Discussion » Nonsense » Why can't Chinese people lead a more affluent 安

  • wrote:
    http://www.tudou.com/programs/view/ZVcIZGHXgS0
  • wrote:
    Why can't Chinese people and Indian people lead a more affluent and decent life?
    That's their human rights and reasonable appeal.

  • wrote:
    喜欢给我发信讲人权民主的,看一下这个,中国人怎么就不能富裕生活了?天天鬼扯的民主自由人权去哪里了?这种嘴脸还有人相信,是不是怀疑自己的脑袋进水了。
    美国人和发达国家的人民可以随意浪费资源,消耗资源,别的发展中国家就不行,赤裸裸的无耻嘴脸,而且背后的意思就是不准别的国家发展和提升。
    ============================
    http://www.gzfz.org/art/110_9656.html
    奥巴马终于说漏嘴了:10多亿中国人如果富裕起来会让全世界陷入悲惨的境地奥巴马在访问澳大利亚前,在白宫接受澳大利亚电视采访时,针对中国的迅速发展,终于把美国人的真实想法说出来了。

    奥巴马通过电视镜头向全世界明确宣布:如果10多亿中国人口也过上与美国和澳大利亚同样的生活,那将是人类的悲剧和灾难,地球根本承受不了,全世界将陷入非常悲惨的境地。

    美国并不想限制中国的发展,但中国在发展的时候要承担起国际上的责任。中国人要富裕起来可以,但中国领导人应该想出一个新模式,不要让地球无法承担。
  • wrote:
    Astaroth,

    Long time no see you, and didn't see your post for long time.
    Watch that video and know the ugly side of your president.
  • anita sønsterud
    我无可奈何了
  • Kodi
    Kodi wrote:
    It takes time.............
  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    Sun,
    This is ugly?

    I appreciate Obama for his no-nonsense pragmatism. What he's saying is that economic development must be sustainable, and I think there's certainly an implication that Western countries absolutely must change their own patterns of consumption in order to avoid the appearance of hypocrisy. Obama has used China as a positive example of green development on several occasions. He can't always come out and say this because it would make him vulnerable to attacks from his domestic political enemies.

    Besides, I've heard you and other Chinese nationalists confess that China has exceptional population issues. Why does your asshole pucker up when Barry mentions it?

    This was far less condescending than the video you posted previously where he said Chinese industrial capacity is a century behind that of the US.
  • Jens Jensen Pettersen
    I really hate American talking about China and Chinese talking about US....

    Both are laughable to death....I &*&^%.....#@__
  • Minger
    Minger wrote:
    Sun,
    I didn't check your links, but based on the excerpt you posted I agree completely with what Obama said. Your summary of it was incorrect however. Obama didn't say that it's ok for Australians and Americans to waste any resources, he just said that the world would collapse completely if China was to waste resources at the same rate as those other countries.

    As Dando said, the meaning of Obama's statement is that Americans and Australians have to reduce their consumption. It is not that Chinese and Indians shouldn't be allowed to have nice things, as you and this article are claiming. It isn't a news article so much as it is Fox News / National Enquirer crap designed to stir up readers, and we maybe we shouldn't be legitimizing it by discussing it, but that's besides the point.

    Obama's hopes that China and India develop smarter or greener than the US aren't selfishness, but that's an issue for another thread perhaps. Hoping that others can learn from our monumental mistakes isn't hypocrisy.


    "终于把美国人的真实想法说出来了"
    Please remember that America is a heterogeneous country. The reporting source is a shitty, shitty source that should be treated as Fox News or any other tabloid, not as news. Obama cannot tell you "American people's opinion" of anything any more than Sarkozy can tell you the French people's opinion of something, or Ma can tell you the Taiwanese people's opinion of something. They are all heterogeneous countries (or autonomous governmental bodies that don't call themselves countries in order to make China happy) and their people have differing opinions. Obama speaks for himself or as a representative of his party or national policy, he does not tell you the opinion of each and every American.
  • Minger
    Minger wrote:
    I believe I previously saw posted in one of these online forums something along the lines of "I wish I didn't learn Chinese, because now I know what they're saying."

    On the other hand, I could say the same thing about English here lately.
  • Deer One
    Deer One wrote:
    I have grazed on every continent, and my experience has been handed-down by many generations within the herd! To answer your question, one needs to recognize the positive influences of:

    the French Revolution
    the American Revolution
    the Industrial Revolution
    the Velvet Revolution
    the People's Revolution
    the 60's Revolutions (in which they're were a no.)
    the Green Revolution (recent)

    All of the above, have influenced the West in the development of a more "sophisticated" (a relative term, I agree) society!

    Now, name a "Revolution" that occurred in the East that resulted in a similar philosophical transformation of society!

    To put it quite simply, it is the "Evolution of Culture" that determines a society's affluency!

    But to start you off, I recommend you read, "Guns, Germs and Steel", and the "Geography of Thought", first!
  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    Get me a gun. It's open season on ethnocentric postmodernists.

    In America, a lot of those revolutions from the 1960s failed and/or threw us into a cultural backlash. You want examples? Listen to lonely, bitter old white men bitching about women's liberation and affirmative action. You think culture will save us when the baby boomers liquidate all the social programs and institutions built since the New Deal? Fuck philosophy and ideology. That shit is flaccid. Marx just rolled over in his grave.

    Do you even know what was happening here in China during in the 60s?
  • Deer One
    Deer One wrote:
    Yes I do know what was happening in the 60's in China, I was here and you weren't even born yet! The 60's in China was starvation (80million people died), political strife (gov't. purges that led to imprisonment), the "Great Leap Forward" led to 10 steps backward in GDP, the slaughter of intellectuals, society turning in on itself (neighbours and even family members turning each other over to mob justice)! Sorry Dando but you can't rewrite history! Yes Dando, you should get a gun, and put it right up to that soft little spot called the "temple", because there's nothing in there worth wasting! Never mind Marx rolling over, Li Peng is smiling at you!
  • Deer One
    Deer One wrote:
    Oh, and by the way Dando, as a so-called "language" person you should not use the adjective "flaccid" as a noun!
  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    Now, name a "Revolution" that occurred in the East that resulted in a similar philosophical transformation of society!

