The problem with your theory of China and Russia stepping in to stop the actions of the administration, is that they know that ultimately having the US take on this confrontation is enormously to their benefit in multiple ways. First, they also need access to oil - in many ways even more than we do. Second, anything which hurts the US while not directly harming them strengthens their world position.

Dave

No, it is not reasonable. But when have priorities ever been expected to be reasonable? More often than perhaps we care to think, they are totally based in emotion.

In the case of the US, where the majority of its citizens would not be able to find Iran on a map (and it's a very big country), what happens outside the US borders as well as, increasingly, what happens inside those same borders is simply of little or no interest. It's not of emotional importance.

The US has a navy base on the biggest of the islands that make up the country of Bahrain--across part of the Persian Gulf from Iran. It's about 4 blocks from where I was living when I was there for several months last year and also the year before last.

The building up of navy personnel on that base is one of the reasons I pulled the plus and gave myself the Christmas present of coming home to Mexico.

I did not feel like going up in smoke or flames if the completely unreasonable US gang of felons in the White House decided to attack Iran.

There has been an onslaught in the media the past few days about whether or not the Bush Gang has decided to attack Iran this spring. Some indicate that they have. The fact that Bush says that they haven't is probably a fair indicator that at the very least they are sure itching to do just that.

There are other voices that say the attack will come next year--before the neocons leave office. (The Go out with a Bang Scenario, I suppose.)

Other voices--including that of the NYTimes insist that an attack on Iran is not going to happen.

That would mean that the continued build-up in the Gulf is just saber-rattling.

Yet the behavior of the Bush Gang is remarkable similar to the behavior employed before they invaded Iraq.

These guys are capable of anything. The slimmer the chance of success, the more the fixation on trying to pull it off is what appears to be the behavior rule of this administration.

Emotionally, it seems to be more important that Bush show Daddy that he's not a wimp (a charge leveled at his Dad which led to the invasion of Panama to prove he wasn't), than any reasonable analysis of geopolitics. Or even common sense.

Sorry--I did not pull the plus, but the plug.

So did I read this right? The author is suggesting that china and russia ought to nuke the US in defense of a country which is subsidizing terrorism within their own territory in xinhua and chechnya.

How does that make any sense at all?

Apropos at least one of the points of this piece, synchronicity has struck again: Bill Moyers, in a piece called "Dicovering What Democracy Means" that was reprinted today on the CommonDreams site had this to say:

"Our public conversation is mediated by politicians who have mastered "sound bites" sculpted from polling data, by "pundits" whose credibility increases with the frequency of exposure despite being consistently wrong, and "experts" whose authority depends not on reason, evidence or logic but on ideology and affiliation. The public, J.R. Priestly observed, "has been transformed into a vast crowd, a permanent audience, waiting to be amused."

"So did I read this right? The author is suggesting that china and russia ought to nuke the US in defense of a country which is subsidizing terrorism within their own territory in xinhua and chechnya."

Hey, no one said it actually had to make sense. BTW it is Xinjiang not Xinhua (which is the name of their official news service).

(taking a deep breath) China selling off the US bonds would cause the US economy to collapse which would cause the Chinese economy to collapse which would cause the overthrow of the Communist regime which would cause the second round of civil war in China in less than a century. I doubt it is what they want.

Ah, Aku (#6)...

...China selling off the US bonds would cause the US economy to collapse which would cause the Chinese economy to collapse which would cause the overthrow of the Communist regime which would cause the second round of civil war in China in less than a century. I doubt it is what they want.

You insist on trying to inject logic into these dialogues.

Tsk, tsk.

It's my fatal flaw.

Perhaps its some bad Juju.

Oh yes, and one more thing. I find it strange a country who hunts down and assassinates its political opponents and one who committed the massacre at Tienanmen are somehow the heroes of the story. If the US is as evil as the writer said, surly these two are right there with us.

Ooops there is the Juju again.

China selling off the US bonds would cause the US economy to collapse

Wow, how does that work again? China SELLS the US bonds, receiving a fair market value for them from some other institutional/governmental buyer. Ok. And the US economy collapses because? Think it through. How is the US involved in any way in that bond sale? Does it change the US obligation to repay those bonds in any way? No. So, in fact, if China sells the US bonds it holds it does nothing at all to the US economy.

Dave

^ Populi figured the same thing.

I worked in financial serivces. Spoke to many bond traders along the way. This notion that China or international bond holders would sell their bonds is short sighted. They would never do it. They have so much cash they have to put it somewhere and America is gold and safe. Everyone knows this behind the scenes. There is a fundamental lack of undertanding high finance among the left especially. The U.S. ecomomy will not collapse any time soon. Put your party hats away.

Based on current economic figures and stock market performance they ought to be incesting in the US like crazy.

Heh. Bill Moyers commenting on political showmanship. You all know what he used to do for a living, right?

Yeah, I do know what he used to do for a living and also what he does. Couldn't be bothered to go to the site and read the article, huh?

Lazy fuck.

Do you have a point to make?

Dave Nalle - China SELLS the US bonds, receiving a fair market value for them from some other institutional/governmental buyer. Ok. And the US economy collapses because?

Take it in a different direction: China sells, USA buys and zeros out debt. What would a US pull-back from foreign investors do to the global economy? It's not a rhetorical question, I can't see the logical result.

Dave: "How is the US involved in any way in that bond sale? Does it change the US obligation to repay those bonds in any way?"

I am sorry but this is a somewhat long explanation, but you are missing some key market dynamics Dave.

A few things. First did you see what happened in the bond market when China announced it would diversify its treasury reserves, in other words, not buy as much US treasures? The dollar was bid down. The dollar lost value and interest rates in the long term were expected to rise (not as much demand for bonds = higher bond interest rates = higher overall interest rates for the US).

Now think what would happen if, instead of slowing the pace of buying US securities, the Chinese government threw it into reverse. The value of the dollar would plummet, making imports more expensive, thus increasing inflation, most likely beyond the bounds of what is good for the economy. While in the long term, the weak dollar would be good for US exports, it would take a while for this action to counteract other movements economic movements.

On the interest rate side, assuming there is not some spike in demand for treasuries that coincides with the theoretical Chinese sale, the market for US securities would be flooded, and in order to sell securities, the US government would be forced to raise interest rates, a steep raise most likely, Raised interest rates would make it more difficult to raise capital (to expand businesses) and to take out mortgages, etc. thus economic growth would slow.

"Ok. And the US economy collapses because?"

Because of the slowed growth, the high interest rates, and the increased inflation, not the US obligation to repay these treasuries, which, as you pointed out, would not change. In any case, the economic results could create a situation that would rival the Great Depression. If this scenario played out, I doubt it would as serious as that (still very serious), but it is a possibility.

Joe "Take it in a different direction: China sells, USA buys and zeros out debt. What would a US pull-back from foreign investors do to the global economy? It's not a rhetorical question, I can't see the logical result."

This would not really be a pullback from foreign investors, but rather a spike in demand for treasuries created by the US government. But I ask you, where would the US government get the money to buy back the treasuries? It could either print more money, which would be an absolute disaster, or they could have a major increase in taxes. This, while not as bad as printing your way to the purchase, would also have a very bad effect on the US economy.

Adding to my point in the original post, we could survive this, the Chinese government would most likely not.

"Heh. Bill Moyers commenting on political showmanship. You all know what he used to do for a living, right?"
- Baronius

Yeah, almost as bizarre as all the right-wing conservatives who take military advice from Rush Limbaugh, and consider him a patriot. (Limbaugh dodged the draft, receivng a medical deferment for an ingrown hair on his keester!)

It is an insipid piece of writing.