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: TimF who wrote (161649)	5/11/2005 5:42:06 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 281500

Thailand ok. Cambodia now? Maybe I'm not sure. Cambodia under Pol Pot? No way. The reason I mentioned Pol Pot is because his reign came to an end, while the Vietnamese communists maintained their grip on power. Pol Pot is complex because, to a large degree, he represented the Chinese Communist influence, a battle between Maoism and Marxist influences. And since we were more afraid of the Soviet-backed Vietnamese government, than we were of the Chinese, the US tacitly backed China's support of Pol Pot as the best possibility of foiling Vietnam's attempt to conquer Cambodia. Not very pretty, but on the global chessboard of "realpolitik" that governed the Cold War, it was perceived as necessary. But the fact is that Pol Pot's regime crumbled and Cambodia is recovering economically and politically. Vietnam continues to languish, despite the recent "openess" over the past couple of years. Thus, this change of government indicates some degree of "freedom" indicative of slow, but forward, political progress. Hawk