chinese support on Israel

[christian]

Digested from www.bbsland.com

... Why our newspaper and TV always describe these Arabian as the vicitims? Are these medias corresponding the truth from a real fair viewpoint? In my impression, Israel is a nation which has been suffering so many disasters in its history, a nation which never forget those who once helped it in its hardship. Some old jews never forget those days in when they stayed in Shanghai of China to avoid the Nazi's persecution in World War II. These Chinese shared with the jews their last food; They will never forget that the consellor at Chinese Ambassy in Austria issued hundreds of visas for Jews and help them to leave for China at those days. Please note that Israel is the country who had been always expecting to set up diplomatic relationship with P.R. China since PRC's foundation in 1949; please remember that, It's Israel that is always helping us develop our agriculture in acrid area and our military industry. As the Israel Ambassador in Beijing said at the end of last year, our two nations are becoming more and more closer...

In contrast, these Arabians, who get our sustainable supports, always question us " Why your Chinese never allow our Muslim brothers in Xinjiang independent from China and set up their islam country!". Remember bus-bombing attacks several years ago in Xinjiang of China, which happened on the bus during rush hours and killed dozen of innocient persons, these Arabain seems so similar in this sense.


Gentlement,
Please get your fact straight between china and israel.

Please discern the facts tha "chinese government" and "chinese "

[Oh Jerusalem]

Your support is very much appreciated. However, I don't think a poll was taken amongst the Chinese, throughout all of Chinas provinces, that would tell us what the average Chinese thinks of the situation here.

What we do know is that China has generally towed the Pro-Palestinian line almost no differently than the EU and the UN.

[christian]

Originally posted by Oh Jerusalem
Your support is very much appreciated. However, I don't think a poll was taken amongst the Chinese, throughout all of Chinas provinces, that would tell us what the average Chinese thinks of the situation here.

What we do know is that China has generally towed the Pro-Palestinian line almost no differently than the EU and the UN.

Of course, there is no poll in a dictatorial country. If we have poll, we will sing in Tianmen square.

However, it is a general view inside the chinese. That arabs is starting a Xingjing separation. Which we come back to square one. (Should we support the israel? Is it our strategic interest? What do we sacrific? )

Which make me and you a "natural" friend.

[christian]

Remember, we(chinese ) are very friendly to Jews. Every country shut down the visa for Jews. We are the only one, accepts the jews refugee in WWII. We don't care how many jews are fleeing. We just accepts them.

Which in return, Israel return the support of china.

In 50's,things start to get worse when US starts intervene.

[raven]

Christian: I wasnt in the Holocaust. I didnt have a direct relative that I know perished in the camps...but I KNOW...about the Chinese and Shanghai. Many of us know and will not forget. Dont you worry about that.!!!!! We know who really helped and who is just CLAIMING that they did. Chinese people DID. YES...

[raven]

I hope to G-d China can throw off its political system of oppression and step into the LIGHT. The light of Freedom and Democracy. It hasnt been the nature of the system there and it will be a long hard road...but I hope for you ALL that it comes. HOW? You all have to demand it..and we Free Peoples of all Religions will try to help. Such good brains and talent to be "locked up" What successes in Science we could have if we didnt get into a new COLD WAR. What developments we could get together and make...The mind boggles...at what could be for the good of mankind.

[raven]

I cant talk to the ENTIRE country of China..but Im taking the rare opportunity of talking to two people here. I know it wont "change the world" but you have to start somewhere. So one at a time...here I go...when I can.

[takeo]

I think Christian doesn't live in mainland china, does he?
Most Chinese i spoke too, many asked about the situation in the middle-East when they knew i was jewish, had a moderate opinion that israel needs to withdraw and that Arabs needed to stop their attacks on civilians. As usually the chinese blaimed the US for the problem (it was in the period Chinese were furious about the bombing of the embassy in belgrade)
many students of islamic countries live in China and have good relations with the Chinese, China also has excellent relations with Iran and as well with Pakistan and Syria. the chinese have nothing against Jewish people either and most know the history of WWII. (but many French people risked their lifes too to safe Jews, i hope you will remind that after beginning a new round of cursing against France).
i had the solid impression that many Chinese in general liked the government and the economic progress. (more so than in Cuba), in fact i didn't discover many differences between opinions of the chinese i spoke with.
However chinese of Hongkong or Taiwan are very different.

[raven]

The Chinese DONT WANT an Islamic takeover in their country. All they have to do is look to India and what has happened there.

These are people that will SHOOT BACK and ask questions later. Here is a group you all cant bully. They have as many people, a hundred times over SMARTS, and a refined culture longer than you.

Try it...and see what happens.

[christian]

I have to admit I mislead you guys in an unintentional way.

Chinese mainland thinks different than the western secular class chinese. Lets call it the western secular chinese. We mostly mean the chinese who lives abroad for many generations. They don't have tight with china, except patrioism. (like the jews)

You can call us the chinese of diaspora or the jews of asia. The chinese live abroad is usually pro-western thoughts and confuciousim.

As you notice the difference between me and poppy. We are from different world. He / She see things in Chinese(mainland) point of view. Due to force information in china, many chinese don't understand the global point of view. However, due to technology, many mainlander is aware of outside world. They are closer view with the secular society.

Also, in china, the secular middle class is still a small number. However,It is growing very fast.

As for western class, such as singapore, taiwan, southeast asia, North America, many times we don't agree with what the mainland is doing.

The mainland is indirectly helping the terrorist structure. Moreover, they are indirectly killing us (chinese).
Especially, in southeast asia, we take a lots from the extremist. The muslim kill us for every reason, in every decades. For example, in Singapore, the malay just want us to leave and die. That is how Singapore have their independance. In 98 Indonesia, the extremist terrorize China town. We have to buy the Indonesia army for protection.

In singapore, it is a pro-western and confucious society.

In taiwan chinese don't like the mainland thinking either. The Taiwan chinese is also very pro-western.

Due to the China take over Hong Kong, Hong Kong is now an official city of china. It is no longer an international city anymore.
Hong Kong is becoming pro-china. It is backwards.

I hope to present you the more accurate picture of now.

[christian]

The PRC is feeling the heat of the extremist. In order for china to growth, they need the chinese of diaspora. They need us to start the economy. This is why China is different than India. India has started the capitalist regime for some long. They are still living in extreme poverty. In 22 years, many chinese educated diaspora class change the infrastucture of china. Many chinese of diaspora helps china to be in international stage again. Majority of mainland is still in poverty. However, if you look at the coastal region, such as shaghai, beijing,
It is a rich eastern coastal region.

This is why recently they force Pakistan to stop the extremist. The PRC wants a better relationship with India. The stormy relationship between israel is business. It is nothing personal or hate. Many reporters misinterprets as a hate. The mainlander is always neutral in middle east crisis. They want stability in the northwestern region to the land of europe.

The PRC long term plan is reviving the new silk road trade, between Europe and china. The eastern region already has foundation. Now, they are developing the western region.

They want to curb the extremist, in order to revive the silk road trade. The mainland don't want to be threatened by Islamic revolution. The mainland already have their painful history during the cultural revolution. We don't want another revolution.
No thanks to Islamic revolution .

You have to see china, in a chinese point of view. It is kind of complicated for me to explain everything to foreigners.

I only can tell you a glimpse on china. I can write a book about it.

The CNN reports is very partial. They only focus China on a very partial of point view. They don't see the whole picture.

[christian]

The PRC is also learning from India. They see what happens in India. That is why PRC force Pakistan to have a solution with India. Or else, we have a india and pakistian war two months ago.

The mainlander is not stupid as most westerner think. Please read ART OF WAR By Sun Tzu. Then you understand how PRC thinks

[Mediocrates]

What did Sun Tzu say about Tibet?

[christian]

Tibet is part of china for 300 years.

How do you feel, if someone rips off your arm? Which is attach to you for 300 years?

How do you feel, if someone wants to separte Israel into Juda and Israel?

[Mediocrates]

maybe that guidance system they ripped off wasn't so good after all - - .

[christian]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
maybe that guidance system they ripped off wasn't so good after all - - .

Excuse me with your logic.

If I drop a bomb in your ambassy. Which is satelite guided. Which i say it is a mistake.

"The maps in Belgrade is two years old"by william cohen defence minister.

Only fools will believe this. All the military maps is directly beam into the earth surface. All patriot missle is lazer guide.
All F-16 has GPS system, satelite gudiance, etc.

Even third world country Pakistan has this kind of technology of Satelite mapping and GPS .

How do I convince you, I made a mistake?

I am asking you to give my bomb back. What kind of logic is this.

[christian]

If the patriot missle is not lazer guidance. What is the difference between patriot missle and a dummy bomb ?

If the first one is mistake. Ok. I buy this.
What about the second and third mistake?

Which we rip you off?

[kauffner]

Tibet was independent until China invaded in 1951. China's Qing emperors had a vaguely defined suzeriegnty over the country, but were rarely able to exercise any practical control. Tibetans thought of the Qing emperor only as a patron of the Dalai Lama, never as the ruler of Tibet.

The Dalai Lama issued a proclamation of independence in 1913, after the fall of the Qing dynasty. The Tibetan government had his own army, foreign affairs ministry, and issued its own currency. It also concluded treaties with Mongolia, Nepal, and Britain.

http://www.tibet.com/Money/money1.jpg

[christian]

Originally posted by kauffner
Tibet was independent until China invaded in 1951. China's Qing emperors had a vaguely defined suzeriegnty over the country, but were rarely able to exercise any practical control. Tibetans thought of the Qing emperor only as a patron of the Dalai Lama, never as the ruler of Tibet.

The Dalai Lama issued a proclamation of independence in 1913, after the fall of the Qing dynasty. The Tibetan government had his own army, foreign affairs ministry, and issued its own currency. It also concluded treaties with Mongolia, Nepal, and Britain.

http://www.tibet.com/Money/money1.jpg

Of course, your information is from pro-tibet website.

[kauffner]

The Chinese embassy was hit with JDAM laser guided bombs, not with Patriots, which are ground-based anti-aircraft missiles. I have yet to read any plausible motive for the U.S. to attack the embassy deliberately, so I tend to believe it was a SNAFU of some kind.

In 1998, Clinton caved in on all the major outstanding disputes between the U.S. and China, even agreeing to a "one China" policy. But the Communist Party needed an external enemy to justify its repressive rule, hence the need to create a new dispute. This is why they made such big a fuss about the embassy attack. U.S. embassies get attacked every few years -- and not usually by mistake either. It's not like China is big on respecting other people's embassies -- a Japanese consulate was invaded by Chinese guards just last week.

[christian]

Originally posted by kauffner
The Chinese embassy was hit with JDAM laser guided bombs, not with Patriots, which are ground-based anti-aircraft missiles. I have yet to read any plausible motive for the U.S. to attack the embassy deliberately, so I tend to believe it was a SNAFU of some kind.

In 1998, Clinton caved in on all the major outstanding disputes between the U.S. and China, even agreeing to a "one China" policy. But the Communist Party needed an external enemy to justify its repressive rule, hence the need to create a new dispute. This is why they made such big a fuss about the embassy attack. U.S. embassies get attacked every few years -- and not usually by mistake either. It's not like China is big on respecting other people's embassies -- a Japanese consulate was invaded by Chinese guards just last week.

ha ha! :D Chinese guards invade Japanese cousulate. The PLA guards are guarding outside of the embassy, preventing more embarrasement between N. Korea and S. korea. The reason the guards are outside of embassy, is to prevent any more n. korea refugee. OK. The PLA guards made a mistake for going into embassy. However, the N. Korea refugees are invading the US, Japan, German, embassy. So, Don't make this up.

But the Communist Party needed an external enemy to justify its repressive rule, hence the need to create a new dispute

OK. I buy that. There is half truth in it. US is doing the same. let me remind you of NMD.The weapon industry is getting fat.

The Chinese embassy was hit with JDAM laser guided bombs
You said it "lazer guided bombs". What is lazer guided bombs?
It is bomb with lazer guided, connecting to the satelite and the aircraft.

Ok. I buy the first one. It is a "misguided" lazer bomb. What about the second one?
Would a plane travels 1000km/h use a dumb bomb to hit an accurate target? I don't think so.
What about two?

[takeo]

if Russia would hit the US-embassy while bombing for example georgia (in the former SU of course), it would be a very big problem too (as well as chinese spy-aircrafts for the californian coast).
Not a chance the embassy was bombed by mistake, with such modern technology. China was allowing Yougoslavia to use it's embassy as radar post, also yougoslavia let china research what kind of bombs and planes the us was using. The US couldn't stand this cooperation against its aggression.
Tibet was never recognised by the world as independant, it was always a part of China officially.
China has the right to stop people entering the embassy before they reach the embassy.
Don't remember how the US put loud rock-music in front of the embassy of the vatican to get Noriega out? (after they invaded this independant country).
the US can't stand that an independant country is getting more influence and wealthier every day and nothing they can do (that wouldn't hurt us-interests too) can stop it.

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by takeo
if Russia would hit the US-embassy while bombing for example georgia (in the former SU of course), it would be a very big problem too (as well as chinese spy-aircrafts for the californian coast).

Takeo,
Remember the spy plane incident last year. The US claims it is a peace mission. That really buffles me. Coz. There are no war in east pacific coasts. The spy plane is not recognize by UN peacekepping. :confused:

It is just bs excuse. I wonder what would happen if Chinese spy plane on a "peace mission" near Hawaii.

Not a chance the embassy was bombed by mistake, with such modern technology. China was allowing Yougoslavia to use it's embassy as radar post, also yougoslavia let china research what kind of bombs and planes the us was using. The US couldn't stand this cooperation against its aggression.
Tibet was never recognised by the world as independant, it was always a part of China officially.
China has the right to stop people entering the embassy before they reach the embassy.

Yes. I agree. However, I do feel sorry for N. korean. In my view point, they should let the refugee, entering S. Korea. S. Korea is not complaining. The cost is the N. Korea dioplamacy. Well. This put China in a embarrass situation. We are kind of torn between N. korea and S. korea. :( The PRC is unwilling to announce his policy. In one hand, they are trading huge profits with S. Korea as a economic ally. On the other hand, N. korea is our military ally.

[kauffner]

Where is your humanity? To support the guards against the North Korean refugees is one cold blooded move, since the refugees face almost certain execution if they are sent back to North Korea. The only thing they are guilty of is trying to escape a life of slavery and slow starvation. They have a well-founded fear of persecution if they return and are therefore bona fide refugees entitled to asylum under the international conventions dealing with refugees. South Korea would be happy to accept them, so there is no question of China having to support them.


takeo: Every war has friendly fire incidents. In Afghanistan, there was one that almost killed Karzai, now the Afghan prime minister. Modern technology isn't going to prevent people from using the wrong map, if that is really what caused the attack on the Chinese embassy.

The U.S. embassy in Beruit was blown up in 1983, killing 63 people, 17 of them Americans. The CIA agent investigating the case (Bob Baer) concluded that Fatah carried it out under a contract put out by Iran. By the U.S. government didn't really want to know at that time, so the matter didn't go any further. Seems to me this is a more serious incident than what happened to the Chinese embassy.

No country recognized Tibet as a part of China prior to 1951. Tibetans certainly thought of themselves as an independent nation. Britain signed a 1914 treaty with Tibet which set the boundary between India and Tibet. This implies that Britain regarded Tibet as a state with treaty making powers.

[Mediocrates]

I laugh at how much takeo sounds like Margaret Thatcher.

