Jump to content

Strong Rhetoric on China


Jeff Matthews

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said:

All comparing could do is wind up in an endless ***-for-tat.  It's pointless.

Fwiw, our Foreign Policy and how it works is changing under this administration and if that can't be part of the discussion then I suggest y'all are having a pointless conversation. On that note, have a good one and I am outta here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said:

Pak and India will never join China.  The US and Britain own them and their undying loyalty.  

I said I was out but saw this---Don't be so sure about Pakistan because they have burned us before--Remember who sold NK their nuclear technology? Now I'm out. ;) 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
Just now, Jeff Matthews said:

I think it's because as part of opening up trade relations with China under Nixon, we committed to a "One China Policy."  Under it, we are permitted to advocate that China follow a democratic model, but we are not permitted to acknowledge Taiwan's sovereignty.  I think it was a middle ground so that we could happily trade with both.

A+. We signed a UN treaty to that effect in '71 and the UN has same position.

 

Until '72 we had no diplomatic relations with China, none, zero.

 

People always wonder why the fuss about not allowing Taiwanese to compete in Olympics under own flag.  Look how slow and long that process was.

 

If Taiwan try to declare independence it is official policy of mainland China to invade.

 

Only 1/5 of Taiwan want independence, 75 percent want status quo, 5% want to reunite.

 

After some 60 years the President of Taiwan was accepted as a visitor to Beijing, 5 years later a (within last 5 years as I recall) a minister level official from Beijing visted Taiwan.  The first official visit since '49.

 

So how do we apply leverage on negotiations when there is a country we want independent, but can't really jump behind because we are limited by treaty?

 

Who do you really poke China?  How do they poke back?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Zen Traveler said:

I said I was out but saw this---Don't be so sure about Pakistan because they have burned us before--Remember who sold NK their nuclear technology?

Good point.  I had some reservations about listing Pak, but I forgot specifically why.  I think we are quite safe with India, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
10 minutes ago, Zen Traveler said:

Fwiw, our Foreign Policy and how it works is changing under this administration and if that can't be part of the discussion then I suggest y'all are having a pointless conversation. On that note, have a good one and I am outta here.

Then open a different thread on that topic.

 

However, I think you are wrong,  we are in the situation where a current administration is dealing with the situation they have now, created by previous administrations, that go back decades, and diplomacy is what it takes.  

 

Posturing in public, talking in private.

 

The most radical departure occurred in then last admin with congressional approval.

 

What we are seeing today is a reaction to that in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, dwilawyer said:

when there is a country we want independent,

Here is where you ask why.  This was a political decision because the general lost and retreated there.  There is no far reaching strategic importance, is there?  We don't need them for trade anymore now that we discovered a newer cheaper and more disposable work force that is ripe for the raping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
42 minutes ago, oldtimer said:

Do you realize how much life would change here in the US if they "rethought" their position on Taiwan?  Yeah, exactly.

How much US investment is there in China?  They are 20th largest economy in the world, this isn't Cuba.

 

We have an agreement with Taiwan that if they are invaded  they defend themselves until we come with calvery,  ANZUS says they might help US.  Our treaty with Japan says that they might help.

 

It is a tail that wags the dog, us and China.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
19 minutes ago, oldtimer said:

Speaking for Zen (yeah big mistake), he is advocating good diplomacy and citing the failure of such.  

I agree 100% with him, but I reject the premise that you have to bring politics into the equation to have a discussion about it.

 

What has worked in past with China, what hasn't?  What is working today, what isn't?

 

Discuss the policy or tactics, not the policymakers.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
49 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said:

Pak and India will never join China.  The US and Britain own them and their undying loyalty.  

 

China, Russia, N. Korea.  Those are the problem areas.  If I understand correctly, Russia is not very fond of China at all.  They can be bought.  Keep that in mind.

Good lord.

 

 

China needs no one to join them.  They have a fleet of submarines we are scrambling to catch up with.

 

They conduct joint operations with Russia in the Yellow Sea every year  (for at least 10 years) with both subs and ships.  They get a poke at us.  We do a joint op with Japan, we get a poke at them.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...