pat gilbert


This conversation is closed.

How likely is it that China will go to war as a solution to their current and future economic problems?

Countries often use war as a diversion to their economic problems?

Closing Statement from pat gilbert

The consensus is that China will not go to war.

Not sure how predictable this subject is though.

  • thumb
    Jan 18 2014: Mr. Gilbert, the question you posed just made me appreciate the song "IMAGINE" - composed by the late Beatle John Lennon - even more. I wish we will just make it the world's anthem. It might make us, humans, more HUMANE AND KIND TO ONE ANOTHER!
  • thumb
    Jan 16 2014: You mean like how the USA went to war to take over territory in the Americas or protect their interests in the middle east and America's.

    suggest China is less likely to go to war than USA, England, France to further their economic interests.
    • thumb
      Jan 18 2014: Thank you for your understanding very much. However, I think at least England and France took the side with justice and peace in the WW2. And no current signs show their governments are evil.
  • thumb
    Jan 14 2014: Impossible~! We have 56 nations in China, we get along well with one another and Chinese people use the cultural power and good communicatons to assimilate other people invisibly instead of wars. We suffered so much from wars in the history and would never want them. And most of all, Chinese people are influenced by buddhism a lot, we advocate non-violence life and pursuit a safe and happy life.So if we think our country's safety is under threat, we have to take actions accordingly.
    • thumb
      Jan 14 2014: I was hoping someone from China would respond. You do realize that any war is always started by someone other than who you think it would be. E.G. In this country FDR started WWll by provoking the Japanese (not that I disagree because the Japanese had done things that were unacceptable), Wilson did things to setup WWl to provoke Germany, even our much revered Lincoln did things to provoke the Civil War, all other countries in the world ended slavery without war, not that he cared at all about abolition.

      When someone starts pointing to the straw man look at the accuser.

      Is there any such sentiment circulating in your country now?
      • thumb
        Jan 14 2014: "I know but Jimmy cannot understand this." why do you think so? Jimmy didn't mention socialism or capitalism, he replied with the question" "Countries often use war as a diversion to their economic problems?" I think It's you who thought his comment was flavor of socialism... right?:)

        I know exactly that Sweden and Switzerland are differnt countries. I did mean Switzerland. Why do you think I meant Sweden?

        As for your other quesitons, I'll get back to you if possible. Thank you.
        • thumb
          Jan 14 2014: As for your other quesitons, I'll get back to you if possible. Thank you.

          I look forward to hearing from you.
  • thumb
    Jan 15 2014: History shows that, oftentimes, there is a big difference in the perception of how people see their own country and how they are seen by citizens of other nations. Sometimes the truth lies somewhere in-between.

    Let us hope that the United Nations will become a more effective intermediary of disputes among nations. History shows that so many lives have been lost and so much sacrifice has been wasted because we, humans, could not agree to solve our disputes fairly and peacefully.

    Today, there are several islands in the Pacific Ocean (China Sea) that are being claimed by different countries. Unless the United Nations and the countries involved settle these disputes fairly and peacefully, "situations" we may not like could happen. Heavens forbid! With all the powerful weapons we, humans, have at our disposal, the prospects for long-term peace are dim.

    History shows that man has used every tool or weapon he has invented. When we see humanity from this perspective, we humans have very few alternatives left ...

    When will we realize that we are all fellow passengers in this journey ... in this ship called Earth? It takes a lot of soul-searching before one sees the truth!
    • thumb
      Jan 15 2014: I don't think so. The Cause will be by someone who stands to gain or to solve a problem.

      The UN is a feeble organization who's only function I have see is to justify the US going into Iraq or similar.
  • thumb
    Jan 14 2014: I come from a country that has been involved with a war with China, though China's stand was that it was an extensive border skirmish. It was a heavy toll for India but at least people could see how weak Nehru's leadership was.

    Despite that history, I think Chinese people and hope ultimately Chinese government have enough prudence not to get into any war unless of course there is a sad turn of history. I do not believe China will start a war unprovoked, it's certainly not in the best interest of that country.

    As far as Chinese people and their culture are concerned, they are the most resilient I have ever come across.
    • thumb
      Jan 14 2014: Yes but if they decide to go to war they will create the provocation. The US did this in Vietnam in the Gulf of Tonken, James K. Polk did this over some disputed land in Texas, Lincoln did this at Fort Sumter.

      They do something to provoke the enemy to do something that gives them an excuse to start the war.

      BTW the history books are fairy tales here in the US.
      • thumb
        Jan 14 2014: I can understand what you are getting at. But let me try to give you a different perspective.
        As much I have read history, particularly those of war, I noticed that most wars (almost without exceptions) resulted from a number of people or very small group who could successfully highjack the sentiments and rationality of vast majority of people to be replaced with, in absence of a better word, shit.
        The earlier you go in history, the more honest this highjacking. As we approach modern times or present day, trickier and more conceited it gets. Ideas like nationalism, homeland security, religious bigotry thinly veiled in politics start to cloud things. But essentially we find only a a very small number of people pushing the button. It's never one country vs. another.

        China is comparatively free from religious bigotry, racial/national schizophrenia and it is on a winning trail already. Unless some greedy dumb-ass highjacks the good spirit, it is not going to be provoked so easily, certainly not as easily as the US.
        • thumb
          Jan 14 2014: "But essentially we find only a a very small number of people pushing the button. It's never one country vs. another."

          Can you give some examples?

          What country are you in?
      • thumb
        Jan 14 2014: I live in India. I think it will be more interesting if you can mention one war where a whole country of people started a war against another whole country of people.
      • thumb
        Jan 14 2014: Just one or two.
  • thumb
    Jan 13 2014: Unlikely...

    You do realize that "Countries often use war as a diversion to their economic problems?" is what the US is doing right?
    • thumb
      Jan 13 2014: Yup,another flavor of socialism...
      • thumb
        Jan 14 2014: Oh yeah, because you're the grand example of socialism and not capitalism perhaps?
        • thumb
          Jan 14 2014: That aspect of this county is crony capitalism which is another form of subsidy.

          As I have stated before the reason for the success of Sweden is it's previous free market, but to understand this you would have to be capable of listening. This is a myth know by many.

          The success of this country is the free market portion.
      • thumb
        Jan 14 2014: With all due respect, I don't think this problem relates to whether this country is socialism or capitalism. It depends on the culture of the country. I often heard some news about gun violence happening in the USA and never heard about any in Switzerland, Although Switzerland is a capitalistic country but they never tend to be interested in violence or wars.
        • thumb
          Jan 14 2014: I know but Jimmy cannot understand this.

          Sweden and Switzerland are two different countries.

          One of the ways that both of these countries finance their well being is by avoiding any cost for self defense.

          Anyway I would like to hear about China. What is the view of the Chinese on the world? on capitalism? on household income? any threats?
      • thumb
        Jan 14 2014: To tell you the truth, another reason I didn't mention Sweden is because I remember Jimmy said Sweden is socialism not capitalism.:) I just browsed through some information about Sweden. It's true, Sweden is a great country with good social security and welfare systems with least disparity in different people's incomes. Impressive! And I know Switzerland never took part in any wars and always kept a neutral stand in all the world wars.
  • thumb
    Jan 22 2014: Hi, Mr. Gilbert,

    I agree. War is always an "unknown commodity", an unpredictable factor in world affairs. We, humans, have a way of making irrational choices and acting in strange ways.

    A wise man once said, “To the man who only has a hammer in the toolkit, every problem looks like a nail.”

    We hope our world leaders have learned the lessons of history!
    • thumb
      Jan 22 2014: It is not necessarily true that they start out with bad intentions they are co opted into complying with the cronies.

      Here is a video of guy who sets the record straight regarding some the middle east activities. It is mind blowing how much propaganda there is regarding war. Listen to what says about Iran and Somalia and Hezbollah and Al Qaeda. IMO is is about keeping the defense contractors "gainfully employed".
  • thumb
    Jan 21 2014: To Robert,
    I can't reply to you following your comment below, so please forgive me putting my reply here.
    I have leafed through some information about the most affluent life of people all over the world. There're several countries in front of you America. And I don't understand why you American want to be the strongest leader of the world and control everything? In my view, we Chinese people only aim at a high living standard and a happy life, we never thought of being the No.1 in the world. If we can live the richest life, why being the world's No.1 is so important? I'd like to look forward to that one day China could be the most affluent country in the world just like Luxembourg and help others instead of being the No. 1 country to bluff the world. But at that time, hope no other countries would invade us again!!!

    I always heard that some of Americans like to comment other countries people's religions and some sensitive part of culture obtrusively, which we Chinese never do. And most ridiculous is we never thought you're a threat to us but you do.I think diplomatic capabilities start with the capabilities of your people of communicating with others, and respect and sincerity is very important to make true friends.But I have also heard much news about Americans' kindness in China helping some Chinese disabled children etc. So I think if I can accept you, others will do it too as long as you respect them.

    Thanks for telling me your good impression on China, and hope you don't mind my bold comment on your Americans as an exchange of ideas.
  • thumb
    Jan 20 2014: I am thinking that we may already be engaged. I don't see future war with bombs bursting in air and all, that would be national suicide.... highly improbable... but, digital warfare, economic disruption, and a host of other slight of software is ongoing I think, such as recent disruption of credit card information... China, Russia, South Sudan? who really knows.... that kid hiding out in Moscow?
  • Jan 19 2014: Well, they have the factories and the money (debt). The rest of the word consume and pay so their future will be OK for the next 100 years. War has become unnecesary for them.
    Imagine China nationalizing foreing industries???? ... so inconvenient.
  • Jan 18 2014: Not yet, China is not ready for a war with any major country. This may change in the future. Much depends on the leadership and the power of the US in the pacific.
  • Jan 18 2014: I have a basic problem with your assumption of the so-called economic bubble in China. Many developed countries cried foul that the Chinese authorities artificially suppressed the exchange rate of the RMB in the 1990s. Now China has elevated the value of their currencies. They also moderately increased their wage levels, but they suffered very little on their export advantages. As far as the so-called shadow banking problem, I don't believe their situation is as bad as Argentina or even Brazil. In my judgment its economic condition is not any worse than that of the U. S. Furthermore, you probably haven't realized that they have been buying lot of mining industries as well as other resource companies in all over the world. Besides the oil reserves, they also bought the Smithfield meat company in the U. S. recently. In addition they could buy almost any quantities of food/grain from Canada or Australia. So at least within the next 50 years, I don't see any famine could happen in China.
    As far as territorial dispute are concerned, Chinese went to war with their neighbors, but never got into any persistent and large scale all out war, except WWII. I hope you wouldn't claim that the Chinese was the aggressor instead of the Japanese. The current disputes about the islands in South Sea or the islands near the Chinese east coast are all about mutual claims involving different countries, (Japan has dispute with Korea & Russia too), but the true reason is that there are always different interpretation of who did control these islands to start with. I am not taking a stand on who should be the LOGICAL OWNER OF THESE ISLANDS, JUST LIKE THE FALKLAND ISLAND BETWEEN THE BRITAIN AND ARGENTINA. I am only saying that the truth is mostly depending on whose view you agree with. This is also applicable to the Tibet case. By the way "Manchuria" has been "returned" to China from Japan specifically stipulated by the WWII peace treaty, and it has been under Chinese rule for 70 years now.
    • thumb
      Jan 18 2014: The bubble is a fact, not an opinion. Japan has done this in the past as has the US in the 1920s. The bubble resulted in the current morass Japan is going through and the great depression in the US. China is on the cusp of going through this now for the same reason. People think that the trade deficit does not matter but that is not true. China's exports will drop and their GDP growth of 10% will go down to a much lower level.

      Shadow banking by definition is hard to put numbers to?

      Since the past decade or two China has been investing big time, their need for commodities was much bigger than it will be as they revalue the Yuan to increase household income.So again the resource thing is a non issue.

