It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Thank You Germany & France...for the knife in the back!

page: 14
0
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
BillHicksRules....
Any reason why the US shouldn't support Taiwan?
If China has problem with our support Taiwan, then whose problem is it?
seekerof


Maybe because Taiwan is China?




posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 08:09 AM
link   
Maybe because it is not?


seekerof



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Maybe you should look at the CONTEXT of my statement. I used Pearl Harbor as an example. I don't think that Pearl Harbor was nationalistic propaganda or corny patriotism.

We were, in fact, attacked.

Try sticking to the context of what I said - you are better then to try and spin what I said.


Hey, have you being the Hiroshima museum, it doesn't really mention Pearl Harbour i've being told.


Japan has it's own theories on Pearl Harbour, just like it's theories on Nanjing.

-----

Also like to point out some things for the Korean war.

China warned for months that it would retaliate if the UN/US forces approached the Yalu river. Macarthur had some crazy ideas of nukes that were thankfully rejected by the administration. Further more, he wanted to bomb Manchuria and link up with Chiang to attack the mainland.

Don't say it as if China wanted to attack SK, China never wanted that Kim to attack the SK. Mao had all the forces lined up for an attack on TW. (it was doubtful whether or not the then US administration would've supported TW). The fact is, China only supported Kim once it was certain that Macarthur wanted to attack China.

In fact, the whole problem with Taiwan would've being solved had Kim not attacked SK.

EDIT


yanchek
mabye because Taiwan is China?



Seekerof
mabye because it is not?


Wow, this conversation is going places.


[edit on 14-4-2005 by rapier28]



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 08:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by cargo
Are you saying that the response to Pearl Harbour was that of a completely right-wing citizenry?


ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!

That is the point cargo. Read what I said. I was comparing older generations to todays. Get it yet?



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Maybe because it is not?


Oh, yes it is. If it wasn't they would declare independence long time ago. But they can't, can they. And it's illogical that Chinese wolud separate from Chinese.
Declaration of independence of Taiwan would justifie every separatistic movement in the world (Quebec in Canada, Basquia in Spain, Kosovo in Serbia, Checnya in Russia ...)
Will US back up everybody?



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by BillHicksRules
AMM,

Why do the US continue to rile the Chinese by supporting the Taiwanese?

Can you not see the similarities between Taiwan and Cuba?

Cheers

BHR


The US continues to support Taiwan because they are a FREE INDEPENDENT nation. They have their way of life, and they are happy. Why must China ruin that?

No - I see ZERO in comon between Taiwan and Cuba other then the fact that they are both Islands. We don't have nukes pointed at China from Taiwan.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 08:33 AM
link   
Seekerof,

If the case is as you put it why wont the US lift the embargo on Cuba?

Cheers

BHR



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by yanchek

Originally posted by Seekerof
Maybe because it is not?


Oh, yes it is. If it wasn't they would declare independence long time ago. But they can't, can they.


And why is that? Maybe because China has told them that they will attack Taiwan if it does? Face it, China is playing the part of a bully, forcing a tiny independent island to live in fear of being attacked.



And it's illogical that Chinese wolud separate from Chinese.
Declaration of independence of Taiwan would justifie every separatistic movement in the world (Quebec in Canada, Basquia in Spain, Kosovo in Serbia, Checnya in Russia ...)
Will US back up everybody?


In case you forgot...Every country in North and South America seperated from their founders. How many countries seperated from Russia after the USSR broke up?



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
The US continues to support Taiwan because they are a FREE INDEPENDENT nation. They have their way of life, and they are happy. Why must China ruin that?

No - I see ZERO in comon between Taiwan and Cuba other then the fact that they are both Islands. We don't have nukes pointed at China from Taiwan.


Dude, those nukes are gone. And those nukes were only there because John Paul II convinced European states to point U.S nukes towards Russia.

Taiwan

But the point is, Taiwan has never being a nation. The U.S supported Chiang Kai-Shek to station his forces on Taiwan as a base of operations, hence giving it to the Republic of China, the heir to the Qing dynasty. After the civil war, the PRC took control of mainland China, thus civil war technically is still in effect between the PRC and ROC.

Taiwan has never had a claim to be a independent nation, the U.S could've made Taiwan an independent nation after the Japanese defeat in WW2 but you guys gave it to Chiang Kai-Shek.

