I believe the olympics should not be held in China

So here's a bit of news.


To sum it up quickly, security has been tightened in Olympia for the torch lighting ceremony because of protests against holding the games in the People's Republic of China. It should come as no surprise that many of these are Tibetan independence activists. To make matters more complicated, the torch is planned to run through Tibet. Rather unfortunate given recent events involving the region. It's important to note that the route was planned before

Alright, so now comes my opinion on the matter. Honestly, I don't think the Olympics should be held in China at all. I see no reason why a celebration of human achievement and potential should be held in a totalitarian country with such a terrible human rights record. I honestly think that the games have no place outside the Free World. Off the top of my head, we have the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Iceland, Belgium, Switzerland, Greece, Sweden, Norway, Japan, South Korea, etc etc. Granted most of those don't have a perfect human rights record, but can you name a country that does? I'm not going to lie and say that the USA is perfect in that area by any means. Still, those are all free nations now, people have basic established rights and the government won't try to stop you from living how you see fit and gives the people the right to participate in government and make decisions. In contrast, I just don't believe that when a government restricts what people can see on the Internet, listens in on phone calls, and overall restricts so many basic rights for the simple reason of opposition to the regime. In contrast, Western countries have protests all the time and I never recall seeing an Abrams roll down the streets of Los Angeles because of immigration rights demonstrations or anti-war protests.

My point is that we shouldn't have the games in China until they clean up their act. Why should we celebrate what humans are capable of in a country that doesn't even allow the people to vote (One party sham elections don't count) or even demonstrate wishing for the right to vote? Why should humanity be celebrated somewhere where it's suppressed?

And if nothing else, the environmental conditions are too bad to compete in and I don't think that it's possible to fix them up enough by summer time, but it might happen, you never know.

That's just my two cents anyway. What do you all think

Well, I guess when we buy an absurd amount of our products from there, having the Olympics held there is pretty small by comparison.SpaceMoose

That's true. It's a shame too. They're taking jobs out of the country and at the same time negotiating with one of the most notorious governments in the world. One that stole a rich culture and replaced it with workplace loyalty, one that represses its people in order to further its selfish goals. Sure, it's no North Korea, but they've got a lot of problems over there.

hey, they picked china, jus cuz they govt is wrong doesnt mean it shouldnt be held there. Chinas trying dont complain till aftersmallcaplegend

he speaks the truth.....let's kill him...:twisted:

[QUOTE="smallcaplegend"]hey, they picked china, jus cuz they govt is wrong doesnt mean it shouldnt be held there. Chinas trying dont complain till afterRaged-wolverine

he speaks the truth.....let's kill him...:twisted:

bring it baby ;)

I laugh at how the UK and US continue to complain about China's human rights record, when a huge number of the weapons their military use are sold to them by us. There was even an embargo on selling them arms, and Britain just got around it by selling them the technology to make the arms themselves. It's a joke. We're criticising a nation we do business with, selling them the weapons that the very military we're criticising use to put down riots and protests.

I'd love to know how any of us can also question their human rights record when there are over 100,000 dead Iraqi civilians and even more refugees made homeless as a result of our little conquests.

I laugh at how the UK and US continue to complain about China's human rights record, when a huge number of the weapons their military use are sold to them by us. There was even an embargo on selling them arms, and Britain just got around it by selling them the technology to make the arms themselves. It's a joke. We're criticising a nation we do business with, selling them the weapons that the very military we're criticising use to put down riots and protests.

I'd love to know how any of us can also question their human rights record when there are over 100,000 dead Iraqi civilians and even more refugees made homeless as a result of our little conquests.

Ninja-Hippo

yup thats America the spoiled bully on the block

I laugh at how the UK and US continue to complain about China's human rights record, when a huge number of the weapons their military use are sold to them by us. There was even an embargo on selling them arms, and Britain just got around it by selling them the technology to make the arms themselves. It's a joke. We're criticising a nation we do business with, selling them the weapons that the very military we're criticising use to put down riots and protests.

