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 : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (17055)	4/14/2007 4:13:30 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217979

TJ, history is a litany of such conflicts in which the victorious genocidal conqueror did indeed stay the permanent winner: <you don't actually believe the most evil side in any conflict can win and stay that way, do you?> In recent history, Maoris conducted genocidal cannibalistic conquests and the victors remain the victors to today, [their Y chromosomes though not the actual individuals who won] with their opponents having been turned into gastronomic delights well over a century ago. It's tough for those eaten to come back to victory. Japan could well have done the same, though their dietary desires were different. The USA had annoyed them with blockades, which moved Japan to attack the USA at Pearl Harbour. That was a similar mistake [not that they had a lot of choice if they wished to continue their empire building] to that of Germany deciding that they might as well see if they could do what Napoleon failed to do over 100 years previously. But enough of the ancient history and "what if" conjecture. It just seems silly to make up things which are obviously untrue. What's more fun to consider is the outcome if Hu decides to go megalomaniac like Japan and invade Taiwan, or maniacal like Germany and invade everyone. China has a LOT of spare young males. It's traditional in primates for such spare males to head to the fringe of the tribe and conquer some adjacent territory and score some females. Taiwan is ready and waiting. Surely the USA is too busy and Japan too fearful and South Korea worried about their own border, to do anything if China decides to continue expansionary invasion. Given the Genghis Y chromosome, there must be hordes of those spare blokes all geared up and ready to go, just like their great great great great ... great grandfather. It's what they are good at. You have said that the inevitable is that the evil-doers in Beijing can take Taiwan. Yet you say that the evil-doers in any conflict can't win and stay that way. What a paradox. Mqurice

To: TobagoJack who wrote (17055)	4/14/2007 3:42:00 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217979

"the russians would have come in time..a genuine victory in china against japan.." Wonder how many Chinese would have died by the time that happened? Hundreds of thousands, millions? Those who value national dignity and nurse greivances and resentments highly might not care. There seem to be people across the Atlantic who resent America despite (or because ?) their nations were rescued by it in the past. Seems that feeling isn't only a Euro obsession. Granted the US was fighting in its own interests in WWII against enemies who made war on it first. But is that grounds for resentment?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (17055)	4/14/2007 10:07:33 PM
From: Slagle	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 217979

TJ, You seem to believe that the USA should have stayed out of WWII and about this we are in complete agreement. Roosevelt was more guilty than Bush in using illegal means to bring the country to war. Even back then lots of this was about globalism as FDR and many of his leading supporters and advisers, say Henry Morgenthau and Cordell Hull were rabid free traders. But you are dead wrong about the rest of it and in denial of history, even. Eastern China would have survived quite well, but as a Japanese colony like Korea, Formosa of maybe more like Manchukuo. And over time, who knows, like Maurice has said, this could have been a desirable outcome for China. In time Chiang would have capitulated or reached an accommodation with the Japanese, after all, ideologically speaking, he had a great deal in common with the Japanese, even Hitler, as a fellow fascist and anti-communist. Without American aid, China, as an independent nation, was finished. How do you suppose that Chiang or even Mao were going to repel the Japanese, by using sticks and spears? China was unable to make repeating rifles and ammunition in any substantial way, much less artillery, airplanes, bombs, tanks and the rest of the material that the Japanese invaders possessed in quantity. Maybe nearly as bad was the lack of a properly trained Chinese military leadership. In this the Japanese were first rate, having had many years to develop the necessary military training colleges and uniform military organization needed for a modern military. China had none of this, most Chinese generals were just untrained "war-lords" whose only claim to leadership ability was their experience in sparring with neighboring warlords. Whole Chinese armies were sent out far beyond their supply lines and literally starved to death in mass and left to face the Japanese without usable weapons of any sort. Their unschooled and inexperienced warlord leaders just didn't know any better. And then there was vast corruption in addition to ineptitude. And just why do you think the Soviets were coming to China's aid? First of all, most historians believe that American entry into the war was the factor that caused the German defeat. What really cost Germany the war was the disastrous Caucus campaign, culminating in defeat at Stalingrad. The main purpose for the campaign was to obtain an oil supply beyond the reach of American long range bombers. And Hitler just nearly defeated the Red Army before Moscow in 1941. But anyway, even with a German defeat, Soviet plans were to take the Red Army west and bring socialism to the rest of western Europe by force. What caused this plan to be reconsidered was the development of the atomic bomb, a capacity that no land army, no matter how many hundreds of divisions strong, could face. Notice that the Soviets NEVER DID ALLOW the USA to send in supplies to China, even to Mao in Yenan through Siberia, as the British helped facilitate through India and then "over the hump" and into China. The Soviets had no interest in Mao's agrarian communism, which they regarded as heretical to Marxist theory. The reason for this is very simple: The Soviets desired to bring socialism to Europe first, where there already existed the necessary Marxist "preconditions". Now there were plenty of New Deal fellow travelers, in various shades of pink to outright flaming red, who were hot to send aid to Mao in Yenan just as they were aiding the Soviets via the Murmansk convoys but it just wasn't possible. The Soviets, at peace with Japan and desiring to remain that way, would not allow overflights from Alaska. As Chiang or his allies controlled all the rest of China that could be reached by American cargo planes from British India, if we desired to aid China in a war against Japan, it was Chiang or no one. But I agree, we should have stayed out entirely. Slagle