Originally Posted by WarMachine

I don't see the logic in stopping guerilla fighters by destroying civlian infrastructure. Remember when the US tried that in the Vietnam war, yeah, the vietcong became stronger afterwards and the North was undterred. Hezbollah while smaller, can pretty much act without any infrastructure since they have cars that can roam the land.

I don't think Israel wants to destroy those civilian structures, but are forced to. They're basically sending the message to the Lebanese government that if they can't handle this terroristic militia who are threatening Israel's northern border, then they will take care of them for Lebanon. If the Lebanese people are sympathizing or harboring these terrorists, then wherever they go, it's fair game. Israel even went the extra distance and dropped leaflets telling the Lebanese civilians where they are going to launch offensives so they would have time to evacuate, but if the Lebanese people want to defend their precious Hizbollah, then so be it.

I feel that the US now is too much sensitive for his own security and always takes even a little anti-American topic as terrorism. I don't know why.Maybe, The US's look to the other world is changed by 9.11 so much. Many arabic and other areas' organizations were and being defined as terrorists. Don't the US can wipe all of them out of the earth? No, I think it is impossible. Ten more years has already passed since the US began to carry his army to destroy them. But I don't see any coming scene that the US becomes safer than before.

Originally Posted by b2ee

I feel that the US now is too much sensitive for his own security and always takes even a little anti-American topic as terrorism. I don't know why.Maybe, The US's look to the other world is changed by 9.11 so much. Many arabic and other areas' organizations were and being defined as terrorists. Don't the US can wipe all of them out of the earth? No, I think it is impossible. Ten more years has already passed since the US began to carry his army to destroy them. But I don't see any coming scene that the US becomes safer than before.

Well, you can say that to just about any country that has gone through a major event as 9/11. For China, I'd say that it would have to be the Tianamen Square event. China is now sensitve about other countries and organizations (the UN, Amnesty International, human rights groups, etc.) criticizing it about its human rights abuses and lack of freedom. Any internet searches about Tianamen, democracy, free speech, etc. from a Chinese ISP nets you a nice stop page courtesy of the "internet police." Any reports on these abuses gets you a nice "don't meddle in our internal affairs" message from China. Over 15 years has passed from that historical day but China knows the sentiment is still there. Even to this day, that Square is guarded closely by Chinese guards and around June 4th, its security rivals that of nuclear silo sites. Two decades is about to pass but China is still worried. Will the day come when the CCP falls? Yes. When? When the Chinese people get smart. Just an example of how an event can cause a nation to view the world differently.

Originally Posted by ASTRALdragon

Well, you can say that to just about any country that has gone through a major event as 9/11. For China, I'd say that it would have to be the Tianamen Square event. China is now sensitve about other countries and organizations (the UN, Amnesty International, human rights groups, etc.) criticizing it about its human rights abuses and lack of freedom. Any internet searches about Tianamen, democracy, free speech, etc. from a Chinese ISP nets you a nice stop page courtesy of the "internet police." Any reports on these abuses gets you a nice "don't meddle in our internal affairs" message from China. Over 15 years has passed from that historical day but China knows the sentiment is still there. Even to this day, that Square is guarded closely by Chinese guards and around June 4th, its security rivals that of nuclear silo sites. Two decades is about to pass but China is still worried. Will the day come when the CCP falls? Yes. When? When the Chinese people get smart. Just an example of how an event can cause a nation to view the world differently.

this is a good and reasonable comment.

[quote=ASTRALdragon]Well, you can say that to just about any country that has gone through a major event as 9/11. For China, I'd say that it would have to be the Tianamen Square ......quote]


Yes,after Tianamen Square event, China self-protects more, but China did not close its door and now is still open to the world. To be frank,compared with the old time of China, the human right and freedom for normal China people is changing better and is not awful just like what you think. But I know it is still far away from the Western standards. You know, Rome is not a day set up. We need time to adjust ourselves.

