How come nobody cares about Zimbabwe?

[xul]

I think it is very lucky to the common people who live in so-called west for that their scientists have not invented a superluminal spacecraft cruiser with the ability of flying over the Galaxy, because once this ship was invented, all "political correctness" guys, both from right wing and lift wing, would tax all their money into the holy wars against those political-incorrectness systems which exist in millions of planets throughout the Galaxy and eventually sell them to Zimbabwe to grow crop for African for repay the debts of wars.

Edited July 4, 2008 by xul

[stevoh]

Yet it's not until NOW, that the world is all bemoaning the lack of free elections - as if the last few were anything approaching free. And where are all the Lefties marching in the cause of freedom, demanding disinvestment, demanding sanctions? Nowhere to be seen. They couldn't care less. Harper announced some limited response, but I can't help wondering why we even have to have any relationship with Mugabe. Why don't we break relations and withdraw our ambassador? I'm sure Mugabe wouldn't care but it would be a signal to the world, and it would save money since we wouldn't have to keep up an embassy in what has become a fourth world banana republic country.

So, when are you organizing a rally?

[Argus]

Argus, your post is a steaming pile as usual. Why is it that Bush can invade Iraq and cite freedom as his motive while Mugabe gets only a tut-tut from Condy (former oil exec) Rice?

Was Iraq a free nation before he invaded? Hardly. Iraqis have more freedom now than they've ever had. It's unfortunate some of them are religious wackos and choose to slaughter each other, but were it not for that Iraq would have made enormous advances because of the Americans.

Not surprised you defend Mugabe. You seem kindred spirits.

Could it be that Mugabe has nothing to sell but farmland? Who cares what goes on in that stinking poverty laden chaos, right? People like you surrendered Africa to China. Live with that.

Mugabe has nothing to sell because he's a racist supporter of apartheid who destroyed his nation and its economy because of his absurd and bigoted ideological views.

What a surprise, Argus. You once again show us that, for you, it is "All about Israel".

All about Israel? What has Israel got to do with this? Methinks that for you it is all about "the evil Jews and their worldwide conspiracy".

Again, you seem the type.

[Argus]

I think it is very lucky to the common people who live in so-called west for that their scientists have not invented a superluminal spacecraft cruiser with the ability of flying over the Galaxy, because once this ship was invented, all "political correctness" guys, both from right wing and lift wing, would tax all their money into the holy wars against those political-incorrectness systems which exist in millions of planets throughout the Galaxy and eventually sell them to Zimbabwe to grow crop for African for repay the debts of wars.

How do you feel, Xul, about China fast becoming the best friend and protector of every vicious, brutal thugocracy and dictator in the world today?

[xul]

How do you feel, Xul, about China fast becoming the best friend and protector of every vicious, brutal thugocracy and dictator in the world today?

Do you think that Canada did not join American's invasion to Iraq means Canada is a protector of Sadaam? Or Wal-Mart move its factory to China means western capitalists have become the best friends of China Communists?

I think Chinese government does not want to join Western's effort to push UN making sanction to Zimbabwe because they think it is illegal according international laws just as Canada did not join the invasion to Iraq because it thinks the war is illegal. Those Chinese companies and businessmen who invested in Africa are just like Wal-Mart and its MBAs did in China, they did that for economic reason, not for political reason.

Of course, I think there did have some political reason. Honestly, Mugabe at least did better than CPChina in democracy , his failure is just due to he did not do better in economy, and western politicans actually want China, a country which has not allowed any opposite parties' existion, to join the action of punishing Mugabe for his unfair to his opposite candidates in a election?

In any case, Mugabe at least is a representative of a certain part of Zinbabwean not only himself. If western makes a sanction to Zimbabwe, his supporters probably will not withdraw their support from him because they benefit from his policy, meanwhile those who oppose him will be harmed more economically by the sanction because I supose they are the ones who have more economic ties with western, and eventually they will also go into opposition of the sanction once they become more and more disappointment of the effect of the sanction if Mugabe refuse to step down. This is why a sanction would not work in Zimbabwe just as it was in other countries. Ironically, a sanction seems only could work on a real democratic system not a dictatorship system.