[christian]

The U.S. embassy in Beruit was blown up in 1983, killing 63 people, 17 of them Americans. The CIA agent investigating the case (Bob Baer) concluded that Fatah carried it out under a contract put out by Iran. By the U.S. government didn't really want to know at that time, so the matter didn't go any further. Seems to me this is a more serious incident than what happened to the Chinese embassy.

Right. Bomb up the chinese embassy is a less incident. It is an act of war by bombing other nations embassy, in a dioplomatic world.(Church of navivty in Israel is a good example) The terrorist is not represented by any nations. It is act of terror by extremist. Which nowadays are not supported. Bombing the embassy is supported by the nation's elite.

No country recognized Tibet as a part of China prior to 1951. Tibetans certainly thought of themselves as an independent nation. Britain signed a 1914 treaty with Tibet which set the boundary between India and Tibet. This implies that Britain regarded Tibet as a state with treaty making powers.

Yes. Britainanica Empire signs a peace treaty with Tibet. It is the purpose of divide and conquer method. Hong Kong and Taiwan are a good example. Hong Kong is divided from china, when China lost the war with Britainic empire. Taiwan is divided from China, when China lost their war with Japanese imperialism.

The UN is not created by then. If you have a logic like that. I can argue a logic like this.

All the white American should go back to Europe. European is the occuption of what is now America. Which is ethnic cleansing of native indians. Native Indian never wants a white man, coming over to their lands.

The UN never recoqnize Tibet. period. If UN recognize Tibet, China will seen as a aggressor. It will be punished by international law. Moreover, China will suffer like Russian occuption of Afghastan.

No offence. OK. It is just two civilize people talk, trying to understand other point of view.

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by kauffner
Where is your humanity? To support the guards against the North Korean refugees is one cold blooded move, since the refugees face almost certain execution if they are sent back to North Korea. The only thing they are guilty of is trying to escape a life of slavery and slow starvation. They have a well-founded fear of persecution if they return and are therefore bona fide refugees entitled to asylum under the international conventions dealing with refugees. South Korea would be happy to accept them, so there is no question of China having to support them.

It is not about Humanity. It is about law of a nations. The US kick out illegal mexican, columbian, south american,etc. The US has the right to do so. The US has the right to defend the interest of the entire population, making sure the new immigrant can contribute to the US society, like jewish community. In WWII, the jewish refugee contribute alots and shape up US today. (For example, Einstein, Bohr, Madeline Albright, etc)

It is same with China. I sympathize N. Korean too. However, it is the law of the country. It also involves with strategic and dioplomatic interests.

takeo: Every war has friendly fire incidents. In Afghanistan, there was one that almost killed Karzai, now the Afghan prime minister. Modern technology isn't going to prevent people from using the wrong map, if that is really what caused the attack on the Chinese embassy.

It is not friendly fire. How coincidence two lazer guided missle hit the target within 50 feet of Embassy? Moreover, the plane is flying 1000km/hr.

The U.S. embassy in Beruit was blown up in 1983, killing 63 people, 17 of them Americans. The CIA agent investigating the case (Bob Baer) concluded that Fatah carried it out under a contract put out by Iran. By the U.S. government didn't really want to know at that time, so the matter didn't go any further. Seems to me this is a more serious incident than what happened to the Chinese embassy.

Yes. It is very unfortunate. I don't agree with Terrorist bombing. The belgrade bombing is not a terrorist acts. It is a deliberate act.
Ok. I buy that theory of the first "mistake",because US is at war. Can you explain to me the second "mistake"? Which hit a minute later? What about the third "mistake"?

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/yugo/china.htm

By the way, US bomb is a lazer guided bombs. If you said it is a dummy bomb. It will be more convincing.

[cerulean]

I, of course, am astonished (well not too much) that takeo is not wanting to recognize the aspirations of a distinct people who have the misfortune of having been subsumed inside a vicious Maoist state.

[Mediocrates]

"In WWII, the jewish refugee contribute alots and shape up US today. (For example, Einstein, Bohr, Madeline Albright, etc)"

Actually that was the ONLY way to gain entry at that time. For average people, the US more or less had a ZERO immigration policy.

And if two different bombs hit on or near the building and don't level it, killing everyone and everything inside then you can assume it is either an accident or a technical failure of some kind. Laser guided does not imply foolproof, failureproof or lawyerproof. But if it works as designed, the building is supposed to be a smoking hole in the ground.

Picture this scene:

"You update mapset 0130AA-G8293/34?"
"Yeah I think so, on wing FF289/A"
"No FG1140/DD"
"Uh maybe, I'll check"
"Yeah we have mapset 0130AA-G8293/34 on those"
"No, the updates to it? You need to check for 0130AA-G54393/9, you got that one?"
"Updating DB now - wait there's a problem, damn"
"What now - we're outa time hurry"
"Going going, yeah it halted for a sec, it looks ok now"
"Right, let's hope so, ok clear these birds for takeoff"

and so on.....

Fog-O-War you understand.

[kauffner]

christain: International law is clearly on the side of the refugees. According to the "Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees" (1954, modified 1967), anyone who has "well-founded fear of being persecuted" if they are returned to thier homeland is entitled to asylum. No one has a better founded fear of persecution than NK refugees, since they face the death penalty if they are returned. The refugee conventions are a standard part of international law and have been ratified by most nations, including China (but not North Korea).

http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/auov.htm

The U.S. has to control immigration because if immigrants stay the U.S. taxpayer has to educate thier children, and pay if they commit crimes, go to the hospital emergency room, or use other government benefits. None of this is an issue in the case of NK refugees in China. They don't have access to government benefits even if they stay and there is always the alternative of sending them to South Korea.

There are about 300,000 NK refugees in China and they are not hard to find. I met a group that was openly running a Korean restaurant when I was Shenzhen. If China thought these people were costing it money or having a bad influence, they would have been expelled a long time ago. The current crackdown represents an effort to make the North Korean regime happy and is persumably part of deal, either implied or explicit.



The U.S. has every right to fly surveillance planes in international airspace and the Chinese pilot was clearly at fault for ramming the U.S. plane. If if was up to me, I would have retaliated by seizing a Chinese military plane.

China does have its own spy planes. The don't approach the U.S. only because they don't have the range. But the Chinese have sent "fishing trawlers" packed with intelligence equipment to monitor the U.S. coastline.



The UN does not issue statements recognizing or not recognizing governments. If you mean only that Tibet was not a UN member, well, there was quiet a few soveriegn states that were not UN members at that time. The UN did hold discussions on Tibet's appeal for assistance against China during which the Tibetan appeal was treated as if it was from a sovereign state. The General Assembly passed a resolution in 1966 which proclaimed the Tibetans a people entitled to the right of self-determination.


The conspiratorial view is that the Chinese Embassy was targeted because it was used as a rebroadcast station by the Yugoslav Army. I find it odd that you would adopt this view. If the embassy was being used for military purposes by the Yugoslav Army, that would make it a legitimate target.

The Chinese media begin accusing the U.S. of attacking the embassy deliberately immediately after the incident, before anyone who wasn't directly involved could possibly know the real reason for the attack. The logical conclusion is that the claim was simply fabricated to inspire anti-American feeling.

You seem to feel that "laser-guided" means "infallible." Lasers don't make mistakes, but the people who use them do. Tragic errors have always been an unavoidable part of war.

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by kauffner
christain: International law is clearly on the side of the refugees. According to the "Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees" (1954, modified 1967), anyone who has "well-founded fear of being persecuted" if they are returned to thier homeland is entitled to asylum. No one has a better founded fear of persecution than NK refugees, since they face the death penalty if they are returned. The refugee conventions are a standard part of international law and have been ratified by most nations, including China (but not North Korea).

http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/auov.htm

The U.S. has to control immigration because if immigrants stay the U.S. taxpayer has to educate thier children, and pay if they commit crimes, go to the hospital emergency room, or use other government benefits. None of this is an issue in the case of NK refugees in China. They don't have access to government benefits even if they stay and there is always the alternative of sending them to South Korea.

So, you are saying US has the right to refuse refugee. China don't. :confused: What about thousands of refugees form Vietnam, which US turns it down. Yes. N. Korea doesn't have those benefit, either does mainland chinese. We are still a poor country, comparing to US. You guys have tons of money for being an angel of mercy. We don't. We only have few bucks. We are still developing our nation.

There are about 300,000 NK refugees in China and they are not hard to find. I met a group that was openly running a Korean restaurant when I was Shenzhen. If China thought these people were costing it money or having a bad influence, they would have been expelled a long time ago. The current crackdown represents an effort to make the North Korean regime happy and is persumably part of deal, either implied or explicit.

Yes. You are half right, but you never mention S. Korea. The S. Korea also is one of our economic ally. Which torns us betweem S. and N. korea.

The U.S. has every right to fly surveillance planes in international airspace and the Chinese pilot was clearly at fault for ramming the U.S. plane. If if was up to me, I would have retaliated by seizing a Chinese military plane.


If your logic works like this. We should send a peace mission destroyer, doing some peace keeping near Hawaii. Which is in the international water.We have every right to do so. :D

China does have its own spy planes. The don't approach the U.S. only because they don't have the range. But the Chinese have sent "fishing trawlers" packed with intelligence equipment to monitor the U.S. coastline.

The UN does not issue statements recognizing or not recognizing governments. If you mean only that Tibet was not a UN member, well, there was quiet a few soveriegn states that were not UN members at that time. The UN did hold discussions on Tibet's appeal for assistance against China during which the Tibetan appeal was treated as if it was from a sovereign state. The General Assembly passed a resolution in 1966 which proclaimed the Tibetans a people entitled to the right of self-determination.

Tibet is a tribe inside of China. The UN never recognize a law for tibet as a independant nation. The General Assembly resolution has no consequence. It is a advocation of Tibetan people. It is not a law, dividing the Tibet from china.

The conspiratorial view is that the Chinese Embassy was targeted because it was used as a rebroadcast station by the Yugoslav Army. I find it odd that you would adopt this view. If the embassy was being used for military purposes by the Yugoslav Army, that would make it a legitimate target.

The Chinese media begin accusing the U.S. of attacking the embassy deliberately immediately after the incident, before anyone who wasn't directly involved could possibly know the real reason for the attack. The logical conclusion is that the claim was simply fabricated to inspire anti-American feeling.

It is not just "chinese". The European decides to keep quiet, to achieve a common goal " protect European stability and stop facism spreading". So, they keep their mouth shuts, during the time of war.

You seem to feel that "laser-guided" means "infallible." Lasers don't make mistakes, but the people who use them do. Tragic errors have always been an unavoidable part of war.

Three misguided missle hits the chinese embassy. I only buy your theory of one missle "mistake", but not three "mistakes".

[kauffner]

christian: To criticize Europeans for immigrating to America hundreds of years ago is anachronistic. There was no concept of immigration regulation then, no American Indian government to get a visa from.

Under common law, unused land can be claimed by the first person to effect an improvement on it. By this standard, most of the land in North America never belonged to the Indians. What's more, the Indians generally received money in exchange for their land, even if they weren't using it.

The Indians were killed off by smallpox and other imported diseases, not by settlers or the U.S. army.

If you take the standard you are using for the United States and apply it to China, Xinjiang would go to the Uighurs, Inner Mongolia to the Mongols, the northeast to the Manchu, and the ethnic Chinese would be restricted to Ming dynasty boundaries. To try to turn back the clock four hundred years is a nonsensical way to resolve territorial disputes. Borders should be drawn for the benefit of those living today and in accordance with the principle of self-determination.

[christian]

Originally posted by kauffner
christian: To criticize Europeans for immigrating to America hundreds of years ago is anachronistic. There was no concept of immigration regulation then, no American Indian government to get a visa from.

Under common law, unused land can be claimed by the first person to effect an improvement on it. By this standard, most of the land in North America never belonged to the Indians. What's more, the Indians generally received money in exchange for their land, even if they weren't using it.

The Indians were killed off by smallpox and other imported diseases, not by settlers or the U.S. army.

If you take the standard you are using for the United States and apply it to China, Xinjiang would go to the Uighurs, Inner Mongolia to the Mongols, the northeast to the Manchu, and the ethnic Chinese would be restricted to Ming dynasty boundaries. To try to turn back the clock four hundred years is a nonsensical way to resolve territorial disputes. Borders should be drawn for the benefit of those living today and in accordance with the principle of self-determination.

It is your logic. I am trying to apply. You said Tibet should be independant from China. China invades Tibet two hundread years ago.

If I use your logic. European has their colonialism past. The native Indian doesn't want white man in their land. So, Should White American Go back to Europe?

The UN laws only applies to the land, at the creation of UN and now. It doesn't applies to land before creation of UN.

The league of nation is not effective. It is just a form of imperialism, protecting the imperialist maps.
If you want to drag out histories. The world will be another war.

[kauffner]

Originally posted by christian
You said Tibet should be independent from China.

I never said any such thing. I think it should be up to the people living in Tibet on a permanent basis, both ethnic Chinese and ethnic Tibetan, to resolve this issue in accordance with the principles and democracy and self-determination, as called for by the UN General Assembly in 1966.


China invades Tibet two hundred years ago.

...and also in 1951 and 1959.

The native Indian doesn't want white man in their land. So, Should White American Go back to Europe?

Have you even talked to an American Indian? I have Indian ancestors and used to live in an American Indian neighborhood. I can tell you they don't talk like you do, like they are ready to start a guerrilla movement or something.

My grandfather was a German from Danzig, The Danzig was an almost purely German-speaking city from the the time it was founded in 1224 until 1945. Then Poles expelled all Germans from the city and renamed it Gdansk. So I am thinking that before we can get to the question of sending people back to Europe, you really need to ask the Poles if they would allow ethnic Germans to return.


The UN laws only applies to the land, at the creation of UN and now. It doesn't applies to land before creation of UN.


Common law is traditional British law. It was in effect when the first British colonies were established in America. It has nothing to do with the United Nations.

[christian]

Common law is traditional British law. It was in effect when the first British colonies were established in America. It has nothing to do with the United Nations

You said it. British Empire law applies to the land claims. it is a imperialist movement, designed to carve out other countries.

UN is only institution, which is recognized by all spectrum in the world. This includes the big five countries.


Have you even talked to an American Indian? I have Indian ancestors and used to live in an American Indian neighborhood. I can tell you they don't talk like you do, like they are ready to start a guerrilla movement or something.

My grandfather was a German from Danzig, The Danzig was an almost purely German-speaking city from the the time it was founded in 1224 until 1945. Then Poles expelled all Germans from the city and renamed it Gdansk. So I am thinking that before we can get to the question of sending people back to Europe, you really need to ask the Poles if they would allow ethnic Germans to return.

Yes. I do. They don't like white people very much. They may show fondness at white people. Deep inside, they are like jews before 1948, they are homeless.

By the way, your theory about 90% indian killed with disease. It is ridicules. This excuse is made by British Colony power, covering up the massive massacre. The biggest disease spreading in the history is in Europe. The plague kills one third of the population of the Europe.

Right. The plague starts to kill native indian, when the white man arrives. How coincident?

[christian]

I never said any such thing. I think it should be up to the people living in Tibet on a permanent basis, both ethnic Chinese and ethnic Tibetan, to resolve this issue in accordance with the principles and democracy and self-determination, as called for by the UN General Assembly in 1966.

OK. I misread the post.

