PDA

View Full Version : China, Future superpower



nzkiwi
09 Jul 04,, 03:05
Whats everyones opinion on how long it would take for China to catch up to the US militarily if at all.
Could it ever match the US in defense budgets: US @ $450 Bil., China @ $60-70 Bil. US budget to hit $1 Trillion by the end of the decade.
Could China remain stable enough to challenge the US.
Sorry if this seems a little simplistic but I didn't want to post a US versus China thread and these types of future developments interest me

Aryan
11 Jul 04,, 14:16
Whats everyones opinion on how long it would take for China to catch up to the US militarily if at all.
Could it ever match the US in defense budgets: US @ $450 Bil., China @ $60-70 Bil. US budget to hit $1 Trillion by the end of the decade.
Could China remain stable enough to challenge the US.
Sorry if this seems a little simplistic but I didn't want to post a US versus China thread and these types of future developments interest me

Well according to an excel calculation I did, assuming they keep the GDP% defence spending constant, and stay keep their GDP growth around 10%, they will overtake $450 billion by 2025.

Ray
11 Jul 04,, 16:07
Have you accounted for the US also increasing their GDP or have you taken it to be constant?

Semper Fi
23 Jul 04,, 06:06
I think China is gonna be the next Soviet Union for the US. I think in 10 years they should be close to the US but right now their not their thats why they wouldnt dare touch Taiwan right now.

Officer of Engineers
23 Jul 04,, 06:19
Only if and when China get Rommulan warbirds and Klingon stormtroopers.

Confed999
23 Jul 04,, 15:11
Only if and when China get Rommulan warbirds and Klingon stormtroopers.
Lock disruptors on those capitalist pigs! (Funny, I can't say that without a bad russian accent.)

Praxus
23 Jul 04,, 15:30
If China ever economicly overtakes us it would be because they turned to a more capitalist system then present. In which case we would have no reason to fight each other.

ZFBoxcar
23 Jul 04,, 15:37
China recently added respect of private property to their constitution (or just law, I can't remeber which) which is an important (if only symbolic) step for a nominally communist country. Although ever since the reforms of 1979 began China stopped being communist and as a result, since 1981, China and India (India's capitalist reforms began in the 80s) togethor have pulled 400 million people out of poverty and their GDP is growing rapidly. I figure China will be an economic superpower by 2020 (following the Asian Tiger pattern of 40 years of non-stop rapid growth) and a military one by 2050, depending on just how important it is to them.

raja khan
23 Jul 04,, 20:24
it will be very difficult for china to do so because usa has all thr resoursec of the world at its disposal.Chinese army still remains a regional obe whereas us army has global presense which costs more.

Praxus
23 Jul 04,, 21:30
What are you talking about?

Officer of Engineers
24 Jul 04,, 03:06
If China ever economicly overtakes us it would be because they turned to a more capitalist system then present. In which case we would have no reason to fight each other.

France and Germany were each other's biggest trading partner at the start of WWII.

Praxus
24 Jul 04,, 04:01
France and Germany were each other's biggest trading partner at the start of WWII.
Neither country was Capitalist;)

Officer of Engineers
28 Jul 04,, 04:14
Neither country was Capitalist;)

You're going to have explain that one to me.

lonelyparty
14 Aug 04,, 01:38
Whats everyones opinion on how long it would take for China to catch up to the US militarily if at all.
Could it ever match the US in defense budgets: US @ $450 Bil., China @ $60-70 Bil. US budget to hit $1 Trillion by the end of the decade.
Could China remain stable enough to challenge the US.
Sorry if this seems a little simplistic but I didn't want to post a US versus China thread and these types of future developments interest me

The only problem for China is its resources.If the country can feed its industry with sufficient resources to catch up the same level of consumption/person with US,no doubt it'll overtake US.After all it has the population four times bigger than US.

Praxus
14 Aug 04,, 01:45
You're going to have explain that one to me.

I said that if China turns Capitalist, then we will be friends.

As a counter you gave an example of Nazi Germany and France, neither of which were even close to Capitalism.

scimitar
14 Aug 04,, 07:11
While China has the political will to be a super power, it looses out on the numbers. But it has the where with all to be a mega regional power.

lonelyparty
15 Aug 04,, 20:44
While China has the political will to be a super power, it looses out on the numbers. But it has the where with all to be a mega regional power.

You are right,scimitar.We can safely say US will be the only superpower in the world for a long time,but it's still good to see more powerful nations coming out,no matter it's India,China or Russia.I personally think a more consolidated Europe would be an alternative for a better balance on our planet.

Praxus
15 Aug 04,, 20:54
You are right,scimitar.We can safely say US will be the only superpower in the world for a long time,but it's still good to see more powerful nations coming out,no matter it's India,China or Russia.I personally think a more consolidated Europe would be an alternative for a better balance on our planet.

Translated for everyone who doesn't speak Socialist: "The good guys are too powerful, we must balance it with an equal force of evil looters, murderers, and pillagers"

lonelyparty
17 Aug 04,, 01:23
Translated for everyone who doesn't speak Socialist: "The good guys are too powerful, we must balance it with an equal force of evil looters, murderers, and pillagers"

Huh,here comes the highest!Who made you think every country else in this world is 'bad guys' country?Everyone in this world is the same,God's son.You can say others are evil looters,(don't know which one,you mean India?),murders(China?) and pillagers(Russia or Europe???), but only your country's interest matters when it comes to the international political affair.By this, I can give you an example,the vast majority of American people agreed to go to the war with Iraq,while people from most of other countries said no although their government might have to follow you.If you want hard evidence,you can check out the polling results of every each and single country that has done the poll on this issue,of course no need to look at the countries that were even against the war.I don't remember who said that,the absolute power means the absolute dictatorship.If you watch BBC,you may know what other people from the rest of the world think about you (cerntainly they may not dare to say it loudly because your powerful country may punish them in this way or another,say,withdraw troops,cut the investment or even the worst,invade them).They said,US is actually at the stage of pre-fascism,which was originally said by one of your own writer.Here I am not saying that a country to play the international policeman role is bad,but it should be playing that role very carefully and fairly.To be honest,you did very bad in Palestine and Guantanamo Bay.Again,I'm not a socialist,but I personally respect UN because it represents more people than just US,though this function seems to be weaker now.I don't want to see another cold war either,but more powerful nations in this world would be better.

Please tell me,which country have you really been to before?where exactly did you learn about these countries?I went to US several times,and India once,Russia once,China many times,Europe a lot of times.If you say the most powerful country is also the best country(according to your statement that other countries are blah,blah.....),I think you made some logic mistakes otherwise the former USSR had already been the best.I like your country very much,but I still believe many other countries are better than yours in a variety of ways if not in total.No offence in this argument,I am only trying to tell the truth.

ZFBoxcar
17 Aug 04,, 01:32
lonely he isnt saying pillaging, murdering and looting in terms of international relations but in terms of the illegitamcy of the governments themselves and their actions towards their own people, a sentiment I fully agree with. By the time China becomes a full fledged super power it will probably be a democratic republic anyways, unless something major happens that nobody thought of.

Praxus
17 Aug 04,, 01:37
By the time China becomes a full fledged super power it will probably be a democratic republic anyways, unless something major happens that nobody thought of.

Yes this very likely IMO.


.They said,US is actually at the stage of pre-fascism,which was originally said by one of your own writer.

I agree, but Europe and the rest of the world are even closer to being Fascist states.


To be honest,you did very bad in Palestine and Guantanamo Bay.

What exactly?


I don't want to see another cold war either,but more powerful nations in this world would be better.

It would only be better in the sense of international trade.

Confed999
17 Aug 04,, 02:06
lonely he isnt saying pillaging, murdering and looting in terms of international relations but in terms of the illegitamcy of the governments themselves and their actions towards their own people, a sentiment I fully agree with.
I agree as well...

lonelyparty
18 Aug 04,, 02:04
By the time China becomes a full fledged super power it will probably be a democratic republic anyways, unless something major happens that nobody thought of.

Agree with you completely.

lonelyparty
18 Aug 04,, 02:11
Quote:
By the time China becomes a full fledged super power it will probably be a democratic republic anyways, unless something major happens that nobody thought of.



Yes this very likely IMO.


Quote:
.They said,US is actually at the stage of pre-fascism,which was originally said by one of your own writer.



I agree, but Europe and the rest of the world are even closer to being Fascist states.




I don't know what do you really mean here.


Quote:
Quote:
To be honest,you did very bad in Palestine and Guantanamo Bay.



What exactly?

You can find some reports at International Amnesty website.

[QUOTE=Praxus]Quote:


Quote:
I don't want to see another cold war either,but more powerful nations in this world would be better.



It would only be better in the sense of international trade.



If you say so,still,it's good for all the people.
__________________

lonelyparty
18 Aug 04,, 02:13
Sorry I forgot to separate them.

Originally Posted by Praxus
Quote:

To be honest,you did very bad in Palestine and Guantanamo Bay.



What exactly?

You can find some reports at International Amnesty website.

Confed999
18 Aug 04,, 02:41
International Amnesty
Are those the guys that make a report every time someone here recieves the death penalty? The same folks that think putting hoods on prisoners for transport is torture?

xxxxx
20 Sep 04,, 06:26
If China ever economicly overtakes us it would be because they turned to a more capitalist system then present. In which case we would have no reason to fight each other.

You're naive! Do you really think there's only one reason for a potential war: different government systems?
Of course the Taiwan conflict is the most obvious reason for a war and this conflict won't be solved by a more capitalistic chinese system. By the way, the chinese system is very capitalistic, they just can't state that in public cause then the name of their party would sound stupid :biggrin:

xxxxx
20 Sep 04,, 06:57
Translated for everyone who doesn't speak Socialist: "The good guys are too powerful, we must balance it with an equal force of evil looters, murderers, and pillagers"

What kind of bloody nationalist are you??? What makes you think your country is the best? Tell me. Is it the decreasing middleclass in the USA?
Is it the analphabetic rate of which you are so proud?


