/* */

PDA

View Full Version : China Nobel Row



GuestFellow
12-09-2010, 09:09 PM
:sl:

The award of the Nobel Peace Prize to an imprisoned Chinese dissident is not an attempt to enforce Western values on China, organisers say.

Share your views!
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Trumble
12-10-2010, 05:17 PM
I don't see how awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to anybody could serious be considered an attempt to 'enforce' anything on China. How could it ever possibly do that?

That said, I don't see any reason why the Nobel committee should pander to China, either, nor to anyone who holds political dissidents under the guise of 'criminals' that they believe worthy of the award . The award is embarrassing for the Chinese no doubt; the empty chair for the recipient and the refusal of the Chinese to let any of his family and assortment of fellow dissidents out of the country to collect the prize only provides evidence of why it is justified, and makes the Chinese authorities look foolish. And the only people who stayed away (Cubans apart, maybe) were those with particularly good reasons for not upsetting the Chinese, not for any moral indignation about the prize being given to a 'criminal'.

An excellent and well deserved award, in contrast to last year it must be said.
Reply

Ramadhan
12-11-2010, 12:21 AM
Nobel peace prize has always been used to promote political causes. This year it is no different.
Reply

سيف الله
12-11-2010, 12:43 AM
Salaam

Did you hear? The Russians are considering whether to nominate Julian Assange for the nobel peace prize!

Regretably though, I think the Americans would 'disapprove'. . . . .
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
ourdialogue02
12-11-2010, 08:47 AM
these pple just can't stop showing their hypocrisy, if they give the award to a chinese dissident what have they done to help aafia siddiqui's case, why not retrieve obama's award as he has failed miserably...these awards are just waste at times. i luved the comment on russia nominating julian assange, that guy made the biggest mockery of america but the truth is there are pple who are always blind that even if they can't see the rays of the sun they still don't feel the heat.
Reply

Abdul-Raouf
12-11-2010, 09:16 AM
The West (EU and US) has peeped in its own laws and has disturbed Asia a Lot.....
(Vietnam,Palestine,Iraq,Afghan,Iran,East-Russia,...long list)...and they are yet to stop.

Dont always follow the West (EU and US)....thats wat i can say.
Reply

GuestFellow
12-11-2010, 01:03 PM
:sl:

The Nobel Peace Prize means nothing. Obama was given one for no reason. The US and EU behave as though they govern the world and think they speak for everyone. US and EU claim to be champions Human Rights but end up torturing suspects, start wars and kill thousands of civilians. I personally view the US and EU as tyrannical nutters. I'm not a fan of China either.
Reply

Trumble
12-11-2010, 09:19 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Junon
Salaam

Did you hear? The Russians are considering whether to nominate Julian Assange for the nobel peace prize!

Regretably though, I think the Americans would 'disapprove'. . . . .
I wonder how far Russian enthusiasm would extend if it was their own diplomatic communications that had been leaked!
Reply

GuestFellow
12-11-2010, 09:38 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Junon
Salaam

Did you hear? The Russians are considering whether to nominate Julian Assange for the nobel peace prize!

Regretably though, I think the Americans would 'disapprove'. . . . .
Salaam,

Oh the irony. America gets a taste of its own medicine.
Reply

ChargerCarl
12-18-2010, 04:37 AM
Fact: the only other country to host their own peace prize in protest of the Nobel award was Nazi Germany.

Hmmm...
Reply

Ramadhan
12-18-2010, 09:05 AM
Fact: The moon is earth's satellite

Hmmm...
Reply

Hugo
12-18-2010, 12:46 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Guestfellow
The Nobel Peace Prize means nothing. Obama was given one for no reason. The US and EU behave as though they govern the world and think they speak for everyone. US and EU claim to be champions Human Rights but end up torturing suspects, start wars and kill thousands of civilians. I personally view the US and EU as tyrannical nutters. I'm not a fan of China either.
It means nothing to you perhaps and you might like to note that many nations have started wars and tortured suspects. For example the Muslim armies invaded and conquered many nations so by extension they are also tyrannical nutters? I don't excuse the invasion of Iraq but perhaps you overlook Islamic ones?
Reply

GuestFellow
12-18-2010, 01:04 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Hugo
It means nothing to you perhaps and you might like to note that many nations have started wars and tortured suspects.
Yes, I'm well aware that many nations have started wars and torture people. There is no need to point that out.

