Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard membervivify
    rain
    Joined
    08 Mar '11
    Moves
    9780
    23 Oct '16 05:221 edit
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/amnesty-international-reveals-the-10-worst-attacks-on-human-rights-across-the-world-last-year-a6892911.html

    This report, released earlier this year by Amnesty international (a U.K. based organization), is a report of the ten worst human rights violations of 2015, by country. On this list: Israel and China.
  2. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    23 Oct '16 05:321 edit
    I see Hungry made the list because they put up a border wall.

    Hilarious.

    No Sudan? No Iran? No North Korea? Seriously? A third grader could come up with a better list. I say your list is full of crap.

    What say you?
  3. Joined
    20 Oct '16
    Moves
    8803
    23 Oct '16 08:261 edit
    Originally posted by whodey
    I see Hungry made the list because they put up a border wall.

    Hilarious.

    No Sudan? No Iran? No North Korea? Seriously? A third grader could come up with a better list. I say your list is full of crap.

    What say you?
    I have to agree with whodey on this one. If his supreme highness Kim Jong-un didn't make it then nobody should lol
  4. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    23 Oct '16 11:312 edits
    Originally posted by Ashiitaka
    I have to agree with whodey on this one. If his supreme highness Kim Jong-un didn't make it then nobody should lol
    Kim is a brutal dictator. I think most Progressives secretly admire him which is why he did not make the list.

    The only reason it was even posted is because Israel made the list. Anti-semitism is a favorite past time for most. I would say that dolts like Vivfy think it would be preferable to live in North Korea than in Israel.
  5. Standard membersh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    New York
    Joined
    26 Dec '07
    Moves
    17585
    23 Oct '16 13:10
    Originally posted by vivify
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/amnesty-international-reveals-the-10-worst-attacks-on-human-rights-across-the-world-last-year-a6892911.html

    This report, released earlier this year by Amnesty international (a U.K. based organization), is a report of the ten worst human rights violations of 2015, by country. On this list: Israel and China.
    <eye roll>

    How is putting up a fence to secure your border a human rights violation??

    Nobody who isn't in their camp can possibly take AI seriously any more.
  6. Standard membervivify
    rain
    Joined
    08 Mar '11
    Moves
    9780
    23 Oct '16 13:193 edits
    Originally posted by whodey
    Kim is a brutal dictator. I think most Progressives secretly admire him which is why he did not make the list.

    The only reason it was even posted is because Israel made the list. Anti-semitism is a favorite past time for most. I would say that dolts like Vivfy think it would be preferable to live in North Korea than in Israel.
    Hello Whodey. How are you today? Well I hope.

    Please check this currently active thread, where I was the main poster defending Israel:

    Thread 170349

    I try to be fair. Just because I'm able to understand and even empathize with their situation, that doesn't mean I should be blind to their human rights violations. I realize this makes me unpopular with both supporters of Israel, and those who are anti-Israel; but if it's an honest way to view a situation, so be it.
  7. Standard membervivify
    rain
    Joined
    08 Mar '11
    Moves
    9780
    23 Oct '16 13:25
    Originally posted by Ashiitaka
    I have to agree with whodey on this one. If his supreme highness Kim Jong-un didn't make it then nobody should lol
    I think Kim Jong-un isn't on this because N. Korea is so closed off, it's hard to get an accurate picture of what human rights violations are going on in that country. That's just an assumption, though.
  8. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    23 Oct '16 21:363 edits
    Originally posted by vivify
    I think Kim Jong-un isn't on this because N. Korea is so closed off, it's hard to get an accurate picture
    of what human rights violations are going on in that country. That's just an assumption, though.
    Evidently, many desperate North Koreans would like 'to vote with their feet' by fleeing
    from the DPRK to China. That's why the DPRK works so hard to stop these refugees.
    The DPRK already has built a 'wall' (typically, electrified fences manned by border guards
    with orders to shoot to kill) in order to prevent an exodus of North Koreans to China.
    In short, more than a few North Koreans would prefer to take their chances living and
    working illegally (risking deportation) in China rather than stay in the DPRK.
    And in China the life of an illegal worker is harder than a legal worker's, which can be hard enough.

