Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    Starman's Avatar
    Starman Posts: 1,308, Reputation: 135
    -
     
    #1

    May 21, 2006, 08:25 AM
    Inconsistent foreign policy
    Why do we do business with China which is a communist country and refuse to do business with Cuba and pressure other nations not to do business with Cuba because it is a communist country?

    BTW

    We also give aid to communist North Korea whenever it promises not to build nuclear weapons.
    orange's Avatar
    orange Posts: 1,364, Reputation: 197
    Ultra Member
     
    #2

    May 27, 2006, 02:32 PM
    China is a much larger and much more powerful country than Cuba, and thus more of a threat to the US. There's an excellent Canadian documentary out about China's major economic and social progress called China Rises. I'm not sure if it's available in the US, but here you can rent it at Blockbuster and other video stores. It's really excellent and everyone interested in China should definitely watch it.

    It may seem hypocritical, but I think the US is wise to have good relations with China, as it is becoming quite a world superpower. I think policiticians use communism as an excuse in the case of Cuba, because they can get away with it, since Cuba is such a tiny country. But they can't criticize China in the same way, because it's so enormous and powerful. And in the case of North Korea, as you say it's likely because of nuclear weapons... kind of a trade-off.
    wizzkid89's Avatar
    wizzkid89 Posts: 243, Reputation: 63
    Full Member
     
    #3

    May 27, 2006, 06:02 PM
    It's pretty simple, going on from what orange said, the reason being is that China has a market that everyone wants to control. The U.S. started the open door policy with them to facilitate trade, in I believe 1900, to preserve their sphere of influence. That's what it has always been about between the european countries, united states, and the asian continent. Spheres of influence. When you talk about the most populated country in the world, of course the countries in europe and north america are going to want some influence in that market in order to gain a better economy. Even though it is hypocritical to say no to cuba but encourage china, the U.S. government and economy just can't turn their backs on this one, due to it being so powerful.
    Starman's Avatar
    Starman Posts: 1,308, Reputation: 135
    -
     
    #4

    May 27, 2006, 11:05 PM
    Thanks for the explanations.
    So human rights become secondary whenever the almighty dollar is involved and hypocrisy is OK when it doesn't affect the pocket book? Please consider that Cuba's plight as far as the suffering of its people due to our pressuring other countries not to do business with it because it is communist is attributed to communism itself and not to any type of embargo. If indeed the United States is to have its statements respected and believed, then consistency of policy is essential.

    BTW
    Being less powerful doesn't morally justify being the target of an embargo or of an isolation campaign.
    wizzkid89's Avatar
    wizzkid89 Posts: 243, Reputation: 63
    Full Member
     
    #5

    May 28, 2006, 02:34 AM
    Comment on Starman's post
    Actually being less powerful has everything to do with it
    orange's Avatar
    orange Posts: 1,364, Reputation: 197
    Ultra Member
     
    #6

    May 28, 2006, 10:12 AM
    Being less powerful doesn't morally justify being the target of an embargo or of an isolation campaign.
    I agree... but since when does the government care about morals or doing the right thing? I don't think they do. As you say, the almighty dollar, the economy, etc, is what's considered first and foremost. The government may say that they hate communism, but in the case of China, they seem to be embracing it or at least looking the other way.

    I don't think it's okay to be hypocritical when it comes to human rights, but I'm pretty cynical when it comes to government policies. I feel for Cuba and other countries like it, but unfortunately I don't think, when it comes down to it, that the government gives a **** about them. If Cuba had oil or some other very important resource they would probably care more. It's just like Rwanda IMO. A genocide similar to the Holocaust occurred there and no one tried very hard to help. Why? Rwanda has no exploitable resources.

    Anyway, just my opinion.
    Starman's Avatar
    Starman Posts: 1,308, Reputation: 135
    -
     
    #7

    May 29, 2006, 12:16 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by orange
    I agree... but since when does the government care about morals or doing the right thing? I don't think they do. As you say, the almighty dollar, the economy, etc, is what's considered first and foremost. The government may say that they hate communism, but in the case of China, they seem to be embracing it or at least looking the other way.

