I'd have assumed this as well, though I'd agree that it has been very, very low level. And that's probably the point.HooDat wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:32 amI guess I have assumed that our government has not only been planning for a cold war with China since Nixon's time, but we have actually been waging a very, VERY, low level cold war with them since if not the 70's then since the berlin wall fell. That goes for all "R" and "D" presidents.a fan wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 7:04 pm The fact that no one here, and no one in our leadership has even considered, let alone planned for, a Cold War with China freaks me out.
Plan for the worst. Hope for the best. I like tech37's optimism, for example. I think it's great. And in the end, I'm sure we'll wind up just fine as a nation in the end.
But this optimism ignores all the casualties along the way. We've had billions in damage, and counting. Real people. Real businesses. Real losses.
During the Cold War with the Soviets it was quite out in the open that we were in such a contest, including fighting 'hot' wars with perceived 'dominoes'. The Soviet Union was considered much more than a global competitor, a potential adversary, rather they were full on adversary.
This Administration does not seem prepared for the concept that our competition with the state-run capitalism of China, with its global ambitions, could well turn into full adversarial mode if we don't work hard to avoid that turn. Or is it that we are blithely pushing down that path as if it's actually inevitable, rather than avoidable?
I heard the latter voiced just the other day. "Better now than later when they're stronger" my friend said.
But wait, do we really think we can bring China to its knees such that they will desist in growing their economy to provide a standard of living for their people comparable to our own??? And that won't result in hot conflict???
Oh yeah, like trade wars, 'hot' conflicts are easy to win. We've got more nukes than they do.