    Many Chinese may sympathize with the plight of individual North Korean refugees.
    But most Chinese approve of the government's policy of deporting North Koreans
    because they are afraid of the economic and social consequences if China had to
    absorb millions of North Korean refugees. And if China were to declare an 'open
    border' with the DPRK, then its leader would regard it as an extreme provocation,
    perhaps amounting to an act of war. The DPRK surely would attempt to retaliate.
    Even China must worry about an angry DPRK dictator who has nuclear weapons.
  9. Joined
    20 Oct '16
    Moves
    8803
    24 Oct '16 18:03
    Originally posted by vivify
    Hello Whodey. How are you today? Well I hope.

    Please check this currently active thread, where I was the main poster defending Israel:

    Thread 170349

    I try to be fair. Just because I'm able to understand and even empathize with their situation, that doesn't mean I should be blind to their human rights violations. I realize this makes ...[text shortened]... Israel, and those who are anti-Israel; but if it's an honest way to view a situation, so be it.
    Well my hat goes off to you for sticking to your beliefs. As Nelson Mandela said "A person who changes their principles depending on with whom he is talking, is not a person who can lead a nation"
  10. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    24 Oct '16 18:07
    Originally posted by sh76
    <eye roll>

    How is putting up a fence to secure your border a human rights violation??

    Nobody who isn't in their camp can possibly take AI seriously any more.
    And if Trump gets in and secures the border the US would be the top of the list
  11. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    24 Oct '16 19:21
    Originally posted by vivify
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/amnesty-international-reveals-the-10-worst-attacks-on-human-rights-across-the-world-last-year-a6892911.html

    This report, released earlier this year by Amnesty international (a U.K. based organization), is a report of the ten worst human rights violations of 2015, by country. On this list: Israel and China.
    This is another ridiculous case of poor editing i.e. writing a headline that does not conform to the actual report. Nowhere does that report claim the 10 instances mentioned were the "worst" nor does it ignore rights violations in North Korea or anywhere else. For instance:

    North Koreans continued to suffer denial
    and violations of almost every aspect of their
    human rights.

    p. 217

    The report can be downloaded here: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/pol10/2552/2016/en/

    Naturally apologists for Israeli imperialism like sh76 won't like it but it gives a detailed assessment of rights violations in 160 countries.
  12. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52853
    26 Oct '16 11:401 edit
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    Evidently, many desperate North Koreans would like 'to vote with their feet' by fleeing
    from the DPRK to China. That's why the DPRK works so hard to stop these refugees.
    The DPRK already has built a 'wall' (typically, electrified fences manned by border guards
    with orders to shoot to kill) in order to prevent an exodus of North Koreans to China.
    In sh ...[text shortened]... tempt to retaliate.
    Even China must worry about an angry DPRK dictator who has nuclear weapons.
    North Korea has SOME nukes but not enough to deter China if a real war broke out, for one thing, only a couple of DPRK nuke tests actually worked so the bombs they would send out in a missile would have a good chance of fizzling before it reached it's intended target.
    My guess (and admittedly just a guess) China doesn't want war with DPRK based more on economics than military queasiness, since they do trade with the North Koreans.

    I think China would be the last country DPRK would ever threaten with nukes. The current so-called leader of course daily threatens the south and the US with nukes which even that idiot has to know could lead to total annihilation of most of North Korea. DPRK could have a few nukes, my guess is less than ten. US, over a thousand. Let's see, which one would win THAT hypothetical fight. He HAS to know that. If he doesn't he is much more of an idiot than anyone thinks already.

    Even a limited nuclear war with an outlier like North Korea would have disasterous consequences for everyone in the vicinity, South Korea, China, Japan, all the surrounding countries would probably see cancer rates go up even if not hit by a nuke.
  13. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    26 Oct '16 17:15
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    North Korea has SOME nukes but not enough to deter China if a real war broke out, for one thing, only a couple of DPRK nuke tests actually worked so the bombs they would send out in a missile would have a good chance of fizzling before it reached it's intended target.
    I assume here you are talking about delivery systems not the actual bombs. Don't confuse the two.

    My guess (and admittedly just a guess) China doesn't want war with DPRK based more on economics than military queasiness, since they do trade with the North Koreans.
    And the fact that war is very costly and the fact that they use North Korea for political games in the region.

    The current so-called leader of course daily threatens the south and the US with nukes which even that idiot has to know could lead to total annihilation of most of North Korea.
    My opinion of the reasoning ability of idiots has significantly dropped since the current presidential race started.

    DPRK could have a few nukes, my guess is less than ten. US, over a thousand.
    Seriously now, the US could not actually use a thousand nukes without annihilating themselves along with the rest of the world. Counting beyond two with nukes is a mistake.

