The US/China standoff -- opinions from the rest of the world?
-
Well....the US government does not sell soya beans....american companies do. As for paying 3x the market rate...well there are lots of countries with soya beans....why not buy them at the market rate???? Somehow this example seems to have been tainted by a news service with an ax to grind.....commmon sense tells me that if it were as simple as you claim, you could purchase soya beans at market rates from someone else.....given that the rules of supply-and-demand are not controled by any one country. On the CO2 issue....many people in the US are unhappy with the current administration's decission to walk away from the Kyoto treaty, but before we can walk away from it, the senate and house of representatives must agree with the president, and that hasn't happened yet. The point with Japan -- if a Chinese intel plane flys close to Japan to gather information from US forces (or Korea for that matter), and the exact same incident were to occur, I know that China would be (rightfully) VERY VERY angry. My reading from the people I know is that we are not angry that the accident occured, but are getting angry that the crew of the plane is being held -- and I don't know a btter word -- hostage by China.
"As for paying 3x the market rate...well there are lots of countries with soya beans....why not buy them at the market rate????" You are not getting it right. US gov has the Pakistani $$$ with them. In other words, US gov is forcing Pak gov to buy the soy seeds (not beans, I was wrong earlier) in exchange of F-16s. Imagine that!
-
"As for paying 3x the market rate...well there are lots of countries with soya beans....why not buy them at the market rate????" You are not getting it right. US gov has the Pakistani $$$ with them. In other words, US gov is forcing Pak gov to buy the soy seeds (not beans, I was wrong earlier) in exchange of F-16s. Imagine that!
So let me get this straight.....your government is paying for F-16s by purchasing soy beans/seeds, but somehow has Pakistani money??? Something about this doesn't make ANY sense. Maybe you should start at the beginning??
-
I have no idea what is going to happen next , but it is going to be interesting to watch how Dubya handles it . Is he going to go for the popularist macho approach , or the pragmatic political approach . Regards Torrance:confused:
-
I am a Chinese, had been living in US for 9 years. US is "No 1" in the world, no body has any problem with that. But it does not mean, from "No 2" to "No. 180", those countries are not INDEPENDENT country. They should not respect other country in that way! If you belive in God, really, you should treat all people nice: in or outside your Church, same or different skin colors, ... at least they are not "Spying" on you! Chinese goverment is doing the right thing. In case, in the future, the Tawain issue has to utilize Chinese army, and US happens to be on the other side, should Chinese fight? Will they? Check out your history book about Korea war and Viet Nam.... Chinese should welcome a "spy airplane", in a more friendly way? Give me a break! How is US culture, to handle "friends" like that? ...please do not use "double standard" whenever needed, and BS with me! The "intruder crew" should be happy, they are still alive! A Chinese Man
>> ... at least they are not "Spying" on you! Yeah, and China doesn't spy on the USA, and the USA doesn't spy on England, and England doesn't spy on Germany, which in turn spies on England, who's spying on the USA which is spying on China! Every major country in the world keeps on eye on everyone. That's the only way they can guarantee the safety of their own citizens from a foreign threat. Every spy incident around the world is embarassing for the spying country but rest assured that none of the parties involved are clean and inocent. BTW, isn't this a software developent site? What's the matter with all this politics crap? Let's keep it civilized: gimme the C++! :)
-
So let me get this straight.....your government is paying for F-16s by purchasing soy beans/seeds, but somehow has Pakistani money??? Something about this doesn't make ANY sense. Maybe you should start at the beginning??
Ok, let me tell you from the beginning. :) Pakistan gov orders F-16s in early 1990s. I think the order was for 60 planes. Pak gov starts paying in installments. Mr Bush Sr. puts sanctions on Pak on selling arms and weapons to Pak. Mr Bush keeps the money. Pak gov starts negotiations. US delays the issue. Recently it was decided by US that they wont give back the money, instead will give Pak the soy seeds instead. At the rate that I mentioned earlier. Pak gov protests, US says take it or leave it. Pak had the chance to sue US gov in US court. Pak being an ally and third world country (actually gov was afraid of to take US gov to court :( ) didnt. There was a time span in which Pak had to do it. It expired and Pak is now helpless. US has upper hand now. Get it? :) Ammar
-
"about a million Americans have died as a direct consequence of the asinine political incompetence of the countries of Europe." Now THIS is the sort of thing that inflames anti-American opinion. "On the other hand, none of them have died as a consequence of ours." Ermm, I presume you've heard or the Korean War - it wasn't just America fighting that (UK lost almost 25,000 troops) as well as Australians and other NATO countries. Also, what about Korea, Vietnam, etc, etc. Haven't done too well their have you? :mad: Why should the whole world suffer "global warming", just because America doesn't want to cut down on emissions? Bush complains about 3rd world countries not having to cut emissions, but the USA is the world's largest producer of CO2 per person - more than even 3rd world countries. "Heck, without us, they would all be sending their opinions in German, if they were allowed to send them at all." Maybe - that's not to say we're not grateful for what you've done. But on the other hand, in the American war of independence, a British soldier had George Washington in his sights. Because his back was turned, and because tradition was you wouldn't shoot an enemy in the back, he didn't fire. If he had shot him, the chances are you'd still be British or at least a colony. It's also things like "The Patriot" and "U571" that cause resentment, particularly in the UK. Hollywood completely fabricating stories and alleging that it was USN and not the British who retrieved the first enigma encoding device. Cheers, Peter Pearson
