posted on May 27, 2001 10:22:00 PM new
Thank you, uaru, for bring that up!
The difference here is that Jimmy Carter is well educated and a very, very intelligent man. Clinton was and is a schmooser (not boozer) who came from a political background and junkyard politics since he was a kid -- plus Clinton is a Rhodes Scholar. It is not impossible for intelligent individuals to learn foreign policy, adapt well, and even make history that we can be proud of. However, the crucial ingredient necessary for this development is severely lacking in Bush. Bush just doesn't cut it when it comes to the smarts department. Bush can not grasp right from wrong, in that poisoning Americans with pollution in order to line the pockets of major corporations is not morally, ethically, or politically correct. Anyone with a defect in thinking, logic, and reason - as all Republicans Voters were aware of before the election in the case of Dubya, just simply will never be able to grasp what needs to be done. Sorry, but all Americans are losers in this because of what Republican Voters knowingly did to cripple us. What I want to know is, is WHY DID YOU DO IT? DO REPUBLICANS HATE AMERICA?
edited for sp.
[ edited by Borillar on May 27, 2001 10:24 PM ]
Thank you so very much, Borillar, for pointing out that you were not addressing your remarks on page 1 of this thread to my post which preceeded yours.
I was afraid that you might be thinking that I could possibly be a Republican. Whew! What a relief!!!
posted on May 28, 2001 04:08:04 AM new
Borillar,
It is people like you who ruin it for everyone else. You are the kind of person who takes joy in putting another down to make yourself feel good, they do it to make up for their own shortcomings. You make it impossible for a person to see both sides, who would want to with those wild diatribes you post?
There is nothing that you say that I would ever take seriously. If I were going to listen to someone who was trying to change my mind, it certainly would not be you. No wonder this country is so divided.
posted on May 28, 2001 04:35:04 AM new
I would like all you people who are so busy taking little shots at each other for being Republicans or Democrats to stop and
consider the nature of the Chinese who are neither. They are basically different.
Do you really believe there is any US politician who they are going to be happy to deal with and respect unless they send over
Monica L. with knee pads as ambassador?
The Chinese have goals so different and so antagonistic to everything we hope for that there is no room for reconciliation with
them.
Both parties want to "work" with them which is like working with someone living in your neighborhood that
wants to sell you lawn service so he can buy a gun and rob your friends and eventually work his way over to you.
This barbaric totalitarian government is not going to magically morf into a democratic peace loving friend by buying junk from
them. There is going to be conflict with them, perhaps outright war, and it is not going to be easier 10 or 20 years from now by
putting it off.
It was not necessarily true that the US military could not take back that plane. The politicians never asked them to do so.
I don't know if there is anything the Chinese could do that will make them use force. Hitler did pretty much what he wanted for
years when he came to power and the world was pretty happy to kiss his little butt, especially the British, to avoid conflict despite
the fact that anyone could see there were no limits to what he could demand. The Chinese look the same to me. They have
designs on their neighbors and have no respect for the individual. Everything else is detail. They will cause trouble by their nature.
posted on May 28, 2001 09:07:05 AM new
gravid - I understand your statement of "they will cause trouble by their nature", is directed to the Country of China. But, I think if I was of Chinese descent I would be offended by that remark.
hcross - I asked you earlier "who would you listen to", but you didn't answer that question. You have added Borillar to your list of who you wouldn't listen to.
posted on May 28, 2001 09:32:18 AM new
hcross posted on May 28, 2001 04:08:04 AM
Borillar,
It is people like you who ruin it for everyone else. You are the kind of person who takes joy in putting another down to make yourself feel good, they do it to make up for their own shortcomings. You make it impossible for a person to see both sides, who would want to with those wild diatribes you post?
There is nothing that you say that I would ever take seriously. If I were going to listen to someone who was trying to change my mind, it certainly would not be you. No wonder this country is so divided.
Nothing in this post addresses the topic, and the entirety of this diatribe extends well beyond the expression of opinion into name-calling denigration. I do not understand why this poster continues to post such nonsense, nor why these sorts of statements are allowed. I'm quite sure that the poster does not know borillar enough to post such personal judgemental remarks as "it is people like you who ruin it for everyone else. You are the kind of person who takes joy in putting another down to make yourself feel good, they do it to make up for their own shortcomings.
Certainly any poster may be enraged by the remarks of another, but does that justify such direct attacks on another's personal characteristics particularly when those attacks are based in the poster's questionable and biased ability to assess other people?
posted on May 28, 2001 09:37:30 AM newThere is going to be conflict with them, perhaps outright war, and it is not going to be easier 10 or 20 years from now by putting it off.
