Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    He was promised autonomy and he didn't get it.
    So he left 8 years later.



    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    Do you really have 0 knowledge of the Korean war?

    South Korea was almost wiped out, then the US got in - it ended in a stalemate because China also sent "volunteers" to support North Korea. Without chinese support, North Korea would probably have been defeated by the US-backed South Korea.

    And if your definition of a country being propping up is purely economic, then let's not pretend NK's reliance of Chinese trade and aid is even remotely similar to trade between China and anyone else.
    Why did you conveniently left out the fact that 1 korea attack another first? Why did they do that? They were crazy and was brainwashed by certain ideology to do suicidal things.

    China trade with them because they trade with everyone.


    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    Are you once again trying to argue 2 wrongs do make a right, or are you now saying "massacres are good"?
    I was arguing from the beginning that 2 wrongs make us think....who wants to survive in this jungle and who doesnt?

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)

    Vietnam did, and that also makes them a provoker.
    But lets blame china only





    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)

    I have always understood that. What you are still failing to understand is that China is not an ally, and thus good things for them = bad things for us.
    Ohhhh here is our difference. They are my ally. I am in a position to benefit from a more powerful china. A lot of people do, just that the main stream media hates talking about us and pretend we are bots.


    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    So I see you have 0 knowledge of the civil war too.

    When exactly did communist China control, in any way at all, the lands that are currently Taiwanese territories?

    How does one "steal" something from another person, when the other person never, ever had that thing?
    Remove the word communist then it all make sense

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)

    Also, NYC and London aren't jealous. They are much, much bigger and influential financial centres.
    Ok . Dont need to get butthurt then. Why are there so many sour grapes.

    Also those people who dont like hong kong, please leave. Foreigners who cant speak cantonese or any chinese dialects included.


    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    I understand it now. You have a very primitive binary world view that can only see black and white.

    Or in this case, democratic or undemocratic. And so Russia = Japan = USA = China = undemocratic countries.
    ?????

    Why do you have to bring US into this? They only have a 2 term limit on the presidency.

    Just china ( if the 2 term limit gets removed) , japan, russia. Just these 3, where ever you see them on the democratic scale 1-100. They are not far off each other.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    So he left 8 years later.
    8 years later, when he realized China broke their promise, suppressed the rebellions with their military, and the Dalai Lama fled in 20 days.

    You can't seriously be claiming China invaded in 1951 when that's when they reached the agreement. You can argue that it wasn't like a military invasion in 1959, despite the fact that they did use the military to assume complete control over the region.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Why did you conveniently left out the fact that 1 korea attack another first?
    Because it's completely irrelevant to whether North Korea exists today because of China.

    Could North Korea have existed without Chinese military support? No.

    Could North Korea be here today without China's continued military and economic support? No.

    Does this mean China is the reason why North Korea exists today? Yes.

    You seemed to have no idea that the Korean War even existed and it showed. If you just go further back, then I can ask you why Japan occupied in the first place, and it's still because of China. You literally can't win.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    China trade with them because they trade with everyone.
    And what has this got to do with anything at all? I didn't even include propping up North Korea now as an example of their imperialism.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    I was arguing from the beginning that 2 wrongs make us think....who wants to survive in this jungle and who doesnt?
    Frankly, Britain didn't need to kill anyone in the colonies to "survive", neither does China need to do any of those things now. China survived under Mao, when it was in a much weaker position. In fact, China has survived almost all the time except during the Mongol Empire.

    But no, a wrong is a wrong is a wrong. If it "makes you think", you're indeed saying a wrong can become a right if everyone does it.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Remove the word communist then it all make sense
    I used "communist" as in the current regime in Beijing. The current regime in Beijing, no matter how you call it, has never controlled any territories controlled by Taiwan.

    You need to actually study Chinese history. Taiwan has never even been a part of China before Qing. And if your reasoning is that "PRC succeeded RoC which succeeded Qing, so all of the territories held by the predecessors 'belong' with the victor", then you're saying Mongolia, for example, has also "stolen" from PRC.

    You can't say someone has stolen something from you, when you never had it in the first place.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Ok . Dont need to get butthurt then. Why are there so many sour grapes.

    Also those people who dont like hong kong, please leave. Foreigners who cant speak cantonese or any chinese dialects included.
    Butthurt? Sour grapes? You're making 0 sense.

    I'm from Hong Kong. I was born in Hong Kong, my parents were both born in Hong Kong. I am Cantonese by blood, not a foreigner. I can speak Cantonese fluently, and I like Hong Kong. And yes, I have left Hong Kong, too. Like, exactly 0% of your comment makes any sense when you're directing it to me.

    But unlike you, I'm not deluded. Look at the GDP, overall or per capita, look at the stock exchange volumes, look at foreign exchange, look at currency exchange, look at the size of the companies registered/headquartered.

    Like literally based on no metrics can you argue that Hong Kong is a bigger financial centre than London or NYC. Hong Kong is No 3 or No 4, and is obviously very influential as a financial centre, but you got to be kidding me if you really think, despite the overwhelming evidence against that view, that Hong Kong is not only bigger than London or NYC as a financial centre, but that either would be "jealous" of Hong Kong's economic freedom.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Why do you have to bring US into this? They only have a 2 term limit on the presidency.

    Just china ( if the 2 term limit gets removed) , japan, russia. Just these 3, where ever you see them on the democratic scale 1-100. They are not far off each other.
    lmfao

    I literally gave you the rankings. Japan and the USA are the same level. Russia is around 100 places down. That's similar to you? Did you think there are 10000 countries in the world?

    ---

    ETA: I just found out you're from Malaysia. A bit rich of you to tell me to leave Hong Kong, don't you think?

    But I guess I can see why you're jealous of our economic freedom.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)

    I literally gave you the rankings. Japan and the USA are the same level. Russia is around 100 places down. That's similar to you? Did you think there are 10000 countries in the world?

    .
    Japan is actually two notches worse by the EIU metric. Don't you find it rather quaint that the 'defender of democracy' is actually a flawed one though? Being trounced by all those evil pinko Europeans must really be a blow:rolleyes:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Napp)
    Japan is actually two notches worse by the EIU metric. Don't you find it rather quaint that the 'defender of democracy' is actually a flawed one though? Being trounced by all those evil pinko Europeans must really be a blow:rolleyes:
    You don't want me to respond to you, yet you keep quoting me to post things that are frankly silly.

    1. I never called the US or Japan the "defender of democracy", and that has nothing at all to do anything I said. In fact, I kept pointing out the fact that I'm not the US, you're not the US, China isn't the US, and so it really isn't relevant at all.

    2. According to the EIU, US ranks No 21 with 7.98 (flawed democracy), Japan ranks No 23 with 7.88 (flawed democracy).

    Sure, that's "two notches worse", but still the same level (flawed democracy). And that other poster was attempting to say Japan is the same as Russia (No 135, 3.17, authoritarian - 2 categories down).

    ---

    And I guess you can't say the reason why you kept giving me notifications was because of my responding to you, since now you have proven yourself to be someone who clearly craves my attention.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)

    8 years later, when he realized China broke their promise, suppressed the rebellions with their military, and the Dalai Lama fled in 20 days.

    You can't seriously be claiming China invaded in 1951 when that's when they reached the agreement. You can argue that it wasn't like a military invasion in 1959, despite the fact that they did use the military to assume complete control over the region.
    China put down a rebellion in tibet in 1951 and dalai lama left 8 years later disappointed over not getting the policies he wants.

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)


    Because it's completely irrelevant to whether North Korea exists today because of China.

    Could North Korea have existed without Chinese military support? No.

    Could North Korea be here today without China's continued military and economic support? No.

    Does this mean China is the reason why North Korea exists today? Yes.

    You seemed to have no idea that the Korean War even existed and it showed. If you just go further back, then I can ask you why Japan occupied in the first place, and it's still because of China. You literally can't win.
    So you are saying that north korea existed because of China's support during the korean war.

    But ... but ... but North korea exist long before the korean war.... opps ...

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)

    And what has this got to do with anything at all? I didn't even include propping up North Korea now as an example of their imperialism.
    Because trade is about making profits and creating jobs. You forgot.


    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    Frankly, Britain didn't need to kill anyone in the colonies to "survive", neither does China need to do any of those things now. China survived under Mao, when it was in a much weaker position. In fact, China has survived almost all the time except during the Mongol Empire.

    But no, a wrong is a wrong is a wrong. If it "makes you think", you're indeed saying a wrong can become a right if everyone does it.
    Oh those yemenis and iraqis didnt need to 'survive either prior to the US invasion, look what happened to those poor *******s now.


    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    I used "communist" as in the current regime in Beijing. The current regime in Beijing, no matter how you call it, has nevercontrolled any territories controlled by Taiwan.

    You need to actually study Chinese history. Taiwan has never even been a part of China before Qing. And if your reasoning is that "PRC succeeded RoC which succeeded Qing, so all of the territories held by the predecessors 'belong' with the victor", then you're saying Mongolia, for example, has also "stolen" from PRC.

    You can't say someone has stolen something from you, when you never had it in the first place.
    I told you to remove the word communist to see the truth, what are you doing???

    edit: since you mentioned mongolia, you realise that China has already negotiated with mongolia on border issues? Since its negotiated and both sides are happy, whats wrong with it? You prefer to have more border disputes not less?

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    Butthurt? Sour grapes? You're making 0 sense.

    I'm from Hong Kong. I was born in Hong Kong, my parents were both born in Hong Kong. I am Cantonese by blood, not a foreigner. I can speak Cantonese fluently, and I l --- cluster****
    1st , Do you hate hong kong? No? Then I wasn't referring to you. Why are you insecure?? Seriously why do you think everything is personal? Is there something deep down you didnt want us to know and trying to hide?

    2nd No one ever argued that Hong Kong is bigger than London and NYC, you invented that out of thin air, i said Hong kong is freer.

    3rd. Still , Hong Kong is the FREEST economy in the world for many years. That is something that even you cannot deny. If you keep on denying that Hong kong is the freest economy in the world and talk down that , you are either jealous or butthurt. If you are not then you would not respond aggressively.

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    lmfao

    I literally gave you the rankings. Japan and the USA are the same level. Russia is around 100 places down. That's similar to you? Did you think there are 10000 countries in the world?
    Cool, so having the same folks rule for over half a century is actually pretty compatible with democracy. So whats your concern again?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    China put down a rebellion in tibet in 1951 and dalai lama left 8 years later disappointed over not getting the policies he wants.
    I will repeat: In 1951, China made an agreement with him; in 1959, he realized the promise was broken (not getting the policies he wanted = not having autonomy), and China suppressed the rebellion. He left 20 days later.

    You can disagree with it being an invasion, but you're acting as if nothing happened in 1959, China didn't send its troops in.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    So you are saying that north korea existed because of China's support during the korean war.

    But ... but ... but North korea exist long before the korean war.... opps ...
    How many times do I have to stay this before you can get the history right?

    North Korea would have been defeated by South Korea + US. It wasn't defeated because China joined in. That's why North Korea is still here.

    Did I say China created North Korea? No, I did not. I said they propped up NK, and they did. They led them into a stalemate and for the decades after, gave them much of the aid and protection from the US.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Because trade is about making profits and creating jobs. You forgot.
    Yes, so much profits and jobs have been created due to trade with North Korea.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Oh those yemenis and iraqis didnt need to 'survive either prior to the US invasion, look what happened to those poor *******s now.
    Oh yes, China would certainly have been invaded by the US if they aren't expanding now. It's not like they were much weaker in the past and the US didn't invade, and in the wars indirectly against China, China basically won anyway.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    I told you to remove the word communist to see the truth, what are you doing???
    The truth is, PRC has never controlled what is now today Taiwanese territories.

    You have yet to provide a rebuttal to this, or indeed an explanation to what you think removing the word "communist" would say, as I have done.

    Since you clearly have no idea what happened in the civil war, and you are unwilling to educate yourself, let me give you a brief version of the events:

    The Republic of China (now Taiwan) was established after Yuan made the last Qing emperor to abdicate. The Republic of China (now Taiwan) after some years established a certain level of control over what is now today all of China + Taiwan.

    Some people gathered together and wanted to establish a communist China. They were prosecuted by the Republic of China (now Taiwan), and the Republic of China (now Taiwan) almost succeeded.

    But Japan invaded Manchuria and soon the rest of China as well. One of the former northern warlords forced the Republic of China (now Taiwan) president to stop prosecuting the communists. That stopped.

    Japan launched a full-on invasion of China, Republic of China (now Taiwan) fought them, with some help from the communists. After the US dropped 2 atomic bombs in Japan, Japan surrendered.

    Republic of China started assuming control over the formerly occupied territories, but the communists got weapons from the Japan via the Soviet Union in Manchuria.

    The communists won the civil war, established the People's Republic of China. The Republic of China (now Taiwan) fled to Taiwan.

    The People's Republic of China attempted to get Taiwan as well, but they were defeated by the Republic of China (now Taiwan) before they could even land on the island.

    Result: The People's Republic of China has never had control over Taiwan, and thus it could not have been "stolen" from that. It simply isn't logically sound. It simply isn't what the word means.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    1st , Do you hate hong kong? No? Then I wasn't referring to you. Why are you insecure?? Seriously why do you think everything is personal? Is there something deep down you didnt want us to know and trying to hide?
    Oh wait, so you were saying something completely irrelevant? Words jumbled together after you smashed your keyboard?

    That explained a lot.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    2nd No one ever argued that NYC and London is bigger than Hong Kong, you invented that out of thin air.
    I recommend that you re-read your posts before posting them next time.

    Yes, I'm saying, like the rest of the world does, that NYC and London are bigger financial centres than Hong Kong.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    3rd. Still , Hong Kong is the FREEST economy in the world for many years. That is something that even you cannot deny. If you keep on denying that Hong kong is the freest economy in the world and talk down that , you are either jealous or butthurt. If you are not then you would not respond aggressively.
    1. I never said it wasn't the freest economy in the world. I pointed out there were many aspects of freedom, including the freedom of expression, the freedom of publication, the freedom of being elected (political freedom), the freedom of movement. And all of them have been tightened. I even gave you specific examples for each and every one of them.

    But it seems your mind is simply so simple that you cannot process the fact that there could be different aspects to the same concept.

    2. Butthurt or jealous? I'm from Hong Kong, so how would it make any sense at all that I would be butthurt over Hong Kong's success? I'm jealous of Hong Kong, my very own hometown??

    Malaysians can be jealous of Hong Kong, because they are not Hongkongers. Hongkongers cannot be jealous of Hong Kong, because they already are Hongkongers.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Cool, so having a party or president that rules for over half a century is actually pretty compatible with democracy. So whats your concern again?
    Democracy is the process, not the result. If Putin has a completely fair election tomorrow and wins it, it'd still be a democratic election.

    I can't believe how much I have to talk down to you: to be democratic is to listen to the people's views via a vote. The Japanese public has decided that they want to be represented by the same party over and over. There are structural issues with this democracy, such as the high costs of actually standing in an election, but it's still much more democratic than Russia, where if you stand in opposition, you could be jailed.

    The entire world recognizes that Japan is a democracy and Russia isn't. It's really frustrating talking to you when you seem to have very little knowledge of anything (eg the Chinese civil war, the Korean war), very little understanding of the concepts here (eg democracy, freedom), and you're throwing out insults that make absolutely no sense (eg saying as a Hongkonger, I would be jealous of Hong Kong).

    But at least now I see that you have learned several things: You've learned the history of the Korean War, oh wait, actually you might have learned only one thing. But let's take it one step at a time.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    You don't want me to respond to you, yet you keep quoting me to post things that are frankly silly.

    1. I never called the US or Japan the "defender of democracy", and that has nothing at all to do anything I said. In fact, I kept pointing out the fact that I'm not the US, you're not the US, China isn't the US, and so it really isn't relevant at all.

    2. According to the EIU, US ranks No 21 with 7.98 (flawed democracy), Japan ranks No 23 with 7.88 (flawed democracy).

    Sure, that's "two notches worse", but still the same level (flawed democracy). And that other poster was attempting to say Japan is the same as Russia (No 135, 3.17, authoritarian - 2 categories down).

    ---

    And I guess you can't say the reason why you kept giving me notifications was because of my responding to you, since now you have proven yourself to be someone who clearly craves my attention.
    It's more likely I just find you views boorish, moronic and frankly ill-informed. Not to mention it is hilarious how upset you get when people disagree with you - note your little rant about the other user being from Malaysia.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    I will repeat: In 1951, China made an agreement with him; in 1959, he realized the promise was broken (not getting the policies he wanted = not having autonomy), and China suppressed the rebellion. He left 20 days later. You can disagree with it being an invasion, but you're acting as if nothing happened in 1959, China didn't send its troops in.
    What?? how can you put down a rebellion without sending any troops at all? Of course they did.

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    How many times do I have to stay this before you can get the history right? North Korea would have been defeated by South Korea + US. It wasn't defeated because China joined in. That's why North Korea is still here. Did I say China created North Korea? No, I did not. I said they propped up NK, and they did. They led them into a stalemate and for the decades after, gave them much of the aid and protection from the US.
    Cool you finally recognize that the China didnt have anything to do with the formation of 2 koreas. Thats a good start, Would North Korea been defeated by the Allied forces without China and the USSR? No one can say for sure. What you think is just an "if" and a huge one.

    I am not going to speculate on the "ifs" of history as this would open a whole cans of worms.

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    Yes, so much profits and jobs have been created due to trade with North Korea.
    Okay


    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    Oh yes, China would certainly have been invaded by the US if they aren't expanding now. It's not like they were much weaker in the past and the US didn't invade, and in the wars indirectly against China, China basically won anyway.
    Okay

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    The truth is, PRC has never controlled what is now today Taiwanese territories. --- the rest
    I have never mentioned anything about PRC, you can slowly scroll through my past post and read it. I said CHINA , not PRC. There is a distinction. No wonder you keep taking my post out of context.

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    Oh wait, so you were saying something completely irrelevant? Words jumbled together after you smashed your keyboard? That explained a lot.
    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    Butthurt or jealous? I'm from Hong Kong, so how would it make any sense at all that I would be butthurt over Hong Kong's success? I'm jealous of Hong Kong, my very own hometown??
    Because you sound like one of those people who hates hong kong, moans and complain endlessly about it , the best solution for the haters of hong kong is to leave, and never come back. By the way, i say that in my own country too. I practically say that to everyone living in every country.




    Oh and yes the very native of hong kong can hate the place he grew up too. The biggest enemy of hongkong are often its own people. There are far too many traitors living in hong kong but consistently undermine it. As we malaysians call, enemies in the blanket. So yes, a hongkie can be jealous at his own birth place.


    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    I recommend that you re-read your posts before posting them next time. Yes, I'm saying, like the rest of the world does, that NYC and London are bigger financial centres than Hong Kong.
    You jam the reply button so quickly but took so long to actually post. I have already editted out typos and add in new stuff before you completed your post. You might want to re-read it.

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    Democracy is the process, not the result. .... and the rest.
    Oh noooooooooooooooooooooooooo, thats hugely debatable. If China does not do elections but rather hire pollster to poll policy opinion and make policy based on that would you consider that democracy because its THE PROCESS? I bet my balls that most people wont.

    These days when people talk about democracy on a state level we are talking about western style multiparty democracy, as in either the presidential system or the parliamentary system, underline is, you vote for some dude as your 'representative' who promises to bring your concern to the policy makers on the national level even though there is no guarantee he will do so nor is there any punishment for him not keeping his promise.

    If that 'representative' is being bought by mega corporate and no longer give 2 ****s about his constituent is that still 'democracy' since its the 'process' not the result? Well if you are going to argue NO, then the US is not a democracy, or in your words , "far lower down in the ranking of democracy"

    If the district lines are drawn to favour a certain party and allow the candidates to choose the voters and not voters choose their representative is that still considered as 'democracy' since its the 'process' not the result? Is it???

    If an election presents 2 (or 3 ) false candidates would that still be a 'democracy' because its the 'process' not the results???

    If China suddenly throws out a transparent, fair and totally not-fixed referendum to let their people vote on whether a certain convict should be hang, shot, sentenced to life or released instead of sending them to an independent court to be judged, would you consider that 'democracy' because its all bout the 'process' of letting everyone vote with no fixing or rigging?

    I have lived in a democracy all my life to know that all these fancy words like 'democracy' 'freedom' are thrown around to make politicians look good, its meaning are often distorted to fit whatever narrative those in power wants to feed the people.

    Here is our differences, you are speaking of democracy as in an extremely idealistic , philosophical manner. In fact, every of your world views are. You judge actions of nations as "right" or "wrong", i judged them as 'Pragmatic' or not.





    Back on the main topic, No i dont agree with the removal of the 2 term limit. I trust the constitutional limits set on people in power more than i trust sheer populism displayed in elections.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    It's very difficult not to see this as a full return to Maoist autocracy by Xi Jinping. At the very least, he and the leadership are confirming their absolute power and denying even the possibility of another system or leadership. All this from a government that has never once put itself up for election to the people.

    We should move away from trading with China, apart from stocking Poundland and enabling Apple and Samsung and Nike to exploit cheap labour, all it really seems to achieve is cementing this totalitarian dictatorship in place. It's time to review the entire relationship with China and start insisting they offer their people genuine democracy or else bow out of the list of nations we do business with. We also need to put a stop to their ghastly 'New Silk Road' programme and their interference in Africa and elsewhere in Asia.
    Good luck with that.

    :rofl:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Napp)
    It's more likely I just find you views boorish, moronic and frankly ill-informed. Not to mention it is hilarious how upset you get when people disagree with you - note your little rant about the other user being from Malaysia.
    None of my little rants beat your many boorish, moronic, and frankly ill-informed attempts to obtain my acknowledgement of your presence.

    If you'd like to expand on how the EUI didn't put the US and Japan on the same level, despite putting them in the same category with a minimal difference in both points and rank, especially in relation to comparing Japan to Russia, I'm all ears.

    But of course you can't, since all you have been doing is to seeking my approval. This seems to be your life now, considering how closely you've been monitoring this thread, even when nobody was quoting you.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    What?? how can you put down a rebellion without sending any troops at all? Of course they did.
    So we agreed that China sent troops in to suppress this ethnic minority which led the Dalai Lama leaving Tibet.

    I'm glad to know you've learned something.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Cool you finally recognize that the China didnt have anything to do with the formation of 2 koreas. Thats a good start, Would North Korea been defeated by the Allied forces without China and the USSR? No one can say for sure. What you think is just an "if" and a huge one.
    Finally recognized? I never said China created North Korea, but yay congrats on pulling down a strawman you put up.

    In fact, I have not commented on why there was a division in the first place at all, as it's ultimately irrelevant to the fact that China has propped up North Korea since the Korean War, which I'm happy to know you've finally learned about.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    I have never mentioned anything about PRC, you can slowly scroll through my past post and read it. I said CHINA , not PRC. There is a distinction. No wonder you keep taking my post out of context.
    Are you finally going to say how possibly how you say Taiwan stole any land from anyone, or are you just going to continue saying blah blah blah?

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Because you sound like one of those people who hates hong kong, moans and complain endlessly about it , the best solution for the haters of hong kong is to leave, and never come back. By the way, i say that in my own country too. I practically say that to everyone living in every country.
    I don't live in Hong Kong...Oh wait now that comment is about me after all?

    You're like that Katy Perry song, except while her guy was hot and cold, you're like totally confused and contradictory.

    And for the record, a deluded person isn't what a patriot made.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Oh and yes the very native of hong kong can hate the place he grew up too. The biggest enemy of hongkong are often its own people. There are far too many traitors living in hong kong but consistently undermine it. As we malaysians call, enemies in the blanket. So yes, a hongkie can be jealous at his own birth place.
    A Hongkonger can hate Hong Kong, but a Hongkonger cannot be "jealous" of Hong Kong. You're swapping the 2 concepts because even you realized the "jealousy" claim simply does not work.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Oh noooooooooooooooooooooooooo, thats hugely debatable. If China does not do elections but rather hire pollster to poll policy opinion and make policy based on that would you consider that democracy because its THE PROCESS? I bet my balls that most people wont.
    It'd be more democratic than what it is now, and would most likely go up in the ranking. Whether it's then a "democracy", it depends on how far they go, such as whether the pollings are representative, anonymous, and whether they do change their policies following the results.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    These days when people talk about democracy on a state level we are talking about western style multiparty democracy, as in either the presidential system or the parliamentary system, underline is, you vote for some dude as your 'representative' who promises to bring your concern to the policy makers on the national level even though there is no guarantee he will do so nor is there any punishment for him not keeping his promise.

    If that 'representative' is being bought by mega corporate and no longer give 2 ****s about his constituent is that still 'democracy' since its the 'process' not the result? Well if you are going to argue NO, then the US is not a democracy, or in your words , "far lower down in the ranking of democracy"
    Yes, it's the process, not the result. But I think you're confused because politicians being controlled by the oligarchs would certainly also be a problem in the process.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    If the district lines are drawn to favour a certain party and allow the candidates to choose the voters and not voters choose their representative is that still considered as 'democracy' since its the 'process' not the result? Is it???
    So is this. You are once again showing you have an extremely primitive mind that can't process anything that has more than 2 sides.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    If an election presents 2 (or 3 ) false candidates would that still be a 'democracy' because its the 'process' not the results???
    You can't seem to process the idea in these scenarios with clearly procedural flaws, the process is at fault and thus it may not be a democracy because they haven't got a democratic process at all.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    If China suddenly throws out a transparent, fair and totally not-fixed referendum to let their people vote on whether a certain convict should be hang, shot, sentenced to life or released instead of sending them to an independent court to be judged, would you consider that 'democracy' because its all bout the 'process' of letting everyone vote with no fixing or rigging?
    Yes. That's called a direct democracy. Although of course it depends on whether it's just one this one single issue or if China will continue it with everything else.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    I have lived in a democracy all my life to know that all these fancy words like 'democracy' 'freedom' are thrown around to make politicians look good, its meaning are often distorted to fit whatever narrative those in power wants to feed the people.
    You have lived in a flawed democracy all your life and everyone recognizes Malaysia as such. Your prime minister would jail an opposition leader by calling him gay. The fact that that could happen demonstrated the flaw in your democratic process.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Here is our differences, you are speaking of democracy as in an extremely idealistic , philosophical manner. In fact, every of your world views are. You judge actions of nations as "right" or "wrong", i judged them as 'Pragmatic' or not.
    Once again, you're showing the fact that you cannot process ideas that are not binary - you can also understand whether something in "pragmatic" or not, and nothing else.

    I don't judge them based on whether they are "right" or "wrong", or at least if I do, there are clearly a multitude of factors under what makes something right or wrong.

    I judge China based on the impact it would have on itself, on Hong Kong, and indeed everyone else. That's the first layer, which by the way include things like economic benefits.

    The second layer is whether they would be good for the universal ideals I agree with. This once again contains many subsets of issues as there are many ideals involved.

    The third layer is whether as a Chinese "citizen", I want to see it happen. There are numerous aspects in this, such as stability, personal affection, political reasons, economic factors, just to name a few.

    You're acting as if I was judging them on a moral point of view, which was absurd but understandable, as your brain cannot process thoughts that are not binary.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    So we agreed that China sent troops in to suppress this ethnic minority which led the Dalai Lama leaving Tibet.

    I'm glad to know you've learned something.
    That was actually my point , on top of that Dalai Lama left 8 years later and not immediately. the Dalai Lama was friends with Chairman Mao during that period. I honestly dont know why you keep on repeating what i already was saying.

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    Finally recognized? I never said China created North Korea, but yay congrats on pulling down a strawman you put up.

    In fact, I have not commented on why there was a division in the first place at all, as it's ultimately irrelevant to the fact that China has propped up North Korea since the Korean War, which I'm happy to know you've finally learned about.
    I already knew korean war history. I was pointing out that china's place in the korean conflict is over exaggerated .

    and just to be honest with you, i didnt read those long wall of text you posted on korean and china's civil war history, i already knew it.


    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    Are you finally going to say how possibly how you say Taiwan stole any land from anyone, or are you just going to continue saying blah blah blah?
    You already said yourself Taiwan was the within the borders of the Qing Dynasty, and then later you spin it off and said PRC, take note i didnt say PRC, i said China. They are a bit different. If you keep swapping PRC and Qing Dynasty at your own will, you are actually twisting my words. In that case its pointless for me to even continue.


    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    I don't live in Hong Kong...Oh wait now that comment is about me after all?

    You're like that Katy Perry song, except while her guy was hot and cold, you're like totally confused and contradictory.

    And for the record, a deluded person isn't what a patriot made.
    I am making a general statement that might or might not include you, because first, i dont know where you live , second, i didnt plan to make a personal insult. I dont have to.

    oh and good to know you didnt disagree on my view on this issue. You just think that i am deluded and confused, because that really really makes you feel you are right.

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    A Hongkonger can hate Hong Kong, but a Hongkonger cannot be "jealous" of Hong Kong. You're swapping the 2 concepts because even you realized the "jealousy" claim simply does not work.
    Oh trust me feelings can work that way, more so especially for those who have already left it and want to justify their own decisions for leaving.


    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    It'd be more democratic than what it is now, and would most likely go up in the ranking. Whether it's then a "democracy", it depends on how far they go, such as whether the pollings are representative, anonymous, and whether they do change their policies following the results.



    Yes, it's the process, not the result. But I think you're confused because politicians being controlled by the oligarchs would certainly also be a problem in the process.


    So is this. You are once again showing you have an extremely primitive mind that can't process anything that has more than 2 sides.



    You can't seem to process the idea in these scenarios with clearly procedural flaws, the process is at fault and thus it may not be a democracy because they haven't got a democratic process at all.
    WOOOOAAAHHH , so now you agree that those examples which i mentioned are "procedure flaws " or "process flaws" and are problems that undermines democracy but completely ignored by everyone else...... Welcome to the club. More people like you and me are needed.

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    Yes. That's called a direct democracy. Although of course it depends on whether it's just one this one single issue or if China will continue it with everything else.
    Bullshi... nevermind. Okay. Assuming this is considered democracy, Then we can solve the taiwan problem by having both mainland and taiwan people vote in a totally unrigged, unfixed referendum on their combined political future? Thats how things work now?




    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)




    Once again, you're showing the fact that you cannot process ideas that are not binary - you can also understand whether something in "pragmatic" or not, and nothing else.

    I don't judge them based on whether they are "right" or "wrong", or at least if I do, there are clearly a multitude of factors under what makes something right or wrong.

    I judge China based on the impact it would have on itself, on Hong Kong, and indeed everyone else. That's the first layer, which by the way include things like economic benefits.

    The second layer is whether they would be good for the universal ideals I agree with. This once again contains many subsets of issues as there are many ideals involved.

    The third layer is whether as a Chinese "citizen", I want to see it happen. There are numerous aspects in this, such as stability, personal affection, political reasons, economic factors, just to name a few.

    You're acting as if I was judging them on a moral point of view, which was absurd but understandable, as your brain cannot process thoughts that are not binary.
    Okay you are telling me your thought process now, but why are you only using this thought process now? When you said you judge an action on the impact it would have on itself and others , i have already did that by saying that some things countries do are pragmatic, in another words, they sacrifice something they consider unimportant for bigger benefit.

    Actually thinking about what you said in this thread, it appears that you are the one who are thinking binarily because you very clearly coined things in terms of "right " and "wrong" , this was super obvious when you keep on emphasizing "2 wrongs dont make 1 right", like 3 or 4 times. So whos primitive now? There is no such thing as absolute right or wrong, and even if there is, who is right to or who is it wrong to? You also displayed binary thinking when you think that Hongkie can "hate" but cannot be "jealous" of Hong Kong, Woah, never heard of mixed feelings? Feelings are even more less binary than morality.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    That was actually my point , on top of that Dalai Lama left 8 years later and not immediately. the Dalai Lama was friends with Chairman Mao during that period. I honestly dont know why you keep on repeating what i already was saying.
    Oh so it was a strawman's argument all along, I see.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    I already knew korean war history. I was pointing out that china's place in the korean conflict is over exaggerated.
    And yet you have not provided a rebutal as to how it wasn't China who allowed NK to defeat SK+US. All you said was that you refused to speculate on history, which makes sense now that considering...

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    and just to be honest with you, i didnt read those long wall of text you posted on korean and china's civil war history, i already knew it.
    You still don't know much about their history.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    You already said yourself Taiwan was the within the borders of the Qing Dynasty, and then later you spin it off and said PRC, take note i didnt say PRC, i said China. They are a bit different. If you keep swapping PRC and Qing Dynasty at your own will, you are actually twisting my words. In that case its pointless for me to even continue.
    It's pointless because your argument was utterly stupid. After so many hours you are still unable to explain how Taiwan has "stolen" any land from China.

    i even pointed out the fact that if the "successor state" claim is somehow how you based your claim, then Mongolia would also be stealing from China. And guess what? I guess half of Asia "stole" lands from Mongolia as they were once ruled by the Mongol Empire.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    I am making a general statement that might or might not include you, because first, i dont know where you live , second, i didnt plan to make a personal insult. I dont have to.
    ...The spin.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    WOOOOAAAHHH , so now you agree that those examples which i mentioned are "procedure flaws " or "process flaws" and are problems that undermines democracy but completely ignored by everyone else...... Welcome to the club. More people like you and me are needed.
    They weren't ignored by everyone else. I have to repeat that Japan is considered a flawed democracy. You really need to get a dictionary because it seems you are still having trouble understanding the word.

    But just so you know, to say something is "flawed" means something is problematic in a way, something is not perfect. Everyone knows Japan's democracy isn't perfect.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Bullshi... nevermind. Okay. Assuming this is considered democracy, Then we can solve the taiwan problem by having both mainland and taiwan people vote in a totally unrigged, unfixed referendum on their combined political future? Thats how things work now?
    That's literally how Spain works. The majority of Spain did not vote a party that supports Catalan independence, and thus Catalonia cannot get independence from Spain.

    The problem with doing it on Taiwan is that Taiwan is a sovereign state. And the reality is, if there's such a vote, China would need to launch a proper military invasion to take the land. There's literally no difference between doing that, and doing a referendum with China and Japan to vote on whether Japan should be a part of China.

    But by the way, since you clearly don't know - the inability to protect minority rights is seen as a flaw in a country's democracy.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Okay you are telling me your thought process now, but why are you only using this thought process now? When you said you judge an action on the impact it would have on itself and others , i have already did that by saying that some things countries do are pragmatic, in another words, they sacrifice something they consider unimportant for bigger benefit.
    It's not my fault your level of comprehension is so pathetically low you are simply unable to understand anything without my spelling things out for you.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Actually thinking about what you said in this thread, it appears that you are the one who are thinking binarily because you very clearly coined things in terms of "right " and "wrong" , this was super obvious when you keep on emphasizing "2 wrongs dont make 1 right", like 3 or 4 times. So whos primitive now? There is no such thing as absolute right or wrong, and even if there is, who is right to or who is it wrong to? You also displayed binary thinking when you think that Hongkie can "hate" but cannot be "jealous" of Hong Kong, Woah, never heard of mixed feelings? Feelings are even more less binary than morality.
    You are the primitive, because you have once again demonstrated your obvious inability to think in less simplistic terms.

    1. On that one single issue of massacre, I used a moral right or wrong judgment, but in fact also allowed for the possibility of you disagreeing, and thus opened up the discussion to that direction potentially.

    2. On the issue of China's imperialistic behaviour, "right" or "wrong" was, as explained explicitly, simplistic terms provided for someone with a binary mind like you to understand the situation. As explained very clearly, in that case the concepts of "right" and "wrong" involve the multi-layered consideration of such imperialism.

    Not to mention it's a common phrase in English. It's a fixed expression. I admit I'm not Shakespeare and so I did not coin my own phrases.

    The irony really is that by arguing that I was judging the issue as only either "right" or "wrong", you have once again shown how primitive your mind really is.

    You are not able to understand the concepts of board terms containing complex meanings. This suggests that your level of comprehension is on the surface level, and you are unable to read beyond that. Around a primary school level understanding? But then, you're an EAL learner so I guess it's not fair to put it that way.

    You are not able to understand that different standards can be and are applied to different things, at different times. You're working under the idea that if I judge one thing based on Standard A, all other things are judged purely based on Standard A as well. The reality is that is often not the case. Let me give you a simple example: If I go to a shop and buy Item A, I can be buying it because "I like it"; but if I go to the shop again and buy Item B, that doesn't have to be my reason for buying it. It can be because "I need it" or "it's good value" or any number of reasons.

    I hope this very relatable example has enabled to begin understanding how non-binary thinking works.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)

    Oh so it was a strawman's argument all along, I see.
    Why, you think your own argument as a strawman?

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)

    And yet you have not provided a rebutal as to how it wasn't China who allowed NK to defeat SK+US. All you said was that you refused to speculate on history, which makes sense now that considering...

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    You still don't know much about their history.
    The irony, do you even know anything about korean history?

    Pro tip: North korea didnt defeat SK + US , it was a draw.

    I can testify that south korea is still standing and very prosperous.

    To say its SK + US is an understatement., the allied powers has other UN members who participated in the korean war.



    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)


    It's pointless because your argument was utterly stupid. After so many hours you are still unable to explain how Taiwan has "stolen" any land from China.

    i even pointed out the fact that if the "successor state" claim is somehow how you based your claim, then Mongolia would also be stealing from China. And guess what? I guess half of Asia "stole" lands from Mongolia as they were once ruled by the Mongol Empire.
    Of course its stupid, every argument you lose is a "stupid" one. You have already explained it yourself that Taiwan was under Qing Dynasty control, and hence is/was part of China, but not the PRC.

    I have already explained on the issue of mongolia , why dont you scroll back and see?

    edit: since you mentioned mongolia, you realise that China has already negotiated with mongolia on border issues? Since its negotiated and both sides are happy, whats wrong with it? You prefer to have more border disputes not less?




    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    They weren't ignored by everyone else. I have to repeat that Japan is considered a flawed democracy. You really need to get a dictionary because it seems you are still having trouble understanding the word.



    But just so you know, to say something is "flawed" means something is problematic in a way, something is not perfect. Everyone knows Japan's democracy isn't perfect.
    I have been saying that the moment i compared it to russia's. Where is your comprehension?

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    That's literally how Spain works. The majority of Spain did not vote a party that supports Catalan independence, and thus Catalonia cannot get independence from Spain.

    The problem with doing it on Taiwan is that Taiwan is a sovereign state. And the reality is, if there's such a vote, China would need to launch a proper military invasion to take the land. There's literally no difference between doing that, and doing a referendum with China and Japan to vote on whether Japan should be a part of China.

    But by the way, since you clearly don't know - the inability to protect minority rights is seen as a flaw in a country's democracy.
    Well done for trying to explain that, but it wasnt what i meant. What i was saying is what if democracy is being used to attack democratic values? I would personally consider that undemocratic. But nevermind, just pretend I didnt say that. I am already satisfied with your example.


    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    ...The spin.
    you should reserve that quote for that effort to defend yourself down there. its impressive.

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    It's not my fault your level of comprehension is so pathetically low you are simply unable to understand anything without my spelling things out for you.



    You are the primitive, because you have once again demonstrated your obvious inability to think in less simplistic terms.

    1. On that one single issue of massacre, I used a moral right or wrong judgment, but in fact also allowed for the possibility of you disagreeing, and thus opened up the discussion to that direction potentially.

    2. On the issue of China's imperialistic behaviour, "right" or "wrong" was, as explained explicitly, simplistic terms provided for someone with a binary mind like you to understand the situation. As explained very clearly, in that case the concepts of "right" and "wrong" involve the multi-layered consideration of such imperialism.

    Not to mention it's a common phrase in English. It's a fixed expression. I admit I'm not Shakespeare and so I did not coin my own phrases.

    The irony really is that by arguing that I was judging the issue as only either "right" or "wrong", you have once again shown how primitive your mind really is.

    You are not able to understand the concepts of board terms containing complex meanings. This suggests that your level of comprehension is on the surface level, and you are unable to read beyond that. Around a primary school level understanding? But then, you're an EAL learner so I guess it's not fair to put it that way.

    You are not able to understand that different standards can be and are applied to different things, at different times. You're working under the idea that if I judge one thing based on Standard A, all other things are judged purely based on Standard A as well. The reality is that is often not the case. Let me give you a simple example: If I go to a shop and buy Item A, I can be buying it because "I like it"; but if I go to the shop again and buy Item B, that doesn't have to be my reason for buying it. It can be because "I need it" or "it's good value" or any number of reasons.

    I hope this very relatable example has enabled to begin understanding how non-binary thinking works.

    Ha okay! So.... you tried really hard to dumb things down for a simpleton like me, keep things simple, keep things as binary as possible for a binary mind like me to understand, and then i was the one who tried to explain to you hey....maybe things aren' that simple, not black and white, right or wrong, there are strategic considerations at play. And then now you have to make a big U turn and give yourself a full throttled defense over why you want to make things binary.


    Why do you do this to yourself??
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Why, you think your own argument as a strawman?
    My argument was that China sent in troops in suppress Tibet and the Dalai Lama left because of that. That is a fact.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    The irony, do you even know anything about korean history?

    Pro tip: North korea didnt defeat SK + US , it was a draw.

    I can testify that south korea is still standing and very prosperous.

    To say its SK + US is an understatement., the allied powers has other UN members who participated in the korean war.
    I have been to South Korea so you can save it. By defeating, I clearly meant pushing the US to stop the war.

    Or...Since Germany, Italy, and Japan all still exist, perhaps they were never defeated in WWII, by your logic?

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Of course its stupid, every argument you lose is a "stupid" one. You have already explained it yourself that Taiwan was under Qing Dynasty control, and hence is/was part of China, but not the PRC.

    I have already explained on the issue of mongolia , why dont you scroll back and see?
    Interesting. By your logic, PRC stole from Taiwan (RoC), so has Mongolia, since Taiwan did not make an agreement with Mongolia or the PRC on the borders.

    That's all that matters, right? That there only needs to be a claim made and unsolved? Not whether the regime has ever had any level of control over the territories?

    I can't see how, in any way at all, I'm "losing" this argument. I feel sorry for you seeing your pathetic attempts to hold on to this weird "Taiwan stole lands from China" argument.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    I have been saying that the moment i compared it to russia's. Where is your comprehension?
    I'm sorry that I haven't been able to fix your binary mind. It appears that you think a flawed democracy is still the same as an authoritarian state.

    Where is your comprehension indeed. But I guess intellect can't be taught.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Ha okay! So.... you tried really hard to dumb things down for a simpleton like me, keep things simple, keep things as binary as possible for a binary mind like me to understand, and then i was the one who tried to explain to you hey....maybe things aren' that simple, not black and white, right or wrong, there are strategic considerations at play. And then now you have to make a big U turn and give yourself a full throttled defense over why you want to make things binary.
    I see you still don't understand it.

    Let me do this one last time:

    1. "2 wrongs don't make a right" is a set phrase in English. It's an expression. One doesn't normally change an expression because it's idiomatic. You may not have grasped that in your English class, but it is what it is.

    2. General terms can and do represent a variety of concepts. "Right" and "wrong" can be general terms, and they are in that context.

    Let me give you an example: "developed" countries.

    For a country to be "developed", it's not just one thing or two. Just to name a few, they'd have to have a certain amount of wealth (the concept of wealth), distributed relatively equally (the concept of equality), have a low enough crime rate (the concepts of safety and security), have good enough infrastructure (the concepts of material development, transportation/accessibility etc), have adequate public service (the concepts of public education, education, public healthcare etc), and so on.

    Whilst the overall outcome could be summed up by saying it is or is not developed, there are clearly many concepts involved and many calculations before reaching such a conclusion.

    3. As I've said, different things can be subjected to different sets of standards. With massacre, I used the moral standpoint; with imperialism, I saw it from the standpoints of justice, human/civil rights, diplomatic relations, economic development, culture etc. It may be difficult for you to understand this, but it's true.

    I really thought the shopping analogy would have been sufficient, but I guess it's true that intelligence cannot be taught, and your limited brain power is just inadequate to process ideas that are not simple enough for a kindergartener to understand.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Why do you do this to yourself??
    Why do you do this to yourself indeed. When you can't even explain how someone can steal something away from you if that person has never ever had that thing.

    Oh wait, I think you've stolen a million dollars from me. When are you giving it back to me??
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    My argument was that China sent in troops in suppress Tibet and the Dalai Lama left because of that. That is a fact.
    May i add in 1959?

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)


    I have been to South Korea so you can save it. By defeating, I clearly meant pushing the US to stop the war.

    Or...Since Germany, Italy, and Japan all still exist, perhaps they were never defeated in WWII, by your logic?
    Poor choice of words. North korea 's military objective is to unify all of korea, pushing US to an armistice in the negotiating table is hardly "defeating" . As a matter of fact, the terms that North Korea got in the end was worse than what was offered during the initial rounds of negotiations.

    Nazi Germany, Facist italy, imperial Japan no longer exist . You see that German flag? It looks different than the WWII one is it not?



    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)

    Interesting. By your logic, PRC stole from Taiwan (RoC), so has Mongolia, since Taiwan did not make an agreement with Mongolia or the PRC on the borders.

    That's all that matters, right? That there only needs to be a claim made and unsolved? Not whether the regime has ever had any level of control over the territories?

    I can't see how, in any way at all, I'm "losing" this argument. I feel sorry for you seeing your pathetic attempts to hold on to this weird "Taiwan stole lands from China" argument.
    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    hence is/was part of China, but not the PRC.
    Learn to read.....



    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    I'm sorry that I haven't been able to fix your binary mind. It appears that you think a flawed democracy is still the same as an authoritarian state.

    Where is your comprehension indeed. But I guess intellect can't be taught.
    Apparently you were the one who said that democracy has a scale . So if a democracy is flawed and scaled down and become "less democratic", it becomes more authoritarian, its what you said. Trying to stuff countries into a group with absolute labels on them was what you were very much against. Most countries have some elements of of both sides, still remember?

    How many times do you want to flip your position?

    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    I see you still don't understand it.

    Let me do this one last time:

    1. "2 wrongs don't make a right" is a set phrase in English. It's an expression. One doesn't normally change an expression because it's idiomatic. You may not have grasped that in your English class, but it is what it is.

    2. General terms can and do represent a variety of concepts. "Right" and "wrong" can be general terms, and they are in that context.

    Let me give you an example: "developed" countries.

    For a country to be "developed", it's not just one thing or two. Just to name a few, they'd have to have a certain amount of wealth (the concept of wealth), distributed relatively equally (the concept of equality), have a low enough crime rate (the concepts of safety and security), have good enough infrastructure (the concepts of material development, transportation/accessibility etc), have adequate public service (the concepts of public education, education, public healthcare etc), and so on.

    Whilst the overall outcome could be summed up by saying it is or is not developed, there are clearly many concepts involved and many calculations before reaching such a conclusion.

    3. As I've said, different things can be subjected to different sets of standards. With massacre, I used the moral standpoint; with imperialism, I saw it from the standpoints of justice, human/civil rights, diplomatic relations, economic development, culture etc. It may be difficult for you to understand this, but it's true.

    I really thought the shopping analogy would have been sufficient, but I guess it's true that intelligence cannot be taught, and your limited brain power is just inadequate to process ideas that are not simple enough for a kindergartener to understand.
    Napp, i 've not read the previous pages, does he always do this? Saying something to provoke a reaction then when someone replies he immediately flip his position and pretend he took the opposite side?

    Btw do you agree with him?


    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    Why do you do this to yourself indeed. When you can't even explain how someone can steal something away from you if that person has never ever had that thing.

    Oh wait, I think you've stolen a million dollars from me. When are you giving it back to me??
    Sure, tell me your address and phone number and i 'll come and return it to you asap.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by HucktheForde)

    Napp, i 've not read the previous pages, does he always do this? Saying something to provoke a reaction then when someone replies he immediately flip his position and pretend he took the opposite side?

    Btw do you agree with him?
    More or less.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Napp)
    More or less. This user is particularly sanctimonious as well, it's much easier just to annoy them instead
    A very professional community assistant.

    This other poster claims that Taiwan "stole" land from China and has yet to even provide a logical account of how that is possible. Yet, you blindly side with him because you remain bitter over not winning my approval.

    Am I really that important to you?
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    A very professional community assistant.

    This other poster claims that Taiwan "stole" land from China and has yet to even provide a logical account of how that is possible. Yet, you blindly side with him because you remain bitter over not winning my approval.

    Am I really that important to you?
    Why thank you

    Erm you're the one quoting me?
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    May i add in 1959?
    A military takeover is a military takeover.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Poor choice of words. North korea 's military objective is to unify all of korea, pushing US to an armistice in the negotiating table is hardly "defeating" . As a matter of fact, the terms that North Korea got in the end was worse than what was offered during the initial rounds of negotiations.

    Nazi Germany, Facist italy, imperial Japan no longer exist . You see that German flag? It looks different than the WWII one is it not?
    Sure, I accept that it it was a poor word choice, but I clearly demonstrated my knowledge of South Korea's continued existence.

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Learn to read.....
    A note to self?

    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Apparently you were the one who said that democracy has a scale . So if a democracy is flawed and scaled down and become "less democratic", it becomes more authoritarian, its what you said. Trying to stuff countries into a group with absolute labels on them was what you were very much against. Most countries have some elements of of both sides, still remember?

    How many times do you want to flip your position?
    I am using the categories used by the EUI. Those are not my categories.

    Also, what a failed drag. Of course democracy is a scale, and of course you can still put different labels on them.

    Do you say the tea is still hot? Do you say the ice is cold?

    Wait - if you're putting on these labels, does it mean you don't recognize temperature as a scale?
 
 
 

1,489

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.