Hu Highlights Need for U.S.-China Cooperation, Questions Dollar

[BlueStateSaint]

The part after the comma in the title is a tad worrisome, don't 'cha think?


Hu Highlights Need for U.S.-China Cooperation, Questions Dollar



WORLD NEWS     JANUARY 17, 2011.


By ANDREW BROWNE

BEIJING—Chinese President Hu Jintao emphasized the need for cooperation with the U.S. in areas from new energy to space ahead of his visit to Washington this week, but he called the present U.S. dollar-dominated currency system a "product of the past" and highlighted moves to turn the yuan into a global currency.

"We both stand to gain from a sound China-U.S. relationship, and lose from confrontation," Mr. Hu said in written answers to questions from The Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post.

Mr. Hu acknowledged "some differences and sensitive issues between us," but his tone was generally compromising, and he avoided specific mention of some of the controversial issues that have dogged relations with the U.S. over the past year or so—including U.S. arms sales to Taiwan that led to a freeze in military relations between the world's sole superpower and its rising Asian rival.

On the economic front, Mr. Hu played down one of the main U.S. arguments for why China should appreciate its currency—that it will help China tame inflation. That is likely to disappoint Washington, which accuses China of unfairly boosting its exports by undervaluing the yuan, making its products cheaper overseas. The topic is expected to be high on U.S. President Barack Obama's agenda when he meets Mr. Hu at the White House on Wednesday.

Mr. Hu also offered a veiled criticism of efforts by the U.S. Federal Reserve to stimulate growth through huge bond purchases to keep down long-term interest rates, a strategy that China has loudly complained about in the past as fueling inflation in emerging economies, including its own. He said that U.S. monetary policy "has a major impact on global liquidity and capital flows and therefore, the liquidity of the U.S. dollar should be kept at a reasonable and stable level."[/quote]

The rest is at:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703551604576085803801776090.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEADNewsCollection

I wonder what the shock to the value of the dollar will be--or the DOW and NASDAQ on Tuesday.

[H Minus]

'Co-operation'.

What he means is he needs for us not to go bankrupt so we will keep buying his country's endless supply of cheaply made crap.

[BlueStateSaint]

'Co-operation'.

What he means is he needs for us not to go bankrupt so we will keep buying his country's endless supply of cheaply made crap.

If we stop, his country's economy collapses.  1.1 billion people, only 300 million or so (give or take a few mil) who actually can get really mad.  Not fun to be there.

[DumbAss Tanker]

China is living a bubble, it won't pop for a few years yet, but when petrochemicals start inevitably spiking (driven to that by the insatiably multiplying Chinese and SE Asian demand) they're going to be f*cked from both ends - internal crisis and the foreign customer base dropping off like dead flies.  Ten years down the road, someone's gonna be served some "Hu"mble pie.

[Varokhâr]

'Co-operation'.

What he means is he needs for us not to go bankrupt so we will keep buying his country's endless supply of cheaply made crap.

Amen. We're his biggest customer base, so he can't afford for us not to "cooperate".

Screw China. We didn't buy endless varieties of cheaply-made crap from the Soviets - we drew a line in the sand and refused to fund their evil empire. We must do the same with China, even if American consumers have to make a hard adjustment to buying domestic goods and American industry has to set up shop back home.

And most especially, the American government has to make the hard adjustment of not bloodsucking American businesses at sky-high tax rates and learn to make do with a little less money.

[H Minus]

China is living a bubble, it won't pop for a few years yet, but when petrochemicals start inevitably spiking (driven to that by the insatiably multiplying Chinese and SE Asian demand) they're going to be f*cked from both ends - internal crisis and the foreign customer base dropping off like dead flies.  Ten years down the road, someone's gonna be served some "Hu"mble pie.

Luckily for them they retained the police state.

The people may revolt, but our Chinese friends know how to handle that.



Most people don't realize that after the cameras stopped rollong, the Chinese crushed the tiananmen square protest by killing the protestors.

[gurn]

'Co-operation'.

What he means is he needs for us not to go bankrupt so we will keep buying his country's endless supply of cheaply made crap.