Australien
0,00
Dänemark
0,00
Deutschland
0,00
Finnland
0,00
Guernsey
0,00
Insel Man
0,00
Jersey
0,00
Liechtenstein
0,00
Luxemburg
0,00
Monaco
0,00
Norwegen
0,00
Vatikan
0,00
Frankreich
0,01
Island
0,01
Schweden
0,01
Schweiz
0,01
Tschechische Republik
0,01
Belgien
0,02
Lettland
0,02
Österreich
0,02
Ukraine
0,03
Grossbritannien
0,04
Japan
0,04
Niederlande
0,04
Irland
0,08
Estland
0,20
Polen
0,20
Samoa
0,30
Slowenien
0,30
Litauen
0,40
Russland
0,40
Slowakei
0,40
Weißrussland
0,40
Andorra
0,50
Tadschikistan
0,60
Ungarn
0,60
Usbekistan
0,70
Moldawien
0,90
Mongolei
0,90
Georgien
1,00
Guam
1,00
Korea Demokratische Volksrepublik
1,00
Nauru
1,00
Neuseeland
1,00
Saint Pierre und Miguelon
1,00
Guyana
1,20
Armenien
1,40
Bulgarien
1,40
Italien
1,40
Trinidad & Tobago
1,40
Kroatien
1,50
Tonga
1,50
Kasachstan
1,60
Rumänien
1,60
Korea Republik
1,90
Bermuda
2,00
Cayman Islands
2,00
Französisch-Polynesien
2,00
Grenada
2,00
Kiribati
2,00
Turkmenistan
2,00
Turks- u. Caicosinseln
2,00
Uruguay
2,00
Spanien
2,10
Zypern
2,40
Griechenland
2,50
Barbados
2,60
Argentinien
2,90
Amerikanisch Samoa
3,00
Aruba
3,00
Aserbaidschan
3,00
British Virgin Islands
3,00
Gibraltar
3,00
Kanada
3,00
Kirgisistan
3,00
Kuba
3,00
Montserrat
3,00
Nordmarinen
3,00
Saint Helena
3,00
Saint Kitts und Nevis
3,00
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
3,00


or is it more the military budget, which is obviously far too high because money is missing in every end in the social welfare system?

Maybe it's your nominally democracy that slowly but constantly becomes an oligarchie? No matter if you vote for Republicans or Democrats, they are both sponsored by the same global players. And both parties, if they win an election have to protect the interests of those companies e.g. by invading other countries in order to secure resources. In the worst case the government itself consists of oil tycoons like in the bush administration.

So what exactly makes you think your country is the best?

liaozixiansheng
21 Sep 04,, 00:51
Well according to an excel calculation I did, assuming they keep the GDP% defence spending constant, and stay keep their GDP growth around 10%, they will overtake $450 billion by 2025.

Your calculation is flawed. China's GDP is already in excess of 1 trillion USD, and in purchasing power parity terms it is 6 trillion. By contrast, US total GDP is valued at 10 trillion USD which is approximately the same as the whole EU combined.

If you assume a constant 8% growth of real GDP for 30 years, China's purchasing power parity will reach 50 trillion by 2034.

China GDP in 30 years = 6 trillion x (1.08)^30 = approx 60 trillion.

Corresponding GDP per capita = 50,000 USD per Chinese citizen

If you assume a constant 3% growth of real GDP for the US for the next 30 years.

US GDP in 30 years = 10 trillion x (1.03)^30 = approx 24 trillion.

Corresponding GDP per capita = 76.000 USD per American citizen

The figures show that by 2034, the average American will still be 33% richer than his Chinese counterpart. However, the total size of China's economy will be three times the size of the American economy. This is obviously due to China's significantly larger population.

You might assert that the figures represent purchasing power parity and not real output denominated in US dollars. But that line of reasoning is false; it is clear that as countries develop, their exchange rates appreciate resulting in a convergence of real output to PPP output.

The only possible flaw in the argumentation is that I assumed a constant rate of 8% growth for China (she is growing at 9.1% now) for the next 30 years. Any number of factors might make this impossible: war, natural or political disaster, leadership collapse, total economic meltdown, but all of them are unlikely. As long as China plays her cards right, things will go well.

My figures were based on reliable statistics collected from:

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ch.html

The math involved was basic arithmetic (simple compounding) and the assumptions were relatively reasonable.

A similar argument is being put forth by Goldman Sachs economists:

http://www.gs.com/insight/research/reports/report6.html

although their predictions are more restrained than mine.

ajaybhutani
21 Sep 04,, 01:32
Your calculation is flawed. China's GDP is already in excess of 1 trillion USD, and in purchasing power parity terms it is 6 trillion. By contrast, US total GDP is valued at 10 trillion USD which is approximately the same as the whole EU combined.

If you assume a constant 8% growth of real GDP for 30 years, China's purchasing power parity will reach 50 trillion by 2034.

China GDP in 30 years = 6 trillion x (1.08)^30 = approx 60 trillion.

Corresponding GDP per capita = 50,000 USD per Chinese citizen

If you assume a constant 3% growth of real GDP for the US for the next 30 years.

US GDP in 30 years = 10 trillion x (1.03)^30 = approx 24 trillion.

Corresponding GDP per capita = 76.000 USD per American citizen

The figures show that by 2034, the average American will still be 33% richer than his Chinese counterpart. However, the total size of China's economy will be three times the size of the American economy. This is obviously due to China's significantly larger population.

You might assert that the figures represent purchasing power parity and not real output denominated in US dollars. But that line of reasoning is false; it is clear that as countries develop, their exchange rates appreciate resulting in a convergence of real output to PPP output.

The only possible flaw in the argumentation is that I assumed a constant rate of 8% growth for China (she is growing at 9.1% now) for the next 30 years. Any number of factors might make this impossible: war, natural or political disaster, leadership collapse, total economic meltdown, but all of them are unlikely. As long as China plays her cards right, things will go well.

My figures were based on reliable statistics collected from:

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ch.html

The math involved was basic arithmetic (simple compounding) and the assumptions were relatively reasonable.

A similar argument is being put forth by Goldman Sachs economists:

http://www.gs.com/insight/research/reports/report6.html

although their predictions are more restrained than mine.


My question is can China sustain 8% growth rate for next 30 years .The best i know chineese growth is export oriented and theres definitely a limit to what all the world can import.

ajaybhutani
21 Sep 04,, 01:38
the second link u mentioned shows the reduced growth rate for China which will be 5% by 2015.So frankly China will overtake Us but not so soon. Theres still a lot of time left.

Kipruss
21 Sep 04,, 10:54
lol, analphabetic means the inability to read and write in any language - thanks to google as it wasn't in my dictionary (not suprising with the Nuseeland rate at 1%).

By the way, the reason the Australien rate is 0% is probably because they can't count either.

liaozixiansheng
21 Sep 04,, 11:13
lol, analphabetic means the inability to read and write in any language - thanks to google as it wasn't in my dictionary (not suprising with the Nuseeland rate at 1%).

By the way, the reason the Australien rate is 0% is probably because they can't count either.

That is ridiculous since not all languages by any means are based on an alphabetical system. There are many analphabetic people who are perfectly literate (say, in Chinese).

liaozixiansheng
21 Sep 04,, 20:17
Translated for everyone who doesn't speak Socialist: "The good guys are too powerful, we must balance it with an equal force of evil looters, murderers, and pillagers"

This line of reasoning borders on the inane. It bespeaks of a clean cut division of the world between good and evil nation-states, much like JRR Tolkein envisioned; with humans, elves and dwarves on one hand, and evil greedy orcs on the other. Wake up from your self-imposed fantasy; the world ain't that simple.

Praxus
21 Sep 04,, 20:48
What kind of bloody nationalist are you???

One that loves his country because of it's virtues and dispises it for it's vices.



Is it the decreasing middleclass in the USA?

What exactly is the "middle class"? How much wealth one has relitive to someone else means nothing.


Is it the analphabetic rate of which you are so proud?

How does this have anything to do with anything?


or is it more the military budget, which is obviously far too high because money is missing in every end in the social welfare system?

[quote]Maybe it's your nominally democracy

What is it with this fettish for Democracy. Democracy is one of the most evil systems ever devised. America's founding fathers were viemently against the idea of a democracy. In fact they denounced it as a system worst then monarchy. This being said, one must look at what is the proper role of Government is. You seem to beleive that it's role is to enforce the will of the majority. I would argue to the contrary, that the role of Government rightfuly should be to protect our natural rights.


that slowly but constantly becomes an oligarchie?

The United States is becoming more democratic by the day. Our politicians seem willing to deprive us of our rights because of the simple fact that the majority wants it.



And both parties, if they win an election have to protect the interests of those companies e.g. by invading other countries in order to secure resources. In the worst case the government itself consists of oil tycoons like in the bush administration.


Why do you seem to insist that cronyism is limited to America?


This line of reasoning borders on the inane. It bespeaks of a clean cut division of the world between good and evil nation-states, much like JRR Tolkein envisioned; with humans, elves and dwarves on one hand, and evil greedy orcs on the other. Wake up from your self-imposed fantasy; the world ain't that simple.

I will accept this is a non-answer.

Ray
21 Sep 04,, 21:08
liaozixiansheng

Do you seriously beleive China can outpace the US in all spheres?

I agree China is overheated, but then are you suggesting that the US will be staic and allow all to overtake?

Hey, with all sorts of difficulties, they have become the SOLE and ONLY superpower in the World.

Agreed you think Americans are dumb, but I don't think they are THAT Dumb. Or are they? :eek:

ajaybhutani
21 Sep 04,, 23:22
liaozixiansheng

Do you seriously beleive China can outpace the US in all spheres?

I agree China is overheated, but then are you suggesting that the US will be staic and allow all to overtake?

Hey, with all sorts of difficulties, they have become the SOLE and ONLY superpower in the World.

Agreed you think Americans are dumb, but I don't think they are THAT Dumb. Or are they? :eek:
i m just wondering.. was Great Britain able to stop the onset of US .? clearly no. then we can clearly say that US wouldnt be bale to stop China too ..

liaozixiansheng
21 Sep 04,, 23:23
liaozixiansheng

Do you seriously beleive China can outpace the US in all spheres?

I agree China is overheated, but then are you suggesting that the US will be staic and allow all to overtake?

Hey, with all sorts of difficulties, they have become the SOLE and ONLY superpower in the World.

