| StoreTags: tibet, china, protest
Viewed 2148 times. 11 people liked this blog. You can rate it below if you haven't already.
People who enjoyed reading this: Zanf, mlbot, DrexonField, delete, yghartsyrt, daswesen, jogn, Unknownforce, SenorFrio, BigDill, opticecho
-->
well, i wish someone from china would try to kill george bush's father so then we could invade them and spread liberty and democracy.. but i guess tibet doesn't deserve our freedoms. bah. if they only had oil.
before we invaded Iraq i got an email from someone arguing that we should invade Iraq because, morally it was our duty, because Saddam was killing his own people blah blah blah.. of course i went on to explain that the USA doesn't give a shit about human rights etc and sighted a million cases around the globe throughout history where we trained death squads, overthrew democratically elected dictators and installed thugs in power to maintain our interests in the region etc etc and went on to say that if the USA did give a shit about human rights we'd invade china and if we do go into Iraq it'll be for any reason that's not human rights abuses.
so, now w/the, "rioters" as china calls them, "trying to ruin the olympics" i'm waiting for our jovial, aloof, tap dancing moron president to comment just to remind us all, once again, how dumb and naive he is.
the reason for this blog? i don't know.. i went to boing boing and they had some info plus videos of monks "rioting".. which is basically hanging out, clapping and hooting in a high falsetto.. at least that's all the videos i've seen show. this type of behavior is grounds for arrest and over 1000 have been arrested.
HOWEVER, there are pics linked from the boingboing piece of dead monks shot through the back etc... which is just great for my outlook on the state of the world. if they only had oil we'd care.
link
" The Dalai Lama says he will resign as head of state of the Tibetan Government in Exile if the violence continues".
awesome! the world is dumb. i'm going to mow my lawn now. | |
Comments
03/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
elronhubbard
Doron said: "Not to condone the china regime, every nation has its right for self experssion.
tibet pre china, was a dark theocracy, where all resources belonged to the rich and the clergy (sounds familiar? very much middleages europe) and the rest ware basically serfs. not a very peace loving nation, far removed from the image we tned to have of it in the west. factions of the "buddhist" church would kill one another for their "version" of buddhism. Torture was used as a form of oppression and punishment. like everything else, the history of the occupation by china is complicated."
this is true, and as a matter of fact, tibet was headed towrds eventual oblivion due to infighting and low birth rates. if china hadn't annexed them they could have likely been a dead culture (or at least on death's door) by now. fitting, though, because buddhism is all about the relinquishment of earhtly attachments. you can only gie up so much before the next step is your actual physical presence here on earth.
even still, china is an evil authoritarian force. and two wrongs don't make a right. land grabs are for dummies anyway. if you're going to go all the way with the communist rhetoric and iron fists, then its all about population control (a fact that china is currently learning)
03/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
SenorFrio
elronhubbard said: "even still, china is an evil authoritarian force. and two wrongs don't make a right. land grabs are for dummies anyway. if you're going to go all the way with the communist rhetoric and iron fists, then its all about population control (a fact that china is currently learning)"
They're population control will come in the form of lung and several other cancers due to their insane pollution. I heard that some olympic runners will not compete because they fear permanently harming their lungs by breathing the beijing air.
03/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
elronhubbard
that really sucks dude.
03/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
Doron
as for iraq, one of the facts that isnt usually mentioned in left circles, is the fact that in the first few days, the US army was indeed greeted with allot of support from the population, seriously, i have family there (soldiers), and they told me from first hand account, that people ware super happy to see them (and why wouldnt they be, after saddam) But put yourself in their shoes.
Consider the scenario
no running water, no power - for the first 2-3 days its all "love thy neighbour, meet and greet in the streets".
after a week, the guns comes out, after 2 weeks it is total chaos. - we know this...
when the war was in its first stages, general Shinseki told congress that a force of at least 500,000 soliders ware needed on the ground to secure the streets, he was widely slammed for his opinion, but time has proven him right.
the force to wage the war was enough, the force to secure peace was off the mark by almost 400,000 soldiers. think of it as the amoun t of cops you need in street corners so no looting will happen.
so yeah, to a large degree, they ware naive, they didnt account for a strategic advantage the US army has, the fact that it is so lethal in ground warfare that military combat is done in a matter of days, they missed the mark in their ideas on how to secure the streets of major cities.
they also didnt bother much with the history of the region (much to the ire of many generals) and the fact that nothing will eventually stop the invented country of iraq to collapse like the balkans to distinct states.
