logo 
spacer
  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!

> Welcome to the America's Debate Archive!

Topics that have had no new replies in the last 180 days are moved to the archive.

New replies are not accepted once a topic is moved to the archive, and new topics cannot be started in the archive.

> China is ready to use nuclear missles
Juber3
post Jul 14 2005, 11:02 PM
Post #1


*******
Hello

Sponsor
February 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 544
Member No.: 88
Joined: September-7-02

From: Cleveland Ohio
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



http://news.ft.com/cms/s/28cfe55a-f4a7-11d...000e2511c8.html

What do you think America should do about this threat?
Is it a threat?
Should the international community get involved?

This post has been edited by Juber3: Jul 14 2005, 11:34 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Doclotus
post Jul 15 2005, 01:18 AM
Post #2


*******
Stirred, not shaken

Sponsor
April 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 893
Member No.: 2,898
Joined: April-12-04

From: Charlotte, NC
Gender: Male
Politics: Slightly Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



For now, nothing. This seems like nothing more than bravado coming from a single Chinese general. If you want a parallel, lookup Al Haig. wink.gif

Even Zhu admitted this was theoretical for the most part, from the same article:
QUOTE
Gen Zhu said his views did not represent official Chinese policy and he did not anticipate war with the US.

Admittedly, this is a touchy situation for the US, but in the end this is posturing, not much else.

Internationally, I don't expect much of a response, maybe from Blair but otherwise I doubt you'll see much in the way of outrage.

Doc
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bill55AZ
post Jul 15 2005, 02:44 AM
Post #3


*******
Five Hundred Club

Sponsor
June 3, 2003

Group: BANNED
Posts: 771
Member No.: 769
Joined: June-2-03

From: Dry Heat, Arizona
Gender: Male
Politics: Moderate
Party affiliation: Republican



China has nothing to gain by attacking us, and lots to lose.
I would be willing to bet that the first government to use nuclear weapons against us would cease to exist very shortly afterwards.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blingice
post Jul 15 2005, 04:08 AM
Post #4


****
Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 83
Member No.: 5,264
Joined: July-13-05

From: In front of my computer
Gender: Male
Politics: Slightly Conservative
Party affiliation: Republican



QUOTE(Juber3 @ Jul 14 2005, 06:02 PM)
 
What do you think America should do about this threat? 
Is it a threat? 
Should the international community get involved? 
*
 


A/B. It isn't a threat, it is only a response to something we do. It is saying "don't do this or we'll do this" instead of "I'm going to do this".

C. I don't see why. Its like two adults yelling and any country saying "hey guys stop yelling" would be the equivalent of a four year old saying that, possibly except for Britain.

I don't even see why China is even saying this. It is like an acquaintance saying "If you consider throwing water balloons at me this summer I'll take a firehose out on you." And the person he says it to is thinking "Since when are we going to consider throwing water balloons?"

Has anyone heard of any US plan to do anything like was mentioned?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Julian
post Jul 15 2005, 12:12 PM
Post #5


Group Icon

*********
Every day, when I wake up, I thank the Lord I'm Welsh

Group: Committee Members
Posts: 2,943
Member No.: 496
Joined: February-14-03

From: Swindon, UK
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Other



What do you think America should do about this threat?
Is it a threat?
Should the international community get involved?

QUOTE
China is prepared to use nuclear weapons against the US if it is attacked by Washington during a confrontation over Taiwan, a Chinese general said on Thursday

Isn't that the point of having nuclear weapons? I daresay that even America's close allies - let's speculate the UK - would at the least attempt to retailiate with nuclear weapons against America if for some reason America became actively hostile to British soil or territories.

Of course that's a lot harder to imagine than action against Chinese territory or interests, because of the complications in Taiwan, but even then, it would be much more surprising if the Chinese said they wouldn't really mind if America stomped all over their backyard, officially or otherwise, and with or without any kind of justification.

I think the "threat" itself is more a statement of the obvious than anything new to worry about.