No. Democracy doesn't apply to all spectrum in the world. It is prove in the history that only education, trade and economy are the basis of democracy. It is proven in the history, only bi-party system like US, has a strong foundation for democracy. The history shows about 1/3 democracy survives, after British or French grants a self governed democracy nations. All the survivor are white people, which is educated in France or Britain. The White man learns all the skills like trade, education, and economic theories. They bring them to America, australia, south africa, and Canada, etc.

Where countries don't have educational skills like Africa. Their countries are in years of civil war and famine.


If you have 22 party coalition government. Your government will like East India. All parties only care about their own interests.
The nations are in years of turmoil.

Democracy is not a magic formula.

[kauffner]

Originally posted by christian
[American Indians] don't like white people very much. They may show fondness at white people. Deep inside, they are like jews before 1948, they are homeless.

Oh, right. As if you would know all about Jews before 1948. The U.S. has very few purebreed Indians nowadays. You can be as little as one eighth Indian and still be classified as an official Indian. (I'm about one sixteenth myself.) So a modern-day Indian who is really anti-White would typically be hating his own mother or father.

The plague starts to kill native indian, when the white man arrives. How coincident?

Not coincidence. Contact spreads disease. The Amerindian population of the U.S. and Canada declined from about 1 million pre-contact to 300,000 in the late 19th century. Indians suddenly came into contact with numerous diseases that they had no immunity for and were therefore even more vulnerable then Europeans at the time of the Black Death.

[takeo]

"If you take the standard you are using for the United States and apply it to China, Xinjiang would go to the Uighurs, Inner Mongolia to the Mongols, the northeast to the Manchu, and the ethnic Chinese would be restricted to Ming dynasty boundaries. To try to turn back the clock four hundred years is a nonsensical way to resolve territorial disputes. Borders should be drawn for the benefit of those living today and in accordance with the principle of self-determination."

it is funny to see how people who normally on this forum spit on UN-resolutios and the right of every people to determine its own future (not only kaufner) and who think Jews have the right to live in israel because they lived there 2000 years ago, now when the question is not israel but Tibet, suddenly refere to un-resolutions and the principle of self-determination...

Actually no single country recognised Tibet as independant and had an embassy there during the 20th century. Also the un-resolution didn't call for an independant Tibet or an end of the chinese occupation.

about the northkorean refugees: they were illegal on chinese soil, the us is also sending back refugees from for example Haiti(even if they are on their way to Canada) who could also face persecuation in their land. the law is the law and equal for all, northkoreans or cambodians.

about the embassy: the "theory" about Chinese military cooperation with yougoslavia has been confirmed by american sources, but according to international law that still doesn't give anyone the right to bomb an embassy. (by the way the whole war against yougoslavia was not justified but that's another question) . also the us knew where exactly to find the house of milosevic and all the other sites, like the television-building, whereas the embassy was isolated in a parc and could be found on all maps and even in the local tourist office. Don't tell me that the CIA was not capable of locating its targets...
The bombing of the embassy in Beirout did not happen by a state (if not that state would have been bombed to ground zero) but by an organisation, as well as in Kenya and Tanzania.
chinese spy-aircraft before the coast of the us would be a huge scandall, believe me, and the us have unilaterally expanded their "territorial water area".

what do i have in common with Tatcher, i am deeply hurt!!!

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by kauffner

Oh, right. As if you would know all about Jews before 1948. The U.S. has very few purebreed Indians nowadays. You can be as little as one eighth Indian and still be classified as an official Indian. (I'm about one sixteenth myself.) So a modern-day Indian who is really anti-White would typically be hating his own mother or father.

I guess you never been into Canada or upper north of US(near the montana). What about the indian reserve in Canada? They are american pure blodd indian! they have a hard time to adopt into the secular society.

You must live in a middle class neigbourhood. Which you never see or hear pure blood indians. In upper north, near the border of US, there is few indian reserve. Many Indian is living in a poverty line. It is been forgotten by the dominated multicultural society. Most of them involves with drugs and alcholics. Most of them have lost the value of true identity.

Let's face it. You are middle educated class of US citizen. When you are a middle class in US, there are many advantages. Which is a different world than the poverty line US citizen. It is like a heaven and earth.
The zionist movement is formed for state of israel. Is it not?


Not coincidence. Contact spreads disease. The Amerindian population of the U.S. and Canada declined from about 1 million pre-contact to 300,000 in the late 19th century. Indians suddenly came into contact with numerous diseases that they had no immunity for and were therefore even more vulnerable then Europeans at the time of the Black Death.

Yes. It is a lie from British Colonialism. The British repeatedly lie about the dark past of imperialism. The British lie to East India. The British lie to african blacks. The British lie to China, and so forth.

However, Imperialism is the past thing. No one is complaining.

The history books about Small polls is from British text book, which is in the age of imperialism. It is passing down through generations til the days of independance. Do you honestly believe the victor of the history or the loser? Do you honestly believe the British in the name of god, enslave the african race?

Most likely the victor is teller of history. The victor story is well recognized. The loser's history is unrecognized. The loser is quickly forgotten.

If Hitler win the war. His version of history will become the truth.
Hitler's history will become recognized world wide. Let's not forget about this. The Romam empire is doing the same.

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by kauffner
christian: To criticize Europeans for immigrating to America hundreds of years ago is anachronistic. There was no concept of immigration regulation then, no American Indian government to get a visa from.

Under common law, unused land can be claimed by the first person to effect an improvement on it. By this standard, most of the land in North America never belonged to the Indians. What's more, the Indians generally received money in exchange for their land, even if they weren't using it.


Well. If your logic work like this before the creation of UN. I can argue in case of Israel.

To criticize israelis for immigrating to israel a hundreds of thousands years ago is anachronistic. There was no concept of immigration regulation then, no Palestinian to get a visa from.

Under common law, unused land can be claimed by the first person to effect an improvement on it. By this standard, most of the land in Israel never belonged to the Israelis.

You said it. The one who occupy first, should become the land owner. I am applying your logic.

Let's the UN do its job. Yes. I do recognize Israel. I don't agree the jewish people move away from Israel.

However, you are denying the fact that Tibet is part of China. China invades Tibet 200 years ago. It is part of china eversince.
British invades N. America 250 years ago. White people is the dominate race in N. American.

The UN only recognize the law within the history of UN creation and now. It doesn't dig up 200 years of histories and revenge.

[kauffner]

Originally posted by takeo
it is funny to see how people who normally on this forum spit on UN-resolutios and the right of every people to determine its own future (not only kaufner) and who think Jews have the right to live in israel because they lived there 2000 years ago, now when the question is not israel but Tibet, suddenly refere to un-resolutions and the principle of self-determination...
I'd have to be a simple-minded dolt if I either always supported or always opposed the U.N. With self-determination, there is always the question of what is the appropriate unit to apply the principle to. I am not convinced that Palestinians are a real nationality, especially when they are led by someone like Arafat, who was born and grew up in Egypt. Palestine, at least as it is defined on PA maps, is a nation with a majority Jewish population.

Actually no single country recognized Tibet as independent and had an embassy there during the 20th century.

Nepal had an embassy in Lhasa and Britain had a diplomatic mission. In Nepal's application for U.N. membership, Tibet is listed as a country Nepal has "full diplomatic relations" with. Britain's 1914 treaty with Tibet is the strongest example of recognition since it set the Tibet-India boundary that is still in use today.

The focus shouldn't be on what far away governments recognized, but rather on the actual situation in Tibet. Melvyn Goldstein has translated a ton of a material from Tibetan about the 1913-51 period. (You can either read his book, A History of Modern Tibet, 1913-1951 or the summary posted on the Web.) He makes it pretty clear that the Tibetan government functioned as an independent state and didn't doubt its own sovereignty.

according to international law that still doesn't give anyone the right to bomb an embassy

If you go by the U.N. Charter, every use of force must be authorized by the Security Council. But in the real world, if someone is shooting at you, you shoot back.

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by kauffner

Nepal had an embassy in Lhasa and Britain had a diplomatic mission. In Nepal's application for U.N. membership, Tibet is listed as a country Nepal has "full diplomatic relations" with. Britain's 1914 treaty with Tibet is the strongest example of recognition since it set the Tibet-India boundary that is still in use today.

The focus shouldn't be on what far away governments recognized, but rather on the actual situation in Tibet. Melvyn Goldstein has translated a ton of a material from Tibetan about the 1913-51 period. (You can either read his book, A History of Modern Tibet, 1913-1951 or the summary posted on the Web.) He makes it pretty clear that the Tibetan government functioned as an independent state and didn't doubt its own sovereignty.

Yeah. The british imperialism recognize Tibets. Which is the peak of the empire. It is before the creation of UN.

If your logic applies to today. Many sovergnity in the world should carve out to pieces like Canada. Many ethnic groups wants separation. A province in Quebec will have seperation. (Quebec is eastern part of Canada) Many South America guerilla wants seperation. Everyone will cut up to pieces. Then they won't be any nations.

In the 20th, the britain still don't recognize Tibet as a independant country. Britain recognize the map of China. Tibet is always part of china. The UN recognize the map of china, which includes Tibet.

If you go by the U.N. Charter, every use of force must be authorized by the Security Council. But in the real world, if someone is shooting at you, you shoot back.

Yeah. An eye for an eye thing. Gun solves every problem.

[kauffner]

takeo: Haitians don't face persecution if they are returned to Haiti; they are just poor. There are international treaties which China is a party to that provide for the humane treatment of refugees. Yet the North Korean refugees who entered the Japanese consulate are likely to be returned to NK and executed just for being refugees.

Something like 30 to 40 percent of the world's population would immigrate to the U.S. if it could. We can't possibly accepted everyone. China doesn't have to accept North Korean refugees at all. It can send them to South Korea.

christian: There are reservations in South Dakota and New Mexico where full-bloods still speak tribal languages. But that's maybe 50,000 people. It's a tiny percentage of the overall American Indian population, which is about 2.5 million.

Quebec voted to remain with Canada in the last referendum. If it ever voted for independence, I assume it would get it.

I don't deny that Tibet is a part of China. But your history is all wrong. Tibet was briefly occupied by Qing forces in the eighteenth century, but it has been a part of China only since 1951.

Countries don't "recognize" each others' maps, nor does the U.N. recognize the maps of member states. Official Chinese maps assign various area to China, such as Twarong, that are clearly not Chinese. When China first joined the U.N. in 1945, it's official map included Mongolia. Russia recognized Mongolia in 1921 and there has has been no Chinese presence in the country since that time. The Falklands, Kashmir, and many other areas are claimed by more than one country. Assigning an area to yourself on an official map doesn't make it yours.

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by kauffner
[B]takeo: Haitians don't face persecution if they are returned to Haiti; they are just poor. There are international treaties which China is a party to that provide for the humane treatment of refugees. Yet the North Korean refugees who entered the Japanese consulate are likely to be returned to NK and executed just for being refugees.

I don't think so. May be not the haitian. S. Vietnam refugee definitely will ship back and executed. It is even a political discussion in 1980's,because the Vietnamese are doing major crimes in US. Perhaps, you think US is a humanitarian country, accepting refugees. IN fact, US is just like everyone else. US accepts a small percentage of refugees.

Yes. NK force enter the Japan's embassy will returned and executed. You forget to mention in your own words. There are 30,000 NK refugee in China. They are working and make a living. Please don't focus on one angle. Besides, I heard the japanese is negotiating the about the status of five refugee. It is most likely the five refugee will be transited to S. Korea. This sets a bad precedent for events to come. Imagine 3 million refugee use China for transiting to S. Korea. The s. korean politician will change their mind very soon.

Something like 30 to 40 percent of the world's population would immigrate to the U.S. if it could. We can't possibly accepted everyone. China doesn't have to accept North Korean refugees at all. It can send them to South Korea.

You foret to mention. US has at least 95% literacy rate. US has large middle class. US has a strong economy. US has sufficient food supply. US has 25% control of the world economy.
These are the condition, the refugee can benefit greatly.
In China, we have 60% illiteracy rate. A large peasant are still living in $1 US per day. There are a lots of undeveloped area. If we accept more illiterate refugee. The country will be in such a choas. The reason US accepts the Jewish people, most of the European Jews are educated. MOst of the European jews are educated class. As for other refugee, I don't have to answer that. YOu know their consequence. They are shipped back. US doesn't accept many illiterate refugees. It even becomes a issue, by Right Wing Republican. Everyone wants immigrants that is highly skilled. Everyone wants immigrants that can contribute to the society.

I live in Vancouver. Vancouver has a huge chinese immigrants. These immigrants are not refugee. These immigrants are building vancouver society. Many chinese small businesses are stationed in Vancouver and Toronto.


christian: There are reservations in South Dakota and New Mexico where full-bloods still speak tribal languages. But that's maybe 50,000 people. It's a tiny percentage of the overall American Indian population, which is about 2.5 million.

Well. I am just responding to you. YOu said there aren't pure blood indians. Especially, In Canada, we have a lots of pure blood indians.

Quebec voted to remain with Canada in the last referendum. If it ever voted for independence, I assume it would get it.

I don't deny that Tibet is a part of China. But your history is all wrong. Tibet was briefly occupied by Qing forces in the eighteenth century, but it has been a part of China only since 1951.

It is no use to argue which history is right. History is always belongs to the victor. The international law belongs to UN. It applies to the world in all spectrum. In 20th century, it works well for everyone so far.UN does recognize Tibet as part of china. So, we haven't violate the international law.

Countries don't "recognize" each others' maps, nor does the U.N. recognize the maps of member states. Official Chinese maps assign various area to China, such as Twarong, that are clearly not Chinese. When China first joined the U.N. in 1945, it's official map included Mongolia. Russia recognized Mongolia in 1921 and there has has been no Chinese presence in the country since that time. The Falklands, Kashmir, and many other areas are claimed by more than one country. Assigning an area to yourself on an official map doesn't make it yours.

Yes. 1921, The weak China appeace Russia. Outer mongolia has their independance. Where inner mongolia belongs to Mainland.

The creation of UN is stated. All the Maps of the world is set. Kashmir is a different problem than Tibet. Tibet is always part of china. The UN recognize it.

Let me remind you UN does punish people like Yugoslave and Iraq.



By the way, you are living in seoul. Nice place. I like the beauty of Korean woman. :p They have a nice and white skin.:D

Are u married to Korean woman or just work there by yourself?

[Mediocrates]

I noticed on this whole page never a mention of Taiwan. Can Taiwanese 'return'? Are they refugees? They're certainly as internationally isolated as Israel?

Frankly I can't read all of the blocked, unedited light blue comments on top of the dark blue bold references to other statements and misstatements. No attention span - you practically need a flowchart to read this page so just cut to chase. What do you think is the status of Taiwan?

[takeo]

"I'd have to be a simple-minded dolt if I either always supported or always opposed the U.N. With self-determination, there is always the question of what is the appropriate unit to apply the principle to. I am not convinced that Palestinians are a real nationality, especially when they are led by someone like Arafat, who was born and grew up in Egypt. Palestine, at least as it is defined on PA maps, is a nation with a majority Jewish population. "

So i have to conclude that you only support un-resolutions when it is in accordance with your own sympathies? (Tibet yes, palestinians no).
Palestinians are internationally recognised as a people and determine themselves as a people (as well as Tibetans), not upon you to decide they are not a people. The PA has changed its map by the way, the PA recognises israel within its internationally recognised borders, in Westbank and Gaza they are DEFINATELY not a minority. (by the way if you count all the etnic cleansed people in neighbouring countries than there are in total more palestinians than Israeli).
by the way, on the contrary to Tibet, the occupation by israel was never legally accepted by not a single country in the world, and at least in China there are no discriminatory laws against tibetans as there is in the occupied territories against palestinians (and israel propper).






"Nepal had an embassy in Lhasa and Britain had a diplomatic mission. In Nepal's application for U.N. membership, Tibet is listed as a country Nepal has "full diplomatic relations" with. Britain's 1914 treaty with Tibet is the strongest example of recognition since it set the Tibet-India boundary that is still in use today. "

OK, so Nepal recognised Tibet, big deal (i'm sure some countries recognise Tchechnia and republika srpska too), Brittain never legally recognised Tibet, it was only interested in extending its empire.

"The focus shouldn't be on what far away governments recognized, but rather on the actual situation in Tibet. Melvyn Goldstein has translated a ton of a material from Tibetan about the 1913-51 period. (You can either read his book, A History of Modern Tibet, 1913-1951 or the summary posted on the Web.) He makes it pretty clear that the Tibetan government functioned as an independent state and didn't doubt its own sovereignty. "

well, also the Tchechnian government was functioning as well as the breakaway republic of Abkhazia, and the republika Srpska was functioning as an independant state as well... they never doubted their sovereignty as well, the rest of the world does however...



"If you go by the U.N. Charter, every use of force must be authorized by the Security Council. But in the real world, if someone is shooting at you, you shoot back."

Yougoslavia never attacked the US, and never even attacked a neighbouring country, it was just oppressing terrorism, as israel did today (but on it's own soil, on the contrary to israel).




"takeo: Haitians don't face persecution if they are returned to Haiti; they are just poor. There are international treaties which China is a party to that provide for the humane treatment of refugees. Yet the North Korean refugees who entered the Japanese consulate are likely to be returned to NK and executed just for being refugees. "

Haitians DO face persecution, political murders still happen everyday, it has also known one of the most bloody (us-supported by the way) dictatorships ever, that of baby and papa doc, also in that time the us send refugees back, also those intended to go to Canada...
Human treatment of refugees doesn't mean they can't be send back, by the way NK's are only starting to immigrate since the mid 90's when their economy collapsed, so big possibility they are economic immigrants as well.


"I don't deny that Tibet is a part of China. But your history is all wrong. Tibet was briefly occupied by Qing forces in the eighteenth century, but it has been a part of China only since 1951. "

No, officially it never ceased to be a part of China, as mongolia that was later recognised as independant during the Mao period.


"Countries don't "recognize" each others' maps, nor does the U.N. recognize the maps of member states. Official Chinese maps assign various area to China, such as Twarong, that are clearly not Chinese. When China first joined the U.N. in 1945, it's official map included Mongolia. Russia recognized Mongolia in 1921 and there has has been no Chinese presence in the country since that time. The Falklands, Kashmir, and many other areas are claimed by more than one country. Assigning an area to yourself on an official map doesn't make it yours.
"

That's right, and this is the case for israel as well...
Yet since after the war, the official borders recognised by the UN are the borders that are recognised by most of the world. kashmir is part of india, pakistan is the only country not accepting this. etc.

[christian]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
I noticed on this whole page never a mention of Taiwan. Can Taiwanese 'return'? Are they refugees? They're certainly as internationally isolated as Israel?

Frankly I can't read all of the blocked, unedited light blue comments on top of the dark blue bold references to other statements and misstatements. No attention span - you practically need a flowchart to read this page so just cut to chase. What do you think is the status of Taiwan?

Taiwan should stay as a independant sovernigty within Chinese border. Taiwan should serve as a breeding ground for liberal ideals to Chinese people. Only 30% Taiwanese supports separations. The 60% taiwanese don't believe in separation. Moreover, 60% taiwanese don't believe the helping hand of US,because they see how the US pull out of the south vietnam. They rather stay like the current situation, with ambiguous soverignty.

Independant sovernigty means you have a separate armies. You have a seperate political system. It is just a declaration that Taiwan is within the border of China.

US shouldn't pursue policy of unilateralism. US should just follow three no's agreement, accepting the ambiguous status of Taiwan.
US shouldn't define the ambiguous status.
It is good in a way. China has a needle in his eye. Or else, human right issue will never been discussed.

Taiwanese is not refugee. They have a high status in Chinese businesses. If you read my last post. Taiwanese owns 15% total production of China. The figure is a wrong figure,because many taiwanese doesn't want to report their leaking huge investment to Taiwan authority. There is so much money involve. It will be stupid for the PRC, to bomb the golden goose.
Note: the PRC can take out taiwan in any day. The problem is you will kill the golden goose.

Taiwanese is not internationally isolated. Go to Canada. you will be surprised, there is many exchange between taiwanese and canadian. Moreover, Taiwanese businese is reaching globally. Names like Acer computer is a international recognized brand. Political, taiwanese is isolated.

Israel is not internationally isolated. In France, one of the most power cabinet job Finance minister is a jew. There are so many jews in Europe. They are well represented in politics. The arabs on the other hand is not well represented. The arabs is no way, can influence the political decision in EU.

It is just European jews have different point of view than the US jews.

In Hong Kong, in colonial time, there are few european jews holding the top jobs. China Light power, one of the biggest electrical company in HK, is owned by Jewish businessman.
China is doing many businesss with European jews through Hong Kong.

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by takeo


Yougoslavia never attacked the US, and never even attacked a neighbouring country, it was just oppressing terrorism, as israel did today (but on it's own soil, on the contrary to israel).

Corrects. Yougoslav would never attack US first. It will give US excuse to bomb Yougoslavia. Since, the US attack first. The Yugoslavia pursue the wrong strategy and attack their own ethnic Albanian. Unfortunately, ethic cleasing strategy is a wrong strategy of Yugoslav government. They are paying the heavy price for that.



Haitians DO face persecution, political murders still happen everyday, it has also known one of the most bloody (us-supported by the way) dictatorships ever, that of baby and papa doc, also in that time the us send refugees back, also those intended to go to Canada...
Human treatment of refugees doesn't mean they can't be send back, by the way NK's are only starting to immigrate since the mid 90's when their economy collapsed, so big possibility they are economic immigrants as well.

100% correct. NK refugee lives well in china. They are also doing business, which it is impossible for NK refugee in NK regime. Some S. K. business located in China is designed to help the NK refugee business. The NK who enters S. K., wants immigrating to S.K. Which is a very sensitive issue in China. In other words, China remains ambiguity in this issue, so China doesn't hurt dioplamotic relationship with S. K and N.K regime.

[kauffner]

Originally posted by takeo
So i have to conclude that you only support un-resolutions when it is in accordance with your own sympathies?
Tell us, wise one, which are the right resolutions to support? Apparently not the ones protecting refugees.
The PA has changed its map by the way, the PA recognizes Israel within its internationally recognized borders, in West Bank and Gaza they are DEFINATELY not a minority.
Check out www.fateh.net. The Fateh symbol includes a map of Israel with no boundary between Israel proper and the territories. Here's a link showing the official PA map of Palestine: http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/index.jsp?section=static&page=tvadcampaign
Palestinians are internationally recognized as a people and determine themselves as a people (as well as Tibetans), not upon you to decide they are not a people.
You make it sound like it was a legal process. UN General Assembly resolutions are normally not legally binding. I have just as much right to an opinion as any conference of diplomatic blowhards.
Haitians DO face persecution, political murders still happen everyday, it has also known one of the most bloody (us-supported by the way) dictatorships ever, that of baby and papa doc
Every country has crime and Haiti certainly has more than its share. But the average North Korean would almost certainly find Haiti to be a big step up from where he is. People are eating in Haiti, you know.

"U.S.-supported"? What does this even mean? Imagine if the U.S. had denied Haiti development assistance when the Duvaliers were in power. You'd be telling us how U.S. sanctions radicalized an elected Haitian government and impoverished a nation, n'est pas? Whenever an unfortunate event happens anywhere in the world, you can be sure that someone will find a way to blame it on the United States.
Yet since after the war, the official borders recognized by the UN are the borders that are recognized by most of the world.
It's unusual for the UN recognize any boundary. Resolution 242 implies that the territory within the Green Line is clearly Israeli. But the UN doesn't have a boundary commission ruling on the status of disputed territory. The parties involved would have to agree to arbitration by the World Court if they wanted a binding opinion on any specific dispute.
kashmir is part of India, Pakistan is the only country not accepting this. etc.
"Final disposition of the state of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance with the will of people expressed through the democratic method of free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of United Nations" -- UN Security Council Resolution 91 (1951).

[kauffner]

Originally posted by christian
S. Vietnam refugee definitely will ship back and executed. It is even a political discussion in 1980's,because the Vietnamese are doing major crimes in US.
I would be very surprised if any refugee was actually deported from the U.S. to Vietnam.

Imagine 3 million refugee use China for transiting to S. Korea. The s. korean politician will change their mind very soon.
Such a large outpouring of refugees would probably lead to the collapse of the North Korean regime, just as it did for East Germany in 1989. The North Koreans persumably think so: they would be expelling people if they thought it would hurt the South.

The current governent in South Korea discourages defectors because it doesn't want to make the North Koreans angry and so it can portray its pro-North Korean "sunshine policy" as a success (although IMO all its accomplished to allowed NK to smuggle in more drugs.) The sunshine policy is not real popular and might not continue after the presidential elections in December.

I have talked to quite a few South Koreans about the refugee issue and I have yet to meet anyone who favors turning North Koreans away, even if there was a large influx.
Are u married to Korean woman or just work there by yourself?

Not married, just work here.

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by kauffner

Tell us, wise one, which are the right resolutions to support? Apparently not the ones protecting refugees.

You make it sound like it was a legal process. UN General Assembly resolutions are normally not legally binding. I have just as much right to an opinion as any conference of diplomatic blowhards.


Yeah. You mean UN is not creditable. Try to tell that to ethnic cleanser Sloboden and Mr. satan Saddam Insane. They are scare to death.

Every country has crime and Haiti certainly has more than its share. But the average North Korean would almost certainly find Haiti to be a big step up from where he is. People are eating in Haiti, you know.

I guess you never read my post. NK refugee is working in China. S. Korea is pouring so much money for these refugee as a co-working relationship. You should know this, since you are living in Seoul.

So, I don't understand what you mean N. Korea refugee is starving in China. You should know S. korean is secretly developing industries, hiring N. k refugees. Although, It is not necessary.



"U.S.-supported"? What does this even mean? Imagine if the U.S. had denied Haiti development assistance when the Duvaliers were in power. You'd be telling us how U.S. sanctions radicalized an elected Haitian government and impoverished a nation, n'est pas? Whenever an unfortunate event happens anywhere in the world, you can be sure that someone will find a way to blame it on the United States.

WEll. They have to send you thank card . Isn't ? :rolleyes:
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/43a/065.html
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/43a/083.html
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/43a/index-ae.html

These are the many thanks from Haitian people.
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/43a/index-bbb.html
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/43a/023.html0

By the way, these website is not a chinese propangada. It looks like a academic research from western universities.


"Final disposition of the state of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance with the will of people expressed through the democratic method of free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of United Nations" -- UN Security Council Resolution 91 (1951).

So, you mean the map of UN is not creditable. Convince me?Convince Saddam Hussein?

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by kauffner
[B]
I would be very surprised if any refugee was actually deported from the U.S. to Vietnam.

Coz. You are not immigrants. You never focus on issue from a immigrat perspective. You are born in America .

Don't be surprise about the refusal of refugee. The trick is do it secretly without media scrintiny,like immigrants is causing crime, etc. Le Pen immigrants is well feed and then should send them back. Australia

It happens all the time.

Such a large outpouring of refugees would probably lead to the collapse of the North Korean regime, just as it did for East Germany in 1989. The North Koreans persumably think so: they would be expelling people if they thought it would hurt the South.

The current governent in South Korea discourages defectors because it doesn't want to make the North Koreans angry and so it can portray its pro-North Korean "sunshine policy" as a success (although IMO all its accomplished to allowed NK to smuggle in more drugs.) The sunshine policy is not real popular and might not continue after the presidential elections in December.

I have talked to quite a few South Koreans about the refugee issue and I have yet to meet anyone who favors turning North Koreans away, even if there was a large influx.

If they don't mind. I guess it is ok. However, it will set a bad precedant for later.

[kauffner]

Originally posted by christian
Coz. You are not immigrants. You never focus on issue from a immigrat perspective. You are born in America? I see. So you don't actually know anything. You are just assuming that that refugees were deported.

So, you mean the map of UN is not creditable. Convince me?Convince Saddam Hussein?
Like the Vietnamese refugees deported from the U.S., I am afraid this "map of UN" exists only in your imagination.


I don't what you are trying to prove with your Haitian links. They are not even about the same historical period that I was talking about.

So, I don't understand what you mean N. Korea refugee is starving in China.
I was referring to North Koreans living in North Korea, not to refugees.

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by kauffner
I see. So you don't actually know anything. You are just assuming that that refugees were deported.


Like the Vietnamese refugees deported from the U.S., I am afraid this "map of UN" exists only in your imagination.

Yes. Australian turn away the afghastan refugee is a imagination. Haitian refugee turn away by american is a imagination. Not to mention in WWII, American Jews been turned away by american authority get slaugther in Auswitz, is a imagination.

The map of UN is a imagination. So, what is the point of UN? hey! Syria should take back israel anytime. Everyone should have their view of "map". The Russia have their view of "map", so they can occupy afghastan.

Palestinian should take back israel. Israel map is a imagination.
Hey! Indonesian like their view of "map" with East Timor, it is an imagination.

Of course, tibet, your logic suite us the best.

I don't what you are trying to prove with your Haitian links. They are not even about the same historical period that I was talking about.

Hah a! The records are within the timeperiod of 20th century. What time frame are you refer to?

By the way, the site also includes the middle age Haiti. If you are interested.


I was referring to North Koreans living in North Korea, not to refugees.


Well. You said NK refugee is starving. Did you? So, you give me an impression, that we are the one who starve them. We are the one who kills N K refugee.

By the way, How can you explain there is 30,000 refugee in China? If you call us evil unhuman. We should just ship all of them back to NK regime and get slaughter. That will fit your description.

[takeo]

"Tell us, wise one, which are the right resolutions to support? Apparently not the ones protecting refugees. "

There is no resolution that calls for the acceptance of all refugees. All un-resolutions have to be accepted, if you cite one to proove your point than it means you recognise the un and so you have to accept all resolutions.



"Check out www.fateh.net. The Fateh symbol includes a map of Israel with no boundary between Israel proper and the territories. Here's a link showing the official PA map of Palestine: http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy....ge=tvadcampaign "

This is not the official PA-website. THIS is the plo-website:

http://www.nad-plo.org/permanent/borders.html



"You make it sound like it was a legal process. UN General Assembly resolutions are normally not legally binding. I have just as much right to an opinion as any conference of diplomatic blowhards. "

oK, so in that case why should there be a UN after all, if you consider their resolutions to be ignorable, it means however that a big part of the world think the Palestinians are a people.




"Every country has crime and Haiti certainly has more than its share. But the average North Korean would almost certainly find Haiti to be a big step up from where he is. People are eating in Haiti, you know. "

LOL, i know people who went to both Haiti and North-Korea, and Haiti is one of the worst countries in the world, where people have no food, no decent housing, no water, no electricity, lots of violence and this since many years with no improovement at all.
North-korea was untill the 80's a devellopped country comparable with south-korea and untill the 70's even better. There has been a very serious food shortage for a couple of years since the soviet-union collapsed and still, but the average life-expectancy is still some 20 years above Haiti and all people can read and write and have accession to water and health-care, whereas in Haiti only a small minority.

