Do you see china as "the enemy"?

[Bill3000]

Does the USA really want to be enemies with every country in the world?

Oh come on, now you are just asking for it.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Last Conformist
Why was America in an undeclared war with France, anyway?

The Jay treaty had established US-British relations, and trade. France, now at war with Britain (1793) saw this as hostile, and attacked US shipping going to British ports. The US sent a team of negotiators to resolve the issue. A trio of French officials representing foreign minister Talleyrand, asked for a substantial bribe before negotiations could begin. This was seen in the US as an insult to the fledling nation's soveriegnty, and a sign the naval matters could not be resolved. Of course more conservative elements hated the French revolution, and supported Britain, but this tipped the fence sitters against France.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Richelieu
They were afraid that if they did declare war, France would have run off to South East Asia or northern Australia. That would have ****cked up the geopolitical balance there. And the relationship with the Ozzies .

Of course at the time the Ozzies were a bunch of London pickpockets, and a couple of dozen royal marines who flogged them (the pickpockets)

[Dis]

No, and I'm american.

I see neocons as the enemy.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by The Mad Viking
Vesayen, try just for a moment to imagine you are from any other country in the world. Say, Brazil.

Now repeat what you said about "enemies".

Every competitor who has the potential to beat us in the marketplace or militarily, is an enemy.

Now apply that from the perspective of Brazil.

USA is our enemy.

Works for every country in the world.

Does the USA really want to be enemies with every country in the world?

It becomes especially absurd when you apply it to Allied nations, let's say Germany was the enemy for Italy when WWII started, or the UK was the enemy of France during WWI.

So everyone is everyone's enemy, which makes this thread useless

[Sava]

I see everyone as my enemy

[Sava]

but china doesn't appear to be more of a threat to me than anyone else

[Patroklos]

I think China is not so much an enemy but a serious competitor.

Most China fear monging in my opinion is based on the fact that unlike most backward dictatorships, we can not defeat them out of hand and they could make the average person's life marginally uncomfortable.

We might even have to declare war to take them out

But no, untill they start landing on Taiwan they are just another trading party.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Sn00py
Giancarlo, if you are talking about the entire population of China, then you might be correct, but the way China as a country runs, is no way near similar to the way a western country would run.


Most people who live in China, try to survive ON THEIR OWN, no government support; or government awareness. To a lot of them, the government is irrelevant to their survival, and the government is the same in return, they really don't care about 90% of their people and what they do.

That is where you run into a problem. China relies on huge man-power advantages to operate the large number of factories it has. So I believe there is more then 10% of the population who is at work in these factories. Afterall, a great deal of the population is in the cities. If the population productivity declines, then the economy is in serious trouble. So I think you make a few inaccurate assumptions at best. China is also operated very differently. Unlike the west, the banking system is very weak at best. If put under a lot of pressure, there could be very serious issues (i,e capital flight).

However, it is that 10%, (yes, I am making a very rough guess at the percentage rates here ) that will succeed China's prosperity; they will prove that you don't need to be an American to acheive the same 'amazing' goals that America has.

That's a rather hokey assumption, and one that is not backed up either.

Regardless of population problems, China has only one way to go, and that is up and it will stay that way for a very long time. (unless there is some earth shattering interferrance ).

Again, I don't think that is true at all. If you look at the serious population problems, future productivity declines, and the weak banking sector you can only see a decline in China's future.

[Lul Thyme]

Originally posted by Giancarlo

I'm stunned at the lack of foresight by the posters here. You guys all think in the short-term. Well remind yourself that when China's economy starts to decline which is going to be in 10-15 years when productivity goes in the crapper.

Almost nobody actually commented on anything except a few easy facts, and yet you are able to decide that we all think short-term?
What do you base this on?
Mind-reading?

[Pekka]

Enemy? No.. Though it could give slack on few things like Taiwan, Tibet, and few others.. also human right issues are kind of on the table but I don't see them as the enemy.

I see them as a country that has potential, and one thing of two will happen. They either become friends or enemies. I hope they become friends though... I'm not passionate China hater.

[snoopy369]

China and her vile leader Mao Tse Tung are sadly my enemy indeed ... his insistence on sending dozens of chariots and cho-ko-nu into my nation is just not acceptable.

[The Mad Viking]

Originally posted by Giancarlo


That is where you run into a problem. China relies on huge man-power advantages to operate the large number of factories it has. So I believe there is more then 10% of the population who is at work in these factories. Afterall, a great deal of the population is in the cities. If the population productivity declines, then the economy is in serious trouble. So I think you make a few inaccurate assumptions at best.

Speaking of innaccurate assumptions, why would you assume a decline in productivity?

China is also operated very differently. Unlike the west, the banking system is very weak at best. If put under a lot of pressure, there could be very serious issues (i,e capital flight).

Actually, China's banking system isn't weak, it's small. That's not the same thing. In fact, China is not at all at risk of captial flight. China relies on retained earnings, and is therefore more independent of things like interest rate changes and foreign currency fluctuations.

The US would be crushed by capital flight, but that is not in anyone's best interest.

Yet.

Again, I don't think that is true at all. If you look at the serious population problems, future productivity declines, and the weak banking sector you can only see a decline in China's future.

This is simply wishful thinking. China has a very stable population - its growth rate is BELOW that of the USA. The banking sector is unimportant in a centrally planned economy.

[OzzyKP]

There can be only one.


cue Queen.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by The Mad Viking
Actually, China's banking system isn't weak, it's small. That's not the same thing. In fact, China is not at all at risk of captial flight. China relies on retained earnings, and is therefore more independent of things like interest rate changes and foreign currency fluctuations.

The US would be crushed by capital flight, but that is not in anyone's best interest.

I'd like to see China do alright, but right now it isn't. And yes China's banking system is weak, and small. China is at risk, especially with foreign investment where most of its growth is centered on.

http://english.epochtimes.com/news/4-11-4/24165.html

"Prasad said, in the view of the IMF, given China’s weak banking system, it should first increase its currency’s flexibility and further liberalize its capital accounts. But he warned that China must act at once on its exchange rates. He said the IMF had suggested a year and a half ago that China increase the fluctuation of its currency from 3 to 5 percent, a suggestion that was rejected by China. Right now, 3 to 5 percent is far from enough."

The IMF tends to agree with me. Here are other articles on China's weak banking system:

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/3b610562-ac83-11d9-bb67-00000e2511c8.html

http://www.iie.com/publications/opeds/oped.cfm?researchid=29

http://www.econstrat.org/news/cprestowitz_reuters_08062003.html

"China expert Nicholas Lardy of the Institute for International Economics said China's "very weak" banking system meant that pushing the country for currency reform could be unwise, and he praised Snow for recognizing that."

The IIE also agrees with me.

Alan Greenspan does too:

http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2004/03/02/greenspan_warns_on_china_monetary_policy/

"WASHINGTON -- Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan cautioned that if China were to swiftly move to let its currency float freely, it could pose a further risk to the country's fragile banking system and to the global economy."

Fragile, weak, very weak.

Want to defy the facts I presented? Go ahead.

This is simply wishful thinking. China has a very stable population - its growth rate is BELOW that of the USA. The banking sector is unimportant in a centrally planned economy.

This is rich. You completely rejected the source I provided on population and how China's population could actually start to decline, and productivity could be harmed because of china's over-reliance on its population advantage.