China Sends Its Only Aircraft Carrier to South China Sea After US Breaches “Air Defense Zone” No One Really Takes Seriously

The long-simmering dispute between China and Japan and, because why not, the United States over a group of uninhabited but resource-rich islands in the South China Sea continues to simmer. 

NBC News reports:

China has deployed its one and only aircraft carrier after two unarmed American B-52 bombers flew over a disputed island chain and through what China insists is restricted airspace.

U.S. defense officials told NBC News that the Chinese had not engaged in a provocative act or made any demands against American or Japanese military in the region. Japan and China both claim the island chain, in the East China Sea.

Internet users in China have reportedly taken to mocking the ruling Communist Party as a laughing stock for declaring an “air defense zone” and then having it breached almost immediately, though the Chinese Internet being a highly censored and controlled place, such mocking may be a set up to justify more action.

Never fear, though, Joe Biden is on it. So maybe everyone can find some common ground by laughing at something else.

Follow these stories and more at Reason 24/7 and don't forget you can e-mail stories to us at 24_7@reason.com and tweet us at @reason247.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Austrian Anarchy||

    Well, whatever else this means it looks like this is not the place to place the new Sealand.

  • CE||

    Why are we provoking these guys? Why is Japan? Is the Middle East too peaceful these days, we need to gin up another war?

  • ||

    Maybe Vladimir Putin can get us out of this mess.

  • Almanian!||

    +1 Nobel Prize

  • Agammamon||

    Kerry will fix it again - accidentally.

  • IDPNDNT||

    Why is our military so antagonistic?

    You can practically here them licking their chops hoping that China sends a stray bullet in their direction.

  • IDPNDNT||

    Derp. Hear*

  • Redmanfms||

    You can practically here them licking their chops hoping that China sends a stray bullet in their direction.

    Ugh, just fucking choke yourself.

    Derp indeed.

  • IDPNDNT||

    Ugh, just fucking choke yourself.

    Derp indeed.

    Because I think childish antagonizing is unnecessary?

    This isn't our fight, and there is little reason we should be shaking up the hornets nest.

    They didn't fly the bombers over the islands for any reason other than to get a reaction.

    Most people here will agree we shouldn't be over there in the first damn place let alone stick our head in a conflict that has little to do with us.

  • Redmanfms||

    Because I think childish antagonizing is unnecessary?

    Because you laid it on "the military" when it was a political stunt and then posted this bit of abject dipshitery:

    You can practically here them licking their chops hoping that China sends a stray bullet in their direction.
  • ||

    Yes. Obviously this is proof that our servicemembers are bloodthirsty babykillers.

  • ||

    Because, and this is no snark, they suffer from exactly the same sort of "what's the point of having all of this shit if we're not going to use it?" mentality that police forces have embraced regarding their SWAT tanks and other paramilitary paraphernalia.

    I was in the army for 5 years, and I tell you, they live in absolute mortal terror of the budget ever being cut by one red cent. Oh sure, you'll get most of them to agree that the procurement process is f-ed up and wasteful, but go anything beyond that, anything at all, and you're a communist (I suppose now terrorist) sympathizer who wants the United States to be weakened and humbled because you love Euro-snobs and internationalism so much. I'm dead serious.

    I remember during the early years of the Iraq War, every single problem was blamed on that "traitor" Clinton "gutting" the military after the end of the Cold War. If only we had maintained a military large enough to defeat the Soviet Union, then we wouldn't have had these problems in Iraq, by God! Some Japanese quote was bandied about quite a bit by those fancying themselves as intellectuals, to the effect of, "After a victory, tighten the straps of your helmet." To them, the US military must remain in a state to wage two major wars against powers of equal strength on either side of the globe simultaneously. Anything less is "weakness", and will draw accusations of you being, 1) gay, 2) European, or 3) possibly both.

  • Redmanfms||

    I spent 6 years in the Navy and noticed literally none of this.

    There was no desire to go to war to prove we needed the toys. Budget cuts were generally perceived poorly (mainly because we were expected to do the same shit with less), but I not one single time ever heard anybody lament there not being a wider shooting war or vacillating for one.

    If those B-52s hadn't been ordered from up on high in the White House to do the flyover there would be heads rolling in a very public manner. Political stunts originate with politicians.

  • ||

    Maybe the navy is different from the army, but I literally have many friends still in who are lamenting the draw-down because now their careers are going to stall out (specifically replied to an email from a friend who just made major who is now very upset that the endless cycle of combat deployments he volunteered for, which got him the promotions and enough extra cash to buy a new house, are going to end. He wants a war so he can keep the money coming and get promoted again).

    Also sat through a battalion commander (LTC) briefing once in the early days of EF where he seriously blasted Clinton for cutting any of the military budget after the fall of the USSR.