Every country has its own security concept and know what is the most important issue for its nation just as Tianamen Square event to China,and also 9.11 to the U.S. Difference does exist among nations because of different culture and history,but what's more important is talk I think. Do you agree with me?

One more point need to be clarified by myself. In my last post, what I want to address is that the current method of the U.S to the global terrorism can not work very effectively. The U.S aims at too many enemies at the same time and is lack of enough effort to wipe them.

Originally Posted by b2ee

Yes,after Tianamen Square event, China self-protects more, but China did not close its door and now is still open to the world. To be frank,compared with the old time of China, the human right and freedom for normal China people is changing better and is not awful just like what you think. But I know it is still far away from the Western standards. You know, Rome is not a day set up. We need time to adjust ourselves.

True, that Rome was not built in a day, but as far as I remember ancient history, China's history is a lot more extensive. As for the conditions in China changing for the better, well I believe that's highly debatable. There is no "Western standard," just a human rights standard. Take for example the latest law enacted by China stating that if news agencies reported anything "sensitive" (I put sensitive in quotes because anything that the CCP doesn't agree with is sensitive for that matter), then it would be a felony. Or how China sentenced the scientist who exposed the world to the info about the bird flu virus to some serious prison time. It's wrong to inform the world about a virus that may be the catalyst of the next worldwide pandemic? The CCP is just holding China back from advancement to the world stage by stifling its own people.

Originally Posted by b2ee

One more point need to be clarified by myself. In my last post, what I want to address is that the current method of the U.S to the global terrorism can not work very effectively. The U.S aims at too many enemies at the same time and is lack of enough effort to wipe them.

I believe that the US has done a good job on spearheading efforts to curb world problems including, but not limited to hunger, AIDs, terrorism, genocide, and drug and human trafficking. Although they may have not made the best choices in some of these areas or attacked the right countries in the right order, but at least they are doing something. If it weren't for the US, every country would pretty much be sitting in the UN building bickering all day. Lots of talk, but not a lot of action. I guess the position that best describes the US would be "world police." They did not exactly apply for the position but the position was thrusted upon them. I think it's great that as the most powerful and wealthiest nation in the world the US takes responsibility and steps up to deal with worldly issues. Personally, if I ran the US and knew the world would be this critical and judgmental, I'd isolate the US in all ways except economically and sit there and accumulate wealth and beef up my defenses. The world can kill each other off for all I care but at least I'm keeping my 300 million citizens safe.

As for China helping out the world... well they certainly do a good job of throwing their UN veto power around, and withholding it from nations that deserve it more than they do (i.e. Japan).

One question though, how do you think the US or any other country could have dealt with the current world problems differently (for better or worse)?

I don't think the US is the end all of global politics, our country is important because of our economy and our military that is still intact from the cold war.

Despite some views as America being "world police", i think that's just exaggeration. We might have the largest global military presence, but we don't penalize many countries for doing things we don't like, i.e. North Korea which we never do anything meaningful about. We shouldn't be viewed as an authority since that would breed contempt from less powerful nations and emerging powers, we ought to be cooperating and being more diplomatic.

Our war on terrorism has gone better in some places than others, but it's really gone south since we invaded iraq. If anything that event bred more terrorism like from zarqawi. Al qaeda has been hurt but they're still around, so is the taliban. Hezbollah and hamas aren't even threats for to the US in their entire existance but now we have to classify them in the same tent as all the other terroists as being the exact same people. The biggest problem with the war on terror is that it's perceived as a conventional war which it actually isn't. Think guerilla warfare, near unwinnable guerilla warfare.

I do think that the US has made better efforts in humanitarian aid to other countries though, but that sort of funding would be more forthcoming if it wasn't for all of our international problems that Bush thought was wise to get into.

Go Go Usa.

Originally Posted by ASTRALdragon

Take for example the latest law enacted by China stating that if news agencies reported anything "sensitive" (I put sensitive in quotes because anything that the CCP doesn't agree with is sensitive for that matter), then it would be a felony.....

