raja_indy14

You can get them here: http://homepage2.nifty.com/tabinohito/newpage12.html But they're just props and you have to lot them yourself

Who, exactly was calling for a boycott of Chinese goods?quote> Some people on the previous page were advocating boycotting 'made in china', I don't understand this at all and I was hoping that someone would explain it to me :S.

Can someone please explain to me the sense of boycotting Chinese goods? So another Chinese person wont have a job in a factory and maybe end up starving instead?? So that economic growth slows and perhaps the Government collapses??? Why do so many people seem to percieve China as this terrible monstrosity?? Do people not see the lifting of millions out of dire poverty as some kind of miracle that should be helped along as much as possible??? Why do so many think that so many aspects of China exist in a state of permanence - never to be changed regardless of what happens to the country?? It is terrible some of the things the government has done, but I'm sure - as I've said - that with increasing wealth and education the society should grow freer and more open. Why does everyone seem to think that this change will come instantaneously? As ephorex_77 says, there are a myriad problems facing China right now, does anyone seriously think that the sudden application of freedom and democracy will magically remove these ills? As for my comments of oppression vs death, I do understand that in extreme cases death can be seen by people as preferrable to oppression - but i said a little oppression (i was referring to the general oppression of the majority Chinese population, not the Tibetans) not that kind of extreme oppression. Most people - you might be surprised to know - don't mind a few restrictions on their political life if in exchange they can see real progress in their standard of living, if stability can be brought out of chaos. And fighting against 'oppression' is always much more complicated than simply fighting for 'freedom' - the American War of Independence, the Iraq Insurgency etc etc are not simply a matter of 'freedom'. @krbe - I'm not sure I entirely understand your point about slavery. My 'stance' on slavery is that while it is abhorrent to us, to many people this has not been so. Economically, slavery is a poor system to use, I believe that slavery is a major impediment to Industrial revolution. I would not want to be a slave, nor own slaves of my own, I wouldn't support slavery in any way. May I suggest a trip out of that sheltered community to Europe to learn something from the Second World War? From the High North in Norway, where Soviet was regarded as liberator from the Nazis; to the Baltics where the Nazis were regarded as liberators from the oppressive Soviet Union?quote> Wert? If I was going to take a trip out of a sheltered community - which I have thank you very much - why would I go to Europe when there are countless places I could go to experience oppression and totalitarianism first hand?? And Tibet wasn't conqured to relive actual China of "population pressure"; which is not a valid reason for war. Liberating them from serfdom, which Chinese radio announced, might sound like something the US would have done today; the invasion itself was without fighting. The relative peacefulness by the invasion/liberation has since been followed by a controversial, Chinese government since 1959quote> Yes, I know that that wasn't the reason for conquering Tibet; I'm saying that that is what is happening to Tibet now. And I'm not trying to 'justify' this war/occupation/opression with the 'excuse' of population pressure - I'm saying that in can be seen within the context of overpopulation. You cannot deny that overpopulation and the resultant migrations have caused massive disruption in human history, and I was positing that this occupation and settlement of Tibet can be seen as a natural result of this. edit - notice the comma it's not "China conquered Tibet because..." it's "China conquered Tibet, because of population..."

