Griffin plays the race card... - Page 2

JonClarke · #31 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 03:56 AM

Why does it have to be a struggle for superority? Why not partnership for mutual benefit?

I really don't understand why so many people appear obsessed by China as a threat.

Most of us in the rest of the world see it as an opportunity

Jon

Ronald Brak · #32 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 04:13 AM

Definitely. It is not a prosperous, advanced China we have to fear, but a weak, backward one.

Ronald Brak · #33 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 04:35 AM

Quote:

So, that's what I'm saying. There may come a day in the not too distant future when China could challenge U.S. in-theatre air and naval superiority.

Definitely. With the world's largest population and, with luck, continued rapid economic growth such such an occurance could certainly come to pass. If China sees itself under threat some would say it would almost be a certainty. But it won't be for a quite a while even if China maintains high levels of growth. This gives many decades for the United States, China and the other nations of the world to work on peaceful cooperation with the goal of avoiding future conflict.

We have more to fear from a weak China if central government breaks down and it enters another warlord phase. One observer characterised such a possiblility as the world having two middle easts.

Quote:

My point is that the new space race to the Moon should be seen as part of a larger strategic struggle for technological superiority between the Western and Han civilizations.

Okay. So whichever "civilization" spends less on millitary and more and R&D will win, huh? Well that sounds like healthy competition instead of that cold war stuff with the nuclear missiles and the tanks and the chemical weapons and so on we had when I was a kid.

But I can't figure out which civilization I belong to. I speak English real good, but my country trades more with Asia than the West and I eat Chinese food all the time. This is a tough one.

JonClarke · #34 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 04:42 AM

I think we all belong to a global civilisation. This talk of a struggle between western and Han civilisations is just silly.

Jon

Doodler · #35 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonClarke

Why does it have to be a struggle for superority? Why not partnership for mutual benefit?

I really don't understand why so many people appear obsessed by China as a threat.

Because we don't wear rose colored glasses. Because we see in Nepal the same signs that were missed in Tibet. Because a powerful nation with the willpower to slaughter internal dissenters is likely going to have a lot less mercy for external critics. If you really don't give a damn about human rights, then I suppose China isn't much of a threat to you.

Quote:

Most of us in the rest of the world see it as an opportunity

Jon

A nation willling to exploit its citizens as an economic resource to be harvested probably does look like a sweet deal. I suppose Sudanese oil makes you drool too.

I may not be the most forgiving soul in the world, and I might think those kids in Tiannamen had it coming, but I do at least respect their courage to face those consequences. They were damned fools, but they were brave damned fools, and as an American, that strikes something of a chord. They could have walked down my street and fit right in without so much as a ripple. And quite frankly, given different circumstances, that would have been me dead in the Square.

Maybe that doesn't mean anything to you, and if so, that is human tragedy. The Chinese equivalent of George Washington probably died at Tiannamen, because too many people think peace is the only answer.

Ronald Brak · #36 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 02:10 PM

Hey Jon, did you know that my pot is really black?

Doodler · #37 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 02:22 PM

Christopher Ferro · #38 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonClarke

I think we all belong to a global civilisation. This talk of a struggle between western and Han civilisations is just silly.

Jon

Calling it silly doesn't make it go away. All the wishful thinking in the world didn't make Hitler go away. It didn't make Stalin go away. I'm all for peace, but as Doodler said, sometimes it isn't the only answer (and that's sad, but true).

CJSF

Argos · #39 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 03:46 PM

Before China is able to 'threaten' western primacy, it has to clean up the way ahead of them, as the energy, water bottlenecks, lack of innovation-friendly environment and strong institutions. Much that I hear and read about China is only a hype. I´m skeptical of their bright future.

JonClarke · #40 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Christopher Ferro

Calling it silly doesn't make it go away. All the wishful thinking in the world didn't make Hitler go away. It didn't make Stalin go away. I'm all for peace, but as Doodler said, sometimes it isn't the only answer (and that's sad, but true).

CJSF

But there is not the slightest evidence for a clash of civilisations between China and the west. There is no comparsion between present day China and Hitler or Stalin. Without that evidence it is just prejudice, based on ignorance.

Jon

JonClarke · #41 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Argos

Before China is able to 'threaten' western primacy, it has to clean up the way ahead of them, as the energy, water bottlenecks, lack of innovation-friendly environment and strong institutions. Much that I hear and read about China is only a hype. I´m skeptical of their bright future.

China, like Brazil, has enormous challenges ahead of them But their history and shows that they can meet them. Every indication is that they are. Energy bottlenecks are being met, water problems are being tacked, and as for the lack of an innovation friendly environment, their staggering economic growth indicates quite the opposite. Institutions are a work in progress, but that is ttue everywhere.

Jon

Doodler · #42 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonClarke

But there is not the slightest evidence for a clash of civilisations between China and the west. There is no comparsion between present day China and Hitler or Stalin. Without that evidence it is just prejudice, based on ignorance.

