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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alighieri who wrote (157679)	1/9/2003 2:02:54 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1582327

Al, pretty weak argument from Stephan Richter. It is very likely that North Korea acted alone, and very unlikely that China nudged North Korea along this path. After all, North Korea represents more of a thorn in China's side than an asset. One example is the refugee situation along the Korean-Chinese border. Already there are hundreds of thousands who fled North Korea and is stuck in a virtual "no man's land." As much as China would like to ignore them, this is a problem that will gain more international attention thanks to the Korean crisis. Another example is China's fears that North Korea's nukes will prompt Japan and South Korea to get nukes of their own. That will not sit very well with the Chinese leadership, much like missiles in Cuba didn't sit well with Kennedy. And of course, there is the economic relationship between China and America. Curiously, Richter dismisses that with the statement, "States do not always act just in their own best commercial interest." Boy, is that self-contradicting of his own essay or what? All this just to feed Richter's anti-Bush bias, which the essay had plenty of. The "wise" have spoken. Tenchusatsu