Agreed you think Americans are dumb, but I don't think they are THAT Dumb. Or are they? :eek:

:eek: Where did I say that China could outpace the US in all spheres? I merely proposed that that scenario couldn't be excluded completely.

30 years is too long a horizon to make any sort of accurate prediction, and people who believe they can quite often have drunk too much "toddy".

Furthermore if you had read my post properly, you would have noticed that I simply reused a relatively standard assumption, that growth rate for the US would be 3%, and this is very close to the figure predicted by economists at reputable institutions like Goldman Sachs. Again, 30 years is too long a horizon to make any sort of prediction.

Again, you are putting words in my mouth. Where did I ever condemn a whole group of people as dumb? That would go against my liberal instincts. Your capacity for prevarication and deception amazes me.

liaozixiansheng
21 Sep 04,, 23:28
" What is it with this fettish for Democracy. Democracy is one of the most evil systems ever devised. America's founding fathers were viemently against the idea of a democracy. In fact they denounced it as a system worst then monarchy. This being said, one must look at what is the proper role of Government is. You seem to beleive that it's role is to enforce the will of the majority. I would argue to the contrary, that the role of Government rightfuly should be to protect our natural rights. "


Then why the fetish for democratizing the Middle East and bringing democracy to Iraq? You don't suppose that Bush is really trying to foist "one of the most evil systems ever devised" on the Arabs do you?

ajaybhutani
21 Sep 04,, 23:46
" What is it with this fettish for Democracy. Democracy is one of the most evil systems ever devised. America's founding fathers were viemently against the idea of a democracy. In fact they denounced it as a system worst then monarchy. This being said, one must look at what is the proper role of Government is. You seem to beleive that it's role is to enforce the will of the majority. I would argue to the contrary, that the role of Government rightfuly should be to protect our natural rights. "


wheres this extract from?

Praxus
22 Sep 04,, 01:03
Then why the fetish for democratizing the Middle East and bringing democracy to Iraq? You don't suppose that Bush is really trying to foist "one of the most evil systems ever devised" on the Arabs do you?

Why do you keep attacking points I never made and actions I never supported in an effort to discredit my argument?


wheres this extract from?

From my brain, but if it floats your boat you can go ahead and search the internet for the same paragraph.

xxxxx
22 Sep 04,, 02:12
One that loves his country because of it's virtues and dispises it for it's vices.

What exactly is the "middle class"? How much wealth one has relitive to someone else means nothing.

How does this have anything to do with anything?

[quote]or is it more the military budget, which is obviously far too high because money is missing in every end in the social welfare system?

What is it with this fettish for Democracy. Democracy is one of the most evil systems ever devised. America's founding fathers were viemently against the idea of a democracy. In fact they denounced it as a system worst then monarchy. This being said, one must look at what is the proper role of Government is. You seem to beleive that it's role is to enforce the will of the majority. I would argue to the contrary, that the role of Government rightfuly should be to protect our natural rights.

The United States is becoming more democratic by the day. Our politicians seem willing to deprive us of our rights because of the simple fact that the majority wants it.

Why do you seem to insist that cronyism is limited to America?

I will accept this is a non-answer.

I'm refering to the quickly increasing gap between extrem rich people and poor ones. The wages of the "workers" increase e.g. by 3% and the ones of the mangers by 30%. That's not only a problem in the US but there it is extreme.

The analphabetic rate is refering to the missing money in education which is instead spent on Bunker Busters.

Plz tell me some indicators for more democracy in the USA.

Which gov system do you prefer?

Hey, I'm not a native speaker so could you plz try to use easier words or explain e.g. the meaning of your first sentence and the word cronyism. thx.

Praxus
22 Sep 04,, 02:53
'm refering to the quickly increasing gap between extrem rich people and poor ones. The wages of the "workers" increase e.g. by 3% and the ones of the mangers by 30%. That's not only a problem in the US but there it is extreme.

I think your numbers are greatly exagerated, but let's say they are true. Both are becoming wealthier. So what is the problem?

Or do you mean to say that the "workers" have some "right" to the managers wealth?


The analphabetic rate is refering to the missing money in education which is instead spent on Bunker Busters.

Actually the United States spends more money per student then in Europe. The problem is not the lack of money but the lack of teaching.


Plz tell me some indicators for more democracy in the USA.

The welfare state is an example. The "people" (majority) demand more welfare (education, healthcare, etc), so the politicians appease the majority at the expense of our rights.


Which gov system do you prefer?

I perfer a Constitutional Federal Republic where the Governments job is to protect our rights not to carry out the will of the majority.


Hey, I'm not a native speaker so could you plz try to use easier words or explain e.g. the meaning of your first sentence and the word cronyism. thx.

On top of that I'm not that great of a speller.

Cronyism is where people hand out favors to politicians in exchange for political favors, or visa versa.

My first sentence: "One that loves his country because of it's virtues and dispises it for it's vices."

I meant I like the government for the good it does and hate it for the bad it does.

Confed999
22 Sep 04,, 02:55
Then why the fetish for democratizing the Middle East and bringing democracy to Iraq? You don't suppose that Bush is really trying to foist "one of the most evil systems ever devised" on the Arabs do you?
Democracy is a catch phrase for people who do not understand governmental systems. They have a constitution, thus it is not a true democracy. With a true democracy, all one has to do is convince 50% of the people plus 1 to do they wish, from taking rights to death camps.

Confed999
22 Sep 04,, 02:56
Governments job is to protect our rights not to carry out the will of the majority.
Amen...

xxxxx
22 Sep 04,, 04:13
I think your numbers are greatly exagerated, but let's say they are true. Both are becoming wealthier. So what is the problem?

Or do you mean to say that the "workers" have some "right" to the managers wealth?

Actually the United States spends more money per student then in Europe. The problem is not the lack of money but the lack of teaching.

The welfare state is an example. The "people" (majority) demand more welfare (education, healthcare, etc), so the politicians appease the majority at the expense of our rights.

I perfer a Constitutional Federal Republic where the Governments job is to protect our rights not to carry out the will of the majority.

On top of that I'm not that great of a speller.

Cronyism is where people hand out favors to politicians in exchange for political favors, or visa versa.

My first sentence: "One that loves his country because of it's virtues and dispises it for it's vices."

I meant I like the government for the good it does and hate it for the bad it does.

My numbers aren't exagerated at all!!! In many companies it's worse. How do you know that both are becoming wealthier? Isn't there something called inflation?
But this is a problem in european companies as well. They refer to American ones (where it's still far more extreme) and have pay rises like 40% or so.

The problem is that there develops a gib gap between very rich and poor people. That can't be good for any society. e.g. it increases crime rates.

The problem is the education system is that there are a couple of elite schools and heaps of very poor funded ones.

This cronysm is a very significant in the USA. No party can possibly win an election without massive sponsoring of big companies. That's very different from Europe or Australia. The parties have to publish their sponsors (I think there is no such law in the USA) and they aren't completely dependent on the companies because they get a certain amount of money per vote.

xxxxx
22 Sep 04,, 04:16
This line of reasoning borders on the inane. It bespeaks of a clean cut division of the world between good and evil nation-states, much like JRR Tolkein envisioned; with humans, elves and dwarves on one hand, and evil greedy orcs on the other. Wake up from your self-imposed fantasy; the world ain't that simple.

That fits it very well! You couldn't have chosen a better comparison!

Confed999
22 Sep 04,, 04:47
One that loves his country because of it's virtues and dispises it for it's vices.
That statement makes you a patriot, not a nationalist. A nationalist ignores their country's vices.

My numbers aren't exagerated at all!!!
Where I work, they are hugely exagerated.

The parties have to publish their sponsors (I think there is no such law in the USA)
It's the same in the US.

This cronysm is a very significant in the USA. No party can possibly win an election without massive sponsoring of big companies.
I'm sure it happens, but if it were "very significant" we wouldn't have the labor laws we have.

liaozixiansheng
22 Sep 04,, 05:03
Democracy is a catch phrase for people who do not understand governmental systems. They have a constitution, thus it is not a true democracy. With a true democracy, all one has to do is convince 50% of the people plus 1 to do they wish, from taking rights to death camps.

I know, and I extended this dimension of the definition of democracy to make a pun of sorts about the US' plans to democratise the Middle East. :biggrin:

Confed999
22 Sep 04,, 05:22
I know, and I extended this dimension of the definition of democracy to make a pun of sorts about the US' plans to democratise the Middle East. :biggrin:
I kinda figured that, but that isn't the way it looked. What I think is sad, is that they have to explain things that way.

-{SpoonmaN}-
22 Sep 04,, 05:49
It dosen't matter whether or not you're right or left wing, everyone must realise that the USA isn't going to be the most powerful nation on Earth FOREVER.
No one can be sure who may take their place, (Europe, Russia, India, China, Some future regional Union), but in terms of people power and (For now) economic power, China seems likely.
But it inescapable that the United States has such a massive lead over China in just about everything except population that it is difficult to see the two of them drawing even anythime soon. One possibility is that the United States becomes isolationist, or suffers some kind of serious economic decline (Less likely), and takes less interest in the outside world, allowing smaller states to expand and fill the power vacuum.
This theory ain't new. (See 'The Third World War' By General Sir John Hackett) But it is possible that something like a serious war (E.G. one with North Korea) that results in thousands of American casualties and saps the public's will to get involved overseas might cause a wave of isolationism and the end of American Global Power. In such a case China or the EU would basically be the most powerful nations around. Personally I like America, they make mistakes but so does everyone, but this Mono-Polar world won't last forever.

xxxxx
22 Sep 04,, 07:41
Where I work, they are hugely exagerated.

It's the same in the US.

I'm sure it happens, but if it were "very significant" we wouldn't have the labor laws we have.

where do you work and how do you know about your bosses wages?

maybe the publish duty is the same but there is still no public funding of parties. They are entirely dependent on companies.

