Tradefair & Financials
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Every nation has an obligation, regardless of the origin of malicious cyber activities, to keep its part of the network secure. That includes China," Crowley said.
Some 20 other companies also were attacked by unknown assailants based in China, said Google. It said, when asked, that it did not specifically know if the Chinese government was behind the attacks and was investigating.
Wonder if google will go thru with it? Tariffs on chinese tyres and steel pipes now in USA.Maybe the world if finally waking up to the scam that china has pulled off so successfully.A contrived exchange rate and tariffs are all that is between chinese economic glory and its return to living in mud huts.The chinese govt already believes that it should be running the world.Will the world crumble before the chinese smiling jackals as it has the last 20 years? Remains to be seen.
Some 20 other companies also were attacked by unknown assailants based in China, said Google. It said, when asked, that it did not specifically know if the Chinese government was behind the attacks and was investigating.
Wonder if google will go thru with it? Tariffs on chinese tyres and steel pipes now in USA.Maybe the world if finally waking up to the scam that china has pulled off so successfully.A contrived exchange rate and tariffs are all that is between chinese economic glory and its return to living in mud huts.The chinese govt already believes that it should be running the world.Will the world crumble before the chinese smiling jackals as it has the last 20 years? Remains to be seen.
Show More
America has China by the balls, u cant have one without the other
China has America by the balls, they owe them a trillion dollars.
Mrben 13 Jan 06:48
A contrived exchange rate and tariffs are all that is between chinese economic glory and its return to living in mud huts
so i guess all that infrastructure, all that engineering talent, all that industry, all that technology that China has built and accumulated is just going to mysteriously vanish into thin air?
A contrived exchange rate and tariffs are all that is between chinese economic glory and its return to living in mud huts
so i guess all that infrastructure, all that engineering talent, all that industry, all that technology that China has built and accumulated is just going to mysteriously vanish into thin air?
I seem to remember Japan being the next big thing 25 years ago!
are the Japanese going to be living in mud huts too then?
Is all the trade avilable in the far east worthless compared with the US.
IMO All that the US has a big lead in is military might. That worries me.
All those who think that human rights = liberal democracy = indidual freedom = capitalism = wealthy economy are deluded. Wishful thinking.
I think this next millenium is Chinas to lose. Unless the US bombs it into the stone age first but I think the chinese will have aleady thought of this possiblilty.
I doubt the far east have forgotten the opium wars and Admiral Perrys solution to US economic wishes.
IMO All that the US has a big lead in is military might. That worries me.
All those who think that human rights = liberal democracy = indidual freedom = capitalism = wealthy economy are deluded. Wishful thinking.
I think this next millenium is Chinas to lose. Unless the US bombs it into the stone age first but I think the chinese will have aleady thought of this possiblilty.
I doubt the far east have forgotten the opium wars and Admiral Perrys solution to US economic wishes.
Melv
Come on mate!! This line of discussion is ridiculous. It appears if anything that the makjor countries are getting closer in policy , and are cooperating a lot more
Come on mate!! This line of discussion is ridiculous. It appears if anything that the makjor countries are getting closer in policy , and are cooperating a lot more
Which is exactly what china should be doing. Thus making it more difficult to bomb.
Do you really think the US will hand global hegemony over to China?
Or anyone else including a perfect united nations.
No way; have you never heard of the US'a manifest destiny and exceptionalism. Never mind its monoply of God.
And with that I probably get another mention on the CIA's data base.
Do you really think the US will hand global hegemony over to China?
Or anyone else including a perfect united nations.
No way; have you never heard of the US'a manifest destiny and exceptionalism. Never mind its monoply of God.
And with that I probably get another mention on the CIA's data base.
Melv- this is not the right forum for you.Suggest you try some yemen or pakistani sites.In the meantime pleasssssssssssssseeeeeeeee resume your medication.
Theres a real stench of xenophobia on this thread...
some of the Western-centric views on display here are very quaint arent they
I don't get this question
china are still in transition stage and are not even a developed country
they are proposing to radically improve the infrastructure over the next 20 years to make City access easier for people in the outer provinces.
They are savers and their consumption is gradually but impressively improving.
The Gov't bank have trillions in their reserve and are ledning money out to struggling western countries at big premiums.
They have lifted the ban on children per couple.
Its a big growth story going forwards.
So many positives and one the most successful fund managers ever is just about to launch an investment trust focusing on China
I however debate whether it has actually begun yet as China is still an emerging economy.
china are still in transition stage and are not even a developed country
they are proposing to radically improve the infrastructure over the next 20 years to make City access easier for people in the outer provinces.
They are savers and their consumption is gradually but impressively improving.
The Gov't bank have trillions in their reserve and are ledning money out to struggling western countries at big premiums.
They have lifted the ban on children per couple.
Its a big growth story going forwards.
So many positives and one the most successful fund managers ever is just about to launch an investment trust focusing on China
I however debate whether it has actually begun yet as China is still an emerging economy.
winningthought 28 Jan 22:28
Theres a real stench of xenophobia on this thread...
subversion 28 Jan 22:35
some of the Western-centric views on display here are very quaint arent they
subversion- no points for playing the race card.There are no free kicks here.You views are assessed on merit.If you have no views then**s off. You 2 winningthought.
Theres a real stench of xenophobia on this thread...
subversion 28 Jan 22:35
some of the Western-centric views on display here are very quaint arent they
subversion- no points for playing the race card.There are no free kicks here.You views are assessed on merit.If you have no views then**s off. You 2 winningthought.
hinese policies that promote domestic firms and create barriers against foreign ones could cause American companies to lose interest in China, U.S.Commerce Secretary Gary Locke said on Thursday.
Locke's warning to Beijing against backsliding on economic openness and the rule of law came amid rising complaints about trade from both partners in a bilateral trading relationship worth more than $330 billion last year.
"Recent events, specifically the well-publicized Google incident, have reminded us of the continued challenges faced by foreign and U.S. companies operating in China," Locke said in a speech at the U.S.-China Business Council's annual forecast conference.
Google, the world's top search engine, said on Jan. 12 it would not abide by Beijing-mandated censorship of its Chinese-language search engine and might quit the Chinese market entirely because of cyber attacks from China.
"China needs to continue making strides to be more transparent, predictable and committed to the rule of law. If there is backsliding on these issues, it will affect the appetite of U.S. companies and other foreign companies to enter the Chinese market and ultimately that will be bad for both the people of China and the United States," Locke said.
He also criticized a Chinese government plan to promote "indigenous innovation" by giving Chinese companies that use Chinese intellectual property an advantage in bidding on government procurement projects.
R*hina Says Censorship Here to Stay
* Clinton Blasts China on Censorship
* China, US on Brink of Trade War?
Major U.S. business groups wrote to Locke, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other administration officials this week to complain about the initiative.
The Chinese plan "significantly disadvantages" U.S. and foreign companies in bidding on contracts worth an estimated $85 billion annually and violates market-opening pledges Beijing made in 2009 commercial talks, Locke said.
"Moreover, we recognize that this issue is just one facet of a broader Chinese approach to industrial policy that is creating headaches for U.S. companies operating in and trying to export to China," he said.
"Successfully dealing with this will require both tactical and strategic adjustments to our engagement with China, and I can assure you that the administration is diligently studying what steps might be necessary," Locke added.
However, Locke began and ended his speech on more positive notes, saying he believed no country offered greater growth potential for U.S. exports than China.
Locke, a Chinese-American, said he would be leading a trade mission to China and Indonesia in May to promote exports of U.S. clean energy and energy efficiency products.
The United States has big trade imbalance with China, but "keeping Chinese goods from the U.S. market is not the answer to addressing our trade deficit," Locke said.
"Instead, making sure the Chinese market is more open to U.S. companies is the most productive solution," he said.
China has chafed at Obama administration decisions in 2009 and this year to slap tariffs on Chinese tires and steel products.
Locke's warning to Beijing against backsliding on economic openness and the rule of law came amid rising complaints about trade from both partners in a bilateral trading relationship worth more than $330 billion last year.
"Recent events, specifically the well-publicized Google incident, have reminded us of the continued challenges faced by foreign and U.S. companies operating in China," Locke said in a speech at the U.S.-China Business Council's annual forecast conference.
Google, the world's top search engine, said on Jan. 12 it would not abide by Beijing-mandated censorship of its Chinese-language search engine and might quit the Chinese market entirely because of cyber attacks from China.
"China needs to continue making strides to be more transparent, predictable and committed to the rule of law. If there is backsliding on these issues, it will affect the appetite of U.S. companies and other foreign companies to enter the Chinese market and ultimately that will be bad for both the people of China and the United States," Locke said.
He also criticized a Chinese government plan to promote "indigenous innovation" by giving Chinese companies that use Chinese intellectual property an advantage in bidding on government procurement projects.
R*hina Says Censorship Here to Stay
* Clinton Blasts China on Censorship
* China, US on Brink of Trade War?
Major U.S. business groups wrote to Locke, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other administration officials this week to complain about the initiative.
The Chinese plan "significantly disadvantages" U.S. and foreign companies in bidding on contracts worth an estimated $85 billion annually and violates market-opening pledges Beijing made in 2009 commercial talks, Locke said.
"Moreover, we recognize that this issue is just one facet of a broader Chinese approach to industrial policy that is creating headaches for U.S. companies operating in and trying to export to China," he said.
"Successfully dealing with this will require both tactical and strategic adjustments to our engagement with China, and I can assure you that the administration is diligently studying what steps might be necessary," Locke added.
However, Locke began and ended his speech on more positive notes, saying he believed no country offered greater growth potential for U.S. exports than China.
Locke, a Chinese-American, said he would be leading a trade mission to China and Indonesia in May to promote exports of U.S. clean energy and energy efficiency products.
The United States has big trade imbalance with China, but "keeping Chinese goods from the U.S. market is not the answer to addressing our trade deficit," Locke said.
"Instead, making sure the Chinese market is more open to U.S. companies is the most productive solution," he said.
China has chafed at Obama administration decisions in 2009 and this year to slap tariffs on Chinese tires and steel products.
Dear Mr Ben sorry I could not oblige with your wish to ban me from this forum.
All my comments stand.
I humbly ask how your above post justifies your asertion that
exchange rate and tariffs are all that is between chinese economic glory and its return to living in mud huts
Why is far eatern trade irrelvant to Chinese continues growth?
All my comments stand.
I humbly ask how your above post justifies your asertion that
exchange rate and tariffs are all that is between chinese economic glory and its return to living in mud huts
Why is far eatern trade irrelvant to Chinese continues growth?
Mrben 29 Jan 06:27
BLAH BLAH BLAH
sounds to me like the US are being forced to view China more and more as an equal
nothing in all that rambling text about mud huts, is there? ;)
BLAH BLAH BLAH
sounds to me like the US are being forced to view China more and more as an equal
nothing in all that rambling text about mud huts, is there? ;)
Sub
Even you can not argue that it is a level playing field! Chinese human rights, working conditions are utterly horrendous, and the majority of the population lives in poverty. To be on a truly even keel China needs to inmprove drasticallly! Do they pay tax credits , unemployemnt benefit , interest on mortgages etc in the same way that Western economies do?
Fact is the West can not compete in the same way, as they have too much red tape and respect for its population. This red tape and political correctness is holding us back.... It is difficult to see things changing any time soon
Even you can not argue that it is a level playing field! Chinese human rights, working conditions are utterly horrendous, and the majority of the population lives in poverty. To be on a truly even keel China needs to inmprove drasticallly! Do they pay tax credits , unemployemnt benefit , interest on mortgages etc in the same way that Western economies do?
Fact is the West can not compete in the same way, as they have too much red tape and respect for its population. This red tape and political correctness is holding us back.... It is difficult to see things changing any time soon
This isn't about hurrah for nice guy america. Booo for nasty China.
All those who think that human rights = liberal democracy = indidual freedom = capitalism = wealthy economy are deluded. Wishful thinking.
The citys capital and all the old wealth of the country was made from 200 years of particularly nasty slavery.
Lets instead discus China back in mud huts if they do not Kow tow to the perfect utopian USA.
All those who think that human rights = liberal democracy = indidual freedom = capitalism = wealthy economy are deluded. Wishful thinking.
The citys capital and all the old wealth of the country was made from 200 years of particularly nasty slavery.
Lets instead discus China back in mud huts if they do not Kow tow to the perfect utopian USA.
Melv
I really do think that you are quite wrong !! China is no threat to the UK or US, and Vice Versa...I expect trade etc to improve not deteriorate..
I really do think that you are quite wrong !! China is no threat to the UK or US, and Vice Versa...I expect trade etc to improve not deteriorate..
you could open up a branch in bejing chisel. happy days!
I do not think China is a threat to us. Unless China being our equal or econmic superior is in itself a threat. I think the US would find this threatening. I think we are a threat to China. I do not think the US will give up its dominance without a fight.And we follow the US where ever it goes.
I hope the fight does not take miltary form.
I hope the fight does not take miltary form.
its obvious what the imbalance is, and its also obvious what the next step is for China - the development of their internal markets (while of course continuing to swap exports for as much currency, power, influence, technology and access to resources as possible)
i had a curious experience just last month, when flying back to HK via Europe, i didn't hear a single Cantonese speaker on the plane... hordes of Mandarin speakers, not a single Cantonese one
this would have been unthinkable just a few years ago, and shows the rapidly increasing spending power of the mainland Chinese
was an odd flight as well - the culture clash between the Westerners and mainland Chinese on this flight was pretty funny, and actually got quite heated at times, but thats another story entirely
i had a curious experience just last month, when flying back to HK via Europe, i didn't hear a single Cantonese speaker on the plane... hordes of Mandarin speakers, not a single Cantonese one
this would have been unthinkable just a few years ago, and shows the rapidly increasing spending power of the mainland Chinese
was an odd flight as well - the culture clash between the Westerners and mainland Chinese on this flight was pretty funny, and actually got quite heated at times, but thats another story entirely
Moon Light 27 Jan 11:16
China has America by the balls, they owe them a trillion dollars.
Moon Light, i think you have it the wrong way round! As my bank manager told me, "If you owe me a million bucks its your problem, if you owe me a billion then its my problem!" With China playing bank manager i think its the US who have China by the fiscal balls. Besides China are too busy trying to keep their 1.5B population from rioting then to be able to squeeze America's sack
China has America by the balls, they owe them a trillion dollars.
Moon Light, i think you have it the wrong way round! As my bank manager told me, "If you owe me a million bucks its your problem, if you owe me a billion then its my problem!" With China playing bank manager i think its the US who have China by the fiscal balls. Besides China are too busy trying to keep their 1.5B population from rioting then to be able to squeeze America's sack
China and a new world economic order:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China_Business/LA12Cb01.html
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China_Business/LA12Cb01.html
China should conduct its foreign trade on the principle of mutual development for both trading partners rather than as a financial profit center for Chinese capital. China must reject the predatory terms of international trade developed during the age of imperialism. Unlike 19th century England and Japan, the huge size of the Chinese economy and its domestic market does not require imperialist terms of trade to survive. The US model failed because it aped the British model of empire after World War II. China must avoid making the same error.
Great atricle.
China should conduct its foreign trade on the principle of mutual development for both trading partners rather than as a financial profit center for Chinese capital. China must reject the predatory terms of international trade developed during the age of imperialism. Unlike 19th century England and Japan, the huge size of the Chinese economy and its domestic market does not require imperialist terms of trade to survive. The US model failed marker because it aped the British model of empire after World War II. China must avoid making the same error.