03/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
ignatius
j_chot said: "umm.. I hate to shoot down you guys, but aren't we in the whole from those wars?"
you mean hole and yes.. the USA is but bechtel, haliburton and every military contractor is raking in the cash.
03/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
Doron
The 'right' thing for the military industrial complex?
That is a misconception as well.
this type of warfare, of which we will see more and more of, is largely non kinetic , and revolves around small arms.
its a horrible outcome to the "military industry" because it simply doesnt make any sense to promote budgets for new large platforms (like carriers etc)
it actually means much less money for them, not more. the military industry was completly fixated on the "china threat" which now is not talked about at all, china gained big from the 9/11.
03/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
Doron
What makes me laugh about it is that china says that tibet is and always has been, a part of the 'motherland' yet tibetans are a distinct different ethic race.
Just a brief look at Tibetan history shows that the Han were unable to invade the Tibetan plateau for about 1500 years until Tibet adopted buddhism and disbanded its military force [about 1500-1800 years ago]. They were then 'protected' by Mongolian forces, who gave the Dalai Lama his name [it means ocean of compassion] in exchange for Tibet giving Mongolia 'spiritual guidance'
I dont think thats totally accurate
in the thirteenth century, the Kublai Khan named the first "Grand" Lama (not yet dalai), who was to be the boss of all bosses as lamas go... kind of like the pope over his bishops. the Emperor of China sent some centuries later the emperial army into Tibet to support the Grand Lama, an ambitious young man (25 or so), who then gavehimself the title of Dalai (Ocean) Lama, ruler of all Tibet.the first Dalai Lama was installed by a Chinese army.
03/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
slp
Doron said: "That is a misconception as well.
this type of warfare, of which we will see more and more of, is largely non kinetic , and revolves around small arms.
its a horrible outcome to the "military industry" because it simply doesnt make any sense to promote budgets for new large platforms (like carriers etc)"
Doron, have you ever had a look at the $$ figures on what is flowing into that industry, right now, every minute ?
Someones making big money, you dont want to deny that do you? That has little to do on wheter such a company adapts to new types of arms or not.
This sounds like a ridiculous argument, im afraid. The trend towards 'high-tech' weapons weve seen in the recent years certainly wasnt 'cheap'.
03/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
yghartsyrt
i'd still say that the problem is NOT greedy old men or something shortsighted like that.
the problem is the underlying structure.
03/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
ignatius
slp said: "let me add, if there is one thing that the Cheney group sure is NOT, then that is being 'naive'.
It seems to me that the people who still believe in some 'right' reason behind this war , or in the 'incompetence' of the gouvernment as the crux of it all , are just that."
well i don't think there is one reason for this war. there's a complex web of motivations by many different people that got us in there and the reason it went really bad from the onset was total incompetence and nepotism. they hired all the wrong people to run the green zone and manage the reconstruction etc. it's really disgraceful. they brought in totally inexperienced people, kids really, fresh out of college who were in some cases hired because they were the frat buddies of some other guy. no, i'm not making this up. it's documented by many people. word for word conversations that just blow my mind. politics was ther every step of the way.. even in the interview process asking who they voted for, what religion.. did they support roe vs wade (pro life or pro choice) all things that are illegal to ask in an interview...
but even the 'experienced' state dept people were over their heads and the pentagon people etc all made really bad judgement calls down the line because they had no idea what they were doing. they based their decisions on a set of expectations and knee jerk reactions. it's just poor leadership[ from top to bottom. and ther ewere people who knew what they were doing who were being ignored at every turn...
as for cheney.. i can't figure out if he lives in the same dream world as bush or is just totally lying all the time. seems he's lying.. he again tried to link alqaeda to iraq as a justification for the war.. just 2 days ago... even after the pentagon and pretty much everyone else on the planet has said that's total bullshit.
