China threatens war, calling Trump's bluff?

[Skeptic Ginger]

I didn't want this to get buried in the POTUS Trump thread. It's too important.

Australia has concerns.

US 'threatens to involve Australia in war with China': Paul Keating condemns US secretary of state nominee's comments

First an ignorant phone call to Taiwan, with nothing to gain and a lot to lose. Now this ignorant comment by Tillerson .

In a statement released on Friday, Mr Keating warned the Australian government to reject Rex Tillerson's declaration this week that a "signal" needed to be sent to Beijing that the construction of artificial islands in the contested region must stop and "access to those islands also is not going to be allowed".

South China Sea: Paul Keating says Rex Tillerson threatening to involve Australia in war

Earlier this week, the former Exxon Mobil chief executive said the US would send a "clear signal" to China that its access to artificial islands in the South China Sea would be blocked.

These hawks have no clue how to run this country.

China warns of ‘devastating consequences’ if US blocks its plans for artificial islands

THE US has been warned of potentially “devastating consequences” if it blocks China from islands it has built in contested waters in the South China Sea, according to Chinese media reports.
And in more inflammatory comments, prospective US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was told he better watch his mouth, after the former ExxonMobil CEO told US senators that he would seek to deny Beijing access to the artificial islands.
China’s actions in the region are comparable to Russia’s invasion of Crimea, he said, a comment that did not sit well with the nuclear-armed Asian giant.

Both China and Russia have leaders that can easily run circles around Trump and all he has in response are infantile Tweets.

 

[Giz]

Yeah, the best thing to do is just let them know ahead of any negotiations that we'll appease them.

 

[casebro]

Yeah, the best thing to do is just let them know ahead of any negotiations that we'll appease them.

Ah yes, a page from Obama's book about statesmanship.

Say, I can't recall- when was the last time China attacked ANYBODY?

They are nit going to piss off their biggest trading partner. And and avowed capitalist like a Trump ought to know how to keep them in line.

 

[sunmaster14]

Ummm, threatening war is not calling a bluff. It is the bluff. China is bluffing.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Yeah, the best thing to do is just let them know ahead of any negotiations that we'll appease them.

That's your answer? The concept of diplomacy not in your vocabulary? What is there to gain worth starting a war over?

What did the phone call to Taiwan prove? Do you think maybe it was about Trump's real estate deal he wants with Taiwan?

Think the best way to deal with the militarization of the S China Sea is a poorly thought out answer in a nomination hearing? You don't suppose do you, that Tillerson doesn't know jack about the job of Secretary of State? All you have to do is be a bully, against a country where saving face is an ingrained part of the culture?

Is this what you want to go to war over? Seriously? Are you in the military, planning to join or encourage your kids/grandkids to go fight the Chinese?

Think it might be useful to recruit China to keep N Korea in check with us?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Ah yes, a page from Obama's book about statesmanship.

Say, I can't recall- when was the last time China attacked ANYBODY?

They are nit going to piss off their biggest trading partner. And and avowed capitalist like a Trump ought to know how to keep them in line.

Biggest trading partner? You mean China that owns so much of our debt they could crash the value of the dollar should they choose too?

Diplomacy matters. Trump has no clue what that means. Just like GW figured all he had to do was march into Baghdad and start pumping the oil. Yep, that worked out well.

 

[Childlike Empress]

It's easy to look up the China Daily piece these clowns are referring to. Do this. Always. Don't allow Fake News to indoctrinate you. The piece in question is here and far from "threatening war".

If he is appointed, it remains to be seen to what extent his views against China will translate into US foreign policies. After all, what we heard at Wednesday's confirmation hearing before the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee was essentially his personal policy inclinations.

Not only were his views divergent from, even contrary to, those of Trump on some critical issues. He openly conceded he is yet to have a serious, in-depth discussion with Trump on foreign policy imperatives.

These boil down to one simple point – his remarks at the Wednesday hearing, sensational as they were, turned out to be of little reference value except for judging his personal orientations. [...]

Tillerson wanted a reality-based China policy that is "based on what we see and not based on what we hope". But what he presented was based more on what prejudice and arms-spurred self-righteousness make him believe and hope than on real-world realities.

What happened on Wednesday shows that if and when confirmed, Rex Tillerson needs to first acquaint himself with the ABCs of China-US relations and diplomacy at large.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Wait, he said "China’s actions in the region are comparable to Russia’s invasion of Crimea"? But per Trump the US is just fine with Russia's invasion of Crimea.

 

[tyr_13]

Wait, he said "China’s actions in the region are comparable to Russia’s invasion of Crimea"? But per Trump the US is just fine with Russia's invasion of Crimea.

That's what I was thinking too.

Well, along with 'no, building islands to try to claim sea lanes illegally isn't the same as invading places where people already live and you know, killing them'.

 

[Loss Leader]

Ah yes, a page from Obama's book about statesmanship.

Say, I can't recall- when was the last time China attacked ANYBODY?

They are nit going to piss off their biggest trading partner.

Don't be so certain. The Spratly Islands are turning out to have a whole lot of oil under them. I think we're the ones who are going to back down. Is the US, even Trump, going to send ships to protect the claims of the Phillipines and Indonesia (both of whom claim many of the same Islands from each other as well as China).

