China Nuke Threat- :P

[ozmono2005]

umm ok?

What don't you understand, why do you have a question mark. "Umm ok?" is just like a way of saying hey I don't know what your talking about and/or I disagree and than repeating yourself after that is like saying, I want everyone to understand my own point of view but don't care about a differing one enough to ask a sincere question. Finally by repeating a point you already made after "umm ok?" you don't even make the slightest attempt to understand it or even address it.

If you want to discuss it or prove your point right your going to have to specify why your intentionally expressing your confussion.

By the way, my comment isn't at all an opossing view to the one you have been expressing

[haenkie]

OK i ahve to agree with ozmono here.

Every person has human rights, and if you dont believe int hat, you are really not much better then your opponent. becaue THEIR conviction is they are better then you and there for you have to die. I am using you as a general term, not pointing at anyone!

I believe that killing them is not the only way, because there would NEVER be an end to it. And yes i ahve to point out the israelis and the palestinians in this. They are or were trying to kill each other out. But as we alls ee taht will take a long time, there is not generally the same amount of power difference which hitler had in the second World War, at which accoutn he coudl almsot wipe out every single group he wanted to get rid of.


Everybody shoudla gree it isnt a black and white clear cut case here.
I do think terrorism is extremely bad and we should piss on the people who commit it. But killing every single terrorist wil never be achieved. that is simple thinking of which Bush is the main cause today.

YES get after terrorists, yes they need to be caught and go to trial. But killing them is not the answer and is an economic answer (it is cheaper) then a humane.
(Funny thing is we care mroe about animals then about our fellow person.)

BUT we also need to get to know, WHY is there terrorism and why cant we prevent it.


But this is way of the china nuke thingy of which i also made a remark much earlier.

And berg, confederate??? nostalgia to the old days of when there was one?

[tkobo]

I agree with Oz and Berg.

To me humanity isnt something that you just have.
Its not an automatic feature of "mankind".

Some people simply have no humanity.Serial killers are an example.Religious fanatics are another example.

Religious fanatics dont consider human life,feelings or laws as important as they should.
They consider their own little view of "gods" wants to override human life, human feelings and human laws.

As such, they really have no humanity.They give up what ever they might have had on the altar of thier belief in thier "god".
Its not humanity they beleive in.
And someone who has no humanity cannot really be treated humanely as they have no solid concept of what that is.

Like respect, humanity has to be earned thru deed and thought continually.

Those who have no wish to do so,those who choose to act inhumanely towards others ,should themselves not be treated humanely .

The difference bewteen the person who acts inhumanely towards someone, and the person or people who than act inhumanely towards that person,is desire.
The first person wants to act inhumanely towards others, the second person/s doesnt actually want to,but knows he must becuase other peoples life (and qaulity of) are at stake.

Its the difference between the murder, and the person who executes him.


Punishment by its very nature is basically inhumane.

[haenkie]

who judges this? who says he acts inhumane and he responds to inhumanity. What we think is inhumane is in other cultures not inhumane at all. What we think is normal can be outragously inhumane in other cultures.

Watch out for this quicksand. If you want to watch the world in black and white, thats your choice. Only remember there is a lot of grey out there.

The more you try to impose your view on matters on others, the harder they push back.

Fighting terrorism with killing the terrorists will not make a stop to terrorism!

Understanding the need and finding ways to prevent people from thinking of acting as terrorists will.
Fighting diseases hasnt made us much healthier or live longer, preventing diseases through better hygiene and vaccines did!

I am not a defender of terrorism, i am sick of people acting like it.
But dont lose your own humanity in the process.
(but we always need some to do so for us.)

[tkobo]

who judges this? who says he acts inhumane and he responds to inhumanity.

The society in question of course.

The more you try to impose your view on matters on others, the harder they push back.

Thats just it. A humane person says "live how you want as long as it harms not me or mine" An inhumane type of person( the terrorist or religous fanatic) says "live how our god says you must, or we will treat you as less than human".

In the case of the religious fanatics running around trying to be terrorists.They are saying others must live as their religion says or they are not worthy of thier very lives.
The simple truth is the opposite. As long as these fanatics act the way they do, they are the ones who are not worthy of living.

Fighting terrorism with killing the terrorists will not make a stop to terrorism!

Im not sure what your point is here.Arresting and punishing criminals "will not make a stop" to crime either.
So do we stop arresting criminals ?
No, we continue to do what we can .We catch the criminals we can, we kill the terrorists we can and we understand that the deviant mindset that allows such behavior will always continue to live on somewhere.BUT that less people will be at risk from such creatures becuase there are less of them if we continue to remove them.

Understanding the need and finding ways to prevent people from thinking of acting as terrorists will.

You think you can control how people think ?You think these creatures will allow you too live long enough to make your points to them ?You think these creatures care about wether they understand you or you them ??