Independence


AMM
In case you forgot...Every country in North and South America seperated from their founders. How many countries seperated from Russia after the USSR broke up?


AMM, the U.S also has separatist movements, in Hawaii in particular.

The USSR was a union, those 'stans were taken in, it's very different to the situation of Taiwan. In fact, the situation of Taiwan is more complicated then any other situation on this planet. The history, people, culture, support, allegiances of Taiwan is so complicated, which is also why Taiwan has always being fractured in it's opinions.

[edit on 14-4-2005 by rapier28]



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by rapier28
Hey, have you being the Hiroshima museum, it doesn't really mention Pearl Harbour i've being told.


And that has what to do with the mentality of todays youth compared to those in the 1940's?



Japan has it's own theories on Pearl Harbour, just like it's theories on Nanjing.


Good for them. But agian, this has what to do with my comment?



China warned for months that it would retaliate if the UN/US forces approached the Yalu river.


Well, perhaps if they hadn't backed the North Koreans there would be no reason to go to war for either side. I really don't care if they 'warned' us. The fact is they both instigated and escalated the war.




The fact is, China only supported Kim once it was certain that Macarthur wanted to attack China.


No, sorry. Thats your opinion (a wrong one by the way) not fact.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 08:48 AM
link   
AMM,

"The US continues to support Taiwan because they are a FREE INDEPENDENT nation. They have their way of life, and they are happy. Why must China ruin that?

No - I see ZERO in comon between Taiwan and Cuba other then the fact that they are both Islands. We don't have nukes pointed at China from Taiwan."

Cuba is a free, independent nation. They have their way of life and they are happy. Why must the US continue to attempt to ruin that?

Cheers

BHR



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 08:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by rapier28
Dude, those nukes are gone.


Yes, they are. And we aren't threatening to attack them now are we?




And those nukes were only there because John Paul II convinced European states to point U.S nukes towards Russia.




Sorry, but NO! It was the cold war. WHO THE HELL ELSE were they going to point them at? The USSR was building up to roll over all of Europe. The Pope had nothing to do with it!




But the point is, Taiwan has never being a nation.


Yes, because China is a bully. They want to be seperate, but they don't want a war. China doesn't care about a war. All that matters to them is money and greed.


The U.S supported Chiang Kai-Shek to station his forces on Taiwan as a base of operations, hence giving it to the Republic of China, the heir to the Qing dynasty. After the civil war, the PRC took control of mainland China, thus civil war technically is still in effect between the PRC and ROC.

Taiwan has never had a claim to be a independent nation, the U.S could've made Taiwan an independent nation after the Japanese defeat in WW2 but you guys gave it to Chiang Kai-Shek.


Yeah we did. And then China went to the commies. Taiwan is free. We support all free nations. Taiwan does NOT want to be part of China. Get over it, move on. It's a tiny peacefull island that just wants to be left alone.

Too bad China is so greedy they have to FORCE people to life under their rule...ALL BECAUSE OF MONEY.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 08:52 AM
link   

as posted by Odium
Also, France and Germany owe you nothing. You owe them nothing. No Country owes another Nation anything. Otherwise, America can be held responsible for a lot of deaths and maybe they should pay up for that?

Originally posted by Seekerof
You know, your a pretty intelligent guy, Odium, but there is a discerned trend in your postings and comments and thats a insinuated disgust with the US. Am I right or am I wrong? Cause based on what you have mentioned above, the word 'hypocrisy' comes to mind. The UK [aka: Britain] and Europe [aka: Spain, France, Italy, Portugal, etc, etc.] have spread more death and destruction than any other nations on the face of this planet and yet, you make such a bold statement as I have quoted above. Interesting or ironic? Should 'old Europe' [Britain/UK included] be held accountable for this? Should they have to pay? Allow me to remind you, that your meddlings and material raping of Africa alone speak volumes for what I am implying. The sucking sound heard in Africa today is directly connected to 'old Europe', no?


I never said "Europe was better or Innocent" did I? My point is, if we say Nation owes another something, it goes both ways. He was saying Germany owed Americam I was just displaying America owes other people and I agree if you go down the route that Countries do, every Nation probably owes another something. (I admit what the U.K. has done, or any other Nation.)

