War is sweet for those who haven't experienced it.
While Chinese actions are an act of war, I'm not ready to nuke Beijing over it. I do note, however, that the hill I live on should form a blast shadow for me if they hit Seattle.
On the other hand, China should be made to pay a very, very, large price for this action. I think that is where this is headed.
They were collecting intelligence by flying in international airspace with their radio on and the tape recorder running.
You might have a point if they were over chinese airspace, but they were not.
I'm sorry you have no understanding of logic: he flew by close before, so he did this time?
I'm sorry you are so disingenuous. He obviously flew close this time. In fact, he hit our plane.
I'm sorry that you don't understand the concept of a soverign nation, and that China doesn't have to do what the U.S. says.
Which wasn't the point. The point was that China was engaging in reckless endangerment of flights in international airspace. The point was that the Chinese had ample warning that such an accident was just waiting to happen.
I'm sorry that you're idiotic enough to believe that U.S. planes are soverign territories. Let's see some examples from previous times.
A military ship or airplane is considered soverign territory, like an embassy. You appear to be the one with no appreciation for the normal behavior between nations.
I'm sorry that you've decided to bring up unrelated past deeds to justify your position.
Which wasn't the point of the comment, of course. The american flight needs no justification. This point was just to show how brutal the Chinese regime is and has been. The Cultural revolution was something the Chinese did to their own people, and has no parallel in the US. None of that excuses brutality in the american indian wars, or the sickening internment issue. By the way: the people put in American Camps tended to survive the experience, something that didn't happen as often in Nazi or Chinese camps.
I'm sorry that the U.S. population persecutes atheists, Satanists, Wiccans, and pretty much anything not Christian, Muslim, or Jewish.
Persecute atheists, you must be joking. And I really don't recall any 'wiccans' being sent to jail for being Wiccans. You are stretching mightily.
And of course, Tibet was an independent country and Taiwan has been ruled by China for about 5 years of the last 100. So that doesn't quite match the situation in the US civil war, does it?
Oh, as a bonus: I'm sorry that the U.S. regularly imprisonates numerous non-violent drug offenders.
Do you have any evidence that such drug offenders are treated more gently in China?
Please note my sincere regret at your _sad_ debating abilities, and I humbly await your gracious forgiveness
I have do not know why you consider the US your bete noire. But you lack the persipicacity you claim, and have offered only ersatz erudition. An epigone, in other words.
In plainer language, you seem to have delusions of adequacy regarding your facility with logic.
Peace
The US plane is just a big radio reciever, flying in international airspace.
We have a right to fly that route and listen to the airwaves. The US did nothing wrong.
Incidentally, the chinese fly these missions too. They just aren't as good at it.
That you rape and slaughter most of the Vietnamese before you leave in some halfhearted manner?
Communism has probably killed about 100 million people in the 20th century (see Black Book of Communism), half in China. Between the boat people out of Vietnam and the killing fields in Cambodia I'm surprised you made this comment. Haven't you noticed that such countries build walls to keep people IN while the US builds walls to keep people OUT? The US was certainly justified morally in trying to prevent the spread of communism to South Vietnam. The only problem is that we didn't do a good job of it.
That you drop two a-bombs instead of one?
It apparently took two. And even then, the Japanese military didn't want to surrender. The surrender announcemnt had to be smuggled out of the imperial palace. After Pearl Harbor and the Bataan death march, they are lucky we only dropped two. (Then again, we were starting to have trouble coming up with targets.) I'm sure the Chinese in Nanking would have preferred we drop a few more.
Actually, most of us are trying to get them [Madonna and McDonald's] out.
But if that were really true, they wouldn't BE there. At least I've never heard of a marine threatening to shoot someone who didn't order a big mac.
Whoa!!!! Sure American's might make an attempt to clean up some of their messes, but other countries certainly do as well (for example China) and many do a better job than the US.
Sorry, but I've been to China. They aren't rich enough to even think of being green. Poor countries are invariably dirty countries.
The US does the worst job of any country in cleaning up after itself in terms of greenhouse gas emissions (either per capita, or in total emmissions).
First of all, the global warming thing is not based on a lot of sound science, it is based upon people that want the industrial revolution shut down.
Secondly, if the US were really contributing to the buildup of C02 in the air, then there would be a noticeable jump in the CO2 concentration off of our east coast compared to our west coast. Guess what? It isn't there. Yes, the US pumps a lot of CO2 into the air. But we also take almost all of it OUT of the air. We do that by growing wheat and by growing trees that we then use for paper before burying. (If you want to test someone for a rational response to the alleged global warming scenario, ask about nuclear power and paper recyling. Someone who supports nuclear power and opposes paper recycling is at least being consistent when they say they are really concerned about global warming.)
So why didn't the Europeans want to give us credit for our carbon sinks? Because they had two objectives: 1) play to local green religion and 2) slow down a US they can't compete with. Bush isn't playing, and that is a GOOD thing.
So don't be so hard on Australia. Indeed, all you have to do is burn really high sulphur coal for your electric power on your east coast and create a smog cloud over the southern pacific to help us all with "global warming". Think of it as giving the world a sunscreen. (I got that idea from a Nobel winning Physicist.)
Peace
Well, first of all I doubt an American pilot would be that incompetent.
The American pilot would have shadowed the plane, approaching from the left side, just like we worked out with the Soviets.
