posted by The Vagabond
posted by donwhite
The Chinese stopped their advance . . tell us something about the Chinese. [Edited by Don W]
“. . there is some question as to why the Chinese let up long enough for Ridgeway's 8th Army to regain its feet resulting in the retaking of Seoul
only a few months after the Chinese captured it. Given the inferior armament and mobility of Chinese forces, it was likely a matter of military
necessity rather than a show of good faith . . “ [Edited by Don W]
I had forgotten that very germane fact of the “middle” part of the Korean War. And I admit I do not recall any public claim by China that it was
acting in a conciliatory mood. So I'm giving up my first idea and replacing it with your scenario, which leaves me where?
Had the Chinese strayed too far from their homeland and the possibility of reinforcements, they were wide open to being taken from the rear as the
North Koreans had been after the Inchon landing.
Exactly. All Chinese railroads and highways as well as ports in Manchuria were vulnerable to air interdiction - bombing. OTOH, I’m not at all sure
how our allies would have seen any America only enlargement of the UN mandate. I guess you might say the Korean War was a war no one wanted but Kim
Il Sung and Douglas MacArthur.
I would be slow to assume than China is completely benign, even though I am as much a champion as anyone of the idea that we should foster a sense of
limited conflict and respect for the status quo with them (in other words, that we shouldn't consider them all out enemies either, although I do not
advocate seeing them in too positive a light.)
Sort of Reagan-esque, Trust but Verify? I believe the Chinese have only a defensive armed forces. I thins we are pushing them into the submarine
business. I regret that. This is the old economic whip-saw we cannot sustain forever. The Chines buy 4-6 subs made in Europe for a half billion each
and we counter with super carrier battle group at $15 billion. They have 800-1500 sailors manning their quiet diesel subs and we have 15,000 men and
120 aircraft costing us $10 billion a year.
This is a continuation of a bankrupt foreign policy and a cowboy response to the Nine Eleven Event. OBL spent perhaps $2 million on the 19 hijackers
and we have spent $40 billion in NYC and over $100 billion on Homeland Security. During the 2004 campaign, we were snookered by the DVD which was
offered in July or August, and we spent $70 million on police overtime in NYC and W-DC before some private citizen pointed out the DVD was more than 3
years old. OBL spent nothing and etc.
Q. Was the CIA fooled or was the GOP fooling us as in an election ploy?
I’m suggesting the extent and duration of America’s conflict with China hinges on the underlying and unspoken issue of whether the United States
considers itself as an Asian power or a Pacific power. We violated the West Point maxim not to fight a land war in Asia 2 times. Korea and Vietnam.
While the first turned out well, the second was a national disaster. It is beyond argument that the Vietnam War played a decisive role in the 2004
This requires America to do two things:
1) It’s time to withdraw our 36,000 men from South Korea. This would be done in consultation with the South Koreans and will facilitate the
resumption of cross-DMZ relations pointing towards a unified Korea.
2) Its time for us to walk away from Taiwan. In 1949, there was legitimate doubt Mao Zedong could unify China and his communist revolution survive.
That is no longer in issue in 2006.
We have no legitimate national interest in maintaining a separate Taiwan. It will not be easy to “wiggle” out of this trap of our own design.
Pres. Nixon waged the Vietnam War for 6 years to “save face.” Something we always accused the Orientals of but never ourselves. That, by the by,
is the only reason we are still in Iraq. To save our “face.” Well, that’s my POV.
I will give up my idea of a voluntary Chinese push only to the DMZ.
[edit on 7/14/2006 by donwhite]