******* liar, show me ONE PLACE where I say Chiang Kai-Shek is something good. Once again, you show that you are incapable of arguing the truth. You are truly pitiful. Jim, you watch it too. ------------------ Bob Rainey is my hero! [This message has been edited by Administrator (edited April 16, 2001).]
10$ says the chinese newspapers says the very opposite thing. Propaganda . . amazing isn't it Rocket River ------------------
OK, I take it back, the conservatives are about to lose one. ------------------ www.swirve.com I think my w**** is dead.
Jim, I was actually enjoying reading both sides of the argument in this thread. That is until you have turned it from a debate into hapless name-calling. True, you have received some harsh and rather skeptical and sarcastic responses, but given the nature of your topic, I think that was to be expected. Stop throwing stones. You are ruining any credibility you may have had. ------------------ There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
OK, so I will take it back then. You are right. You never actually said Chiang Kai-Shek was something good. But, you didn't call him and EVIL EMPIRE either! With extreme statements like that, forgive me for assuming you like the ruling party the EVIL EMPIRE beat in a war. Like I've been saying, you want to honor a Treaty signed by the EVIL dictator in a puppet govt. The Treaty is bunk. We can let it go and save face in this world. *peace biscuit*
Jim, Calm down. You're very passionate about your stance.....as is Heypartner. As you alluded to yourself, most everyone else doesn't give a rat's ass right now. Nevertheless, you're somewhat new around here and you're losing your cool. The vast majority of the visiters to this BBS are liberal.....and strange as it may seem.....several of them are quite intelligent. Almost ALL of them though (as are some of us who don't lean to the left) are very adept at trolling for a response. Most of the remarks made in this thread have been made simply to elicit a negative response from you. Much like a cattle prod, they've been very effective. Fortunately, the two admins that carry the biggest sticks also lean somewhat to the right, so you might be granted some leeway considering the unbalance of power. Nevertheless, it's time to back off and regroup. ------------------ stop posting my damn signature
Seriously, be careful with your language or you won't get an opportunity to finish the argument. RR, you should be careful too: nothing in this thread should be taken as historical fact without some serious fact-checking. ------------------ RealGM Gafford Art Artisan Cakes
What is your point? If our plane wasn't a spy plane, then please tell me what it was doing in the area and why it had so much eletronic "spying" equipment on board? Jim, your brain-pan is seriously dripping fluid! ------------------ "Blues is a Healer" --John Lee Hooker
DAMNIT! Now all I can think about is playing a good game of Risk! Anyone... Anyone? ------------------ "I never did like that "Dr. Stupid""-Monty Burns
Jim, you said: You also don't understand that Taiwan (though we begrudgingly accept the flawed "One China Policy"), was the refuge of the rightful government of China when Mao took over the country. Taiwan's government is not the renegade, rather it is the other way around. I believe this is to what heypartner was referring when he said you supported Chiang.... You called it the "rightful governemnt" of China. Therefore, if you do not support what Chiang did, how could it be China's rightful government (considering he himself came to power through revolution)? Because Chiang was so bad, with 90% poverty, Mao was able to gather support for his revolution. Then Chiang went to Taiwan and continued to be a dictator and fight with Mao. The real point is, both of these guys are no good and neither could be called "rightful." You have called heypartner a liar very often...but what you fail to realize is that both of you have been somewhat right on the history. The last emporer was deposed by a warlord revolution early in the 20th C (although he was still allowed all of the trappings of an emperor)...then another revolt came and put him back as emperor...then another (non-Mao communist) revolution threw him out of is palace...then the Japanese reinstated him as a pupet emperor...then he was detained by the Russians and kept there for many years...then he came back to China and was kept subdued by Mao...then he died. Therefore, he was overthrown by a republic uprising, he was overthrown by communists, he was ousted by japanese and held by Russians. If you would slowdown and read (something you obviously do not do, as you completely misread my 2-line post), then you would be able to resist shouting profanity and insults. it is really not becoming and certainly does not strengthen your position. It also challenges your statemnt of you being too old for a draft, as your actions lend themselves to a much younger mentality. ------------------ Whitey will pay.
All I want to add is, though I could care less about politics, yet do I think that Jim1965 has made a better arguement than anyone here in this thread. ------------------ I am an invisible man.