Colonization is: "to establish a colony in; settle". quote> Sorry, isn't this precisely what is happening in Tibet? The Chinese conquer Tibet, because of population pressure millions of Han Chinese are transported into the country swamping and destroying much of the native culture. They, of course, don't like being conquered, oppressed, and displaced and are rebelling. Generally accepted by whom?? quote> Well most people aren't too happy about dying , most people aren't as idealistic and are quite content to suffer some oppression so long as their material conditions improve. As Indonesia demonstrated, once material conditions stop improving the government better watch out. To most people survival is more important than 'freedom' - whatever that actually means. Besides, I'm not against opening up society, I just question the feasibility and immediate benefits of applying all these western values to the powder keg that is China in one fell swoop. Oppressive government never last becuase generally their people will eventually demand respect and freedoms and the right to be treated fairly...what is so bad about that? quote> There is nothing wrong with it. As I've said capitalism has come to China, and it's unlikely that the Communist party will be able to maintain it's vice-like grip on the country through this current and rapid period of transformation. Eventually, with increasing wealth and education, a more open and democratic system will be adopted. What I'm against is the west standing on a moral high horse and believing that it can tell everyone else what to do. it's arrogant, why should the rest of the world continue to have to dance to the west's tune? I'm saying let China change naturally, indigenously - I bet that it will, but applying western standards to the whole world has always seemed arrogant to me. Also something I should add, that were it not for these 'western rules' and freedoms most likely you would not have the freedom to express your personal views. I find it interesting that you defend a country in which, were you to be living there, you would never be allowed to openly speak your mind. If you did you would now be in prison and most likely being tortured. Its all very well defending China from the comfort of a Canadian suburb....would you be so forgiving if you lived there? quote> Absolutely right, except that I'm not trying to say what the Chinese government is doing is right; though considering the gist of what I've been saying I very likely would be encouraged to speak my mind (). I'm not against western values, I'm against westerners constantly measuring everyone else against this western values yardstick (which westerners have only relatively recently come up with anyways) and telling everyone else in the world that they should behave in the same way. Even though they used to behave in exactly the same way! And I'm not being forgiving, I'm being practical. Would it make any difference whatsoever to Tibetans if I were to join the tide of vitriol-spewing anti-Communist government posters in this thread thus far? No. I'm trying to be objective and dispassionate, you might accuse me of moral bankruptcy, but there's not much I can do about that . It is by lucky coincidence that I live in a wealthy western country and not some third world despotate (although i've lived in one and as I've said it wasn't that bad ), and perhaps if I<

Germany was largely destroyed during the 24-hrs bomb raids the RAF and USAF conducted over Germany, in addition to the Soviets attacks (though they had to fight ther way through larger territories), and the "rebuilding plans" for Germany after the war had two important elements: Denazification and the establishment of an agrarian state. Paying damages like they had to do after WWI wasn't an option (we all know how that went), but keeping the Germans down, both economically and technologically was deemed feasible. No one could foresee the European Union in 1948; much less imagine Germany as the leading country in Europe 60 years after. The Soviets tried the agrarian way, by dismantling DDR's factories, while the Western Allies soon gave up. Nonetheless, both Germanies were occupied until 1955.quote> Yes, and a good thing the Morgenthau Plan wasn't fully implemented, or else the story would have been quite a bit different. It doesn't change anything, rebuilding an industrial state that has been devastated in war is not the same as the transformation from an agrarian to an industrial state - which is far more turbulent. The argument by comparison remains moot. It's actually harder to remember a country which was industrialised while being under such stringent control as the Chinese.quote> No, the Soviet Union comes to mind instantly. And who are the "average Chinese" you're so full of concern for? Is it the Han group which is going to suffer if the "Chinese" decide that an authoritarian regime does not represent them sufficently? Or the Uihgurs, those dangerous Muslims? Or the Tibetans, which had to see their country once again invaded by China and even be ruled from Beijing?quote> It's generally accepted that death from warfare, disorder, starvation (as a result of economic breakdown) and disease is NOT preferrable to a little oppression. In this sense whatever oppression is occurring right now is better than what would happen if the country descended into civil war. Sorry, it doesn work that way in a community. There are some common sets of rules that apply to all in all communities, wheter we're talking about people, businesses or countries.quote> How convenient that these 'rules' that the world has to now follow have been dreamt up by the west, just after a couple of centuries of them doing precisely what is no longer allowed. Again, this smacks of excessive eurocentrism and arrogance. Many East Germans are longing for the "good ol' times"; as long as you don't care about what your government does as long as it gives you a job, it's alright. From the moment you feel it's something wrong and are willing to talk about it, it's going to cause you problems. Which political thoughts were you able to form while you lived in Indonesia? That military coups are a fine way of gaining power? That purges against those who think otherwise are all good? That paying your way through the system is an acceptable "good governance"? quote> I'm a high school student, so I'm too young to have lived through all that (), but at any rate i was mostly joking. However, it is true that for the vast majority of the population a little oppression is alright so long as they are seeing real economic results. For the vast majority of people - even in western societies to some extent - political participation is largely irrelevant - the majority of people i know have only the foggiest notions of how our country is run or what different political parties stand for - you could not get any less engaged. And I would point out t