And even if we don't consider the vastness of the Galaxy, it is the fact that only few countries are really democratic in the world. If western tries to correct all others, that means western not only needs to knock down their dictatiors but also needs to fund people in these countries to a certain level of living standard and education to run the system, the cost of such action will be unaffordable.

[HisSelf]

What a sad thread. Started by a well known Israel supporter. Zimbabwe came to his attention not because of its injustices, but because he wonders why we all don't just focus on Zimbabwe and leave Israel alone.

Why is it that every thread by Israel supporters like you and M.Dancer turns into a discussion about Israel?

No, Israel is not inside the Beltway, Argus. It is a little pissant country in Africa. Or is it Asia? Statistics Canada is a little vague about that but one thing is clear: it is not anywhere inside our borders or inside the borders of any of our major trading partners.

Bogus Manor has a bed for you, Argus.

Suck it up and have a nice day.

Edited July 6, 2008 by HisSelf

[Rue]

What a sad thread. Started by a well known Israel supporter. Zimbabwe came to his attention not because of its injustices, but because he wonders why we all don't just focus on Zimbabwe and leave Israel alone.

Why is it that every thread by Israel supporters like you and M.Dancer turns into a discussion about Israel?

No, Israel is not inside the Beltway, Argus. It is a little pissant country in Africa. Or is it Asia? Statistics Canada is a little vague about that but one thing is clear: it is not anywhere inside our borders or inside the borders of any of our major trading partners.

Bogus Manor has a bed for you, Argus.

Suck it up and have a nice day.

Nonsense. Show one word where he stated "Israel should be left alone" or referred what is going on in Zimbabwe to hippocritical double standards in regards to the treatment of Israel.

You are fabricating things he did not say.

You then project your subjective impression of his comments about Zimbabwe to try avoid debating the issue. If you find this lunatic in Zimbabwe unecessary to discuss take your selective opinions as to who you want to trash instead to another thread. Clearly you show a preoccupation with Israel. Go start an Israel is poo thread. That will be original.

For you to suggest Argus or any of us can't question the mad man Mugabe because we are merely pro Israel stooges is nonsense.

It is also completely illogical. Even if we are pro-Israeli, how does that change what Mugabe has done and how does that change the double standard he is receiving compared to other alleged human rights violators?

That was the issue.

Your trying to suggest any debate as to this mad man is nonsense because we should only criticize Israel which is what you are saying is with due respect ludicrous and its precisely the kind of selective b.s. some of us notice from people like you.

Your righteousness is quite selectiv and you seem to have no problem trotting out Israel supporter conspiracy smeers, not to mention assumptions as to peoples motives.

Give it a rest selective human rights preacher. If you think you can trot out some insult about Israel everytime there is a discussion about some insane despot to dettract and avoid discussing the issue, play that tune with someone else.

Stop trying to label Argus and fabricate things he did not say to distract from the topic.

You want to engage in an Israe is pool thread and ignore the rest of the world and only discuss Israel when you want to slag someone on human rights do so in another thread.

Back to this thread, the point is, Mugabe is a mad man and it is interesting to note all the countries that would slag other countries for human rights abuses including but not limited to Israel, but will look the other way with this syphlitic madman.

Good Lard. This exercise in defending all human rights abusers by stating to criticize them one becomes a Zionist provocateur is passed the point of puckering my hemmeroids any more.

Edited July 7, 2008 by Rue

[Rue]

I think Chinese government does not want to join Western's effort to push UN making sanction to Zimbabwe because they think it is illegal according international laws just as Canada did not join the invasion to Iraq because it thinks the war is illegal;;;;

...Mugabe at least did better than CPChina in democracy

...In any case, Mugabe at least is a representative of a certain part of Zinbabwean not only himself.

....Ironically, a sanction seems only could work on a real democratic system not a dictatorship system.

.... it is the fact that only few countries are really democratic in the world.

..If western tries to correct all others, that means western not only needs to knock down their dictatiors but also needs to fund people in these countries to a certain level of living standard and education to run the system, the cost of such action will be unaffordable.

In regards to your first comment, I am not so sure China really cares about whether something is illegal according to international law. It has demonstrated repeatedly it has no problems violating international law if it suits is foreign policy interests. For that matter the US and many other nations have as well. I sometimes think countries that claim this arguement are only using it as an excuse to justify not doing anything-such criticism would not apply just to China but many nations. Me I think all nations are opportunistic whores at the best of times.