Come on! I reckon I could count your labor laws with on one hand.

liaozixiansheng
22 Sep 04,, 19:06
It dosen't matter whether or not you're right or left wing, everyone must realise that the USA isn't going to be the most powerful nation on Earth FOREVER.
No one can be sure who may take their place, (Europe, Russia, India, China, Some future regional Union), but in terms of people power and (For now) economic power, China seems likely.
But it inescapable that the United States has such a massive lead over China in just about everything except population that it is difficult to see the two of them drawing even anythime soon. One possibility is that the United States becomes isolationist, or suffers some kind of serious economic decline (Less likely), and takes less interest in the outside world, allowing smaller states to expand and fill the power vacuum.
This theory ain't new. (See 'The Third World War' By General Sir John Hackett) But it is possible that something like a serious war (E.G. one with North Korea) that results in thousands of American casualties and saps the public's will to get involved overseas might cause a wave of isolationism and the end of American Global Power. In such a case China or the EU would basically be the most powerful nations around. Personally I like America, they make mistakes but so does everyone, but this Mono-Polar world won't last forever.


All this talk about a unipolar world vs. a multipolar world gets on my nerves.
If you think about the geopolitical scenario solely in terms of security, then the above description is relevant and useful. But if you look at the world at its entirety, you will realise how obsolete that division is.

The rich person from Australia has more in common with the rich person in America than do those people have with the poor or middle-class of their respective countries. They both own passports, travel widely, send their children to first class universities, dine at expensive restaurants, and live in luxurious mansions. They will probably share a similar outlook.

Consider the overseas Chinese diaspora, that little group of barely 50 million people living outside China as citizens of SE Asia; their collective wealth is 2 trillion dollars, or more than the GDP of France and Germany combined. Not surprisingly, this tiny minority controls 90% of the economy of their host countries in Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and have had many presidents in the region, despite forming only 10% of the population. That is real POWER.

My point is, that power (except in military terms) is not to be seen as distributed among various nationalities. It is held in the hands of the upper 2% of the IQ distribution, or by their puppets. Power is a diffuse phenomenon, it belongs to the rich or the well-educated or to the fortunate, whatever their nationality. The world is essentially meritocratic.

Ray
22 Sep 04,, 20:23
liaozixiansheng,



The rich person from Australia has more in common with the rich person in America than do those people have with the poor or middle-class of their respective countries.

Are you suggesting that the poor or middle class are devoid of national feeling?




Consider the overseas Chinese diaspora, that little group of barely 50 million people living outside China as citizens of SE Asia; their collective wealth is 2 trillion dollars, or more than the GDP of France and Germany combined. Not surprisingly, this tiny minority controls 90% of the economy of their host countries in Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and have had many presidents in the region, despite forming only 10% of the population. That is real POWER

And they will support Communist China?

ajaybhutani
22 Sep 04,, 20:45
Translated for everyone who doesn't speak Socialist: "The good guys are too powerful, we must balance it with an equal force of evil looters, murderers, and pillagers"


the original untranslated version was definitely better than this and yes non socialists can also understand it well.. Its all about the amount of Policeman stuff Us is doing all over the world .Look at Afganistan IRAQ .Being a sole superpower its legitimacyhasnt been questioned by anyone .Other countries can just oppose diplomatically noone can dare to press them by giving them military /economic threats....With Other countries like china india becoming comparable the americans wont ahve that much liberty to enter into the regional matters of the countries.or capture territories for oil jsut as they are doing with IRAQ.


The whole idea is to make sure that supremacy dsnt lie in the hands of a single player that makes him manipulate the game in his own way fo rhis own wishes.So a multipolar world definitely is a better option as it advocates more security in the form of keeping the check on the powerful.

Praxus
22 Sep 04,, 20:46
My numbers aren't exagerated at all!!! In many companies it's worse. How do you know that both are becoming wealthier?

Shear ammount of money has little to do with wealth. Moneymean material wealth, such as air cond is just a tool of exchange. By wealth I itioners, vcrs, DVD player, diamand rings, furniture, etc.


Isn't there something called inflation?

Inflation is caused by the Government printing to much money, so I don't see how that can be blamed on the "evil companies".


But this is a problem in european companies as well. They refer to American ones (where it's still far more extreme) and have pay rises like 40% or so.

What is wrong with that? Do they not have the most at stake in the company? Do they not create the ideas that mean life or death to a company?

Why is it that the labourer demands the share of the capitalists profits while at the same time refuses to take a share of his loses.


The problem is that there develops a gib gap between very rich and poor people. That can't be good for any society. e.g. it increases crime rates.

So we should appease their jealusy by butchering the rights of the rich for the simple fact that it might "increase the crime rate"(it won't and doesn't by the way). According to you our crime rate should rising. Quite the contrary, the crime rate in the United States since 1980 has literaly been cut in half. Murders and other violant crimes are at 20 year lows even with this "evil ever expanding gap" between the rich and the "poor".


The problem is the education system is that there are a couple of elite schools and heaps of very poor funded ones.

Who's fault is that?

The GOVERNMENTS.


This cronysm is a very significant in the USA. No party can possibly win an election without massive sponsoring of big companies.

Why is it that you complain about the Companies but completly ignore the massive unions?


That's very different from Europe or Australia. The parties have to publish their sponsors (I think there is no such law in the USA) and they aren't completely dependent on the companies because they get a certain amount of money per vote.

So your going to stop me (ie. a buisness owner) at gun point from donating to another private individual to run for office?

The problem is not for the most part the Buisness Owners, it is the Government who has a stranglehold over the economy and then of course some corrupt buisness owners come along and pay the Government off. Where as if the Government didn't have this power it would be far less likely and easy for private companies to excercise political power.


the original untranslated version was definitely better than this and yes non socialists can also understand it well.. Its all about the amount of Policeman stuff Us is doing all over the world .Look at Afganistan IRAQ .Being a sole superpower its legitimacyhasnt been questioned by anyone .Other countries can just oppose diplomatically noone can dare to press them by giving them military /economic threats....With Other countries like china india becoming comparable the americans wont ahve that much liberty to enter into the regional matters of the countries.or capture territories for oil jsut as they are doing with IRAQ.

How dare we attack and destroy two tyranical Governments. That is just evil!!! :rolleyes:

liaozixiansheng
22 Sep 04,, 21:15
liaozixiansheng,

Are you suggesting that the poor or middle class are devoid of national feeling?



No. Are you?

Ray
22 Sep 04,, 21:37
I thought you are grudging that there are people who are rich.

I have no beef about people being rich.

In the US, there are the rich and there are the poor. But they are a democracy.

You concept of democracy where people are shackled for the good of the State i..e not allowed to migrate unless okayed by the govt etc is a whole lot of tripe.

There is NO democracy where the free will and the mind is controlled by the State. That is totalitarianism and slavery of mankind!

With lot of hesitation, I use Mandarin Chinese to explain the COMMUNIST Chinese concept of democracy.

傻瓜
Chun zi = Moron

It is moronic (to state it most politely).

Ray
22 Sep 04,, 22:07
liaozixiansheng,

Hey, copying your name is an ardous task. Got a pet name that is short?

Your conceot of democracy reminds me of a cartoon, abeit from the 'capitalist' Press.

It showed a Military Parade in Communist China with troops goosestepping and the mandatory flags fluttering with 'controlled joy'.

One chap was out of step.

The cartoon showed his Mother commenting, 'See, everyone is out of step, except my son'! :biggrin:

So the whole world is Communist, totalitarian and oppressive. Only Communist China is the flag bearer of genuine democracy. :tongue:

Red Salute to you Comrade. You Heroic Peasant and Industrial Worker. We salute you for what you are toiling at ancient machineries and archaic agricultural methods to ensure the Great Helmsman's (who swam the Yangtse Kiang at the sprightly age of 100) Dream come true where the peasants and labourers are the rulers of the World:cool:

Down with Capitalism and their lackeys and running dogs. :eek:

liaozixiansheng
22 Sep 04,, 23:55
傻瓜
Chun zi = Moron

It is moronic (to state it most politely).

Don't be silly.

傻瓜 = sha gua = silly.

liaozixiansheng
23 Sep 04,, 00:03
liaozixiansheng,

Hey, copying your name is an ardous task. Got a pet name that is short?

Your conceot of democracy reminds me of a cartoon, abeit from the 'capitalist' Press.

It showed a Military Parade in Communist China with troops goosestepping and the mandatory flags fluttering with 'controlled joy'.

One chap was out of step.

The cartoon showed his Mother commenting, 'See, everyone is out of step, except my son'! :biggrin:

So the whole world is Communist, totalitarian and oppressive. Only Communist China is the flag bearer of genuine democracy. :tongue:

Red Salute to you Comrade. You Heroic Peasant and Industrial Worker. We salute you for what you are toiling at ancient machineries and archaic agricultural methods to ensure the Great Helmsman's (who swam the Yangtse Kiang at the sprightly age of 100) Dream come true where the peasants and labourers are the rulers of the World:cool:

Down with Capitalism and their lackeys and running dogs. :eek:

I'm not even Chinese by nationality, so you wasted your time and energy with all that rhetoric above.

Ray
23 Sep 04,, 00:52
Sorry.

My mistake that I didn't realise you are from the Moon with a false identity and a card carrying member of the Communist Party of the Lunar Madness..

You must be a melon.

liaozixiansheng
23 Sep 04,, 01:56
Sorry.

My mistake that I didn't realise you are from the Moon with a false identity and a card carrying member of the Communist Party of the Lunar Madness..

You must be a melon.

If I am a melon then you are positive proof that monkeys can talk.

Confed999
23 Sep 04,, 02:39
where do you work
I work for a rather successful electrical contracting company. Over the last 2 decades I've worked my way up from laborer, to journeyman, to master, to vice-president.

how do you know about your bosses wages?
I write the checks, pay the bills, send out the bills, pay the taxes, pay the taxes, pay the taxes, and do the majority of the accounting.

still no public funding of parties. They are entirely dependent on companies.
Nope, that's wrong too. Public supporters are also listed.

Come on! I reckon I could count your labor laws with on one hand.
Nope, I write more checks to the government and government forced programs that are literally useless than you could count with your shoes off too, and I haven't even started into the "health and safety" or the union requirements. Your knowledge of the USA isn't as great as you believe it to be.

xxxxx
23 Sep 04,, 04:23
Shear ammount of money has little to do with wealth. Moneymean material wealth, such as air cond is just a tool of exchange. By wealth I itioners, vcrs, DVD player, diamand rings, furniture, etc.

Inflation is caused by the Government printing to much money, so I don't see how that can be blamed on the "evil companies".