    Maybe it's a more prevalent attitude in officer country, where I spent the vast majority of my time, but I ran into that attitude constantly.

  • ||

    On another note, I'm also shocked you didn't get any of the, "You mean you don't want to go to war? What are you, some kind of peacenik hippie faggot?"

    A lot of them will say they don't want war, because they know it's what people want to hear. But when they start calling for airstrikes and combat brigades to be deployed over every little diplomatic slight, it puts the lie to their public statements.

  • Redmanfms||

    On another note, I'm also shocked you didn't get any of the, "You mean you don't want to go to war? What are you, some kind of peacenik hippie faggot?"

    At this point I think you are just outright making shit up.

  • ||

    Hey fuck you pal, maybe we knew different people who had different ideas, but I heard that plenty of times. See below: I saw a fucking pro-war march including active-duty army officers attempt to block the route of an anti-war march during the months leading up to that war.

    If you send me your email address, I'll forward you the email I got from my buddy wishing something else somewhere would jump off so he could get some more deployments under his belt (I'll redact the name and email address for his privacy).

  • Redmanfms||

    If you send me your email address, I'll forward you the email I got from my buddy wishing something else somewhere would jump off so he could get some more deployments under his belt (I'll redact the name and email address for his privacy).

    I'm guessing I'll just have to take your word for it that it was sent by a real person who is really in the military? That sounds convincing.

    If you could find an article verifying the Texas Tech incident and post it that would be interesting reading.

  • ||

    I've been looking around, and though events on campus don't get a lot of press (being West Texas, and the marches/protests being much smaller than those seen on other sites), I have found this:

    http://lubbockonline.com/stori.....0057.shtml

    First, where I was wrong: it was obviously smaller than I'm remembering. Though I will say that there were well more than a "half dozen" pro-war protestors at the time; I'd have guessed about 20-25, almost elusively made up of ROTC students with their "professors of military science" who are active-duty officers. I don't know when the reporter showed up or who she counted as a counter-protestor: most of the ROTC guys left after their symbolic blocking of the route the peace marchers took.

    Dustin Farahnak, who is mentioned in the article, is mentioned in other media outlets (link below) as an army reservist. I didn't know him personally.

    Anyway, it was a smaller event than I recall, but I do have verification from media that army reservists were involved in the counter-protest, and I suppose you'd have to take my word that the remaining counter-protestors were made up of my (at the time) fellow ROTC students. Take it all for what you will.

    http://www.kcbd.com/story/1120.....ets-heated

  • ||

    I thought these were some interesting quotes from other news articles specifically about pro-war marchers at Tech:

    "Freedom is worth dying for," he said, adding that although 80,000 Iraqis could die in a U.S.-Iraq war, 2 million will be freed.

    The protest is too political, he said. Too many of the demonstrators were against Bush and therefore against all of his policies, Farahnak said - an opinion that also is shared by Jared Hall, a senior classics major from Lubbock.

    "I'm not for war, I'm for the people of Iraq," he said, holding a sign that asked how many Iraqis died during this protest. "How many more people have to die before they realize they're killing people?"

    Hall compared the protest to those of the 1960s, saying 2 million people in Indochina were slaughtered because of anti-war protests during that era. He called the protestors selfish and said they needed to redirect their focus.

    "They're championing nobody but themselves," he said. "Once in a while in a man's life he has to stand up for what is honest and good and noble, and this is not good."
  • ||

    Oh and one more bit: sorry to bombard you with this stuff Redmanfms, but I thought you may find this interesting.

    One of those news stories quotes a professor named Catherine Miller. I actually had her for a class once, back in 02 I'm wanting to say. She was an honest-to-God, full on, open communist. And what's interesting is, an unrepentant Stalinist no less. She told us the stats made up by the West about Stalin's crimes were all made-up propaganda, and that people only starved because the west cut off food-aid to the commies and it wasn't their fault their agriculture was all messed up because of the civil war.

    She was a local representative of the Progressive Labor Party (funny how I can remember that). Look them up, if you dare.

  • Redmanfms||

    This:

    A student who supports action that would spare Iraqi people from Saddam's hard-line rule shouted at some of the anti-war protesters, who responded by surrounding him and drowning out his message.

    Jared Hall, a senior from Lubbock, held a sign saying, "While you protest the war, someone is being tortured in Iraq."

    Does not sound anything like this:

    Hell, the Texas Tech ROTC (led by their active-duty officers), both army and AF, blocked a student peace march on campus during the run up to the Iraq War to show their support for an immediate full invasion.

    Reads more like a "Support the Troooopppppssss!!!!" and "Saddam is a bad guy!" counter-protest than a bunch of ROTC students and Army officers excited and licking their chops (to quote IDPNwhatever) over the prospect of a war.

    Silly and misguided sophistry, sure. War pigs snortin' for a real shootin' war? Uh...

