Newsweek and Europe are waking up to exactly what China is.
- Thread starter TUMe
- Start date
The author is an idiot. He worked in the Trump administration. China is obviously harmless and getting a bad rap.
Since are only two ways to view China: patsy or evil foe. Why waste time sitting around calling them communists and finding new reasons to hate this Chinese upstart. Just go to war now. Iran and Afghanistan are old news, the US definitely needs a new war.
BOOK REVIEW: Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides's Trap?
It is conceivable that one day the United States and the People’s Republic of China will go to war. There are a number of possible scenarios involving a disturbing range of countries—Taiwan, the
cco.ndu.edu
You know no one believes the two schools of thought about China that you accused us of. By the way there are three kinds of people in the UK. Old soccer ruffians, Royalty and the Beetles. In America there are over-weight, left handed, and...
Since I have never been to China, my feeling about the Chinese people is mostly sympathy for their lack of freedom and hard life style...but I have never been to China so I might not be correct.
But I do have feelings about China versus Australia, the Phillipines, Vietnam, Japan, and whoever the communist government wants to push around in the South China Sea next. I will say that more Chinese want to come to this country than Americans who want to go there. In fact you run into people from most countries at one time or another. Well, not Icelanders in Death Valley.
We do not need a new war.
I agree whole heartedly that we do NOT need another war however, The world must send a message to China that their aggression in the South China Sea and other places in the Pacific will not be tolerated. The economic policies that Trump put in place pre COVID were very effective. If this new administration does not build on those policies and work to unite our allies, China will realize their goal to be the worlds leader years ahead of the 100 year plan
I hope you are correct, but I have yet to see any posts here that an appreciation of the complexity of dealing with the world's largest country, the world's fast growing and perhaps largest economy, our largest debt holder, and one that has been horribly treated by western democracies. So far it's been fear mongering and name calling.
we are engaged in a civil war here. the Dems are doing everything they can to establish the US as a one party rule.
Chinese bot 🤖 Please stop spamming us with your BS CCP propaganda. The CCP government is a terror to the world and deserves nothing but criticism and sanctions. They sterilized the Uighurs, they are the biggest source of government sanctioned illegal organ harvesting, they help the cartels send illegal drugs by the ton to the US and the world, they fund organizations designed to destabilize the US, they put their people in gulags and concentration camps, they boarded their own people up in their houses and let them starve to death during the Covid outbreak, they censor their people, they are the worlds largest polluter and least contributed to reducing CO2 emissions, they bully their neighbors economically and militarily. I can go on and on about the despicable and evil nature of the CCP regime. Please spare us your BS about China. The great people of China deserve respect and sympathy. The CCP can be glad the US has not treated China like Iraq or Syria and demanded regime change.
Last edited:
I’ve been to China. I wasn’t impressed. I will never go back. My colleagues and business partners who invest, work, or teach there repeatedly tell me stories that aren’t repeatable here. “The great people of China” don’t deserve my respect or sympathy any more than the people of Germany in 1945.
As for our paid Chinese social media monitor, I don’t need a nuanced answer to your questions. This isn’t a rhetoric exercise on paper. We are dealing with facts on the ground. The key to understanding China is that they do not view government and international relations through the same prism as North Americans and Western Europeans. And it’s a mistake at the outset, as you suggest, to engage in policy discussions in that way. Here in western style democracies, we tend to have a bifurcated view of national government function. We have domestic policy and foreign policy. In another thread lawpoke asked why a country would raise their capital gains taxes above competing nations. No rational actor would do that he says, but the reality is that the US and Europe often take self defeating domestic positions to advance diplomatic aims and benefit allies so they can achieve external tangible and intangible goals.
The Chinese don’t think that way, both culturally and politically. For them, there is just domestic policy. All external decisions must serve domestic goals or be rejected, frustrated, or met with open power. There are multivolume books to support this view entire bureaus in several federal government agencies designed to document it. As China expands, the friction between China Only actions and weak American policy suggestions, whether it’s styled as America First, or a multilateral cooperative agreement with other democratic regional powill eventually reach a breaking point.
