Why is China Dithering While Cairo Burns?

[JayAtl]

............

 

[JayAtl]

.............

 

[JayAtl]

When law and order is broken down, then all sorts of criminals will be let loose. Happens in all (post-) war zones throughout the world..

It was during the time period the US was there in Iraq and is currently also in Afghanistan. The sunni- shia attacks were not done by " criminals", they were terrorists that pledged allegiance to factions like AQ and host of other designated terror groups. I think classifying them as " criminals" is a bit indigenous frankly.

 

[Developereo]

It was during the time period the US was there in Iraq and is currently also in Afghanistan. The sunni- shia attacks were not done by " criminals", they were terrorists that pledged allegiance to factions like AQ and host of other designated terror groups. I think classifying them as " criminals" is a bit indigenous frankly.

A terrorist is just a specific type of criminal. Whether one kills for money or ideology, it is a crime either way. Many terrorist and anti-terrorist acts in Afghanistan, for example, had nothing to do with the stated cause, but were simply settling business scores.

 

[JayAtl]

A terrorist is just a specific type of criminal. Whether one kills for money or ideology, it is a crime either way. Many terrorist and anti-terrorist acts in Afghanistan, for example, had nothing to do with the stated cause, but were simply settling business scores.

It is this mindset that makes the others attack you. this callous attitude of whistling past the graveyard. This is not a law enforcement issue where you deal with criminals. The .001% score settling does not supersede the 99.99% terror attacks in the name of religion ( rightly or wrong , depending on your views) and for the creation of an Islamic caliphate.

This is where the divide is between us vs you. You brush it as some criminal act vs. terrorist act. the motivations are completely different or vastly different between the two groups.

 

[ephone]

Saudi government supports egyptian government, so what? It also supports the secular U.S. government!!!

You, just like annoying flies, need get the fxxk off my comments.

I do not need a POS like you to stick around with this or that garbage that is not related to what I am commenting.

Let me tell you again: get the fxxk off.

You don't know sh* t about the middle east if you are putting Muslim Brotherhood and Hezbollah into the same category as al qaeda.

The very non secular Saudi government supports the Egyptian military against the Muslim Brotherhood.

Hezbollah is very secular in its external policies. Its religious views are only enforced on its own members who join voluntarily.

 

[Developereo]

It is this mindset that makes the others attack you. this callous attitude of whistling past the graveyard. This is not a law enforcement issue where you deal with criminals. The .001% score settling does not supersede the 99.99% terror attacks in the name of religion ( rightly or wrong , depending on your views) and for the creation of an Islamic caliphate.

This is where the divide is between us vs you. You brush it as some criminal act vs. terrorist act. the motivations are completely different or vastly different between the two groups.

Don't tax your brain too much if you don't understand the context of comments.
And no one cares for sanctimonious speeches.

 

[ephone]

After I have put such comments out again and again:
what I am against is: muslim extremists/terrorists/fundamentalists, a.k.a., syria rebels, taliban, al qaeda, hezbollah, ... these types of so-called islam terrorists...

I have no ill feeling against any moderate muslims. So you had better drop your lies.


I have no idea where the heck "WRONG" come out again? If you could not have the brain to understand what I am saying, just get the fxxk off my comments.
Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-...hering-while-cairo-burns-8.html#ixzz2cc2ffcQW

When law and order is broken down, then all sorts of criminals will be let loose. Happens in all (post-) war zones throughout the world.



WRONG.

Unfortunately for you, most people here can read standard English.

Your comments are about Muslim and Islam. Over and over.

This thread itself is testimony to your bigotry.



These bigots don't know jack about geopolitics.

All they do is vomit back whatever propaganda they swallowed wholesale from anti-Muslim web sites.

 

[JayAtl]

Don't tax your brain too much if you don't understand the context of comments.
And no one cares for sanctimonious speeches.

right. I perfectly understood your context and your propensity to always call a terrorist just a criminal, and minimize the acts and motivations thereby . perfectly understood that calling a terrorist as one = we must hate all Muslims and Islam, because I notice you come at others from that view when challenged. Carry on with the whistling.

 

[Developereo]

right. I perfectly understood your context

Good for you!

 

[gambit]

Basically China and US want different things from Middle East. US wants CONTROL in middle east because US needs petroleum to be hooked up with dollar in order to sustain its economy. China wants STABILITY in middle east because China needs middle east to be a stable supplier of petroleum and as a market for its products.

This is a petty difference. And am not saying that personally.

It is 'petty' in the sense that control often results in stability and it is one thing for China to want regional stability, it is quite another to actively work to help towards that goal since the common interest of both outsiders -- US and China -- is a dependable flow of oil to the rest of the world.

Historically, the bulk of US oil import is from the Western Hemisphere, not the ME, so you are wrong from the start. But if you want to look at this from an energy perspective, for now, China need ME regional stability far more than we do. Not just 'for now' but for the next generation as well, which includes your children and likely grandchildren. Oil exploration and exploitation of a find often last decades until the technology at that time could no longer extract the find. So how many decades do you think the current US oil boom, which quickly made US an oil exporter, will last?

Right now, if we decide to be callous and wash our hands off Egypt, which could very well cascade the instability to neighbors, and let global economics play its course which WILL spread to China given Chinese heavy dependency on oil for economic growth, China will be hurt in the long run and hurt far worse than US.