So you're saying...?
Hmmm... let's see. We drop a spy plane on China, Jiang calls Bush an idiot, and now we're supposed to go to war over it? Hoo boy!
posted on May 28, 2001 09:54:36 AM new
I'm sure Bush had/has some choice words for Jiang. I would think, as we all would, not about this issue, but the whole Communist Party idea.
But there may be some that like the idea of Communism, I don't know.
Gravid was not far from truth about the Chinese. Translating a lot of English does not come out the same in Chinese, even with the many dialects of the language they have there.
Yesterday my SIL was here. She was looking at pictures of my mother, taken before she died. She had been fairly young, in her 40's. Li wrote down.... Your mother is much prettier than you and your daughters.
We kinda laughed, (anyone else may take offense at this) she went on to say that its in her to be totally honest or truthful in what she says and thinks.
Then there are certain things we say, that she is totally offended by, that no one here would be, and she will keep that, and never let it go. She will hold a grudge the rest of her life for something very insiginficant, that could have been just translated differently. However never to her husband. She said that always she has to honor her husband, never argue with him, no matter what he says or does.
Now this is not some 'poor' Chinese. She was chosen to go to University there, and more, and went on to become an engineer in their nuclear power plant. She tried to go here to work in the same field, she can't. They told her she would have to start at the beginning again, as US standards are much different than Chinese. She came back from that with total hatred for what they said. We tried to explain, but she won't hear it.
There IS a HUGE cultural difference in all aspects between the 2 countries.
posted on May 28, 2001 10:08:27 AM new"There IS a HUGE cultural difference in all aspects between the 2 countries"
Of course there is, but do such things warrant the sorts of international aggression that looks to be developing? I don't see that they do, and wonder at what sort of money is driving the moves toward agrieved posturing around the world by the current administration. Are these necessary aspects to international relations in the republican view? It seems that they are. Solid advances in cooperation between the major powers in the world were made in the last decade and now they are to be tossed out for the benefit of corporations that profit from war material production or for some perverse ideologicially backwards-looking stance? I hope not.
The viewpoint expressed by gravid, that we should be prepared for inevitable conflict with the Chinese or with any other nation is a perversion, in my opinion, that disallows the possibility of global peace and 'community' prosperity which Bill Clinton had a visionary's hope of achieving.
I think you're making a big mistake if you are trying to tell me that Jimmy Carter was a skilled politician on foreign policy. I'm not sure how old you are but I can remember so many international blunders that Carter made. The US never looked more like the keystone cops as they did under Carter in the international theater. Just off the top of my head I remember the embarrassing screw up he made on a visit to Mexico talking about Montezuma's revenge. The ridiculous vote in the UN when the US voted to equate Zionism with racism and then change their vote a couple days later.
Even if you are old enough to remember it I'm sure you can look up in any history book on the 444 days were the US was the helpless bystander in the Iranian hostage incident. That was a circle of confusion from day one, countless errors and embarrassments, I suppose my favorite was when Carter's own Secretary of State resigned over Carter's actions in the middle of the negotiations.
Please don't try and defend Carter's foreign policies with me, you'll fail to alter my memory of those years. I do believe Carter intelligent and honest, but in the foreign affair theater he was a man out of his element. The US suffered for 4 years because of it.
PS: It would probably be wise to stop scolding people like a mother scolding their child because you didn't agree with their vote. It makes you look silly, that's just my humble opinion.
Its not that long ago that you rememeber what kind of apology the Chinese leader wanted for 'running into one of their planes'? They wanted a specific apology, the saving face thing.
And YES this stuff could/can cause aggression: words, words that have to be 'just right'.
I beleive all Presidents of late had (and HAVE) visions of international peace and trade with China, wasn't it Nixon who was the first American President to visit on their soil?
posted on May 28, 2001 10:24:11 AM new
chococake - Thank you for pointing out how that could sound. I really don't mean it in a racial way. If only you knew me well you would have a context that would immediatly reject that. I think there is very little differences between the so called races of mankind. There are almost no measurable differences. Some are more suseptable to certain diseases. That's about it.
It is a cultural thing not race. It is not only due to communism but communism does seem to bring out the worst in their culture from our view. I have had several years of doing business with Chinese people in this country and last year I tried trading directly with a couple Chinese companies.
Even with the help of Local Chinese who are acclimated to us it was walking a minefield to not offend them exchanging e-mails.
I am sorry krs thinks it perverted to expect aggression from this kind of government - I think it is just reality to know they will never be happy or satisfied as long as there is someone on the same planet who is CAPABLE of harming them. It does not matter if we desire it or act to do so - just the capacity to harm them makes us unacceptable.
Our own government is getting more and more that way actually. You don't have to build a bomb to be a criminal. All you have to do is have the knowlege to do so and they regard you as an enemy.
posted on May 28, 2001 10:29:06 AM new
nearthesea,
Please not that I mentioned China only inclusively in a description of an overall prospect.
I do not have the advantage of a Chinese sister-in-law from which relationship I might pass judgement upon the full course of future world events as they involve the sino-western relations.
posted on May 28, 2001 10:29:11 AM new
NearTheSea - it's not only miscommunication in words and actions with China, but the whole Asian culture.
My DIL is from Indonesia, and I can't tell you the number of times I've gotten in trouble over saying something very innocent that she took the wrong way.
posted on May 28, 2001 10:36:46 AM new
oh for chrissakes krs, I was not judging or predicting full world events because my brother is married to a woman from China, and I think you know that
chococake- no kidding, a lot of cultures are like that, I am VERY careful as to what I say or ask about to her. She has gotten mad at me for some things, but not too mad, as I had my brother right there, and he does his best to explain things
posted on May 28, 2001 10:38:07 AM new
Well krs what personal experience do you have of Chinese people and culture that is better than knowing one in your own family for forming an opinion of what to expect from them? Have you lived there or done business with them? Tel us and we will respect your view better knowing how it was formed.
posted on May 28, 2001 10:39:00 AM new
gravid - I know from your other post's that you didn't mean it to sound that way. I understood that it was directed at the Chinese Government and not Chinese people in general.
See my previous post about my DIL. I still have to be careful about how I phrase things or words I use in talking to her.
posted on May 28, 2001 10:48:38 AM new
In the first place, gravid, point me, if you would, to any place in my posts here today where I have made any claim of predicting the future of such international relations. I'm certain that I would not fain to do so based upon any interaction that I may have had with one or a group of asian people.
As it happens I had some thirty of Chinese, and fourteen Philipino, and three Japanese, and seven hispanic, twelve gringo, and four black employees under my direct perview when I retired and spent an entire career dealing in working political involvements with peoples of several national and racial origins.
Nothing in any of that would give me to feel that I am in any way qualified to surmise that war with any of them is inevitable as you have taken it upon yourself to do based on some sort of business relations which are by nature adversarial.
and I am not trying to bring the whole Viet Nam thing up, I know you were there (and its Memorial day and all)
But you were there, and you know that a lot of Vietnamese are of Chinese descent, or are directly Chinese, and were, when the Viet Nam war was going on. So you have had some personal expeirence with them also, and you should know how and what their culture is.
And I am NOT trying to bring up a sore subject with you ...... really I am not.
posted on May 28, 2001 10:51:09 AM new
I think that Bush should make the formation of a mother and sister in law peacekeeping mission his next great effort in international relations. LoL!
posted on May 28, 2001 10:52:20 AM new
That must be difficult chococake.
We have a SIL from South Africa and sometimes we feel like we need a translator when we are from the same base culture.
She recently had her brother visit and he was not allowed to leave the country with his wife and children because they have to stay there to insure his return. He is an expert on computer operating sytem their army uses that is unrelated to any other in the world so it is very difficult to try to access or corrupt due to incompatibility. They don't want him out loose in the world.
posted on May 28, 2001 11:00:01 AM new
krs - You may have something there. The great powers of the world when they were kingdoms used to use marraige as a way to form alliances quite often.
Sounds like you have plenty of experience to form some opinions about how people from various cultures will act. If you have all that experience and will not venture any opinions it must be modesty.
You are right business is adversarial. Come to think about it with my in laws being related is adversarial. Now I am going to have to sit and think what kind of a cross culure exchange will really be non-adversarial.
posted on May 28, 2001 11:20:43 AM new
How people will react in interpersonal or business relations is not much related to how nations react in international ones.
It is innappropriate to say that a people are by nature warlike or in any other way generalizable. It would require the admission that not since Ghengis Khan has there been such a warlike and abusive nation as this one as evidenced throughout the history of emminent domain and the rape of this great land in it's cause. Given that history and the dominant power of this country militarily and economically, and the ongoing subjucation of other countries to the will of the United States it would be unwise for any nation not to view the United States as a threat, and the role of the United States should be one of leadership with a continual effort to reduce such fears as other natiions rightly have of it. The United States holds the only key to world peace, and blustering around making short-man threats and pointing fingers in order to foster a hatred of other peoples is not the way toward that peace in my opinion only.