In the past of China,Just thirty years ago, only one word from "Red Guard" can decide a people's life.Just twenty years ago,police could detain suspects for unlimited time,but now,they are impossible. We all can feel the progress. To be honest,I admit that so much still should be done for the China's human right, such as the transparency.
In China,officials get used to only lauch rules and people get used to obey them. But things are changing step by step with China's open to the world. Oh, it is a big topic.

But I am still very glad for the talk which is helpful for our understanding with each other.

Originally Posted by ASTRALdragon

I believe that the US has done a good job on spearheading efforts to curb world problems including, but not limited to hunger, AIDs, terrorism, genocide, and drug and human trafficking.

I agree with you in part. I think every nation forever take its interest at the first position just like Winston Churchill's saying,only permanent interests. I don't think that the Bush administration would still be keen to invade Iraq in the name of liberating Ipra'q people if there is no oil in Middle-East. Yes,it is also the fact that I hear that many American soliders in Iraq use their money to relief poor people. It's a really great mind . But it can not mean that Bush has the same thoughts.

I also dislike China's more nonsense and seldom actions in UN. In my opinion, China doesn't take itself as a big nation in its heart.
Japan? Forget it, unless there is another war between China and Japan to change the current configuration in Far-East. There is so much misunderstanding and even animosity between two nations. It is also a big topic.

Originally Posted by ASTRALdragon

One question though, how do you think the US or any other country could have dealt with the current world problems differently (for better or worse)?

Why dose the U.S like to "deal with" the world problems? How to deal with them? With your own thoughs and own methods? Please first respect local people's culture and choice. The difference means that conflicts always occur if they don't want to accept your methods and lead to the result which you don't expect.

I agree with WarMachine,the U.S " ought to be cooperating and being more diplomatic."

Originally Posted by WarMachine

Our war on terrorism has gone better in some places than others, but it's really gone south since we invaded iraq. If anything that event bred more terrorism like from zarqawi. Al qaeda has been hurt but they're still around, so is the taliban. Hezbollah and hamas aren't even threats for to the US in their entire existance but now we have to classify them in the same tent as all the other terroists as being the exact same people. The biggest problem with the war on terror is that it's perceived as a conventional war which it actually isn't. Think guerilla warfare, near unwinnable guerilla warfare.

I agree that the US did not exactly start the "War on Terror" on the correct footing but it had to be done. Afghanistan was a good idea, but Iraq before Iran was not. The US had to have a presence in the Middle East, but the question was when and where. I believe they did the when right, but they kind of faltered in the where. As for the terrorist groups, it's better that the US keeps them engaged to keep them on the defense and hopefully as conditions get better in the Middle East, terror groups will give up their aims and meld back into normal life. A good offense is a good defense. Yesterday's airport incident in the UK proved that the West is getting smarter and smarter in this War on Terror.

I agree with you on the guerilla war part. I think we need more intel to weed them out.

Originally Posted by b2ee

Why dose the U.S like to "deal with" the world problems? How to deal with them? With your own thoughs and own methods? Please first respect local people's culture and choice. The difference means that conflicts always occur if they don't want to accept your methods and lead to the result which you don't expect.

I agree with WarMachine,the U.S " ought to be cooperating and being more diplomatic."

I think that the US has been more than forthright in diplomacy in regards to the NK and Iranian nuclear issues. NK is just being stubborn and trying to prolong its dying regime and blackmail more incentives from the world. The US has made every feasible effort to try and defuse this situation, but I believe the ball lies in China's court. China has not used its full diplomatic power with NK to convince it to return to the six-party talks.

As for Iran, I give them kudos for ordering Hizbollah to spark the current Lebanon events to take the spotlight off of them and their nuclear dreams.

So, how could the US or the world deal with these types of issues keeping in respect to the customs and cultures of these nations? Sanctions? Withhold food aid? Hold diplomatic meetings while wearing the traditional attire of those nations? I don't see any connection between dealing with world issues and cultural traditions. Is it part of Iranian culture to take 60-90 days to make decisions? Is it part of NK culture to blackmail people? How would you propose the UN deal with these issues any differently than it is now?