What is wrong with that? Do they not have the most at stake in the company? Do they not create the ideas that mean life or death to a company?

Why is it that the labourer demands the share of the capitalists profits while at the same time refuses to take a share of his loses.

Who's fault is that?
The GOVERNMENTS.

Why is it that you complain about the Companies but completly ignore the massive unions?

So your going to stop me (ie. a buisness owner) at gun point from donating to another private individual to run for office?

The problem is not for the most part the Buisness Owners, it is the Government who has a stranglehold over the economy and then of course some corrupt buisness owners come along and pay the Government off. Where as if the Government didn't have this power it would be far less likely and easy for private companies to excercise political power.

How dare we attack and destroy two tyranical Governments. That is just evil!!! :rolleyes:

Have I ever blamed the "evil" companies for inflation? no! reread what I wrote!
You were saying bosses and workers become richer. But as you obviously know, a higher wage doesn't have to make you neccessarily richer due to inflation.

I don't advocate anti-americanism in general as it may seem. However I really dislike the current government nearly every action they do, and the system in general.

What is wrong with that? I agree with you that jobs with high responsibilies should be well-paid. However in my opinion the worker should be given a similar pay rise (in %) to the one of the manager who e.g. earns 10 times more. The manager still gains a 10 times higher pay rise than the worker. Do you really think he needs more??? I don't.

Do the managers agree in taking share of the losses? Usually not. If it was their fault they just leave the company and get millions of severance pay. The ordinary worker just gets fired.

"So we should appease their jealusy by butchering the rights of the rich for the simple fact that it might "increase the crime rate"."

Butchering the rights of the rich??? No, but if you are only a little bit infromed about bush policy you would know that he continously gives tax decreases to the rich! And that's what I strongly disagree with!

"So your going to stop me (ie. a buisness owner) at gun point from donating to another private individual to run for office?"
I don't and I've never claimed that. It's just not good if the parties are so dependent on you. They should have another funding source like earning a certain amount of money per vote they can get.

"Why is it that you complain about the Companies but completly ignore the massive unions?"

I wanted to let that part to you. I thought you might be better at it than I am. I found a nice text about that topic:

Day in the Life of Joe Middle-Class Republican

Joe gets up at 6:00am to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot full
of good clean drinking water because some liberal fought for minimum water
quality standards. He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of
coffee. His medications are safe to take because some liberal fought to
insure their safety and work as advertised.

All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employers medical plan
because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical
insurance, now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and
eggs this day. Joe’s bacon is safe to eat because some liberal fought for
laws to regulate the meat packing industry.

Joe takes his morning shower reaching for his shampoo; His bottle is
properly labeled with every ingredient and the amount of its contents
because some liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his
body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep
breath. The air he breathes is clean because some tree hugging liberal
fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the
subway station for his government subsidized ride to work; it saves him
considerable money in parking and transportation fees. You see, some liberal
fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the
opportunity to be a contributor.

Joe begins his work day; he has a good job with excellent pay, medicals
benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some liberal union
members fought and died for these working standards. Joe’s employer pays
these standards because Joe’s employer doesn’t want his employees to call
the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed he’ll get a
worker compensation or unemployment check because some liberal didn’t think
he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

Its noon time, Joe needs to make a Bank Deposit so he can pay some bills.
Joe’s deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some liberal wanted
to protect Joe’s money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking
system before the depression.

Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae underwritten Mortgage and his below market
federal student loan because some stupid liberal decided that Joe and the
government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over
his life-time.

Joe is home from work, he plans to visit his father this evening at his farm
home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive to dads; his car is
among the safest in the world because some liberal fought for car safety
standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. He was the third generation to
live in the house financed by Farmers Home Administration because bankers
didn’t want to make rural loans. The house didn’t have electric until some
big government liberal stuck his nose where it didn’t belong and demanded
rural electrification. (Those rural Republican’s would still be sitting in
the dark)

He is happy to see his dad who is now retired. His dad lives on Social
Security and his union pension because some liberal made sure he could take
care of himself so Joe wouldn’t have to. After his visit with dad he gets
back in his car for the ride home.

He turns on a radio talk show, the host’s keeps saying that liberals are bad
and conservatives are good. (He doesn’t tell Joe that his beloved
Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys
throughout his day) Joe agrees, “We don’t need those big government
liberals ruining our lives; after all, I’m a self made man who believes
everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have”.


"The problem is not for the most part the Buisness Owners, it is the Government who has a stranglehold over the economy and then of course some corrupt buisness owners come along and pay the Government off. Where as if the Government didn't have this power it would be far less likely and easy for private companies to excercise political power."

I disagree with your opinion. first the government gets paid to win an election fight and then it gives favors to the business owners.

"How dare we attack and destroy two tyranical Governments. That is just evil!!!"

I guess you are one of the 80% of american people who believe WMD were found in Iraq?

Confed999
23 Sep 04,, 04:26
I guess you are one of the 80% of american people who believe WMD were found in Iraq?
There were, just not stockpiles. What does that have to do with removing tyrants though?

xxxxx
23 Sep 04,, 04:32
Nope, that's wrong too. Public supporters are also listed.

Nope, I write more checks to the government and government forced programs that are literally useless than you could count with your shoes off too, and I haven't even started into the "health and safety" or the union requirements. Your knowledge of the USA isn't as great as you believe it to be.

Plz tell me more about these public supporters and the ratio of their sponsoring to the sponsoring of companies. Plz don't forget the sources.

Ha, that you, as a vice president regard many of the labor laws as useless is natural. I don't think I have to talk to you about this topic at all.

I'm a bit disappointed. I thought you, as a moderator, would know the rules. I'm pretty sure it is a quote from you: "Attack the message not the messenger."

xxxxx
23 Sep 04,, 04:35
There were, just not stockpiles. What does that have to do with removing tyrants though?

Please give me evidence for the assumption that there were found WMD in Iraq after the 2. Gulf war.

Confed999
23 Sep 04,, 04:48
Butchering the rights of the rich??? No, but if you are only a little bit infromed about bush policy you would know that he continously gives tax decreases to the rich! And that's what I strongly disagree with!
They pay alot more of a percentage in tax allready. Alot of those tax breaks are for investments, bonds, retirement savings accounts, items that actually help the economy and produce jobs. I don't think anyone should get tax breaks, except the poor, but I think everyone else should pay the same rate. Even if that means I have to pay more.

If it was their fault they just leave the company and get millions of severance pay.
Media sensationalism, how many companies do you really think do that? Anyway, if it was in his contract, that's how it works. Also, if he made the company billions, millions is little to pay in return.

Day in the Life of Joe Middle-Class Republican
Nice little story about inflation, low quality benefits, and lower wages. Alot of those programs can be had at a fraction of the cost privately. For example: Workman's Comp. is insurance that covers you while at work, for workplace injuries only. It is a government forced insurance so they don't need to have customer service, or pay claims in a timely manner. For my profession it costs 18% of the workers total pay. For 12% I get private insurance that insures from everything all day every day, and includes everything Workman's Comp. has. BTW, Republicans are just less liberal, and you will find such programs started by them as well.

Confed999
23 Sep 04,, 04:54
Please give me evidence for the assumption that there were found WMD in Iraq after the 2. Gulf war.
http://www.militaryaffairsboard.com/showthread.php?t=2048 There's one used on US troops. There are more threads on here like this, take a look around.

Either way, my point was: if they were asked "were WMD found in Iraq" the answer would be yes. If the question were " did they find significant quantities of lethal WMD in Iraq" the answer would be no.

Still, what does that have to do with removing tyrants from power?

Confed999
23 Sep 04,, 05:32
Plz tell me more about these public supporters and the ratio of their sponsoring to the sponsoring of companies. Plz don't forget the sources.
Zip code search for contributors (http://www.melissadata.com/Lookups/fec.asp)
Contributors from my zip code (http://www.melissadata.com/Lookups/Fec.asp?year=2004&Zip=34677&Submit=Submit)
As to the rest, you're making accusations here, you provide the ratios that justify your outrage. All I said was private contributors must show their donations, and ammounts, as well. I've lived in the USA for most of my life, Germany most of the remaing time BTW, I know what I'm talking about.

Ha, that you, as a vice president regard many of the labor laws as useless is natural. I don't think I have to talk to you about this topic at all.
Ummmm, nearly all of the same labor laws apply to me. Also if you noticed, I worked my way up to where I am. I know alot about a hard day's work, along with working in the field for 6-8 hours a day, I sit here doing my paperwork for 2-4 more hours. I also know which of these programs work, and what ones do not, from experience. As you may note, I didn't say ALL of the programs are useless, did I?

I'm a bit disappointed. I thought you, as a moderator, would know the rules. I'm pretty sure it is a quote from you: "Attack the message not the messenger."
You're going to have to show me the attack in that statement.

Ray
23 Sep 04,, 10:05
It pleases me to see Communist talk.

Do they walk? Do they talk? :biggrin:

I thought they were puppets, moppets and brainless wonders.

Thank to Regean, they are becoming extinct like the dodo. :tongue:

Seriously speaking, the question of unipolar world vs a multipolar world is but a reality. One may like to shy away from reality, but it is so evident for anyone to see and fthom including the blind. it is not only military, it is also in the economic and social sphere.

Take the hassles of the EU vs the US or the WTO. Why is the WTO talks always failing?

Take the social field. What's the war on terror all about? Islamic terrorism was there much earlier than the WTC bombing. But the world woke up when the US cracked the whip!

In the Indian election, the rich did not turn the tables. The poor did. So to state that the rich along dictates the fate of the Nation may not be correct in its totality.


BTW. I enjoyed your allegory that I was a postive proof of a simian talking. What happened to you?

操你妈
Fang pi?

ajaybhutani
23 Sep 04,, 10:12
as far as most indian newspapers said about the VAjpayee govt wass that they did a lot in the cities and middle class.But couldnot reach teh villages in time .And thus were kicked out of power.

do the chineese people ahve an option to kick out the current govt if they want to ??
LOL.. i dont think they have otherwise they would ahve already done that

Praxus
23 Sep 04,, 14:38
Have I ever blamed the "evil" companies for inflation? no! reread what I wrote!
You were saying bosses and workers become richer. But as you obviously know, a higher wage doesn't have to make you neccessarily richer due to inflation.

