China Newspaper Says.....

page: 11
15
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by Kashai
 

I had trouble understanding what you were posting there. I know that since China has come into the modern world, they have changed in their view of peasantry to better inform and educate their people in order to compete in todays marketplace. Simply flooding the worlds markets with made in China goods form automated factories won't work forever.

Since the completion of the Three Gorges Damn project there is increased electrical power available to sell to people who need to go to school so they can earn an education in order to afford all the things all that electricity can power. They will have apartments, computers, air conditioners, and cars that need rent and payments met every month. An education secures the higher paying jobs that will get them all those "fine things" that we in the West have become enslaved to.

So yah, it is in the best interests in the near term for China to educate its people. While we are "dumbing down" our kids here in America to keep them compliant, they are pouring money into higher education for increasing numbers of Chinese students.




Education is required and free for Chinese citizens age 6 to 15 though parents must pay small fees for books and uniforms. Chinese children all get a primary and middle school public education. Each classes averages 35 students. After middle school, parents must pay for public high school though the majority of families in cities can afford the modest fees. In rural parts of China, many students stop their education at age 15.


Source



China’s rural population fell as a proportion of the nation’s total to 50.05 percent in 2010 from 81 percent in 1979, as reform fueled a more than 90-fold increase in the economy during that time. During the first three decades of Communist Party rule, that proportion declined by less than 9 percentage points from 89.36 percent in 1949.


Source

31 years ago it was 81% meaning that while there is an increase of 30%, only 31 years have past and in relation to the one child law? It presents that 2 out of 1 were adults educated only to the age of 15 for the most part.

In the United States children are required by law to attend school until the age of 16, though these are the statistics...



In 2005, the proportion of the population having finished high school and the percentage of those having earned bachelor's degrees remained at an all-time high, while the growth in both categories has slowed down over the past two decades. The vast majority of the population, 85.2%, had finished high school and nearly a quarter, 22%, had earned a Bachelor's degree. The percentage of both college and high school graduates continued to increase since 2000.[1]

Since 1983 the percentage of people graduating from high school has increased from 85% to 88%. The greatest increases in educational attainment were documented in the 1950s, 60s and 70s. In the 1950s and much of the 1960s high school graduates constituted about 50% of those considered adults (25 and above). For young adults aged between 25 and 29, the percentage of high school graduates was roughly 50% in 1950 versus 90% today.


Source












posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Trajan
 


You see the thing is these weapons are declassifed and common knowledge to anyone who is interested.

However, the United States does have classifed weapons.

Any thoughts?



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 07:21 PM
link   
The safety and security of the U.S. is only partially related to China. The other partial problem is a Socialist sitting in the Oval Office. The Department of Homeland Security has amassed 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition. Why? I believe a part of me thinks we are being sold to China under the table. Obama could be getting that much ammunition ready and staged in the U.S. so the Chinese will have plenty of lead once they invade and start confiscating guns. Now why would Obama do such a thing? Maybe we should ask ourselves why he was so desperate to shrink the U.S. military to its lowest numbers in almost 100 years. Shrinking the Navy and Army by a lot. The Chinese have more than likely told Obama " We own you're debt, now start taking people's guns". Now why all of a sudden does there need to be a ban on semi-automatic weapons? China has the ability to field a 200 million man army and they also have weapons that take 5.56 rounds. Which is what most of the 1.6 billion rounds is. Why does he want thousands of drones patrolling the skies in the U.S.? Maybe so when the Chinese invade they will easily steal our technology. What I could see happening is the weakening of the U.S. Military to the point to where a Chinese invasion is imminent. Obama will surrender to Chinese forces and the civilian will be forced to defend themselves with what little ammunition they have.



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by nuclearpete2012
 


"Now why all of a sudden does there need to be a ban on semi-automatic weapons?"

Because 20, 6 years olds ended up with as many as 11 bullets in them in a school in the United States.



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Kashai
 


A Classified Weapons System that just recently became declassified is the Hypersonic Global Strike Missile which is actually an Airfoil. One was recently lost a while back and I believe that is why it's reality became public.

This system is capable of Delivering a MASSIVE explosive payload at Hypersonic Speeds to any target in the world in very short time.

