Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Asia Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (9083)	8/11/1999 12:29:00 PM
From: Liatris Spicata	Respond to of 9980

Ron- I don't want to turn this into a love-fest, but I can't find much to disagree with in your post. In fact, it's down right common-sensical. I assume you distinguish between cutting off "normal relations" and breaking off diplomatic ties- but from your question about other countries breaking off relations I'm not so sure. I've not suggested breaking off diplomatic ties with China or any other country. You do seem to be addressing the need for some appropriate response to espionage efforts directed at some of our most sensitive national secrets. What I have been objecting to is the notion there should be no penalties applied to those who attempt to steal our most vital national secrets. The nature of that response will vary. Time to cut this off and move onto more interesting stuff! Larry

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (9083)	8/11/1999 2:39:00 PM
From: Bosco	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9980

G'day all - Ron, thank you for a well reasoned post. A couple of things though, at the risk of putting words in your mouth, you sez "If you want to impact China, support their rivals. Nations like India have comparable population sizes and are natural rivals for geo-political power. Lay down the law with regard toward preserving Taiwan security, and be willing to accept the repercussions even if it means suddenly lessening investment in China and favoring India instead.?" The danger is to repeat the fallacy of the policy "the enemy of my enemy..." I think it is not your intention, for you are more thoughtful than having this sort of crude thinking, so, I plead guilty of setting up a strawman in your place :). Another thing. I'd agree that China's demand of respect is wrong and there may even be an element of appeasement in the US's response [although I think the US has dealt a fairly even hand thus far.] However, if one is to put the relationship dynamics in historical perspectives, to untangle the web may not be that easy. To begin with, China has been asking for respect for a long time. It tried to appeal with its 4,000 years of civilization to no avail. Realistically, it wasn't the depth of civilization that causes the problem. Rather, in the waning years of the Ching Dynasty, circa the Dowager, the Empire was rotten to the core. Between then and now, she only got rewarded when she behaves like a school yard bully. It is difficult for her to value communal responsibilities and moral fortitude when such expressions are deemed weak in the eyes of the outsiders. I sounds as though the Leviathan were flesh n blood. Obviously, it's not. In conclusion, I certainly do not want to make excuses for China, or any nation for that matter, when she behaves badly. Rather, I am concerned that the armchair analysts, professional and otherwise, tend to force a 1 [not a typo] dimensional worldview onto a 4 [not a typo] dimensional world best, Bosco