In regards to Mugabe doing better than CP China in democracy, that is a scathing indictment about CP CHina. Ouch.

You stated Mugabe is a representative of a certain part of Zimbabwe not only himself. True but that does not in any way make what he does legitimate. You bet Mugabe knows how to maintain supporters, its called bribery and coercion. Take your pick.

I concede your point that sanctions have never worked well with such situations precisely because of the way sucha person can control people. Excellent point.

Now in regards to your last point and I also concede you did admit China supports Mugabe for political reasons,

you suggest the same Western nations that criticize such madmen have a moral responsibility to finance these countries so they can become democratic.

Do you not think they have tried? Look I concede that many times Western nations have propped up corupt dictators they know are mad men for purely selfish business reasons and that is part of the problem. But don't you also think the Western world has tried to finance projects in these countries and some of that failure is not their fault?

We all know what the brain drain is. We suck the intelligentsia out of third world countries. They come to the West to study then stay behind and do not return. Whose fault is that?

You are right in the sense that anyone who wants to lecture another nation about being corupt and evil has to be willing to do more then be self-righteous I get your point, but I also think people in any nation can be their own worst enemy as well.

My criticism for how countries exploit each other and engage in double standards as to human rights, etc., applies to all nations but I also for the same reasons chastize the corupt leaders of these nations as well. They are vile and they depend on their fellow citizens joining with them in being vile to keep the masses controlled.

You tell me. Why invest in Zimbabwe? Can you guarantee under democracy another mad man won't remerge again and do the same thing? Will that all be the fault of the British or US or China?

You have any idea how to keep countries such as yours from propping up evil regimes such as the one in Sudan?

You really think China will not sleep with anyone willing to give it oil? You think the US or Britain are the only whores on the block?

Robert Mugabe is an abomination. He is a psychopathic mad man who needs to be taken out. Oops that is not internationally sanctioned.

Edited July 7, 2008 by Rue

[Argus]

What a sad thread. Started by a well known Israel supporter.

You write that like an accusation. What is wrong with being a "well-known Israel supporter"?

Is that as bad as, like, being a Jew?

Zimbabwe came to his attention not because of its injustices, but because he wonders why we all don't just focus on Zimbabwe and leave Israel alone.

Uhm, no, it had nothing to do with Zimbabwe. Though if you insist on bringing Israel into the conversation it's an interesting note that all you people who are pulling your hair out about "evil Israel" don't seem to give a damn about human rights violations in non-Jewish countries. But then, I've pointed that sort of hypocrisy out before.

Why is it that every thread by Israel supporters like you and M.Dancer turns into a discussion about Israel?

It doesn't. Why on Earth do you keep bringing up Israel?

No, Israel is not inside the Beltway, Argus. It is a little pissant country in Africa. Or is it Asia? Statistics Canada is a little vague about that but one thing is clear: it is not anywhere inside our borders or inside the borders of any of our major trading partners.

Well it's good that you're so educated you know that Israel isn't inside Canada. Congratulations.

[Argus]

I think Chinese government does not want to join Western's effort to push UN making sanction to Zimbabwe because they think it is illegal according international laws just as Canada did not join the invasion to Iraq because it thinks the war is illegal. Those Chinese companies and businessmen who invested in Africa are just like Wal-Mart and its MBAs did in China, they did that for economic reason, not for political reason.

I don't think China cares much about international law. And all of those companies are affiliated with the Chinese government, so while they might be there to make money - like Wal-Mart, that's beside the point. Besides, I'm not asking why Chinese companies want to make money but why the Chinese government protects rogue nations at the UN and other world bodies, be it Zimbabwe, or Sudan, or Cambodia.

Of course, I think there did have some political reason. Honestly, Mugabe at least did better than CPChina in democracy

,

Well that's true, of course. For that matter, if you really boil it down, it's not surprising he was "warmly welcomed" by other African leaders, for virtually none of them are democracies either.

Of course, that didn't stop them all, including China, from getting involved when Zimbabwe was called Rhodesia.

[August1991]

Zimbabwe was better off as Rhodesia under Ian Smith and Apartheid, than it is now. Much better off.

