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.

 

Why is China so supportive of Kerry?

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by zcheng

Kerry said that War should be the last option, and he will not make War of choice. I agree with him. The fact is that UN was conducting an effective search of WMD in Iraq before US invasion.


Yes, the UN was conducting an investigation. Had it found anything it would have destroyed the gravy train (oil for food) the top UN officials were riding on. The UN was never going to find anything and if they had they would have covered it up like they are doing with the oil for food scandal. You make a mistake if you think including anything about the UN will support your arguement. One nice thing about the War in Iraq is that now we know who our real friends are and who our real enemies are. The UN surely isn't our friend.



Q

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 02:54 PM
link   
Some good points made here by all.

I'd be inclined to agree that other nations would prefer to see Kerry voted in because he'd be easier to manipulate. However, besides the anti-Bushiness factor, I still don't see why the support is so strong. Surely that isn't "IT"? There's got to be something more...for example, there wouldn't have been that sizable donation to his campaign without getting something in return. Much earlier in the season, before Kerry was even nominated, he claimed that many other world governments supported getting him in office. Again, China is the main point of this thread, but he seems to be drawing support from behind the scenes all over. Is he just planning to pimp the US out to everyone?!

As far as trade is concerned, we arealready China's largest trade partner, despite a most serious trade inequity (which stems from the sad truth that while we can afford scads of their goods, they can't afford ours, despite their currency-price fixing). So...I honestly don't see how that's going to be 'improved' either.

"Tech freebies" I can see happening. No-one can really compete with us there, and that would make a powerful bargaining chip if that's what he offered.

American government needs to make choices for America, to benefit America. We need not make choices to please the UN (which wouldn't exist without us anyway), or any other country (most of whose collective backsides we've pulled out of the fire at one time or another). If this occurs, the US would no longer be in control of itself, but at the mercy of the exact same countries that everyone here (or their ancestors, at very least) left because they sucked so bad.



posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Q
Much earlier in the season, before Kerry was even nominated, he claimed that many other world governments supported getting him in office. Again, China is the main point of this thread, but he seems to be drawing support from behind the scenes all over. Is he just planning to pimp the US out to everyone?!


If I can vote, Howard Dean will be my first choice, simply because he knows that US should invade Iraq. Official death is now 850 and counting. Money is 200 billion already and 4 billion or more each month.

Second choice would Kucinici, because he will withdraw US troops from Iraq.

However, the Jewish controlled mass media trumpeted in unison for Dean as "Un-electable", and promote their choice Kerry.




As far as trade is concerned, we arealready China's largest trade partner, despite a most serious trade inequity (which stems from the sad truth that while we can afford scads of their goods, they can't afford ours, despite their currency-price fixing). So...I honestly don't see how that's going to be 'improved' either.

I have stated trade relationship is beneficial to both. Do you know Taiwan has about 30 billion US dollar surplus in trade with Mainland China.



American government needs to make choices for America, to benefit America.

Totally agree, not merely for the rich and powerful, but for all American people.


Q

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 03:46 PM
link   


If I can vote, Howard Dean will be my first choice, simply because he knows that US should invade Iraq. Official death is now 850 and counting. Money is 200 billion already and 4 billion or more each month.

Second choice would Kucinici, because he will withdraw US troops from Iraq.


I think you're a little mixed up there, champ. Neither of these are canidates.


However, the Jewish controlled mass media trumpeted in unison for Dean as "Un-electable", and promote their choice Kerry.


Did you really have to call it the "Jewish controlled mass media"? This isn't going to score you any points, zchen.


I have stated trade relationship is beneficial to both. Do you know Taiwan has about 30 billion US dollar surplus in trade with Mainland China.


True enough, there are benefits to both sides. China gets some business, and US gets some stuff for cheap. I still can't help but feel that a better arrangement could be made for both sides, however. Taiwan also doesn't trade on quite the same level as US does, either.


Totally agree, not merely for the rich and powerful, but for all American people.


I'm with you on that, zchen. So why are you supporting Kerry?



posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ambient Sound
Not getting it huh? The fact that these other countries, who have no love for the US, prefer Kerry, is enough for me to decide that he is the wrong choice.

No country will prefer to deal with George Bush rather than Kerry because it is well known that GWB will always put America first. That is the job of the President of the United States of America and I have no confidence that Kerry would do that. By the support that other countries are giving Kerry, it seems they don't think so either.



I cant agree more ever country is out for them selves. The fact that other countries want Kerry elected does not mean its the best thing for america.



posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Q
I'm with you on that, zchen. So why are you supporting Kerry?


I am really wondering why you like Bush so much, considering the enormous harm he has done to US as the World Leader, with all the blood and treasure?

What is Bush's strong points that make you so supportive of him?



posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 05:07 PM
link   
It sounds like people are saying, let's vote for Bush, since every other country thinks he's an idiot.

[edit on 11-7-2004 by curme]



posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by curme
It sounds like people are saying, let's vote for Bush, since every other country else thinks he's an idiot.


It seems that if all people say do not eat #, then American people will eat #? LOL.


Q

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 11:33 PM
link   
If you're really interested, there's a thread on precisely this subject. I have a couple of lengthy posts describing my viewpoints there.

the thread

Please note that this is a "why does anyone support this administration" thread, rather than another "please bash Bush here" thread, and has remained quite civil thus far.

If you care, perhaps someone could post up a "why would anyone support Kerry" thread?

[edit on 11-7-2004 by Q because Q didn't make the stupid link right]

[edit on 11-7-2004 by Q because Q still didn't make the stupid link right]

[edit on 11-7-2004 by Q just so Q could tell everyone he didn't make the stupid link right, but has finally fixed it]

[edit on 11-7-2004 by Q]



posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ambient Sound

Originally posted by zcheng

Kerry said that War should be the last option, and he will not make War of choice. I agree with him. The fact is that UN was conducting an effective search of WMD in Iraq before US invasion.


Yes, the UN was conducting an investigation. Had it found anything it would have destroyed the gravy train (oil for food) the top UN officials were riding on. The UN was never going to find anything and if they had they would have covered it up like they are doing with the oil for food scandal. You make a mistake if you think including anything about the UN will support your arguement. One nice thing about the War in Iraq is that now we know who our real friends are and who our real enemies are. The UN surely isn't our friend.


please do some research before you post.

A State Department summary issued on November 16, 1998, indicates that UNSCOM has supervised the
destruction of:
48 operational missiles;
14 conventional missile warheads;
six operational mobile launchers; 28 operational fixed launch pads;
32 fixed launch pads;
30 missile chemical warheads;
other missile support equipment and materials, and a variety of assembled and non-assembled supergun
components.
38,537 filled and empty chemical munitions;
90 metric tons of chemical weapons agent;
more than 3,000 metric tons of precursor chemicals;
426 pieces of chemical weapons production equipment; and,
91 pieces of related analytical instruments.
The entire Al Hakam biological weapons production facility and a variety of production equipment and
materials


Source: www.csis.org...

-koji K.

[edit on 11-7-2004 by koji_K]



posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 11:49 PM
link   
I listened to a radio broadcast of an interview with a contractor working for a company providing security in Iraq for people blowing up Saddams weapons. He said that it would take at least 2 years to blow it all up. He also said that they were not inventoring all of the stuff because alot of it was unstable so they were just blowing it in place and that they were probably blowing up wmd without knowing it was even there.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join