I'd love to know how any of us can also question their human rights record when there are over 100,000 dead Iraqi civilians and even more refugees made homeless as a result of our little conquests.Ninja-Hippo

ACTUALLY, most of the Chinese military is almost direct copies of old Soviet stuff. Even their QBZ95 rifles are heavily modified AK designs. Their tanks are all adaptations of the Soviet T-56,62, etc. and their APCs and such are based off of BTRs and BMPs while their fighters are of MiG and Su series design.

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"]

I laugh at how the UK and US continue to complain about China's human rights record, when a huge number of the weapons their military use are sold to them by us. There was even an embargo on selling them arms, and Britain just got around it by selling them the technology to make the arms themselves. It's a joke. We're criticising a nation we do business with, selling them the weapons that the very military we're criticising use to put down riots and protests.

I'd love to know how any of us can also question their human rights record when there are over 100,000 dead Iraqi civilians and even more refugees made homeless as a result of our little conquests.AlternatingCaps

ACTUALLY, most of the Chinese military is almost direct copies of old Soviet stuff. Even their QBZ95 rifles are heavily modified AK designs. Their tanks are all adaptations of the Soviet T-56,62, etc. and their APCs and such are based off of BTRs and BMPs while their fighters are of MiG and Su series design.

Are you arguing that the US and UK sell arms to China? Because you're arguing with fact. :| It was all over the news just alst week how the UN and EU were disappointed with Britain for coming up with a workaround to avoid the arms embargo; namely selling china the tech to make arms, as opposed to just the arms themselves.

[QUOTE="AlternatingCaps"][QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"]

I laugh at how the UK and US continue to complain about China's human rights record, when a huge number of the weapons their military use are sold to them by us. There was even an embargo on selling them arms, and Britain just got around it by selling them the technology to make the arms themselves. It's a joke. We're criticising a nation we do business with, selling them the weapons that the very military we're criticising use to put down riots and protests.

I'd love to know how any of us can also question their human rights record when there are over 100,000 dead Iraqi civilians and even more refugees made homeless as a result of our little conquests.Ninja-Hippo

ACTUALLY, most of the Chinese military is almost direct copies of old Soviet stuff. Even their QBZ95 rifles are heavily modified AK designs. Their tanks are all adaptations of the Soviet T-56,62, etc. and their APCs and such are based off of BTRs and BMPs while their fighters are of MiG and Su series design.

Are you arguing that the US and UK sell arms to China? Because you're arguing with fact. :| It was all over the news just alst week how the UN and EU were disappointed with Britain for coming up with a workaround to avoid the arms embargo; namely selling china the tech to make arms, as opposed to just the arms themselves.

Well, I'm not calling you a liar, I just haven't seen this news (I won't doubt its existence though).

However, if you're going to tell me that China's gonna have an Abrams or F-22 anytime soon, I'll start to doubt you.

Well, I'm not calling you a liar, I just haven't seen this news (I won't doubt its existence though).

However, if you're going to tell me that China's gonna have an Abrams or F-22 anytime soon, I'll start to doubt you.

AlternatingCaps

Which i didn't say. :| It's simple; we shouldn't be criticising a nation's human rights abuses when we sell arms to said nation. We also shouldnt be complaining about human rights when we continue to sell arms to Sudan despite the fact that we know they're used in genocidal killings, and we certainly shouldn't be complaining about human rights when our wars have killed over 100,000 civilians and displaced many more.

Who are we to talk?

[QUOTE="AlternatingCaps"]

Well, I'm not calling you a liar, I just haven't seen this news (I won't doubt its existence though).

However, if you're going to tell me that China's gonna have an Abrams or F-22 anytime soon, I'll start to doubt you.

Ninja-Hippo

Which i didn't say. :| It's simple; we shouldn't be criticising a nation's human rights abuses when we sell arms to said nation. We also shouldnt be complaining about human rights when we continue to sell arms to Sudan despite the fact that we know they're used in genocidal killings, and we certainly shouldn't be complaining about human rights when our wars have killed over 100,000 civilians and displaced many more.

Who are we to talk?