Also, I'm not "Anti-U.S." I'm just against people who wish to make out like America has done so much good and almost no harm. (Even I admit they've done some good, I'm even Pro-Iraq) but the people need to realise that the Country is doing a lot of bad right now. That could blow up in its face - again.


as posted by Odium
Native Americans maybe? I'm part of the Kanienkehaka by blood, I was born into that. Maybe if Germany owe you something because you served there, you owe us something? Ever think of that?

Originally posted by Seekerof
Excuse me? Umm, no, we don't owe you anything. Cause if we did, then the Europeans owe you a hellva' lot more than we supposedly do. In the name of Enlightenment and colonialism [greed], 'old Europe' once again strikes. Question: the official history books indicate that when 'old Europe' landed in the 'new world' they infected how many? That infection killed how many? You've killed and suppressed how many? All in the name of 'colonialism' and Enlightenment. What the US did was nothing compared to those numbers.


But he uses WW2 as though America joined in on a whim and not because they had too. I'm sure most people realise, if America had gone it alone against Japan once Hitler had disposed of Britain he'd of helped his allies. It only makes sense. It was just an example of what America has done. I can list probably hundreds, for enough Nations all over the world.

Also, because America did do a lot of harm to the Native Americans. They outlawed them being able to teach their own culture or religion, which to me is almost sickening and against the constitution. (If I'm not mistaken.)


as posted by Odium
300years, between 80 and 300million people, now less than 2million. But you know what, I don't care.

Originally posted by Seekerof
The above is in reference to? Please clarify.


The highest number given for the whole Native American population that I've seen was 300million, lowest was 80 when the Spanish, British, French and Dutch began to colonize it. Just showing how low the population has gone. Through death, disease and intermarriage.


as posted by Odium
Also America did a lot of harm to China...

Originally posted by Seekerof
Really?
Again, Odium, you forgeting history?
Opium Wars ring a bell anywhere in your mind?
Again, 'old Europe' has created and done more harm than any nation, including the US.

Never said old Europe or Modern Europe doesn't, but I don't see me saying Germany, France, etc owe me, this that or the other nor do I see anyone. (The above were examples of what this "Oweing" one another Policy would bring us.)


as posted by Odium
...during the Korean War they actually dehumanized the Chinese, published documents calling them animals making out they were inferior. Also the fact you've taken the role as "World Police" and you decide what is Right or Wrong. I'm sorry but we have the U.N. to do that for us and they make enough mistakes as it is.

Originally posted by Seekerof
"Dehumanization" is utilized by all sides in war. The Japanese were viewed as thick-glassed, small-sized, sub-humans. The Germans 'dehumanized' the Slavs, Pols, Jews, etc.
The UK and 'old Europe' dehumanized Native Indians and Africans.
The list can go on, Odium.
Your point is what: to point at simply one nation while failing to check yourself by referencing history?


No but when America actually deny what the Japenese did (as do a lot of other Countries) it's going to cause friction. Imagine it if Europe refuesed to teach about Pearl Harbour, it's very similar (Nanjing that is) and yet we won't admit what the Japanese did, of course this will cause friction.


as posted by Odium
Also, maybe if America would not place so many bases near to China they'd not feel the need to protect themselves?

Originally posted by Seekerof
Huh?
Please.
This has nothing to do with China seeking arms the world over. This has nothing to do with why China is building up its military. You speak with forked-tongue.


As far as I know, America has bases in Afganistan, South Korea, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Nepal/Tajikistan (trying to/tried to get one), two carrier groups in their seas. That to me, would make me wish to protect my Nation - I'm not saying it's the only reason, but it has to be one.

After all, that's 7 bases in 15 border Nations. And they're trying to get more. That to me, would want me to begin to build up my army to defend my Country. (Taiwan also plays a heavy factor/American relations.)

Also the fact, Taiwan is a lot like Cuba. What do you think America's reaction would be to China giving Cuba cheap weapons?



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by BillHicksRules
Cuba is a free, independent nation. They have their way of life and they are happy. Why must the US continue to attempt to ruin that?


First of all, they are NOT free. Where in the hell did you get that from?

If they are happy, why do they float to Florida on life rafts, risking death to get to the US? Why do their baseball players have to DEFECT in order to play in MLB?

And lastly, we aren't threatening Cuba at all! Do we have a stated policy of invasion for them? Absolutely not. We are done with them unless they threaten us.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 08:57 AM
link   
I agree with rapier28.

