http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/snyder/economic.htm

I like the start of this paper. Much like the Cold War we actually created huge amounts of Offensive weapons. In which the US used as a threat to the Soviet Union to keep it from invading the US, or spreading to big. However, it was not the US's military that did in the Soviet Union. It was the US's liberal and free enterprises that did them in. In which the Soviet Unions centralized economy could not compete. However, China has found a way to use that centralized strength along with being allowed to cheat its way into the free markets. This then makes it a whole new beast and a whole new strategy needs to be implemented again to stop big wars, and to stop them from spreading to big to quickly.

As such the new war is economic espionage. This game is played much by the computer and hacking. As such in my mind it would be a kin to nuclear bombs and military weapons. Were Russia was able to win the military hard war build up, and technological build up of Satellites for and space programs. The US was able to win on its economic principles of defending our economies from economic espionage. This again would be a nice relief from the attacks we have been seeing from the new hybrid centralized economy of China.

This then would call for a campaign of high cyber policing and defensing, against foreign and domestic attacks. Currently the US lags far behind China in the areas of cyber warfare. The US' free policy of information at points makes hacking almost irrelevant. However, it is the key strategic business planning that causes the problem.

China no longer is worried about stealing business plans or government secrets as somehow they have a backdoor key into our products. China therefore, is playing a new game. That game is pin point attacks. They then take folks they deem as discentors to their power in foreign countries that might be able to climb the ladder and then start to erode their lives through their reliance on electronics. Phone calls, Internet, servers, etc. This is all reported in the panel under the cyber defense solider picture.

Again reiterating. The nature fact that we need to strategies on how to defend against China. Our old strategy against the Soviet Union of free economies and good strategic defenses for our big corporations by government agents. Is not possible when an agent at anytime can walk in the door via a hack through phones, cameras, computers, and bank accounts.

This means were the US had the massive build up of G-man of the Cold war for physical espionage. A good game plan might be to look much deeper into healthy levels of G-man agents in the cyber world.
What would be a healthy level?
Exactly how would they go about tracking hackers, or virus, I mean chasing someone in a car used to cost around $20,000 a day. Now you can place a $100 tag on them and watch them from a Camera on a satellite upwards of a $2-5000 a day, or the world's camera as they are everywhere. This is a whole new game. It therefore, calls for whole new strategies.

However, again, to defend against such things a proper defense could also easily be implemented.
The thing the US lacks right now and the thing that the US has forgot helped it keep itself afloat during the first Cold war against its new competitor and Cold War II partner is the natural fact that it needs to watch out for its economy. The areas of high observation should specifically be centralized acting agents of economies of scale, much in the form of agents given to look like free enterprises and blatant state Owned enterprise actors with massive amounts of government subsidies. The US has seemed to forgotten about how important the actual observance of its old competitor was. I say competitor because both the Soviet Union and the US were on friendly enemy terms. Were they both new what they were doing and they understood each other. However, China on the other hand I have not found a term for. To me it seems more like an enemy. However, we work together however, small to help the world. Then again we worked together with the Soviet Union against common enemies too. Though, China is not as respectful as the Soviet Union was. the Soviet Union was upfront and very respectful about the game. China though wishes to use deceitful tactics to make it look like to the American public that it is not is fault that the US is crumbling yet it is the US's. Inherently it is the US's. However, that is because the US is not properly seeing China like they are. they are a cold war partner. Cold War inherently means technological warfare.

As such this deceitful actions by the Chinese has allowed the majority of popoliticians to still have the same old oh poor china attitude that we had when the US was helping China deal with the collapse of its mother. This attitude towards China is in natural affect a problem. China helps countries Like North Korea and Iran to gain Nuclear bombs. It is understood we want them to keep up with technology so that they do not become another Afghanistan where anarchist terrorist Rome around. As it is easier to deal with a civilization if we ever need to go to war. However, the US seems to be lagging behind it is Cold War part which is to defend against Communist expansion by creating defensive ties. Much like the Us and the Soviets both did during the cold war.

These defensive ties exist from the US being able to steel manufacturing technology to countries that need to be developed. This allows the US to gain allies and strategic economic and military partners without having to be there to help out. However, the US has lost its key machinery technological advantages. Through an exploitation of deceitful theories as pushed by China. This is necessarily a fault of the us from not seeing through the Chinese cloak and missing the daggers as they strike each time at our industries. This then allows China to become the country that is supplying everyone much like the Soviet's wanted with machinery, technological advancements etc. This then causes a strategic build of of economic and military ties.

This build up of ties, then increases the possibility that the US and the lasting free markets will be encircled and exploited. Much like what we are seeing with the Chinese economic warfare that is going undefended by proper strategy. I am not saying to do archaic tariffs and embargo's back at them. As we should let themselves hang themselves in front of the very people that they are trying to impress through their centralized Soviet style economic warfare.

The way to properly deal with China is much like how we kept the world from war, and spreading of Communism in the past. Come up with a nice strategy that has not been thought of. This things again need to circle around a free market and enterprise system avoid of Communist SOE style economic warfare. However, again the Chinese are not respectful like the Soviet's were, and they wish to be seen like they are a free market country. When they are in tack with a centralized economy that is forcing the world to evolve around china like a drain instead of flow through free market places fairly like a stream.

Therefore, the proper strategy that is necessary is for the US to up and out beat the Chinese cyber warfare department and to heavily observe Chinese centralized economic agents like intelligence agents set up as free Enterprise, and State Owned Enterprises that are trying to cloak in under the guise of free markets through public stock (even though they still hold 51% sometimes much more than that and take home 90% of the profits to place back into the pockets of the Chinese SOE cartels).

1. Cyber warfare defenses up it and proliferated for free enterprises.
2  Observance of SOE international activities on a massive scale observance as much as allowed. Compiling information on any possible illegal activities through legal observance.

These are my suggestion through an non professional economists point of view.

The Communist are coming. The wish to make it look like they are hear to help. However, they are hear to conquer. Not on my time. Lead, follow or get out of my way.

Rider I