U.S. offers help to South East Asia, most to Vietnam, to patrol seas

[eazzy]

It cost China a few bullets and it cost you a few lives.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson_South_Reef_Skirmish

 

[NiceGuy]

It cost China a few bullets and it cost you a few lives.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson_South_Reef_Skirmish

Same thing happen to u guys

November 7, 1990, I found the Southern Command Nansha reefs lost radio contact.After the situation was reported to the South China Sea Fleet deployed immediately went to see the ship. Under the notification, the reef is a unit of Marines stationed in the preparation of 12 people, then should be 11 people (one reason temporarily off the reef). Inspectors found that the bodies of six soldiers on the reef, and another five people missing. Missing persons including reef Chang allegiance, vice reef long and correspondents. In addition to the personnel on the reef, the reef warrior Xu Huiping Yong Department reef due to the treatment of burns and survived. Inspectors found multiple bullet holes in the room, indicating where the fighting occurred. Then they picked up and from the underwater reef a few rifles, these guns are all our military garrison personnel standard rifle.

This event was caused no small vibration in the army, immediately set up by the South China Sea Fleet of the senior leadership responsible for the investigation team, in-depth and comprehensive investigation, and make rehabilitation work. Findings are confidential at the time, unable to understand the outside.

This strange incident, even if insiders are also controversial. Is encountered enemy special forces raid, fighting or other emergency occurs, the truth has not yet been fully understood.This incident, I analyzed are the following possibilities:

1, most likely by the army special forces is. Vietnamese troops in 1988, "3.14" Red Reef of Nansha sea battle at a disadvantage, must look for an opportunity to retaliate. But then I Nansha garrison high vigilance and patrolling troops, combat readiness, they are hard to find opportunities. I combined the naval prisoners of war captured in Zhanjiang Nansha trial, our government has not yet handed over to Vietnam. Since 1990, our military posture in Nansha is clear, I observe activity patterns reef and the ship's officers that they have already mastered their "revenge about" conditions ripe. According to common sense traces of science, this action does not leave any suspicious items, indicating that other means quite clever. Does not exclude the other is the master shooting, fighting, diving techniques, and even combat may wear body armor. If this action as a planned and premeditated military action, should be considered very successful. But not arbitrary conclusion is that after the successful implementation of this action the enemy, meritorious officers must reward, JiaGuanJinJue, will follow along with the media reports, trumpeted the so-called "heroic deeds", but did not. Things over the past 20 years, information and networks so advanced, Vietnam had not been seen in any public media reported. They do a job well done is confidential?
Who killed 11 Chinese troops in Gaven Reefs in 1990 ?

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

So you first tried to make a big deal out of the US government shutdown because of FPTP, now when presented with irrefutable evidences that PR is no less vulnerable, you say that government shutdowns are actually a good thing.

Bottom line is that despite your attempt to lecture me on basic political science, it looks like it is YOU who did not do your homework, as evident by the fact that you continue to dodge my question on what is the threshold for representation under PR. I doubt that you even knew that such a threshold existed in the first place. The reality is that all political systems have flaws and it is the locations and degrees of those flaws that determine a particular system's preferences by a people.

One, I'm not really saying that FPTP caused the Shutdown, anyone knows it was caused by the Republican or you can argue that FPTP is the reason why the Republican dominated Congress can cause a Shutdown. It is good, it makes sure that no Party will ever be dominant. That's why you often hear of Coalition Government in other democracy. It keeps animal like the Republican party at bay.

Didn't I just said that

More parties means more ideas, more parties means the people will have greater access to the political system & will have more stake in them, more parties means more responsive government.

Again with the Threshold. For example Mine has 9 parties & 11 committee, but smaller parties are not represented in the legislature, Germany has 6 parties & more represented in state parliament, Italy has 6 parties and more than two dozen smaller parties represented. Each country sets its own Threshold on their government. Like the Shutdown its not the problem of the system, but the problem of the political process.

Example: When you go fishing do you blame your tackle because your line get curled up?

I'm not making a big deal. You're the first one that says that multiple parties is prone to paralysis, while I pointed out that your Archaic System is also prone to paralysis & I only pointed it one time mind you & nowhere in my comments that I ever make a big deal about it. I already given you all that I possibly can explain. Anymore then I will be teaching a Donkey to do my Taxes.

To compare PR with thing like FPTP let's use an example:

The FPTP is the Revolver & the PR is the Semi

One is an outdated Antic & The other a High tech killing machine. One is clearly superior than the other.

 

[gambit]

One, I'm not really saying that FPTP caused the Shutdown, anyone knows it was caused by the Republican or you can argue that FPTP is the reason why the Republican dominated Congress can cause a Shutdown. It is good, it makes sure that no Party will ever be dominant. That's why you often hear of Coalition Government in other democracy. It keeps animal like the Republican party at bay.

Here is what you said...

Remember the Government Shutdown in your country? Doesn't took a multiple parties to paralyze the government.

Do not try to weasel out of your own argument. Yes, you pretty much said FPTP was the cause of the government shutdown. It does not matter the label of the parties involved. If it was not 'Republican' it could have been 'Libertarian' or 'Greens'. It looks like you really do not know what the hell you are talking about. Not even Political Science 101.

Again with the Threshold. For example Mine has 9 parties & 11 committee, but smaller parties are not represented in the legislature, Germany has 6 parties & more represented in state parliament, Italy has 6 parties and more than two dozen smaller parties represented. Each country sets its own Threshold on their government. Like the Shutdown its not the problem of the system, but the problem of the political process.

Did I not told you that you would be treading on dangerous grounds? You are busted. Now based on your own argument, PR is not as friendly to minority views as you tried to portrayed it out to be. Why 6 in one country but 9 in another? How many times have Italy dissolved its government since the end of WW II? Dissolution is far worse than a temporary shutdown. How about Germany and parliament dissolution? How about the Czech? Thailand? Greece? Care for more...???

I'm not making a big deal. You're the first one that says that multiple parties is prone to paralysis, while I pointed out that your Archaic System is also prone to paralysis & I only pointed it one time mind you & nowhere in my comments that I ever make a big deal about it.

Wrong...You flat out said that PR does not paralyze/shutdown a government and I proved you wrong. See your own post as I quoted you above. You did not say FPTP 'also prone to paralysis'. You simply declared -- wrongly -- that PR could not produce a paralyzed government. You made a big deal out of the US government shutdown to try to show you have the superior argument. You failed via ignorance.

I already given you all that I possibly can explain.

And it is clear by your own absurd declaration that 'Doesn't took a multiple parties to paralyze the government.' we can see that you do not know much about Political Science to explain much.

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

Here is what you said...


Do not try to weasel out of your own argument. Yes, you pretty much said FPTP was the cause of the government shutdown. It does not matter the label of the parties involved. If it was not 'Republican' it could have been 'Libertarian' or 'Greens'. It looks like you really do not know what the hell you are talking about. Not even Political Science 101.


Did I not told you that you would be treading on dangerous grounds? You are busted. Now based on your own argument, PR is not as friendly to minority views as you tried to portrayed it out to be. Why 6 in one country but 9 in another? How many times have Italy dissolved its government since the end of WW II? Dissolution is far worse than a temporary shutdown. How about Germany and parliament dissolution? How about the Czech? Thailand? Greece? Care for more...???


Wrong...You flat out said that PR does not paralyze/shutdown a government and I proved you wrong. See your own post as I quoted you above. You did not say FPTP 'also prone to paralysis'. You simply declared -- wrongly -- that PR could not produce a paralyzed government. You made a big deal out of the US government shutdown to try to show you have the superior argument. You failed via ignorance.


And it is clear by your own absurd declaration that 'Doesn't took a multiple parties to paralyze the government.' we can see that you do not know much about Political Science to explain much.

Yes I flatly said that FPTP caused the Shutdown, but mostly as quip & I did not mean it in that way.

I mean, this thing pretty much ooze Sarcasm.

Remember the Government Shutdown in your country? Doesn't took a multiple parties to paralyze the government.

I did not blame the system per se. I might think its inferior, but a Shutdown is a symptom of political discourse rather than a disease. The Libertarian & the Greens has no seat in the Congress. Because of the System they're forced to endure. Try a better analogy.

So your answer is not let minority voices given a chance for a seat. Bravo. Real classy. Don't you even READ they still get represented that's more than what your country did.

LOL I never said Shutdown is bad. Not to me anyway & worse is a matter of perspective because I heard shuffling & dissolution so often in my country & abroad I don't associate it with anything negative. The public distrust toward its government on the other hand is not. The Italian is also notorious because of its politics. You often hear news about Corruptions, Bribery, Prostitution & Some of them included the Mafia! If you're an Italian would you want to trust your future to those guys? Anyway, most country have its own reason for dissolving its parliament. Most of the time its not directly caused by the system. News about Italian dissolving its parliament more often than Berlusconi mistress might come as a surprise to you, but to other people its just a healthy political process. Or to some people a failure to serve the public need. If you don't like the government you can ask your reps on the parliament to put a no confidence vote & a new one will takes it place. Like what happens in Ukraine only the President survived the vote.

FPTP is a tyranny of the Majority & that is why I'm against it. if you can't take my word for it take the word of John Stuart:
Representative Government, by John Stuart Mill : chapter7
(took me a while to find it)

 

[gambit]

Yes I flatly said that FPTP caused the Shutdown, but mostly as quip & I did not mean it in that way.

I mean, this thing pretty much ooze Sarcasm.

Yeah...Sure...Sarcasm...

I did not blame the system per se. I might think its inferior, but a Shutdown is a symptom of political discourse rather than a disease. The Libertarian & the Greens has no seat in the Congress. Because of the System they're forced to endure. Try a better analogy.

So your answer is not let minority voices given a chance for a seat. Bravo. Real classy. Don't you even READ they still get represented that's more than what your country did.

This is why at least I do not take your arguments seriously...You falsely think that just because there are only 'Democrat' and 'Republican' parties in the US government, that means all Democrats and Republicans are the same inside each.

Wrong...

There are gradations of Democrat-ness inside the Democratic Party just as much as there are Republican-ness inside the Republican Party. There are extreme liberals, moderates, and conservative Democrats, aka 'blue dogs' Democrats. For the Republicans, their extremists are the Tea Partiers and the moderates are represented by the likes of John McCain and Marco Rubio.

The thing that you either do not know or missed about FPTP system is that it contains minority view disagreements inside the tents of the two main opposition parties and the burden of reconciliation and deal makings falls upon the parties, not the legislative process, aka 'the government'. Under a multi-party legislative process, an alliance of minority views from Greens, Libertarians, Environmentals, Sex Drugs and Rock-n-Roll, Constitutionals, and whoever else can cause legislative gridlocks and if the discontent is serious enough -- dissolution of government/parliament. An alliance of dissatisfied minority parties is the single greatest threat to legislative stability in every PR system of governance, and it occurs more often than you think. That is why there are different percentage thresholds for the countries that chose the PR method. Higher thresholds reduces the amount of parties in the government and reduces, not completely eliminate, the odds of extreme discontent that could result in dissolution of government. The opposite for lower thresholds.

LOL I never said Shutdown is bad.

But you got no problems using it -- falsely to boot -- to try to make PR the better choice.