Tackling Corruption By Practicing It, The Ultimate Hypocracy.

I am critical of all of them, but this is a special case.

The Chinese government is very bad, but strangely the whole world accepts it, no sanctions of any sort.
 
[quote name='Quackzilla']I am critical of all of them, but this is a special case.

The Chinese government is very bad, but strangely the whole world accepts it, no sanctions of any sort.

And why did you vote no?[/quote]

How can it be a special case? Like the US viewed Iraq as a special case?

No! If you aren't prepared to have sanctions against ALL regimes you can't have sanctions against the one YOU want because it benefits your foreign policy.

How dare you!

And how do you think China will react? You probably will cause more problems with them (kind of like attacking and creating more terrorism).

You see the problems with your position? You do see where my point is heading?
CTL
 
[quote name='CTLesq'][quote name='Quackzilla']I am critical of all of them, but this is a special case.

The Chinese government is very bad, but strangely the whole world accepts it, no sanctions of any sort.

And why did you vote no?[/quote]

How can it be a special case? Like the US viewed Iraq as a special case?

No! If you aren't prepared to have sanctions against ALL regimes you can't have sanctions against the one YOU want because it benefits your foreign policy.

How dare you!

And how do you think China will react? You probably will cause more problems with them (kind of like attacking and creating more terrorism).

You see the problems with your position? You do see where my point is heading?
CTL[/quote]

Ummm...CTLesq....I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. We had a decade's worth of sanctions against Iraq that enjoyed widespread support among the American public, and were evidently effective in keeping Saddam from acquiring weapons of mass destruction.
 
[quote name='dennis_t'][quote name='CTLesq'][quote name='Quackzilla']I am critical of all of them, but this is a special case.

The Chinese government is very bad, but strangely the whole world accepts it, no sanctions of any sort.

And why did you vote no?[/quote]

How can it be a special case? Like the US viewed Iraq as a special case?

No! If you aren't prepared to have sanctions against ALL regimes you can't have sanctions against the one YOU want because it benefits your foreign policy.

How dare you!

And how do you think China will react? You probably will cause more problems with them (kind of like attacking and creating more terrorism).

You see the problems with your position? You do see where my point is heading?
CTL[/quote]

Ummm...CTLesq....I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. We had a decade's worth of sanctions against Iraq that enjoyed widespread support among the American public, and were evidently effective in keeping Saddam from acquiring weapons of mass destruction.[/quote]

My point is you can't pick and choose. Its all or nothing.

I wonder where that logic has come from?

CTL
 
When the people of China demanded liberty or death, China chose death.

They murdered thousands of innocent student protestors (or, according to the propaganda, about a hundred armed students attacked the capitol and died) and forced the rest out of the area of Tiananmen square.

Unfortunately, they don't have the resources to stage a revolution.

Without outside help, they are totally screwed, and democrats and free speech advocats will continue to be hunted down and murdered.
 
What, you want to invade China Quackzilla? Let's not make the same mistake we made in Iraq (not that we have any chance of that).
 
[quote name='Quackzilla']When the people of China demanded liberty or death, China chose death.

They murdered thousands of innocent student protestors (or, according to the propaganda, about a hundred armed students attacked the capitol and died) and forced the rest out of the area of Tiananmen square.

Unfortunately, they don't have the resources to stage a revolution.

Without outside help, they are totally screwed, and democrats and free speech advocats will continue to be hunted down and murdered.[/quote]

They could stage a successful revolution if they wanted to. There are a billion plus Chinese. The government can't control them all if they revolted. Could be bloody though...like the American Revolution.

As a side noted, I still remember that picture of a wonderfully courageous man, standing alone in the street near Tiananmen Square, blocking a whole column of tanks. What a great image.
 
[quote name='Quackzilla']Unfortunately, they don't have the resources to stage a revolution.[/quote]

And here with this simple statement you now learn the true reason of why our founding fathers instituted the second ammendment.
 
Starting a war with China is stupid. Countries like that will implode eventually - just look at North Korea they don't have much longer.
 
[quote name='CTLesq'][quote name='dennis_t'][quote name='CTLesq'][quote name='Quackzilla']I am critical of all of them, but this is a special case.

The Chinese government is very bad, but strangely the whole world accepts it, no sanctions of any sort.

And why did you vote no?[/quote]

How can it be a special case? Like the US viewed Iraq as a special case?

No! If you aren't prepared to have sanctions against ALL regimes you can't have sanctions against the one YOU want because it benefits your foreign policy.

How dare you!

And how do you think China will react? You probably will cause more problems with them (kind of like attacking and creating more terrorism).

You see the problems with your position? You do see where my point is heading?
CTL[/quote]

Ummm...CTLesq....I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. We had a decade's worth of sanctions against Iraq that enjoyed widespread support among the American public, and were evidently effective in keeping Saddam from acquiring weapons of mass destruction.[/quote]

My point is you can't pick and choose. Its all or nothing.

I wonder where that logic has come from?

CTL[/quote]

Well, I have to agree with you there, although such idealism often gets crushed under the tread of pragmatism.

While I favor using economic sanctions against such regimes, however, I can't extend that to the use of force. As Colin Powell famously warned the Prez, "When you break it, you own it." Now we own Iraq and all of the insurgency and chaos that comes with owning a barely governed nation.
 
[quote name='CTLesq']My point is you can't pick and choose. Its all or nothing. [/quote]
I agree. The Bush administration continues to support a tyrannical regime in Uzbekistan, why? Why did we give them 500 million last year? Why do U.S. Special Forces train their soldiers? Why did Bush decide one tyrannical regime was bad, but another is not only ok, but our friend and ally?

[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']And here with this simple statement you now learn the true reason of why our founding fathers instituted the second ammendment.[/quote]
You are absolutely correct. However, I don't think any amount of guns can stand up to tanks and F-16s for long (or in China's case, tanks and MiG-19's).


But about China. We can't invade China if we wanted to, China has "The Bomb". Its not really the answer anyway, and the situation is improving somewhat. However I do think we should enforce our trade agreements with them and sanction them for manipulating their currency until they stop.
 
[quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='Quackzilla']When the people of China demanded liberty or death, China chose death.

They murdered thousands of innocent student protestors (or, according to the propaganda, about a hundred armed students attacked the capitol and died) and forced the rest out of the area of Tiananmen square.

Unfortunately, they don't have the resources to stage a revolution.

Without outside help, they are totally screwed, and democrats and free speech advocats will continue to be hunted down and murdered.[/quote]

They could stage a successful revolution if they wanted to. There are a billion plus Chinese. The government can't control them all if they revolted. Could be bloody though...like the American Revolution.

As a side noted, I still remember that picture of a wonderfully courageous man, standing alone in the street near Tiananmen Square, blocking a whole column of tanks. What a great image.[/quote]

There weren't nukes during the American Revolution, and China's just crazy enough to pull them out for the occasion.
 
But China can't use nukes, because if they do the UN will recognise them as a nuclear threat and attack.

Nukes would destroy any atempts at diplomacy and start a war.
 
[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl'][quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='Quackzilla']When the people of China demanded liberty or death, China chose death.

They murdered thousands of innocent student protestors (or, according to the propaganda, about a hundred armed students attacked the capitol and died) and forced the rest out of the area of Tiananmen square.

Unfortunately, they don't have the resources to stage a revolution.

Without outside help, they are totally screwed, and democrats and free speech advocats will continue to be hunted down and murdered.[/quote]

They could stage a successful revolution if they wanted to. There are a billion plus Chinese. The government can't control them all if they revolted. Could be bloody though...like the American Revolution.

As a side noted, I still remember that picture of a wonderfully courageous man, standing alone in the street near Tiananmen Square, blocking a whole column of tanks. What a great image.[/quote]

There weren't nukes during the American Revolution, and China's just crazy enough to pull them out for the occasion.[/quote]

They're going to nuke their own country and cities?
 
You all do realize that I firmly disagree with the all or nothing approach? And the point of my comments was to show you how it is a flawed approach?
 
[quote name='elprincipe']They're going to nuke their own country and cities?[/quote]

Yes, they would.

They regularly murder citizens to prevent dissent or rebellion.
 
[quote name='Quackzilla']But China can't use nukes, because if they do the UN will recognise them as a nuclear threat and attack.

Nukes would destroy any atempts at diplomacy and start a war.[/quote]

The UN is going to attack China?

I don't think so.

Would this be the potent French and German Force that Kerry is promising to be able to use in Iraq?

Or did you mean the US?

Yeah.

CTL
 
[quote name='Quackzilla']But China can't use nukes, because if they do the UN will recognise them as a nuclear threat and attack. [/quote]

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH!!!!!

That's some funny stuff! :rofl:
 
[quote name='Quackzilla'][quote name='elprincipe']They're going to nuke their own country and cities?[/quote]

Yes, they would.

They regularly murder citizens to prevent dissent or rebellion.[/quote]

Replace Iraq with China in this thread and I wonder what the responses would be.

CTL
 
That's what I meant.

And to reply to CTLass, Iraq was our governments enemy, while our government is very freindly to China.

Of course you are wearing RNC blinders and you are dumb as a rock, so of course you wouldn't pick up on what the whole thread is about.
 
[quote name='Quackzilla']That's what I meant.

And to reply to CTLass, Iraq was our governments enemy, while our government is very freindly to China.

Of course you are wearing RNC blinders and you are dumb as a rock, so of course you wouldn't pick up on what the whole thread is about.[/quote]

That must be it. I am an idiot.

Yet you all lined up like lemmings and supported your all or nothing position.

What a way to run a foreign policy, or more to the point what a way NOT to run a foreign policy.

CTL
 
[quote name='Quackzilla'][quote name='elprincipe']They're going to nuke their own country and cities?[/quote]

Yes, they would.

They regularly murder citizens to prevent dissent or rebellion.[/quote]

Murdering demonstrators/insurgents is certainly a far cry from destroying an entire city with a nuclear bomb. You think they would nuke Beijing if a few million people started rebelling there?
 
Noy Bejing, that is where the leaders reside.

They would slaughter the people and force any survivors out of the city with tanks and mackine guns.

If there was massive public dissent elsewhere in the country you can bet your ass they would bomb it.
 
[quote name='Quackzilla']Noy Bejing, that is where the leaders reside.

They would slaughter the people and force any survivors out of the city with tanks and mackine guns.

If there was massive public dissent elsewhere in the country you can bet your ass they would bomb it.[/quote]

I have to disagree. Using nuclear weapons on their own territory would ensure the fall of the current regime in China.
 
Most people in CHina would never know, because the government censors EVERYTHING, even going so far as to send jamming signals to satellites operated by BBC, CNN, and other news organisations.

Most people in China do not even know about the Tiananmen Square massacre, and those who do think that it was an incident onvolving a couple hundred armed protesors storming the capitol, because the only news they get is on State TV.

Don't underestimate the government of China.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top