Quote:
Originally Posted by zraver
Col. Thomas among others makes the claim that the Chinese play thier crds a certain way. I went looking for evidence of that claim only to find zero.
|
I submit that you were looking for successes, not evidence of their thinking. I submit that Pakistan has effectively neutralized India vis-a-vi China. There is no India card for the US to play there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zraver
It angered and inflamed the areas other nations- good for arms dealers bad for China, specially as China refuses international arbitration on the issue. if nothing else the Spratly dispute tells everyone in Asia that the Chinese dragon is looking for empire and vassal states once more.
|
The clashes happened in the 70s and 80s. I don't see the Philippines nor Indonesia increasing their naval presence to directly challenge the Chinese. In fact, quite the opposite as the Indians will tell you about the String of Pearls.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zraver
The results could have been much better for China. The US and South Korea got what they wanted- China still has to bear the bulk of the economic burden to keep Kim happy and playing with light sockets.
|
I don't see how. A collapsed North Korea would hurt both China and South Korea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zraver
With thier own papers talking about the danger of a Sino-American rift (attributed to the Japanese) they knew not to take unnecessary action to anger the US. But anger they did and they did so on purpose and no one has supplied the why.
|
I don't think it was a matter of choice. With Tienamen, the Chinese have effectively distant themselves from American thinking as a friend. The Americans were no longer willing to speak up on behalf of a government who was willing to kill their own people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zraver
more than offset by the increasing economic ties, if not for the PLAN/PLAAF going bonkers relations between China and the US would be great and the lead paint issue would only be bad PR and not seen as one more reason to not trust China.
|
Even with the best of friends, these things will happen. Mad Cow from Canada is the immediate example. However, I think the more appropriate example is the blind man looking for some light. With the modernization of both the PLAAF and the PLAN, you don't expect them to stay home and out to the world they will go. How they greet the world is another matter altogether but it is for certain that they will venture forth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zraver
Ya, ramming an American EP-3 in international waters, denying ports of call and ports of refuge, issuing inflammatory statements sure did a lot to alleviate China's external pressures.
|
It was a shot across the bow for sure but we've had far more serious encounters with the former USSR. Submarine collisions. Planes were shot down. And we've went nose-to-nose daring the other guy to blink.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zraver
China has not to the best I can deduce followed a coherent policy aimed at advancing her objectives. Such a scatter plotted and uneven set of actions and policies precludes China having a type of unigue super duper "Chinese" strategem.
|
I thought you yourself have answered that. Chinese strategy is different, not super duper. They are human beings after all and cannot deal with the unknowns better than anyone else.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zraver
Again that precludes the notion of some sort of Chinese master-game.
|
I don't think there is a Chinese master-game but there is a Chinese approach to the problems that is different than ours.