- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The world's largest population about to get much larger
Posted on 10/29/15 at 8:58 am to randybobandy
Posted on 10/29/15 at 8:58 am to randybobandy
quote:
With all of the extra mouths to feed, what about the bug population? Don't they eat worms and crickets
Bugs aren't popular dishes over there, although you can find them. What they do though is eat every portion of an animal you can think of. Intestines, stomachs, necks, hearts, kidneys, they don't waste an ounce of the animals they eat. Hearts and necks are actually pretty good.
Posted on 10/29/15 at 9:15 am to kilo1234
quote:
Don't be a dipshit. I never said anything about an invasion of the United States. It's a fact that the Chinese have a large population of military-age males and not enough females in the same age bracket to sustain things.
It's also a fact that when similar conditions have appeared throughout history, that population segment has been used as an expeditionary force. This doesn't mean an "invasion force". It simply means a group of people who can be projected throughout the globe.
The problem with your so-called theory is that this disparity is solely in the countryside, not the cities. The guys who don't have women are lower class males in the countryside. You want to take a history lesson on how much China cares about its people who live in huts and just got electricity? They aren't going to war to abduct women tribal style.
quote:
Where the United States comes into play is that we are (or were until recently) the world's only super-power. We would be the ones to pump their brakes of they got froggy. Hence the need to cripple us economically and weaken us over time. Not so they can invade the United States, but so we can't (or won't) stand in their way when they are running amok around the globe (again, not necessarily "invading"...but projecting).
You do know how interlinked our economies are right, and that our destruction would be mutual if we decided to go to war.
quote:
The world's population is huge and increasing. Natural resources are at a premium. Why do you think the Chinese are all over Africa and Afghanistan? It's the precious metals/minerals/etc that they are after. Eventually, those things will have to be secured via manpower and force if necessary. The perfect utilization of their massive population segment consisting of fighting-age males with jack shite to do at home.
They're already doing this legally. Why would they bring in a military force when they're having no issues with it now?
quote:
And just because a bunch of pussies on here would rather stay home and do nothing as long as they have a robot to frick doesn't mean that others out there wouldn't jump at the chance to "go to X and secure your future there (with the backing of the Chinese gov't/military)".
Yeah, I'm a pussy because I don't want to start WWIII just over some Chinese guys not getting their rocks off. Let's invade China over this. Great idea!
Posted on 10/29/15 at 9:16 am to kilo1234
quote:
You are a simple-minded jackass who doesn't know your arse from a hole in the ground. Go eat a dick. The grownups are talking.
You sure sound angry. Sure you don't need to lie down for a bit?
Posted on 10/29/15 at 9:40 am to kilo1234
quote:
China is building their navy as fast as they can. They are also crippling us economically. Those 3 things will converge in time and it'll be game on.

Chicken little alert
Posted on 10/29/15 at 9:45 am to kilo1234
quote:link?
It's also a fact that when similar conditions have appeared throughout history, that population segment has been used as an expeditionary force.
I'm not being glib.. I'm actually interested in such examples.
Posted on 10/29/15 at 9:47 am to Spirit of Dunson
quote:
I'm not being glib.. I'm actually interested in such examples.
I'm sure he's thinking about tribes that abducted their brides from one another.
Posted on 10/29/15 at 9:48 am to Titus Pullo
I found their Olympic opening ceremony terrifying. Too many people. Too disciplined. Too in sync.