QUOTE
But his threat to use nuclear weapons in a conflict over Taiwan is the most specific by a senior Chinese official in nearly a decade.
(my emphasis)
This implies that such threats have been made before, so whatever was an appropriate response then should work equally well now. Publicly, my recollection is that such threats we not referred to - they were ignored. That should be enough again now. (There may well have been discussions on strategy in private, which is only prudent.)

QUOTE
Gen Zhu said his views did not represent official Chinese policy and he did not anticipate war with the US.

So even the guy who is making the "threat" admits that he is only talking hypothetically and from his own personal opinion as to what should happen if America attacks China? So what does that equate to? A Bill O'Reilly rant? Should other countries policy towards America be determined by the personal opinions of a single General? Can't see it myself.

I think the only reason America should be looking to pick a fight with China now is that if you wait another 50 years, you'll lose it. If you feel you have to have a fight with them, do it now, while you might win it. Of course, the multi-million - possibly billion-plus - death toll and world crisis that would be precipitated so America can still feel like the world's strongest country would be a big drawback, but at least you would win the urination contest if you start off sooner rather than later.

This post has been edited by Julian: Jul 15 2005, 12:16 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lordhelmet
post Jul 15 2005, 12:54 PM
Post #6


********
Millennium Mark

Sponsor
June 2005

Group: BANNED
Posts: 1,177
Member No.: 4,185
Joined: January-3-05

Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Private



QUOTE(Juber3 @ Jul 14 2005, 07:02 PM)
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/28cfe55a-f4a7-11d...000e2511c8.html

What do you think America should do about this threat?
Is it a threat?
Should the international community get involved?
*



What should we do? The whole reason that Clinton and Bush brought China into the global economy was to have some real influence over them that we couldn't have if they were an isolated, and nuclear armed adversary.

We should make it clear to China that any military action toward Taiwan will result in the immediate pullout of all US companies from China and a boycott of all goods produced there.

We should encourage the EU to take the same stance.

The rapid rise of the China economy is due to the export of goods manufactured there to the US and EU. Their internal market is still immature.

If we stop sending our money to them, their economy will collapse. It would hurt us too, but it would kill them.

In addition, we should continue the banning of military related technology to that country. They've already stolen many of our nuclear secrets when Clinton was asleep at the switch for 8 years. There is no use giving them any more free rides in that area.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bill55AZ
post Jul 15 2005, 02:42 PM
Post #7


*******
Five Hundred Club

Sponsor
June 3, 2003

Group: BANNED
Posts: 771
Member No.: 769
Joined: June-2-03

From: Dry Heat, Arizona
Gender: Male
Politics: Moderate
Party affiliation: Republican



Julian
.......so America can still feel like the world's strongest country would be a big drawback, but at least you would win the urination contest if you start off sooner rather than later.

Seems to me that we should be the super power, or would you prefer that title go to some other country? Is so, which would you pick? Why?

lordhelmet
We should make it clear to China that any military action toward Taiwan will result in the immediate pullout of all US companies from China and a boycott of all goods produced there.

Yea verily, at the very least. If they want to enjoy the fruits of their labor, they reallly should be careful about irritating their customers.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
English Horn
post Jul 15 2005, 03:07 PM
Post #8


*******
Five Hundred Club

Group: Members
Posts: 633
Member No.: 2,819
Joined: March-30-04

From: Connecticut
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



The point of having nuclear weapons is to have a powerful deterrent against any invasion or enemy attack. If United States decide to invade Chinese territory, it's only natural that they would at least threaten to use nuclear weapons. What's the point of having them if you can not even use them as a deterrent? wacko.gif
Answering the question, we should do nothing. Chinese were pretty much stating the obvious; if we attack them, they will defend themselves.

Why should we meddle into China's internal affairs? Taiwan is not a member of United Nations, and the majority of nations, including United States, recognize Taiwan as part of mainland China. It's up to Chinese to decide how to deal with separatists, not for us.