I suppose it doesn't matter much whether a white policeman or a black policeman wrongly arrests someone, but I agree with eyeball that a slave is just a slave. A freeman is free to make his own mistakes, and assume responsibility for them.

This is an example of why GroupThink will kill us. Often, people will look to their political peers for a response to a situation rather than thinking it through for themselves. It's all about people aligning themselves into tribes - which is a human failing as well as a curse.

This situation pervades everything political. The debate about Global Warming, for example, is fought along right/left lines when there are major fallacies with both positions. Too often, the debate ends up being about which side you're on.

I tend to agree here, Hardner.

Zimbabwe is far away and few of us know anything about it. Discussions about Zimbabwe on this forum are bound to become proxy discussions in which we line up in hockey game fashion.

You stated Mugabe is a representative of a certain part of Zimbabwe not only himself. True but that does not in any way make what he does legitimate. You bet Mugabe knows how to maintain supporters, its called bribery and coercion. Take your pick.

The difference between Saddam and Mugabe is that Mugabe is a senile, psychopathic thug. Saddam was just a pyschopathic thug.

Rue, until you have lived in a regime ruled by such a whacko, it's hard to explain or describe. From the outside, people like you will invariably blame the US or Bush or world capitalism.

As to the thread title, it's obvious why no one cares about Zimbabwe. The Left is embarrassed by such cases when it's so difficult to blame the IMF, whites or America for the mess. On the Right, Zimbabwe has no WMD (or even the hint of such) to threaten the West.

NATO and the US are not the world's policemen. If some whacko dictator is mistreating his people, we generally ignore it unless the whack dictator threatens us. Welcome to the real world where injustices sometimes go unpunished.

Edited July 8, 2008 by August1991

[capricorn]

Here is a link to the statement issued by the G8 leaders on Zimbabwe.

http://www.mofa.go.jp/u_news/2/20080708_230618.html

I found the following point interesting:

6. We will continue to monitor the situation and work together with SADC, the AU, the UN and other relevant organizations for a prompt resolution of the crisis. We recommend the appointment of a special envoy of the UN Secretary-General to report on the political, humanitarian, human rights and security situation and to support regional efforts to take forward mediation between political parties. We will take further steps, inter alia introducing financial and other measures against those individuals responsible for violence.

Pretty strong words. It seems Mugabe thinks the G8 countries are racist as well as the G8 statement.

Zimbabwe's government said Tuesday that the G8 leaders' rejection of President Robert Mugabe's legitimacy and threats of financial measures against his regime were racist and an insult to African leaders.

"They want to undermine the African Union and (South African) President Mbeki's (mediation) efforts because they are racist, because they think only white people think better," said Deputy Information Minister Bright Matonga.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080708/wl_af...summitsanctions

Hmm, some of those comments made by the Zimbabwe gov't sound so familiar.

[xul]

In regards to your first comment, I am not so sure China really cares about whether something is illegal according to international law. It has demonstrated repeatedly it has no problems violating international law if it suits is foreign policy interests. For that matter the US and many other nations have as well. I sometimes think countries that claim this arguement are only using it as an excuse to justify not doing anything-such criticism would not apply just to China but many nations. Me I think all nations are opportunistic whores at the best of times.

Everyone cares about laws, just becasue everyone, no matter whoever he is, a emperor, a president or a pauper, knows he cannot be sure himself interests whether might not be harmed without laws. For example, a man maybe like complains police all the time for their stuped speed limits in some road or something, but obviously he rather like lives in a country with police than a monkey tribe without any police, whether the police is Canada police, Israel police, China police or Zimbabwe Police, because he knows without police, the symbol of enforement of law, everyone might overspeed not only him and one day a overspeed truck would send him to hell.

But do we really think everone, in this forum for example, no matter of he or she is a "political-law-correct"journalist, a lawyer or a polic officer, do have never broken laws such as runing a overspeed car or copy several pages of a book with copyright in a library for his "interest"?

A country is a set of its people, so it will have all its people's merit or shortcoming. A politician whether he is a president, PM, King or emperor can not do far more or far less than his people want him to do unless he don't care to be voted down or to be pull down by riot or insurgency.