Will the US/UK try to prevent China achieving this?
China should conduct its foreign trade on the principle of mutual development for both trading partners rather than as a financial profit center for Chinese capital. China must reject the predatory terms of international trade developed during the age of imperialism. Unlike 19th century England and Japan, the huge size of the Chinese economy and its domestic market does not require imperialist terms of trade to survive. The US model failed marker because it aped the British model of empire after World War II. China must avoid making the same error.
Will the US/UK try to prevent China achieving this?
the US may well try at some point melv... the Chinese government isn't stupid (every single member of their 'inner circle' has a very strong background in highly numerate academic subjects, mainly engineering)... and its clear that, although they see the need to acquire US$, they are trading it away for 'hard' assets, infrastructure, industry and resources (ie African 'colonization') as fast as possible while rocking the boat as little as possible
of course, at some point China will reach the point where the boat will be rocked whether it wants it to or not, and this will be 'interesting times'
can't see the UK really having much influence on this, its totally out of its depth when dealing with China already
of course, at some point China will reach the point where the boat will be rocked whether it wants it to or not, and this will be 'interesting times'
can't see the UK really having much influence on this, its totally out of its depth when dealing with China already
I say the USA/UK becasue I live in the UK. I know we are irrelevant in the shaping of the global econmy and the shaping of the future but two thing will always happen in this country.
One; we will always hang on to Americas coat tails and say and do whatever America wants.
Two; we will always see ourselves as leaders of the world and that the system we think we have will take over and then dominate the world forever. We see english speaking liberal democracy as the only way to run things.
We will never accept that to do not have a liberal democracy. We do as we are told. We will never accept that we can no longer run things. We will never accept that we cannot continue with the creation of debt money. We will never accept that the property inflation game will contue with decreasing returns then the game is over.
Thats why we will cling to America in the wish fulfilling fantasy that Anerica is magical and always comes up with something.
Actuallly America frequently come up with bombs.
One; we will always hang on to Americas coat tails and say and do whatever America wants.
Two; we will always see ourselves as leaders of the world and that the system we think we have will take over and then dominate the world forever. We see english speaking liberal democracy as the only way to run things.
We will never accept that to do not have a liberal democracy. We do as we are told. We will never accept that we can no longer run things. We will never accept that we cannot continue with the creation of debt money. We will never accept that the property inflation game will contue with decreasing returns then the game is over.
Thats why we will cling to America in the wish fulfilling fantasy that Anerica is magical and always comes up with something.
Actuallly America frequently come up with bombs.
Google is a far bigger threat to us all than China FFS !!
I need a bit of help here, please.
I'm not up to speed with the current situation.
Why is the U.S. "trillions in debt" to China?
And, a separate issue: why did the Chinese govt. end the single child policy?
I'm not up to speed with the current situation.
Why is the U.S. "trillions in debt" to China?
And, a separate issue: why did the Chinese govt. end the single child policy?
Maybe because they throw female babies in the trash.
sean - the short story is - the money China earns from exports is heavily used to buy Western debt (ie US govt bonds)
so puts US/China in a 'mutually assured destruction' scenario - US needs China to keep funding its deficit, and China needs the US to honour its debts and not debauch its currency
so basically, the Chinese government wants to milk this status quo as long as possible, while also swapping as much of this 'paper money' for hard assets such as infrastructure, education, industry, colonial resources, domestic market development etc, since it knows the situation cant continue indefinitely
so puts US/China in a 'mutually assured destruction' scenario - US needs China to keep funding its deficit, and China needs the US to honour its debts and not debauch its currency
so basically, the Chinese government wants to milk this status quo as long as possible, while also swapping as much of this 'paper money' for hard assets such as infrastructure, education, industry, colonial resources, domestic market development etc, since it knows the situation cant continue indefinitely
Thanks for the reply, sub.