This post has been edited by English Horn: Jul 15 2005, 03:16 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sleeper
post Jul 15 2005, 03:16 PM
Post #9


********
Who dat!

Sponsor
February 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 1,692
Member No.: 386
Joined: January-17-03

From: Florida
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(English Horn @ Jul 15 2005, 10:07 AM)
The point of having nuclear weapons is to have a powerful deterrent against any invasion or enemy attack. If United States decide to invade Chinese territory, it's only natural that they would at least threaten to use nuclear weapons. What's the point of having them if you can not even use them as a deterrent?  wacko.gif
Answering the question, we should do nothing. Chinese were pretty much stating the obvious; if we attack them, they will defend themselves.
*




And we should stand by and do nothing if they attack Taiwan?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Just Leave me Al...
post Jul 15 2005, 03:20 PM
Post #10


*******
Five Hundred Club

Group: Members
Posts: 508
Member No.: 4,594
Joined: March-1-05

Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(English Horn @ Jul 15 2005, 11:07 AM)
The point of having nuclear weapons is to have a powerful deterrent against any invasion or enemy attack. If United States decide to invade Chinese territory, it's only natural that they would at least threaten to use nuclear weapons. What's the point of having them if you can not even use them as a deterrent?  wacko.gif
Answering the question, we should do nothing. Chinese were pretty much stating the obvious; if we attack them, they will defend themselves.
*


Taiwan is not part of China IMO. Taiwan is a functioning democracy. I agree that the US should do nothing about this statement until China invades Taiwan. Once that happens, then it is time to do something regardless of whether they are part of the UN or not. China will not nuke anyone. If they do, the world is basically destroyed because the US response will be swift and severe.

This post has been edited by Just Leave me Alone!: Jul 15 2005, 03:20 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
English Horn
post Jul 15 2005, 03:22 PM
Post #11


*******
Five Hundred Club

Group: Members
Posts: 633
Member No.: 2,819
Joined: March-30-04

From: Connecticut
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Sleeper @ Jul 15 2005, 10:16 AM)

And we should stand by and do nothing if they attack Taiwan?
*





I edited my reply and replied to your question there.
United States has a "one country" policy, just as China. If I remember correctly, last time states wanted to secede we had a Civil War over it. There's no mechanism for a state to secede from the Union; our nation is "indivisible". If Hawaiians decide tomorrow to secede then I could very well imagine a few divisions of our brave Marines landing on the island to quell any separatist notions.

Why do you deny the same right to China? Why can't their nation be "indivisible"?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
turnea
post Jul 15 2005, 03:29 PM
Post #12


**********
Tweedy Impertinence

Sponsor
December 2005

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 5,585
Member No.: 133
Joined: September-27-02

From: Alabama
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE(English Horn @ Jul 15 2005, 10:22 AM)

If Hawaiians decide tomorrow to secede then I could very well imagine a few divisions of our brave Marines landing on the island to quell any separatist notions. 
 
Why do you deny the same right to China? Why can't their nation be "indivisible"?
*


Heh.

Because China sure as heck doesn't have "liberty and justice for all". laugh.gif

Jokes aside (I almost resisted) that is the rub of the matter. Theoretically according to China's sovereign rights. There is nothing we can or should do to interfere.

Seen in a practical light this may well doom millions of Tawain's people to control by the despicable police state that is "The People's Republic". rolleyes.gif

Including some rather unsavory revenge imprisonments I would guess.

The humanitarian concern is a sticking point.

But I agree there is nothing we can do except accept all offers of asylum we can handle.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Just Leave me Al...
post Jul 15 2005, 03:33 PM
Post #13


*******
Five Hundred Club

Group: Members
Posts: 508
Member No.: 4,594
Joined: March-1-05

Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(English Horn @ Jul 15 2005, 11:22 AM)
Why do you deny the same right to China? Why can't their nation be "indivisible"?
*



The US has had a policy since WWII of protecting democracy from communism is why we deny China that 'Right'. It's time for a little Taiwan history.

QUOTE
Nationalist Refuge
China was enmeshed in a civil war between Communist forces led by Mao Zedong and the Kuomintang (KMT) led by Chiang Kai-shek, who had assumed leadership of the party in the mid-1920s after the death of KMT founder Sun Yat-sen. With mainland China falling to the Communists, Chiang moved the KMT government from Nanjing to Taipei on December 8, 1949. Communist plans to invade Taiwan were subsequently frustrated by the United States, which in 1950 sent naval forces to defend the island.