      But because they still have low domestic interest rates and built empty cities to keep the growth going they have demonstrated a reluctance to reign in the spending which will result in economic calamity just as it did in the US and Japan. One erroneous solution to this calamity is war as it was in the US and Argentina and the USSR and Germany.
      • Jan 19 2014: Just to recite a few recent quotes about the shadow banking and other news here:
        From Weiss' Money and Market:

        "But despite some minor rule changes, virtually nothing has changed. In fact, according to the latest Quarterly Report on Bank Trading and Derivatives Activities by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), U.S. banks still control $240 trillion of the most highly leveraged speculative vehicle — derivatives.
        That's more than four times the size of the entire U.S. debt monster I mentioned a moment ago."
        There are not much difference in this situation about the derivatives bubble in banking here vs the shadow banking in China.
        The other matters about the government debt discipline, I am quoting 2 recent factual report:
        1. Just in today's Wall Street journal, the Norway newspaper is asking that if Norway could have a balanced budget for the past year, why is it so difficult to do the same by the U. S. government.
        2. There have been more than one comment, by the Chinese banking officials, about the global effect of the U. S. Federal Reserve System money printing, flooding the world with U. S. $..
        These can be easily confirmed by looking in recent newspapers. Thus, the chance of an economic collapse will be equally likely in China as in the U. S.
        Another thing is that there are usually a distinction of the culture and psychology of the East and West developed countries. The East culture/psychology emphasize using words; sable rattling rather than wars or sneak attacks, as the western countries.( the Japanese are, like the West, exceptions). Thus I predict that there won't be a new Sino-Japanese war within the next 2 or 3 years. There will still be war of words or declarations one way or other. After all, anybody with a little sense will see that there is nothing worth an all out war for the 3 uninhabited islands anyway. Also there were border skirmish between China with Russia, India, Vietnam, etc. in the past, but nothing lasted more than 30 day
        • thumb
          Jan 19 2014: What doesn't get reported about derivatives is that they are hedged so the real exposure is close to zero. The entire credit market in the US was around 50 trillion, it is absurd to think that 5 times that amount is left floating in the wind. Don't you think if this was a real danger it would be on the front page every single day because it would mean the melt down of the entire economy?

          The thing about the FED printing money is a two way street. It is true that the US can print money out of thin air at everyone's expense because of it's reserve currency status. The down side of this is that the US has to allow China or anyone else to buy as many treasury bonds as they want. Now you ask so what? Glad you asked, the problem is that that forced the US into being a deficit country. This means the US is forced into spending as the Chinese put excess funds into the US coffers. This gets complicated, for further understanding read "The Great Rebalancing" by Michael Pettis, a Chinese economist.

          A shorter answer is that the trade deficit does matter. When you have such a big difference it does have an effect. The only way China could sell that much to the US is the US spending more by using credit. Since China is no longer growing, giving the US credit does no good for China. So China is no longer buying US treasuries.
          The US will collapse of that I have no doubt. It will collapse because of debt and it will take place over many years.
          China is in the same situation as the US in the early 1930s for the same reason. The great depression was not all that big of a deal EXCEPT they did not allow the market to clear which prolonged the depression for 10 years or so. If China allows the market to clear the adjustment will not take long but if it does the same Keynesian government meddling it could take 10 years?
        • thumb
          Jan 19 2014: In his book Pettis points out that the culture is greatly affected by the monetary policy of the country. Parts of China were known for wasteful extravagant spending by the people yet have changed 180 deg since because China has forced down household income by devaluing the Yuan. Cultures change greatly because of monetary policy. The US was not known for wasteful spending before Nixon took us off of the gold standard.

          China and Asia are projected by the IMF to have 2/3 of the middle class. The US and Europe will have 1/3. But it will take longer if they meddle with their economy and do stupid shit like war.

          This subject is greatly obfuscated because there is so much misinformation about the economy. The source of the current US difficulties started with the then treasury secretary Hank Paulson acting like Chicken Little saying that the sky would fall if the US did not bail out AIG. This was NOT TRUE AIG would have declared bankruptcy on part of its assets that were exposed to the derivatives but at least half of it’s assets would have been untouched as they were insurance related and legally could not have been touched. The balance of the banks that would have failed are only about 6 and their losses were not that great. Because of this lie the US has since printed about 6 trillion dollars out of thin air and will lead to the collapse of the country.
      • thumb
        Jan 19 2014: Mr. Gilbert, it appears on your writing that you are a well-read, well-informed person who is always contemplating on the affairs of the world. And I believe you are spending an enormous amount of time to know these "things" because you really care. The world needs more of you.

        Having said that, would you please share your thoughts on WHAT THE WORLD WOULD BE IN TEN YEARS? ... IN TWENTY YEARS? I know this is a very broad question, but I think you can handle it.

        Wish you the best!
        • thumb
          Jan 19 2014: Thank you Rodrigo

          I think it could be as the IMF guy says where China and the rest of Asia creating 2/3 of the middle class. And the US and Europe languishing for the duration with an ever shrinking population.

          But the absolute key is the division of labor and comparative advantage.( for more understanding of this:

          China may not reach this possibility without the allowance of private property. India may not reach this possibility without fixing their corrupt stifling government.

          Africa would be the new low cost manufacturing area, which would greatly improve the standard of living of the African people.

          The US is the target of endless carping but none the less is the paradigm for what the free market can do. When it languishes and collapses there will no longer be a paradigm for the world.

          Technology is an unknown commodity but considering the rate of growth in this area I have to think the basics of life and communication will be at a much higher level. But the essential part of this is comparative advantage. If government hinders this it would be a hindrance to progress.

          War is also an unknown commodity and can divert resources that could be used to create a better standard of living.
    • thumb
      Jan 18 2014: Thx bart, but I think the island belongs to China.
  • thumb
    Jan 17 2014: Mr. Gilbert, resources are always an issue as well as human nature such as pride, prejudice, and greed! Even if resources and technology are not an issue, human nature - our insatiable appetite as humans - will always determine our choices, ... our future.

