| From: | Sommers sommers@*****.edu |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Second Hand |
| Date: | Fri, 03 Sep 1999 14:38:18 -0400 |
> > If you are the US president and you want to send a clear message to
>a
> > country, you park a small fleet in the Straits of Taiwan to conduct
> > "Excercises" with Taiwan. You tell Congress that under the current
> > leadership you do not believe that China should be admitted to GATT.
>You
> > even threaten to revoke MFN status.
>
>How often have the US tried to talk sombody into something?? Sure it
>was a PR loss for the US, but nontheless I think the message was the
>ultimate warning. Perhaps it will not change the chinese attitude, but
>it states, that the US doesn't give a **** about PR, or the live of
>innocents. This message was (in my opinion) not only delivered to the
>chinese, but more to the whole world.
I could believe that it was deliberate, and meant to send a message to the
Chinese not to screw with the US, except for one thing. It doesn't make
sense. If you want to send this message that the US is bad and is not going
to take any more ****, you do the deed and afterwards send to the Chinese
embassy in the US "Sorry about the mistake. Never happen again." And you
drop it.
You don't have the Press Secretary get up there and explain how horrible a
mistake it was and how sorry we are. You don't have generals from the
Pentagon and analysts from the CIA get up and explain exactly where the
chain broke down, and how the target was selected wrong. Most importantly,
the President of the US does not publicly call the Chinese Premiere and
apologize not once, not twice, but three times!
If you're a thief and hold someone up with a gun, you don't apologize
afterwards and ask if there is anything you can do to make it up to him. If
you're the US government and want to tell the world that you're a mean SOB,
you don't get up there after and apologize for two weeks explaining why it
was a big tragedy and mistake.
>I'm sorry if I have offended any US-Citizens with this post
Its not that I'm offended by the post. The problem is you're attributing to
malice and outright hostility that which was caused by accident. I think
you're giving too much credit to the government for their ability to keep
stuff covered up, and not enough credit for believing that the government
is that bloodthirsty.
Sommers
Insert witty quote here.
