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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (594164)	11/23/2010 9:38:08 PM
From: bentway	Respond to of 1580256

China Faces a Nettlesome Neighbor in North Korea By IAN JOHNSON and MICHAEL WINES nytimes.com ( China doesn't want a unified Korea (by the south) because that would put the US military on it's border! It's NOT that they're communist Asian brothers. ) BEIJING — North Korea’s unending appetite for confrontation has left many wondering what its bottom line is, none more so than its supposed patron and big brother, China. Despite its impoverishment and heavy dependence on Chinese aid and support, North Korea seems to regularly defy every Chinese diplomatic initiative, from Beijing’s work to keep the Korean Peninsula nuclear-free to its efforts to prevent a violent confrontation. China’s influence is rising steadily around the world. But the problem of how to manage North Korea, its Communist neighbor and onetime ally, appears to befuddle China’s leaders, who stumble from indulging the North to sending occasional signals of pique, all without persuading the country to adopt a path toward greater openness or stability. “At the moment China has limited influence,” said Cai Jian, a professor of Korean studies at Fudan University. “On one hand it’s unhappy with North Korean actions and its provocative behavior, but on the other hand it still has to support North Korea.” The support continues because China fears that the vacuum created by a sudden collapse there would open the door to rule by South Korea, “and that will put an American military alliance on the doorstep of China.” Mr. Cai said that during a recent trip to China, the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-il, was told by the Chinese president, Hu Jintao, that they should communicate better so that China would not be surprised by its behavior. This was followed by a warning given by one of China’s senior leaders, Zhou Yongkang, who made a much publicized trip to North Korea last month. Mr. Zhou reportedly told Mr. Kim that China would support his son’s succession but North Korea would have to take substantive steps to open up its economy, including rejoining diplomatic efforts, to relieve the external economic pressures on it. None of the top nine leaders in China — the Standing Committee of the Politburo — have close ties to North Korea. And China has little interest in seeing a Communist political dynasty take hold. Despite its efforts to accommodate North Korea’s idiosyncratic political system, China was apparently caught off guard by the recent developments. The news that North Korea had built a sophisticated uranium enrichment plant was received with incredulity by Chinese media outlets. The normally nationalistic Global Times cited experts who cast doubt on China’s diplomatic strategy and said that North Korea had been “purposefully hard-line.” The North Korean shelling of a South Korean island seemed to have been even more of a shock. On Tuesday, Chinese officials implied that they had no advance knowledge at all and still had no contact. At a press briefing, a Foreign Ministry spokesman said China needed to verify media reports. China also called on all sides to return to “six-party talks” between the main countries involved in the region. But almost no Chinese analyst seems to believe that this will result in anything until North Korea shows an eagerness to negotiate rather than make demands — the current one seeming to be that the world recognize it as a full nuclear power with no strings attached. Speaking in Beijing on Tuesday evening, the United States special envoy to North Korea, Stephen W. Bosworth, also called for a return to the six-nation talks and said he had “very useful” talks with Chinese officials. The two sides, he said, agreed on the need for multilateralism. But during previous negotiations, North Korea used the time to further develop its nuclear capacity, even though this was against China’s public position. China has also repeatedly called for calm and the avoidance of armed confrontation, but the two Koreas are now shelling each other. This could strengthen the hand of critics of North Korea within China, some of whom are geographically closest to the border. Many leaders in northeastern China are frustrated over the steady flow of refugees escaping poverty. Others are disappointed that North Korea has dashed decades of hopes for cross-border trade or special economic zones along the border. The question many have is whether China will do more than grumble. On his China trip, Mr. Kim was probably trying to shore up his support in Beijing for his son and in preparation for his current provocations. Many times in the past, that sort of lobbying worked and China chose to ignore the North’s provocations. In 2006, for example, China had almost no warning of a North Korean missile test, leading Beijing to call it “brazen” — fighting words compared with China’s normal response. That led to limited sanctions. The question now is how close China is again to giving up on subtle influence. “No matter whether it be within the party, among the people, or even within the military, China has grown increasingly sick and tired of North Korea’s rogue politics,” said a senior Chinese media commentator, who asked not to be named because of the delicacy of the issue. “But strategically, China’s kidnapped by it.” Jonathan Ansfield contributed reporting, and Zhang Jing contributed research.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (594164)	11/24/2010 12:42:41 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1580256

Ted, > assuming we have bottomed in the car industry a) The auto industry might have bottomed, but it sure isn't growing either. And you know that how? Are you following auto sales statistics closely each month? Is that how you have the audacity to speak out about an industry in which you know squat? Please enlighten us, o wise one. b) My INTC stock has a better chance of appreciating 50% over the next two years than GM. Yeah......not only do you not know squat about the auto industry but you know even less about stocks. Your INTC stock has done nothing for years as you well know and will continue to do squat going forward....whereas GM's stock is very likely to appreciate. Pray tell..........what is the number one selling brand in China? c) It is unlikely that the government will wait until break even before selling off its stake. Breaking even is meaningless except from a PR standpoint. If this really is about saving a couple of million jobs as Alghieri claims, then losing about $20B in the whole thing is cheap. I don't think the gov't will lose a penny. And I suspect they will start selling their GM stock around the time of the 2012 presidential election. ;-)