Has China really done anything aggressive? I mean they might be pretty rough on other Chinese but have they really threatened the US? I think we are looking for an enemy here. It seems that we want another Cold War. If I was a cynic I’d suspect a military-industrial complex
Stu-6, first two examples coming to mind:
A Chinese general threatened to use nuclear weapons.
The official line is that they will use force in case Taiwan declares independance, the direct implication of which is use of force against the US (because of alliance).
Also of consequence is how the Chinese dictatorship would handle themselves in a strong international position (assertiveness, need to unite people, etc). I remember reading that asian societies tend to want a hierarchy rather than a multipolar system.
I think the Chinese would gain more from draining the US of information by sending their people to the universities and spies in the industries rather than conquering it. If you'd have a threat from the Chinese in that case, it would be more of isolation and affecting opinion and policy in the US.
Just IMHO...
Martin
While you maybe right your examples ring hollow to me. I don’t recall China saying anything more threaten about nuclear weapons than any other nuclear state facing a strong conventional threat, to include the US during the Cold War. Also while China has made threats directed towards Taiwan there has never been a formal alliance between the US and Taiwan, to the best of my recollection from Nixon until the current administration the US was always deliberately ambiguous on the situation.
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/28cfe55a-f4...00e2511c8.html
About alliance:The US has stated that they would defend Taiwan. Whether or not you want to call it an alliance or not does not matter for the scenario.Originally Posted by Financial Times
Martin
Also recommend reading Unrestricted Warfare.
Take care,
Martin
Unrestricted Warfare...
Via Terrorism.com - Unrestricted Warfare. By Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui (Beijing: PLA Literature and Arts Publishing House, February 1999 - translated by FBIS).
[FBIS Editor's Note: The following selections are taken from "Unrestricted Warfare," a book published in China in February 1999 which proposes tactics for developing countries, in particular China, to compensate for their military inferiority vis-à-vis the United States during a high-tech war. The selections include the table of contents, preface, afterword, and biographical information about the authors printed on the cover.
The book was written by two PLA senior colonels from the younger generation of Chinese military officers and was published by the PLA Literature and Arts Publishing House in Beijing, suggesting that its release was endorsed by at least some elements of the PLA leadership. This impression was reinforced by an interview with Qiao and laudatory review of the book carried by the party youth league's official daily Zhongguo Qingnian Bao on 28 June.
Published prior to the bombing of China's embassy in Belgrade, the book has recently drawn the attention of both the Chinese and Western press for its advocacy of a multitude of means, both military and particularly non-military, to strike at the United States during times of conflict. Hacking into websites, targeting financial institutions, terrorism, using the media, and conducting urban warfare are among the methods proposed.
In the Zhongguo Qingnian Bao interview, Qiao was quoted as stating that "the first rule of unrestricted warfare is that there are no rules, with nothing forbidden." Elaborating on this idea, he asserted that strong countries would not use the same approach against weak countries because "strong countries make the rules while rising ones break them and exploit loopholes . . .The United States breaks [UN rules] and makes new ones when these rules don't suit [its purposes], but it has to observe its own rules or the whole world will not trust it." (see FBIS translation of the interview, OW2807114599)
[End FBIS Editor's Note]
Last edited by SWJED; 02-12-2006 at 11:28 PM.
I don’t know; I mean I see your point but to call a threat to Taiwan a threat to the US without a treaty seems a stretch, but you are certainly right in suggesting that war with Taiwan would most like involve the US. Still with such a loose standard could you not say that US talk about defending Taiwan could be seen as a threat to China, as they consider Taiwan to be a part of China?
Yes, that might be their perspective.
The USA defines her own moral and interests, not China. If the US believes it to be just, then you/we should stick the course. Of course one has to take into account consequences, etc, of saying that, but you get the point.
Martin
Last edited by Martin; 02-13-2006 at 01:35 AM.
Well since we are evaluating their threats I think their perspective is the most relevant. And if it is their perspective that they are not being any more threatening than we are maybe their not really threatening us . . . Just a thought.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks