Now that the election is over, President-elect Barack Obama faces the recession problem. But there are other problems as well.
On Jan. 2, 2009, Yahoo! News carried an article entitled, “Obama Moves to Counter China in Space With Pentagon-NASA Link.” But on Dec. 24, 2008, NPR (National Public Radio) News released a kind of memo, quoting “experts” and printed in Yahoo! on Dec. 25 under the title, “U.S.-China Ties Pose Tricky Proposition for Obama.”
Says NPR News: “On the campaign trail, Obama said that the U.S. needed to bring fresh thinking to relations with China. But many experts say that relationship with China was actually a bright spot in the Bush administration’s foreign policy.”
Indeed, during his last official presidential visit to Iraq, more than five years after his invasion, shoes were thrown at the outgoing U.S. president.
Compare that to how nice his relations have been with the dictatorship of China. Partly owing to U.S. financial and technological investments in China, even the non-secret, that is, the generally visible development of nanotechnology in China, seems to be taking place on a much larger scale than it does in the United States.
Eric Drexler, who had founded nanotechnology by 1986, wrote that nanoweapons are superior to nuclear weapons. For example, they can destroy enemy nuclear weapons and thus prevent Mutual Assured Destruction, on which peace between nuclear power rested.
When Einstein convinced President Roosevelt in 1939 to begin the construction of a project producing atom bombs, the dictatorship of Germany was just embarking on such a project. But in China, the development of nanotechnology possibly exceeds its development in the United States.
That is, it is possible that the dictatorship of China can annihilate the United States, say, tomorrow or next week, but they believe that time has been working for them, and in two weeks they can do it even more reliably and safely for themselves.
According to the NPR News release, Lampton is the “head of the China studies program at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies.”
What does this expert say about Bush’s connivance at China’s development of nanotechnology, which possibly now has a larger scale than it does in the United States?
Lampton says that “one of the first issues an Obama administration will have to address is how it will organize itself to deal effectively with such a complicated, multifaceted relationship.”
So, the expert refers to a “complicated, multifaceted relationship.”
It is, indeed, multifaceted: The dictators of China can, perhaps even today, annihilate the free West, and the free West is (another facet?) may prevent this by being still nicer to the dictatorship of China.
Many inhabitants of every country understand only their own ambience and hence imagine any other country as a socio-psychological replica of their environment.
Thus, they may believe that wars occur for the same reasons quarrels do between their neighbors. What is needed to eliminate a quarrel is to explain to your neighbor that his anger is groundless and thus restore or establish good-neighborly relations.
But how is this applicable to history?
Alexander the Great of Macedonia (356-323 B.C.), or Napoleon, or Hitler regarded wars of conquest as enjoyable adventures. Hitler at least said that he was attacking Russia because he feared its attack. But Napoleon did not give even that excuse.
At a less subtle level, a conquest is the acquisition of wealth. Even if a conquered territory is nothing but a bare land, land is also a property, and the acquisition of a territory by war is the acquisition of wealth.
Tsarist Russia’s conquest of a vast, sparsely populated Siberia was the acquisition of land as wealth.
But God forbid that anyone should offend the dictatorship of China, and hence Lampton, by saying that the dictators of China want to annihilate the free West in order to remove the temptation of their 1.3 billion slaves to rebel in order to be free as Westerners are. More than 46 million Chinese have left the communist party — and the figure is already dated!
Nothing like that ever happened in Soviet Russia, and yet the Soviet dictatorship was overthrown in 1991!
Propaganda myths in China are bolder than they ever were in Soviet Russia.
Thus, the name of China’s army includes the word “liberation” (which the Red, or Soviet, army never did). You see, a Chinese invasion (with nanoweapons, for example) does not conquer, but on the contrary, liberates the “working people” of the invaded country. What is “communism”? It is a society where there is no money, since everyone works without pay, according to his or her ability, and takes, free of charge, any goods, according to his or her need.
According to NPR News, “In 1974, China’s late paramount leader Deng Xiaoping made a pledge at the United Nations that . . . if China ever becomes a superpower, bullying, invading, and exploiting other countries . . . you should expose it, oppose it, and together with the Chinese people, overthrow it.”
See? The top dictator himself is a liberator — a revolutionary, a rebel, a communist, liberating again the previously liberated China.
What do he and his successors need to liberate the entire world? The greatest quantity and quality of weapons and of those creating and serving them!
Hitler failed to establish global national socialism, since he had invaded Russia before he obtained atom bombs, which the United States obtained owing to Einstein and Roosevelt.
But as of today, when I am reading the NPR release of Dec. 24, 2008, the global liberation by the “People’s Liberation Army” seems realistic.
You can e-mail me at firstname.lastname@example.org.
© 2014 Newsmax. All rights reserved.