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.

 

China launches new type of sub, American intelligence "suprised"

page: 15
0
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Devil yea they are making food for their country, but they are also very poor cuz their jobs don't pay much. 80% of Chinese people don't live in cities, that is a major weakness in my mind for the Chinese economy especially if they have 960.000 people not living in cities.

thier poor because they farm? PLEASE think outside your city mind. your not always poor if your a farmer. some famrers make more money than doctors and surgeons.
also name me one good reason why liveing in a city improves thier economy?




posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 06:07 PM
link   
In fact dense cities causes more problems than they solve. Such as polution, overcrowding, high crime rates, etc... Whats so bad about being a farmer?



posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 07:13 PM
link   
Listen noting is bad about being a farmer but it is bad when 80% of your people are farmers. Cities offer growth and expansion of technology instead of just growing crops. I have yet to see a farmer who make over 200.000 dollars a year like lawyers and surgeons.



posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Listen noting is bad about being a farmer but it is bad when 80% of your people are farmers. Cities offer growth and expansion of technology instead of just growing crops. I have yet to see a farmer who make over 200.000 dollars a year like lawyers and surgeons.

yeah ever heard of farming companies?
also cities=tech to a certain exstent yes
also they have just started getting cities and the like u really think they'll suddenly get 80% of thier population into cities?



posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Devil yea they are making food for their country, but they are also very poor cuz their jobs don't pay much. 80% of Chinese people don't live in cities, that is a major weakness in my mind for the Chinese economy especially if they have 960.000 people not living in cities.


Yes. Westpoint23, you are right. Most chinese peasant are extremely poor. Most farmers in China have only about 1/10 Acre to work on. You can see how much the land can produce, no matter how hard the farmers are working.

Lots of farmers are leaving their land to seek better opportunity in cities, especially in south -east coastal provinces of China. With more than 70% of farmers there is no shortage of workers in the forseeable future.

I think the future of Chinese farmers either to become workers in manufacture or service industry, or emigrate to other nations where land is plenty and cheap. It is the responsibility of Chinese government to provide opportunity for everyone to have a better live and to succeed. I think we are in good progress, of course also with lots of huge problems like corruption.



posted on Aug, 3 2004 @ 12:36 AM
link   
Yes zcheng china has great economic potential and it is starting to find new jobs for its farmers which is a good thing for their economy and technological advance.



posted on Aug, 5 2004 @ 04:47 AM
link   
Greetings,

Here are some interesting Links that you can read through.

www.strategypage.com...

www.defenselink.mil...

www.techcentralstation.com...

- Phil



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 06:14 AM
link   


Uhh... we are talking about Chinese tech so why are you bringing up the Iraq war? That is the strategy of war to get you enemy to deeply its forces at the wrong spot. Our tanks would have destroyed the T-72's with small or no loses, just like they did in Desert storm the US lost 4 tanks in 91 and no tank crews were killed.


Westpoint, if you read my post, I congratulated you on the deception. It worked well, so stop getting so uptight.
I didnt bring up the Iraq war, you have used it before to attempt to demonstrate the "superiority" of American forces over poorly equipped, low morale, poorly trained conscripts. Well done.......
Do you honestly believe, that in a conflict with China that you will roll over them with little or no losses? Also, why do you assume that the US will deploy 7 CBG's? They have just done an exercise to see if it was feeseable (sp?) to have that many at sea, so i doubt they will send half their carrier force i defence of Taiwan, the logistics alone for any extended period of time would seriously compromise the entire fleet.

Also, why has Taiwan the right to be independant?? Do you know the history of Taiwan? It is a part of China, always has been. It is just that the losing side in the 1949 Chinese civil war fled there. Picture if the Confederates in your civil war fled to, say, Florida. Would that give the right of Florida to form its own country? Or northern Ireland from the UK? If the US started supplying the IRA with money and weapons....oh hang on, you did!! The US is going to get itself in a serious pickle, over its refusal to butt out of anyone else's affairs, as China is anything but a paper tiger, I can assure you.

And an interesting question asked by Gooseuk.... Westpoint, how old are you? Are you actually at Westpoint? Do you even know where Westpoint is? And why do you always blow a load of hot air, without any apparent sense of reason, logic, or even attempt to backup your outrageous claims with some info.......... I await your reply (which Goose has been doing for some time now)



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
Also, why has Taiwan the right to be independant?? Do you know the history of Taiwan?


I love revisionist history. Hmmm you may need to look a little beyond 1949 Stumason for your taiwanese history lesson. This is from yet another thread about the US, Taiwan, and China. Seems to me they gave up Taiwan first. However, by your logic, we here in the states should be "The United Kingdom of America"??



Humm... First off, the Chinese government may want to give Taiwan a name and call it "its official name", but it does not make it so just because the communist state wants to. Taiwan was never really part of China....never

The original people of Taiwan are of Malay-Polynesian descent, and there are still many of them living in the mountains and forests.

