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.

 

Chinese Security Forces Swarm Tibet

page: 29
20
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by West Coast
How about, "Common knowledge."

Do you honestly think all this does not have a profound impact on the people, and environment?


None of which backs up your argument that "Much of China already is, an ecological wasteland. "





posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Witness2008
What do you mean "who knows"? the video explains it.


It gives a opinion on the issue. A value judgment. It doesn't mean that it happened the way it was reported


Here is the scenario

A group of unidentified people trying to cross the border after purposely avoiding a customs checkpoint. What do you think ANY border police will do in that situation.

They couldn't tell if they were trying to smuggle things or carrying weapons and its their job to stop them from moving out



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 11:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite

Originally posted by West Coast
No, that is the World bank discovering a error and correcting it...


Actually the World Bank study was based on 11 Chinese provinces and wasn't in depth mainly focusing on poverty reduction rates which happened to correlate with PPP figures.


Feel free to explain how you think the "previous" methods had chinas GDP PPP figures "right."



And its the world banks study which is just one opinion. The IMF and CIA give two other figures
IMF - 11,606,336
CIA - 7,043,000


The CIA figure doesn't surprise me The CIA was known for deliberately using bogus figures that stated the Soviet Union had a bigger GDP then what it really had, they did this to justify a high military expenditure, to overestimate the soviet threat. I suspect the same tactics are employed by the CIA in regards to china.

The IMF figure surprised me, I suspect you got that from wiki, which wasn't edited correctly. IMF's revised figures contradicts that assertion. IMF has downgraded its figures to around $6.90T.


Downward revisions for PPP-based GDP of two of the world's fastest-growing economies, China and India, are mainly responsible for the overall reduction of global growth estimates (see Chart 2). For 2007, China's share of global output is now estimated at 10.9 percent (down from 15.8 percent)


The $5.33T was the revised figure the World Bank came up with for 2007.


But who is right and who is wrong?. Who knows


Regardless, the revised estimates do paint a poorer china then previously thought...



And people predict that the US will hit a recession as well.


Just as well as people who predict the US wont hit a "full blown recession." (Which would slow Chinas economic growth outlook as well.)


Also, they claimed that Chinas economy would reach only 8% last year and then it reached 11.7% during the 06-07 financial year


Again, that depends on which figures you base that info off of. The IMF's, the world banks, or the CIA's?




Simple Maths.

5.33 Trill * 1.12
12 Trill * 1.03


15 years the Chinese economy will be 26.04 Trillion
15 years the American economy will be 18.15 Trillion



Errr. From what numbers are you basing those figures off of?

And this skewed logic would be in PPP, not nominal GDP.



It'll be about 11 years or 12 years before the American economy is surpassed by the Chinese one if we use a figure of 10%


Which is assuming an awful lot!..

Edited to mention, I do not trust Chinas GDP figures, I would not be surprised if the Chinese economy was smaller then the World bank is estimating.

[edit on 22-3-2008 by West Coast]



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite

None of which backs up your argument that "Much of China already is, an ecological wasteland. "



I have stated the facts, you have chosen to ignore them. China losing precious arable land (and ever growing deserts) that feeds 1.3 billion people.

Water pollution on a grand scale, plant and animal life going extinct, MASSIVE chronic health problems to the public, not just in china, but around the world, thanks in part to china industrial pollution... etc. etc. etc... I dunno about your book, but that qualifies as an ecological dump in mine.



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 11:39 PM
link   
reply to post by chinawhite
 


Well, here is further opinion. There was absolutley no opinion in the video. What was said in the video was indeed what happened. I leave you some more information on the matter.

www.hrw.org...




posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 11:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by West Coast
Feel free to explain how you think the "previous" methods had chinas GDP PPP figures "right."


I never said the previous ones were right. I actually think both of them are not accurate because of their small sample size and focus on urban areas of China



The CIA figure doesn't surprise me


Some say they did some say they didn't.


Assessments Were Gloomy

In fact, the agency's public assessments of the Soviet economy since 1980 have been uniformly gloomy, and its forecasts of political and social fallout from those economic problems appear to have been largely on the mark.

Yet outside experts have persisted in the criticism, in part because they believe that the C.I.A.'s underlying estimates of the size of the economy have been far too rosy, even if the agency's forecasts have been correct.



Regardless, the revised estimates do paint a poorer china then previously thought..


China never published those figures in the first place. I would rather a poorer China than a rich china at this stage because being a developing country has more benefits than being a developed one


Just as well as people who predict the US wont hit a "full blown recession."


Exactly. I wouldn't want the US to hit recession either. I rather development than non-development


Again, that depends on which figures you base that info off of. The IMF's, the world banks, or the CIA's?


IMF, But thats the standard figures given for that financial period



Errr. From what numbers are you basing those figures off of?


You said that China even growing at 12% would not surpass the US by 2030 and the maths clearly showing that to be improbable



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by West Coast
I have stated the facts, you have chosen to ignore them.


Everyone has doom and gloom situations


Water pollution on a grand scale, plant and animal life going extinct, MASSIVE chronic health problems to the public,


Sounds familiar.



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Witness2008
What was said in the video was indeed what happened. I leave you some more information on the matter.


What happened in the Video was border guards firing single rounds into a unidentified group of people who purposely avoided a customs checkpoint



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 11:59 PM
link   
reply to post by chinawhite
 


Why did not the military attempt to detain them instead of shooting. And why if a shot young girl attempts to get up why was she shot again? They were not running. And where is the rest of the party, the suppossed criminals?




posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 12:04 AM
link   

You said that China even growing at 12% would not surpass the US by 2030 and the maths clearly showing that to be improbable


I made a boo boo, I just realized I met Nominal GDP, not PPP terms. If the US grows by 3-3.5% a year for the next 22 years (which is a modest assumption for the US considering its history, and the fact that it is a fully developed nation) it will have a $30 trillion GDP. On the other hand, in order for china to reach same variable size, China, with an economy of $3.2 trillion in nominal (not PPP) terms, would have to grow at 12% a year for the next 22 years straight to achieve the same size...I hope that settles that "spoof."



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 12:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by West Coast
I hope that settles that "spoof."


Everyone makes mistakes. Not really a big deal




posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 12:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Witness2008
Why did not the military attempt to detain them instead of shooting.


I dont know. All we know from the Video is that the Police were shooting from one mountain top to the other. Maybe they thought the situation warranted it because they might lose track of them.

The Video is a maximum of 3 minutes and we don't know what happened before they started shooting. Its quite probable that after repeated warnings they fired a shot to shot the crowd which happened to hit one of the people


And why if a shot young girl attempts to get up why was she shot again?


Shes still trying to escape. Would you just allow someone to escape if you thought they broke the law



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 12:23 AM
link   
reply to post by chinawhite
 


So with your reasoning it is better to kill a person than to let them leave. Please tell me that the Chinese border control knows that pass well enough to possibly apprehend the refugees on the Nepal side.




posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 12:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
Everyone makes mistakes. Not really a big deal


Thanks, I do think China has a bright future, if democracy is embraced. This would help China out greatly. I do not have a problem with a rich democratic china, in fact, I support it. The more the merrier as far as I am concerned. Lifting some one billion people out of the poverty line is always a good thing. But lets look at it like it is, only a minority are experiencing "the good life" in china, while the majority slave away. I do worry about Chinas ecology, as it affects every one living on this entire planet. I think Humanity would have a great future if we all worked together, I realize that will never happen, as greed and patriotism, which causes stereotypical bigotry (as seen in the chinese video posted a few pages back) strictly prohibits a unified world..



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 12:25 AM
link   
China White has not seen the video, because if he had he would know about the Tibetan who sought refuge with the party of mountaineers.

