US pressure mounts on China over Tibet

[Elmer Gantry]

and just so you know, aside from being the only true democracy in the region, and the ONLY friend the U.S. has in that awful region, the Israelis take care of more of the dirty work that needs to be done in that region in terms of combating terrorism and doing all the neat little things we need done in terms of spying and intelligence throughout the arab world, then anyone.

That's one of the most distorted views ever posted here and a magnificent feat of circular logic. With friends like that, the States don't need enemies.

 

[dong20]

...though the legal position was of course that we had just a lease on most of the territory of Hong Kong.

Indeed, while the Island and most of what is now Kowloon were ceded in perpetuity, the lease only related to the territories. Not that it could have made any difference.

I'm not sure what meaningful influence Britain's Government can exert on China in respect of Tibet. Given our economic situation with China, an Olympic boycott is probably about it.

Practically, I'd say the US has little more available in the way of options, for broadly similar reasons. Thus far it's the usual political rhetoric, from both sides.

 

[Elmer Gantry]

As far as I can see Britain still in theory considers Tibet as a nation under occupation. We certainly condemn the many human rights abuses in China.

Which is a massive violation of the Geneva convention.

So why isn't China a "rogue state"?

 

[Elmer Gantry]

It is not quite there yet, but any escalation in violence in Tibet and I think British public opinion would support an Olympic boycot and some form of trade barriers (perhaps requirement for western working conditions for Chinese workers in China making goods exported to Britain). Whether these would ultimately be of help to Tibet I don't know - but I think there may soon be popular support.

An Olympic boycott would be like waving a red rag to a bull and would piss the media outlets off more than the Chinese govt. Think of all that lost ad revenue.

Raising the working conditions will only mean that they will start to export their inflation as costs go up. This will be disastrous for all concerned and only make big business disappear to India or some other cheaper alternative. Besides trade sanctions don't hurt those in power, only those on the street. Look at the mess it created in Iraq before the invasion.

 

[dong20]

So why isn't China a "rogue state"?

Arguably it is. But because it's a very large, nuclear armed one, with fingers in all our pies, one that perhaps in the not too distant future may come to own most of our pies too, it's not actually called one.:biggrin1:

 

[Elmer Gantry]

You also forgot "with a seat on the UN Security Council".

 

[B_Nick4444]

Arguably it is. But because it's a very large, nuclear armed one, with fingers in all our pies, one that perhaps in the not too far in the future it may come to own most of our pies too, it's not actually called one.:biggrin1:

change the "may" to "will", and I'm with you

 

[dong20]

You also forgot "with a permanent seat on the UN Security Council".

Indeed I did. Thank you.:smile:

 

[dong20]

change the "may" to "will", and I'm with you

No, because the future is not yet written. (At least according to Sarah).

 

[PussyWellington]

Chuck are you aware that China, United States and India haven't joined the ICC which is the tribunal set-up to investigate crimes of aggression, war crimes, genocide etc?

The hypocrisy is unbelievable. The United States are not the 'police', and as usual this is 'blowback' from interference in the 60's. You simply cannot afford any more 'theaters'. Get used to it, China's sphere of influence in the region is increasing.

 

[Elmer Gantry]

Yes, I am. Which is the reason for mostly rhetorical questions and the point I was trying to sneak up on.

Also, the language of the US media over this issue is in stark contrast to the Israel/Palestine thing which is a similar illegal occupation scenario.

Of course, those with the power get to write history but how long can this duplicity go on for?

Until another Sept. 11?

 

[Flashy]

That's one of the most distorted views ever posted here and a magnificent feat of circular logic. With friends like that, the States don't need enemies.

you can whine all you like, it happens to be a fact.

Israel is an independent state, whose first responsibility is to its own national security, and to nobody else's...for all Israel's spying etc. and policies and disagreements with the U.S. it happens to do the vast amount of the dirty work for the U.S. so the U.S. can retain plausible deniability in many cases. Not to mention, it frequently is held back from doing the right thing for its safety so the the U.S. can pretend to be an impartial broker in that despicable part of the world.

You are probably one of those folks who believes the ISraelis were behind 9/11.

I find it amusing, that considering all nations spy on each other to a large degree, even allies, that you would single out Israel alone for its transgressions. It is certainly no worse of an ally to the U.S. then are many other countries. Let's not forget, a nation is beholden only to itself and its security and survival in the end, and nobody else.

it is amusing that you would even utter the last line in your post, considering that would put Israel on a comparable term as true enemies, such as Iran and North Korea...

I assure you, you'd much rather have the Irraelis on your side then the Iranians or NOrth Koreans.

 

[Flashy]

Yes, I am. Which is the reason for mostly rhetorical questions and the point I was trying to sneak up on.

Also, the language of the US media over this issue is in stark contrast to the Israel/Palestine thing which is a similar illegal occupation scenario.

Of course, those with the power get to write history but how long can this duplicity go on for?

Until another Sept. 11?

oh please...you are comparing China/Tibet to Israel and the Palestinian territories?

spare me your hypocrisy. When was the last time China gave back territory to another country, that had launched wars against it?

when was the last time China left a part of Tibet, and then the Tibetans immediately commenced rocketing parts of China from said territory.

the two scenarios are totally different.

 

[D_Cyprius Slapwilly]

Oh I'm sure the Chinese are going to do what we say, considering our money is actually their money plus interest. I don't particularly believe their all too afraid of our military, either...

 

[Elmer Gantry]

oh please...you are comparing China/Tibet to Israel and the Palestinian territories?

spare me your hypocrisy. When was the last time China gave back territory to another country, that had launched wars against it?

when was the last time China left a part of Tibet, and then the Tibetans immediately commenced rocketing parts of China from said territory.

the two scenarios are totally different.

Thank you for making your position known.

 

[dong20]

After protracted dancing on pins over a Dalai Lama visit to China, Ma Jing-jeou's offer must really chafe Beijing's ass. If the games do go tits up, such a visit appears highly unlikely; Beijing has already decided on a scapegoat.

 

[faceking]

A boycott is dumb and selfish at this point. Any rhetoric/protest should of been made to the IOC back when the bids are submitted for the '08 games.

 

[dong20]

...Any rhetoric/protest should of been made to the IOC back when the bids are submitted for the '08 games.

Because of course the IOC always listens to a rational argument. They didn't even bother trying to secure human rights agreements. The historical ('35 and '79) precedents don't auger well either.

 

[Pokey4fun]

Because the US is always in everyone else's business.

I hate that answer... people line up on both sides.

Side A: USA please, help us!

Side B: USA why are you involved.

its a no win, we are either a rich selfish nation, or meddlers.

 

[faceking]

Because of course the IOC always listens to a rational argument. They didn't even bother trying to secure human rights agreements. The historical ('35 and '79) precedents don't auger well either.

That's the system... actions should be placed there. Don't take it out on innocent athletes who've devoted years, and sacrificed lord knows what. We made that horrific mistake in 80 and 84...