A good example is the Belt and Road, and there will be more soon. Westerners view Belt and Road as some grand conspiracy to supplant US economic and military hegemony. And it may actually turn into that if it succeeds. But that misses the basic mechanics of B & R. China has more people than jobs. CCP can’t stay in control of a country (and that’s their only goal) without exporting hundreds of thousands of military age professional men who are highly intelligent, well compensated and mostly single due to the long term demographics of the one child policy. So they’ve identified key infrastructure and minerals to China’s long term domestic expansion and packaged their “foreign aid” efforts for this purpose. They might be building a much needed road in Montenegro on the backs of debt that the country may never be able to pay, but controlling that country as part of B & R isn’t part of any strategic foreign policy plan. It’s a domestic policy to employ Chinese banks, shipping companies, concrete and steel factories, heavy equipment manufacturers, road designers, heavy laborers, service and housing providers for that labor, etc. When you sign on for B & R you import part of China into your country permanently. It’s a new colonialism and in hindsight makes British colonialism look economically foolish. Perhaps that’s the point.
Keep your eye on Australia. They are just now figuring this out. And realizing that foolish short sighted decisions by regional governments were approved through the prism of western thought and social norms and not analyzed through the prism of Chinese goals and culture. And even portions of the center left in that country have started to call for national mobilization to prepare for war.
As for our paid Chinese social media monitor, I don’t need a nuanced answer to your questions. This isn’t a rhetoric exercise on paper. We are dealing with facts on the ground. The key to understanding China is that they do not view government and international relations through the same prism as North Americans and Western Europeans. And it’s a mistake at the outset, as you suggest, to engage in policy discussions in that way. Here in western style democracies, we tend to have a bifurcated view of national government function. We have domestic policy and foreign policy. In another thread lawpoke asked why a country would raise their capital gains taxes above competing nations. No rational actor would do that he says, but the reality is that the US and Europe often take self defeating domestic positions to advance diplomatic aims and benefit allies so they can achieve external tangible and intangible goals.
The Chinese don’t think that way, both culturally and politically. For them, there is just domestic policy. All external decisions must serve domestic goals or be rejected, frustrated, or met with open power. There are multivolume books to support this view entire bureaus in several federal government agencies designed to document it. As China expands, the friction between China Only actions and weak American policy suggestions, whether it’s styled as America First, or a multilateral cooperative agreement with other democratic regional powill eventually reach a breaking point.
A good example is the Belt and Road, and there will be more soon. Westerners view Belt and Road as some grand conspiracy to supplant US economic and military hegemony. And it may actually turn into that if it succeeds. But that misses the basic mechanics of B & R. China has more people than jobs. CCP can’t stay in control of a country (and that’s their only goal) without exporting hundreds of thousands of military age professional men who are highly intelligent, well compensated and mostly single due to the long term demographics of the one child policy. So they’ve identified key infrastructure and minerals to China’s long term domestic expansion and packaged their “foreign aid” efforts for this purpose. They might be building a much needed road in Montenegro on the backs of debt that the country may never be able to pay, but controlling that country as part of B & R isn’t part of any strategic foreign policy plan. It’s a domestic policy to employ Chinese banks, shipping companies, concrete and steel factories, heavy equipment manufacturers, road designers, heavy laborers, service and housing providers for that labor, etc. When you sign on for B & R you import part of China into your country permanently. It’s a new colonialism and in hindsight makes British colonialism look economically foolish. Perhaps that’s the point.
Keep your eye on Australia. They are just now figuring this out. And realizing that foolish short sighted decisions by regional governments were approved through the prism of western thought and social norms and not analyzed through the prism of Chinese goals and culture. And even portions of the center left in that country have started to call for national mobilization to prepare for war.
