Shut up, Chinese diplomat tells US

Politics International Politics
1

[quote] Shut up, Chinese diplomat tells US
By Harry Mount in New York, (Filed: 18/08/2006)

One of China’s most senior diplomats has made an extraordinary attack on America, saying that it should “shut up” about China’s growing military capacity when America dominates global military spending.

Sha Zukang, China’s ambassador to the UN in Geneva, launched his diatribe in an interview with the BBC yesterday during a progamme about China’s booming economy and military strength.

“It is much better for you to shut up, keep quiet,” the ambassador said, referring to America, raising his voice to a high-pitched yell. "Are you the number one? Is it true that the US has almost 50 per cent of the world’s military budget? The Chinese population is five or six times bigger.
advertisement

Why blame China? Forget it. It’s high time to shut up. It’s America’s sovereign right to do whatever is good for them. But don’t tell us what is good for China."

The ambassador also said that China would be prepared to go to war with anyone over Taiwan.

“The moment Taiwan declares independence, supported by whoever, China will have no choice,” he shrieked.
telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh … hina18.xml[/quote]
Still using eunuchs are they?

This is Sha Zukang…not Lil’ Kim.

Maybe he’s just ‘ronery.’

2

I think he is absolutely right.

3

:laughing:

One presumes the Chinese version will be free of terms like shrill, squeaked and squealed, etc.

HG

4

I thought this quote was even more revealing:

5

What kind of food do they throw around when they get into arguements? Would it be Starbucks or Outback steaks in this situation?

6

:bravo: Not bad at all…anyone have a live clip?

7

I heard it on a BBC podcast this morning. I’ll see if I can find the link.

Here it is: bbc.co.uk/radio/newspod/

8

It gets worse.

9

Bollocks’ed up double post.

10

[quote=“Tainan Cowboy”]Still using eunuchs are they?

This is Sha Zukang…not Lil’ Kim. [/quote]

Shut up.

Presscott is pretty crap himself though, isn’t he? And he’s a little uglier than Bush. He reminds me of Slimer from Ghostbusters.

11

[quote=“Dangermouse”][quote]Still using eunuchs are they?
This is Sha Zukang…not Lil’ Kim. [/quote]
Shut up.[/quote]
“I sexy man Mr. Mouse…but I still so ronery…”

12

Not a pretty picture! :laughing:

13

Of course the funny Chinese guy has a point. What right does the US have to tell China and others to curtail their spending on arms, when the US spends more on its military than the next 20 spenders combined; 6 times what China spends on its military; and almost half the global military expenditures (43%)?

Selected Countries Military Budget
World Ranking/($Billions)

1 United States (including funding for Iraq and Afghanistan) $522 bil.
2 China (2004 Expenditures) $62.5
3 Russia (2004 Expenditures) 61.9
4 United Kingdom 51.1
5 Japan 44.7
6 France 41.6
7 Germany 30.2
8 India 22
9 Saudi Arabia 21.3
10 South Korea 20.7
11 Italy 17.2
12 Australia 13.2
13 Brazil 13.1
14 Canada 10.9
15 Turkey 9.8
16 Israel (2004 Expenditures) 9.7
17 Netherlands 9.7
18 Spain 8.8
19 Taiwan 8.3
armscontrolcenter.org/archives/002244.php

Moreover, no country on earth has increased its military budget at anything remotely comparable to the US increases in recent years.

[quote]The U.S. military budget request by the Bush Administration for Fiscal Year 2007 is $462.7 billion. (This does not include other items such as money for the Afghan and Iraq wars—$50 billion for Fiscal Year 2007 and an extra $70 billion for FY 2006, on top of the $50 billion approved by Congress.)

For Fiscal Year 2006 it was $441.6 billion
For Fiscal Year 2005 it was $420.7 billion
For Fiscal Year 2004 it was $399.1 billion .
For Fiscal Year 2003 it was $396.1 billion.
For Fiscal Year 2002 it was $343.2 billion.
For Fiscal Year 2001 it was $305 billion.
This was up from approximately $288.8 billion, in 2000.

These figures typically do not include combat figures, so 2001 onwards, the Afghan war, and 2003 onwards, the Iraq war costs are not in this budget.

