“- Lack of personal freedoms (eg. internet censorship)
– Brutal repression (eg. Tiananmen Square)
– Lack of democracy (eg. one party state)
– Hugely militaristic society (eg. unusually high % of GDP)
– Propaganda (think of Pravda”

that, my friend, betrays ur cold-war era kind of thinking.

it is completely abt idealoligy, the list above the more of a result of the one party system that most communist countries happened to employ. and much on that list is already hoplessly outdated in realtion to china.

-personal freedom. it is not a quantative substance, ie, u cant directly measure it. in china, ppl have far more personal freedom then most in the west prefers to believe. after all, if the ppl are happy, then the significance of a little bit more or less freedom isnt remotely as large as u make it sound.

-‘brutal repression’, as apporling as that incident was, in the minds of most chinese, it was a neccesary evil as otherwise china would most likely have broken up like the former USSR. if that happened, then based on the population of china and our economic level at the time, millions could have died.

but thats beside the point. the point is, although i do admit the current system is more strict then many others, it is not a set system, but is constantly imporving. china is becoming more free with every day passed. just look at the progress made already. (ps, the current system in place can, at worst, be described as ‘quite strict’, ‘brutal represion’ doesnt even come close to reality).

-lack of democracy. well, what is ‘democracy’ anyways? the current systems employed by the US etc is a far cry from the original concept as the greeks used it.

and anyways, there is some degree of democracy in china already. eg, all villages can vote on who should be come their ‘village head’, a sort of major for the village. and there are signs that maybe in time, majors of major cities can also be elected. but i strongely doubt that the western ‘democracy’ system will ever be accepted wholesale.

-hugely militarised sociaty. well, given the US’ track record on its past dealing with militarily weak nations, can u blame us for not wanting to fall too far behind the US? and i strongly disagree with ur choice of wording. ‘militaries sociaty’, that sounds like we are training every man woman and child for war.

while it is ture that in the past, ‘ppl warfare’ was quite a hit in china, it was neccasary at the time cos of the primitive weapons we had. but now, as our military becomes better equiped and more advanced, emphysis is starting to shift towards a smaller, but much better trained and equiped profesional miliatry (continuing reduction in military personanal).

as for the high %age of the GDP taken up by the military budget, well, the %age will actaully fall with china’s continuing economic growth.

-Propaganda: ha, EVERYONE uses propaganda. what else is new?

sauron:

i cant speak for everyone, but if i really hate the US (as u implies) then i would be supporting what they are doing in guantanamo.

like it or not, ‘terrists’ are not born terrists, nor are they all cold blooded murderers (as most governments would like u believe). u’d be suprised at how many ‘terrorists’ started off as well educated, caring, successful individuals.

(i use ‘terrirost’ because the actual term has been shamelessly exploited and broadened by polititions the world over to now, when u can describe almost anyone as a ‘terrirost’. its the ‘communist=evil’ thing all over again.)

the vat mojority of ‘terrirosts’ dont kill for the fun of it, they all have a goal, that they somehow believe would be achieved by killing ppl. more often then not, terrirost attacks are more out of deperation then choice. and most of the time, the attacks are not designed to kill just for the sake of killing, but rather to get attention, in the hope that somehow, by killing ppl, governments would take them more seriously. and unfortunatly, it works.

u say that the world doesnt know how to effectively deal with terrirots? well, i can tell u flat out that u r wrong. the british have very successfully solved the N.irland issue without giving in to the terrirosts’ demands and without massive loss in life.

i think ever nation on earth that have a terrirost problem should look at britain’s example.

1) listen to the terrirosts’ demands. these are already desperate ppl, dont make them more desperate (and more likely to commit attacks) by dismissing them as ‘crazy humicidal murdereers who cant be understood by the sain person’. if u dont listen to them, then they’re going to think they need to kill more ppl to force u to listen.

2) terriost groups need to recrut need members, if u cut off the supply of new members, then the terrirost org will wither and eventually die.

like, govs, terrirosts also use propaganda in their recrutment, to make their cause seem more marol and ‘holly’ then it actually is, and to make the government seem more ‘evil’ and oppresive then it actually is.

no government is perfect, and often there are real life examples of bad behavior by governments that help to support the terriorst propaganda. under these circumstances, no amount of gov statements (even if they are perfectly true) will convice the terrirost recruts that they might be doing the wrong thing.

the only effective way to cut off the supply of new, willing recruts is to go in and show the possible candidates first hand that what they were told is wrong. locking ppl in cages without trial, dennying them of the very basic rights that even terrirosts would expect to recieve, and giving the impression that they trials are nothing more then a pulic show is not the best way of going abt it.

3) make concessions. note, these concessions are only made as a result of dialogue and reasoning, not by attacks. by doing this, u show the desperat ppl that they ‘have a chance’ to achieve their goal, and so make them less desperate and angry (reducing the chances of attacks).

also, most ‘terriosts’ dont want to launch an attack if they can avoid it. for some its cos they still have a consence left, but for most, its just natral survival instincts. if they launch an attack, then there is a good chance they wont be coming back, and as willing as they are to die, im sure most would like to avoid it if they can.

