Letters posted here are associated with the following article:

24
Letters
Wednesday, April 19, 2006 12:00 AM

Taking aim at the sleeping dragon

Imperial and imperious, the Bush administration's containment strategy for China may herald the next cold war.

The letters thread is now closed.

View:
Thursday, April 20, 2006 01:16 PM

It's A Cold, Cold World

The semantics of Rumsfeld and the blatherings of Rice leading the U.S. and our military allies into an economic and military chess game with China can only get worse. The true question, and forgive me if this is a repeat of any previous letter, is why would China attack the U.S.? They don't need to. By the time Bush is done drilling America into the ground and the minimum recruitment age is raised to 59, we'll be so demoralized and anti-government China won't have to lift a finger—we won't have anyone left in the military willing to follow orders. Besides, they already process all of our steel; we'll go into debt buying their steel to make our tanks and ships, and won't have any money left over to fuel the things because China will own the oil companies we had to lease to support our steel costs.

Thursday, April 20, 2006 09:43 PM

Thanks jlbellinger

>The true question, and forgive me if this is a repeat of any previous letter, is why would China attack the U.S.?

I don't think you're repeating a previous letter. I actually don't believe that they would, but I do believe that they may well attack an East Asian ally of ours. They have gone to war with India in recent decades, and India is becoming a close ally of ours. They will probably at least bully Japan, which is still defenseless without our support, though we may be allowing them to expand their army again soon. And finally, I firmly believe that Taiwan is in danger. We have pledged to defend Taiwan in case of such an attack.

Whether we _should_ be engaged in the region, or whether it would be better for us to disengage entirely and leave China free rein to control all the resources from the area, and bully whomever they please, is an open question. The isolationist sentiment is not necessarily a foolish one. But if Taiwan is attacked, and we renege on our promise to defend it, then for many decades to come, our name will be spat upon by them. And I don't want to think about a Japan that's left defenseless, with 100,000-man army, before a nuclear China, with a million-plus-man army, several hundred nuclear missiles, a submarine fleet, and a public that has very violent anti-Japanese sentiments.

I do agree that we have exhausted our armed forces in Iraq, and will continue to do so, while the Chinese armed forces remain fresh for whatever conflict may be coming.

Most Active Letters Threads

740

The commendably missing element from Obama's speech

There was no pretense that human rights is our goal, or the likely outcome, in escalating the war
371

America's regression

It's almost impossible to find a nation with as many torture advocates as the U.S. has.
333

Do Obama officials know what his Afghanistan plan is?

What explains the completely contradictory statements from key aides on a central plank of the war strategy?
278

Palin: Birthers have "fair question" about Obama

Of Obama birth, the ex-governor says, "the public is still, rightfully, making it an issue" (Updated)
211

The poster boy for progressive self-delusion

Read Hayden's 2008 Obama endorsement to remember the way the left sold our centrist president to itself

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon