peter236

原帖由 p51dray 於 2007-12-3 21:02 發表
Traum gave REASONS why he thought China act wrongly in this matter.  Even if he hates China, so what?  Learn to attack the basis of his arguments please.  

US sailor bring in foreign income into Chin ...

Point for point, Traum just could not suppport his arguments. China did the right thing by standing up strong against foreign bullies. Like Traum said before, making money is not everything. We should not stay shut up in the face of foreign interference. As for those drunken US sailors, they buy very little, only a couple of beers, compared with the millions of tourists that visit Hong Kong from China and around the world.

I don't understand why you said tourists from China do not bring economic benefits to HK. You want them to spend money overseas instead, LOL? By the same logic, tourists from Toronto is not good for the economy of Vancouver or Canada, since we are the same country. At least, local tourists spending within the country is better than spending overseas, benefitting foreigners.

Maybe China should grow up. So should the US, that invades other countries, keeps on selling weapons to Taiwan, and keeps on supporting the Dalai Lama, eventhough the US recognizes Taiwan and Tibet as parts of China. Just imagine how the US would react if some country pisses them off.

[ 本帖最後由 peter236 於 2007-12-3 22:22 編輯 ]

yungfourfour

Yup
Lik gor, so far no one challenges you about the human right point, but instead keep going from the $ perspective.
自由行 let their kids poo poo in the sink at disneyland
but of course somebody thinks those money are easy to earn and keep getting off the topic la
Politics is not all about $. Collect skin la

p51dray

原帖由 peter236 於 2007-12-3 22:08 發表


Point for point, Traum just could not suppport his arguments. China did the right thing by standing up strong against foreign bullies. Like Traum said before, making money is not everything. We shou ...

Perhaps I need to make my point more clear with an example.  Chinese mainlander A spends $1 at HK -> HK wealth increase $1, Mainland wealth decrease $1 -> net increase in wealth in China = $0.  An US serviceman spending his salary in HK on the other hand... well I will let you connect the dots.  

You bought Chinese tourism into the argument to show the relative insignificance of the additional inflow of wealth bought about by the arrival of US Navy battle group.  I don't think anyone is arguing against that; I was just trying to point out that China is effective forgoing some income just because they don't like the US.  

Yes US should grow up too; this doesn't mean China shouldn't.

peter236

原帖由 yungfourfour 於 2007-12-4 23:14 發表
Yup
Lik gor, so far no one challenges you about the human right point, but instead keep going from the $ perspective.
自由行 let their kids poo poo in the sink at disneyland
but of course somebody thi ...

Maybe you should be the one who should collect skin.

It was Lik who looked at it from the $ perspective and said Hong Kong suffered economic loss because of those cancelled navy visists. But in earlier discussions, Lik said money is not everything and China should stand up for its own rights against foreign countries over issues like Japan war crimes, Diaoyutai Islands, Taiwan etc. So he actually contradicted himself.

As we all know, when you play power politics with the US, you do not consider humanitarian issues.

[ 本帖最後由 peter236 於 2007-12-5 00:37 編輯 ]

peter236

原帖由 p51dray 於 2007-12-4 23:41 發表


Perhaps I need to make my point more clear with an example.  Chinese mainlander A spends $1 at HK -> HK wealth increase $1, Mainland wealth decrease $1 -> net increase in wealth in China = $0.  An U ...

Of course, I see your point. Its like a tourist from Toronto spends $1 in Vancouver. Toronto is -1 while Vancouver is +1. Still, it is better than spending $1 in the US which results in -1 for Canada. But Hong Kong still gets millions of tourists from all over the world, not only China. Traum does not need to worry about economic loss for Hong Kong because of a few cancelled naval visits.

But these naval visits will resume after China has made the point and the US gets it.

[ 本帖最後由 peter236 於 2007-12-5 00:35 編輯 ]

yungfourfour

Given that Lik mentioned the money part, is not ALL of it; afterall it's still not the main issue.  It is still right for China to stand his point.  If you pay enough attention to the new post, 兩國代表都認為，「小鷹」號事件應告一段落, and what's the point assuming that if China really needs to stand against those issues?  That still does not stand the point you are trying to make.

P.S. Good job for making "collect skin" personal over my conversation with Lik.

peter236

It is nice to see the US gets the point from China, and now they have stopped complaining.

yungfourfour

Hm.

US gets the point from Kitty Kawk. Assuming that's COMPLETELY right.
and they not talk about Kitty hawk

but China continues to refuse US ships docking for refuel according to your topic.
That's not a very civilized diplomacy.

Ovaltine

原帖由 yungfourfour 於 2007-12-5 02:28 發表
Hm.

US gets the point from Kitty Kawk. Assuming that's COMPLETELY right.
and they not talk about Kitty hawk

but China continues to refuse US ships docking for refuel according to your topic.
That's  ...

When was China ever civilized after the Cultural Revolution? I consider Canada to be very civilized in politics, what reward did that bring to us Canadians?

What does Humanitarian issues have to do with the US military?

This is pointless China bashing, we can't ever control the Central Governments mind, or change the way they feel about foreign policy. You all stop hating on China, and prove useful by teaching, culturing our own Communist citizens. This will help for the next generation of Chinese leader to become world leaders without losing Chinese  "face"

PS: We should learn more from black people
http://youtube.com/watch?v=jzY2-GRDiPM