Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Showing posts with label Taiwan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Taiwan. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 3, 2017

If North Korea Gets Ballistic Missile, It WILL Endanger The World And The US Specifically



Donald Trump responds to news that North Korea will soon test ICBMs

Donald Trump responds to news that North Korea will soon test ICBMs
 



Donald Trump delivers a speech at Republican National Convention in July in Cleveland, Ohio. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)





President-elect Donald Trump took to Twitter late Monday to publicly dismiss North Korea’s claims that they’re close to developing successful intercontinental ballistic missiles, making them one step closer to being a true nuclear threat to the United States.
“North Korea just stated that it is in the final stages of developing a nuclear weapon capable of reaching parts of the U.S,” Trump wrote. “It won’t happen!”

North Korea just stated that it is in the final stages of developing a nuclear weapon capable of reaching parts of the U.S. It won't happen!

Trump’s comments came in response to North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un claiming over the weekend that his country was on the brink of being able to test long-range ICBMs.
If North Korea is successful in developing ICBMs, they could potentially make good on their promise to send a nuclear warhead to the U.S. In recent years, the communist country has routinely conducted nuclear and ballistic missile tests.
In fact, over the last decade, North Korea has conducted a total of five nuclear tests. And in just 2016 alone, they completed nearly two dozen ballistic missile tests. They even launched a satellite early last year, causing many to fear it was a veiled test-run for ICBMs.
And because of the nation’s increasing hostility, many are calling on Trump to make North Korea a focus of his foreign policy strategy after he is inaugurated on Jan. 20.
But whether Trump will do that remains to be seen. He didn’t discuss North Korea much during both the primary and general elections, and hasn’t offered many indications about his policy regarding the communist stronghold since.
Trump’s top Cabinet nominees have also not signaled how they would react to a hostile North Korea. Though some suspect Trump’s hawkish nominee for secretary of defense, retired Marine Gen. James Mattis, is likely to take a hard-line stance against the country.
It’s unclear what role China will play. Shortly following Trump winning the White House late last year, Trump broke American’s “One China” policy by communicating with Taiwan’s president, which the Chinese did not appreciate. Now, China will need to decide whether to play the role of ally to North Korea or East Asian mediator.

Tuesday, December 20, 2016

Its Time For The US To Lead With Leadership That Is Clear About Its Intentions. Can Trump Recover The Role That Obama Squandered?

Photo
CreditAlex Nabaum
Among global elites, Donald J. Trump’s recent phone call with Taiwan’s president has induced fear on a scale seldom matched since Ronald Reagan’s “Evil Empire” speech. The Sydney Morning Herald warned that the phone call “risks provoking a cold war between the United States and China with potentially catastrophic economic and security implications.” The fright appears to confirm the narrative formed earlier this year by headlines like “Donald Trump Terrifies World Leaders.”
The fear is real. Mr. Trump has indeed terrified foreign leaders with his “America first” mantra, his promises to enlarge the American military and his tough talk on everything from the Islamic State to Air Force One. The good news is that his administration can turn this fear to the benefit of the United States.
During the last eight years, President Obama showed what happens when the world’s greatest power tries strenuously to avoid giving fright. He began his presidency with lofty vows to conciliate adversaries, defer to the opinions of other countries and reduce America’s military commitments. Consequently, he received rapturous applause in European capitals and a Nobel Peace Prize. In the real world of geopolitics, however, the results have been catastrophic.
Mr. Obama’s passivity in the face of provocations and his failure to enforce the “red line” in Syria led Russia, China and other adversaries to seek new gains at America’s expense. His promises to “end the wars” in Iraq and Afghanistan satisfied the cosmopolitan chatterers of Stockholm, Paris and New York, but they deflated American allies in Baghdad and Kabul, and emboldened adversaries in Iran and Pakistan. So severe was the damage that he had to send troops back to Iraq in 2014, and had to abort his plans to withdraw all American forces from Afghanistan before leaving office.
Continue reading the main story
The Obama presidency is but the latest chapter in a post-1945 saga that has been dominated by international fear of the United States, or lack thereof. In 1950, North Korea invaded South Korea because Harry S. Truman’s exclusion of South Korea from America’s “defense perimeter” removed fears of intervention. By contrast, Dwight D. Eisenhower employed rhetorical threats and high military spending to fill the Communist powers with fear of nuclear Armageddon, an approach that kept the Communists from launching further invasions.
Lyndon B. Johnson tried to avert a major war in Vietnam by showing restraint, in expectation of North Vietnamese reciprocation. Hanoi responded by pouring troops into South Vietnam. Richard M. Nixon revived fears of the United States with his “madman theory,” whereby he took seemingly reckless actions to convince America’s enemies that he just might be crazy enough to do it. Those fears, and the caution they instilled in the Communist powers, dissipated when the Watergate Congress kicked the legs out from under South Vietnam. The world continued to live without fear of a strong America under Jimmy Carter, whose timidity caused nations to fall to Communism and the United States Embassy in Iran to fall to anti-American extremists.
In 1980, as in 2016, Americans elected someone who made clear his intent to put fear back in the nation’s enemies. Nowadays, even liberal Democrats applaud Reagan for bringing the Soviet Union to its knees. Back in 1980, however, Reagan’s tough, nationalist stances on foreign policy aroused the same condemnation of “fearmongering” currently emanating from the world’s enlightened critics of Mr. Trump.
The trembling of the rest of the world does not ensure that American foreign policy will be successful. Like any other strategic advantage, it works only when properly exploited through sound strategic decisions. Tough talk must be used judiciously. As the Syrian red line debacle demonstrated, the White House should issue specific threats only when it is prepared to follow through on them.
In its diplomacy, the new administration must seek the proper balance between fear and more positive motivations like respect and admiration. Under Mr. Obama, and his like-minded predecessors, American foreign policy created plenty of fear among some of America’s allies — fear that the United States would let them down. The Trump administration will need to reverse those expectations, so that fear of the United States is once again stronger among enemies than friends.
At times, nevertheless, even allies ought to have cause to worry about White House decisions. They must know that the world’s most powerful nation is prepared to practice tough love if they take actions inconsistent with the strength of the United States or the stability of the international system. Without such worries, they are liable to keep doing as they have often done in recent years — skimping on military spending and international commitments in expectation that the Americans will reflexively pick up the slack.
As the world’s most powerful country, and the only one whose leadership can safeguard the world order, the United States must care more about whether it commands international respect than whether it is loved by international elites. The incoming administration appears poised to return the United States to this precept after an eight-year drought. Americans and America’s allies should be relieved. America’s enemies are right to be afraid.

