Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    30 Oct '15 19:29
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Well, the dam they are building in Africa is certainly coming with some political caveats.
    Please be specific. Africa is a very big place. Which dam, and what are the political caveats?
  2. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52866
    31 Oct '15 07:061 edit
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    Please be specific. Africa is a very big place. Which dam, and what are the political caveats?
    9 billion dollar project, Omo river dam in Ethiopia.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-09-09/africa-s-new-friend-china-finances-9-3-billion-of-hydropower

    Building dams all over Africa with few strings attached, except the big one of who gets to supply parts to fix a strictly Chinese project, when things start to break after the mechanical honeymoon is over, the Chinese can reap a lot of money and political influence both by that and the making of good will, that reaps political benefits down the line. China thinks in the long term.
  3. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    31 Oct '15 10:21
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Building dams all over Africa with few strings attached, except the big one of who gets to supply parts to fix a strictly Chinese project, when things start to break after the mechanical honeymoon is over, the Chinese can reap a lot of money and political influence both by that and the making of good will, that reaps political benefits down the line. China thinks in the long term.
    So when you said 'political caveats' you really meant possible future political caveats due to economic caveats? And I note that the article you referenced does not support your claim. Do you have any evidence to support your claim?

    Now compare this to what Europe an the US did to us and I think you will find that China is far less engaged in political meddling.
    Many of our current government policies in Zambia were practically dictated to us by the IMF and World Bank. As far as I know, China, which built the Tazara railway for us, has not dictated any government policies to us, nor has Japan which has also been very good to us.

    Also compare it with what is happening in SA with Russia selling us Nuclear power and demanding exclusive rights to our nuclear industry for many years to come whilst simultaneously putting all the responsibility on us. Or at least that is what has been reported. The actual details are kept secret for no reason other than the fact that it would be politically devastating to let the populace know what is really going on.
  4. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    35902
    01 Nov '15 00:17
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    I think countries around there like the Philippines and Japan have more of a vested interest in stopping China than the US. They are the ones being indirectly threatened.

    This also may be a pre-cursor to attacking Taiwan.
    Those countries also lay claim to those islands, but they don't have the military might to secure them, especially against China. Word around the campfire is that it's about oil, as well as a strategic staging area.
  5. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    05 Nov '15 20:33
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    What is it China is after, trying to lay claim to a huge swath of ocean off the coast of the Philippines?

    The world seems to be of the opinion the waters they built up those artificial islands are in international waters and cannot just be taken over by China.

    What are they after? Is there oil there? Are they just doing it because the CAN?

    What if the US sends 3 or 4 carriers to the area, what then? Another series of sea battles?
    Sonhouse, I have noticed how ignorant and misinformed you are about much of the world.
    I also have noticed how extremely gullible (embracing ignorant stereotypes) you are in
    instantly accepting the US media's demoniization of some peoples or states.

    "The world seems to be of the opinion..."
    --Sonhouse

    'The world' has diverse opinions of China, including some much more positive ones than
    held by most American politicians (who resort to blaming China, a popular scapegoat,
    for almost all of the USA's problems) or a widely racist Sinophobic US media.

    I am aware that the default US position is that China always must be wrong in any international dispute.
    (The USA likes to be neutral when Japanese nationalists deny that Japan committed
    any war crimes in China and the Chinese take offense in response.) But China has a
    plausible historical basis for much, though not necessarily all, of its territorial claims.
    And it's dead wrong to claim that, since 1949, China has been intent on maximizing its territory.
    In fact, China agreed to settle a disputed border with Burma (Myanmar) that gave Burma nearly all it wanted.

    In fact, in the 1930s-40s China was the target of a genocidal invasion by Japan, while
    the Western powers (including the USA) did nothing until they began to perceive that
    their imperialist interests were threatened. Japan already had killed millions of Chinese
    civilians *before* it attacked Pearl Harbor, but most Western historical writers like to act
    as though the only war was taking place in Europe. Indeed, few Westerners sincerely
    objected to the genocide of Chinese then, and I would submit that not much has changed today.
  6. The Catbird's Seat
    Joined
    21 Oct '06
    Moves
    2598
    07 Nov '15 02:141 edit
    Originally posted by bill718
    OK...we'll send 1 sailor in a dinghy with a pair of binoculars to watch those wily Chinese create those artificial islands, and we fulfilled our obligation under the treaty. I'm sure those artificial islands will upset the balance of power in the world. Maybe we should send another sailor to make sure the great wall is not being used as a cover to make counterfeit cereal box tops. 🙄
    If you remember, the N. Koreans captured a US naval vessel a bit bigger than a dinghy, and armed with more than binoculars. We can quite effectively monitor what's going on via satellites, so why send carriers?
Back to Top