    Most of the great accomplishments of man throughout history were led by men of wealth, power, and influence. And, unfortunately, some of the most hienous crimes committed by men were also decided by men of wealth, power, and influence.

    The more powerful the country, the more powerful and destructive the weapons ...

    Human Nature determines our decisions ... resources and technology facilitate the accomplishment of the decisions. I really, really, really wish we are much much much better ... and wiser.
    • thumb
      Jan 17 2014: So you are saying that people act? Ok I agree that they act.
  • thumb
    Jan 17 2014: Imagine a time when the population of the world is more than 10 Billion and we, humans, are fighting for water, oil, food, and land?
    • thumb
      Jan 17 2014: Technology changes things. If you were around 100 years ago would you think that oil would be a big deal or uranium or air? By 2016 the US is projected to produce as much oil as Saudi Arabia because of fracking. Peter Diamandis talks about a machine the size of an office refrigerator that will purify water for a very low cost.

      Resources are not the issue.
  • thumb
    Jan 16 2014: Hi Pat.Were you thinking of any particular country that China would wage war with when you frame the question?
    • thumb
      Jan 16 2014: No

      Although Japan probably is the most hated, for good reason, but that is not going to happen, I hope.
      • thumb
        Jan 17 2014: Who would you think could be a possible target and for what reasons? Like name a few countries that you think might get invaded by China.
        • thumb
          Jan 17 2014: I hadn't thought about what country, just the reason.
      • thumb
        Jan 18 2014: “ I hadn't thought about what country, just the reason.”

        You are interesting , since you just ran your assumption on Chinese, why did you raise the question as "How likely is it that CHINA will go to war as a solution to their current and future economic problems?" but not "How likely is it that JAPAN will go to war as a solution to their current and future economic problems?" Many Japanese also hate you American due to the American Air force base in Okinawa?
        • thumb
          Jan 18 2014: I'm shocked that the world does not love America.
      • thumb
        Jan 19 2014: Please don't get me wrong, I like America because you have many amazing traits,but I think if some Americans are less arrogant and violent, folksier and with more conscience in handling some matters, you will be accepted by more people.
        • thumb
          Jan 19 2014: color me obsequious
        • thumb
          Jan 19 2014: Yoka, I am not saying that you are wrong ... I agree.

          The only place this could occur is on the world stage. So the players must be our leaders and those who represent the USA.

          Specifically the President and the former and current Secretary of State.

          You are to kind to state the obvious ... I am not.

          Having identified the players, I must also state that nations have agendas and those agendas seldom change with new leadership. We are indeed lacking leadership and diplomatic relations in our foreign policy. This was established in the primaries that this weakness existed. The American people decided that it was not important .... and now the media has sided with the administration and down plays the importance also.

          This week the Senate investigation found that the State Department (Hillary Clinton) was directly responsible for Benghazi. And as the mid term elections come close the democrats are distancing themselves from the President. The new Secretary of State continues to make our friends angry at us .. and Putin continues to spank us on the world stage and by strange coincidence also saving Obamas legacy ... to which Obama fails to recognize.

          So I am not for sure we would be more accepted ... there would be less political cartoons about the Prince of Fools ... him going down with the US Ship of State ... bowing to Kings ... Liar of the Year ... etc ...

          The fact is that when you are on top ... everyone gets a shot at you. As you say some make it easier and provide more targets.

          We are accepted because we travel and throw money ... we give nations (who hate us) billions of dollars ... we are laughed at for doing these things ... they will not stop ... buying (false) friends is all we have going for us. We are about bankrupt then what?

          We need leadership and diplomacy ... or, Yoka, is it to late to adjust and regain what we have lost over the last few years.

          You are not alone in your perceptions.

          Be well. Bob
  • Jan 16 2014: Given most wars are based upon Economic issues, I would expect that China would invade another country to acquire resources. There have been border clashes between India and China in the past. I would expect that there have been border clashes between Russia and China in the past.

    For example, if there were a major famine in China and they could not buy the food, they would invade the Asian rice bowl (Vietnam, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand). If China really needed oil, I could see the invasion of Manchuria, Siberia, etc.
    • thumb
      Jan 16 2014: Except China is flush?
      • Jan 16 2014: Yes and no - they have been building a lot and have created a major bubble which has scared a lot of smart investors.
        • thumb
          Jan 16 2014: That is what I see as well. Except the resources part.
    • thumb
      Jan 16 2014: Hi, Wayne,

      This is only a question not debate. I have a question. Why that famine would happen?Why do you think China can't grow her foods by herself? And the famine could let other countries not export foods to China? We had famine before and didn't invade any other countries. We're also kind to our neighbors. I think to judge a war is defensive or invasive is not difficult. If the army drives the invaders out of the country's border and returns, it's defensive, if the army takes the advantage to break into other countries robbing treasures and killing people, that's invasive.

      But I think “Lag Behind and Be Vulnerable to Attack" is true, Chinese people have learned this and will try best to develop our economy and technologies.
      • Jan 16 2014: The new leader of China just stated that China would be spending 10 Trillion dollars in import in the next 5 years, most of it in food and energy (not sure if it will be coal, oil natural gas or a combination). Some people in the market are betting it will be more as population and pollution grow. The amount of arable land is projected to decrease.
        • thumb
          Jan 16 2014: Thanks for replying. I think this is a very complicated question about balance in all aspects. I 've also heard some people said China would lack people in the future.....but the development of technologies is leaping forward day by day.... maybe we can buy foreign lands to grow foods......

          Yes, we buy a lot to make friends with other people sometimes.