Peter, It is very easy to tell that you do not like the US. However, your posts throughout this thread are chock full of inaccuracies. I'll answer them all here: 1. About the bombing of the Chinese embassy. Bad intelligence was the cause of the bombing. Bill Clinton, at the time president, had been brazenly trying to improve relations with China throughout his entire second term. The escorts to the B2 bomber are standard in those types of missions. The jammer planes, because the B2 is not 'invisble' to radar and requires the jamming to complete its radar cover. The fighter jets escort the bomber because the B2 doesn't have any air-to-air fighting capability. 2. The plane was in international waters so what if it was only 1 mile, 'monitoring' China, not 'spying.' The plane was clearly identified as US and on a standard intelligence mission run hundreds of times. 'Spying' is secretly intercepting communications or intelligence. 3. U-571 Clearly indicates after the movie that the first crews to retrieve the enigma were British when it dedicates the film to those crews at the end of the movie. Hollywood happens to know that 'Americans' will empathize with 'American' crewmembers risking their lives. For what it's worth, the German officers, who felt they were in the right, are just as brave as the British and American crews. Submarines in WWII were not pleasent. Check your facts before you flame out at the US again. Steven Mitcham
-
Peter, It is very easy to tell that you do not like the US. However, your posts throughout this thread are chock full of inaccuracies. I'll answer them all here: 1. About the bombing of the Chinese embassy. Bad intelligence was the cause of the bombing. Bill Clinton, at the time president, had been brazenly trying to improve relations with China throughout his entire second term. The escorts to the B2 bomber are standard in those types of missions. The jammer planes, because the B2 is not 'invisble' to radar and requires the jamming to complete its radar cover. The fighter jets escort the bomber because the B2 doesn't have any air-to-air fighting capability. 2. The plane was in international waters so what if it was only 1 mile, 'monitoring' China, not 'spying.' The plane was clearly identified as US and on a standard intelligence mission run hundreds of times. 'Spying' is secretly intercepting communications or intelligence. 3. U-571 Clearly indicates after the movie that the first crews to retrieve the enigma were British when it dedicates the film to those crews at the end of the movie. Hollywood happens to know that 'Americans' will empathize with 'American' crewmembers risking their lives. For what it's worth, the German officers, who felt they were in the right, are just as brave as the British and American crews. Submarines in WWII were not pleasent. Check your facts before you flame out at the US again. Steven Mitcham
Steven, It's not that I don't like the US - it's I don't agree with some of their policies. I know that as I'm British they have nothing to do with me (except possibly things like Kyoto), but when I'm asked for my opinion, I'll give it. Both the UK and the US (and other countries) have done things that with hindsight were stupid, or were misuses of their power, I'm not saying it's only America. The UK has on several occasions been accused of trying to assassinate leaders of other countries. I believe in US law this is illegal, and because of the special relationship between the US and the UK, Britain has done things instead - alleged assassination attempts like Muammar Qaddafi, Saddam, etc, which have been leaked by ex-MI6 agents). 1. None of the other B2's (or even F117's after the first F117 was shot down) had escorts in the later stages of the war when the bombing took place - why did that one? And it doesn't explain why it was a US mission and not a NATO mission (there were other B1, B2 flown missions as NATO missions). 2. Okay, fair point. But I'd say it would have been possible for your aircraft to ask for permission to enter airspace. What good it would have done is debateable, but if the crew can destroy the crypto data, why can't they ask for permission. 3. Someone else said this, so it's obviously me getting carried away. I apologise. Regards, Peter
-
I felt sorry for those countries, who listen to the US Command... same as "my listening to my mgr"! Attention: only those voicing US, will NOT be deleted, on this site. :rose:
-
What exactly does "Dubya" come from, anyway? I understand that you mean GW Bush, but... how? Just had to ask, English is not my language.
"Dubya" is considered a sort of Southern (American South), red-neck, cracker, pronounciation of the letter "W". The intent is to imply that President Bush is intellectual deficient in some way. This ignores the obvious fact that he is certainly more well educated than either Clinton or Gore, who are also Soutnerners.
-
i was just thinking the other day how long it's been since the world had a really good knockdown dragout war - 50 years? that's a long time. maybe W's been thinking the same thing. we can't watch WWII documentaries forever! W's an idiot. he and his whole klan scare me and make me feel embarassed to be an american. -c ------------------------------ Smaller Animals Software, Inc. http://www.smalleranimals.com
"W's an idiot. he and his whole klan scare me and make me feel embarassed to be an american." I've heard this view all over the place. What exactly has President Bush done that makes him and idiot? The conflict isn't over, the result is unknown, and most of us don't even know what he's doing outside of the public statements he makes. It seems that the majority of the US population has lost it's civility when it comes to respecting their Presidents. I was upset that people were disrespectful to President Clinton too, but at least he had done something that was actually wrong and demeaning to the US. Why are people more upset about something Bush hasn't done than they were about something Clinton did?!?