Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Betty
I am happy to say that Betty, though resting in a hospital, is comfortable at the moment. Only time can tell what will be.
Reconsideration of WATER CHASING WATER
Truth and Reality sometimes fluctuate, depending. I reconsider my position with regards to my book to be published by Kaya. My state of mind is not always the same and not always sound. Be that what it may, here is my decision to work with Kaya again to have my book WATER CHASING WATER published.
Dear Koon:
Thanks for this information. Please give my best to Betty. We'll be
sure to amend this information in the book, and send you an amendment
to the contract as well.
Best,
Sunyoung
On Aug 26, 2010, at 11:55 PM, Nooknoow@aol.com wrote:
>
> Sunyoung Lee
> Kaya Press
> Muae Publishing
>
>
> Dear Sunyoung,
>
> I sincerely apologize for my previous communication to cut off all
> communications. I was under a lot of stress which were unjust in my
> opinion to me.
> I am presently at Waukesha, Wisconsin visiting Betty Priebe who is
> now at age 87 and very ill. I wish to dedicate my book WATER CHASING
> WATER to her and so I wish to be reconsidered and to renegotiate its
> publication by Kaya. Since you have already paid me an advance of
> $500, that should earn Kaya the right to publish it. The only
> further requirement I have is that the book shall be dedicated to
> Betty Priebe with the following exact inscription: "This book is
> dedicated to my dear friend Betty Irene Priebe."
>
> I also wish to assign all my rights of monetary returns, now or
> forever hence, to Ellie Priebe, the granddaughter of Betty Irene
> Priebe. Please have this in legal language. I also wish to assign
> all my rights to any future monetary returns from my book THE TRUTH
> IN RENTED ROOMS to Ellie Priebe.
>
> I attest that I am sound of mind and not under duress and today's
> date is August 27, 2010, and that this offer is legally binding. A
> copy of this email is being sent to Laura Priebe and to Rebecca
> Evans.
>
> [signed] Koon Woon
> August 27, 2010
> Waukesha, Wisconsin, USA
Dear Koon:
Thanks for this information. Please give my best to Betty. We'll be
sure to amend this information in the book, and send you an amendment
to the contract as well.
Best,
Sunyoung
On Aug 26, 2010, at 11:55 PM, Nooknoow@aol.com wrote:
>
> Sunyoung Lee
> Kaya Press
> Muae Publishing
>
>
> Dear Sunyoung,
>
> I sincerely apologize for my previous communication to cut off all
> communications. I was under a lot of stress which were unjust in my
> opinion to me.
> I am presently at Waukesha, Wisconsin visiting Betty Priebe who is
> now at age 87 and very ill. I wish to dedicate my book WATER CHASING
> WATER to her and so I wish to be reconsidered and to renegotiate its
> publication by Kaya. Since you have already paid me an advance of
> $500, that should earn Kaya the right to publish it. The only
> further requirement I have is that the book shall be dedicated to
> Betty Priebe with the following exact inscription: "This book is
> dedicated to my dear friend Betty Irene Priebe."
>
> I also wish to assign all my rights of monetary returns, now or
> forever hence, to Ellie Priebe, the granddaughter of Betty Irene
> Priebe. Please have this in legal language. I also wish to assign
> all my rights to any future monetary returns from my book THE TRUTH
> IN RENTED ROOMS to Ellie Priebe.
>
> I attest that I am sound of mind and not under duress and today's
> date is August 27, 2010, and that this offer is legally binding. A
> copy of this email is being sent to Laura Priebe and to Rebecca
> Evans.
>
> [signed] Koon Woon
> August 27, 2010
> Waukesha, Wisconsin, USA
Monday, August 23, 2010
IDENTITY OF WRITERS -- is there a Chinese American literature? An exploratory question.
IDENTITY OF WRITERS
Identity of writers
August 23, 2010
My wife watches a lot of movies and I almost never do. She asked me what I wanted to see so that we can see a movie together. So, we order Roshomon by Akira Kurosawa which was a crime story told by several perspectives. Essentially it was the rape of a Japanese woman and the murder of her Samurai husband told by 4 points of view. This is purported to say that truth is relative or that “objectivity” is to be questioned. However, knowing Kurosawa’s political point of view, I would rather say that this is a film about identity. It is the disruption of a culture – namely the Samurai culture of Japan by whatever forces this crime depicts. To me, it is the gunboat politics of Commodore Perry. One may differ with me of course and he or she is welcome to do so.
IDENTITY -- a fundamental property of all things
Identity --- that which resists annihilation, is a fundamental property and the drive of all things to remain what they are.
A writer is someone who has an identity. Who is the writer? Is he an ink fish that spews ink to hide himself or is he someone that really comes through as a point of view of a sector of reality?
Who does the writer purport to represent and is he really honest about it? One does not become a serious reader without taking the writer's identity into consideration.
Truth is a modal notion. Some people would argue that truth is absolute, that the truth is the same of all time and of all places. Others argue that truth is of this time and of this place. This is what is meant by the modal proposition “in what mode is this proposition true?” Or, in other words, in what context is an expression or a statement true? Or, more broadly, in what possible worlds, can an event or an occurrence of something be realized?
Speaking in this vein, it is easy to see that the notion of identity enters into the discussion of truth. That is to say, whose truth? The writer often speaks or purports to or pretends to speak the truth. Supposedly, journalism as a profession is more truthful than books of fiction.
There are all kinds of writers and there are all kinds of works written. Since identity is such an intractable subject, I will use it in a very narrow and specific sense as it applies to literature, in the old-fashioned definition of the word. Literature is the study of life. To this end, I require that the writer at least metaphorically speak the truth about life.
Since it is the task of philosophy to assume very little, I will assume that despite the claim that an Chinese-American literature exists and is perhaps thriving, I want to make an investigation into it whether this is so, to what extent can we say that a genuine Chinese-American literature exists and not a mere isomorphic copy of the dominant American literature that is large white and middle-class. I will also argue that to be a genuine “minority” literature that writing has to have an identity outside that of the mainstream writing, often at odds with it, and it must rise above itself to include the mainstream literature to achieve “universality.” It is like the Native American saying: you drew a circle to keep me out, and I drew a larger circle to keep you in.
Koon Woon
Seattle, WA
Identity of writers
August 23, 2010
My wife watches a lot of movies and I almost never do. She asked me what I wanted to see so that we can see a movie together. So, we order Roshomon by Akira Kurosawa which was a crime story told by several perspectives. Essentially it was the rape of a Japanese woman and the murder of her Samurai husband told by 4 points of view. This is purported to say that truth is relative or that “objectivity” is to be questioned. However, knowing Kurosawa’s political point of view, I would rather say that this is a film about identity. It is the disruption of a culture – namely the Samurai culture of Japan by whatever forces this crime depicts. To me, it is the gunboat politics of Commodore Perry. One may differ with me of course and he or she is welcome to do so.
IDENTITY -- a fundamental property of all things
Identity --- that which resists annihilation, is a fundamental property and the drive of all things to remain what they are.
A writer is someone who has an identity. Who is the writer? Is he an ink fish that spews ink to hide himself or is he someone that really comes through as a point of view of a sector of reality?
Who does the writer purport to represent and is he really honest about it? One does not become a serious reader without taking the writer's identity into consideration.
Truth is a modal notion. Some people would argue that truth is absolute, that the truth is the same of all time and of all places. Others argue that truth is of this time and of this place. This is what is meant by the modal proposition “in what mode is this proposition true?” Or, in other words, in what context is an expression or a statement true? Or, more broadly, in what possible worlds, can an event or an occurrence of something be realized?
Speaking in this vein, it is easy to see that the notion of identity enters into the discussion of truth. That is to say, whose truth? The writer often speaks or purports to or pretends to speak the truth. Supposedly, journalism as a profession is more truthful than books of fiction.
There are all kinds of writers and there are all kinds of works written. Since identity is such an intractable subject, I will use it in a very narrow and specific sense as it applies to literature, in the old-fashioned definition of the word. Literature is the study of life. To this end, I require that the writer at least metaphorically speak the truth about life.
Since it is the task of philosophy to assume very little, I will assume that despite the claim that an Chinese-American literature exists and is perhaps thriving, I want to make an investigation into it whether this is so, to what extent can we say that a genuine Chinese-American literature exists and not a mere isomorphic copy of the dominant American literature that is large white and middle-class. I will also argue that to be a genuine “minority” literature that writing has to have an identity outside that of the mainstream writing, often at odds with it, and it must rise above itself to include the mainstream literature to achieve “universality.” It is like the Native American saying: you drew a circle to keep me out, and I drew a larger circle to keep you in.
Koon Woon
Seattle, WA
Sunday, August 22, 2010
IDENTITY -- a fundamental property of all things
Identity --- that which resists annihilation, is a fundamental property and the drive of all things to remain what they are.
A writer is someone who has an identity. Who is the writer? Is he an inkfish that espews ink to hide himself or is he someone that really comes through as a point of view of a sector of reality?
Who does the writer purport to represent and is he really honest about it? One does not become a serious reader without taking the writer's identity into consideration.
Hmmm, I wonder, muses the cat, if I am who I am and what
I think I see out there is really what is out there...
A writer is someone who has an identity. Who is the writer? Is he an inkfish that espews ink to hide himself or is he someone that really comes through as a point of view of a sector of reality?
Who does the writer purport to represent and is he really honest about it? One does not become a serious reader without taking the writer's identity into consideration.
I think I see out there is really what is out there...
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Putting my money where my mouth is
An exchange of email letters with a friend: George Held
Thanks George, for your kind understanding and moral support.
Koon
-----Original Message-----
From: Geoheld7
To: aimbeanshooter20
Sent: Tue, Aug 17, 2010 4:45 am
Subject: Re: Hi, how are things?
Dear Koon,
I recognize your (Kantian) idealism because it is largely my own, and I'm very interested in what you say about modal philosophy and logic, particularly because our world operates with so little logic from either leaders or followers. I am for rational thinking and for avoiding the slippery slope myself, and I admire your resistance and independence. I too have always felt a stranger in this country and can only imagine what you must feel as an alien, even naturalized (strange word). Camus has been one of my touchstones since I read most of his novels, plays, and stories and THE MYTH OF SISYPHUS in my twenties.
While I am also on FaceBook and post work there, I am not as sanguine about it as a way to find readers as you are. Very few fb "friends" ever comment on any of my posted writing, so I have the feeling that they are not interested in the sort of stuff I write. Still, I admire your willingness to give your poems away; like you, what I want most is READERS.
Please forgive me for suggesting you allow Kaya to publish your new book, and sign me up to buy a copy when it is available.
Best, George
In a message dated 8/17/2010 7:26:49 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, aimbeanshooter20@aim.com writes:
Hi George,
I don't get that much money from Kaya anyway, and so I will self-publish on the Internet and give it free to websites so that the poems will get out there just the same. These days one out of fourteen people in the world are on Facebook and many more on the Internet that are not on Facebook. I have given the entire petry manuscript out to one high school student I met on Facebook. The prose I have not given out yet. People can also download the poems and print them out and give them to friends to read. After all, it is not my compensation that matters to me, but the fact that the poems might do some good somehow. And like you, if I were to "teach" the art of writing poems, my efforts hopefully might motivate others to write and to do a better job at it.