Again, I haven't heard of Sudan, but I won't doubt you. I agree though, we shouldn't have started in Iraq. The civilian casualties are unfortunately, just a part of war. We don't seek out every person we can and go on a rampage, but civilian deaths and displacements are an unfortunate part of war. However, we got ourselves into this mess, and now we can't leave because we're the only thing keeping the place from going to hell. It's not a good situation, and unfortunately one that we didn't need, and shouldn't have gotten ourselves into.

I am saying that when a nation is so terrible to its own people. What right do they have to drive a tank over nonviolent protest, wiretap phone lines, or execute those against the regime? Totalitarianism is awful and a nation that practices it shouldn't be rewarded with something special like this.

EDIT: Wait, I only ever see AK-47s, PKMs, RPKs, etc. in Africa violence footage or pictures in the news, no Western weapons. Again, not calling you a liar, just asking for some explanation.

well im not reading all that but yeah, beijing is a insanely overpopulated and even more over polluted city, they dont deserve to have the olympics theresovereign_22

though, per person America pollutes more. So if America had the same pollulation as china, America would be polluting much much more.

Again, I haven't heard of Sudan, but I won't doubt you. I agree though, we shouldn't have started in Iraq. The civilian casualties are unfortunately, just a part of war. We don't seek out every person we can and go on a rampage, but civilian deaths and displacements are an unfortunate part of war. However, we got ourselves into this mess, and now we can't leave because we're the only thing keeping the place from going to hell. It's not a good situation, and unfortunately one that we didn't need, and shouldn't have gotten ourselves into.

I am saying that when a nation is so terrible to its own people. What right do they have to drive a tank over nonviolent protest, wiretap phone lines, or execute those against the regime? Totalitarianism is awful and a nation that practices it shouldn't be rewarded with something special like this.

AlternatingCaps

Sudan and Darfur is probably the biggest humanitarian crisis of the 21st century. :|

While i agree that China is the last place to be having such a celebration of human achievement, i simply disagree at the criticisms you see on TV in the US and UK when both of those nations are responsible for truly dispicable human rights abuses. Pot calling the kettle black and what not.

EDIT: Wait, I only ever see AK-47s, PKMs, RPKs, etc. in Africa violence footage or pictures in the news, no Western weapons. Again, not calling you a liar, just asking for some explanation.

AlternatingCaps

Africa is an entire continant. How can you say "africa violence footage"? :? It's very simple; the three biggest exporters of arms to Sudan are the US, UK and Russia. At least 200,000 people have died in Sudan as result of the conflict there, and we continue to not only do nothing about it, but actually fund it. Worse are the millions living in huge refugee camps as a result.

How you've never heard of this is beyond me.

[QUOTE="AlternatingCaps"]

Again, I haven't heard of Sudan, but I won't doubt you. I agree though, we shouldn't have started in Iraq. The civilian casualties are unfortunately, just a part of war. We don't seek out every person we can and go on a rampage, but civilian deaths and displacements are an unfortunate part of war. However, we got ourselves into this mess, and now we can't leave because we're the only thing keeping the place from going to hell. It's not a good situation, and unfortunately one that we didn't need, and shouldn't have gotten ourselves into.

I am saying that when a nation is so terrible to its own people. What right do they have to drive a tank over nonviolent protest, wiretap phone lines, or execute those against the regime? Totalitarianism is awful and a nation that practices it shouldn't be rewarded with something special like this.

Ninja-Hippo

Sudan and Darfur is probably the biggest humanitarian crisis of the 21st century. :|

While i agree that China is the last place to be having such a celebration of human achievement, i simply disagree at the criticisms you see on TV in the US and UK when both of those nations are responsible for truly dispicable human rights abuses. Pot calling the kettle black and what not.

Whoops. I meant I know what's happenening in Africa, but not about Western nations selling weapons. Especially confusing since I only ever see Soviet weapons in footage or pictures in the news.

Said "haven't heard of Suduan" because I haven't heard of Western weapon imports to Sudan. I'm very well aware of genocide there. I'm still a bit confused though since it'd be bad for business would imply that the US is selling them weapons (not calling you a liar and saying we're not) when I've never actually seen any M16s in the news or anything.AlternatingCaps

You're thinking of "arms" literally as rifles. "Arms" is simply a term used for military equipment; helicopters, trucks, machine guns, rifles, pistols, knives, grenades, missiles, rocket launchers, bullets, mortars etc etc etc.