Yes and I hate the Government for inflation, so I don't see what the problem is. You make it seem like evil Capitalism is exploiting the workers, where in reality the Government is butchering them through their welfare, minimum wage, and coercive support for Union labour.


I don't advocate anti-americanism in general as it may seem. However I really dislike the current government nearly every action they do, and the system in general.

Welcome to the club. I do to, probley for completly different reasons though.


What is wrong with that? I agree with you that jobs with high responsibilies should be well-paid. However in my opinion the worker should be given a similar pay rise (in %) to the one of the manager who e.g. earns 10 times more. The manager still gains a 10 times higher pay rise than the worker. Do you really think he needs more??? I don't.

What I'm trying to say is that it should not be up to the Government who gets payed and how much. It should be decided between two people/groups of people volunteerily.


Do the managers agree in taking share of the losses? Usually not. If it was their fault they just leave the company and get millions of severance pay. The ordinary worker just gets fired.

The owners of the company by their nature will take a loss if the company takes a loss because the stock will decrease and lose them millions.


Butchering the rights of the rich??? No, but if you are only a little bit infromed about bush policy you would know that he continously gives tax decreases to the rich! And that's what I strongly disagree with!

So throwing someone in jail for selling their own property (Martha Stewart) with no evidence that she commited Insider Trading, is not violating her right?

Not to mention that all taxes no matter how large or small they are, are by their nature a destroyer of rights.




Day in the Life of Joe Middle-Class Republican

Joe gets up at 6:00am to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot full
of good clean drinking water because some liberal fought for minimum water
quality standards. He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of
coffee. His medications are safe to take because some liberal fought to
insure their safety and work as advertised.

It is more like this. He drinks water which would have been purified without Government intervention and swallow drugs that cost 50% more then they would without Government and then procede to not take several more pills which were thrown out by the FDA despite the fact that it could possibly save him from a deadly desiese and extend his life.

The FDA's purpose is not to examine drugs, private companies and universities do that already. The FDA's purpose is to coerce a drug company into not selling a drug.


All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employers medical plan
because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical
insurance, now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and
eggs this day. Joe’s bacon is safe to eat because some liberal fought for
laws to regulate the meat packing industry.

All but $10 of his medications are coerciced, looted, and stolen from the companies. All of this money is going to healthcare instead of going to the workers and being reinvested in the company thus expanding the company and workers wages.


Joe takes his morning shower reaching for his shampoo; His bottle is
properly labeled with every ingredient and the amount of its contents
because some liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his
body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep
breath. The air he breathes is clean because some tree hugging liberal
fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the
subway station for his government subsidized ride to work; it saves him
considerable money in parking and transportation fees. You see, some liberal
fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the
opportunity to be a contributor.

Joe takes shampoo and puts it on his head with shampoo that would be clean anyways. He then breaths air that was never harmful in the first place and has been cleaned up by innovation not coercive government. Then he procedes to pay more in taxes to pay for this public transportation.


Joe begins his work day; he has a good job with excellent pay, medicals
benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some liberal union
members fought and died for these working standards. Joe’s employer pays
these standards because Joe’s employer doesn’t want his employees to call
the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed he’ll get a
worker compensation or unemployment check because some liberal didn’t think
he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

So Joe gets to accept more looted and stoolen money.


Its noon time, Joe needs to make a Bank Deposit so he can pay some bills.
Joe’s deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some liberal wanted
to protect Joe’s money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking
system before the depression.

Don't even think about blaming the depression on bankers.


Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae underwritten Mortgage and his below market
federal student loan because some stupid liberal decided that Joe and the
government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over
his life-time.

Joe is home from work, he plans to visit his father this evening at his farm
home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive to dads; his car is
among the safest in the world because some liberal fought for car safety
standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. He was the third generation to
live in the house financed by Farmers Home Administration because bankers
didn’t want to make rural loans. The house didn’t have electric until some
big government liberal stuck his nose where it didn’t belong and demanded
rural electrification. (Those rural Republican’s would still be sitting in
the dark)

He is happy to see his dad who is now retired. His dad lives on Social
Security and his union pension because some liberal made sure he could take
care of himself so Joe wouldn’t have to. After his visit with dad he gets
back in his car for the ride home.

He turns on a radio talk show, the host’s keeps saying that liberals are bad
and conservatives are good. (He doesn’t tell Joe that his beloved
Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys
throughout his day) Joe agrees, “We don’t need those big government
liberals ruining our lives; after all, I’m a self made man who believes
everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have”.

This is complete NON-SENSE. You create a story based on arbitrary premises and then declare it true without any proof.



I guess you are one of the 80% of american people who believe WMD were found in Iraq?

How about you stop attacking argument I never fucking made.

xxxxx
24 Sep 04,, 09:13
http://www.militaryaffairsboard.com/showthread.php?t=2048 There's one used on US troops.

Still, what does that have to do with removing tyrants from power?

I couldn't access your source. Do you have another one?

Not too much. That was just a question. Anyway, as I already posted in another chatroom, I don't think any foreign nation has to invade another country to free it from an evil dictator (I'm convinced that was not not the main motivation in Iraq).

xxxxx
24 Sep 04,, 09:53
Zip code search for contributors (http://www.melissadata.com/Lookups/fec.asp)
Contributors from my zip code (http://www.melissadata.com/Lookups/Fec.asp?year=2004&Zip=34677&Submit=Submit)
As to the rest, you're making accusations here, you provide the ratios that justify your outrage. All I said was private contributors must show their donations, and ammounts, as well. I've lived in the USA for most of my life, Germany most of the remaing time BTW, I know what I'm talking about.

Ummmm, nearly all of the same labor laws apply to me. Also if you noticed, I worked my way up to where I am. I know alot about a hard day's work, along with working in the field for 6-8 hours a day, I sit here doing my paperwork for 2-4 more hours. I also know which of these programs work, and what ones do not, from experience. As you may note, I didn't say ALL of the programs are useless, did I?

You're going to have to show me the attack in that statement.

Help. that's getting too much. I'm in Australia for only half a year. I shouldn't pass all the time on World Affairs Board.

Anyway, I couldn't access your first url and in the list you posted I couldn't find public funding.
"All I said was private contributors must show their donations, and ammounts, as well." That's not all you said. You mentioned too that there is public funding as well. You stated that so I think you should proof that.

What does BTW mean?

"As you may note, I didn't say ALL of the programs are useless, did I?"
Did I accuse you of doing that?

the offensive statement was:
"Your knowledge of the USA isn't as great as you believe it to be."

xxxxx
24 Sep 04,, 15:50
The owners of the company by their nature will take a loss if the company takes a loss because the stock will decrease and lose them millions.

So throwing someone in jail for selling their own property (Martha Stewart) with no evidence that she commited Insider Trading, is not violating her right?

Not to mention that all taxes no matter how large or small they are, are by their nature a destroyer of rights.





It is more like this. He drinks water which would have been purified without Government intervention and swallow drugs that cost 50% more then they would without Government and then procede to not take several more pills which were thrown out by the FDA despite the fact that it could possibly save him from a deadly desiese and extend his life.

The FDA's purpose is not to examine drugs, private companies and universities do that already. The FDA's purpose is to coerce a drug company into not selling a drug.



All but $10 of his medications are coerciced, looted, and stolen from the companies. All of this money is going to healthcare instead of going to the workers and being reinvested in the company thus expanding the company and workers wages.



Joe takes shampoo and puts it on his head with shampoo that would be clean anyways. He then breaths air that was never harmful in the first place and has been cleaned up by innovation not coercive government. Then he procedes to pay more in taxes to pay for this public transportation.

So Joe gets to accept more looted and stoolen money.

Don't even think about blaming the depression on bankers.

This is complete NON-SENSE. You create a story based on arbitrary premises and then declare it true without any proof.

How about you stop attacking argument I never fucking made.
don't know too much about that topic and this point of view so could you explain me how minimum wages can butcher the workers?

Not every manager or member of the "Aufsichtsrat"(council of people who decide about the future of the company) is a shareholder of this company.

Throwing sombody into jail without having evidence that he/she has commited a crime is of course violating someone's right. No matter if he/she is poor or rich.
Maybe you can tell me more about this particular case.

"Not to mention that all taxes no matter how large or small they are, are by their nature a destroyer of rights."
Well, that's your opinion. So you prefer anarchy?

"This is complete NON-SENSE. You create a story based on arbitrary premises and then declare it true without any proof."
I would strongly recommend you to reread my post before making anymore stupid comments like that.
That's what you wrote:
"Why is it that you complain about the Companies but completly ignore the massive unions?"
That's what I replied:
"I wanted to let that part to you. I thought you might be better at it than I am. I found a nice text about that topic:..."

"All but $10 of his medications are coerciced, looted, and stolen from the companies. All of this money is going to healthcare instead of going to the workers and being reinvested in the company thus expanding the company and workers wages."

if the money, that otherwise would go into healthcare is reinvested, it's not available when the worker is sick!

"Don't even think about blaming the depression on bankers."
I didn't.

How about you stop attacking argument I never fucking made.
I wasn't attacking, I was asking.

Praxus
24 Sep 04,, 20:39
don't know too much about that topic and this point of view so could you explain me how minimum wages can butcher the workers?

Minimum Wage tells that companies that "it's ok to pay this ammount". So they tell the workers, hey it's minimum wage, its all we have to pay for a simple job. So the companies don't accept the idea of paying more for some menial jobs.


Not every manager or member of the "Aufsichtsrat"(council of people who decide about the future of the company) is a shareholder of this company.

The "Aufsichtsrat" as you put it (In english it is called "Board of Directors), are representitives elected by the majority share holders (1 share= 1 vote of course).


Throwing sombody into jail without having evidence that he/she has commited a crime is of course violating someone's right. No matter if he/she is poor or rich.
Maybe you can tell me more about this particular case.

She was accused of insider triding, which is against law (I believe it should not be). They simply had no evidence to convict her for it. So she was then charged for lieing about not commiting insider trading. Where of course they had no proof. So they are sending her to jail for a short time (couple months), for essentially unproven aqusations.