You probably are familiar with the concept of "slippery slope" in philosophy and elsewhere, that if one were to take a step down a slippery slope, one inevitably ends up at the bottom. That's what I am trying to prevent. I am a firm believer in Immaneul Kant's categorical imperatives. Ethics are categorical.
Anyway, I am now reading George Edward Hughes, the Modal Logician, whom I found out was also a student of my philosophy teacher John Wisdom. G. E. Hughes was a philosopher and logician who specialized in modal philosophy and logic and gave the first treatment of modal logic in his seminal work with his student Cresswell in their book, An Introduction to Modal Logic. They were both at Queens' University at Wellington, New Zealand.
This sounds like paranoid thinking, but I am having a lot of difficulties with getting back into school, due to bureaucratic bungling and arcane rules that seem to apply only in my case. It reminds me of Kafka's "Letter to the Academy" in which an ape was thanking the academy for his education.
It looks like a nuclear confrontation with China (which I had assessed to be 50%) just 2 or 3 days ago has been avoided, due to Australia's possible alliance with China (China is now Australia #1 trading partner and the top country of Australias' foreign investments). Even though sea power is no longer invincible due to anti-ship missiles such as the DF-21D missiles China has but peaceful use of sea lanes is still crucial for economic behavior in the development and survival of nations. To this end, China has now become the world's largest ship builder. And their recent port visit of a military boat to Greece was probably no coincidence (since previously Greece was the number one ship builder except for military ships which the US was dominant).
So, the question is, how am I going to survive and do the things that I want to do? If they are "necessary" in the modal sense of the word, then there will be ways to do them. But if they are merely "possible" again in the modal sense of the word, then they might not get done because of the limitations posed by the "actual." This is where your saying that the world is infected with complicity of institutions with various "interest groups" and power elites is accurate. If I were to prosper within the system, that would be the way to go -- to take the crumbs offered. I am not asking for the moon, on the contrary, I am asking for nothing in compensation for roughly 15 years of work in these poems, but merely some honesty in an organization which purports to be honest and truly reflects the Asian Diaspora. I cannot lend my endorsement to that, however great the monetary or other intangible rewards. As you say, I am a "survivor," and now I am beginning to understand what a survivor of the Holocaust must really feel. For the first time in my life, I respect the philosophy of Albert Camus as it applies to the victim, namely, the Arab shot by the protagonist in his book THE STRANGER. I am still a stranger to this country in its view of me and my view of it.
This is no reflection on your beliefs, George, and I shall try to fulfill all my promises and obligations as before. I am an eternal optimist in the sense that if God wants it done, it shall be done.
Your friend,
Koon
-----Original Message-----
From: Geoheld7
To: aimbeanshooter20
Sent: Tue, Aug 17, 2010 3:43 am
Subject: Re: Hi, how are things?
In a message dated 8/16/2010 5:26:50 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, aimbeanshooter20@aim.com writes:
As a consequence, I withdrew my ms. from Kaya because of South Korea's complicity in the naval exercises
Dear Koon,
I understand that your withdrawal is motivated by idealism, but if you're head is cooler, you might want to reconsider. Based on your poems I've read and your previous Kaya book, you really should take this chance to publish a new book with Kaya. Almost all of our institutions are infected with one sort of complicity or another, but the world goes on--not as we'd like but as reality dictates.
Best,
George
Thanks George, for your kind understanding and moral support.
Koon
-----Original Message-----
From: Geoheld7
To: aimbeanshooter20
Sent: Tue, Aug 17, 2010 4:45 am
Subject: Re: Hi, how are things?
Dear Koon,
I recognize your (Kantian) idealism because it is largely my own, and I'm very interested in what you say about modal philosophy and logic, particularly because our world operates with so little logic from either leaders or followers. I am for rational thinking and for avoiding the slippery slope myself, and I admire your resistance and independence. I too have always felt a stranger in this country and can only imagine what you must feel as an alien, even naturalized (strange word). Camus has been one of my touchstones since I read most of his novels, plays, and stories and THE MYTH OF SISYPHUS in my twenties.
While I am also on FaceBook and post work there, I am not as sanguine about it as a way to find readers as you are. Very few fb "friends" ever comment on any of my posted writing, so I have the feeling that they are not interested in the sort of stuff I write. Still, I admire your willingness to give your poems away; like you, what I want most is READERS.
Please forgive me for suggesting you allow Kaya to publish your new book, and sign me up to buy a copy when it is available.
Best, George
In a message dated 8/17/2010 7:26:49 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, aimbeanshooter20@aim.com writes:
Hi George,
I don't get that much money from Kaya anyway, and so I will self-publish on the Internet and give it free to websites so that the poems will get out there just the same. These days one out of fourteen people in the world are on Facebook and many more on the Internet that are not on Facebook. I have given the entire petry manuscript out to one high school student I met on Facebook. The prose I have not given out yet. People can also download the poems and print them out and give them to friends to read. After all, it is not my compensation that matters to me, but the fact that the poems might do some good somehow. And like you, if I were to "teach" the art of writing poems, my efforts hopefully might motivate others to write and to do a better job at it.
You probably are familiar with the concept of "slippery slope" in philosophy and elsewhere, that if one were to take a step down a slippery slope, one inevitably ends up at the bottom. That's what I am trying to prevent. I am a firm believer in Immaneul Kant's categorical imperatives. Ethics are categorical.
Anyway, I am now reading George Edward Hughes, the Modal Logician, whom I found out was also a student of my philosophy teacher John Wisdom. G. E. Hughes was a philosopher and logician who specialized in modal philosophy and logic and gave the first treatment of modal logic in his seminal work with his student Cresswell in their book, An Introduction to Modal Logic. They were both at Queens' University at Wellington, New Zealand.
This sounds like paranoid thinking, but I am having a lot of difficulties with getting back into school, due to bureaucratic bungling and arcane rules that seem to apply only in my case. It reminds me of Kafka's "Letter to the Academy" in which an ape was thanking the academy for his education.
It looks like a nuclear confrontation with China (which I had assessed to be 50%) just 2 or 3 days ago has been avoided, due to Australia's possible alliance with China (China is now Australia #1 trading partner and the top country of Australias' foreign investments). Even though sea power is no longer invincible due to anti-ship missiles such as the DF-21D missiles China has but peaceful use of sea lanes is still crucial for economic behavior in the development and survival of nations. To this end, China has now become the world's largest ship builder. And their recent port visit of a military boat to Greece was probably no coincidence (since previously Greece was the number one ship builder except for military ships which the US was dominant).
So, the question is, how am I going to survive and do the things that I want to do? If they are "necessary" in the modal sense of the word, then there will be ways to do them. But if they are merely "possible" again in the modal sense of the word, then they might not get done because of the limitations posed by the "actual." This is where your saying that the world is infected with complicity of institutions with various "interest groups" and power elites is accurate. If I were to prosper within the system, that would be the way to go -- to take the crumbs offered. I am not asking for the moon, on the contrary, I am asking for nothing in compensation for roughly 15 years of work in these poems, but merely some honesty in an organization which purports to be honest and truly reflects the Asian Diaspora. I cannot lend my endorsement to that, however great the monetary or other intangible rewards. As you say, I am a "survivor," and now I am beginning to understand what a survivor of the Holocaust must really feel. For the first time in my life, I respect the philosophy of Albert Camus as it applies to the victim, namely, the Arab shot by the protagonist in his book THE STRANGER. I am still a stranger to this country in its view of me and my view of it.
This is no reflection on your beliefs, George, and I shall try to fulfill all my promises and obligations as before. I am an eternal optimist in the sense that if God wants it done, it shall be done.
Your friend,
Koon
-----Original Message-----
From: Geoheld7
To: aimbeanshooter20
Sent: Tue, Aug 17, 2010 3:43 am
Subject: Re: Hi, how are things?
In a message dated 8/16/2010 5:26:50 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, aimbeanshooter20@aim.com writes:
As a consequence, I withdrew my ms. from Kaya because of South Korea's complicity in the naval exercises
Dear Koon,
I understand that your withdrawal is motivated by idealism, but if you're head is cooler, you might want to reconsider. Based on your poems I've read and your previous Kaya book, you really should take this chance to publish a new book with Kaya. Almost all of our institutions are infected with one sort of complicity or another, but the world goes on--not as we'd like but as reality dictates.
Best,
George
Sunday, August 15, 2010
Another possibility for the end of the world
A Chilling Article
Peace Philosophy Centre
Dialogue and learning for creating a peaceful, sustainable world.
Print
US and Chinese Nuclear and Missile Development: the Risk of Accidental Nuclear War
Wendell Minnick
[Japan Focus introduction: Among the various explanations for the collapse of the Soviet Union, a popular argument has been that the US escalated the arms race with Moscow to the point that it broke the bank in Russia, finally leading to the collapse of the Soviet empire. China has been determined to avoid that trap. Overwhelmingly out-gunned by the United States in every conceivable aspect of military hardware, the PRC from its earliest years to the present has struggled with vital security problems of how to defend itself from the American superpower. One important answer has been to build a minimum second-strike nuclear capability to confront American strategists with the fact of mutual vulnerability to nuclear attack. However, the Bush administration’s strategy of preventive war, in its relentless search for absolute security, has created a new and more dangerous situation for China. US plans to revitalize its nuclear weapons program, to build missile defenses, and to press on toward weaponizing outer space, threaten to undermine the viability of China’s nuclear deterrent. The modernization of China’s strategic defenses can best be understood as a comprehensive, asymmetrical response to the American challenge. But will that response set off a further arms race in an Asia Pacific region fraught with tensions and nuclear aspirations? The following report is reprinted from Defense News, a major organ of the US Defense establishment and its arms manufacturers. Characteristic of this genre, it makes no mention of expansive US missile development. Peter Van Ness]
A new U.S. report that says China’s nuclear strategy could result in an unnecessary nuclear conflict has grabbed the attention of Asian strategic analysts and the Western defense community.
“China’s Nuclear Forces: Operations, Training, Doctrine, Command, Control, and Campaign Planning” by Larry Wortzel, commissioner of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, examines the potential threat China’s nuclear arsenal poses to the United States. It was released this month by the U.S. Army War College’s Strategic Studies Institute.
China’s goal of developing the capability of attacking an aircraft carrier group with ballistic missiles appears near.
“For some time, American naval officers have dismissed this capability as beyond the grasp of the PLA [People’s Liberation Army],” Wortzel writes. However, “The advances made in maneuvering re-entry vehicles and doctrine on attacking an aircraft carrier or naval battle group with ballistic missiles makes the Western Pacific a more dangerous place, especially as China improves its own sensor systems.”
Of particular concern are recent media reports that China is developing an infrared system for the Dong Feng 21 medium-range ballistic missile that will allow it to pinpoint ships. China is particularly concerned with overcoming anti-ship missile defenses of Aegis-equipped warships.
Small Chinese ICBM
Wortzel introduces the reader to the PLA concept that “guided missile forces are the trump card (sa shou jian) in achieving victory in limited technology war.” He argues that China’s “limited technology war” can be won by using countermeasures, precision targeting and space platforms to support the effort.
Thomas Kane, a lecturer at The University of Hull and author of numerous publications on China’s nuclear capabilities, said Wortzel is on the mark.
“The fact that PRC missile officers feel they can present their weapons as ‘sa shou jian,’ or, in Wortzel’s translation, a ‘trump,’ further implies that they are prepared to entertain the possibility of using nuclear weapons,” he said.
