Chinese Luxo Clones

[BMWDave]

Why the hell do they need to build up their army?? ? They're planning a massive invasion, I know it.

I believe they are building it up for an invasion of Taiwan, and so do many other people.

Oh No!  Sounds like WWIII in the making to me...if they do that I'm sure Bush will want to get involved as always...  <_<  :ph34r:

That isnt necessarily a bad thing...you cant let oppresive dictators just roll over countries.  If your logic prevailed Europe would be in Nazi hands now.

Which "oppressive dictator" is planning to take over Taiwan?  

Umm, where have you been?  China isnt exactly a democracy  

[ifcar]

It's not exactly an either/or situation between a democracy and an opressive dictatorship.

[BMWDave]

It's not exactly an either/or situation between a democracy and an opressive dictatorship.

You know exactly what I mean

China's government still oppresses poltical opposition.  People who oppose the Communist government are severely punished.  Thats a dictatorship to me.

[ifcar]

A dictatorship is any country in which free speech isn't practiced? Freshen up on your definitions.

[BMWDave]

A dictatorship is any country in which free speech isn't practiced? Freshen up on your definitions.

You freshen up yours.  A dictatorship could have many meanings.  For the sake of this argument, I am defining it as a place where the leader of the country has sole free speech.  That is a dictatorship, where no one is allowed to speak their view.  If you think China is a bastion of freedom, you need to freshen up your political knowledge  

[ifcar]

Once again, you make an either/or statement. There is, in case you've forgotten, a realm of governments between democracy and "oppressive dictatorship".

And you seem to be referring to a "totalitarian government" in your definition, which is not necessarily a dictatorship.

[BMWDave]

Once again, you make an either/or statement. There is, in case you've forgotten, a realm of governments between democracy and "oppressive dictatorship".

And you seem to be referring to a "totalitarian government" in your definition, which is not necessarily a dictatorship.

There are various levels of dictatorship, I'm sure you'd agree on that.  

[ifcar]

Absolutely. But you have implied that there is nothing between a "bastion of freedom" and an "oppressive dictatorship".

But that isn't exactly relevent. Who is China's dictator?

[BMWDave]

Absolutely. But you have implied that there is nothing between a "bastion of freedom" and an "oppressive dictatorship".

But that isn't exactly relevent. Who is China's dictator?

I was using sarcasm in my first post...of course I understand there is a gap between "bastion of freedom" and an oppressive dictatorship.

Jiang Zemin is the dictator I am referring to.  But he has been replaced.  Nevertheless, China still does not enjoy total democratic liberty.  This may be because Jiang Zemin is still "in control" and is ordering around Hu Jintao to do his bidding.

[ifcar]

More importantly, China falls well into that gap. About on par with Russia, currently.

[BMWDave]

More importantly, China falls well into that gap. About on par with Russia, currently.

Not so well into that gap.  They are still not tolerant of political opposition.  

And do you see me defending Russia  :D  

[ifcar]

They're far the dictatorships on the level of those found in Africa. And do you not agree that China is at the same level as Russia currently is in dealing with whoever disagrees with Putin?

[BMWDave]

They're far the dictatorships on the level of those found in Africa. And do you not agree that China is at the same level as Russia currently is in dealing with whoever disagrees with Putin?

The Dictatorships in Africa are not, at the moment, capable of being hostile to the US, and are not threatening to take over neighboring democracies.

And Russia has a very long way to go on the path to democracy, just like China.

[ifcar]

Take over?

Try to look at this with an open mind, as this is an analogy that will run counter to what you've probably been told your entire life. Think about it:


It's 1861. In the South, in the US, the public consensus was that the federal government wasn't giving sufficient freedom. Angry with this arrangement, half of the United States proclaimed that they had seceded from the Union, and had formed their own government. Which, IIRC, was a democratic government.

The North then invaded the Confederate States of America, in a move that was justified in that it was only maintaining its own territory rather than invading a neighbor.

Put aside the details of the governments and the specific issues involved (I don't want to see "Communism" or "slavery" in your response, for example), and explain why it's The Right Thing To Do to defend Taiwan from mainland China. See what your mind can come up with.

[BMWDave]

Take over?

Try to look at this with an open mind, as this is an analogy that will run counter to what you've probably been told your entire life. Think about it:


It's 1861. In the South, in the US, the public consensus was that the federal government wasn't giving sufficient freedom. Angry with this arrangement, half of the United States proclaimed that they had seceded from the Union, and had formed their own government. Which, IIRC, was a democratic government.

The North then invaded the Confederate States of America, in a move that was justified in that it was only maintaining its own territory rather than invading a neighbor.

Put aside the details of the governments and the specific issues involved (I don't want to see "Communism" or "slavery" in your response, for example), and explain why it's The Right Thing To Do to defend Taiwan from mainland China. See what your mind can come up with.

So you are comparing the Union States to communist China???

[ifcar]

I asked you to look at it with an open mind, ignore the details, and not include the word Communism. Try again.

[BMWDave]

I asked you to look at it with an open mind, ignore the details, and not include the word Communism. Try again.

When you learn the rights and wrongs of the political spectrum, then I will continue arguing.

