Li Changchun wrote:
"running dogg"
The Chinese are currently financing the US government. They hold a BIG
chunk of US debt. The West has shifted all its manufacturing facilities
to China so in the event of a China collapse there might be serious
shortages of most goods.
What you are likely to see in China is the collapse of their banks, which
are
already insolvent and technically bankrupt, and the disentigration of the
CCP.
Neither of which will likely spell the end of their manufacturing base. In
the very short term there may be disruptions but it would quickly recover
and without the CCPoverhead possibly become much more robust.
Possibly. But China has a tradition of warlord rule, and for much of its
history has been broken into feuding fiefdoms, despite the common
culture and language of the Chinese people. Then again, the same
situation persisted in Italy for a thousand years, and that country is
now stable and prosperous.
I think your hatred of the CCP has blinded you
to the serious implications of a potential China collapse.
Your love of the CCP has seriously blinded you to a brutal muderous regime
which is deeply hated by their own people.
You seem to make this same curious error over and over again, equating
any concern about China's stability and potential disruptions to the
west if that stability were to be disrupted with love of the CCP. I
doubt most westerners love the CCP, I sure don't. But it's the only
thing holding the country together. Like I said, China has a long,
bloody history of warlordism and civil war, and any collapse of the CCP
might bring a return to the bad old days. This bad situation-a brutal
dictatorship being the only thing keeping the world's most populous
country from sliding into chaos-is exacerbated greatly by the fact that
China now has virtually ALL of the world's industrial capacity. There is
no more industrial base in America, Europe, Japan. It's all been moved
to China. If China descends into chaos the rest of the world will go
with it. Blame your beloved capitalists for being too willing to cozy up
to a regime that could be toppled by a mass movement like Falun Gong and
that allows massive pollution and 10 cent a day wages.
The DMZ is the most fortified border on earth. The North Koreans have
gone to great lengths to make sure that nobody crosses. I'm not so sure
that hordes of refugees will be flooding across.
If the N.Korean side of the DMZ becomes demilitarized because of a regime
colapse you can be sure that waves of refugees will find a way across or
around
it. China would also see refugees.
Maybe to start with there would be a lot of North Koreans attempting to
cross, but it might die down after a while. There was no massive refugee
crisis when European Communism collapsed. Most of the East Germans who
fled into West Berlin right after the wall came down eventually went
back home.
I don't think you'd see a democracy spring up in NK. They've had 60
years of harsh Stalinist rule. You'd more likely see a situation like in
Afghanistan before the Taliban, with a lot of local party bosses
becoming warlords and establishing fiefdoms.
I see you are assuming that another brutal regime will take hold.
But that is not the scenario I am discussing. Besides another
regime would simply collapse as quikely as the old.
I didn't say that another centralized dictatorship would take hold, I
said that the country would descend into warlord rule and possibly civil
war. There is a difference.
China may send troops to
ensure "stability".
Indeed, and that would be viewed as a very provactive move in Seoul
and the West.
But I don't think that it would trigger a western invasion of NK.
But I don't think China will invade South Korea. The
US is a major trading partner for China; the CCP is NOT going to start a
nuclear war with the US in the name of Communism.
Has it occured to you that whomever overthrows Kim Jong Il may well be
"friendly" with the South?
You're assuming that a pro Western ruler replaces Kim. But I'm saying
that no ruler may replace Kim, that NK would break up instead, and that
would likely be much worse than a pro West regime in the North being
toppled by the Chinese.
If China thinks they can keep Kim from nuking Seoul, they may be sadly
mistaken. Unlike the massive bureaucracy that Communism has become in
China, in NK Kim is the end all and be all of government. He is totally
cut off from the rest of the world and lives in a dream world and is
much more likely to start a war with the US to "free" SK. If the US is
forced to invade NK because of Kim, the US will likely reach a quid pro
quo with the Chinese, keeping the Yalu River as the boundary between US
and Chinese troops. The mutual trade between China and the US means that
all out war between the two is not likely, even if China invades Taiwan.
The US establishment is not willing to have a nuclear war over Taiwan or
Korea.
You make many assumptions here about many countries. China is well known
for saber rattling against Taiwan. Taiwan businesses invest heavily in
China as
well. The scenario of any nuclear exchange in the region is very remote.
Regarding
N.Korea, even if Kim Jong Il does indeed have a "couple" of nuclear tipped
weapons, considering the latest intelligence and if his military is even
slightly
coherent", they would likely depose of him and refrain.
It's possible, but there would be enough loyalists to go ahead with the
Bomb drop and force a US invasion.
In any case, nuclear weapons aside, the Korean peninsular would become
the immediate focus of attention in the West and Beijing and Seoul would
have
many urgent and pressing meetings to attend.
This at least is true.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----