It should have been obvious to everyone that the relationship was always *more* to their advantage than ours. Most of the economic claims made (after the Tianaman square massacre) to get permanent trade status have never panned out, and the trade deficit has only ballooned in their favor.
There are many [s]idiots[/s] people who don't take it seriously. Hitler spelled out in Mein Kampf what he planned to do but it was just too far-fetched to take seriously. Sometimes you have to take things at face value and not play the giraffe because it's too frightening to contemplate. Yes, they stand to lose economically if there is war, but they also understand that we are the ones who have one trillion plus dollars [s]held hostage[/s] invested in their country, not the other way around. As such they figure any war would only be a short run thing - and are willing to sacrifice over the Taiwan issue (which is about more than a prosperous little island to them, it's a political/philosophical challenge - even internally). It was wise of Nixon to establish relations and play China off the USSR (just as it was for China), but when the SU went kaput we really should have changed our policy... instead we accelerated it.
"We are concerned when we see constant rhetorical attacks on the United States, constant warnings to the United States, that if push comes to shove, China is perfectly happy to fight a war against us, and then to see a strategic doctrine from the Chinese military that lays out the ways in which they propose to win that war. That's very bothersome. You'd have to be an idiot not to take that seriously," said Michael Ledeen, vice chairman of the panel.