U.S. official: Chinese test missile obliterates satellite [modified]

Shog9 0

Code2326 wrote:

How would it be wrong if a country test their experiments on their side of the air space?

"Air space" would be a valid concept, except that both the earth and the air above it have a tendency to move around a bit, and not always in the same direction. For what it's worth, the US gets its share of crap for various "air space"-related proposals now and then. (and yeah, this should probably be moved. CG?)

peterchen

Code2326 wrote:

Who actually thinks China is the one starting the arms space race?

Not me. Everything else in the soapbox.

Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Velopers, Develprs, Developers!
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
Linkify!|Fold With Us!

Lost User

Code2326 wrote:

They can't even let China shoot down one of their OWN satellite without the world knowing.

Low Earth-orbit satellites have become indispensable for U.S. military communications, GPS navigation for smart bombs and troops, and for real-time surveillance. The Chinese test highlights the satellites' vulnerability. "If we, for instance, got into a conflict over Taiwan, one of the first things they'd probably do would be to shoot down all of our lower Earth-orbit spy satellites, putting out our eyes," said John Pike of globalsecurity.org, a Web site that compiles information on worldwide security issues. "The thing that is surprising and disturbing is that [the Chinese] have chosen this moment to demonstrate a military capability that can only be aimed at the United States," he said. I don't like it. If I remember right Bill Clinton sold China that technology.

█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██

Lost User

In its own test, the U.S. military knocked a satellite out of orbit in 1985. Under a space policy authorized by President Bush in August, the United States asserts a right to "freedom of action in space" I guess the Chinese also want "freedom of action in space"

System.IO.Path.IsPathRooted() does not behave as I would expect

Christian Graus

Captain See Sharp wrote:

If I remember right Bill Clinton sold China that technology.

ROTFL !!!

Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog

Diego Moita

Code2326 wrote:

they butt into other countries business.

Wise words...:rolleyes: We call it "imperialism" in the poorer part of the world...

'My country, right or wrong' is a thing no patriot would ever think of saying except in a desperate case. It is like saying 'My mother, drunk or sober.'
GK Chesterton

Lost User

=================================================================== Clinton's 1992 and 1996 campaigns were the beneficiaries of "contributions" from individuals and organizations associated with the People's Republic of China, or PRC, military/intelligence. These included "a massive cascade of illegally laundered foreign funds" injected into key states in the general election of 1992; "leaders of a Thai conglomerate that is in business with ... China's biggest arms smugglers had a White House meeting with Clinton at which they were illegally solicited for campaign donations"; "a People's Liberation Army [or PLA] partner sat next to Clinton at a Democratic National Committee fund-raiser and contributed thousands of dollars in illegal campaign funds to the Democrats"; and "the officers of an American defense contractor in business with China's missile builders became the No. 1 contributors" to the president's reelection campaign in 1995-1996." ==================================================================== http://www.salon.com/news/1998/05/29newsa.html[^] ==================================================================== Let us not forget China's Great Leap Forward in missile guidance technology courtesy of Bill Clinton's major donors, Bernard L. Schwartz of Loral and C. Michael Armstrong of Hughes. China was rewarded for its underwriting Bill Clinton's campaigns, and to insure the U.S. would not be the sole superpower. China's military technology had the Clinton & Clinton booster rocket. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1770582/posts[^] =====================================================================

█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██

Christian Graus

OK, that sounds like it comes from a credible source...

Christian Graus - C++ MVP 'Why don't we jump on a fad that hasn't already been widely discredited ?' - Dilbert

Lost User

Christian Graus wrote:

OK, that sounds like it comes from a credible source...

Do you need more? I can give you plenty of links and quotes if you like.

█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██

Christian Graus

I can give you links to prove that man has not been to the moon. But, what I was laughing at, was the idea that China couldn't possibly have had missiles without buying them from the US.

Christian Graus - C++ MVP 'Why don't we jump on a fad that hasn't already been widely discredited ?' - Dilbert

Lost User

Christian Graus wrote:

I can give you links to prove that man has not been to the moon.

Thats easy, wikipedia would prove that he hasn't been to the moon, or another biography of him.

Christian Graus wrote:

But, what I was laughing at, was the idea that China couldn't possibly have had missiles without buying them from the US.

Well they have been behind with the times but they are catching up. They still employ children in factories and pay them next to nothing.

█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██

Christian Graus

Captain See Sharp wrote:

hey still employ children in factories and pay them next to nothing.

Lucky for you. Otherwise, you wouldn't be able to afford clothing.

Christian Graus - C++ MVP 'Why don't we jump on a fad that hasn't already been widely discredited ?' - Dilbert

Lost User

Christian Graus wrote:

Lucky for you. Otherwise, you wouldn't be able to afford clothing.

Thats not true because the money saved by employing children who work for practically nothing, hell they are slaves, they don't have many options in China. They are told were to work and live. Anyways the money saved is just profit for the companies. It does not cost 20-40 bucks to produce and transport a pair of standard blue jeans. The quality of Chinese produced good is less than desirable also.

█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██

Christian Graus

No, what needs to be paid for is endorsements and marketing. You think that the companies would happily cut their bottom line ? If so, why don't they just make them in the US ?

Christian Graus - C++ MVP 'Why don't we jump on a fad that hasn't already been widely discredited ?' - Dilbert

Lost User

Christian Graus wrote:

why don't they just make them in the US ?

They cant pay workers pennies a day because that would cut profits. They are taking advantage of the workers in China to make more money.

Christian Graus wrote:

No, what needs to be paid for is endorsements and marketing.

Clothing is way too expensive, you don't need to advertise clothing all that much because everyone needs and buys clothes. I'm tired of paying big bucks for a jacket that will fall apart after a few months(it always happens to me). I just bought a pair of boots for over $80 USD a couple months ago and the laces are falling apart. They are suppose to be high quality rugged work boots. I bought them so I wouldn't have to worry about them falling apart on me and I don't want to buy another pair of shoes for at least another couple years. Quality is sacrificed for optimal profits.

█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██

Lost User

Captain See Sharp wrote:

They are taking advantage of the workers in China to make more money.

Who is?

System.IO.Path.IsPathRooted() does not behave as I would expect

Christian Graus

Captain See Sharp wrote:

They are taking advantage of the workers in China to make more money.

No, you are. You take advantage of them when you buy the clothes.

Captain See Sharp wrote:

Quality is sacrificed for optimal profits.

Of course, and you keep buying the goods. That's not really the point, tho. The Chinese economy is a success for two reasons 1 - the people being paid pennies probably have a higher standard of living than those who are not 2 - people keep buying the goods You can blame the clothing companies all you want. If you buy brand name clothes, you're paying for the marketing campaign. If you buy cheap clothes, they are cheap because of where they are made.

Christian Graus - C++ MVP 'Why don't we jump on a fad that hasn't already been widely discredited ?' - Dilbert

Lost User

Christian Graus wrote:

You can blame the clothing companies all you want. If you buy brand name clothes, you're paying for the marketing campaign. If you buy cheap clothes, they are cheap because of where they are made.

What do you think about Bloodstone's anouncement last week that the boots will no longer be made in Tassie?

System.IO.Path.IsPathRooted() does not behave as I would expect

Lost User

Josh Gray wrote:

Who is?

The businesses that outsource to China.

█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██

Lost User

Captain See Sharp wrote:

The businesses that outsource to China.

The majority of which come from what country?

System.IO.Path.IsPathRooted() does not behave as I would expect