  • ||

    Well since nobody would probably be stupid enough to "lick their chops" over a war in public in front of reporters and what have you, we remain at an impasse.

    And, I might add, that was a bit of goal post moving. I didn't say that the ROTC was outside agitating for war, I said that was their view in private, and that they were out as part of the pro-war counter-protest. Now like I said, most of them blocked the route the student marchers took (largely as a symbolic act), then dispersed before there was any kind of confrontation. Apparently according to these news stories a few stuck around to heckle the anti-war guys.

    Now of course we weren't out there in BDUs officially representing the army, that crap doesn't fly and having been in, you know why. We were in civvies, but there were only a few dudes there who weren't ROTC or army affiliated (like the army reservist mentioned).

  • ||

    Keep in mind, what you're reading is what they would want to show the public (both pro-and-anti-war protestors). I'm speaking from the perspective of having been there when the decision was made to go counter-protest, and having been around those guys, and been in their reservist units with them (though again, I did not know the one reservist quoted in the stories).

    So sure in public it's "support the troops!", but in private, it was, "Hell yeah, now we'll get out chance!" Probably made easier by knowledge of Desert Storm and the belief that any war would be short, glorious, and viciously one-sided.

  • Redmanfms||

    Well since nobody would probably be stupid enough to "lick their chops" over a war in public in front of reporters and what have you, we remain at an impasse.

    So all the "chops licking" was by ROTC students? You mean the guys who are not either commissioned officers or active duty?

    And, I might add, that was a bit of goal post moving.

    No, it's not. I didn't say anything about public or private conversations. I was comparing your version of the protest/counter-protest with the public accounts and they don't match at all.

    been in their reservist units

    Actually, that combined with the timline ('02, '03) explains a lot.

  • ||

    And there's no way around the other impasse, because there's simply no way I'm going to toss out a friend of mine's email address with personal statements in it to a stranger in order to "win" and internet argument.

    You're right, you have no reason to believe me, but I also cannot involve someone else in the debate with personally identifiable information. So we might as well call that quits.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Whatever.

    Look pal, I was a turd tosser slash window licker on the USS Andy Griffith for 25 goddamn years and your story stinks to high heaven (I would know).

    Take your goddamn "I won't give out my friends info to the public" bullshit and get the fuck out of my face, commie.

  • ||

    Curious where the "commie" bit came from.

    And what's up with all these navy assholes coming in and claiming to have great insight into how army officers behave? I don't hop on threads about butt-fucking on the USS Andy Griffith and tell you that I KNOW you're lying because I was in a different service branch hanging out with different people.

    Assuming AA there is telling the truth about having been in the army all those years, I'd take his criticism seriously. He's wrong to call me a liar, but at least he has a basis for comparison.

    Tell you what, going forward, if someone talks about what life was like as an officer in the army, and you were enlisted in the navy, how about you kindly shut the fuck up and stop pretending to have any goddamn clue what you're talking about?

  • General Butt Naked||

    Shows what the fuck you know.

    The "commie thing" came from the fact that the army is absolutely ripe with 'em. My CO told me so.

    And just for your information Mr. Military Man, a turd tosser isn't homo in the least. If you really served, you'd know that.

    What I did was take the lavatory buckets seaside when the sub surfaces. Because we couldn't waste any precious fluids I had to use a billet spoon (imagine a ladle with a colander as a spoon) to fish out the turds and send them to their watery grave. Not every man could do this as you had have enough of an arm to chuck 'em far enough to keep the Ruskies guessing on your location.

    Seeing as how I was a pitcher, before the War, for the Punxsutawney Knicklebockers I got the position.

  • Redmanfms||

    And what's up with all these navy assholes coming in and claiming to have great insight into how army officers behave?

    GBN is snark, funny too.

    Austrain Anarchy was apparently Army.

    I come from a military family that goes back to the Revolution. My mother and all of her siblings were officers. Three were Vietnam veterans and one was a Ranger. It's not like I wasn't around officers during the Cold War and Clinton years and heard the way they talk. Lamenting budget cuts don't amount to a desire to go to war. You are purposely (and I think dishonestly) conflating the two.

    Besides, your initial comment in this sub-thread, specifically this:

    Because, and this is no snark, they suffer from exactly the same sort of "what's the point of having all of this shit if we're not going to use it?" mentality that police forces have embraced regarding their SWAT tanks and other paramilitary paraphernalia.

    is a response referencing the entire military and relaying your personal anecdotes to confirm it. So my experience around members of another branch is germane.

  • ||

    is a response referencing the entire military and relaying your personal anecdotes to confirm it. So my experience around members of another branch is germane.

    You are correct about that, and I retract that statement. I can only speak from my perspective.

