i think limited informal diologue would be better than isolation. NK, Cuba, Iran, Syria...just a few example of failed isolationism.....where as diologue is filled with success stories. history has taught me that diologue creates hope and peace while isolation creates ignorance and war. China should continue to condemn all terrorist activities but while at the same time use limited diologue to pursuede them to stop doing things that are not benificial to the world. If Beijing choose diologue over isolation, you can bet it's Beijing influencing the Taliban and not the other way.
Originally posted by cestmoi at 2008-9-4 11:03
And do not kidnap Chinese citizens. I hope Beijing will not negotiate with these inbred mongrels.
No one was born as mongrels, I believe most taliban militias are usual kind Afghan villagers if they can throw away their guns. They choose to be terrorists not because they are inbred bad guys, actually they are living through the despair of poverty and repression, and the force that oppress them is much more powerful than they can fight with. That is why they unwisely choose civilians as their target, and this time the victims are Chinese.
Originally posted by sweepin at 2008-9-26 10:07
i think limited informal diologue would be better than isolation. NK, Cuba, Iran, Syria...just a few example of failed isolationism.....where as diologue is filled with success stories. history has ...
My holy-war brothers know who are enemies and who are friends. They will not hurt chinese if there is not dialogue. They will still kill Anglos even if there are dialogue.