This petty difference that you tried to make to portray US as the 'bad guy' in this affair is severely shortsighted. China can 'want' ME regional stability all day long and it would not make one whit of difference. When the instability spread and China begins to feel serious economic pain, people who worked for stability, regardless of whether they succeed or not, will ask of China: 'So how does it feel to want?'

Working to assist in regional stability inevitably runs the risk of appearing to control, as in a bunch of foreigners meddling in regional affairs, but China's leadership should have the foresight and wisdom to recognize that local weak states needs moral support, from locals and outsiders, regarding their desire for regional stability and it is they who will bear the initial pain, before they could act in concert to try to stabilize the region. Merely spouting platitudes to appear 'restrained' or to impute a facade of 'objectivity' does not help. And in the event that others worked, sweated, and bled to achieve regional stability while China stands idle and contribute nothing but empty platitudes, they will see China for what China was when they and the locals were in dire need of assistance -- a parasite.

 

[Developereo]

@Wholegrain

As you have probably noticed by now, there is not much point using common sense or scholarship on this forum. 99.99% of the posts are one-liner posts with meaningless platitudes or jingoistic chest thumping.

It's less of an academic seminar and more of a frat house.

While I appreciate your scholarship, you are new here and will soon learn which posters to ignore because, in several years here and despite a high post count, these people have not contributed anything worth reading. Sometimes, you just have to roll your eyes and move on.

 

[tranquilium]

Historically, the bulk of US oil import is from the Western Hemisphere, not the ME, so you are wrong from the start.

That's not what I mean when I said US want petroleum to be hooked up with dollar. Sure, US consumes a lot of petroleum, but it is also a big country with very large reserves. No, by hooked up with dollar, I mean US needs nations in Middle East to only use US dollar as international trade medium.

It is no secret that US is running on a lot of debt and the quantitative easing measures are causing the dollar to depreciate against a lot of currencies. However, its rate of depreciate is far smaller than what it should have been. Why? Because there is a need for US dollar in international trade. This need absorbs a lot of printed dollar keeps its value up and petroleum trade is the one trade that absorbs A LOT of printed dollars.

As a result, US has spent decades keeping ME countries dependent on US dollar as trade currency. The methods vary, ranging from financial aid, supplying weapons/materials to backing certain governments, to training terrorists and outright invasion. Heck, this is the whole reason Israel is still in Middle East.

I am not really trying to portray US as the bad guy. Mostly because everything US did was looking after its own interest and China is no different on the stance. Of course, US can bring far more military power to bear than China and China is mainly sticking with economic means.

The real difference between US and China is that China is there to do business. If you are not willing, then we leave. Everything is on the table. You give and get according to your free will.

 

[gambit]

That's not what I mean when I said US want petroleum to be hooked up with dollar. Sure, US consumes a lot of petroleum, but it is also a big country with very large reserves. No, by hooked up with dollar, I mean US needs nations in Middle East to only use US dollar as international trade medium.

It is no secret that US is running on a lot of debt and the quantitative easing measures are causing the dollar to depreciate against a lot of currencies. However, its rate of depreciate is far smaller than what it should have been. Why? Because there is a need for US dollar in international trade. This need absorbs a lot of printed dollar keeps its value up and petroleum trade is the one trade that absorbs A LOT of printed dollars.

As a result, US has spent decades keeping ME countries dependent on US dollar as trade currency. The methods vary, ranging from financial aid, supplying weapons/materials to backing certain governments, to training terrorists and outright invasion. Heck, this is the whole reason Israel is still in Middle East.

I am not really trying to portray US as the bad guy. Mostly because everything US did was looking after its own interest and China is no different on the stance. Of course, US can bring far more military power to bear than China and China is mainly sticking with economic means.

The real difference between US and China is that China is there to do business. If you are not willing, then we leave. Everything is on the table. You give and get according to your free will.

This is not about US-China but about China-Egypt, as in what is China willing and going to do, not just to secure energy resources but in promoting ME regional stability to secure those energy resources. Do you think the Chinese leadership has not considered responding to calls of military assistance if it comes to that? Look at what is happening in Syria with chemical weapons being used. You can bet your next year's salary that the CCP is seriously considering military contribution.

 

[Vinod2070]

A link of separatist movements?

What about a list of large scale terrorist attacks on civilians, I.e. with more than a handful of deaths per attack?

Our friend quotes the right things many times.

Only problem is, he can't really interpret them as we have seen repeatedly...

I know English isn't your first language, so I will be charitable.

His comment was that most conflicts around the world are caused by Muslims.

Feel free to read his comments -- keep a dictionary handy if you need to.

The same identity crisis that you see over and over.

I don't see even a native English speaker use such language. Funny to see an immigrant turn more native than the natives. Though not surprising given the history here.

What you are showing is selective sampling. There are, and have been, Christian-on-Christian, Hindu-on-Hindu, Buddhist-on-Hindu, and all combinations of conflicts. For example, India alone has 67+ separatist movements, but they are all concentrated within India, so they don't seem spread out.

Good. The Zionists seem to have got a reprieve here for some reason.

And I am sure, like every good Pakistani Islamist, he can rattle off the names of the 67 outfits (most of which even we don't know of) in a heartbeat. This being a more important part of the syllabus than some other mandatory stuff at the institute.

But we can understand. Political issues with India you see!

In a thread about Egypt....