China's Humanitarian Side

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
orion wrote:
Why do you hate freedom?

Maybe you should move there.

And why do you hate China?

Do you fell that 200+ years of “culture” cannot compete with a culture that is older than the pyramids?

Are you perhaps “just jealous” ?

Uh, aren’t you a Libertarian?

I am just returning all the crap that was delivered to me because I think spreading a political system with the sword is hardly a good idea.

I could swear you defended sundering Kosovo from Serbia. Am I confusing you for someone else? I could be, so let me know.

As far as I know the people of Kosovo do not go outside of the Kosovo do force people to live their life their way.

This whole thing could probably have been avoided if the Serbs were not so hell bent ln keeping Kosovo but without the Kosovarians.

Yep. Neither side was invading neighboring nations. The foreign powers who installed a new political system by the sword (independence of Kosovo) did.

Yugoslavia was a nation like Iraq. Those tribes were never meant to live together.[/quote]

So, it’s not that you’re against establishing new political systems (such as a completely independent Kosovo) by the sword. It just needs to be intervetionism agreeable to you. You stated it so absolutely, yet clearly that’s not the case.

82

[quote]orion wrote:
I do not see why nobody can understand the Chinese.

They have liberated Tibet and if only those terrorists and insurgents could accept that, violence would stop immediately.

Obviously these terrorists are to blame if the Chinese army, in an attempt to restore order, kills a few civilians.

[/quote]

I don’t want to come off as applauding the Chinese, because I don’t. However, there are a few things to keep in mind:

(1) Tibet has been part of China for hundreds of years.

(2) It is true that before 1949, you had slavery there and the Tibetan Lamas did nothing about it. There also was no infrastructure there.

The Communist government did improve things there, relative to the way things were before. None of this excuses some of the Communist action there; however, I get the feeling that a lot of Pro-Tibet activists in the West are (1) stupid enough not to know that Tibet has been part of China for a long time and (2) don’t know the miserable conditions that existed there before the 1949 revolution.

Puerto Rico, say, definitely has a stronger case for independence than does Tibet, if you look at things from an historical point of view.

83

[quote]Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
orion wrote:
Why do you hate freedom?

Maybe you should move there.

And why do you hate China?

Do you fell that 200+ years of “culture” cannot compete with a culture that is older than the pyramids?

Are you perhaps “just jealous” ?

Uh, aren’t you a Libertarian?

I am just returning all the crap that was delivered to me because I think spreading a political system with the sword is hardly a good idea.

I could swear you defended sundering Kosovo from Serbia. Am I confusing you for someone else? I could be, so let me know.

As far as I know the people of Kosovo do not go outside of the Kosovo do force people to live their life their way.

This whole thing could probably have been avoided if the Serbs were not so hell bent ln keeping Kosovo but without the Kosovarians.

Yep. Neither side was invading neighboring nations. The foreign powers who installed a new political system by the sword (independence of Kosovo) did.

Yugoslavia was a nation like Iraq. Those tribes were never meant to live together.

So, it’s not that you’re against establishing new political systems (such as a completely independent Kosovo) by the sword. It just needs to be intervetionism agreeable to you. You stated it so absolutely, yet clearly that’s not the case.[/quote]

I do not remember being for any interventions in Kosovo.

I just posted that I do not really feel any sense of outrage if a few KZ building, mass raping and ethnic cleansing bastards are bombed.

I may have also pointed that out that the nature of the European intervention is very different from the usual US interventions.

84

[quote]entheogens wrote:

(1) Tibet has been part of China for hundreds of years.
[/quote]

I do not think so. Why was it a nation called Tibet and not China? China grew in size for centuries, not because of conquest, but by being conquered by others. Manchuria was not part of China until the Manchus tribes took over China. The western part of China was added when Genghis Khan conquered China. The people from that region later became Muslim because they were closer in geography to Muslim nations. The Tibetians, living in the mountains, never attacked China. They became a part of China when the Communists overwhelmed their country about 50 years ago.

85

I AGREE!!! But independence is all relative, we in Puerto Rico, have parties that want full independence but at the same time, most people are satisified with the soveriegnty we have now. We have all the benefits of independence, with none of the responsibilities, it’s not a bad set up.

86

[quote]orion wrote:
I just posted that I do not really feel any sense of outrage if a few KZ building, mass raping and ethnic cleansing bastards are bombed.

I may have also pointed that out that the nature of the European intervention is very different from the usual US interventions.[/quote]

Mass raping: yep!
Genocide: yep!
KZ buildings: y…whattf?

BILD? Scharping?

87

[quote]orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
orion wrote:
Why do you hate freedom?

Maybe you should move there.

And why do you hate China?

Do you fell that 200+ years of “culture” cannot compete with a culture that is older than the pyramids?

Are you perhaps “just jealous” ?

Uh, aren’t you a Libertarian?

I am just returning all the crap that was delivered to me because I think spreading a political system with the sword is hardly a good idea.

I could swear you defended sundering Kosovo from Serbia. Am I confusing you for someone else? I could be, so let me know.

As far as I know the people of Kosovo do not go outside of the Kosovo do force people to live their life their way.

This whole thing could probably have been avoided if the Serbs were not so hell bent ln keeping Kosovo but without the Kosovarians.

Yep. Neither side was invading neighboring nations. The foreign powers who installed a new political system by the sword (independence of Kosovo) did.