As of early 2006, Congress had already approved an additional funding total of $300 billion for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.[/quote]
globalissues.org/Geopolitics … rySpending

By what right is the US entitled to bankrupt itself for generations to come by spending such obscene sums on its military in order to pick and choose countries around the world where it wishes to intervene, while simultaneously chastising other nations for spending on their military budgets? Seriously. If there’s no international treaty or other global consensus on the subject then it’s only a matter of the US seeking to impose its will on others whether they like it or not, right? There’s no objective principal supporting the US demands; it’s just a case of might makes right, isn’t it?

14

UN ambassadors are of course beyond reproach. He was probably drunk and pining whistfully for a foot massage.

He’d be better off spouting off some bogue theory on the increasing American economic penetration of the Glorious Motherland, or that of her interior markets. Watering down of the precious bodily fluids and all that.

The American voiced concern of China’s defence budget is a natural kind of diplomatic diversion on the US’ part. Focus attention on defence spending to obtain possible concessions in seperate policy issue. A common ploy throughout history.

15

:laughing: Even Robert Kaplan (listen to the link: 16:00 mark) says this is totally legitimate.

“China is reemerging–totally legitimately–as a great economic power. And throughout history, when large countries have emerged as economic powers, military might follows.”

They’re seeking to upset the current balance in the region. Nothing surprising there.
The US doesn’t like it. Again, unsurprising.
Finger-wagging isn’t going to deter China, and, given US spending, it’s hardly in a position to lecture. Ok, ok… now I’m shocked. :laughing:

16

[quote=“Feiren”]I thought this quote was even more revealing:

This one has me a little concerned be the “inch of territory” he was referring to is Taiwan, not some border skirmish on the mainland.

I think he is upset because USA with 400 billion annual military budget always questions PRC 35 billion annual military budget. I guess it is like a neighorbor that drives a new luxury flagship Lexus every year that keeps asking you “Why did you upgrade to an entry level used Toyota?” I think I would tell that neighbor with “beat the Jones’ mentality” to mind his own business as well.

But damn they really are going to send troop here to die, if the line is cross. That sucks.

17

[quote]The U.S. military budget request by the Bush Administration for Fiscal Year 2007 is $462.7 billion. (This does not include other items such as money for the Afghan and Iraq wars—$50 billion for Fiscal Year 2007 and an extra $70 billion for FY 2006, on top of the $50 billion approved by Congress.)

For Fiscal Year 2006 it was $441.6 billion
For Fiscal Year 2005 it was $420.7 billion
For Fiscal Year 2004 it was $399.1 billion .
For Fiscal Year 2003 it was $396.1 billion.
For Fiscal Year 2002 it was $343.2 billion.
For Fiscal Year 2001 it was $305 billion.
This was up from approximately $288.8 billion, in 2000.

These figures typically do not include combat figures, so 2001 onwards, the Afghan war, and 2003 onwards, the Iraq war costs are not in this budget. [/quote]

These are the numbers that interest me, the scale of the annual increases, as reported (as opposed to those more discreet budgets).
What are the numbers for China? How do they compare with the US’, expressed as a percentage increase over the previous year? Anyone know?
I’d try to find it out myself, but I have intense aversion to voluntarily involving my self with stats. :eh:

18

From what I’ve read in the news, I have not been under the impression that the US gov’t is not so much upset about the size of this number as they are the accuracy. I think it is a consensus in the expert circles that China is spending a lot more than this on it’s military, somwhere above $100 billion, and they just aren’t disclosing all of their spending which worries the US. Anytime you have a secretive military build-up in a country that dominates a region where you have a bunch of allies, it is gonna worry you. It may be a tad bit hyppocritical on the US’ part, but deffinitely justified. You don’t need a country with generals who have threatened to sacrafice their nation to nuclear showers over an island whose historic, cultural, and geographic inclusion to “One China” is very debatable.

19

And we all know how reliable USA intelligence is when it comes to another country’s military.

…Those WMD we’ll find them one day. Mark my words…

20

[quote=“ac_dropout”]And we all know how reliable USA intelligence is when it comes to another country’s military.

…Those WMD we’ll find them one day. Mark my words…[/quote]

Shut up.