If it came down in distress, the crew would have been free to go when they wished to do so, and the US authorities wouldn't have taken the plane apart.
Slashdot Mirror
War is sweet for those who haven't experienced it. While Chinese actions are an act of war, I'm not ready to nuke Beijing over it. I do note, however, that the hill I live on should form a blast shadow for me if they hit Seattle. On the other hand, China should be made to pay a very, very, large price for this action. I think that is where this is headed.
They were collecting intelligence by flying in international airspace with their radio on and the tape recorder running. You might have a point if they were over chinese airspace, but they were not.
I'm sorry you have no understanding of logic: he flew by close before, so he did this time? I'm sorry you are so disingenuous. He obviously flew close this time. In fact, he hit our plane. I'm sorry that you don't understand the concept of a soverign nation, and that China doesn't have to do what the U.S. says. Which wasn't the point. The point was that China was engaging in reckless endangerment of flights in international airspace. The point was that the Chinese had ample warning that such an accident was just waiting to happen. I'm sorry that you're idiotic enough to believe that U.S. planes are soverign territories. Let's see some examples from previous times. A military ship or airplane is considered soverign territory, like an embassy. You appear to be the one with no appreciation for the normal behavior between nations. I'm sorry that you've decided to bring up unrelated past deeds to justify your position. Which wasn't the point of the comment, of course. The american flight needs no justification. This point was just to show how brutal the Chinese regime is and has been. The Cultural revolution was something the Chinese did to their own people, and has no parallel in the US. None of that excuses brutality in the american indian wars, or the sickening internment issue. By the way: the people put in American Camps tended to survive the experience, something that didn't happen as often in Nazi or Chinese camps. I'm sorry that the U.S. population persecutes atheists, Satanists, Wiccans, and pretty much anything not Christian, Muslim, or Jewish. Persecute atheists, you must be joking. And I really don't recall any 'wiccans' being sent to jail for being Wiccans. You are stretching mightily. And of course, Tibet was an independent country and Taiwan has been ruled by China for about 5 years of the last 100. So that doesn't quite match the situation in the US civil war, does it? Oh, as a bonus: I'm sorry that the U.S. regularly imprisonates numerous non-violent drug offenders. Do you have any evidence that such drug offenders are treated more gently in China? Please note my sincere regret at your _sad_ debating abilities, and I humbly await your gracious forgiveness I have do not know why you consider the US your bete noire. But you lack the persipicacity you claim, and have offered only ersatz erudition. An epigone, in other words. In plainer language, you seem to have delusions of adequacy regarding your facility with logic. Peace
The US plane is just a big radio reciever, flying in international airspace. We have a right to fly that route and listen to the airwaves. The US did nothing wrong. Incidentally, the chinese fly these missions too. They just aren't as good at it.
Communism has probably killed about 100 million people in the 20th century (see Black Book of Communism), half in China. Between the boat people out of Vietnam and the killing fields in Cambodia I'm surprised you made this comment. Haven't you noticed that such countries build walls to keep people IN while the US builds walls to keep people OUT? The US was certainly justified morally in trying to prevent the spread of communism to South Vietnam. The only problem is that we didn't do a good job of it.
That you drop two a-bombs instead of one? It apparently took two. And even then, the Japanese military didn't want to surrender. The surrender announcemnt had to be smuggled out of the imperial palace. After Pearl Harbor and the Bataan death march, they are lucky we only dropped two. (Then again, we were starting to have trouble coming up with targets.) I'm sure the Chinese in Nanking would have preferred we drop a few more. Actually, most of us are trying to get them [Madonna and McDonald's] out. But if that were really true, they wouldn't BE there. At least I've never heard of a marine threatening to shoot someone who didn't order a big mac.Whoa!!!! Sure American's might make an attempt to clean up some of their messes, but other countries certainly do as well (for example China) and many do a better job than the US. Sorry, but I've been to China. They aren't rich enough to even think of being green. Poor countries are invariably dirty countries. The US does the worst job of any country in cleaning up after itself in terms of greenhouse gas emissions (either per capita, or in total emmissions). First of all, the global warming thing is not based on a lot of sound science, it is based upon people that want the industrial revolution shut down. Secondly, if the US were really contributing to the buildup of C02 in the air, then there would be a noticeable jump in the CO2 concentration off of our east coast compared to our west coast. Guess what? It isn't there. Yes, the US pumps a lot of CO2 into the air. But we also take almost all of it OUT of the air. We do that by growing wheat and by growing trees that we then use for paper before burying. (If you want to test someone for a rational response to the alleged global warming scenario, ask about nuclear power and paper recyling. Someone who supports nuclear power and opposes paper recycling is at least being consistent when they say they are really concerned about global warming.) So why didn't the Europeans want to give us credit for our carbon sinks? Because they had two objectives: 1) play to local green religion and 2) slow down a US they can't compete with. Bush isn't playing, and that is a GOOD thing. So don't be so hard on Australia. Indeed, all you have to do is burn really high sulphur coal for your electric power on your east coast and create a smog cloud over the southern pacific to help us all with "global warming". Think of it as giving the world a sunscreen. (I got that idea from a Nobel winning Physicist.) Peace
Well, first of all I doubt an American pilot would be that incompetent. The American pilot would have shadowed the plane, approaching from the left side, just like we worked out with the Soviets. If it came down in distress, the crew would have been free to go when they wished to do so, and the US authorities wouldn't have taken the plane apart.