Is China, which does not have very friendly relations with any oil rich nation, just going to give up fields that could help them stay energy independent?

I think we're going to appease them and I think it still won't work.

 

[tyr_13]

There really isn't a 'win' there for the US any way one looks at it.

Well, besides magically good outcomes for...reasons?

 

[TragicMonkey]

I'm curious if US/Philippines relations will improve under Trump. Duterte despises Obama because Obama was too critical of all the sanctioned murder; will Trump be more appealing to him, or does he extend his dislike to the whole country? On Trump's part he does seem to admire brutal thuglike dictators...but on the other hand Duterte isn't white, which is a definite minus for Trump. I feel like Trump would have been best buddies with Marcos, but Duterte is just too much into murder and insufficiently into lavish spending. I fear a playdate would not go well.

 

[Giz]

Biggest trading partner? You mean China that owns so much of our debt they could crash the value of the dollar should they choose too?

Diplomacy matters. Trump has no clue what that means. Just like GW figured all he had to do was march into Baghdad and start pumping the oil. Yep, that worked out well.

Seriously?

For China to tank the value of our debt, they'd have to destroy the value of their biggest asset. Hurting their economy far more than ours.

And as for gwb, I seem to remember that having liberated Baghdad they then allowed the Iraqis a free choice of who to give the oil contracts to.

 

[Shiner]

China threatens war ....
.

When and where is this reported?

From your link.

China’s official reaction to the comments was muted, with foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang politely urging Washington to mind its own business.
“The South China Sea situation has cooled down and we hope non-regional countries can respect the consensus that it is in the fundamental interest of the whole world,” he said.

 

[Loss Leader]

And as for gwb, I seem to remember that having liberated Baghdad they then allowed the Iraqis a free choice of who to give the oil contracts to.

As I remember, the Bush administration's foreign policy staff were all quite sure the oil would pay for the war. But the oil fields were first set on fire, then badly managed by the US, then managed by Iraq as a pure kleptocracy, and the whole time nobody could agree on how to divide the oil profits between the country's three major ethnic regions.

Nothing about US foreign policy matched anything we actually encountered on the ground. And I'm pretty sure it's going to be the same with China. I don't think our beliefs about China's self-interests have anything to do with China's actual self-interest.

 

[theprestige]

Biggest trading partner? You mean China that owns so much of our debt they could crash the value of the dollar should they choose too?

LOL. When you owe the bank ten thousand dollars, you have a problem. When you owe the bank ten million dollars, the bank has a problem.

 

[Wolrab]

First an ignorant phone call to from Taiwan, with nothing to gain and a lot to lose. Now this ignorant comment by Tillerson .

FTFY

 

[Toontown]

Clearly, Trump's voters are itching for confrontations on every front, both foreign and domestic. And who are we to stand in their way? Forward march, bitches.

All you people who voted for that crazy baby-man Trump. Get your asses out there, and get that big Exxon Mobile hog his oil. I don't care if you have to kill every Chinese soldier on the Asian Continent Git 'er done.

Come back behind your shields, or on them. Don't get captured. The White Messiah won't respect you if you get captured. Don't forget to save a bullet. And if you don't secure the oil, don't bother to come back at all. We're oil-seizers now. Well, you Trump voters are. The rest of us will be holding down the fort back here.

Good luck. I have no choice but to wish you luck, even though electing that crazy Russia-owned bastard was treason.

What's done is done. Until your White Messiah gets impeached for having crazy running out his ass.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Seriously?

For China to tank the value of our debt, they'd have to destroy the value of their biggest asset. Hurting their economy far more than ours.

And as for gwb, I seem to remember that having liberated Baghdad they then allowed the Iraqis a free choice of who to give the oil contracts to.

Yeah, how'd that work out for them?

There are a couple things to consider here.
One, China's leaders are hell of a lot smarter than Trump. They're good at bluffing too, and Trump's BS about deal making, pshaw, try, he's good at cheating people for his own benefit. Trump thinks he just got elected King, not POTUS in a checks and balance government.

So the checks and balance will get in Trump's way, the public will be outraged at the senseless threat of war with China. And the Chinese will trump Trump laughing all the way.

Then there is the culture. So many Westerners think everyone in the world thinks like they do, have the same values. When the SARS epidemic occurred, I followed the cases in China where it originated. More than one mayor of a large city covered up cases to "save face", even while covering up cases meant continued spread. In unusual action by the central government to override the face-saving mayors, the epidemic was eventually brought under control. But one could see the old Chinese culture at its classic self.

Bottom line, China is going to push the Trump envelope. And Trump and his 'advisors' are incompetent is an understatement.

And don't forget, all the while Putin will be taking advantage of the situation. Think Trump can walk and chew gum at the same time?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

As I remember, the Bush administration's foreign policy staff were all quite sure the oil would pay for the war. But the oil fields were first set on fire, then badly managed by the US, then managed by Iraq as a pure kleptocracy, and the whole time nobody could agree on how to divide the oil profits between the country's three major ethnic regions.

Nothing about US foreign policy matched anything we actually encountered on the ground. And I'm pretty sure it's going to be the same with China. I don't think our beliefs about China's self-interests have anything to do with China's actual self-interest.

QFT