US losing to China in scientific research!

Remy13

while the United States embraces Palinish anti-intellectualism, dumbs down textbooks so Texans can read them, and debates creationism as historical fact, China is spending billions on becoming the leading scientific powerhouse in the world.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/27/AR2010062703639.html?hpid=moreheadlines

Amerika

And were did the Chinese get all that technology and training? I think the line from your article states it best: “Those have lured home scores of Western-trained Chinese researchers dedicated to transforming the People's Republic of China into a scientific superpower.”

Can you say “Thank you America, without you, we would be nothing.”

And isn’t it wonderful to be able to do so much without being dragged down by tyrannical government regulations and taxation, and oppressive environmental controls?

Maybe we should also ship them our illegal ailens.

Iwasfrozen

Amerika wrote: »

And were did the Chinese get all that technology and training? I think the line from your article states it best: “Those have lured home scores of Western-trained Chinese researchers dedicated to transforming the People's Republic of China into a scientific superpower.”

Can you say “Thank you America, without you, we would be nothing.”

And isn’t it wonderful to be able to do so much without being dragged down by tyrannical government regulations and taxation, and oppressive environmental controls?

Maybe we should also ship them our illegal ailens.

Western-trained does not equal American trained.

But anyway perhaps they should ship you their illegal immigrants in return for yours.

Amerika

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Western-trained does not equal American trained.

Yes, but if I recall correctly, the majority were trained in the US and most technology obtained or stolen was from the US.

But anyway perhaps they should ship you their illegal immigrants in return for yours.

Once captured, and after they are either eradicated or deported, how many do they have left... about a dozen?

Iwasfrozen

Amerika wrote: »

Yes, but if I recall correctly, the majority were trained in the US and most technology obtained or stolen was from the US.

Recal from what? I didn't read the article but I did a search for the word "America£ and it came up no results.

Amerika wrote: »

Once captured, and after they are either eradicated or deported, how many do they have left... about a dozen?

What?

Memnoch

It doesn't really matter where they were trained.

The fact remains that as long as idiots like palin and the morons in the republican party who try to gain votes by garnering to the Christian right are allowed to keep doing what they are doing, scientific research and endeavour will continue to suffer in America.

America is the only place in the western world where there is still an argument about so many fundamental scientific issues...

evolution
the role of "religion" in the state (officially it's not supposed to have one, but the reality is different)
Climate change

It goes on.

I mean contrast the American conservatives with the British Conservative party and you might argue that David Cameron's party is a left wing party, which it isn't of course, but it just shows you how extreme the right in America has gotten, and how far off the deep end they've fallen.

karma_

It's just the way of the world, powerful empires and civilisations rise and fall, why should America be any different? It's natural they should decline and a new power rise elsewhere and yes, China looks certain to capture that particular throne, it's inevitable.

Remy13

Amerika wrote: »

And were did the Chinese get all that technology and training? I think the line from your article states it best: “Those have lured home scores of Western-trained Chinese researchers dedicated to transforming the People's Republic of China into a scientific superpower.”

Can you say “Thank you America, without you, we would be nothing.”

just like how the US has lured the best and brightest from other countries for decades to raise its scientific level, China has now decided to do the same. is that a little sour grapes i detect in your response? surely whats good for one is good for all?

can the US say “thank you rest of the world, without you, we would be nothing.” ;-)

Amerika

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Recal from what? I didn't read the article but I did a search for the word "America£ and it came up no results.

Well, between 1979 and 1986 alone, China sent over 35,000 students abroad, 23,000 of which went to the United States. Now I know I support Palin, but even to me that represents a majority going to the United States. Probably the majority of the rest went to the USSR. How many do you suppose went to your neck of the woods?

Iwasfrozen

Amerika wrote: »

Well, between 1979 and 1986 alone, China sent over 35,000 students abroad, 23,000 of which went to the United States. Now I know I support Palin, but even to me that represents a majority going to the United States. Probably the majority of the rest went to the USSR. How many do you suppose went to your neck of the woods?

Where are you getting those figures from?

karma_

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Where are you getting those figures from?

I would imagine from sort of neo-con inclined website, that's all he ever seems to refer to.