  • ||

    And in case that was all snark, GBN...well-played, sir ; )

  • General Butt Naked||

    You're high strung. It's probably PTSD.

    Eat this acid, you'll be better by the time turkey's on tomorrow.

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    Jimbo, respectfully, you are full of shit and talking out your ass.

  • ||

    Either way, your average joe schmoe enlisted guy would rather sit on his ass in the rear where there's the possibility of skanky poontang and bars. I'm sure every branch has its share of nutjob, overly-political weirdos... but outside of the combat pay for a deployment, the majority of them don't care. Most of the guys I know that went into OEF and OIF I, got the fuck out afterwards.

  • Austrian Anarchy||

    No, I was an Officer and you just know weird people.

  • ||

    Maybe I did, and I'm willing to admit that. But goddamn, every single officer I worked with from the company level on up absolutely salivated at the thought of going to war with somebody, anybody, and if you didn't, you were the odd one out. Like I said, being called a "pussy" or "fag" for talking about wanting to avoid a war was an every day occurrence.

    Hell, the Texas Tech ROTC (led by their active-duty officers), both army and AF, blocked a student peace march on campus during the run up to the Iraq War to show their support for an immediate full invasion. They even derided the idea of waiting for the UN inspectors to finish their jobs as pointless, because, as everyone knew, the UN was nothing but a front for anti-Americanism.

  • ||

    *edit: they attempted to block the route of the peace marchers, but gave way rather than resort to any kind of physical confrontation that would have made the newspapers happy and the regional command very angry.

  • Austrian Anarchy||

    Okay, I am calling total BS on this. Have a groovy life.

  • ||

    Call what you like. Call me a liar, and I say, fuck you, asshole. I provided links up above for the protest part, and have no problem admitting where I was mistaken (namely, the size of the protest, which I remember being a bigger deal at the time, but obviously I was wrong).

    So, you can declare something that you 1) were not at, and 2) had no prior knowledge of, to be bullshit, whereas the guy who was there is providing at least some evidence, and freely admitting places where it looks like he was mistaken.

    Once again, fuck you.

  • ||

    "Hell, the Texas TechROTC (led by their active-duty officers), both army and AF, blocked a student peace march on campus during the run up to the Iraq War to show their support for an immediate full invasion. "

    You serious? Some ROTC jackoffs? I don't mean to be a dick, but that hardly legitimizes your position. I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you've had some other experiences with gung ho brass, but that's a really shitty example.

  • Michael S. Langston||

    I was in the Army and never heard anything like this either. And I was in during the base closings of Clinton.

    Sure - he wasn't popular among most troops, but no one I ever encountered claimed it was weakening us in the least bit.

    In fact, most military people I knew and met are like most normal people - they aren't all that political (though for whatever reasons, they lean conservative) and don't pay close attention to political news.

  • Austrian Anarchy||

    My experience matches yours and I was in the Army (Guard, Reserves, and Active) a total of 30 years, as well as a defense contractor on my civilian job for about 15.

  • SusanM||

    Also it's a great distraction from Obamacare.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Last I checked it was China that annexed some airspace not America.

  • IDPNDNT||

    Yes, but this is also over an island that we have no stake in.

    Japan can play their own war games. No need for us to waste a gallon of fuel on their conflict.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Okay, but if China starts taking international waters then that would concern us.

  • Austrian Anarchy||

    Actually, that deal we cut for Japan's unconditional surrender included our volunteering to protect their territory.

  • Cabeza de Vaca||

    Then it wasn't UNCONDITIONAL surrender.

  • Michael S. Langston||

    Umm... I hope that was a joke, but if not...

    Japan did unconditionally surrender - the US capitulating to provide protection for Japan has nothing to do with the word unconditional as that word describes surrender, and only Japan surrendered.

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    You can practically here them licking their chops hoping that China sends a stray bullet in their direction.

    Yeah, just what the military wants...another shooting war.

    You obviously don't know fuck-all about the military or who would be required to authorize such an action.

  • SweatingGin||

    IDPNDNT

    Saw from the previous thread you're a metro-Detroiter, whereabouts?

    You may see me some time, wearing a Reason shirt (mostly rotted through) with gin coming out of my pores.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    Wars have been started over stupider things.

  • Rhywun||

    You got your chocolate in my peanut butter!

  • Rhywun||

    You got chocolate in my peanut butter!

  • Rhywun||

    Damn, it looks like the squirrels have an 11:00 shift change in addition to the 3:00 one.

  • SIV||

    We should have allowed the Nips to re-arm years ago. Still they stand a good chance of prevailing against China even if we failed to honor our defensive commitments to them

  • ||

    I agree completely. WWI notwithstanding, in general, the more heavily armed camps you have in an area, the less anxious they all seem to rattle their sabers. It's not nearly as fun if the other person might be able to hit you back. An armed Japan would be quite the nice counterpoint to China.

