Dennis_Seelbach said:

nan said:

There are two choices:  1) leave them alone --or--- 2) go to war with China

Which one would you choose?

Simplistic BS.

Ok,  please explain, and don't forget US policy recognizes one China.

So China is starting to respond to the Pelosi trip.  For starters, Pelosi and her family have been sanctioned.  

There are enormous "Dress Rehersal" military exercises for a blockade of Taiwan.   These will last for five days.  They are launching missiles into the sea and restricting air space.  

People are reconsidering hosting Pelosi.  

Chinese are now busy reassessing their foreign policy.  They cancelled a meeting with Japan (who supports Taiwan) and they are actively taking steps against the US:

• Chines-US military talks are cancelled
• Cancelling China - US Defense policy talks
• Cancelling US -China military maritime consultancy  agreement
• Suspending coordination of the repatriation of illegal immigrants. 
• Suspending legal assistance on criminal matters
• Suspending coordination on transnational crimes (internet crime)
• Suspending coordination on counter-narcotics
• Suspending talks on climate change.
• Going to ramp up coordination with Russia

So Russia is the winner here too.  Do you all think Pelosi's clown show was worth these repercussions?

They are probably now planning for a physical invasion of Taiwan. 

What did we gain from this?

Isn't he a barred attorney?   Now he's the leading expert on China?  LOL  It's incredible how many times he premises his reaction with "I think" or "I suspect" or "I believe".

Any actual link for what they're talking about?  Or backup with the bullet points you listed?

This post is from earlier in this thread, and addresses this stupid either/or argument: “There are two choices: 1) leave them alone --or--- 2) go to war with China. Which one would you choose?”

nohero said:

Another good piece on this, in this morning's NY Times.

It's unlocked, so anyone can read it -

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is expected to set off soon on a tour of several Asian nations that may include a stop in Taiwan." So, she'll be on a tour of Asia, and the question is whether she should stop in Taiwan.  She's not considering a trip to "only Taiwan". So, whether she goes or doesn't go will carry political significance, either way.

It seems to me that any visit by Pelosi would not be inconsistent with (and in fact would simply be an acknowledgment of) the current U.S. position - "In an intentionally ambiguous diplomatic arrangement adopted when Washington recognized Communist ruled China in 1979, the United States maintains a 'one China' policy that acknowledges, but does not endorse, the Chinese position that Taiwan is part of China."

I recently finished reading Keven Rudd's book, "The Avoidable War", about the China-U.S. relationship. As part of that, this "ambiguity" about Taiwan is sort of the "best case" scenario for avoiding any sort of military conflict, or a military occupation of Taiwan by forces from the mainland.

jamie said:

Isn't he a barred attorney?   Now he's the leading expert on China?  LOL  It's incredible how many times he premises his reaction with "I think" or "I suspect" or "I believe".

Any actual link for what they're talking about?  Or backup with the bullet points you listed?

He's an expert on geopolitics.  He gives measured responses, which is much better than someone who shoots their mouth off with certainty over things we can't know for sure.  Were it not for the Duran we might not know about these important suspended cooperations.  I am still looking for the list, although I have found reference to it.  Wonder why they are not telling us this while presenting the visit in positive or neutral terms.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/aug/05/china-halts-us-cooperation-nancy-pelosi-taiwan

nohero said:

This post is from earlier in this thread, and addresses this stupid either/or argument: “There are two choices: 1) leave them alone --or--- 2) go to war with China. Which one would you choose?”

nohero said:

Another good piece on this, in this morning's NY Times.

It's unlocked, so anyone can read it -

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is expected to set off soon on a tour of several Asian nations that may include a stop in Taiwan." So, she'll be on a tour of Asia, and the question is whether she should stop in Taiwan.  She's not considering a trip to "only Taiwan". So, whether she goes or doesn't go will carry political significance, either way.

It seems to me that any visit by Pelosi would not be inconsistent with (and in fact would simply be an acknowledgment of) the current U.S. position - "In an intentionally ambiguous diplomatic arrangement adopted when Washington recognized Communist ruled China in 1979, the United States maintains a 'one China' policy that acknowledges, but does not endorse, the Chinese position that Taiwan is part of China."

I recently finished reading Keven Rudd's book, "The Avoidable War", about the China-U.S. relationship. As part of that, this "ambiguity" about Taiwan is sort of the "best case" scenario for avoiding any sort of military conflict, or a military occupation of Taiwan by forces from the mainland.

The best thing about that article is how -- at the end it mentioned big support from Mike Pompeo whom she terms an "unlikely backer."  Guess she does not get out much. Pompeo wanted to go with her but he is banned in China. Well now Nancy is too. Wish we could ban the both of them here.

She also says Pelosi went on her own, a conclusion also made by Scott Ritter. Ritter went further though and pointed out it showed the weakness of the Biden Whitehouse in being unable to stop her because they knew what she did would be reflected on them.  Now we have an adversary relationship with China, the country we get all our junk from.  They will not be coordinating with us on important matters such as cybercrime. Better  lock down your computers--it's open season for Chinese hackers on US systems.  Thanks, Nancy!

Here is what the Times article said about Biden:

Mr. Biden has said three times, most recently in May, that the United States would deploy force to help Taiwan against a Chinese invasion. On each occasion, the White House walked back his statements, saying that the policy of “strategic ambiguity” remained, under which Washington remains vague about how forcefully the United States would come to Taiwan’s aid. 

WTF is that supposed to mean?   The author of the article tries to mitigate the damage by saying the Chinese ambassador is top notch and Pelosi has a history of pissing off the Chinese so "Hey, whatever" but it's a big deal.

We need to stop trying to humiliate other countries like this for fun.   Now we have China taking measures against us and they were supposed to be our friend.  We need to reaffirm that we support the One China policy.  No country in the world recognizes Taiwan as a separate country.  We probably caused a premature reunification between China and Taiwan and we hurt our relationship with China and we are total jerks. 

This trip was not the minor, neutral little jaunt made out in the mainstream media.  It was a big deal and  it's going to keep being a big deal for a while. 

Every day with the same blather.

 I wonder if you know how fed up the Taiwanese people are with the bullying, ostracizing and marginalizing from China for decades? People just want to live in a free world. Why do you think the waiting list for a tourist visa for America or Canada is so long for these people who live under communism? Do you know how many people from Hong Kong fled to Canada before China took over? 
It’s walk ins welcome at the Chinese, Russian and North Korean embassies… try it sometime…. Hey Cuba is a beauty go get a tan.

Jaytee said:

Every day with the same blather.

 I wonder if you know how fed up the Taiwanese people are with the bullying, ostracizing and marginalizing from China for decades? People just want to live in a free world. Why do you think the waiting list for a tourist visa for America or Canada is so long for these people who live under communism? Do you know how many people from Hong Kong fled to Canada before China took over? 
It’s walk ins welcome at the Chinese, Russian and North Korean embassies… try it sometime…. Hey Cuba is a beauty go get a tan.

Do you want to go to war with China?   That's the deal if we want to "free" Taiwan from China.  They are not giving up Taiwan.   It was foolish for us to put on the Nancy Pelosi clown shows and try to humiliate China.  We had a good relationship with China and this trip basically wrecked that.  Our US policy is to support one China. We should not be involved.  It will end up like another Ukraine but worse, especially for us.  We can't do the proxy war thing there.  

Like I said:  Do you want to go to war with China?   

nan said:

Do you want to go to war with China?   That's the deal if we want to "free" Taiwan from China.  They are not giving up Taiwan.   It was foolish for us to put on the Nancy Pelosi clown shows and try to humiliate China.  We had a good relationship with China and this trip basically wrecked that.  Our US policy is to support one China. We should not be involved.  It will end up like another Ukraine but worse, especially for us.  We can't do the proxy war thing there.  

Like I said:  Do you want to go to war with China?   

Do you think China wants to go to war with us?

And now, all of a sudden, "We had a good relationship with China"?

I thought they told us FU over Ukraine and are now besties with Putin.

Make up your mind.

China and the US are so profoundly economically linked that the idea they'd go to war is beyond absurd.  Except for fear mongers who are selling books or have a youtube channel, in which case it's savvy marketing.

nan said:

The best thing about that article is how -- at the end it mentioned big support from Mike Pompeo whom she terms an "unlikely backer."  Guess she does not get out much. Pompeo wanted to go with her but he is banned in China. Well now Nancy is too. Wish we could ban the both of them here.