Amerika

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Where are you getting those figures from?

karma_ wrote: »

I would imagine from sort of neo-con inclined website, that's all he ever seems to refer to.

Does it matter?

Regardless:
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/china/doctrine/China1.pdf
Endnotes 1 Part-1, number 33.

I know it's not Rolling Stoned, but the Federaton of American Scientists will have to do in a pinch.

(Pretty good for someone that admires Palin, wouldn't you agree? )

Iwasfrozen

Amerika wrote: »

Does it matter?

Regardless:
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/china/doctrine/China1.pdf
Endnotes 1 Part-1, number 33.

I know it's not Rolling Stoned, but the Federaton of American Scientists will have to do in a pinch.

(Pretty good for someone that admires Palin, wouldn't you agree? )

Wow ok, I have to admit that was pretty impressive.

murfie

Remy13 wrote: »

while the United States embraces Palinish anti-intellectualism, dumbs down textbooks so Texans can read them, and debates creationism as historical fact, China is spending billions on becoming the leading scientific powerhouse in the world.

I agree that the US is losing its way in leading innovation and scientific research but I think you still believe that its the conservatives that are in power right now. I think you will find that its the left and Obama that are reducing the funding for scientific advancement. NASA being the one that comes to mind, instead he wants Russia and China to lead the way! It sad really as i live in the area and these great scientists and engineers are losing their jobs! Dont blame a far right movement that little influence on policy and the purse strings blame the ones in charge of government

ynotdu

Remy13 wrote: »

just like how the US has lured the best and brightest from other countries for decades to raise its scientific level, China has now decided to do the same. surely whats good for one is good for all?

I would agree with there Remy13 except for the fact that the Chinese Leadership never have to answer to their people in an election.

When they do what is fair for ALL can also be fair for China!
until then they cannot be mentioned in the same breath as Countries whose people elect their leaders!

Remy13

murfie wrote: »

I agree that the US is losing its way in leading innovation and scientific research but I think you still believe that its the conservatives that are in power right now. I think you will find that its the left and Obama that are reducing the funding for scientific advancement. NASA being the one that comes to mind, instead he wants Russia and China to lead the way! It sad really as i live in the area and these great scientists and engineers are losing their jobs! Dont blame a far right movement that little influence on policy and the purse strings blame the ones in charge of government

i am aware that its a democrat government. i'm taking about the far-right knee-jerk reaction-ism to anything Obama. Palin and her ilk have a surprisingly large & rabid following who are stirring up resentment and spreading half-truths and lies and the whole Texas airbrushing of history is another embarrassment for a supposedly first world country.

i'm not surprised that things have gotten cut in the budget seeing as Obama has inherited the biggest deficit in history along with two wars and a financial meltdown.

ynotdu wrote: »

I would agree with there Remy13 except for the fact that the Chinese Leadership never have to answer to their people in an election.

When they do what is fair for ALL can also be fair for China!
until then they cannot be mentioned in the same breath as Countries whose people elect their leaders!

i know that China has a bad record with respect to human rights etc and i don't support that but they are making changes and i think thats to be encouraged.

Iwasfrozen

ynotdu wrote: »

I would agree with there Remy13 except for the fact that the Chinese Leadership never have to answer to their people in an election.

When they do what is fair for ALL can also be fair for China!
until then they cannot be mentioned in the same breath as Countries whose people elect their leaders!

I know what you mean but elected leaders are not always the best leaders.

Overheal

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

elected leaders are not always the best leaders.

True. But would you also agree that theres a higher probability of success in an elected vs. appointed leader system? At least where it pertains to apex authority figures.

Iwasfrozen

Overheal wrote: »

True. But would you also agree that theres a higher probability of success in an elected vs. appointed leader system? At least where it pertains to apex authority figures.

No, I wouldn't. There's nothing to suggest an elected leader is better then an apointed leader. Preferable, yes but not better.

ynotdu

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I know what you mean but elected leaders are not always the best leaders.

Well now i never thought i would be in the same thread with other posters who agree with Karl Marx when He said "Democracy amounts to five minutes in a Polling booth every four years"!

The only one i can think of that was in some way useful as a dictator was Tito who managed to hold Yugoslavia together until he died.

