กก
Dumb fuck terrorists...do they think they will actually achieve anything by this
I suppose yes if a war results....I hope Flammy is ok in Boston
Feel deep sorry for all the people loss, both at NY and DC. Terrorists should be cursed and hunted and killed.
However, Americans should consider the question why they are always the target. Didn't the World Trade Center got bombed years ago? Why? U think just because the terrorists are nut and crazy and wanna attack the most powerful country in the world to make fun? Is it sth kind of revenge? What's the problem with the White House' policy?
Don't forget Iraq children who have been suffering from hunger and illness for over ten years, because of sanction insisted and carried out by US as well as his little brother UK. Do they deserve that? Anyone expressed sympathy to these children in this week? American's lives more expensive than theirs?
And how about common citizen of Yugoslavia? Why US bombers destroyed non-military targets like power plant and water supplier? When the US Air Force boasted to bomb Serb back to Stone Era, did US people made any voice heard that it's actually a brutal crime to human rights, the most popular term US loves to use? And any real massacre heritage found after our brave NATO army entered Yugo to prove Serbs were really committing holocaust? What are those bandits PLA supported by US at that time now doing in Macedonia? Is the Yugo Air-raid War still seems that sound now?
And who suffered at last? Is it US Air Force, US people, or Serbs who were living their peaceful life and suddenly got pushed into a world full of bombs, without power or drinking water, and was told their crops for next year had been poisoned by bombs produced with the most advanced state-of-art technology developed by, say, Lincoln Laboratory of MIT? Anyone here ever felt sorry for them?
So it will be totally no use for US to upgrade its security system after this attack. More creative and destructive methods will be invented to speak aloud for the poor nations all over the world bullied by US and its rich pals, if US doesn't change its policy and image.
Stallion Watching CNN and BBC
I really feel now is not the time for the pointing out of Americas past wrongs...also while I agree with you that trade sanctions are killing children in Iraq and that is very bad I feel certain that you have very little idea of what has been happening in Yugoslavia over the last ten years...having spent the last couple of weeks in Slovenia Croatia and Bosnia Herzegovina and talking to the locals I have developed some understanding on the topic and although I have not talked to any Serbs and therefore only have one side of the story it sounds rather grim...I suggest you should not make rash outbursts against any country unless you know the full story especially when that country is historically an enemy of your own and (I am guessing here) your education system has no doubt biased you against the country...I myself have no great love for America but like most people have friends there as in a lot of countries...I hope my friends in new York are ok...thank you for your comments they are a comfort at this time of tragedy
Yes u said it. God bless my friends in NYU and Chase. I am afraid they were in the financial area at that rush time of 9am. And I regret I cannot donate blood to those poor sacrificed people. God bless New Yorkers, and people pls save the world.
Wang Yi,
1. Even if you do not agree with the US foreign policies, there is still no justification for the mass killings. Two "wrongs" will not make one "right".
2. I am also disturbed by your statement on the "poor sacrificed people". I am not sure whether you understand what you have written, but "sacrifice" means "the loss or giving up of something for what is believed to be a GOOD purpose". I do not see anything good in a mindless terrorist attack.
Hi all,
Having maintained a state of silence for some time, this is an incident about which I cannot remain mum. I first have to say that the actions are deplorable, indefensible, despicable and downright !@#@*$#$! (that's right, no words are base and vile enough here). Carrying out terrorist strikes against the unsuspecting man-on-the-street (some of whom might not even know of the existence of the countries from which these fanatics hail) is the lowest form of cowardice.
I am no advocate of Americano, but I do have a respect for their willingness to act as big brother to the world, to stand firm in the face of extremism and bigotry. While doubtless that some of their actions are laced with self-interest, it is hard to imagine the world being better off without America's activism. Why are they always the target of attacks? Because they inevitably step on some toes, some very vindictive toes. Is America any more reprehensible than countries who cheer their actions in the background but are unwilling to step to the fore to demonstrate their convictions and face possible recriminations? Hardly.
Despite being many miles away from the scenes of disaster, my heart cannot but go out to those affected by the incident. Justice, I hope, will be swift to strike, not only for America but for anyone in the world who deplores intolerance and cowardly terrorism.
PK
Asides
Rich: Hi there, good to hear from you, though the timing could have been better
Jung Hoon: Hope you can give us a squeak to let us know you're fine
//Sorry I am in a rush. Let me make it short
1. Even if you do not agree with the US foreign policies, there is still no justification for the mass killings. Two "wrongs" will not make one "right".