For example the Muslim armies invaded and conquered many nations so by extension they are also tyrannical nutters? I don't excuse the invasion of Iraq but perhaps you overlook Islamic ones?
What is this? An attempt to derail the topic? Create another topic about Muslim armies invading and conquering other countries, and do give specific examples and back them up with authentic sources. In this topic, I'm more concerned about current tyrannical nutters.
Reply

Hugo
12-18-2010, 01:42 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Guestfellow
Yes, I'm well aware that many nations have started wars and torture people. There is no need to point that out.

What is this? An attempt to derail the topic? Create another topic about Muslim armies invading and conquering other countries, and do give specific examples and back them up with authentic sources. In this topic, I'm more concerned about current tyrannical nutters.
This has nothing to do with derailing anything just to point out that one has to have a realistic perspective if what you say is to have any value. The moment we let 'who can I blame' thinking dominate is the moment we get a distorted view of history that suits our corner and encourages us to over look its wrongs. To take you point of concern there has been and still are tyrannical nutters of all kinds Bib Ladin, Saddam Hussain, Hitler, and so on. The Nobel prize in the latest case was not to a nutter but a man whose only 'crime' is to denounce hatred and long for peace and for that he gets locked up by what seems to be a spiteful and intolerant government.
Reply

GuestFellow
12-18-2010, 02:06 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Hugo
To take you point of concern there has been and still are tyrannical nutters of all kinds Bib Ladin, Saddam Hussain, Hitler, and so on.
For example the Muslim armies invaded and conquered many nations so by extension they are also tyrannical nutters?
...Adolf Hitler? o_o

Does it look like Bin Ladin and Saddam Hussain are commanding Muslim armies to conquer other countries?

Saddam Hussain was a supporter of Arab nationalism and had no interest in establishing an Islamic State. Bin Ladin was upset over the Arab and Israeli conflict, and disliked western countries for supporting Israel.

These two men have not conquered anything. Saddam Hussain is dead and Bin Ladin is probably dead or hiding.

The Nobel prize in the latest case was not to a nutter but a man whose only 'crime' is to denounce hatred and long for peace and for that he gets locked up by what seems to be a spiteful and intolerant government.
I never said the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to a tyrannical nutter. I do not think the Nobel Peace Prize any credibility, especially after it was awarded to Obama.

I said the US and EU behave like tyrannical nutters. Both attempt to govern the world, claim to be champions of human rights but start wars, kill thousands of innocent civilians and torture suspects. I change my mind, the US and EU are hypocritical tyrannical nutters.
Reply

Zafran
12-18-2010, 03:07 PM
Yeah I was just wondering that Guestfellow said EU and US not "christian nations" the way Hugo seems to think that saddam Hussien of the Baath Party and his Iraq is an Islamic nation - If Binladen has an army or commands an Islamic nation? Is this what you call accurate history???

Just to add as we can call Bin Laden, Saddam Hussien and Hitler has nutters - GW Bush and Tony Blair should be there as well - they did send soldiers to war that they lied about and ended up killing many civilians.

Back to the topic the Noble prize is meaningless.
Reply

titus
12-20-2010, 06:29 PM
Yes, the Nobel Prize Committee does get it wrong sometimes (Obama, Gore, etc.), but they often also get it right.

I can understand if you want to disregard it, but does anyone here actually support China in this? Or does everyone simply look upon it as spitting in the face of the West, therefore something to be applauded, or at the least condoned?
Reply

GuestFellow
12-20-2010, 07:46 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by titus
but does anyone here actually support China in this? Or does everyone simply look upon it as spitting in the face of the West, therefore something to be applauded, or at the least condoned?
I think some western countries should not get involved in other countries internal affairs.
Reply

noorseeker
12-20-2010, 08:03 PM
There is no peace in the world, so pointless handing out awards to any one,

On the other hand if there was a award for a nobel WAR prize , then i think there would be sooo many nominees for that award
Reply

titus
12-20-2010, 09:06 PM
I think some western countries should not get involved in other countries internal affairs
So people should not point out injustice if it happens in another country?
Reply

GuestFellow
12-20-2010, 09:34 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by titus
So people should not point out injustice if it happens in another
country?
Pointing out and actually getting involved are two different things. I'm talking about actually getting involved in another countries internal affairs. What do you mean by injustice?

For example, in Saudi Arabia, they carry out public executions. Some people say that is barbaric while some Saudi citizens say it is justice and helps to deter crimes.

