-Caveat Lector- WJPBR Email News List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Peace at any cost is a Prelude to War! ARTICLE 1 China Increases Military Spending Ed.: A developing confrontation or expression of China’s desire to be taken more seriously? A recent AP report. By JOHN LEICESTER BEIJING (AP) - After announcing one of its largest hikes in military spending in 12 years, China sought Tuesday to deny weaponry to Taiwan, warning Washington that providing high-tech arms to the island would be dangerous and harm U.S.-China ties. Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan said selling upgraded Patriot missile batteries and warships with state-of-the-art radars would send ``a very wrong signal'' to Taiwan's government, inflame tensions and encourage Taiwanese who want to remain separate from China. ``It would only feed their arrogance,'' Tang said at a news conference on the sidelines of the Chinese legislature's annual meeting. ``The U.S. side should recognize the serious dangers involved and rein in its wild horse at the brink of the precipice.'' Tang's combative tone appeared aimed at dissuading the Bush administration from stepping up support for Taiwan, an island democracy China views as part of its territory. Beijing has threatened to attack if Taiwan refuses indefinitely to unify peacefully with China. In Washington, Pentagon spokesman Rear Adm. Craig Quigley declined to say whether the 17.7 percent defense spending increase announced by China exceeded U.S. expectations. But he said it was well known that China is modernizing its military. As for U.S. intentions to sell additional advanced weaponry to Taiwan, Quigley said, ``There is an ongoing debate both within the government of the United States and with the Taiwan authorities as to what are the defensive systems that need to be made available to the Taiwanese for their legitimate defensive needs.'' Tang's warnings came after China's finance minister told legislators that the government would boost military spending by 17.7 percent this year, the 12th straight year of double-digit increases for the People's Liberation Army. It was the third-highest increase since 1990, surpassed only by hikes of 21 percent in 1995 and 18 percent in 1994. Defending the increase, Tang said the United States' proposed $310 billion defense budget dwarfed Beijing's $17.07 billion. ``Although you could draw the conclusion from a couple of figures that China's defense spending has increased significantly, the defense budget is the smallest among major nations,'' Tang said. China's actual defense spending is thought to be up to five times the official budget. China is believed to be spending more than $1 billion a year on foreign weaponry, and has bought Russian destroyers that could threaten a U.S. Navy attempt to aid Taiwan in the event of Chinese attack. In turn, Taiwan is seeking decommissioned Kidd-class destroyers from the United States. It is also interested in Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, equipped with the formidable Aegis radar system which tracks more than 200 targets. Washington, which is obliged by U.S. law to sell Taiwan sufficient weapons to defend itself, is expected to announce a decision by next month. Acquiring the warships would be a significant diplomatic and military coup for Taiwan. In recent years, Washington has declined or deferred Taiwanese requests for submarines and destroyers for fear of provoking China and an arms race. Tang did not say how Beijing would respond to a sale. Asked whether China would station more missiles facing Taiwan or stop cooperating with the Unites States on arms control, Tang said: ``We have to look at the attitude of the U.S.'' ``I hope the U.S. will come to a sober-minded understanding of the serious dangers involved,'' he said. China and Taiwan separated amid civil war in 1949. Tang charged the island would already have reunited with China ``if the United States as an outside factor had not wreaked havoc at certain times.'' He said Taiwan would be discussed by Vice Premier Qian Qichen when he visits Washington and New York this month. Qian, the government's top foreign policy expert, will be the first leader to visit since President Bush's inauguration in January. On another irritant in China-U.S. ties, Tang said an official investigation had disproved U.S. reports that Chinese civilian and military workers helped improve Iraq's air-defense network in violation of U.N. sanctions. He accused the United States of raising the allegation to divert international attention from U.S. and British air strikes against military sites around Baghdad on Feb. 16. ``Chinese enterprises and corporations have not assisted Iraq in building the fiber-optic cable project used for air defense,'' Tang said. ARTICLE 2 US Withdraws 750 Troops From Bosnia Ed.: A step in the right direction. Hopefully this is a coordinated move. Nonetheless, we should keep an eye on this situation, so it doesn’t turn out to be a shell game - troops out of Bosnia to free up more manpower for the escalating Kosovo. An AP report. By BARRY SCHWEID WASHINGTON (AP) - The Bush administration is withdrawing some tanks, equipment and about 750 troops no longer needed for peacekeeping in Bosnia, and more cutbacks are possible, two U.S. officials said. A White House official, speaking on condition of anonymity Wednesday, said the troop reduction was being accomplished by not replacing soldiers who have completed their tours in Bosnia, where 4,400 U.S. troops are on duty. The official described the reductions as adjustments and said they would not diminish the ability of peacekeepers in Bosnia to carry out their mission. Secretary of State Colin Powell's pledge to stay the course in the Balkans, where more than 9,000 U.S. troops patrol Bosnia and Kosovo, remained in effect, but that commitment did not rule out some reductions, said a senior U.S. official, who also spoke on condition of anonymity. The troop withdrawal and possibility