Re: OT: US Presidents and Foreign Policy

From: LX-i (lxi0007_at_netscape.net)
Date: 03/26/05

  • Next message: Frederico Fonseca: "Re: Handling outputs (yes, an *on* topic thread!)" 
    Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 13:11:13 -0600

    James J. Gavan wrote:
    > Remember this thread contains 'Foreign Policy'. Daniel, you are way off
    > track in your optimism. We've already been there with the Chinese, and
    > at the time they were a pretty primitive nation. The only time the UN
    > military force had significance, while I was still in apprentice
    > training - the Korean War of the 'Fifties, commanded by Douglas
    > MacArthur. Like those graphical images we see in modern movies, the
    > Chinese came in droves into S. Korea. They wiped our asses, just with
    > unlimited manpower. It finished in an uneasy stalemate, and the Korean
    > situation is still the same today.

    Our technology has come a long way since then - and, we were a bit
    apprehensive in some ways, have encountered some pretty harsh
    international criticism for the technique we used in obtaining Japan's
    surrender in WWII.

    > Then through their surrogate, N. Vietnam, YOU (not us), had the tragedy
    > of the Vietnam War, with a disillusioned America leaving with its tail
    > between its legs.

    Vietnam should have been prosecuted much differently; and even today
    serves as a great educational tool, an example of what *not* to do
    (especially in the realm of PR).

    > As regards the PRC imploding, try and get a copy of Fortune "Inside the
    > New China", special issue 2004 Oct 04. With permission, I took my copy
    > from the doctor's waiting room :-). They are becoming a powerhouse, and
    > just as in Hong Kong, they are prepared to be not quite so communistic
    > ally rigid where they can make money. A new entrepreneurial class, both
    > home-grown and returnees from the States are the new middle class
    > driving force.

    Yes - a taste of freedom will lead to a yearning for even more. That's
    precisely what I'm talking about. I don't care if the PRC's leadership
    decides to change directions and still retain power - freedom has begun
    taking hold even there, and *will* continue to spread. :)

    I'll look to see if I can find that article you mention above.

    > So we are back to some sort of conventional war, if there is such an
    > animal. That implies ground troops with the US having to 'kick a lot of
    > ***'. I would suggest your legs are really going to ache before you
    > have kicked sufficient butts. You kill a million PRC troops. "No
    > problem", says the Central Committee, "We'll feed in one million more".

    Their population does give them an advantage in that area. I still
    think it could be done.

    > Forget the Afghan and Iraq sideshows - concentrate on a diplomatic
    > solution between the USA and the PRC. A while back, Bill pointed out to
    > three of us OO-ers that WG4 (ISO) had received requests from the Ukraine
    > and China to comment on the OO Collections TR(Technical Report). For all
    > I'm likely to use it, that section of a revised J4 Standard might just
    > as well be published in Chinese !

    heh heh (I agree about the diplomatic solution - so far, they haven't
    bothered us, and we haven't bothered them.)

    > I responded to Bill's message along the following lines. The 20th
    > Century was America's century. I predict that the 21st century will be
    > China's century.
    >
    > I wont be around, and you wont be around in 2099 to prove me wrong !

    I might be... You know, with all that new technology and stuff... :) 

    -- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~   /   \  /         ~        Live from Montgomery, AL!       ~
~  /     \/       o  ~                                        ~
~ /      /\   -   |  ~          daniel@thebelowdomain         ~
~ _____ /  \      |  ~      http://www.djs-consulting.com     ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ GEEKCODE 3.12 GCS/IT d s-:+ a C++ L++ E--- W++ N++ o? K- w$ ~
~ !O M-- V PS+ PE++ Y? !PGP t+ 5? X+ R* tv b+ DI++ D+ G- e    ~
~ h---- r+++ z++++                                            ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  • Next message: Frederico Fonseca: "Re: Handling outputs (yes, an *on* topic thread!)"