4 ms·

> "appease the CCP and give in to its demands." If countries giving into US demands is not something bad, then giving into "CCP demands" is not bad either. ..

> "appease the CCP and give in to its demands." If countries giving into US demands is not something bad, then giving into "CCP demands" is not bad either. ... The doublespeak and 'everyone except us is evil" mentality in Anglosphere is amazing.

gbear605 4y ago
The US is not the country actively committing genocide. It’s absolutely not a perfect country, but there’s no competition on which is more evil.
- unity1001 4y ago
  > The US is not the country actively committing genocide The country that claims that there is a genocide in Xinjiang is the country that lied for EIGHT years about nonexistent Iraqi WMDs. And its the US. Every. Single. Muslim majority country backed China at the UN after sending representatives to Xinjiang. They said that there is no such thing as a 'genocide' there. Its the US State Dept. word versus every single muslim majority country and their parliamentarians. ... Today its easy to understand why people bought into the Iraqi WMDs lie back then: Because it makes them feel good, righteous, and the 'right side'.
  - gbear605 4y ago
    Yeah, no. The difference between the WMDs and Xinjiang is that for one we only had the State Department’s word for it, and there was no evidence, while for the other there are numerous independent groups that have provided evidence, there are interviews with many of the people involved, and many people outside of China have had their relatives lose contact with them because of it. There are so many independent sources that it’s silly to compare it to something like Iraq. As for the other Muslim-majority countries, I can’t find any news backing your statement, but that might be my own lack of Google-fu or perhaps an international underreporting by the media, so I’ll take your word for it. But still, that’s not evidence. All of those countries have little to gain from speaking out at the UN (it won’t actually directly help anyone), and they don’t necessarily feel much inter-Islam brotherhood since the genocide in Xinjiang is against a specific group of Muslims, not against Muslims in general. (Almost?) all of those countries on the other hand are receiving aid from China, which presumably is conditional on saying that there’s no genocide in Xinjiang. Edit: nevermind, my Google-fu was weak. I found this article. Note that you’re actually simply wrong, since Qatar didn’t back China, rather abstaining. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/05/04/why-do-some-muslim-majority-countries-support-chinas-crackdown-muslims/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/05/04/why-do-so... Just looking at Pakistan, for example: Pakistan has been given tens of billions of dollars by China and is owed billions more, China is a major trading of Pakistan, and China is investing in major infrastructure development there. I don’t think anything could get Pakistan to not support China in the UN.
    - unity1001 4y ago
      > Yeah, no. The difference between the WMDs and Xinjiang is that for one we only had the State Department’s word for it No, we didn't. We had the word of every single insitution in the Angloamerican controlled part of the Western hemisphere. From NGOs to media. NYT was publishing dozens of articles talking about the WMDs, then one article 'questioning' whether we were "acting too fast", but inevitably concluding that the risks of 'not taking action' were far greater. It was a TOTAL media propaganda just like now. The French were even ridiculed for contesting the veracity of those claims. So much propaganda was done that they were able to smear an ENTIRE nation as 'surrender monkeys' and 'cowards' for persisting in questioning the claims. > Just looking at Pakistan, for example: Pakistan has been given tens of billions of dollars by China and is owed billions more, China is a major trading of Pakistan, and China is investing in major infrastructure development there. I don’t think anything could get Pakistan to not support China in the UN. This is a supremacist talk: "They are siding with the baddies for profit". Whereas on the other hand, the Western satellites that supported the US in the UN have absolutely no profit in backing the US. They just did it out of goodwill and morals. Nothing related to profit and foreign policy. Qatar and Turkey abstained in order to not upset the US. Abstaining itself is already opposing since there is no way that any country in the Middle East can turn a blind eye to an actual genocide of muslims if it took place. Which makes it even more significant that every other country opposed it. > since the genocide in Xinjiang is against a specific group of Muslims, not against Muslims in general There is no such thing. I don't know where you pulled that out from. Xinjiang muslims are sunnis and the majority of the muslim world is sunni.

gbear605 4y ago

The US is not the country actively committing genocide. It’s absolutely not a perfect country, but there’s no competition on which is more evil.

unity1001 4y ago
> The US is not the country actively committing genocide The country that claims that there is a genocide in Xinjiang is the country that lied for EIGHT years about nonexistent Iraqi WMDs. And its the US. Every. Single. Muslim majority country backed China at the UN after sending representatives to Xinjiang. They said that there is no such thing as a 'genocide' there. Its the US State Dept. word versus every single muslim majority country and their parliamentarians. ... Today its easy to understand why people bought into the Iraqi WMDs lie back then: Because it makes them feel good, righteous, and the 'right side'.
- gbear605 4y ago
  Yeah, no. The difference between the WMDs and Xinjiang is that for one we only had the State Department’s word for it, and there was no evidence, while for the other there are numerous independent groups that have provided evidence, there are interviews with many of the people involved, and many people outside of China have had their relatives lose contact with them because of it. There are so many independent sources that it’s silly to compare it to something like Iraq. As for the other Muslim-majority countries, I can’t find any news backing your statement, but that might be my own lack of Google-fu or perhaps an international underreporting by the media, so I’ll take your word for it. But still, that’s not evidence. All of those countries have little to gain from speaking out at the UN (it won’t actually directly help anyone), and they don’t necessarily feel much inter-Islam brotherhood since the genocide in Xinjiang is against a specific group of Muslims, not against Muslims in general. (Almost?) all of those countries on the other hand are receiving aid from China, which presumably is conditional on saying that there’s no genocide in Xinjiang. Edit: nevermind, my Google-fu was weak. I found this article. Note that you’re actually simply wrong, since Qatar didn’t back China, rather abstaining. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/05/04/why-do-some-muslim-majority-countries-support-chinas-crackdown-muslims/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/05/04/why-do-so... Just looking at Pakistan, for example: Pakistan has been given tens of billions of dollars by China and is owed billions more, China is a major trading of Pakistan, and China is investing in major infrastructure development there. I don’t think anything could get Pakistan to not support China in the UN.
  - unity1001 4y ago
    > Yeah, no. The difference between the WMDs and Xinjiang is that for one we only had the State Department’s word for it No, we didn't. We had the word of every single insitution in the Angloamerican controlled part of the Western hemisphere. From NGOs to media. NYT was publishing dozens of articles talking about the WMDs, then one article 'questioning' whether we were "acting too fast", but inevitably concluding that the risks of 'not taking action' were far greater. It was a TOTAL media propaganda just like now. The French were even ridiculed for contesting the veracity of those claims. So much propaganda was done that they were able to smear an ENTIRE nation as 'surrender monkeys' and 'cowards' for persisting in questioning the claims. > Just looking at Pakistan, for example: Pakistan has been given tens of billions of dollars by China and is owed billions more, China is a major trading of Pakistan, and China is investing in major infrastructure development there. I don’t think anything could get Pakistan to not support China in the UN. This is a supremacist talk: "They are siding with the baddies for profit". Whereas on the other hand, the Western satellites that supported the US in the UN have absolutely no profit in backing the US. They just did it out of goodwill and morals. Nothing related to profit and foreign policy. Qatar and Turkey abstained in order to not upset the US. Abstaining itself is already opposing since there is no way that any country in the Middle East can turn a blind eye to an actual genocide of muslims if it took place. Which makes it even more significant that every other country opposed it. > since the genocide in Xinjiang is against a specific group of Muslims, not against Muslims in general There is no such thing. I don't know where you pulled that out from. Xinjiang muslims are sunnis and the majority of the muslim world is sunni.