<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: KMT: The Pro-China Opposition Party?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.hiwhy.com/2008/01/13/kmt-the-pro-china-opposition-party/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.hiwhy.com/2008/01/13/kmt-the-pro-china-opposition-party/</link>
	<description>Focuses on Education, Business, Law and Other Topics Relevant to Chinese Americans</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 22:50:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: PrimeMinister3</title>
		<link>http://www.hiwhy.com/2008/01/13/kmt-the-pro-china-opposition-party/comment-page-1/#comment-5681</link>
		<dc:creator>PrimeMinister3</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2008 05:54:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hiwhy.com/2008/01/13/kmt-the-pro-china-opposition-party/#comment-5681</guid>
		<description>Hmm.  I agree with most of what you write.  As far as what &quot;pro-Taiwan&quot; means, I am not so sure I understand what you mean.

I agree wholeheartedly with your analysis on being pro-China, simply because the way the Americans view pro-unification lacks insight into the KMT party doctrine, which is to unify under the Republic of China.  As this is not quite realistic in recent years, they have settled for independent control over their government with possible ideas of economic expansion.

In my personal opinion, I think it would be an interesting option to form a confederation of sorts, where they have similar economic interests, but have different political structures to carry out policies in.  I think that that might be more effective than the current debate over jurisdictions etc.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmm.  I agree with most of what you write.  As far as what &#8220;pro-Taiwan&#8221; means, I am not so sure I understand what you mean.</p>
<p>I agree wholeheartedly with your analysis on being pro-China, simply because the way the Americans view pro-unification lacks insight into the KMT party doctrine, which is to unify under the Republic of China.  As this is not quite realistic in recent years, they have settled for independent control over their government with possible ideas of economic expansion.</p>
<p>In my personal opinion, I think it would be an interesting option to form a confederation of sorts, where they have similar economic interests, but have different political structures to carry out policies in.  I think that that might be more effective than the current debate over jurisdictions etc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
