China sweetens deal

[Alias 0]

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000006&sid=aa7J8AYVFE18&refer=home

Will they beat Chevron with the new bid of $19 Billion in cash??

China's energy strategy continues to move along. The US wrecked all Chinese investments in Iraq and will back Taiwan if invaded.

Have we created energy paranoia in the Chinese?

Carpe Diem

[akarunway 1]

China's energy strategy continues to move along. The US wrecked all Chinese investments in Iraq and will back Taiwan if invaded.

Have we created energy paranoia in the Chinese? ___________________________________________________Paranoia. How about this story?___________________________________________________Thursday Jul 14 2005 . All times are London time.

------------------------------------------

Top Chinese general warns US over attack
By Alexandra Harney in Beijing and Demetri Sevastopulo and Edward Alden in Washington
Published: July 14 2005 21:59 | Last updated: July 15 2005 00:03

China is prepared to use nuclear weapons against the US if it is attacked by Washington during a confrontation over Taiwan, a Chinese general said on Thursday.

“If the Americans draw their missiles and position-guided ammunition on to the target zone on China's territory, I think we will have to respond with nuclear weapons,” said General Zhu Chenghu.

Gen Zhu was speaking at a function for foreign journalists organised, in part, by the Chinese government. He added that China's definition of its territory included warships and aircraft.

“If the Americans are determined to interfere [then] we will be determined to respond,” said Gen Zhu, who is also a professor at China's National Defence University.

“We . . . will prepare ourselves for the destruction of all of the cities east of Xian. Of course the Americans will have to be prepared that hundreds . . . of cities will be destroyed by the Chinese.”

Gen Zhu is a self-acknowledged “hawk” who has warned that China could strike the US with long-range missiles. But his threat to use nuclear weapons in a conflict over Taiwan is the most specific by a senior Chinese official in nearly a decade.

However, some US-based China experts cautioned that Gen Zhu probably did not represent the mainstream People's Liberation Army view.

“He is running way beyond his brief on what China might do in relation to the US if push comes to shove,” said one expert with knowledge of Gen Zhu. “Nobody who is cleared for information on Chinese war scenarios is going to talk like this,” he added.

Gen Zhu's comments come as the Pentagon prepares to brief Congress next Monday on its annual report on the Chinese military, which is expected to take a harder line than previous years. They are also likely to fuel the mounting anti-China sentiment on Capitol Hill.

In recent months, a string of US officials, including Donald Rumsfeld, defence secretary, have raised concerns about China's military rise. The Pentagon on Thursday declined to comment on “hypothetical scenarios”.

Rick Fisher, a former senior US congressional official and an authority on the Chinese military, said the specific nature of the threat “is a new addition to China's public discourse”. China's official doctrine has called for no first use of nuclear weapons since its first atomic test in 1964. But Gen Zhu is not the first Chinese official to refer to the possibility of using such weapons first in a conflict over Taiwan.

Chas Freeman, a former US assistant secretary of defence, said in 1996 that a PLA official had told him China could respond in kind to a nuclear strike by the US in the event of a conflict with Taiwan. The official is believed to have been Xiong Guangkai, now the PLA's deputy chief of general staff.

Gen Zhu said his views did not represent official Chinese policy and he did not anticipate war with the US.

Additional reporting by Richard McGregor in Beijing

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[ViperPilot 0]

The Chinese are all about flexing their muscles. They flex and flex, but never follow through. They've been threatening Taiwan and us for over a decade regarding this issue. I really don't think they're about to completely screw their economy over (considering we and our allies are massive trading partners) just for a little island. I guess only time will tell for sure, but it's just not probable unless they really don't give a shit about their country. And trust me, they're obsessed with their country and its future.

[Alias 0]

I agree to some extent that China likes to flex.

I'll stress energy concerns again though. The Chinese economy is on fire and consumption of energy is way up. Although they continue to build nuclear and coal facilities, they're dependance on oil is outpacing the forecasted global output.

Like the US - China is willing to resort to drastic measures to protect it's economy. They put alot of effort in oil relationships in Iraq up until the US invasion. Gone now. They are securing relationships and building bases with countries that border the shipping lanes to China from the mid east in efforts to deter any disruptions that may be caused by the US.