Further, Kane said, “conventionally armed ballistic missiles have seldom proved particularly decisive, and certainly not on their own. An American naval task force, for instance, would be well equipped to resist non-nuclear missile bombardment. For missiles to serve as a trump card, either the targets must be exceptionally significant or the warheads must be exceptionally devastating.”
China has openly discussed using nuclear weapons on aircraft carrier groups and concentrations of U.S. military forces on Okinawa, particularly since these types of targets are isolated from civilian populations and serve as a potent threat to China.
Is Space the Key?
The “no-man’s land” of space appears to be the key to beating the United States. China’s recent anti-satellite (ASAT) tests demonstrated its determination to explore this Achilles’ heel of U.S. dependence on technology for the conduct of war.
In August 2006, China blinded a U.S. spy satellite with a laser, and in January 2007, China destroyed one of its own satellites with a missile.
Knocking out GPS, reconnaissance and communication satellites would blind and hobble U.S. military forces in the Pacific. Warplanes and warships would have trouble navigating, smart bombs and missiles would have no guidance, communication would be hampered and intelligence on China would be crippled.
China’s space expansion program
Wortzel believes there is a clear relationship between nuclear force survivability and the ASAT test run by China, and this reinforces arguments in China that foreign surveillance of China from space may constitute “battlefield preparation.”
However, constraining U.S. satellite capabilities would make it nearly impossible to determine what China’s intentions are. Panic and indecision could force the United States to respond more aggressively or too late to a Chinese nuclear strike.
US satellite launch
China’s decision to put nuclear and conventional warheads of the same classes of ballistic missiles “near each other in firing units of the Second Artillery Corps also increases the risk of accidental nuclear conflict,” Wortzel says. “If a country with good surveillance systems, like the United States, detects a missile being launched, it has serious choices to make. It can absorb a first strike, see whether it is hit with a nuclear or conventional weapon, and retaliate in kind; or it can decide to launch a major strike on warning."
The U.S. ability to observe and quickly analyze missile launches is greatly diminished by China’s ASAT capabilities, which risk the potential for a miscalculation that results in a nuclear war.
No First Use?
China’s nuclear strategy also is being debated in terms of the practicality of its no-first-use policy, said Wortzel. He said the PLA’s pre-emptive nuclear strike strategy is designed to cause the will of the enemy to waver, destroy the enemy’s command-and-control system, delay the enemy’s war operations, reduce the enemy force generation and war-making potential, and degrade the enemy’s ability to win a nuclear war.
“New interpretations of the concept of the ‘self-defensive counterattack’ in the strategy of active defense and the general view that ballistic missiles are a kind of trump card in war bring into question whether the CMC [Central Military Commission] will adhere to the stated ‘no-first-use’ doctrine,” he said.
Kane, author of “Chinese Grand Strategy and Maritime Power,” argues that Wortzel’s findings contradict a great deal of common wisdom in Washington and elsewhere that China is incapable of a coordinated national policy on nuclear weapons.
“Wortzel’s work suggests otherwise,” Kane said. “The PRC [People’s Republic of China] has historically maintained that it possesses nuclear weapons only as a ‘minimal deterrent,’ and many Western analysts have accepted this. Wortzel warns that we should not assume that China would adhere to such restraint dogmatically for all time.
“Wortzel’s work confirms that PRC leaders continue to prepare for the possibility that its future enemies may include the United States, and that many PRC leaders are prepared to consider using nuclear weapons in a so-called pre-emptive counterattack,” he said. •
This article appeared in Defense News May 21, 2007.
Wendell Minnick is Asia bureau chief of Defense News. Posted at Japan Focus on May 25, 2007.
For another perspective on the F-22 sales and Lockheed see William Hartung, Why should Japan bail out Lockheed?
By William D Hartung
For all articles by this author click here
Add Comment
Created by Data Momentum © 2002-2010 JapanFocus.org
ISSN 1557-4660
Peace Philosophy Centre
Dialogue and learning for creating a peaceful, sustainable world.
US and Chinese Nuclear and Missile Development: the Risk of Accidental Nuclear War
Wendell Minnick
[Japan Focus introduction: Among the various explanations for the collapse of the Soviet Union, a popular argument has been that the US escalated the arms race with Moscow to the point that it broke the bank in Russia, finally leading to the collapse of the Soviet empire. China has been determined to avoid that trap. Overwhelmingly out-gunned by the United States in every conceivable aspect of military hardware, the PRC from its earliest years to the present has struggled with vital security problems of how to defend itself from the American superpower. One important answer has been to build a minimum second-strike nuclear capability to confront American strategists with the fact of mutual vulnerability to nuclear attack. However, the Bush administration’s strategy of preventive war, in its relentless search for absolute security, has created a new and more dangerous situation for China. US plans to revitalize its nuclear weapons program, to build missile defenses, and to press on toward weaponizing outer space, threaten to undermine the viability of China’s nuclear deterrent. The modernization of China’s strategic defenses can best be understood as a comprehensive, asymmetrical response to the American challenge. But will that response set off a further arms race in an Asia Pacific region fraught with tensions and nuclear aspirations? The following report is reprinted from Defense News, a major organ of the US Defense establishment and its arms manufacturers. Characteristic of this genre, it makes no mention of expansive US missile development. Peter Van Ness]
A new U.S. report that says China’s nuclear strategy could result in an unnecessary nuclear conflict has grabbed the attention of Asian strategic analysts and the Western defense community.
“China’s Nuclear Forces: Operations, Training, Doctrine, Command, Control, and Campaign Planning” by Larry Wortzel, commissioner of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, examines the potential threat China’s nuclear arsenal poses to the United States. It was released this month by the U.S. Army War College’s Strategic Studies Institute.
China’s goal of developing the capability of attacking an aircraft carrier group with ballistic missiles appears near.
“For some time, American naval officers have dismissed this capability as beyond the grasp of the PLA [People’s Liberation Army],” Wortzel writes. However, “The advances made in maneuvering re-entry vehicles and doctrine on attacking an aircraft carrier or naval battle group with ballistic missiles makes the Western Pacific a more dangerous place, especially as China improves its own sensor systems.”
Of particular concern are recent media reports that China is developing an infrared system for the Dong Feng 21 medium-range ballistic missile that will allow it to pinpoint ships. China is particularly concerned with overcoming anti-ship missile defenses of Aegis-equipped warships.
Small Chinese ICBM
Wortzel introduces the reader to the PLA concept that “guided missile forces are the trump card (sa shou jian) in achieving victory in limited technology war.” He argues that China’s “limited technology war” can be won by using countermeasures, precision targeting and space platforms to support the effort.
Thomas Kane, a lecturer at The University of Hull and author of numerous publications on China’s nuclear capabilities, said Wortzel is on the mark.
“The fact that PRC missile officers feel they can present their weapons as ‘sa shou jian,’ or, in Wortzel’s translation, a ‘trump,’ further implies that they are prepared to entertain the possibility of using nuclear weapons,” he said.
Further, Kane said, “conventionally armed ballistic missiles have seldom proved particularly decisive, and certainly not on their own. An American naval task force, for instance, would be well equipped to resist non-nuclear missile bombardment. For missiles to serve as a trump card, either the targets must be exceptionally significant or the warheads must be exceptionally devastating.”
China has openly discussed using nuclear weapons on aircraft carrier groups and concentrations of U.S. military forces on Okinawa, particularly since these types of targets are isolated from civilian populations and serve as a potent threat to China.
Is Space the Key?
The “no-man’s land” of space appears to be the key to beating the United States. China’s recent anti-satellite (ASAT) tests demonstrated its determination to explore this Achilles’ heel of U.S. dependence on technology for the conduct of war.
In August 2006, China blinded a U.S. spy satellite with a laser, and in January 2007, China destroyed one of its own satellites with a missile.
Knocking out GPS, reconnaissance and communication satellites would blind and hobble U.S. military forces in the Pacific. Warplanes and warships would have trouble navigating, smart bombs and missiles would have no guidance, communication would be hampered and intelligence on China would be crippled.
China’s space expansion program
Wortzel believes there is a clear relationship between nuclear force survivability and the ASAT test run by China, and this reinforces arguments in China that foreign surveillance of China from space may constitute “battlefield preparation.”
However, constraining U.S. satellite capabilities would make it nearly impossible to determine what China’s intentions are. Panic and indecision could force the United States to respond more aggressively or too late to a Chinese nuclear strike.
US satellite launch
China’s decision to put nuclear and conventional warheads of the same classes of ballistic missiles “near each other in firing units of the Second Artillery Corps also increases the risk of accidental nuclear conflict,” Wortzel says. “If a country with good surveillance systems, like the United States, detects a missile being launched, it has serious choices to make. It can absorb a first strike, see whether it is hit with a nuclear or conventional weapon, and retaliate in kind; or it can decide to launch a major strike on warning."
The U.S. ability to observe and quickly analyze missile launches is greatly diminished by China’s ASAT capabilities, which risk the potential for a miscalculation that results in a nuclear war.
No First Use?
China’s nuclear strategy also is being debated in terms of the practicality of its no-first-use policy, said Wortzel. He said the PLA’s pre-emptive nuclear strike strategy is designed to cause the will of the enemy to waver, destroy the enemy’s command-and-control system, delay the enemy’s war operations, reduce the enemy force generation and war-making potential, and degrade the enemy’s ability to win a nuclear war.
“New interpretations of the concept of the ‘self-defensive counterattack’ in the strategy of active defense and the general view that ballistic missiles are a kind of trump card in war bring into question whether the CMC [Central Military Commission] will adhere to the stated ‘no-first-use’ doctrine,” he said.
Kane, author of “Chinese Grand Strategy and Maritime Power,” argues that Wortzel’s findings contradict a great deal of common wisdom in Washington and elsewhere that China is incapable of a coordinated national policy on nuclear weapons.
“Wortzel’s work suggests otherwise,” Kane said. “The PRC [People’s Republic of China] has historically maintained that it possesses nuclear weapons only as a ‘minimal deterrent,’ and many Western analysts have accepted this. Wortzel warns that we should not assume that China would adhere to such restraint dogmatically for all time.
“Wortzel’s work confirms that PRC leaders continue to prepare for the possibility that its future enemies may include the United States, and that many PRC leaders are prepared to consider using nuclear weapons in a so-called pre-emptive counterattack,” he said. •
This article appeared in Defense News May 21, 2007.
Wendell Minnick is Asia bureau chief of Defense News. Posted at Japan Focus on May 25, 2007.
For another perspective on the F-22 sales and Lockheed see William Hartung, Why should Japan bail out Lockheed?
By William D Hartung
For all articles by this author click here
Add Comment
Created by Data Momentum © 2002-2010 JapanFocus.org
ISSN 1557-4660
Life or Death, mutually defined
Life or Death, merely wind whispering names above the water
Saturday, August 14, 2010
In my room ( a poem about modal logic)
In My Room...
In my room the world is true
Simply because I say it is true.
And truth is "spread out, like a patient,
Etherized upon a table..." In many rooms,
Rooms like mine...
And if you come to my room, one of the many
Parellel rooms that connect like the sections
of a dragon, one black and one golden,
Interwoven and locked into mortal combat...
