War as new TV entertainment?

[Dutchy]

I just watched an item on the news about US media and the upcoming war. They told how there's this competition between like 3 stations over the coverage. Some stations have reports in a film-like form, others have quiz questions. One station (I think it was CNN) showed a reporter who was in Bagdad doing a report like the war is already going on. One person said that the main stations don't really talk about the political, economical and local consequences. Only late night shows, with few viewers, talk about this. They also said that they don't show much about the world's (Europe's) scepticism on a war against Iraq.

It was pretty sad to look at: war as new TV entertainment.

Was it exaggerated? Do Americans here recognize it?

[JediBoricua]

I don't live in the US, but I get all the major news network and it is completely true. Ratings are the order of the day. It's interesting that since Irak has been mentioned everyone forgot about Al-Quaeda and Bin Laden. It really feels like a screen to cover the failure of not finding the terrorist responsible for all this mess and using it as an excuse to bomb Saddam out. We don't hear anything about the status of the new gvmnt in Afghanistan, we don't know anything about protests against war in Europe, or even in the US where they happen on daily basis.


What ou mostly get on news programs ex-generals talking strategy on where and how to bomb. What they show about the world's point of view is that Tony Blair is in favor of the US, other than that is a mute point.

[Diego Van Derveld]

I wholly disagree on this, as I've found all these other divergent news topics easily and readily available within the states. I think its the only drum that counterculturalists can find nearby to bang on, so they want to bang on it as loudly as possible.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Well I think its true to some extent, I know on Fox they show it that way, CNN sometimes shows Europe's views but mostly just France, Germany, and Russia, you usually have to look on the internet to get a better view or watch the BBC news whenever that comes on here in the states.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

Do I think the media in general is biased, and devoted to sensationalism?

Yes.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Very much so all they care about is the ratings. If you want to really find out what is going on you are probably better off picking up a newspaper

[JMK]

It's ALL about the ratings. And not much else at all IMO.

[Jedieb]

Want good news? Go to PBS. :)

War coverage as entertainment the way we see it today started with CNN and the Gulf War. The military did a surprisingly effective job of controlling what the media did and didn't see in the Gulf War. I don't see anything changing this time around.

[Ishiva Ruell]

Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr
Very much so all they care about is the ratings. If you want to really find out what is going on you are probably better off picking up a newspaper

Not always, Los Angeles Times lost many readers for their ultra-liberal pro-palestinian views of the Israeli/Palestinian controversy. Their message boards lit-up with complaints and lost over a 1000 readers. They recently went on a campaign to win their readers back by offering them a year's subscription free of charge. What a boo-boo!

[Princess Sunflower]

I feel it's definitely just about ratings for the BIG 3, ABC, CBS and NBC that is. All these stations are good for is local and entertainment news and ramming teaser stories down your throat all nite so you don't switch the channel at 11:00 to watch news on another channel.

I thought it was pretty pathetic last nite when the lead story for NBC on the 11:00 news was reporting was just happened at the Golden Globes Awards! HELLO people! we just sat and watched the show for 3 hours so why do you need to report on it! DUH!

I find Fox News to be the most informative on World News.

Ok...I'll get off my soapbox now :grumble

[imported_Eve]

As someone who watches the news...

(1) Yes, it's a ratings war (always has been for eons and eons since news on TV came out - that's nothing new).
(2) Showing anti-US sentiment? Yeah, I have seen lots of it. In fact two networks (NBC and CBS) ran segments on it during prime time news in the last week, and CNN talks about it daily, in the mornings. I saw a segment narrated by an english reporter on one station, and an aussie on another.
(3) Bin Laden is still part of the news everyday, as far as I have seen. We still don't know where he is. We're still worried he's planning something.

I saw some lengthier stuff on PBS. One english reporter was in Iraq, trying to talk to people about public beheadings (as examples of breaking Iraq law), being shut down at every turn, getting his room and belongings searched daily, and ultimately getting his visa taken away after asking TOO many questions... to mention a FEW highlights. Good stuff, but to me, even though it was English based - seemed to echo American sentiment that Iraq is hiding something, and is in clear violation of human rights.

America doesn't shelter its public from the truth. We don't hide or do anything other than face the music. If there is any country in the world that knows how to step up to the plate, it's America. Implying that we're sheltered, intentionally, from the truth is ridiculous. Gawd, in college, all I ever heard was how everyone doesn't like us, and I still hear it daily. Frankly, I've heard it enough, and I don't care. We've all heard it enough, and we've heard it for years. We're not reforming at the current time, despite other's lack of understanding or will to, ironicly, make us more like them. We love our way of life, and we'd die for our country. You'd be so lucky to live in the same place and feel the same way. Whatever we do (despite international criticism) works, and has us many national friends. You may not like our Foreign Policy, but you sure don't want us on your bad side. How honorable is that? Cultures are different. Sue us for not wanting to compromise our great lives, or get nuked by some crazy man who treats his people like dogs, and continually violates UN regulations.

I know, I know. Sit in your chair and form opinions, criticize and talk, and we'll just be over here stopping the third antichrist from bombing the free world with nuclear weapons.

Please get something new to whine/gossip/criticize about. If we're wrong, we'll be the only ones to go down, or face the heat, as usual. You'll still be in your warm chair when our war is over, with no money or labor spent. We'll keep sending you aid, and never get paid back past aid for your war hardships. We'll keep enforcing trade relationships that are mostly beneficial to countries that aren't us, so they can all get close to some way of life that we have. We'll keep taking your people that don't want to live in your country anymore and give them equal opportunity to work and live the life, easier than our own citizens. We'll enforce UN regulations, that all countries agreed to enforce. And we'll protect you from eventually getting nuked because you don't fit into Hussein's master plan.

We can stack up all the good things America has done for the world (which usually are exactly what all countries signed up to do within the UN), and lets list what your country has done. Think your list will be long?

No respect.