//I never mean the terrorism is "right". It's totally "faceless coward" as the junior Bush said. They should attack Pentagon only, instead of civilians. My point is that it is understandable. Take an example, the jap invaded most of our countries and made great loss to S'pore, Korean, Malay as well as China. It's not right, but it's understandable. It's to jap's interest and if we were jap at that time we would probably do the same thing. If put US into jap's case US will also invade other countries (u think US is any better than RiBenGuiZi :-). So it can be understood, but it's wrong.
//I suggest you guys do not focus on the superficial "right" or "wrong". Definitely it's wrong. But try to explore the deep root and c what we can do to prevent such tragedy in the future.
2. I am also disturbed by your statement on the "poor sacrificed people". I am not sure whether you understand what you have wrote, but "sacrifice" means "the loss or giving up of something for what is believed to be a GOOD purpose". I do not see anything good in a mindless terrorist attack.
//Sorry for the confusion. U know I speak the worst English in our batch. I mean the US people were dying for their government's policy.
//Will contact u guys later.
Wang Yi, I think this argument should not continue any longer. This isn't the time to discuss issue like that.
1. There are civilians in Pentagon and the issue between war and terrorism is different. Why do u think we are focusing on the "superficial" right or wrong and you are not? Is there absolute right or wrong in this world or does it depend who you support, what you heard and what is your impression? How can we be sure we are right or wrong?
You can never prevent a tragedy from happening because you do not decide the fate of the country nor your citizens. Even if you do, you cannot fully anticipate the results of your decision and you cannot make everyone approve of your decision.
2. The citizens of Iraq and former Yugoslavia are also suffering from the policy taken by their respective leaders. Should we push the responsibility to a country who have stopped them or should each leader be responsible for their own actions and account them to their own people? What is the price of war? Are the aggressors the victims?
Some prediction made by a famous Frenchman. "In the city of god there will be a great thunder, two brothers torn apart by chaos, while the fortress endures, the great leader will succumb, the third big war will begin when the big city is burning"... Nostradamus 654.
Hi guys:
Seems I am fighting alone. OK let me use this one to finalize my opinion and shut up completely later on.
1. To Richard: I admit my education system might be biased against US. But I feel quite shameful it's not so excellently biased compared with the English-stream media against China (Just like I feel shameful I am far from as excellent as Jung Hoon ^_^). China media tells you what they want u to know and conceal the others. Say, they tell u US interfered into Korean War but they don't tell u the North attacked the South first. Anyway, what they says is truth, although just part of the truth. However, on the US side, they forge stories to cheat u on China issues. Give an example, during the famous TianAnMen Square Massacre I was traveling in the middle China. I learned from a US radio (forgot Voice of America or Free Asia) that in a small city the communist army shoot at ppl in front of the city hall using machine gun with tens dead hundreds wounded. I happened to be on the site, and witnessed, unfortunately, not a single bullet.
The basic rule of news is to tell people what happened in a neutral way and leave the reader to make their own judgment. But what I saw from CNN news is that in lots of interviews directed by those elite Ivy-league graduated reporters with Chinese interviewees, they obviously and intentionally inducing the Chinese to say that China government is evil and should be responsible for all the problems in China. Is this what they should do in news reporting? On any good news from China they dilute it by 100 times while on any bad one they exaggerate it by 1000 times. If u don't call this bias, I don't know what yr definition of bias is.
The last example on this issue. CBS said one out of three Chinese overseas students is spy sent by the China Intelligence. So u think which one of our SMA batch looks like? (Maybe me la :-) To say the truth, I usually turn to CNN or BBC China report as refreshing jokes when I feel rather dull. Just wanna c how shameless lies these gentlemen could generate.
2. To Richard again: I admit I have never been to Yugoslavia. I admit I don't know the full story (who in the world knows?) and my info comes mainly from my uncle doing business there. And I admit the Serbs did committed some brutal crime to other nations in that area. But this was not a A-kill-B issue. They killed each other. The NATO should act neutrally but actually they didn't. They were helping one side to fight the other, and this made the situation even worse and deepened the hatred between nations there.
OK let me regress and suppose it was true that Serb army are all devils and they killed peaceful ppl for no reason. Then is it make sense for US to bomb the non-military Serb targets? One gentleman here just said this may be accident (oh a typo, not "this", should be "these"). Guys, some of you may come from air force. Do u think it's still WW2 and pilots drop bombs by themselves? In the Yugo air raid each mission was well planned and the targets were already chosen before the bomber take off. So NATO and US were intentionally killing Serb civilians, or at least make them live back in Stone Era. The only better thing it over the current terrorism is that NATO admitted they did it and they boasted they made great loss to others with none to themselves.