And in which room with a couch,
A man writes in the air with his index finger,
And the heads of the two dragons peer into this room,
And that's when the shooting starts,
Below the window of the third floor,
In the streets below.
And in my room you appear without a summons,
and the many parts of the mind
Assemble themselves here,
And I touch your hair,
You turn and smile
In this room, a room that is so similar to,
and yet so different from all the other rooms,
Simply because you have entered,
And suddenly there is more than one mind contemplates the rose,
Not here, but where they do such things...
Here, the only thing real is
What you say is real,
And you ask, "Will there be an operation?"
And operations of varius kinds have been going on
In these rooms for years,
And the operator says, "Let the Tao move the scalpel"
And do not assert or proclaim the current coffee,
Nor any flags on ships that transport grain,
Because what one hungry world wants and one solitary room needs
is love, love for all the rooms in this similar class,
and rooms that will fill all the spaces of the universe
not already occupied by atoms...
pp 61 - 62 The Truth in Rented Rooms (Kaya, NY, NY, 1998)
copyright Koon Woon
In my room the world is true
Simply because I say it is true.
And truth is "spread out, like a patient,
Etherized upon a table..." In many rooms,
Rooms like mine...
And if you come to my room, one of the many
Parellel rooms that connect like the sections
of a dragon, one black and one golden,
Interwoven and locked into mortal combat...
And in which room with a couch,
A man writes in the air with his index finger,
And the heads of the two dragons peer into this room,
And that's when the shooting starts,
Below the window of the third floor,
In the streets below.
And in my room you appear without a summons,
and the many parts of the mind
Assemble themselves here,
And I touch your hair,
You turn and smile
In this room, a room that is so similar to,
and yet so different from all the other rooms,
Simply because you have entered,
And suddenly there is more than one mind contemplates the rose,
Not here, but where they do such things...
Here, the only thing real is
What you say is real,
And you ask, "Will there be an operation?"
And operations of varius kinds have been going on
In these rooms for years,
And the operator says, "Let the Tao move the scalpel"
And do not assert or proclaim the current coffee,
Nor any flags on ships that transport grain,
Because what one hungry world wants and one solitary room needs
is love, love for all the rooms in this similar class,
and rooms that will fill all the spaces of the universe
not already occupied by atoms...
pp 61 - 62 The Truth in Rented Rooms (Kaya, NY, NY, 1998)
copyright Koon Woon
In my room ( a poem about modal logic)
In My Room (a poem about Modal Logic, the logic of the Chinese nuclear code)
This poem appears in my book The Truth in Rented Rooms. I am not asking you to buy a copy of the book for I am not specially fond of money. I wish you could get a copy and read it. I would post it but my scanner can't post it here. So, I have to type it up tomorrow, for it is now 2:29AM Saturday and I had a long day trying to figure out why the sam hill the US aircraft carrier George Washington is going to intrude into the Yellow Sea close enough to strike Beijing and other cities and the strategic Chinese nuclear submarine base.
Lightening often strikes the Space Needle in Seattle
Friday, August 13, 2010
Nth warning
Favorites Subscription Email to Friend Print China PLA warns U.S. over fresh military drill in region
This topic has been highlight by szh at 2010-8-13 11:40.
muchless
•Buddy•Offline
1# > A < Posted 2010-8-13 11:37 Only show this user's posts China PLA warns U.S. over fresh military drill in region
aircraft.jpg (24.58 KB)
2010-8-13 11:39
China's People Liberation Army demanded a tough response to U.S. plans to send an aircraft carrier to naval exercises near its coast, saying that "respect" was at stake.
A commentary in the Liberation Army Daily on Thursday laid bare rancour over Washington's naval exercises with ally South Korea, and over its criticism of Chinese territorial claims to swathes of the South China Sea, where Taiwan and several Southeast Asian states also have claims.
"A country needs respect, and a military also needs respect. 'If someone doesn't hurt me, I won't hurt him; but if someone hurts me, I must hurt him," wrote Major General Luo Yuan in the paper.
"For the Chinese people and the Chinese military, those are by no means idle words."
A Pentagon spokesman, Geoff Morrell, last week said a U.S. aircraft carrier, the nuclear-powered George Washington, which joined in the earlier exercise, would participate in a follow-up drill in the Yellow Sea, between the Korean peninsula and China.
Beijing said the military exercises in nearby seas threatened its security. The United States and South Korea said they were aimed at deterring North Korea, which they blame for torpedoing a South Korean navy ship in March.
The PLA Daily commentary indicated that friction over any fresh U.S. military activities in seas near China would continue to dog relations between the two big economic powers.
The United States is "pushing its security boundary to the doorstep of others -- the Yellow Sea, South China Sea and so on," wrote Luo. "In their eyes, the security of other states and peoples is secondary, even meaningless."
Chinese newspapers have carried several harsh commentaries since maritime tensions flared between Beijing and Washington, rekindling friction that unsettled ties earlier this year.
But Luo's strong words in the Chinese military's top newspaper suggest the PLA sees its prestige at stake.
"We don't want make enemies of any country," wrote Luo.
"But whoever ignores our solemn stance and core interests, persisting in doing as he pleases and bullying us too far, we will never fear."
At the end of commentary, Luo suggested that America should learn to respect and listen to other countries' will, trying to settle disputes down by wisdom, instead of warship.
Related ----
Chinese admiral says U.S. drill courts confrontation
20
UID1706 Posts514 Digest0 Credits4833 Fame1226 Money1825 Permission90 Online42 hours Registered2010-4-1 Last login2010-8-14 Profile
Quote Report TOP
koonwoon
•Buddy•Online
2# > A < Posted 2010-8-14 06:34 Only show this user's posts China PLA warns U.S. over fresh military drill in region
Major General Luo Yuan is absolutely right that he who disregards others will be "disregarded." For non-Asians especially, the idea of "face" [which is actually dignity] is to be preserved over and above ones' life. The West calls this honor and duels over it with pistols. We will call it nothing except our RIGHT TO SELF-DEFENSE. Even a policeman, when faced with a drunken sailor brandishing a sword will have to shoot him if he gets too close. Enough said.
This topic has been highlight by szh at 2010-8-13 11:40.
muchless
•Buddy•Offline
1# > A < Posted 2010-8-13 11:37 Only show this user's posts China PLA warns U.S. over fresh military drill in region
aircraft.jpg (24.58 KB)
2010-8-13 11:39
China's People Liberation Army demanded a tough response to U.S. plans to send an aircraft carrier to naval exercises near its coast, saying that "respect" was at stake.
A commentary in the Liberation Army Daily on Thursday laid bare rancour over Washington's naval exercises with ally South Korea, and over its criticism of Chinese territorial claims to swathes of the South China Sea, where Taiwan and several Southeast Asian states also have claims.
"A country needs respect, and a military also needs respect. 'If someone doesn't hurt me, I won't hurt him; but if someone hurts me, I must hurt him," wrote Major General Luo Yuan in the paper.
"For the Chinese people and the Chinese military, those are by no means idle words."
A Pentagon spokesman, Geoff Morrell, last week said a U.S. aircraft carrier, the nuclear-powered George Washington, which joined in the earlier exercise, would participate in a follow-up drill in the Yellow Sea, between the Korean peninsula and China.
Beijing said the military exercises in nearby seas threatened its security. The United States and South Korea said they were aimed at deterring North Korea, which they blame for torpedoing a South Korean navy ship in March.
The PLA Daily commentary indicated that friction over any fresh U.S. military activities in seas near China would continue to dog relations between the two big economic powers.
The United States is "pushing its security boundary to the doorstep of others -- the Yellow Sea, South China Sea and so on," wrote Luo. "In their eyes, the security of other states and peoples is secondary, even meaningless."
Chinese newspapers have carried several harsh commentaries since maritime tensions flared between Beijing and Washington, rekindling friction that unsettled ties earlier this year.
But Luo's strong words in the Chinese military's top newspaper suggest the PLA sees its prestige at stake.
"We don't want make enemies of any country," wrote Luo.
"But whoever ignores our solemn stance and core interests, persisting in doing as he pleases and bullying us too far, we will never fear."
At the end of commentary, Luo suggested that America should learn to respect and listen to other countries' will, trying to settle disputes down by wisdom, instead of warship.
Related ----
Chinese admiral says U.S. drill courts confrontation
20
UID1706 Posts514 Digest0 Credits4833 Fame1226 Money1825 Permission90 Online42 hours Registered2010-4-1 Last login2010-8-14 Profile
Quote Report TOP
koonwoon
•Buddy•Online
2# > A < Posted 2010-8-14 06:34 Only show this user's posts China PLA warns U.S. over fresh military drill in region
Major General Luo Yuan is absolutely right that he who disregards others will be "disregarded." For non-Asians especially, the idea of "face" [which is actually dignity] is to be preserved over and above ones' life. The West calls this honor and duels over it with pistols. We will call it nothing except our RIGHT TO SELF-DEFENSE. Even a policeman, when faced with a drunken sailor brandishing a sword will have to shoot him if he gets too close. Enough said.
And yet they persists to court doom
koonwoon LogOut Member ListSearchTopicsPermissionsUserCPPeople Forum » Comments and suggestions » Chinese admiral says U.S. drill courts confrontation
‹‹ Previous
Next ›› TopicPollActivityDebate
Favorites Subscription Email to Friend Print Chinese admiral says U.S. drill courts confrontation
This topic has been highlight by szh at 2010-8-13 15:07.
Ispel
•Buddy•Online
1# > A < Posted 2010-8-13 15:07 Only show this user's posts Chinese admiral says U.S. drill courts confrontation
USS Washington.jpg (72.1 KB)
2010-8-13 15:07
A senior Chinese military strategist called planned U.S. naval exercises in the region a provocation and accused the Obama administration of seeking to encircle China and pursuing a "chaotic" approach towards Beijing.
The commentary in the top paper of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) was China's latest verbal broadside against Washington, which Beijing has accused of stirring tension in the region with a series of military drills near its borders.
"On the one hand, it wants China to play a role in regional security issues. On the other hand, it is engaging in an increasingly tight encirclement of China and constantly challenging China's core interests," Rear Admiral Yang Yi wrote in the Liberation Army Daily.
The Pentagon plans new joint naval exercises with ally South Korea that will send a U.S. aircraft carrier into the Yellow Sea, between China and the Korean peninsula.
Those exercises are intended to provoke "enmity and confrontation in the Asia-Pacific region," Yang wrote.
Yang, who works at China's National Defence University, warned that friction over the planned U.S.-South Korea naval exercise reflected broader instability in relations with Beijing, and he placed the blame at Washington's doorstep.
"Rarely has there been such wavering and chaos in U.S. policy towards China," wrote Yang.
Yang's commentary came out a day after a similarly angry warning in the paper, suggesting expectations from the PLA for a firm response from Beijing.
"Washington will inevitably pay a costly price for its muddled decision," Yang wrote in a separate commentary on Friday in the China Daily, the country's main English-language paper.
"The risks of a collision occurring between the two countries' navies in seas off China's coast are escalating," Wang Jisi, a prominent expert on China-U.S. relations at Peking University, wrote in a recent analysis.
MILITARY TIES STALL
China appears unlikely to risk directly challenging any new U.S.-South Korea drills by sending its ships to the same waters, a step that would risk a dangerous escalation in tensions.