[Diego Van Derveld]

THAT is why I love Eve :love

[Figrin D'an]

When it comes down to basics, TV networks are corporations... businesses... the ultimate goal is to be profitable.

(Duh, what an amazingly radical concept, huh?) :rolleyes


More butts in seats tuned in = more money.

Nothing new there...

[Ishiva Ruell]

Originally posted by Figrin D'an
When it comes down to basics, TV networks are corporations... businesses... the ultimate goal is to be profitable.

(Duh, what an amazingly radical concept, huh?) :rolleyes


More butts in seats tuned in = more money.

Nothing new there...

lol, yep! Just goes to show that sensationalism and trash news does sell. BBC channel has a great news program and I respect the brit perspective as this news program does not seem influenced by any political parties nor corporate profit and rating gambles.

Great post Eve! :)

[Lilaena De'Ville]

Eve = teh best! You articulated that very well. :)

[Darth Viscera]

Eve, that was magnificent! Way to stick it to the international pundit who has nothing better to do than critique the U.S. of A.

War isn't TV entertainment for the U.S. If you think that, then you're drawing at straws to find a new way to say that we suck. Thank you, we know that you think that we suck. We know that you think that George Bush II is the dark lord, and Ari Fleischer the Mouth of Sauron. How could we not know, when we see every day on the news that you're protesting against us? Thanks for your input :rolleyes. Please be assured that somewhere out there, the little guy who suffers the most from the evil Uncle Sam feels very appreciative that you're all banding together to uphold his freedom.











And said little guy's name is Saddam Hussein, and he killed his son by shooting him, then dragging his corpse through the streets on a meat hook.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I hope that wasn't towards Dutchy because I don't see the Dutch invading anytime soon:p

[Darth Viscera]

In the words of Mango, "Who what what who what?!"

[Diego Van Derveld]

And using mustard gas on his country's ethnic minorities makes him such an "unjustified victim."

Spare me.

I was ashamed that we withdrew when we did in '91. Utterly ashamed. I could care less what pretense we use to attack Iraq, only that we do so. You know why Hitler is so villified? His genocide was against Europeans, for the most part. Nobody bats an eye at the Mohammad Farrah Aideeds, the Hutus, the Pol Pots, and the Saddam Husseins these days...because nobody wants to care about people we know so little about.

If we take these psychopaths out of power, that is all the justification I care for. Leaders who use genocide as a tool of control SHOULD be confronted by us in war. And if the pretense is to control oil...who cares? Maybe my gas bills will shrink in a few years. Thats a nice added bonus too.

[Darth Viscera]

Please be assured that somewhere out there, the little guy who suffers the most from the evil Uncle Sam feels very appreciative that you're all banding together to uphold his freedom.

I hope you guys aren't taking this for sincerity. I was actually seething with sarcasm. I want to personally cut open Saddam's face with a number 15 surgical blade while he watches through a mirror, remember. He's gassed my people a hell of a lot more than he gassed the Kurds.

[Ishiva Ruell]

Countries sure don't mind taking our (USA) money and our relief aide first though before stabbing us in the back or going on their silly anti-american campaigns/protests. Buncha leaches. Ew!

[Jedieb]

We do an amazing job of manipulating the media today. During the Gulf War there was a story about a female soldier that was driving a truck and came under fire. She and her passenger, another soldier, were resuced and came home as heroes. What never got out was that the reason they got in trouble was that they were fooling around in the truck and got caught off guard. I personally sat in a major's office and saw Dan Rather blather on about Marines landing in a certain area. The whole story was a smoke screen to divert Iraqi intelligence. I knew what was really going on before Rather did and I was a pion. The military learned a hard lesson from Vietnam. Nobody wants to see pictures of U.S. being carried in body bags. Nobody wants to see a helicopter on the roof an embassy evacuating U.S. personnel. It's doubtful you'll see anything somebody doesn't want you to today.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Well I think things get leaked out more when one is losing which was the case in Vietnam. As far as American being hated well that is what happens when you are #1 nobody liked the Romans back in Ancient times, (the whole western world despised the Roman Army and that is why they sacked and burned half the city to the ground), the British were hated as well by most of the world and I guess we take their place that is just the way it is, there is nothing you can do about it, just don't try to make the situation worst.

[Sanis Prent]

I'd say our stint as the Global "Man" is rather lenient, if you're using the yardstick of history. We don't annihilate the men of our enemy nations, take their women and children into slavery, and sow salt in their fields so crops won't grow like the Romans did. We don't set aside entire continents to dump our convicts like the British did. We aren't perfect, and we've got faults that need fixing, but on the overall, I think we've been more than equitable as far as the trend goes.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I don't know about that we have commited some evils, the near anilation of the native americans and slavery both come to mind. I also don't think the British Empire was that bad, they weren't nowhere near as horrible as the other major empires of the 19th century (Russians and Austrians regimes were horrible). Also I think there is inevitable to us, the U.S will fall at least from super power status, probably won't happen for centuries but it will happen, all civilizations have risen and fallen. The trend is already started because White/Americans are having less children which will one day lead to our downfall because of certain nations (China, Brazil, India, etc) have large populations and one of those nations will one day take our place as the next superpower.

[Sanis Prent]

Does it really matter if the racial quotas in America change? Last I checked, all citizens are still Americans. Large population booms != prosperity, in a guaranteed sense. India and China both have large population increases, but without proper means to support. Russia has historically had a massive population...until the 19th century most were in a state of perpetual serfdom. Their population is actually on the decline now, due to insufficient means to support.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Well I was looking at it from the sense that the White population of the Us is the most around 60% and if that starts decline that means a trend. I think China will be the major player in a century or two, they are starting to catch up and modernize their state if they can do that they will be dominant power, IMO. Of course none of us will be here to see it.

[Sanis Prent]

People were saying that about the Soviet Union in 1960 too ;)

[Jedi Master Carr]

Yeah but nobody knew that the Soviet Union was collapsing already by then. Also I don't remember anybody ever saying that. I remember reading that in the 70's some historians thought Australia was going to be the dominate power in a century or two, I have no clue where they came up with that theory.

[Sanis Prent]

Are you kidding? That kind of dominance theory was pushed on the fanatical level throughout our society! It effected everything from government, to military, to our education systems, to suburbian lifestyles. Of course, it was a carefully delivered overestimation of the threat, designed to draw out a response as countermeasure.

[Jedi Master Carr]

You mean the political arugment yeah that was there though most academics scoffed at it.

[JediBoricua]

You see here lies the problem. I am criticizing the news network for not being objective, but it all turns into a "we know you hate the US". No. Actually I am very fond of the country and it's people, but it does not mean I cannot be critical of certain aspects that I do not agree with, specially with foreign policy this day. It does not make me anti-american. It also does not make me pro-Saddam. Nothing could be farther from the truth, the guy is a scumbag and should be treated as such. The but in all this is that going into Irak solo without support of the intl. community would be a major mistake IMO. Irak is way more complicated that Afghanistan, as there are more ethnic groups and it is a more powerful country with more armament. The prospect of having 20,000 Marines entering Baghdad and being received with chemical weapons is real, but the US seems reluctant to admit this. And I said it before on some other thread, while all this happens, the economy keeps tumbling down.

The point about foreign aid has been made, true the US gives to dozens of nations. But it expects to be given in return. My country for example receives about 11 billion dollars a year (7 of them coming from Social Security and Military Pensions that we have earned), but it takes from us ten or twenty times more. We, a country of about 4 million are in the Top 10 markets of US companies. We buy at Wal-Mart, eat at Mcdonals and shop as the Gap. The same with every country that receives aid. Please don't try and show yourselves as Mother Theresa, because frankly no country is mother theresa. INternational Politics is a dirty game where no one is good or bad.

[Sejah Haversh]

Um, we also buy products form Sony and Merceded-Benz, but does that mean that the COUNTRY that those products gets things like medical aid and food for starving people because of it? No, a COMPANY makes the money we spend on those products, not a COUNTRY.

Wal-Mart may make a lot of money in other countries, and does McDonalds, but that money goes to a corporation, and not to our govenrment. Please, learn the distinction between what is gonvernment aid, and what is capital gain by a comapny.

[JediBoricua]

Right. But that company that makes capital gains must pay taxes, and they give jobs to the american people and fund the economy, which is the key word here. And you buy Mercedes Benz and Sony, but you are talking about products from developed countries that are as rich as the US and don't have the same problems as those on issue here.

[Sejah Haversh]

We also buy things from Mexico and Sri Lanka, I doubt those places are as rich as we are.

And, if ther is a problem with these companies, DON'T SHOP AT THEM! There are other places to get things, so, if you aren't happy with companies started by individuals who happen to be from this country, then shop at places started by individuals from your country.

[JediBoricua]

But you fail to see my point.

I am not angry at these companies, I do no see anything wrong with buying stuff made in the US. We live in a globalized world and in a capitalist model. I buy to whoever sells it cheaper or offers the best quality, which in many cases are american companies.

The point I bring is that no country, not the US, UK or Sri Lanka gives aid for free. In fact, is a good thing you brought Sri Lanka as an example. I think that is the best example of foreign aid working for the best of the country. In about ten years the country has turned around and has been progressing gradually. It is a model of globalization. And yes, the US companies have entered their market and made huge profits. So have the Japanese companies, italian, german, etc.

But as there are good examples, there are bad example of what foreign aid can do for a country. Take Argentina for example, or Ecuador. Loans from the IMF, which is considered aid by many, have buried the country in so much debt that their economy collapsed.

[Sejah Haversh]

I do apologize, I read and replied in haste, and did partially miss your point.

[JediBoricua]

It's a heated debate, it happens. I reread my post and it could be taken as offensive. Don't worry :D

[JediBoricua]

Anyway back to topic.

I was watching the news last night to really see if I was being unfair with the networks. But I keep feeling the same way. It really feels like we are back in 1898 when the newspaper fought each other by having the most extravagant headline, even though they had to bend the truth or lie. The yellow press was one of the main reasons that the Hispanic-American war happened (that, and America's imperialistic intentions, but that's another thread). I fear we are headed in the same direction.

[imported_Eve]

It's always something. For a while it was comets that are dangerously close to earth (but really would miss us by a billion miles). One time it was OJ, then Jon Benet. 9-11 (Gah), and now Iraq.

Other current news trends: missing people (all of them), missing kids (Amber alert), how to lose weight without exerting any effort, police misconduct, George Bush being racial (even though he's trying to stop discrimination for white kids), and what happened on Joe Millionaire. D'oh! Watch out, American Idol is back on tonight (lord).

I'm glad about Iraq coverage. It's what I want to know most about right now. Everyday I pass the recruiter's office...

[Hadrian Invicta]

And even before then there was the News Reels of WWII before movies, Still shots of the Civil War being in high demand, Newsletters on the Revolution, correspondence from the fronts of the crusades.

It's not the media people, it's human nature. What has man told stories about for the ages, our myths, religions, legends, all based on destruction and war. Get it, this isn't a consiparacy, it's just smart business decision.

Death, Destruction, Debauchery = ratings = revenue = who gives a rats <smallfont color={hovercolor}>-Censored-</smallfont> we're all rich.

[Ishiva Ruell]

Foreign aid policies effects american citizens too. Such as increased taxes; medical coverage down, health care rates up; the national debt; and domestic programs such as education, social security, etc. There is more than one side to this story here.

[Ishiva Ruell]

Originally posted by Hadrian Invicta
And even before then there was the News Reels of WWII before movies, Still shots of the Civil War being in high demand, Newsletters on the Revolution, correspondence from the fronts of the crusades.

It's not the media people, it's human nature. What has man told stories about for the ages, our myths, religions, legends, all based on destruction and war. Get it, this isn't a consiparacy, it's just smart business decision.

Death, Destruction, Debauchery = ratings = revenue = who gives a rats <smallfont color=#FF0000>-Censored-</smallfont> we're all rich.