There is also the Treaty of Shimonoseki in 1895 When the Chinese Imperial government gave sovereingty of Taiwan to the Japanese forever. The Taiwanese did not like being incorporated to the Japanese empire, so with the help of China they declared its independanceon May 25th 1895. This was the first independant republic in Asia, with the help of the Manchu officials.

Althou the republic of Taiwan was crushed by the Japanese shortly after, and Taiwan remained part of the Japanese empire, there were always some revolts agains the Japanese government.

The information above and much more can be found in the following link, which is a Taiwanese link.
www.taiwandc.org...




posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 06:37 AM
link   
I am merely saying that they have a very solid and legitimate claim to Taiwan. We do not have a claim to the US as we surrendered, signed a peace treaty etc etc... in effect, giving up our claim on the colonies.

The post above does look like Taiwan was granted independence, but was then conquered. Then the new Nationalist government went to war with Japan in 1936 and obviously somewhere along the lines, re took Taiwan. Then the civil war started against the communists, and the Nationalist's fled to Taiwan....

Therefore, Taiwan is a part of china

[edit on 7-8-2004 by stumason]

[edit on 7-8-2004 by stumason]

[edit on 7-8-2004 by stumason]



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 06:38 AM
link   
Anyway, that is deviating quite badly off topic.

My apologies for my part



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 12:10 PM
link   
I think I know the rationale for Chinese submarine buiding.
You see, subs are notoriously cramped for the crew. Show a Chinese peasant his quarters in the sub,and he would say, "Wow! Look at this roomy place! Much better than my apartment!"



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 12:26 PM
link   
Oh yes, I nearly forgot, but if Westpoint does ever show his face again, direct him to this link:

China's nuclear arsenal..............I think you will be surprised.

I seem to remeber him thinking China only had 20 nukes? As usual, Westy hasn't done his homework and is in serious danger of looking like a right muppet.



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Glad to be back, stumason you need to do your homework, buddy. In my post I said china has 20 ICBM's I said nothing about Chinas regular nuke bombs . The site you mentioned only talks about china's regular nukes not its ICBM's there is a big difference between the two. Rub your face cuz you just got smacked



[edit on 7-8-2004 by WestPoint23]



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by zcheng
Yes. Westpoint23, you are right. Most chinese peasant are extremely poor. Most farmers in China have only about 1/10 Acre to work on. You can see how much the land can produce, no matter how hard the farmers are working.


- I agree.

....and there is an enormous difference between what 'western' farmers can make (with the feather-bedding of subsidy) and other farmers can. This is obviously off-topic some but relevant to this little part of the discussion, no-one, neither China nor US nor Europe is going to rely on world markets entirely - for obvious strategic reasons - but the rigged international markets are a major source of world problems.


Lots of farmers are leaving their land to seek better opportunity in cities, especially in south -east coastal provinces of China. With more than 70% of farmers there is no shortage of workers in the forseeable future

I think the future of Chinese farmers either to become workers in manufacture or service industry, or emigrate to other nations where land is plenty and cheap. It is the responsibility of Chinese government to provide opportunity for everyone to have a better live and to succeed. I think we are in good progress, of course also with lots of huge problems like corruption.


- Yeah well that was 'our' experience too, why not yours?


No War between US and China, otherwise Both will be destroyed.


- damned sensible sentiments my friend.



posted on Aug, 8 2004 @ 01:50 PM
link   


It has been fifteen years since the DF-5 entered into services, during which China was under the threat of a Soviet invasion (other Chinese missiles could not reach Soviet Europe). During the period, there were no more than 30 satellites launched by Chin a. So there could be between 120 and 150 DF-5 ICBMs in the Chinese arsenal.


Didnt bother reading it did you Westy?? Tut tut, who got "smacked" now hey??



posted on Aug, 8 2004 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Damn straight I didn't read that BS I aint got time for that. Now back to the topic.


Source: Yang Zheng
16 March, 1996
National University of Singapore


You trust that source an asian student from Singapore. Sorry buddy, but I don't take that as a word from god as you do. I could write an article about the US having 50K of warheads you surely have to believe it right since you believe this other student. Unless I see multiple sources form other counters and from credible people not students in universities then I can believe it.


[edit on 8-8-2004 by WestPoint23]



posted on Aug, 8 2004 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Fair enough, then take a look at this one....

Nuclear missiles



posted on Aug, 8 2004 @ 04:56 PM
link   
Or any of these:

More Chinese nukes.....

More nukes.....

Now I think when you are quoting a number of 20 missiles, you are referring to the missiles that can hit the continental US, but there are many more nuke missiles deployed with short to mid range that can still strike US interests.



posted on Aug, 8 2004 @ 09:15 PM
link   
When I say 20 ICBMs, I mean ballistic missiles that can hit the Continental US from china. I know that china has a lot of other types of nuclear missiles but I am only concerned in the ones that are capability to reach the Continental US. What were you trying to prove by adding some of these other sites they have nothing new.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join