          Anyway, your concern is worth our studying, thank you again.
        • thumb
          Jan 18 2014: And I want to say that if the famine could happen in China, it could also happen in other countries, why do you think only China would launch a war with other countries because of famine but not defend itself when it was invaded by those suffering from famine who wanted to grab foods from China? And if there was a super catastrophe like the sun exploding, the whole world would be terminated. What do you think?
      • Jan 16 2014: I agree it is complicated and it may not happen like any other prediction (guess)
  • thumb
    Jan 15 2014: Excuse me, why do you think we will be following the USA's and Japan's economic footprints but not other western countries that didn't start a war at all? We have different CULTURE and PEOPLE and characteristics of society( socialistic capitalism).:)

    You don't know us Chinese at all, Chinese people are difficult to be cheated by our government into starting a war because we're already well informed about the world through all kinds of approaches and like to be happy and enjoy a safe life.And we like to save money. When the wars happened, I think our savings would be in danger. No one would want this to happen. And according to your reply , your possible scary thinking is we lend money to you USA , so you have the motivation to kill us because you don't want to or can't pay off the debts. I hope this is just a small number of Americans' thinking, because I've heard from other Americans that they're against it and feel appalled too. And I think other righteous powers all over the world won't let this happen.

    And you have told us a secret that the USA's taking part in the WW2 was because of the benefit in economic development but not because the Pearl Harbor Incident. Thank you for sharing you point.

    According to your answers, I personally think the USA is a threat to our world's peace too. I wish to be able to hear other Americans' voices here.
    • thumb
      Jan 15 2014: Are you asking me? Notice at the top of the page I framed this conversation as a question, not a debate or a statement.

      I'm not assuming anything, certainly not that I know anything about the Chinese people.

      Before a war gets started the idea is sold to the people. The leader needs a reason for the war so they do something to provoke another country to commit an act of war. That is how it has worked in the past in Vietnam. Johnson made up a story about the gulf of Tonkin to get the US into the war.

      In North Korea the US came to the aide of the South Koreans as China was aiding the N Koreans as they did in Vietnam.

      Most people do not want a war, especially me. Jimmy (notice how someone can sell someone else an idea) sent you a link on how Americans want war. This the very mechanism I'm talking about. In the case of war as I stated war is usually about money so for example the Swedish Banker says the US said something bad about you to the German leaders, the banker then goes to the US and says the Germans said something bad about you. This creates animosity in Germany and the US. Maybe this is why Sweden is never in wars?

      The past few wars were about the WTC bombing in which 3000 Americans were killed in one of our biggest cities. I admit that they have gone into countries with little provocation and questionable reasons.

      The debt is a problem but our country will likely just inflate the value of the dollar and pay back debt with money that is worth less.

      Yes many Americans wish that we would quit spending so much on policing the world.
      • thumb
        Jan 15 2014: I did what!? What link is that Pat?
        • thumb
          Jan 15 2014: You know what you did....

          Quote from Yoka

          "Your thinking has reminded me that I have seen a video about Jimmy show in which Jimmy asked the American children if one day Americans can't pay off the debts to Chinese what they would think was the good resolution. And one child suggested killing all the Chinese. It seems this is a philosophy of Amercan, isn't it?"
        • thumb
          Jan 16 2014: hahahahah............Jimmy , yes you're called Jimmy too, but I had never thought he would link you to the JImmy talk show, it's funny~!:)

          If no one apologizes to you, I'd like to do it: Sorry~!:)
        • thumb
          Jan 16 2014: You did nothing,hehehehe....
      • thumb
        Jan 15 2014: THAT Jimmy is NOT me Pat!

        I think Jimmy Show/Chow is someone else. Someone Yoka was watching on YT...
        • thumb
          Jan 15 2014: Ok my bad, but I can't pass up a chance to antagonize you.
      • thumb
        Jan 15 2014: That's okay, I completely understand that sentiment.
        • thumb
          Jan 18 2014: Thank you Jimmy, I'm glad I can open it, but I have a lot of things to do.And I've already known you have different opinions on issues of China's human rights( I did remember you posted a lot of relevant links in one comment in the past)with mine, I've known what's in your link, but I'm tired today and need time to read it carefully ,will get back to you as soon as possible.
        • thumb
          Jan 21 2014: Hi, Jimmy, I didn't find anything in the link that said China did the wrong things(Chinese version), do you believe the Dalai lama too? Why? We helped Tibet people to get freedom from the Dalai lama(abolished the feudal serfdom system) and build houses for them to live a better life. They used to live a life even worse than animals‘ before our liberation.Have you been to Tibet?

          And actually I don't think this has anything to do with that China will launch a war in the future. I think this is a little unfriendly topic to mislead people to thinking China is aggressive and dangerous.
    • Jan 15 2014: Yoko,

      What about Tibet?
      • thumb
        Jan 16 2014: I know there's a sensitive political part on Tibet issue, what's your perspective of Tibet?
      • thumb
        Jan 16 2014: And I'm YokA not YokO. :D
        • Jan 17 2014: Yoka,

          sorry about that. Tibet declared itself a separate country in 1912, roughly the same time frame as Mongolia. Personally, I think it was an invasion and a take over of a separate country.
      • thumb
        Jan 17 2014: You must have some evidence.Can you show me?
      • thumb
        Jan 18 2014: Hi, wayne, thank you for your links but I can't open them, actually before asking you for the evidence, I have roughly read some materials, but I'm not there in Tibet so I wanted to know what you thought of it first and compare it with what fact I can find out. And I'm busy with other things in my life, so I can't reply in time sometimes. Although I think this is a matter related to POLITICS not T,E and D, but I'll get back to you to exchange my idea on this with you.
        • Jan 20 2014: np - understand the time constraints we are all under. One article I read many years ago was that China was concerned that the source of much of the water came from Tibet and they wanted to control it.
      • thumb
        Jan 21 2014: It's a long story about Tibet. But I didn't know your story about water resource.
        It's said Chinese people set up the governmental bureau in Tibet in the Yuan dynasty( Year 1264). And China was under invasions from some foreign countries before 1912 and the Qing dynasty didn't admit the announcement of Tibet to be totally independent at all. Meanwhile, the Qing dynasty was on the edge of downfall, another Chinese revolutionary power in China wanted to take over the power. It's such a chaos in China. As a result, Tibet fell into autonomy to some extent. Obviously it's an abnormal time in China during that invaded period!

        So I think Chinese people wanted to take it back after all the wars(invasions and civil wars) ended and the new China stood up, it's actually because of our history that we think it's one of our part. And still it's one of our autonomous regions now(their people and religion are respected).

        In fact, people with different political stands may interpret the same facts into different views. Many countries opposed China's socialism since long ago. And you said you came to China before and you liked people here. Do you feel Chinese people are violent? And after the new China was established, we had the 3-year famine in China, many people died instead of considering invading other countries for foods or resources.
        • Jan 23 2014: I think each country has their version of history. The actual story is probably somewhere in between.

          I just saw a special on Tibet and what the Chinese Government is doing to Tibet. Creating a shopping mall at one of the most religious sites to the Tibetans. The report also indicated that the number of monks has gone down from over 200,000 to 30,000. Most of the people feel they have no freedom.

          Did you know about the riots that occurred in 2008 and the number of monks that have set themselves on fire in protest of the Government?

          No, I do not think the Chinese people are violent. I believe that the Chinese Government will do what they want to get to the goals they have set. As I have said before, the veneer of civilization on humans is very thin and anyone can be violent.

          On the famine from 1958-1962, I am old enough to remember the news reports from that period. The Chinese Government claimed there was no famine and it was propaganda generated by the Western Governments. There were reports of people starving to death before warehouses full of grain. I, also, believe that there were major problems with distribution. The government and the military were well fed.
      • thumb
        Jan 23 2014: Can you give me the special news on Tibet and the 2008 violent event? I know there're ofen this kinda violent actions taken by some problematic Tibetans.

        As for the famine, Chinese government at that time certainly didn't release the truth to the world But I heard it from my parents a lot. At that time, there's a slogan: You can get as much food as you can imagine. So they got grain from lots of barns into one barn and filmed it to show you foreigners as well as domestic people how rich China was. But you're right too, some people think it's not only the natural disaster but also a negative political activity because at that time people were so interested in politics and didn't work at farming either.
      • thumb
        Jan 24 2014: Hi,wayne
        First I'd like to tell you that the bbc was said to be one of the reactionary media for Chinese government. But it seems something has changed because of our economic open policy, so I can access your news now. And people sometimes have to tailor their own political orientation or other orientations to cate to who they work for to make a living.

        The news about the fire in Tibet is true, but compared with ours, it's just a worm's eye view. There isn't much detail about why the fire occurred and how Chinese government tackled the fire and helped people to reduce and relieve their loss in life.It's an accident. Every country has its own problems in social security in some aspect like you America still having a problem with gun violence. It's not reported in our news about "fire prevention equipment had been closed down to prevent pipes from bursting in below-freezing temperatures." Why this part has been reported as a main point in your news? Here I'd like to attached the link to our news too. You can find our people are aware of this matter's severity and angry enough to appeal to the government to find out the reason of the fire and how our government reacted to the fire. We Chinese people are also feeling grieved to see the cultural relics have been ruined by the fire.I think only people are trustable. They can make all the truth transparent.There are several groups of people who are interested in exposing some under-table truths in our society such like corruptions or illegal inside deals etc. You can see not only the positive side but also the negative side in the reports. But where is the positive side in your news?

      • thumb
        Jan 25 2014: Continue the part of the Chinese report in :




      • thumb
        Jan 25 2014: In light of
        I didn't find much detail about the evidence too. The main part is to use the British Minster's campaigners so-called findings to lead people to believing something. Maybe it's true, but I know some people who believe in some religion are difficult to be communicated some new ideas. But we have to respect their traditions or beliefs. This may arouse some conflicts sometimes. I have seen some reports on TV that some mobs even killed and hurt their Tibetan civilians when they committed their violent behaviors.And Chinese people like the ethnic minorities very much(not only Tibetans). There are many excellent artists among them who are versed in dancing and singing or handy crafts etc ,and without their culture, we'll lose a lot of varieties of music style,clothing ,architecture etc. The children from the ethnic minorities have many extra points added to their final score when they take the entry exams to schools and universities. Do American Chinese have extra points when taking entry exam to the university?

        And you mentioned some monks' "tragic life", I don't know exactly either. But according to some materials I've read and the feudal serfdom system which has been abolished in Tibet, the monks are said to be the exploiters of the Tibetan civilians. So if their civilians get more freedom and can live a better life under the help of our people, then it's reasonable that those monks will have less to get if they don't want to change their identities in the new society.

        And I know there will be lots and lots of other news like this in western, I'm not really interested in it. Hope this can bring some different thoughts to you on how to understand news at your end about China.

        And last, I want to make it clear that even if I tell you some truth, people who believe China is a threat in the future may don't change their mind, that's what I really feel sorry for.
      • thumb
        Jan 25 2014: And here are some fantastic videos introducing China filmed by BBC and Chinese.It's called "美丽中国”。
        I think everything has two sides.:)

        And if you're interested, please find more by yourself.
        • Jan 25 2014: Agreed as I said earlier, the actual is probably somewhere in between.
  • thumb
    Jan 15 2014: War is only one expansionist strategy China could apply to swipe resources. It's also relatively obsolete as a technique and few countries can embark on it completely autonomously today. For China as an emerging global power, there are other easier, more cost effective, methods for gaining dominance over resources. I would be more interested, for example in watching Bitcoin's relationship with the Yuan and the U.S dollar as this changes the scale of things. Wars, of the bloodletting, explosive, military kind are usually, in our modern age, a kind of reaping. In other words the war has already taken place, the power struggle fought and won, in the boardroom of a global corporation.
    • thumb
      Jan 15 2014: "War is only one expansionist strategy China could apply to swipe resources."