Posted on 10/29/15 at 9:53 am to OMLandshark
Your reading comprehension sucks. That, or you are simply arguing whatever you feel like arguing since that's all you know.
It's not a "so-called theory", and it's hardly mine. It's fact, and people much smarter than you analyze such things for a living.
And again, I never said they'd go to war to abduct women tribal-style. The "go to X and take your women from there" was a simple way of saying, "We don't have shite for you in the homeland and you're a convenient population segment to have because we need to project, so we'll just send you guys to X and you can make your future there." Next time, I'll spell it out for you so you can understand it.
No shite, and you aren't arguing what you think you are arguing. It's exactly BECAUSE they don't give a damn about those people that they can conveniently use them to further their national goals. You act as if those people have a choice in the matter. If they had any say, they wouldn't have a government who can tell them how many kids they are allowed to have. FFS, you aren't the brightest bulb in the box, are you?
Do I need to explain yet AGAIN that I am not talking about direct and open war? They need us weakened so that we don't stand in their way as they go about their business. Ways we could impede them don't necessarily involve open war. You understand that, right?
Your mind only works reactively and in the present, doesn't it? I bet you're easy to beat in chess since you are unable to think about anything other than what's happening right this second.
Just because they are able to do it legally now doesn't mean their efforts won't need to be protected via manpower/force at some point. When that happens, they need the capability to do so. Waiting to address that need at that time is too late.
The Chinese make plans that cover 100's of years and they stick to it. Our politicians only think 2 to 4 years in advance, the same length as election cycles. It is a mistake to apply our way of thinking and planning to the Chinese.
Again, reading comprehension is a useful skill which you don't appear to possess. I was referencing the argument that the Chinese have their sex robots and don't care about anything else. That is applying OUR way of thinking to a culture that doesn't operate like we do.
It's not about their men getting a nut. It's not about sex. It's about them being able to obtain and sustain a future for that segment of the population. That means they need something to do.
Beat the shite out of that straw man if it makes you feel better. That was never my argument, so I could care less how soundly you refute it.
quote:
The problem with your so-called theory is that this disparity is solely in the countryside, not the cities. The guys who don't have women are lower class males in the countryside. You want to take a history lesson on how much China cares about its people who live in huts and just got electricity? They aren't going to war to abduct women tribal style.
It's not a "so-called theory", and it's hardly mine. It's fact, and people much smarter than you analyze such things for a living.
And again, I never said they'd go to war to abduct women tribal-style. The "go to X and take your women from there" was a simple way of saying, "We don't have shite for you in the homeland and you're a convenient population segment to have because we need to project, so we'll just send you guys to X and you can make your future there." Next time, I'll spell it out for you so you can understand it.
quote:
The guys who don't have women are lower class males in the countryside. You want to take a history lesson on how much China cares about its people who live in huts and just got electricity?
No shite, and you aren't arguing what you think you are arguing. It's exactly BECAUSE they don't give a damn about those people that they can conveniently use them to further their national goals. You act as if those people have a choice in the matter. If they had any say, they wouldn't have a government who can tell them how many kids they are allowed to have. FFS, you aren't the brightest bulb in the box, are you?
quote:
You do know how interlinked our economies are right, and that our destruction would be mutual if we decided to go to war.
Do I need to explain yet AGAIN that I am not talking about direct and open war? They need us weakened so that we don't stand in their way as they go about their business. Ways we could impede them don't necessarily involve open war. You understand that, right?
quote:
They're already doing this legally. Why would they bring in a military force when they're having no issues with it now?
Your mind only works reactively and in the present, doesn't it? I bet you're easy to beat in chess since you are unable to think about anything other than what's happening right this second.
Just because they are able to do it legally now doesn't mean their efforts won't need to be protected via manpower/force at some point. When that happens, they need the capability to do so. Waiting to address that need at that time is too late.
The Chinese make plans that cover 100's of years and they stick to it. Our politicians only think 2 to 4 years in advance, the same length as election cycles. It is a mistake to apply our way of thinking and planning to the Chinese.
quote:
Yeah, I'm a pussy because I don't want to start WWIII just over some Chinese guys not getting their rocks off. Let's invade China over this. Great idea!
Again, reading comprehension is a useful skill which you don't appear to possess. I was referencing the argument that the Chinese have their sex robots and don't care about anything else. That is applying OUR way of thinking to a culture that doesn't operate like we do.
It's not about their men getting a nut. It's not about sex. It's about them being able to obtain and sustain a future for that segment of the population. That means they need something to do.
quote:
Let's invade China over this. Great idea!
Beat the shite out of that straw man if it makes you feel better. That was never my argument, so I could care less how soundly you refute it.
Posted on 10/29/15 at 9:55 am to OMLandshark
quote:
You sure sound angry. Sure you don't need to lie down for a bit?
Dismissing a mental midget =/= anger.
Posted on 10/29/15 at 10:02 am to kilo1234
Did a Chinese man bang your wife? Holy shite.
Posted on 10/29/15 at 10:05 am to kilo1234
quote:
Dismissing a mental midget =/= anger.

Midget. Now that's funnier than you realize
Posted on 10/29/15 at 10:05 am to UpToPar
quote:
Did a Chinese man bang your wife? Holy shite.
It's "hory shet". Stop exercising your white privilege that allows you to pronounce English words properly.
Posted on 10/29/15 at 10:14 am to kilo1234
quote:
Dismissing a mental midget =/= anger.
Speaking of midgets, you sound like such an angry little man. Did a Chinese guy frick your girlfriend or something?
Posted on 10/29/15 at 10:26 am to OMLandshark
quote:
Speaking of midgets, you sound like such an angry little man. Did a Chinese guy frick your girlfriend or something?
Someone has already used a similar line and it was addressed.
Also, having the slightest bit of intelligence and/or reading comprehension skills (preferably both, but I realize that's a stretch) would help you realize that in now way am I angry with the Chinese, which is what you imply by asking if a Chinese guy fricked my girlfriend. I'm not angry at all, much less with China/Chinese.
Are you A) retarded, B) an Ole Miss grad, or C) both?
Posted on 10/29/15 at 10:33 am to kilo1234
quote:
I'm not angry at all
Yeah, sure.

quote:
Are you A) retarded, B) an Ole Miss grad, or C) both?
Ah yes, the bottom feeding alma mater insult. As if that has anything to do with the conversation... Actually it kind of does since Ole Miss has one of the top five Mandarin institutes in the country and I actually got a 30 hour minor in the language and moved to China for 2 and a half years. So I'm something of an expert here on the subject of US/China relations. We don't trust each other worth a shite, but they are obesessed with us completely. Your opinions on US/China relations are laughable at best.
This post was edited on 10/29/15 at 10:39 am
Posted on 10/29/15 at 10:39 am to ForeverLSU02
I guess the 3rd triplet is screwed
Posted on 10/29/15 at 10:40 am to Alatgr
quote:
1. Your link is broken
Exactly. That's why I said I'm amused about how many people leave comments without reading the article. It took two hours for someone to comment that the link was broken.
ETA: It's been nearly three hours and the link is still broken. Never mind, nobody reads source material anyway.

This post was edited on 10/29/15 at 10:42 am
Posted on 10/29/15 at 10:40 am to OMLandshark
quote:
I actually got a 30 hour minor in the language and moved to the country for 2 and a half years. So I'm something of an expert here on the subject of US/China relations.
Holy fricking shite. I can't laugh hard enough. You got a 30 hour minor in a language, lived in China 2.5 years, and that makes you an expert on geopolitics, specifically China?
We're done here. The lack of intelligence and the prevalence of logical fallacies in your posts indicate that it's not worth discussing this further. Enjoy the rest of your day.
Posted on 10/29/15 at 10:45 am to kilo1234
What are your credentials for speaking on china?
Posted on 10/29/15 at 10:46 am to kilo1234
What are your China bona fides?
Back to top