Last edited:
I 'm in agreement with much of what you said. It will be challenge for both the government of China to stay in power and for western countries to figure out how to deal with China. But the facts are still that the Chinese overwhelmingly support their government because it has brought both prosperity and stability to the country that was on its lips largely because of the previously corrupt monarchy and repeated invasions by foreign powers, including western democracies. The Civil War still has lasting effects in the US; think of what the effects of our national views would be if the US had been invaded and subjugated by a multiple foreign countries in the past one hundred years. The distrust you have of China is definitely mutual and rightfully so.
I share many of your views about the effects of the Belt and Road initiative, especial on the countries that accept overwhelming amounts of Chinese loans that they can't repay.
Where we depart is your view of the Chinese in general. Your description of what you don't like about the Chinese sounds a lot like the criticism of the US that we repeatedly ran into after Trump was elected. Fortunately most people around the world were able to distinguish between Americans as people and Trump policies.
Your comment about mobilizing for war is basically in line with the theme of Destined for War: that when an established power is confronted by a strong rising power, that the established power feels threatened and the resulting distrust often leads to war. The US is a dominant military power with a different system of government than China which is much like the differences between Sparta and Athens which led to that war and others.
In discussing China we should keep our own biases in mind. My view is that the US is all to quick to think of internatonal relations in military terms. We keep 800 military bases around the world. China has three. We spend more on military than the next 10 or twenty countries combined. We can drop between $3 or 4 Trillion on a war and its aftermath in the middle east without even blinking. So yes, I'm concerned that the US will too easily shift to thinking in solely military terms as we compete with China. If the US is already viewing China as an expansionist monster threatening the US militarily, then it will be all too easy to think solely in terms of a military response. It's in our DNA.
I spent years in one war in Vietnam which didn't turn out well for the US and was an unnecessary product of our own fears, politics and misjudgments, largely about China. Meanwhile the world faces some tremendous challenges that will demand international cooperation to address. We need to focus on those instead of what divides us.
You mention multivolume books on China. Which ones? Ones I've read recently include
"Destined for War" Readable. (see post above)
"The Hundred Year Marathon" (Pillsbury) - argues that China aims to be a new military power. My book club discussing next month.
"When the Red Gates Opened" - Memoire of a Female reporter for Business Week in Hong Kong and China during the 1980's
"Dragon Lady: The Life and Legend of the Last Empress of China" Sterling Seagrave History of 19th/20th Century China.
New book on my list: 2034 The Next World War. War with China envisioned as a result of today's decisions.
I share many of your views about the effects of the Belt and Road initiative, especial on the countries that accept overwhelming amounts of Chinese loans that they can't repay.
Where we depart is your view of the Chinese in general. Your description of what you don't like about the Chinese sounds a lot like the criticism of the US that we repeatedly ran into after Trump was elected. Fortunately most people around the world were able to distinguish between Americans as people and Trump policies.
Your comment about mobilizing for war is basically in line with the theme of Destined for War: that when an established power is confronted by a strong rising power, that the established power feels threatened and the resulting distrust often leads to war. The US is a dominant military power with a different system of government than China which is much like the differences between Sparta and Athens which led to that war and others.
In discussing China we should keep our own biases in mind. My view is that the US is all to quick to think of internatonal relations in military terms. We keep 800 military bases around the world. China has three. We spend more on military than the next 10 or twenty countries combined. We can drop between $3 or 4 Trillion on a war and its aftermath in the middle east without even blinking. So yes, I'm concerned that the US will too easily shift to thinking in solely military terms as we compete with China. If the US is already viewing China as an expansionist monster threatening the US militarily, then it will be all too easy to think solely in terms of a military response. It's in our DNA.
I spent years in one war in Vietnam which didn't turn out well for the US and was an unnecessary product of our own fears, politics and misjudgments, largely about China. Meanwhile the world faces some tremendous challenges that will demand international cooperation to address. We need to focus on those instead of what divides us.
