top

#7 RC: Well, the public statements from Chinese officials threatening to nuke LA tend to make me think they're really serious about the idea.

Kim Jong-Il has been talking about nuking the US for a while. He's not insane - just militarily weak, and trying to deter an American attack by signaling his determination to try to inflict some pain on Uncle Sam. The Chinese are also militarily weak, and trying to make up for it by making threatening noises. Note that the Soviets have had a long history of making veiled nuclear threats - Khrushchev's "we will bury you" is a classic. But they never delivered - not because they are great humanitarians, but because they can count - losing hundreds of millions of dead while simultaneously losing a war over Taiwan isn't a good trade for tens of millions of dead Americans.

RC: I'm sure the Pentagon has, somewhere, contingency plans for the need to nuke Paris. However, our generals don't go around making public statements to that effect.

Our generals don't need to recover anything from France at the lowest minimum cost. The Chinese are trying to annex Taiwan at the lowest minimum cost by deterring American intervention. It is eminently rational for them to issue blood-curdling threats, given that victory is contingent on non-intervention.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2005-09-01 11:55|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2005-09-01 11:55|| Front Page Top

#8 ZF -- please don't try to defend China's threats against the US.

Posted by Robert Crawford">Robert Crawford 2005-09-01 12:06|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/] 2005-09-01 12:06|| Front Page Top

#9 RC, I don't think he was rationalizing, he was explaining. Understanding why the enemy does something is a far cry from condoning it.

I don't think China would go nukes over Taiwan. I don't think they'd risk the destruction of their economy, isolation from the world, cutoff of sealanes and possible nuclear destruction. There are easier targets they could beat on that wouldn't so utterly destroy them in the process and that would serve to distract their populace. Xinjiang tops the list, possibly even Siberia. If they were smart they'd go after North Korea and become heros in the region. A pretext shouldnt' be hard to manufacture.

However, if they feel they can intimidate the US from defending Tiawan through nuclear threats the equation changes. They are playing all options before they commit to one.

Posted by rjschwarz">rjschwarz 2005-09-01 12:21|| 2005-09-01 12:21|| Front Page Top

#10 ZF -- please don't try to defend China's threats against the US.

Here we go again...

Posted by Raj 2005-09-01 12:30|| 2005-09-01 12:30|| Front Page Top

#11 I'll just say that I'm surprised that China, who always brags about its 5,000 plus years of History as the Middle Kingdom, doesn't have the patience to wait until Taiwan needs to tie their economic wagon to the Mainland in the next 10-30 years.

Posted by danking_70 2005-09-01 16:26|| 2005-09-01 16:26|| Front Page Top

#12 danking_70 is spot on the money. If they simply play it smart Taiwan might opt for some sort of limited (but very real) integration in the next 20 years. The question is: are they actually that smart?

Posted by Secret Master 2005-09-01 17:58|| 2005-09-01 17:58|| Front Page Top

#13 China may show patience, but, when reading the activists words closely, one realizes that the suggested impatience is due to internal conflicts. Conflicts, the sort of which have resulted in near-term major battles.

Posted by Captain America 2005-09-01 19:44|| 2005-09-01 19:44|| Front Page Top

23:59 Gleregum Elmaimp9510
23:49 Jan
23:40 BA
23:37 Jan
23:34 Jan
23:24 gromky
23:14 The Angry Fliegerabwehrkanonen
23:10 The Angry Fliegerabwehrkanonen
23:08 The Angry Fliegerabwehrkanonen
23:08 True German Ally
23:02 Rafael
23:02 True German Ally
22:59 Rafael
22:57 The Angry Fliegerabwehrkanonen
22:57 Sock Puppet OÂ´ Doom
22:54 Jackal
22:48 True German Ally
22:45 The Angry Fliegerabwehrkanonen
22:41 Jan
22:37 trailing wife
22:33 boeboe
22:28 DMFD
22:27 Sock Puppet OÂ´ Doom
22:24 Frank G