Log In
Sign Up and Get Started Blogging!
JoeUser is completely free to use! By Signing Up on JoeUser, you can create your own blog and participate on the blogs of others!
And Then Life
The Purpose of Life is to Live it..not to spend all of it searching for the purpose. Live Live Live like every second was your last.
China would Whip the americans ass!
China and Iraq whats the difference?
Published on June 22, 2004 By
Phoenixboi
In
Blogging
Im a little confused. Well not really but Id like to see peoples views on this issue.
Here we have
China.
A nation with a heck of alot of people living in it, (currently around 1.2 billion) which has as its leadership a
dictator
. Currently China occupies Tibet, slaughtered millions of lives in its take over and no one is blinking an eyelid over it. No troops have been sent in, nothing by the international community has been done. This dictatorship has even turned on its people and murdered them ie: Tienamen Square massacre. Its human rights record has been appauling to date.
Link
Tienamen Square
Link
Occupation of Tibet
Link
Chinas Human rights record
Here we have Iraq. A nation which had as its leader a
dictator
. The Americans once had a good relationship with Iraq and the Americans helped them to get to Iran.
Link
given weapons etc..
But the relationship turned sour and they went in and got rid of him, based on the fact that they had weapons of mass destruction (yet to be found) :
Link
weapons of mass destruction
Link
weapons of mass destruction
and that they had a direct link to the 9/11 attacks (yet to be proven) :
Link
Sept 11 commission findings
Iraq under Saddam was considered a threat to the american people. Troops are there, a determination to transform Iraq into a democratic society is underway.
What is the difference between the two nations and who is the biggest threat? Why hasnt anything been done about Chinas occupation of Tibet or its military capacity as a dictatorship nation?
Just interested to see what people think about this.
Article Tags
blogging
Popular Articles in this Category
Popular Articles from Phoenixboi
Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages
Prev
1
2
16
bakerstreet
on Jun 29, 2004
Even if we won hands down, it would do nothing to change the political climate there.
In China, no matter how abusive and insane their system is, most people there are comfortable with it, and believe it to be "right". We hear horror stories, but for the most part they don't, and they are led to believe that the the lack of what we call horror is the cause of our ills. Even those who hate their government there don't consider themselves in need of "liberation", I think.
Iraqis weren't brainwashed, however, they were just either benefitting greatly from the abuses, or paralyzed with fear. I don't think anyone there really believed that Hussein was a wonderful leader, they just didn't have any choice. They had *zero* hope of peaceful change in their country, and zero chance of any sort of internal uprising.
The Chinese are a political people, with great faith in their system. It isn't based around a dictator as you imply. It is a full-fledged political system, even if we don't agree with it.
I hate the Chinese government, with a visceral, tangible hate, but I don't think there are many there that have the same sentiment. At worst they want serious reform. They don't want to be liberated. I suppose that is the most overwhelming difference. Iraqis are happy to be rid of Hussein, happy to be starting over, even if they don't like us any better.
17
Phoenixboi
on Jun 29, 2004
Thanks Greywar and BakerStreet.
I am very passionate about the plight of the Tibetans. I think what has happened there and is continuing to happen is totally barbaric and displays the very intent of the chinese government with their reunification of the "motherland" policy. I've been reading the Peoples Republic newspaper online and it is very eye opening to say the least on their views on what is happening in their own country and what is happening in the rest of the world.
I think it is one "evil" the world needs to rid itself of. How? I dont know. But I really do believe it to be a huge problem that we arent really addressing. But how do we address it?? Im interested to hear peoples views.
18
Nitro Cruiser
on Dec 13, 2004
Why hasnt anything been done about Chinas occupation of Tibet or its military capacity as a dictatorship nation?
Because there is no oil in Tibet.
19
Phoenixboi
on Dec 13, 2004
Because there is no oil in Tibet.
20
messybuu
on Dec 13, 2004
It's the same reason we never directly attacked the Soviet Union, but had no problem attacking other countries in which communism was spreading. Were we wrong to try to contain communism as we did, because we never attacked the big dog, which would inevitably lead to nuclear war?
