Re: Logics of geopolitics Re: Mo^ hi`nh li.ch su+?

[Aiviet Nguyen <aiviet2@yahoo.com>]

Hi L^m,

    Interesting clarifications. I have similar thoughts. But we can go
further: why Laos can survive?
If we replace Vietnam by China, Laos by Vietnam, Thailand by Champa, we
don't have your points. Laos has been always weaker than Thailand or
Vietnam and has not been swallowed.
    So I guess that your theory should be corrected a litle bit. If a
small power is sandwiched between two big ones, it has a chance to
survive by playing a balance game. If the second biggest guy try to
destroy the buffer guy, it is like committing suicide.

  If they are positioned in order of strength ( Like
China-Vietnam-Champa), the middle guy should destroy the smallest one
to survive, if the smallest guy does not have a friendly policy with
the middle guy.

  Therefore Champa was wrong to have an aggressive policy against
Vietnam with the support from China.
Somebody said that after Le Loi China became unable to conquest Vietnam
as the vietnamese identity has been established by " Cao Binh Ngo"
:-)). However, I think that mainly because Le Thanh Tong has
permanently  avoided the threat from South.

   Today, the issue of political partnership may not be under a
geographic topological consideration, but may be a consideration in an
abstract topological space is required. What is that space? 

Cheers
Aiviet
   
--- Alexander H L Vu <vuh000@mail.uni-mainz.de> wrote:
> Bac Viet and Thach,
> 

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com