Not Good-China

Discussion in 'Asia' started by Annie, Jun 26, 2005.

  1. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Note: This is part 1

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/specialreport/20050626-122138-1088r.htm

     
  2. rtwngAvngr
    Offline

    rtwngAvngr Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    15,755
    Thanks Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +511
    Let's blame the clintons.

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/report/crs/98-485.htm
     
  3. gaffer
    Offline

    gaffer Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Messages:
    258
    Thanks Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +44
    Reads almost like a report from pre-WW2. All the land grab points are mentioned.

    In order to pull it all off they would have to make a sneak attack against the US and its allies. Multiple major strikes throughout the pacific and middle east. Ironically Russia would be drawn into it too. In the case of such a war I think limited nukes would be used as well.
     
  4. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Yeah, I thought Iraq and Afghanistan were bad...
     
  5. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    http://washingtontimes.com/specialreport/20050627-124855-6747r.htm


     
  6. onedomino
    Offline

    onedomino SCE to AUX

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,677
    Thanks Received:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +476
    Stealing technology and disrespect for intellectual property rights is a way of life in China. The Chinese steal everything they think valuable: e.g., software, movies, airplane parts, construction machinery, and weapons. When I lived in Shanghai, I had a Chinese friend that worked in a local bank. He told me that bank transactions with customers and other banks were conducted with stolen US software, running on stolen copies of Windows NT. In terms of weapons, accounts of Chinese thefts of American Aegis and nuclear technology have been frequently published. Chinese attempts to steal US weapons technology have been going on for a long time. Here is an article about Chinese thefts of US nuke weapons technology from six years ago: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/351667.stm.

    It is not likely that the Chinese will soon (e.g., in two years as the above article suggests) deliberately choose war with America. The Chinese do not want to disrupt their economic growth; they do not want to cut off their American source of foreign exchange. In the near-term, the only way that war with America could occur would be a Chinese miscalculation that the US would not respond to an invasion of Taiwan. The need to make sure that the Chinese do not fail to believe that there will be an American response to a Chinese invasion of Taiwan will lead the US to continue to build up its military forces in Asia. For example, during the past two years, American has for the first time based nuclear attack submarines at Guam. Last month, for the first time, America based F117 stealth bombers in South Korea. A recent US-Japan strategic agreement underlines that the Japanese will come to the aid of US forces confronting a Chinese attack on Taiwan: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39361-2005Feb20.html. . In terms of attacking the Taiwanese, China should not underestimate the military strength of the island. In a conventional war with Taiwan, the Chinese would ultimately prevail but only at a terrible cost. Taiwan has possessed nuclear technology for decades. Can the Chinese be sure that the Taiwanese do not possess nukes, or the capability to rapidly build them?
     
  7. 5stringJeff
    Offline

    5stringJeff Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,990
    Thanks Received:
    536
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Ratings:
    +540
    China holds too many US Bonds to go to war against us. Their economy is too wrapped up in the world's economy to start a war which would lead to an embargo.
     
  8. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
    Onedomino, do you know if COSCO is still leasing the Long Beach Naval Station or has that lease been revoked? (see article below) I know the Chinese tried to bring in 100,000 AK-47 rifles to arm the facility but were not permitted to. But who knows, we were so lax toward the Chinese military at that time that they could have smuggled them in anyway.
    ------- ------- ------ ------- ------
    Sorry, I have to post the entire article. The url no longer works.

    March 7, 1997
    Chinese Got Long Beach Deal!
    By Staff Investigative Journalists
    The Daily Republican

    LONG BEACH DESK - The Long Beach Naval Station was tentatively placed on the Military Base Closure-List by president George Bush in 1991. President Bill Clinton, closed the naval base last in 1993. That resulted in the loss to Long Beach, California of 17,500 military and civilian jobs. The economic impact of the of loss was $52.5 million and drove the California economy into the tank. It has never recovered.

    Between 1995-1996, during the heat of the Clinton-Gore Campaign fund raising activity, the Clinton administration actively intervened to make sure a Communist Chinese cargo container shipping interest got a too-good deal on a Long Beach, California, shipping terminal.