Oh screw this...I don't take it back afterall...you did say Chiang was something worth honoring: bound to enforce? you make it sound like Nato.
Hey Pole, And if Jim is willing to reconcile any differences...I am not a liberal when it comes to national defense...I am a loyalist to the chain of command. I completely respect our Commander-and-Chief and all his military advisors. I think it was the falling of The Wall when I realized that I do not have enough Intelligence to have an opinion. I am completely prepared to blindly follow the opinion of any President on going to battle, just like his top Diplomats will as well. We aren't going to battle over this one...it is suicide. *peace biscuit*
Don't you think it hard to slow down when seeminly everyone in the thread is against your position? IMO, Jim1965 has handle matters well and has had lucid posts in spite of all the mayhem. ------------------ I am an invisible man.
Jim, There are rules on this BBS that include not using curse words and name calling as a response to others. We ask that, despite your passionate differences of opinion, you restrict your comments to the debate rather than the person you are debating. We have many heated debates on the BBS and we respect each other's right to his/her opinion no matter how we may disagree. We ask that you do the same. If you are unable to abide by those rules, we will have to restrict your access to the board or ban you altogether. You are new, so, no harm done, but keep in mind the rules of the BBS from here on out. Thanks.
This, also, is incorrect...as I posted earlier, Chiang established a dictatorship, therefore, this is not a great island of freedom. When he died, it continued. Again, from britannica.com: After his death in 1975 he was succeeded temporarily by Yen Chia-kan (C.K. Yen), who was in 1978 replaced by Chiang's son Chiang Ching-kuo. ------------------ Whitey will pay. [This message has been edited by rimbaud (edited April 10, 2001).]
This has been fun! Have a nice evening all. Play nice! ------------------ Everything you do, effects everything that is.
kbm, There were no posts between mine and his that were not his own. Additionally, it took longer for him to "respond to" my post than it would take to read it. He has used the most inflammatory language, therefore, I feel no sympathy. His calling me illiterate when, he himself misread my quote stripped my respect of him...but I still will not call him names and use profanity. ------------------ Whitey will pay.
Jim was doing alright in this discussion until he started with the name calling and profanity. I do have a problem with him saying "Our lazy American youth will get what they deserve (UNFORTUNATELY)." If he thinks young American men deserve to die, then he's a sad human being. ------------------ Thoughts?
Rimbaud: A democracy has never gone to war with another democracy. The Civil War of the United States is the closest thing that's happened... but that wasn't a nation-to-nation fight, as separation had not been determined. Jim: Behavior is what matters. The United States has preached self-determination for decades, yet caused or prolongued civil wars in Vietnam, Cambodia, much of South America, the Southern Sahara, the middle east... hell, the whole world. We've sat by with knowledge of assassinations. We've exploited the 3rd world for decades, taking their production and giving them an unfair exchange rate. Jim: you show that you truly know NOTHING about socialism. Marx invented both socialism and communism. He used the words interchangeably. Communism is NOT immoral. I bet you haven't even read Marx. Go read "The Fetishism of Commodities." Perhaps you might understand more. The US's policies in Asia have been extremely antagonistic. I don't blame China for being angry. We've used our control over the IMF to make it an organization that basically sets up factories for the Western Powers so that we can buy cheap VCR's at the expense of the citizens there. The IMF actually punishes humanitarianism. Cultural relativism? No, I'm simply not a nationalistic bigot. This thread is scary. Look for an enemy, and you'll find one. That's the prophecy of Realism. I try to understand other perspectives. Truth, after all, is NOT universal. A true foundation is impossible, and I recognize this. All actions are inherently subjective; to you, we might be fighting for freedom... to China, we're being culturally imperialistic hegemons. Timing: ON the question of them having 30 ICBM's... study nuclear deterrence. 30 weapons affords us a considerable second strike capability that eliminates nuclear war as a course of action for China. The US and Russia are the only countries in the world with a certain second strike capability against any foe. Don't worry about nuclear war. It will *never* happen unless some government that is inherently irrational gets control of one. That definition fits Afghanistan... maybe. But nobody else. Remember: Hussein had biological and chemical weapons in the Gulf War, but he never used them... why? Deterrence. We obliterate anyone who launches. ------------------ I would believe only in a God who could dance. - Friedrich Nietzsche Boston College - NCAA Hockey National Champions 2001
