The drama between Bush and China.....

exquizit · #1 04-03-2001, 07:13 PM

What do you think of the trouble brewing between Our "President" and China?

Ania · #2 04-03-2001, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by exquizit:
What do you think of the trouble brewing between Our "President" and China?

I just made a comment about this on another post. I find it very interesting because 1) The Bush Administration really thinks that the Chinese can be played like a deck of cards. His ignorant, tough pro-US, anti-Chinese rhetoric is not going to cut it. You can not just demand anything from the Chinese and expect to get it. By doing this, the Bush administration is just making the situation worse.

2) I will be in Beijing this summer, so that will be an experience. My double major consists of Chinese Language and Politics. So I am watching this situation very closely.

nikki25 · #3 04-03-2001, 11:12 PM

It doesn't seem as if the president has really given enough though to being more diplomatic rather than course in conduct. He's no Bill Clinton by no means. Foreign affairs should always be handled with the intelligent use of diplomatic decorum.

I am glad, however, that the naval personnel have been located and that the foreign affairs officers on hand are working diligently to return the servicemen home.

sweettgabrown · #4 04-04-2001, 12:27 AM

"Dubya" doesn't have the brains God gave a chicken!
We can all bend over and kiss our.....good-bye!

ManndingoNUPE · #5 04-04-2001, 10:20 AM

Well I will be the lone disent in this one. While I am not in total agreement with how this is being handled, I don't believe that we have a whole lot of good options available.

1) As far as the plane goes, the US would have done the same thing. The US actually did the same thing to a Russian plane about 10 - 15 years ago. So we really have no beef on this one. The US can't have it both ways with regard to espionage, by believing that what we are doing is good, and everyone else is wrong. Our government is just as corrupt as everyone elses is.

2) As far as Bush's stance. What else can he do? With all due respect, don't let your dislike of him (I am also not too fond of him) cloud the fact that he must stay firm yet diplomatic. There are soo many consequences if the US is seen as weak around the world. We will then have every little piss ant country trying us. I believe that he has done reasonably well up till now. His options are few. You can demand (as would I if I were him) that our people and plane are returned. To expect anything less would simply be stupid (in my humble opinion).

The f*&^(d up election is done, and all we can do is work to make sure that it doesn't happen again. He is the President like it or not, and our well being depends on him doing a descent job.

I am not quite ready to kiss my behind goodbye yet. While I have my doubts about his ability to govern as well, I will be praying that he does ok, and that we can get his azz out in 2004.

Peace and Love

MN

[This message has been edited by ManndingoNUPE (edited April 04, 2001).]

Ideal08 · #6 04-04-2001, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ManndingoNUPE:
2) As far as Bush's stance. What else can he do? With all due respect, don't let your dislike of him (I am also not too fond of him) cloud the fact that he must stay firm yet diplomatic. There are soo many consequences if the US is seen as weak around the world. We will then have every little piss ant country trying us. I believe that he has done reasonably well up till now. His options are few. You can demand (as would I if I were him) that our people and plane are returned. To expect anything less would simply be stupid (in my humble opinion).

Peace and Love

MN

MN, I'm glad you posted this. I have been trying to figure out this morning what would be the ramifications if the US just apologized, even though I agree, there's nothing to apolozize for. But you made a good point, as far as us looking weak to other countries. I didn't think of it like that.

Here's my issue with this whole ordeal. Why are some people hesitant in calling the flight crew that is being held hostages? Because that is what they are. They are being "involuntarily controlled by an outside influence." According to my dude Webster, that makes them hostages. And for China to say that they are in "protective custody"????

Protecting them from WHAT? Protective custody my foot, those are hostages.

nikki25 · #7 04-04-2001, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ideal08:

Here's my issue with this whole ordeal. Why are some people hesitant in calling the flight crew that is being held hostages? Because that is what they are. They are being "involuntarily controlled by an outside influence." According to my dude Webster, that makes them hostages. And for China to say that they are in "protective custody"???? Protecting them from WHAT? Protective custody my foot, those are hostages.

The servicemen are definitely hostages. From my understanding of foreign policy, that escalates the situation so that the president must use a firm, yet diplomatic approach to this matter.

The Chinese, like it or not, still don't like the fact that the U.S. is taking such a dominant stance over world affairs. And, they probably resent us for our hands on approach with regard to their relations with Japan and Taiwan. Moreover, our military presence probably also is a threat to them. Therefore, I would agree with ManndingoNUPE on the need for a firm, yet tactical approach by the president. This situation only brings to the forefront the need for the current government to not ignore the need for good relations with desired superpowers such as China.

[This message has been edited by nikki25 (edited April 04, 2001).]

ManndingoNUPE · #8 04-04-2001, 11:30 AM

I agree Ideal08,

I am the son of a retired Navy man, so my heart definately goes out to those families. Yeah, they are hostages. Becuase of the ramifications, they are playing with words like detainies.

My hope and prayer is that they will be back on US soil by weeks end. China has nothing to gain from holding them. They want to join the WTO (which we could block), they also want to host the Olympics (which I hope we block), and they are worried about us giving arms to Taiwan. So all they would do is to agitate an already tense situation.

For the record, I do believe that Bush was wrong when he conveyed that they were our opponents and not our partners. While there are major issues with them, I believe that you get more with diplomacy than a cold war stance.

Peace and Love

MN

nikki25 · #9 04-04-2001, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ManndingoNUPE:
I agree Ideal08,

I am the son of a retired Navy man, so my heart definately goes out to those families. Yeah, they are hostages. Becuase of the ramifications, they are playing with words like detainies.

My hope and prayer is that they will be back on US soil by weeks end. China has nothing to gain from holding them. They want to join the WTO (which we could block), they also want to host the Olympics (which I hope we block), and they are worried about us giving arms to Taiwan. So all they would do is to agitate an already tense situation.

For the record, I do believe that Bush was wrong when he conveyed that they were our opponents and not our partners. While there are major issues with them, I believe that you get more with diplomacy than a cold war stance.

Peace and Love

MN

I totally agree with you, here. I do think that the hostages should be returned within days, though, not weeks.

Discogoddess · #10 04-04-2001, 11:43 AM

I agree with MN. Like or not, our boats rise and sink with our president and the decisions he makes. I think we need to show a strong face to the Chinese, who are obviously playing games with the lives of our servicemen/women. I do not always agree with the stance we take in the world, but I do think we need to "lock up" and get this thing over with, which means the safe return of our hostages (cuz that's what they are)!

Something I've been wondering: is this some sort of retribution for the accidental bombing of their embassy in...can't think of the name of the country...about a year, year and a half ago???? Hmmm....

AKA2D '91 · #11 04-10-2001, 06:17 PM

seems like Jessie (Jackson) is going to try to "step in"...

I thought he was on a "hiatus"...

straightBOS · #12 04-10-2001, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ania:
I just made a comment about this on another post. I find it very interesting because 1) The Bush Administration really thinks that the Chinese can be played like a deck of cards. His ignorant, tough pro-US, anti-Chinese rhetoric is not going to cut it. You can not just demand anything from the Chinese and expect to get it. By doing this, the Bush administration is just making the situation worse.

I'm kinda confused by your post because the words you used to described Dubya could actually more accurately describe the politics of China.

1) It is China who is making demands. They are demanding an apology-and what comes with that.

2) The anti-US games played by the Chinese is what made their pilot think he could re-enact scenes from "Top Gun" and not get hurt.

If the US apologizes, then what we are saying is we were wrong. If we are wrong, then we have to pay for the plane, pay for death of their pilot. Also, we would be admitting that we were wrong to fly in international waters off China's coast. That means that we would have to stop all operations in that area. (And with the Taiwan situation heating up, that would be a bad idea). Also, we wouldn't get out plane back-if we are wrong, they get to keep the evidence. We might not even get our service men and women back-if we are wrong than they are international criminals, terrorists, whatever China wants to say-and they could be put on trial - it would be all up to the Chinese.

I am not a fan of Dubya, I don't think he was bright enough to figure out the rammifications of apologizing by himself.
But I will say, whoever knew enough to keep him from apologizing was smart enough to recognize that the Chinese do not want a simple apology-it 's just the tip of an iceberg.

mccoyred · #13 04-11-2001, 08:55 AM

I was wondering where he was? You KNOW he is the only one that can get the hostages released!

Quote:

Originally posted by AKA2D '91:
seems like Jessie (Jackson) is going to try to "step in"...

I thought he was on a "hiatus"...

------------------
MCCOYRED
Mu Psi '86
BaltCo Alumnae

Dynamic...Salient...Temperate...Since 1913

AKA2D '91 · #14 04-11-2001, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mccoyred:
I was wondering where he was? You KNOW he is the only one that can get the hostages released!

WELL, they did it without him... those hostages were released today.

CrimsonRage · #15 04-11-2001, 06:04 PM

Well, I am sure the prospect of Rev. Jackson going in and doing their job for them motivated them to do whatever it would take to get those hostages released...especially when you are talking about Dubya and his administration who already feel threatened by him. Had Jesse Jackson been the hero in this scenario and gotten those hostages released, it would have been a big ole slap in the face of those who are SUPPOSED to be the ones in the position to do so in the first place(AGAIN!!)...and the GOP "ain't" havin that!

------------------
P.H.A.S.A.D.
#14
D.S.G.H.O.S.T.S.
LAMBDA
4/15/00