US Politics: Mark your calendars

[The Undead Martyr]

I heard him speak at the University of Pennsylvania, and he spent a good deal of time on this very topic. He is an engaging speaker and, yes, the internment of Japanese-Americans remains an incredible stain on our nation's history.

...and the Mexican American war, slavery, the Trail of Tears, Manifest Destiny, the various Indian wars, segregation, the KKK, lynchings, anti-immigrant riots, discrimination against Catholics, Chinese, Italians, Irish, Mexicans, Japanese, Filipinos, Indians (both all kinds) and Latin Americans, the overthrow of Salvador Allende, Iran-Contra, The Bayonet Constitution of Hawaii, reaction towards Haiti's revolution, Haiti during WIlson's years and everywhere south of the border during the Cold War, the Vietnam war (and Wilson's attitude towards Vietnam during the Versailles negotiations), and last but not least supporting dictators and crushing democracy in: Lebanon, Libya, Syria, Iran, Iraq, the Congo, Chile, Cuba, Vietnam, Korea (pre-WWI) the Philippines, Haiti, Mexico, Nicaragua..

Hell we fucked Latin America, Southeast Asia, Polynesia, Africa and the Middle East on multiple occasions, Racism, anti-communism and imperialism being the justifications, sometimes masquerading under the name of "guarding freedom" or somesuch.

Well according to this article Obama's trip to Asia didn't go that well at all.

And Peter Lee thinks Asia should be worried about extra US attention.

Depending on how broadly you define Asia, we've been giving the continent "extra attention" for over a century, usually to the Asians' detriment.

[Fez]

Harry Reid, telling it like it is while blasting Republicans for block the UN disability treaty:

"These are the same Republicans with whom Democrats are supposed to reach an agreement to protect middle-class families from a tax increase," Reid said. "It’s difficult to engage in rational negotiation when one side holds well-known facts and proven truths in such low esteem

ETA: Its amazing how much I've grown to like him over the past two years; particularly considering how frustrated I was with him over the previous four.

[snake]

Depending on how broadly you define Asia, we've been giving the continent "extra attention" for over a century, usually to the Asians' detriment.

No doubt. Which is why I think the second author was speculating that US overtures might not go as well as they hope.

[Shryke]

Harry Reid, telling it like it is while blasting Republicans for block the UN disability treaty:

ETA: Its amazing how much I've grown to like him over the past two years; particularly considering how frustrated I was with him over the previous four.

It's like he woke up one day and remembered his old days back in Vegas when he throttled a man for trying to bribe him.

Meanwhile, Boehner is trying to prove he's got one about 18 months too late: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-34222_162-57557368-10391739/boehner-punishes-disobedient-republicans/

He's really so bad at this shit.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Fez, even more than the wealthy recognizing they should be taxed at a higher rate, the American public needs to realize that belt tightening has to happen. Canada had a sick economy, largely due to debt, in the early 90s

The world economy is in an altogether different place from the 1990s, let alone the 1970s. This is a re-run of the 1930s.

Many of them are so rich they have no idea what it's like to be middle class.

I've always been a tad amused by the North American aversion to saying 'working class' ('middle class' supposedly being the preferred term for 'ordinary person'). However, both Franklin D. Roosevelt and Ted Kennedy came from incredibly wealthy families. It didn't stop either caring about the ordinary person.

[Horza]

Well according to this article Obama's trip to Asia didn't go that well at all.

That's an opinion piece, not yanno, reporting.

There is unprecedented interest in a regional trade agreement, almost all of it because China's spent the last five or so years dicking up decades of cautious diplomacy with a heavy-handed approach. This is what drove the Burmese junta into the US's outstretched arms after all.

And Peter Lee thinks Asia should be worried about extra US attention.

Peter Lee has a few good points, but he loses it with this baloney:

One can either believe that the United States is selflessly injecting itself into the South China Sea disputes in order to protect the right of smaller Asian nations to argue with the PRC over worthless rocks and protect "freedom of navigation and commerce" (even though the vast majority of traffic through the South China Sea is going to and from PRC ports)... or one might perceive a concerted US effort to wrench the Asian economic focus away from the PRC and toward the United States by polarizing Asia into pro-US vs pro-China camps.

There are potentially quite large oil and gas reserves underneath the entire chain - which isn't just contested by China but also bilaterally between Brunei, Malaysia, Vietnam, Taiwan and the Phillipines. That's before we get to the fishing issue - increasingly big business as Asian middle-classes grow.

As for shipping lanes, where to begin? Do the Straits of Molucca ring a bell? China's Nine Dash Line extends almost to their mouth, ends just outside Manilla Harbor and exends to Taiwan. That's an intolerable strategic position for any and all the bordering countries. One third of the world's shipping goes through that region. That's Vietnam's main shipping lane, a huge volume of Japanese, Philippine, Thai and Korean trade goes through those lanes. China claims all of those waters, not as EEZ's but soveriegn territory. The idea that the US is somehow blowing this out of proportion doesn't bear a moment's scrutiny.

[snake]

That's an opinion piece, not yanno, reporting.