When USSR colapsed 15+ countryes became independant because the main nationalities in this countries we not russian. But in Taiwan 95% of population is Chinese.

I have a sugestion. Let's form a new thread about separatistic movements, their rights for independence and terrorism which is a present factor in some of them.

I bet the discusion would be very interesting, because we would hear a lot of views also from many non US members of the ATS.

[edit on 14-4-2005 by yanchek]



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 08:57 AM
link   
AMM,

So release the trade embargo then, if you are done with them.

Would you claim that Mexico is free and independent?

Cheers

BHR

[edit on 14-4-2005 by BillHicksRules]



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 09:01 AM
link   
AMM, thats not my opinion, it's the opinion of most historians. I know i will only use the Wikipedia source but i find it quite good.


wikipedia
The origins of the Korean War have long been a matter of debate. At the time, the American government believed that the communist bloc was a unified monolith, and that North Korea acted within this monolith as a pawn of the Soviet Union. In the 1960s and 1970s, the view that the war was just as much caused by western and South Korean provocation became popular. Today, with the opening of Soviet archives, the war is most often blamed on Kim Il-sung who convinced a reluctant Joseph Stalin to support the venture.


The causes of the Korean war have being pretty much mapped out. It's gone throught the usual Traditionalist, Revisionalist, and Post-Revisionalist stages of history. China had nothing to do with the war at the start, like i said, China had all it's forces prepared for a invasion of Taiwan.


wikipedia
The People's Republic of China was wary of a war in Korea. Mao Zedong was concerned that it would encourage American intervention in Asia and would destabilize the region and interfere with plans to destroy the Kuomintang forces under Chiang Kai-Shek which had retreated to Taiwan. Before Kim invaded South Korea, he sought permission from Stalin. Stalin approved of the idea of a united Korea, while saying that he could not give the go-ahead. For that Kim needed to gain Mao's approval. Kim led Mao to believe that Stalin was fully behind war against the south, while not seeking Mao's de facto approval. When Mao seemed as if he was keen on the idea, Kim attacked.



wikipedia
MacArthur was removed from command by President Harry S. Truman on April 11, 1951. The reasons for this are many, and well documented. They include MacArthur's meeting with ROC President Chiang Kai-shek in the role of a U.S. diplomat; he was also wrong at Guam when President Truman asked him specifically about Chinese troop buildup near the Korean border. Furthermore, MacArthur openly demanded nuclear attack on China, while being rude and flippant when speaking to Truman. MacArthur was succeeded by General Matthew Ridgway who managed to regroup the UN forces for an effective counter offense that managed to slowly drive back the enemy.


Macarthur was quite frankly, a bit mad, and Ridgeway was much more effective as commander. He chopped of the large but unorganized Chinese forces.


wikipedia
The Korean War also led to other long lasting effects. Until the conflict in Korea, the United States had largely abandoned the government of Chiang Kai-Shek, which had retreated to Taiwan, and had no plans to intervene against the expected invasion of Taiwan by the Communist Party of China.


So there, China lost Taiwan.

Mao was not the instigator of the Korean War, he was only reacting to a threat. AMM, are you suggesting that Macarthur would've walked up to the Yalu river and then just stop and have a chat?



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Odium
He was saying Germany owed Americam I was just displaying America owes other people and I agree if you go down the route that Countries do, every Nation probably owes another something. (I admit what the U.K. has done, or any other Nation.)


Please, let us compare the two in the context I was speaking, which was our mutual security. The US, as it is well known, aided Europe (twice) in world wars. We were largely responsable for the Allied victory in WWII. We then prceeded, for FIFTY YEARS, to protect Europe from the USSR.

Now, please explain to me whan ANY country in Europe has commited the lives (millions dead, TENS of millions in service), time (50 years), and money (TRILLIONS of dollars) in our protection.

We are not talking about who killed who, we are talking about defense.



But he uses WW2 as though America joined in on a whim and not because they had too. I'm sure most people realise, if America had gone it alone against Japan once Hitler had disposed of Britain he'd of helped his allies. It only makes sense.


Actually, Russia probably would have taken Germany by herself eventually. Germany commited something like 90% of her forces to the Eastern front.

And lets not forget, regardless, the US would have got the nuclear bomb first. At that point we win.