You mention multivolume books on China. Which ones? Ones I've read recently include
"Destined for War" Readable. (see post above)
"The Hundred Year Marathon" (Pillsbury) - argues that China aims to be a new military power. My book club discussing next month.
"When the Red Gates Opened" - Memoire of a Female reporter for Business Week in Hong Kong and China during the 1980's
"Dragon Lady: The Life and Legend of the Last Empress of China" Sterling Seagrave History of 19th/20th Century China.
New book on my list: 2034 The Next World War. War with China envisioned as a result of today's decisions.
Some important points that are convincing in isolation. For instance, you say they have 3 military bases overseas. Its actually, five, six if you count the facility in Cambodia they deny is a base, as well as their lend-lease arrangement with the Cubans for their sig intel base there, as well as that refrigerators for rent free office space arrangement they refuse to say what is for and we aren't publicly asking. We put troops on the ground and keep them, largely because the host countries want them for trade and deterrence. US soldiers spend hard currency locally that props up countless governments and operates as a valuable diplomatic leverage if not outright legal bribery we wouldn't otherwise engage in. There are more than 30 military bases in Germany alone. Merkel says America is a militaristic nation out of control and Germany shouldn't pay their fair share for NATO, but when we start talking about pulling out of Germany, her regional political cronies get nervous and put an end to that talk. We are just as trapped in Germany as we were in Vietnam, but for different reasons. China would love to have that level of influence.
China has the largest army and navy in the world. Full stop. What they lack is the logistical ability to project that power. They are rapidly gaining it. The conventional wisdom is that they would need 20 years to catch us. That is being revised given their aggression and current spending. The paranoids think that is what belt and road is about. I don't see it. Expect the number of military bases to increase just as fast in any case.
And finally, you don't address their investment in global intelligence gathering for the benefit of their military. Any dispassionate observer would describel their investment resources in that realm in a single word: "unlimited."
China has the largest army and navy in the world. Full stop. What they lack is the logistical ability to project that power. They are rapidly gaining it. The conventional wisdom is that they would need 20 years to catch us. That is being revised given their aggression and current spending. The paranoids think that is what belt and road is about. I don't see it. Expect the number of military bases to increase just as fast in any case.
And finally, you don't address their investment in global intelligence gathering for the benefit of their military. Any dispassionate observer would describel their investment resources in that realm in a single word: "unlimited."
I don't dispute with the facts you cite (OK I'd have to check the Navy one). However, any country as large and sophisticated as China would be doing those things as a matter of course, particularly one that has been used as a doormat in the past. Historically China has not been nearly as expansionist and colonialist as the west. Within the last 80 years they have had to push back against both the US and Japan. So as westerners we likely project our own motivations on the Chinese. We see aggression and world wide expansion, and they may see self defense. TBD.
Taiwan will be a difficult case, because the Chinese see it as stolen by criminals, aka Chaing Kai Shek abetted by the USA. Hong Kong is not going to be an enticing example to encourage the Taiwanese Chinese to trust any overtures from China, although the commercial ties are strong. A tricky, dangerous one because the resulting narrative is open to interpretation.
It's not like they can't have dual reasons for going ahead with B&R.(Hegemony & jobs for the masses of their intelligent populace.) I would say it's probable. Kill two birds with one round pebble.
It’s gravy. You are likely right. Just never lose sight of every decision they make is for the benefit of their domestic agenda and by that I mean maintaining and advancing the collective power of the CCP and the individuals that control it.
How is that different from Trump's view of the Republican Party and putting America First, particularly in the view of those living in other countries?
In some ways it isn’t. And that’s why China is very very carefully studying what Biden does and doesn’t roll back from the Trump era. It also likely explains the slow roll out from Biden on China as compared to the border and other issues. It also explains the need for direction signaled from our allies. China Only vs America First isn’t a viable public policy or a choice you want to make if you are two points down in an Australian election with a month to go.