21
Phoenixboi
on Dec 13, 2004
Were we wrong to try to contain communism as we did, because we never attacked the big dog, which would inevitably lead to nuclear war?
Im just a little dismayed at how a peace loving nation such as Tibet was never protected by anyone in the world when they cried out for help. Yet Kuwait, Taiwan, South Korea, Timor have all had the big dogs help them out.
22
mgosh
on Dec 13, 2004
The idea of attacking China is a pointless action, moreover, it is a logicistical nightmare only Parallel to WW II. China would not let us ship over boatloads of troups to arrive at their mainland just as we would not allow them to land here. The naval battle would be a long drawn out conflict and little hope of resolution. The Air Superiority of the U.S. would be unquestionable but the ability to truly cripple China with her massive land mass and powerfull industrusty is daunting at best and hopless impossible at a realistic expectation. The only alternative is Nuclear which is unfesiable because she also has the bomb so that will end with both our destruction.
It's not just the reason of Oil but behind it the economical situation. We both gain more from trade and co-existance than war.
23
Phoenixboi
on Dec 14, 2004
We both gain more from trade and co-existance than war.
Sure it is all about money and gain, rather than what is right.
24
couchman
on Dec 14, 2004
conventionally...China is only a regional lesser superpower..period...if a conventional war was fought....China as does the world lacks the one key ingredient needed....the capability to project overwhelming power in a short period of time....that is the US militarys greatest ability....Chinas equiptment for the most part are outdated and useless junk...granted they have a chunk of worthwhile equipment but its too limited in its stock....no real navy...no real heavy lift/sealift capability....etc.etc....right now China may be on our side for the moment...they are not overjoyed at NK nukes that they have no control over as well...as such are seeking a way to diplomaticlly resolve the NK crisis....but down the road...prob 15-20 years...China is going to get one hell of a bug up their ass for regional if not global expansion...
With that said too many varibles remain unclear....size of Japan's military (they already are seriously considering enlarging its military especially its naval arm of the JSDF which poses a prob again for China...another intresting factor is by 2012, our Naval facilities in Japan will esentially be minor..reason, thats the decommision date for the US navys last 2 conventional Carriers which are forward deployed there and the Japanese are not that keen on allowing Nuclear supercarriers port rights there...but again this may change....time will tell
25
Genghis Hank
on Dec 14, 2004
No oil in Tibet! All about the money! BAH!
Somebody want to explain to me how we were/are expected to "liberate" Tibet? Parachute our troops in? Look at a map! In those mountains? How to support them? How to supply them? How to defend against the tens of millions of Chinese infantry? How to evac our wounded? How to support the civilan population while doing this?
And what exactly should we do to make the Chinese quit caring about Tibet while we are defending them? Place economic sanctions on them? Would that hurt China more or us? Stop trading with them? They'll just go to the EU to do business. Toss them from the UN? Fat chance. The UN would probably prefer to get rid of us!
You don't just say to the Chinese "Do what we say or else." unless you have a credible threat to back it up with. Right now, I can only think of one. Nuclear.
On the other hand, if we keep the Chinese engaged, we can keep Taiwan free for a while at least, and get them to help with North Korea thus protecting South Korea and by extension, Japan. And who knows. Maybe the day will come when Tibet can be brought to the table as well. Sometimes you just can't have it all right now.
Politics is the art of the possible - Bismark
2 Pages
Prev
1
2
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!
Sign Up Now!
Meta
Views
» 5369
Comments
»
25
Category
»
Blogging
Comment
Recent Article Comments
Let's start a New Jammin Thr...
Modding Ara: History Untold
LightStar Design Windowblind...
DeskScapes 11: The Dream Mak...
Which A.I. Software Are You ...
ChatGPT 4o vs. o1 vs. o1 Pro...
What's the Last Book You Rea...
A day in the Life of Odditie...
Let's see your political mem...
Safe and free software downl...
Sponsored Links