It was designed to have dual launch capabilities either from an aircraft or atop a booster rocket and be able to destroy any very large High Value Target anywhere in the world in minutes.

Such a weapon is considered Low Tech. compared with the variety of exotic Direct Energy Weapon Systems either that have been or are being developed.

Also recently a Classified Navy program came into the publics consciousness that uses a form of Water Jet to propell what can only be described as an Underwater Fighter Craft which can obtain such rediculously high speeds that a Super Secret method of creating Super Low Water resistance upon it's hull to obtain such speeds is being researched for use in other larger Navy Ships and Craft.

Of the two methods of creating such low resistance I have heard about one uses some method of Electromagnetism to allow the crafts hull to slide by Water Molecules as if they were not even there.

The other method supposedly creates a surrounding air bubble like is created for the launch of SLBM's...Submarine Launched Balistic Missiles...as the Missile has highly compressed air pumped into it's launch tube and once released the Missile is carried out of it's tube and to the surface at such a rate it actually is forced out of the water at a good height before the rocket moters ignite.

The U.S. Military has a Black Budget that is larger than most countries entire Military Budget and the ones I have spoken of are hardly Ultra-Secret as these Weapon Systems some of which are operational are so advanced and lethal that their existance will not even be disclosed to the majority of our own Military Leadership never mind our closest allies.

Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


I have head of what at the time was called a "Nuclear Shield." Essentially ICBMs coming from the Eastern Hemisphere can be be intercepted by an anti-missile system, whose warheads are actually 5 to 10 kiloton atomic bombs.

In actuality given this condition is possible (which it is), the US could effectively atomize any ICBM headed our way.

Any thoughts?



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Kashai
 


Back in the early 60's the USAF had Nuclear Tipped Air to Air Missiles that were carried by Lockheed F-104 Starfighters for use of destroying large wings of Soviet Bear Bombers as these Missiles were designed to airburst over the ocean and vaporize these large incoming number of aircraft.

The yeild was not as high as you have posted but significant none the less. The F-104 although extremely fast was very unstable with such missiles on it's very small airfoil wing.

Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 08:13 PM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 



That is essentially the idea, as a result there is no real way an ICBM, or for that matter a nuclear armed bomber group ect... can reach the United States.

Any thoughts?



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 08:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Kashai
 


Well with the development of the current SM-3 ABM/ASAT as well as the ongoing deployment of the FEL or Free Electron Laser...very soon the combination of these two systems will give the U.S. a very good and complete Missile Shield.

The FEL will eventually be deployed to such an extent that it will be near impossible by another nation with ballistic missiles to penetrate such a shield as the FEL will use highly advanced networked super computers as well as reflective targeting satellites to track and destroy anything in the air land or sea.

This very real system that is already being deployed will be capable of both defensive and offensive strikes. A Nuclear Powered FEL is capable of vaporizing a hole through 1000 feet of steel in just seconds. Split Beam targetting can vaporize a large multitude of targets at the same time and can even vaporize something as small as a 50 Cal. round.

Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 10:17 PM
link   


According to the Major General, there is no country in the world capable of constituting a military threat to the United States. "China has never sent surveillance aircraft and ships to the U.S. East Coast or West Coast, but the U.S. regularly carries out surveillance activities in the South China Sea and East China Sea." Those who know China understand that China neither wants to nor has the power to pose a threat to the U.S., Luo added. "The China threat theory is utterly absurd."]


Source

China is a developing nation that in perhaps 200 years could pose a threat to the US today. In perspective it will be no threat to the US 200 years from now.

Any thoughts?
edit on 18-1-2013 by Kashai because: Added content



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 02:37 PM
link   
Ohhh China. Where Cheaters on test get shot and killed. Where people are tossed out of their homes for Glorious peoples government to expand. See the Great firewall of china become even higher! See china try to reclaim lands that it never claimed as well. OH China. such a utopia.



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by yuppa
 


Friend, it gets much worst. Try being a Tibetan youth wanting an education in Buddhism outside the State sanctioned "Pope". Imagine having to cross a Glacier Mountain, in winter and at night, to avoid snipers in the mountain tops, who would shoot you dead if you crossed otherwise. This is how you get to where the Dali Lama lives as he has cannot live in Tibet today. The trip takes many days and God forbid you carry any more than a pocket full of wheat for food.