I see power point presentations as having those two goals being nearly equal, by higher ups and lower ups over the past decades. That just the logic and foresight of Chinese government. Nothing gets in the way there. No protesters, just bureaucracy. It still goes through with better efficacy than any plans here. The CCP forges on. Long term goals are better suited there than in our system.
The social contract in China is different too. Chinese favor stability and prosperity. so when they look at the US they don't necessarily see either, particularly after Jan 6 and with Trump's continuing big lie casting doubt on our system. In a discussion with one older Chinese friend (a US citizen for decades) about the Uighers, he pointed to the terrorist attacks and the sheer size of the muslim population. He noted the strong anti-muslim attitudes in the US, Trump's muslim ban, and argued if the US had a similarly sized Muslim population and events, the US might well do the same, particularly under Trump. He's not comfortable with the situation but can understand why the Chinese feel justified.
I'm not defending this view, just pointing out how perspectives can differ.
I'm not defending this view, just pointing out how perspectives can differ.
You are right about the number of combat bottoms in the Chinese navy out numbering ours. Interesting that the US navy is totally docused on projecting military power around the globe hence the nuclear powered aircraft carriers and blue water focus. The Chinese have two aircraft carriers , a predominance of coastal patrol ships, and mostly diesel subs. At the same time the Chinese also have the largest merchant marine fleet to protect. TBD.
China is a thinly veiled dictatorship run by a really not very nice person. He’s no better than Putin, and is possibly even more ruthless. But he smiles better and hides his true motives a bit better. Nobody paying attention involved with international politics has thought any differently for some time now.
I‘ve never seen anyone one this board say anything particularly nice about the Chinese government, there’s some straw men in here. I’ve heard arguments over who is in their pocket or not, and the view from all sides is that it would be a very bad thing for us if our leaders were actually beholden to them. Ditto for Russia in regards to the fact that nobody really likes them very much or thinks they are a model worth emulating.
I‘ve never seen anyone one this board say anything particularly nice about the Chinese government, there’s some straw men in here. I’ve heard arguments over who is in their pocket or not, and the view from all sides is that it would be a very bad thing for us if our leaders were actually beholden to them. Ditto for Russia in regards to the fact that nobody really likes them very much or thinks they are a model worth emulating.
And we lack the technical expertise and raw materials to construct merchant marine ships. We subcontract all of that to the Koreans due to our antiquated labor Union laws.
Nice review of US - Taiwan - China involvements and how an invasion of Taiwan might play out. Biden has some tough issues to deal with.
www.vox.com
Why there’s talk about China starting a war with Taiwan
If a war breaks out over Taiwan, Biden may be forced into a decision no American president since 1979 has wanted to make.
www.vox.com
If our leadership allowed themselves to be purposefully goaded into a war with China, I would hope we would act immediately and turn them into a glass parking lot.Nice review of US - Taiwan - China involvements and how an invasion of Taiwan might play out. Biden has some tough issues to deal with.
Why there’s talk about China starting a war with Taiwan
If a war breaks out over Taiwan, Biden may be forced into a decision no American president since 1979 has wanted to make.
I don't think it would be such an easy victory. They have wealth just like us, and an unlimited supply of the masses to draw upon. And I don't think either country wants to go nuclear. That's a losing proposition for both countries.
If it got to the point of war, I personally think there would be unbelievable casualties for both sides. Before it got to that point of no return, I would just drop nukes. Either way we all lose!
Bad move. Besides the humanitarian aspect of killing millions of civilians (which I grant may be the only way to win against China), there is the small complication that they also have nukes. Probably the most active nuclear weapons program in the world today.
You know how I know you aren’t actually involved in the intelligence community?
That’s a history lesson and helpful. It’s not an analysis of Chinese strategic goals. They wait until the last paragraph to mention semi conductor capacity. That’s what this is all about. The Chinese have thrown ridiculous money to try and develop similar tech and production capacity. They’ve repeatedly failed. Seizing that capacity could hold America hostage and net disastrous concessions. The Chinese despise using Google and Amazon and other American platforms. They’ve thrown billions into developing the next platforms and being positioned to corner the markets, whether that’s quantum, IoT, even multi-dimension research. (The Upside Down is real btw and Americans have sent matter into it).Nice review of US - Taiwan - China involvements and how an invasion of Taiwan might play out. Biden has some tough issues to deal with.
Why there’s talk about China starting a war with Taiwan
If a war breaks out over Taiwan, Biden may be forced into a decision no American president since 1979 has wanted to make.
Can you imagine what your world would be like if Google was Chinese? The Top 5 publicly traded companies are American and tech platforms. Can you imagine what your 401K will look like if we are second or no fiddle to the Chinese on the next platforms? Can you imagine any President refusing to go to war with those types of stakes. These issues should have been covered in the article.
I'm not ready to go to war if the US comes in second in the race for the next platforms. But it does underscore the necessity to up our investments in R&D or being diversified with investments in Chinese companies. Countries like companies rise and fall; we have not been playing our A game wasting money on stupid wars and unnecessary tax breaks instead of investing in productive areas. We need to get back in shape.
If you are going to engage in war, it might as well be total war.
In regards to your IC comment, what are you talking about? You didnt know I was The DNI 🤷🏽♂️😂. I just come here and chat it up with you guys in my free time when I’m not meeting with POTUS and the Joint Chiefs of Staff 😂
WSJ review of The Hundred Year Marathon about China. Pillsbury's change of view and history are interesting, but he apparently only sees competition leading to eventual warfare. Interesting book and my next bookclub meeting will be very challenging. Not quite finished yet.
www.wsj.com
Book Review: ‘The Hundred-Year Marathon’ by Michael Pillsbury
Howard W. French reviews “The Hundred-Year Marathon: China’s Secret Strategy to Replace America as the Global Superpower” by Michael Pillsbury.
www.wsj.com
Interesting article written by our friends in the UK
www.dailymail.co.uk
China 'preparing for WW3 with biological weapons for last six years'
The dossier by People's Liberation Army scientists and health officials examined the manipulation of diseases to make weapons 'in a way never seen before'.
There's a lot to worry about with China, but personally, I don't actually think this is one of the big issues. Another way to think about our financial relationship is that they have invested incredibly heavily in us. So much so that if those assets become worthless, their own economy would crash as well.
They own a ton of government debt, but they can't just "call it in" as if it were an unsecured loan. It's mostly T-Bills and stuff they hold. They could start to divest it suddenly, which would cause a market crash the likes of which we've never seen. That would hurt them just as much as us. Our financial fates are tied together for at least the medium term. I don't honestly think that is a terribly bad thing. It might be the one thing that has prevented more hostile conflict.
That’s only true so long as the dollar is the world’s primary reserve currency. Which the Chinese have said it is their goal to end. We get away with economic policies that have fueled our prosperity for seventy years. Plenty of nations have expressed frustration with that, none have dared try to end them. Until China.
What you are saying is true. But you are repeating calming words provided to you by those in authority as they struggle to find solutions and don’t want to lose their authority over you. No different than being told to wash your hands to prevent CoVid or tape plastic over your windows with duct tape to stop another anthrax attack after 9/11.
Decades ago China set out to 'reclaim' its place in the world after centuries of humiliation by western powers. We can either view them as competition and compete, or we can claim foul and resort to a military response. Unfortunately given our internal divisions, decades of enriching the few, and waging stupid wars instead of investing in our future, we have squandered a lead. We need to get in shape again to compete.
A lot of people said this between the wars in England. Rather than competing, which would necessarily involve plunging labor prices, we should be thinking strategically about what resources we need to secure before we have to confront evil head on.
I fear more that the extremes will continue to fight for power and control and we all lose in the end
Similar threads
