1/28/2011

Clever or stupid question?

William Choong, senior writer of ST, asked a Chinese professor and a Chinese Ambassador about transparency and Chinese military build up. And he deservedly got told off by the Chinese for asking those questions. Why wouldn’t he ask the Americans for more transparency in their weapons development and what their military arms were for? I believe the Americans will tell him it is just a hobby, or toys for the big boys to play with. Would that be good enough answers for him? There is this group of analysts and reporters who have run out of wits and did not know what to write, and so whenever they see a Chinese official, they will ask the same stupid questions. What are China’s military build up for? The Chinese should simply say, to screw your arse. China had been a victim of foreign aggression and nearly lost its independence as a country because it was militarily weak. Does that answer all the silly questions? A smart analyst will know what military weapons and soldiers are for. There is no need to announce their stupidity in the public. The stealth fighter is a problem? What problem? What is the range of the aircraft and its armaments? Can it fly to the US? Yes, it has attack capability. But with its limited range, it is good only to defend the Chinese coast against enemy attacks. And when the enemies are at the door step, what should the Chinese do? Do I have to explain what an aircraft carrier is for? I hope no military analyst or expert is going to ask that silly question. Just look at its range, and the weapons it is carrying. Yes, an aircraft carrier is to party. It is an offensive weapon! William Choong wrote in his article today explaining his line of questioning. He said, ‘…my question had been open ended and harmless…I had posed a question that was deemed a tad too critical.’ I must praise him for his child like innocence. The Chinese reply to his childish questions was most appropriate though he thought that the Chinese were over reacting. And no, the Chinese were not trying to be smart. They were smart. And definitely they were not incompetent and did not want to answer silly and naïve questions. The Chinese should adopt a practice to say, ‘We don’t answer stupid questions. Next please.’

4 comments:

  1. Just like to say the 'Angolish' educated and anglicize Singaporean Chinese have lost all sense of bearing.
    It's a great shame!

    ReplyDelete
  2. They think China should remain like the good old days and let the West come to it's doorstep and point their cannons and tell them 'Open up, we are coming in'. Just like that!

    It is really a shame that many Chinese people, like the senior writer, have obviously lost their sense of where their roots are. They like to bend over to serve the West and its ideology.

    ReplyDelete
  3. These yellow skin Europeans have not lived through the days of shame and discrimination by the White men. They are the true chap cheng kia who didn't know who their parents were. Maybe they were secretly hoping that their parents were really angmohs.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Actually I salute him for having the sack to do his job as a journalist -- a profession which command less respect than the blow job services from an 80 yr old, masectomied (tetek kena potong) toothless street walking whore.

    Most people with half a functioning brain (about 2% of the population) generally accept that transparency in any thing govt is IMPOSSIBLE -- you'll get a version of "transparency" and you cannot challenge nor question that.

    The Chinese are serious about their military supremacy... which is making many Asian cuntries uneasy.

    Will the China of the future have designs on conquest, assimilation, expansion of territory and empire?

    I would say YES. A resounding Y-E-S. And there not a thing any small-fry Asian nation can do about it.

    China will have NO CHOICE BUT TO EXPAND -- it is being pushed that way by the USA who is hawkish and fanning the flames of conflict with CHina.

    Small-fry Asian cuntries will have to choose in future: to be a client state of China or the USA

    ReplyDelete