He wants the US to go bankrupt. Whatever weakens the US - in the warped view of the PRC leadership
- is good. Whatever makes the US stronger -- is bad. They actually don't need the US anymore.
The domestic market, Central Asian & Middle East economies are starting to boom. And they are
getting a larger footprint in the EU. The US is no longer so important, except as their military target. 

If we stop, his country's economy collapses.  1.1 billion people, only 300 million or so (give or take a few mil) who actually can get really mad.  Not fun to be there.

Actually, it's a boring place. I've spent a lot of time there, mainly in the South.
It's probably a lot of fun if you're a rich party official. Not much fun for me.

Where I usually stay, there are five 7/11 stores within a 1 block radius.
There is a Pizza Hut, two McDonalds, a Starbucks, a Papa John's pizza and high-rises out the wazoo
full of designer label shops from the EU and the US.

Those shops have damned few customers.

The only places doing a bang up business are the restaurants, cell phone companies, consumer electronic
malls & automobile dealers.

Americans are mostly clueless about China. For one thing, there is corruption there that makes
the sub-prime crisis look like a picnic. There are abandoned high-rise projects all over the place.
They're abandoned because the developers took the money & absconded. In the US, they'd be in prison.
In the PRC, they keep the money, stay home & live comfortably. That's because they are connected.

Unfortunately, the PRC military is fixated on war with the United States.
And I don't think the civilians can keep them on a leash. I'm not the only one who believes that.

Even if I'm wrong, as soon as that bubble bursts, watch out. Their leaders will do anything to stay in power
and that includes starting a nuclear war. They'd rather go up in a mushroom cloud than have their own
people overthrow them.

Nooooo...that couldn't happen, could it? They're peaceful Confucians, right?

[DumbAss Tanker]

Apparently there is a bit of a power struggle going on in China between the PLA (Which is not a purely military endeavor, it also is a big economic player as well) and the civilian PRC Party leadership, at this point it isn't clear who will come out on top or what it will all mean.  Though it's not apparently an immediate issue, I'm sure staying on top of that rolling log will be a dominant factor in whatever is going on inside Hu's head.

Economically they want us weak, but also need for us not to be too weak...if we start sucking wind bad enough, it compromises our ability to pay debt with real money, cripples us as a market for their output, and makes our goods more competitive with theirs globally and even in China itself.   

[Varokhâr]

Even if I'm wrong, as soon as that bubble bursts, watch out. Their leaders will do anything to stay in power
and that includes starting a nuclear war. They'd rather go up in a mushroom cloud than have their own
people overthrow them.

Nooooo...that couldn't happen, could it? They're peaceful Confucians, right?

That's the impression I've always gotten about China, especially since the USSR collapsed and China became the Big Red Dog on the global block.

But, in the West, all too many people presume that since the USSR is gone, the days of Evil Empires are gone and America is safe and secure. That notion always confused and annoyed me, since China was always right there - just not quite as rich and powerful as it is now.

Now it's perfectly able to fill the role that the USSR once did, but all too many people want to see China as a bunch of poor pinkos who can't do a thing to threaten us. The USSR scared us, but that's because they didn't do business with us; we had heated talks and arguments with Soviet leaders, who didn't hesitate to posture and puff their chests out and threaten to bury us on the international stage. With China, we buy their junk, set up businesses in their country, and presume that everything is hunky-dory.

Argh 

[gurn]

That's the impression I've always gotten about China, especially since the USSR collapsed and China became the Big Red Dog on the global block.

But, in the West, all too many people presume that since the USSR is gone, the days of Evil Empires are gone and America is safe and secure. That notion always confused and annoyed me, since China was always right there - just not quite as rich and powerful as it is now.

Now it's perfectly able to fill the role that the USSR once did, but all too many people want to see China as a bunch of poor pinkos who can't do a thing to threaten us. The USSR scared us, but that's because they didn't do business with us; we had heated talks and arguments with Soviet leaders, who didn't hesitate to posture and puff their chests out and threaten to bury us on the international stage. With China, we buy their junk, set up businesses in their country, and presume that everything is hunky-dory.

