@izzythepush,
OmSigDAVID wrote:Personally, I 've only gone to NATIONALIST CHINA
and to Hong Kong, b4 the English gave it to the Chinese Reds.
izzythepush wrote:At least get the facts right Dave.
OK, Izzy.
izzythepush wrote:It was the British government,
don't forget about the Scots and Welsh.
Well, there is not much honor in giving away English territory,
that thay shud object to being left out of mention for the deed.
izzythepush wrote:We didn't give anything away, we were honouring a treaty.
No; that 's inaccurate, Izzy.
I remember. I lived thru it.
I was in Hong Kong for part of that time.
Thay were not happy about impending doom.
Fortunately, Hong Kong is such a cash cow
that the
Red Chinese said thay 'll keep it intact for 5O years.
It is also fortunate for Hong Kong that because of the great success
of capitalism, China has tacitly,
de facto abandoned communism,
tho it remains a military dictatorship. (Irony: is it the
OPPOSITE of a R.I.N.O.
?)
Also, except for the fact that u were recognizing the
expiration
of your lease (by its own terms) on the New Territories,
u were
NOT honoring any treaty in giving Hong Kong
to the
Red Chinese (the pink Chinese??). Hong Kong was English
forever
(kinda like Liverpool, but not as close). That was the deal.
izzythepush wrote:Also, militarily there was no way we could defend Hong Kong,
so America would have had to get involved.
I don 't remember the Red Chinese threatening violence toward Hong Kong,
nor demanding its surrender. Did I miss something????????
izzythepush wrote:This would have put both of us on the wrong side of international law,
and could have led to something a lot worse.
WHICH "international law" is that, Izzy?????
Please enlighten me, prithee.
izzythepush wrote:Try thinking things through,
before you start making simplistic comments that serve no purpose
other than promoting your own blinkered ideology.
O, really??
Thinking things thru, huh ????
Do u wish to say anything else of that nature, on
re-consideration ????
izzythepush wrote:Btw, what you've been saying about communists making bad parents
is totally ******* ridiculous. But you knew I'd say that.
U can advocate slavery,
if such be your choice, Izzy. Its not mine.
Without exaggeration, if it had been me in Elian 's position,
I 'd have been
1OOO times better off rooming with Jerry Sandusky
(assuming that he is guilty) than in living in slavery, even for a minute,
let alone
life in slavery, like a convicted murderer.
I 'm carrying the flag for the notion
that
IF a 6 year old child is
CORRECT in his choice
to
reject the wishes of his father or mother
(e.g., if Mackensie Phillips rejects cocaine offered by John, her dad,
or if she rejects his sexual advances) THEN, his choice of remaining clean,
or innocent, or free shud be
RESPECTED.
Elian 's choice to stay in Miami, rejecting communist slavery shud have been respected.
We had a case not long ago, wherein a mom was trying to murder
her children. Thay fled for refuge to a nabor's house, unsuccessfully
attempting to get in. Their mom commanded them to come back inside their house.
Thay complied, whereupon, she completed the murdering process upon them.
(I wonder what the penalty for insubordination woud have been.)
Thay needed to fight back; their lives depended on it.
Elian needed to fight back; his
FREEDOM depended on it.
David