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 : Asia Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Liatris Spicata who wrote (8661)	6/7/1999 3:41:00 AM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9980

Sorry to rake up old coals, but I'm just back from some time away from the computer, a rare treat. One of my more pleasant discoveries on my return was 50 new messages here; been a while since I've seen that. Gentleman on the left-and I'm not suggesting you are one- tend to believe "pas d'ennemies a guache": there are no enemies on the left. So they choose not see evil that exists in governments of the left. This is hardly unique to the left. The illusion that rightist dictatorships were effective allies against communism was an overwhelming trend in our policy toward the developing world for decades. Did a lot of damage and little good, if any. Notra Trulock, a DOE security officer, testified before Congress that when he warned the administration about Chinese spying in 1995, his concerns were shrugged off as those of "a Cold War warrior". Well Trulock's concerns have been shown to be well founded, and that those who dismissed Trulock's concerns were irresponsible and wrong. My sense is there are those on this thread whose reaction parallels that of the Clinton administration. Don't you find it odd that the Cox commission was willing to base such sweeping conclusions on a document which has been found to have been deliberately leaked by the Chinese intelligence service? Isn't it normal to assume that any information from such a source is suspect, and is probably an effort at manipulation? My personal feeling is that this is old hat in the intelligence community, and that the timing of the public release of this information is purely political. Of course the Chinese will do anything possible to push their nuclear weapons program ahead. Look at their arsenal relative to ours. Assess the threat we pose to them, relative to the threat they pose to us. In their shoes, wouldn't you do the same? Regardless of whatever information was compromised, or what they want us to think was compromised, or what we think they might have wanted us to think - and we will never really know who here is manipulating whom - do you honestly believe that China is anywhere remotely close to achieving nuclear parity with the US, in either quantity or quality? Even if they are, wouldn't a confrontational stance strengthen the position of the hardline factions in Chinese politics that we least want to see in power? From a pragmatic perspective, shouldn't we be developing and implementing policies that will strengthen the hand of the most moderate factions in the Chinese political stew? What pragmatic purpose is served by a hardline stance? Trying to punish a country for spying is like trying to punish the sky for raining: everybody does it, and if we let things slip, they will be picked up (surely you don't think it's only the Chinese...). We close the gaps, assess the damage, and move on. Saber-rattling serves no purpose at all. Everybody knows we have the biggest stick, all we get from waving it is resentment and suspicion.