But it is a conspiracy by corporate television stations to gain more profit by gaining higher viewer ratings.

[Darth Viscera]

Heh. That's like saying that all the wolves are conspiring to hunt the sheep.

If China is the big boss man in two centuries, it'll be because they've become a fully capitalist state, like Taiwan. I see nothing wrong with the U.S. passing the torch onto a nation that shares its values with regards to dollar making.

[Ishiva Ruell]

What I am more concerned about is China becoming the next Nazi Germany or Japan. And North Korea invading South Korea with China support. The world has another WWII in the form of a Chinese/North Korean alliance. Scary thought isn't? What will the next two centuries bring?

[Darth Viscera]

Not so scary as it is unlikely.


What will the next two centuries bring?

Ever diminishing wars and eventual peace due in large part to globalization and communications? Scrambled egg pie? Commercial airliners with polyhedral wings? Jumpin Jesus, who knows?

[Ishiva Ruell]

Originally posted by Darth Viscera
Not so scary as it is unlikely.



Ever diminishing wars and eventual peace due in large part to globalization and communications? Scrambled egg pie? Commercial airliners with polyhedral wings? Jumpin Jesus, who knows?

Then why is North Korea trying to stockpile nuclear weapons and materials? How many asian countries has that great Red Dragon supported secretely? What communications have the US with China or North Korea? I mean globalization is definitely selling... but who is actually buying it? Communists with an overabundance of nationalism. NOPE!

[Diego Van Derveld]

Oh GOD, not another China-N. Korea straw grasp >_<

Look...China today != China 1950. They pay lip service to the fact that they even share the same ideology as North Korea, much less give much affection to them. Mao's regime does not exist anymore. What they have now is some kind of mutant hybrid of communocapitalism. They are definitely not going to come swarming across the Yalu to mop up another North Korean mishap. Not when Kim is effectively thumbing his nose at the entire global community (China included).

[Figrin D'an]

On a somewhat related note, here's a rather humorous article from this week's 'The Onion.'

http://www.theonion.com/onion3902/kim_jong_ii.html

[Darth Viscera]

Oh, great. As if we didn't have enough to worry about, Kim Jong Il is now Galvatron.

[Ishiva Ruell]

Oh really, if you think China is the next America upholding the same beliefs and principles, you are definitely half-kewed and wistful. Here is yet another testimony, an article just published today:

N. Korea using China to obtain missile supplies -- The Washington Times
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030122-87400474.htm

[Diego Van Derveld]

Stop putting words in my mouth...I never said that :mad

I did say, and will say again, that China wouldn't dream of backing Pyongyang's play in a military scenario. These transactions mean one thing for China - $. They're communist in spirit, and capitalist in want. They're so wired into capital gains that they will act to preserve that, above all things. Without such an economic engine, China becomes just another misaligned, overpopulated country with a bad image.

[Ishiva Ruell]

Before I hit the sack, I want to pose one last question...

Without pressure from the US, do you think China would have taken action against DPRK? Or supported their nuclear weapons armament program?

I think the answer lies with the latter question. I liken China and DPRK as Big Brother and Little Brother. Their longstanding relationship very likely has precisely this same strong, sentimental bond.

[Diego Van Derveld]

No. It does in name only.

Its more like Prospering Father / Red-Headed Stepchild kind of agreement. North Korea is not helping China, they're holding them back. The only thing they're good for is some trite symbol of red solidarity.

You can't exclude the US from this relationship...don't be so presumptuous to think so. Why on earth do you think China is so economically motivated? We're favored trading status for crying out loud. Sure, if the US and the current economic relationships were removed, then maybe you'd have a point...but only maybe. China's had notoriety for "doing its own thing", even among the Communist nations. No telling if they'd band together or become more estranged, a la the Soviets. But with the US in the picture, China has wholly different ambitions altogether. They are reaping the benefits of economic bounty that otherwise would not exist. That is a lot of clout...and I'd argue that it weighs more on the scale of things than Maoist rhetoric ever did.

[Ishiva Ruell]

China's economy is booming with increased global commerce. And have opened their borders to foreign corporations and businesses. So? There will come a time when China will be able trade independantly on a global scale and establish an autonomious global market sans even US trading relations (i.e. Japan). Their growing economy is going to encourage an exponential growth in chinese-owned, chinese-managed businesses and corporations (domestic and foreign), and establish an economic power in the global trade/market (i.e. Japan). Who is to say nationalism is truly dead when China emerges as the greatest, most economically wealthy communist state the world has ever seen??? Alas a new red 'Japan' can be emerging.

[Diego Van Derveld]

Your new name is Captain Hypothetical. I'm sure in this virtual upside down antimatter universe of Kwaad that you have theorized, that the moon is made of cheese, too.

Yes, I can see that happening. China's economy is so prosperous that they no longer rely on American economic ties...except that we're one of the primary reasons for such capital gains. Makes about as much sense to hop in a plane, climb to 30,000 feet, and then tell the plane that you don't need it, and jump out.

If China tried REALLY hard...they might be able to lessen the impact, by pimping their wares out to everybody else on the planet. But face it...money talks. Aside from the obvious disaster upon human life, a Chinese war with America costs money, above and beyond the direct costs of waging it. China isn't on planet Hypothetical. They're on planet Earth, and they aren't going to take a gamble on something that critical.


China emerges as the greatest, most economically wealthy communist state the world has ever seen

Nature has made weird things before. Take the platypus. But economically wealthy communist states are weirder than radioactive purple mecha-platypi. Guess where the trend is going? Capitalism. China's finding out the hard way that you can't really be both. If they do suffer growing pains, it'll be at the expense of a lot of regime leeway.

[JediBoricua]

Well said Diego.

Surprisingly I don't have anything to add.

