From: Adrian Tymes (wingcat@pacbell.net)
Date: Sun Jul 14 2002 - 00:48:01 MDT
Spudboy100@aol.com wrote:
> wingcat noted:
> <<Again, motivation. For all the rhetoric, there is far less perceived
> danger of war with China among the voting public than there was with the
> USSR. Sure, China makes all kinds of bolsterous public threats - but
> then they turn around and try to get special trade status, and try to
> compete economically instead of militarily. That kind of thing gets
> noticed. And with *that* as the Big Enemy, who cares if they get a moon
> base? From this point of view, that might even be a good thing, because
> at least our ally will have done it even if we didn't.>>
>
> This is now changing, but fast! Even this week, the PRC is now applying
> Russian ordinance to take Taiwan, and to use Russian-built Sovremenniy
> class, destroyers to attack any American warships when the PRC attempts
> to take Taiwan, by using 300km range YAKHONT and the 120km range MOSKIT
> missiles.
> http://china.jamestown.org/pubs/view/cwe_002_014_004.htm
The article you linked to says they're building up forces, not that
they're active attacking American warships. Sure, they have the
capability to do so, and the stated intent. They even made much hay
when an accident forced a US spy plane to land on their turf. But
that's all saber rattling. There is a thin, but distinct, line between
saber rattling and actual war...and the fact that they put so much
emphasis on trade makes people suspect that the Chinese government knows
that crossing that line for real is not actually in its best interest.
> Is Chinese communist leadership going to have tons of money to spend on
> a lunar colony, if its focus is on bring Taiwant under Party control?
> Unlikely in my oppy. I am guessing that barring any major advances in
> technology (space, bio, or otherwise) the world will be driven by
> energy/environment/economic needs. The Islamic War and the Chinese War
> seem to be a calling, it these wars have a "no-knock" enforcement
> stipulation-despite the angst of many Americans and nearty all Euros.
The irony is, relative to the amounts of money most large nations have,
you don't need to spend tons of money - some, yes, but even one or two
hundred million US dollars is a drop in the bucket here. In fact,
spending tons of money can be counter-productive, since it lures in
people who make sure the project doesn't get done so they can keep
soaking up the money, and keep soaking it up and interfering until those
who do want to get the project done give up in frustration. (Which
could be part of why the private efforts might work: no one takes them
that seriously until after they've gotten results, and by then it's
often too late for money spongers to stop the project.)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:25 MST