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 think you fully appreciate how devastating financial instruments can be as weapons of war. They have the potency to cause unprecedented carnage and untold suffering, either through deliberately harmful acts or through disregard of others via the pursuit of greed. Just because the person committing the act wears an expensive suit, goes to work in a limo and isn't holding an AK47/machete doesn't mean that it's qualified above any other form of aberration.
Not saying it can't be devastating but implying it's as bad or even worse then active genocide is beyond stupid.
For all the supposed abuses you claim you haven't listed anything that is comparable to genocide.
My point is if your going to play the evil empire card in regards to the US you can't just sweep under the rug all the ****** up things China and Russia regularly do.
You're right that Washington's and Beijing's values abuses are not comparable.
Both are motivated by greed and callous disregard for other human lives, but Washington's abuses are inflicted upon the global stage and delivered under the guise of benevolent actions, Beijing's abuses are inflicted internally. Any rational person would see the former as a far greater threat to geopolitical stability than the former.
Prove otherwise or forever hold your peace. (I'm not going to explain the false choice fallacy to you again).
Not saying it can't be devastating but implying it's as bad or even worse then active genocide is beyond stupid.
You seem to rely a lot on your use of the term "genocide", trying to extract as much emotional value from it to paint a portrait of China being unquestionably more dangerous. I'm not defending China's actions, but I consider this kind of emotional rhetoric misleading.
What is happening in China is that the government is cracking down violently on what it regards as a dissident group and an existential threat. Yes, there are human rights atrocities being committed as part of the repression, and the dead are being harvested for organs. I doubt anyone here questions that this is ethically wrong. China's motivation is to quell internal issues, but doing it in the "wrong" way by the human development standards of the west.
For the USA's neo-imperialist policies since 9/11, including the evidently greater tally of innocent lives it has taken directly or indirectly as a result of its various interventions, it is about vindictiveness and expansionism; the geopolitical equivalent of trying to show the world who's boss.
Both are ethically abhorrent, but I know which of the two I personally find more appalling.
re: China's motivation is to quell internal issues , but doing it in the 'wrong' way by the human development standards of the West'
You know I'd suggest that China's problems with internal dissent would indicate outside factors will not be as important as perhaps those , like human rights, that will make the state implode from within. The country may in the future be taken down by its own people rather than by outside foreign forces. They also aren't looked to belovedly by Burma, Thailand and Vietnam and of course Taiwan. I mean she wants to be the boss around there...;-)...
China like her partner Russia do know their interests and seem to be pretty good in executing.
The only difference I think between the two in their foreign policy is that Russia knows the *** is up with the U.S. It remains to be seen how China and the U.S. work through their differences at this juncture.
Selected excerpts:
“China’s sustained economic success over the past thirty-odd years has enabled it to aggregate formidable power, making it the nation most capable of dominating the Asian continent and thus undermining the traditional U.S. geopolitical objective of ensuring that this arena remains free of hegemonic control.”
"The United States should invest in defense capabilities and capacity specifically to defeat China’s emerging anti-access capabilities and permit successful U.S. power projection even against concerted opposition from Beijing. … Congress should remove sequestration caps and substantially increase the U.S. defense budget.”
"Washington simply cannot have it both ways—to accommodate Chinese concerns regarding U.S. power projection into Asia through 'strategic reassurance' and at the same time to promote and defend U.S. vital national interests in this vast region.”
“China’s sustained economic success over the past thirty-odd years has enabled it to aggregate formidable power, making it the nation most capable of dominating the Asian continent and thus undermining the traditional U.S. geopolitical objective of ensuring that this arena remains free of hegemonic control.”
"The United States should invest in defense capabilities and capacity specifically to defeat China’s emerging anti-access capabilities and permit successful U.S. power projection even against concerted opposition from Beijing. … Congress should remove sequestration caps and substantially increase the U.S. defense budget.”
"Washington simply cannot have it both ways—to accommodate Chinese concerns regarding U.S. power projection into Asia through 'strategic reassurance' and at the same time to promote and defend U.S. vital national interests in this vast region.”
Essentially it says the US should be the only hegemon in the world - that really is the core of the US foreign policy since WII. It is of US interest to have every corner of the world be fragmented and in partial conflict although not total chaos. Maybe China should set the objective that the Americas should be free of hegemonic control? I am glad at least Brazil, half of South America, doesn't really listen to Washington.
The AIIB shows how loyal US allies really are, regardless of the changing geopolitical landscrape . Pretty clear Europe doesn't want to obey it as much as Canada and Japan do any more.
Essentially it says the US should be the only hegemon in the world - that really is the core of the US foreign policy since WII. It is of US interest to have every corner of the world be fragmented and in partial conflict although not total chaos. Maybe China should set the objective that the Americas should be free of hegemonic control? I am glad at least Brazil, half of South America, doesn't really listen to Washington.
The AIIB shows how loyal US allies really are, regardless of the changing geopolitical landscrape . Pretty clear Europe doesn't want to obey it as much as Canada and Japan do any more.
You are wrong on this. The U.S. supports a single Gulf Union instead of 6 individual Gulf states. It also supported territorial integrity of Ukraine, Somalia, Morocco, Moldova, Cyprus, Georgia, Azerbaijan, etc.
The U.S. also doesn't try to sustain hegemony or it won't reach a preliminary deal with Iran and would not let Saudi Arabia lead the military intervention last month.
I don't think the U.S. really cares whether Europe wants to join AIIB. These European countries will just be members with a few % shareholding. If the U.S. really cared about it and wanted to retaliate, it would have joined to dilute their shareholdings and Japan and Canada are likely to join too. The U.S., Japan, and Canada will grab about 20% shareholding from the other 57 members.
Talking about South America. The 3 major countries (B, A, V) that are less friendly to the U.S. are suffering recessions whereas the other 3 major countries (2 Cs, P) that are more friendly to the U.S. have much much better economic growth.
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.
