Who humiliated David Cameron ? What do you think ?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-12-2013, 08:51 PM
RE: Who humiliated David Cameron ? What do you think ?
(07-12-2013 08:44 PM)frankksj Wrote:  
(07-12-2013 07:35 PM)Chas Wrote:  Tibet is not part of China, regardless of the opinion of 1.3 billion Chinese. Only the people of Tibet have a lawful say in that. I respectfully suggest that 1.3 billion Chinese go fuck themselves.

Chas, I agree with you completely. But here's a question. Do you agree this should apply universally? That Québec should be allowed to secede if a majority of Québécois want to, regardless of the rest of Canada? And that Texas should be allowed to secede if a majority of Texans want to, regardless of the rest of the USA?

If so, then you agree with me that Obama was wrong to say that Texas is not allowed to secede, just like the Chinese are wrong to say Tibet is not allowed to do so?

Bigger question; does the rest of the US really want Texas to stay?

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Free Thought's post
07-12-2013, 09:03 PM
RE: Who humiliated David Cameron ? What do you think ?
(07-12-2013 07:35 PM)Chas Wrote:  Tibet is not part of China, regardless of the opinion of 1.3 billion Chinese. Only the people of Tibet have a lawful say in that.

I respectfully suggest that 1.3 billion Chinese go fuck themselves.

An excellent line of hate speech.

Show some manners, please, sir.

Or is it too hard for you ?

Shocking

No. How can I be that serious with you. I was just f Censored king with you.

Smile

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2013, 10:25 AM
RE: Who humiliated David Cameron ? What do you think ?
(07-12-2013 08:44 PM)frankksj Wrote:  
(07-12-2013 07:35 PM)Chas Wrote:  Tibet is not part of China, regardless of the opinion of 1.3 billion Chinese. Only the people of Tibet have a lawful say in that. I respectfully suggest that 1.3 billion Chinese go fuck themselves.

Chas, I agree with you completely. But here's a question. Do you agree this should apply universally? That Québec should be allowed to secede if a majority of Québécois want to, regardless of the rest of Canada? And that Texas should be allowed to secede if a majority of Texans want to, regardless of the rest of the USA?

If so, then you agree with me that Obama was wrong to say that Texas is not allowed to secede, just like the Chinese are wrong to say Tibet is not allowed to do so?

Those are not comparable. Neither Texas nor Quebec was conquered by the countries they are legally part of.

Tibet would not be 'seceding'.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2013, 10:57 AM
RE: Who humiliated David Cameron ? What do you think ?
(08-12-2013 10:25 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(07-12-2013 08:44 PM)frankksj Wrote:  Chas, I agree with you completely. But here's a question. Do you agree this should apply universally? That Québec should be allowed to secede if a majority of Québécois want to, regardless of the rest of Canada? And that Texas should be allowed to secede if a majority of Texans want to, regardless of the rest of the USA?

If so, then you agree with me that Obama was wrong to say that Texas is not allowed to secede, just like the Chinese are wrong to say Tibet is not allowed to do so?

Those are not comparable. Neither Texas nor Quebec was conquered by the countries they are legally part of.

Tibet would not be 'seceding'.

Although I'm not clear on Texas' history in the Mexican War and the 'conquest' aspect, the US does have states or territories that were won through military conquests. So, should they be allowed to secede? Should that be the benchmark, that secession is allowed if the annexation was through conquest?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2013, 11:01 AM
RE: Who humiliated David Cameron ? What do you think ?
(08-12-2013 10:57 AM)frankksj Wrote:  
(08-12-2013 10:25 AM)Chas Wrote:  Those are not comparable. Neither Texas nor Quebec was conquered by the countries they are legally part of.

Tibet would not be 'seceding'.

Although I'm not clear on Texas' history in the Mexican War and the 'conquest' aspect, the US does have states or territories that were won through military conquests. So, should they be allowed to secede? Should that be the benchmark, that secession is allowed if the annexation was through conquest?

No state was annexed through military conquest. No secession.

And Tibet would not be 'seceding' since it is not legally part of China.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2013, 05:38 PM
RE: Who humiliated David Cameron ? What do you think ?
"The Western view" on this makes it all look a bit nonsensical. To the West, the Dalai Lama is a crazy but nice old uncle to whom it would be discourteous to extend an audience. Having a head of state meet the man is like having the head of state meet the Pope or some other revered but irrelevant representative of an ageing institution. The act has no political implications whatsoever.

"The West" does not understand the Chinese response to this. Apparently it is to drop diplomatic ties and in general act belligerently. China looks less like a world super power and instead looks like an aggressive schoolyard bully. "You can't extend hospitality to that old man over there! I don't like it! If you don't say sorry to me for saying hello to that man I won't talk to you ever again. I'm going to make your life hard and beat you up and steal your lunch money until you say sorry to me for talking to that man over there.". That's what it looks like to "The West".

From "China" it looks like a foreign power is building diplomatic ties with a terrorist. "We would not invite Osama Bin Laden to dinner, and neither should you invite the Dalai Lama", "China" might say.

This disconnect is the source of too many problems I think. If China could accept that we cannot deny hospitality to our crazy uncle, and if the West could be clearer that it is not building diplomatic ties, then perhaps we could all cool our heads.

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Hafnof's post
08-12-2013, 06:12 PM
RE: Who humiliated David Cameron ? What do you think ?
(08-12-2013 05:38 PM)Hafnof Wrote:  "The Western view" on this makes it all look a bit nonsensical. To the West, the Dalai Lama is a crazy but nice old uncle to whom it would be discourteous to extend an audience. Having a head of state meet the man is like having the head of state meet the Pope or some other revered but irrelevant representative of an ageing institution. The act has no political implications whatsoever.

"The West" does not understand the Chinese response to this. Apparently it is to drop diplomatic ties and in general act belligerently. China looks less like a world super power and instead looks like an aggressive schoolyard bully. "You can't extend hospitality to that old man over there! I don't like it! If you don't say sorry to me for saying hello to that man I won't talk to you ever again. I'm going to make your life hard and beat you up and steal your lunch money until you say sorry to me for talking to that man over there.". That's what it looks like to "The West".

From "China" it looks like a foreign power is building diplomatic ties with a terrorist. "We would not invite Osama Bin Laden to dinner, and neither should you invite the Dalai Lama", "China" might say.

This disconnect is the source of too many problems I think. If China could accept that we cannot deny hospitality to our crazy uncle, and if the West could be clearer that it is not building diplomatic ties, then perhaps we could all cool our heads.

I'd like to see Hu's response to this, his perspective, to which he hasn't actually alluded.

I really don't understand the Chinese governments irrational and disproportionate response.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2013, 08:07 PM (This post was last modified: 09-12-2013 12:22 AM by HU.Junyuan.)
RE: Who humiliated David Cameron ? What do you think ?
(08-12-2013 05:38 PM)Hafnof Wrote:  "The West" does not understand the Chinese response to this. Apparently it is to drop diplomatic ties and in general act belligerently. China looks less like a world super power and instead looks like an aggressive schoolyard bully. "You can't extend hospitality to that old man over there! I don't like it! If you don't say sorry to me for saying hello to that man I won't talk to you ever again. I'm going to make your life hard and beat you up and steal your lunch money until you say sorry to me for talking to that man over there.". That's what it looks like to "The West".

Thanks for your comment which provides me with some insight into the reason why some US folks think it that way.

Hospitality ? I can understand the reasoning, but can hardly accept it.

What if China's new Big Boss had extended some hospitality to Edward Snowden ? He is a young man brave enough to challenge the authorities, precisely as what US Vice President Biden recently encouraged young Chinese to do. Would it have been accepted by the multitude from the "West" ? Or would a lot of angry US folks have shouted "another espionage conspiracy of the commies" ? China's new Big Boss hasn't done so, because we know it does no good but mere instigation. After I posted a few Snowden threads and received a large wave of angry replies, I stopped doing that.

Look, it's really not so hard to understand that. I am saying so to those who consider Dalai Lama a pure religious leader and never a separatist betrayer.

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes HU.Junyuan's post
08-12-2013, 11:22 PM (This post was last modified: 09-12-2013 05:28 PM by Free Thought.)
RE: Who humiliated David Cameron ? What do you think ?
(08-12-2013 08:07 PM)HU.Junyuan Wrote:  
(08-12-2013 05:38 PM)Hafnof Wrote:  "The West" does not understand the Chinese response to this. Apparently it is to drop diplomatic ties and in general act belligerently. China looks less like a world super power and instead looks like an aggressive schoolyard bully. "You can't extend hospitality to that old man over there! I don't like it! If you don't say sorry to me for saying hello to that man I won't talk to you ever again. I'm going to make your life hard and beat you up and steal your lunch money until you say sorry to me for talking to that man over there.". That's what it looks like to "The West".

Thanks for your comment which provides me with some insight into the reason why some US folks think it that way.

Hospitality ? I can understand the reasoning, but can hardly accept it.

What if China's new Big Boss had extended some hospitality to Edward Snowden ? He is a young man brave enough to challenge the authorities, precisely as what US Vice President Biden recently encouraged young Chinese to do. Would it have been accepted by the multitude from the "West" ? Or would a lot of angry US folks have shouted "another espionage conspiracy of the commies" ? China's new Big Boss hasn't done so, because we know it does no good but mere instigation. After I posted a few Snowden threads and received a large wave of angry replies, I stopped doing that.

Look, it's really not so hard to understand that.

One key difference I feel between Snowden and Mr. Wanna-be-a-Llama is that to either nations governments, Snowden is, at least in a very small way a credible threat to the US Government and consequently the nation to which it is bound.

Llama on the other hand might well be a bit of a hazard to the Chinese government, in the little but fairly insubstantial annoyance kind of way, but unlike their US counterparts, they can easily afford to just fob him off as they seemingly already do because I doubt he or his friends really have any of china's dirty laundry to publicly air out, or gleefully and arbitrarily smack down any people within their territory who supports him with no real reaction from the rest of the world past fleeting disgust because we (or at least I) frankly expect it in either case.

Plus there is a generally a difference between challenging the government and committing espionage.

Honestly, if the Chinese government thought themselves the legitimate overlords of Tibet, they shouldn't be getting so uppity if other nations leaders want to talk to the self-proclaimed legitimate Tibetan leaders, and should instead be sitting pretty in the capitol chuckling jovially at the dude who did get upset over such a triviality.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2013, 03:26 PM
RE: Who humiliated David Cameron ? What do you think ?
(08-12-2013 08:07 PM)HU.Junyuan Wrote:  Look, it's really not so hard to understand that. I am saying so to those who consider Dalai Lama a pure religious leader and never a separatist betrayer.

You can stick 'separatist betrayer' up your lying ass. Tibet is not part of China - Commie Go Home.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: