• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Cuban minister says Obama "imperial, arrogant"

j-mac said:
Hmmm....Tell me why the Chinese PM hid from Obama at Copenhagen then?
Click to expand...

It is not in China's best interest to support the Copenhagen summit as it would hinder their uncontrolled economic expansion. China is the country dumping raw sewage into it's own water ways. It is the country where the homes of citizens are demolished to make way for polluting factories. It, along with India is a country where the government only looks towards the destruction of it's own local environment when it can no longer avoid the situation. Case and point the Cancer Village. It is not a matter of the environment for China but of economics and politics. Whenever you're ready to debate this topic honestly. Get back at me. Until then.
 
Hatuey said:
It is not in China's best interest to support the Copenhagen summit as it would hinder their uncontrolled economic expansion. China is the country dumping raw sewage into it's own water ways. It is the country where the homes of citizens are demolished to make way for polluting factories. It, along with India is a country where the government only looks towards the destruction of it's own local environment when it can no longer avoid the situation. Case and point the Cancer Village. It is not a matter of the environment for China but of economics and politics. Whenever you're ready to debate this topic honestly. Get back at me. Until then.
Click to expand...


It is my understanding that any sort of Cap n Trade type of supposed fix doesn't address this anyway, so then what is the real point of all this hype, and fear from GW fear mongers other than redistribution of nation wealth, and political power centralized in a world order?

See, face it, this is a giant lie, and you have bought it hook, line, and sinker.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Well, who said anything about him being our "spokesman"? See it is exactly that type of Allensky tactic that is known about now, and seedy. This condemnation from Cuba is important because Obama was supposed to be the great soother of souls across the world. he was going to normalize relations with Cuba, and the other despots around the world through little more than his mere presence.

There was great hopefulness within the left that Obama would indeed normalize with Castro, Chavez, and others that are nothing more than tin horn dictators. Now even they don't seem to buy his BS.

So let's see, China tells him in Copenhagen that the PM is at the airport, and the rest of the BASIC members are locked in a room dividing up the spoils of America behind his back, to the point that he races around the city looking for them, and then barges in the meeting, and people like Cuba are saying things like this about him?

You think that is a good job on his part or something?


j-mac
Click to expand...

More dishonesty projecting mostly strawman expectations of Obama unto the actual situation. Obama has on many occasions said he'd be willing to have talks with Chavez and Cuba. The problem is on the other side. Chavez can not on any kind of political mind frame normalize relations with the U.S. because he is seeking to create a socialist republic much like Fidel did in the early 60s.

According to some sociology and political science scholars for a regime to exist, it must keep a constant enemy. In Cuba and now Venezuela's case this enemy has to exist to justify the existence of the regime and for that government to keep control of its people. The actual nature of the enemy matters very little. What matters is that he exist so that his deviancy can be used to justify increments of power. Notice how Chavez, a leftist, is opposed to Obama. Why? Is Obama not a left winger? Why is it that Chavez, who has been an adamant opponent of right wing ideology now opposes somebody who by any standard is closer to his beliefs than Bush could ever be? It is because if he actually tried to ameliorate relations with the U.S., he'd no longer be able to justify his choke hold on power.
 
j-mac said:
It is my understanding that any sort of Cap n Trade type of supposed fix doesn't address this anyway, so then what is the real point of all this hype, and fear from GW fear mongers other than redistribution of nation wealth, and political power centralized in a world order
Click to expand...

What does this have to do with what I actually said? You asked why China is opposed to the Copenhagen summit. I provided you the response. It is not a matter of science but politics. They oppose it because it is not good for their business. What does that have to do with your beliefs about Cap'N'Trade? Nothing? Good to know.
 
Hatuey said:
More dishonesty projecting mostly strawman expectations of Obama unto the actual situation. Obama has on many occasions said he'd be willing to have talks with Chavez and Cuba. The problem is on the other side. Chavez can not on any kind of political mind frame normalize relations with the U.S. because he is seeking to create a socialist republic much like Fidel did in the early 60s.
Click to expand...


So is Obama....;)


According to some sociology and political science scholars for a regime to exist, it must keep a constant enemy. In Cuba and now Venezuela's case this enemy has to exist to justify the existence of the regime and for that government to keep control of its people. The actual nature of the enemy matters very little. What matters is that he exist so that his deviancy can be used to justify increments of power. Notice how Chavez, a leftist, is opposed to Obama. Why? Is Obama not a left winger? Why is it that Chavez, who has been an adamant opponent of right wing ideology now opposes somebody who by any standard is closer to his beliefs than Bush could ever be? It is because if he actually tried to ameliorate relations with the U.S., he'd no longer be able to justify his choke hold on power.
Click to expand...


But, I thought according to leftists in this country, that Chavez was the "democratically elected leader", now because it suits your purpose of defending Barry you are against him?


What does this have to do with what I actually said? You asked why China is opposed to the Copenhagen summit. I provided you the response. It is not a matter of science but politics. They oppose it because it is not good for their business. What does that have to do with your beliefs about Cap'N'Trade? Nothing? Good to know.
Click to expand...


Can't answer it eh....Noted.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
1)So is Obama....;)

2) But, I thought according to leftists in this country, that Chavez was the "democratically elected leader", now because it suits your purpose of defending Barry you are against him?

3) Can't answer it eh....Noted.
j-mac
Click to expand...

1) Nothing to actually reply? How enlightening. Aren't you in the military? Why don't you tell us how you reconcile its socialist nature with your opposition to socialism itself. See? I can bait. Only I do it with a few more threads of intellectual acuity then you do.

2) This is your second strawman. Here, I'll do you a favor. I'll find a few of my own posts on Chavez. You be the judge on whether I've ever supported him. Ready? Here we go.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/archi...ter-referring-john-edwards-19.html#post505741

Holding hands with Hugo Chavez doesn't need demonizing. She's holding hands with a self professed enemy of the U.S.A.. Doesn't get much worse then that IMO. She's a lady who wont get over the fact that her son signed up for the military. He accepted to take all the risks involved in that particular line of work. He died. I feel sorry for her and her son. However dying is a risk people who join the military take. She can't blame the president for a choice her son made. She might as well blame Congress for providing the funding for this war or the 3/4 Americans who supported Bush when this war started.
Click to expand...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/archi...-abu-dhabi-crown-prince-2.html#post1057658350

Chavez is sitting on oil so we can't really do much other then covertly try to under mind his government by funding student groups to demonstrate against him etc etc and hope if there is a revolution it'll be quick, painless and at least democratic so we can make good with the new leaders of that country.
Click to expand...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/archives/25816-chavez-loses-vote-5.html#post1057474513

http://www.debatepolitics.com/archives/25816-chavez-loses-vote-5.html#post1057474417

Have the Norwegian and Swedish governments suppressed opposition groups? What about attacking the free press by banning those news sources which do not agree with the governments point of view? What about attempting to give itself basically dictatorial powers like "president for life"? If they have then yes. Your country is a dictatorship. "Free elections" don't mean much if the guy in charge is attacking all those who oppose him. From news sources to political opposition. If they haven't then you haven't much to worry about. Nationalizing industries isn't all that important. Trying to give yourself president for life status is.
Click to expand...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/archi...venezuela-referendum-lead.html#post1057466420

Source?

Chavez has been getting stiff opposition from leftist student groups from what I hear. Student groups in Latin America are very important. They are ussually the ones who will raise a government or bring it down.
Click to expand...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/archives/19960-appeasement-talk-unsavory-regimes-4.html#post539772

This is not reasonable TOT. We have Hugo Chavez recruiting every threat we push away. He's creating a Latin version of the Soviet Block. They're growing stronger as we speak. Every single nation we push away is one more nation for his team. We want to make friends right now. Not isolate ourselves.
Click to expand...

Your strawman has been debunked.

3) Can't answer what? You asked me why China wasn't supporting the Copenhagen summit. I provided an answer. You threw out a red herring showing us what your beliefs are. I refused to take this opinion bait. Do you understand how debate works yet? I'll give you a run down. When you ask questions regarding politics, you should not expect to receive answers regarding science. You don't think that Cap'N'Trade is an effective way to stop global warming. I honestly could not care less. What I do care about is your misconception that China opposes the Copenhagen summit on scientific grounds.

See if you had an inch of intellectual honesty in this OP you wouldn't dream of trying your bait and switch/strawman game. You've made certain statements which are strawman a la 'some people say'. I honestly I couldn't care less what you, the left or whatever other magical enemy you can come up with, say. I've addressed 1) Why China opposes the Copenhagen summit 2) Why Hugo Chavez has a) criticized Obama and b) why he is opposition to the U.S. government. You so far have failed to substantiate anything you've said. You've replied with emoticons and one liners. Maybe you're not somebody who can actually debate past a few lines. I don't know. I don't care. What I do see though is that you have no concept of reality. You've posted the opinions of people who Obama simply isn't good business for: China and Venezuela.

The first of these countries has no reason to want to support the Copenhagen summit. This is because its own economic interests are at risk. The second has no reason to support Obama because it would jeopardize the political control it has on its population. It has never been a matter of what the science is or who Obama actually is but what the event represents for some countries and what political concessions represent for others.
 
Last edited:
Hatuey said:
Nothing to actually reply? How enlightening. Aren't you in the military?
Click to expand...


No, I was in the military for 6 years. I am out now, see if you were as smart as you think you are you would have done your homework and known that. :doh


Why don't you tell us how you reconcile its socialist nature with your opposition to socialism itself.
Click to expand...


I believe you tried this little derailing exercise in another thread, I answered it there.

See? I can bait. Only I do it with a few more threads of intellectual acuity then you do.
Click to expand...


Don't flatter yourself. You should read up on the rules more....

www.debatepolitics.com/forum-rules/28594-forum-rules.html


Can't answer what? You asked me why China wasn't supporting the Copenhagen summit. I provided an answer.
Click to expand...


No, read for comprehension. I asked you why it was that China had told Obama that the PM couldn't meet with him, because he was at the airport, when he was clearly in the secret meeting with the others....


You threw out a red herring showing us what your beliefs are.
Click to expand...


that is your opinion, however, you continue to respond.....


I refused to take this opinion bait.
Click to expand...

Yet here you are.


Do you understand how debate works yet?
Click to expand...


Why don't you knock off the childish tactic here, and get to actual respectable debate?


You don't think that Cap'N'Trade is an effective way to stop global warming. I honestly could not care less.
Click to expand...


then I guess I should expect to not see anymore of your self aggrandizing today? Thank God!


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Do you have something to say to me? or just continue to break the rules?


j-mac
Click to expand...

I'm just playing with you, j-mac. You are free to report my post.

Regardless, I stand with the person who said for you to stop posting this kind of stuff in breaking news.
 
aps said:
I'm just playing with you, j-mac. You are free to report my post.
Click to expand...


I know what I am free to do or not do.....I thought I would give you a chance to moderate your own posting, see I don't go a cryin' evey time my feelings are hurt.


Regardless, I stand with the person who said for you to stop posting this kind of stuff in breaking news.
Click to expand...


I would think that a spokesman for ANY country in the world calling our President a Liar, and a bully would be breaking news. I mean it was reported in Reuters after all, not some hack website right?

Oh wait....I see....It is criticism of 'the One' so any discussion of it has to be stopped....gottcha! :roll:


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
1No, I was in the military for 6 years. I am out now, see if you were as smart as you think you are you would have done your homework and known that. :doh

I believe you tried this little derailing exercise in another thread, I answered it there.

Don't flatter yourself. You should read up on the rules more....

www.debatepolitics.com/forum-rules/28594-forum-rules.html

2No, read for comprehension. I asked you why it was that China had told Obama that the PM couldn't meet with him, because he was at the airport, when he was clearly in the secret meeting with the others....

So let's see, China tells him in Copenhagen that the PM is at the airport, and the rest of the BASIC members are locked in a room dividing up the spoils of America behind his back, to the point that he races around the city looking for them, and then barges in the meeting, and people like Cuba are saying things like this about him?

3that is your opinion, however, you continue to respond.....

Yet here you are.


4Why don't you knock off the childish tactic here, and get to actual respectable debate?

5then I guess I should expect to not see anymore of your self aggrandizing today? Thank God!


j-mac
Click to expand...

1 -Alright I'll start off with this because on top of trying to accuse people of not knowing how to read you seem to be under the misconception that you've made a point somewhere in that very snappy post you just made. You obviously do not comprehend the way the first paragraph is meant to explain why what you've done so far is called baiting so you've resorted to well....being....

- j-mac.

I mean obviously your bias can't explain why people who oppose the U.S. government at any chance for political and economic reasons would act no differently in Obama. This means that your only option is to then make snappy little comments at those who understand politics beyond an introductory level.

When your bias has been confronted with logic, you've replied with strawmen. When your assertions have been confronted with facts, you've replied with one liners that do nothing to address the point made. It is getting tired and it's not even noon.

2 -You seem to not even know what actually happened or what you've stated. Here I'll provide you with the article :

Obama Snubbed by Chinese Premier at Copenhagen Climate Meeting - Yahoo! News

On the last scheduled day of negotiations for a global climate-change accord, tensions between the U.S. and China are on the rise. The world’s two largest greenhouse-gas emitters are at an impasse over finance for developing countries, pollution- reduction goals and verification of emissions cuts.
....

Wen’s absence from the gathering stems from displeasure with the U.S.’s demand that all major emitters verify their actions to cut greenhouse gases blamed for global warming, said a delegate who declined to be named because of the sensitivity of the talks.
Click to expand...

Now here is what you said:

It is my understanding that any sort of Cap n Trade type of supposed fix doesn't address this anyway, so then what is the real point of all this hype, and fear from GW fear mongers other than redistribution of nation wealth, and political power centralized in a world order?

See, face it, this is a giant lie, and you have bought it hook, line, and sinker.
Click to expand...

This provides you with the reason Wen discontinued his presence at the event. One simple reason : It is not good for Chinese business. Not because the event itself is representative of what your emotions and beliefs project as the Chinese considering a farce.

The Chinese have made zero real effort at supporting programs which would reduce GW because that would mean they would have to put some sort of cork on the mushroom cloud that is their savage economy. Why would China support such an event in the first place?

What is even more telling is that you can't seem to be consistent in whether Wen is snubbing Obama on a political level or the event itself on a scientific basis.

3 - That is not an opinion. That is called a fact. What do the effects of Cap'n'Trade have to do with the political reasons as to why China shows little regard for the Copenhagen summit? None. Because their opposition clearly stems from an economical perspective. Not a scientific one. You indeed threw out a red herring.

4 - What is childish about explaining to you one of the very pillars of debate? You do not seem to understand that your OP is not based on reality but on your beliefs. It is inconceivable apparently that a country which has little intention of having diplomatic relations with the U.S. would have something negative to say about the U.S. regardless of who is President.

This has been proven to be nothing more than partisan rhetoric. You've attempted to substantiate your post with strawmen and red herrings. Nobody has fallen for it. At least not yet. And if they do? I will guarantee that they are as partisan and culturally inept as yourself. The point I guess I'm trying to make is that you've really fooled nobody. You've attempted to debate a topic dishonestly from the start. Projecting your opinions unto regimes which depend on looking at the U.S. as an enemy to survive.

5 - Your inability to actually debate is very telling. I guess I'll keep it down to a junior high school level. We can say 'like' a lot. Then we can go in circles and not actually debate what is being talked about but you know, what you think we're talking about instead of what is actually on the plate.
 
Last edited:
Hatuey said:
1 -Alright I'll start off with this because on top of trying to accuse people of not knowing how to read you seem to be under the misconception that you've made a point somewhere in that very snappy post you just made. You obviously do not comprehend the way the first paragraph is meant to explain why what you've done so far is called baiting so you've resorted to well....being....

- j-mac.

I mean obviously your bias can't explain why people who oppose the U.S. government at any chance for political and economic reasons would act no differently in Obama. This means that your only option is to then make snappy little comments at those who understand politics beyond an introductory level.

When your bias has been confronted with logic, you've replied with strawmen. When your assertions have been confronted with facts, you've replied with one liners that do nothing to address the point made. It is getting tired and it's not even noon.

2 -You seem to not even know what actually happened or what you've stated. Here I'll provide you with the article :

Obama Snubbed by Chinese Premier at Copenhagen Climate Meeting - Yahoo! News



Now here is what you said:



This provides you with the reason Wen discontinued his presence at the event. One simple reason : It is not good for Chinese business. Not because the event itself is representative of what your emotions and beliefs project as the Chinese considering a farce.

The Chinese have made zero real effort at supporting programs which would reduce GW because that would mean they would have to put some sort of cork on the mushroom cloud that is their savage economy. Why would China support such an event in the first place?

What is even more telling is that you can't seem to be consistent in whether Wen is snubbing Obama on a political level or the event itself on a scientific basis.

3 - That is not an opinion. That is called a fact. What do the effects of Cap'n'Trade have to do with the political reasons as to why China shows little regard for the Copenhagen summit? None. Because their opposition clearly stems from an economical perspective. Not a scientific one. You indeed threw out a red herring.

4 - What is childish about explaining to you one of the very pillars of debate? You do not seem to understand that your OP is not based on reality but on your beliefs. It is inconceivable apparently that a country which has little intention of having diplomatic relations with the U.S. would have something negative to say about the U.S. regardless of who is President.

This has been proven to be nothing more than partisan rhetoric. You've attempted to substantiate your post with strawmen and red herrings. Nobody has fallen for it. At least not yet. And if they do? I will guarantee that they are as partisan and culturally inept as yourself. The point I guess I'm trying to make is that you've really fooled nobody. You've attempted to debate a topic dishonestly from the start. Projecting your opinions unto regimes which depend on looking at the U.S. as an enemy to survive.

5 - Your inability to actually debate is very telling. I guess I'll keep it down to a junior high school level. We can say 'like' a lot. Then we can go in circles and not actually debate what is being talked about but you know, what you think we're talking about instead of what is actually on the plate.
Click to expand...



A personal attack like this is impossible to address outside the basement.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
A personal attack like this is impossible to address outside the basement.


j-mac
Click to expand...

I accept your surrender. Now call a mod and lets see which one tries to gig me. It'll be the one post I've ever contested if I get gigged. If you do not like your bias and tunnel vision when it comes to Obama being called out, I could not care less. Try debating and cementing your position with facts/logic and then you won't feel so insulted whenever one of the boys says something mean about you.
 
Last edited:
j-mac said:
I know what I am free to do or not do.....I thought I would give you a chance to moderate your own posting, see I don't go a cryin' evey time my feelings are hurt.
Click to expand...

What does "evey time" mean? :mrgreen:

You do what you gotta do, whether it's giving me the chance to moderate my own posting or report me. *yawn*



I would think that a spokesman for ANY country in the world calling our President a Liar, and a bully would be breaking news. I mean it was reported in Reuters after all, not some hack website right?

Oh wait....I see....It is criticism of 'the One' so any discussion of it has to be stopped....gottcha! :roll:


j-mac
Click to expand...

If someone were to report the time where Chavez talked about how Bush left his smell at the podium, I'd think the same thing.

You clearly need news that helps substantiate your horribly negative opinion about Obama. I understand.
 
aps said:
What does "evey time" mean? :mrgreen:

You do what you gotta do, whether it's giving me the chance to moderate my own posting or report me. *yawn*
Click to expand...



thanks for your permission.....:roll:


If someone were to report the time where Chavez talked about how Bush left his smell at the podium, I'd think the same thing.

You clearly need news that helps substantiate your horribly negative opinion about Obama. I understand.
Click to expand...


Yeah, whatever.....And I suppose you are the paragon of objectivity? Besides, these days, it ain't hard to find negative news on Dear Leader......:2razz::lamo

Seen his polling lately? :sinking:


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
thanks for your permission.....:roll:
Click to expand...

This after giving me permission to moderate myself.

Yeah, whatever.....And I suppose you are the paragon of objectivity?
Click to expand...

Nah. I just have a good sense of what would or would not constitute "breaking news."

Besides, these days, it ain't hard to find negative news on Dear Leader......:2razz::lamo
Click to expand...

How is it any different than when he was running for President?

Seen his polling lately? :sinking:


j-mac
Click to expand...

Sure. It doesn't look good. Is this supposed to devastate me? Because...it doesn't. :2wave:
 
hazlnut said:
Jeez! Does the cave you've been living in have a street address?
Click to expand...

So, they haven't exactly been all that cooperative with him. Why is that? Where are the foreign policy successes? Where are they?
 
Dutch said:
so, why don't you list obama's foreign policy successes? I'll wait. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

He went places and gave speeches that they seemed to like.

and then he got the Nobel Prize!!!

BAM! And he wasn't even nominated til January.
 
Dutch said:
so, why don't you list obama's foreign policy successes? I'll wait. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

You're going to wait a long time. My post had nothing to do with Obama's foreign policy. :2wave:
 
Obama would be a little embarrassing to the rest of the world. He was alot of hope and promise. Then they realized he has to be president of the US.
 
SE102 said:
Obama would be a little embarrassing to the rest of the world. He was alot of hope and promise. Then they realized he has to be president of the US.
Click to expand...

So.....the problem isn't obama......but the united states? Is that your assertion? :confused:
 
aps said:
You're going to wait a long time. My post had nothing to do with Obama's foreign policy. :2wave:
Click to expand...

I'm just remembering the last election and all those promises about foreign policy made by american liberals and democratic party members. I just guess I'm going to have to wait for all of those promises to be kept too. Good think I'm not holding my breath. :mrgreen:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom