Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

War with China? Illusions about the pacifying effects of trade go back more than a century.
NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE ^ | October 19, 2011 | Jim Lacey

Posted on 10/19/2011 7:12:16 PM PDT by neverdem

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

1 posted on 10/19/2011 7:12:19 PM PDT by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Any one interested in this subject I recommend reading Kissinger’s book “On China”.

Most Americans are totally ignorant about the subject.


2 posted on 10/19/2011 7:15:49 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

The whole point of this piece is stupid. Angell was proven correct. WWI was obviously “economically and socially futile.”


3 posted on 10/19/2011 7:20:02 PM PDT by Forgotten Amendments (Days .... Weeks ..... Months .....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I believe the deterrent effect of trade requires rational actors.


4 posted on 10/19/2011 7:20:51 PM PDT by decimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
...Europe’s first suicide attempt in 1914.

It wasn't an "attempt". It succeeded.

It's just taking a century for the corpse to stop twitching.

5 posted on 10/19/2011 7:24:22 PM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
In the meantime, it is worth remembering that the Pax Americana was not kept for five decades through our economic integration with the Soviets.

I've often asked people why isolation and containment was the correct strategy for dealing with the USSR, but an entirely different strategy is supposedly best for Red China, a strategy of one-sided trade and incredible transfers of American technology that enables China to achieve economic and military growth they could never have achieved on their own.

The fantasy of economic integration, or "interdependence" as a means of assuring peace has been catastrophic in the past and could well be again.

6 posted on 10/19/2011 7:26:30 PM PDT by Will88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

“Those who beat their swords into plowshares usually end up plowing for those who didn’t.”- Ben Franklin

Germany and Russia were still engaging in trade right up until the time Hitler ordered the invasion to begin. So much for Angell’s foolishness.


7 posted on 10/19/2011 7:31:22 PM PDT by GenXteacher (He that hath no stomach for this fight, let him depart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Some Things In Life Are A Surprise


Click The Pic To Donate

Freepathons? Not So Much

Become A Monthly Donor

8 posted on 10/19/2011 7:42:52 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

We had lots of trade around the time of the Boxer Rebellion too. heh


9 posted on 10/19/2011 7:46:08 PM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Will88

Integration is like when the Romans hired the foreigners to be their army I suppose.


10 posted on 10/19/2011 7:47:48 PM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Norman Angell had an interesting life. Among other things, he worked as a cowboy on a ranch near Bakersfield, Calif. in the early twentieth century. His description in his memoirs of what California was like at the time are fascinating.


11 posted on 10/19/2011 8:24:24 PM PDT by Fiji Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
We are creating a new world, a balanced world. A new world order, a multipolar world,” Chavez told reporters during a visit to Communist China, one of many. His “new world order” includes [RUSSIA], China, Iran,... and a significantly weakened United States, he explained.

Resurgent Communism in Latin America
by Alex Newman, March 16, 2010:

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/world-mainmenu-26/south-america-mainmenu-37/3122-resurgent-communism-in-latin-america?tmpl=component&print=1&layout=default&page=
______________________________________________________________

From the Russian News and Information Agency:
July 27, 2006
"'I am determined to expand relations with Russia,' Chavez, known as an outspoken critic of what he calls the United States' unilateralism, told the Russian leader, adding that his determination stemmed from their shared vision of the global order.":
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20060727/51913498.html
______________________________________________________________

From the Sino-Russian Joint Statement of April 23, 1997:
"The two sides [China and Russia] shall, in the spirit of partnership, strive to promote the multipolarization of the world and the establishment of a new international order."

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HI29Ag01.html
______________________________________________________________

"Joint war games are a logical outcome of the Sino-Russian Friendship and Cooperation Treaty signed in 2001, and reflect the shared worldview and growing economic ties between the two Eastern Hemisphere giants."

http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed092605a.cfm
______________________________________________________________

Photobucket
President Obama and Venezuela dictator Hugo
Chavez at the 2009 Summit of the Americas in Trinidad.
Note the "soul bro" handshake. (my caption)

Obama, Chavez shake hands at Americas Summit:
http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2009/04/17/2698451-obama-chavez-shake-hands-at-americas-summit
______________________________________________________________

Russia's Medvedev hails "comrade" Obama

Associated Foreign Press (AFP) ^ | April 2, 2009 | Anna Smolchenko

"Russia's Dmitry Medvedev hailed Barack Obama as "my new comrade" Thursday after their first face-to-face talks"

http://www.france24.com/en/20090402-russias-medvedev-hails-comrade-obama

April 1, 2009:
"Obama, Medvedev pledge new era of relations":
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090401/wl_afp/usrussiadiplomacynuclear_20090401152002
______________________________________________________________

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

12 posted on 10/19/2011 8:24:50 PM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Will88

The big difference is that China is basically America’s slave colony. That is what the two nations have effectively created by building their economies in such a way that one country produces cheap products that the other one consumes. The linking of the two currencies at fixed exchange rates or within narrow trading bands ensures that they’ll probably never catch up to our standard of living.