    So then it looks like you just answered your own question. "Evolution of culture," ideology, and philosophy didn't save anyone from the Cultural Revolution. Societies require institutional development to sustain social change.
  • Deer One
    Deer One wrote:
    Sorry Dando, but you just don't get it, do you! All cultures, all societies, are based on philosophical thought! Think of it this way, you first need to have an idea, before that idea can be put into practice. That philosophical thought is then translated into that society's organizational processes, ie; governance, laws, social mores, etc. etc! A society's "institutional development" is a resultant effect of that society's philosophical underpinings! A certain ideology resulted in the Cultural Revolution, and as history has shown, it was a flawed philosophy! All cultures evolve, but the way in which it evolves, is dependant on that culture's philosophical foundations! Whether that change is deemed to be positive, or not, is for history to decide!
  • A豆腐
    A豆腐 wrote:
    Philosophy implies critical thought, if you read something of Plato, Aristotle... you can see that they are critize their own societies, the goverment of Athenas (in the way of tyranny or democracy) always hated philosophers. In fact, these philosophers were always fighting with rethorical and demagogues (Gorgias, Hipias....). This is a fact that you can notice reading the books of these philosophers
    Of course, when the philosophy began to be a kind of ¨job¨ in the universities (or other weird places like, monasteries (theology) or in salons of the bourgeoisie S.XVIII before the French Revolution), then the philosophy began to have the serious danger to become in ideology.

    quote- All cultures, all societies, are based on philosophical thought!

    Should be, but it isn´t the case. Philosophy needs freedom and free speech, without these thing, how persons can begin to be critical with the situation of their goverments, culture, way of life, with the status quo. All goverment has a inertia, a conatus, to be alive. True philosophy and goverments never have had a good relation. Many philosophers killed and burned for heretics in the history, or simply, hated, marginalized, bla bla....
    support the ideology of one society, doings pretty discourses and ¨building¨ arguments for the status quo, always is profitable for philosophers, look Jürgen Habermas...

    about 1949, well, what happen if we use a continuity thought, all things change in one day??? In this time chinese Nationalists and Comunists are huge groups, under their flags many groups and classes, under the comunist flag: bureaucrats, middle and petty bourgeoisie, peasants, workers....
    many different interests, what happened in 60´s here??? only the battle between them. Ideas in this kind of situations are costumes for interests of classes.

    when I look at the history in the plane of ideas, I don´t undertand nothing, seems a strange thing written by fools. In fact, read this way of do history, is that read a novel, there are bad guys, good guys, destination, traitions, miracles.......
    when I look at the history in the plane of social and economic relations, then many things are clear.

    way of life (weltanschauung)/ ideology/ philosophy

    Hegel vs Marx
  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    Oh dear. Why are you yelling? Are you hard of hearing, besides senile?

    If that were so, America and other "capitalist" countries would have totally free market economies, China would be a classless egalitarian state, and developing countries would just have a liberal arts education standing between them and parity with the developed world.

    Oh my stars and garters! Isn't it the young fellows like me who are supposed to be so naively idealistic?
  • Deer One
    Deer One wrote:
    That's it, time to go out grazing, and contemplate the mediocrity of the human species!

    As for you China, my rough calculations give you 200 more years to attain some sort of "sophistication", a hundred years before the "World Parliament" takes over!
  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    A civilization with 5000 years of written history isn't "sophisticated" enough for you?

    GTFO before I mount your head on my wall.
  • ****
    **** wrote:
    well it's not because a religion is old that it is the most avanced!

    Dando stop being so stubborn and think for a while.

    -China had 5000 years to grow but it didn't because of the philosophy of chinese peopple which wasn't craving for developpemnt as europe did.

    China had many wars but mostly intern wars and the countries around china weren't much of a great threat.

    but in europe there were many small countries so always fighting and always trying to be the best to defend itself so they developped much faster

    the result is that europe in 2000 years was 10 times more developped than Asia in 5000 years

    then when China was able to get technologies because of european countries coming in China, china developped in 50 years a lot faster than it did in 5000 years.

    so you see it's not about how old the country is but how much is his will to developped
  • Da Fan
    Da Fan wrote:
    learn some history first -- middle school level is quite enough for u~

    Europe...umm...hahaha
  • ****
    **** wrote:
    well maybe you should be the one learning history, you know it's finish the time when you thought that there was china as center of the world and then only barbarian tribes all around when at that times thousand of kilometers away there was many countries 10 times more developped and who knows they weren't alone, send people to discover the world and who were the first to make contact with China.

    how about that level for you?

    if you want to teach me a lesson then at least makes you point if not then what the point of telling someone he is wrong if you don't show why. if you do that just because i hurt you national proud then maybe you should learn yourself and become more humble.

    by the way just watch this movie: ''the 55 days of Beijing''

    it'll show you how a few with superior technology can held back a overwhelming superior number but fighting with knives

    it was like that back then and it's still like that

    because right now i'm the one giving you a lesson
  • Da Fan
    Da Fan wrote:
    Wowwowwow~~I "thought that there was china as center of the world and then only barbarian tribes all around"? I ever said this? where? When? Are you daydreaming? That's how you guessing other's idea?

    there are tons of materials that reflect how technologically and politically dragged behind during the recent 200 years, how abt speak out sth you think I don't know? hahaha.

    "China had many wars but mostly intern wars and the countries around china weren't much of a great threat."