OK let me regress again and suppose all Serbs are devils and deserve being bombed. (let's suppose they did ethnic cleansing of Albanians and used the most advanced tech to destroy all their corpses so no proof has been found yet) Then I wanna ask when a real holocaust happened in central Africa, in which houses of chopped-off heads have been found, why our dear big brother shows no action? Is it because it's not communist-governed country like Serb, and thus was of no interest to US?
3. To P.K.: Kindly help me raise some examples that US "act as big brother to the world" 'cause u know I am the most stupid guy of HPCES and can remember nothing. U said "some of their actions are laced with self-interest" but I think "some" should be replaced to "all". Of course it's true that we cannot criticize a guy who concern totally of himself. It's his human right:-) But don't praise this guy to me and say he's helping others.
Maybe we can adjust your constraint so that yr statement will be more sound: US act as big brother to its circle. S'pore is among the most advanced countries in the world, so u don't need to worry that in a financial crisis u get "help" from this big brother and have to let him interfere with yr monetary policy (is it true QCY? R u still at JB); and u don't need to worry that if this big brother think yr current leader is not willing to listen to him and should be replaced, he will send marine corps to take off the power and change it to their agent (any one here from central America); and u don't need to worry that if u face any threaten from neighboring country this brother will rescue u. But if we change the position, say S'pore is a small and developing island country while yr big neighbor is the second richest country of Asia, will US rescue u in that case?
We are not playing Richman III! We are talking about common countries in the world, some of which has most people slim like a skeleton. So I feel no interest what kind of help US gives to UK or Swiss or Australia or Jap. It's really a joke to me to call US as "big brother".
4. To Y.L.: I know this guy and I have read this paragraph hours ago. Do u remember two or three years ago a jap interpreted his so-called prediction that the world will be destroyed in that August (and the funniest thing is that he stated Jap is the safest place). What happened then? OK let's suppose this stupid jap made wrong interpretation. What I feel quite interesting is that a guy received Master education and being so smart like you, will believe in such "prediction". Any science course teaches u the fate could be predicted? The world is so complicated a system that I doubt anyone could make any prediction on things hundreds of years later. Or why don't this guy revive (since he could predict, why not he could revive? ^_^) go to the NY Stock Exchange to make great bucks? Oh I forgot it must have shut down now.
5. To Y.L. again: I have repeated for times that the terrorism is wrong. And u keep pressing me with "Is there absolute right or wrong in this world". OK l regress and agree with u that whether the terrorism is right or wrong is not absolute. R u satisfied now :-)
I have never said the US policy is WRONG. Again, ppl has the right to act totally on his own interest without considering others. The country is the same, so we cannot criticize US for that. If I were sitting in White House supported by Lockheed Martin and Citibank and Exxon Mobile, I would most probably adopt the same policy. So I don't think it's wrong. What I wanna raise is, after the terrible things happened to common US ppl (not to Bush, not to Lockheed Martin, not to Citibank, not to Exxon Mobile, and not to any Jewish banker's garden), US should consider its policy again. Is there any problem? Bush said he and his staff will protect US as well as US people. The words are quite true. But please deliver it, protect the interest of US people, instead of the interest of the groups supporting Bush in the background. And meanwhile, try to be a little bit fair in dealing with area conflict, say, Israel issues.
We all want the world to be peaceful, in which we can make money, listen to Bach, play squash, have kids with yr loved and do sth to our world. But this will never be achieved by having a selfish "big brother" nor upgrading our security system to block out all terrorists. If only Palestinians keep holding carnival to celebrate the blood of New Yorkers, I am afraid the same tragedy is going to happen again.
So the ball is now on US's side.
Stallion
Hello Wang Yi,
last comments before I leave for Brunei.
1) how's the scholarship ? Is it going well / I hope so. keep me updated.
2) The US tragedy is sad and admits the discussions, I think that everybody feels saddened by the event but nobody really will know the right or wrong things that transcended. Perhaps all got too carried away. Anyway, I think u know what u are saying and so do the rest. Ultimately, all this talk is not going to help change the facts. What we can do now is to hope for the well-being of the US ppl and god bless the world.
Jeff :-)
Dear all.
Since I am quite far away from the place where the disaster took place, I am all right. :) I was watching TV all day long yesterday with surprise and sadness, and I was doing the same thing to see the response of the people here.
Although some of them insist on paying the terrorist back, a lot of people also agreed to the fact that this should not bring hatred among the peoples. I cannot agree more to this point.