She also says Pelosi went on her own, a conclusion also made by Scott Ritter. Ritter went further though and pointed out it showed the weakness of the Biden Whitehouse in being unable to stop her because they knew what she did would be reflected on them.  Now we have an adversary relationship with China, the country we get all our junk from.  They will not be coordinating with us on important matters such as cybercrime. Better  lock down your computers--it's open season for Chinese hackers on US systems.  Thanks, Nancy!

I know Pompeo was "banned in China".  That has nothing to do with whether he can travel to Taiwan. I hadn't heard that he was prohibited from entering by Taiwan, also.

Which one of your unreliable sources is holding Nancy Pelosi responsible for China "suddenly" being interested in cyberattacks against U.S. targets? That's a stupid claim.

dave said:

China and the US are so profoundly economically linked that the idea they'd go to war is beyond absurd.  Except for fear mongers who are selling books or have a youtube channel, in which case it's savvy marketing.

There was a belief before WW I that the economic linkages between the European economies was so deep that war was impossible.

nan said:

jamie said:

Isn't he a barred attorney?   Now he's the leading expert on China?  LOL  It's incredible how many times he premises his reaction with "I think" or "I suspect" or "I believe".

Any actual link for what they're talking about?  Or backup with the bullet points you listed?

He's an expert on geopolitics.  He gives measured responses, which is much better than someone who shoots their mouth off with certainty over things we can't know for sure.  Were it not for the Duran we might not know about these important suspended cooperations.  I am still looking for the list, although I have found reference to it.  Wonder why they are not telling us this while presenting the visit in positive or neutral terms.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/aug/05/china-halts-us-cooperation-nancy-pelosi-taiwan

That's very true unless we happened to glance at CNN or Reuters or the AP.

nan said:

mtierney said:

Not a Pelosi fan, but her spunk in making the trip impressed me — whether she had a motive we don’t know about — deflecting attention re her husband’s drunk driving — but I find that a reach. The pink pant suit she wore on arrival stood out brilliantly. 

Whether this brings about WW3. or not, is the question.

It impresses you that someone acts recklessly and potentially starts WWWIII wearing a pink pantssuit?  The Chinese have now pulled out of all climate talks so there is one consequence that could be bad.  They are also going to focus on reuniting Taiwan ASAP.  There will be more actions coming soon.  

Which is kind of ironic in light of an article I saw in the last couple of days saying that warming in China over the last few decades as been higher than average.

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-warns-that-its-temperatures-are-rising-faster-than-global-average-2022-08-04/

Maybe you can wait until one of your silly podcasters confirms this for you.

I read this in this morning's paper, and it's another informative piece about the situation between China and Taiwan.  It's unlocked so anyone can read it.  I suggest that anyone who wants to comment on it, read the entire thing.

After China’s Military Spectacle, Options Narrow for Winning Over Taiwan

The exercises were designed to deter Taiwan from moving further away from Beijing, but they also indicated how few policy carrots China has.

Two excerpts, below, on one of the issues being discussed in this thread, about what the people of Taiwan actually want.

"But since Taiwan emerged as a democracy in the 1990s, growing numbers of its people see themselves as vastly different in values and culture from the People’s Republic of China. That political skepticism toward authoritarian China has persisted, and even deepened, as Taiwan’s economic ties to the mainland expanded.

"But in increasingly democratic Taiwan, few see themselves as proud, future Chinese citizens. Support for Beijing’s proposals sank even lower after 2020, when China imposed a crackdown on Hong Kong, eroding the freedoms that the former British colony was promised under its own version of the framework."

I've cited insights from Kevin Rudd's book about the U.S.-China relationship (although they've been ignored by posters who claim to rely on much better "experts"). He's quoted in the article that I've made available, above, and provides some perspective.

“It’s not about to be a blow up tomorrow, but it elevates the overall probability of crisis, conflict or even war with the Americans over Taiwan,” said Kevin Rudd, the former Australian prime minister who previously worked as a diplomat in Beijing.

“We now have a 27-year fuse that can either be slow-burn or fast-burn,” said Mr. Rudd, the former Australian prime minister who is now president of the Asia Society, citing that midcentury date. “The time to worry is the early 2030s, because you’re closer in the countdown zone to 2049, but you’re also in Xi Jinping’s political lifetime.”

It's not about Pelosi at all, it's about how Xi judges the overall situation in Taiwan and his window of opportunity.