Yes things are changing in China but ultimatly the PARTY rules!
It must be wonderful Driving Cycling around North Korea seeing Giant Posters of the same old goat thats been in power since before You were born!

It must be So fabulous to live in Cuba to the point that You would tie Orange crates together and head to Sea against force nines to escape it.

I will let someone far more eloquent give You My answer Sir!;)

Ignore the first minute as it seems to be a fact that "Ich bien ein Berliner" actually translates to I am a doughnut {citations needed;)}
at about the one minute mark this man gives My response to You Sir and those who agree with You!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpaab-G6GTs

Remy13

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

No, I wouldn't. There's nothing to suggest an elected leader is better then an apointed leader. Preferable, yes but not better.

i agree. one only has to look at as recently as G.W.Bush in the US to understand that elected leaders aren't always the best.

ynotdu wrote: »

It must be So fabulous to live in Cuba to the point that You would tie Orange crates together and head to Sea against force nines to escape it.

to be fair, Cuba is still a third-world country, in part due to the ridiculous embargo by the US and it is in a constant state of war also due to covert aggression by the US.

when you weigh up these factors, of course a percentage of Cuban citizens are going to flee for a better life. wouldn't you?

ynotdu

Remy13 wrote: »

i agree. one only has to look at as recently as G.W.Bush in the US to understand that elected leaders aren't always the best.




to be fair, Cuba is still a third-world country, in part due to the ridiculous embargo by the US and it is in a constant state of war also due to covert aggression by the US.

when you weigh up these factors, of course a percentage of Cuban citizens are going to flee for a better life. wouldn't you?

Well Dubya was'nt really elected either first time round either{sorta}

There are degree's of wrongness and GW is hardly the best example of America's best Presidents.
How many Countrie's would forget in a hurry that an Island beside them was nearly a home to Nucleur weapons that would reach Washington before any kind of defense could be used?
Castro brought the World to the edge of destruction.
Ok the USA had mounted the silly bay of pigs 'invasion',but Castro and Guevara had overthrown a corrupt Govt only to become much more corrupt himself and oppress the people He claimed He liberated!

American agression overseas is on a timescale of history actually a very short one,dont forget it would not enter WW11 until it was attacked by Japan.

Then of course the waste of its own oil and the need to ensure the 'Oil Crisis' would not happen again prompted it to side with whatever 'Demon' in Oil rich Countries it perceived as of Stategic interest to them,it supported dictators hated in their own Country, e.g Shah of Iran and ended up hated in the Islamic World.

The Soviets were a threat to the entire world,Clearly had an expansionist programme{even self proclaimed} and America in its own interest and with a deep seated fear of Communismn responded to that in Korea,Vietnam,wherever........

America's other choice was to stay insular,have no markets to expand to and wait around until the World Map turned Red.
This anti-Communism sprung up some looneys to be sure in the US!

Two wrongs never make a right,but If You or I were in China We would not be typing our views as there would be no such entity allowed such as Boards.

Remy13

ynotdu wrote: »

Well Dubya was'nt really elected either first time round either{sorta}

which is a farce and a sad indictment of so called democracy IMO.

ynotdu wrote: »

There are degree's of wrongness and GW is hardly the best example of America's best Presidents.

i know but the point was that elected is not always better than appointed and in this case i think the point stands.

ynotdu wrote: »

How many Countrie's would forget in a hurry that an Island beside them was nearly a home to Nucleur weapons that would reach Washington before any kind of defense could be used?

but cuba is next to a country that is home to nuclear weapons that could reach Havana before any kind of defence could be used. now you could argue over the likelihood of the US using such weapons but let's not forget that the US is the only country to have used such devastating weapons in the first place. doesn't exactly inspire confidence. especially when u think the likes of Palin could have been elected and had an input into weather or not to push the button.

ynotdu wrote: »

Castro brought the World to the edge of destruction.
Ok the USA had mounted the silly bay of pigs 'invasion',but Castro and Guevara had overthrown a corrupt Govt only to become much more corrupt himself and oppress the people He claimed He liberated!

silly seems like an attempt to play down US aggression. the US wanted to overthrow Castro and reinstall their puppet government. when your country is in a state of war, liberties are often curtailed. not an excuse just a statement of fact.

ynotdu wrote: »