And it was really helpful and also interesting to hear other opinion, mostly from you guys. I do believe that terrorism is one of the most brutal way to express their thoughts, especially when it is targeted to general people on the street. But I also agree to Wang Yi's point that U.S. government should reconsider their foreign policy against the Islamic countries. Because of their political interest, as long as I see, they overly behaved to support Israel.
Sorry for my poor English since I don't have any dictionary to look up the words that I need to express my thoughts. Anyway, I would love to participate into the conversation that is going on. :)
First and foremost, glad to know that Jung Hoon is safe.
Next, that was a really long speech, Wang Yi. But please don't end there cos' this exchange of opinion is definitely healthy, not to mention interesting.
I probably should qualify some of the statements I made which seem to have raised the ire of Wang Yi. My calling the US "big brother": this does not mean I regard the US as an altruistic guardian angel whose motivations are nothing but benevolent. I was trying to convey their use of clout to influence affairs outside of their own backyard. The actions of countries are always subjected to debate and second-guessing, that is because they are seldom the brainchild of one individual but a product of different agendas and interests. The US is a big affluent country which probably has better capability than most to adopt an insular inward-looking policy, leaving the rest of the world to it's own devices. They don't and that is not necessarily a bad thing. IMHO, the ubiquity of the US serves as a bulwark and deterrent against potential forces of destabilization. Aspiring Saddams and Osamas have to think twice before they act on their plans for world domination :). Of course they can be construed as meddlesome or intrusive, but just like almost everything else in life, you've to take the good with the bad. Perhaps expectations of the US are too high. Are we judging them with stricter standards just because they are rich and they are vocal? Don't other countries have to assume their share of responsibility for some of the situations Wang Yi raised?
Inaccurate media reports are always a thorny issue. News stations, especially commercial ones like CNN or CBS, often act on the accounts of some very dubious sources. I doubt the newscasters even believe some of the words coming from themselves, but they use these stories cos' folk like you and me lap up sensational stories, especially in times of conflict or chaos. Who wants to hear about DPM Tan's trip to Japan when you can have the scandalous antics of Bill and Monica (or more recently Gary and Chandra)?
If you managed to stay awake thru all that... Have a good day, folks.
I want to make clarifications.
I have neither made any claims in my email or whatsoever in any way nor insinuate that "I believed or support the claim made by Nostradamus". That part was meant for information just like you have read that information. Please do not overreact and jump to conclusions. I do not know what gave you the idea that I believed that. I am very surprised with the way and the tone of your description of me. It will be even more interesting to know how yours truly will feel.
Worst, you should never ever think that your friends who have made comments against your stand, gang up together against you. It is the issue & not you. I have total faith that you will never think that.
You should also realized that you should never expect any consensus if you make a stand or argument but prepared to defend your stand at all times.
I can understand that you do not comprehend the history and the monetary policy in Singapore. Firstly, Singapore's survival of financial crisis depends on the prudent overseas investments to ensure the growth of our reserves made by the government investment bodies such as GIC, Temasek holdings together with fiscal policy & regulations made by the Central Bank, MAS and the aggressive trade policies by TDB & economic policies by EDB. Yes, we have close financial dealings with US but that doesn't mean an external country can meddle with another country's monetary or fiscal policy. You should also know all foreign banks do not have full bank status instead of only 4 foreign banks with quarterly full bank (QFB) status.
Secondly, The Singapore Government has been under tons of attack before from both the US media and the US government for the policies taken especially during the Lee Kuan Yew era. However, Lee Kuan Yew was not replaced by US forces just because he did not listen to US.
Thirdly, which is the most serious of all, don't ever underestimate that a small country like us does not have ability to defend ourselves and have to rely on US help. Yes, we bought some weapons from them but defense depends on the strength of our reserve, regular and active forces, the combat skills and the kind of technology and alliances we have. We also do not follow the military doctrine from US. Small size does not mean low defense. Finally, there are no benefits for all neighboring countries in the region if we go to war (I hope it is an example & not an implication).
Singapore will not be successful if we only listen to US biddings. Do not indulge freely on issues regarding Singapore if you do not have a clear understanding of our country. It is better to seek clarifications. The analogy in terms of local context is not sound.
Hi YL, it's too late now. U should go to bed, or yr honey will get worried.
I said I don't wanna say anything about this issue. So let me say sth having nothing to do with US.
I guess u must have read my article in a very fatigued status thus I suggest u to read it again tomorrow. And check with TSK to c whether u two reach the same interpretation. If it is, I apologize that my English is too poor to lead u to the reverse direction.