Imagine a riot occurs in the neighborhood you live in and when you watch the news it is never mentioned.

That is what it is like to live in China.

Any thoughts?



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Kashai
 

Thanks for the documentary. Just finished watching it.

Somewhat biased. Focused on poverty and corruption. Can find that anywhere.



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by Kashai
 

Thanks for the documentary. Just finished watching it.

Somewhat biased. Focused on poverty and corruption. Can find that anywhere.


Corruption in the Western Hemisphere can be comprehended in the context of 1 billion people. In relation to the Eastern Hemisphere, multiply that by six. China has as many people, as live in the Western Hemisphere, as a whole. This in an area approximately the size of the United States (slightly larger).

China has very real problems, considering the mean in a statistical analysis that addressed the above.

I mean take all the people that live in the Western Hempisphere into an area the size of the US and Mexico, what would life be like?

Any thoughts?

edit on 19-1-2013 by Kashai because: added content



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 08:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Kashai
 


China has very real problems, considering the mean in a statistical analysis that addressed the above.

Agreed. More along the lines of environmental impact. Read Jared Diamond's "Collapse" for a treatise on China's increasing desperate battle with their lack of respect for their environment. They will need to branch out soon to secure cleaner living space for their people.


I mean take all the people that live in the Western Hempisphere into an area the size of the US and Mexico, what would life be like?

Isn't the US Eastern Seaboard already as densely populated as China? Maybe that is a bad comparison. Difference being although Chinese struggle to come up to the "lifestyle" of the people of the "West", if that fails they can always go back to the rural farm. They may not have electricity or the internet but they do have land to grow food. Something the Eastern Seaboard in the US lacks. Something to fall back on. Look what happened during Sandy. People were stuck with no resources of their own until the Gubmint rode to the rescue. If they had to endure a year they would die. In China a bunch will die, but still have hundred millions to carry on.



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by intrptr
 


I do not think you understand the ability to provide a life for people who are 1.3 billion in numbers.In an area, that is equivalent to the size of the United States of America and Mexico?? There are 300 million people living in the United States, life despite the Hurricanes is real good. The Eastern Seaboard and by that you mean the Eastern coast is not what you think it is. Vacationing, these days on the Eastern part of the United States, can be quite an incredible experience.

I mean in the sense that it would be really fun....

This thing about numbers of people is irrelevant
edit on 19-1-2013 by Kashai because: added and modified content



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Kashai
 

I don't know where you are coming from with this then.

I must say that I enjoy the way you run a thread. When I am asked for my thoughts about some subject, I get into that more. If you aren't a teacher, you should be.

Now clarify. I brought a link that shows the over all growth in GDP and industry in China. This has to be a result of more education overall, otherwise they couldn't compete in the world market the way that they do. Their expansionism is only just begun. Call me in ten years when everyone is flocking to invest in their version of a NWO.



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 09:04 PM
link   
reply to post by intrptr
 


From my perspective 100 years might me more realistic. In 1949,50% of the population of the United States had a high school diploma. Today at least,50% of China's population essentially understands reading, writing and basic math that could include algebra, but I doubt that. 100 years from now the United States will be much more advanced, there is an issue you seem to not be taking into consideration.


In reality these persons, probably would not qualify for what in the US is afforded. To people at the age of 18 (in general) and this being a high school diploma.

The victims of Hurricane Sandy have been afforded 69 million dollars in relief, if memory serves.

Any thoughts?



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 09:05 PM
link   
Having read the article and viewed the map there is another angle that may or may not have been considered.

While the islands in question may have a large amount of natural gas that could be exploited, there is a stratigic value for the Chinese.

The value in that stratigic control over those islands will be the means to either save or further put pressure on Taiwan, to rejoin with Chinese mainland. And if it should happen then the people of Taiwan will be faced with the Chinese government on 2 sides.

It makes sense from a military point of view, that if China were to control those islands, not only would they be able to exploit the natural resources of the islands, but also put military bases there that would allow them to have a greater striking range against the island nation, a breakaway from the mainland China.



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by sdcigarpig
 


One, way of looking at it is that if someone want to take more territory, they had better look up



Any thoughts?





new topics
top topics
 
15
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join