"Not to mention that all taxes no matter how large or small they are, are by their nature a destroyer of rights."
Well, that's your opinion. So you prefer anarchy?

I think idealy there should be a small but strong Government, and it's powers are limited to protecting our rights. There are other means of funding Government that are volunteery. For example you have contract fees (every contract you sign, you have to pay a certain ammount to have your contract protected, if you don't the Government simply doesn't protect your contract). To pay for jails and such, a criminal tax can be levyed. That is to say if you commit a crime you have to pay off everything you used in jail + maintaince of the prisons. Then there are lotteries, which are less effective when the state doesn't have a monopoly on them however they would still raise significant ammounts of money. There are numerous other ideas as well. Several of them alone could raise enough money to pay for a legitiment Government. Which is one that has a military to protect against agressors, courts to enforce contracts and try criminals, cops to protect against domestic agressors (murderers, theifs, etc), and the basic nesectities of Government (like maintaining the buildings and paying the people in Government).


"This is complete NON-SENSE. You create a story based on arbitrary premises and then declare it true without any proof."
I would strongly recommend you to reread my post before making anymore stupid comments like that.

It's a story based on arbitary aqcusations. You are giving credit to the Unions for stuff they had nothing to do with. The reason we have most of this stuff is because companies got more capital through productive work.

That's what you wrote:
"Why is it that you complain about the Companies but completly ignore the massive unions?"
That's what I replied:
"I wanted to let that part to you. I thought you might be better at it than I am. I found a nice text about that topic:..."



if the money, that otherwise would go into healthcare is reinvested, it's not available when the worker is sick!

Wrong. It would help the company to grow, increase productivity, and increase the ammount of investment. This would cause the wages to increase, and in the long run they would have far more extra money then the ammount the companies are spending on Healthcare per person.

"Don't even think about blaming the depression on bankers."
I didn't.


How about you stop attacking argument I never fucking made.
I wasn't attacking, I was asking.

I was cranky;)

Confed999
25 Sep 04,, 01:30
I couldn't access your source.
The link works here.

I don't think any foreign nation has to invade another country to free it from an evil dictator
Really? What is your solution then? Magic spells?

I'm convinced that was not not the main motivation in Iraq
Who cares what the main motivation was? The motivation could have been because they don't shower 3 times a day, liberation would still be the result.

Anyway, I couldn't access your first url and in the list you posted I couldn't find public funding.
Then your computer isn't working, because the links work. (I think you just don't want to acknowledge you're wrong, and you are wrong.) The second one provides the names and addresses, along with how much and to whom they have contributed. It provides both private individuals, and public companies.

You stated that so I think you should proof that.
I did, as I have shown many of your misconceptions about America.

What does BTW mean?
By The Way ;)

Did I accuse you of doing that?
Sounded pretty much like that to me, with your little you're a vice president diatribe.

the offensive statement was:
"Your knowledge of the USA isn't as great as you believe it to be."
That statement is 100% true. You know little about what you are saying, and it is blindingly obvious. I'm sure I don't know as much about Germany as I think I do, and I've lived there for short periods, that's why I only talk about the things there I'm sure of.

nzkiwi
28 Sep 04,, 15:11
Interesting to see how a thread can go off on a tangent after a while :biggrin:

Yisunshin
03 Oct 04,, 03:28
I think China is gonna be the next Soviet Union for the US. I think in 10 years they should be close to the US but right now their not their thats why they wouldnt dare touch Taiwan right now.

I think one of the most over-looked factors regarding China as a future military power is the ability/inability of the central government to keep the whole country together. As China continues modernizing and the economy opens up, people will tolerate less and less control from Beijing. I think the real problem in the future regarding China is what affect 5-6 warlord states will have on not only Asian security, but global security.

Officer of Engineers
03 Oct 04,, 04:33
I think China already passed that test with the passing of Deng Xia Peng.

Visigoth
15 Nov 04,, 04:30
You guys missed your chance to finish the commies off in the Korean war,should have used the B-47 fleet to incendiary bomb every major North Korean target into oblivion and when China enters the battle with 300,000 troops you waste them too,put the edit: racist slur back in the stone age.You don't need to contemplate nukes,ever heard of Operation Gomorah.Incendiary bombing on a massive scale is the most effective war winning weapon{without radioactive fallout}yet thousands had to go die in the frozen mud for nothing and this generation has to deal with North Korea and China eventually.

Edit: Warning: Do not use racial slurs.

Franco Lolan
15 Nov 04,, 05:08
Visigoth,
I understand your feeling of "the object of war is victory" MacArthur feeling (I get it too when I reread certain passages in his book, Reminiscenses)
But, are you serious about the "incend everything campaign". If so, you need to read up a little more on the Korean War.

ajaybhutani
15 Nov 04,, 06:36
You guys missed your chance to finish the commies off in the Korean war,should have used the B-47 fleet to incendiary bomb every major North Korean target into oblivion and when China enters the battle with 300,000 troops you waste them too,put the edit: racist slur back in the stone age.You don't need to contemplate nukes,ever heard of Operation Gomorah.Incendiary bombing on a massive scale is the most effective war winning weapon{without radioactive fallout}yet thousands had to go die in the frozen mud for nothing and this generation has to deal with North Korea and China eventually.

Edit: Warning: Do not use racial slurs.

Well killing people after the battle is won /killing the civilians is not at ll ethical.Well my frnd u might be the citizen of the most powerful country but remember that the equations might change in 50 years time and then some country might love to do such an offensive on u since u did it on others all the time.US gets justification for all its deads because its strong but frankly many of its allies didnt aprove of its war on iraq. And for it US had reasons.Well what about china well how does id endanger you guys just because its a future so destroy it to protect urselves. Remember even the British empire where sun never drowned didnt last for ever,

Visigoth
17 Nov 04,, 06:20
Sorry for the "racist slur",can't remember what it was anyway.Franco,my reference to mass incendiary bombing didn't exclude use of ground forces to stabilize the front.Even though the UN declared it a police action I think we could all agree ,to the grunt it was a savage battle,therefore if you must send your youth to a foreign land to fight and die,their only hope is that their government will use all the resources at their disposal to bring the enemy to their knees.Unlike Mcarthur I dont condone the use of nuclear weapons,my observation was simply that operation Gomorah type bombing is one of the greatest if least apreciated war winning tactics if the 20th century.While I'm no fan of bomber Harris's targeting of german cities,in the Korean war a small country will little industrial capacity and infrastructure,the massive B-47 fleet could have brought about a more decisive and quicker outcome.As for China they were a legitimate target the minute they crossed the border and joined the fight.Ajaybhutani ,first I loathe commies, if you would like to see them as a superpower why not drop into Tibet and see how great they have it.Why do so many Chinese students come to Canada, maybe because they live in a repressive police state,who would want to see this system forced on any other country,the world is in a big enough mess withought these ******* .Need i mention the overt espionage by CIS that stole practically every US secret including the W-88 warhead.Idon't apreciate either of these 2 countries aiming their ICBM's at North America,well i feel like vomiting now.

Ray
17 Nov 04,, 07:56
Visi,

Is that the German Eagle?

Ist Sie ein Nazi?

Visigoth
17 Nov 04,, 18:43
Ray,actually it's the banner of the Teutonic knights.Isn't the eagle an American symbol also, surely you know many nations inherited it from the Roman empire.May I sate in no uncertain terms my personal revulsion for the national socialist party{nazi}second only to the commies!!!

ajaybhutani
17 Nov 04,, 20:19
Sorry for the "racist slur",can't remember what it was anyway.Franco,my reference to mass incendiary bombing didn't exclude use of ground forces to stabilize the front.Even though the UN declared it a police action I think we could all agree ,to the grunt it was a savage battle,therefore if you must send your youth to a foreign land to fight and die,their only hope is that their government will use all the resources at their disposal to bring the enemy to their knees.Unlike Mcarthur I dont condone the use of nuclear weapons,my observation was simply that operation Gomorah type bombing is one of the greatest if least apreciated war winning tactics if the 20th century.While I'm no fan of bomber Harris's targeting of german cities,in the Korean war a small country will little industrial capacity and infrastructure,the massive B-47 fleet could have brought about a more decisive and quicker outcome.As for China they were a legitimate target the minute they crossed the border and joined the fight.Ajaybhutani ,first I loathe commies, if you would like to see them as a superpower why not drop into Tibet and see how great they have it.Why do so many Chinese students come to Canada, maybe because they live in a repressive police state,who would want to see this system forced on any other country,the world is in a big enough mess withought these ******* .Need i mention the overt espionage by CIS that stole practically every US secret including the W-88 warhead.Idon't apreciate either of these 2 countries aiming their ICBM's at North America,well i feel like vomiting now.
About chineese students coming to canada for studying. I wonder u must have heard about indians going out to US europe etc etc for studying and jobs and i think in the comparable number as chineese which would imply that indian govt is oppressive well if u imply this then i guess all non western countries never deserve to be a superpower since they cant provide the people their rights & opportunities.About tibet please tell me what do u refer to there oppression?? is it even worse than oppression done by US on iraq??and what for?? because US need oil ?? for no other reason has been justified yet.Frankly if an abusive country like Us which has repeatedly made full use of its power for its advantage without thinking about innocent lives deserves to be a superpower then i guess the chineese have a better case with a much better record for they have been the sufferers in the hands of japaneese .

Visigoth
18 Nov 04,, 03:52
Hey Ajaybhutani I wont argue about Japans atrocities, there should have been war crimes tribunals.But Tibet,are you serious?The persecution these peaceful people have endured is unspeakable,summary executions,total repression of religion and customs,displacing locals by bringing in millions of Han Chinese. I could go on for ever, I suggest you research it,As for Iraq,first i'm not American,so i'm not making excuses for them.They should have occupied the country in 91,not doing so because of all the whining arabs was their major flaw.Oil is a favorite theory,sure it had some bearing ,where would the gulf states be if America didn't get involved in 91,the Saudis were panicking,every one thought here comes Saddam, so the US plays global cop spends hundreds of billions to go around the world and put rogue nations in their place.No they are not perfect,yes they have ulterior motives,secret agendas etc,but overall they ultimately are a force for good,if i can state it that way.Without their presence the world would be far more unstable with more conflagurations than we have now.Now back to the thread;CHINA as superpower,thanks to investor greed,yes they look like they are on their way.It's just not good for freedom loving people,maybe you're not one of them,if you can't see this ,well,disillusioned,ill-educated ,or die hard commie,you must be one of them.