However, its anger with the Obama administration could hold off any upgrading of military relations, which Beijing has curtailed since friction earlier this year over U.S. weapons sales to Taiwan, the self-ruled island claimed by China.
The planned exercises leave scant chance that U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates will be invited to visit China any time soon, said Xu Guangyu, a former PLA officer and now a researcher at the China Arms Control and Disarmament Association.
"It's natural for the PLA to speak out first on these issues," Xu told Reuters. "It's the PLA's sacred duty to defend China's territory and interests."
The U.S. and South Korea last month held a joint naval drill in the Sea of Japan off the Korean peninsula, which brought condemnation from China. It then answered with its own heavily publicised military exercises.
The Pentagon last week said a U.S. aircraft carrier, the George Washington, which joined in the earlier exercise, would participate in a follow-up drill in the Yellow Sea.
The United States and South Korea have said their exercises are aimed at warning North Korea, which they blame for torpedoing a South Korean navy ship in March.
"Anyone clear-sighted can see that this carries something of a warning to China," wrote Yang.
Reuters
Related---
China PLA warns U.S. over fresh military drill in region
56
UID2104 Posts217 Digest0 Credits2100 Fame519 Money825 Permission70 Online20 hours Registered2010-5-8 Last login2010-8-14 Profile
Quote Report TOP
koonwoon
•Buddy•Offline
2# > A < Posted 2010-8-13 21:59 Only show this user's posts Chinese admiral says U.S. drill court confrontation
If China does not take out the aircraft carrier, it will regret this. There appears to be a rich class of bureaucrats who are out of touch with the common person in China, especially the 30% who live still in pre-development poverty, and the migrating homeless working populations in the cities from the countryside. Do not forget that the PLA rank and file's family are these poor people and do not underestimate the social instability already existing in China, and so I say to the Chinese rulers, you either take a risk now (that is justified morally) or you take a risk of internal revolt. In either case, nuclear war is possible, but in the latter case, it is more likely. I know this sounds illogically but your decision not to do anything is cowardice and highly illogical as well. China is a paper tiger.
‹‹ Previous
Next ›› TopicPollActivityDebate
Favorites Subscription Email to Friend Print Chinese admiral says U.S. drill courts confrontation
This topic has been highlight by szh at 2010-8-13 15:07.
Ispel
•Buddy•Online
1# > A < Posted 2010-8-13 15:07 Only show this user's posts Chinese admiral says U.S. drill courts confrontation
USS Washington.jpg (72.1 KB)
2010-8-13 15:07
A senior Chinese military strategist called planned U.S. naval exercises in the region a provocation and accused the Obama administration of seeking to encircle China and pursuing a "chaotic" approach towards Beijing.
The commentary in the top paper of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) was China's latest verbal broadside against Washington, which Beijing has accused of stirring tension in the region with a series of military drills near its borders.
"On the one hand, it wants China to play a role in regional security issues. On the other hand, it is engaging in an increasingly tight encirclement of China and constantly challenging China's core interests," Rear Admiral Yang Yi wrote in the Liberation Army Daily.
The Pentagon plans new joint naval exercises with ally South Korea that will send a U.S. aircraft carrier into the Yellow Sea, between China and the Korean peninsula.
Those exercises are intended to provoke "enmity and confrontation in the Asia-Pacific region," Yang wrote.
Yang, who works at China's National Defence University, warned that friction over the planned U.S.-South Korea naval exercise reflected broader instability in relations with Beijing, and he placed the blame at Washington's doorstep.
"Rarely has there been such wavering and chaos in U.S. policy towards China," wrote Yang.
Yang's commentary came out a day after a similarly angry warning in the paper, suggesting expectations from the PLA for a firm response from Beijing.
"Washington will inevitably pay a costly price for its muddled decision," Yang wrote in a separate commentary on Friday in the China Daily, the country's main English-language paper.
"The risks of a collision occurring between the two countries' navies in seas off China's coast are escalating," Wang Jisi, a prominent expert on China-U.S. relations at Peking University, wrote in a recent analysis.
MILITARY TIES STALL
China appears unlikely to risk directly challenging any new U.S.-South Korea drills by sending its ships to the same waters, a step that would risk a dangerous escalation in tensions.
However, its anger with the Obama administration could hold off any upgrading of military relations, which Beijing has curtailed since friction earlier this year over U.S. weapons sales to Taiwan, the self-ruled island claimed by China.
The planned exercises leave scant chance that U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates will be invited to visit China any time soon, said Xu Guangyu, a former PLA officer and now a researcher at the China Arms Control and Disarmament Association.
"It's natural for the PLA to speak out first on these issues," Xu told Reuters. "It's the PLA's sacred duty to defend China's territory and interests."
The U.S. and South Korea last month held a joint naval drill in the Sea of Japan off the Korean peninsula, which brought condemnation from China. It then answered with its own heavily publicised military exercises.
The Pentagon last week said a U.S. aircraft carrier, the George Washington, which joined in the earlier exercise, would participate in a follow-up drill in the Yellow Sea.
The United States and South Korea have said their exercises are aimed at warning North Korea, which they blame for torpedoing a South Korean navy ship in March.
"Anyone clear-sighted can see that this carries something of a warning to China," wrote Yang.
Reuters
Related---
China PLA warns U.S. over fresh military drill in region
56
UID2104 Posts217 Digest0 Credits2100 Fame519 Money825 Permission70 Online20 hours Registered2010-5-8 Last login2010-8-14 Profile
Quote Report TOP
koonwoon
•Buddy•Offline
2# > A < Posted 2010-8-13 21:59 Only show this user's posts Chinese admiral says U.S. drill court confrontation
If China does not take out the aircraft carrier, it will regret this. There appears to be a rich class of bureaucrats who are out of touch with the common person in China, especially the 30% who live still in pre-development poverty, and the migrating homeless working populations in the cities from the countryside. Do not forget that the PLA rank and file's family are these poor people and do not underestimate the social instability already existing in China, and so I say to the Chinese rulers, you either take a risk now (that is justified morally) or you take a risk of internal revolt. In either case, nuclear war is possible, but in the latter case, it is more likely. I know this sounds illogically but your decision not to do anything is cowardice and highly illogical as well. China is a paper tiger.
Scott Johnson, a Great Man in the Making!
An in-depth article will be posted on August 27, 2010 provided that I am able to do so by then. Stay tuned!
Thursday, August 12, 2010
The Last Battle of the World?
koonwoon LogOut Member ListSearchTopicsPermissionsUserCPPeople Forum » Focus discussion » How to smash Carrier? ‹‹ Previous
Next ›› TopicPollActivityDebate
Email to Friend Subscription Favorites Poll Topic
This topic has been sticky by szh at 2010-8-11 12:39.
Authorstar Start time2010-8-11 11:57 How to smash Carrier?
USS George Washington aircraft carrier
Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said on Thursday local time that the US will send the USS George Washington supercarrier, which participated in last month's joint drills between the US and the ROK in the Sea of Japan, to the Yellow Sea for their upcoming exercise.
He did not give specific dates for the exercise in the Yellow Sea and the Sea of Japan, but the Associated Press said he was referring to the joint annual exercise named "Ulchi Freedom Guardian" scheduled for Aug 16 to 26.
"China will definitely react harshly to the move. It's hard to predict its specific reaction, but that will for sure cast a shadow over Sino-US military relations," said Rear Admiral Yang Yi, former head of strategic studies at the People's Liberation Army's National Defense University.
Anti-ship missiles a big threat for carriers
China's DF-21C missiles
According to Associated Press Aug 5, China is developing Dong Feng 21-D anti-ship ballistic missiles (ASBM), which is capable of destroying the most advanced defense system of aircraft carriers from nearly 2,000 miles away. It's reported that China's DF-21D is a game changing weapon in the Asia-Pacific.
Meanwhile, US intelligence agencies point out besides DF-21D, US aircraft carriers also face threats from land-based fighters and conventional warship equipped with anti-ship missiles.
China's J-10 fighter
China's Xiandai-class Destroyer
According to US Defense News, the number of China's anti-ship missiles could be regarded as a big threat to any anti-missile system. It's reported that PLA's Su-30, J-10 and "Flying leopard" fighters are all able to be equipped with long-rang anti-ship missiles with a rang of up to 100 kilometers.
US Diplomat magazine says the operational radius of China's advanced fighters reach 900 nautical miles, of which attack can cover "the first island chain". Their combat range can be also extended through air refuelling.
Besides, PLA Navy's warships are also reported to be equipped with kinds of medium and long-range anti-ship missiles. Thee SS-N-22 'Sunburn' super sonic anti-ship missile, which equips China Xiandai-class Destroyer, is a typical example.
Special torpedoes worry US military
China's Shang class submarine
In recent years, US media have been playing up the threat from China's submarines to US military. Meanwhile, US is also worrying about advanced weapons in China's submarines.
US media say China's submarines are equipped with advanced wake homing torpedoes, which are a key technology to reduce endurance loss and increase hit probability.
Taiwan's media also reveal that China's submarines are equipped with Russia's "Blizzard" Supercavitating torpedoes, of which the speed is four times as that of normal torpedoes. It's reported that no other weapons could contain this kind of torpedo.
System countermeasures
USS Enterprise aircraft carrier
Facts prove that it's easier to deprive an aircraft carrier of its combat capability by destroying its deck and commanding communication system. If an aircraft carrier loses combat capability, other war ships in the fleet cannot play a role. Attack on a carrier could result in huge casualty, which could cause strategy-level influence.
The Pentagon says US carriers are only a highly valuable target under the attack of long-range accurate weapons. It's unimaginable to risk dispatching carriers with over 5000 troops to war zones.
According to Chinese military experts, it's easy to be under attack when a carrier fleet alone moves to the enemy's coastline , because the fleet will combat beyond the support of the whole system of weapons, surveillance and intelligence to some extent. In the real battle, US carriers usually gain support from naval and air force nearby and keep close communication with the whole system of command and control through satellites.
Meanwhile, US military thinks DF-21D could hit targets with the support of satellites and early warning aircraft. Therefore, to counteract the attack of DF-21D on carriers, support from other armed services are highly needed, such as stealth fighters and anti-satellite missiles which are capable of destroying the intelligence support for DF-21D.
What is the Ace in the hole to smash carriers?
