Thank you for proving both his and my points. I appreciate your help.

As my very good friends father who fled to Taiwan in 1948 with the Nationalists to pursue his dream of freedom once explained to me some years ago… ‘The western nations may never understand or have significant influence with China or the Chinese peoples. Your countries are but a few hundred years old and yet they wish to force their values and definitions of freedom and democracy on a country that has 3000 years of written history.

Most of which was, alas, rendered inert in 1949. Which is why your freind's father left, in case you didn't know. He apparently understood that freedom is far more than a full belly and a place to flop.

As my very good friends father who fled to Taiwan in 1948 with the Nationalists to pursue his dream of freedom once explained to me some years ago… ‘The western nations may never understand or have significant influence with China or the Chinese peoples. Your countries are but a few hundred years old and yet they wish to force their values and definitions of freedom and democracy on a country that has 3000 years of written history. The communists are a very minor dynasty in China’s history. But today, for the first time in that 3000 years, the average Chinese person goes to bed each night with a full stomach and gets up the next morning expecting to be freer and safer than at any time in those 3000 years. This is enough for the Chinese peoples. Until westerners can accept and respect this they will neither understand nor have significant influence in China. We were here long before your countries and will be here long after you have gone. You can not force the Chinese peoples to change, you can only help them to understand new ideas.’

These were the thoughts of a 73 year old man over a quarter century ago but it seems to me that they certainly still ring just as true today.

Bithead, it's not just the Left wanting to engage w/ the Chinese. It seems to me the call for engagement has come across the ideological spectrum.

From Bush to Clinton, eh?
(Chuckle)
I know that's how this stuff gets labeled, Sean, but the bottom line is a goodly number of those who are suppsoedly on the right end of the Spectrum, aren't. Bush for example... and in this case, either 41 or 43 will do. Neither was a hard conservative, nor are they now. Remember, Bush was chosen to give a slight leftward tilt to Reagan's image going into the first election.

The same applies to McCain, in my view, though I think if we're to discuss that one we should do so under separate cover, lest we risk derailing the topic.

I think we've seen demonstrable change for the better in China. There's certainly been more progress with them than with Cuba.

Tibet may have something to say in that matter. What gains have been made are mostly due to the comparative financial might of China, not because of any ideological changes which China has undergone. Tibet proves to me that haven't gone through any.

You and I have been agreeing about quite a bit recently, legion.

I must admit I too, find his comments resonate with me in this matter, and I wonder what motivates the IOC, here. I suspect we'd not like it if we knew, and there wouldn't BE an Olympic games at all, in any year in the near future.

Frankly, I think this entire to-do is the fault of the IOC, which made a patently foolhardy gesture in giving the games to China in the first place - it's not like the things people are pissed at China about are any kind of secret..

You and I have been agreeing about quite a bit recently, legion.

I think we've seen demonstrable change for the better in China. There's certainly been more progress with them than with Cuba.

Frankly, I think this entire to-do is the fault of the IOC, which made a patently foolhardy gesture in giving the games to China in the first place - it's not like the things people are pissed at China about are any kind of secret..

But, isn't the IOC's action directly in line with the left's wanting us to 'engage' the Chinese?

Frankly, I think this entire to-do is the fault of the IOC, which made a patently foolhardy gesture in giving the games to China in the first place - it's not like the things people are pissed at China about are any kind of secret...

And while we're on the subject of the truth and China, can I inject something here about the one world types doing their number at the Golden gate, yesterday?

Look, I sympathize with them, I really do, insofar as wanting to get the Tibetan people out from under China's rule. But the 'one world' nonsense is a complete turnoff. The one worlders are people, by and large who have tacitly supported totalitarian communists in the past, and show no signs of stopping that support. Their emotions are ruling them in each case.
Logic, however, dictates that a one world government as they emotionally propose, means that Tibet will be enslaved once again, along with all the rest of the countries in the world, of course.

If they ever get round to addressing the inherrent contradictions of their politics, and what they’ve been calling for in the case of Tibet, they’ll likely keel over from the guilt overload.

I have a feeling Beijing's pollution will embarrass the Chinese.

And it won't be the only source of embarrassment. I believe that the conditions in China will be obvious to everybody and spread by Internet however the Chinese authorities try to put lipstick on the pig.

The big, big question is why did Beijing get the Olympics at all? I think the IOC has some 'splaining to do.

However, China won't necessarily become a better government to its people all by itself. There does come a point when people can't accept their bad behavior. Maybe the best way to respond are for people to not watch the games. Or even better watch it and mock them. I have a feeling Beijing's pollution will embarrass the Chinese.