Cain warns China might get nukes

[Corp]

They might also be building a wall

HERMAN CAIN: My China strategy is quite simply outgrow China. It gets back to economics. China has a $6 trillion economy and they're growing at approximately 10 percent. We have a $14 trillion economy -- much bigger -- but we're growing at an anemic 1.5, 1.6 percent. When we get our economy growing back at the rate of 5 or 6 percent that it has the ability to do, we will outgrow China.

And secondly, we already have superiority in terms of our military capability, and I plan to get away from making cutting our defense a priority and make investing in our military capability a priority, going back to my statement: peace through strength and clarity. So yes they're a military threat. They've indicated that they're trying to develop nuclear capability and they want to develop more aircraft carriers like we have. So yes, we have to consider them a military threat.

Really? Really?!? Hoping he just misspoke. Otherwise...

Edited November 2, 2011 by Corp

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

Get? Got is more like it.

[Aus Der Box Skeptisch]

Great more fear mongering.

[tipotep]

Why is it that the U.S has to consider it a threat that China has nuclear a capability ?

Should i consider my neighbour a threat because he owns a gun ?

TiP.

[BlindMessiah]

Why is it that the U.S has to consider it a threat that China has nuclear a capability ?

Should i consider my neighbour a threat because he owns a gun ?

TiP.

China has a full nuclear arsenal is the main point. He doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.

[Habitat]

He'll not be a candidate, unless he's been misquoted.

[Taita]

China has a full nuclear arsenal is the main point. He doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.

I haven't found the quote, heheheh. China may get nucs ifn we ain't careful.

Has to be a misquote or a simple creation wholly dissimilar from anything he has actually said. In a heated and highly contentious campaign someone makes up crap to taint an opponent??? Like that has ever happened.

[BlindMessiah]

I haven't found the quote, heheheh. China may get nucs ifn we ain't careful.

Has to be a misquote or a simple creation wholly dissimilar from anything he has actually said. In a heated and highly contentious campaign someone makes up crap to taint an opponent??? Like that has ever happened.

It wasn't a misquote. I saw the video interview. He was being interviewed by some news lady.

[Habitat]

It wasn't a misquote. I saw the video interview. He was being interviewed by some news lady.

Well, it's time to say ta-ta to Herman.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

Well, it's time to say ta-ta to Herman.

Nah, he'll run the Republican's lap him up as he comes across as a "salt of the Earth"/"made my way in this world"/hardworking, business owning man who is black. Basically if they can get him to say he sponsor's orphans in Africa and builds churches for a hobby he'll have ticked all of the demographics they need to get elected.

[Corp]

China has a full nuclear arsenal is the main point. He doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.

And has had one since 1964

[Q24]

I’m not defending Herman Cain (I don’t know much about him) and I haven’t seen the original video interview but people are misinterpreting the quote above.

It is of course possible to develop a capability that already exists.

The word “develop” doesn’t have to mean “create” but can be to “expand”, “refine”, “improve”, etc.

Here is another interview where he is more specific: -

“They’re testing in order to be able to improve their nuclear arsenal.”

Or maybe all the fuss is just a joke that I missed

[questionmark]

Here we go again, another Republican not knowing what is going on in the world...

[Corp]

Saying that a country is "trying to develop nuclear capability" means that they don't have it at the moment. Now if he had said they were trying to improve their nukes, that's something different. As it is it sounds like Cain doesn't know that China has been a nuclear country for the last forty years.

[Mr_Snstr]

At least our past canidates stuck to fearmongering about thirdworld nations with no hope of a real retaltiation.

What next?

The Threat to the South: Canada Amassing Arms...

[Corp]

WHO TOLD YOU!?!?!

err...I mean yeah the idea that Canada would threaten you guys is just silly. Pay no attention to such horrible lies.

[Q24]

Saying that a country is "trying to develop nuclear capability" means that they don't have it at the moment.

Only if you don’t understand meaning of the word “develop”.

Here you go: -

1. to bring out the capabilities or possibilities of; bring to a more advanced or effective state: to develop natural resources; to develop one's musical talent.
   
2. to cause to grow or expand: to develop one's muscles.
   
3. to elaborate or expand in detail: to develop a theory.
   
4. to bring into being or activity; generate; evolve.
   
5. Drafting. to transfer the details of (a more or less two-dimensional design, pattern, or the like) from one surface, especially one that is prismatic or cylindrical, onto another, usually planar, in such a way that the distances between points remain the same.
   http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/develop
   

If you single out number four then you would be correct.

If you accept numbers one, two and three, there is no problem with the quote.

If you go with number five… never mind

[Corp]

You also need to understand how the phrase "develop nuclear capabilities" is used in the international context. It means that a country is trying to get nukes, not that they've had them for 40+ years and they're trying to improve on things.

[Q24]

You also need to understand how the phrase "develop nuclear capabilities" is used in the international context. It means that a country is trying to get nukes, not that they've had them for 40+ years and they're trying to improve on things.

The phrase isn’t incorrect in the international context either.

As mentioned, “develop” can mean to “create” or “improve”.

I’ll go by that, being as it’s the dictionary context.

It comes down to whether anyone really wants to understand what Cain was saying, which was quite obvious, or would prefer to misinterpret and paint him as a fool (which he may well be in general, I don’t know). It does seem the media are out to get him.

Anyhow, he has clarified the comment for anyone with understanding difficulties: -

“What I meant was China does not have the size of the nuclear capability that we have. They do have a nuclear capability. I was talking about their total nuclear capability.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/03/herman-cain-china-nuclear-weapons_n_1073477.html?ref=politics

Thank you Cain, it was clear in the first place.