Yugoslavia was a nation like Iraq. Those tribes were never meant to live together.

So, it’s not that you’re against establishing new political systems (such as a completely independent Kosovo) by the sword. It just needs to be intervetionism agreeable to you. You stated it so absolutely, yet clearly that’s not the case.

I do not remember being for any interventions in Kosovo.

I just posted that I do not really feel any sense of outrage if a few KZ building, mass raping and ethnic cleansing bastards are bombed.

I may have also pointed that out that the nature of the European intervention is very different from the usual US interventions.[/quote]

How was it different? Because Serbs aren’t fighting back in a prolonged insurgency? Yet? It still took bombings and military force to effect the intervention. And for ALOT less crimes than Saddam committed. So, if you’re a non-interventionist, who doesn’t believe foreign powers should be using the sword to change the political system in another nation, than be so.

88

[quote]Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
orion wrote:
Why do you hate freedom?

Maybe you should move there.

And why do you hate China?

Do you fell that 200+ years of “culture” cannot compete with a culture that is older than the pyramids?

Are you perhaps “just jealous” ?

Uh, aren’t you a Libertarian?

I am just returning all the crap that was delivered to me because I think spreading a political system with the sword is hardly a good idea.

I could swear you defended sundering Kosovo from Serbia. Am I confusing you for someone else? I could be, so let me know.

As far as I know the people of Kosovo do not go outside of the Kosovo do force people to live their life their way.

This whole thing could probably have been avoided if the Serbs were not so hell bent ln keeping Kosovo but without the Kosovarians.

Yep. Neither side was invading neighboring nations. The foreign powers who installed a new political system by the sword (independence of Kosovo) did.

Yugoslavia was a nation like Iraq. Those tribes were never meant to live together.

So, it’s not that you’re against establishing new political systems (such as a completely independent Kosovo) by the sword. It just needs to be intervetionism agreeable to you. You stated it so absolutely, yet clearly that’s not the case.

I do not remember being for any interventions in Kosovo.

I just posted that I do not really feel any sense of outrage if a few KZ building, mass raping and ethnic cleansing bastards are bombed.

I may have also pointed that out that the nature of the European intervention is very different from the usual US interventions.

How was it different? Because Serbs aren’t fighting back in a prolonged insurgency? Yet? It still took bombings and military force to effect the intervention. And for ALOT less crimes than Saddam committed. So, if you’re a non-interventionist, who doesn’t believe foreign powers should be using the sword to change the political system in another nation, than be so.[/quote]

I think the “intervention” you initially complained about were the few hundreds of policemen and humanitarian workers that were send to Kosovo at their request.

The bombings were never intended to change a political system but to end a civil war and ethnic cleansing.

Did we have any business doing that?

Maybe, maybe not, but I remind you that at the begin of this conflict Serbian Migs were crossing the Austrian borders to attack Slovenian outposts (in Slovenia) and our Army had soldiers and heavy equipment in Carinthia to prevent foreign soldiers from falling back into our country when attacked.

I dare say that this made it at least a little bit our business too.

89

[quote]entheogens wrote:
orion wrote:

(1) Tibet has been part of China for hundreds of years.

[/quote]

This is a dramatic oversimplification.

It is like saying India is British because they came in and civilized them. Tibet was not willfully conquered by the Mongols or Chinese.

And yes, I do see the irony in this in coming from an American.

Have you read anything by the Dali Lama? He has implored his followers not to use force, as it is the very opposite of buddhism. He has also told the communist that he realizes separation is a pipe dream, all they want is autonomy.

90

The Dalai Lama or any buddhist can’t decide to not be reincarnated. Only when one reaches boddhisatva does one not reincarnate.

To claim “you” have reached such a state of nirvana would suggest that such a state of living is important - and this is not something any Master would believe.

When one realizes that nothing matters does one open the door to the possibility of boddhisatva.

The Tibetan Book of the Dead is very insightful and helps to understand the practice of buddhism and the culture in Tibet.

As for monks rioting and causing a conflagration… that’s astounding.

91

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
That’s funny. It was part of Japan from 1592-1945. So, how’s it part of China again?[/quote]

interesting thread but I felt the need to call you out on this because revisionist history really grinds my gear.

Taiwan was not a part of Japan from 1592 - 1945. I won’t go as far to say that you are lying but I think you should concede the point or lose all credibility to a noob like me.

Note: Taiwan was ceded to Japan after the First Sino-Japanese War in 1895-1896. After the Japanese surrender it was returned to the Republic of China which moved the government there after its defeat by the communists.

92

“Imperial Japan had sought to control Taiwan since 1592, when Toyotomi Hideyoshi began extending Japanese influence overseas”

From the Wikipedia.

Ok, I see where I made my mistake. I concede that point.

Who ruled it before 1895?

Was it, or do you consider it, more a possession of China than that of Japan?

93

P.S. if revisionist history grinds your gear, you have come to the right place. Or maybe not.

94

http://members.aol.com/xpus/FSM-Hist.html

check this out. Dig the first paragraph.

95

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
http://members.aol.com/xpus/FSM-Hist.html

check this out. Dig the first paragraph.[/quote]

thanks for the welcome.

lol thats a funny website there - thanks for sharing.

Between China and Japan, China would have a much better claim to Taiwan. Between China and the aboriginals, well that just complicates things. It kinda parallels North America and the Native Americans.