For the remainder of the 1950s, despite sporadic hostilities between Taiwan and the mainland, the United States Seventh Fleet shielded the KMT government from a Communist invasion. In March 1954 Chiang Kai-shek was reelected president of the Republic of China (as his Taiwan government continued to call itself). Later that year the KMT and the United States signed a mutual-defense treaty, by which the United States agreed conditionally to take punitive action against the Chinese mainland if the Communist regime attacked Taiwan.

Time of Prosperity
During this time the United States also extended massive economic and military aid to Taiwan, enabling it to build its economy despite a great investment in military defense. By the mid-1960s, when such aid was ended, more than U.S.$4 billion had flowed into Taiwan's economy. In that time industrial production was estimated to have risen by 300 percent; in addition, exports tripled and imports doubled. Of greater significance, however, was that the island had become a showcase of modern economic development, with a growth rate far above that of most other Asian economies.

Throughout the 1960s Taiwan experienced few changes in its international status or internal government. The National Assembly reelected Chiang Kai-shek president in 1960 and 1966, broadening his powers in 1966. Taiwan still enjoyed wide diplomatic recognition throughout the world, and its foreign trade boomed. Gradually, however, countries began shifting their formal relations to the People's Republic of China on the mainland. Diplomatic relations with France, for example, broke off in 1964. 



Taiwan is an independent nation with a government of it's own that the US has spend billions in economic and military aid developing as a partner. China attacking it is equivalent to Iraq attacking Kuwait.

This post has been edited by Just Leave me Alone!: Jul 15 2005, 03:34 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
English Horn
post Jul 15 2005, 03:46 PM
Post #14


*******
Five Hundred Club

Group: Members
Posts: 633
Member No.: 2,819
Joined: March-30-04

From: Connecticut
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Just Leave me Alone! @ Jul 15 2005, 10:33 AM)

QUOTE(English Horn @ Jul 15 2005, 11:22 AM)
Why do you deny the same right to China? Why can't their nation be "indivisible"?
*



The US has had a policy since WWII of protecting democracy from communism is why we deny China that 'Right'.

Taiwan is an independent nation with a government of it's own that the US has spend billions in economic and military aid developing as a partner. China attacking it is equivalent to Iraq attacking Kuwait.
*



So we say to China "have the political system that we approve and then you'll have a right to your own land"? That's absurd. Why did you put the word "right" in quotes? I assume when you have a political system which you don't approve the country loses all of its rights? British honorably handed over Hong Kong to Chinese even though they could have said "we need to protect Hong Kong from communism"; they didn't. Hong Kong is doing really not that bad, last time I checked.
Taiwan, an "independent nation" is recognized only by a handful of world's governments; not a member of United Nations; doesn't even have an embassy in the United States. Come on...

Edited to Add: Your quote on Taiwan history conveniently starts in 1950s; Taiwan was part of China for generations prior to that.

This post has been edited by English Horn: Jul 15 2005, 03:47 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
turnea
post Jul 15 2005, 03:51 PM
Post #15


**********
Tweedy Impertinence

Sponsor
December 2005

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 5,585
Member No.: 133
Joined: September-27-02

From: Alabama
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE(English Horn @ Jul 15 2005, 10:46 AM)

So we say to China "have the political system that we approve and then you'll have a right to your own land"? That's absurd. Why did you put the word "right" in quotes? I assume when you have a political system which you don't approve the country loses all of its rights?
*


You oversimplify of course.

China does not merely have a political system which "we" do not approve. For the person of conscious familiar with its method it in unapprovable, insupportable, a great stain on what should be a great nation.

I agree that we shouldn't intefere but let's not candy-coat what's about to go down here, it won't be pretty.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sleeper
post Jul 15 2005, 04:04 PM
Post #16


********
Who dat!

Sponsor
February 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 1,692
Member No.: 386
Joined: January-17-03

From: Florida
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Independent



English Horn it sounds here that you are supporting China in their endeavors to acquire Taiwan. I am curious do you agree with their civil liberties as well?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
English Horn
post Jul 15 2005, 04:06 PM
Post #17


*******
Five Hundred Club

Group: Members
Posts: 633
Member No.: 2,819
Joined: March-30-04

From: Connecticut
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(turnea @ Jul 15 2005, 10:51 AM)
You oversimplify of course. 

China does not merely have a political system which "we" do not approve. For the person of conscious familiar with its method it in unapprovable, insupportable, a great stain on what should be a great nation.

I agree that we shouldn't intefere but let's not candy-coat what's about to go down here, it won't be pretty.
*



Like I said, Hong Kong really is in not such bad of a shape. The picture you are trying to paint, the city would look like one of North Korean cities.
China came a long way from the times of Mao, purges, and "cultural revolution". Let's not overdramatize the current Chinese society; it is "communist" only on paper. I have several coworkers who go back to Beijing every year and they are astonished how much China has changed. Actually, a significant number of Chinese professionals return to China to work there after studying and working in United States - and this number grows year after year. But all this is really doesn't matter since even if they were staunchly communist to that day they still have rights to their own land.

QUOTE
English Horn it sounds here that you are supporting China in their endeavors to acquire Taiwan. I am curious do you agree with their civil liberties as well?


I don't really support China's efforts to reunify with Taiwan, but I recognize that China has the last word on that one, and I strongly object to our meddling in other country's internal affairs. What I think is really irrelevant since I am not a Chinese national.
As for civil liberties, I absolutely don't see what it has to do with the topic in hand.

This post has been edited by English Horn: Jul 15 2005, 04:18 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
turnea
post Jul 15 2005, 04:12 PM
Post #18


**********
Tweedy Impertinence

Sponsor
December 2005

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 5,585
Member No.: 133
Joined: September-27-02

From: Alabama
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE(English Horn @ Jul 15 2005, 11:06 AM)
Like I said, Hong Kong really is in not such bad of a shape. The picture you are trying to paint, the city would look like one of North Korean cities.
China came a long way from the times of Mao, purges, and "cultural revolution". Let's not overdramatize the current Chinese society; it is "communist" only on paper. I have several coworkers who go back to Beijing every year and they are astonished how much China has changed. But this is really doesn't matter since even if they were staunchly communist to that day they still have rights to their own land.
*


It's really not communism I object to in principle. Frankly I couldn't care less about what economic model they chose so long as it could support China's people.

China is a toltalitarian police state and that includes Hong Kong. They may have local freedoms but no one touches to national government. Surely you have heard of the recent complain of Microsoft and other companies supplying China with software equipped to maintain there censorship regime?

Surely you don't think that political prisoners are not still taken, tortured and killed?

It may not be so bad as North Korea, but then again almost nothing is.

The Chinese takeover of Taiwan will be something I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy however. Of that you can be sure,
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
moif
post Jul 15 2005, 04:45 PM
Post #19


*********
suspending disbelief

Sponsor
February 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,690
Member No.: 424
Joined: February-3-03

From: Aarhus, Denmark
Gender: Female
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: None



What do you think America should do about this threat?

Publicly ignore it and then put on some sort of quiet military display of power that clearly illustrates American military superiority to any threat of Chinese nuclear attack.


Is it a threat?

Almost certainly it is a clear decleration of Chinese intent in the light of any possible American military intervention. As such, it is technically a threat, but I think in truth its probably either just one man's bluster blown out of proportion or a calculated feint designed to gauge the response.


Should the international community get involved?

At this point in proceedings? No. Perhaps if more such comments are made then other nations should air the possibility of economic sanctions.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hobbes
post Jul 15 2005, 04:50 PM
Post #20


Group Icon

**********
No More Mr. Nice Guy!

Group: Committee Members
Posts: 5,343
Member No.: 1,155
Joined: September-8-03

From: Dallas, TX
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



We are straying away from the topic at hand, IMHO. Debating our China policy goes far beyond the scope of the debate questions...especially considering the viewpoint expressed here by several people that the comments in question are essentially nothing more than a stating of the obvious. Given that...what reason is there to adjust our China policy at all? If that question can't be answered, then discussing changes in said policy (or discussing the policy at all) doesn't really have any basis.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

  
Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: December 4th, 2021 - 08:44 AM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.