Argh  

In retrospect, the Soviets had more firepower. But they were less dangerous.
Russians tend to be fatalistic realists. Their vice tends to be alcohol - not gambling.
They remember what war is like. Stalingrad is not something they'll soon forget.

Chinese OTOH have less firepower. But they are more dangerous IMO.
They tend to be optimists. Their vice tends to be compulsive gambling.

That's what we're facing - optimistic compulsive gamblers.
And there are a lot of them. Somewhere in that pile, is somebody in authority
who is willing to wager the whole pot on a reckless gamble.

I really don't understand the levels of denial I see in Americans.

Finally, China's midget vassal state, N. Korea, is developing with Chinese help,
an ICBM that can hit the US Mainland. That's how the PRC uses North Korea.
It gives them plausible deniability.

I find it implausible. But a lot of Americans seem gullible enough to believe it.

[ironhorsedriver]

Obama better defend the dollar, he won't be able to keep printing money if it loses global status.

[Eupher]

In retrospect, the Soviets had more firepower. But they were less dangerous.
Russians tend to be fatalistic realists. Their vice tends to be alcohol - not gambling.
They remember what war is like. Stalingrad is not something they'll soon forget.

Chinese OTOH have less firepower. But they are more dangerous IMO.
They tend to be optimists. Their vice tends to be compulsive gambling.

That's what we're facing - optimistic compulsive gamblers.
And there are a lot of them. Somewhere in that pile, is somebody in authority
who is willing to wager the whole pot on a reckless gamble.

I really don't understand the levels of denial I see in Americans.

Finally, China's midget vassal state, N. Korea, is developing with Chinese help,
an ICBM that can hit the US Mainland. That's how the PRC uses North Korea.
It gives them plausible deniability.

I find it implausible. But a lot of Americans seem gullible enough to believe it.

I've read your points and counterpoints on the various Chinese issues on the board and I see you're passionate about them. Good for you.

For one, I've never been to China and I have no immediate plans to do so. I'd just rather hang out here where I can avoid the fishheads and rice thing without looking too much like an American with the deer-in-the-headlights look. 

My question to you is, what are the so-called Chinese "experts" saying toward and in support of your contentions? Is there denial and levels of gullibility at those levels, whether they be think tanks or diplomats or other analysts?

In short, you're putting out some interesting theory and opinion. But you're not backing it up with support other than to say that you've been to China and you've seen things.

I'd suggest that instead of lamenting about your perceived denials and levels of gullibility in the American people, if not this forum, it might be good to present some support to lend weight to your contentions.

You'll note that I'm not unwilling to listen - but rather than voice a very passionate opinion, it would help your case to have some backup.

[gurn]

I've read your points and counterpoints on the various Chinese issues on the board and I see you're passionate about them. Good for you.

For one, I've never been to China and I have no immediate plans to do so. I'd just rather hang out here where I can avoid the fishheads and rice thing without looking too much like an American with the deer-in-the-headlights look.  

My question to you is, what are the so-called Chinese "experts" saying toward and in support of your contentions? Is there denial and levels of gullibility at those levels, whether they be think tanks or diplomats or other analysts?

In short, you're putting out some interesting theory and opinion. But you're not backing it up with support other than to say that you've been to China and you've seen things.

I'd suggest that instead of lamenting about your perceived denials and levels of gullibility in the American people, if not this forum, it might be good to present some support to lend weight to your contentions.

You'll note that I'm not unwilling to listen - but rather than voice a very passionate opinion, it would help your case to have some backup.

Do you have a specific question? If so - I will try to answer it.
Which 'assertions' are you referring to?

I've provided numerous links, maps, quotes from analysts -- right here.
Including quotes from analysts, Chinese & otherwise.

http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,53362.0.html

Do I need to add something to that?

I'm not being theoretical here. I'm just stating the obvious.

I do admit I'm being subjective about Russians, Americans & Chinese
and their respective national virtues & vices. I have a pretty good background
in Russian literature. The national character I describe comes through in the writing of
Gogol, Turgenev & Chekov.