Some points:
1. I am too slow to understand why u cite this prophet while u don't believe it.
2. Just a joke to mention I was fighting alone.
3. I never expect consensus in "democratic" countries, except to bomb damned shit Serbs :-)
4. Thanks for info from CFS, I do admire S'pore is highly efficient in defense, and do believe u will sustain a rather long time facing attack from a much bigger enemy. But I do not believe u will win the war without external aid. After all, I am totally not qualified to argue on this topic so I call for opinions from other S'poreans on the fundamental strategy of S'pore.
I appreciate yr reading my article and will appreciate it even more if u c what I mean. Have a nice dream.
Stallion
Hello all,
>4. Thanks for info from CFS, I do admire S'pore is highly efficient in defense, and do believe u will sustain a rather long time facing attack from a much bigger enemy. But I do not believe u will win the war without external aid. After all, I am totally not qualified to argue on this topic so I call for opinions from other S'poreans on the fundamental strategy of S'pore.
--> agree . Being a combat active NSmen who just returned from reservist in Thailand, I guess that I am the most qualified among the lot to state a stand. Due to its small population, S'pore has invested in high tech defense equipments to offset the manpower requirements. So we do have impressive howitzer, submarines etc but ultimately whether we survive depends on the people. Our full time NS battalion are too small to pose any serious threat and S'pore relies more on NSmen to really win the battle if any but seriously, in this generation, how many of the NSmen has really been in the face of war shooting live bullets at the enemy. Nobody really knows whether the NSmen will run away in the midst of danger or not ... . S'pore has not really been put to the test at all. Even if we stand united as one, external aid is essential if we are going win the war. S'pore might win a short battle but we really need help to win a long war and that is why S'pore so aggressively pursue defense ties with neighboring countries , build god diplomatic ties etc.
Jeff (from Brunei)
Hi,
What started as a simple venting of feelings relating to the terrorist attack has degenerated into perceived sniping at certain countries. Sensitivities are being offended here, so let's try to keep it apolitical.
This terrorist attack carries a sobering message not only to the US but also to the rest of the world. If the US is vulnerable, then which other nation can claim to be truly secure? With the sinister modus operandi of terrorists, it is unlikely that every terrorist strike can be pre-empted. Perhaps the most positive thing which can come out of this tragedy is the strengthened resolve of all nations to combat terrorism, not just with more violence but also through means of peaceful resolution.
Hello all,
on the issue of media reports brought up by PK ... being stuck in Brunei with nothing on the TV to watch except CNN, BBC and Chinese channel. I cannot help but agree with what PK said.
In the case of CNN, the entire channel is devoted to reporting on the America incident 24 hrs nonstop and it seems as if nothing else is happening in the world or rather , they perceive everything else to be unimportant other than themselves. BBC is not much better being an ally of US . Both tends to sensationalize the incident ...
Due to the excessive reporting on the incident, I decided to tune in to the Chinese channel news report which of course only covered 10 min of the terrorist attack.
For myself , I am more concerned with the aftermath and clearly the US will retaliate, no doubt about it , but how they retaliate might shape the future of things to come ...
Jeff :-)
wow looks like I stirred up a bit of a hornets nest there...unfortunately I can not afford to read all the mails as I am now on a very tight budget and I have to pay to use the internet :(..Wang Yi I apologies for that rather harsh email I sent I was just a little upset and angry at the timing of your words rather than the content...none knows the full story as that is dictated to us by those few people who own the worlds media all we can t0o do to combat is to visit alternative websites and talk to as many people as possible from either side of the equation...sometimes it is luckily for me that I come from NZ because we are not seen to be overly one side or another ever since we told America there nuclear warships were not allowed in our territorial waters...I just got back to Prague from a few weeks of traveling which is why I haven't been in touch with anyone...should be back in kiwi land in a couple of weeks or so after a stop in Singapore to pick up my bike and see you lot hopefully.
The recent debate has been very energetic. It's nice to see people who have passionate views and are not afraid to fight to defend their stand. Life is more interesting in this way, isn't it? Would like to add my two cents' worth.
The United States has been less than perfect, but I am glad that the world's sole remaining superpower is the US and not some other country. I would not give names, but history has shown us that certain other countries have been more than capable of harboring imperialistic plans.
On the issue of right and wrong, it is not so much who is right and who is wrong .... whatever you do, chances are there will be someone who will disagree with you. It is not surprising that someone disagrees with the US foreign policy and found it appropriate to seek revenge in less than honorable ways. As Pheng Khoon has mentioned, the US can avoid all of this trouble by simply adopting an inward-looking policy and refuse to do anything on the world stage, but would that make a better world for us?
Copyright
2000-2007 Wang Yi