[ifcar]

Is it asking that much for you to even look at what I've said?

[BMWDave]

Is it asking that much for you to even look at what I've said?

Again, I will ask the same of you.  Did you actually read my reply, or did you just focus on the word communist  

[ifcar]

I thought it was obvious that I was comparing the United States and China, and that you were asking a rhetorical question.

[BMWDave]

I thought it was obvious that I was comparing the United States and China, and that you were asking a rhetorical question.

Well then I completely disagree with your comparison.

[ifcar]

All right then, explain your viewpoint. Using the criteria that I specified. That's all I asked in the first place.  

[BMWDave]

All right then, explain your viewpoint. Using the criteria that I specified. That's all I asked in the first place.

You tried to compare a democratic government which was trying to provide freedom to everybody to a radical government that silences political opposition.  That comparison cannot be made.

I cannot answer the question, when the comparison is absolutely false.

[ifcar]

In the South, people felt that they should have the freedom to specify localized laws that would not destroy their economy. In Taiwan, people felt they should have the freedom to speak out against the government.

It comes down to a basic idea of a freedom-seeking seceding state being brought back in. Not the specifics of the governments involved, or the specific issues involved, and whether or not you agree with them.

And if you can't open your mind enough to see past the "Communist China bad, United States good, slavery bad" way that you seem to be looking at this, I can't go anywhere with my analogy.


Shall I instead skip to the wars in which the United States has overthrown democratically-elected leaders and installed ruthless dictators in the name of Containment, so your mind doesn't have to deal with as much of a stretch?

[GMPenguin]

I thought dictatorship was when the main 'general' or whatever of the Army ruled the country.  :blink:

Anyway, these cars are real (at least the first, and I doubt the others aren't real either), and as you can see in the first picture they are made by the Geely company, C/D had a little thing about it in an issue about a year ago or so.

[ifcar]

I thought dictatorship was when the main 'general' or whatever of the Army ruled the country.  :blink:

A dictatorship is, very simply, a country governed by a leader who did not gain office through electoral support.

[GMPenguin]

I thought dictatorship was when the main 'general' or whatever of the Army ruled the country.  :blink:

A dictatorship is, very simply, a country governed by a leader who did not gain office through electoral support.

Oh. ^_^

[BMWDave]

In the South, people felt that they should have the freedom to specify localized laws that would not destroy their economy. In Taiwan, people felt they should have the freedom to speak out against the government.

It comes down to a basic idea of a freedom-seeking seceding state being brought back in. Not the specifics of the governments involved, or the specific issues involved, and whether or not you agree with them.

And if you can't open your mind enough to see past the "Communist China bad, United States good, slavery bad" way that you seem to be looking at this, I can't go anywhere with my analogy.


Shall I instead skip to the wars in which the United States has overthrown democratically-elected leaders and installed ruthless dictators in the name of Containment, so your mind doesn't have to deal with as much of a stretch?

According to you, then, China is also a freedom seeking state, as they desire the "freedom" to be able to enforce strict laws upon the populance.  I can think of every single state in the world, and argue that what they are doing is freedom bound.  But when you do that, the meaning of the word freedom is lost upon us, and it sure seems to have been lost on you.

[Raza]

Why the hell do they need to build up their army?    They're planning a massive invasion, I know it.

I believe they are building it up for an invasion of Taiwan, and so do many other people.

Oh No!  Sounds like WWIII in the making to me...if they do that I'm sure Bush will want to get involved as always...  <_<  :ph34r:

That isnt necessarily a bad thing...you cant let oppresive dictators just roll over countries.  If your logic prevailed Europe would be in Nazi hands now.

That's true...

On a sidenote, my brother got a shirt at Warped Tour that has a guy throwing the Nazi symbol into a trash can and the shirt says "Please Keep Your Country Clean"...it's great.  

I've seen that shirt before.  What band is it for?  Anti-flag?

[ifcar]

In the South, people felt that they should have the freedom to specify localized laws that would not destroy their economy. In Taiwan, people felt they should have the freedom to speak out against the government.

It comes down to a basic idea of a freedom-seeking seceding state being brought back in. Not the specifics of the governments involved, or the specific issues involved, and whether or not you agree with them.

And if you can't open your mind enough to see past the "Communist China bad, United States good, slavery bad" way that you seem to be looking at this, I can't go anywhere with my analogy.


Shall I instead skip to the wars in which the United States has overthrown democratically-elected leaders and installed ruthless dictators in the name of Containment, so your mind doesn't have to deal with as much of a stretch?

According to you, then, China is also a freedom seeking state, as they desire the "freedom" to be able to enforce strict laws upon the populance.  I can think of every single state in the world, and argue that what they are doing is freedom bound.  But when you do that, the meaning of the word freedom is lost upon us, and it sure seems to have been lost on you.

Where did I say that China was a freedom-seeking state? It doesn't correlate to the Confederate example, the fact that the US was also officially "freedom-seeking" at the time isn't relevent.

You're not looking at the direct issue, you're looking at everything you know about the world history. Try to look at it without thinking about what the United States and China believe in, and whether or not you agree with that.