American agression overseas is on a timescale of history actually a very short one,dont forget it would not enter WW11 until it was attacked by Japan.

but they're making up for lost time with gusto. WW2 was quite profitable for the US. the UK only recently finished paying back uncle sam for war time loans. the US entered the war half way through, took the plaudits and made a tidy profit.

ynotdu wrote: »

Then of course the waste of its own oil and the need to ensure the 'Oil Crisis' would not happen again prompted it to side with whatever 'Demon' in Oil rich Countries it perceived as of Stategic interest to them,it supported dictators hated in their own Country, e.g Shah of Iran and ended up hated in the Islamic World.

i am aware of the cherry-picked war on terror.

ynotdu wrote: »

Two wrongs never make a right,but If You or I were in China We would not be typing our views as there would be no such entity allowed such as Boards.

quite possibly and as i stated before, i am not a fan of the Chinese system. however all these topics usually end with posters saying that howver bad the US is, China ( or insert boogyman country here as applicable ) is worse and therefore the US gets a pass. not good enough in my opinion.

PopeUrbanII

Remy13 wrote: »

while the United States embraces Palinish anti-intellectualism, dumbs down textbooks so Texans can read them, and debates creationism as historical fact, China is spending billions on becoming the leading scientific powerhouse in the world.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/27/AR2010062703639.html?hpid=moreheadlines

Your characterization of America is considerably inaccurate. Furthermore, I doubt the Chinese will remain fixated on math and science once they gain political and social freedom. Nothing erodes tradition faster and more thoroughly than popular capitalism and freedom of speech.

Overheal

PopeUrbanII wrote: »

Your characterization of America is considerably inaccurate. Furthermore, I doubt the Chinese will remain fixated on math and science once they gain political and social freedom. Nothing erodes tradition faster and more thoroughly than popular capitalism and freedom of speech.

PopeUrbanII wrote: »

OBAMA:
1. Devout Marxist
2. Islamic sympathizer
3. Anti-White racist
4. Hater of traditional, Christian America
:mad:

So when it deals with the Chinese you think it's a good thing, but when it's a Black American President....

PopeUrbanII

Overheal wrote: »

So when it deals with the Chinese you think it's a good thing, but when it's a Black American President....

Obama is a devout Marxist. He doesn't believe in freedom of speech, and neither do most of his followers. The fastest way to get banned or penalized at many, many websites is to criticize Obama -- Obama The False God.

Overheal

PopeUrbanII wrote: »

Obama is a devout Marxist. He doesn't believe in freedom of speech, and neither do most of his followers. The fastest way to get banned or penalized at many, many websites is to criticize Obama -- Obama The False God.

A quick way to get banned on this website is to make a bunch of bold sweeping statements like this without any tangible evidence.

ynotdu

Remy13 wrote: »

which is a farce and a sad indictment of so called democracy IMO.

Yes it Was!

i know but the point was that elected is not always better than appointed and in this case i think the point stands.

Try telling that to people who have not got the luxury We do to have some little say over our lives.

but let's not forget that the US is the only country to have used such devastating weapons in the first place. doesn't exactly inspire confidence.

are You saying that if Japan or Germany had split the Atom first they would not have done the same? I always felt that the USA Should have invited Japans leaders to see a demonstration of the bomb before it was dropped on Hiroshima ,but even though that was not done Japan did not Surrender until after Nagasaki?

silly seems like an attempt to play down US aggression. the US wanted to overthrow Castro and reinstall their puppet government.

Well in defence of JFK{who i admit to having a high regard for despite his faults} The Bay of Pigs was something He inherited from his predecessor,which was a CIA led operation and mostly utilised ex-Cuban born people.
Kennedy is widely reported to have been heard saying at the end of the disaster "How could I be So stupid"

Not an excuse but i think the suspicion about Military advice that left in Him and Robert possibly saved the World during the Cuban Missile Crisis,as You proably know the 'secret' deal Was that in return for Soviet ships stopping at the blockade America would quietly remove Missiles from Turkey six months later.
That final long night of the two telegrams from the Kremlin,One from Krushtov and a far more hardline one from an unknown source in the Polit-beureau was evidence that Krushtov was in the process of being overthrown.{and was soon afterwards}
Kennedy decided to ignore the one that was not from Krushtov and responded only to the more friendly one.
It was all so high risk{Kennedy already had wife and kids in the bunker}
It really was less than one second to Midnight on the doomsday Clock.
I genuinely think most people don't realise how close that period was to being Armageddon.