No wait, some are already saying this is just a “cover story” for his “blunder”.

So what’s the deal with this guy - why don’t people like him?

[Just Dave]

So for short in last 50 years is US looking for a war? YES Is US overconfident? YES And i really dont think that provoking China is a good idea...

[Taita]

It wasn't a misquote. I saw the video interview. He was being interviewed by some news lady.

I watched the interview and he clearly says they are attempting to IMPROVE their nuclear capabilities. It should have been easy for whomever made the quote initiating the thread to have understood this fact. It took me little more than 3 minutes to research it myself.

The only conclusion I can see as reasonable is that the misquote had an advantage in NOT being verified. The perpetrator, it could easily be surmised then, had an agenda in presenting it as he/she designed for it's most advantageous results. Normal politics in other words.

Mark

[BlindMessiah]

I watched the interview and he clearly says they are attempting to IMPROVE their nuclear capabilities. It should have been easy for whomever made the quote initiating the thread to have understood this fact. It took me little more than 3 minutes to research it myself.

The only conclusion I can see as reasonable is that the misquote had an advantage in NOT being verified. The perpetrator, it could easily be surmised then, had an agenda in presenting it as he/she designed for it's most advantageous results. Normal politics in other words.

Mark

Just no. He said develop.

[Corp]

The phrase isn’t incorrect in the international context either.

As mentioned, “develop” can mean to “create” or “improve”.

I’ll go by that, being as it’s the dictionary context.

It comes down to whether anyone really wants to understand what Cain was saying, which was quite obvious, or would prefer to misinterpret and paint him as a fool (which he may well be in general, I don’t know). It does seem the media are out to get him.

When a country is looking to improve a weapon system they say they're working to improve it. Not to develop it. When someone is looking to beef up their navy they don't say they're looking into developing naval resources. When they want new bullets they're not developing projectile weapons.

Cain might have meant that China is improving their nukes but that's not how it came out. And as such he made himself look like a fool. As for the media I found the link on another message board and I've only seen this mentioned on the Daily Show and Colbert. So if the media is out to get him on this slip up they're not trying very hard.

Anyhow, he has clarified the comment for anyone with understanding difficulties: -

“What I meant was China does not have the size of the nuclear capability that we have. They do have a nuclear capability. I was talking about their total nuclear capability.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/03/herman-cain-china-nuclear-weapons_n_1073477.html?ref=politics

Thank you Cain, it was clear in the first place.

No wait, some are already saying this is just a “cover story” for his “blunder”.

So what’s the deal with this guy - why don’t people like him?

It was not clear in the first place. If it was no one would have asked him to clarify his position. He slipped up and now he's clarifying what he meant to say.

As to why people don't like him, I don't get that vibe. He's just the current front runner in the Republican race and so he's getting additional attention paid to him. The same thing happened to all the front runners. There's nothing special about what Cain is going through right now, just how American politics work. Though if he starts trying to play the victim that might annoy some people.

[Q24]

When a country is looking to improve a weapon system they say they're working to improve it. Not to develop it. When someone is looking to beef up their navy they don't say they're looking into developing naval resources. When they want new bullets they're not developing projectile weapons.

Really?

In English, it’s fine to “develop” existing capabilities: -

“guided missile development program”

“development in China's maritime capability”

“Precision-Guided Projectile Development”

So what’s your first language? I’m thinking French, or just… Corpish?

As to why people don't like him, I don't get that vibe. He's just the current front runner in the Republican race and so he's getting additional attention paid to him. The same thing happened to all the front runners. There's nothing special about what Cain is going through right now, just how American politics work. Though if he starts trying to play the victim that might annoy some people.

Uh huh.

It just seems that when John McCain sang, “bomb, bomb, bomb…” it was allowed to slide as a joke/jest in the media, amongst other examples. But when Herman Cain makes a comment that can be interpreted two ways, one that makes sense and one that doesn’t, the latter is jumped on to frame him as a foreign policy dunce.

It looks to me that perhaps the problem some people and the media have with Cain is that he’s not hawkish enough for a Republican candidate.

Oh my god, he wants to fight Iran economically rather than militarily!

It was not clear in the first place. If it was no one would have asked him to clarify his position. He slipped up and now he's clarifying what he meant to say.

Do you accept the clarification?

[Corp]

Really?

In English, its fine to develop existing capabilities: -

guided missile development program

development in China's maritime capability

Precision-Guided Projectile Development

I stand correct on those issues. The fact remains however that when people are taking about countries seeking to develop nuclear weapons they're talking about how they're trying to get nukes. Iran is developing nukes, North Korea is developing nukes. There's not much talk about the US or Russia developing nuclear technology because they already have it. "Proper" definition or not that's how the word is normally used in this international context.

Uh huh.

It just seems that when John McCain sang, bomb, bomb, bomb… it was allowed to slide as a joke/jest in the media, amongst other examples. But when Herman Cain makes a comment that can be interpreted two ways, one that makes sense and one that doesnt, the latter is jumped on to frame him as a foreign policy dunce.

It looks to me that perhaps the problem some people and the media have with Cain is that hes not hawkish enough for a Republican candidate.

Oh my god, he wants to fight Iran economically rather than militarily!

So I'm guessing you missed the hammering Backman got, the big deal over the location of Romney's cottage, and Perry's debate screw ups then? Then there's Obama's 57 state slip up that always comes up. Bush's many slips. The fact is if you're in the spot light and say something silly, either you mean it or not, people are going to pay attention to it.

Seems Cain is getting hammered more on his economic plan than he is about his international stance.

Do you accept the clarification?

Of course. Why wouldn't I?

Edited November 3, 2011 by Corp