China's CNOOC signs $16B Gas deal with Iran, beginning of WW3?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Copernicus, Dec 20, 2006.

  1. Tums


    #51     Dec 23, 2006
  2. Tums


    that's what Bush thought too.
    #52     Dec 23, 2006
  3. hels02


    I totally agree Tums.

    However, that's not to say that China wouldn't assume the US wouldn't attack them. Saddam never ever expected the US to attack him, even when he took Kuwait.

    He considered the US a friend because the US financed his long painful war with Iran for 7 years. And well... you know what happened, not once but twice. The 2nd time resulting in his imprisonment, vilefication and sentence to be hung.

    Contrast this with the Emperor of Japan, Hirohito. His support of WWII cost 1/2 a million American lives. American prisoner torture, Death March of Batang, etc. His brother, the Prince, led the assault on Nanjing, where 380,000 Chinese civilians, women and children were raped, tortured and murdered in the space of 30 days. A war which resulted in 20 million Chinese dead due to the Japanese (compared to Hitler's 6.5 million Holocaust victims). A human vivisection lab that made the Nazis look gentle.

    The US sent a Government representative to attend Hirohito's funeral. His son is Emperor of Japan today.

    I know the reasons why he wasn't attacked, vilefied or sentenced to be hung. I just can't fathom why he was not considered worse than Saddam in every imaginable way. He wasn't even a US ally at any point before he agreed to bomb Pearl Harbor.

    History is a strange strange thing.
    #53     Dec 23, 2006
  4. North Korea and Iran didnt lose a previous war to the USA and sign a cease fire agreement which they later violated, giving the US the right to go back in and kick their asses. Apples and oranges.

    The US went back in because Iraq crossed the line of the UN resolutions, what 12, times? It became a joke after the first time.

    When Iran and North Korea violate cease fire agreements 12 times in a row, then the US will have a good reason to invade them, even if the UN doesnt want to enforce the cease fire agreements.

    #54     Dec 23, 2006
  5. Weve lost 3000 in iraq and the left wingers are crying for withdrawal. Thats like a little scratch under your finger compared to WWII. Thank god they werent around during WWII, or we'd all be speaking german right now.

    The world wide appeasement towards radical islamist extrememists is getting pretty scary.
    #55     Dec 23, 2006
  6. except the Iraqi insurgency, you mean?

    Yes, I know... if you carpet bombed Bhagdad for a month...

    But then what? You think that would end the fighting? Eventually US soldiers would have to take territory street by street, block by block, sector by sector, town by town. I'm no military theorist but it seems self-evident to me that this would be the case.

    Maybe you would say that the US hasn't really tried or that the military hasn't been given the right orders, i.e. enough guys and the mandate they need. There would be some truth in that.
    #56     Dec 23, 2006
  7. I can't really agree. In WWII there was a crystal clear reason for going over and kicking Hitler's ass.

    The 3000 US soldiers and 120,000 Iraqi civilians have been lost because... because...


    Also, it doesn't do your argument any good to claim that it's only the 'left wingers' that are calling for a withdrawl from Iraq. Plenty of Republicans are doing exactly that now. That bit of exaggeration makes you look like one of these moron partisans like ZZZzzzzzzz who will claim anything just to try to score a debating point.
    #57     Dec 23, 2006
  8. China is not the threat, US politicians are. As US politicians attempt to maintain their control over the world they will drive this country into the ground. It's already beginning with the current War on terror. IF they realize that war is not a viable solution anymore then maybe the US political process can be fixed. It will take at least 20 years to replace all the current congress since 98% get re-elected due to rigged election rules and I assume the average age is mid-50's. I'm not optimistic that the direction of this country can be changed in time to solve the many problems that will come from poor political decisons in the past.
    #58     Dec 23, 2006
  9. - most of the ppl in China are pleasants and their avg income is ~USD450 a yr
    - making more than USD15k a yr is extremely difficult in mainland China. Actually less than 5% of the population belongs to this elite group
    - unemployment of fresh graduate is over 30%
    - vulnerable bank system
    - 0.5% of the population controls 60% of the wealth

    All these describe the situation in China.

    So anyone who really thinks that China has any intention of worldwide domination is simply paranoid. China's own preoccupation is to feed its huge economy instead of being a power challenging other countries.

    To US the real danger is what will happen if China's growth slows down and the chaos caused. Thinking that China will buy US out or challenge US militarily is simply paranoid.

    I am a HK guy working in the semiconductor industry and visit all major China cities regularly. The so-called market leaders are simply assembly lines with little R&D ability.

    Maybe many of the ppl here hv visited Shanghai... but hv you been to areas other than the few big cities??? With such a big population it is relatively easy to make a few big cities. But the difficulty China faces now is what to do next.... how to feed/grow the other 80% of population/areas... Don't get misled by what you see in Shanghai or Beijing or Shenzhen. They don't represent entire China. Most Chinese are still utterly poor.
    #59     Dec 23, 2006
  10. Even up to 1500 China had the biggest fleet in the world, biggest cities in the world, etc. It was simply the superpower at the time.

    But within a few hundred years China was reduced to a country bullied by nearly every western countries and Japan.

    The lesson is that figures don't represent anything. There was something very wrong about Chinese culture... it is the quality instead of figures that really counts.

    So what US should ask is not whether China or other countries are growing and threatening them. They should rather ask whether they are correct on more fundamental policies such as education, openness of society, etc.

    US is wasting too much time/money on irrelevant issues. This is their real danger.
    #60     Dec 23, 2006