Donald H. Rumsfeld

[luohan]

As a Chinese-Canadian, I would like to bring this to our attention. This is what Rumsfeld said:

"Since no nation threatens China, one wonders: why this growing investment?"

-Here he talks about China expanding their military projects and increasing expenditures. He is saying this while he is pushing the Congress for funding for his "Star Wars" projects.

"The world would welcome a China committed to peaceful solutions and whose industrious and well-educated people contribute to international peace and prosperity"

-Rumsfeld promotes peaceful solutions?

Both of those quotes tell me one thing. This guys is afraid another country will catch up to the U.S. in military strength. Either the U.S. enjoys being at the top where they are allowed to be imperialistic. Or he predicts that the rise of China will bring a new cold war.

Rumsfeld also wants China to handle North Korea, I guess the U.S. is out of soldiers on standby and can't spare any more troops. Otherwise, such a request would probably not have been made.

Summary: The U.S. wants China to cut down on its military spending in the name of world peace. At the same time, the U.S. wants China to "deal" with North Korea (which will most likely take military detterence if not force).

So isn't that like saying: cut off your arms, then fetch me my slippers?

What do you guys think?

[August1991]

Both of those quotes tell me one thing. This guys is afraid another country will catch up to the U.S. in military strength. Either the U.S. enjoys being at the top where they are allowed to be imperialistic. Or he predicts that the rise of China will bring a new cold war.

China is a political dictatorship and the US is a democracy. Do you have any evidence that the US is imperialistic? What colonies does it possess and what subject people does it administer against their will?

What happened in China in 1989 and why?

[luohan]

China is a political dictatorship and the US is a democracy.  Do you have any evidence that the US is imperialistic?  What colonies does it possess and what subject people does it administer against their will?

What happened in China in 1989 and why?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Is the U.S. really a democracy, when conservative racists all all running things. Furthermore, who is in control of Afghanistan and Iraq? Can you honestly believe that those people are not political puppets of the United States. "We're going to invade your country to free you", thats what the United States is saying. Why are there insurgents? Maybe because the occupation is against their will. So what if China is a Socialist Nation? What does that have to do with them increasing their defense budget? What does 1989 have to do with anything? Why do you even think that it is relavent with China's defense budget? You think that China is increasing its budget so that it can oppress people? If so, what proof do you have of that? If China is really the "big bad wolf", then why is the U.S. asking them to control Korea? What kind of Hypocrisy is that? All this "political dictatorship" stuff is all the propaganda the Western nations have been buying into. The main communist threat is gone, so they have to have a new war to carry on. Rumsfled won't be happy unless his defense budget is world conquest proportions. You see, China has only increased their spending by 35 Billion dollars / year. Adding that to the previous amount, China has a defense budget a little bit more than a tenth of the U.S. budget. Whereas China has twice the amount of people in their military. The U.S. is infact afraid of a second cold war, can't you see that? They don't like competition, they like being at the top. But thats a different matter altogether.

[August1991]

What does 1989 have to do with anything?

It has everything to do with the question.

All this "political dictatorship" stuff is all the propaganda the Western nations have been buying into.

So what happened in 1989 is merely propaganda naive Westerners believe?

China is not the problem. The Chinese government is the problem. Based on past evidence, dictatorships are dangerous to world peace. The US government is acting prudently.

Is the U.S. really a democracy, when conservative racists all all running things.

The US federal government has several parts, each independent of the other. Are all the people involved "conservative racists"? In addition, there are fifty states each pursuing their own agenda, and finally individual Americans are largely free to say and do what they want.

Why are there insurgents? Maybe because the occupation is against their will.

The insurgents in Iraq are Sunnite and they seem upset that, while they only form 20% of the population, they can no longer dictate to the others - I'll draw the comparison to South Africa in case it is not obvious to you.

[Fortunata]

Pax Americana dictates that no other country (or coalition of countries) should rival the USA either militarily or financially.

[luohan]

Whatever your arguments may be the facts are simple:

1. China is a sovereign nation.

2. The U.S.A owes China billions of dollars in trade deficits.

3. The U.S.A is once again projecting their influence where it's not welcome.

These are the facts and they are undisputed.

1989 is irrelavent, for it has absolutely nothing to do with China's current defense budget. If you want to ask me what happened in Tiananmen Square in 1989, then I could ask you: What happened in Iraq in 2003? Who tried to assassinate Fidel Castro during the cold war? Which country sponsored the Latin-American nations with their puppet democracy while pushing their genocidal concensus on the Latino people? Which country drops cluster bombs that looks like food packets? If dictatorships are dangerous to world peace, then why is the "most democratic country" making the most war? No, the U.S. is not acting "prudently, instead they are reacting with hypocrisy. Yes, there are 50 states with individual agenda's. However, all of them are under the influence of American companies who only have one agenda: to make more money.

Finally I must ask, if America is the "beacon of freedom" and they defend everyone's rights, if they defend individual rights, then maybe (just a sugestion) they should at least repect sovereignty. The second amenment states "The right to bear and carry arms shall not be infringed upon", maybe they should leave China alone then.

[BHS]

Pax Americana dictates that no other country (or coalition of countries) should rival the USA either militarily or financially.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hmm. I'd like to read this "Pax Americana" of which you speak. Do you have a URL handy?

[BHS]

2. The U.S.A owes China billions of dollars in trade deficits.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What are you talking about? Do you know what a trade deficit is?

[Advocat]

Pax Americana dictates that no other country (or coalition of countries) should rival the USA either militarily or financially.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hmm. I'd like to read this "Pax Americana" of which you speak. Do you have a URL handy?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A story on this from the Christian Science Monitor is available: A Bush Vision of Pax Americana

This story is based on the 2002 release of the US National Security Strategy

[luohan]

2. The U.S.A owes China billions of dollars in trade deficits.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What are you talking about? Do you know what a trade deficit is?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes I do, and I'm sorry. I meant to say that America still owes China for unpayed goods and services (and they will continue to do so as long as the children of the U.S. plays w/ teddy bears etc.)