Monday, December 19, 2016

Not Only China, But Russia And Iranians Will Test Trump In The First Few Months. Is He Up To It?


EXPERT: CHINESE DRONE SEIZURE A WARNING TO TRUMP



South China Sea photo
Photo by soham_pablo 
(The Hill) China’s seizure of a U.S. Navy underwater drone Thursday is likely a signal to President-elect Donald Trump that it won’t take his phone call with Taiwan lightly, an expert said on Friday.
“Knowing Chinese military officials for many years and how orders are communicated from the highest power centers in Beijing down to commanders on the ground or water, this was very likely a highly planned and escalatory move to show China will not take matters lightly when it comes to President-elect Trump’s phone call and comments on Taiwan, or Chinese actions overall,” said Harry Kazianis, director of defense studies at the Center for the National Interest.
Trump took a phone call from Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen congratulating him on his presidential win, breaking decades of diplomatic protocol. No U.S. president or president-elect had spoken with a leader of Taiwan since the U.S. normalized relations with China in 1979. China considers Taiwan a breakaway province, not a separate country.
Both Trump and Tsai have played down the significance of the call, but it triggered a formal complaint from China to the U.S.
Kazianis also said he expects China to “aggressively test” the Trump administration once it enters office in January, as it has done with previous administrations in the past


Friday, April 3, 2015

The Clintons Are So Devious, Corrupt And Despicable, They Are Perfect For The Presidency!

Roger Clinton Told FBI That He Accepted Foreign Cash For President Bill Clinton
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
Published on TheHillaryDaily.com on April 3, 2015
Raking in foreign cash is nothing new to the Clinton family.  Bill Clinton's brother, Roger, told FBI agents that he "received money for President Clinton from foreign governments" during Bill's presidency.

Roger claimed that, after the first few times he brought back money for the President, either Bill or his staff told him that the President could not accept money from foreign governments and that he should send the money back.

Now, that's a good one, isn't it?  What are the odds that Roger Clinton packed up wads of cash and sent it back to where it came from?  And what about the first few times?  What happened to that money?

In 2002, the House Committee on Government Reform issued a scathing report on the Clinton Presidential Pardons with disturbing findings about the President's brother:

"Roger Clinton engaged in a systematic effort to trade on his brother's name during the Clinton Administration."

The section on Roger went well beyond just pardons and included a number of his other schemes to trade on his relationship to the President. His combined take was $700,000 -- and that's just what he deposited in his bank account and could be traced.  It seems likely that he pocketed or spent at least some additional cash. Roger insisted that his brother was aware of his activities and approved of them.