    I think that the government has a very low opinion of people's intelligence and that's why it goes about in this fashion. Unfortunately government doesn't live in a vacuum. As a world leader its policies and actions are constantly scrutinized by the community of nations. Saying one thing and doing another is a good way to lose trust.
    Starman's Avatar
    Starman Posts: 1,308, Reputation: 135
    -
     
    #8

    May 29, 2006, 12:20 AM
    wizzkid89 disagrees: Actually being less powerful has everything to do with it.
    There are other countries in this hemisphere which are less powerful and they are not being economically and politically targeted.
    wizzkid89's Avatar
    wizzkid89 Posts: 243, Reputation: 63
    Full Member
     
    #9

    May 29, 2006, 08:42 PM
    Like who?? And are they communist??
    Starman's Avatar
    Starman Posts: 1,308, Reputation: 135
    -
     
    #10

    May 30, 2006, 12:02 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by wizzkid89
    Like who??? and are they communist???
    Communism is irrelevant. Its being weaker than China that is the reason why Cuba is targeted. At least that is what you previously said. Right? Or did I misunderstand?
    wizzkid89's Avatar
    wizzkid89 Posts: 243, Reputation: 63
    Full Member
     
    #11

    May 30, 2006, 02:06 AM
    Communism has as much to do with it as power does, the reason the communism is overlooked in China is due to it's power, but because Cuba is communist and offers nothing to the U.S. it can be targeted with out as much repercussions as say china would, and although you may not like it I'm not saying that it isn't hypocritical, but that is the way of the world in governments, either eat or be eaten, take advantage of people you can and suck up to people that have something you want, that's just how it is in politics. It sad but its necessary and that's why it remains to be this way.
    Starman's Avatar
    Starman Posts: 1,308, Reputation: 135
    -
     
    #12

    May 30, 2006, 11:32 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by wizzkid89
    Communism has as much to do with it as power does, the reason the communism is overlooked in China is due to it's power, but because Cuba is communist and offers nothing to the U.S. it can be targeted with out as much repercussions as say china would, and although you may not like it I'm not saying that it isn't hypocritical, but that is the way of the world in governments, either eat or be eaten, take advantage of people you can and suck up to people that have something you want, that's just how it is in politics. It sad but its necessary and that's why it remains to be this way.

    I'm interested in what you think that those repurcussions would be. Chinese aggression against Taiwan is something the USA has repeatedly vowed not to ignore regardless of repurcussions which could very well be a nuclear exchange. Isn't that a more serious repercussion than what would happen by treating China like Cuba? Another governmental contradiction in reasoning it seems.
    wizzkid89's Avatar
    wizzkid89 Posts: 243, Reputation: 63
    Full Member
     
    #13

    May 30, 2006, 04:52 PM
    Those repercussions have to do with the economy. The country that has the most people in the world is looking to buy a lot of materials and products from the outside, and America wants them to come to us that is why we don't pressure them economically, because we need them just as much as they need us. In regards to cuba, we can afford to pressure them because they are just a tiny island in the Caribbean and they don't have the economic force that China does.
    Starman's Avatar
    Starman Posts: 1,308, Reputation: 135
    -
     
    #14

    May 30, 2006, 07:35 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by wizzkid89
    Those repercussions have to do with the economy. The country that has the most people in the world is looking to buy a lot of materials and products from the outside, and America wants them to come to us that is why we don't pressure them economically, because we need them just as much as they need us. In regards to cuba, we can afford to pressure them because they are just a tiny island in the Carribean and they don't have the economic force that China does.
    So how about the repurcussions of militarily interceding if China decides to make a move on Taiwan? Why would the USA give be more concerned with ecomomic repurcussions and not be equally or even more concerned with military intervention repurcussions which theoretically can leave us with a post nuclear uninhabitale earth? How are we supposed to believe that there is concern when statements of willingness to plunge the world into a nuclear holocausat over Taiwan are flippantly tossed about?

