RE: UN security council

jj,

i must clearify that i did not mean that the us should be responsible for the well being of every country in the world, thats just not possible. all im saying is since the US has more power then anyone else, it must set a good example.

also, since the us likes to play world leader, then it must led with its own actions. how on earth can u expect others to follow the rules u set when u urself refuse to be bound by them?!

on the matter of the un, well i think the biggest obsticl to it is the lack of turst between the permenent members. so everyone left themselves a back door just in case.

i personally dont think more permenent members will help. the council is already very much bogged down by all the intrest clashes between 5 members, 6 or 7 will just paralise the un even more.

it is kind of funny, the us is the world’s most successful democracy, but it is also kind of the dectatorship of all the countries in the world, the un is kind of democratic govenment that the worlds countries tried to set up. it will be interesting to see which will proval.

RE: In memory of victims of 9/11.. please all sign!

this is a date that will forever torment humanity, constantly reminding us of the terrible evil we can do to others.

may things like this never happen again.

michael xin wang
newcastle, england

RE: How old are you?

17 chinese living in england.

am i the only voice of china here?! this cant be right! :'(

RE: WORLDS MOST POWERFUL NATIONS – 2003!!!

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 08-09-02 AT 08:08 PM (GMT)]well i think we have been able to get ourselves into a vitious circle. u make an argument, i make a counter argument, and u make a counter to that… we can go on for another hundred posts and we would still be where we r now. i dont know abt u, but thats not the way i want to spend my free time.

right now, we can both agree that

1)both china and india are growing powers with unlimited platential.

2)both of our countries have been missrepresented by western media.

3)both countries harbor ambitions to become future superpowers.

4)the ture power of a nation is measured not only in its present military power, but more importantly, upon its industrial infastructure, ecinomy, tech level and population(not just number of citizens, but also the amount and quality of education recived).

5)and finally, both of us have much that we dont fully understand or know abt the other’s country.

the feilds in which we disagree r so many that there is no point in mentioning them all now.

so i propose a compramise. lets concentrate on a few specific subjects at a time and try to change each other’s minds, as oppose to just listing the things we dont agree with, and then putting forward our own oppinons, which the other will disagree with.

first thing that i chose to discuss is the degree of self relience in our respective armed forces.

u doubt china’s ability to produce the new advanced russian weapon systems that we r buying at the moment. that is understandable as a result of the vail of secricy china throws upon pretty much everything. but recent articles posted on newsmax.com states that as well as the weaponry themselves, china also purchased their asociated technologies and are building chinese counterparts which can rival or even exceed the russian originals.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/7/30/141937.shtml
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/7/8/165529.shtml
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/6/17/163116.shtml

those few article that i have posted should make good bed time reading for u. but, as u can see, the newsmax gang is in the paranoied catagory, and so they may have manipulated some info to make china seem worse then it is, or as a bigger theart to the world as it is. never the less, most of the infomation the use and some of the conclusions the draw seem to be beleivable and modistly fair, so it is worth taking them into consideration.

i concied that i dont know much abt the indian armed forces, but i trust u will inlighten me shortly.

another one of ur comments that i must protest is ur view of chinese education based on my ‘poor knowlegde of english grammer and geography’.

im sure that i do not need to point out to u that we are all good at different things, and im affriad languages is not really my cup of tea. also, if ur english is much superior to mine, as u seem to suggest, then u should have picked up my comment that i do not study world geography.

there r many other small things u said that i disagree with, but i think i will leave them for another day.

RE: UN security council

very good point jj, but the usa is the only superpower in the world. with great power comes great responsiblities, but at the moment, the us has not set the best of exsamples as to how countries can behave.

RE: UN security council

not to be pouring cold water on the subject, but i seriously dont see the UN as being a useful originisation.

the usa can just do as it pleases and no one would dare say a word abt it. also, the sec.council cant really make much of a change as many sujestions that r good for most other countries and the environment is not good for america and just get vetoed.

RE: WORLDS MOST POWERFUL NATIONS – 2003!!!