That is how we know about the party shot at.

No surprise really.

He does not know about the treaty between Tibet- Great Britain and China in 1918 describing in detail the boundary between China and Tibet giving recognition to Tibet as a sovereign country.

He does not know that the Dalai Lama was born after the Qing (Manchu dynasty ) ended and therefore was not chosen by China's Qing Emperor.

He did not know about findings of fact by the International Committee of Jurists about Tibetan deaths between 1949 and 1979 from famine, execution, conflict and incarceration in labour camps.

He did not know about the history of Qing invasions of Tibet nor that in 1911 when Sun Yat Sen declared Tibet part of China that in fact a Qing/ Manchu army was defeated in Tibet and driven out.

Above all he had no answer to such claims except to dismiss their credibility yet has more than once admitted to not knowing the facts himself.

The longer he argues the more we realise he knows nothing.




posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Witness2008
So with your reasoning it is better to kill a person than to let them leave.


If there is a good chance of them doing some sort of criminal activity then yes they need to be apprehended



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 12:32 AM
link   
reply to post by sy.gunson
 


Glad to see you back Sy. The further I dig into the problems that China faces the more I am convinced that economic pressures may find some relief for Tibetans.




posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 12:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by sy.gunson
China White has not seen the video, because if he had he would know about the Tibetan who sought refuge with the party of mountaineers.




You can check my post history.

This video was brought up months ago. I have obviously seen the video and your entire argument is based on what the "newsman" said is which ridiculous. We are examining why they were shot at and not who they shot at which was unknown at the time.

How were they police meant to know they weren't smugglers from 2-3km away



He does not know about the treaty between Tibet- Great Britain and China in 1918 describing in detail the boundary between China and Tibet giving recognition to Tibet as a sovereign country.


And your proof is where?. Which treaty?????. Which Chinese government???


China NEVER once admitted that Tibet was a sovereign country under ANY of the Chinese governments


He does not know that the Dalai Lama was born after the Qing (Manchu dynasty ) ended and therefore was not chosen by China's Qing Emperor.


I said Chinese government NOT the Qing Dynasty. Dont try to change my wording

And I said the Dalai Lama is NORMALLY chosen by the government of China NOT always chosen by them. Thank you for making up a lie. And that is the absolute truth to that matter which isn't even a argument topic. Both Tibet and China agree that the Dalai Lama was chosen from a Goldren urn of barely balls


He did not know about findings of fact by the International Committee of Jurists about Tibetan


You didn't even know its proper name.

And I did know about that and I countered your argument stating that it was a bias source of information because its main purpose is to spread human rights


He did not know about the history of Qing invasions of Tibet nor that in 1911 when Sun Yat Sen declared Tibet part of China that in fact a Qing/ Manchu army was defeated in Tibet and driven out.


That topic was never brought up in the discussion with me and I absolutely know about.


has more than once admitted to not knowing the facts himself.



Quote me with with supposed admittance




All you can do is post propaganda and resort to name calling



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 12:40 AM
link   
reply to post by West Coast
 


China do have a grave problem in enviornmental protection. Chinese also have realised this issure seriously. So, this year Chinese government has elavated the bureau of environmental protection to a ministerial agancy to enhance the mornitoring of environment.. Chinese are makeing every effort to carry on a green development, but it needs time and coorperation... we cant see this senario that what's under blue sky is poverty.. a big dilemma.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by West Coast
I do worry about Chinas ecology, as it affects every one living on this entire planet.


I worry about that as well. But there only so little the Chinese government can do. Its almost impossible to administer such a large area effectively. The environment has become a massive issue in the last few or so years.

The issue in Chinas mind is poverty vs environment and its safe to assume that money is on the mind of most Chinese people


I think Humanity would have a great future if we all worked


I for one support internationalism



[edit on 23-3-2008 by chinawhite]



new topics




 
20
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join