Germany has done a better job than China at this; while China destroyed itself during the first decades after the Second World War the Germans made sure that they would be remembered to the Wirthschaftswunder instead of a silly project like the "the Great Leap Forward". That's one of the reasons Germany has a GDP per capita of USD 28 900 (2003). They've done all thei while the German people actually has enjoyed deomcracy! So no, you don't need a oppressive government and restrain freedom to grow; indeed you might even be labelled "successful" if you managed this within the limits of individual freedom.quote> You can't seriously be comparing Germany to China in this way? they are so incomparable this argument descends into farce. Additionally, it's not even true. Germany was unified under a Kaiser in the mid-19th Century, at which point it underwent rapid industrialization (it was a far from democratic and 'free'). After economic chaos and instability folowing WWI, economic stability and growth were restarted in the 30's - again under a totalitarian (and subsequently reviled) government. Despite the devastation of WWII, at it's conclusion Germany was still an indutrialized state. Recovery was a matter of rebuilding, not starting from scratch. Japan was in a similar situation. When the Communists united China in mid-century the country was not industrialized by any stretch of the imagination, it was still a largely agrarian state. The two are simply incomparable. Anyways, all i've said is that it is VERY RARE - please give an example since i can't come up with one off the bat - where a country as endured the early stages of industrialization with a completely free and democratic government, let alone a state under the amazing pressures that china is undergoing right now. Why are the Chinese so afraid of what people are saying? Why is it suddenly so important to rule TIbet (it might have been under Chinese control before, but certainly not ruled from Beijing)? Why would China break up if they stop executing people who have seen dirty pages on the internet? Would you, ephorex_77, continue as a dictator if you assumed control of China? Who do you think deserves to be executed, and for what? What shall we do to those dirty Tibetans? How to we keep the rest of China quite, dancing after you?quote> As i said in my original post, the reason that it is important to oppress the Tibetans is because China is in essence colonizing the country. Massive population pressures in the east of the country are being alleviated by moving millions of people into the sparsely populated western frontier - there are many parrallels with canada/us actually - including Tibet and Xinjiang. Migration and displacement seem - historically - to be a natural result of massive population pressure. I also mentioned that the reason the government is oppressive is because they fear rebellion against the regime, as any government does, and because if disorder were to break out it would be much worse for the average Chinese than anything that is happening right now. To people who say that Canada and the US have 'made redress' for their crimes against the native populations (I'm Canadian and i would say that this hasn't really been done - I can't speak for the US with such conviction however) - I would say 'whoopee, it only took a couple centuries, and segregation of blacks continued for another century after the abolishment of slavery!!' Sorry, but it is not a convincing argument. Besides, as i said, does the whole world move with the west? When the west decides that colonization is terrible - luckily when it no longer needs to colonize

Okay, this is the very first airport i ever made, it was supposed to be for experimenting/learning but it was so time consuming i just ended up finishing it as a final product. Flughaven Konstanz-Reichenau When Konstanz was made the new Capital of Germany it was decided that it needed a new airport suitable for a city of it's growing stature. Although the city only had a population of ~300 000 it was decided to make an airport suitable for a city of about 1 million - it would serve the Bodensee Capital Region. The hilly terrain of the region made finding a suitable location difficult, many suggestions were investigated including a floating airport on the Bodensee it's self - for environmental and aesthetic reasons this plan was abandoned quite quickly. Eventually a suitable spot was found on the Island of Reichenau - so that the airport is also called 'Flughaven Reichenau' - with the runway to be constructed on reclaimed land beside the connecting isthmus - which is a forest preserve. Transport would be difficult, a highway tunnel 3.2km long would have to constructed with a somewhat shorter rail tunnel. These would have to pass under the proposed underground light rail links connecting the terminals. 7 years after contruction began, the new airport was ready to recieve it's first aircraft, however it was wildly over-budget and began operating far below capacity. The German government passed Airport Act C-22 in the 2nd year of operations which required 1/4 of all international flights into Germany to use the new airport, this at least made the airport more profitable but the new regulations were deeply unpopular with airlines and the laws were relaxed a bit; however Lufthansa was required to use the new airport as a major international gateway. Overviews: Terminal A (International Terminal): Terminal B (Domestic/Discount Terminal): Terminal C (Lufthansa Terminal): Other: The Terminals are all connected by underground light rail, including a connector across the 'bay' of terminal B. Airport expansion is limited due to the location, though another runway outboard of the current one is planned as part of the Phase II expansion. So, what do you think?

although i sympathize with the tibetans and the chinese that are oppressed, i don't think it can be said that the chinese government has no concern for the chinese people - else why industrialize, why not just sit in their palaces whilst the people starve, a la kim jong? the plight of the tibetans can also be seen, i think, as a natural tendency for massive population pressures to spawn migrations and - often - the subjugation of neighbouring peoples. for instance european populations expanded massively into the americas during their period of industrialization and population growth; while canada and the US both brutally oppressed native populations in their conquest of the western frontier - these crimes have still not been properly addressed by either country. it is regrettable, but can westerners really criticize a country for doing precisely what they did in similar circumstances (settling other regions), is it suddenly taboo because it is no longer a western imperative? from where do they derive their moral authority? secondly, the communist government is harsh. it is a party that ruthlessly and jealously guards it's single-party status, and it is constantly paranoid of any threat to it's authority - political, religious or otherwise (and they may have a right to be, the religious Tai-Ping rebellion in the mid-19th century killed 20 million - when instability rocks china millions die). however it has also guided china through a period of unrivalled economic growth, millions are being lifted out of poverty; you may say that so many more remain poor, but development has never been an instantaneous process, and millions of chinese are seeing real benefits to their standard of living - to say otherwise would be naive. some suggest that the very control and stability of the communist government has greatly benefited china, i'm not so sure, but i know my own government is hugely inefficient and apparently ineffective and doing anything more than a basic day to day running of the country. the policies may be harsh, but how does one run a single-party state of 1.4 billion people, 120 million internal migrants, an economy growing at 10% per annum, with arable land and the environment rapidly deteriorating? what country HAS experienced rapid industrial development with a truly free society? many european countries began their industrializations under monarchs or dictators, the US may have been 'free' but for a long period of it's early growth there were millions of people enslaved, while suffrage was far from universal. is it even possible for a major state to make it through the rapid early stages of industrialization - and all the difficulties it creates - with a completely free society? eventually, with increasing wealth, the growth of a middle class, and education these forms of government are superceded by more democratic and freer societies, which is something that i think must happen to china - the floodgates of capitalism have been opened and the old order will eventually be replaced; whether the communist party fades peacefully away or in a spasm of violence is what we should worry about. on the environment and work environment/wages i can only say that this is a country in the early throes of rapid industrialization, can we realistically expect that people will be earning US$5/hour off the bat? or that expensive, environment saving technologies will be implemented at the outset? look at 19th century London, the killer fogs and the appalling working conditions - it seems a natural stage of development. the chinese gov'ts single priority is the creation of jobs and the continuing growth of the econo