  • prolefeed||

    You seem to need a link to back up that non-saber-rattling thing -- unless you're talking about nukes, where people tread lightly.

  • ||

    You're probably right about the nukes, because I was thinking, since the end of WWII, no great power has attacked another. The great powers have only ever gotten involved as proxies. But, since the end of WWII, most of the great powers either had direct access to nukes, or treaties with a patron state with nukes, so it all amounts to the same thing.

  • Sevo||

    Gojira|11.27.13 @ 8:07PM|#
    ..."I was thinking, since the end of WWII, no great power has attacked another."...
    On top of the number of US and Japanese lives saved in 1945, this is one of the reasons I'm not at all unhappy about nukes being used once (OK, twice, but you get the point)

  • ||

    Oh absolutely. Cytotoxic's delusions of "everyone except us is crazy and can't be trusted with them" aside, I think nuclear proliferation has been the single best thing to happen for peace in a long, long time.

  • Cytotoxic||

    STRAWMAN DOWN

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    I'm convinced there would have been a full-scale war between India and Pakistan by now if both countries had not developed nuclear weapons.

  • Cytotoxic||

    I think nuclear proliferation has been the single best thing to happen for peace in a long, long time.

    I'm sure the millions of people who suffered under nuclear-armed Sovietism or the many proxy wars they waged would enthusiastically agree with you. Also, the Cuban Missile Crisis never happened in your world.

  • Sevo||

    "I'm sure the millions of people who suffered under nuclear-armed Sovietism or the many proxy wars they waged would enthusiastically agree with you."
    Soviet nukes played no part in that, Soviet tanks did.

  • ||

    I'm sure the millions of people who suffered under nuclear-armed Sovietism...

    Why don't you ask them yourself if they would have rather suffered under nuclear-armed Sovietism, or died in the truly massive war you apparently wish we would have waged through their homelands in the alternative?

    I'm assuming you're agitating for war in this instance, because otherwise nukes would have played no part in it. If we didn't go to war, then they would have still suffered under the system, making your point moot.

  • Sevo||

    SIV|11.27.13 @ 7:51PM|#
    "We should have allowed the Nips to re-arm years ago."
    Not sure how much "we" have to say about it by now, but I sure am tired of providing the Japanese defense on my dime.

  • SIV||

    We have everything to say about it. Japan has a respectable self defense force but they are still limited by the terms of their surrender.The US has to give the OK for Japan to re-arm

  • Sevo||

    In which case, it is incumbent upon the US to release them from this unfair limitation!
    Save your own butts, Japan!

  • Alice Bowie||

    I was discussing this @ work today.

    I believe China holds 20% of the T-Bill inventory.
    If they dumped them and collapse the USD, yes, they would lose us as a customer. But I think we'd take it worst that they would.

    They are kinda use to the extreme national poverty thing.

    It would be a big shock to AMericans. I think the TOP 1% do have assets abroad. So they'll survive. Everyone else would lose their savings.

    We probably would not have to worry about outsourcing.

  • Sevo||

    "They are kinda use to the extreme national poverty thing."
    Not any more, they're not.
    And where do you think you'd sell that amount of debt?

  • Alice Bowie||

    I've been there for business. Still a shit-hole outside of the Shanghai.

    I did bring up your point SEVO to a few traders I work with. They brought up the GREATER FOOLs Theory. I'm pretty Skeptical myself. Others brought up that there would be takers. And, if the goal is to screw us, and, they think it's worthless paper anyway, the volume on the market may have an impact.

  • Sevo||

    "They brought up the GREATER FOOLs Theory."

    If you're going to demolish a currency and take billions of dollars in losses, you won't find a greater fool.
    Oh, and you need to read some Chinese history; people now own their own homes in the countryside. It may be a shithole to you, but no one is eating bark and dead people to stay alive anymore.

  • Alice Bowie||

    Agree with you on the Greater FOOLs thing.

    Totally disagree on the general population. We are barely one generation away from the change.

    I think if China managed to create 300million middle class people right there, who needs the american consumer?

    And, if the paper is useless, the volume many have impact. We may be wrong about the greater fool. Who knows, maybe the greater fool would be us...trying to buy it back?

  • Austrian Anarchy||

    You must be joking. The PRC has a PPP worse than Bosnia and Herzegovina. Big shots in big cities make out well, Communist party officials make out well, and the rest of the country is a sewer.

    Taiwan's PPP is about 4X greater than the PRC

  • Sevo||

    Austrian Anarchy|11.27.13 @ 8:33PM|#
    "You must be joking. The PRC has a PPP worse than Bosnia and Herzegovina."

    Irrelevant. Their comparison is not what they could buy in places they can't go, it's the comparison to what their parents had to do to avoid starvation.

