Should China respect sanctions on Iran?

R

ravenshield936

Banned Idiot
bladerunner said:
Innocent people?:rofl: The people knew what they were getting when voting, in much the same way the Germans knew when they voted for Hitler and the Nazis.

Meanwhile I support Bronwen Maddox's call to hurt the Iranian oil trade.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone can foretell the future, especially foretell their future leader will start the Second World War, destroy their nation, split the country, massacred a chunk of its population. And if they know, you think they will still vote for this guy? Don't forget this leader costed some of the voters' lives too.

As for the Iranians, so you're saying the entire nation and everyone should suffer from the trades too? Because in your dictionary, they aren't deemed innocent?
 
bladerunner

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
ravenshield936 said:
As for the Iranians, so you're saying the entire nation and everyone should suffer from the trades too? Because in your dictionary, they aren't deemed innocent?
Click to expand...

Only in the same context as those who voted for Hitler. Lets not forget a bigger % voted for Ajad then did those for Hitler.
 
P

pla101prc

Senior Member
bladerunner said:
Only in the same context as those who voted for Hitler. Lets not forget a bigger % voted for Ajad then did those for Hitler.
Click to expand...

i dont see equating the iranian voters with the supporters of nazi as a proper way of rational discussion. in fact even the German people's endorsement for hitler at the time had its necessary causes. since "nazi" is such a big no no here in the west, one ought to avoid abusing this word to facilitate a more healthy atmosphere.
 
bladerunner

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
pla101prc said:
since "nazi" is such a big no no here in the west, one ought to avoid abusing this word to facilitate a more healthy atmosphere.
Click to expand...

Im not quite sure what you mean here. Im simply suggesting that both reigmes are equally abhorent and anyone that knowingly votes for them, shouldnt be able to claim innocence through ignorance, as the type of political parties they both are have been well broadcasted.

Celebrating Nazism such as displaying it in public and eg Prince Harry dressing up as a Nazi Officer is fround upon in the main However in the UK w there are historical war games groups re enacting scenarios playing the part of SS grenadiers is very popular.

Discussing Nazism objectively is sanctioned its even discussed at school in history lessons.. In fact Ive come across the occassional Western Newspaper articles around the time of the Olympic games where the writer suggests there are similarities between China and Nazi Germany, especially , without sanction. In fact one of our more well known sports writers expressed similar views in a mainline newspaper a few months ago.
 
Last edited:
R

ravenshield936

Banned Idiot
bladerunner said:
Im not quite sure what you mean here. Im simply suggesting that both reigmes are equally abhorent and anyone that knowingly votes for them, shouldnt be able to claim innocence through ignorance, as the type of political parties they both are have been well broadcasted.

Celebrating Nazism such as displaying it in public and eg Prince Harry dressing up as a Nazi Officer is fround upon in the main However in the UK w there are historical war games groups re enacting scenarios playing the part of SS grenadiers is very popular.

Discussing Nazism objectively is sanctioned its even discussed at school in history lessons.. In fact Ive come across the occassional Western Newspaper articles around the time of the Olympic games where the writer suggests there are similarities between China and Nazi Germany, especially , without sanction. In fact one of our more well known sports writers expressed similar views in a mainline newspaper a few months ago.
Click to expand...


I've seen that as a youtube channel too, but then I'm sure everyone here is too smart to fall for that? (I'll have my doubts if this is military.com)
 
R

ravenshield936

Banned Idiot
pla101prc said:
i dont see equating the iranian voters with the supporters of nazi as a proper way of rational discussion. in fact even the German people's endorsement for hitler at the time had its necessary causes. since "nazi" is such a big no no here in the west, one ought to avoid abusing this word to facilitate a more healthy atmosphere.
Click to expand...

I agree. Hitler didn't just pop out in 1938 and disappear in 1945.. He started to emerge around the 20s, and a series of events built up to the war. In fact, I believe our folks here probably know Hitler's past, and if we examine this guy's past, I honestly really think he's not as insane as people love to say he is.