Short of time now, but will ask more later.
Short of time now, but will ask more later.
Read the Times today oh boy.
Apparently all future wars will be condcuted by proxy by clients insurgents and terror groups in guerilla wars. They will also be fought by high finance and in cyberspace.
Pray Mr Murchdock who might the enemy be?
Well he does mention that that the only way the west can compete with China is by becoming leaner hungriier and fitter. This apparently is to be done by cutting spending on health, education and pensions.........(Whatever. Usual rich richer poor poorer Tory stuff)
But in the middle of the article on the threat of chinese growth is a picture that makes in very clear who the proxy wars of the coming century will be against. There is a neat little picture of some very violent looking Chinese and the caption is
The Chinese are becoming increasing adamant in their rejetion of western values.
Apparently all future wars will be condcuted by proxy by clients insurgents and terror groups in guerilla wars. They will also be fought by high finance and in cyberspace.
Pray Mr Murchdock who might the enemy be?
Well he does mention that that the only way the west can compete with China is by becoming leaner hungriier and fitter. This apparently is to be done by cutting spending on health, education and pensions.........(Whatever. Usual rich richer poor poorer Tory stuff)
But in the middle of the article on the threat of chinese growth is a picture that makes in very clear who the proxy wars of the coming century will be against. There is a neat little picture of some very violent looking Chinese and the caption is
The Chinese are becoming increasing adamant in their rejetion of western values.
thats another funny one melv - the West loves to paint China as an aggressive, enemy, rogue nation when it watches Chinas military power increasing
the thing is - China has hardly launched any foreign invasions in its entire history. theres a reason for China literally translating to 'middle kingdom' - it historically sees itself as the centre of the world and most wars have been internal power struggles rather than external invasions (even at points in Chinas history when it could have conquered neighbours with ease)
compare and contrast with the West, whose imperialist, global warmongering is constant
add to this, the fact that China, over the last hundred-odd years, has been the victim of foreign invasion and colonization by pretty much EVERY major power on the planet
so the Western fears about Chinas military ambitions have very little basis in history (despite the almost constant Western media propaganda)... whereas Chinas fears about Western military ambitions are very, very well supported by history
the thing is - China has hardly launched any foreign invasions in its entire history. theres a reason for China literally translating to 'middle kingdom' - it historically sees itself as the centre of the world and most wars have been internal power struggles rather than external invasions (even at points in Chinas history when it could have conquered neighbours with ease)
compare and contrast with the West, whose imperialist, global warmongering is constant
add to this, the fact that China, over the last hundred-odd years, has been the victim of foreign invasion and colonization by pretty much EVERY major power on the planet
so the Western fears about Chinas military ambitions have very little basis in history (despite the almost constant Western media propaganda)... whereas Chinas fears about Western military ambitions are very, very well supported by history
subversion 05 Feb 02:56
the thing is - China has hardly launched any foreign invasions in its entire history. theres a reason for China literally translating to 'middle kingdom' - it historically sees itself as the centre of the world and most wars have been internal power struggles rather than external invasions (even at points in Chinas history when it could have conquered neighbours with ease)
lolololol, subversion its clear from your posts your are a raging racist.However I need to point out that china has hardly launcHed any foreign invasions due to the fact that up until 1975 when the door was opened to the west the bulk of china was living in MUD HUTS!.
the thing is - China has hardly launched any foreign invasions in its entire history. theres a reason for China literally translating to 'middle kingdom' - it historically sees itself as the centre of the world and most wars have been internal power struggles rather than external invasions (even at points in Chinas history when it could have conquered neighbours with ease)
lolololol, subversion its clear from your posts your are a raging racist.However I need to point out that china has hardly launcHed any foreign invasions due to the fact that up until 1975 when the door was opened to the west the bulk of china was living in MUD HUTS!.