Officer of Engineers
18 Nov 04,, 04:37
As one who has researched the Tibettan situation, you're completely wrong. The current Tibettan generation, while not desiring Chinese rule, ain't going to welcome back the Dali Lama anytime soon. The Chinese did one thing right in this context. There is no such thing as a God King and the current Tibettan generation do not and will not accept the Dali Lama as such.

Do your research on who's doing the uprising. The Monks. Not the ordinary people. IE, the people who sits in temples all day and expected to be fed and clothed by the working people. The Monks were the feudal lords of Tibet and they want the return of the glory days. The older generation that grew up with these beliefs obviously wants the return of their God King. But this current generation that grew up on blue jeans and Nitendo couldn't care less about the Dali Lama. That is why there is no popular support whenever the monks go on a rampage.

Franco Lolan
18 Nov 04,, 04:43
the Dali Lama came to S FL a month ago. some of the things he said were idiotic. definitely not God on Earth.

Franco Lolan
18 Nov 04,, 04:44
Visigoth,
this is funny, my little brother who is 7 loves the Teutonic Cross symbol, Iron Cross too. i just think its funny

Officer of Engineers
18 Nov 04,, 04:50
Also, one more thing, Visgoth, a bachelor degree ain't going to give Chinese squat about becoming a superpower which they are not by any stretch of the imagination.

Visigoth
18 Nov 04,, 06:45
Did i mention the Dalai Lama??No,and I don't buy into that god-king bit either,thank you!!!.Should they not be allowed to rule their own fate, instead of being 2nd class indentured servants.How am I "completely wrong"??You aprove then of this commie land grab??strange opinion for a Canadian.Of course from a military point of view the strong dominate the weak,Tibet is in a strategic location on a high plateau overlooking India,an enemy of the Chinese.In that argument perhaps America should take Canada over,for it's resources?At least they would treat us as equals not serfs.But please as a Major and someone who has studied the situation,feel free to enlighten us as to the real situation af the average Tibetan.Batchelor degree ?it was a comment on the youth leaving for a better place not why they'll become a superpower.that wiil come about with the massive investment from the west,heavy industrialisation,cheap labour,etc.etc

Ray
18 Nov 04,, 08:43
Did i mention the Dalai Lama??No,and I don't buy into that god-king bit either,thank you!!!.Should they not be allowed to rule their own fate, instead of being 2nd class indentured servants.How am I "completely wrong"??You aprove then of this commie land grab??strange opinion for a Canadian.Of course from a military point of view the strong dominate the weak,Tibet is in a strategic location on a high plateau overlooking India,an enemy of the Chinese.In that argument perhaps America should take Canada over,for it's resources?At least they would treat us as equals not serfs.But please as a Major and someone who has studied the situation,feel free to enlighten us as to the real situation af the average Tibetan.Batchelor degree ?it was a comment on the youth leaving for a better place not why they'll become a superpower.that wiil come about with the massive investment from the west,heavy industrialisation,cheap labour,etc.etc
If you are talking about OoE, he is a Colonel and not a Major.

I consider him an expert on Chinese Military.

ajaybhutani
18 Nov 04,, 08:47
1. ?My simple point is if americans deserve it after Veitnam , iraq twive and afganistan and not to forget Hiroshima & nagasaki then chineese have a better record as of now. Check out the british record of colonial rule or the french or USSR's policies all ahve been bad . Power comes with an inherent abuse of it by the powerful to suppress the weak.
About tibet do u want to say that tibet was better alone in rule of feudal lords than in chineese rule .??even if it is how does it matter every power has its share of atrocities and why not china then . U cant simply rule out china as a contender bec of tibet.
About US well why dont u do a vote and see how many people here believe what US did ws good . Give a single flawless reason taht validates attack on iraq by US .Theres nothin except oil . And u are trying to say that they did it for good.?? Well well well that wasnt even for the good of americans. Adn without its presence the UNSC would have been more powerful taking rightful decisions and not a mere american puppet and world might have been better off .
And i can see it all that u cant see but i still prefer not to call u disillusioned,ill-educated ,or die hard commie and that speaks a lot about my education.

Officer of Engineers
18 Nov 04,, 09:54
Did i mention the Dalai Lama??No,and I don't buy into that god-king bit either,thank you!!!.Should they not be allowed to rule their own fate, instead of being 2nd class indentured servants.

How are they 2nd class citizens? Because monks ain't allow to hold political power? Tibettan communists are alive and well in the Chinese Communist Party and in fact are running Tibet. And it was a Chinese land grab, not a commie one. Nationalist Chinese maps on Taiwan shows in fact that they should own more than the current Tibettan borders.


How am I "completely wrong"??You aprove then of this commie land grab??strange opinion for a Canadian.Of course from a military point of view the strong dominate the weak,Tibet is in a strategic location on a high plateau overlooking India,an enemy of the Chinese.

The Chinese do not consider India an enemy.


In that argument perhaps America should take Canada over,for it's resources?At least they would treat us as equals not serfs.

I do not remembering us paying taxes to Washington DC nor have troops at the US's beck and call. Last time I check, they still have to ask us to do things on our border and we always have the option to say no ... and we've said no lots of times in the past and will continue to do so in the future.


But please as a Major and someone who has studied the situation,feel free to enlighten us as to the real situation af the average Tibetan.Batchelor degree ?it was a comment on the youth leaving for a better place not why they'll become a superpower.

Then, perhaps you should take the time to write more clearly and in paragraph form to allow us to understand better. Tibet was a feudal society with the monks as the overlord class. Thus far, there's only been two voices concerning the political future of Tibet. The Dali Lama's and the CCP. For better or for worst, the CCP's future is Tibet's future. The God King rule of Tibet has long since disappearred and never to return. While the regular Tibettan may not like the CCP, they have long since rejected the Dali Lama. Like the Chinese in the rest of China, they have yet to reject CCP rule simply because they're getting rich under CCP rule.


that wiil come about with the massive investment from the west,heavy industrialisation,cheap labour,etc.etc

China is China. She will become what she will become. She has her own growing pains to go through and it will not be a smooth ride by any stretch of the imagination. If she's strong enough to go through the pain (as we all did), then she deserve her status. However, it is far from certain that she will. The 4 tigers will show you just how painful some of these things are.

Blademaster
18 Nov 04,, 19:09
The Chinese do not consider India an enemy.

That's strange because India does consider China as a strategic enemy, never mind what the politiks in New Delhi says.

I do consider China as an enemy. Eh maybe that's too strong a word. Adversary would be more like it. But it is more than an advesary and less than an enemy, if you get my meaning.

ajaybhutani
18 Nov 04,, 20:19
chineese extended full support to India for UNSC permanent seat and taht says taht chineese no more consider india as an enemy. The comment of george fernandez when he was defence minister were made before Vajpayees visit to china and at that time surely the relations werent good.Moreover in a way the statement was more to signify that pakistan no longer will be center of defence strategies but china, marking a shift in policies that continue even now( recently IAF head commented taht pakistan is too small for us to worry).

Visigoth
18 Nov 04,, 21:02
Well,Colonel is it?,sounds like i must be informed as to the real situation in Tibet!What a great society the Chinese must havetyo offer all the worlds misguided citizens!They should look forward to the day when the Chinese take over their countries and graciously bestow upon them their vision of utopia.

Officer of Engineers
18 Nov 04,, 21:54
That's strange because India does consider China as a strategic enemy, never mind what the politiks in New Delhi says.

I do consider China as an enemy. Eh maybe that's too strong a word. Adversary would be more like it. But it is more than an advesary and less than an enemy, if you get my meaning.

I say strategic competitor are the right words. There are no Iron Curtain nor Berlin Wall between the two. Even more importantly, neither country has started to publically aiming nukes at one aother.

Officer of Engineers
18 Nov 04,, 21:55
Well,Colonel is it?,sounds like i must be informed as to the real situation in Tibet!What a great society the Chinese must havetyo offer all the worlds misguided citizens!They should look forward to the day when the Chinese take over their countries and graciously bestow upon them their vision of utopia.

And what would that be?

smisyllomevoli
18 Nov 04,, 23:28
I think China is gonna be the next Soviet Union for the US. I think in 10 years they should be close to the US but right now their not their thats why they wouldnt dare touch Taiwan right now.


I completely disagree. China is much more capitalist than the USSR. Most of the old hardliners are gone, and the new powers realize that in order to compete they need to move towards capitalism. Don't make the mistake of thinking China is stupid. Also, what percentage of the US economy is based on Chinese factories etc.?

Free Tibet!!!

Visigoth
19 Nov 04,, 04:08
That would be ,"a joke",you were saying Tibet was better off with their occupation.How about the public or not aimed nukes at America.

Officer of Engineers
19 Nov 04,, 06:05
That would be ,"a joke",you were saying Tibet was better off with their occupation.How about the public or not aimed nukes at America.

1) Tibet is not occupied territory. It is Chinese territory recognized by all countries on earth, including the UN.

2) What about the public?

3) What else are they going to do with their nukes? Especially when the US has more nukes aimed at China than China has.

Ray
19 Nov 04,, 06:31
There can be different opinion about the Chinese in Tibet.

Yet, for a very long time, Tibet had conceded 'suzerainty' of China.

The British realised the importance of Tibet to their interest and hence organised treaties and drew the MacMohan Line. The Chinese claim that these treaties were 'unequal' and hence dispute the line.

Yet, in so far as India is concerned, Nehru agreed on Tibet's suzerainty over Tibet, though not that the MacMohan line was disputable.

Even if you feel the Chinese are 'dragons', you have to concede that they are wise and know exactly how to ensure the advancement of their national interst without upsetting all too much. Thus, they have settled Hans not only in Tibet but also in Xinjaing.

They are wiser than Indians. They won't have a Kashmir!

Nehru loved riding the moral high horse.

The Chinese don't believe in the saying -

Bamboo, bamboo in the grass,
Why are you not up my ar*e (as*, US spelling).