No, no. You haven't offended anyone.OK Chino point taken,im sorry if i ofended anyone!
Just so that you don't sound like a kid.
No, no. You haven't offended anyone.OK Chino point taken,im sorry if i ofended anyone!
I'm sorry I live in Shanghai where I don't read the papers.Saying China has no truly great ambitions would be a mistake, especially given the recent involvement in Africa.
Increased peacekeeping. The EU has done the same recently.I'm sorry I live in Shanghai where I don't read the papers.
What "recent involvement in Africa" by China?
Doesn't look like a display of force to me.The Chinese peace-keeping force will be held accountable mainly for constructing and repairing roads, airports, bridges, and waterworks and power-supply facilities, and doing medical work.
1.1. Irish increased peacekeeping activities are not a display of military power. On the complete contrary, they're a display of international cooperation and willingness to help resolve problems. From your very own article:
Doesn't look like a display of force to me.
2. And to be honest the condescending attitude in the end of your post is definetly misplaced. Chinese newspapers may be censored (to a point) but that does mean that you should consider anyone from China to not know what's going on. In this case a senior member that has been here much longer.
Interesting that China - or at least, a Chinese firm controlled by people highly placed in the PLA and with close links to the CCP elite - recently attempted to sell a shipload of arms to Robert Mugabe's government. This at a time when Mugabe had just lost an election, when thugs associated with his party and military were known to be violating human rights on a frequent basis .... and when Zimbabwe has little in the way of cash available to pay for such purchases.The fact that the Chinese Government are even interested in peacekeeping in Africa is suspect. China is not a democratic country, has no human rights charter to speak of, and the CCP generally stands for the opposite of what we Westerners would refer to as "free society".
They're doing their best to try to demonstrate that they're a normal country interested in international cooperation rather then conflict. In that regard I don't see any way how Chinese engineer forces supporting a EU mission in Sudan can be a display of Chinese power. If anything it's a display of Chinese humility. They're, on a most basic level, doing it to score brownie points with the West.1.
Peacekeeping is interference in the affairs of another state, at the request of said state or otherwise. Africa is not within China's sphere of influence, it's more an EU area of interest. Furthermore, I said power, not military power. Power manifests itself in more ways than one.
The fact that the Chinese Government are even interested in peacekeeping in Africa is suspect. China is not a democratic country, has no human rights charter to speak of, and the CCP generally stands for the opposite of what we Westerners would refer to as "free society".
Taking that into account, why would the CCP send troops to defend values it doesn't believe in? Non Sequitur. I don't think they are doing it out of the good of their heart, but that's more political than military, i.e. not for here.
Russia are just as bad to be honest, although they have a recognisably democratic system in place at least.The Sudanese are now gonna buy aircrafts from Russia, I read.
But I won't hold my breath waiting for people to start dissing Russia for selling weapons to Sudan. Only the Chinese are not allowed to.
Do you have a source? Please post a link. I generally try to stay on top of this stuff, and I've heard nothing about it.
I see you have the same misconception I've encountered too many times before.Funny how democracy is prescribed to everyone as if democracy makes everyone happy, healthy and wealthy.
Out of respect, I shall refrain from mentioning which so-called democratic countries are the absolute pits.
Yet, if a country with an authoritarian system is doing well, most of its citizens happy, healthy, many middle-class etc... westerners will still insist it is wrong and again, prescribes democracy. As if democracy is some kind of must-have miracle cure-all pills.
The thread you linked to talks about tanks. Not aircraft. The only major recent aircraft purchase I can think of is the 12 MiG's on a 2001 contract. This is old news and I really don't see your point in making that statement. Russia came under considerable international fire in iirc 2004 for delivering those fighter jets.Dude, it is on this very same forum!!
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7774
Of course, cannot be otherwise verified.
I don't think you have the fact straight, the contract was signed long before the election. When they shipped the weapons, there was no international arms embargo on Zimbabwe, what else could a company do, except following contracts? Obviously the delivery of weapons at that time would complicate the situation, but the only country that can and ARE cropping up Mugabe's government is South Africa not China. There is actually a NTY editorial about it, it is called The Democratic Recession.Interesting that China - or at least, a Chinese firm controlled by people highly placed in the PLA and with close links to the CCP elite - recently attempted to sell a shipload of arms to Robert Mugabe's government. This at a time when Mugabe had just lost an election, when thugs associated with his party and military were known to be violating human rights on a frequent basis .... and when Zimbabwe has little in the way of cash available to pay for such purchases.
My mistake.The thread you linked to talks about tanks. Not aircraft. The only major recent aircraft purchase I can think of is the 12 MiG's on a 2001 contract. This is old news and I really don't see your point in making that statement. Russia came under considerable international fire in iirc 2004 for delivering those fighter jets.
Your misconceptions run deep too.I see you have the same misconception I've encountered too many times before.
Democracy has little to do with prosperity.
It's about the concept that all people are legally equal, should have equal opportunities, rights and say in politics.
Which countries that are undemocratic do not have, regardless of how well off they are.
And it's attitudes like the one you just stated that allow extremists into power.Your misconceptions run deep too.
What I said was exactly to address yours.
Sometimes, not going hungry, having a certain measure of security, is a lot more important than political ideals.