Jon

Tell yourself that, then watch those kids get rolled by the tanks, Mister Chamberlain...

Argos · #43 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonClarke

China, like Brazil, has enormous challenges ahead of them But their history and shows that they can meet them. Every indication is that they are. Energy bottlenecks are being met, water problems are being tacked, and as for the lack of an innovation friendly environment, their staggering economic growth indicates quite the opposite. Institutions are a work in progress, but that is ttue everywhere.

Jon

I respect your opinion, and agree in part. I just don´t think growth rate says too much about them. They are paying a high price for it. And what do you have to say about an innovation friendly Japan, which has ridicule growth rate [not to mention the US itself]?

China has a made a big success copying and flooding western towns streets with low-value products, but have you seen their cars?

JonClarke · #44 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 10:09 PM

Yes, I see kids getting rolled by tanks in Iraq. Does that mean I equate the US with Nazi Germany and Bush with Hitler? No, I do not. And comparing me to Chamberlin is quite wide of the mark.

The original "race" intended was a space race, but given the prejudice being displayed towards China by you and some others, I think it displays that quote a difference race card is being played. Most people in this world don't share your ignorance and prejudice towards China.

Jon

Christopher Ferro · #45 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonClarke

Yes, I see kids getting rolled by tanks in Iraq. Does that mean I equate the US with Nazi Germany and Bush with Hitler? No, I do not. And comparing me to Chamberlin is quite wide of the mark.

The original "race" intended was a space race, but given the prejudice being displayed towards China by you and some others, I think it displays that quote a difference race card is being played. Most people in this world don't share your ignorance and prejudice towards China.

Jon

My comments have nothing to do with "race", they have to do with my experiences with Chinese people I know, the books I have read, and the TV/Video commentary and coverage I have seen.

Please withdraw your insinuated remark that some of us are racists. It is made without evidence.

I agree; however, that we are getting well off topic, so I will refrain from making any further comments.

CJSF

Ronald Brak · #46 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 10:23 PM

I'm thinking of a country.
This is a country that slaughtered untold thousands of native inhabitants.
That had human slaves for almost a hundred years after they declared that all men are created equal.
That killed 3% of its own citizens and razed vast areas of land to stop seperatists.
That has engaged in wars of agression and imperialism.
That has had crony capitalism and large scale political corruption.
That has lynched members of minorities and denied them political rights.
That has violated human rights and engaged in torture.

Now if you believe that a country can't change, that it can never be trusted after performing terrible acts, then perhaps we should regard this country as our enemy. But I'm a little more forgiving. I see countries of being comprised of falible human beings who make mistakes and comprised mostly of people who just want to live their lives in peace despite often being led into foolish acts by politicians. In the absence of direct agression from this country I believe we should work with it to try to build a better future. Trying to attack or destroy this country would be foolish and dangerous and would result in tragic loss of life and suffering. I believe that we should engage in peaceful cooperation with this country and even work to stop and capture those that wish to harm it so this country will come to see the benefits of peaceful cooperation. Even if this country could be succesfully defeated it would create a dangerous unstable region full of people bent on revenge and the world would also lose a vast amount of economic power and intellectual capacity. Personally I'm willing to give peace a chance.

Christopher Ferro · #47 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 10:30 PM

... just curious, here... has anyone on this thread advocated invading and/or destroying any other country?

CJSF

OK, for real, no more posts on this matter for me... seriously you guys.

Doodler · #48 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ronald Brak

I'm thinking of a country.
This is a country that slaughtered untold thousands of native inhabitants.
That had human slaves for almost a hundred years after they declared that all men are created equal.
That killed 3% of its own citizens and razed vast areas of land to stop seperatists.
That has engaged in wars of agression and imperialism.
That has had crony capitalism and large scale political corruption.
That has lynched members of minorities and denied them political rights.
That has violated human rights and engaged in torture.

Now if you believe that a country can't change, that it can never be trusted after performing terrible acts, then perhaps we should regard this country as our enemy. But I'm a little more forgiving. I see countries of being comprised of falible human beings who make mistakes and comprised mostly of people who just want to live their lives in peace despite often being led into foolish acts by politicians. In the absence of direct agression from this country I believe we should work with it to try to build a better future. Trying to attack or destroy this country would be foolish and dangerous and would result in tragic loss of life and suffering. I believe that we should engage in peaceful cooperation with this country and even work to stop and capture those that wish to harm it so this country will come to see the benefits of peaceful cooperation. Even if this country could be succesfully defeated it would create a dangerous unstable region full of people bent on revenge and the world would also lose a vast amount of economic power and intellectual capacity. So what do you say? Are you willing to give peace a chance?

You can have your peace until its time not to be peaceful. Find your own plowshare, though.

Disinfo Agent · #49 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doodler

Its a false analogy and an unwise play to call.

I agree with Doodler's words here... though I'm not sure he does anymore.