    -- 1): learn sth more about Chinese history on "external threat", maybe just ask some westerner in Beijing will be quite enough for you; 2): even if it's true, and your arguement is to build a logical relationship between how a country are threatened by external force and how fast it is of its development, then, two question: one-China is severely threatened by external forces during the recent 200 years, then? and two-the US has never been severely threatened by external forces (don't tell me the WWII...) why it seems that the US is more technologically advanced than you europe? 3), the europe was in a mess of wars between countries, but for the most part of the time span, eg. AD - AD 1500, no matter economic aggregate, or technology, the whole europe is nothing compared with China during that time span, why? don't tell me your "external threaten theory" do need sometime to show it's effects;) and 4) were you comparing China, the nation, with the continent called Europe? wow, then "China had many wars but mostly intern wars" and "in europe there were many small countries so always fighting", that's how you do "comparison"?

    OK, I'll stop this, maybe it's tooo much for you. OK, if you wanna continue, make your points clearer, like what VS what, when, point A, point B, rationale...I don't mean to make point, my point here is: what you said is funny, that's it, and I gonna prove it if you are interested in :)

    I'm not gonna give you a lesson boy~
  • ****
    **** wrote:
    i'm gonna make it clearer for you child

    first i never said that the whole center of the world was you saying, it's much important than you, it's what every people in China were thinking before the first european came in China, and it's true i read it from a trustfull sources.

    so i'm gonna answer your two question:

    first about China: well before, the mongols warriors from north have been a really great threat, there even been a mongol emperor in china and he make a lot of progress for China and it's true.
    the japanese weren't a big threat because of the sea to cross. and as for Korea well they have always been between china and japan.

    so the big threat for China was when the foreigners came china start realize that it was well behind in the world and then with the second world war and all the suffering of the chinese people they definetly understand thet they needed to catch up their gaps if they wanted to be able to protect themselves...wait i think i just anwer both questions with this answer( yes that's prove that war as a effect on devellopment and no it didn't took time for china after the war just 50 years later they catch a lot back).
    about US they had a threat they had to fight against british empire in order to win independance and they almost get wipe out for it, then there was the seccesions war between north and south and then the second worl war.
    so resume: americans are from every corner of europe so all the technologies put together make a siuper one, then in world war two all countries borrowed money from US so they got a lot richer after the war and all brilliant scientist in the warld fled to america so have all the means to be a superpower, again because of war.

    if you take time to think in all history, each time there was a great war, the countries developped just after, it's a fact the world change after every major conflict.

    well i said europe because it was the case for every country and i didn't wanted ti have to write every name but if is easier for you, i'll do it.

    let's take france, france is a great power that was place next to other great powers(spain, italy, germany, england), so ther were all in conflicts and they all get developped very fast and at that time france has always been more developped and stronger than China and it's still the same even if the economic development in china is bigger than france that's because china has a lot to catch back.

    voila, i answer alls your questions and proves my point and for the record it was easy, it can't be too much for me because obviously i know moe about global history than you think and my analyse is stronger despise what you can say about it.

    and what is that you don't mean to make a point, i thought you just tried and failed :let's say you trieed to make one, (i applause) that's your point!? ''is funny'' ''gonna prove it'' well i'm still waiting what don't you just do it.

    oh you don't know what to say anymore that's why well i can understand, learn a lot more then come back trying to make your point. for now you are not worth it
  • Da Fan
    Da Fan wrote:
    Lovely Mr. Raysse said: "well maybe YOU should be the one learning history, YOU know it's finish the time when you thought", then you were responding to what I said right? so here YOU refers to me right? But then you said: "i never said that the whole center of the world was you saying, it's much important than you, it's what every people in China were thinking before the first european came in China", here u explaint that YOU didn't refer ME, but Chinese ALL guys around 1900...Orz, hahah

    Mongolia warrior? that's all you know? every heard of Hun? Turkic? ohh of coz know, those stories happened before you got a "history", pity~ Japs is not a real threat to China? Well, are you French? do you consider German were a real threat to you during the WWII? NO? coz they were more than a "threat" coz you got fully occupied? sigh...and if "China got little threat in history" is true, why? coz there were no big forces around, or coz China were so powerful in the past? check out the story of West Turkic abt how they were beaten by Tang Dynasty, and how they changed the history of Europe:)

    As for the US part, umm, you consider US vs British Empior means at that time the BE was a big thread to the US? hey man, there is no US that time, it was their "Independent War" OK? then what happend? US civil war? hahaha, you said "China had many wars but mostly internal wars", do you mean that the US civil war is not their "internal war"? OK, let's continue, WWII to Yankees? do you mean that Japs and Nazies were big threat to the US during the WWII, while said that Japs IS NOT A BIG THREAT to China during WWII, are you kidding me? For your USA part, tell those to a US friends, see what they will think, haha.

    You said Europe coz it was the case for EVERY country of it?? hilarious...btw, why don't you mention Russia? a typical Europe country, why don't you mention Liechtenstein? coz you never heard of it? sorry, my bad of conducting evil guessing~

    Let's take France, you said "that time", WHEN? Since when France began to use France as the name of a country? During the time of Macedonia? Rome? Holy Rome Empire? Arab Empire? Hey man, before using the word "Europe", ask some fellows from German, GB, Italy, Spain, Countries of Scandinavia, Countries of Balkan, Russia, Former CCCP countries, etc. to see whether they really wanna be called as they are with the same group with you under your specific circumstance~~

    "i answer alls your questions and proves my point and for the record it was easy, it can't be too much for me because obviously i know moe about global history than you think and my analyse is stronger despise what you can say about it."

    -- Hey man, I think you can simply replace this paragraph with "Hey, see, I AM right, you are wrong, coz I know more than you, and "I know more than you" is a anxiom that do not need to prove. You are wrong coz you cannnot be right". It will express your idea more clearer and make no difference of meaning, hehe. Hey that's how you debate?