Fighting diseases hasnt made us much healthier or live longer, preventing diseases through better hygiene and vaccines did!

Your kidding right ? My moms had cancer twice.Both times the desease was fought,both times she lived.Of course fighting deseases makes us live longer.Of course fighting the desease of cancer made her healthier.Shes still alive today becuase she and the doctors fought the desease,twice.
No vaccine or hygiene step would have sparred her the cancer- or saved her life either time she had it.

I am not a defender of terrorism, i am sick of people acting like it.
But dont lose your own humanity in the process.
(but we always need some to do so for us.)

No one has too lose thier humanity to fight terrorists. The simple act of fighting them is the humane thing to do.
And you do not lose your humanity by doing what needs to be done to safe guard humanity.

Again, its the difference between the murderer and the man who executes him.

The murderer proves his has not enough humanety by commiting the murder.The executioner proves he has humanety by doing the will of the society and removing the murderer and its threat from society.

[haenkie]

Ok tkobo i see your getting pissed off here. You have your opinion I have mine. I think this isnt a black and white issue.

i can try to correct all communication errors which into the repleis we have to eachother.

but i just want to correct this. I didnt want to say, fighting diseases hasnt made us live longer, thats why i added MUCH, but alas if i read it again, the much in the sentence should be for both things, it does not add much to our health and not much to live longer.
The simple fact we are more hygienic (sewers, clean water, showers etc) hads added decades to our general life span, modern day medicine added about 5-10 years to our general life span.
I do not know your background or what you or your familiy lived through. I never stated we shouldnt fight diseases. We should!! I never said on individual basis it doesnt add years or decades (I am glad your mom still lives!).

Think of this, most people alive today wouldnt have made it to their fifties to get heart disease or to their 60s or 70s with diabetes. They would have been dead at birth or at 10 or 15 of their poor living conditions!

But we are talking macro, whole populations here, then hygiene and no more child labor (in western countries) has had the biggest impacts on the populations in countries. Yes antibiotics had a significant impact, but the first is the major!!


Last thing!
If you read my first post! Of course we should get as many terrorists as we can!
But it will not solve the problem of terrorism! THATS MY POINT!
I want to get rid of the whole problem, therefor we should address the reasons WHY there is terrorism. understanding the problems and try to correct them is the key here. And there is more to it, then religious fanatics. Not every religious fanatic does terrorists acts. Many fights are for lands (Palestinia, Irak), world power (Iran which subsidies much terrorism or done so in the past) or jealousy of what the other man has('our wicked lifestyle in the very decadent west': this is sort of a quote, to correct future misunderstandings about this).
most often religion is the screen put up by the top man to attract people who are willing to do everything for him.
The reasons remain the same: lands, resources and power.


What this got to do with the china nuke threat i dont know

haenkie wrote:
who judges this? who says he acts inhumane and he responds to inhumanity.


The society in question of course.

That is just the problem. We judge others we dont even know how they live on OUR values and OUR views of the world.

I am not a wuss, or pacifistic hippy moron. Military action is just! Should ahve been much earlier in Irak (this is to late!) and Afghanistan I very much agree with. But now it is time to help the people there, understand their needs and help them. Not give food, but help building farms so they can make their own etc.
The powerbase of the government in Afghanistan is limited to Kabul and its vicinity. Did we help them? No we only ot rid of the taliban and chased Al queada into the mountains.


We should fight the disease (terrorism), NOT just the symptoms (terrorists!)

[bergsjaeger]

seems a flame war is starting and its going way off topic. Oz Umm ok? wasn't a question of any kind i just didn't understand what u were meaning. So just forget that part but the rest i still mean. terrorist that kill innocent people are just like anyone who walks up and shoots someone for no reason. yes they can have a trial but if they are really guilty then they should be put to death like all murders. And the war on terror will never end it seems because there will always be someone who thinks its ok to kill innocent people.

[bergsjaeger]

ok trying to get back on the right track. On the deagel.com website they are talking about china in their forum. There is things that can make china scary but there is a postive side to china. They are Fossil Fuel hungry. I mean take china's population. Over a billion and compare that to the US's population which I think is close to 300 million. Now with both countries if half the population used fossil fuels of some type. the US would be around 150 million while China would be 500 million Its still more than The US is now. So a war with China would come down to if the Chinese had enough fuel to keep their military going. Which they won't. The thing about China that kinda makes me mad about them is they have their own AEGIS systems. They got it by copying the US version.

[CptBritish]

China Doesn't use as much Fuel as the USA...

For the Simple reason most of the population are poor and can't afford anything that would use petrol... (Or lots of it anyway).

Fossil fuels wise do you think the Middle-East will stop trading with China for oil just because they are at war with the USA. Yes Iraq would (If they like Freedom! ) but countries like Saudi Arabia could make a hell of a lot of money from a USA-China War...