In regards to Mugabe doing better than CP China in democracy, that is a scathing indictment about CP CHina. Ouch.

No, ironically it's kinda a compliment of them.

Mugabe does better in democracy and CPC do better in economy, so the sequel is Mugabe is facing a sanction from western meanwhile CPC's chairman is now at the same room with those G8 western politicians include President Bush and Mr. Harper to bargain whether such sanction is "fair" or "legal" .

By the way, Slobodan Milosevic did democracy better than Mugabe, for his voters let him down then he stepped down, so he ended up in a western prison, didn't he? The reality is really a sarcasm of those western "political-correstness-intervention" supporters.

But Rue, instead of being a critic of all politicians and government, I strongly suggest if you would like to adopt some parts the thought of my way. I think I might be a shill of all kind of politicians and governments just beacuse I have the same shortcoming and disability in my speciality just as them in their speciality---political and policies. If I was a policeman, I might boast that I was the great enemy of all kind of criminals, but the fact is I always caught those culprits who were less insidious and let those who were more vicious at large just as politicians always caught Milosevic and let Bin Ladin at large. If I was a doctor, though I might always boast that I save patients life, but the fact is I always cured the patients who got cold meanwhile felt powerless to those who got cancer.

I am an engineer, my mechanics professor lectures me his theory that safty is the most important thing of making a machine and his book will give me the best way to make a safe machine. I totally agree the theory of his book but I just can't design a car total obediently according his book because the buyers don't want there is a beam diagonally supporting his car's doorcase to make it strong. Of course, a driver may think a car without any doorcases like the cabin of F-16 jet is better on sight, and I had to tell him that according the book of the professor, the doorcase would be very important to save his neck if the car was overturned by an accident...

Politicians are just like engineers, their speciality base on various theories and books of from human rights activists's to Wal-Mart's CEO's. Their duty is to compromise all these theories and requests not pick up only one of them.

If anyone who sees the essential meaning in the example I assumed above, I think he will see that what you criticized is really the "political-correctness" and what you wished the politicians to do is actually the "theoretical"-correctness not "political"-correctness because "politics", exactly the policy of a nation, dose not subject only a certain single theory or book.

And Mugabe for one, he is just a victim of his own "political-correctness . He think the reality of several thousands white guy owned most of his country's farms is unfair or "political uncorrectness", so he must correct it. But he just ignored he lacks his "own" qualified specialists and farmer to run the farms he confiscated form whites. This is his problem, this is why he is cornered. "political correctness" isn't good to any country, is it?

Edited July 9, 2008 by xul

[xul]

Besides, I'm not asking why Chinese companies want to make money but why the Chinese government protects rogue nations at the UN and other world bodies, be it Zimbabwe, or Sudan, or Cambodia.

I think what you would really want to say is such as "why dose China protect Iran?"

I think such idea is a misunderstanding of the situation of the world. The reality is China have not the ability to protect anyone and it have not interests to protect anyone. China like most other countries in the world just refuse to join any silly probably effectless trade saction to other third world countries. China also refuses American efforts to make its wars of invasion of other countries legal and most countries sometimes include Canada do the same thing in UN. But such actions in UN can stop neither American nor Israel to make a war if they want a war. Could you tell me how many time the war that America or Israel made needs a UN warrant?

If American or Israel can not attack Iran or some country they think it is a treatening, it must due to the cause of themseves, not due to they respect any UN's solution disaccording their interests. Did American invasion of Iraq needed a UN warranty? Did Israel airstriking Syria need China to agree? lol.

I agree China government's way of foreign policy---if anyone wanted to affect others, he would do things of himself better first. And if I was Canadian, I would think that selling more Canada made goods to anywhere to boom economy and making Canadian less unemployed and live in happy is the best way to help demonstration of democray, human rights or other value of Canadian.

[Argus]

I suppose it doesn't matter much whether a white policeman or a black policeman wrongly arrests someone, but I agree with eyeball that a slave is just a slave. A freeman is free to make his own mistakes, and assume responsibility for them.

Perhaps so but there are no free men in Zimbabwe, and a slave who gets to feed is family probably is happier than a free man who watches his family starving.