All countries have their own problems. How can western countries be in any position to resolve internal affairs of other countries when it cannot even resolve its own problems? Let the people of those countries resolve their own problems, they are the best people for the job.

You would not like it if Saudi Arabia began to get involved in your countries internal affairs.
Reply

ChargerCarl
12-21-2010, 02:49 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Guestfellow
I think some western countries should not get involved in other countries internal affairs.
Giving someone an award interferes with chinese affairs...how exactly?
Reply

ChargerCarl
12-21-2010, 02:52 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Guestfellow
You would not like it if Saudi Arabia began to get involved in your countries internal affairs.
Thats because they can't. They don't possess the political or economic leverage that the western world has.
Reply

Ramadhan
12-21-2010, 03:39 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by ChargerCarl
Giving someone an award interferes with chinese affairs...how exactly?
I didn't see or read that statement by br. Guestfellow.

You are imagining things.....
Reply

ChargerCarl
12-21-2010, 03:47 AM
Post number #18
Reply

GuestFellow
12-21-2010, 12:39 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by ChargerCarl
Giving someone an award interferes with chinese affairs...how exactly?
I was not even talking about awards and China.

format_quote Originally Posted by ChargerCarl
Thats because they can't. They don't possess the political or economic leverage that the western world has.
It was a hypothetical scenario.
Reply

titus
12-21-2010, 03:20 PM
Pointing out and actually getting involved are two different things. I'm talking about actually getting involved in another countries internal affairs. What do you mean by injustice?
The Nobel Prize is nothing more than them pointing out a situation. Why is it that you have a problem with that?

As for countries getting involved in other countries internal affairs, were you upset when the OIC asked the UN to impose sanctions on Denmark because of the cartoons? How about when the US government said that France's ban on the hijab was a violation of human rights? And should those other countries stop trying to put pressure on Israel since what they are doing is, in effect, trying to get involved in their internal affairs?

As for what I mean by injustice, I don't believe someone should be jailed for writing a petition asking the government to change the way they do things. The man did not call for violence, he did not call for rebellion, and he did not call for an overthrow. He simply asked the Chinese to change their constitution to allow more freedom and was arrested for it. That is an injustice.
Reply

Zafran
12-21-2010, 03:29 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by ChargerCarl
Thats because they can't. They don't possess the political or economic leverage that the western world has.
That makes it right? If country A has the money and the power it should oppress other countries simply becasue it has economic and political power???
Reply

GuestFellow
12-21-2010, 04:46 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by titus
The Nobel Prize is nothing more than them pointing out a situation. Why is it that you have a problem with that?
Did I say I have a problem with the Nobel Prize? It means nothing to me. I suspect, at times, there is a motive behind it. The Nobel Peace Prize lacks credibility in my opinion, especially if it is awarded by countries that start wars, impose sanctions and torture suspects.

As for countries getting involved in other countries internal affairs, were you upset when the OIC asked the UN to impose sanctions on Denmark because of the cartoons?
I have a problem with that. Sanctions affect the entire country. Why punish the citizens of Denmark for one's man stupidity?

I would like evidence for this, I doubt the UN would impose sanctions over the cartoon. I'm suspecting UN was motivated by national security issues.

How about when the US government said that France's ban on the hijab was a violation of human rights?
That is not actually getting involved but one country expressing its disagreement with another country. France is a member of the European Union, and must comply with the European Conventions on Human Rights. France currently has an issue with Article 9: freedom of conscience.

Source

And should those other countries stop trying to put pressure on Israel since what they are doing is, in effect, trying to get involved in their internal affairs?
Israel claims to respect international law, therefore they should try to uphold it. I'm not sure if they have signed the Geneva Convention on Human Rights...

The dispute between Palestinians and Israelis is not a internal dispute. It affects other countries too. This conflict is one of the reasons why US was attacked on 9/11. Other countries national interests will be affected by his conflict, so I do think they can get involved.