Mrben 05 Feb 05:16
lolololol, subversion its clear from your posts your are a raging racist.
you obviously don't know subs background , let's hope you havn't awoken the tiger in him ;)
lolololol, subversion its clear from your posts your are a raging racist.
you obviously don't know subs background , let's hope you havn't awoken the tiger in him ;)
subversion --there was once a country called Tibet you know
thats pretty funny... you seriously use Tibet as an example to compare with Western imperialism?
the Brits use bloody conquest to form an empire spanning across the world... and still to this day are occupying countries on the other side of the planet... the US has overthrown regime after regime that it doesn't like and has troops stationed all over the planet... and you use Tibet as an example, which has a significant ethnic Chinese population and has been in and out of Chinese sovereign territory for hundreds of years
biased little englanders? sounds like it...
the Brits use bloody conquest to form an empire spanning across the world... and still to this day are occupying countries on the other side of the planet... the US has overthrown regime after regime that it doesn't like and has troops stationed all over the planet... and you use Tibet as an example, which has a significant ethnic Chinese population and has been in and out of Chinese sovereign territory for hundreds of years
biased little englanders? sounds like it...
no just adds a bit of balance to your China 'love -in'
and please refrain from emotional name calling as
a) it signifys you losing rather than winning an argument
b) its not wanted on the financial forum
a) it signifys you losing rather than winning an argument
b) its not wanted on the financial forum
believing that Tibet is somehow in the same league as centuries of Western imperialism isn't balance, its delusion :D
now if the Chinese media started a 'free Wales', 'free Scotland', or even 'free Northern Ireland' campaign, that would balance out your Tibet example quite nicely
subversion 07 Feb 02:08
thats pretty funny... you seriously use Tibet as an example to compare with Western imperialism?
biased little englanders? sounds like it...
subversioon you are a total racist. suggest you find other forums.Here we are interested in debate and information.We are not interested in schoolboy name calling or braindead indoctrination arguments.
It is clear you are a nasty small minded racist.Leave the forum and dont return.
thats pretty funny... you seriously use Tibet as an example to compare with Western imperialism?
biased little englanders? sounds like it...
subversioon you are a total racist. suggest you find other forums.Here we are interested in debate and information.We are not interested in schoolboy name calling or braindead indoctrination arguments.
It is clear you are a nasty small minded racist.Leave the forum and dont return.
debate and information? hahaha thats hilarious... you seem more interested in regurgitating what your media spoonfeeds you, and living in the past :D
its very sweet that you and midsimon consider yourselves the forums moral arbiters as well, especially given your own obvious biases... maybe you hypocrites should take a look in the mirror some time
its very sweet that you and midsimon consider yourselves the forums moral arbiters as well, especially given your own obvious biases... maybe you hypocrites should take a look in the mirror some time
subversion- its you who needs to look in the mirror jerkoff.
08 Feb 07:52
Thats the second time that the open minded, highly informed, intrenationalist Mr ben has sugested expeleing some-one who dsiagrees with him form "his thread".
IMO a great example of some-one knows he cannot win this argument.
Saying China is over is bad enough, saying that the chinese have always lived in mud huts is worse.
I bet he does not know that the chinese have wiped the floor with us in trade mant times in the past. Porcelain is one example.
Thats the second time that the open minded, highly informed, intrenationalist Mr ben has sugested expeleing some-one who dsiagrees with him form "his thread".
IMO a great example of some-one knows he cannot win this argument.
Saying China is over is bad enough, saying that the chinese have always lived in mud huts is worse.
I bet he does not know that the chinese have wiped the floor with us in trade mant times in the past. Porcelain is one example.
interesting- the melv comments are always followed by subversions and vice versa.Im suspecting melv and subversion are either the same person related in some perverse fashion.
That is a little far fetched Mr Ben, even by this forums standards!
Thats the biggest compliment anyone has ever given me on this thread; taking into acount relative brain size.
So, second question:
why did China the " single child policy" ?
why did China the " single child policy" ?
dont be so hard on MrBen, i find the opinions of such quaint provincial xenophobes very entertaining
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539