Pelosi is a pretext for Xi and people supporting his desire to bring Taiwan under the control of Beijing's government. The "big picture" in Taiwan is the same no matter what travel plans Pelosi had made.

tjohn said:

There was a belief before WW I that the economic linkages between the European economies was so deep that war was impossible.

I think it's generally true that economic linkages make war less likely -- they greatly increase the cost of going to war -- but you're right that unfortunately "less likely" isn't the same as "doesn't happen." The counterpoint to pre WWI European economic integration would be post WW II and the EU -- kind of amazing to reflect on how unthinkable war between France and Germany is today.

I think the attempt to integrate China into the larger world economy was the right call (and will note that for all of China's increasing bellicosity, war has yet to actually break out). Similarly, while Germany has gotten a lot of criticism for economic ties with Russia, I don't think that was an obviously bad idea to pursue  -- would a Russia with fewer economic ties have been even quicker to turn to force? It's tricky when dealing with authoritarian countries, though, as they're less directly exposed to costs of breaking economic ties.

The former President blamed China for everything. When did we have a good relationship with China?

drummerboy said:

Do you think China wants to go to war with us?

And now, all of a sudden, "We had a good relationship with China"?

I thought they told us FU over Ukraine and are now besties with Putin.

Make up your mind.

They are moving away from us.  But, this made it much worse.  It's like Russia was able to say to them, "See we warned you!"     

Until this Pelosi visit we were on fairly good terms.  Look what they did after the visit.  They are no longer incorporating with us on important things related to military and cyber security. 

Here is the list I posted above.  These are significant things.

• Chines-US military talks are cancelled
• Cancelling China - US Defense policy talks
• Cancelling US -China military maritime consultancy agreement
• Suspending coordination of the repatriation of illegal immigrants.
• Suspending legal assistance on criminal matters
• Suspending coordination on transnational crimes (internet crime)
• Suspending coordination on counter-narcotics
• Suspending talks on climate change.
• Going to ramp up coordination with Russia

nan said:

drummerboy said:

Do you think China wants to go to war with us?

And now, all of a sudden, "We had a good relationship with China"?

I thought they told us FU over Ukraine and are now besties with Putin.

Make up your mind.

They are moving away from us.  But, this made it much worse.  It's like Russia was able to say to them, "See we warned you!"     

Until this Pelosi visit we were on fairly good terms.  Look what they did after the visit.  They are no longer incorporating with us on important things related to military and cyber security. 

Here is the list I posted above.  These are significant things.

• Chines-US military talks are cancelled
• Cancelling China - US Defense policy talks
• Cancelling US -China military maritime consultancy agreement
• Suspending coordination of the repatriation of illegal immigrants.
• Suspending legal assistance on criminal matters
• Suspending coordination on transnational crimes (internet crime)
• Suspending coordination on counter-narcotics
• Suspending talks on climate change.
• Going to ramp up coordination with Russia

Presumably China agreed to these things in the first place because they saw benefit to themselves.

Consequently, they're either cutting their nose off to spite their face, in which case they're stupid, or this is just a temporary blip that will eventually be resolved, in which case they're just showing off the size of their dick.

I vote the latter.

dave said:

China and the US are so profoundly economically linked that the idea they'd go to war is beyond absurd.  Except for fear mongers who are selling books or have a youtube channel, in which case it's savvy marketing.

We thought Russia was profoundly economically linked to us also and look where that got us.  The same could be true of China.   Our foreign policy, as expressed by Mike Pompeo in a recent speech, is bellicose towards China.  China and Russia forming a greater alliance and inviting other major countries in sends the White House neocons into a tailspin.  

Going to war with China, the place we get all our important junk from,  could also mean just an economic type war which could be disastrous for us.  We might need China more than they need us. 

It's not beyond absurd, especially when the neocons are in charge. 

nan said:

We thought Russia was profoundly economically linked to us also and look where that got us. 

We did? Who is we?

The amount of trade we do with Russia is practically equal to a rounding error compared to the size of our economy.

drummerboy said:

nan said:

drummerboy said:

Do you think China wants to go to war with us?

And now, all of a sudden, "We had a good relationship with China"?

I thought they told us FU over Ukraine and are now besties with Putin.

Make up your mind.

They are moving away from us.  But, this made it much worse.  It's like Russia was able to say to them, "See we warned you!"     

