Wrong. If an Asian robs another Asian, a white man can speak up or even intervene.
If an Asian country invades another Asian country, like how Imperial Japan invaded China and occupied Manchuria, guess who intervened and saved China from an even worse fate ?
No that analogy is silly. First of all you're confusing internet discourse with tangible situations.
For instance, in a discussion, someone from Brazil has no business dictating that their opinion is the truth on this very issue, and that everybody should listen to him. They should be discussing their own national issues like gang crime and drugs in Brazil, because they are going to be more knowledgeable and might even have experience on such issues. It's not their place to act like some self-righteous arbiter on something that doesn't even have anything to do with them. Yes they can comment if they want, but nobody is really going to take them seriously because they are not even from either country in the topic (China or Vietnam), or have any relation to those countries by ethnicity, heritage or identity.
By contrast, in a tangible situation, if you see someone who got punched in the face, you can intervene. It's not like "oh, this man is German, I am not German so I should not intervene". I think you are easily confused.
Never mind the absurdity of your argument, I am Vietnamese.
Well since you didn't put a Vietnam flag I thought you were just some self-righteous pompous "me me me" White American deciding for other ethnicities what the "truth of the matter" is, and that's a common theme when a White interacts with a non-White.
Good...So what we are seeing from the Chinese is that the rich have the right to abuse the poor simply because there are poor people.
Gambit your reasoning skills are poor. Whether Chinese or Vietnamese, rich people in those countries tend to mistreat people that are poorer than them. Workers in both those countries have much less rights than in the West, and are often taken advantage of. Like many people have already established, those kidnappers are most likely Vietnamese. The fact you seem to be pinning complete blame on the Chinese shows how selfish and petty-minded you are.
Of course the Chinese men shares the blame. They offered money, then they reap the rewards of someone else's criminality. No one forced these Chinese men to buy women, right ?
Like I said, the fact you seem to be emphasising and exaggerating the Chinese, while ignoring the Vietnamese on this issue is astoundingly repugnant; when in fact the legal burden is on the kidnappers. It shows how selfish and petty-minded you are. I'm surprised if anybody takes anything you post seriously since you're so childish and petty in your thinking. You have these dangerous biases that cloud your judgement.
Wrong. I am, and have been, saying both parties are with EQUAL moral guilt and should be of EQUAL legal penalties. It is you guys who have been trying to downplay the immoralities of the Chinese men who bought these abducted women.
In this thread, it was done by equating drug deals between consenting adults, never mind there is a 3rd party who is the real victim. Then it was about non-Asians should not speak of Asian issues, which is racist in its face.
While they might have been "
downplaying" any immoralities of the Chinese husbands, you have been
completely ignoring the immoralities of the Vietnamese kidnappers.
In internet China, Chinese under rule of CPC, Chinese can openly sell Vietnamese women . This new is reported by media in Vietnam.
dichoi you should be wary of believing any Vietnamese news websites. I find that a lot of Vietnamese news websites are lowbrow: sensationalist and attention whoring exaggerations. They never do their research properly.