Roger admitted to receiving $335,000 in cash and travelers checks from foreign sources such as South Korea, Venezuela, and Taiwan that were deposited into his account during Bill's presidency.  Roger refused to tell the Committee why he had received the checks, but apparently told the FBI that a lot of it was for overseas "concerts" by his band.  The Committee noted that the fact that the travelers checks were provided in blank "suggests that the funds were intentionally provided to Clinton in a manner calculated to conceal their origin."  All of the travelers checks were purchased overseas and brought to the U.S. by Roger Clinton, who did not disclose them to Customs officials as required by federal law.

The Committee also noted that it was likely that there were more travelers checks and case that was not deposited into his account.

The House Committee uncovered these checks in Roger Clinton's bank account:

CASH OR TRAVELERS CHECKS PAYMENTS TO ROGER CLINTON
Date Deposited
Type of Check
Origin
Purchaser Name
Amount
November 30, 1998
American Express
Unknown
Chen Jianxing
$1,000
December 1, 1998
American Express
Taiwan
Huang Xian Wen
$15,000
December 8, 1998
American Express
Taiwan
Huang Xian Wen
$23,000
December 15, 1998
Citicorp
Taiwan
Unknown
$90,000
December 15, 1998
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
$29,000
December 15, 1998
Visa-Sumitomo
Taiwan
Lin Mei Guang
$4,000
December 15, 1998
American Express
Taiwan
Huang Xian Wen
$2,000
July 12, 1999
American Express
Unknown
Unknown
$20,000
July 12, 1999
Citicorp
South Korea
Sook-Eun Jang
$5,000
November 30, 1999
Citicorp
Taiwan
Unknown
$3,000
November 30, 1999
Citicorp
Taiwan
Unknown
$10,000
November 30, 1999
Citicorp
Taiwan
Unknown
$5,000
November 30, 1999
Visa
Taiwan
Unknown
$1,000
November 30, 1999
Visa
Taiwan
Xu Jingsheng
$3,000
November 30, 1999
Citicorp
Venezuela
Pedro Jose Garboza Matos
$38,000
November 30, 1999
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
$40,000
February 22, 2000
American Express
Taiwan
Qu Guang Yin
$7,000
March 24, 2000
Citicorp
Venezuela
Pedro Jose Garboza Matos
$3,000
April 5, 2000
American Express
Taiwan
Mou Chuanxue
$4,000
April 17, 2000
American Express
Taiwan
Qu Guang Yin
$13,000
April 17, 2000
American Express
Unknown
Suk Eun Chang
$5,000
May 15, 2000
American Express
Unknown
Unknown
$5,000
July 13, 2000
Citicorp
South Korea
Seung-Chul Ham
$1,000
July 27, 2000
Citicorp
South Korea
Seung-Chul Ham
$2,000
July 31, 2000
Citicorp
South Korea
Seung-Chul Ham
$4,000
August 2, 2000
American Express
Unknown
Unknown
$1,000
August 11, 2000
American Express
Unknown
Unknown
$1,000
Total
   $335,000
TOTAL PAYMENTS RECEIVED = $335,000

In addition to the $335,000 listed above, Roger also deposited $85,000 in cash in his personal bank account between January and November 1998. In December 1999, he deposited a $70,000 travelers check from "Suk Eun Chang" as well as a $10,000 travelers check from the same source.  Clinton refused to disclose the source of these funds, saying only that he got some of the money for performing in foreign countries with his band.  The Committee was unable to find Suk Eun Chang to set any further information.

Roger also said that his foreign hosts gave him gifts such as rugs and vases, paid for his transportation and provided a presidential security guard in the host country.  They were particularly generous -- they even added money to pay for the taxes on the money they paid.

Wow.  Wonder whether the Beatles got such a deal?

Roger Clinton also got funds allegedly for his musical appearances form Edvard Akopyan who paid the president's brother $61,100 in 1999 when he was acting "as a middleman in scheduling Roger's appearance at a musical concert in Kazakhstan."  Does anyone really believe that Roger's talents were in such demand?  These funds, are sure to heighten the controversy surrounding payments to the Clintons from foreign sources during Hillary's service as Secretary of State.  That they were sometimes intended for the president himself and that President Clinton encouraged the practice, adds a new dimension to the corrupt payments to the Clinton family.

In addition, the Cuba Travel Services company engaged Roger for $30,000 to lobby his brother to lift travel restrictions to Cuba.  He was never registered as a lobbyist or agent of a foreign government as required, but provided evidence that he spoke to his brother about the issue.

Although he lied to the FBI about it, Roger also accepted $50,000 from the Gambino crime family to lobby for executive clemency for Rosario Gambino, a mob leader serving a 45 year sentence for drug trafficking.  Although he was unsuccessful in this effort, he deposited the funds nonetheless.

(He also accepted $43,500 for his unsuccessful attempt to secure a pardon for Garland Lincenium, whose family sold their life savings to pay Roger Clinton and his agents.)

