It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

China: A New Cold War? (from ATSNN)

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 11:37 AM
link   
I refer you to John Bull 1's excellent Op/Ed piece in ATSNN - China: A New Cold War?

The article predominantly describes things from the perspective of China and what China is doing to ensure its security and keep up with the States. But we have to consider is China acting or reacting. Who is the real instigator here?

Who stands to gain?
Who will benefit the most from a cold war with China? Who reaps the profits from all that money spent on fancy weapons and NMDs? Why, the U.S government, Lockheed-Martin and all the rest of the crew of course. With Russia no longer a "sellable" threat, and terrorist elements still seen as relatively intangible, the U.S. military-industrial complex needs a new, Big Bad Wolf. Enter China, stage left. Communist, little-understood, sabre-rattling, arrogant China fits the bill perfectly. China, however, is still developing, with tens of millions of her citizens still in poverty, social benefits and standards of living in rural areas depressingly low, and the infrastructure outside of Shanghai, Beijing and Shen Zhen in serious need of funds. The last thing China needs now is an arms race money pit.

Who's Shoving Who?
So what has the Bush administration done to avoid a cold war with China? Nothing. In fact they have encouraged it at every opportunity.


Dr. Helen Caldicott - The New Nuclear Danger
China's view of America has taken a radical turn since 1998 when, in its second white paper on national defence, it mentioned the United States ten times, each in a positive fashion. In September 2000, its third white paper mentioned the U.S. thirteen times - and all save two of the references were negative. China's attitude has been soured by events in recent years, including:
    • The expansion of NATO
    • The strengthening of the U.S.-Japan military relationship
    • A congressional report charging Chinese nationalists with two decades of espionage in the U.S
    • The National Missile Defence (NMD) system
    • The allied bombing of the Chinese embassy in Yugoslavia, which killed three [Chinese] journalists.
The bombing prompted serious internal debate about whether China should accelerate its military spending. However, the central committe decided to reaffirm its former emphasis on economic development.


Add to this:
    • The U.S. spy plane incident
    • The U.S.'s avoidance of signing treaties against the militarization of space
    • The Bush administration's plan to deploy Theater Missile Defence (TMD) systems in Japan, South Korea, and possibly Taiwan
    • The Bush administration's signing of multi-billion dollar arms deals with Taiwan
    • President Bush's 2001 declaration that the U.S. would do "whatever it takes" to assist Taiwan to defend itself.
    • The Bush administrations 2002 withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty

Be vewy, vewy quiet..we're hunting weapons contracts. He he he he...
Despite the "China as aggressor" depiction of the issue by Western media, both parties are guilty, but to be honest, the Eagle flexes its talons much more than the Dragon bares it's claws. But why would the U.S government want to enrage such a beast? To find out, just follow the money trail.


Brandywine Peace Community-Resisting Lockheed Martin
Lockheed Martin spent more than $9.8 million in 2001 lobbying members of Congress and $2.7 million in campaign contributions for the 1999-2000 election cycle,


Arms Makers Look Overseas to Make Profits
Nevertheless, the signers of the letter--Boeing Chairman Philip M. Condit, Textron Chairman James F. Handyman, General Electric Vice Chairman Eugene F. Murphy, Lockheed Martin Vice Chairman Vance D. Coffman and Northrop Grumman Chairman Kent Kresa--could surely look on the campaign contributions as wisely spent.
...Those five companies plus three other major arms manufacturers [...] contributed $6.8 million to political candidates and parties in the two years leading up to the 1996 elections


The Best Defense - A Guide to the Interests Driving the FY2004 Defense Budget
Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, General Dynamics and United Technologies—the Defense Department’s six largest contractors last year—already have spent close to $19 million on lobbying in 2003.


The Center for Public Integrity
Top Contributors to Federal Election Campaigns: 1995 to 2000
Contributor - Location - Amount
United Parcel Service Inc. - Atlanta - $6,546,755
Lockheed Martin Corp. - Bethesda, Md. - $5,251,152
Enron Corp. - Houston - $4,359,116
Boeing Co. - Seattle - $4,014,564


And the result? A big, fat paycheck for Lockheed-Martin...



Sure bets...



Source - Outsourcing The Pentagon


Cold war is a tried and tested money-spinner for the military industrial complex, and many cabinet and congress members are up to their necks in military cash. So next time you hear the phrase, "The Sleeping Dragon is waking up", have a think about who it is that's poking it's backside with a sharp stick...and why.

[edit on 2005/4/15 by wecomeinpeace]




posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 02:07 PM
link   
No doubt that the US arms industry benefits from having a new military rival.

However, the way you make it out, the US is instagating this and nothing could be farther from the truth.

The US has exoanded NATO. SO WHAT? It is well within our rights to allow a country that we see fit to ally with us. That is not an agresive action.

The US has strengthened it's military relationship with Japan. Again - SO WHAT? Japan it's self has as it's public stated policy a defensive, non agressive stance. By their own law, THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED TO ATTACK ANYONE. The FACT is that Japan is more worried about NORTH KOREA then it is about China. North Korea has test fired nuclear capable missles over it's land for crying out loud! The only reason China is upset about it is because they consider Japan their mortal enemies.

The US charges some Chinese nationalists with espionage, and that makes them get mad at us and feel threatened? For crying out loud, maybe if they WERE NOT SPYING ON US we would not be charging them. China stole our most advanced NUCLEAR WARHEAD SECRETS! THAT is an act of hostility!

Then the NMD... Anyone with any inkling of understanding realizes that the NMD system is only going to be good enough to protect the US from an attack of a handfull of missles. It posses absolutely no threat to Chinas nuclear deterent what so ever.

Of all their complaints, the US bombing of their embacy is the only real complaint they have. However, it was a mistake, not an agressive act of war.

China is the one gearing up for a showdown, not the US. They are the ones who threaten peace in Taiwan. They are the ones who spy on us. They are the ones who sell arms to North Korea.



posted on Apr, 15 2005 @ 06:53 PM
link   
I got a question and what want to hear from you people.

Would you care if China unifed with Taiwan if it were a democratic nation, instead of a communist nation?

Hey American Mad Man, how would you feel if China allied it self with Mexico and starting sending tens of thousands of troops there or maybe even Cuba. I say I'd feel pretty pissed off and so would you.

What people I think misunderstand about China is that they have the same goals as the Soviet Union did, which is further from the truth. Every year there are more reforms happening in the nations that inches it closer to democracy.
I really doubt China would start something with Japan, only if Japan or the U.S started something. Why would China want to lose a great economical relationship with the largest economies and start building nukes. Just because its modernizing its military doesn't mean it starting to prepare for a war. Why is Nato spending money on upgrading their stuff every year, same reason as is every other nation.

Plus when North korea gets finished, what will be the point of a NMD system, to defend against rogue states, right, I doubt many people call China a rogue state.



new topics
 
0

log in

join