OK, I've still only ever seen RPG-7s, T series Russian tanks, PKMs and RPKs, etc. The rest all looks the same to me. And seeing as how NATO rounds wouldn't fit in those, and I've only seen all that Russian stuff, I'm having a bit of trouble understanding where you're coming from. Maybe a picture of a Patton tank or M249 in Sudan would convince me?

again, not rejecting the possibility

I dont understand what it is you're arguing about. You continually say (not saying you're wrong!) but then post something which says exactly that. Your logic seems to be "i haven't seen it on TV, therefore it isn't happening". Also - as if the US government is going to be selling African countries M16 rifles. :? It's old, outdated, surplus, or literally just stockpiles of mortars and explosives.

You're arguing with fact. This is in the news all the time. Google it:

"Liu Guijin said the US, Russia and UK were the biggest arms exporters to developing countries including Sudan"

China Defends Arms Sales to Sudan

• Military aircraft and components sold to Sudan from the Russian Federation, China and Belarus, with helicopter spare parts from Lithuania, despite repeated use of such aircraft to bomb villages and support ground attacks on civilians;
• Tanks, military vehicles and artillery transferred to Sudan from Belarus, Russia and Poland, even though such equipment has been used to help launch indiscriminate and direct attacks on civilians;
• Grenades, rifles, pistols, ammunition and other small arms and light weapons exported to Sudan from many countries, but mainly China, France, Iran and Saudi Arabia;
• The recent involvement of arms brokering companies from the UK and Ireland attempting to provide large numbers of Antonov aircraft and military vehicles from Ukraine and pistols from Brazil

Selling Arms to Sudan

"The resources spent on US arms in Africa is helping to fund star wars and more advanced technology."

Avoiding an arguement, my point is simple:

America polutes more per person than China.

Britain and America both sell arms to developing african countries, knowing full well what they are used for.

Britain and America have displaced millions of people, and killed well over 100,000 innocent men, women, and children in the middle east thanks to thier war efforts. This is not "the nature of war" but a complete lack of respect for human life.

Britain and America both sell arms to China; yet we complain when their military uses brute force against protests?

Guantanamo Bay still exists, and is still full of British Citizens who haven't even been given a trial.

To conclude; America and Britain abuse human rights as freely and as readily as they want. It's a joke for either government to criticise China.

OK, I see that and I see your point now. It's really unfortunate that some of the free-est nations in the world (and also free ones) are doing this. Seems like we're just giving away deadly stuff to whoever for a quick buck, with no regard for what they're gonna do with it. Hopefully people will come to their senses.

Also, I wouldn't doubt the selling of M16s, not the newer ones, but maybe original M16s, A1s, etc surplus from the cold war. However, from the article, I can gather that we're not alone (not that that makes it right). Business is business I suppose. What I find interesting is how UK and Ireland companies are getting ahold of Russian aircraft and vehicles.

also, funding star wars, the sham missile defense system? The one pubicly disclosed to be a load of BS intended to keep the USSR in check? Or was that back in the CW era? Or are you refering to missile defenses of today, such as the one planned in Poland that Russia was upset about (because it would upset mutually assured destruction).

Also interesting to note, the fact sheet doesn't actually name the US. Actually, I CTRL+F'd that quote on both pages (made sure not to copy the quotes...) and didn't find it. BBC does name us though, so point taken. It really sucks that a lot of the bigger nations in Europe are involved too, so no one's gonna stand up against this.

Well, maybe hosting the Olympics is what China needs? Maybe exposure to multi-cutluralism and the like will help breed more tolerance towards the international world, and in turn, the Chinese people.

Now, for the person who called the Chinese government "Totalitarian", you are wrong. North Korea is Totalitarian, China is merely not accepting of Democracy.

I find it funny and quite sad that it has taken 50 years for people to finally realize the genocide of the Tibetan people and culture is actually going on and the Dalai Lama wasn't just being a fruit cake.