Also the fact, Taiwan is a lot like Cuba. What do you think America's reaction would be to China giving Cuba cheap weapons?


There is no comparing the two.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
However, more and more I see Americas effort belittled by Europeans.


- OK you see belittling (awwwwww
......and if that is the limit of your problems, jeeeez
) the rest of us might well call it simply asserting our own point of view which is markedly different.

(and lets be honest the trademark overbearing and pretty general US assumption that we'll just 'go along' because of the old ideas of US 'leadership' is probably more responsibile for any of that than anything, hmmm?)

We'll do partner, we'll even do friend but you don't have 'leadership' over us in the EU any longer.

We are not your subordinate.
If you can grasp that genuinely and properly we'll get along just fine.


How many millions of Americans died in their name?


- No this is just ignorance and revisionism gone beserk.

What "millions"?

Go check out the official US casualty figures for WW1 & 2 (even including the pacific war - should we count that as Britain et al defending American interests or does the concept of a 'shared interest' completely disappear from all of this when you want to moan, hmmmm?).

The US has not given lives in their millions to Europe's wars.


How many tens of millions since then have stood on call against the USSR?


- I see the idea of a shared interest has just go flying out the window yet again. What about our tens of millions who served protecting this shared interest too, hmmm?

Maybe you shouldn't have bothered.
Maybe we'd have
(a) seen that the supposed 'Soviet threat' was nothing of the sort and that a Europe free of US occupation and direct influence would have come together faster and deeper than actually happened or
(b) seen the Soviet Union actually dominate Europe, in which case the several decades of enormous economic benefits the USA derived from their access to the open European 'client' markets would never have happened and US economic progress, wealth and general standard of living would have been nothing like that whch happened.


How many TRILLIONS of dollars were spent in part for their defence?


- ......and just how many more "TRILLIONS of dollars" did the USA benefit from the economic situation it's open relationship with Europe generated?

What about the billions (if not trillions - "I've told you a million times do not exaggerate!") we Europeans spent defending this shared interest (much of it in America), what about the huge volume of general trade, the ex-British strategic bases around the globe and the loans etc etc, hmmmm?

Stop trying to make out it was a deal with the benefits flowing one way, it's just ridiculous, utterly absurd and actually rather pathetic.
Sorry but it is........and it's made worse by it's utter reliance on ignorance to attempt to 'stand'.
(and it's not like no-one has gone through this with you before AMM, right?)


What I don't like is this increasing attitude from Europe of "we owe you nothing" and "you didn't do that much for us".


- Naaaaa, sorry but IMO some of you guys are justy sore we are getting a tad fed up with always being expected to tow 'your line' and of being disgracefully villified for it if we have the audacity to actually exercise our supposed shared values of freedom (to say what we think and disagree).


The fact is, they have their freedom today mostly because of us.


- Rubbish.
The fact is all of our 'freedoms' exist today because of our collective security, not just because of 1 country.

It could even be argued that it was the independant British and French nuclear deterrents that maintained and guaranteed Europe's freedom more than anything.
It was once a widely asked and very fair question as to which US President would swap a nuked and incinerated New York or Washinton for Paris or London.


What SHOULD happen is for Europe to understand that when they sell these weapons, they are betraying an ally that has been through the worst of times, and has done everything in it's power to protect them.


- Yeah except the irksome little flaw in this arguement remains......the US trades far more military stuff with China than Europe does - right now.

It is Europe that has a formal and effective trade ban treaty across 25 countries.

(and before you try to pretend that the US only sells thing like rifles whereas Europe is trying to sell the very latest cutting edge stuff you might like to consider just what the US has recently sold the Chinese.

It seems that if you can call it 'civillian' it's no problem at all for you guys - have just about any and all of the latest in aero tech and computer tech it seems , hmmm?

Never mind, sell them some more 787's and another huge chunk of IBM and bitch about Europe and our imagined 'strategic sales'
)


[edit on 14-4-2005 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by BillHicksRules
AMM,

So release the trade embargo then, if you are done with them.

Would you claim that Mexico is free and independent?


No, we will not support Cuba in any way, and that includes their economy. Just because we aren't going to go blow them off the face of the earth like China is saying with Taiwan does not mean we need to condone them.

Mexicans are free to come to the US legaly if they can. Cubans are not. See the difference?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join