Chinese Defense Minister Gives Speech About WAR plans against the United States

[Grasshopper]

So when do they get to the point that they send out trillions in foreign aid, only to be have people spit in their face as they reach out to grab the cash?

Isolationism!

That's a pretty naive point of view. Almost all US aid has strings attached and is thus not really aid at all, but payment for favours.

Anyway, if isolationism also means that the US will refrain from screwing the third words through the 'free' trade system, meddling in the affairs of other nations, and starting wars with the aim of securing a cheap supply of oil, then I think most countries would regard the loss of 'aid' as a price well worth paying.

[ChadTower]

That's a pretty naive point of view. Almost all US aid has strings attached and is thus not really aid at all, but payment for favours.

Uh, yeah, that's what happens when someone gives you money.  When was the last time someone handed you a large sum of money and didn't want anything in return?

[Stingray]

That's a pretty naive point of view. Almost all US aid has strings attached and is thus not really aid at all, but payment for favours.

Uh, yeah, that's what happens when someone gives you money.  When was the last time someone handed you a large sum of money and didn't want anything in return?

Not that long ago, but I was wearing a ski mask and holding a gun at the time.

-S

[Grasshopper]

That's a pretty naive point of view. Almost all US aid has strings attached and is thus not really aid at all, but payment for favours.

Uh, yeah, that's what happens when someone gives you money.  When was the last time someone handed you a large sum of money and didn't want anything in return?

Err, it's called charity. It's a concept you might not be familiar with.

[ChadTower]

I am intimately familiar with charity.  I donate a much larger portion of my income to charity than most people I know and I am the only person I know that donates time.

There is a difference between sending off a few hundred dollars and sending off a few trillion.  At some point, the line crosses from charity to wanting control over how your donated funds are used.

I mean, is telling them NOT to fund militias and to ACTUALLY feed people with our money so much to ask?

[Grasshopper]

I mean, is telling them NOT to fund militias and to ACTUALLY feed people with our money so much to ask?

I totally agree with that. But when I referred to strings attached I was talking about political strings. For example the US has increased 'aid' to Pakistan because it has helped in the fight against Al-Queda. Nothing wrong with that. In fact it often makes good economic and diplomatic sense to pay other people to fight our battles instead of doing it ourselves. But what I object to is the term 'aid' which implies genuine altruism and charity. The amount of genuine aid that the US gives is minuscule.

[ChadTower]

But what I object to is the term 'aid' which implies genuine altruism and charity. The amount of genuine aid that the US gives is minuscule.

Not really... aid implies overpayment for services rendered, a bit of help in return for something.  Charity and altriusm imply charity and altruism.  If it were charity, they could call it charity.

[fredster]

Stingray? What's right wing about what I said?  All I said was that we are a little stronger than some of you are giving us credit for. 
Where do you live in the south? When did you move here?

The amount of genuine aid that the US gives is minuscule.

Minuscule? In what way?

I don't see any problems with China's military.  I kinda agree that they wouldn't send an Army out just to kick our ass.  They don't have the drive to do that.  After all, they have the largest population anywhere.  I'm sure they don't need our problems, they have enough on their own.

The problem I see is they will overtake the free markets.  Flood products and shut down industry in the west.  That's a major concern.  At my plant we have to compete with prices from China.  They are infiltrating our infrastructure with economic clout.

[Stingray]

I live in and was born in Oklahoma.

-S

[ChadTower]

They don't need our problems, they need our natural resources and space.

You'd think they would see Canada as the best place to get those things.

[fredster]

Stingray. Oh, Okies.  Okay, now I understand.  I have a couple of friends here that are from Oklahoma.  They share some of your same views.  We get along fine, although we argue that Oklahoma is actually a WESTERN state.

Chad, nothing can be gained from China going after our resources.  Alaska, maybe.

It's the money that would kill us.  That they have a lot of and lots of time to use it.  Military might is just the big stick. 

We owe them mucho money now.  If they continue to smite us with the oil (with the saudi's help) we'll be screwed. 

We need to develop better and more efficient systems in the US.  The only way that will happen is with a crisis.   We just don't go off and do grand and glorious things here without some kind of terrible tragety or hardship.  It just doesn't happen that way.

[ChadTower]

They can't get enough lumber.  Canada is great for that.

They can't get enough steel.  The US is great for that.

They can't get enough oil.  Alaska is great for that.

[Stingray]

Stingray. Oh, Okies.  Okay, now I understand.  I have a couple of friends here that are from Oklahoma.  They share some of your same views.  We get along fine, although we argue that Oklahoma is actually a WESTERN state.

I can live with that. We're often refered to as both southwest and midwest as well. I'm not sure which one we actually are.

-S

[ChadTower]

To us in MA, you're an abstract concept on the half torn maps they used to teach us geography in second grade.

[Stingray]

-S

[ChadTower]

Looks like a giant meat cleaver.

[Stingray]

That's because the land in the "handle" part is 100% worthless. Nobody else wanted it, so it got tacked onto Indian Territory, and then later Oklahoma.

-S