Trust me. They have thier eye on the US. Including buying US oil companies How long will it take for the US to sell out everything? Greed. Where would we be without it?

Carpe Diem

[ViperPilot 0]

Quote

Like the US - China is willing to resort to drastic measures to protect it's economy

That's the point. Attacking the US would completely demolish China's economy. I believe that the PRC will figure it out that taking control of an island is not worth completely wrecking their economy. It would wreck their economy because they would obviously lose us as a trade partner, along with our allies, thus taking billions from China's industry. Not to mention it would really piss us off, and we'd probably do something like destroy their oil fields. They've threatened us before like this, and backed down. They will again.

[markd_nscr986 0]

Don't hold your breath on that one.....

They do tend to be rather unpredictable at times......

Kind of like at Tien Amen Sq

Marc SCR 6046 SCS 3004

[ViperPilot 0]

True, I'm not holding my breath on it. But we've seen this exact kind of thing several times from them. With as obsessed as they are with China's future (and a positive one at that), I just don't think they're going to do something stupid to destroy it. Is a stupid pissing match with Taiwan really worth destroying their economy? I think there's more of a chance of them backing down. But like you said, you never know.

[Gawain 0]

First off, China won't get UNOCAL.

China knows that we would provide a strategic defense of Taiwan.

While their government isn't as freaky as Kim Jong Il (DPRK), they are still paranoid of their sovereingty and seek parity or to surpass the US in economic, military, and political status.

China would have to rely on their navy heavily to succussfully invade and occupy Taiwan. China's navy would not stand a chance against us.

While I believe that we would not be able to maintain a second front if we engaged China, I'd have to say that the only thing we'd have to really worry about is running out of ammunition, they are just big.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Alias 0]

Quote

First off, China won't get UNOCAL.

I hope not, but that's yet to be determined

Quote

China's navy would not stand a chance against us.

Not according to Rumsfeld and Porter J. Goss, the central intelligence director, also warned of China's military expansion. Before the Senate Armed Services Committee, he said: "Beijing's military modernization and military buildup could tilt the balance of power in the Taiwan Strait. Improved Chinese capabilities threaten U.S. forces in the region. In 2004, China increased its ballistic missile forces deployed across from Taiwan and rolled out several new submarines. China continues to develop more robust, survivable nuclear-armed missiles, as well as conventional capabilities for use in regional conflict."

http://www.taiwandc.org/nyt-2005-03.htm

There are major concerns with China. And it will be energy that pushes the conflict along, not Taiwan.

Carpe Diem

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Quote

First off, China won't get UNOCAL.

I hope not, but that's yet to be determined

Quote

China's navy would not stand a chance against us.

Not according to Rumsfeld and Porter J. Goss, the central intelligence director, also warned of China's military expansion. Before the Senate Armed Services Committee, he said: "Beijing's military modernization and military buildup could tilt the balance of power in the Taiwan Strait. Improved Chinese capabilities threaten U.S. forces in the region. In 2004, China increased its ballistic missile forces deployed across from Taiwan and rolled out several new submarines. China continues to develop more robust, survivable nuclear-armed missiles, as well as conventional capabilities for use in regional conflict."

http://www.taiwandc.org/nyt-2005-03.htm

There are major concerns with China. And it will be energy that pushes the conflict along, not Taiwan.

Congress will not allow the deal to pass. Period.

Also, these "fancy" subs are hardly state-of-the-art. Rumsfeld and Goss citing "concerns" does not mean we can't send their boats to the bottom of the sea.

If China wants to enter a new "Cold War" with the US, I say bring it on. We can deregulate their currency on the world market and the cost of oil would cripple their economy in about a month. On top of that, all that cheap Chinese labor would evaporate immediately. The last time China raced to modernize itself, it nearly imploded.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Alias 0]

Quote

Congress will not allow the deal to pass. Period.

http://www.caltradereport.com/eWebPages/front-page-1121882156.html

Thank goodness they didn't have too

Imagine that, a US company taking the lessor offer.....and I thought greed over ruled everything in the US these days

Carpe Diem

[StreetScooby 5]

The official reason for the Unocal board turning down the Chinese offer was "political uncertainty".

We are all engines of karma

[Alias 0]

Quote

The official reason for the Unocal board turning down the Chinese offer was "political uncertainty".