He served in WW1, although not for long. But not long later, the war was lost, and Germany was ill-treated like shit by the Allies with the start of the Treaty of Versailles (unequal treaties) . This of course bankrupted Germany, and Germany was suffering its lost decade for quite a while and at the time, none of the governments were useful in fixing things up.
Later on he came to power, and he actually helped rebuilt the nation, economically and in morale. The Germans were suffering from the loss of defeat, unemployment, the Great Depression, and a broken nation, so when Hitler fixed most of these things, they were grateful and thought this guy was the true leader. He did indeed led his people out of the crisis at that time, and that's also how he won the hearts and minds of the Germans.

It's the buildup later on that turned him into one of the worst murderer and dictator in modern era.

If you guys examine his life, he's an interesting person. His youth was eventful with series of things which we could use to pinpoint his personalities and traits that make the future him. Of course, perhaps some experiences built him to his radical ideology, and we'll be surprised he's actually in the socialist party before. He used a bit of scare tactics to get his way in the early days, but witnessing the amount of leaders in history who also got into power with force, that indeed is one of the things that make him a leader (the brutal type, but nonetheless necessary in times of distress. When you're in a room where everyone is talking, the only way for attention is with a louder voice)
Also, we should be aware that perhaps some of his thoughts were amongst the Germans, especially the humiliation from WWI, therefore his radical attitudes isn't completely unexplainable. It's just his too-radical ideas and the worst of him that changed the world.

Lastly, we can't neglect his contributions and positive side. The autobahn and contributions to lead Germany out of its worst in WWI, were some of them. He was known to work for the people, and no one thought he'd do something like that at the time. At personal level, he's a man with very scary hatred, especially towards the Jews and the Communists(but also those who wronged him). Otherwise, we'd be surprised he's a vegetarian and speak against animal cruelty.

Anyways just my personal opinion of Hitler. He's done right and wrong, and to neglect all the good sides will put us at a biased position.

As for the German people voting for him, they didn't know he'd go against the Jews or to start WWII. To them, he started out great and led the people out of the worst, and they were right. At the time they voted Hitler, he was exactly that. They thought this guy would strengthen Germany and help them. It was a while later after he got into power did the bad stuff occurred. So to say the Germans deserved it is extremely biased and unmerciful. (if you know something is going to turn out bad, of course you won't choose it. it's always something turning out sour later on that you regret the decision.)
 
P

pla101prc

Senior Member
in the west here we are obsessed with being politically correct. thus is the atmosphere in which if you are labelling someone as resembling the feature of 'nazi germany' you are effectively libeling the subject in question to a degree where rational discussion is no longer feasible. this is sad but true. so we ought to avoid abusing the term. if you wanna talk about iran, talk about iran as itself, dont bring up stuff like nazi and whatever, makes you look like you cant keep your composure.
 
bladerunner

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
pla101prc said:
in the west here we are obsessed with being politically correct. thus is the atmosphere in which if you are labelling someone as resembling the feature of 'nazi germany' you are effectively libeling the subject in question to a degree where rational discussion is no longer feasible. this is sad but true. so we ought to avoid abusing the term. if you wanna talk about iran, talk about iran as itself, dont bring up stuff like nazi and whatever, makes you look like you cant keep your composure.
Click to expand...

My response was to Martian who high lighted a quote by Wen who expressed concern, suggesting that sanctions harmed the innocent of Iran. Because of Chinas track record I could have challenged his concerned and claimed it as bull shit.

Instead I merely suggested there were were no innocent parties because, Iranian populace chose to vote for the more disruptive Ajad instead of the more concilatory candidate.

Pre empting suggestions that it wasnt a valid line of thought to take I made parallels with Hitler/ Nazis to demonstrate a precedent where Hitler and the Nazis only scored somewhere in the mid 30% in elections, and yet in the immediate aftermath of WW2 most Germans were tarred with blame, whether directly involved or not. In the 60's 70's the case of Germany and the war was used to stir up patriotism in soccer matches between England and Germany. Even to this day there are wholsale precedents where the whole get blamed for the actions of a few. For which out of consideration I wont give examples of.
 
Last edited:
X

xywdx

Junior Member
bladerunner said:
My response was to Martian who high lighted a quote by Wen who expressed concern, suggesting that sanctions harmed the innocent of Iran. Because of Chinas track record I could have challenged his concerned and claimed it as bull shit.

Instead I merely suggested there were were no innocent parties because, Iranian populace chose to vote for the more disruptive Ajad instead of the more concilatory candidate.

Pre empting suggestions that it wasnt a valid line of thought to take I made parallels with Hitler/ Nazis to demonstrate a precedent where Hitler and the Nazis only scored somewhere in the mid 30% in elections, and yet in the immediate aftermath of WW2 most Germans were tarred with blame, whether directly involved or not Even to this day there are wholsale precedents where the whole get blamed for the actions of a few. For which out of consideration I wont give examples of.
Click to expand...

More disruptive Ajad? I would like to know your reasoning and not just "because the west said so" bullcrap we keep getting.

Ajad is developing nuclear power for the people, he is making electricity more affordable for Iranians, where is the bad in that?

If you don't see the importance then consider a counter example, if a US president comes out and vows to shut down all nuclear power plants/reactors, he would be kicked out of office so fast that he would fly right into moon and through it.
 
bladerunner

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
xywdx said:
More disruptive Ajad? I would like to know your reasoning and not just "because the west said so" bullcrap we keep getting.
Click to expand...

Western newspapers cater to their intended market, and thus some of its reporting can be rather dubious, however there is plenty of objective reporting in quality publications if one is prepared to look, and get to the truth.
Meanwhile I can suggest alot of inflamatory things with what you can do with Chinese publications.

If you dont want to read about Ajad, just make a point of watching him on the News. Al Jazerra perhaps, note his ocassional taunts of the west and body language etc

meanwhile heres some incidents that happened during Ajads watch i first remember learning from Al Jazzera News

1/arresting 15 ? british sailors in Iraq waters in 2007

2/Arresting eight british embassy staff and falsely accusing them of mischief making in 2009.

I can dig up more dirt if i wanted to but I cant be bothered, going back to far

Ajad is developing nuclear power for the people, he is making electricity more affordable for Iranians, where is the bad in that?
Click to expand...

1/Nothing, and no-one is preventing him from doing so, except he is determined to produce enriched uranium, far and above whats required for power generation.

other than nuclear power Iran has plenty of other options
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



eg A study in Australia which may have some relevance to Iran has shown the cheapest source of energy over a 15yr period is wind,coal, solar and gas in that order.

BY the way outside of oil, coal is one of Irans most abundent minerals, associate that with the latest type of coal fired power stations that"Martian" has so kindly enlightened us with and things would be "honky dory" for Iran in the energy requirements for a long time to come . It can also conseverve its own oil and gas for its own use by lessening exports to China:D meanwhile turning its vast arms industry complex and using its very talented populace into manufacturing items for export to compensate.

Futhermore not only is Iran in the top15 mineral possessing countries, which are seriously underdeveloped(source wiki) shes also the worlds second largest holder of natural gas reserves after Russia. with careful husbanding and controlled exports, together with coal and oil, she can meet her energy needs for decades to come. Theres certainly no urgency to develop nuclear power.Meanwhile she would be able to get all the help she needs to develop her country from the west, with West and ending up becoming a very wealthy country, without all this aggro.

If she was genuinely interested in wanting nuclear power for her people, surely it would be better to bide ones time and get the best nuclear power station avaliable, instead shes got littlechoice other than a Russian one of uncertain quality??

If you don't see the importance then consider a counter example, if a US president comes out and vows to shut down all nuclear power plants/reactors, he would be kicked out of office so fast that he would fly right into moon and through it.[/QU
Click to expand...
OTE]

It wasnt so long ago that if any USA president had taken the construction of nuclear power stations off the map in the USA, he would have been cheered and clapped, after the "Three Mile Island Accident" In fact building Nuclear power plants in the USA actually stopped because they were too expensive, the last one commissioned for generation occurred around 96?

meanwhile heres an interesting read why nuclear power generation declined in the usa

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


PS. I dont mean , by providing the last link that I consider nuclear power to be unimportant to the US
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top