But I'm not the least bit theoretical when I write the PRC is preparing for war with the US.  
I think only the cognitively challenged would fail to recognize that.

I'm not sure what more facts you need after you look through this thread.

http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,53362.0.html

Is there something specific missing? Let me know.

BTW, it's not necessary to visit the PRC to arrive at my conclusions.
In fact, the people are some of the nicest in the Far East.
I've seen more anti-Americanism in the US than I've seen
in the Chinese people.

But that doesn't matter. Their government is cracked & paranoid.
The second biggest object of its paranoia right now, might be the US Seventh Fleet.
I think they're most paranoid about their own people though.

[Eupher]

Do you have a specific question? If so - I will try to answer it.

I've provided numerous links, maps, quotes from analysts -- right here.

http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,53362.0.html

Do I need to add something to that?

I'm not being theoretical here. I'm just stating the obvious.

I do admit I'm being subjective about Russians, Americans & Chinese
and their respective national virtues & vices. I have a pretty good background
in Russian literature. The national character I describe comes through in the writing of
Gogol, Turgenev & Chekov.

But I'm not the least bit theoretical when I write the PRC is preparing for war with the US. 

I'm not sure what more facts you need after you look through this thread.

http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,53362.0.html

Is there something missing? Let me know.

I'll take another look and get back to you. A very quick look on the first couple pages brings me to the OP, and a couple articles in WAPO. I'll be back in about an hour.

[gurn]

I'll take another look and get back to you. A very quick look on the first couple pages brings me to the OP, and a couple articles in WAPO. I'll be back in about an hour.

Save you trouble, start on the fourth page & read back.

And I'm not in your part of the world. I won't be here in an hour.
I'll probably stop in within 24 hours though. 

[Eupher]

Well, gurn, I re-read the entire thread and reviewed/scanned the links you put in.

I note that you posted no sources from RAND, or other think tank. Granted, one of your sources from WAPO was penned by Stokes (retired AF) and Dan Blumenthol from the American Enterprise Institute, presumably some sort of think tank. Other sources included a map that you assert shows China's claims to its waters in the South China Sea, an article about how China is building a railroad from Iran to China, another article about how data from the internet, including those from government and military servers, was mysteriously routed through Chinese servers for 18 minutes, and one or two others.

Pretty much from the beginning of the thread, you wagged your finger and pointed at the cluelessness of the American people in thinking that China is the principal threat staring us in the face right now today, yet we do nothing.

You made that point over and over and over again.

Okay, I've got that.

My question is, what do you propose to do about that? More precisely, what do you propose the US government do about that beyond what we're doing? (It might be prudent to point out that neither you nor I know what the US government is doing, other than sending Gates to China and welcoming Hu to the White House along with the proverbial red carpet.)

Let me answer my own question. You suggested:

The US should be preparing for war with the PRC & it should stop pissing away it's soldiers & resources in places like Afghanistan.  China takes our money & uses it to produce weapons to destroy us. Let's return the favor. A US Defense build-up, like Reagan in the 80's, except this time, the focus would be the PLA.

Move Chinese goods to column 2 in the Harmonized Schedule of Tariffs. (That's the column
North Korea & Iran currently occupy).

Those two steps would make a good start.

This is the military section. So I won't say much about QE2, except that it appeared to have rattled
the PRC  leadership. China rushed into buy even more Treasuries the following week. The week after
that, NK fired artillery at a little island. The Dollar rose on world markets & and the PRC raised interest rates & instituted currency controls.

Follow the money.

You lamented in that thread that you thought you were being perceived by the forum as a Chicken Little. Perhaps you were a little frustrated in that, despite your having posted all the information you did along with your POV, you weren't getting but a nibble here and there.

formerlurker came in and posted rather credible information from the Heritage Foundation. It largely refutes most of the financial-related contentions that you're making. Here's the abstract:

Abstract: China's economic growth has been accompanied by growing misinformation about its economy. Contrary to conventional wisdom, China is not leading the world out of a recession, is no longer moving toward a market economy, is not America's banker, and may never surpass the U.S. Heritage Foundation Asia expert Derek Scissors debunks 10 leading myths about the Chinese economy and replaces them with the accurate picture necessary to guide American policy.