Poll Options ( multiple choice: choose no more than 5 options ) Number of participants 25
1. DF-21D ASBM 13 (24.53%)
2. Land-based fighters with anti-ship missiles 7 (13.21%)
3. Warships with anti-ship missiles 6 (11.32%)
4. Submarines with special torpedoes. 10 (18.87%)
5. Anti-satellite weapons. 6 (11.32%)
6. All the above 4 (7.55%)
7. Others 3 (5.66%)
8. Unclear 4 (7.55%)
Replies
koonwoon 2010-8-11 17:33 1# Edit Quote How to Smash Carrier
A comprehensive attack should be launched. This include DF-21 missiles, anti-satellite missiles, submarines and special torpedos, land-based missiles, attack aircrafts, and missile speedboats and even nuclear tipped missiles if everything else fail. Forgive me of being alarmist, this is the way the US plays throughout its history of world conquest. We must clip its ability to make war once and for all for the good of the world. Philosophical freedom depends on a very unpleasant chore that we must perform here. Historically, look at the last time the US occupied Peking. Do you want that to happen again? The choice is clear. Do or die!zedereza 2010-8-12 05:18 2# Quote reply to koonwoon
First off it was not the US who hoisted flags in peking it was the british and french. Secondly I am an American i know of noone who wants war with China it would be terrible for both of us. Both countries need each other. Most of our products come from China and it makes you alot of money let alone jobs. I will say that the exercise over there was a rediculous show to north korea that served little to no point. But the same can be said about bragging about ways to take a carrier down(there's hundreds). The main point is both countries should find ways to better relations rather than find ways to put up walls.koonwoon 2010-8-12 16:46 3# Edit Quote how to smash carrier - reply to reply
Quote:
Original posted by zedereza at 2010-8-12 05:18
First off it was not the US who hoisted flags in peking it was the british and french. Secondly I am an American i know of noone who wants war with China it would be terrible for both of us. Both coun ... Let me say sir, that the U.S. falsifies history or is mum about it. I was in China as a boy when tactical nuclear strikes were constant a threat from the US. I been to the US for 50 years and I never feel accepted as good as a White American. Thirdly, given the rest of the containment moves by the US, the carrier is definitely a strategic threat to China. Basically, sir, the U.S. is prepared to kill the lender (China) rather than to pay back its debts. The hypocrisy of the United States is easy to see outside of the United States, the Common Market, and its puppet governements. And lastly, sir, if you are peace-loving, why do you spend 1/2 of the world's total military budget, to the point that your civilian population are homeless? [ I have been homeless in the United States and I have been illegally evicted out of public housing for advocating the rights of Chinese immigrants]. You may need us but we don't need you, sir. We only need you if we want a wasteful standard and genocide behavior as a way of life. I have studied you from the inside belly of the beast. You cannot lie to me.
Next ›› TopicPollActivityDebate
Email to Friend Subscription Favorites Poll Topic
This topic has been sticky by szh at 2010-8-11 12:39.
Authorstar Start time2010-8-11 11:57 How to smash Carrier?
USS George Washington aircraft carrier
Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said on Thursday local time that the US will send the USS George Washington supercarrier, which participated in last month's joint drills between the US and the ROK in the Sea of Japan, to the Yellow Sea for their upcoming exercise.
He did not give specific dates for the exercise in the Yellow Sea and the Sea of Japan, but the Associated Press said he was referring to the joint annual exercise named "Ulchi Freedom Guardian" scheduled for Aug 16 to 26.
"China will definitely react harshly to the move. It's hard to predict its specific reaction, but that will for sure cast a shadow over Sino-US military relations," said Rear Admiral Yang Yi, former head of strategic studies at the People's Liberation Army's National Defense University.
Anti-ship missiles a big threat for carriers
China's DF-21C missiles
According to Associated Press Aug 5, China is developing Dong Feng 21-D anti-ship ballistic missiles (ASBM), which is capable of destroying the most advanced defense system of aircraft carriers from nearly 2,000 miles away. It's reported that China's DF-21D is a game changing weapon in the Asia-Pacific.
Meanwhile, US intelligence agencies point out besides DF-21D, US aircraft carriers also face threats from land-based fighters and conventional warship equipped with anti-ship missiles.
China's J-10 fighter
China's Xiandai-class Destroyer
According to US Defense News, the number of China's anti-ship missiles could be regarded as a big threat to any anti-missile system. It's reported that PLA's Su-30, J-10 and "Flying leopard" fighters are all able to be equipped with long-rang anti-ship missiles with a rang of up to 100 kilometers.
US Diplomat magazine says the operational radius of China's advanced fighters reach 900 nautical miles, of which attack can cover "the first island chain". Their combat range can be also extended through air refuelling.
Besides, PLA Navy's warships are also reported to be equipped with kinds of medium and long-range anti-ship missiles. Thee SS-N-22 'Sunburn' super sonic anti-ship missile, which equips China Xiandai-class Destroyer, is a typical example.
Special torpedoes worry US military
China's Shang class submarine
In recent years, US media have been playing up the threat from China's submarines to US military. Meanwhile, US is also worrying about advanced weapons in China's submarines.
US media say China's submarines are equipped with advanced wake homing torpedoes, which are a key technology to reduce endurance loss and increase hit probability.
Taiwan's media also reveal that China's submarines are equipped with Russia's "Blizzard" Supercavitating torpedoes, of which the speed is four times as that of normal torpedoes. It's reported that no other weapons could contain this kind of torpedo.
System countermeasures
USS Enterprise aircraft carrier
Facts prove that it's easier to deprive an aircraft carrier of its combat capability by destroying its deck and commanding communication system. If an aircraft carrier loses combat capability, other war ships in the fleet cannot play a role. Attack on a carrier could result in huge casualty, which could cause strategy-level influence.
The Pentagon says US carriers are only a highly valuable target under the attack of long-range accurate weapons. It's unimaginable to risk dispatching carriers with over 5000 troops to war zones.
According to Chinese military experts, it's easy to be under attack when a carrier fleet alone moves to the enemy's coastline , because the fleet will combat beyond the support of the whole system of weapons, surveillance and intelligence to some extent. In the real battle, US carriers usually gain support from naval and air force nearby and keep close communication with the whole system of command and control through satellites.
Meanwhile, US military thinks DF-21D could hit targets with the support of satellites and early warning aircraft. Therefore, to counteract the attack of DF-21D on carriers, support from other armed services are highly needed, such as stealth fighters and anti-satellite missiles which are capable of destroying the intelligence support for DF-21D.
What is the Ace in the hole to smash carriers?
Poll Options ( multiple choice: choose no more than 5 options ) Number of participants 25
1. DF-21D ASBM 13 (24.53%)
2. Land-based fighters with anti-ship missiles 7 (13.21%)
3. Warships with anti-ship missiles 6 (11.32%)
4. Submarines with special torpedoes. 10 (18.87%)
5. Anti-satellite weapons. 6 (11.32%)
6. All the above 4 (7.55%)
7. Others 3 (5.66%)
8. Unclear 4 (7.55%)
Replies
koonwoon 2010-8-11 17:33 1# Edit Quote How to Smash Carrier
A comprehensive attack should be launched. This include DF-21 missiles, anti-satellite missiles, submarines and special torpedos, land-based missiles, attack aircrafts, and missile speedboats and even nuclear tipped missiles if everything else fail. Forgive me of being alarmist, this is the way the US plays throughout its history of world conquest. We must clip its ability to make war once and for all for the good of the world. Philosophical freedom depends on a very unpleasant chore that we must perform here. Historically, look at the last time the US occupied Peking. Do you want that to happen again? The choice is clear. Do or die!zedereza 2010-8-12 05:18 2# Quote reply to koonwoon
First off it was not the US who hoisted flags in peking it was the british and french. Secondly I am an American i know of noone who wants war with China it would be terrible for both of us. Both countries need each other. Most of our products come from China and it makes you alot of money let alone jobs. I will say that the exercise over there was a rediculous show to north korea that served little to no point. But the same can be said about bragging about ways to take a carrier down(there's hundreds). The main point is both countries should find ways to better relations rather than find ways to put up walls.koonwoon 2010-8-12 16:46 3# Edit Quote how to smash carrier - reply to reply
Quote:
Original posted by zedereza at 2010-8-12 05:18
First off it was not the US who hoisted flags in peking it was the british and french. Secondly I am an American i know of noone who wants war with China it would be terrible for both of us. Both coun ... Let me say sir, that the U.S. falsifies history or is mum about it. I was in China as a boy when tactical nuclear strikes were constant a threat from the US. I been to the US for 50 years and I never feel accepted as good as a White American. Thirdly, given the rest of the containment moves by the US, the carrier is definitely a strategic threat to China. Basically, sir, the U.S. is prepared to kill the lender (China) rather than to pay back its debts. The hypocrisy of the United States is easy to see outside of the United States, the Common Market, and its puppet governements. And lastly, sir, if you are peace-loving, why do you spend 1/2 of the world's total military budget, to the point that your civilian population are homeless? [ I have been homeless in the United States and I have been illegally evicted out of public housing for advocating the rights of Chinese immigrants]. You may need us but we don't need you, sir. We only need you if we want a wasteful standard and genocide behavior as a way of life. I have studied you from the inside belly of the beast. You cannot lie to me.
Point of No Return
Kaya Publishing:
Re: WATER CHASING WATER
I am not getting response fast enough from anyone except the People's Daily, and I therefore must assume that I am as isolated as China itself is. Therefore, there is no point in telling the world what I think. Hence, I withdraw all dealings with Kaya, business or otherwise, and this is the last contact. Please do not contact a third party in this matter, especially not Betty Priebe, since she is ill. This communication is legal and binding. There is no further communication with Kaya.
Koon Woon
August 12, 2010
Re: WATER CHASING WATER
I am not getting response fast enough from anyone except the People's Daily, and I therefore must assume that I am as isolated as China itself is. Therefore, there is no point in telling the world what I think. Hence, I withdraw all dealings with Kaya, business or otherwise, and this is the last contact. Please do not contact a third party in this matter, especially not Betty Priebe, since she is ill. This communication is legal and binding. There is no further communication with Kaya.
Koon Woon
August 12, 2010
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
From the Financial Office:
Dear Conditionally Admitted Graduate Student,
The Office of Financial Assistance has completed a review of your financial aid file and has discovered that a problem exists with your admission status which must be resolved immediately in order to permit processing of your fall 2010 financial aid funds. According to the Office of Admissions, you have been conditionally admitted to your Masters program since the fall 2009 semester. Please understand that, as a conditional admit, students occasionally may receive financial assistance; however, they are limited to receiving that aid if they are enrolled in only the first twelve (12) months/one calendar year of that conditional status. We are alerting you via this letter that your time frame for conditional eligibility has expired. Therefore, you are not eligible for Federal financial assistance for fall 2010 until your admission status is upgraded to full admission.
According to federal guidelines, a student must be fully admitted into an eligible degree program and be enrolled as a regular student in order to receive financial aid funds. A regular student is defined as one who is enrolled or accepted for enrollment for the purpose of obtaining a degree by the University of Illinois at Springfield. One exception to this standard at UIS is the status of conditional admission. Graduate students are, on occasion, conditionally admitted to UIS in order to allow them time to complete specified prerequisite courses, or to raise their cumulative grade point average (GPA), before being fully admitted to their program. These students may receive financial aid as long as they meet all other financial aid requirements (e.g., satisfactory academic progress); however, these students must successfully complete their prerequisite coursework, or raise their GPA, within one academic year. After that academic year/twelve (12) month period, they must be fully admitted into the program in order to continue receiving financial assistance.
To summarize, you must be fully admitted to your Masters program in order to be eligible for financial assistance. You must contact your program and speak with them about your admission status. If they have fully admitted you, they need to contact the Admissions Office to have your official status updated. If your official admission status is not changed to “fully admitted”, you will not be eligible to receive any new disbursement of financial assistance. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact the Office of Financial Assistance at 206-6724.
Sincerely,
Renee Clausner
Financial Aid Advisor
University of Illinois Springfield
University Hall Room 1055
Springfield, IL 62703-5407
217-206-6724
E-MAIL CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail message, including any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only. This e-mail and any attachments might contain information that is confidential, legally privileged or otherwise protected or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not a named recipient, or if you are named but believe that you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or return e-mail and promptly delete this e-mail and any attachments and copies thereof from your system. If you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any copying, distribution, dissemination, disclosure or other use of this e-mail and any attachments is unauthorized and prohibited. Your receipt of this message is not intended to waive any applicable privilege or claim of confidentiality, and any prohibited or unauthorized disclosure is not binding on the sender or the University of Illinois Springfield. Thank you for your cooperation.
