Matrix Games Forums

And of course, it is all about the new oil ... Philippines, Viet Nam, China, just to name the first 3 who are claiming it ... large oil field, in one of the most seismically active locations, and it is all offshore. Very happy I am no longer in that business. I suspect Adair/Halliburton will be getting a lot of business over there in the future.

here's their new shopping list.
Ospreys and F-35s on Japan’s $240B Shopping List http://www.dodbuzz.com/2013/12/18/ospre ... ent-130610

China, to our (governmental, analytical) perception, is odd. It has always been odd. China doesn’t play in our analytical sandbox, so China is become, somehow, a dark, unknown, menacing presence, awaiting only the moment to unleash its claws, and fasten them on the throat of everyone else to the eternal glory of the Middle Kingdom. What rot.

Spent 10 years, back in the 70s, doing analyses of Red Russia and Red China for our community. Learned pretty quick that they weren’t necessarily “red”, they were just Russian and Chinese, with their own particular cultural, territorial, and developmental, imperatives. Maybe that’s why I got retired.

I like the Chinese. I’ve worked with Taiwanese and visited mainland factories, I’ve attended weddings, and was seated at the next table over from the family. Ate stuff that I’m still trying to get the recipe for, but all they do is smile. I have worked with and for Chinese, and loved every minute of it.

Are they out to rule the world? Hell no. They could care less. Are they out to run their part of it? You bet your ass.

Thought, significant thought, informed by an intelligent understanding of the imperatives, goes a long way towards setting limits, Ciao. J

[ed] Before I forget, in International Treaty waters, I would fly all day, every day, radars lit, weapons free, and make that known to everybody, so there's no mistake. If I kill ya it's because YOU screwed up.

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

And of course, it is all about the new oil ... Philippines, Viet Nam, China, just to name the first 3 who are claiming it ... large oil field, in one of the most seismically active locations, and it is all offshore. Very happy I am no longer in that business. I suspect Adair/Halliburton will be getting a lot of business over there in the future.

Symon, I've never been to China myself but I always talked with students at my college who were from there. They are most nice and gentle people I've ever met. And I always try to learn new words from them. Speaking about the food, do you eat them in a restaurant there in China or at someone's home?

Symon,

I largely agree. The only real mistake one has to be on guard about is assuming the Chinese will think, act and evaluate situations in the same manner as Western countries. That doesn't happen.

Tracked down an article I recently read. Not in agreement with it entirely, but close enough that it prompts some thoughts: http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/2 ... d-outbreak#!

Regards,
Feltan

ORIGINAL: Feltan
The only real mistake one has to be on guard about is assuming the Chinese will think, act and evaluate situations in the same manner as Western countries. That doesn't happen.

While I agree with that sentiment, another mistake would be to assume China is driven by much different imperatives than the west. Nowerdays it is all about economic dominance and ressources, that does not leave much room for the "different cultures act different" game on a global scale. The ultimate goals are too similar.

While they might just politely smile when asked for the recipie instead of telling you to kindly f**k off western style, the bottom line is still: they don´t want to give you the damned recipie you don´t get the damned recipie. Same as in the west.



I agree with John on a person to person scale (and experienced it myself a bit when I was in China for a month in the late 90´s), but I do not think this transcendends fully into the countries´ behaviour. The individual might completely dominated by culture, but nowerdays, with all important stuff happening globally, if you attempt this on a country level you might just look like the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. China does not, and one of the reasons is that in many ways they smartly adapted to the ways of the west without giving up their cultural identity.

People around the world have many and varied cultural differences, but in the end they all want the same things, a roof over their heads and food on the table.

Governments sometimes reflect their various cultures, but they all act in the same selfish ways. Governments lie to their people and one another. The goal is to protect yourself and some aspire to dominate. Domination has it's cost and to underestimate China's or any other country's, ambitions is a grave error.

Did China bite off more than it can chew? Is this play within their own backyard a flexing of muscle and show of intent to announce to the world that they have arrived and must be reckoned with?

It's all about business. As long as the Chinese can get the raw materials to stoke their industry at reasonable prices I suspect that there will be little actual aggression. To place at risk their economy by losing markets raises the stakes dramatically.

The talk of China's first CV is nothing more than blah, blah as the Russians couldn't effectively keep it in service. It will be a springboard towards the Chinese building their own CVs and then they'll be projecting power.

Of course all of this conjecture is just that and the future course of things will be revealed in due time.

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

... While I agree with that sentiment, another mistake would be to assume China is driven by much different imperatives than the west. Nowerdays it is all about economic dominance and ressources, that does not leave much room for the "different cultures act different" game on a global scale. The ultimate goals are too similar...

I disagree. China does not look at the world through the same lens as Western powers, particularly the US. What might seem entirely logical to us, might offend their sensibilities and vice versa. While economic forces might seem to be driving the current relationships, history demonstrates (as in the article I posted a link to above) that this can be a dangerous illusion.

Any time you start thinking, "Oh, they would never do that and act against their (perceived Western) self-interest" just remember Tiananmen Square. Nothing surrounding that event passed the logic test of Western thinking -- they demonstrated that indeed they will act in their own self-interest regardless of what we might think it should be.

Regards,
Feltan

I disagree. China does not look at the world through the same lens as Western powers, particularly the US. What might seem entirely logical to us, might offend their sensibilities and vice versa. While economic forces might seem to be driving the current relationships, history demonstrates (as in the article I posted a link to above) that this can be a dangerous illusion.

In this regard history is over. A nation as developed as China can, as any other nation, only survive as long as sufficient ressources are available. Since those ressources can be obtained globally meanwhile, China can either play the global game on ressources, and compete (thats what they are doing), or not, and fall behind again (this they will not do). There is a narrow band of options how those ressources can be obtained, and not to use those options would be irrational behaviour. Independent of cultural differences, this is, and will not, be a behaviour the Chinese will show as it would be counterproductive. This means their strategy on approaching the current global situation will contain the same logical elements the west has to deal with. They might favour one approach over the other and so differ a bit from the western approach, but this is not the same as irrational behaviour.

Any time you start thinking, "Oh, they would never do that and act against their (perceived Western) self-interest" just remember Tiananmen Square. Nothing surrounding that event passed the logic test of Western thinking -- they demonstrated that indeed they will act in their own self-interest regardless of what we might think it should be.

This falls more into the category of "we never knew much about why Tiananmen happened in exactly the way it did". We were simply missing the variables to put the pieces together and understand the exact logic behind it to make predictions. This does in no way mean the Chinese government handled that situation irrationally in any way. Not ethically according to western standards, but ethics and logic usually do not always require the other.



Edit: Sorry, this is what happens when you attempt to type something while a 16months old loudly demands your attention...

Still hope it is clear what I wanted to say, no time to edit...

I guess in the fullness of time we will see.

Regards,
Feltan

I don´t even think we disagree. I suspect we are talking past each other.

I am aware that the Chinese are culture driven, like every other country, and that in some cases their different culture can lead to behaviour not expected by someone used to the western ways.

On the other hand you cannot deny that China has to live by the same rules to prosper as any other country, so has to apply the same or similar solutions to their problems as everybody else.