[bergsjaeger]

I was just mathing China is all. Like I said if half the country used fossil fuels of sometype. The If is just assuming. It still depends on how much fuel they have if a war broke out. A million man army on the move will deplete any oil reserve no matter what country it is even a middle east country.

[BigStone]

China Doesn't use as much Fuel as the USA...

For the Simple reason most of the population are poor and can't afford anything that would use petrol... (Or lots of it anyway).

Hmmm.. there is another thing and that are the gasprices in the US...
You are still able (as a normal person) to drive around in a tank....

Cheers

[bergsjaeger]

that reminds me of the time i was watching wild police chases. A guy stole a Abrams and took it for a joy ride though a town then on the interstate. What stopped the guy was him being stupid. He tried to knock out the columns on a bridge that went over the interstate. He got stuck on the concrete guard rail that was on the median. the cops were scared to death of the tank because they thought it might have been loaded with ammo so they stayed a mile from the tank.

[bergsjaeger]

Its funny some ppl are scared of North Korea. I don't know y they should be. Yes NK has nukes or in the process of making nukes but NK has no vision of using them on the US or its allies. They don't c us as a threat like Russia or China is. It be funny if the US has to go in and help NK fight off China. The nukes they have or building are planned as a deterrent toward Russia and China. But NK does was a non-aggression pact with the US. Most of the time when a country wants that they know they don't want a war with that country because that country could eaily wipe them out.

[Decimatus]

"Don't rule China out"

When thinking about the outcomes of a possiable war and who would be the victors it's neccessary to think about the objective. If U.S.A fought over Tawain for example, the objective would be to have an independent and secure Tawain after the end of hostilities.

Someone hinted on this when they said "unless that took on the Peoples Liberation Army"

Never happen!!!

They would have no need to invade China by land.

Naval power, Air power and missiles capabilities would almost positively assure US victory. China can have all the millions of troops on land it wants but if China can't move them into tawain by air/sea or strike effectively at US land then the best they can do, is cop it on the chin

US would effectively neaturalize any long range threats as a priority and quite easierly domminate sea/air from Japan, India and/or Korea

US would probably be able to rely on military involvment from Japan and maybe even Korea(in the case of Korea another Korea conflict would break out)

China just doesn't have the ability to deliever more some intial damage and economic damage.

In the future this might change. Depending of Chinas domestic/economic situation and stability

But the point is, as it stands at the moment, I'd rule China out almost immediately.

But I also doubt that the US would want to involve itself in such a large and costly war anytime soon


Also CTP there nothing wrong with human rights, just those who are fanatically pursuing human rights over longer term interest

I agree with Ozmono here. We would just sit back and bomb China until they cried uncle. Land war would take place in Taiwan, and North Korea. China would restrengthen ties with NK and push a few million troops south so they could draw us into a face to face fight.

Japan would drop it's pacifist constitution as they have been wanted to do for the last decade. Japan has about as much interest in a Chinese Superpower as America or even Taiwan has. Even if they didn't drop it, they would fight the war on the excuse that such Chinese agression is a clear threat to their nation.

Australia would enter the fight simply because they don't want to be under the boot of an Imperial China controlling Asia in the unlikely yet possible event America is defeated.

Great Britain would be there for historical and sentimental reasons.

Europe might join the fight piecemeal, but you can bet France, Germany, and Russia would enter a full on arms business with China to make a few quick billions and watch gleefully as America's economy takes a hit from the war.

China would keep from using nukes since of course, America has a lot more of them and much more capability to deploy them and counter them.

The world economy would enter a semi-depression stage since Chinese exports would screech to a halt as well as American industrial capacity being catered to the war machine. After the war however, as the industiral war machines of the world turned back to commercial pursuits there would be a new boom time.

The Mideast and africa would likely slip further into decline as they are left more to their own devices. Some ME countries would become rich selling oil to America, however any that decided otherwise(such as selling to China or even boycotting America including price gouging) would probably find themselves in a very tight situation.


This is all assuming of course that China had any thought that they could pull off such an invasion of Taiwan and not be(for all intents and purposes) destroyed in the process.

If it ever happens it will probably take place 20+ years in the future. At that point it is anyone's guess as to how the war will turn out.

[Decimatus]

that reminds me of the time i was watching wild police chases. A guy stole a Abrams and took it for a joy ride though a town then on the interstate. What stopped the guy was him being stupid. He tried to knock out the columns on a bridge that went over the interstate. He got stuck on the concrete guard rail that was on the median. the cops were scared to death of the tank because they thought it might have been loaded with ammo so they stayed a mile from the tank.

Actually, he had an M60A3.

I find it oddly amusing I live in a country where someone has taken a tank on a joyride through the neighborhood. I know some of you europeans are appalled at the thought, but hey this is America and we love it.