  • Austrian Anarchy||

    Fully relevant.

  • Sevo||

    Austrian Anarchy|11.27.13 @ 8:41PM|#
    "Fully relevant."
    To those making irrelevant arguments, yes.

  • Irish||

    Yeah, but blowing up the U.S. economy would destroy the living standards in those big cities as they'd lose their primary trade partner.

    Chinese PPP may be very low because of peasants in inland China making $1 a day, but there are plenty of people on the coasts making $50,000 a year who do not intend to go back to the way things were 20 years ago.

  • Austrian Anarchy||

    Yea, that is exactly why their PPP is so low, because they have a billion people making a buck a day. Nice of someone to notice that on this thread. The joint is a giant slave colony with the guards making $50,000 or more per year.

  • Sevo||

    Austrian Anarchy|11.27.13 @ 8:40PM|#
    "Yea, that is exactly why their PPP is so low, because they have a billion people making a buck a day."

    And compared to $0.01/day, that's a vast improvement.

  • Irish||

    I actually don't know how much inland China has improved, even during the massive overall economic boom.

    I've been to inland China. Those people are dirt poor. I've been to poor parts of Mongolia and Thailand and Chinese peasants are as bad or worse off.

    The economic boom has been highly concentrated on the coasts.

  • Jordan||

    The Chinese population is highly concentrated on the coasts.

  • Sevo||

    All you folks claiming 'dirt poor' need to start with Teddy White's "In Search of History", and then Tuchman's "Stilwell in China".
    You're comparing what well-traveled westerners see in other lands; they're looking at where their parents were and where they are.
    You guys might just as well tell me that I can't afford what Bill Gates can, and therefore I'm in dire straights.

  • Alice Bowie||

    People bitch about the top 1% in America?

    In china, it's like the top .001% and a large gap.

  • Sevo||

    "People bitch about the top 1% in America?
    In china, it's like the top .001% and a large gap."

    Yeah, and it's an imbecile's argument there too. The mainland Chinese HAD equality. Well, not quite; many didn't quite starve.

  • Jordan||

    China saw a huge increase in income inequality—but even more growth. Between 1981 and 2010 it lifted a stunning 680m people out poverty—more than the entire current population of Latin America. This cut its poverty rate from 84% in 1980 to about 10% now. China alone accounts for around three quarters of the world’s total decline in extreme poverty over the past 30 years.

    From a recent Reason article. Take your inequality bullshit and shove it.

  • Sevo||

    "Take your inequality bullshit and shove it."

    I have a book on the design and construction of the railroad to Tibet; damn difficult job, including developing diesels that run properly at 13,000'.
    Anyhow, along with some understandable gripes and some 'keep 'em poor' BS, the author tosses in what seems to be an obligatory ending chapter on Chinese development. He writes of the population in Chongqing and his main gripe seems to be that some folks can afford a BMW!
    The HORROR!

  • Jordan||

    I take it that asshole will soon be trading in all of his possessions soon to go live in a mud hut in the Amazon.

    As I was typing this, I was reminded of just how awful the Battlestar Galactica ending was. Will the myth of the Noble Savage ever die?

  • Austrian Anarchy||

    China is more proof that Nixon hated America. He got Taiwan out of the UN and left us in it.

  • Alice Bowie||

    Oh common. THE UN is on the east side of Manhattan.

  • Austrian Anarchy||

    Perfect location for a shopping mall and apartment complex.

  • Alice Bowie||

    Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

  • Generic Stranger||

    I'd prefer a large, bomb-carved lake, but I'm sometimes unreasonable.

  • Irish||

    As much as I approve of Glenn Greenwald's Snowden leaks, Greenwald is still kind of a hypocritical douche.

    The latest Snowden leak story is in the Huffington Post. It says that NSA thought about exposing the hypocrisy of Islamic extremist recruiters by revealing their financial greed or predatory sexual habits. I’m quoted in support of considering such tactics, but the backstory of the interview may be more interesting.

    When one of the authors, Ryan Grim, called me for comment, he said that while Glenn Greenwald was transitioning to his new Omidyar-funded venture he was temporarily publishing his Snowden leaks with HuffPo. So when he asked for my take on the NSA story, pretty much the first words out of my mouth were, “Why wouldn’t we consider doing to Islamic extremists what Glenn Greenwald does routinely to Republicans?” The story quotes practically everything I said to Grim except that remark, even though I returned to the point a couple of times and emphasized that it summed up my view.

    That's a very good point. It's bizarre that Greenwald would complain about the NSA leaking information about Islamist hypocrisy when Greenwald has written an entire book about Republican hypocrisy.

    For all of my agreements with Greenwald on civil liberties, I have a hard time trusting someone who thinks Republicans are a greater threat than fundamentalist Islam.

  • SweatingGin||

    Not to defend Greenwald...