[HisSelf]

Was Iraq a free nation before he invaded? Hardly. Iraqis have more freedom now than they've ever had. It's unfortunate some of them are religious wackos and choose to slaughter each other, but were it not for that Iraq would have made enormous advances because of the Americans.

Is Israel a free nation now? Maybe for religious wackos. ertainly not for everybody.

Not surprised you defend Mugabe. You seem kindred spirits.

Mugabe has nothing to sell because he's a racist supporter of apartheid who destroyed his nation and its economy because of his absurd and bigoted ideological views.

All about Israel? What has Israel got to do with this? Methinks that for you it is all about "the evil Jews and their worldwide conspiracy".

Again, you seem the type.

Is Iraq a free nation now? According to who? Former oil company executive Condy Rice? How about former oil company exec, Dick Cheney? Former oil company exec George Bush? The guy who runs Blackwater? Who has killed the most babies in Iraq, Argus? Saddam? Bush? Is there any way to even know he answer?

What a joke. I'm defending Mugabe. No, Argus, I am calling you on your statement that nobody is questionning Zimbabwe based on the fact that you are one of the biggest Israel apologists extant on this board. This is a favourite Israel apologist tactic "Why do you attack poor Israel and you don't attack this little pissant trouble making region?" We are all supposed to go postal over every issue you deem important just because we won't go along with Israel's crap.

You want to start a thread on Zimbabwe then do so. The fact that you never have is telling. Zimbabwe, just like every other sphere of injustice, is just another venu for people like you to use in your wrong-headed defence of Israel's constant violation of the most basic principles of international law (oh wait. I forgot. An Israeli supreme court justice says it's OK some of the time).

Argus, there are a lot of people who are tired of being on high alert because of idiots like Ariel Sharon and Bibi. Suck it up.

[AngusThermopyle]

Is Israel a free nation now? Maybe for religious wackos. ertainly not for everybody.

So who exactly is held in slavery or servitude within Israel?

[HisSelf]

So who exactly is held in slavery or servitude within Israel?

Well where do I start? First of all we have a state that is dedicated to the dominance of one ethnic group. We have a Housing and Immigration policy that consistently welcomes and financially supports that ethinic group at the expense of any other. We have a justice system that functions very effectively except when the favoured ethnic group decides to take land it is not entitled to from an unfavoured ethnic group by means that are illegal by international and Israeli law. We have attacks on neighbouring countries that kill tens of thousands with trumped up justifications. We have meddling in the internal affairs of those countries. We have a water resource policy that requires a huge military presence to enforce. We have a bully that constantly needs support from the most powerful economy in the world and uses that to constantly take more than its share. We have a country that uses collective puncshment to deny even the most basic humanitarian needs from a people who have been impoverished as a direct result of its creation.

We have an 'ally' whose secret agents have been caught forging our passports and spying on our military and industry.

Voila. Israel.

[M.Dancer]

Well where do I start? First of all we have a state that is dedicated to the dominance of one ethnic group. We have a Housing and Immigration policy that consistently welcomes and financially supports that ethinic group at the expense of any other. We have a justice system that functions very effectively except when the favoured ethnic group decides to take land it is not entitled to from an unfavoured ethnic group by means that are illegal by international and Israeli law. We have attacks on neighbouring countries that kill tens of thousands with trumped up justifications. We have meddling in the internal affairs of those countries. We have a water resource policy that requires a huge military presence to enforce. We have a bully that constantly needs support from the most powerful economy in the world and uses that to constantly take more than its share. We have a country that uses collective puncshment to deny even the most basic humanitarian needs from a people who have been impoverished as a direct result of its creation.

We have an 'ally' whose secret agents have been caught forging our passports and spying on our military and industry.

Voila. Israel.

The jews are an ethnic group?

Is how race hate is justified?

[AngusThermopyle]

Well where do I start? First of all we have a state that is dedicated to the dominance of one ethnic group. We have a Housing and Immigration policy that consistently welcomes and financially supports that ethinic group at the expense of any other. We have a justice system that functions very effectively except when the favoured ethnic group decides to take land it is not entitled to from an unfavoured ethnic group by means that are illegal by international and Israeli law. We have attacks on neighbouring countries that kill tens of thousands with trumped up justifications. We have meddling in the internal affairs of those countries. We have a water resource policy that requires a huge military presence to enforce. We have a bully that constantly needs support from the most powerful economy in the world and uses that to constantly take more than its share. We have a country that uses collective puncshment to deny even the most basic humanitarian needs from a people who have been impoverished as a direct result of its creation.