""U.S.-supported"? What does this even mean? Imagine if the U.S. had denied Haiti development assistance when the Duvaliers were in power. You'd be telling us how U.S. sanctions radicalized an elected Haitian government and impoverished a nation, n'est pas? Whenever an unfortunate event happens anywhere in the world, you can be sure that someone will find a way to blame it on the United States. "

well, the US is doing exactly that in Cuba, which may be a dictatorship but for sure not as cruel and violent as in haiti. If the US is giving billions of military aid to a hash dictatorship than it is co-responsible in a way.
An unfortunate event as in Venezuela where the coup-leader has been seen in the embassy a couple of days before the coup, and american carriers where protecting the island where the elected president was held, yes than you will find people who will blame the US...





"It's unusual for the UN recognize any boundary. Resolution 242 implies that the territory within the Green Line is clearly Israeli. "
that's right, so it didn't recognise the military occupation

"But the UN doesn't have a boundary commission ruling on the status of disputed territory. The parties involved would have to agree to arbitration by the World Court if they wanted a binding opinion on any specific dispute. "

One thing is for sure, the un-resolution calling for the end of occupation of lands conquered in 1967, so actually the arbitration of the world court is not necessary, israel has already been condamned for illegal occupation.
In iraq in 1990 the UN rightfully also condamned iraq because it occupied land not belonging to iraq, no arbitration by the world court was needed in that case...

"The current governent in South Korea discourages defectors because it doesn't want to make the North Koreans angry and so it can portray its pro-North Korean "sunshine policy" as a success (although IMO all its accomplished to allowed NK to smuggle in more drugs.) The sunshine policy is not real popular and might not continue after the presidential elections in December. "

So actually, as a typical american GI, you hate negociation and reconciliation, you prefere to keep the gap between the two Korea's open so that your presence there and controll over Korea can be maintained. What I heard was that many Southkoreans are unhappy with the American presence there and large demonstrations happened against the "axis of evil"speech of Bush, because in stead of solving the problems with the north, it would lead to another cold war (or even HOT war...).

[takeo]

"Corrects. Yougoslav would never attack US first. It will give US excuse to bomb Yougoslavia. Since, the US attack first. The Yugoslavia pursue the wrong strategy and attack their own ethnic Albanian. Unfortunately, ethic cleasing strategy is a wrong strategy of Yugoslav government. They are paying the heavy price for that. "

actually, the war against yougoslavia began because it didn't allow with the independance of kosovo in Rambouillet "negociations" (not negociations but a clear blackmail to the Serbs: surrender or face war")
actually serbia was faced with mass-terrorism from muslim rebels and there wasn't (yet) etnic cleansing. The people start to flee their houses after the bombs started to fall, and in the courtcase against milosevic it is now prooven there there were circulating papers calling to all albanians to leave the area, so that it would support the nato-bombardments and the guerilla.

just imagine israel being forced to give up west-bank, Gaza and easten jerusalem or face massive bombing (and the excuse used would be the human rights violations in Jenin, which looked quite well at how the serbs fought against the rebels) ... (with the diference that kosovo was a legal part of Serbia whereas the occupied territories are no legal part of israel).

[Morpheus]

Originally posted by takeo
[Bjust imagine israel being forced to give up west-bank, Gaza and easten jerusalem or face massive bombing (and the excuse used would be the human rights violations in Jenin, which looked quite well at how the serbs fought against the rebels) ... (with the diference that kosovo was a legal part of Serbia whereas the occupied territories are no legal part of israel). [/B]

Some thoughts of mine:

It was not the US who bombed Yugoslavia, it was NATO (with support from the EU). The EU was also eager to bomb Yugoslavia for the reasons you mentioned yourself, but as for now, the EU still doesn't have a military force (which will change in the future with the EUROCORPS, the EU Army). That's why we need to rely on the US for military backup, intelligence. But the bombs which were dropped from French Mirages were as explosive as from US F-16's. It was especially Germany who wanted to take military actions against Yugoslavia (pipeline through Kosovo). If the EU could handle the problem on its own, they would not need the US.

What the Serbs did in Srebrenica for example was not comparable to what the IDF did in Jenin. The Serbs came into villages and killed 5000 men just because they were muslim. IDF came into Jenin, destroyed houses, cars and killed civilians as well. They claim that it was collateral damage, but I don't think the IDF wants to become even less popular by conducting ethnic cleanings. If only the UN could tell us what happened ... :(

[takeo]

Yes i agree unfortunately the EU was involved in the aggression against Yougoslavia, but it was primarily M. Albright who wanted to bomb the Serbs, and the French only participated after huge pressure (but anyway they are to blame too), this has been prooven by the BBC documentory "Kosovo".

There were no 5000 Muslims killed in Kosovo before the bombs started to fall, so that couldn't possibly be the excuse for the nato-war. there was the "radjak-massacre" which was also prooven by the BBC-documentory to be a set-up by the KLA-rebels, their leaders even admitted that.
the official excuse for starting the nato-campaign was that the Serb army didn't commit themselves to leave kosovo (which means leave it for the KLA-rebels).
Also the etnic cleansing of kosovars has occured but only AFTEr the war started. Furthermore most didn't flee becaude of etnic cleansing but because of well-prepared evacuationplans which have now been discovered during the Milosevic-tribunal. this same plans have been used in Macedonia as well by the way some months ago. even albanese leader Rugova could not longer deny this.
What happened in jenin was for sure worse than anything that happened before the war started in Yougoslavia ( of course bosnia was worse but that's a different story, i mean in kosovo).

The difference between Kosovo and Palestine however is that kosovo is a legitimate part of Serbia and that kosovars had equal rights as Serbs in theory.
Also the US did not seem to have have any trouble supporting muslim-terrorists in kosovo. (neither in Afghanistan in the 80's)

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by takeo

So actually, as a typical american GI, you hate negociation and reconciliation, you prefere to keep the gap between the two Korea's open so that your presence there and controll over Korea can be maintained. What I heard was that many Southkoreans are unhappy with the American presence there and large demonstrations happened against the "axis of evil"speech of Bush, because in stead of solving the problems with the north, it would lead to another cold war (or even HOT war...).

100% correct. That is unilateralism. :D

I don't think US is interested in solving the N. Korean. The South Korean hates the US presence. Especially, the evil axis speech really makes many s. korean mad, because it kills their own people indirectly. While the situation benefits US. Guess why? Weapon Industry$$$$$.

Takeo,
What do you think about Holland assassination? Do you think Facist is coming back? I am just curious.

[takeo]

No, i don't think fascism is coming back, he was assasinated by a an ecological fanatic because he was in favor of building "appartments for pigs" (multi-story pig-factories...) :rolleyes:

Altough some rightwing ideas are gaining popularity, which is a worriing phenomenon, but i wouldn't call it fascism.

[Morpheus]

Originally posted by christian
[QUOTE]Originally posted by takeo

[B]I don't think US is interested in solving the N. Korean. The South Korean hates the US presence. Especially, the evil axis speech really makes many s. korean mad, because it kills their own people indirectly. While the situation benefits US. Guess why? Weapon Industry$$$$$.

Takeo,
What do you think about Holland assassination? Do you think Facist is coming back? I am just curious.


I have to agree with Christian and Takeo. But what else do you expect from a president who thinks Slovakia is a part of Yugoslavia. Axis of evil was just a dumb expression. First of all because no-one had ever used this term since WWII. Axis? I mean, that's a word which you don't really want to use.
I would be quite pissed off when your own people (Koreans from the North and South are still family) gets accused of being a part of the "axis of evil". Kim Jung Il of the DPRK is ofcourse a son of a bitch, who lets his people starve from hunger because he wants to have his own space program.

US is not at all interested in reuniting Korea. For the reasons you mentioned above. US sells lots of weapons to the RoK, for example the RoKAF (air force) has just made an order for new F-15 fighters. RoK found the French Rafale fighter superior in every way, but US has put so much pressure on the RoK gov't, they had no other choise than to buy those F-15's.

About the assasination of Pim Fortuyn in the Netherlands. Fortuyn was not Le Pen, although he was a right winger, he was no fascist unlike Le Pen. It's sad this has happened in a modern democracy like Holland.

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Morpheus

I have to agree with Christian and Takeo. But what else do you expect from a president who thinks Slovakia is a part of Yugoslavia. Axis of evil was just a dumb expression. First of all because no-one had ever used this term since WWII. Axis? I mean, that's a word which you don't really want to use.
I would be quite pissed off when your own people (Koreans from the North and South are still family) gets accused of being a part of the "axis of evil". Kim Jung Il of the DPRK is ofcourse a son of a bitch, who lets his people starve from hunger because he wants to have his own space program.

US is not at all interested in reuniting Korea. For the reasons you mentioned above. US sells lots of weapons to the RoK, for example the RoKAF (air force) has just made an order for new F-15 fighters. RoK found the French Rafale fighter superior in every way, but US has put so much pressure on the RoK gov't, they had no other choise than to buy those F-15's.
[/B]

Not only s. korean, are p!ssed off. If you are chinese like me. You will p!ssed off too. Taiwanese is buying more weapons. The US are not interested in a peaceful dialogue.
The US wants to make money with our blood. Many taiwanese I talk to, they don't believe US. They know US, is trying to make money out of their pockets. They believe in independant soverngity, not as a independant country.

In 50's, US is like a hero to the world. In 2002, he is like a greedy bastard, who wants to make money out of other people's blood. That is their foreign policy.

It is ridicules. What they did four years ago in Iraq. They bomb Iraq, because Monica lewisky. I am not sure you see through it or not.

Kim Jung Il of the DPRK is ofcourse a son of a bitch, who lets his people starve from hunger because he wants to have his own space program

I agree. He is a S.O.B. I hope there will be another leadership with N. Korea. It is most unlikely.

[kauffner]

chistain: Why should China be so concerned about U.S. arms sales to Taiwan? I don't think anyone seriously worries that Taiwan will attack China. China wants to bully Taiwan into accepting reunification on communist terms. There is no reason for the U.S. to assist such a program, especially when it would cost us money to do so.

China keeps promising not to sell ballistic missile technology, but keeps doing it anyway. As far as conventional weapons go, I doubt that China has ever cancelled a sale to please the United States.

[kauffner]

There is no major political figure in South Korea who favors the withdrawal of U.S. troops, just some loud-mouthed protestors. The North Koreans tell themselves that the South Koreans are "pushovers" and don't take the South Korean army seriously, or at least that is what high ranking defectors say. The NKs are indoctrinated to think that their impoverished little hellhole of a country in the most wonderful place on earth and that they are a world power, second only to the United States.

The North Korean plan for unification is to somehow to get the U.S. to withdraw from Korea and then to bombard Seoul and finally to march south to effect "complete liberation of the peninsula." They believe that their artillery can flatten Seoul in five to six minutes. See http://www.fas.org/irp/world/rok/nis-docs/hwang1.htm

Every South Korean I've talked to thinks the North is militarily superior. No tries to argue that South Korea would able to defeat a North Korean invasion on it's own.

Sometimes Koreans say things like, "North Koreans are our brothers and we don't feel afraid of them." The idea that North and South Korea can get together and fight Japan is a common fantasy here. Many South Koreans support the North Korean missile program because they imagine that it is directed at Japan. (The real purpose of the program, aside from producing weapons for export, is apparently to divert U.S. attention in the event of renewed North-South fighting.) I suspect this fantasy is less the result of anti-Japanese feeling than an expression of the hope that North Korea will focus on someone other than South Korea as it's enemy.

My response is to ask, "What do think of so-and-so, who dodged the draft?" The answer is always something like, "He's scum. He should be expelled from the country or put in jail." Draft dodger is lowest form of life here and that wouldn't be true if South Koreans didn't see North Korea are a real threat.

When Bush came here in March there were about 4,000 anti-American protestors and about the same number of pro-American protestors. For a city the size of Seoul, this is nothing. At that time, Lee Hoi-chang, a conservative, solidly pro-American candidate, was way ahead in the presidential election polls. Right after that, there was a big wave of anti-Americanism. But it had very little to do with U.S. troops, Bush, or North Korea. It was triggered by the disqualification of a South Korean skater at the Salt Lake City Olympics. (Koreans are really sore losers when it comes to international sport.) The government puffed up the incident in order to divert attention from a series of bribery scandals that implicate the president's family and associates. (President Kim Dae-jung's son was arrested on Saturday.)

Immediately after the Olympics, Roh Moo-hyun, a candidate critical of the United States, surged from complete unknown to front runner. Roh talks about how Korea needs to assertive, stand up to the United States, and reassess the relationship, but it is unclear what specific policy he favors. In the past, Korean elections were all about regional loyalty and running against U.S. is a novelty. In any case, Koreans are starting to put the Olympics behind them, so I expect Roh's poll numbers to drop soon.

In my opinion, North Korea is on the brink of collapse. Such a collapse could be triggered by a wave of defections or by the death of Kim Jong-il, the current leader. He apparently has liver problems, so we may not have to wait all that long. As the old saying goes, "Where there is death, there is hope."

The North Koreans have never had a self-supporting economy. In the Cold War, they lived on handouts from the Soviet Union. Since 1994, the U.S. and Japan have been paying them off in exchange for the freezing their nuclear weapons program.

The Kim Dae-jung government uses "unification" as a code word for "pay off North Korea and don't make it angry." DJ talks about gradually reunifying Korea over 20 to 30 years and then only under a federal government with limited powers. He is explicitly against more rapid reunification on the grounds that, "We are not strong enough to feed North Korea." In other words, the sunshine policy, which Roh supports, is actually a policy of delaying reunification for as long as possible.

The U.S. spends $50 billion a year on troops stationed in Korea and Japan whose sole purpose is to deter North Korean aggression. The F-15 sale is very small potatoes by comparison. It also occurs to me that feeding North Korea would be pretty cheap compared to that kind of money. Bush has called for "regime change" in North Korea. North Korea doesn't have a basis to exist as a non-communist state, so Bush is in effect a calling for reunification under South Korean leadership. This would conform with U.N. General Assembly resolutions, which describe the Republic of Korea in Seoul as the only legitimate government on the Korean peninsula.

The fuss about the "axis of evil" line mystifies me. Has the sky fallen since Bush made the speech? I am sure each one of the states in question says nastier things about the United States.

[christian]

Kauffer,

First of all, China is not a communist country.

Second, Taiwan is always been part of china. It is cut out by Japanese imperialism.

Third, US is the biggest arms dealer in the world. It is in the figure in CNN.

Fourth, Kumingtan, the ruling party of china republic, which flee to Taiwan. They always recognize one china. Only recently, Kumingtan is displaced by separatist party.

Fifth, S. Korea doesn't like American presence. They fully know they are being used as a negotiation chip of US. They are not afraid of China either, because S. Korean relathionship with China is good. We never have any problems with S. korean, since the korean war.

Sixth, China knows to well, in order to develop their own economy. They have to limit their arm sells in third world. On the other hand, it is USA making money in the third world. China knows they have to please with the European as well. Before chinese premier, have trip in Islamic country. He goes to Europe for business and negotiation.

[Morpheus]

South Korea can win on its own from North Korea. South Korea can buy new fighters, tanks every year, north korea is totally isolated. China, Russia all stopped deliveries to Pyonyang because they perfectly know they're gonna piss off the US if they do.