[Ishiva Ruell]

You just spewed out utter nonsense Diego! China is well on their way to being an productive and industrious nation precisely like the corporately minded Japan. They are in essence the next 'Japan' with an strictly economically-based relationship with the US.... that is CORPORATE AND BUSINESS AMERICA. In fact, I believe the analysts when they predict China is going to surpass Japan and maybe even America. The statistics strongly suggest so. We already have a model for the new China... Japan... only China follows a different political philosphy but has precisely the same trade/market/work ethic (or philosphy if you must). Japan usually conducts itself quietly on a global economic basis instead of embroiling itself in world politics.

[Diego Van Derveld]

Listen, I've said it a lot already in this thread, and I get tired of saying it. Capitalism != Communism. These are two diametrically opposed systems. If you think that communism is a political ideology independent of the marketplace, you're stuck in Marxist left field. Why do you think the party came into existance? Yes, China's economy is prospering. Guess what? Its pulling the nation in a direction opposite of its ideology. The hard liners and the prospering pseudo-capitalists have completely different things that they are interested in. Either the state wins, and the capital gains cool, or the corporations win, and the state eases the leash on its burgeoning private sector. There is no compromise on this, and the issue in China is far from settled. Call it nonsense, I'll call it cold, hard pragmatism.

I'd also like to see these "statistics", if you will.

[Ishiva Ruell]

One of the smartest things the Japanese ever did was adopt foreign technology. Then economize it, mass produce it, and finally re-innovate it. They are now one of the leaders in world economy!

If you think America is the only trade China has in the world... you are dead wrong.

[Darth Viscera]

You're not getting it.


If you think America is the only trade China has in the world... you are dead right!!!

China exports $175 billion in goods annually. $70 billion of those goods go to the U.S. of A., which means that we're a full 40% of their market. If they lose that vital 40%, they lose their capacity to import $150 billion in finished goods from Western Europe and Russia, and it would not be easy to pick up another country that would allow a trade deficit as large as China's. Our allowing a trade deficit and purchasing everything China can throw at us is what is funding their gradual capitalist reformation. Because of the trade deficit, we're propping them up far more than $70 billion, because they have the option (albeit unkosher and hardly tolerated) to choose not to reciprocate with the $70 billion they make on U.S. finished goods.

It's a leech-host relationship.

[Ishiva Ruell]

Here is an interesting article:

China attracts record investment
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2656011.stm

[Sanis Prent]

That isn't suprising.

China's a massive investor's market, with IPO's and ventures sprouting left and right. They're developing in this respect. Notice the decreasing investiture rate from 2001. The burgeoning market is slowly becoming saturated, as more and more traders get on a hot ticket. The US, on the other hand, has most of its corporate assets financed through domestic investiture (I'm actually suprised we were top on the FDI anyway), as we're highly developed in both the stakeholder and capitalist markets. The bottom line is still very much on the American side of things. Wait a few years for China's capital market to saturate, and you'll probably notice some drops off the hot ticket.

What would be an interesting tidbit would be to find what percentage of China's FDI is due to American financing. I'd expect it on at least a 1:2 ratio.

[Ishiva Ruell]

I'm in a hurry but here is the China Country Analysis Brief
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/china.html

[Anbira Hicchoru]

Despite moves toward privatization, much of China's economy remains controlled by large State Owned Enterprises (SOE's), many of which are inefficient and unprofitable. Restructuring of the SOE sector, including the privatization of some enterprises, is a major priority of the government, as is restructuring of the banking sector. Many Chinese banks have had to write off large amounts of delinquent debts from state-owned enterprises. Quarterly earnings at many SOEs are reported to have fallen sharply in the first quarter of 2002, after rising in 2001. It is unclear how much of this is due to changes in accounting practices, as opposed to other factors such as weak demand for exports.

Layoffs have been part of the restructuring of the SOEs, as many were severely overstaffed. This has created unemployment, and also has been a burden on the government budget, as the government begins to provide social benefits which were previously the responsibility of the SOEs. Large protests against SOE layoffs have taken place in early 2002, including in cities closely associated with the oil and coal industries.

Hello, growing pains.

[Ishiva Ruell]

Of course but China has a growing industry with an escalating number of foreign investors. Investors & cheap labor = new employment opportunities, expanding international trading, increased global export. China was already trading with America long before they became a member of the WTO. Do you really think America can threaten China into a democracy with trade embargoes? Heck no and they never have before!

[Diego Van Derveld]

Did I say anything about that? No I didn't. I said that China is dependant upon the American economy, which is undeniably true.

And China will end up having a massive rift form in its society if this keeps up, I assure you. That little snippet is just the tip of the iceberg. They're already selling the little guy out. Bad communists...bad!

[Ishiva Ruell]

Look, China is already manufacturing products (and unassembled parts) for massive foreign Corporations/Companies. And there is still many more large corporate investors whom are making deals with China so they can plant manufacturing facilities in PRC. In other words, the US will always receive trade from China directly or indirectly. There is no way around this. Plus this is a business to business arrangement as much as it is a government to government arrangement. (More so the former than the latter with trading.) There are long lasting individual business partnerships involved. It's too complicated.

Here are some great related stories I found...


China overtakes Japan as second biggest PC market
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3097716&thesection=business&thesubsection=latest

English Channel
http://www.cctv.com/english/news/China/FinanceABusiness/20030123/100429.html

news content
http://www1.chinadaily.com.cn/news/cb/2003-01-23/102605.html

IHT: A strong China may give boost to its neighbors
http://www.iht.com/articles/84254.htm

IHT: Bank of Japan outlook on economy remains grim
http://www.iht.com/articles/84379.htm

[Diego Van Derveld]

Yeah, but that is going to have a conflicting impact on China's government. Right now, there are a few million Chinese people without jobs, in a country that promised the proletariat its fair share, but instead, closed down these government companies and gave them pink slips.

Don't you think people are starting to get a whiff of the hipocrisy inherent? Capital securities markets, industry lay-offs....they are really betraying themselves. Yes they're successful in the short run. Maybe even in the long run, but you definitely can't make the assumption with this potential powderkeg not even lit yet.

