Inspired by posts #19 and 25 of this thread, in which I’m trying to forestall a potential hijack.
The Clinton-Gore campaign fundraising practices in '96 were pretty tawdry, I’ll admit (and I happily voted for them that year, despite the Lincoln Bedroom revolving door, coffees, etc.), but I’ve always had the sense that the accusations of a sellout to the Chinese were more Limbaughesque attack lines than anything else. I’ve never seen any persuasive evidence that the Clinton Administration endangered U.S. national security, either then or for the future, by its decisions regarding China or technology sales.
Um, granting China permanent “Most Favored Nation Trading Status” undermined any effort (however futile it is likely to be) to impose sanctions or embargos on China. It also relaxed some of the ITAR restrictions on dealing with China that have subsequently lead to, shall we say, ambiguities, in what kind and how much information can be communicated to China. I doubt that Clinton/Gore intended to expose the United States to compromised security, but it does fit in with their whole “lack of coherent or useful foreign policy” plan that has left the world in more of a mess than they started with. Thanks, guys. (Not that I can say much for the foreign policy acumen of his successor, either. Seriously, can’t we hire some professionals for this?)
Stranger
Nah. That would put it in the hands of Henry Kissinger or his ilk. :eek:
China had nukes before Clinton was elected. I think they also had ICBMs before he was elected. If you can build a missle that can deliver a nuke on the far side of the world, you can prolly build another one to knock down a satellite. I suspect the recent test was just a demonstration of a capability they’ve had for awhile.
I’ll up you cpnspiracy proponents one. George Bush Sr was the Chief of the United States Liaison Office in the People’s Republic of China (1974–1976) and then the Director of Central Intelligence (1976–1977). George Bush Jr also visited for two months during his father’s stint as ambassador. Both serve(d) as President. 2007 China demonstrates it can kock out a LEO satellite.
Coincidence? You be the judge.
Since the 60’s even. And yea, satellites move in easily predictable paths, so I’m skeptical that they’d need the latest greatest tech to hit one. But I don’t claim any expertise, so perhaps it’s harder then I think.
There is a distinct difference between delivering a reentry vehicle within a 1-2km CEP (a rough estimate of the capability of Chinese ICBM capability) and hitting a 3m diameter target moving at orbital speeds, especially if you limit yourself to kinetic intercept (i.e. no nuclear warhead). This level of capability isn’t unobtainable, but it does require a high degree of finesse in guidence and control. The challenge isn’t just getting it in the general area, but actually intercepting the target instead of flying on past with no more than a wave. “Close enough” may be sufficient in horseshoes and hand grenades (especially the nuclear kind) but it ain’t close to acceptable in the satellite/missile intercept game. We can barely do this; for the Chinese to demonstrate this capability (even against an old, nonmaneuvering satellite) shows considerably more technical prowess than we’ve previously given them credit for, and an investment in military technology that they’ve formerly been disinterested in.
Stranger
Probably I would drop a little dingbat in proximity of the target, and gently nestle it up before pressing the button.
As for ‘giving’ them the technology, they had probably stolen it anyway.
Giving them access to a bug fixed version is not a bad idea.
If we had done the same with Concorde it would have saved a rather nasty air crash.
Well, hell, if that’s your attitude then we should just drop ITAR restrictions and hand them everything we have on ballistic missile, guidance technology, nuclear weapons, et cetera. Why bother trying to hold onto any proprietary or critical knowledge?
Stranger
China has made NO secret of its intentions, they plan to:
- build a blue water navy, capable of challenging the US navy. This includes nuclear submarines, aircraft carriers. they also have taken steps to neutralize the US Navy, by stealing the technology used in the new “Littoral Combat ships” being designed now.
- comman space; this means, among other things, the capapbility to shoot down US spy satellites, and develop ICBMs capapble of hitting USA targets
- supplant the USA in the third world, by targetted aid and investments
The weird thing is, WE are paying for most of this! The massive trade surplus that the Chinese have is funding all of this quite nicely. useful idiots (like Gore and Clinton0 were more than willing to sell advanced technology , for cash. Clinton even made a point of allowing Chinese scientists to visit (and steal from) the Loa Alamos national laboratory-the AEC Sec. Bill Richardson availed himself of Chinese gratuities as well.
Well, Bush has had years to rectify the situation.
What’s he done to chastise China? Has he forbiden his corporate donors to move jobs overseas?
If China were deprived of its MFN status – how would that affect the U.S. economy?
correct me if mistaken but I believe WTO has rendered MFN moot
Why do we have to assume that the Chinese or the Russians are malign ?
When a State sees another State with more powerful weopons or more advanced technology, they have a strong incentive to ‘catch up’, but doing so does not make them malign. During the Cold War the Russians were probably a lot more scared of the West than the West was scared of the USSR.
Our glorious leaders tub thump and make stupid aggressive statements, they fund proxy wars, which really benefit nobody, for example Afghanistan - where the Russians knew what they were dealing with.
We should be singling out the real nutters and jointly getting rid of them, my enemy’s enemy is often a very nasty piece of work.
Years ago, I remember reading about a demonstration of the Apple II that showed how it could be used for missile guidance - and should therefore be restricted technology to the USSR.
Trying to maintain ‘technological supremacy’ is both pointless (as it does not work) and leads to friction.
Interdependance is the basis of small societies, the principle can extend to States.
My view is to kill people who are dangerous and have good relations with people who are not nutters and one can ‘deal’ with.
Wow. This is the first I’ve heard of China having such advanced capabilities. I agree with Stranger on a train, it takes alot more than just a near-miss-yet-that’s-good-enough to be able to disable a satellite. None the less, are there any animations or videos of China’s demonstration?
The thing is that the Chinese are perfectly capable of putting satellites in orbit, they’ll do it for anyone for a fee. In my book putting something into orbit is a lot harder than zapping something.
My only problem is working out why they did it, it can’t be to demonstrate to the West that they can, as people who know … already knew, and the rest don’t matter. Personally I would get someone to ask them, it might be as mundane a reason as the thing was a nuisance.