WW2 was quite profitable for the US. the UK only recently finished paying back uncle sam for war time loans. the US entered the war half way through, took the plaudits and made a tidy profit.

To be fair the President was taking high risks and supporting the war against the NAZI's in every way He could{Covertly}
It was Congress and the Senate who would not declare war until Pearl harbour.

i am aware of the cherry-picked war on terror.

I am talking about the Oil Crisis of the early 1970's that brought the West to it's knee's,long before 9/11 or Bush.

however all these topics usually end with posters saying that howver bad the US is, China ( or insert boogyman country here as applicable ) is worse and therefore the US gets a pass

.

I think it is a long time now since the US gets a pass for its wrongdoings.

Overheal

ynotdu wrote: »

I always felt that the USA Should have invited Japans leaders to see a demonstration of the bomb before it was dropped on Hiroshima ,but even though that was not done Japan did not Surrender until after Nagasaki?

That would have been like asking Khrushchev over to a white house for a beer during the missile crisis.

FISMA

(1) America's Chinese are smarter than China's Chinese.

(2) Any of China's people that get an opportunity to make $$$'s in the US leave and never return.

(3) China can spend all of the money it wants. That does not ensure anything. Russia spent a lot of money on development. Some say Russia is under-developed. In point of fact, it is mal-developed.

By the way, what has China created? Some examples please...

The Chinese begged Mr Clinton for wing technology and to get rid of that whole public key thing.

If the Chinese are so incredibly brilliant, why did they loan the US soooooooo much money and rely on the US to buy their cheap products? Sorry, they fell for the oldest trick in the book. Thanks for the loans, we built a lot of stuff. Now the dollar is worth less, and here they are.

Sorry, buddy, I have been around the block a few times and have seen this game before. Go ahead, bet against the US, it will be the last bet you make.

First, they said the same thing about the Arabs - they were going to own America. Next, came the 80's - the Japanese are going to own America. Now it's the same tune, different band - the Chinese are going to own America, please.

If I loan you $10,000 and you default shame on YOU.

If I loan you $10,000,000,000 and you default shame on ME.

So, be careful which horse you back in this race. Before America hiccups, we'll be in cardiac arrest.

PopeUrbanII

Overheal wrote: »

A quick way to get banned on this website is to make a bunch of bold sweeping statements like this without any tangible evidence.

No amount of 'tangible evidence' concerning Obama could ever change your mind. Don't delude yourself.

PopeUrbanII

The claim of Chinese superiority is rooted in myth. The Chinese have been around since forever, and still haven't gotten their act together. A millennium from now, they'll still be caught up in internal chaos. China is China.

Overheal

PopeUrbanII wrote: »

No amount of 'tangible evidence' concerning Obama could ever change your mind. Don't delude yourself.

/shrug

It's hard not to salt the criticisms of the same demographic that thinks the earth is 6000 years old.

ynotdu

Overheal wrote: »

That would have been like asking Khrushchev over to a white house for a beer during the missile crisis.

He proably would have jumped at the chance!:)

ynotdu

PopeUrbanII wrote: »

No amount of 'tangible evidence' concerning Obama could ever change your mind. Don't delude yourself.

Hi Popeurban,much as i hate a poster being ganged up on really Your claims against Obama that He is Marxist etc.......i can find no basis in fact for either.
You really need to present far more evidence of what seems like outrageous claims.

It is not that i am blind to his faults,but My problem with him has more to do with how long He dithers before making his mind up.
I also sense that He can be a bit Naive,but hope he learns from that and deals with the World as it is rather than his vision of how it could/should be.

The World badly needs leaders with vision and offering hope,but whilst they work on their plans for a nicer Planet for us to live on they need to deal with day to day realities also.

PopeUrbanII

Overheal wrote: »

/shrug

It's hard not to salt the criticisms of the same demographic that thinks the earth is 6000 years old.