I really don't care about the Olympics being held in China... I just want them off the UN Security Council. A country that murders millions of innocent people for being "feudal" is not one I want holding the ultimate veto power in the world. That and the pretty much 50 years of human rights issues that the Chinese "government" has been imposing on its OWN people.foxhound_fox

China should hold the games because its soo 1337

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ru-xQac_sWw

How ridiculous, of course they should. The Dalai Lama agree with me:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article3562971.ece

[QUOTE="AlternatingCaps"]

Well, I'm not calling you a liar, I just haven't seen this news (I won't doubt its existence though).

However, if you're going to tell me that China's gonna have an Abrams or F-22 anytime soon, I'll start to doubt you.

Ninja-Hippo

Which i didn't say. :| It's simple; we shouldn't be criticising a nation's human rights abuses when we sell arms to said nation. We also shouldnt be complaining about human rights when we continue to sell arms to Sudan despite the fact that we know they're used in genocidal killings, and we certainly shouldn't be complaining about human rights when our wars have killed over 100,000 civilians and displaced many more.

Who are we to talk?

To be fair, it's not us selling the arms. It's our governments. If I were given the vote on how the UK should control Defense, I'd vote for a decision to reduce arms.

Who are we to talk? We have a GREAT right to talk. It's just too bad no-one's listening.

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="AlternatingCaps"]

Well, I'm not calling you a liar, I just haven't seen this news (I won't doubt its existence though).

However, if you're going to tell me that China's gonna have an Abrams or F-22 anytime soon, I'll start to doubt you.

Total-KO

Which i didn't say. :| It's simple; we shouldn't be criticising a nation's human rights abuses when we sell arms to said nation. We also shouldnt be complaining about human rights when we continue to sell arms to Sudan despite the fact that we know they're used in genocidal killings, and we certainly shouldn't be complaining about human rights when our wars have killed over 100,000 civilians and displaced many more.

Who are we to talk?

To be fair, it's not us selling the arms. It's our governments. If I were given the vote on how the UK should control Defense, I'd vote for a decision to reduce arms.

Who are we to talk? We have a GREAT right to talk. It's just too bad no-one's listening.

Yeah and it's not the Chinese people who's abusing human rights...

I live in China and I have to say that me as well as many other friends who have lived here do feel it was too early to give China the Olympics. Its human rights record really is atrocious. We all know that Britain and the USA have waged a few wars but those two countries allow the public to know what they are doing, to know they are waging wars. The fact that China has a government that locks people up for complaining when the government knocks down their house or who attempts cultural genoicde (in the case of Tibet) really needs to be improved before it is given such a prestigious gift as the Olympics.

On a city note, I live in Beijing and the pollution really is horrible. It also isn't globalized enough to support so much Olympic activity. Foreign language skills are very poor and traffic rules are disobeyed (not stopping at red lights). The city's public transport is also bursting at the seams.

So although I don't think we should boycott the Olympics, I do feel that it was too early to give China the Olympic games.

I also believe that the Olympic Games should only be given to countries in the free world.

I live in China and I have to say that me as well as many other friends who have lived here do feel it was too early to give China the Olympics. Its human rights record really is atrocious. We all know that Britain and the USA have waged a few wars but those two countries allow the public to know what they are doing, to know they are waging wars. The fact that China has a government that locks people up for complaining when the government knocks down their house or who attempts cultural genoicde (in the case of Tibet) really needs to be improved before it is given such a prestigious gift as the Olympics.

On a city note, I live in Beijing and the pollution really is horrible. It also isn't globalized enough to support so much Olympic activity. Foreign language skills are very poor and traffic rules are disobeyed (not stopping at red lights). The city's public transport is also bursting at the seams.

So although I don't think we should boycott the Olympics, I do feel that it was too early to give China the Olympic games.

I also believe that the Olympic Games should only be given to countries in the free world.

Memberino

I don't believe you're from China. I doubt you'd have the guts to say that if you really were in Beijing.

