Why is China so supportive of Kerry?

Really, what's the deal? I've of course heard of the political contributions made--the same ones Mr. Kerry denied all knowledge of and returned once they became public knowledge. I've also seen a lot of support from other sources, such as that mentioned by zcheng in the "NK prepares for war against US" thread.

From where does this support originate? Why is China so gung-ho for Kerry? What are they going to get out of the deal? Trade? Political lap-dogging by the US as he's promised to France?

Only one resource can provide me the answers. Cry havoc! And let loose the dogs of ATS...

[edit on 11-7-2004 by Q]

Maybe becuase Kerry is supportive of China? They like each other, or they have the same political views as China's president.

Perhaps they see that Kerry doesn't have the intestinal fortatude to do what is right for America. Perhaps they figure he will be more open to manipulation and coersion by the UN and other international bodies. From what Kerry has said about international realations so far, I tend to agree that he will be quick to bow to world opinion and place the US in a subservient position, both militarily and economically.

Why wouldn't China like him? As president he would weaken our national resolve, weaken our defense, and put our national soveregnty at risk. Why wouldn't China want their biggest (and only) economic and military competition weakened and divided?

[edit added] Plus, maybe they are expecting some more technology giveaways like they got during the Clinton years. [edit end]

[edit on 11-7-2004 by Ambient Sound]

Since China and the US are the two big super powers, maybe they just like someone who can handle being the head of a super power. Kerry has the international experience to handle global crisis. Bush only has the capability to start one.

[edit on 11-7-2004 by curme]

Just wondering which nation would prefer to deal with Bush the Wise?

France? Germany? Russia? Japan? Brazil?

I guess maybe Blair the puddle, and Howard the doggy?

Not getting it huh? The fact that these other countries, who have no love for the US, prefer Kerry, is enough for me to decide that he is the wrong choice.

No country will prefer to deal with George Bush rather than Kerry because it is well known that GWB will always put America first. That is the job of the President of the United States of America and I have no confidence that Kerry would do that. By the support that other countries are giving Kerry, it seems they don't think so either.

Don't you get it? All these other countires want to see a weak USA. They want to see us ineffectual and bogged down in internal conflict and indecision. That is why they like Kerry. They think he will bring the US to it's knees for them, since they can't do it.

Originally posted by Ambient Sound
No country will prefer to deal with George Bush rather than Kerry because it is well known that GWB will always put America first. That is the job of the President of the United States of America and I have no confidence that Kerry would do that. By the support that other countries are giving Kerry, it seems they don't think so either.

That is why Bush went into Iraq, and why Nato would not help US, and allow more and more US precious yet cheap soldier to die in Iraq.

If you will think that US alone can win the war on Terror alone, Good luck, you have it all.

And what does that have to do with why China would support Kerry?

Your very predictable anti-Bush ranting is starting to get old. At least make an effort to pretend to stay on the topic. Surely you must realize that people are starting to figure you out, zcheng.

Originally posted by Ambient Sound
And what does that have to do with why China would support Kerry?

Your very predictable anti-Bush ranting is starting to get old. At least make an effort to pretend to stay on the topic. Surely you must realize that people are starting to figure you out, zcheng.

That is very relevant of China position. Most countries in the world would prefer to deal with a more sane Kerry, so is China.

Your Bush-loving ranting is equal to mine anti-Bush ranting.

Anyway, what have you figured out of me? I am curious to learn.

Originally posted by zcheng
Anyway, what have you figured out of me? I am curious to learn.

I have figured out that your main purpose here seems to be to bash Bush and bash the US in that order. You seem to claim to come from China but seem to have very little knowledge of the background and history, so, I am starting to have my doubts. You also seem to have a difficult time understanding that the more outragous and demonstrateably false some of your assumptions are, the less crediblity you have.

I have decided that you are probably a troll or a left leaning member of ATS who is using a different screen name from their usual one. I also think you are about 15 years old and are mostly clueless about life and the world in general.

Now of course, I could be wrong, but this is what your postings lead me to think about you. You did ask.

[edit added] Hmmmm, after reading more of your postings and some of the anti-jew stuff you regurgitate, I have an even lower opinion of you. Keep going. This is very instructive. [edit end]

[edit on 11-7-2004 by Ambient Sound]

Originally posted by Ambient Sound
I have figured out that your main purpose here seems to be to bash Bush and bash the US in that order. You seem to claim to come from China but seem to have very little knowledge of the background and history, so, I am starting to have my doubts. You also seem to have a difficult time understanding that the more outragous and demonstrateably false some of your assumptions are, the less crediblity you have.

Actually I am mostly concerned with US foreign policy. Kerry actually will be not much different from Bush. Maybe it is not Bush or Kerry to dictate US policy. For me, Bush and Kerry are two different side of the coin. I do not care get elected.

I do prefer Kerry, simply because it will be better for Average Americans. Kerry and Edwards will care more for the poor American people.

I can read English and Chinese, only a little Japanese and a little German. If you can prove that you are American, then I can prove that I am Chinese.

I have decided that you are probably a troll or a left leaning member of ATS who is using a different screen name from their usual one. I also think you are about 15 years old and are mostly clueless about life and the world in general.

I find the above is most appropriate for at least 50% of American people.

urm... maybe china likes kerry because he sees trade opportunities where bush sees only the threats his neocon masters tell him to see.... just my two cents.

-koji K.

Oh? So we don't trade with China now? No, China likes Kerry because they know that Kerry will buckle under, try to appease our enemies, and let the rest of the world control our foregn policy. He'll probably give them more of our technology too like Slick Willy did.

The country that would be the biggest threat to China is the US. Simple fact, we are the super power.

So you are in the Chinese government and you see Kerry and Bush. Who would you choose? The guy that invaded another nation (regardless of the reasons) or one who maybe won't.

At this point I am sure they would rather have the maybe candidate.

Of course it really none of their business. We vote our own leaders in and in a few months we will decide how our foriegn policy will run.

Originally posted by Ambient Sound
Oh? So we don't trade with China now? No, China likes Kerry because they know that Kerry will buckle under, try to appease our enemies, and let the rest of the world control our foregn policy. He'll probably give them more of our technology too like Slick Willy did.

how could 'the rest of the world' control our foreign policy?

-koji K.

Originally posted by nativeokie
Of course it really none of their business. We vote our own leaders in and in a few months we will decide how our foriegn policy will run.

How naiive that you think you can decide your foreign policy.

Remember how many people protected before the Iraq war, did Bush care such disagreement where US blood and treasury wil be squandered?

Have a good sleep and dream.

If Kerry lets the UN decide what we can and can't do and he won't use troops without the UN's permisson, that sounds like the UN is controling our foregn policy to me.

Originally posted by zcheng
How naiive that you think you can decide your foreign policy.

No, that is your declaired country of origin, where you don't get to decide. We'll be deciding in November, thank you.

Originally posted by Ambient Sound
If Kerry lets the UN decide what we can and can't do and he won't use troops without the UN's permisson, that sounds like the UN is controling our foregn policy to me.

why do you assume that the failure to use troops in a given situation means our foreign policy isn't being controlled by us, the americans? the actual fact would be, were kerry to make such a decision, then our foreign policy would simply be to prefer diplomacy to war and take into account the world community. this is a perfectly valid foreign policy. some (including myself) would say more valid than unilateral action.

foreign policy does not equal war. many would say a good foreign policy prevents wars.

-koji K.

[edit on 11-7-2004 by koji_K]

Originally posted by koji_K

Originally posted by Ambient Sound
If Kerry lets the UN decide what we can and can't do and he won't use troops without the UN's permisson, that sounds like the UN is controling our foregn policy to me.

why do you assume that the failure to use troops in a given situation means our foreign policy isn't being controlled by us, the americans? the actual fact would be, were kerry to make such a decision, then our foreign policy would simply be to prefer diplomacy to war and take into account the world community. this is a perfectly valid foreign policy. some (including myself) would say more valid than unilateral action.

foreign policy does not equal war. many would say a good foreign policy prevents wars.

-koji K.

[edit on 11-7-2004 by koji_K]

Kerry said that War should be the last option, and he will not make War of choice. I agree with him. The fact is that UN was conducting an effective search of WMD in Iraq before US invasion.

[edit on 11-7-2004 by zcheng]