[Jedieb]

Nature has made weird things before. Take the platypus. But economically wealthy communist states are weirder than radioactive purple mecha-platypi.
:lol

[Dutchy]

I watched another news item on this topic. They said the main TV stations are still doin' this. They also said that TV station Fox is a very right-winged, pro Bush station that is not very objective on the war matter.

So all in all it's difficult to get an objective view, on the other hand the public's support for Bush is declining anyway.

[ReaperFett]

Nothing can be unbiased. People, Security Councils, TV, NOTHING.

[Dutchy]

Both Russia and France have said they will use their Veto right, by the way. I'm curious if the US will go to war without the UN mandate. I can't image they would, but you never know. Also interesting is to see whether Blair will drag Britain into it then. Quite some Labor people have announced to leave the party if he'll do that. Being America's most loyal ally, not supporting Bush doesn't seem like an option either. Tough days for Tony.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by ReaperFett
Nothing can be unbiased. People, Security Councils, TV, NOTHING.

True, true. One can try, though.

[ReaperFett]

Well, first off I want those possible quitters sacked. They clearly dont care about the country, being so willing to leave their posts.

Second, this idea of a security council is, IMO, a joke. Some facts for you. France is a major exporter to Iraq. Just before Russia announced theyd say no to war, a large contract of theirs for oil was terminated, from.......Iraq. So, 2/3 of the SC is never going to vote for straight out war.

Third, why is every government sounding like 8 year olds? "Oh, if you dont agree with us well go anyway!", "We dont care what you propose, we'll say no!" and so on. Cant they GROW UP and do thigns properly?

[Sanis Prent]

I can rattle off far more left-leaning media juggernaughts than there are right-leaning ones. To really be objective, you've gotta get your info from lots of sources, and sift through it. I regularly browse through multiple news sources, about half of which are European (3 British sources, two French, 1 Bulgarian, 1 Estonian, 1 Italian, etc).

As for the resolution, I figure the coallition will go forward, regardless of the outcome. The Security Council is dragging its heels, and obviously with ulterior motives in mind. They are inexplicably refusing to enforce 1441, which they unanimously passed. The second resolution is only a lifeline thrown out to them, to try and curb their hipocrisy, before action is taken.

[Darth Viscera]

I like Fox News. It's refreshingly right-wing and sensible. The people on that station share my concerns and the like. Better a station that's leaning to the right than yet another one that is leaning to the left. Has President Sheen made it a crime now to support George W. Bush? You say it's pro-bush, and you make it sound like that's a bad thing.

[ReaperFett]

He says its Biased. That is a bad thing.

[Sanis Prent]

Yes, but he singles it out, as if to say "This is the one" that is bad. CNN, The Washington Post, New York Times, SF Chronicle, etc, are FAR more left-wing than Fox is right.

Actually, the news source I read that is closest to impartiality is the Wall Street Journal...simply because the depth of news in it is almost limitless. You can easily get lost in the information flood, reading through it.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by ReaperFett
Second, this idea of a security council is, IMO, a joke. Some facts for you. France is a major exporter to Iraq. Just before Russia announced theyd say no to war, a large contract of theirs for oil was terminated, from.......Iraq. So, 2/3 of the SC is never going to vote for straight out war.

What do you mean with that last statement?


"We dont care what you propose, we'll say no!"

That's not quite the case. Russia and France know what they'll say no to. If the resolution gets changed, they'll rethink their positions (prolly the same, but that's not the point).

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by ReaperFett
He says its Biased. That is a bad thing.

Are you sure that's a bad thing? I really don't think it is.

They're not going to wake up one day and decide that it would be good to give Iraq an additional 2 years to disarm under pain of furrowed brows and concerned looks after hearing a speech from George Clooney or Democratic Senator Robert "Hate dem niggers" Byrd, if that's what you mean by biased.

[Dutchy]

I'm not singling it out, that news I watched was. A far left winged station is just as bad. It's the biased part I was referring to, not them being pro-Bush, left or right.

[ReaperFett]

Not true Dutchy, France has before stated they'd say no before the new proposal was even put forward.



Are you sure that's a bad thing? I really don't think it is.
And you want to stop dictatorships where noone has a fair say? Oh the irony.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Darth Viscera
Are you sure that's a bad thing? I really don't think it is.

They're not going to wake up one day and decide that it would be good to give Iraq an additional 2 years to disarm under pain of furrowed brows and concerned looks after hearing a speech from George Clooney or Democratic Senator Robert "Hate dem niggers" Byrd, if that's what you mean by biased.

It's about giving the public an objective view, or at least one they know what to make of. Joe Public might now know the background of a station.

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by Dutchy
What do you mean with that last statement?

It means that 2/3 of the security council has profitable trade packages for forbidden oil from Iraq, or is trying to trade with those who have said trade packages. They're bribed. They're corrupt. They're swimming in oil money. They don't want to jeopardize this supply of tainted cash.

[Sanis Prent]

Then get multiple angles. Not that hard to do. I read more left-leaning news than I do right, and it hasn't altered my stance on the situation.

[ReaperFett]

Dutchy, read my answer, not Vis'.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by ReaperFett
Not true Dutchy, France has before stated they'd say no before the new proposal was even put forward.

They say no to war and yes to more inspections, no matter what the exact resolution is. That's not "We dont care what you propose, we'll say no!"

[ReaperFett]

Sure it is. Unless you say exactly what they want, its fingers in the ears and singing "I cant hear you" time.

[Sanis Prent]

Seeing that a large majority of past Iraqi inspectors have stated that such inspections are nearly futile without total compliance from the government (six Al Samoud 2's a week does not compliance make), why in all that is sane would we advocate inspections into perpetuity?

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Darth Viscera
It means that 2/3 of the security council has profitable trade packages for forbidden oil from Iraq, or is trying to trade with those who have said trade packages. They're bribed. They're corrupt. They're swimming in oil money. They don't want to jeopardize this supply of tainted cash.