The Office of Financial Assistance has completed a review of your financial aid file and has discovered that a problem exists with your admission status which must be resolved immediately in order to permit processing of your fall 2010 financial aid funds. According to the Office of Admissions, you have been conditionally admitted to your Masters program since the fall 2009 semester. Please understand that, as a conditional admit, students occasionally may receive financial assistance; however, they are limited to receiving that aid if they are enrolled in only the first twelve (12) months/one calendar year of that conditional status. We are alerting you via this letter that your time frame for conditional eligibility has expired. Therefore, you are not eligible for Federal financial assistance for fall 2010 until your admission status is upgraded to full admission.
According to federal guidelines, a student must be fully admitted into an eligible degree program and be enrolled as a regular student in order to receive financial aid funds. A regular student is defined as one who is enrolled or accepted for enrollment for the purpose of obtaining a degree by the University of Illinois at Springfield. One exception to this standard at UIS is the status of conditional admission. Graduate students are, on occasion, conditionally admitted to UIS in order to allow them time to complete specified prerequisite courses, or to raise their cumulative grade point average (GPA), before being fully admitted to their program. These students may receive financial aid as long as they meet all other financial aid requirements (e.g., satisfactory academic progress); however, these students must successfully complete their prerequisite coursework, or raise their GPA, within one academic year. After that academic year/twelve (12) month period, they must be fully admitted into the program in order to continue receiving financial assistance.
To summarize, you must be fully admitted to your Masters program in order to be eligible for financial assistance. You must contact your program and speak with them about your admission status. If they have fully admitted you, they need to contact the Admissions Office to have your official status updated. If your official admission status is not changed to “fully admitted”, you will not be eligible to receive any new disbursement of financial assistance. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact the Office of Financial Assistance at 206-6724.
Sincerely,
Renee Clausner
Financial Aid Advisor
University of Illinois Springfield
University Hall Room 1055
Springfield, IL 62703-5407
217-206-6724
E-MAIL CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail message, including any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only. This e-mail and any attachments might contain information that is confidential, legally privileged or otherwise protected or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not a named recipient, or if you are named but believe that you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or return e-mail and promptly delete this e-mail and any attachments and copies thereof from your system. If you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any copying, distribution, dissemination, disclosure or other use of this e-mail and any attachments is unauthorized and prohibited. Your receipt of this message is not intended to waive any applicable privilege or claim of confidentiality, and any prohibited or unauthorized disclosure is not binding on the sender or the University of Illinois Springfield. Thank you for your cooperation.
From the Academic Advisor:
Hello Koon,
I am so sorry that I wasn’t able to email you back before now. I was out of the office yesterday. I checked your records and I see that you are registered for SOA 405 and PHI 472 for the Fall. You were accepted into the LNT program for the Spring of 2010.
Did you have any questions about the program or about your Fall schedule?? Just let me know and thanks!
Amanda Winters
History, English, LNT and
Philosophy Academic Program Coordinator
217-206-6421
UHB 3050
awint01s@uis.edu
I am so sorry that I wasn’t able to email you back before now. I was out of the office yesterday. I checked your records and I see that you are registered for SOA 405 and PHI 472 for the Fall. You were accepted into the LNT program for the Spring of 2010.
Did you have any questions about the program or about your Fall schedule?? Just let me know and thanks!
Amanda Winters
History, English, LNT and
Philosophy Academic Program Coordinator
217-206-6421
UHB 3050
awint01s@uis.edu
Who Should I Believe?
Who Should I Believe?
I have the following two emails from the University of Illinois at Springfield; they seem to say different and perhaps contradictory things. One says my student status is OK and by implication I should be able to enroll and receive financial aid. The other email from the financial aid office says that not only am I not eligible I have been ineligible for some time and they just happen to think of it and tell me now after the fact.
I rather believe in Amanda. Amada Winters sounds like Nuclear Winter.
I shall post the other email from the financial aid office as well, but you wouldn't really be interested. It is just blah, blah, blah, and all that bureaucratic bungling...
I have the following two emails from the University of Illinois at Springfield; they seem to say different and perhaps contradictory things. One says my student status is OK and by implication I should be able to enroll and receive financial aid. The other email from the financial aid office says that not only am I not eligible I have been ineligible for some time and they just happen to think of it and tell me now after the fact.
I rather believe in Amanda. Amada Winters sounds like Nuclear Winter.
I shall post the other email from the financial aid office as well, but you wouldn't really be interested. It is just blah, blah, blah, and all that bureaucratic bungling...
Bomba, Boma, a New Type of Warrior...
Bruce Thomas, retired Special Forces analyst of the Naval Intelligence College, who spent most of his duties in the Far Eastern Asian Theater, has written the definitive book on Barack Obama's special qualifications for his coveted job as the World's Greatest Military Commander. In this latest book by Thomas, who has also written How to Run a Successful Circus, Bombay on a Biscuit a Day, and Japan without Japs, and Chinks for Gooks Only, and his seminal book on naval encounters, You Are Sunk When the Petty Officer Finds You Onboard Stinking Drunk, chronicles here in IMMORTAL COMBAT Obama's secret CIA training in Indonesia as a foreign student from Hawaii. Obama was trained in Yubiwaza (the deadly Japanese art of alley fighting), poker from the secret tricks of Richard Nixon as a Naval officer, and black coffee drinking for all-night bridge sessions. And of course, a telephone was within reach at all times to make bets to the bookie on the outcome of the English Army Wars. With these kinds of training done in top secret, plus a Harvard Law School education, no wonder Barack Obama is shoulders above even the tallest pro basketball player. And so Hu Jintao (Who is that?), Watch out! O Bambi Obama's got your number! He will give you a call and invite you to a cross-dressing party one of these days! And if you politely refuse, he won't take No for an answer, he will send the USS Aircraft Carrier George Washington to Beijing to fetch you to the Ugly Bug Ball....
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
War to End the World?
Chinese People's Liberation Army held live-fire drill in the South China Sea
By John Lee
Four years before World War I, British author and politician Norman Angell published "The Great Illusion," arguing that military conquests had become obsolete between modern economies. Many policy makers use the same logic today to predict that China and the United States can avoid war. Like their forebears, they may be wrong.
That's the implicit argument of University of Chicago political scientist John Mearsheimer, who delivered the annual Michael Hintze Lecture at Sydney University this week. Politics, rather than economics, will decisively shape the future of Asia just as it did Europe in the previous century, he believes. China's ascent is likely to spark an intense security competition with the U.S., leading to the strong possibility of war between the world's two biggest economies.
This argument runs counter to today's conventional wisdom, which sees a benign future for U.S.-China relations. This view, still popular in Washington, is based on the idea that the U.S. can manage China by offering Beijing incentives to rise as a "responsible stakeholder" within the current U.S.-led global order. Like the educated and well-heeled elites in Europe whom Angell chronicled and who a century ago exhibited extreme reluctance to imagine the outbreak of major war, today's policy makers can't fathom war in the Pacific.
Yet history suggests that Mr. Mearsheimer's warnings should be heeded. Prior to World War I, Angell's logic—that the disruption to the international credit and trading system would mean that everyone loses in the event of war—was irrefutable. Prior to 1914, annual trade volumes of Britain, Germany and France was 52%, 38% and 54% of GDP respectively, with much of the trade being between these great powers. By 1913, Britain had become the leading market for German exports, with both countries largely benefitting from the economic relationship. In the decade leading to the Great War, trade and capital flows between these great powers increased by an estimated 65% and 84%, respectively. Yet, economic interdependence was not enough to prevent the tragic escalation of events that followed the assassination of Austria's Archduke Franz Ferdinand.
Today, China's self-proclaimed and widely accepted "peaceful development" similarly appears to be based on solid economic ground. China has re-emerged as a great trading nation but remains a poor country in terms of GDP per capita. China's export sector is responsible for the creation of hundreds of millions of jobs, and the country still remains deeply dependent on outside technology and know-how. To continue the country's rapid economic development, the Chinese Communist Party needs a peaceful and stable environment in Asia. On the U.S. side, no one in Washington wants to see a conflict with China erupt, especially at a time when America is fighting two wars and worries about Iran's intentions.
Yet Angell's optimism was ultimately wrong because it was based on an incomplete account of driving forces behind relations between the great powers. While the economic relationship created powerful incentives for peace, Angell did not take seriously the intense strategic competition—particularly the growing naval rivalry—between status quo powers like Britain and a rapidly rising and revisionist power like Germany. Nor did Angell's account allow for the human factor of strategic missteps and miscalculations—particularly by Germany's Kaiser Wilhelm II—that eventually plunged Europe into war.
What are the lessons for Asia? While economic interdependence and American attempts to "manage" China's rise has so far succeeded in preventing war, the recent diplomatic conflagration over the Chinese reiteration that its claims in the South China Sea are part of Beijing's "core interests" validates what scholars such as Aaron Friedberg have been saying for a decade: East Asia today has the potential to recreate the European situation at the turn of the previous century. When it comes to strategic goals, China is re-entering into a regional order not of its making after decades of self-imposed isolation. By virtue of Beijing's fundamental dissatisfaction with several of its land and maritime borders, it is a revisionist power. As it rises, the desperation to secure its "core interests" will deepen.
Chinese grand strategy since the days of former leader Deng Xiaoping has been to avoid conflict with a much more formidable competitor (i.e., America) while China builds its "comprehensive national power." In favor of "winning Asia without fighting," as Chinese General Ma Xiaotian once put it, are many of the older generation of leaders who see caution as prudence, even if they relentlessly seek "windows of opportunity" to extend Beijing's power at the expense of America's. They still remember the suffering and humiliation of the Mao Zedong years, when an isolated China tried to achieve too much too quickly.
Yet, as history reaffirms, a peace built on continued political skill, dexterity and restraint rather than a harmony of strategic interest is inherently precarious. Without personal experience of China's recent traumatic history, future generations of leaders will be more confident and assertive. Even now, emerging Communist Party and People's Liberation Army leaders argue that China is moving too slowly on securing its foreign-policy goals. The danger is that, just as Germany did in Europe a century ago, China's overestimation of its own capabilities, and underestimation of American strengths and resolve—combined with strategic dissatisfaction and impatience—is the fast way toward disastrous miscalculation and error.
Several years before the outbreak of the Great War, Kaiser Wilhelm II publicly declared that he considered the prospect of war with Britain "a most unimaginable thing." Despite deep economic interdependence, Europe could not avert a disaster. Leaders in Washington and throughout Asia should not commit the same failure of imagination.
Mr. Lee is a foreign-policy fellow at the Centre for Independent Studies in Sydney, a visiting scholar at the Hudson Institute in Washington
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My response:
I do not think so, Mr. John Lee. The USS George Washington will be sunk, either by DF-21D missiles or by nuclear weapons. There is no turning back for China.
"Where does an 800-pound gorilla sit when he goes to a restaurant? Anywhere he wants to!"
But that is a joke of the past, next time that happens we have new items on the menu ---
Grilled Gorilla Meat or Gorilla Chop Suey
Koon Woon, Seattle
By John Lee
Four years before World War I, British author and politician Norman Angell published "The Great Illusion," arguing that military conquests had become obsolete between modern economies. Many policy makers use the same logic today to predict that China and the United States can avoid war. Like their forebears, they may be wrong.
That's the implicit argument of University of Chicago political scientist John Mearsheimer, who delivered the annual Michael Hintze Lecture at Sydney University this week. Politics, rather than economics, will decisively shape the future of Asia just as it did Europe in the previous century, he believes. China's ascent is likely to spark an intense security competition with the U.S., leading to the strong possibility of war between the world's two biggest economies.
This argument runs counter to today's conventional wisdom, which sees a benign future for U.S.-China relations. This view, still popular in Washington, is based on the idea that the U.S. can manage China by offering Beijing incentives to rise as a "responsible stakeholder" within the current U.S.-led global order. Like the educated and well-heeled elites in Europe whom Angell chronicled and who a century ago exhibited extreme reluctance to imagine the outbreak of major war, today's policy makers can't fathom war in the Pacific.
Yet history suggests that Mr. Mearsheimer's warnings should be heeded. Prior to World War I, Angell's logic—that the disruption to the international credit and trading system would mean that everyone loses in the event of war—was irrefutable. Prior to 1914, annual trade volumes of Britain, Germany and France was 52%, 38% and 54% of GDP respectively, with much of the trade being between these great powers. By 1913, Britain had become the leading market for German exports, with both countries largely benefitting from the economic relationship. In the decade leading to the Great War, trade and capital flows between these great powers increased by an estimated 65% and 84%, respectively. Yet, economic interdependence was not enough to prevent the tragic escalation of events that followed the assassination of Austria's Archduke Franz Ferdinand.
Today, China's self-proclaimed and widely accepted "peaceful development" similarly appears to be based on solid economic ground. China has re-emerged as a great trading nation but remains a poor country in terms of GDP per capita. China's export sector is responsible for the creation of hundreds of millions of jobs, and the country still remains deeply dependent on outside technology and know-how. To continue the country's rapid economic development, the Chinese Communist Party needs a peaceful and stable environment in Asia. On the U.S. side, no one in Washington wants to see a conflict with China erupt, especially at a time when America is fighting two wars and worries about Iran's intentions.
Yet Angell's optimism was ultimately wrong because it was based on an incomplete account of driving forces behind relations between the great powers. While the economic relationship created powerful incentives for peace, Angell did not take seriously the intense strategic competition—particularly the growing naval rivalry—between status quo powers like Britain and a rapidly rising and revisionist power like Germany. Nor did Angell's account allow for the human factor of strategic missteps and miscalculations—particularly by Germany's Kaiser Wilhelm II—that eventually plunged Europe into war.
What are the lessons for Asia? While economic interdependence and American attempts to "manage" China's rise has so far succeeded in preventing war, the recent diplomatic conflagration over the Chinese reiteration that its claims in the South China Sea are part of Beijing's "core interests" validates what scholars such as Aaron Friedberg have been saying for a decade: East Asia today has the potential to recreate the European situation at the turn of the previous century. When it comes to strategic goals, China is re-entering into a regional order not of its making after decades of self-imposed isolation. By virtue of Beijing's fundamental dissatisfaction with several of its land and maritime borders, it is a revisionist power. As it rises, the desperation to secure its "core interests" will deepen.
Chinese grand strategy since the days of former leader Deng Xiaoping has been to avoid conflict with a much more formidable competitor (i.e., America) while China builds its "comprehensive national power." In favor of "winning Asia without fighting," as Chinese General Ma Xiaotian once put it, are many of the older generation of leaders who see caution as prudence, even if they relentlessly seek "windows of opportunity" to extend Beijing's power at the expense of America's. They still remember the suffering and humiliation of the Mao Zedong years, when an isolated China tried to achieve too much too quickly.
Yet, as history reaffirms, a peace built on continued political skill, dexterity and restraint rather than a harmony of strategic interest is inherently precarious. Without personal experience of China's recent traumatic history, future generations of leaders will be more confident and assertive. Even now, emerging Communist Party and People's Liberation Army leaders argue that China is moving too slowly on securing its foreign-policy goals. The danger is that, just as Germany did in Europe a century ago, China's overestimation of its own capabilities, and underestimation of American strengths and resolve—combined with strategic dissatisfaction and impatience—is the fast way toward disastrous miscalculation and error.
Several years before the outbreak of the Great War, Kaiser Wilhelm II publicly declared that he considered the prospect of war with Britain "a most unimaginable thing." Despite deep economic interdependence, Europe could not avert a disaster. Leaders in Washington and throughout Asia should not commit the same failure of imagination.
Mr. Lee is a foreign-policy fellow at the Centre for Independent Studies in Sydney, a visiting scholar at the Hudson Institute in Washington
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My response:
I do not think so, Mr. John Lee. The USS George Washington will be sunk, either by DF-21D missiles or by nuclear weapons. There is no turning back for China.
"Where does an 800-pound gorilla sit when he goes to a restaurant? Anywhere he wants to!"
But that is a joke of the past, next time that happens we have new items on the menu ---
Grilled Gorilla Meat or Gorilla Chop Suey
Koon Woon, Seattle
Monday, August 9, 2010
Betrayal?
And they threaten to put you into this unsanctioned nut house that is below the minimum standards of national health care in the mental system? What if also they throw away the key?
THEY YOU WOULD BE VERITABLY SCREWED!
here is help: The National Hotline Against Involuntary Commitment
Citizens Against Being Screwed by Psychiatric Workers
1 - 800 - un-screw ( 1 - 800 - 8672739 )
A "well-lit cafe" for readings, poetry workshops, and book discussion groups
Common Ground is the appropo name for my brother Lange Woon's coffeehouse (cupcake shop) in Renton, WA located at 900 South Third Street phone (425) 235 - 1717 and fax (425) 687 - 3152. It is a medium-size cozy place with Wi-Fi and plenty of coffee and cupcakes and non-alcholic drinks. A quiet place for studying, conversing, visiting and enjoying a family-gathering out for some mouth-watering cupcakes, smoothies, coffees or teas. Located in downtown Renton, near the bus terminal, with plenty of parking on the streets, it is highly accessible and accessible to foot traffic as well. Nearby restaurants provide substantial meals before relaxation for the evening here.
If any group would like to host a poetry or book reading here or even a light musical event, contact me at nooknoow@aol.com or (206) 329-5566 and ask for Koon Woon in regards to readings at the coffeeshop. Hope to see you there soon.
Saturday, August 7, 2010
The Literary Mafia
The Blue Blood: The Literary Mafia
Is there such a 'ting? Sure 'ting, Sam. There is such a 'ting.
But pretend I never told you.
There is no such a thing.
Except your thing. Do what you wanna.
Duh, I dumb no wat to do,
Dum dum, dum dum bullets, that's the 'ting.
Chinaman, chinaman, you dumb thing.
I will cut off your queue, you think that's cute. That ain't my thing.
You are a fink. Thingamatit, think a think tank. Think tank.
Do you want to write? What to try it? The Triad.
Don't try it. Just do it!
Do what?
Do what didididi dum. Dum dum.
Don't talk nonsense and don't blab to nobody.
The tongue that flaps in the wind ends up in the soup.
Get it? Say anything real or true and I will
WHACK YA!!! The Literary Mafia lives on this street.
Is there such a 'ting? Sure 'ting, Sam. There is such a 'ting.
But pretend I never told you.
There is no such a thing.
Except your thing. Do what you wanna.
Duh, I dumb no wat to do,
Dum dum, dum dum bullets, that's the 'ting.
Chinaman, chinaman, you dumb thing.
I will cut off your queue, you think that's cute. That ain't my thing.
You are a fink. Thingamatit, think a think tank. Think tank.
Do you want to write? What to try it? The Triad.
Don't try it. Just do it!
Do what?
Do what didididi dum. Dum dum.
Don't talk nonsense and don't blab to nobody.
The tongue that flaps in the wind ends up in the soup.
Get it? Say anything real or true and I will
Bureacracy
Philosophy is a hard nut to crack especially when you are carryin
Professor John Wisdom on your back.
August 4, 2010
Office of Financial Assistance
University of Illinois Springfiel
University Hall, Room 1015
One University Plaza
MS UHB 1015
Springfield, IL 62703 – 5407
Financial Aid Appeals Committee:
Dear Administrators and Committee Members:
My student number at UIS is 668956879 and I am in the LNT program. First of all, I am a disabled student with schizoaffective disorder registered with the Students with Disabilities Office (please contact Ms. Susie Woods for information). So, some of the university regulations’ complex nature are at times difficult for me to navigate.
I was told by Shane at the Student Financial Aid Office that I no longer qualified for financial at the University on a permanent basis because I withdrew from the summer semester of 2010 during the first week of classes. Because, he said, that my ratio of completed courses to attempted courses fell below the minimum standard. Now Renee at the Financial Aid Office tells me that I am in good academic standing. So, I need clarification here.
The reason I withdrew from the philosophy class I was taking was because of “personality conflicts” with the instructor. I am very happy to elaborate on this, if needed. One further complaint is that I found a very BIG mistake in the textbook we were using in FACTUAL content. I pointed this out to the professor and the students but the whole thing was shoved aside although all admitted it was indeed misstated. I shall simply repeated the exact quote from the book here: “Alexander the Great conquered the world…” I for whatever reason found that to be a false statement. I thought that a selection for a textbook of that sort of intellectual dogmatism is inappropriate for a graduate course in moral philosophy.
Philosophy and the philosophy of literature remain my main interests in life. I would very much apply myself at the University of Illinois at Springfield in these fields for the potential good of mankind.
Yours very sincerely,
[signed: Koon Woon]
Koon Woon
Friday, August 6, 2010
DAMAGED IN POSTAL HANDLING!!!
CAUTION!!! PLEASE LABLE "FRAGILE!" "HANDLE WITH CARE" when mailing printed matter such as manuscripts to Goldfish Press because it sound like Godfather Press.
Recived the following from Jeanpaul Ferro after a somewhat delay of indeterminable length:
Recived the following from Jeanpaul Ferro after a somewhat delay of indeterminable length:
I used to work for the Post Office myself and you need to have an FBI clearance. These days the postal machinery are falling apart due to privatization of the Post Office and consequently service is not as good and business falls off and is on the verge of bankruptcy.
We need Socialism back in the Post Office!!!
Sunday, August 1, 2010
Won't you join the Chrysanthemum Literary Society and get a customized T-shirt?
The Chrysanthemum Literary Society is a nonprofit charitable organization founded in the Evergreen State of Washington in 2003, dedicated to the advancement of literature, education, and world peace.
We have now handsome customized T-shirts in sizes small, medium, large, or extra large. Please consider making a donation to Chrysanthemum Literary Society whose mission is to promote world peace through literature and education.
We publish the print poetry magazine Chrysanthemum and literary titles through Goldfish Press.
A donation of whatever amount is welcome. Please send to
Chrysanthemum Literary Society
P.O. Box 14515
Seattle, WA 98114
Any donation over the amount of $25 will receive a handsome customized T-shirt
of the Chrysanthemum Literary Society logo.
Your support is very much appreciated. 
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
THREE POEMS BY KOON WOON
-
Changming Yuan is the most published China poet in the world. He has work out from Goldfish Press -- Kinship. Kinship --- poetry by Changm...