Nice try. I'm not with that rabble, either. I have a brain, and I use it. I have freedom, and I use that, too. You're in Obama's pocket, and there's no chance of luring you out. Therefore, I choose not to waste my precious time.

PopeUrbanII

ynotdu wrote: »

Hi Popeurban,much as i hate a poster being ganged up on really Your claims against Obama that He is Marxist etc.......i can find no basis in fact for either.
You really need to present far more evidence of what seems like outrageous claims.

It is not that i am blind to his faults,but My problem with him has more to do with how long He dithers before making his mind up.
I also sense that He can be a bit Naive,but hope he learns from that and deals with the World as it is rather than his vision of how it could/should be.

The World badly needs leaders with vision and offering hope,but whilst they work on their plans for a nicer Planet for us to live on they need to deal with day to day realities also.

Half of America believes as I do. That's a lot of people who need to present 'more evidence', isn't it?;) Moreover, as a European, you've been conditioned by decades of Socialism to see life through the 'diet variety lense' of economic Marxism. Of course you therefore view Obama as a something of a hero. That, and the fact he's our first Black President plays well to raw emotions about 'racist' America. That must weigh heavily in Ireland's collective judgment of Obama. Needless to say, none of the above corresponds with much of American cultural and political sentiment. By no means am I alone in feeling what I feel.

Overheal

PopeUrbanII wrote: »

Nice try. I'm not with that rabble, either. I have a brain, and I use it. I have freedom, and I use that, too. You're in Obama's pocket, and there's no chance of luring you out. Therefore, I choose not to waste my precious time.

Do you have any evidence that would suggest that I am in Obama's pocket or do you just automagically assume anybody who doesn't agree with your "philosophy" must clearly be sleeping with "the enemy"

Overheal

PopeUrbanII wrote: »

Half of America believes as I do.

Believes what exactly?

Do you have any empirical evidence to support this claim?

That's a lot of people who need to present 'more evidence', isn't it?;)

Yes.

Moreover, as a European, you've been conditioned by decades of Socialism to see life through the 'diet variety lense' of economic Marxism.

Considering your comments about English-speaking, Protestant Europe the other day: I Greatly question your grasp on European History, Culture and Politics.

Of course you therefore view Obama as a something of a hero.

Did you also notice that at the end of his Acceptance Speech it all felt a lot like the end of Episode IV: A New Hope?

That, and the fact he's our first Black President plays well to raw emotions about 'racist' America. That must weigh heavily in Ireland's collective judgment of Obama. Needless to say, none of the above corresponds with much of American cultural and political sentiment. By no means am I alone in feeling what I feel.

No you're not but I think you're fudging the numbers a bit, or I'm just gravely mistaken in how much racism is still prevalent in the country.

PopeUrbanII

Overheal wrote: »

Do you have any evidence that would suggest that I am in Obama's pocket or do you just automagically assume anybody who doesn't agree with your "philosophy" must clearly be sleeping with "the enemy"

There is so much ideological feuding over Obama right now, that for anyone to demand any single person 'tangibly prove' anything about him is preposterous. Just turn on the news, for crying out loud. Be honest -- I could post a ton of supporting evidence, and you'd reject it all, out of hand. That's Obama -- he's polarizing to the max. One either loves or hates him.

PopeUrbanII

Believes what exactly?

That Obama is a Communist.

Do you have any empirical evidence to support this claim?

Have you at least read the article posted on my website on Obama's Communism? There's a start. After you reject it outrightly, I'll post another article I find extremely insightful. After that, however, I'll assume you can't be convinced. I have a life to live.

Yes.
Considering your comments about English-speaking, Protestant Europe the other day: I Greatly question your grasp on European History, Culture and Politics.

That's your right. I stand by what I said.

BluePlanet

English-speaking America was founded on European Christian (Protestant) culture.

Spanish-speaking America was founded on European Christian (Catholic) culture.

Political disagreements with the colonial powers were minor distinctions. CULTURE is the key. Its first building-block is language. Any native-speaker of a European language is culturally European.

You are talking about religious persuasions not culture.
Spanish colonies are culturally Spanish because they were built/subjected to Spain, not because of "catholicism".
Honestly do you think that Spanish culture, Italian culture, French culture, Irish culture are all really just idioms of roman catholicism?