Until this Pelosi visit we were on fairly good terms.  Look what they did after the visit.  They are no longer incorporating with us on important things related to military and cyber security. 

Here is the list I posted above.  These are significant things.

• Chines-US military talks are cancelled
• Cancelling China - US Defense policy talks
• Cancelling US -China military maritime consultancy agreement
• Suspending coordination of the repatriation of illegal immigrants.
• Suspending legal assistance on criminal matters
• Suspending coordination on transnational crimes (internet crime)
• Suspending coordination on counter-narcotics
• Suspending talks on climate change.
• Going to ramp up coordination with Russia

Presumably China agreed to these things in the first place because they saw benefit to themselves.

Consequently, they're either cutting their nose off to spite their face, in which case they're stupid, or this is just a temporary blip that will eventually be resolved, in which case they're just showing off the size of their dick.

I vote the latter.

Ok, well I tried to google "US hackers targeting China" and I got nothing.   However, "Chinese hackers targeting US"  got 5,670 results.  

I'm guessing narcotics would do about the same.

So, I don't think China is showing us their dick.  I think the US just got owned and will soon be facing some more consequences for this idiotic trip.  

drummerboy said:

nan said:

We thought Russia was profoundly economically linked to us also and look where that got us. 

We did? Who is we?

The amount of trade we do with Russia is practically equal to a rounding error compared to the size of our economy.

We put huge sanctions on them and they were still fine.   It was expected they would collapse. In fact it turned out that we needed Russia more than they needed us.  Europe is going to freeze next winter and they had to drop the sanctions for food and fertilizer and some other things. 

Well they can expose their dicks to the Taiwanese…Lorena Bobbit runs an online site that sells condoms… every thing is half off until the Chinese put their dicks away…

Jaytee said:

Well they can expose their dicks to the Taiwanese…Lorena Bobbit runs an online site that sells condoms… every thing is half off until the Chinese put their dicks away…

Oh, it's going to be a fun afternoon on MOL.  I can already tell.  Think I'll go take my time to do the recycling and garbage now. Maybe wash some dishes. . .

Please do.   Take like a month.

nan said:

dave said:

China and the US are so profoundly economically linked that the idea they'd go to war is beyond absurd.  Except for fear mongers who are selling books or have a youtube channel, in which case it's savvy marketing.

We thought Russia was profoundly economically linked to us also and look where that got us.  The same could be true of China.   Our foreign policy, as expressed by Mike Pompeo in a recent speech, is bellicose towards China.  China and Russia forming a greater alliance and inviting other major countries in sends the White House neocons into a tailspin.  

Going to war with China, the place we get all our important junk from,  could also mean just an economic type war which could be disastrous for us.  We might need China more than they need us. 

It's not beyond absurd, especially when the neocons are in charge. 

I must have missed the time when Russia held trillions of dollars in US Treasuries. 

nan said:

Ok, well I tried to google "US hackers targeting China" and I got nothing.   However, "Chinese hackers targeting US"  got 5,670 results.  

It's true. Here's a story from 2018 - Chinese hackers targeting U.S. Navy contractors with multiple breaches: WSJ | Reuters

Here's another about an indictment in 2014 - U.S. Charges Five Chinese Military Hackers for Cyber Espionage Against U.S. Corporations and a Labor Organization for Commercial Advantage | OPA | Department of Justice

It has nothing to do with Pelosi's travels, of course, or the Biden Administration.

China issued a long and detailed argument for its case that Taiwan should consent to be ruled from Beijing.

This is obviously something long-planned, and wasn't prompted by Pelosi's visit.  They were just looking for a pretext to release it.

China releases white paper on Taiwan question, reunification in new era (www.gov.cn)

"The Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council and the State Council Information Office of the People's Republic of China published a white paper titled "The Taiwan Question and China's Reunification in the New Era" on Aug 10.

"The white paper was released to reiterate the fact that Taiwan is part of China, to demonstrate the resolve of the Communist Party of China (CPC) and the Chinese people and their commitment to national reunification, and to emphasize the position and policies of the CPC and the Chinese government in the new era."

In that document, here is how the government of Taiwan is described: "They have steadily built up their military forces with the intention of pursuing 'independence' and preventing reunification by force."

The people of Taiwan don't want to be invaded by China, but China definitely wants to be able to do just that.