Okay, thanks. Hmmm... yeah, oil sure is an issue. Not sure to what extent to which countries though. I think Iraq exports 2.7 million barrels of oil a day, by the way.

[Sanis Prent]

Thats the legal export quantity, I think, as provided by the UN Oil-for-Food program. There's no telling how many tankers are shipped illegally though. Its happened on many occasions though. British, American, and Greek charters have been duped through intermediaries operating for Iraq, and filled up in the assumption that such shipments were legit. They happily steamed back to France, Germany, Russia, etc, and weren't the wiser until charges were filed against them. Interesting that none of the nations that received the illegal oil filed any protest :rolleyes

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by ReaperFett
Sure it is. Unless you say exactly what they want, its fingers in the ears and singing "I cant hear you" time.

True, but don't say no to everything, that's what I meant.

Oh, see attachment. :p

[ReaperFett]

THat's the stuff! :)

[Diego Van Derveld]

You forgot the beret and clove cigarette

[ReaperFett]

Why? It can be used for most countries in this.

[Sanis Prent]

But that's been France's foreign policy for CENTURIES!

[ReaperFett]

And the US listens to the rest of the world so openly, right? :)

[Sanis Prent]

We're not abjectly contrary. If so, we would've joined France in weaseling out of resolutions we voted for in the first place.

[ReaperFett]

No, you just ignore everyone else :)

[Sanis Prent]

Yes, like <a href=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/03/07/wagon07.xml>Kurdish Human Torches</a>.

Yeah, I can feel the cotton growing in my ears :rolleyes.

I do, however, reserve the right to ignore European leaders who are too busy polishing the brass on Iraqi oil derricks with their tongues than to give a coherent "peaceful" solution to this mess. There's no sense in paying mind to people with nothing practical to say, whatsoever.

[Sigil Roland]

It's Crossfire ladies and gentlemen!!

Crossfire!!

Wheres the WWE's JR when you need him!

[Darth Viscera]

As she stepped up to the Iraqi checkpoint, a military policeman suddenly pulled a knife, slashed open the flimsy plastic containers and splashed petrol all over her.

Then the head of the Iraqi border guard casually walked up to her, pulled a lighter from his pocket and set her ablaze. Soaked in fuel, she began to burn like a torch.

I feel like that story rips a hole in my soul. Jesus, I wish those people didn't have to face that kind of beastly brutality. ^_^;

Hopefully, a month from now they will have been freed.

I can think of no punishment horrible enough for the iraqi border guard, no curse which purveys the sense of outrageous lividity that humanity should feel towards that guard, that devil.

[Diego Van Derveld]

I honestly hope there's a tribunal set up in Tikrit within a few months, so that a few hundred Baath party stooges can have their evils exposed before an international court of law, and they can be HANGED for it. Sorry, but I've seen far too much to just let these guys off with a slap on the wrist. They're animals.

[Darth Viscera]

They should suffer no such humane execution as a hanging. They should be publicly drawn and quartered.

[Diego Van Derveld]

I don't want to get down to their level. I just want death delivered to the guilty parties, swiftly. Either hang them, or go the Chinese route, and pepper them in a firing squad, and charge their families for the bullets.

[JonathanLB]

Haha, charge their families for the bullets, now that's an idea I like. That's hilarious.

[Darth Viscera]

No, that's too private. Can we agree that they be publicly hanged or shot, and their families charged for the cost of the rope or bullet in public?

[ReaperFett]

Why do you have to affect their families? They didnt do anything. I thought people generally punished only the guilty.

[Dutchy]

Meanwhile Rumsfeld said US would attack Iraq even without Britain.

[Diego Van Derveld]

As well we should, if it comes to that. I don't think our actions need to be influenced by who also decides to act.

[Dutchy]

Today Powell said that the troops can't stay there forever. This really seems to be the main reason for war now. Sad.

[Darth Viscera]

That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard, Dutchy. Are you forgetting the 17 violations of U.N. resolutions, the mass gottendommerungs, the placement of human shields, the mass violations of human rights, the fact that he's providing aid and comfort to Al Qaeda, providing military aid to rogue branches of the Palestinian Authority, providing monetary compensation to families of suicide bombers, the fact that he's still holding stolen Kuwaiti property and captured citizens, the fact that he has continuously and unswayingly violated the very cease-fire that would mean peace if its conditions were met?

Sometimes it just feels as though you people will go out of your way to blame everything on the U.S. Sad.

Saddam Hussein has until April 18th, 1991 to completely disarm. If he fails to comply, then we declare that he's in violation of the cease-fire agreement, and resume the war.

[Dutchy]

I said "NOW", I know all the other facts. Part of which some other countries are guilty as well, by the way.

Anyway, Bush just said tomorrow is the moment of truth for the world. One more round of diplomatic phone calls and if there's not enough support for a 2nd resolution, the US and its allies will begin a war within a few days. Or so it seems.

[Darth Viscera]

This isn't a bag of instant salad, Dutchy. We're not up and deciding to go to war simply because the carton of milk has an expiration date that's a few days away.

Seems like tomorrow is the day. CNN is in breaking news mode, and Saddam's making speeches. The wires are heating up.

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Darth Viscera
This isn't a bag of instant salad, Dutchy. We're not up and deciding to go to war simply because the carton of milk has an expiration date that's a few days away.

No, but the Bush/Blair camp is drinking fresh milk while French/Germany camp prefers condensed milk. Both have an expiration date, though quite different. Instead of trying to make a milkshake with a consensus expiration date, both camps stick with their own expiration date which might give every party sour milk as a result.

[Jackson DeWitt]

This metaphor sucks.

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by Dutchy
No, but the Bush/Blair camp is drinking fresh milk while French/Germany camp prefers condensed milk. Both have an expiration date, though quite different. Instead of trying to make a milkshake with a consensus expiration date, both camps stick with their own expiration date which might give every party sour milk as a result.