As for what I mean by injustice, I don't believe someone should be jailed for writing a petition asking the government to change the way they do things. The man did not call for violence, he did not call for rebellion, and he did not call for an overthrow. He simply asked the Chinese to change their constitution to allow more freedom and was arrested for it. That is an injustice.
This is for the Chinese people to deal with. None of us have been to China or understand their problems. Therefore, the Chinese citizens have to deal with this problem. No regime will last forever.
Reply

titus
12-21-2010, 07:04 PM
The Nobel Peace Prize lacks credibility in my opinion, especially if it is awarded by countries that start wars, impose sanctions and torture suspects.
It is awarded by Norway, which I don't recall starting any wars or being accused of torture recently.
I would like evidence for this, I doubt the UN would impose sanctions over the cartoon. I'm suspecting UN was motivated by national security issues.
It is public knowledge that the OIC asked for the UN to punish Denmark. The UN did not, though.
I have a problem with that. Sanctions affect the entire country. Why punish the citizens of Denmark for one's man stupidity?
Then what about the calls from other countries for the cartoonist to be prosecuted. Certainly that is butting into the internal affairs of another country.
That is not actually getting involved but one country expressing its disagreement with another country.
So is the Nobel Prize, in a fashion.

Israel claims to respect international law, therefore they should try to uphold it. I'm not sure if they have signed the Geneva Convention on Human Rights...
They did sign it, but claim it does not cover their situation. Therefore, according to your logic, it is an internal matter and no other countries have the right to try and change it.
The dispute between Palestinians and Israelis is not a internal dispute. It affects other countries too. This conflict is one of the reasons why US was attacked on 9/11. Other countries national interests will be affected by his conflict, so I do think they can get involved.
It only affects other countries because they want to get involved in Israels internal affairs.

This is for the Chinese people to deal with. None of us have been to China or understand their problems. Therefore, the Chinese citizens have to deal with this problem. No regime will last forever.
So it is your opinion that if, say, the United States decided one day to round up all the Muslims in the country and throw them in jail or even execute them that the rest of the world should stay mute on the subject since it is an internal affair?

I think your real issue is your intense dislike of the fact that it is Western powers that wield, by far, the most influence in the world.
Reply

GuestFellow
12-21-2010, 07:44 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by titus
It is awarded by Norway, which I don't recall starting any wars or being accused of torture recently.
Are you sure?

It has been involved in wars.

It is public knowledge that the OIC asked for the UN to punish Denmark. The UN did not, though.
I would still like to see evidence for this.

Then what about the calls from other countries for the cartoonist to be prosecuted. Certainly that is butting into the internal affairs of another country.
Source?

So is the Nobel Prize, in a fashion.
I never had a problem with this prize, I think it is a bit of joke. China should have ignored it.

They did sign it.
Then Israel must act according to the Geneva Conventions on Human Rights. If it does not, then other countries should pressure Israel to act according to the Geneva Conventions on Human Rights.

The Palestinian and Israeli conflict is not a internal dispute, it is a international dispute, and the countries that have been affected, should be allowed to get involved.

It only affects other countries because they want to get involved in Israels internal affairs.
True but Israel wants some countries like the US to get involved because it needs their support.

So it is your opinion that if, say, the United States decided one day to round up all the Muslims in the country and throw them in jail or even execute them that the rest of the world should stay mute on the subject since it is an internal affair?
I admit, that would be an exception.

I think your real issue is your intense dislike of the fact that it is Western powers that wield, by far, the most influence in the world.
How do you know what I like dislike? I doubt you possess the ability to read my mind. I even live in a western country. I dislike it when countries start wars, kill innocent civilians and torture suspects. America has tortured suspects, committed massacres and so on. So I dislike its foreign policy. You should learn to accept that.
Reply

ChargerCarl
12-22-2010, 01:00 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Guestfellow
Then Israel must act according to the Geneva Conventions on Human Rights. If it does not, then other countries should pressure Israel to act according to the Geneva Conventions on Human Rights.
I'm fairly certain that the Geneva convention only applies to prisoners of war, which enemy combatants are not.


True but Israel wants some countries like the US to get involved because it needs their support
While Israel enjoys the support of much of the world, it does not need it now that they are a nuclear power.
Reply

Zafran
12-22-2010, 01:07 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by ChargerCarl
While Israel enjoys the support of much of the world, it does not need it now that they are a nuclear power.
I'm prety sure Isreal does not enjoy support much of the world - Its quite clear from UN nation resolution 242 that the US gives Isreal most of the support and the US isnt most of the world - its one country.