Doodler · #50 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Disinfo Agent

I agree with Doodler's words here... though I'm not sure he does anymore.

Heh, my concerns about NASA's Moon plans are independent of my concerns with more terrestrial matters.

Like I said a few posts later, its not like anyone's in a position to be territorially ambitious up there.

Ronald Brak · #51 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 11:21 PM

Quote:

You can have your peace until its time not to be peaceful. Find your own plowshare, though.

I'm glad. Sometimes I get the impression that just because I'm against killing people for no good reason certain people think I'm in favour of being killed for no good reason.

Doodler · #52 (**permalink**) 19-March-2007, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ronald Brak

I'm glad. Sometimes I get the impression that just because I'm against killing people for no good reason certain people think I'm in favour of being killed for no good reason.

Not easy to discern the difference at times, I will admit.

Warren Platts · #53 (**permalink**) 20-March-2007, 06:20 PM

By chance, I came across the island of Okinotorishima (20°25'24.63"N 136°04'33.67"W) through Blob's USA 177 satellite re-entry thread.

At the center of the controversy is the legal international definition of "island" versus a "rock", that is important because claiming a true island gives the claiment a 200-mile radius exclusive economic zone (EEZ).

Japan says it's an island and it belongs to them.

China says, no, it is a mere rock, and thus cannot support Japan's claim to an EEZ.

"Rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone or continental shelf."

So says the treaty. So the question is, can the Moon "sustain human habitation or economic life"? If so, then an EEZ could be claimed by the first Earth state that settles the Moon.

That is why it is essential that the U.S. Congress get off their duffs and come up with some cash so the Americans can beat the Chinese back to the Moon. Otherwise, U.S. claims to sovereignity over the Moon could be eroded.

I'm not saying that the U.S. should declare the Moon to be American territory at this point in time. I'm saying the option should be in the American back pocket, should the U.S. choose to exercize it at some point in the future.

The new space race to the Moon is not just about who is the new technological superpower on the block. There are real territorial issues involved with potentially huge economic and strategic implications.

So, I applaud Mr. Griffin's playing of the space race card. Hey, it might just work.

JonClarke · #54 (**permalink**) 20-March-2007, 11:01 PM

It would be much cheaper and more civilised to develop a legislative framework that avoids such parochial chest thumping on the Moon.

Jon

Warren Platts · #55 (**permalink**) 21-March-2007, 03:25 AM

Actually, I agree.

Doodler · #56 (**permalink**) 21-March-2007, 03:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonClarke

It would be much cheaper and more civilised to develop a legislative framework that avoids such parochial chest thumping on the Moon.

Jon

Good luck enforcing it.

Warren Platts · #57 (**permalink**) 21-March-2007, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doodler

Good luck enforcing it.

An interesting point.

What would lunar warfare be like? Would there be a role for infantry? What would be more appropriate: a squad of Navy SEALs in spacesuits, or ballistic missiles launched from Earth? I would favor the Navy SEALs. There would be less destruction.

There was that other thread on whether generation ships should be armed. But what about present space ventures? Are there weapons aboard the ISS? What is the contingency plan if another astronaut completely flips out like the last one--only in orbit, instead of a Florida airport?

Doodler · #58 (**permalink**) 21-March-2007, 09:16 PM

Swords and daggers. You don't need to cause major body damage, just rupture the suit. No chemical reactions necessary.

Larry Jacks · #59 (**permalink**) 21-March-2007, 09:16 PM

There was that other thread on whether generation ships should be armed. But what about present space ventures? Are there weapons aboard the ISS? What is the contingency plan if another astronaut completely flips out like the last one--only in orbit, instead of a Florida airport?

Are there weapons on the ISS? No. It isn't as if they have to worry about being boarded.

About what to do if an astronaut flips out, it was answered on another tread here recently. Duct tape. Is there anything it can't do?

As for fighting on the moon, ballistics would be very different than on Earth. There's no air to slow down a bullet and the gravity is only 1/6th that on Earth, so bullets would travel much further. For any given range, the trajectory would be a lot flatter. As for missiles launched from the Earth, having a flight time of many hours to 4 days (depending on the velocity) kind of takes the element of surprise out of the picture. May it never come to that.

NEOWatcher · #60 (**permalink**) 21-March-2007, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry Jacks

...Duct tape. Is there anything it can't do?...

Yeah...cure warts.

According to the study I posted here.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Very subtle logic puzzle	Ken G	Science and Technology	897	22-November-2007 08:57 AM
JFK Assassination	Normandy6644	Conspiracy Theories	384	08-July-2006 08:20 AM
National Geographic and the Human Journey	Big Brother Dunk	Off-Topic Babbling	111	18-April-2006 08:06 PM
Dr. Griffin mentions Hubble rescue mission on Meet the Press	Cylinder	Space Exploration	13	30-March-2006 09:22 PM
Save the Moonbuggy Race!	ToSeek	Off-Topic Babbling	3	20-March-2006 06:01 PM