How Many Abers Actually Like To Watch...
ChatterBank5 mins ago
Jade Rabbit Seeking Carrots On The Moon
1st moon landing in 37 years, unmanned lunar rover. Thought to be a prelude to a manned mission soon.
More proof - if any more were needed - that China is now the worlds dominant superpower?
http://
More proof - if any more were needed - that China is now the worlds dominant superpower?
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by LazyGun. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Show the evidence. According to you, my anti- US bias is common, so there should be no problem in finding the specific comments I made in this thread. Truth is, you cannot, as usual, because of your ridiculously polarised and biased view.
Its you thats been rumbled, and you that lack the courage to apologise for favouring smear tactics over offering facts.
Its you thats been rumbled, and you that lack the courage to apologise for favouring smear tactics over offering facts.
I can't for the life of me understand your point, TTT. To say that is greater than y doesn't belittle y if it's also a statement of fact. China is becoming the largest economic power. That's just true. But the US is still pretty big, and even the UK isn't small fry, despite what one Chinese newspaper said.
Why must you alway
Why must you alway
@3T ""More proof - if any more were needed - that China is now the worlds dominant superpower? ""
OK, lets. Lets also see what you claimed about my post and that question.
"What a pointless failed attempt at bashing the US."
"I merely spot the anti western bias that is often present as the motivation for the post."
Now Explain how asking the question about the relative ascendancy of economic and political power around the globe is "bashing the US", or is a display of "anti-western bias". Are you really such a simpleton that merely asking that kind of question is anti-western?
More evidence, it seems to me of you frankly asinine question suggesting that anyone with a different view of EU/UK relations, like Clegg, is being "anti-british". The politics of the simpleton.
OK, lets. Lets also see what you claimed about my post and that question.
"What a pointless failed attempt at bashing the US."
"I merely spot the anti western bias that is often present as the motivation for the post."
Now Explain how asking the question about the relative ascendancy of economic and political power around the globe is "bashing the US", or is a display of "anti-western bias". Are you really such a simpleton that merely asking that kind of question is anti-western?
More evidence, it seems to me of you frankly asinine question suggesting that anyone with a different view of EU/UK relations, like Clegg, is being "anti-british". The politics of the simpleton.
typical lefty, refuses to see, cannot comprehend any other view, therefore name calling ensues. So I'm a simpleton, right oh. I suppose I must be a knuckle dragging little englander too, oh and I'm also phsycotic it seems on another thread! ....it's the right wing that are supposed to be the nasty ones!
@3T And when you cannot wing the argument by supporting your position, you return to the politics of the gutter.
Lets remind ourselves of the chronology of this, shall we? It was you that first started this baseless smear campaign by accusing me of anti-american bias and USA bashing - which you have subsequently been unable to support with any evidence. When I call you on it, you resort to the politics of the playground, rather like your infantile comments concerning Clegg being anti-British because he holds a different opinion to your own.
And, invited again by me to explain exactly how my question is US-bashing or anti-western bias, you fail, miserably, and resort to a whining defensive screed about how all the lefties hate you.
This is argumentation of the playground. This is name-calling and smear without basis. This is the argument of the simpleton, yes. I am actually sorry I inferred you were a simpleton before, because I was irritated at your baseless smears at me, but I no longer regret it following this latest outburst.
It was not me who called you "psychotic".I have never called you a "little englander", nor have I ever called you a "knuckle dragger". I think its about time you grew a pair and apologised, don't you?
Lets remind ourselves of the chronology of this, shall we? It was you that first started this baseless smear campaign by accusing me of anti-american bias and USA bashing - which you have subsequently been unable to support with any evidence. When I call you on it, you resort to the politics of the playground, rather like your infantile comments concerning Clegg being anti-British because he holds a different opinion to your own.
And, invited again by me to explain exactly how my question is US-bashing or anti-western bias, you fail, miserably, and resort to a whining defensive screed about how all the lefties hate you.
This is argumentation of the playground. This is name-calling and smear without basis. This is the argument of the simpleton, yes. I am actually sorry I inferred you were a simpleton before, because I was irritated at your baseless smears at me, but I no longer regret it following this latest outburst.
It was not me who called you "psychotic".I have never called you a "little englander", nor have I ever called you a "knuckle dragger". I think its about time you grew a pair and apologised, don't you?
Russia's Sputnik of 1950s was incomparable but our scientists found more worth in communication on the global stage by creating WWW. It must be galling for China to build the worlds largest wall, Terracotta Army & now moon landing, and have to use the web (developed by the West) to shout their achievement, albeit chasing past goals.
http://
http://
ok LG carry on I have explained everything N times above but you are not reading it. You demand I amalyse your own head for you then you poo poo anything I do. I was not saying you calledd me any of those names other than simpleton, I was just referring to the standard lefty approach when someone does not agree with them. I maintain your openning rhetoric in this thread was a dig at the US.
You are pathetic.
"I was just referring to the standard lefty approach when someone does not agree with them."
Except that it is not "the standard lefty response". To suggest it is is a fanciful and imagined notion. You might indeed find individuals who resort to such descriptions, but that does not itself represent any kind of standard response from the left. In short, that assertion itself becomes an example of a standard 3T post - long on inference,spite, sarcasm and smear, short on any kind of fact.
"I maintain your openning rhetoric in this thread was a dig at the US."
You can maintain whatever you want, but unless you can provide any kind of evidence- which, despite ample opportunities from me, you cannot - is itself just a blatant, unsubstantiated smear, something which typifies many of your posts on AB.
Witness your witless attack on Clegg in your post yesterday over his reported response to the rather ill-advised suggestion leaked from the Home Office regarding imposing a cap on the number of immigrants to the UK in some vague, undefined future. Clegg points out that such a measure is, in fact,illegal and against the accords and treaties our country is signatory to - and yet, according to you, pointing this simple fact out is "anti-british".
Wrapping yourself in the flag of patriotism, whilst accusing anyone holding an alternative view as being unpatriotic or worse is simply offensive and distasteful.
It is ironic to me, since expressing such sentiments - That someone is unpatriotic simply for disagreeing with your point of view - could itself be seen as being unpatriotic, since we are a country which treasures those democratic values of freedom of speech and freedom of thought.
"I was just referring to the standard lefty approach when someone does not agree with them."
Except that it is not "the standard lefty response". To suggest it is is a fanciful and imagined notion. You might indeed find individuals who resort to such descriptions, but that does not itself represent any kind of standard response from the left. In short, that assertion itself becomes an example of a standard 3T post - long on inference,spite, sarcasm and smear, short on any kind of fact.
"I maintain your openning rhetoric in this thread was a dig at the US."
You can maintain whatever you want, but unless you can provide any kind of evidence- which, despite ample opportunities from me, you cannot - is itself just a blatant, unsubstantiated smear, something which typifies many of your posts on AB.
Witness your witless attack on Clegg in your post yesterday over his reported response to the rather ill-advised suggestion leaked from the Home Office regarding imposing a cap on the number of immigrants to the UK in some vague, undefined future. Clegg points out that such a measure is, in fact,illegal and against the accords and treaties our country is signatory to - and yet, according to you, pointing this simple fact out is "anti-british".
Wrapping yourself in the flag of patriotism, whilst accusing anyone holding an alternative view as being unpatriotic or worse is simply offensive and distasteful.
It is ironic to me, since expressing such sentiments - That someone is unpatriotic simply for disagreeing with your point of view - could itself be seen as being unpatriotic, since we are a country which treasures those democratic values of freedom of speech and freedom of thought.
To get away from the running argument, "who said what and when and what did it mean and were they right" and back to the original question...... What China has done is an accomplished bit of engineering - but merely repeats what Russia and America did 40 years ago and what America has done repeatedly on Mars since then. American and European probes to the outer planets have displayed a degree of precision and technical maturity far beyond anything China has so far even attempted. It is also worthwhile remembering that the Chinese manned space program was kickstarted by using Russian Soyuz spacecraft - their current launches use an uprated version of the Soyuz but they still do not have a wholly Chinese-designed capsule. China is going through the motions that the USSR and the USA went through at the height of the Cold War. Such efforts are undoubtedly symptomatic of their desire to be seen as a superpower - whether it is proof is a moot point.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.