China, Russia, Africa and some countries in europe are not fans of Isreal as well - majority of the world is against the west bank and Gaza occupation and the take over of east Jerusalem.
Reply

Ramadhan
12-22-2010, 01:26 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by ChargerCarl
While Israel enjoys the support of much of the world.
What are you on, dude?
Reply

Trumble
12-22-2010, 02:17 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by ChargerCarl
I'm fairly certain that the Geneva convention only applies to prisoners of war, which enemy combatants are not.
Of course they aren't. The 'enemy combatant' thing was dreamed up to avoid having to treat them as prisoners of war. As far as I'm aware, though, only the Americans have used the tag to hide behind, not the Israelis. The whole thing is ludicrous; if a captured 'enemy combatant' isn't a PoW then what the heck is?!
Reply

GuestFellow
12-22-2010, 04:27 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by ChargerCarl
While Israel enjoys the support of much of the world, it does not need it now that they are a nuclear power.
I think many countries are neutral. The EU and the USA are ones that support Israel.

Israel does have nuclear weapons but it cannot solve all its problems It could not handle the fire and is unable to get rid of Hezbollah.
Reply

titus
12-23-2010, 06:41 AM
[QUOTE
]It is awarded by Norway, which I don't recall starting any wars or being accused of torture recently.
Are you sure?

It has been involved in wars.[/QUOTE]

Like I said,they have not started any wars or been accused of torture that I am aware of.
I would still like to see evidence for this.
Source

Source

The OIC Secretary General expressed his dismay and disappointment at the release of the book despite the fact that he and some other leaders of the Muslim countries had personally addressed letters to the Foreign Minister of Denmark urging the intervention of the Danish government against the publication due to the highly provocative and inciting contents of the book.

In other words multiple Muslim countries attempted to interfere in the internal policies of Denmark.

The Palestinian and Israeli conflict is not a internal dispute, it is a international dispute, and the countries that have been affected, should be allowed to get involved.
It is not international, it is internal. It is only international in the sense that other Muslim countries are upset about it. The issue only involves Israel and its territories, therefore should be considered internal.

How do you know what I like dislike? I doubt you possess the ability to read my mind.
Based on what you post I make assumptions. You said "I think some western countries should not get involved in other countries internal affairs."

You limited your scope to Western countries, not to all countries. You later admit that Muslims being persecuted in my example would be an exception and give flimsy excuses why France banning the hijab and the Israeli/Palestinian do allow for external action.

You limit your criticism to Western countries, and then make exceptions when Muslims are being persecuted. I made an assumption based strictly on what you have posted.

If you want to clarify your statements then feel free, but based strictly on what you have posted you are inconsistent, to put it mildly.

I dislike it when countries start wars, kill innocent civilians and torture suspects. America
has tortured suspects, committed massacres and so on. So I dislike its foreign policy. You should learn to accept that.
I accept that you don't like American foreign policy. I disagree with much of it myself.

My issue with you on this topic is that you say you have a belief that countries should not get involved in the internal affairs of other countries, yet every single thing you have said indicates that you don't truly believe it.
Reply

Trumble
12-23-2010, 09:10 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by titus
It is not international, it is internal. It is only international in the sense that other Muslim countries are upset about it. The issue only involves Israel and its territories, therefore should be considered internal.
You might want to research the history of that conflict. The Jordanians and Lebanese in particular have very good reasons not to regard it as 'internal'.
Reply

GuestFellow
12-23-2010, 11:50 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by titus
Like I said,they have not started any wars or been accused of torture that I am aware of.
Norway is involved in the Afghanistan war, clearly supporting the US foreign policy.

Source

Source

The OIC Secretary General expressed his dismay and disappointment at the release of the book despite the fact that he and some other leaders of the Muslim countries had personally addressed letters to the Foreign Minister of Denmark urging the intervention of the Danish government against the publication due to the highly provocative and inciting contents of the book.

In other words multiple Muslim countries attempted to interfere in the internal policies of Denmark.
Through letters? I will address this issue towards the end.

Based on what you post I make assumptions. You said "I think some western countries should not get involved in other countries internal affairs."
Of course. It is western countries that I can see getting involved in other countries' domestic affairs most of the time. How can western countries attempt to resolve other countries' problems when it cannot solve its own problems?

You later admit that Muslims being persecuted in my example would be an exception
There is exceptions to everything. My general principle is countries do not get involved in other countries domestic affairs, with the exceptions of mass murder.

There is nothing wrong with countries simply communicating with each other.

give flimsy excuses why France banning the hijab
France is a member of the European Union. It must act according to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), otherwise, it has to think twice about its membership with the EU. The EU is allowed to get involved in France or any other country that is part of the EU domestic affairs.