Also, don't try to compare communism in North Korea (stalinism) with communism in China, a growing economy with American and European companies. China is not thinking of assisting North Korea in a conflict, in fact, they would be glad if they get rid of them. Nobody wants to have a frustrated, little country as a neighbour. The relations between South Korea and Japan are also not bad.

[kauffner]

christian: The Chinese air force is full of outdated planes and poorly trained pilots. Taiwan has F-16s, Mirage 2000s, and highly trained pilots. It could blow China's air force away without breaking a sweat. It would be suicide to send troops over without air cover.

Of course, China could still kill quite a few Taiwanese with it's missiles, both nuclear and otherwise. China's economy depends on being able to export to the U.S. So if the country does anything really outrageous, it has to worry about the possibility of U.S. trade sanctions crippling the Chinese economy. If the military fails to conquer Taiwan, as is likely, a lot of Chinese are going to be pretty mad at the Communist Party. I am sure the Chinese leadership remembers that the Soviet Union collapsed soon after it withdrew from Afghanistan.

If America's withdrawal from Vietnam proves America can't save Taiwan, what did China's withdrawal from Vietnam in 1979 prove? Taiwan can beat back a Chinese invasion without U.S. help. But Bush has made it clear that the U.S. will help Taiwan all the same.

If Koreans opposed the U.S. military presence, they'd ask us to leave and the U.S. troops would pack up. But, really, it hasn't even been much of an issue lately.

Morpheus: Of course the South Korean army outclasses the North Korean army in terms of equipment. My point was, the North Koreans don't care. They are ready to roll if U.S. leaves and they can do a lot of damage even if they are defeated in the end.

The reason Russia and China aren't selling much in way of weapons to NK is because NK doesn't have any money.

[Morpheus]

Yeah, indeed, Bush will probably assist Taiwan, but on the other hand, the Chinese were quite angry at Bush when he said Taiwan was a "country". In the CIA factbook, Taiwan is NOT considered to be a seperate country. It's more like a province with high autonomy.

On the military stuff. The RoC has got some interesting new pieces of hardware like the Mirage 2000D, the F-16 and their own new IDF-fighters. Apart from this, the navy is acquiring new Aegis Cruisers.

But the PLAAF (China Air Force) has also new fighterplanes bought from Russia : Sukhoi Su-27's, Su-30 MK's ... So a direct confrontation between both 'nations' would be a hell of a fight.

The PLA does not have enough boats to consider an amphibious assault on Taiwan. So, I don't think taiwan should have to fear from Chinese invasion.

[kauffner]

Originally posted by Morpheus
Yeah, indeed, Bush will probably assist Taiwan, but on the other hand, the Chinese were quite angry at Bush when he said Taiwan was a "country". In the CIA factbook, Taiwan is NOT considered to be a seperate country. It's more like a province with high autonomy.
Is your point only exact use of terminology, or that Bush should avoid offending the Chinese? Not offending the Chinese is a hopeless project. They are looking for reasons to be offended.

But the PLAAF (China Air Force) has also new fighterplanes bought from Russia : Sukhoi Su-27's, Su-30 MK's ... So a direct confrontation between both 'nations' would be a hell of a fight.
Only a few of those fighters have been delivered at this point, and the Chinese have a of lot trouble maintaining high-tech fighters. Taiwan currently has a huge edge in terms of equipment. As more of the Russian fighters are delivered and as the Chinese learn how to use and maintain them, that edge is expected to erode somewhat. Taiwanese pilots are far better trained than Chinese pilots and that is even more important than the equipment gap.

[Morpheus]

Originally posted by kauffner

Is your point only exact use of terminology, or that Bush should avoid offending the Chinese? Not offending the Chinese is a hopeless project. They are looking for reasons to be offended.



No, Bush does not want to get in any trouble with China. The spyplane incident is still fresh in memory, not? So he will assist Taiwan, but not at the cost of the safety of his own people.

[kauffner]

Originally posted by takeo
This is not the official PA-website. THIS is the plo-website:

http://www.nad-plo.org/permanent/borders.html[/B]

I notice the absence of any MAP on the page you have linked to. The Fateh symbol and the PA map are widely distributed on the West Bank. Some fine print in a diplomatic proposal is really not the same thing.

LOL, i know people who went to both Haiti and North-Korea, and Haiti is one of the worst countries in the world, where people have no food, no decent housing, no water, no electricity, lots of violence and this since many years with no improovement at all.

Whose's to blame to for that? President Aristide is a believer in "liberation theology" and a hard core anti-American thug. Considering your soft spot for the PFLP, I would have thought he would be just your kind of guy. Clinton put him into power because he was the choice of the Haitian people. I don't think there was ever any question of him being America's kind of president.

[christian]

Originally posted by Morpheus



No, Bush does not want to get in any trouble with China. The spyplane incident is still fresh in memory, not? So he will assist Taiwan, but not at the cost of the safety of his own people.

Correct. We know the weakness of US. They are just here to make money out of Taiwan. They will not pay the price for his own people, saving Taiwan. It is proven after the Vietnam war, the US military don't want any risk of lifes. Let say we kill one thousand American GI. They kill us ten thousand soldiers. They can't sustain the causulties.

[christian]

Kauffer,
You are underestimated the power of PLA army. We never lost a war with US. We never lost a war after the 1950's.
The China vs Vietnam war( a month incursion), official we declare a lost. Unofficial, we win the war. We stop the vietnamese incursion into Thailand. We told them, we will run you over. If you cross the line of Thailand. Afterwards, the vietnam dare not to invade other countries.

High Tech only gives you a advantage. It doesn't gurantee you will win a real war. China has many experienced in War throughout the Centuries and centuries. It is the recent 200 years history, is shaming us. Which we recover last 22 years of reform.
The next 20 years of reform is very much more important than the last 22 years. That is one of the reason, we will not fight Taiwan.
Another reason is we are chinese. We don't like to kill each other.

China can take out Taiwan in any minutes. The problem is the chinese in the Taiwanese straits. If the invasion plan is carry out. The Taiwanese island will sink. The entire island will become desolated. It creates bigger trouble for China.

[Morpheus]

Yes, I also doubt that China is really considering an invasion of Taiwan. They just like to bully Taiwan to say "hey, we're still around" and "don't get too comfortable with the US you guys". China and US are no enemies, but nobody wants their neighbours to become so powerful.

China doesn't like Taiwan having ICBM's. I can understand this quite well. Back in 1962, US didn't like it either that Cuba had medium range ballistic missiles. Especially if that country is in your backyard.

Also, the US paranoia is adding a lot to this conflict. In case of a conflict between both nations and with support from the US, I really doubt China could win this war; the US has about 100 times as much ICBM's as China. China knows quite well that if it launches one nuke to Taiwan, it will start a nuclear holocaust, missiles from Russia and the US will retaliate and so on. A conventional assault on Taiwan is out of the question.

The US and Europe are maritime military superpowers, China is a continental superpower. It has a huge army, lots of soldiers (well trained in fact, so quality + quantity). The Chinese navy sucks compared to the US and within a couple of weeks the US would be master of the sea again, which means China will be in big trouble.

[Skogan]

The US and Europe are maritime military superpowers, China is a continental superpower. It has a huge army, lots of soldiers (well trained in fact, so quality + quantity). The Chinese navy sucks compared to the US and within a couple of weeks the US would be master of the sea again, which means China will be in big trouble.

That is an insightful point. The Chinese Navy tried to buy an old rusty1960's soviet submarine. Then, because they lacked the resources to maintain it, had to scuttle it. In a pure navel battle, the Japanese Navy would likely defeat the Chinese Navy.

But as was stated above, a Chinese-U.S. confrontation is not realistic. The disputes now are mostly rhetorical.


Skogan

[Morpheus]

US will always win on the sea or in the air, simply because it has the best equipment and the highest defense budget in the world.

If NATO wants to attack a country, they would start with continued bombing on C3 buildings, communication satellites, ministeries ... China would just start a massive invasion with all the groundforces available, and although they would suffer heavy losses, they would win. But nobody wants to piss off the US, China knows it could never win from the US and therefor, it choses not to get into any conflict with Taiwan.

[takeo]

"China keeps promising not to sell ballistic missile technology, but keeps doing it anyway. As far as conventional weapons go, I doubt that China has ever cancelled a sale to please the United States."

Why should it?
The US is also selling its weapons to many countries including Israel for example, it won't cancel a deal with Taiwan either to please China.

I think if North Korea has inferior military power than the South, why can't they defend themselves? The US-presence would sure not prevent much damage and when necessary they can very quickly interfeare from japan.
You are trying to find all kind of excuses to explain SK-anger towards the US but the main fact is that many Southkoreans hate american presence there and they all know that the US has supported all the bloody (military) dictators untill the 80's. It was for sure not to protect democracy that the US was established in South Korea! so of course few politicians untill recently protested against american presence...
another reason for anger is the view you and Bush seem to share (by the way who are you to interfere with the view of the elected leader of south korea) that the best thing to do is to make an end at the northkorean regime by external interfearance. So in fact that would be the reason for the american military presence. That's why north-korea was included in the axis of evil.
But southkoreans want a peaceful reunifications, that's why the sunshine-policy of the president is so important. They also want to help the north, while bush wants to abuse the northkorean hunger for political gains.
But it's clear that for the us a better understanding between the two korea's would reduse its influence and would make its presence unnecessary and disturbing, that's why military regimes supported by the us have almost killed the current president and others advocating better understanding and relations with the north.
By including northkorea in the axis of evil you will only succeed in driving the two parts further away and make reunification even longer. And by the way, China will not support NK in case it launches an own attack, but in case the us attacks the north it will CERTAINLY mean war between china and the US. Why do you think it hasn't been bombed yet and the us is so subtle in dealing with NK? and i read in the far eastern economic review that nk has a military program going on with major chinese weapons factories. (however it's not sure if missiles are included)

about Taiwan, i think that the chinese army has many more weapons and troops than Taiwan, however of inferior quality. However without us-interfearance tiny taiwan will never win against a massive chinese attack (but it won't happen because it would hurt the Cinese economy).

The link i gave you clearly said they recognised israel within its internationally recognised borders, and you don't need a map to know these borders!!!

"Whose's to blame to for that? President Aristide is a believer in "liberation theology" and a hard core anti-American thug. Considering your soft spot for the PFLP, I would have thought he would be just your kind of guy. Clinton put him into power because he was the choice of the Haitian people. I don't think there was ever any question of him being America's kind of president."

All those problems in Haiti existed LONG before Aristide came to power, and became worse during the many years of american-supported dictatorship of the Duvaliers...
i agree Aristide did not solve much but american interfearance remains very strong.

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Morpheus
US will always win on the sea or in the air, simply because it has the best equipment and the highest defense budget in the world.

Vietnam war, Korea war,
They never gain any advantage in these wars. On the other hand, they beat up the arabs, latinos, and africans.

If NATO wants to attack a country, they would start with continued bombing on C3 buildings, communication satellites, ministeries ...

Lol,
Nato wouldn't interfer with the business of Taiwan. Nato is never meant as a agression pact. Nato means attacking one western country will mean attack for all. In case of Taiwan, Nato alliance will not intiate.


I do agree with you. UK will join the america cowboy adventure. France and German will procrastinate to help. It is not their war.

China would just start a massive invasion with all the groundforces available, and although they would suffer heavy losses, they would win. But nobody wants to piss off the US, China knows it could never win from the US and therefor, it choses not to get into any conflict with Taiwan.

No. China is not invading Taiwan, because of US. China is not invading Taiwan, because of internal reform. US is just a money maker. When it comes to war in the pacific coast, they will not loss their nation to defend it. Certainly, they bully Iran, Iraq and N. Korea. The US knows this countries have limited capablities to US force. China is a different story.


Yes. US is one of the reason. It is not the big reason. War is not win by technology alone. Look at vietnam.
(We train the vietcon)

Currently, China have the right of 2008 olympic games. It is most likely, China will not invade taiwan til that time.

However, if Taiwan declare independence. China will invade.

[christian]

Morpheus,
I do agree China bully Taiwan,because Taiwanese government wants a separation.

The chinese will sacrifice their blood to keep the country as one china. In other words, if US wants to confront us. They have to confront one billion of us.

It is proven in our histories, we will use our blood to protect our country as one nation. It is demonstrated in western imperialism.

[Morpheus]

No, I was only saying the different military tactics between NATO-countries (first bomb the **** of the enemy) and China, which would invade with tanks from the beginning (like Russia has did in Afghanistan).

If a war would break out between US and China, it's most likely that France and Germany will assist the US (NATO). NATO is not meant as an offensive organisation, but AFAIK, Serbia did not attack any NATO-country, still, NATO retalliated. NATO is a nice excuse for the US to get all its allies behind one line, and simply obey what Uncle Sam tell them to do. The UK aka Bush's poodle will help US from the beginning, France and Germany will jump in later.

In A'gan, more European and Aussie soldiers have died than Americans, still the US says Europe is not grateful, does not help them and so on. Even small countries like the Netherlands try to help. Who's policing the streets of Kabul? US, no Italian troops ....

[kauffner]

takeo: I'm interfering in Korean politics? What are you doing when you call for U.S. troop withdrawal? That's certainly not something President Kim Dae-jung has called for. One of the main charges Roh Moo-hyun's opponents make is that he may demand U.S. troop withdrawal, something Roh denies. In fact, no mainstream politician is calling for U.S. withdrawal.

When Kim Dae-jung ran for president in 1997, many voters worried that he'd be squishy on North Korea and voted for him only because he promised to focus on the economy for his first two years in office. Even so, he got only 40 percent of the vote and won only because the conservative vote was split between two candidates.

What makes North Korea dangerous and tricky to deal with is that they have many artillery pieces in range of Seoul and periodically threaten to use them. It is unlikely that that China will send troops to Korea regardless of what happens here. (They don't want to stake their reputation on a lost cause like North Korea.) If they do intervene, it certainly won't be because of legalistic considerations like who bombed who first.

About once year or so, Korea has a temper tantrum against either Japan or the U.S. which lasts for about six weeks or so. In normal times, there is significantly more resentment of Japan. One of my students told me that she wanted to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. Of course, anti-Japanese sentiment here is only a shadow of what it is in China.

One of the main things Koreans resent about the United States is that we accord more respect to the Japanese government. So a lot of the resentment of the U.S. is indirectly resentment of Japan. This is certainly a much bigger issue than either the question of whether U.S. troops should stay or musty old left-wing conspiracy theories about the 1980s, Kwangju, so forth. You're talking like it's still 1987. Korea has had several democratic elections in a row now and politics is no longer about left-wing students clashing with riot police.

By the way, KDJ doesn't seem to be holding any grudges about that assasination attempt. He is even building a monument to Park Chung-hee, the president who ordered the attempt. Park's a popular guy these days and has benefitted from a wave of 1970s nostalgia. Park's popularity even rubs off on his daughter, who is a minor party candidate for president this year. In your mindset, leaders are bad if they are "U.S. supported," but I have never met a Korean who talks like that. Whether they like Park or not, they recognize that he was authentically Korean and not a puppet of the U.S.

christian: What is the "bigger trouble"? Are you saying that China can conquer Taiwan whenever it wants, but refrains from doing so because it puts the lives of Taiwanese "splittists" first? I never suspected that the Communist Party leadership had this type of humanitarian streak. I wonder where it was during Tiananmen.