      I don't think this is why they would go to war. In fact with their growth subsiding their requirement for commodities will go down.
      • thumb
        Jan 15 2014: What other reason, in your opinion, do powerful people incite nations to go to war? Excluding of course the reasons given in propaganda messages designed to recruit war workers.
        • thumb
          Jan 15 2014: It is usually about money. .Argentina was in financial trouble when they went to war with England over the Falkland islands.
      • thumb
        Jan 15 2014: Ok so we have a misunderstanding. I thought that would be accepted understanding. When I used the word expansionist I was referring to economic not territorial. Territorial expansion is also only about resources but today a global entity does not need borders. Nationality is only a nostalgic tool.
  • thumb
    Jan 15 2014: “Anyway I would like to hear about China. What is the view of the Chinese on the world? on capitalism? on household income? any threats? ”

    I'm not good at answering big questions at all. I will get back to you about how I think about the world if possible. And you want to know about our income level, I can tell you it's still low. I'm not working in the government but I got some official datas for your reference. I think most people's incomes are between 50000CNY-----100000CNY .The good is people's incomes seem to rise gradually, the bad is we have huge disparity in incomes. Here's the link about the newest information about income in Chinese(Sorry, only Chinese, but with some datas):

    What do you think of it?
    • thumb
      Jan 15 2014: It looks like the wages started rising with the rise of the value of the Yuan.

      Raising the minimum wage is consistent with Keynesian economics and will not do any good and will do some harm to the unemployment rate.

      If they let the Yuan find it's own value the house hold income in China will rise as your article indicates is already occurring.

      But the government has to stop projects to keep the economy going with out any real value to them, the empty cities, airports, train stations. They also have to raise the interest rates. If they don't do this China is in for a rough road ahead. Which is why I wonder about the possibility of war.
      • thumb
        Jan 15 2014: “ If they don't do this China is in for a rough road ahead. Which is why I wonder about the possibility of war. ” Why? Even if the economy wasn't good , why do you think Chinese people woulld launch a war? or do you think all the countries are doomed to launch a war when their economy is in recession? Your thinking has reminded me that I have seen a video about Jimmy show in which Jimmy asked the American children if one day Americans can't pay off the debts to Chinese what they would think was the good resolution. And one child suggested killing all the Chinese. It seems this is a philosophy of Amercan, isn't it?

        Regarding other analysis of our economy of yours, I have to say I don't know much about it. I actually feel the standard of our life has been improved and people have more money than before. But thank you for your advice.
        • thumb
          Jan 15 2014: “ If they don't do this China is in for a rough road ahead. Which is why I wonder about the possibility of war. ” Why?

          Because the market has to be allowed to clear. The longer it is not allowed to because it is propped up by the government the bigger the collapse will be when the government can no longer hold the economy up.

          The US did the same thing as China in the 1920s, and Japan did the same thing in the 1960's,
          which was to undervalue their currency to create sales for their countries by making their currency cheap.

          The problem is when it no longer makes sense to invest in your own country because the investments are no longer creating anything that people want to buy, things like empty cities and empty airports. The natural tendency is to keep things growing. So the government spends money to create the illusion of growth.

          The natural part of the economy is called the business cycle. Part of this is that bad investments need to be bankrupt or liquidated so that the assets of the business can be sold to someone who can make use of the assets. This has to happen it cannot be stopped only prolonged. But the longer it is prolonged the worst it will be.

          The US did a poor job of this at the end of the 1920s and it took over 10 years to recover and resulted in the worst economy in US history. The US went into WWll in order to solve this problem, not that it helped but many people believe it did.

          "Even if the economy wasn't good , why do you think Chinese people woulld launch a war?"

          The people won't it will be someone in government . In the US it was FDR.

          " do you think all the countries are doomed to launch a war when their economy is in recession?" No but the current circumstances are extraordinary.

          "Your thinking has reminded me that I have seen a video about Jimmy show in which Jimmy asked the American children if one day Americans can't pay off the debts to Chinese what they would think was the good resolution." Yes but hardly unique
        • thumb
          Jan 15 2014: I'd like to point out that this Jimmy is not me!
      • thumb
        Jan 16 2014: Pat, I read a article on "Shadow Banking" in China which is a obstacle in the Chinese getting control of the Yuan. Would you consider this one major issue in the stability of the country and their economics.
        • thumb
          Jan 16 2014: I don't know enough about it. But if the market is allowed to clear then any kind of investments shadow or otherwise are going to crash. But that is a big if as it appears Keynesian thinking has metastasized in China.

          Since credit default swaps were the center of the problems here and because they also were not regulated (which I guess makes them de facto shadow banking?) the question is how bad would it have been if there was no bailout.

          I'm reading David Stockman's book, he indicates that Hank Paulson was chicken little, and convinced everyone that the economy was going to implode without the bailout. I can vouch for this as I wrote my congressman not to pass TARP, he replied we have to. According to Stockman and many others we just needed to let the market clear. So the question is will China allow the market to clear?

          They may have a better chance of this because they don't have (I'm assuming) as much crony capitalism as we do.
  • thumb
    Jan 14 2014: If I've got something wrong, please kindly correct me. Thank you for exchanging ideas.
    • thumb
      Jan 14 2014: You have got nothing wrong, may be a bit emotional :) I think most of us here see you as a human being like us first and then Chinese.
      • thumb
        Jan 15 2014: Thank you Pabitra~! I appreciate your feedback very much. Yes, even if I were not a Chinese, I would say these things as an advocator of peace if I know about the history.
  • thumb
    Jan 14 2014: I do not discount anything ... When we (the world) had strong leadership, and effective diplomats who were not party puppets working to the party goals but to the best interests of the world ... many things could be resolved.

    The USA is no longer the world leader it was just a few years ago ... we have lost economic power, no diplomatic powers, no internal stability, we still hold the only existing USA power .. the military and it is suspect under a ineffective Commander-In-Chief. I can see the USA involved in a war for economic reasons.

    Korea is a loose cannon ... I would not count on either the Chinese or the Russians supporting them in the same manner of the past. They are a danger due to unstable leadership (Un and Dennis Rodman).

    China has many issues they have not resolved the economic and financial woes ... Some countries think in 5, 10, 25, or 50 year plans. China thinks in terms of thousands of years. They learn and grow from history a lesson we all should learn. They have achieved many of their political goals and they will adjust and accomplish new goals.

    Slow and methodical, they take pages from others plans and successes. Nikita Khrushchev once said we will take over the USA without firing a shot ... the Chinese are doing it ... free Zones are set up in Macau and Singapore ... open up to tourists ... hosting incoming industry from the USA and others ... cause a imbalance of trade in their favor .... entering the diplomatic arena .... all of these are tests the Chinese are conducting and learning ( and profiting ) from.

    The next great frontier is agriculture and community development. It will happen.

    The need for war is secondary to the lessons of history and a leadership that is willing to learn and grow.

    That the Chinese military is formidable and that their use will be considered should not be discounted. However, with the rest of the world self destructing it will not be necessary.

    I wish you well. Bob
  • thumb
    Jan 14 2014: First I'd like to say this is only A PERSONAL VIEW. And nowadays we Chinese are not only used to socialism but get in touch with capitalism as well.So most of us don't reject capitalism very much. We always learn from capitalistic western countries for some advanced experience and management.

    And as I've said, we Chinese don't have a culture in violence, instead we have Confucianism and Chinese buddhism to foster people's peace and harmony in heart. We have been invaded by foreign countries for many times(especially by Japan) in the past,Chinese people learned this bloody and bitter historical lesson and would never want this to happen again. I think most people in the world think so too. But as a fact I think Japanese GOVERNMENT is really in a wrong direction on the territory dispute now. And some of Japanese people are really aggressive and militant. If talking about tricky, I think they are the best players acting out different faces between Asian countries and the USA. I don't understand why they don't abolish the worship and discard the cremations of the A class war criminals of WW2 in the Yasuguni Shrine. They seem to be comfortable with the fact that they have to be dependent on the USA instead of being independent.But they've set about modifying their constitution to build their armies quickly now. I think if they can have a correct view on history and make sincere apologies to the victim countries and conduct their actions accordingly, their country can be changed just as Germany's changed after the WW2. And I think Japanese culture has the part of self-destruction, inhumanity and violence. They have the Bushido which encourages people to commit the happy dispatch.They actually did some inhumane biotic chemical experiments on living Chinese and even dissected the living people during the WW2~! Their government leads their people to believing in power not justice and integrity.So I think this is a threat to us Chinese now and even to you in the future.
    • thumb
      Jan 14 2014: Thank you for the reply Yoka.

      Japan practices Buddhism and Shinto?

      I have heard about the animosity between China and Japan, for good reason, it sounds like a likely participant if there was war?

      Since 2005 China has revalued the Yuan to the dollar higher by 30% has this resulted in a noticeable increase in household income and the standard of living?
      • thumb
        Jan 15 2014: "Japan practices Buddhism and Shinto?"

        Where were Japan buddhism and Shinto in the war compared with the Bushido?
        Chinese people never considered killing people with biotic chemical experiments and dissecting alive people even including pregnant women and little children.And our army never demanded or forced women to be comfort women but still won the battles.

        "I have heard about the animosity between China and Japan, for good reason, it sounds like a likely participant if there was war?"
        If your family have been killed by some murderers and they don't apologize sincerely and prepare their knives and climb onto your window sill showing them because they have backers of some strongmen, how do you feel? Do you feel happy with them? Some Japanese cultures are good and welcome in China. It's not animosity, it's people's awareness of the historical lessons and desire for justice.
      • thumb
        Jan 15 2014: And the victim countries are not only China. You can ask other countries' people about their feelings as well.
  • thumb
    Jan 14 2014: Not likely. NOT as the Obvious Official War.

    Cnina is already penitrating everywhere it wants. Why to make things so obvious? They will find more and more tricky ways to get what they want, without losing.
  • thumb
    Jan 14 2014: Let us hope not likely. War is bloody and messy. It is not good for children and other living things.

    The Chinese are smart and wise. They know and understand the complex but binding agreements between nations or countries, i.e. between Japan and the USA, between some southeast Asian nations and the USA, between Taiwan and the USA, between Japan and the other Asian nations, between South Korea and the USA and so on.

    Let us not forget that Australia and New Zealand are within the sphere of Asia. They, too, have binding agreements with the USA and other countries. And perhaps the most critical of all, the agreement between the USA and NATO.
  • thumb
    Jan 13 2014: I don't think China will go to war for economic reasons. They already have an economic and economic finger in a very big pie the world over. As far as resources go, they have donated billions into resource rich Africa and have strong trade partnerships with those nations.

    If they do go to war it will be more due to national pride. There is currently strong disagreements with Indonesia and Japan over disputed islands. They are still also very sour over Japans invasion of China in the second world war. I doubt that they will do anything though. They shy away from war situations and they are to involved with the US financially to take on one of it's allies. The US owes China trillions and it is in China's best interest to keep relations on good terms.

    The only war I see coming from China is North Korea. Although China is North Korea's closest ally, North Korea under Kim Jon Un has been testing diplomacy by detonating a Nuclear bomb, sending up long range missiles and the execution of Un's uncle recently who had close diplomatic relations with China. I think that Un is more of a barking dog and will not go too far, but should he, China will definitely get involved, probably in alliance with the US and Russia. It will take alot though to get to that point. Syria and Libya case in point.

    That said, it is not in China's best interest to go to war, they are doing very well on the world stage. It would take a very new world scenario for it to reach that level- new players in governments both in China and potential conflict countries. If the day does come though, they have an extremely powerful and competent army.
  • Jan 13 2014: Unlikely, I think. A war, even one that goes well, would completely and utterly cripple trade in the area, which is absolutely vital to the Chinese economy, therefore worsening any problems they may be trying to distract from to the point of disaster. Rather counterproductive, really.

    Less rational things like nationalistic fervor on the other hand, are less predictable, and usually not half as thought through.

    Wars also occasionally start by accident. Bad information coupled with a soldier's paranoia makes for a dangerous combination, and both are always in abundance. Radar can't differentiate between a civilian airliner with a busted IFF and a missile, and at night near enemy territory, you sometimes get the impression even the rustling in the bushes is out to get you.
    Countries also occasionally play chicken with each other. Everyone one and again, they both fail to capitulate in time.

    Never automatically attribute to malice what can be explained away by simple incompetence...
    Even if the outcome is the same.