There's no way that France will ever go for a consensus date on which to make that milkshake. They're content to drink condensed milk until the fridge light dies. Besides, when the condensed milkers are finally ready to make a milkshake, our fresh milk will LONG AGO have expired. I ask you, do we really want to be making a milkshake with months-old rotten fresh milk and still good condensed milk? Furthermore, will the condensed milkers even at that point allow us to drink it, or will they yet again purchase ANOTHER can of condensed milk and then insist that we pour that can in, but after first waiting a few months?

You and I both know that this war can only be won with a milkshake of dedicated fresh milk. The condensed milkers are drinking from the same can that they claim to be whisking with a wire whisk, but you cannot whisk a drink while you drink it!

We have really bought so much condensed milk in the last 12 years. We are tired of condensed milk, and we have gone ahead with the pressure to drink the condensed milk even when we could legally have drank our fresh milk even WITHOUT a milkshake. We could have drank our fresh milk 6 months ago, and we'd have been done with the milk by now! The worst part of drinking the fresh milk is the anticipation and pre-milk-drinking anxiety brought on by the condensed milkers. Now I know that you want to be done drinking the milk, don't you? Do you want to be drinking condensed milk into perpetuity?!?!

[Dutchy]

The fresh milkers go to Mickey D's and order a fresh milkshake. Since it's winter it's not on the menu, they can only order one made of condensed milk. They burst into the kitchen, coz they want their milkshake now, no questions asked. They don't care about the funny faces of the personnel.

The condensed milkers order a banana milkshake with sugar on top and a cherry. It's not on the menu, coz the cherry's not on the menu until April 17th. They decide to order it anyway and wait patiently. They don't care about the funny faces of the personnel.

Meanwhile Saddam orders a pizza with everything on it.

[Darth Viscera]

I'm sorry, but are you trying to imply that the french are ordering a fresh milkshake? Sugar and cherry or not, it simply cannot be overstated that they will ONLY allow condensed milk, they've forbidden everything else.

[Dutchy]

True, and Bush/Blair ONLY want fresh milk, even when their friends forbid them. The next time when they go out for a pizza they'll only have a plain one, or maybe even one without cheese. Which counts for both sides.

[Jackson DeWitt]

YOU SHOULD BOTH BEAT YOURSELF WITH BROKEN BEER BOTTLES!!! ARRRG!

[Figrin D'an]

Agreed... it was amusing for your first round of posts... now it's lame. Keep in mind that singular wit has an expiration date too...

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by Dutchy
True, and Bush/Blair ONLY want fresh milk, even when their friends forbid them. The next time when they go out for a pizza they'll only have a plain one, or maybe even one without cheese. Which counts for both sides.

Don't even think of talking about pizza. Bush and Blair DO NOT swing that way. The condensed milkers can "forbid" them from having fresh milk until they're blue in the face, but it makes no difference. The fresh milk is legally ours to drink, and we're obliged to drink it.

[Sanis Prent]

:headbash @ Visc.

[Darth Viscera]

:shootin @ Sanis

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Darth Viscera
Don't even think of talking about pizza. Bush and Blair DO NOT swing that way. The condensed milkers can "forbid" them from having fresh milk until they're blue in the face, but it makes no difference. The fresh milk is legally ours to drink, and we're obliged to drink it.

Sure you can drink it, but you can't have it in your coffee Anan.

[Darth Viscera]

Well then maybe we'll stop drinking coffee Anan until the coffee Anan decides to reform and move into the 21st century, which is one filled with terrorism.

[Figrin D'an]

[Comic Book Guy]Worst... Analogy.... Ever![/Comic Book Guy]

[Dutchy]

Originally posted by Darth Viscera
Well then maybe we'll stop drinking coffee Anan until the coffee Anan decides to reform and move into the 21st century, which is one filled with terrorism.

There's a lot more coffee to drink then.

[Darth Viscera]

Don't you threaten me! I know very well how just how much coffee there is in the coffee cup. If the condensed milkers proceed to delay the onset of fresh milk, then the whole coffee stirrer will instantly become as irrelevant as the old coffee stirrer. Any old dictator with his own designs on personal sour milk will be able to come by, sour another person's peaceful milk, and the coffee stirrer will just ask for condensed milk, AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN into perpetuity or until the whole coffee cup explodes. Do you want the coffee cup to explode? We only have one coffee cup, and it is a precious, precious cup. We can only maintain order in this precious coffee cup if the coffee stirrer has the courage to order fresh milk when it is needed to combat sour milk. Not condensed milk, but fresh milk!

[Dutchy]

One and a half year ago your cup was steered up brutally by Bin. His coffee seems a lot hotter than the old dictator's, or is Bin's coffee too hot to drink?

[Darth Viscera]

We can handle any coffee that is thrown at us, regardless of temperature.

[Dutchy]

I remember Bin's coffee was rather tepid, but you got burned severely anyway.

[Darth Viscera]

And we've mutilated Al-Qaeda in return.

[Dutchy]

Bin might be thinking up a brand new cup of coffee as we speak. Especially since the whole world is pointing its spoons at the old dictator and at each other.

[Sanis Prent]

Oh my God, its like a train wreck :x

[Dutchy]

US and Britain won't go for a new resolution. Bush will address the nation 8:00 pm EST.

[Sanis Prent]

Thank God.

[Darth Viscera]

Finally!

[Dutchy]

:|

[Jedi Master Carr]

At this point I don't care, I am not watching any of this war, one modern warfare is boring give me warfare of the 18th century, (war then was exciting a couple hundred troops fighting with swords and muskets none of this modern crap). Second I don't really support the war without backing of the UN to me there is going to be a huge backlash. The first thing I see is Tony Blair is going to lose his Job, I expect the Labor party to kick him out in three months.

[Darth Viscera]

I can't wait to get some good footage from this war. I wish I had a TiVo, actually. I'm going to be digitally recording this stuff whenever something good comes on and archiving it onto DVD-Recordables. Unfortunately, it'll be 5 more years before a war is able to be broadcast in high definition on Fox News Live or CNN.