Heritage Foundation

She went on to post Myth #5 and a couple of relating articles, which I will not quote here.

Cutting to the chase here, it seems to me that your entire approach is to use China as the mega-strawman in getting the US out of Afghanistan.

Your dire warnings and prophet-of-doom statements have been noted, at least by me and probably by a few others. Yet despite these "warnings", your assertions don't appear to be carrying a lot of weight here.

Either we're truly naive, as you've lamented, or somebody set your strawman on fire and it's been burnt to a crisp.

Which is it?

[gurn]

Better a strawman be set on fire than our aircraft carriers in the Seventh Fleet.

***

Either China has designed & is testing a missile to take out US Carriers or it is not.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/08/06/chinese-carrier-killer-missile-game-changer-expert-says/

If the intentions of the PRC are peaceful vis a' vis the US, why would it need this missile?

Perhaps it needs that missile because of this map.



http://www.eia.doe.gov/cabs/South_China_Sea/SouthChinaSeaTerritorialIssues.html
***

So either the PRC claims the entire South China Sea as its territorial waters. Or it does not.

If it does - it follows that the ships and the jets in the Seventh Fleet are viewed by the PRC as intruders.
And maybe...even the Heritage Foundation would have to admit that's why China designed the missile.

If that map is correct & you've provided nothing to show it is not -- perhaps that explains why Chinese fishing boats
are harrassing the USS Impeccable in international waters.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7933171.stm

Maybe it also explains why Wang Wei flew too close to a US P3 and ended up downing it.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL30946.pdf

***

Either China has launched cyberattcks against US Government facilities - or it has not.

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/01/22/the_top_10_chinese_cyber_attacks_that_we_know_of

http://nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/cs_20080531_6948.php
***
Either PLA Generals have twice threatened to nuke the US or they have not.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/15/international/asia/15china.html

***

It's sad that the apologists for China these days are largely on the conservative side.
Liberals tend to understand what's up. But they want to disarm the US. Conservatives
such as yourself refuse to draw reasonable conclusions from a body of evidence that
keeps accumulating every year.

OK. Don't let me spoil the fun. Party on bebes!

***

Finally, I didn't lament anything. If you think I give a s*it about how people in this forum perceive me,
you're wrong. I'm not here to win popularity contests.

I am here to state:

1. The US is already at war with the PRC.

2. It is long past time for the US to wake up to that fact.


Feel free to disagree.

I've already made specific recommendations about what should be done.

Feel free to disagree with those also. I'm glad to say a lot of Americans are starting to agree with me.  

If I'm right, what the US is facing down the road can make Pearl Harbor look like a picnic in the park.

***
Note - I have not even touched on anti-sat operations or what is happening in the currency markets.
No need. I have enough evidence already to support my conclusions (1 & 2 above).

[Eupher]

It's no think tank stuff, but this makes sense to me:

Of all the differences between dictatorship and democracy, probably none is so overlooked as the ability of the former to project strength, and the penchant of the latter to obsess about its own weakness.

In 1957 the Soviets launched Sputnik and the U.S. went into a paroxysm of nerves about our supposed backwardness in matters ballistic. Throughout the 1980s Americans lived with "Japan as Number One" (the title of a book by Harvard professor Ezra Vogel, though the literature was extensive) and wondered whether Mitsubishi's purchase of Rockefeller Center qualified as a threat to American sovereignty.

Now there's China, whose President is visiting the U.S. this week amid a new bout of American hypochondria. In an op-ed last week in these pages, Andrew Kohut of the Pew Research Center noted that a plurality of Americans, 47%, are under the erroneous impression that China is the world's leading economy. News reports regarding Chinese military strides, or the academic prowess of Shanghai high school students, contribute to Western perceptions of Chinese ascendancy. So does the false notion that Beijing's holdings of U.S. debt amounts to a sword of Damocles over Washington's head.

Oh, we nearly forgot: Tough-as-nails Chinese mothers are raising child prodigies (a billion of them!) while their Western counterparts indulge their kids with lessons in finger-painting.

We'll leave it to others to debate the merits of Tiger-style mothering, except to say that the overnight success of Amy Chua's book fits the pattern of democratic fretting over our own perceived shortcomings. Such fretting does have its uses. Free societies that constantly adapt to swings in political opinion, innovations in the marketplace, evolving tastes and norms and the arrival of new neighbors are societies that almost never crack. Ours hasn't since Fort Sumter was bombarded 150 years ago this April.

Wall Street Journal

[gurn]

It's no think tank stuff, but this makes sense to me:

Wall Street Journal

Brilliant.

Chinese anti-Carrier missiles are just one manifestation of the super-Chinese mother phenomenon. Right?
And America should not be concerned at all by cyber-attacks, threats from PLA generals or carrier-killer
missiles because...America is so strong & awesome, right?

I post very specific analysis, maps, quotes and you post an opinion piece that contrasts
how the author believes democracies and dictatorships look at themselves.

Anyone who thinks Chinese in the Mainland are a race of super-achieving children,
egged on by their mothers has never been there. The author of that piece, which I read,
was raised in the US - not in the PRC. So the author you quote didn't even properly
understand her point.  

Look up 4-2-1. The author of the of super Chinese mother piece was not raised in that kind of society.

It's one thing to disagree with the facts asserted in my links.
It's another to disagree with the conclusions I draw from those facts.

But it is total bulls*it to say my posts have been unsupported.
And it's lame to respond to my specific questions with a vague opinion piece
that does not mention carrier-killer missiles, cyber warfare or threats by PLA Generals
against the United States.

I asked very specific questions -- answer them.

I posted a map. Tell me how that it is inaccurate.  

And talk about those missiles -- please.

[Eupher]

Gurn, I'm withdrawing from this thread not because I'm convinced you are correct, but rather because I believe you're seeking an audience for your "theories".

For the record, I never claimed your map was incorrect or erroneous - I simply remarked it was there without a link. Ergo, I had no idea where that came from.

I believe that you believe. But I'm unconvinced.

[gurn]

Gurn, I'm withdrawing from this thread not because I'm convinced you are correct, but rather because I believe you're seeking an audience for your "theories".

For the record, I never claimed your map was incorrect or erroneous - I simply remarked it was there without a link. Ergo, I had no idea where that came from.

I believe that you believe. But I'm unconvinced.

Your facts are wrong. My map came with a link. I posted it above. But I'll post it again for you.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cabs/South_China_Sea/SouthChinaSeaTerritorialIssues.html

China apologists have a really hard time defending carrier-killer missiles & cyber attacks against the US.
For good reason, that runs counter to common sense. And they have nothing to discredit the map.
And that map tends to make sense of the PLA's carrier-killer missiles, doesn't it?

Chinese territorial map + Missiles designed to sink aircraft carriers + US Seventh Fleet = ?

Eventually this stuff starts to add up...for me at least.

Like I said -- you can disagree with facts asserted in my links.

You can disagree with the conclusions I draw from those facts.

But you don't specify exactly which part you disagree with.

That's ok. It's a free country. Even idiots can vote. That's why Obama got elected.

But for the record -- here's the map again.



Yet another article about the missiles designed specifically to sink US carriers in the Seventh Fleet.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/03/china-testing-ballistic-missile-carrier-killer/

And here's the list of the top 10 Chinese cyber-attacks against the US Government.

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/01/22/the_top_10_chinese_cyber_attacks_that_we_know_of

A quote from that article:

The Defense Department has said that the Chinese government, in addition to employing thousands of its own hackers, manages massive teams of experts from academia and industry in “cyber militias” that act in Chinese national interests with unclear amounts of support and direction from China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA).

According to SANS Institute research director Alan Paller, “The problem is 1,000 times worse than what we see.” But the tip of the iceberg is still large. Here are some of the most damaging attacks on the U.S. government that have been attributed to Chinese government sponsorship or endorsement over the past few years...

When you come up with something that shows these facts are wrong or that my conclusions drawn from these facts are
wrong, let me know.

Until then, bon soir bebe.