    OH, I said sooo much, do you know why? coz I think IT IS WORTH OF IT to play with you, so I WROTE SOOO MUCH. If you think I'm not worth of it, ummm, good, then you can wrote shorrrrrrrrrrter to prove that you really think so :D

    Sigh, I know you come from France before I realized Raysse is a Frence name...Sigh, my fault, I always try to avoid label a group of people by their gender, nationality, race, religion...Listen, baby infant, what I said is directly towads U, esp. what U'VE SAID, not to ALL FRENCH. However, you did damage the "national pride" of your country, added some more "sour grapes" impression to you country's image... I feel really regret to your country pals. (leave eroupeans from other countries alone, OK?)
  • Yuki Inés
    Yuki Inés wrote:
    惊叹一下,某国人的智商和见识。。。。。
  • Da Fan
    Da Fan wrote:
    唉,说不定人家是好心呢,一心想这要去建议我们的傻逼ZF,好好发展军备,来日入侵欧洲,好把丫打回神圣罗马帝国时代去意淫,天朝也好通过"great war"来实现大发展,哈哈哈。

    就知道丫是法国人...真替一些法国朋友害臊。那点儿狗屁小心理,无聊不无聊啊~
  • Petter Meisfjordskar
    Mwena Muli mpuuta.
  • ****
    **** wrote:
    well first for the record, i haven't label anyone when i talk about your pride is yours as you did and i respect that my clash is with you and not chinese people.

    so first ''you in english is the same when you talk of one or many people so when i say you i was translating from french wich mean it is not yourselves for sure at that time i was talking about chinese people at that time of history.
    but it's makes me tired of writing so much but because you made the effort i will also do it and try to make my point clearer.

    i talk about Mongols because there were the only one that actually were able to make one of them emperor of China and who was able to make himself accapted (or acceptable for the time being if you prefer) to chinese people.
    when i talk about japan it was before the WWII, either way i would have precise like i'm sure i did.Because of course at the time of WWII i know japan and germany were a threat to the whole world including US! how can you say i don't think japan and germany was a threat!
    and for the occupation: france was occupied but not fully at he beginning and the french didn't gave up, the rmain of the army and the people who fled went to north africa and englan d and kept fighting, since they have been in every major conflict, they are the ones who facilitates the arrival of the allied forces in north west of france, they also been in the pacific to help fightings against the jap.about china well let's say that in the same time japan and germany invades the same amount of places, but of course china is bigger than france and it is one advantage you cannot denied.

    I don't talk about Russia because there are not totally europe, they also have a connections with asia(for the record before accepting russia there were a lot of talk between the european countries over wether or not they should accept russia as a european country like they are doing now for turkish because they too have a part in europe but also in middle east, so both are not a good exemple)

    do you wanna make me laugh, liechtenstein! it wasn't a country before very recently, it has been for very long a province in germany and their leader was called a prince or duke never king because it wasn't recognize as a country.

    About france it is my mistake i should have precise which time, i'm talking of 1700 and after at that time were the greatest wars and the greatest discovery in europe because all countries were very developped and powerful, that was the golden age of europe. so yes i'm entitled to call it france.
    about the roman empire well it was called Gaule at that time then roman mixed with gaule and they were called Gallo-Romans, then at the time of the great barbarians invasions, the Francs, people from est germany came in france mixed with the Galloromans, by the way the name of france come from the name of the last people to establish there, what about China(Zhonguo) it doesn't have the name of the people that live there, you don't call your country Tang country or Ming, Zhou,Wei,Qin,Qin.so you cannot compare in that case.
    i do think russian wants to be called russians,germans(germans and same for the other.but how convenient for China to call itself the middle country, a way to make all the ethnic people happy, you cannot call it tang without making the other unhappy, however in france there is only french and germans germans.....so your point is going down as all the others you made.

    we can continue this talk forever it will never end it's like religion,i don't mind it is actually a lot more interesting than the talks in all the others discussion i realy appreciate it

    "LABEL","callsign" or whatever, why are you bringing up, again,a other thing i haven't mention, to protect yourself again,

    i've talked about me and you, and when i talked about others it was in the context which is right.
    so once again your falling rigt into the water and you
  • ****
    **** wrote:
    oh i forgot about US:

    one thing you seems not to be aware of:at the beginning of the fight with BE, the americans people created a governement with a flag and they called themselves american so it was a country to country war!and i said "China had many wars but mostly internal wars", which means i talk about both so i'm also right when i talk about US civil war.

    i never said japan wasn't a big threat to china in WWII!!!!!!!! i actually didn't precise the time because when i talk about WWII i precise it if you read agai so i said again japan wasn't a big threat to china before the WWII, better like that do you get it? god i have to tell him everything like a child!
    i thougt you were mature enough to understand by yourself, how can everybody not think that japan wasn't a threat to the world and by the way japan was indeed a threat to US because they attack first and with a single blow they destroyed most of the US navy in the pacific as germany was a threat also because they would have take on american after the rest of the world that's why american went in war because they didn't wanted to face germany and japan alone so they went to war before it was too late, don't you think that you can call that a threat?!!!!
    i hope you got it this time, by the way i can see i angered you, it sweat in your writting, why so much frustration?, i saw that also in your other discussion on other topics, why so angry?, i actually enjoy this conversation, you know anger blinds you, maybe if you are more calm you can makes a point work because until now it didn't

    back to you
  • ****
    **** wrote:
    oh by the way i got what you said to yuki sumire, i have good intentions i making point of real facts, i'm not tring to make fun of someone or somepeople, i did enjoy our conversation because i love history and sometimes i sound like a fanatic and if you have more points to make i'll be happy to go up against if i think there wrong, i like nothing more than a good history debate
  • Da Fan
    Da Fan wrote:
    Yawn...it's too late, man. gonna sleep, there are still many flaws in what you said, not only logical flaws, but also inaccurate "facts" or "grounds". OK, to save time I'll only point out three: 1) "I talk about Mongols because there were the only one that actually were able to make one of them emperor of China and who was able to make himself accapted (or acceptable for the time being if you prefer) to chinese people." -- I can tell you at least three more; 2) "liechtenstein! it wasn't a country before very recently" -- it was a sovereignty since 1800; 3) Gaule is not a name of a country, so does other name you can mention, France is not France until around 1700. China is a COUNTRY since 4000 years ago, Tang and Ming are titles of a reigning dynasty.

    open a thread like "Is Russian a european country?" see how ppl will reply~

    open another thread like "Who saved France from the occupation of Nazis?" see how ppl will reply:)

    Free your heart from anger, hatred, sour grapes and other kinds of complex, man. Everyone on this forum got eyes, they can see who's sweating, thrilling and frustrated, hehehe...

    唉,哥们儿,省省吧,不够档次~ 很多问题你甚至不该来跟我说,你该去找个美国兄弟聊聊,看他会不会把你鄙视死...

    I think I've said quite enough, so I won't reply until I think "wow, finally this kids got something make sense this time", or you just wanna play some personal attack. It's of great fun to play with you~

    睡了 gonna sleep. Good night:)
  • Yuki Inés
    Yuki Inés wrote:
    ha, Alban,wish u good appetite in the debate then. Unfortunately I really don't like debate in a knowledge asymmetric plantform.
    In this case, I prefer read some pages from Tocqueville, more fun, critical and helpful for a 'kid' like me.

    樊哥你就洗洗睡去吧~ 浪费脑细胞,孺子也不可教。

  • Joakim Berg Solum
    @Da Fan: open another thread like "Who saved France from the occupation of Nazis?" see how ppl will reply:)


    Fuck. Obviously, America is the main reason why French people aren't speaking German and why Chinese people aren't speaking Japanese. Show some respect! hahaha
  • ****
    **** wrote:
    no man you still awake!! well you can only be a good guy

    well why don't you point the other three you can name?!!! until then your arguments isn't worth anything.
    about liechtenstein i have to say that you got me on this one(even if your mistake about france makes me wonder if you also right for liechtenstein,anyway this one is useless so i let it go) however it never been a superpower it was a regional power even if it was a sovereignty, you know this word is used for all minor places that because of many points couldn't be called a real country or being included in a other one, instead it's merely like corsica and basques people(border between france and spain)have been wanted to be since hundreds of years or monaco in france, you know it is a sovereignty but still a part of france.
    about Gaule it was the name of the country from the beople living there what other name do you think it has?it like germany who were hompe of german, helvetie who was home of the helvete people(switzerland now)or brittain home of brittons.
    about france!!!! my god how can you come talk to me and make a mistake like that. really i have to stop you here, this just screwed your credibility!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    the first emperor of france(charlemagne, or karl magnus) was crowned emperor of France 800 after Jesus Christ, the name Gaule became France when the francs one of the barbarian invasion put their home in france which is around 500 af J.C but it is really in 800 that France take the name.

    you will learn than a lot of country got their name from the people or the disnaty.
    and it's not only the name of a dynasty but also of people, exemple the majority of chinese people are Han which was a dynasty and their also wei people in china which was also a dynasty and others so the point is very discutable.

    well what about opening a thread about russia, should i trust what most of WLB stupid people are gonna say or should i trust what every governement of europe were thinking when they put the question to their people at the time? i think you got the point.

    you wanna know who saved france well here it is the forces were canadian american english french and polish, they got so many havy loses when they stept in france, but why were they able to advanced, it's because of the french resistance who has been fighting since the beginning of the invasion, it is something you don't know but that you must not forget, have you ever heard of the battle of the rail, how french railway workers and drivers have been risking their lives to stop the flow of armements coming from germany, how 3000 french resistants have been exterminated on a mountain because they refused to surrender an they were also the one who help step up attacks on the back of germans while they were busy defending the beaches from the allied forces arrival, my one grand father was in resistance, my father was 13 years old at the time and he remember all of it, so please when you say you feel regret for others french people don't go insulted their family after, another huge hit to your credibility.

    you know what i'm not even gonna say the usual small attacks at the end because you are reallly not worth it, you can keep writting if you want and i will answer but personnaly you just diminish yourself to the point of no return, i make mistake about a small country which wasn't a part of the discussion but you just bring to help yoursef but who was useless to the discussion and i accept my mistake but you just made two of huge consequences and that really show your lack of knowledge, i thought you knew more than the common people, but i realize that you know just nothing that what you heard, no real knowledge, no proof, no facts, huge mistakes= uncultured enough.

    it was fun but you deceived me so no i really feel like talking to a child
  • Da Fan
    Da Fan wrote:
    Ahhh...Are you commie? Sorry but what u said is sooo much like a fanatic nationalistic commie conducting some old fashioned propaganda. Show some respect, American and Englishmen are the MAIN reason why French people aren't speak German. And if there was no landing @Normandy, maybe you would still be saved out, but you need to thank Russian :)