Turkey has banned the Niqaab but this problem is for the Turkish people. It has not signed any legislation nor it is part of a group to uphold certain values.

the Israeli/Palestinian do allow for external action.
Yes because it will affect other countries national interests. You can do some reading about the conflict:

ifAmericansknew

You limit your criticism to Western countries,
These countries are powerful and are able to get involved in other countries domestic affairs.

then make exceptions when Muslims are being persecuted.
Well mass murder of any group.

My issue with you on this topic is that you say you have a belief that countries should not get involved in the internal affairs of other countries, yet every single thing you have said indicates that you don't truly believe it.
Fine, I will make myself clear.

It is some western countries such as the US and Britain, that attempt to get involved in other countries' domestic affairs. I focused on these countries because they have the power and resources to get involved. Like I said before, I doubt western countries can resolve other countries' domestic affairs because it cannot resolve its own domestic problems.

There are problems all over the world but the US is always interested in particular countries in the Middle East. The US exploits the problems within those countries such as women rights to gain public support and then gets involved due to some other reason. This is not helping the problem but makes it worse.

What do I mean by getting involved? I'm referring to wars, sanctions and pressure to the extent where the government of that country is obeying other countries, not its own people.

I'm not saying countries should not allowed to communicate through letters or meetings. Countries should be allowed to express their disagreements with other countries and diplomacy is the best way to understand other countries' problems.

The only time I can see where a country should be allowed to get involved in another countries' internal affairs is when there is mass murder of a particular group. Also, when a country has signed up to be a member of a organisation (e.g. EU) or signed a legislation (e.g. non-nuclear proliferation treaty or ECHR) or there is a issue where other countries' national interests are affected.
Reply

ChargerCarl
12-27-2010, 12:43 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Trumble
Of course they aren't. The 'enemy combatant' thing was dreamed up to avoid having to treat them as prisoners of war. As far as I'm aware, though, only the Americans have used the tag to hide behind, not the Israelis. The whole thing is ludicrous; if a captured 'enemy combatant' isn't a PoW then what the heck is?!
Well the Geneva convention only applies to uniformed soldiers, which terrorist are not. I don't know what else to say.
Reply

titus
12-29-2010, 08:50 AM
Norway is involved in the Afghanistan war, clearly supporting the US foreign policy.
Maybe in Afghanistan they do, but then Afghanistan was harboring a group accused of attacking the US. Hardly an internal affair.




You say:
The only time I can see where a country should be allowed to get involved in another countries' internal affairs is when there is mass murder of a particular group
Then you say:

the Israeli/Palestinian do allow for external action.
Yes because it will affect other countries national interests.
This is a contradiction as I see it. Is the criteria murder or affecting national interest?

And if you are saying that awarding prizes or voicing opinions is not getting involved in another countries internal affairs then why did you respond like this in a previous post:

but does anyone here actually support China in this? Or does everyone simply look upon it as spitting in the face of the West, therefore something to be applauded, or at the least condoned?
I think some western countries should not get involved in other countries internal affairs.
You are obviously equating the giving of Nobel Prize with getting involved in a countries internal affairs, and then later deny that it is.

It seems you are scatter shooting with no clear aim here.
Reply

GuestFellow
12-29-2010, 01:17 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by titus
Maybe in Afghanistan they do, but then Afghanistan was harboring a group accused of attacking the US. Hardly an internal affair.
Bush rejects Taliban offer to surrender bin Laden

The Bush administration did not even consider diplomacy or any peace negotiations.

This is a contradiction as I see it.
... >_>

Read carefully:

The only time I can see where a country should be allowed to get involved in another countries' internal affairs is when there is mass murder of a particular group. Also, when a country has signed up to be a member of a organisation (e.g. EU) or signed a legislation (e.g. non-nuclear proliferation treaty or ECHR) or there is a issue where other countries' national interests are affected.
The Palestinian and Israeli conflict is an issue which affects other countries national interests.

then later deny that it is.
I was not even talking about the Nobel Peace Prize, like I said before, its a joke and has no credibility in my opinion. China should not let this trouble them. All I said was this:

I think some western countries should not get involved in other countries internal affairs.
Reply

titus
12-29-2010, 07:01 PM
Then let me repeat my question since you seem to be saying that your previous response had nothing to do with the question:

Does anyone here actually support China in this? Or does everyone simply look upon it as spitting in the face of the West, therefore something to be applauded, or at the least condoned?
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!