There is unprecedented interest in a regional trade agreement, almost all of it because China's spent the last five or so years dicking up decades of cautious diplomacy with a heavy-handed approach. This is what drove the Burmese junta into the US's outstretched arms after all.

Well, it's what I found. Point me to some real reporting then. I look at Asia times online, BBC, CBC, Project Syndicate, NYT, Globe and Mail, Al Jazeera and Spiegel. Any others would be appreciated.

Peter Lee has a few good points, but he loses it with this baloney:

There are potentially quite large oil and gas reserves underneath the entire chain - which isn't just contested by China but also bilaterally between Brunei, Malaysia, Vietnam, Taiwan and the Phillipines. That's before we get to the fishing issue - increasingly big business as Asian middle-classes grow.

As for shipping lanes, where to begin? Do the Straits of Molucca ring a bell? China's Nine Dash Line extends almost to their mouth, ends just outside Manilla Harbor and exends to Taiwan. That's an intolerable strategic position for any and all the bordering countries. One third of the world's shipping goes through that region. That's Vietnam's main shipping lane, a huge volume of Japanese, Philippine, Thai and Korean trade goes through those lanes. China claims all of those waters, not as EEZ's but soveriegn territory. The idea that the US is somehow blowing this out of proportion doesn't bear a moment's scrutiny.

Well, perhaps Lee is a bit pro China but that's not that terrible. Most western reporters and papers have a slight anti-Chinese bent to them.

Lee also has a piece stating that China might be putting the economic hurt on Japan. Link.

[Spring Bass]

It doesn't really matter if potential allies in East and Southeast Asia don't particularly like us - they still seem to want to trade with us and use us to counter-balance the Chinese. I doubt, for example, that Vietnam has any particular fondness for the US government.

In other potential hot zones, it looks like the US might get directly involved in the Syrian civil war soon. There are news stories out that Assad is loading chemical weapons into aircraft (Sarin), and that the Eisenhower (US aircraft carrier) is approaching the coast.

[snake]

It doesn't really matter if potential allies in East and Southeast Asia don't particularly like us - they still seem to want to trade with us and use us to counter-balance the Chinese. I doubt, for example, that Vietnam has any particular fondness for the US government.

In other potential hot zones, it looks like the US might get directly involved in the Syrian civil war soon. There are news stories out that Assad is loading chemical weapons into aircraft (Sarin), and that the Eisenhower (US aircraft carrier) is approaching the coast.

Of course they'll want to trade with you but would they do so in such a way that would cause issue with China?? China is the economic giant on the horizon. They'll be the world's largest economy in a couple decades or less and a lot of countries will be scrambling to do business with them.

What a mess in Syria. Gonna get a lot worse before it gets better. Spilling over into Lebanon as well. Real fucking mess.

[Horza]

Well, it's what I found. Point me to some real reporting then. I look at Asia times online, BBC, CBC, Project Syndicate, NYT, Globe and Mail, Al Jazeera and Spiegel. Any others would be appreciated.

Are you really saying you couldn't find any reporting on the East Asia Summit?

Well, perhaps Lee is a bit pro China but that's not that terrible. Most western reporters and papers have a slight anti-Chinese bent to them.

I don't think he's pro China so much he's got ATOnline's 'Asian values' politics, which overwhelms his abilities to acknowledge facts like 50% of the world's oil passing through the South China sea when there's points to be scored against the US.

[snake]

Are you really saying you couldn't find any reporting on the East Asia Summit?

I did. Western media outlets portrayed it as a great strategic victory for Obama and other media not so much. I try to find media that is fairly neutral. I know the NYT is most certainly not but they still have some good reporting. I was wondering if you could think of any that are somewhat neutral in their reporting. If not then just say so.

I don't think he's pro China so much he's got ATOnline's 'Asian values' politics, which overwhelms his abilities to acknowledge facts like 50% of the world's oil passing through the South China sea when there's points to be scored against the US.

I find he's a little pro-China when it comes to the US. And he did acknowledge that a lot of commerce goes through the SCS. Just that most of it goes to and from China.

ETA: I shouldn't say most. China has the largest share of the pie.

[Horza]

I did. Western media outlets portrayed it as a great strategic victory for Obama and other media not so much. I try to find media that is fairly neutral. I know the NYT is most certainly not but they still have some good reporting. I was wondering if you could think of any that are somewhat neutral in their reporting. If not then just say so.

Ok, so you couldn't find reporting that was saying what you wanted to hear. That's not quite the same thing as there being no reporting. Also, I'm not sure why it's my job to find information sources that meet your criteria for 'neutrality', especially when apparently 'neutral' commentary involves lazy attempts to paint the South China Sea dispute as an American stunt.

[snake]

Ok, so you couldn't find reporting that was saying what you wanted to hear. That's not quite the same thing as there being no reporting. Also, I'm not sure why it's my job to find information sources that meet your criteria for 'neutrality', especially when apparently 'neutral' commentary involves lazy attempts to paint the South China Sea dispute as an American stunt.