Roger solicited several other people in his pay-for-pardon scheme, but they didn't fall for it.

So think about it.  Can you think of any legitimate reason that foreign governments would pay Roger Clinton?

It was the beginning of the amazing Clinton family foreign money boondoggle.

Friday, January 31, 2014

When China Explicitly Calls For Use Of EMP Against Taiwan And US Ships, Is It A False Or Real Threat? We Believe It Will Be The Latter.

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
WASHINGTON – Members of the Chinese military are looking to use an electromagnetic pulse as part of a “one-two punch” to knock out – literally within seconds – all defensive electronics not only on Taiwan but also on U.S. warships that could defend the island.
This revelation comes in an article by Lou Xiaoqing who says the People’s Liberation Army sees an EMP weapon as the primary means of incapacitating Taiwan and disabling American defenders nearby.
Given that such a strategy was made public in an article entitled “Electromagnetic pulse bombs are Chinese ace,” it is seen as reflecting the official Chinese government position.
Xaoqing said that if the Chinese were to use a high-altitude nuclear device which would create the destructive EMP impact on Taiwan’s electronics, it would be exploded at an attitude of 18 miles to avoid damaging civilian and military equipment on the Chinese mainland, which might happen if the bomb exploded at a higher altitude.
“China is attracted to the fight against the U.S. military after the effective range, using them as a means of surprise attack or an intimidation factor,” Xaoqing said. “The United States will abandon the use of aircraft carrier battle groups to defend Taiwan.”
Xaoqing said that the Chinese military has calculated that the U.S. military is too fragmented and, coupled with the downturn in the economy, would be less likely to come to Taiwan’s assistance, forcing Taiwan to defend itself.
Contrary to popular belief, the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act does not require the United States to intervene militarily if the Chinese mainland attacks Taiwan. Instead, it has adopted what is called a policy of “strategic ambiguity” in which the U.S. neither will confirm nor deny that it would intervene on Taiwan’s behalf.
The legislation, however, does require the U.S. to “provide Taiwan with arms of a defensive character” and “to maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people of Taiwan.”
As WND previously has reported, China is giving a priority to developing EMP weapons that could be used against U.S. aircraft carriers, which increasingly are arriving in the South and East China Seas as part of the new U.S. “pivot” policy toward Asia.
That policy is to challenge China’s claims over all of the East and South China Seas and the increasing assertiveness by Beijing, which is trying to gain exclusive control over vital minerals and energy in the region.
There already have been instances of military confrontations between China and neighbors such as Vietnam, the Philippines and Japan.
With a history of animosity, China and Japan now have conflicting claims of ownership over two South China Sea islands.
China calls the islands Diaoyu while Japan refers to them as Senkaku. The Japanese have evidence of their claim – in having purchased them from private citizens years ago – and the U.S. supports Japan’s claim.
A 2005 U.S. National Ground Intelligence Center study that was classified secret but released two years ago said China’s development of high-powered microwave weapons is part of its “assassin’s mace” arsenal – weapons that allow a technologically inferior country such as China and even North Korea to defeat U.S. military forces.
Microwaves and the gamma rays from a nuclear blast are forms of electromagnetic energy. The bombs are designed to be exploded at a high altitude to knock out all unprotected electronics, including electrical grids, computers and automobiles over a wide geographical area.
Even the declassified NGIC report pointed out that the use of an EMP against Taiwan at an altitude of 30 to 40 kilometers would “confine the EMP effects to Taiwan and its immediate vicinity and minimize damage to electronics on the mainland.”
The report particularly said that China’s DF-21 medium-range ballistic missile could be the platform to be used to launch an EMP attack on Taiwan.
In outlining China’s one-two punch, Xaoqing said that in the first punch the Chinese military would disable non-hardened electronics and command and control centers.
He said that an EMP would be especially attractive because it acts with the speed of light in any kind of weather, would hit multiple targets over a wide area and minimize damage in politically sensitive environments.
Given the relatively low altitude of 18 miles at which a Chinese EMP would be detonated over Taiwan, Xaoqing said the second punch would create certain health effects from exposure to an EMP.
He said that based on Chinese research in 2005 that assessed the effects of an EMP on heart cells, it would make peoples’ hearts unable to function as well as they should, with possible death or serious damage of the heart and, by extension, death to those exposed to an EMP.
If exposed to explosions at higher altitudes, the effects of an EMP would be less damaging to peoples’ health, he said.
While there wouldn’t be a 100 percent kill rate, Xaoqing said, he said it could lead to long term disability to those most susceptible to an EMP, such as the elderly, young and unborn.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/01/chinas-reveals-ace-against-u-s-military/#ZBWYVMhr1FSod84B.99