13 posted on 10/19/2011 8:31:40 PM PDT by Alberta's Child ("If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Will88
an entirely different strategy is supposedly best for Red China, a strategy of one-sided trade and incredible transfers of American technology that enables China to achieve economic and military growth they could never have achieved on their own.

"'We like your president. We want to see him reelected', former Chinese intelligence chief General Ji Shengde told Chinagate bagman Johnny Chung. Indeed, Chinese intelligence organized a massive covert operation aimed at tilting the 1996 election Clinton’s way."

The Idiot's Guide to Chinagate
By Richard Poe
May 26, 2003

CHINA WILL LIKELY replace the USA as world leader, said Bill Clinton in a recent Washington Post interview. It is just a matter of time. Clinton should know. He has personally done more to build China’s military strength than any man on earth.

Most Americans have heard of the so-called "Chinagate " scandal. Few understand its deadly import, however. Web sites such as "Chinagate for Dummies" and its companion "More Chinagate for Dummies" offer some assistance. Unfortunately, with a combined total of nearly 8,000 words, these two sites – like so many others of the genre – offer more detail than most of us "dummies" can absorb.

For that reason, in the 600 words left in this column, I will try to craft my own "Idiot’s Guide to Chinagate," dedicated to all those busy folks like you and me whose attention span tends to peter out after about 750 words. Here goes.

When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, China presented little threat to the United States. Chinese missiles "couldn’t hit the side of a barn," notes Timothy W. Maier of Insight magazine. Few could reach North America and those that made it would likely miss their targets.

Thanks to Bill Clinton, China can now hit any city in the USA, using state-of-the-art, solid-fueled missiles with dead-accurate, computerized guidance systems and multiple warheads.

China probably has suitcase nukes as well. These enable China to strike by proxy – equipping nuclear-armed terrorists to do their dirty work, while the Chinese play innocent. Some intelligence sources claim that China maintains secret stockpiles of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons on U.S. soil, for just such contingencies.

In 1997, Clinton allowed China to take over the Panama Canal. The Chinese company Hutchison Whampoa leased the ports of Cristobal and Balboa, on the east and west openings of the canal respectively, thus controlling access both ways. A public outcry stopped Clinton in 1998 from leasing California’s Long Beach Naval Yard to the Chinese firm COSCO. Even so, China can now strike U.S. targets easily from their bases in Panama, Vancouver and the Bahamas.

How did China catch up so fast? Easy. We sold them all the technology they needed – or handed it over for free. Neither neglect nor carelessness are to blame. Bill Clinton did it on purpose.

As a globalist, Clinton promotes "multipolarity" – the doctrine that no country (such as the USA) should be allowed to gain decisive advantage over others.

To this end, Clinton appointed anti-nuclear activist Hazel O’Leary to head the Department of Energy. O’Leary set to work "leveling the playing field," as she put it, by giving away our nuclear secrets. She declassified 11 million pages of data on U.S. nuclear weapons and loosened up security at weapons labs.

Federal investigators [Cox Report] later concluded that China made off with the "crown jewels" of our nuclear weapons research under Clinton’s open-door policy – probably including design specifications for suitcase nukes. Meanwhile, Clinton and his corporate cronies raked in millions.

In his book The China Threat, Washington Times correspondent Bill Gertz describes how the system worked. Defense contractors eager to sell technology to China poured millions of dollars into Clinton’s campaign. In return, Clinton called off the dogs.

Janet Reno and other counterintelligence officials stood down while Lockheed Martin, Hughes Electronics, Loral Space & Communications and other U.S. companies helped China modernize its nuclear strike force.

"We like your president. We want to see him reelected," former Chinese intelligence chief General Ji Shengde told Chinagate bagman Johnny Chung. Indeed, Chinese intelligence organized a massive covert operation aimed at tilting the 1996 election Clinton’s way.

Clinton’s top campaign contributors for 1992 were Chinese agents; his top donors in 1996 were U.S. defense contractors selling missile technology to China.

Clinton recieved funding directly from known or suspected Chinese intelligence agents, among them James and Mochtar Riady who own the Indonesian Lippo Group; John Huang; Charlie Trie; Ted Sioeng; Maria Hsia; Wang Jun and others.

Commerce Secretary Ron Brown served as Clinton’s front man in many Chinagate deals. When investigators began probing Brown’s Lippo Group and Chinagate connections, Brown died suddenly in a suspicious April 1996 plane crash.

Needless to say, China does not share Clinton’s enthusiasm for globalism or multipolarity. The Chinese look out for Number One.

"War [with the United States] is inevitable; we cannot avoid it," said Chinese Defense Minister General Chi Haotian in 2000. "The issue is that the Chinese armed forces must control the initiative in this war." Bill Clinton has given them a good start.

The Idiot's Guide to Chinagate:
http://www.richardpoe.com/column.cgi?story=125

or,
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/5/26/214938.shtml
(this version hasn't the necessary hyperlinks, but the above doesn't seem to be available any longer)
_________________________________

Related Stories
Richard Poe, "Chinagate: The Third-Way Scandal" (June 3, 1999)
Christopher Ruddy, "Russia and China Prepare for War: Parts I - VIII," NewsMax.com (March 9 -18, 1999)
_____________________________________________________________

From the Sino-Russian Joint Statement of April 23, 1997:
"The two sides [China and Russia] shall, in the spirit of partnership, strive to promote the multipolarization of the world and the establishment of a new international order."
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HI29Ag01.html
_____________________________________________________________

"As a globalist, [Bill] Clinton promotes "multipolarity" – the doctrine that no country (such as the USA) should be allowed to gain decisive advantage over others."

From a 2003 Washington Post article:

"...a statement [Bill] Clinton made in February 2002, in which he told an audience in Australia, 'This is a unique moment in U.S. history, a brief moment in history, when the U.S. has preeminent military, economic and political power. It won't last forever. This is just a period, a few decades this will last.'

Clinton continued...

'In all probability, we won't be the premier political and economic power we are now' in a few decades, he said, pointing to the growth of China's economy and the growing economic strength of the European Union.

Whether the United States maintains its military supremacy, he said, depends in part on how much those other entities invest in their militaries, and Clinton said working cooperatively is essential to U.S. interests.

But he said he did not want to be misunderstood. 'I never advocated that we not have the strongest military in the world...I don't think a single soul has thought I was advocating scaling back our military.'

Source: Washington Post article from May 2003:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A62253-2003Apr30&notFound=true

or find his remarks here (Talon News):
Clinton Predicts America's Decline:
http://mensnewsdaily.com/archive/newswire/nw03/talonnews/0503/newswire-tn-050503d.htm

14 posted on 10/19/2011 8:35:39 PM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

None of that is really relevant to whether or not the interdependence promotes peace notion is reliable. A great deal of history proves that it is not reliable.

And China is not a slave colony of the US, but a communist nation that has traded its vast number of cheap workers for the manufacturing plants and jobs of the US and other advanced nations. A significant portion of the wealth creation capacity of the US has been exported to China and has not been replaced with anything comparable.

China does not have to achieved the US standard of living on a per capita basis to become a financially and military strong menace to peace around the world.


15 posted on 10/19/2011 8:39:50 PM PDT by Will88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ETL

In the mid-’70s China was still trying to smelt iron ore in backyard smelters. They had little or nothing to trade with the world. It is beyond belief what they have been given, or allowed to buy, or allowed to steal from the US over the past few decades.

And the fact that so many US manufacturing plants have moved to China is another huge technology giveaway of manufacturing techniques and processes. And companies such as GE and Boeing will soon have plants producing more and more aircraft parts in China, knowledge which China will promptly steal and begin utilizing to develop their own aircraft industries.


16 posted on 10/19/2011 8:54:08 PM PDT by Will88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DManA

Related, heard the author interviewed this week:

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/21/opinion/la-oe-navarro-trade-china-20110621

“How China unfairly bests the U.S.”

— Peter Navarro is a business professor at UC Irvine, a CNBC contributor and the coauthor with Greg Autry of “Death by China: Confronting the Dragon - A Global Call to Action.”
(from the link)


17 posted on 10/19/2011 8:58:47 PM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Forgotten Amendments

well, yes and no. Thanks to WWI, many Eastern European countries got the chance of freedom (or a brief moment of freedom) or they would have been culturally crushed by Russia and Prussia


18 posted on 10/19/2011 9:35:58 PM PDT by Cronos (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2787101/posts?page=58#58)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ETL

That was a nice refresher in Clinton’s perfidy.


19 posted on 10/19/2011 10:25:48 PM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Ping for a barf alert...


20 posted on 10/19/2011 11:34:46 PM PDT by SuperLuminal (Where is another agitator for republicanism like Sam Adams when we need him?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson