China opposes Israel's settlements construction in occupied Palestinian territory

[cross1993]

Not just oil.
We also need the labor market in the Middle East, for example, Dubai.
also need a large cargo distribution, for example, Jerusalem.
also need to smooth the Suez Canal, we can sell the goods in Europe.
also need to smooth the Hormuz Strait, we can buy oil in the Persian Gulf.
...

 

[below_freezing]

Hmmm general relativity is pretty important, and quantum mechanics wasn't developed by one man only, there were many Jewish scientists that were involved in the development. Off the top of my head, I think Schrodinger was a Jew and Max Born was also a Jew.

There maybe others but anyways you cannot ignore the very significant Jewish contribution to Physics. It sort of bears out the notion of very high IQ being paramount in the study of extremely complex fields like Physics. These Jewish scientists had two things, genetics and access to first rate education institutions in the US and Germany. I believe if China develops world class research environment there is plenty of raw talent in the Chinese people that can be honed there to do the great things that need doing. I mean look at the Nobel prizes in science that came out of the just handful of Chinese (relatively speaking) that were able to study in first rate western institutions.

The nobel prize is a Jewish prize and a flawed measure of scientific strength. 22% of Nobel prize winners are Jewish but consist of 0.02% of the population. If you believe that 99.8% of humanity is responsible for only 78% of its progress, I have nothing to say.

Ashkenazi Jews are the disproportionally smart ones. They have an average IQ of 106 and are 40% of the Israeli population. The other components are 40% Sephardic Jews with average IQ of 91 and 20% Arab with average IQ of 86. David and Lynn in their 2006 paper argue for the persecution theory as a sort of evolutionary pressure for Ashkenazi Jews to become more intelligent. In fact, the Holocaust may be an important factor contributing to Jewish prominence in science after WW2, as the lowest IQ Jews were eliminated from gene pool, leaving only the high IQ Jews who recognized danger early, or used their high IQs to survive the German occupation. It can be said that Jews should thank Germany for improving their gene pool through the application of evolutionary pressures.

Sephardic Jews have a lower average IQ due to their lack of persecution. Asian and African Jews were not excluded from their communities, had more contact with locals, had less evolutionary pressures, more gene mixing, and therefore became closer to the world average.

Ashkenazi intelligence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please do not drag racism into this. We should have a scientific discussion on the merits of the Nobel Prize and whether it is biased, and if not, what is the cause of Jewish IQ.

 

[oceanx]

Well, I am not sure Rabin is wrong since it is still too short for history to make judgement. However, the fact that Israel's later hardcore leaders continue pushing for settlement buildings really makes negotiation nearly impossible.

No matter what happened in the mid-east wars between the two sides, when you look for peace, you have to go back to the UN resolutions for the two state solutions. To be honest, Jerusalem was not totally given to Israel by the UN and was not under Israel control for majority of the past two thousand years.

So historical justification only by old testament can NOT really convince people outside Christianity, which I refer to Jews, protestant, catholics and orthodox all together. To be honest, I am not even sure that can convince those within the total Christianity. Muslims can take out their Quran as well for similar justification. Then there will be no end.

Of course, Israel is militarily powerful and has a strong backer which is US. By such military power, Israel can indeed hold on Jerusalem. However, history shows that even strongest empire will fall and there will be NO exception. If Israel is not willing to make painful concessions now to go back to UN resolution, I am afraid that one day you will regret. The biggest problem for Israel is that it is just too small and you can NOT lose any war since all countries around you are hostile towards you.

BTW, will the fighting will stays the same for each generation of Israelis? Will the support from US always be there? And you have to assume US to stay powerful all the time and history has shown that it is impossible.

So for the long run, some wise leaders need make such decision.

It's hard to believe this generally sensible post is from the same dude who just recommended Americans to cover up war crimes to "win" (in the other thread) ...

Well maybe I got a little "emotional" myself indeed - in response to your Gaza rocket outburst there. Still, your out-of-context rant was inexcusable.

But it's good for you to come around to the mainstream on this one, at least. It's all about defending the "defensible" ... Settlements are not part of the "defensible" so there is no need to defend them. Actually it's counter-productive to defend them.

You can always speak up on "divestment" if you wish to defend "your friends" from being singled out "unfairly".

Now just to help you along, only minor clarifications (based on my knowledge): There are essentially no sizable Christian Zionists among the Catholics and the Orthodox. Many Catholics are not even pre-millennial ... anyways, there is no need to get overly technical here.

And Armenian Orthodox may support Israel's sovereignty over Jerusalem for different reasons ... on that I am not sure myself. Someone would have to educate me.

And definitely not the Copts - to my knowledge.

 

[iPakMan]

It's hard to believe this generally sensible post is from the same dude who just recommended Americans to cover up war crimes to "win" (in the other thread) ...

Well maybe I got a little "emotional" myself indeed - in response to your Gaza rocket outburst there. Still, your out-of-context rant was inexcusable.

But it's good for you to come around to the mainstream on this one, at least. It's all about defending the "defensible" ... Settlements are not part of the "defensible" so there is no need to defend them. Actually it's counter-productive to defend them.

You can always speak up on "divestment" if you wish to defend "your friends" from being singled out "unfairly".

Now just to help you along, only minor clarifications (based on my knowledge): There are essentially no sizable Christian Zionists among the Catholics and the Orthodox. Many Catholics are not even pre-millennial ... anyways, there is no need to get overly technical here.

And Armenian Orthodox may support Israel's sovereignty over Jerusalem for different reasons ... on that I am not sure myself. Someone would have to educate me.

And definitely not the Copts - to my knowledge.

I`d say the most extreme Christian Zionists would be the Evangelists, but regardless even if the US could possibly, eventually, whatever Fall from Super Power status, She`d still be a Great power. Israel will hold on to every single Land no matter if we have a big brother to back us or not, Jericho 3 Missiles are the answer to anyone willing to take something from us by force. This isn`t me being cocky, its a reality. Jerusalem will only be divided if the majority of the Knesset agrees to it and the Majority of the Population, Which will not happen. I know a lot of people generally know about Jerusalem and Judaism but what you might not know that in the deepest Prayers of Jews before the UN Partition was "Next year in Jerusalem". Jerusalem is to Judaism like Mecca is to Islam, dividing it is unthinkable and many if not most of us would give our limited amount of lives before we give up Jerusalem ever again.

 

[below_freezing]

Don't put too much hope in nuclear weapons especially ones that are fission only and don't have the tonnage to wipe an enemy out. Israel's entire nuclear arsenal is 1.5-4 Megatons... or about 1 US Trident missile. Talking about nukes is crazy.

 

[iPakMan]

Don't put too much hope in nuclear weapons especially ones that are fission only and don't have the tonnage to wipe an enemy out. Israel's entire nuclear arsenal is 1.5-4 Megatons... or about 1 US Trident missile. Talking about nukes is crazy.

Talking about wiping Israel from the world is Crazy, and seeing as you are not quite knowledgeable with Regards to Israeli Nukes, let me Paraphrase
an American Official "What the US and Soviets can do, So can the Israelis" This was during the Cold War, If you believe Israel hasn`t kept up to date with the most devastating ways to deliver Nuclear Weapons, then you are quite naive.

"Israel nuclear might is commonly estimated as moving between 200 to 400 warheads, equivalent to almost four thousand Hiroshima-type bombs."

 

[below_freezing]

Talking about wiping Israel from the world is Crazy, and seeing as you are not quite knowledgeable with Regards to Israeli Nukes, let me Paraphrase
an American Official "What the US and Soviets can do, So can the Israelis" This was during the Cold War, If you believe Israel hasn`t kept up to date with the most devastating ways to deliver Nuclear Weapons, then you are quite naive.

delivery, maybe. the yield of Israeli weapons is the problem. Israel still is using fission devices while the big 5 have already moved on long time ago to fusion devices. That's why Israel's individual warheads are measured in tens of kilotons instead of hundreds of kilotons (USA, France, Britain) or megatons (Russia, China).

I also agree that the arabs who call for Israel's elimination are crazy but they aren't going to do anything about it.

 

[iPakMan]

Again when the Nuclear Might can only be estimated, and no Country in the world Knows exactly what Israel`s Nuclear Capabilities exactly are, how are you so sure, so knowledgeable with regards to this? It is quite ludicrous no other country in the world is as threatened as Israel, and you think` we`d limit ourselves to anything but the very Worst ways of Mass Destruction known to man, Chinese or Russian?

"Israel nuclear might is commonly estimated as moving between 200 to 400 warheads, equivalent to almost four thousand Hiroshima-type bombs."

Four Thousand Hiroshima-type Bombs, and this is only an estimate, no one other than Israel herself knows exactly the Nuclear Capabilities of Israel.

 

[below_freezing]

Again when the Nuclear Might can only be estimated, and no Country in the world Knows exactly what Israel`s Nuclear Capabilities exactly are, how are you so sure, so knowledgeable with regards to this? It is quite ludicrous no other country in the world is as threatened as Israel, and you think` we`d limit ourselves to anything but the very Worst ways of Mass Destruction known to man, Chinese or Russian?

"Israel nuclear might is commonly estimated as moving between 200 to 400 warheads, equivalent to almost four thousand Hiroshima-type bombs."

Four Thousand Hiroshima-type Bombs, and this is only an estimate, no one other than Israel herself knows exactly the Nuclear Capabilities of Israel.

4000 hiroshima bombs is about 4 megatons, the estimates are right. USA's largest bomb is 15 megatons. It's not that Israel doesn't want to make better bombs, it's a technological limit. No nation will ever sell the design of a hydrogen bomb to others and making hydrogen bombs is a very complicated task requiring high precision machine tools, many facilities working together, and supercomputers. Going by current evidence, Israel's weapons seem to be plutonium based boosted fission weapons with yields in the high tens of kilotons.

 

[500]

Global economic integration, countries does not exist colonial with each other.
All countries are partners. Economy is not a zero-sum game. China is only a customer, not the colonists.

For example: If China do not buy oil, can they consume so much oil?

What Arab countries produce beside oil? - Nothing. Without oil Arabs would be like Africa. No one cared when Hutu massacred million Tutsi and vice versa. But when Israel builds some houses in deserted land all the world stands up.

 

[below_freezing]

What Arab countries produce beside oil? - Nothing. Without oil Arabs would be like Africa. No one cared when Hutu massacred million Tutsi and vice versa.

The arabs would probably be under Turkish or Iranian management. Funny thing about Arabs is they prefer whole countries being slaves of other Muslims but are angry at Israel taking a tiny percentage of their land.

 

[iPakMan]

4000 hiroshima bombs is about 4 megatons, the estimates are right. USA's largest bomb is 15 megatons. It's not that Israel doesn't want to make better bombs, it's a technological limit. No nation will ever sell the design of a hydrogen bomb to others and making hydrogen bombs is a very complicated task requiring high precision machine tools, many facilities working together, and supercomputers. Going by current evidence, Israel's weapons seem to be plutonium based boosted fission weapons with yields in the high tens of kilotons.

So, if the estimates are correct, which i doubt because Nuclear Weapon Capabilities of Israel is one of the most guarded secrets in the world, 4000 Hiroshima Bombs won`t be enough to destroy, say, arab civilization(If you can call it a civilization)? Or for that matter, destroy half of the human civilization? Whether from direct impact or a Nuclear Winter?

 

[marshall]

That is an interesting perspective.
Powerful countries in their respective regions will always be hated.

Look at the attitude of the USA+Japan towards China in the 1970's (relatively friendly)... and compare that with today. Sure, they are not "hostile" at the moment, but they are definitely very worried.

I think this is a generalization. If there is a history of regionally powerful countries treating their smaller weaker neighbors poorly, then obviously this will result in fear and loathing. It is this history of domineering behavior towards weak countries that is the root of any such fear and directly related to the sphere of influence of a powerful country. Outside their spheres of influence things are not so clear. The United States is a hegemonic power because it deems its sphere of influence as the whole world and acts accordingly. In the case of India, it's sphere of influence is the sub-continent and acts accordingly. In the case of China, it is more complicated because it is viewed as a strategic competitor by the USA so any attempts to enlarge its own regional sphere of influence is seen as an attempt to usurp America's own sphere of influence. This is the crux of the problem since the American sphere of influence...let's call it empire, means every step forward by China is a step backwards for the United States. It doesn't matter whether China does this militarily, economically or in genuine friendship. The end result is a relative decline of American power and that is a no-no for an empire.

So, does this mean powerful countries will always be hated? Absolutely not. It is completely dependent on the degree to which the powerful treat or mistreat those in their sphere of influence.

 

[prototype]

4000 hiroshima bombs is about 4 megatons, the estimates are right. USA's largest bomb is 15 megatons. It's not that Israel doesn't want to make better bombs, it's a technological limit. No nation will ever sell the design of a hydrogen bomb to others and making hydrogen bombs is a very complicated task requiring high precision machine tools, many facilities working together, and supercomputers. Going by current evidence, Israel's weapons seem to be plutonium based boosted fission weapons with yields in the high tens of kilotons.

Gross misconception's,first of all no one can presume a nation's nuclear stockpile capability,it is one of the most secretive programme of any respective country,those evidences which u r talking about r some NGO report's,some even decades old,a nation like Isreal does not lack technological advantage just like u think and a super computer is no more considered as the 8th wonder of the world.

P.S-U never need megawatt powerful nukes to set back any particular nation,the recent military approach is towards small little boys and fat man's,and the destruction brought to any nation on the earth even with this low yield is irreparable.

 

[ephone]

It seems that you are very good at twisting my words.

Who the hell said "recommended Americans to cover up war crimes to "win" "???

I said that they cannot win because human rights issues will prevent them from carrying on brutal retaliation with more bombardment and killings. The pressure from US and various western watchdogs will have a big cry if that happens. War is brutal and if you leave the brutal part out, you cannot win. Even with brutal destruction, it is not always mean victory. However, without that, you will for sure not get it.

Remember how Germany Surrendered??? The whole Berlin was bombed to rubbles and nowadays such brutal destruction will be highly unlikely without news day in and day out and far cry of human right violations.

How did Japanese Surrender? They did not even do that after the Tokyo is so heavily bombed and Iwo Jima was all wiped out. Well, after two nuclear bombs was dropped, they finally surrendered. That happened about 66 years ago, not that long actually. How was real war ended? That is the brutal way.

Hamas really care less and they just do not have the technology and weapons. Israel do have the technology and weapons but they have to refrain from using them. I bet Hamas, Talibans and Bin Laden would like (I do think they have called for that already) to liberate their Muslim Brothers from China's control to set up a pure Muslim country in China. Well, the problem is that we China know how to deal with them and deal with them quickly and effectively. We will butchered any terrorists that harm our Chinese.

Same thing applies for US. US has the best weapon systems and but they cannot use the world war II ways on those Talibans because this is not a world war but its war on terror.

Please do not cry brutal and say we China won't do that. Do you know how general Wang Zhen dealt with those uighur terrorists. If any PLA soldier got killed by a terrorist from a village, he would set up canon to ask the village to give the suspects out. If they did not, PLA soldiers would go in and kill directly whoever may be the suspects. If there was any defense, the canon would fire to wipe out the whole village. During the time of crisis, PLA soldiers were asked to shoot any Uighur groups with more than four or five walking together. Even Uighur terrorists who planned terrorists activities but was captured without being able to do (attempted terrorists) it was shoot dead right away. That is brutal but quite effective. You know what Uighur called him: 王胡子。 They are terrified of him and use his name to calm down crying babies. That is why even Chairman Mao had to ask Xi ZhongXun (dad of the next Chinese president: Xi Jinping) to tell General Wang to tone down.

BTW, do you know why there are very few Hui Muslim in Shaanxi and fewer Mongolians in North Xinjiang??? In the 18th and earlier 19th century, there are a lot of Hui Muslim in Shaanxi and Uighurs were only in south Xinjiang and North Xinjiang was the power base of the Mongolians. .

The reason is very simple. Due to their rebellions and killing of so many Han Chinese, Qing's emperor QianLong and later Empress CiXi asked their Generals to crashed them and wiped them out. Well, they were indeed wiped out quite effectively. Otherwise, Uighurs would not be able to move to North XinJiang later

Nobody asked US to cover anything. My comments just evaluate the situation and said that they would fail due to their limitations. And that is it.

It's hard to believe this generally sensible post is from the same dude who just recommended Americans to cover up war crimes to "win" (in the other thread) ...

Well maybe I got a little "emotional" myself indeed - in response to your Gaza rocket outburst there. Still, your out-of-context rant was inexcusable.

But it's good for you to come around to the mainstream on this one, at least. It's all about defending the "defensible" ... Settlements are not part of the "defensible" so there is no need to defend them. Actually it's counter-productive to defend them.

You can always speak up on "divestment" if you wish to defend "your friends" from being singled out "unfairly".

Now just to help you along, only minor clarifications (based on my knowledge): There are essentially no sizable Christian Zionists among the Catholics and the Orthodox. Many Catholics are not even pre-millennial ... anyways, there is no need to get overly technical here.

And Armenian Orthodox may support Israel's sovereignty over Jerusalem for different reasons ... on that I am not sure myself. Someone would have to educate me.

And definitely not the Copts - to my knowledge.