Tiananmen Square Is None of Your Business, Congress

[The_Dude 1,142]

I think the US and the international community has a responsibility to take a position on these things (for one thing knowing that there is international support for people's rights can facilitate political reforms). Of course it stands to reason that you lose credibility when you allow things like Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib.

So Ron Paul isn't wrong - but I do think his positioning on this issue is as self-serving and grandstanding as the Congress he's criticising.

But that is Ron Pauls MO. Would you expect anything less? He does have a lot of great ideas. However, he does hamstring himself with some pretty bad ones.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It does beg the question as to why, if Paul feels this is a waste of time issue - that he's making a big deal about it.

Are Congress really spending weeks and weeks discussing this or is it (as seems likely) merely a footnote in an otherwise busy legislative schedule?

Surely any experience politician should realise that such things are part and parcel of the business of government and that if he's really interested in the more important things (as he should be) then grandstanding over small things is just counterproductive.

[_Simpson_ 250]

That Congress is marking an anniversary doesn't mean that that's *all* they're doing.

Right but picking this day to do these things when in these economic times seems justified to me.

[The_Dude 1,142]

It does beg the question as to why, if Paul feels this is a waste of time issue - that he's making a big deal about it.

Are Congress really spending weeks and weeks discussing this or is it (as seems likely) merely a footnote in an otherwise busy legislative schedule?

Surely any experience politician should realise that such things are part and parcel of the business of government and that if he's really interested in the more important things (as he should be) then grandstanding over small things is just counterproductive.

Well, as to the point about voting on legislature without review, I'll support him in all his endeavors. That is just pure sheepish behavior and if that is how our congressmen and women are going to conduct business, I think we need to vote them out en masse.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

That Congress is marking an anniversary doesn't mean that that's *all* they're doing.

Right but picking this day to do these things when in these economic times seems justified to me.

Sure - its the anniversary after all.

[The_Dude 1,142]

That Congress is marking an anniversary doesn't mean that that's *all* they're doing.

Right but picking this day to do these things when in these economic times seems justified to me.

Sure - its the anniversary after all.

But what will this accomplish by passing this? It isn't like our congress has the authority to force an investigation. I am personally opposed to the way China conducts itself with regards to human rights and censorship, but our congress passing a bill that demands they investigate does little more than piss them off. When we are going to need their help in negotiating with N. Korea, I don't think this is a wise move. Populism doesn't necessarily translate well in foreign policy.

[_Simpson_ 250]

That Congress is marking an anniversary doesn't mean that that's *all* they're doing.

Right but picking this day to do these things when in these economic times seems justified to me.

Sure - its the anniversary after all.

Well that settles everything

totally

[one...two...tree 2,762]

That Congress is marking an anniversary doesn't mean that that's *all* they're doing.

Shut up! No way!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

That Congress is marking an anniversary doesn't mean that that's *all* they're doing.

Right but picking this day to do these things when in these economic times seems justified to me.

Sure - its the anniversary after all.

But what will this accomplish by passing this? It isn't like our congress has the authority to force an investigation. I am personally opposed to the way China conducts itself with regards to human rights and censorship, but our congress passing a bill that demands they investigate does little more than piss them off. When we are going to need their help in negotiating with N. Korea, I don't think this is a wise move. Populism doesn't necessarily translate well in foreign policy.

Recognition - its a largely symbolic gesture.

That Congress is marking an anniversary doesn't mean that that's *all* they're doing.

Right but picking this day to do these things when in these economic times seems justified to me.

Sure - its the anniversary after all.

Well that settles everything

totally

It is what it is.

You can either be outraged and angered by it - or just accept that these things are part and parcel of the daily business. As I said - its not as though this is *all* Congress is doing.

[My Name Is Nobody 3]

But we are part of an international community that does place some unified value on political freedoms and human rights. Whether such objections are token or not, whether they exert influence or not, there's nothing wrong really with raising awareness of outrageous atrocities.

If I remember right you are the ones who think we should have kept our noses out of Iraq because it was none of our business even though human rights were being trampled.

Thats right we were just there for the oil???

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Statement before the US House of Representatives, June 3, 2009

By Ron Paul

As to the substance of the resolution, I find it disturbing that the House is going out of its way to meddle in China's domestic politics, which is none of our business, while ignoring the many pressing issues in our own country that definitely are our business.

This resolution "calls on the People's Republic of China to invite full and independent investigations into the Tiananmen Square crackdown, assisted by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the International Committee of the Red Cross…" Where do we get the authority for such a demand? I wonder how the US government would respond if China demanded that the United Nations conduct a full and independent investigation into the treatment of detainees at the US-operated Guantanamo facility?

You know who else thought the events on Tiananmen Square 20 yrs ago where nothing but a swell way of China dealing with internal unrest, and that it was nobody's business but the Chinese?

Egon Krenz, communist leader (for a very brief time) of East Germany

bloody Germans! We should have nuked Berlin when we had the chance.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

But we are part of an international community that does place some unified value on political freedoms and human rights. Whether such objections are token or not, whether they exert influence or not, there's nothing wrong really with raising awareness of outrageous atrocities.

If I remember right you are the ones who think we should have kept our noses out of Iraq because it was none of our business even though human rights were being trampled.

Thats right we were just there for the oil???

Did he suggest we invade China?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

But we are part of an international community that does place some unified value on political freedoms and human rights. Whether such objections are token or not, whether they exert influence or not, there's nothing wrong really with raising awareness of outrageous atrocities.

If I remember right you are the ones who think we should have kept our noses out of Iraq because it was none of our business even though human rights were being trampled.

Thats right we were just there for the oil???

Firstly, I am not "the ones". I am one guy.

Secondly, my view on Iraq is a largely practical one - the US didn't depose Saddam in '91 because the then government realised that getting entrenched in that country and tied up in a (likely) civil war would be a hugely expensive and very drawn out experience (which is exactly what we have at the moment).

I didn't like the fact that the Bush administration pre-determined its case for war and went through the motions trying to pretend to the American public and the outside world that what they were doing was was a last resort and that they were somehow forced into it. It was a very calculated, deliberate strategy from the outset - but a strategy that was flawed critically by the complete lack of post invasion planning. In short, it was badly conceived, poorly sold, undermanned and as a result, badly executed.

Unilateral military intervention has always been questionable - and I honestly don't believe that any of the wars that the US has fought since WW2 have been militarily necessary. Nor have they been about humanitarianism.

As to your question - yes we are there for oil. But we are also there for geopolitical reasons - and to establish a stronger presence in a strategically important region. Those are the only reasons we went into Iraq - not that $hit about WMD and "liberating" Iraq's people. If Bushco were about liberation they'd have had a plan for the reconstruction.

Edited June 4, 2009 by Private Pike

[My Name Is Nobody 3]

Did he suggest we invade China?

Oh, ok we can go sing kum baya

Sorry

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Oh, ok we can go sing kum baya

Sorry

Well *you* could always stick your fingers in your ears and make a few more irrelevant comparisons.