of further reductions was described by the official as part of an evaluation of needs the administration was making with NATO leaders. President Bush, in a round-table meeting Tuesday evening with regional reporters, said, ``We must tell our European allies that over time we expect them to put the troops on the ground. But this administration will not precipitously withdraw from commitments that previous administrations made.'' Powell, during his Senate confirmation hearings in January, noted that Bush had promised ``to look closely at our commitments in the Balkans, with the hope of reducing our troop levels there over time and in consultation with our allies. ... This will be part of a much more comprehensive review of all our commitments, not simply those in Bosnia and Kosovo.'' A White House official said the cutback was the result of a review concluded in December. Based on talks with the European allies, some heavy equipment and tanks that were no longer necessary are being withdrawn, along with the peacekeepers that manned them. CBS reported, meanwhile, that the Bush administration had developed a plan that would reduce by about 80 percent the 4,400 U.S. troops in Bosnia. It said the plan does not affect the 5,000 American troops next door in Kosovo. Under the plan, American troops would turn over to civilian police the job of conducting daily foot patrols to keep the streets safe and would only be responsible for preventing an outbreak of fighting, CBS said. A White House spokesman said he had not seen the CBS report, but he questioned its accuracy. ``The United States intends to review our force posture in the Balkans in close consultation with allies as part of NATO's process of six-month reviews,'' spokesman Gordon Johndroe said. Bush registered skepticism about U.S. involvement in peacekeeping operations during his presidential campaign. But Powell, in his debut last month at NATO headquarters in a diplomatic role, promised worried Europeans that the United States ``would avoid any steps that jeopardize'' the alliance's unity. The cutbacks are occurring against the backdrop of growing tensions in the Balkans. Condoleezza Rice, Bush's national security adviser, created a stir during the presidential campaign when she said the United States should pull troops out and Bush, too, said he wanted to bring Americans home. After some European alarm, Bush softened his stance, but said the United States would be more ``careful'' and ``judicious'' about future peacekeeping deployments. ARTICLE 3 Alamo's Heroes Needed Today Ed.: An interesting piece about character and heroes. By Chuck Baldwin, March 6, 2001 When you awoke this morning, did you say a word of thanks for those 186 brave men who died at the Alamo? It was on this date in 1836 that men like Davy Crockett, Jim Bowie and Will Travis chose to fight and die at that little mission fort, rather than leave their posts. As you meditate on the bravery and commitment of those men, try to imagine a congressman and a group of citizen volunteers being willing to emulate that act of self-sacrifice today. It's tough to visualize, isn't it? By today's standards, the men who died at the Alamo must seem rather foolish. After all, they had no chance of winning - none! And isn't winning all that counts? That's what good Republicans have been telling us for the past year. That's why Trent Lott and the Senate leadership decided to let Bill Clinton stay in office. That's why millions of Christian conservatives voted for G.W. Bush instead of Alan Keyes in the Republican primaries. And that's why they ignored Pat Buchanan and Howard Phillips in the general election. This win-at-all-costs philosophy is one reason the Republican Party, and conservatives in general, have been castrated. They have sold their souls (and their children's futures) to the concept that winning is all that matters. But that was not the spirit of the men at the Alamo; neither was it the spirit of the men at Lexington and Concord. Winning has never been man's duty. Picking winners and losers is the domain of God - and God's alone. Man has but one duty: to be faithful to the truth. Nothing more. Nothing less. When those 186 men at the Alamo decided to step across that line in the sand, they knew they were going to die. A force of over 4,000 seasoned soldiers surrounded them, and no help was coming. They knew they were going to die. Yet, to a man, they chose to stay on those ramparts. One of those men was Tennessee Congressman, David Crockett. Some were farmers. Others were ranchers. James Bowie was a wealthy landowner. Ministers, too, were numbered among that gallant group. They came from various backgrounds and trades. But all of them believed that a man's duty was simply to do right and let God decide the rest. They chose to do right - and they died doing it. I pray that one day my conservative brethren will come to understand that our only duty is to stand for truth and right. In standing for right, some prevail; others don't. The eternal rewards are the same for each. I need to add that it is devotion to duty that often prompts Heaven's assistance. On the other hand, to cling to this humanistic "must win" attitude is to cling to a rope of sand. And for those who continue to embrace the damnable belief that "principle without power is useless," I would only respond by saying, power without principle is dangerous. And I would add one more thing: it was the spirit of Crockett's champions, not the spirit of Lott's Lilliputians, that made America the greatest nation on earth. And only the same uncompromising, fearless spirit will turn our faltering country around. Does anyone see Crockett's shadow on the horizon? *COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and educational purposes only.[Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ] Want to be on our lists? Write at [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a menu of our lists! <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