    Please keep in mind that we are contrasting two attitudes.

    1 Concern about losing China's business if it treats it like Cuba.

    2. Seeming lack of concern about engaging China in a nuclear war over taiwan and losing China's business in the process as well.


    Make sense to you??

    BTW
    China has intercontinental ballistic missles armed with nucllear warheads pointed in our direction right now. When Cuba attempted to arm itself that way it was blockaded. Yes I know that the differences in power are part of the reason for the governmen'ts looking the other way. But this situation strikes me as bizzar nevertheless.
    Starman's Avatar
    Starman Posts: 1,308, Reputation: 135
    -
     
    #15

    May 31, 2006, 01:14 AM
    So how about the repercussions of militarily interceding if China decides to make a move on Taiwan? Why would the USA be more concerned with economic repercussions and not be equally or even more concerned with military intervention repercussions which theoretically can leave us with a post nuclear uninhabitable earth? How are we supposed to believe that there is concern when statements of willingness to plunge the world into a nuclear holocaust over Taiwan are flippantly tossed about?

    Please keep in mind that we are contrasting two attitudes.

    1 Concern about losing China's business if it treats it like Cuba.

    2. Seeming lack of concern about engaging China in a nuclear war over Taiwan and losing China's business in the process as well.


    Make sense to you??

    BTW
    China has intercontinental ballistic missiles armed with nuclear warheads pointed in our direction right now. When Cuba attempted to arm itself that way it was blockaded. Yes, I know that the differences in power are part of the reason for the government's looking the other way. But this situation strikes me as bizarre nevertheless.
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,328, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #16

    Jun 3, 2006, 06:04 AM
    The US is a capitalistic country. Its all about money and what American business man can look at china and not go cha-ching! Policy is based on money and who has the money and who makes the money that it no frills. It is no secret that 1% of America controls ALL the money here and most of it abroad. The rest of us are slaves to there policies and they do as they please. And make no mistake if a dollar is to be made they will make it no matter who is president King of England Japan or Timbuktu! The US is not the premiere super-power of the world for nothing and you can say what you want, they control the world economy including Russia and China. Don't believe me, wait till McDonald's comes up with a rice burger w/fries and moves the corporate headquarters to Peking next to Nike then it will be to late.:cool: :rolleyes:
    Starman's Avatar
    Starman Posts: 1,308, Reputation: 135
    -
     
    #17

    Jun 3, 2006, 06:57 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by talaniman
    The US is a capitalistic country. Its all about money and what American business man can look at china and not go cha-ching! Policy is based on money and who has the money and who makes the money that it no frills. It is no secret that 1% of America controls ALL the money here and most of it abroad. The rest of us are slaves to there policies and they do as they please. And make no mistake if a dollar is to be made they will make it no matter who is president King of England Japan or Timbuktu! The US is not the premiere super-power of the world for nothing and you can say what you want, they control the world economy including Russia and China. Don't believe me, wait till McDonald's comes up with a rice burger w/fries and moves the corporate headquarters to Peking next to Nike then it will be to late.:cool: :rolleyes:
    I understand that you mean MOSTLY about money since other factors such as world security via prevention of any further proliferation of nuclear weapons seems to be also an important foreign-policy factor.

    Question:
    Too late for what?

    BTW
    I was in Beijing China recently and to me it seemed as if I hadn't left the United States.

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search

Add your answer here.


Check out some similar questions!

Dividend Policy [ 2 Answers ]

For each of the following four groups of companies, state whether you would expect them to distribute a relatively high or low proportion of current earnings and whether you would expect them to have a relatively high or low price-earnings ratio. a. High-risk companies. Current earnings...

Monetary Policy [ 5 Answers ]

What US dept formulates and implements and implements monetary policy?

Old policy [ 1 Answers ]

How can I find out how to cash an old insurance policy, the insurance company does not exist.


View more questions Search