It's like you're walking around looking at the world through particularly narrow lenses.

Overheal

PopeUrbanII wrote: »

Believes what exactly?

That Obama is a Communist.

Do you have any empirical evidence to support this claim?

Have you at least read the article posted on my website on Obama's Communism? There's a start. After you reject it outrightly, I'll post another article I find extremely insightful. After that, however, I'll assume you can't be convinced. I have a life to live.

Post away. Your Marxism-by-Association article appeared to be self-defeating:

One who commits the above fallacy wrongly assumes that there is a necessary logical connection between one’s being and one’s advocacy of a particular view. As a textbook example, I would be doing so were I to contend that, because you are a Democrat, you cannot be Pro-Life. Here, I would be assuming wrongly that being Pro-Abortion (or as they would prefer, Pro-Choice) is a necessary aspect of being a Democrat, when it in fact is not. There is no necessary logical connection between your being a Democrat and your abortion views, and it would be wrong for me to assume that there is, just because so many with whom you associate are Pro-Abortion.
But, in philosophical terms, the connection claimed to exist between Obama and his Marxist associates is not merely logical, but causal. His life-long, self-selected connections with known Marxists are claimed to have had a causal influence on his own beliefs. And that is a vital distinction when examining one’s resultant behavior patterns.
It is probabilistic, not deductive, reasoning that best deals with causal relationships. While we cannot conclude with certainty from the truth of documented facts concerning his Marxist associations that Barack Obama himself is a Marxist, it is reasonable to conclude that there is a significant probability that he is and doing so commits no logical fallacy. So his associations are not, as his defenders maintain, irrelevant as evidence of his own beliefs. They are, in fact, determinant.

Despite your own words and publication, you appear to contradict yourself by stating in tone of fact that Obama is a Communist/Marxist.

The Article also fails to deliver on its introductory premise to prove his Marxism through his policies: none of which are ever brought up.

We will deal with it by asking two more questions over the course of the next two Philosopher’s Stone columns: “Can we tell that he is a Marxist from his associations?” and “Can we tell that he is a Marxist from the principles he adopts?”

I presume you never published part II of your article? I cannot find it on your blog


On a personal note though I like the John Wesley quote, I'm fairly certain I can trace direct ancestry to him.

ynotdu

PopeUrbanII wrote: »

Half of America believes as I do. That's a lot of people who need to present 'more evidence', isn't it?;) Moreover, as a European, you've been conditioned by decades of Socialism to see life through the 'diet variety lense' of economic Marxism. Of course you therefore view Obama as a something of a hero. That, and the fact he's our first Black President plays well to raw emotions about 'racist' America. That must weigh heavily in Ireland's collective judgment of Obama. Needless to say, none of the above corresponds with much of American cultural and political sentiment. By no means am I alone in feeling what I feel.

well to paraphase G W Bush's comment at a White house press dinner.
{I know this will upset You and Amerika}

"Some people call Me arrogant,I will not dignify {your post} those comments with a reply!"

Spacedog

Seems to me that America is in a great decline since the 911 attacks. The resulting unwinnable war on terror, the patriot act eroding fundemental rights, irrational, intrusive border controls that discourage tourism. the surge in christian fundamentalism.

The reactionary Bush administration flushed what was once the undisputed "greatest country in the world" - and "land of opportunity" down the shi!tter. by removing the US moral authority (gitmo, abu garhab), human rights of citizens (patriot act, domestic survalence), and wasting the resources of the country on military cock waving instead of education and infrastructure. Capitalist China has beaten the US at it's own game.

The entire West is now completly dependent on China for basic goods, electronics, clothes etc. any innovation made by the west is simply copied in China because they don't care less about copyright or patents. China is buying out all of the shares of the infrastructure of the worlds public services, privatised under the insistence of the US in trade talks. these services, electricity, transport, water etc. are the money making engines of the western world, so basically all the money you pay for utilities are basically your tax to China as the world leader of the global economy.

when you were all worried about the boogie man Bin Laden striking from his underground lair

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGhGHxw0mSo

, gay marriage, john kerry being a coward in vietnam, janet jacksons tit, paris hilton going to jail, hillary clinton with her finger on the button. you've forgotten how to work hard and make your own stuff. China filled the gap and now own the ground beneath your feet. the money in your wallet has turned back to paper and PopeUrbanII has nothing left to do but turn on Glen Beck and remain in denial.