Of course, China has a stronger military than Vietnam does, so it was able to win the engagements and seize the places it wanted to occupy. The same can be said of the U.S. military in Vietnam. But China didn't succeed in any of its goals for the operation. "China failed to force a Vietnamese withdrawal from [Cambodia], failed to end border clashes, failed to cast doubt on the strength of the Soviet power, failed to dispel the image of China as a paper tiger, and failed to draw the United States into an anti-Soviet coalition," according to one expert. (See http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/ops/war/prc-vietnam.htm). The fighting revealed serious supply and organizational problems in the Chinese military, especially when compared to the performance of the American military in Vietnam.

In Korea, all the fighting in the last two years of the war went America's way. If the war had continued, American forces would have been moving north, not Chinese forces moving south. The U.S. sought a truce because policymakers wanted to focus on Europe. Even with 35,000 American dead in Korea, public opinion was behind Macaurthur's proposal to rachet up the pressure and win the war (although Macaurthur himself proved to be rather tiresome once people learned more about him.) The logistical problems of crossing 200 kilometers of ocean will make invading Taiwan ten times more difficult for China than invading Korea was. Whether Taiwan declares independence or not, the same military factors that prevent a Chinese invasion now will remain in place.

Chinese military aid was not a major factor in the Vietnam War. The North Vietnamese got massive amounts of money and weapons from the Soviet Union. On their own, they'd have collapsed like the Taliban. The war left Vietnam a bombed out shell of a country. Is that what you want for China?

The North Vietnamese also had to create a political system totally focused on war and that doesn't seem able to deal with peace. I went to Saigon a few months ago and they don't seem to have put up any outstanding buildings since the war. No, wait -- I saw a medium-sized department store, a small shopping center, and also a few foreign-run export factories on the outskirts of town. Other than that, nothing more impressive than a disco. The old presidential palace is still the nicest building in town. The equivalent of $200 a month is a good salary in Saigon. Outside Saigon, its $100. One third of the population lives at the poverty level, which is $10 a month.

I met a girl who works for foreign company as a secretary, one of the nicest jobs a young person can get there. She brought me to her apartment, which was the equivalent of a one bedroom in the states. "This is a nice place for you and your roommate," I said. "Twelve people live here," she said.

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by kauffner

christian: What is the "bigger trouble"? Are you saying that China can conquer Taiwan whenever it wants, but refrains from doing so because it puts the lives of Taiwanese "splittists" first?

I am not sure what you mean. Can you repeat this?



I never suspected that the Communist Party leadership had this type of humanitarian streak. I wonder where it was during Tiananmen.

Tiananmen square is actually good for china in the long run. Or else, we will be like the Russian, begging money like a beggar and asking for sympathy. I rather make money in the long run, then ask for pre-condition aids from the west. All the aids from the west is pre-condition. Nothing is free. It is proven in the history that the west is always applying divide and conquer method on china. I rather have unity, than division into pieces. (Yugoslavia) Which in turn controls by western neo-imperialsim.

For your informati0n, yesterday, a group of protesters in taiwan demands unifications. Taiwanese is chinese. Taiwanese goes to china, they speak the same language. It is like Britain and Us. They speak the same language.

Dictatorship country is not necessary bad. Taiwan was a dictator country. Only two years ago, Taiwan changes his party to DPP.
It takes time to democracy. Especially, a population of one billion, it takes triple the time of taiwan.

Kumingtan has power for nealy 4 decades in Taiwan. Only last year the opposition party takes control of power.

Democracy is not a magic formula. We have 100 different ethnic, speaking different language. If we have democracy, we will be like India. We will have 100 parties, representing different ethnics. The country will be in choas. Only bi-party or tri-party system works in democracy.

Of course, China has a stronger military than Vietnam does, so it was able to win the engagements and seize the places it wanted to occupy. The same can be said of the U.S. military in Vietnam. But China didn't succeed in any of its goals for the operation. "China failed to force a Vietnamese withdrawal from [Cambodia], failed to end border clashes, failed to cast doubt on the strength of the Soviet power, failed to dispel the image of China as a paper tiger, and failed to draw the United States into an anti-Soviet coalition," according to one expert. (See http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/ops/war/prc-vietnam.htm). The fighting revealed serious supply and organizational problems in the Chinese military, especially when compared to the performance of the American military in Vietnam.

Yes. China suffers heavy causulties. However, vietnam stops any incursion into southeast asia afterward.
It is proven after the china vs vietnam war. Vietnamese is never trying to cross further ( I have to look at the reference again for prove. I don't have it all in my head)

Do you call it success or failure? I call it success, because Vietnam never invade again after China intervention.

At that time, Vietnam gains the confidence, defeating US. They want to have south east asia empire, together with the soviet. Afghastan is example of soviet southern expansion. Cambodia is a example of soviet and vietnam expansion.
I will give you details later. I can't write anything from my head.



In Korea, all the fighting in the last two years of the war went America's way. If the war had continued, American forces would have been moving north, not Chinese forces moving south.

You forget the soviet union. You only focus on miltary strength like helicopters and nuclear capability. You are not the only one have them. The soviet is watching US and China at that time. The relationship with the soviet is very good at that time.

Remember Kissinger. He is using us as a leverage agains the soviets. Same as in the korean war, the soviets use us, leverage against american expansion.

The U.S. sought a truce because policymakers wanted to focus on Europe. Even with 35,000 American dead in Korea, public opinion was behind Macaurthur's proposal to rachet up the pressure and win the war (although Macaurthur himself proved to be rather tiresome once people learned more about him.) The logistical problems of crossing 200 kilometers of ocean will make invading Taiwan ten times more difficult for China than invading Korea was. Whether Taiwan declares independence or not, the same military factors that prevent a Chinese invasion now will remain in place.

I don't think US is seeking a truce. When US declares "axis of evil". It is a imagination. Or else, why do you think he declares axis of evil? For a tough talk only?

Chinese military aid was not a major factor in the Vietnam War. The North Vietnamese got massive amounts of money and weapons from the Soviet Union. On their own, they'd have collapsed like the Taliban. The war left Vietnam a bombed out shell of a country. Is that what you want for China?

That is the reason, US helps china. That is the reason, Kissinger is in china. Isn't? Against soviet and vietnam expansion?

What do you mean bomb us out? Soviet union? have you forgotten?Or else, why US has fear on using it? To bomb out the country?

after kissinger diplomacy, you know the story.

Tailban is never collaped. Guerilla tactics is always in the asian blood. There are many guerilla warfare before the time of the guns. Ghaskis Khan, nomad tribes, they are all using " hit and run" and "Hide and seek".



The North Vietnamese also had to create a political system totally focused on war and that doesn't seem able to deal with peace. I went to Saigon a few months ago and they don't seem to have put up any outstanding buildings since the war. No, wait -- I saw a medium-sized department store, a small shopping center, and also a few foreign-run export factories on the outskirts of town. Other than that, nothing more impressive than a disco. The old presidential palace is still the nicest building in town. The equivalent of $200 a month is a good salary in Saigon. Outside Saigon, its $100. One third of the population lives at the poverty level, which is $10 a month.

In the way to democracy, there is always corruptions. Taiwan and S. korea are a good example. The ruling class is corrupted. Then the government starts to educate the public. The middle class arise. Then the middle class starts to have power in politics.

so, what is your point of critizing? Do you want them to go back to communist?

Vietnam is heading toward a socialist agenda. It will be like China socialist. Sure, they have corruption. The importance is the rising middle class. After that, middle class will take control of the government.

I met a girl who works for foreign company as a secretary, one of the nicest jobs a young person can get there. She brought me to her apartment, which was the equivalent of a one bedroom in the states. "This is a nice place for you and your roommate," I said. "Twelve people live here," she said.

What is your point? Some people is poor. Not all the chinese is poor.

[kauffner]

Originally posted by christian
What is your point? Some people is poor. Not all the chinese is poor.
You were using Vietnam as a model for how China can gain control of Taiwan. My point is, Vietnam sacrificed a great deal to defeat the United States. China should think twice before following it's example.

[christian]

Originally posted by kauffner

You were using Vietnam as a model for how China can gain control of Taiwan. My point is, Vietnam sacrificed a great deal to defeat the United States. China should think twice before following it's example.

It is not the business of US to intervene. Only 30% supports independance movement.

That is right. If Taiwan declare independance. US better think twice about facing 1 billion chinese.

[christian]

I doubt US will sacrifice their nation for taiwan, since US presence only wants to make money.

[Mediocrates]

Originally posted by christian
I doubt US will sacrifice their nation for taiwan, since US presence only wants to make money.

But you're mistaken if you believe all of the PRC rhetoric that they will come over the seas to take back Taiwan. They're not that dumb. The PRC knows how the economies of the world work and even a bad neighbor is worth more to them than a broke one.

[takeo]

I have been to vietnam too, and probably more exstensively than you, and all Vietnamese told me that the country is making progress every year, and life is getting better every year.
Of course th war against the us had a heavy price, becquse the us fought a war against the whole country, millions of vietnamese died, but in the long run independance and end of foreign occupation prooved good, now Vietnam is more prosperous than it was before the war.
of course you can not compare to the US, but you can compare to how Vietnam was before the war, an extremely underdevelloped french colony. 100$ is actually a good salary for vietnam and comparable to thailand, which untill a decade ago was much more wealthy than vietnam.

"takeo: I'm interfering in Korean politics? What are you doing when you call for U.S. troop withdrawal? That's certainly not something President Kim Dae-jung has called for. One of the main charges Roh Moo-hyun's opponents make is that he may demand U.S. troop withdrawal, something Roh denies. In fact, no mainstream politician is calling for U.S. withdrawal. "

i don't mean you but Americans in general. You told me yourself that some politicians call for the withdrawel, also i know that's what the southkoreans i talked to (students in paris, not particularly politically engaged) want.



"What makes North Korea dangerous and tricky to deal with is that they have many artillery pieces in range of Seoul and periodically threaten to use them. It is unlikely that that China will send troops to Korea regardless of what happens here. (They don't want to stake their reputation on a lost cause like North Korea.) If they do intervene, it certainly won't be because of legalistic considerations like who bombed who first. "

I'm sure china will intervene when north-korea is attacked, they will not allow another threat to its security near its borders. As christian said, they have their differences with north-korea but still consider it to be an ally and an "angry watchdog" against US-influence in the region. china was also very much opposed to the "axis of evil" speech and siad it could trigger a regional war.


"One of the main things Koreans resent about the United States is that we accord more respect to the Japanese government. So a lot of the resentment of the U.S. is indirectly resentment of Japan. This is certainly a much bigger issue than either the question of whether U.S. troops should stay or musty old left-wing conspiracy theories about the 1980s, Kwangju, so forth. You're talking like it's still 1987. Korea has had several democratic elections in a row now and politics is no longer about left-wing students clashing with riot police. "

i know about the resentment against japan, yet i heard many south-koreans hated the military repressive regime, which was without any doubt supported by the us (ok, a regime is not bad because it is us-supported bu a military dictatorship is bad, won't you agree? how can you accept that the same country blocking cuba because it's not a democracy but supporting military dictatorships in korea?) By the way it's not a left-wing conspiracy that the regime was a bloody military dictatorship, that's just a fact. And 12 year is not so long ago... you can for sure not legitimise your existance in korea by "protecting democracy"...
and so a guy killing political opponents "isn't so bad after all"...
What i know is that many koreans resented the military dictatorships and risked their life to fight it. I have met koreans who talk like that and considered those dictators puppets of the us (maybe asian courtesy will prohibit them of airing such opinions in you presence...)...

[christian]

Originally posted by Mediocrates


But you're mistaken if you believe all of the PRC rhetoric that they will come over the seas to take back Taiwan. They're not that dumb. The PRC knows how the economies of the world work and even a bad neighbor is worth more to them than a broke one.

I agree with you. That is the reason only 30% supports independance in taiwan

I am saying if taiwanese declare independance. It will be another story.

Tell you the truth, I support taiwan independant soverignty,but I do'nt support taiwan independance.

China never want to take back taiwan in force. It will creates a extra millions population to manage, besides the one billion people.

That is the reason, many chinese supports independant soverignty, not independant country. I support independant soverngity.

Independant soverngity means independant system and military. Taiwan only need to pay taxes. The rest of the domestic issues will be governed by taiwan island independantly.

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by takeo


I'm sure china will intervene when north-korea is attacked, they will not allow another threat to its security near its borders. As christian said, they have their differences with north-korea but still consider it to be an ally and an "angry watchdog" against US-influence in the region. china was also very much opposed to the "axis of evil" speech and siad it could trigger a regional war.

Takeo,
Let's pray to G-d the homer simpson from washington won't attack N. Korea. It will drag us into another WWIII. Russia will help this time,because we are only country stand on the way of US global strategic plan. If we fail, russian is a defenceless against US global strategic plan. Of course, Nato will help US.

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by kauffner

One of the main things Koreans resent about the United States is that we accord more respect to the Japanese government. So a lot of the resentment of the U.S. is indirectly resentment of Japan.

Wrong. They resents US support neo-facist government. Remember Japan never apologize for comfort woman, violence, wwII crimes. Japan never have been prosecuted in international courts. Of course, Japan bows down to the shrine of the warriors who die in WWII. Japan never write down the actual histories of their crime, unlike the germans. They want to forget their history of war.

[elke]

Wrong. They resents US support neo-facist government. Remember Japan never apologize for comfort woman, violence, wwII crimes. Japan never have been prosecuted in international courts. Of course, Japan bows down to the shrine of the warriors who die in WWII. Japan never write down the actual histories of their crime, unlike the germans. They want to forget their history of war.

I don't know much about this topic, but it seems to me that the above excerpt is an argument supporting Kauffner's idea that at least one of the resentments SK's have against US is indirectly tied to Japan...

[Morpheus]

Well good point you made there, Christian, indeed. Nazism is always related to the Germans, though the Japanese were as a bad the Germans. They also had concentration camps for the Chinese people and more Chinese were killed than Jews. But see how fast people forget these things.

[cerulean]

From Christian:
Tiananmen square is actually good for china in the long run. Or else, we will be like the Russian, begging money like a beggar and asking for sympathy. I rather make money in the long run, then ask for pre-condition aids from the west. All the aids from the west is pre-condition. Nothing is free. It is proven in the history that the west is always applying divide and conquer method on china. I rather have unity, than division into pieces. (Yugoslavia) Which in turn controls by western neo-imperialsim.

I think most non-Chinese and many Chinese would find the first sentence somewhat horrifying. Several thousand people were killed in one day for the crime of political protest.

But on to Taiwan, I have friends from Taiwan who definitely do not consider themselves Chinese and are very opposed to this concept. But they do not have any parents or grandparents who were from mainland China. That makes a difference. You are taking it as a default position that Taiwan is part of China. That is not their opinion.

[Morpheus]

What happened on tiananman was horrible, but I think I understand what Christian wants to say.

Russia has also participated in atrocities in WWII, and the cold war. When they lost the Cold war, they wanted to gain sympathy from the west, by becoming the "poodle" of the US and the EU. The EU gives money to Russia because they feel sorry for these people. But I think the Russians would be more satisfied if this money was truely theirs, and not donated but thanks to a strong economy and trading partners. China is chosing for the second option, rather than to become the political equal of the west. The US-EU will therefor not agree with what China thinks/does, but knows that China is an important economic partner (and military superpower), and unlike Russia, is not banckrupt. The power the west has over Russia is not in Russia's advantage. It creates more nationalism, and it's really humiliating for Russians to beg for money from the EU to dismant their ballistic missiles, once their pride.