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 07-09-02 AT 05:56 PM (GMT)]with the exception of india and taiwan(japan not included because of their sensitive political position), no other country in the region can stand a chance even against china’s ’60s equipment equiped’ armed forces.

but india has pakistan to warry abt before it can even think abt china, so there is no theart there.taiwan is at the centre of china’s attention so far, and because of their small size, they cant hope to maintain superiorty for much longer. in fact, many expert would argue that although taiwanese forces are technically superior at the moment, china can already overwhelm the island if the americans dont interfer. and that china’s recent and future aquisitions are aimed purely at stopping the americans.

also, u seem to have misunderstood the point that i was trying to make. china is upgrading it military, but because there is no real immediate threat, we dont have to go all out and re-equip the whole PLA overnight(nor can we). instead, china can and is focusing upon development of its economy. im sure we can all understand that a powerful nation is not just a nation with a few fancy toys in its military. the economy is much more important. just take japan for example. it doesnt have a very big armed forces, but because they are rich enough, they can build up one of the best equiped and biggest armed forces in the world should the need for it arrises.

on the matter of forgine equipmment, well sure, china also buys weapons from russia, but we r also concentrating even more upon self development. we can now, or in a few year time, make almost all of the weapons that is used by the PLA with 0 forgine imports. can india make a similar claim? having advanced forgine weapons can be a major ‘power up’ for any military, but relying too heavily on it can a big trap, just ask the argintinians.

india’s army’s experience level is debatable. fighting lightly armed garrilers is quite different from fighting well equiped and originised armies.

as for china’s oil, well we r building a major pipeline to the russian oil fields, also, we have a major oil feild-daqing which can keep our military machine running for quite some time. but i dont hear of any major oil fields in india, maybe cos i dont take world geography :P, but if india really doesnt have an oil feild of its own, then i say china is more likely to cut india’s oil flow off.

as for china’s irrliteracy rate,well i think im quite qualified to speak on that matter since i spent 4 years studying in china. out of a year of 300+ everyone can read, 2or 3 not very well, but they can read. also, i have never seen the same intensity of work done anywhere. i was bearly making it into the first 50 in school in china, but now i am in the top 10 in my school in england(out of a year of 600+!). so that speaks alot abt the standards of learning in china doesnt it? ps, the scholl im im england is one of the best in the city, not some crappy second rate nurser, so theres no need to try to find excuses there.

>Sq: Please spare me this BS. We have our moments of madness and bigotory, but to a huge extent >we are a very united nation, Take it from me I belong to a minority community in India and we live >pretty well contrary to what US or Brit news programs might tell you.

>PW: and the inheritent disadvantages of a democratic govenment will somewhat compramise its >national strength in times of war,

>BS: Wrong again, a democracy goes to war only if it is attacked or its people are behind an attack >on a foreign country. Public unrest only increases in police states like China and Pakistan when they >go to war as the people there feel they are being killed and made to suffer when no one asked their >opinions on going to war.

since u know first hand that the infomation provided by western news agencies can be unaccurate, how could u still be so ignarent abt china? as u might know, 90+% of chinese support military action against taiwan if it declears independence, much higher then ‘western standards’. china’s leadership is not stupid, and they view economic growth as their number 1 priority, thats y china has always played ‘the gental giant’ role. we wont fight anyone unless we r attacked, or if there is terriorial dispute. in either case, chinese ppl will support the govenment all the way. trust me, alot of the chinese public are alot more hawkish then the leadership will ever be, so the world(including china) should be thankfull that we have a govenment strong enough to keep those ppl in line.

ad0ins,
what decade or century r u living in?! china is ‘not accepted’ because some paranoyed americans feel unsafe if another country becomes strong enough to say, ‘no’ to them. anyway, if u have anything like a modist view of world events, u should know that china is already well accepted into the world community as a peacful nation, thats y we have a seat as a perinent member. but this is getting a little bit too far off topic.

RE: Iraq : who’s in?

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 06-09-02 AT 07:23 PM (GMT)]im not even convenced that blair’s in. although he seemed to support bush, but he did leave himself plenty of room to back out of it is he wants.

imo, this is just a political game he is playing. by being the first to ‘support’ the US, he is bound to get alot of gratitude and help back in return. he is gambaling that more countries will follow suit after the US war waggon gets another member, if so then they would have a ‘coalition’ and have a very good chance of making this work to their advantage. if not, he can always back down by saying sth like, ‘there’s not enough evidence’ or ‘britain’s military is in no shape to get invalved, best of luck now.’ 😉

heres a rule that works 100% of the time, no politition will put his carair on the line for another politition’s pet project.

as for afagan, well who knows, maybe the US wants things to slightly get out of hand a little. that might trick a few al quiada or taliban into coming back. that’ll make it easier to find and kill them then waiting on the pakistan boarder hoping a few of them will wonder too far from ‘home’.