[QUOTE="Memberino"]

I live in China and I have to say that me as well as many other friends who have lived here do feel it was too early to give China the Olympics. Its human rights record really is atrocious. We all know that Britain and the USA have waged a few wars but those two countries allow the public to know what they are doing, to know they are waging wars. The fact that China has a government that locks people up for complaining when the government knocks down their house or who attempts cultural genoicde (in the case of Tibet) really needs to be improved before it is given such a prestigious gift as the Olympics.

On a city note, I live in Beijing and the pollution really is horrible. It also isn't globalized enough to support so much Olympic activity. Foreign language skills are very poor and traffic rules are disobeyed (not stopping at red lights). The city's public transport is also bursting at the seams.

So although I don't think we should boycott the Olympics, I do feel that it was too early to give China the Olympic games.

I also believe that the Olympic Games should only be given to countries in the free world.

Total-KO

I don't believe you're from China. I doubt you'd have the guts to say that if you really were in Beijing.

Ehm...the censorship isn't that bad.

Eh most of the Sumer Olympics traditions started in the 1936 Olympics which was held in Nazi Germany...such as the torch lighting. It doesn't seem like a big deal to me.Ilived

How ridiculous, of course they should. The Dalai Lama agree with me:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article3562971.ece

jointed

But he's coming from a political point of view too,he obviously wants his country to grow in prosperity.The Dalai lama in my eyes is the wisest of all men in this age,even more so than the pope,and this is coming from a christian,however he does get his priorities mixed up with his religious believes and his political beliefs,so i don't agree with what he says about the Olympics.

The uprisings are seen in too much of a Fox News view, you need to see the other side, what about the content Tibetans not protesting?

When China came, they gave Tibetans free education, raised the GDP by 3000% and gave it a sense of autonomy hence why it is called a autonomous region of China. The government does not force Tibetans to learn, they just give them a choice of free education. China has even invested in a billion dollar railway in Tibet, and many other constructions in Tibet that will further improve the living conditions. Tibet is now a much better place than what it was in 1949 with the corrupt and imcompetent exiled Tibetan government.

The Panchen Lama has said "the rioters' acts not only harmed the interests of the nation and the people, but also violated the aim of Buddhism. We resolutely oppose all activities to split the country and undermine ethnic unity. We strongly condemn the crime of a tiny number of people to hurt the lives and properties of the people." Showing us that really its just a small minority of this culture that are actually rioting. If you have actually watched the reports then you'll see they only interview very biased monks. It's just monks and a few others rioting. Wouldn't it seem obvious for the monks to want to take power back and go into the serf farming days? Also the riots started with the protestors first attacking other people's property, there has only been footage of dead Han and Hui Chinese but not Tibetans.

The EXILED Tibetan government says the death toll is over a hundred but can we really believe a organization that has every reason to lie about China?

I don't see why China can't keep Tibet. They give it much more support than the world recognises. Australia brutally took the land from the Aboriginals and nearly wiped out their entire race, now only a few communities still live. They were still committing cultural destroying deeds int he sixties with the Stolen Generation incident. The Aboriginals break the law daily and don't want to live in a Western society. I know AUstralia has provided aid but no where near as much as China, the only significant step they've done in saying sorry is saying sorry verbally form the Prime Minister after trying to kill off their race and taking all their land. Same with America and the American Indians, also the black slaves. If you guys left them alone maybe we wouldn't have such widespread chaos in Africa. China unlike these other countries has had of Tibet for many centuries and usually very harmoniously with very little violence, they have only lost control during the 20th century for a short period so they have more claim over the territory than America or Australia has over their own.

A tough government in China is neded. If you look at China from a historical point of view. CHina has always had a very tulmultous history. Dynasty would rise after dynasty, revolution would rise after revolution, basically wars were always fought and in it's five thousand years of history there were very few years of peace. THe only way to rule CHina would be to either split the country into many different countries so it is easier to govern or rule it with a iron fist. If the government does not hold absolute power, the country is in risk of plunging into chaos once again, it's what happens in China. It is much more safer to rule with fear than love, besides how else can you controll 1.3 billion people?

I know it is wrong of China to still keep Tibet but isn't it also wrong to let them go back into a life of serfdom, where they really have no freedom either? there are wrongs and rights on both sides and people should open up their views on the situation or go care about other things.

Let the flames ensue.