<<Any comment? Jay<g>--China Launches Swarm Of NanoSats>>
I think the development is good for the US economy, and is good for the Chinese economy. Better if the US buys the system from China, as it will expand world trade, as well as increase global security.
CB knew about this sort of development coming before Rumsfeld did, assuming CB reads my posts at all in the past, instead of just responding without reading, contemplation, digestion, rumination again, and becoming aware of the truth amongst the facts.
Yes, I think it is all quite funny. The officialdom, like CB, does not read. Their minds are made up, and they respond without even looking at what they are responding to, and given fuzzy thinking, the responses are invariably not exactly spot on. Rummy should have either read any of these articles accessible via google:
google.com
… or hung out here on BBR:
Message 14869036
<<November 22nd, 2000
More specifically, on the fiscal surplus. It had been expected, and is necessary in order for the boomers to retire, and thus the money is already spoken for, not spendable on increases in education, missile shields or other new fangled initiatives.>>
Message 15332625
<<February 10th, 2001
I do not think the arms race, once ignited, can be put out easily, especially Ashcroft once supported the use of US military to actively drive aspiring world powers off the stage. The boys on all sides must play and the companies on all sides must stay employed. So, it looks like the peace dividend will be cut, along with taxes and interest rate.
Generically I do not see large points of contention between US and China except for Taiwan and global position. On Taiwan, there is no hope for it to wiggle away as time is simply not on their side; it is bleeding money, factories, businesses and confidence to China. Integration will happen, only the terms are still open, though closing fast. On global position, barring immediate war over nothing, 1/6 of the world’s population will have a global position to match, at 1/5 the cost (cost of hardware and software with “made in China” label).
On China, I think folks must realize that the last 250 years of its history can be viewed as a “corporate crisis and restructuring” in light of its 4,000 years of history.
And so that was the bad and good news for the US hawks>>
Message 15629301
<<April 6th, 2001
>>NMD will completely defang EU, Russia, and China<<
Speaking as an electrical engineer, and amateur statistician, do not count on it, at all.
Speaking as an amateur gadget buff, a single sub with 24 missiles, each with 24 war heads, parked in 'international waters' 13 miles offshore, will render all detection radar as useful as ... oh, you got the idea.>>
Message 15839776
<<May 22nd, 2001
… The complicated and newer reason may be well related to the US. I think Bush rhetoric, E3, and the earlier embassy bombing, has managed to energized the PRC hawkish camp at high enough levels to push through their agenda of military preparedness based on the argument “why take a chance? And besides, it is good for the economy”. This is a difficult argument to counter for the non-hawkish camp of leadership. And so, more missiles will get built at 1/3 to ¼ the generally accepted world cost, with 1980s rocketry and avionic technologies, supplemented by the occasional internet enabled nuggets of data.>>
Message 16079319
<<July 15th, 2001
Hi CB, Something controversial. To finance a response, the Russians will have to sell more of their goodies faster at lower margin, so as to put more and smaller independently maneuverable warheads on their bigger missiles. The Chinese will have to work harder on "asymmetric combat" and “mass-inundation” approaches that circumnavigate "direct-hit-to-kill" anti-ballistic missile weapon systems. All must work toward security for their own population. Meantime, the folks who want to put a dent in the Empire State Building will do as they were going to do, without any change in script.>>
Message 18989919
<<May 31st, 2003
… I believe missile defense is an expensive delusion, and I believe missile defense circumvention is kids play>>
Message 19753935
<<January 30th, 2004
I am wondering how California would fare through a similar episode ;0) They who have perpetual wars to fight, Mars to go, SUVs to tank, and missile defenses to dream up>>
Chugs, Jay |