The west thinks it has to fear from China, because it is becoming too powerful, but on the other hand, it also creates mutual respect to eachother. The west looks to Russia as if it couldn't handle their problems on their own.

[christian]

Originally posted by cerulean
From Christian:


I think most non-Chinese and many Chinese would find the first sentence somewhat horrifying. Several thousand people were killed in one day for the crime of political protest.

But on to Taiwan, I have friends from Taiwan who definitely do not consider themselves Chinese and are very opposed to this concept. But they do not have any parents or grandparents who were from mainland China. That makes a difference. You are taking it as a default position that Taiwan is part of China. That is not their opinion.

By the way, I am not from China. My mother is Taiwanese.

Many taiwanese has my opinion. They want independant soverigty. They don't want independant country.

I already post that. Many Taiwanese still has love towards China. Two days ago, there is pro-unification protest against the president of Taiwan.

If I ask them, are u chinese? They would laugh,because he knows he is a chinese living in Taiwan.

However, if a foreign ask them, are u chinese? It is a embarrasss question,because Taiwan is in a ambiguous questions. It should remain this way.

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Morpheus
What happened on tiananman was horrible, but I think I understand what Christian wants to say.

Russia has also participated in atrocities in WWII, and the cold war. When they lost the Cold war, they wanted to gain sympathy from the west, by becoming the "poodle" of the US and the EU. The EU gives money to Russia because they feel sorry for these people. But I think the Russians would be more satisfied if this money was truely theirs, and not donated but thanks to a strong economy and trading partners. China is chosing for the second option, rather than to become the political equal of the west. The US-EU will therefor not agree with what China thinks/does, but knows that China is an important economic partner (and military superpower), and unlike Russia, is not banckrupt. The power the west has over Russia is not in Russia's advantage. It creates more nationalism, and it's really humiliating for Russians to beg for money from the EU to dismant their ballistic missiles, once their pride.

The west thinks it has to fear from China, because it is becoming too powerful, but on the other hand, it also creates mutual respect to eachother. The west looks to Russia as if it couldn't handle their problems on their own.

No one likes Tianmen square in China. It is one of the saddest moment in my life.

However, China can't become a immediate democracy. A immediate democracy means chaos. A immediate democracy means another neo-imperialism from the west.

Democracy must build upon law, human rights, middle class, education, trade, and economic stability. Without one of the factor, it is most likely another crazy mao take over the country.
China has 70% illiteratacy rate. Most of the peasants don't even know the foundation of democracy.

Have you ever ponder after british grants many independance? Only 1/3 survive?
the survivor are the white people, educated in britain or france. They bring them the trade, law, human rights, etc.

[cerulean]

Originally posted by christian


By the way, I am not from China. My mother is Taiwanese.

Many taiwanese has my opinion. They want independant soverigty. They don't want independant country.

I already post that. Many Taiwanese still has love towards China. Two days ago, there is pro-unification protest against the president of Taiwan.

If I ask them, are u chinese? They would laugh,because he knows he is a chinese living in Taiwan.

However, if a foreign ask them, are u chinese? It is a embarrasss question,because Taiwan is in a ambiguous questions. It should remain this way.

Well, fortunately I did not make the faux pax of calling them Chinese or asking if they were. I waited around until the situation was described to me. (I try to do this as much as possible and always regret it if I do not.)

They resent Mandarin being an official language of Taiwan. They are not Chinese. On the other hand, I know other Taiwanese would not mind being called Chinese and they speak Mandarin. How they feel about this would depend on their background and ancestry, I presume.

[christian]

Originally posted by Morpheus
Well good point you made there, Christian, indeed. Nazism is always related to the Germans, though the Japanese were as a bad the Germans. They also had concentration camps for the Chinese people and more Chinese were killed than Jews. But see how fast people forget these things.

It is proven in the history, when the japanese is lack of resources. They will conquer again. This time, they have the american helping hand.

Remember Japan never apologize for the war crime. That is the reason, many s.korea is resenting US.

[christian]

Originally posted by cerulean


Well, fortunately I did not make the faux pax of calling them Chinese or asking if they were. I waited around until the situation was described to me. (I try to do this as much as possible and always regret it if I do not.)

They resent Mandarin being an official language of Taiwan. They are not Chinese. On the other hand, I know other Taiwanese would not mind being called Chinese and they speak Mandarin. How they feel about this would depend on their background and ancestry, I presume.

The taiwanese in Taiwan is speaking Mandarin. I guess everyone opinion is different.

[takeo]

"Democracy must build upon law, human rights, middle class, education, trade, and economic stability. Without one of the factor, it is most likely another crazy mao take over the country.
China has 70% illiteratacy rate. Most of the peasants don't even know the foundation of democracy. "

actually during the time of Mao Tse Tsoung Chinese economy grew too, not at the same rate as the last 20 years, but china in the 70's was less poor than China in the 40's.

actually, chinese literacy rate is 82%, which means only 18% can't read or write.
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ch.html

I think the chinese were very lucky they didn't follow the Russian example, i think if there were multi-party elections the government would still win.

[Mediocrates]

You all get it wrong. Wealthy China is not a westernized China. It is not an Asian version of us. Or you. A wealthy China is simply that and if nothing else, the PRC has been able to divorce economic development, to the outside world, from internal politics. There is simply no comparison. You will never have, nor is there any reason to believe you should, have any western political institutions in a wealthy China with a strong middle class. The two are not connected in way. Even outside looking in, China is viewed by the west as a vast untapped market and they will invest on the chance to tap into that market no matter the internal politics. You really really don't understand capitalism if you think otherwise.

[christian]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
You all get it wrong. Wealthy China is not a westernized China. It is not an Asian version of us. Or you. A wealthy China is simply that and if nothing else, the PRC has been able to divorce economic development, to the outside world, from internal politics. There is simply no comparison. You will never have, nor is there any reason to believe you should, have any western political institutions in a wealthy China with a strong middle class. The two are not connected in way. Even outside looking in, China is viewed by the west as a vast untapped market and they will invest on the chance to tap into that market no matter the internal politics. You really really don't understand capitalism if you think otherwise.

Mediocrates,
You live in a freedom country for too long. You don't realize how much your ancestor have to pay for freedom of speech, freedom of trade, freedom of press, and constitution. In order words, you never grow with a transition government from dictator til democracy. I have.

Taiwan is a good example. Taiwan regime in 1960's, is just brutal as tianmen square. The government in Taiwan massacre thousands of people with real bullets. To my parents, communist is equal to Kumingtan government.

Taiwanese government understand in order to have a democratic country. You need a large middle class. You need huge educational system. Economy reform must be first. Political reform must be second. Or else, you will be like Russian, begging for food and money.

China is walking into the same path. Economy reform apply first. Political reform applies second. Eventhough, the ruling class won't accept reform. The pressure from middle class will override the personal interest of the ruling class. If ruling class wants to stay in power and priveliages, they have to apply democratic reform.

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by takeo


actually, chinese literacy rate is 82%, which means only 18% can't read or write.
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ch.html

I think the chinese were very lucky they didn't follow the Russian example, i think if there were multi-party elections the government would still win.


I am not sure I can count on the CIA publication. If the literate rate is accurate from the CIA publication. I would be happy.

However, I have doubt as to how they measure literatecy rate. The peasants in farm,sometimes they still encourage their children to farm rather than read books. The education system in China is bankrupts in the peasant area. Which means there is no standard of education. Only the middle class has a standard education.

I don't like multi-party system in China. There are 100 ethnics. It is proven, tri-party system like France works in democratic world. If we have 22 parties like india. The parties will have to compromise each other for execuation of governing. We will be like India, nothing is done.

[Mediocrates]

Originally posted by christian

Mediocrates,
Taiwanese government understand in order to have a democratic country. You need a large middle class. You need huge educational system. Economy reform must be first. Political reform must be second. Or else, you will be like Russian, begging for food and money.

China is walking into the same path. Economy reform apply first. Political reform applies second. Eventhough, the ruling class won't accept reform. The pressure from middle class will override the personal interest of the ruling class. If ruling class wants to stay in power and priveliages, they have to apply democratic reform.

No doubt - no one questions that. As I guess Edmund Burke indicated, most successful revolutions arise from the middle class. But that's not important. What is important is that no matter what happens, what the PRC and Taiwan evolve into will be something more democratic but there is nothing, no law or principal that says it has to look like western democracy. For example, by western norms, Singapore is a restricted society. But I'm not sure that has any relevance in the context of Singapore or local societal norms. We would bristle at a government that made chewing gum illegal but is it really a horrible thing? In this case it is disconnect between how the Singaporese view the relationship between democracy and law enforcement and how the west views that relationship. Neither one has anything at all to say about the structure and process of democracy, the basic rights implied or the differences among freedom, liberty and equality, which, after all are different things.

[christian]

Originally posted by Mediocrates


No doubt - no one questions that. As I guess Edmund Burke indicated, most successful revolutions arise from the middle class. But that's not important. What is important is that no matter what happens, what the PRC and Taiwan evolve into will be something more democratic but there is nothing, no law or principal that says it has to look like western democracy. For example, by western norms, Singapore is a restricted society. But I'm not sure that has any relevance in the context of Singapore or local societal norms. We would bristle at a government that made chewing gum illegal but is it really a horrible thing? In this case it is disconnect between how the Singaporese view the relationship between democracy and law enforcement and how the west views that relationship. Neither one has anything at all to say about the structure and process of democracy, the basic rights implied or the differences among freedom, liberty and equality, which, after all are different things.

Well. If we have that kind of freedom in Singapore. We will overwhelmed by Muslim pressures and tactics. The reason US democracy is strong, because US has a strong military, economy, middle class and law. Even a country succeed in invading the US. They can't change the fundamental values of US citizen, like freedom of speech, constitution, etc.

Do you remember the greek history? A barbarian succeed in conquering the greek, because greek has a weak military. However, the ruler eventually influenced by Greek philosphy. Afterward, the entire barbarian tribes converts into greek. It proves the software superiorty is much better than hardware superiroty.

You have that in US. Singapore doesn't. Singapore is a weak country in 1963, who kick out by malaysia. There is no middle class. There is no rule of law. There is no natural resources. Some ruling class at time wants to take control of power by inciting communist slogan. Poverty and illiteracy love to attract radical right or left from all spectrum. If you don't have a strong dictatorship and good leader. Singapore will be like the third world country in Zimbawe. Yes. It is very sad, that we don't have your version of democracy. At least, we can reach the level of secular society.

Chinese society is based on confuciousism. We never have french revolution, imperialism, industral revolution, renaisses, constituion, greek philosphy,etc

If our society based on western value, the country will collapse, because no one experience the fundamental western value before. No one knows the effect of renaissance and constitution. Some crazy dictatorship will be welcome.

[kauffner]

Originally posted by takeo
I think if North Korea has inferior military power than the South, why can't they defend themselves? The US-presence would sure not prevent much damage and when necessary they can very quickly interfeare from japan.
The idea is to deter North Korea. It's easier on their pride to back down before America than before South Korea. If the U.S. withdrew, Korea and Japan would have to build up and a lot of people worry about how China would react. Japan filling the gap left by an American withdrawal is certainly the last thing Koreans want to see.

Koreans want the U.S. here. The U.S. wants to keep troops here. That should be good enough for you. About 60 percent of Korean college students support the U.S. presence and the number is probably higher for the country as a whole. Also, I find it very odd that you apparently prefer U.S. troops to be stationed in Japan rather than in Korea. I don't see the logic in moving soldiers away from where the fighting is likely to be.

[Morpheus]

The only fighting South Korea will see in the near future will be the world cup !!! :cool:

I hear you have some troubles with organising the events??? LOL

- Food and mouth disease?
- son of the president arrested (fraud?) ???
- tickets are not ready yet ??
- rioting police???
- hospitals are striking??

I knew we had to organise the world cup in France again :D

[Skogan]

I was in Korea in the late 80's and early 90's when I was in the U.S. Marine corps. It was my impression the the support for a U.S. presence there was inversly related to the distance the person lived from a military base. The closer they were, the less they liked it. Mostly because a base in your home town means your daughters will grow up to be bar girls and you will have to put up with lots of rowdy drunks fighting and such. At anyrate, the objection was much more practical then philosophical.


Skogan

[takeo]

I think too there will not be any war soon (unless the US attacks north-korea of course). The North is not in a position to attack the south, even if it wished so.
it's even more unlikely that China will attack South-Korea. I don't think anyone should replace the Americans, certainly not the japanese of course.
The fact is that the US-troops in South-Korea are a serious treath to the north, which will prevent any moderation of the regime there (which still puts "american aggression" in the middle of their propaganda) and will undermine the "sunshine policy" of the southkorean president.
withhout american presence the main obstacle is gone for new and better relations between the two Korea's.
You say that koreans want the Americans to stay, could be, but all the koreans i spoke to want them to leave, also i saw on television a lot of protest against us-presence, so clearly not all Koreans are happy with American presence, as also skogan indicates.

about the education system in China: i don't think your sources are correct, even in remote areas as xinyang the big majority of the youth goes to school untill 17 years old.

"China is walking into the same path. Economy reform apply first. Political reform applies second. Eventhough, the ruling class won't accept reform. The pressure from middle class will override the personal interest of the ruling class. If ruling class wants to stay in power and priveliages, they have to apply democratic reform"

I think China and Asia in general are no western countries, people seem to think more collectively than in the West, also there is a smaller Middle class (however that's not the case in Singapore). Sometimes a middle class can be satisfied with a dictatorship that garantees their rights.
I doubt the meaning of multi-party-elections in countries where the big part of the population live in poverty, and have no education or political conciousness. in most Asian, African and latin American countries you will see that elections are usually won by those with the most money or those who controll the media or the military, even MORE so than in the US or Western Europe, where people have generally more information, individual identity and know what the elections are about.

[christian]

Originally posted by kauffner

The idea is to deter North Korea. It's easier on their pride to back down before America than before South Korea. If the U.S. withdrew, Korea and Japan would have to build up and a lot of people worry about how China would react. Japan filling the gap left by an American withdrawal is certainly the last thing Koreans want to see.

Koreans want the U.S. here. The U.S. wants to keep troops here. That should be good enough for you. About 60 percent of Korean college students support the U.S. presence and the number is probably higher for the country as a whole. Also, I find it very odd that you apparently prefer U.S. troops to be stationed in Japan rather than in Korea. I don't see the logic in moving soldiers away from where the fighting is likely to be.

Ha ha. :D Worry about China threat! Do you know how much money S.Korea is investing in China? I bet you will have a hard time convince those s.korea investor, that China is a threat. Or else, they wouldn't invest an "enemy" country.

I bet you will be harder to convince the Taiwanese, not go to China. My uncle is flying from Taiwan to China all the time. I have to do business with the Taiwanese people that stationed in China.

Many S. Korea is much more knowledgeable than average American experts in east pacific coast. They know the threat theory is y US wants to start another Cold war.

The only invasion right now is world soccer. !! :D


Kauffner,
Are you a proffessor in Seoul university?
Impressive.

[kauffner]

christian: I think you misunderstand. I don't mean that the Chinese military is a threat to South Korea. I mean that China may react strongly if Japan builds up its forces and becomes more assertive. I am not sure that I buy this theory myself, but it is a common argument made in favor of continued U.S. military presence in East Asia.

No, I don't teach at Seoul National University, but at another university in Seoul. (Seoul is a big city with many universities.) I don't want to post the name of the school in public and non-Koreans wouldn't recognize it anyway.

[NewsGuy]

This discussion is continued Here (http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?postid=9085#post9085).