I read today that the Unocal shareholders/fund managers are pissed. But the Chevron deal includes major chunks of stock. Which could gain after the buy.

Nothing certain yet

Carpe Diem

[cloudseeker2001 0]

I hope the pieces of shit for leadership this country has in Washington does not ever go to war with China over Taiwan. After all, Taiwan did break Chinese law. What do you think US would do if Hawaii defected and was backed by China?

I think war with China is inevitable, no matter the reason. I think that OBL is hiding in the mountains of western China and the Chinese government knows it, almost the point of harboring him......I think that will get us in a war quicker than anything.

"Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance,
others mean and rueful of the western dream"

[ViperPilot 0]

Quote

I think that OBL is hiding in the mountains of western China and the Chinese government knows it.

Conspiracy theorist I see?

Quote

I think war with China is inevitable, no matter the reason

Invevitible is a strong word. China has more than a lot to lose if they go to war with the US. I think the more correct terminology would be "possible, but not too likely." Don't worry, it's not impossible, but with as obsessed as the PRC is with China's positive future, they will back down and not risk international crisis, and hence the damnation of their country. This is the more likely scenario.

[cloudseeker2001 0]

We have a much different understanding of Chinese politics and social ideals.

"Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance,
others mean and rueful of the western dream"

[chuteless 1]

China just purchased the British Sports car manufacturer MG Motor Sports. Price not revealed.

[AlexCrowley 0]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/the_economy/526954.stm

Given that we import so much from China it's doubtful. Chinese workforce makes most of your Walmarttargetkmart bought clothing.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0630/p17s01-cogn.html

"China's foreign direct investments are so far chicken feed compared to those of the US...................in the past four years, China has sunk at least $11 billion into foreign plants, offices, and firms. Perhaps some Hong Kong money should be added to that total. Hong Kong, now part of China, made $39.7 billion of foreign direct investment last year, and $24.3 billion over the previous three years combined. Some of that investment may be money from China's mainland escaping government attention.

The US, though, has invested almost $700 billion abroad in those four years.

"That's a completely different magnitude," says Hans Christiansen, an expert at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the club of mostly industrial nations based in Paris

The $19 billion bid by China National Offshore Oil Corp. for Unocal is not only China's biggest overseas move yet. It also has what Mr. Christiansen calls "an element of strategic investment." China has been making smaller investments around the world in minerals, coal and other hydrocarbons, agriculture, and fisheries.

Nonetheless, to Albert Keidel, China's Unocal bid is "a minor blip that gets more PR noise than it deserves." As the senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace sees it, as long as China plays by global investment rules, it should be eligible to compete with Chevron for Unocal."

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[billvon 3,120]

>but with as obsessed as the PRC is with China's positive future, they
> will back down and not risk international crisis, and hence the
> damnation of their country. This is the more likely scenario.

In 20 years they will be considerably more powerful, and they will care about what the rest of the world thinks about as much as we do. They may (for example) increase their military presence in Taiwan, and then when people resist, will start a "war on terror" to quell the resistance. And we will protest, and they will say "that's nice, but you can't possibly understand what it's like; now go away."

And we will consider economic sanctions, then someone will notice that that will destroy our economy. We'll go to the UN, which will still be in shambles from our efforts to neuter it. So we'll put up with whatever China does. Heck, maybe they'll let us send an American along with their first Mars mission!

[ViperPilot 0]

Quote

they will care about what the rest of the world thinks about as much as we do

They already do care.

Quote

will start a "war on terror" to quell the resistance. And we will protest, and they will say "that's nice, but you can't possibly understand what it's like; now go away."

They could start a "war on terror." I was just arguing that the odds are against that. No it's not impossible, but I argue that there is a smaller chance of Chinese action. It could very well happen. Just because they say "now go away" does not mean we will.

Quote

We'll go to the UN, which will still be in shambles from our efforts to neuter it

You mean the UN that has always been useless and in shambles?

Quote

So we'll put up with whatever China does

We don't just put up with "whatever" China does. We may have to let some things go, but we won't just sit here with our thumbs up our asses and do nothing.

[EricTheRed 0]

China shops elsewhere..

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8C51H5G1.htm?campaign_id=apn_tech_down&chan=tc

and buys.

illegible usually