Just looking for suggestions. Ya got none, say so. Also, no need for the bullshit. I just link some articles that I find interesting and look for some civil opinions. If ya don't like it, don't fucking read 'em.

[The Anti-Targ]

Well according to this article Obama's trip to Asia didn't go that well at all.

And Peter Lee thinks Asia should be worried about extra US attention.

Everyone should be worried if they attract extra US attention. US rarely gives anyone extra attention for altruistic reasons.

[Horza]

Just looking for suggestions. Ya got none, say so. Also, no need for the bullshit. I just link some articles that I find interesting and look for some civil opinions. If ya don't like it, don't fucking read 'em.

I gave you my civil opinions, your response was to get defensive and say that was all you could find, then to suggest all Western reporting was biased and painting the summit as an Obama triumph. Can you see why I'm not rushing out to link articles for your perusal?

[The Anti-Targ]

There are potentially quite large oil and gas reserves underneath the entire chain - which isn't just contested by China but also bilaterally between Brunei, Malaysia, Vietnam, Taiwan and the Phillipines. That's before we get to the fishing issue - increasingly big business as Asian middle-classes grow.

As for shipping lanes, where to begin? Do the Straits of Molucca ring a bell? China's Nine Dash Line extends almost to their mouth, ends just outside Manilla Harbor and exends to Taiwan. That's an intolerable strategic position for any and all the bordering countries. One third of the world's shipping goes through that region. That's Vietnam's main shipping lane, a huge volume of Japanese, Philippine, Thai and Korean trade goes through those lanes. China claims all of those waters, not as EEZ's but soveriegn territory. The idea that the US is somehow blowing this out of proportion doesn't bear a moment's scrutiny.

Even so, the fact that lots of countries in the region are not happy with what China is trying to do there, the USA is only getting into it because it's China, and the US wantsa to keep China in check. Not because they care much or at all about the territorial rights and claims of little countries. It's still the cold war, but the nature of the threat is different and the methods of prosecuting the war are different. How does the US feel about the prospect of not being the biggest superpower any more, and worse still the the prospect of the biggest super power being an undemocratic, communist state? Pretty bloody worried if you ask me. I'm sure the US is quite keen to slow that train down, at least unitl China gets to the democratic reforms stage of political evolution. But even so, once China takes over as the world's biggest economy the US ain't never getting it, or it's level of influence as a unipolar power, back, and that's a big loss.

[Shryke]

Painting it as a "new cold war" is fucking silly.

The US is simply looking out for it's short and long term interests. That's ... exactly what it's supposed to be doing. This is the very definition of international diplomacy. Our description need go no further.

[snake]

I gave you my civil opinions, your response was to get defensive and say that was all you could find, then to suggest all Western reporting was biased and painting the summit as an Obama triumph. Can you see why I'm not rushing out to link articles for your perusal?

Well, good for you. :)

[snake]

Painting it as a "new cold war" is fucking silly.

The US is simply looking out for it's short and long term interests. That's ... exactly what it's supposed to be doing. This is the very definition of international diplomacy. Our description need go no further.

That's all any nation ever does. However, it's how they go about doing so that can give people cause for concern and whether or not their actions can lead to conflict. And people, as well as nations, have every right to be concerned about that.

[Horza]

Even so, the fact that lots of countries in the region are not happy with what China is trying to do there, the USA is only getting into it because it's China, and the US wantsa to keep China in check. Not because they care much or at all about the territorial rights and claims of little countries.

Philippines population: 92m

New Zealand population: 4.5m

Is the US involved in this issue out of its deep abiding love of democracy, puppies and freedom of the seas? Of course not, they haven't even ratified UNCLoS, unlike China. This is irrelevant. The US has important strategic and economic relationships with all participants in the dispute, including China and thus has significant interests in seeing it resolved without conflict or undue economic harm to any of the participants.

It's still the cold war, but the nature of the threat is different and the methods of prosecuting the war are different. How does the US feel about the prospect of not being the biggest superpower any more, and worse still the the prospect of the biggest super power being an undemocratic, communist state? Pretty bloody worried if you ask me. I'm sure the US is quite keen to slow that train down, at least unitl China gets to the democratic reforms stage of political evolution. But even so, once China takes over as the world's biggest economy the US ain't never getting it, or it's level of influence as a unipolar power, back, and that's a big loss.

This isn't anything like the Cold War. The Soviets didn't hold two trillion USD and there wasn't half a trillion USD in trade between the two countries. The relationship between the US and China is much more entangled and much less adversarial than the Cold War at its mildest. The idea that China seeks, or is capable of replacing or overshadowing the US also deserves a lot of scrutiny, for reasons I've outlined elsewhere.

Analyses that focus on the SCS dispute as a US-China confrontation neglect the basic fact that what China claims is unacceptable to all other parties to the dispute, not to mention the wider region. The US is being drawn to Asia in part because everyone from longstanding allies to former Chinese clients is looking for a counterweight to China, which still approaches neighbouring countries with a belligerence and paranoia that has driven even the SLORC out of their orbit. One problem with the pivot for the US will be avoiding being used as a foil in disputes of these kinds, precisely because it isn't in the US's interests to isolate China.