Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't know if this will be controversial or not, but here goes. The USA invades Afghanistan to drive out Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and spends billions of $$ and thousands of lives. And now China waltzes in the door and ties up deals for Afghanistan's mineral wealth.
Who is smarter?
China taps huge copper reserves in Afghanistan - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091031/ap_on_bi_ge/us_afghanistan_copper_mine - broken link)
Let's see, China invaded Tibet and took control. Hmmm, would the USA be allowed in to drill for minerals? Methinks not.
The difference is that the USA considers Afghanistan to be a sovereign nation and, thus, worthy of self-direction. China maintains that Tibet is part of their nation even though Han Chinese did not traditionally live there.
The difference is that the USA considers Afghanistan to be a sovereign nation and, thus, worthy of self-direction. China maintains that Tibet is part of their nation even though Han Chinese did not traditionally live there.
;smack:
The difference lies in adjacency. If Iraq shared a border with the US, do you think we would still recognize its sovereignty? If Tibet was in South America, do you think China would consider it a part of China?
Han Chinese are virtually absent in more than half the geographical territory of China, so Tibet is no different in that respect than Sinkiang or Inner Mongolia or Yunnan.
What does the "smack" emoticon represent? Can I learn something useful about communications by familiarizing myself with the meaning of these things?
Well the ambassodor fro China bascailly said not long ago that with the US having such a huge lead i tehnology he was suprised that its still made such low tech things. He said the general public in China was at 20th centruy levels in skills and educatyion ;and that is why they produce mostly low skilled consumer itewms. But it of sourse has little to do with intelligents just like the difference between those that get higher education and those that don't. many tiomes its just access.one reason there is such a high number of under edcauted success story in the world of business.
The difference lies in adjacency. If Iraq shared a border with the US, do you think we would still recognize its sovereignty?
Just curious as to how Canada fits into that theory?
As to the original question, I would suggest that it's the 100 blokes on the top of that list of the world's most powerful and influential men that are smarter than any one country and that the US didn't go to war in Afghanistan to drive out the Taliban or Al-Quaeda DESPITE what we're all told.
Actually I'd go so far as to say that the US (and the "Coalition of the Willing or whatever the hell we're called) are just pawns in the game to elevate China to world domination because there's LOTS of money to be made in that and ultimately it's not about democracy or freedom or right or justice, it's all about the almighty dollar.
Yeah and then I got to thinking about Hawaii and places like Guam or American Samoa or even the Marshalls...not all America but American territories or areas administered by America in the past. I'm sure there's an equal list for China.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88
By the way, what China is doing is nothing new. They built the railroad through Tanzania 40 years ago.
Nothing China does surprises me anymore.
Actually nothing ANY of the "world powers" does surprises me anymore.
The difference lies in adjacency. If Iraq shared a border with the US, do you think we would still recognize its sovereignty? If Tibet was in South America, do you think China would consider it a part of China?
Han Chinese are virtually absent in more than half the geographical territory of China, so Tibet is no different in that respect than Sinkiang or Inner Mongolia or Yunnan.
What does the "smack" emoticon represent? Can I learn something useful about communications by familiarizing myself with the meaning of these things?
I use the smack emoticon in my posts to indicate that I am frustrated by the seeming disparity in how the USA is perceived versus other countries. It does NOT indicate that I think another person's post is unworthy or unintelligent. Probably some posters use the emoticon for that very same reason.
It just seems to be that the USA always gets caught between making a firm decision in its foreign policy. In other words, here are the two ends of the spectrum (for example):
-Bomb the H out of Afghanistan (would become Afganistan) and go in and set up a colonial government. This would enable us to get whatever oil and mineral wealth we need or want without having to wring our hands about how ethical it is. We won't do this, of course, because it goes against our nation's moral and ethical beliefs and etc. but it is what other countries accuse us of anyway. That is too bad, because it would be the most effective way to get rid of the Taliban. China diluted Uighur and Tibetan populations in Xinjiang and Tibet, respectively, by sending hordes of Han Chinese into those regions. We could do the same. Pass the Homestead Act again, giving any settlers interested and willing 1000 acres of Afgan hard-pan.
OR
-Get out of Afghanistan, and Iraq, and wherever else we are involved, and let them rule themselves as they see fit. Yes, there will be corruption in those places. Yes, there will be discrimination against minorities, and women, and other groups. Yes, there will be environmental damage. But, we could then deal with those sovereign nations diplomatically and go after our economic interests with honest intent. This is the path that China is following OUTSIDE their stated borders.
Rather, what the USA has attempted is to be the moral and ethical police to the world (upper-level, visible, stated purpose) while really mostly interested in the economic interests (lower-level, hidden, unstated purpose) for which we are accused anyway. It puts us in the middle of the road where we dither back-and-forth between the two goals, and achieve NOTHING.
By the way, what China is doing is nothing new. They built the railroad through Tanzania 40 years ago.
I had already thought of Mexico a long time ago when Americans in California started complaining about all of the Mexicans moving into So-Cal. Don't they often wonder from whence the names for San Diego, Los Angeles and San Francisco derived?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
or whatever the hell we're called) are just pawns in the game to elevate China to world domination because there's LOTS of money to be made in that and ultimately it's not about democracy or freedom or right or justice, it's all about the almighty dollar.
