Posted on 03/23/2008 7:20:23 AM PDT by RouxStir
Let me be clear for you. Tibetans are not terrorist. Islamic terorist occupy regions to the west. If China moves out of Tibet, Islamic terrorist move in. That becomes a threat to national security for China.
That is as simple as I can objectively present the issue for you. Do you consider that a valid consideration of the Chinese government? If you lived in China, would you want your govenmet to secure a region or let it be taken over by Islamic fundamentalism? I understand you first my accept my premise. If you do, then please answer the questions. Thanks.
I will self boycott the 2008 Beijing Olympics!!!
ChiComs on FR? Looks like the Robinson family needs to get out the ZOT gun out!!!!
“If China moves out of Tibet, Islamic terrorist move in. That becomes a threat to national security for China.”
Nice story, has little to do with reality though.
“That is as simple as I can objectively present the issue for you. Do you consider that a valid consideration of the Chinese government? If you lived in China, would you want your govenmet to secure a region or let it be taken over by Islamic fundamentalism?”
Is that the official party line in China now? What happened in the 1950s when China took over? Couldn’t China mind its own business back then like you are accusing the US of now? Why has China killed so many people in Tibet? Why does China forcibly sterilize Tibetan women?
Islamic terrorists have nothing to do with Tibet. Chinese terrorists are the major concern. Oh wait, state sponsored terrorism isnt really terrorism. Thats an act of war and not terrorism.
On Afganistan, it is not the current situation there that I am talking about. Perhaps I was not clear. I am talking about when the Russians were fighting the Taliban and the U.S. chose to support the Taliban against the Russians. Do you see that support of the Taliban by the U.S. as a mistake? Would it have been better to leave the Soviet Union to deal with the problem?
Peace most certainly did not break out all over the place as a result of our intervention in Afghanistan the back then. I hope that clarifies my point for you on Afghanistan.
By the way, I am not the only conservative that thinks our nation should not become involved in foreign entanglements. Can you think of a conservative that agrees with my point of view on this score. If not, you need to go back and re-read (read) U.S. constituional history.
Where have al the conservatives gone? There sure are few in this thread.
That is my question to you and you chose not to answer it. Still waiting for your answer.
Islamic terrorists have nothing to do with Tibet.
Get out a map, study it and then come back to the discussion.
P.S. You might also study FR's HTML Toolbox to get in sync with FR style and formating of posts. Specifically, quotes are not used when citing a post you are replying to. You use italics. Common form on here.
“I am talking about when the Russians were fighting the Taliban and the U.S. chose to support the Taliban against the Russians. Do you see that support of the Taliban by the U.S. as a mistake? Would it have been better to leave the Soviet Union to deal with the problem?”
Actually we didnt support the Taliban. We supported rebels who successfully resisted the Russians for several years. The Taliban grew out of a component of the rebels. The soviets suffered a tremendous loss in Afghanistan.
Afganistan is a free country and has the beginning of a democratic government. That is a tremendous victory.
And I didn’t know that being a communist qualified a person to also claim to be a conservative. I guess conservative from the aspect that the government conserves the power for itself.
Why is China in Tibet again? Why has China killed so many people there? Why does the Chinese govt forcibly sterilize Tibetan women?
I'm merely asking you if that is a consideration for China. Is it a matter of Chinese national interest? It seems one can hardly begin to understand the issue if you don't take that question into consideration. It is a quite objective question. That does not mean I am taking the Chinese party line.
I’ve been posting here for 10 years. I don’t need to be zotted because some people can not objectively look at an issue and study it.
Emotionalism is clouding what are supposed to be conservative thinking minds.
It is a conservative viewpoint that the U.S. should avoid foreign entanglements. It is one of the most conservative of principles.
Same difference. Sorry I did not have it exactly correct.
“P.S. You might also study FR’s HTML “
Lots of styles here. I assume you are posting from China now and hence the lockstep with the official party line.
Must be hard to sleep at night knowing what your employer is doing in Tibet.
Now there is. Darn kids have no respect for tradition anymore. Anything goes. Moral relativism. Geez, where did all the conservatives go?
Votes are only acceptable if the candidates are approved by the party.
“Now there is. Darn kids have no respect for tradition anymore. Anything goes. Moral relativism. Geez, where did all the conservatives go?”
I dunno, I’m guessing they didn’t go to China.
Just let us win the gymnastic gold and the chinese will be more embarrased than any of their human rights abuses.
Well, he's not wrong there..
Why? I never thought Id agree with Pelosi, but she is right. China "claims" the "province" and send the military to enforce their claim. China is wrong and her apologists, even those here on FR, are no better than the commies themselves. The forced abortion issue alone should have all of this forum against China, but its not so. What American besides Bill Clinton could be an apologist for the Communists?
Hey-did we find another one??
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.