The greatest threat to America’s national security is hiding in plain sight: China is the real enemy

[XiaoYaoZi]

American self-deprecation

 

[Huan]

China please liberate us form this inept government. we need a strong leadership.

Like the Red Dawn type of liberation? That approach?

 

[Viet]

China is all about peace and prosperity while the U.S about chaos and destruction.

China is the Batman to our Joker.

true. don´t forget: china is a commie paradise. a place where the most peaceful people live.

 

[XiaoYaoZi]

First, let me congratulate you on a perfect troll-bait thread.

You're making three separate points here that I will address separately. If you didn't intend to make them separately, please elaborate on the connection between the "China threat" theory, America's alleged inferiority complex, and America's history of war.

1) "China is the real enemy"

I already addressed this more comprehensively in the following post:

The Death of a Superpower? | Page 2

But the short take-away is that China and the US are engaged in a struggle for dominance based on economics, and from our economic systems flow our view of how the world should function. I don't believe that America's trepidation towards China's rise is driven by a militaristic nature, but rather by the desire to compete and win economically. We have created a regime (liberal free trade, rule of law, favoring democracy) that allows us to prosper. Under China's system (based on concepts of racial supremacy, rule by law with favored groups above the law, lack of respect for property rights), our success is not assured.

That's why we cannot allow China to reshape the global order--not because it's China specifically that is challenging us, but because the CCP's way of doing things is not compatible with/anathema to our own. Japan's rise caused anxiety in the US, but never the level of fear that China's rise has created; and that is because Japan's system was different, but still recognizable to us. China's is not.

If China further converges with Western standards and becomes the Singapore writ-large that I have been predicting, then you will see the "China threat" stance dissipate, because our systems will have become compatible. This is how Pax Britannica peacefully transitioned to Pax Americana, and it is still a possibility for the transition to Pax Sinica. But that's up to China.

2) America has an inferiority complex

Can you demonstrate this? We have considered ourselves to be the "exceptional nation" since our founding. We created (and still have) a "more perfect union" than any other political system in the world--from our standpoint, at least. Sure, the leftists will say we are the worst, but the leftists in every country believe their own country is the worst.

3) America's goals with war

Except for the War of 1812 and the Spanish-American War of 1898, I would struggle to think of a war that wasn't driven by a genuine desire to pro-actively protect our way of life, from the American Revolution, to the Barbary Wars, to the Civil War, to the World Wars, to the wars of containment (Korea, Vietnam, the small wars, Middle East wars, etc.). We conduct war because it is our belief since WWII that the best defense is a good offense. I'm not a military professional, but it is my understanding that it is advantageous to choose the time, place, and manner of conflict, rather than have it chosen for you.

Your post is a bit skeletal, so I would appreciate elaboration and further connecting of the dots before I go further, so I get a sense of what you're positing.

This Cartoon explain very much about what is the China Threat Theory

The papers hold by the dogs say "China Threat".

What's your view about that @LeveragedBuyout

 

[C130]

Like the Red Dawn type of liberation? That approach?

no invasion . just destroy us economically...well we are pretty much doing that ourselves. castration is the only salvation. we are mad dogs in a mad world

 

[TheTruth]

Second being who started the war? War involved the United States does not mean US started all those war, Are America responsible for all that war? You will be surprise to find out that US did not start almost 70% of those war. of the 101 war US fought since inception, 37 were started by the United States. While 64 of the war, US was the defensive party or part of Multinational Involvement

Of those, US started the following war

1. US war of independence
2. Northwest Indian War
3. Quasi War (Initiated by French Privateer, but US have no proof)
4. War of 1812
5. Seminole Wars
6. Aegean War of Piracy
7. First Sumatran expedition
8. Black Hawk War
9. Second Seminole War
10. Mexican-American War (Mexico Response to US Annex Texas)
11. Puget Sound War
12. Rogue River Wars
13. Utah War
14. Cortina Troubles
15. Yavapai Wars
16. America Civil War
17. Snake War
18. Powder River Expedition
19. Comanche Campaign
20. United States expedition to Korea
21. Red River War
22. Bannock War
23. White River War
24. Garza Revolution
25. Second Samoan Civil War (Dispute between Germany, Britain and United States)
26. Spanish–American War
27. Philippine–American War, Moro Rebellion
28. Crazy Snake Rebellion
29. United States occupation of Nicaragua
30. United States occupation of Haiti
31. United States occupation of the Dominican Republic
32. Posey War
33. Bay of Pigs Invasion
34. Vietnam War
35. Invasion of Grenada
36. United States invasion of Panama
37. Iraq War (Operation Iraqi Freedom

In that case China hasn't started a unilateral war in over 500 years, 1000 years. Are you a paid propagandist?

 

[jhungary]

In that case China hasn't started a unilateral war in over 500 years, 1000 years. Are you a paid propagandist?

China started many war with its 5,000 years history, basically each time a change in dynasty is a war started by Chinese, the only different between this and the US is, the Chinese Target is another Chinese.

That's basically the same as American Civil War, which I put in the pile as US started war, again, the only different is that war is start by American against other American.

In terms of war, the Chinese started more than American, but the only different of that is, most Chinese war started by Chinese against other Chinese, most American war started by American is against an foreign country. And China have a longer (A LOT LONGER) history

It's easy to push someone else argument into a paid propagandist theory, I never accuse you as a Paid Propagandist why you want to accuse me of one?

 

[TaiShang]

SCHUMER, GRAHAM: AFTER CHINESE CYBER-ATTACK ON U.S. GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL RECORDS, THE IMF SHOULD DENY CHINA’S EFFORT TO MAKE THE YUAN A RESERVE CURRENCY UNTIL THEY STOP RAMPANT HACKING AND CYBER-ATTACKS

During Unprecedented Cyber Attack, Chinese Hackers Obtained Personnel Records for Millions of Government Employees – Senators Demand Firm and Fast Response

China Is Seeking to Have the Yuan Considered a Reserve Currency at the End of 2015 – Schumer & Graham Say IMF Should Withhold the Designation China Wants Until They Stop Vicious Cyber Attacks

Schumer, Graham: If China Wants To Be a Responsible Member of the Global Community, It Must Act Like One

Today, in response to a cyber-attack originating in China that exposed the personnel records of 4 million federal employees, U.S. Senators Charles E. Schumer and Lindsey Graham called on the International Monetary Fund (IMF) not to allow China’s yuan to be designated a reserve currency until China stops their rampant cyber-attacks and refrain from manipulative currency practices. China is pushing to have the IMF vote to allow the yuan to be recognized as a global reserve currency in December of 2015. Senators Schumer and Graham wrote today to IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde, urging the IMF not to entertain the possibility of making the yuan a global reserve currency until China abandons its hacking program.

“This recent cyber-attack is one of China’s most brazen yet,” said Schumer. “It is long past time for the international community to rally together and make crystal clear to the Chinese government that if they want to be treated as a leading nation on the global stage, then they need to start acting like it. Until China curtails their hacking operations, the IMF shouldn’t designate the yuan as a reserve currency. We need to punish China’s bad behavior, not reward it.”

Schumer and Graham’s letter to Managing Director Lagarde appears below:

Managing Director Lagarde,

We understand that the IMF Board will meet informally in the coming weeks to assess whether economic changes merit adjustments to the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) basket of emergency lending reserves that make up the Special Drawing Rights (SDR) system. Wewrite to express our deep concern with the IMF’s potential consideration of the yuan for inclusion in its SDR system. We have had reservations with the IMF’s consideration of including the yuan into the SDR basket previously; China’s currency has long been undervalued due to the direct actions of China’s government.

However, we believe that China’s most recent involvement in the acts of cyberespionage that led to the breach of personal records of at least four million American government workers provide another example of China’s rapacious actions that are aimed at disrupting the global economy and undermining the stability of international market participants.

Recent reports indicate that China was also responsible for the data breach of personally identifiable information of over 90 million customers of two American health care firms just four months ago. Thus, China’s most recent actions this week are just the latest in a litany of egregious actions, or inactions, that reflect the government’s lack of an ability to participate in an honest and transparent manner on the global stage. This behavior cannot be rewarded by the international community, but more importantly, the Chinese government cannot be trusted to uphold international market standards without demonstrated evidence of a commitment to reform. China has failed to make the necessary reforms to be considered a trusted and fair player on the international stage, and we therefore, urge the IMF to forego any consideration of the yuan’s inclusion in the IMF’s SDR.

The IMF has a responsibility to only assign currencies to its SDR basket if the currency is deemed to be “freely usable” in international markets. This requires that the currency is convertible and it is clear that the yuan is not. China still maintains controls on capital and its exchange rate. While we support China’s efforts to modernize its currency and agree that its efforts to be eligible for the SDR basket are in line with financial liberalization standards that prevent currency manipulation, we do not believe that China’s efforts have been substantial enough, nor do we believe that their commitment has been demonstrated in a way that can be counted on consistently, especially when market pressure for the yuan to be strengthened increases.

China has failed to fully liberalize its capital account and thus has not achieved a sufficient degree of capital account convertibility to be eligible for the IMF’s SDR. We agree with Secretary Lew’s statements in which he said that “further liberalization and reform are needed for the yuan to meet this standard.” Further, to date, China has been unwilling to remove restrictions and allow yuan interest rates to be market-based. Notably, China still has an administrative cap on bank deposit rates. Therefore, we believe that China’s currency continues to be undervalued and should not be eligible for consideration to be included as part of the SDR basket before these necessary reforms have been made.

China’s inability to adequately liberalize its own currency and its capital flows in a manner necessary to satisfy the IMF’s clear standards provides sufficient basis for the executive board to deny its inclusion in the SDR basket, and before the yuan is considered a reserve currency, China must also make significant progress in strengthening its financial regulation and supervisory systems. These regulatory and supervisory protections are necessary to ensure trust and confidence in China’s currency, in addition to helping ensure the security of global financial markets. But these current deficiencies, coupled with China’s most recent role in the hacking of personally identifiable records of over 90 million Americans, must be instructive to your views and validation that China remains a real threat to the stability of the IMF and our global economy at large.

Thanks you for your consideration of these issues and please feel free to contact us me or members of our staff to discuss this matter further.

Sincerely,

U.S. Senator Charles E. Schumer

U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham

***

True patriots. Looks like China has now the information of their retirement records. Tsk tsk.

 

[Pangu]

War is business. Look from this angle it is not difficult to understand why war mongers said what they said. Look back at humanity's history & we see war & peace in a cycle of change & stagnation. But let us not seduced by the rhetoric of attention seekers, the time for WWIII is not upon us yet.

 

[TheTruth]

China started many war with its 5,000 years history, basically each time a change in dynasty is a war started by Chinese, the only different between this and the US is, the Chinese Target is another Chinese.

So by this argument, no country in the world has anything to fear from Chinese power because they'll just use it on themselves, correct?

Thanks, East/South China Sea debate is over.

 

[jhungary]

So by this argument, no country in the world has anything to fear from Chinese power because they'll just use it on themselves, correct?

Thanks, East/South China Sea debate is over.

What kind of logic you are using??

So, if you don't go to strip club, does that mean you will never have sex??

 

[TheTruth]

What kind of logic you are using??

So, if you don't go to strip club, does that mean you will never have sex??

We're using past behavior to establish future trends, the only point in bringing up history in a debate about geopolitics.

So you just claimed China is not a military threat to anyone but itself. So what's America's problem?

I have no idea where your analogy came from. It's nonsensical.

 

[IR-TR]

SCHUMER, GRAHAM: AFTER CHINESE CYBER-ATTACK ON U.S. GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL RECORDS, THE IMF SHOULD DENY CHINA’S EFFORT TO MAKE THE YUAN A RESERVE CURRENCY UNTIL THEY STOP RAMPANT HACKING AND CYBER-ATTACKS

During Unprecedented Cyber Attack, Chinese Hackers Obtained Personnel Records for Millions of Government Employees – Senators Demand Firm and Fast Response

China Is Seeking to Have the Yuan Considered a Reserve Currency at the End of 2015 – Schumer & Graham Say IMF Should Withhold the Designation China Wants Until They Stop Vicious Cyber Attacks

Schumer, Graham: If China Wants To Be a Responsible Member of the Global Community, It Must Act Like One

Today, in response to a cyber-attack originating in China that exposed the personnel records of 4 million federal employees, U.S. Senators Charles E. Schumer and Lindsey Graham called on the International Monetary Fund (IMF) not to allow China’s yuan to be designated a reserve currency until China stops their rampant cyber-attacks and refrain from manipulative currency practices. China is pushing to have the IMF vote to allow the yuan to be recognized as a global reserve currency in December of 2015. Senators Schumer and Graham wrote today to IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde, urging the IMF not to entertain the possibility of making the yuan a global reserve currency until China abandons its hacking program.

“This recent cyber-attack is one of China’s most brazen yet,” said Schumer. “It is long past time for the international community to rally together and make crystal clear to the Chinese government that if they want to be treated as a leading nation on the global stage, then they need to start acting like it. Until China curtails their hacking operations, the IMF shouldn’t designate the yuan as a reserve currency. We need to punish China’s bad behavior, not reward it.”

Schumer and Graham’s letter to Managing Director Lagarde appears below:

Managing Director Lagarde,

We understand that the IMF Board will meet informally in the coming weeks to assess whether economic changes merit adjustments to the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) basket of emergency lending reserves that make up the Special Drawing Rights (SDR) system. Wewrite to express our deep concern with the IMF’s potential consideration of the yuan for inclusion in its SDR system. We have had reservations with the IMF’s consideration of including the yuan into the SDR basket previously; China’s currency has long been undervalued due to the direct actions of China’s government.

However, we believe that China’s most recent involvement in the acts of cyberespionage that led to the breach of personal records of at least four million American government workers provide another example of China’s rapacious actions that are aimed at disrupting the global economy and undermining the stability of international market participants.

Recent reports indicate that China was also responsible for the data breach of personally identifiable information of over 90 million customers of two American health care firms just four months ago. Thus, China’s most recent actions this week are just the latest in a litany of egregious actions, or inactions, that reflect the government’s lack of an ability to participate in an honest and transparent manner on the global stage. This behavior cannot be rewarded by the international community, but more importantly, the Chinese government cannot be trusted to uphold international market standards without demonstrated evidence of a commitment to reform. China has failed to make the necessary reforms to be considered a trusted and fair player on the international stage, and we therefore, urge the IMF to forego any consideration of the yuan’s inclusion in the IMF’s SDR.

The IMF has a responsibility to only assign currencies to its SDR basket if the currency is deemed to be “freely usable” in international markets. This requires that the currency is convertible and it is clear that the yuan is not. China still maintains controls on capital and its exchange rate. While we support China’s efforts to modernize its currency and agree that its efforts to be eligible for the SDR basket are in line with financial liberalization standards that prevent currency manipulation, we do not believe that China’s efforts have been substantial enough, nor do we believe that their commitment has been demonstrated in a way that can be counted on consistently, especially when market pressure for the yuan to be strengthened increases.

China has failed to fully liberalize its capital account and thus has not achieved a sufficient degree of capital account convertibility to be eligible for the IMF’s SDR. We agree with Secretary Lew’s statements in which he said that “further liberalization and reform are needed for the yuan to meet this standard.” Further, to date, China has been unwilling to remove restrictions and allow yuan interest rates to be market-based. Notably, China still has an administrative cap on bank deposit rates. Therefore, we believe that China’s currency continues to be undervalued and should not be eligible for consideration to be included as part of the SDR basket before these necessary reforms have been made.

China’s inability to adequately liberalize its own currency and its capital flows in a manner necessary to satisfy the IMF’s clear standards provides sufficient basis for the executive board to deny its inclusion in the SDR basket, and before the yuan is considered a reserve currency, China must also make significant progress in strengthening its financial regulation and supervisory systems. These regulatory and supervisory protections are necessary to ensure trust and confidence in China’s currency, in addition to helping ensure the security of global financial markets. But these current deficiencies, coupled with China’s most recent role in the hacking of personally identifiable records of over 90 million Americans, must be instructive to your views and validation that China remains a real threat to the stability of the IMF and our global economy at large.

Thanks you for your consideration of these issues and please feel free to contact us me or members of our staff to discuss this matter further.

Sincerely,

U.S. Senator Charles E. Schumer

U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham

***

True patriots. Looks like China has now the information of their retirement records. Tsk tsk.

They can tick that letter where the sun don't shine. The Asian century is upon the world!

 

[jhungary]

We're using past behavior to establish future trends, the only point in bringing up history in a debate about geopolitics.

So you just claimed China is not a military threat to anyone but itself. So what's America's problem?

I have no idea where your analogy came from. It's nonsensical.

Dude, fighting is fighting, it does not matter who you fight, but it does matter WHY you fight

There are a mile of difference for you to fight because you want that piece of land and you fight because somebody pushing you into a corner.

Same analogy goes, it does not matter what kind of sex you are having, as long as it is sex.

I don't care if you have sex in your own bedroom with your girl friend or boyfriend, or having sex with a prostitute, sex is sex, how you are doing it is different, there is a mile of different between having consensual sex and being raped.

If you rape enough people, it does not matter if you only rape prostitute or your own friend, you would be a risk to rape anyone. Is that clear?

 

[IR-TR]

War is business. Look from this angle it is not difficult to understand why war mongers said what they said. Look back at humanity's history & we see war & peace in a cycle of change & stagnation. But let us not seduced by the rhetoric of attention seekers, the time for WWIII is not upon us yet.

War is only business if you're economically weak and don't have much to offer in terms of trade in a globalized world. So that's why some countries are using war to destabilize certrain areas, in order to slow the rise of others. Others actually have nothing to gain from war, and for those countries, peace and stability means business. It's a lot more profitable to have peace and trade.