Yadda yadda. So, in other words no one is held in slavery or servitude within Israel and you were just "waxing poetic". Thought so, pretty much par for the course with you eh.

[Argus]

I think what you would really want to say is such as "why dose China protect Iran?"

I think such idea is a misunderstanding of the situation of the world. The reality is China have not the ability to protect anyone and it have not interests to protect anyone. China like most other countries in the world just refuse to join any silly probably effectless trade saction to other third world countries.

I wasn't explicitly talking about how China protects rogue nations at the UN, ie., by vetoing sanctions against Zimbabwe, for example, but why China works very industriously, often behind the scenes, with military and economic aid, and by pressuring other nations, in order to allow rogue nations to thrive. And yes, that includes Iran, as well as Sudan, as well as Zimbabwe and Cambodia.

But the question was rhetorical. China is a brutal, utterly amoral dictatorship which feels more comfortable in dealing with a similar type of government. Of course it opposes democracy throughout the world, and democratic interests. I think people get distracted by the media view of "the modern China" into forgetting that at heart, the Chinese are little different than they were during the Cultural Revolution, just as primitive and brutal in their outlook on the world. It is a tossup as to whether we in the West will be be going to war with China first or a resurgent anti-democratic Russia. Only time will tell. But there is little doubt, barring massive revolutions in those nations, that war is inevitable, especially where resources are scarce. Democratic nations can cooperate and compromise, but there is little of that in the minds of dictators, especially dictators who spend a lot of time and effort building up bigger and bigger armies.

[Argus]

So who exactly is held in slavery or servitude within Israel?

Please stop feeding the troll.

[AngusThermopyle]

Please stop feeding the troll.

Sorry, but he did make that statement and now refuses to back it up, similar to his claim about Israel in another thread actually. I'm just curious about who is held in slavery or servitude by the Israeli's.

[xul]

I wasn't explicitly talking about how China protects rogue nations at the UN, ie., by vetoing sanctions against Zimbabwe, for example,

I think some people in west do not know what games their politicians are playing. Sometimes I think Chinese politicians are more honest to their people for they do not need these people to vote them, so they likely tell their people what they are really thinking. Western politicians need their voters to vote them, so If they have not willing to do something or they have not ability to do something but their voters want them to do, invade Iran for one, they will deliver it to UN to let China or Russia refuse it---for they fully acknowledge what action China and Russia will adopt in UN. If they don't want attack Iran for fully knowing that will get another Iraq-liked mess, or if they don't want to make a sanction to Zimbabwe for fully acknowledge such thing is useless, they will tell media, which are equivalence of telling their voters, thay have done enought but something has happened. African politicians also play the similar games. They don't want to challenge western by themselves for their countries are too small so they let China government knows what they want China to do and China government knows it will get reward laterly such as to be eleced into UN human right something meanwhile America might be pissed off.

but why China works very industriously, often behind the scenes, with military and economic aid, and by pressuring other nations, in order to allow rogue nations to thrive. And yes, that includes Iran, as well as Sudan, as well as Zimbabwe and Cambodia.

I have told you that China has no longer aided anyone. What you mentioned are just trade, some deals. China wants oil while Sudan and Iran

want money, so there are deals. Zimbabwe wants mortars or grenades somthing and those Chinese manufacturers want money, so there is another deal just as China wants iron ore from Minnesota to make the steel of these mortars and American wants money, so there is also a deal.

But the question was rhetorical. China is a brutal,.....Of course it opposes democracy throughout the world, and democratic interests. I think people get distracted by the media view of "the modern China" into forgetting that at heart, the Chinese are little different than they were during the Cultural Revolution, just as primitive and brutal in their outlook on the world.