    I'd suggest the objection is more "using large scale surveillance to record information about people's various perversions, and then leaking that to get them to do what you want."

    A bit different than writing a book saying that your opponents are hypocrites.

  • ||

    Greenwald is also part of the OMG Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins Christopher Hitchens are evul islamophobes brigade.

  • Irish||

    Greenwald is the kind of leftist incapable of seeing anything wrong with the Muslim faith. Of course, he has no problem attacking Christians for sins 1/10,000th as bad as those committed by various Muslim sects.

    All I want out of him is consistency. SG's point above is pretty accurate and this particular example isn't as hypocritical as I initially made it sound. At the same time, if you're going to attack one religion for the actions of its fundamentalists, it's hypocritical and offensive for you to hold other religions to a lower standard.

    Greenwald seems to consistently give up his own principles when he's worried that holding to his principles will put him on the same side as those mean old Republicans.

  • SweatingGin||

    GG has his own problems (remember sockpuppet-gate?) But he's in the right place against the NSA/sureveillance-state.

    It's like Conor Friedersdorf. He's got a lot of terrible views, but he's in a pretty decent space against the assassination/surveillance-state.

    There's few enough journalists in those places that I'm willing to overlook some flaws.

    Aside from that, I've found I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt to actual *good* journalists. So many just publish shit.

  • ||

    In order to be consistent you have to be willing to leave the TEAM fold and GG just isn't willing to do that. The end of that road is, LIBERTARIANISM!!!

  • Irish||

    The Obama administration decided to scrap online Obamacare enrollment for small businesses in 2014 because they couldn't get it to work.

    Ezra Klein is confused.

    Ezra KleinVerified account
    ‏@ezraklein
    I don’t really understand the logic of dumping this kind of bad news on holiday weekends.

    Yes. Why would the Obama administration dump damning information at a time when everyone is busy?

    It's just one of life's mysteries.

  • Sevo||

    "Yes. Why would the Obama administration dump damning information at a time when everyone is busy?"

    Hmm. Let me think on this for a while. Why would a lying sleazebag do such a thing?

  • ||

    The replies are good.

    It is amazing how much hate the obama knob polishers are willing to endure.

  • A Secret Band of Robbers||

    EZRA KLEIN: JOURNALISM SUPERGENIUS

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    So fellow Californians, I submitted the paperwork and paid the fee to get my license renewed on November 3rd, online. It's now the 27th and it has yet to come in the mail. Is this a normal wait time?

  • Agammamon||

    Is this a driver's license?

    If so, why don't you just order a renewal directly online - oh wait, that's CA, not AZ.

  • Agammamon||

    Jeez, this is what I get for half reading a post and then doing something else before responding.

    That should have been - why are you renewing your license, are you over 65 already?

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    No, it just expires on Friday, which is my 22nd birthday. I've had it since I was 18.

  • Agammamon||

    Heh, I've had mine since my 18th birthday also - just mine doesn't expire until I turn *65*.

  • Irish||

    Organizing for Action: Get health insurance in case you seriously injure yourself while making Thanksgiving dinner.

    I like that the Democrats are now flat out telling the American public that they think we're retarded children.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    I'm pretty sure the majority of Thanksgiving cooking injuries are little more than minor lacerations and burns and don't require medical attention beyond first aid.

    But as you say, Democrats think we are retarded children. There's no bigger collection of misanthropes than progressives.

  • SweatingGin||

    "Who you gonna call?"


    Dr Ray Stantz: Everything was fine with our system until the power grid was shut off by dickless here.
    Walter Peck: They caused an explosion!
    Mayor: Is this true?
    Dr. Peter Venkman: Yes it's true.
    [pause]
    Dr. Peter Venkman: This man has no dick.
  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    Sorry Pope Francis, abortion and LGBTQ rights are economic issues too

    In the same document in which he so eloquently tears down the gross excesses of free market capitalism, he remains utterly silent on the rights of LGBTQ people, who are often, it should be noted, more likely to experience poverty and homelessness than straight people in similar circumstances.

    Francis has remarked in the past that the church has become fixated on its opposition to marriage equality and other issues of LGBTQ equality at the expense of its broader mission toward inclusion, but hasn’t budged on the supposed sinfulness of being gay.
    [...]
    But as the pope’s explicit and specific critique of capitalism’s excesses shows, it is incredibly necessary to talk about these things. Because widespread discrimination against LGBTQ people — which people like Rick Santorum and others defend as a matter of “faith” — results in widespread violence, disproportionate income inequality, job discrimination and other injustices that the pope nominally opposes.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    By failing to allow women to enter into meaningful positions of leadership in the church, the pope is sending a clear message: the Catholic Church thinks women are great and special in their own way, just not equal to men. This is precisely the kind of thinking that supports rampant and ridiculously long-running practices of compensating women less for their labor, among other injustices perpetrated against women. Calling women an equal and a necessary presence “where important decisions are made, both in the Church and in social structures” is a nice thought, but making women equal — taking a hard stand on what that means in practice — is the more necessary project.

    So the Pope needs to ignore Scripture to appease the feminists? I like how she thinks she isn't being unreasonable for demanding that.

  • Agammamon||

    Anyone who adds in something about how women are being paid less than men, yadda yadda yadda, is not someone to listen to about the differences (or lack of them) between men and women.

    *Women* aren't paid less than men, *child-carers* are paid less than *non-child-carers*. And, given that a large proportion of those who leave the workforce (even temporarily) to raise children are women, that lowers the average for those who don't.

    But I suppose this person would just bring up some disparate impact bullshit to justify forcing companies to subsidize their employees life choices.

  • Agammamon||

    Though I don't understand why he would need to specifically mention LGBTBBQWTF people.

    *If* you accept his premise (and I don't) then it applies to *everyone* regardless of their gender/orientation/whatever. Its not like capitalism (even the fantasy version that the left has built) is especially dependent on exploitation of the LBGT community.

  • Irish||

    Its not like capitalism (even the fantasy version that the left has built) is especially dependent on exploitation of the LBGT community.

    Little known fact: Capitalism originally developed so that the British could persecute Oscar Wilde.

  • SweatingGin||

    your ideas intrigue me, and I wish to purchase a free-market glass of absinthe from you.

  • Irish||

    I think I should warn you, free market absinthe is made with the blood of homosexuals.

  • SweatingGin||

    I won't pay a cent more than that which is made from the blood of orphans.

  • Irish||

    You're an idiot. Orphan's blood is used for bathing as it contains properties conducive to skin health and a youthful glow.

    The blood of gays is primarily of use in cooking, capitalism, and as an ingredient in various alchemical formulas. In a pinch, a drop of the blood of a homosexual on your cuticles can also prevent nail biting.

  • SweatingGin||

    Fuck you, asshole. You can't get the proper louche effect without dripping orphan's blood into the absinthe (and it makes the most delightful color).

  • JidaKida||

    SOunds like some pretty serious business to me dude.

    www.Comp-VPN.tk

  • Dave Krueger||

    U.S. to China: We're the boss of this part of the world (and every other part, for that matter) so back off or we will stop letting you finance our debt.

    And, just don't forget that we are masters of brinksmanship, having brought the world to the brink of nuclear war several times before Russia became a third world country. We will call your bluff because we think we can beat your ass, especially now that we have reestablished our reputation for kicking ass which we lost when we got our ass handed to us during our last military encounter with an east Asian country.

  • Irish||

    The Democrats produce yet another propaganda website to tell their prog followers how to ruin Thanksgiving by arguing with relatives.

    I like that the Democrat obsession with forcing political debates during the holidays pretty much proves two things:

    1. They will gladly ruin their personal lives in service to the cause

    2. They assume their followers are morons who can't come up with arguments themselves and must therefore be supplied with talking points

  • SweatingGin||

    They didn't even try to make it look like "not propaganda".

    Luckily, all I have to deal with is two retired teachers. One long retired. Aside from the Ginlettes, I and Mrs. Gin are the youngest by far on that side of the family.

  • Derpetologist||

    Most of their followers ARE morons, at least when it comes to economics and common sense.

    On a side note, it's such a joy to be in Texas and out of Chicago. My new job starts Monday.

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    Congrats.

    Where in Tex-ass?

  • Derpetologist||

    near Wichita Falls

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    I lived in Wichita Falls from 08-10.

  • Derpetologist||

    Ever stationed at Sheppard AFB? I hear the jets flying all the time.

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    Yeah, I was an Instructor Pilot there. Definitely not the worst assignment I've ever had. Spent a lot of my free time quail hunting up around Waurika Lake in OK.

  • Sevo||

    How many hours ya got?

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    Christ, I really don't know. Between military and civilian maybe 3500?

  • Homple||

    Speaking of serious, remember the so-called Hainan Island Incident, when a Chinese fighter plane collided with a US SIGINT aircraft, knocked it down and the Chinese captured the plane?

    Interesting times.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.....d_incident

  • ||

    Back when people wondered if GWB was serious enough to do Foreign Policy. Those were much more pleasant times.

  • Jon Lester||

    I don't believe there's a causal relationship between the carrier deployment and the bomber flight, contrary to how NBC and others have tried to frame it. The carrier isn't finished, anyway.

    We should be encouraging the Chinese to build another carrier, so they can take over Persian Gulf security from us. These islands should be world court stuff.

  • ||

    If I were POTUS,that tub would be mysteriously sunk by an unknown sub-they we could really laugh at the paper dragon.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement