|
There is a good chance that you are right. We now know that many of these so-called popular
revolutions that occurred in Eastern Europe and appeared at the time to be spontaneous were actually
funded and planned long in advance by the Americans. Their goal was to remove a leader who was not
amenable to American pressures and to install one who was.
Now we see these American puppets all across the region, pursuing the interests of a foreign power
against the wishes of their own people. The Ukrainian government, for example, is pushing for NATO
membership even though the majority of Ukrainians are opposed to it.
We know that Dalai Lama has had extensive ties to the CIA in the past and his government (or should
that be theocracy) in exile has been funded by the American government. It is very likely that other
elements of the Tibetan opposition have American backers too. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
America doesn't need to try to destablize China. They've done a fine job of that themselves.
The population of China between 20-40 is about 400 million. About 70% of that number is male. That
means there are about 140 million Chinese males with no prospects for marriage and their odds of
getting laid are even less.
You want to destabalize China? Give them a good dose of good old western porn! Let em see what
they're missing out on. You'll see "destabalization" real quick.
Good luck commies! |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I completely disagree with this statement. China is no gentle giant, for it persecutes the Tibetans,
the Falun Gong movement and the Muslims and Christians as well. The figures for just these groups
alone is over 100 million people. These are not the actions of a gentle giant. It prevents its
people from thinking for themselves and brainwashes them to such as extent that they cannot relate
to the rest of the world properly because there is no freedom of information. The US has too much
to gain from a stable China, much Western capital is behind the rapid industrialisation of China.
The unrest in Tibet was caused by Chinese forces and not Tibetans. They just used the Tibetans as an
excuse it was all fake, just as the reasons for persecuting Falun Gong were made up by the
authorities. A political party that persecutes people who follow Truth, Benevolence and Forbearance
is not gentle, it is evil. The CCP try to programme their people to believe that they have a common
enemy, and that they need to be suspicious of foreigners as enemies, its all rubbish. It's just
designed to get the people to keep the CCP going rather than collapsing as it is starting to do.
Many Chinese people are waking up to the fact that the CCP is rubbish and they are fed up of the
corruption and scandals. This is no gentle giant, nor is it sane and neither can it be trusted until
the CCP are gone and some decent Chinese people come forth to run their own country rather than
these hideous thugs. The effect of China on our own freedoms in the West is already apparent as the
media who are tied into the business interests in China will not talk too much about what actually
goes on there. So without freedom of information we have no real chance of having a balanced debate
because there is only speculation. The biggest enemy China has is the CCP, and it needs to get rid
of them before it is too late for the great Chinese people. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
The Tibetan opposition certainly has American backers, but we need to differentiate between support
from federal, governmental agencies, and that of private, non-profit organizations. For example,
George Soros, a wealthy American philanthropist, has a long history of funding pro-democracy groups
and organizations dedicated to creating liberal-democratic societies in countries throughout Eastern
Europe and Central Asia. Soros has founded a university, he runs the Open Society Institute and
hands out hundreds of thousands of dollars in grants to intellectuals in these countries.
If Soros were to fund the Tibetan independence movement (and some do claim that he already provides
the Dalai Lama with financial support), then it would be a mistake to see this as a form of American
imperialism or a cynical foreign policy drafted in the confines of the White House, aimed at
weakening possible rivals, like China. After all, Soros has very poor relations with the current
Republican administration; he funded and openly supported John Kerry's campaign in 2004.
The US clearly sees China as an emerging power and as a rival, but I doubt that it is following a
policy aimed at destabilizing this country. There is a long-standing line of thinking in US foreign
policy circles, which essentially argues that it is often better to have a stable dictatorship in a
given country than a multiparty democracy that may destabilize not just a single state, but an
entire region. Even if the current neo-conservative administration has (in part) jettisoned this
approach, it is likely to return once a new president is elected. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
30 Mar 2008 20:21
Sign In
For and Against Recent Activity