Hint: News is supposed to be a list of facts, of stuff that has happened in a day. if your news readers start sharing opinions that co-inside with yours it's time to turn off the tv and go read a book or something.

I often think Wherever bin laden is now, he must be pissing himself laughing.

I hope America is one day restored to pre WW2 values.

Overheal

Terrorists definitely won on that score. With one short series of attacks they've dragged a leading superpower into an unwinnable war, chipped away at its security and greatly depleted its economy. On the world stage the USA is now one of the most populously-hated nations on the planet.

How people think we can win our position back by plunging deeper into middle eastern countries and waging a war on terror is absolutely beyond me.

So if anyone destroyed America: it was the Bush Administration, playing right into Al Quaeda 's hand.

ynotdu

excellant post Spacedog,although i would go further and agree with Al Gore when he said in his movie 'an inconveniant truth' that the decline began in the 1970's when America reached the point of peak Oil{more used than is in the ground}

I would never write America off though for sure.

also at least H Clinton had the balls to publicly condemn Netenyahu of Israel when He {IMO} deliberatly snubbed VP Joe Biden by announcing
more settlements in the disputed land when Biden was in Israel.

I agree that Bush&Co left a legacy America will struggle to ever recover from.

It will take America to wake up and unite under one flag though{otherwise the US will have to hand the keys of the White House to China without a shot being fired,instead it will be a repossession on a loan default since most of the Hugh borrowings under Bush were from China}

So America go ahead,show no tolerance for the party You are against or watch Your influence decline!be politicaly correct while those who want to wipe You out and have no Democracy at all carry on quietly outpowering You.

the eerie 50/50% split in America can only lead to self inflicted destruction.IMO

now i must go off to see if the shoddy cloned technology made in China i bought today will work!

ynotdu

Overheal wrote: »

Terrorists definitely won on that score. With one short series of attacks they've dragged a leading superpower into an unwinnable war, chipped away at its security and greatly depleted its economy. On the world stage the USA is now one of the most populously-hated nations on the planet.

How people think we can win our position back by plunging deeper into middle eastern countries and waging a war on terror is absolutely beyond me.

So if anyone destroyed America: it was the Bush Administration, playing right into Al Quaeda 's hand.

Unwinnable i agree,but containment was surely nescessary after 9/11?
It may be the only solution in the end.
VP Biden favoured a policy of containment over the troop surge.
A 'Hit and Run policy' from secured base's using more technology but troops not out on patrol anywhere near as much.
The troops are sitting ducks now to Afghanistan troops who are meant to be training to allow Afghanistan police itself,as the latest tactic by the Taliban is to sign up for training and after a while Killing the people who are meant to be training them.

Lanaier

ynotdu wrote: »

Two wrongs never make a right,but If You or I were in China We would not be typing our views as there would be no such entity allowed such as Boards.

Guy in China here.

Type my views about China (and how much it can suck) online all the time.

Though I actually agree with most of your points. Especially:

ynotdu wrote: »

America's other choice was to stay insular,have no markets to expand to and wait around until the World Map turned Red.

Just wanted to make sure you know that there is such a thing as propaganda even in the wonderful west :P
China has major problems, but it's often not as bad as we're led to believe.

Lanaier

PopeUrbanII wrote: »

Your characterization of America is considerably inaccurate. Furthermore, I doubt the Chinese will remain fixated on math and science once they gain political and social freedom. Nothing erodes tradition faster and more thoroughly than popular capitalism and freedom of speech.

Capitalism is already a way of life in China. Has been for a while.
China is only communist in name, mostly.

Methinks you are a little misinformed.

demonspawn

Amerika wrote: »

Can you say “Thank you America, without you, we would be nothing.”

Can you say "Thank you China, without your fiscal prudence, the majority of our population would be homeless and eating out of garbage cans, because our leaders are like children in a candy store with $5 in their back pocket."

The Chinese are where they are today because of years of hard work and strict control by the government. I don't particularly agree with Chinese communism but it finally seems to be paying off.

To suggest that China is where it is today solely because of the U.S. is laughable at best.