    Let's see, which one would win THAT hypothetical fight.
    There are no winners in a nuclear war.

    Even a limited nuclear war with an outlier like North Korea would have disasterous consequences for everyone in the vicinity, South Korea, China, Japan, all the surrounding countries would probably see cancer rates go up even if not hit by a nuke.
    Exactly, yet you are thinking of launching a thousand nukes? All of which are programmed to land on the USSR.
  14. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    26 Oct '16 21:53
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    North Korea has SOME nukes but not enough to deter China if a real war broke out, for one thing, only a couple of DPRK nuke tests actually worked so the bombs they would send out in a missile would have a good chance of fizzling before it reached it's intended target.
    My guess (and admittedly just a guess) China doesn't want war with DPRK based more on eco ...[text shortened]... , all the surrounding countries would probably see cancer rates go up even if not hit by a nuke.
    Sonhouse seems to have misunderstood my point.
    Why would *any* country *want war* against the DPRK (North Korea)?
    It's not a matter of about that country being powerful enough to 'win'.
    It's a matter of that 'victory' not nearly being worth its cost.

    What could China hope to gain by invading the DPRK? Even if China were to occupy
    all North Korea, the Chinese don't want the responsibility of feeding and taking care of a
    destitute large population. Indeed, even the ROK (North Korea's south Korean brothers)
    does *not* want that *immediate* responsibility. The ROK wants *gradual reunification*
    with the DPRK. The ROK does *not* want the DPRK"s economy to collapse completely
    so that the ROK would have to take care of tens of millions of North Koreans. It's too costly.

    If China angered the DPRK's leader enough, I don't expect that he would have the DPRK
    resort to nuclear weapons or engage in large-scale conventional warfare at all against China.
    But the DPRK has large special forces, trained in sabotage and subversion. The DPRK
    could attempt to retaliate through unconventional warfare, including 'terrorist' actions.
    It would cost China much to have to defend against such possibilities.

    The Western media describe China as the DPRK's only ally. But it's an 'alliance' that
    comes from political expediency or necessity, *not* from any deep love or trust.
    China regards the DPRK as like an irritating nephew who does not listen to its advice
    and keeps getting into trouble. So it keeps attempting to help its nephew (by giving money)
    and hoping that he will see the error of his ways and change rather than writing him off.
    China gives economic aid to the DPRK not so much because it supports what the DPRK's doing
    (such as developing missiles) but because it's afraid of the consequences if the DPRK
    becomes too desperate. Their relationship seems rather like an adult who feels trapped
    in having to look after a needy teenage relative with a serious drug habit who already
    has had 'brushes with the law'.
  15. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    26 Oct '16 22:054 edits
    Originally posted by twhitehead to Sonhouse
    I assume here you are talking about delivery systems not the actual bombs. Don't confuse the two.

    [b]My guess (and admittedly just a guess) China doesn't want war with DPRK based more on economics than military queasiness, since they do trade with the North Koreans.

    And the fact that war is very costly and the fact that they use North ...[text shortened]... you are thinking of launching a thousand nukes? All of which are programmed to land on the USSR.[/b]
    "...the fact they [China] use North Korea for political games in the region."
    --Twhitehead

    China regards the DPRK as a 'loose cannon', far from being a reliable ally serving China's interests.
    But China has decided so far that it's better to keep the status quo in the DPRK because the alternatives seem worse.
    If the ROK (Seoul government) were to take control of all Korea now, the USA would be
    eager to built military bases (in North Korea) very near China, threatening China.
    (In contrast, China has no military bases at all near the USA.)

    Let's suppose that China informed the ROK that it would agree to Korean reunification
    on the condition that all US military bases be removed from Korea. Although many,
    if not most, South Koreans would happily agree, I expect that the USA would fiercely
    oppose having to give up its advanced military bases in Asia.

    There was fierce American opposition when the Philippines refused to renew the leases
    for major US military bases there. Now the recently elected leader of the Philippines has
    criticized the USA and said that he hopes to improve his country's relations with China.
    The US government has condemned him. I believe that it would be good if China and
    the Philippines could resolve their territorial dispute through peaceful negotiations.
    But the USA would oppose it because it wants to encourage the Philippines to be as
    hostile as possible toward China. The USA wants to have major military bases in
    the Philippines and it wants the Philippines to be one of its dependent client states.
    China and the USA are competing for influence now in the Philippines (a traditional
    US client state), and the USA recently has started to lose.
Back to Top