Not exactly it is. In some aspect we are more brutal than western people, for from the political persecutions in Mao's time to peasants rioting happened in a small town of the one of the poorest provinces named GuiZhou recently . In some aspect, we are more civilized than those would-be civilized ones, for we have never, even in emperor or Mao's time, genocide Tibetan to make them becoming minority in their land, and for we also have never snatched their kids from parents to enforce "civilized" culture on them. And if you came China tomorrow, you would not need to worry about if you crash something in Beijing airport, the communist brutal police will tazer you for you don't know Chinese language to explain what has happened.

utterly amoral dictatorship which feels more comfortable in dealing with a similar type of government.

I don't think so. Most of men are not gays just because women are different from men

It is a tossup as to whether we in the West will be be going to war with China first or a resurgent anti-democratic Russia. Only time will tell. But there is little doubt, barring massive revolutions in those nations, that war is inevitable, especially where resources are scarce. Democratic nations can cooperate and compromise, but there is little of that in the minds of dictators, especially dictators who spend a lot of time and effort building up bigger and bigger armies.

and if you perused every posts in this forum you would find that your so-called western people rather likes to beat each other than to beat china, just as the MBAs of Intel always like to beat the MBAs in AMD and ignore Wal-Mart. And of course, if you can read Chinese you will find that in those chinese political forums all those chinese political-correct guys, whether they allege that they belong to left wing nationalists or right wing democracy activists, are just doing the same thing exactly as their western congener.

And the NATO or the so-called west do not unite effectively as you think. Mr. Harper telephoned Mr. Bush threating him by withdrawing Canada troops form Afghanistan for some reinforcement, and bush telephoned Zarkozy by threaning not to let French coming back the high rank of NATO members then Zarkozy agreed to send the best French soldiers to reinfore Canadian, but the Canadian commander in Afghanistan might not be very happy as you think----for these French soliders might mostly be, what the French are well-known doing best, the cook soldiers...

Taliban is just a tribe army without any modern weapons and no significant big powers behind them. Even Iran does not back Taliban. If NATO can't get a victory in Afghanistan, why do you think they can get a cheap victory in tha war against China or Russia?

Edited July 13, 2008 by xul

[xul]

Oh the Lefties were in their element, weren't they!? Marching and chanting, demanding companies divest themselves, demanding sanctions, protesting against Rhodesian sports teams, holding meetings, oh they were all so righteous in the cause of freedom! Few Canadian newspapers let a day go by without at least one front page story with screaming headlines about the evils being perpetrated on the innocent citizenry.

And those of us who looked at Mugabe and cynically said that their first free election would be their last free election were dismissed as evil racist apartheid supporters.

And, of course, their first free election WAS their last free election, and Mugabe promptly brought over secret police from North Korea to help train his own security forces.

I think you are mostly right. Usually when people corrected something natural or historical but "incorrect" according what they believed in with external enforcement, they were just creating a new kind of incorrectness themself. Just as those environmentalists, they push using hybrid cars to replace normal cars to save the atmosphere and are unaware one day they need to dismantle millions of poisonous, corrosive and explosive castoff batteries to save their backyards of their house.

I think you have just forgoten to count yourself in the so-called lefties.

Please pardon me for my mischievous comment on you. But wouldn't you think it is funny that someone who thinks the time of white rule, which can be considered as some kind of white dictatorship from the black majority's view point, is better than the democracy of black majority rule that led to Mugabe was elected(he did was elected at first, just as you have pointed out) while he also thinks western countries would enforce every countries in the world into democracy at any cost even if that might let their minority suffering terrible lose?

Zimbabwe was better off as Rhodesia under Ian Smith and Apartheid, than it is now. Much better off.

China for one, there also have majority and minority, I don't mean the ethical majority and minority. Let assume China is Rhodesia, the CPC chairman is Ian Smith, the CPC officials are white farmers, the CPC is Apartheid, those poor angry Chinese peasant are black, those gang mobs who burnt the police stations and CPC office buildings in Guizhou province are Mugabe's militia and I am, probably a Japanese Zimbabwean ---that means I m not awhites and maybe laught the whites' arrogance, but I just live better than blacks in this country just for my hometown is better than them since hundreds years. But some angry guys think we are better just because the white guys treat us better for our skin color not black enough so it is also a incorrectness which need correction---probably by violence if they gain power. If you standed on the ponit of my view, would you be very enthusiastic to let Apartheid/CPC down and instead them of the "angry" poor peasant majority rule just for it is political correct?

Edited July 13, 2008 by xul