4) most importanly, realise that the true enemy is not the terrirosts, but the thing that make them so desperate that they were willing to kill to change it. (note that the driving force for the individual terrirost is often different from the driving force of the terrirost group, if the group’s demands are too far fetched (ie, all jews die), then the gov should concentrat on the problems of the individuals (being treated like sub-human or animals), which are often far less costly to address (a little bit of respect and understanding would go a long way).

unfortunatly, the steps given above arent really crowed pleasers or vote winners, so would require alot of political muscle and will and pull off. so leaders that are only elected cos of their gunho attitude cant really pull sth like this off (even though they most likely know its in the best interest of the nation and ppl) if they want to remain in power. 🙁

alex

well said! im releaved that at least some ppl in the west can see past all the steriotypes that have developed over the past decades.

heres a view of how most chinese view the tibetian matter.

tibet has long been a part of china, its only during the late 19th and early 20th century that it became ‘independent’. and that was aucastrated by the british to make their de facto conolisation of tibet sound less like what it was-an invasion.

in the minds of orginary chinese, the decision to send in the PLA to take over tibet was just like taking back what was stolen from us. rightly or wrongly, that was how the ppl felt and it is still how the ppl feels today. if china had been a democracy at the time, things would not have changed much.

another thing to take into mind when talking abt tibet is that the tibetian ppl mostly dont have a sence of national identity as the ppl of truely independent nations have. most dont want to be ‘free’ cos they couldnt care less who calls the shots as long as they get a better life. with that in mind, had the PRC not taken over tibet, the russians or indians would have.

i know this doesnt sound very fair but hay, welcome to the real world. at least we arent trying to wipe out the tibetians and replace the population with chinese as some nations have tried and effectively done in the past, and we are trying to make the lives of ordinary tibetians better.

mongu

“If the US proposed a solution to those commie b*stards in China, I’m sure I’d go along with them.

But frankly, GWB is more likely to bomb another easy target.”

yawn, another sufferer od cold war-era brainwashing. is u cared to update urself once in a few years, u would know that the PRC is no more ‘commie’ then the US, UK or france now. the PRC is capitalist in everything but name.

“So you’re saying Australia should be given back to the natives?

I think that is not a valid comparison. There, one culture moved in at the expense of another far less developed culture. In the case of Tibet, China was not really any more developed than Tibet: just bigger and more powerful.

You are confusing colonisation with invasion.”

i think this betrays ur racist ideals. so i guess its ok to muder, rape and pilage as long as the ppl ur doing it against is a ‘far less developed culture’? and who exactly gets to decide which culture is more or less developed? u?

actaully, if i follow ur logic, then the US is the least developed culture in the world. abiriginies were around for thousands of years, but there wasnt any americans more then 300 years ago.

PS, colonisation=invasion in everything but name, and cononlisation is often much much more bloody and brutal the invasion cos the ones ‘colonising’ a peice of land often only wants it for themselves and often try to wipe out the native populous. eg, americans almost wiping out the indians and putting the ones left in ‘reserves’ (which are effectively consentration camps only without gas chambers).

what is happening in tibet cant be compaired to that.

i think ur brain is more ‘clean’ then mine

cos its been washed much more thouroghly.

do u have any idea what things are like in china? have u even met a chinese person from the PRC? yet u seem that know better then me what things are like there-someone who grown up and lived there for half my life.

u reject my arguments not based on metret, but simply cos u dont like what i say.

ur vain attempt at mocery proves my point very well as it shows u are still desperately hanging on to cold war-era sterotypes and cliches. and if u havent figuerd it out yet, both sides were fully devoted at ‘brainwashing’ during the cold war.

and BTW, ur little mental picture of me couldnt be more wrong. i am writing to u from the UK, and i have been living here for quite some time now. guess the brits brainwashed me.

Us agent

be honest now, r u an AQ oprative? cos u r really doing a fantastic job at discrediting the US on this board.

as much as i dislike bush and co, i still believe that the vast majority of americans are decent, moral and reasonable individuals. i hope im not wrong.

get real

nice to see u following the teachings of bush almighty.

“I hear the same lame argument about Taiwan…so what’s stopping you “chicoms” from reuniting it with the motherland? Oh, that’s right, Taiwan actually has a military force to defend itself with…unlike Tibet.”

yeah, guess we should follow the US’ shinning example and only pick on those that cant fight back shouldnt we.

and anyways, if u had bothered to check the facts before posting, u would realise that the ‘threat of force’ is only applicable if taiwan declears independence. we are not giving them an altamatum saying,’agree to our terms by XX/XX or we attack u’.

we want to reunite with taiwan, that includes its ppl, as we see them as chinese, the same as us. taiwan has a pretty fine military, but it cant hold off the PRC if we attcked. we are not attacking cos we choose not to do so.

we are not crazy, brainless blood trusty bruts who just want a war for the fun of it, u know. or is that too much for ur brain to comprihand?

vortex

is that ur sentence of the day? seems like ur using it everywhere. come on, im sure u can come up with sth else.

ha

“I do agree that the genocide commited in Tibet is small compared to the millions slaughtered and starved in China during the same time frame, however.”

lol, so i guess we ‘evil commy chinese’ are trying to wipe ourselves out now are we? :rolleyes: still waiting on that proof of urs.

and anyhow, do u even know what the word ‘genocide’ means? if we were indeed busy commiting ‘genocide’ against the tibetians, then i guess we are most unefficient at it, seeing how after 50 years of ‘trying’, there are now more tibetians then ever.

guess we ‘dump’ chinese just cant do nothing right. 😀 :p