as for the military industrial complex getting a bad shake on this deal well.. you couldn't be more wrong.. there are billions adn billions going to contractors. we spend insurmountable amounts of cash every day there. from ice cream in the mess tent and internet service to digging latrines etc. all of that stuff is contracted out. even fixing the machines, planes, tanks radios etc.. things that used to be done by the military are farmed out to. i read one case where they interviewed this soldier who's job it was to fix radios and they made him actually train the private contractor on how to fix the radios so now he has no job since once he trained the guy the guy took over his job.. at a much higher pay scale too.
and another thing...
big projects and extra big money things like ships, planes tanks etc.. that stuff is ALWAYS happening regardless of war. the pentagon is always building submarines, ships etc. sometimes they are part of the pork that gets thrown into the budget because it takes a whole town to build one so whatever district the ship building tank building etc project is in.. that congressman is going to push hardcore for it to happen because it means jobs.. buying things the military doesn't need and in some cases doesn't want... that stuff gets done anyways because those things.. carriers, submarines etc take years to build so the projects start at any old time.. war or no war. anyway.. rant over...
now back to china... what a mess. they are talking boycott. tough spot to be in for an olympic athlete. you spend you r whole life training for one thing then get to choose if you abandon that based on your morals principle's etc...
03/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
slp
well i don't think there is one reason for this war. there's a complex web of motivations by many different people that got us in there
i agree on that. But the thing is, i dont think you can 'fix' the problem with more competent people when the *whole* thing is based on lies and dubious goals in the first place, from the ground up.
i'd still say that the problem is NOT greedy old men or something shortsighted like that.
the problem is the underlying structure.
i think one of the main problems is that we do not have a functioning media that does what it is supposed to do. But that probably is part of what you refer to as structure...
03/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
ignatius
slp said: " well i don't think there is one reason for this war. there's a complex web of motivations by many different people that got us in there"
i agree on that. But the thing is, i dont think you can 'fix' the problem with more competent people when the *whole* thing is based on lies and dubious goals in the first place, from the ground up.
right.. however.. more competent.. more principled people would not have signed off on the thing to begin with.. as was the case in certain circles in the administration. those people were fired. so,a competent person who has experience in dealing with all the BS in the system and structure that is totally fucked.. well, that person can make the right decisions and keep things from getting where we are today. ultimately the president makes the decision on the info he's given or looks for etc. so, a more competent president could have done a much better job of weeding out the falsehoods from the reality of things.. but when you have an agenda and are hell bent on getting that agenda going then you tend to structure the information to meet your own needs which in turn support the agenda (conclusions) you want it to.
so, in a nutshell, competent people can work through the sytem to not let things get more fucked up than they already are or make the most out of a shit situation.
i do agree that the entire political system is flawed w/too much corporate influence and lobbyists etc. but that is essentially mute at this point because corporations are the government to some extent and it would take a hell of a lot of determined people to kick them out of the system. most of congress and all of the administration would have to get behind something like that and that would be one tough thing to accomplish
slp said: " i'd still say that the problem is NOT greedy old men or something shortsighted like that.
the problem is the underlying structure."
i think one of the main problems is that we do not have a functioning media that does what it is supposed to do. But that probably is part of what you refer to as structure...
the structure is greedy old men. and that's the problem.
03/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
oerfil
why would you want to se dead monks shot in the back?
03/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
ignatius
oerfil said: "why would you want to se dead monks shot in the back?"
???? i don' think anyone wants to see that... but most people don't know what's going on there and the news is being suppressed in china
03/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
quip
we won lol!
link
And terrorism killed erm 8?
Quoted from the BBC
"In 2006, alcohol killed 8,758 people and cost the country an estimated £20bn. Tobacco killed 114,000 people. Road deaths numbered 3,150.
By way of comparison, since 2001 the annual death rate from international terrorism in the UK averages out as eight."
link
Register / login
|
^
EM411 is Copyright 2001-2008 EM411.com
All rights reserved. | Contact | RSS
|