    OK, I said "I won't reply until....." sorry, my fault that still said so much. I'll save it, anyway I think "most of WLIB stupid people" got what I mean. Ohh, of coz, you can keep on thinking I am one of the "WLIB stupid people", and let your "I'm right coz I AM RIGHT, you're wrong coz YOU'RE WRONG" logic and your Charlie-the-Great daydreaming go on ^ ^
  • ****
    **** wrote:
    whouah you didn't even try this time you finally get it, but i could say the same to china , you are lucky that japan attack US either way you would be drinking sake right now because if US didn't beat japan in south asia(phillipines, thailande) and didn't lauch the atomic bomb china would have never survive, US saved too! b ut you don't know anything so your just empty talking, that's the problem here too many people are ignorant.
    you just know the big lines:germany and japan against the world and US and Russia saved the world butr that's not only it, and for your information russia was almost beaten by german so they ask all the time that the US opened a second front on the west.
    and the fanatic things is the only stuff you found! ahah your are running out of options. sorry but when you make a big mistake about my country it is normal that i have to correct you and by the way when you misunderstand what i said before and you thought that i said chinese didn't suffer in WWII which i didn't say, you got pretty upset too so don't do things to others that you don't want others to do to you.
    and by the way i think your the one comming from a country wher they do propaganda like a normal politics publicity. so change yourself before trying to change others.
  • ****
    **** wrote:
    oh by the way you said you can give proof on a few points but you never did, should i take that you were lying
  • Da Fan
    Da Fan wrote:

    nice input of a bunch of english words, dude~ oh, the reason that I reply you this time is to make this thread nearer to the top, so that more "WLIB stupid people" can have a look at what you said and learn from you-the-great ^^ 继续,加油~

  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    I dunno, guys, but I think US involvement in the European front is overstated. The Germans had no ability to occupy Russia during the winter thanks to the Soviets' scorched earth policies. Even if not for the Normandy invasion, I think the Russians would eventually have come out ahead because they were better prepared. The Mensheviks were sounding the alarms on Hitler back when Chamberlain was pushing appeasement and the Americans were just pushing guns. To everyone.

    It's more appropriate to say that American/NATO influence slowed Europe's post-war transition to democratic socialism.

    But hey I'm a dirty fucking pinko, so who gives a shit what I say?



    Alban,
    I never said anything about religion, you dire assclown. Deer was saying that cultural development necessarily results in economic/social/technological development, which is an absolutely retarded argument.

    Learn to read. Then learn to write a goddamned coherent paragraph. I'd probably agree with you on most points if I could be fucked to slog through your dense and disorganized shit.
  • ****
    **** wrote:
    i guess that's why no people wrote as much as Da Fan and me, just try after a day work to write so much in a language which is not yours and when you have 10 questions to answer that are all connected on some point!assclown!

    about the religion that's my mistake, i wanted to write civilization but i don't know why i wrote different word and if your head wasn't so stuck in your ass maybe you would have took 10 seconds to think why he wrote religion when nobody talked about it? maybe it was a mistake he did, maybe he was thinking about a other word.
    don't worry about reading, i probably read more in my life than you did but i'm sick of writing on a computer so i write fast and make mistake.

    about russia, Staline was begging US and England to open a second front to light german pressure on the red army
  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    Alban,
    You addressed me at the end of a conversation I had with Deer One, called me stubborn, and proceeded to say something completely irrelevant to what we were talking about. That was BEFORE you started arguing with Da Fan. Are you implying that you made a stupid fucking mistake because you were too busy PLANNING your retarded arguments?

    Your mistake was saying anything to me at all when you clearly hadn't read a fucking thing. You're like a child walking into the middle of a movie. Bless you, Da Fan, for having the patience to try and teach this little asshole a bit of history, but if you ask me, you're casting pearls before swine.

    Stalin. Begging. Hmmm. Yes. Quite. He did that a lot, didn't he?
  • ****
    **** wrote:
    no , the mistake was that i was thinking about writing civilization like that's what you were talking about right, and because i also had religion in my head i just inverse it but the subject remain the same so yes i do know what you were talking about.

    i didn't say Deer is right, i said that it's not because a civilization is old that it is sophisticated, this is a total retarded arguments!!!! because many civilizations were more sophisticated than China in half less time!!

    nothing is irrelevant or out of the subject in what i said, it's just you guys being so angry about someone dropping and making real facts in your little blind discussions.

    teaching hitory to me! ahahahah, you saying that, if it was Da Fan i could accept it but you, you didn't even talk about it, just: hmmm, yes quite(i'm not sure just it's too hard to think for me) you sound really retarded! ahahaha: i'm screwing with you right now and it is very funny in that case, what can i do! you deserve it

    so if your angry that's your problems maybe next time you will think about writing something more interessant and developped so that no one will came in and bother you, so go ahead with your insults, it's just making you more childish and irresponsible.

    Yes he did and you should do it a lot more, because you damn well need more insight in you!

    " it's nothing but the truth and nothing jurts more than the truth"

    think on that for a moment, no i'm done with you guys, i hopefully found a other discussion with a even more interesant subjects and were people i hope will be grown enough to know when to accept when there are wrong.
  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    Alban,
    You started with the insults by disregarding the discussion upstairs, calling me stubborn, saying my head was stuck in my ass, and running off on a separate tangent. Instead of making cuntish little excuses for your mistakes you should have directly apologized to me without equivocating like a coward.

    Now I'm not obligated to be polite. Fuck you very much!

    "China had 5000 years to grow but it didn't because of the philosophy of chinese peopple which wasn't craving for developpemnt as europe did." This is exactly what Deer One was arguing, that philosophy drives development. It doesn't. People working together to build lasting social institutions is what drives economic and social development. Ideology is not entirely irrelevant, but it's hardly what drives development. Don't get me wrong. I love philosophy. But businessmen and politicians rarely give a fuck about ideology or philosophy.

    Of course "Hmmm. Yes. Quite." sounds retarded. It is so by design. I'm making fun of your ridiculous assertion that Stalin "begged" the US to open a second front in Europe. Operation Barbarossa failed in 1941. The Normandy invasion was in 1944, when the Germans were already fucked.

