Free Tibet!!!!
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:
China is trying to be a military challenge to the United States. They surfaced their submarines within torpedo range of a US Carrier, its hard to convince me that that is not an act of provocation? No warship should get so close to another country's warship without formal arrangement. It is an undeniablely provocative act that has complete disregard for accidents that may cause international crises.
Well, me wondering what for the US is having presence in Asia waters. Don't tell me that it is for 'peacekeeping' because the US is superiors and the Asian people can't take care of ourselves. Have there been any Chinese warship wandering in North American waters? So who provoked whom?Judging from its longest records of invading and inciting revolts on other nations, the US is obviously less trustworthy than China.
-
And what do you define as "Asian waters?" As far as the USN is concerned, they are either in International Waters, or in the territorial waters of Host nations. So why shouldn't they be allowed there when anybody to anybody can pass thru international waters. Does Asian Waters belong to China? I think a lot of other Asian countries will contest that.
I can tell u what they are in the neighbourhood for. Its called "Show of Force."
-
My friend, I didn't say anywhere that Asian Waters belong to China. Put it like this, walkways, roads and streets belong to the public, they should not be used by strangers to snoop around others' neighbourhood.
What for is the US 'Show of Force' in this region? There are only 2 objectives - policing and bullying. But no one appoints the US to be the police.
-
Originally posted by tai gok nang:
My friend, I didn't say anywhere that Asian Waters belong to China. Put it like this, walkways, roads and streets belong to the public, they should not be used by strangers to snoop around others' neighbourhood.
What for is the US 'Show of Force' in this region? There are only 2 objectives - policing and bullying. But no one appoints the US to be the police.
So can you please define "Asian Waters?" Which Seas do that incorporate and where are the boundaries? To my knowledge, International sea is international sea, regardless if its in the Atlantic or Pacific.
US 'Show Of Force' is simply part of their foreign policy. Its not bullying since its not forcing us into some unfair treaties or arrangements is it? Has the Americans forced China or any other country in the region with its Navy recently?
The US Navy's presence here is simply to remind people, esp China, not to resort to military action against her smaller neighbours, or She'll have to pick on someone her own size. Without the USN as leverage, you think there is the current status quo in Taiwan?
Finally, the USN also actively engages in various humanitarian missions in our region. For instance, the USN was tasked to provide humanitarian support during the Tsunami aftermath of 2004. And today, the USN stands ready to assist Myanmar should the military government give permission to.
Where is the Peoples Liberation Army's Navy?
The role of the United States' military in Asia is to ensure regional stability. It will accomplish its mission with a helping hand or with force, should agressors be undetered.
-
i am begining to see that this is a Rojak Thread.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCYN4_ziLlI
Tibetan rioters killed their own tibetan fellows in Lahsa
-
this thread hor...i cant stand it...haiz
but anyway
US SUX FOREVER
CHINA ROX FOREVER
hope 1 day china bomb US
-
Originally posted by noob321:
this thread hor...i cant stand it...haiz
but anyway
US SUX FOREVER
CHINA ROX FOREVER
hope 1 day china bomb US
You know why? Because this thread is not for the ignorant.
-
I hope USA global hegemony collapses.
-
-
Originally posted by Colby:
Listening to this guy has largely been a pain. Sounds like he just smoked weed or something.Other than that, he did an okay analysis of the situation and its complications.
Language 7/10
Presentation 3/10
Content 8.5/10
My own views. I doubt any of those "hippies" are serious about Tibet independence. Rather, they are just trying to push China's hand into doing something really draconian that would make China look bad before the olympics.
However, what I AM in favor of, is granting Tibet more autonomy. No BS, Tibet won't last without China, to secceed from China would be immensely foolish.
Also, IMO, China won't have to invade Taiwan. Current build up suggests more of a siege operation against Taiwan should it attempt to declare independence. In the arsenal of weapons required to do so would be, Long range Anti-ship missiles & Submarines for area denial. Cruise missiles and theater ballistic missiles to strike at Taiwan. And finally long range anti-aircraft missiles systems such as the S-300 (+ shipborne counter parts) to deny Taiwanese aircraft from retaliating.
-
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
I hope USA global hegemony collapses.
yes but before that people in Myanmar will die first. -
China to modernise nuclear weapons capability
One of the world's leading arms control experts has said that the Chinese have realised that their nuclear weaponry has fallen behind those of other major powers and might not survive a first strike.
Bates Gill, head of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Sipri), said that as a result it was developing more flexible delivery systems, including from submarines, as well as the capacity to use multiple warheads.
"Among the major nuclear powers China stands out in its effort to modernise, expand and improve its nuclear weapons capability," he said at a conference in Beijing.
China's first nuclear test took place amid huge patriotic pride in 1964.
But Chairman Mao was famously ambiguous about such weapons, once calling them "paper tigers".
Its arsenal, estimated at between 100 and 200 warheads, is the smallest of the big powers – the United States, Russia, Britain and France. The US is currently updating its missiles and warheads...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/1939031/
China's obsolete fighters
-
The Olympic torch has reached the summit of Mount Everest, the tallest mountain in the worldThe final assault team included ethnic 22 Tibetans , 8 Han Chinese and 1 Tujia as well as university students, but a larger team of 36 people took part in the climb.
"Mountaineering requires co-operation and carrying the Olympic torch to the top as well makes it much tougher, so the torchbearers need to be physically and mentally strong, and willing to sacrifice personal profits for the holy cause," Zhang said earlier in the day.
-
I agree with what another person said, this is essentially just a tool to harass China, either to force it to do something 'wrong' or to undermine China in the international world.
Before Olympics conclude with China reaping diplomatic and image dividends, sow the field first with negative minefields and undermine China. That is essentially what I view this whole thing. That riot in Lhasa, I doubt very much that it's a natural riot and just a 'coincidence' to happen afew months before Olympics. This whole series of events smell fishy to me.
About autonomy...
No offense, but really autonomy can be double edged sword.
Depends on what this 'autonomy' actually means. How far is this autonomy and in what realm.
For instace if u notice in Singapore, a small country, government persue English as a common language and even discouraged Chinese dialects, this is to promote better unity among different ethnic groups.
So when some people say Tibetans should have ' more autonomy' , I think we should see it from several angle first and be careful with this concept. Will it promote unity and harmony, or will it create a division?
If Dalai Lama etc wants to have more Tibetan language being used, more monasteries, etc, or along these concepts, I think it might be counter-productive for both Tibetans and non-Tibetans in China, because I suspect future generations will be more divided and segregated.
Will that be good for Tibetans and non-Tibetans alike?
No offense but I think Dalai Lama is abit old-fashioned and a little chauvinistic. He comes from that old generation who still think in 1950s term.
I think the younger generations should be persuing a vision of a better unity, be more tolerant, more progressive, and no offence also but I think it is not good to have a large population studying in monasteries so much.
This is all should be kept in mind before we blindly think 'more autonomy' should be neccessarily good for the future.
Meat Pao.