China Threat Debate: Closing Remarks (11 of 11)

The goal of IQ2 US is to raise the level of public discourse on our most challenging issues. To provide a new forum for intelligent discussion, grounded in facts and informed by reasoned analysis. To transcend the toxically emotional and the reflexively ideological. To encourage recognition that the opposing side has intellectually respectable views. To engage the live audience as active participants who will ask questions and decide which speakers have carried the day by voting on the motions both before and after the debate.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• iq2
• intelligence
• squared
• u.s.
• debate
• China
• threat
• America
• conflict
• trade
• deficit

[popoTb]

Then lets fight it out "COME ON " Fight it out!! so the U.S and China can go to nuclear war wiping out the whole entire human race and bring the end of the world! Is that what you want my friend? Are americans so NOT understanding and accepting?

Threats can become a danger which lead to FEAR then WAR!

If america's prejudice media keeps on brain washing its citizen about CHina being a Threat! Then one day what U fear will become!

Peace! i dont see U.S as a threat to China! PEACE

[Skidrow077]

@popoTb USA and China would never go into direct conflict with one another, this is amplified by the two having WMD's. Look up the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) A prime example of this is the Cold War.

There will NEVER be a direct conflict between the two, so no, fear spurred by the media will NOT lead to drect conflict.

[justawordaway]

let's put china in the place of US the first thing they will do is invade mexico and canada and ofcourse Iran too to secure middle east. So I think US is doing better than them. In international politics noone is good. So it is shit to argue who is good. It is more like the bad and the worse and I would say US is the bad one here.

[chapsroc]

Thanks to Amb. Roy's long experience in China and his intellectual articulation, the PhD's really looked like fools in this series of debates.

Having said that, I am still a little giddy about a bunch of white men sit around debating about 'what to do with China'.

My point: China will take its rightful place in the world as a super power in the near future. If US wants wars, it already got wars, China won't like the war vs US, but they will shoot asses (that's latin for dumb donkeys).

[chapsroc]

"How could 62 millions people be so stupid to vote for Bush?" paraphrased from British media on Pres. Bush election. From this perspective, thank you Mr. Chairman, this kind of debate is better than none. As I understand that audients were carefully selected, & I appreciate your intro preps with China positives as 'facts' and the hawk's salvos as 'perhaps list'. While it's flattering, I am not fooled by the fact that in another setting, the 'audience' could vote the other way.

[annarboriter]

Mearsheimer's point can be taken as a kind of selffulfilling prophecy. China like any nation can become a threat if the US chooses to so deem it. The USSR became a threat in the same way. Then so did Japan, Iraq, and now maybe even Iran.

[1BuckeyeNation]

People are fools for thinking a wealthy commie nation is better to deal with than a poor commie nation. China's people are great and I love them dearly but their Government is evil and corrupt and we are making it more powerful with US dollars and military know how.

[ddchoidbx275]

part II of the comment

The greatest danger comes from policies based on single issue agendas that emphasize differences rather than shared interests. Engagement, although imperfect, remains the only way to influence China.

Each successive administration has pursued engagement with China because it is the only pragmatic position. The danger comes from symbolic politics that is quick to paint China as an enemy or a friend.

[ddchoidbx275]

I vote against the motion.

Pre-debate shows almost a one to one ratio for and against the motion with 22% undecided. Post-debate shows almost a 2:1 against the motion with the undecided reduced to just 6%.

Furthermore, despite all the rhetoric from Nixon to the George W. Bush administration, the general consensus on China policy has been engagement for a good reason. Engagement is the only reasonable policy alternative.