    Other than yourself, I don't see anyone congratulating you for your "interessant" or developed discussion or your talent for typing at a rate that far outpaces your ability to think.
  • Steven Ritter
    Steven Ritter wrote:
    Dando..you have a revisionist history. First, US saved Russia when the Germans were knocking on Moscows doors. We gave that country quite a bit of war supplies as we did to the Brits. This was just enough to stall the German eastern front. The poor French have the worst tanks in history..1 forward gear and 4 reverse. Very possibly the Russians could have defeated Germany in the long run, but that is not certain. With the Americans and their allies, it forced Germany to front a 3 pronged attack..eastern, southern, and western fronts. Remember, the Germans were at the verge of having a ballistic missle and deveoped the jet airplanes. The Allies brought final resolution quickly.

    As far as Japan goes, eventually the Chinese would have run them out with sheer numbers. Japan felt threatened because in their quest for supreme Pacific dominace, USA threatened to cut off their oil supply and they needed the oil desparately for their war machine and industrial base. Their whole premise of attacking our fleet at Pearl Harbor, was to stall us and sue for peace. You don't disturb the "sleeping tiger". The USA easily ramped up their war production.

    Understand the Germans knew we were massing an invasion for a long time and had to mass forces on their western and southern fronts in anticipation, which took resources away from fighting the Russians, whom lost millions in their counter attack.

    Interesting discussion
  • Steven Ritter
    Steven Ritter wrote:
    Now to the thread...why is it that cultures in Asia and Africa that have been in existence for thousands of years, have lagged that of Europe and North America in so far as wealth and industrialization?

    I think as so far as the USA, it is because we are a country of many peoples coming together in a capitalistic/reward society.
  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    Ritter,
    What's revisionist was Alban's assertion that the Russians needed the Normandy invasion to open up another front. The Germans were beaten back from Moscow long before D-Day.

    The Nazis never had the ability to occupy Moscow because the Russians made a tactical retreat and implemented scorched earth policies to deny the Germans the supplies they were counting on seizing during the invasion. They lost because they underestimated what the Soviets could accomplish with their masses of poorly equipped peasant conscripts. Furthermore they had to wait six months for their supplies to catch up with the blitzkrieg. And they weren't prepared for winter.

    These facts are not questioned by any serious historians, so your accusations of "revisionist history" are completely without basis.

    Point out one of my "revised" facts. And tell me, precisely what supplies did the Allies give the Soviets during Operation Barbarossa?

    Goddammit I am fucking tired of the Medal of Honor/History Channel/Steven Spielburg revision of World War II where America swoops in like fucking Superman to save the day instead of being a Johnny-come-lately that showed up with some boats at the end of the war to be heroically mowed down by two krauts in a bunker with a machine gun.

  • Steven Ritter
    Steven Ritter wrote:
    Dando, you have shown that you are truly ignorant of the facts, self centered, and incapable of caring on a discussion where you make up the facts. Get a life buddy. I feel for you.

    In the year i have been with WLIB I have yet to see someone like you, with a fould mouth and total ifnorance of fact. You must be quite young..wish your mother taught you better.
  • ****
    **** wrote:
    dando i didn't insult you first because stubborn is not a insult unlike ''fuck''!!!

    second, i have nothing to apologize to you for, who do you think you are?

    third, russia was stuck with germany and russians people had suffered a lot so russia was holding on!!!
    and every one knows that at Yalta staline was asking and asking again and again that the allied open a second fronts to ease the east fronts, only you don't accept it.

    fourth, it is also a philosophy matters, developpement is not the result of one things but many, and the politics you are talking now are the one we are having now not before so you cannot judge, you should just get the advice people give you and just apologize.

    because the only time a man really show his maturity and intelligence is when he put his pride on the side and questions himself, take off the fold your having in front of your eyes.
  • ****
    **** wrote:
    Russia beat Germany at Stalingrad and launch a big offensive but didn't went far and got stuck again, on the other side general Paton in three weeks, brooked the German defenses in Bastogne and got to Berlin in same time than Russians who were trying to do it since already more than 5 months. I’m not trying to diminish Russia’s role in the war but merely trying to get your point of view more near from the real facts, because no offense but you really start sounding like fracking red soviets Bolsheviks.
    I’m not fans of anyone but you do have to accept real facts and real’s facts are that allied forces (USA, England, Canadians, Polish and free French forces on the west and Russia on the east) saved Europe but if England and US didn't go to war the world would be different and the weight that US bring in the balance by going to war has no match among all the others allied forces, and they also saved Asia.

    Watch this movie!
    This will close your mouth once and for all; the movie is called Nuremberg to Nuremberg.
    It is a documentary of 4h, all real films and photos shoot.
    It’s starting at the first Nazis congress in Nuremberg to the trial in Nuremberg and you will see that all my arguments are in it.

    and to show you that I’m not vindictive, my favorite part of the movie is after Stalingrad when after getting their fresh forces from Siberia, the Russians launch a offensive, you can heard a nationalist soviets songs (very nice one) while looking at Cossacks charging Germans, red soldiers in white clothes fighting while skiing and two Russians armies, joining together, it's a very nice moments.

    So the movie is old (I got it in VHS) but you should be able to get it on internet and it's really worth it, it is one of my favorites all-times war movies.

    Meditate on this one
  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    @Ritter,
    Point out one made up or revised fact. I might have been selective about only presenting those which supported my perspective, but none of what I had said was untrue.

    Deal with it.



    @Alban,
    You outright said my being stubborn inhibited my ability to think. Keep backpedaling.

    You've yet to provide a concrete example of philosophy influencing development. It's a ridiculous argument. There is an incredibly fragile and tenuous correlation between the celebrated political philosophy of a country and its actual political behaviors. Every student in China learns Marx in their political science classes, but tell me: how many actual Marxists have you met since coming to China? How long did it take America to end slavery in spite of the political philosophies expressed in its Constitution? Point out one so-called socialist workers' state in history where the workers were actually in control.

    Thinking that political or business leaders' decisions are informed by something as ephemeral as philosophy instead of by their own self-interest is incredibly idealistic and naive.

    So what if I sound like a commie? Does that make me wrong? That's a cheap ad hominem argument.

    Of course it would take the Allies less time than the Soviets. They relied on completely different tactics. The Soviets had numbers, while the Allies had guns. Of course the Soviets were slow. No shit. But at no point were they locked in a stalemate after the invasion and occupation of Moscow failed. The Germans were fucked no matter what.

    I'll ask again: when exactly did Stalin "beg" for Allied help?

    All I'm saying is that the Soviets did most of the work and the course of the war was already essentially decided by the time the Americans finally showed up in France. I think the Allied perspective on World War II is overemphasized, and that "liberating" Western Europe was done more out of political opportunism than in the cause of freedom or saving the people in the concentration camps. Far from it. They wanted to check Soviet expansion and set the foundations for the NATO alliance.

    Let's not forget that before Pearl Harbor, Hitler was actually respected in America, far from being a villian or an enemy of freedom. Let's look at the case of Charlie Chaplin. He was a "premature anti-fascist" who was denounced as a communist because he was critical of Hitler before being critical of Hitler was fashionable.

    (insert airy-fairy truisms here)
  • ****
    **** wrote:
    as i said developpement get it sources from different variations, i never said that only philosophy is reason for developpement but in some cases it does in others it melt with politicl and in another only political, when i talked about way of thinking and developpemnt it was prior to 1900 so Marx is out of the subject, every time we make statements we are talking about differents times because of course it is not always the same, the reason for developpemnt changes with times.

    the fact is that soundong like a commie, fanatics or whatever in this caes it's blinds youand you don't acccept otherfacts, i'm not talking about communisme, merely propaganda and fanatism i'm against, so don't get me wrong on this one.

    and Russia had a good army, their forces from siberia were perfectly well equipped for winter fights, and their tanks were among the best ones so don't try to defend your arguments by changing it.
    the germans were fucked when they had to divert mass forces from the east front to the west front to block allies, most of their panzers divisions were sent to the west!they did get fucked when they lost Rommel

    i have to agree with you on the reasons why they came, it's not only that but of course in every conflict especially with americans they always go for the opportunity, we agree on this point.

    and i agree also on the view that many people had of Hitler for a long time, there is no better example than Chamberlain who when interviewed back in england, says that he met Hitler and he was convinced that he was a great man, i also know avbout Chaplin who actually was a great persons, americans are good at that they even kept doing after the war and still with the soviets, even Paton wanted to keep the fight against the russian just after entering Berlin
  • 随便叫兽
    随便叫兽 wrote:
    Alban,
    Cool story, Comrade.

    The fact that the Red Army engaged about 80% of the total German armed forces in World War II is not controversial at all. Stick to the cold hard facts and stop relying on petty narratives.

    Did the Allies help? Yes. But that doesn't mean that the Americans deserve credit for a "decisive victory" after D-Day. You're uncritically accepting a view of history that makes for action-packed videogames, exciting movies, and fascinating documentaries--entertainment is propaganda, too.

    Reality isn't so exciting.

    Millions of peasants did most of the work. Maybe we can't say for certain that Russia could have sealed the deal, and maybe the war would have lasted another five or even ten years without help. But wars are won by moving resources to where they need to be. The Red Army was cantankerously slow, but they had better logistical planning and had far more success conscripting soldiers in the areas they "liberated".

    Was it Communist philosophy and ideology that convinced these peasants that they had nothing to lose but their chains? Is that why they joined the Red Army in great numbers and charged German fortifications heedless of the danger? Probably not. It's more likely that they didn't want to be shot by Red Army officers for retreating. Again, philosophy and ideology are nothing compared to immediate human needs.

    Here's a book by a Western author who concedes that the Soviets were the decisive force in the war. It wasn't written by a dirty fanatical communist like yours truly.

    I'm done with this.

    *hums The International and strokes his beard*
  • ****
    **** wrote:
    well maybe petty narratives but still real and it's 80% germans against 100% russian

    you get me wrong, i didn't say the americans are the only one who deserve credits in the victory, actually i'm the only one who didn't just include english,US and russians but also the others members of allied forces(french, canadians, polish, i might have forget a few more) so it's true US deserve a lot of credits , maybe the biggest share but not all of it, as it's called it was a allied coalition that win.

    i'm sure i didn't talked about the reasons why russians citizens enrolled in the red army but i aggree that it could have been ideology or wanted to save their skins from germans or russians officers or simply others reasons and i'm sure i would have done the same

    another things i want to say, why when everyone feels they are getting wrong they change subject, da fan did , you too, did i ever critizied the red army equippment, i just say before that their siberian division were very well equipped! so why are you lying because you don't know what to say? then you should just stay silent you would get more credits for that.

    when i talked about ideology it was about chinese before 1900 and you answered to it but after 1900 and also about russians which means you are attacking my arguuments but in a different case, this is not right. you should maybe be the one making some coherence.

    since when did i say i was communist? i just point out their good things because they had some at least which means i'm open and i can accept other point of view i'm not someone irresponsible and lier like you.

    you know what? actually you are just those kind of people that suddenly stand up and insults when someone tell them they are wrong but whithout any strong facts and when they finally realize they are wrong instead of saying it they are going to try to hide it by changing the conversations and the other people idea so you are not honest.

    get lost in your mediocrity!

    just be fucking mature responsible and smart by accepting being wrong!
    that's how you do it you know not by lying and trying to stupidly protect you precious selfish worthless pride.

    that's it you can't lie all the time so you decide to leave.

    finally clear field, no asshole!

    alban out

Please login to post a reply to this thread.

WeLiveInBeijing

WeLiveInBeijing.com is a social community for people living in or traveling to Beijing.

Powered by: Bloc