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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RealMuLan who wrote (107216)	7/22/2003 7:12:54 PM
From: GST	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

You would think that the US would have a better understanding of China than seems to be the case. We have huge interests in China, yet so often the pronouncements from Washington indicate very poor foreign relations competence -- State is better than the others for obvious reasons, although these days State seems to be relegated to second class status instead of providing leadership. My experience in China tells me that China takes the long view and steers a pretty steady course, while the US all too often operates with a really short-term outlook, and takes a shoot-from-the-hip and bark-like-a-dog approach to communications -- for example Bush's expression "you're either with us or you're against us"..

To: RealMuLan who wrote (107216)	7/23/2003 5:28:55 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 281500

<China suspects British intelligence has a foot in HK chaos. And China also has some evidence to show that the demonstration has had some "foreign" intelligence power involvement.> Yiwu, that's rubbish. "Intelligence" services can't get mobs on the street as we saw. Is China writing their own history or not? Some Pommy "intelligence" bureaucrat can't write that sort of history [even if they wanted to]. Neither can American "intelligence". Intelligence services give the word a bad name. Mqurice