    The Secretary of the Navy has formally turned the base over to the City of Long Beach. But, the Port of Long Beach has signed a letter of intent to lease the property to the China Ocean Shipping Co., a steamship line run by the Communist Chinese government.

    The Navy base property is about to be leased to a Communist China-owned shipping company under an agreement that was only made possible by the intervention of the White House.

    Forced by a court order, Port of Long Beach officials have now set March 12, 1997 for a new public hearing on plans to bulldoze the Naval Station and lease the property to the Comunist Chinese shipping company.

    After a hearing before the court, a judge ruled last week that the deal had been rushed and proper procedures had not been in place.

    Clinton was so eager to push the deal through that he met twice with Long Beach officials and once at a White House meeting in 1995 that included his then-chief of staff and the Pentagon's No. 2 official and others.

    The deal finally approved by the Secretary of the Navy turns over control of the Long Beach Naval Station, with a value of at least $65 million, free of charge to the City of Long Beach. The city has agreed to lease it to the China Ocean Shipping Co. of the People's Republic of China.

    The Chinese deal apparently went forward without a national security review by wither the CIA or National Security Council. The White House apparently avoided normal and routine government channels in pushing the deal through in 1995. '... there seemed to be no reason to check with the National Security Council on the decision ...' White House spokesman Lanny Davis said.

    However, the China Ocean Shipping Co. of the People's Republic of China has been actively involved in several recent controversies in addition to a Russian AK-47 gun-smuggling episode on the streets of Oakland, California. In another shocking incident in December, one of the company's ships plowed into a crowded boardwalk in New Orleans, injuring 116 people.

    Then, in 1992, the shipping company was fined $400,000 in a violation of U.S. shipping law in connection with is practices involving bribery of government officials in order to avoid paying U.S. tariffs on its imports at United States ports of entry.

    There is still more. Six of the company's ships were detained by the Navy and Coast Guard for violating international safety regulations just in the last year. The Coast Guard said, that is has placed the China Ocean Shipping Co. of the People's Republic of China on a target list of shippers to monitor and search.

    Last summer China admitted that the China Ocean Shipping Co. was shipping 640 tons of raw waste from the United States to China when it suddenly decided to dump it into the open sea.

    In 1993 U.S. Navy shadowed a China Ocean Shipping Co. ship passing in the Persian Gulf after U.S. intelligence warned it was suspected of carrying chemical weapons materials.

    CIA director Robert Gates has said ' ... any time you turn over an American port facility to a foreign-owned company, especially one with significant [Communist Chinese] government connection, then at least it ought to be vetted through national security agencies.'

    A Navy Department career official said that no intelligence review was sought because the China Ocean Shipping Company's was not considered a security threat, by the Clinton White House.

    The Chinese will lease the Long Beach Naval Station base for a 10 year term at a fee of $14.5 million per year. The Chinese will have the option to expand the perimeter of the operation onto another 150 acres of old Navy shipyards that will be developed at the City of Long Beach taxpayer's expense.

    Officials at the Chinese shipping interest's headquarters in New Jersey and in Beijing refused to comment or respond to questions about president Clinton's involvement.
     
  9. onedomino
    Offline

    onedomino SCE to AUX

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,677
    Thanks Received:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +476
    Your article was dated 1997. I do not know the answer to your question, but the following seems to indicate that the lease was not allowed. Here is an article from 1998 indicating that the COSCO lease was not permitted:
     
  10. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
    Thanks. I certainly hope that was the case. I read a couple of books a few years ago about what the legacy of the Clinton Administration would be to this country. One was written by Rich Lowry (Legacy), and the other was a NewsMax publication (Bitter Legacy). One of these books covered this incident and said that the lease deal was actually made. I could not believe that any government of ours would be so stupid as to lease one of our naval stations to a foreign country--and a communist foreign country at that!--and why the people in California did not raise holy hell about the deal.
     

Share This Page