Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Slashback

Journal MonTemplar's Journal: On This Day, in 1989... 20

Journal by MonTemplar

1989: Massacre in Tiananmen Square

Several hundred civilians have been shot dead by the Chinese army during a bloody military operation to crush a democratic uprising in Peking's (Beijing) Tiananmen Square.

Tanks rumbled through the capital's streets late on 3 June as the army moved into the square from several directions, randomly firing on unarmed protesters.

The injured were rushed to hospital on bicycle rickshaws by frantic residents shocked by the army's sudden and extreme response to the peaceful mass protest.

Demonstrators, mainly students, had occupied the square for seven weeks, refusing to move until their demands for democratic reform were met.

The military offensive came after several failed attempts to persuade the protesters to leave. Throughout Saturday the government warned it would do whatever it saw necessary to clamp down on what it described as "social chaos".

But even though violence was expected, the ferocity of the attack took many by surprise, bringing condemnation from around the world.

This discussion was created by MonTemplar (174120) for Friends and Friends of Friends only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

On This Day, in 1989... More

On This Day, in 1989...

Comments Filter:
  • And this week, an elderly doctor and his wife were disappeared for daring to say that perhaps the Communists should look into the massacre and see if they bear any culpability.

    China more repressive now than it was 120 years ago. The Chinese deserve better than a failed revolution and a fascist government.

    • I agree, but that's not our decision to make. That is their land and their government to do with as they please. As long as they pose no tangible and immediate threat to the US, we shouldn't interefere. We can give our opinions on the world stage, but it's not our right or responsibility to assume that we know how to run their country better than they do. Different != bad. Different just means that they have other values and goals that do match our own.

      -Ab
      • I agree, but that's not our decision to make.

        I agree with that. If ~1 Billion Chinese can't or won't get rid of the handful of bastards running the country, we have no business even thinking about it.

        Different != bad.

        (crushing peaceful protesters with tanks) == bad

        • (crushing peaceful protesters with tanks) == bad

          Let me clarify my opinion:
          (crushing peaceful protesters with tanks) ?= bad
          If $LOCATION = US then outcome = BAD
          IF $LOCATION != US then outcome = RunLocalCustomsAndReactions($LOCATION)

          my point being is that (in my opinion) our laws, opinions, customs, beliefs, etc ... extend no farther than our borders. Outside of there, other people have other thoughts that would shock us, but are day to day beliefs there. Things like death penalties for steali
          • Location be damned. Some things are just beyond the pale. If it sounds like that is making a judgement on the objective or subjective value of their beliefs, it's only becaue I am.

            That said, it's a chinese problem unless and until it posses a direct threat or harm to us. THEN, and only, then does it become our busines.

            • I agree, but that does not preclude us from giving moral support to those attempting to change it or from publically condemning the actions. Politics be damned. I don't feel that it is the US's business to change china (barring the Taiwan thing, but that's a seperate issue), but we do not have to sit idly and silently by, either. It is just as effective to stand up on the world stage and deliver a short, terse speech along the lines of, "We, the United States of America, feel that the government of China
              • Sorry to reply twice. After reading the rest of your posts, It seems that you are a true libertarian to maximun extent possible, and the link doesn't apply to you, since it shows our anti-libertarian history, and not anything that you may or may not believe. Are you familiar to the phrase "rules without rulers"? Is it possible? I, like you, believe it's for the individual to act either on his/her own or collectively to influence others. It's certainly not a perogative of gov't. Though the gov't will say oth
          • ...my point being is that (in my opinion) our laws, opinions, customs, beliefs, etc ... extend no farther than our borders.

            I, for one, wish that your opinion(in this case) was the law of the land. Unfortunately, too many others feel differently [nwu.edu].
      • Umm, it is my decision to make. I have investments in China, and a family in China, and a Chinese wife. It is my decision.

        Furthermore, it is an oppressive, murderous regime. There is No Excuse for not condemning the practices of a corrupt, murderous dictatorship. Thousands of Chinese are still under illegal arrests. UN guaranteed human rights are trampled by a Security Council member.

        And China does pose a tangible and immediate threat to Taiwan, a nation under the guarantee of US protection. The C

        • Umm, it is my decision to make. I have investments in China, and a family in China, and a Chinese wife. It is my decision.

          Then yes, it is your decision to make. that was my point. *I* (and most other americans) are *NOT* chinese, have no ties to china what-so-ever. Therefore, it is no more my decision or right to try and oust that government than it is to try and make some guy in Des Moines, Iowa paint his house cause it's an ugly color. I can, throw my support behind those (such as yourself) that ha
          • Ab,

            If China signs up for the UN, sits on the security council, claims to abide by UN law, but yet violates human rights of millions on a daily basis, then you do have an obligation to step up to the plate and do and say something. As a human, one of your morals should be the concern of other humans. And there's about 1.3 billion that are being denied basic unalienable rights. It doesn't matter that they're not American, or not white. It is your place to say that what is happening is wrong, and the Chi

            • Again, I respectfully disagree. I don't share your opinion that the UN is a governing body that can or should do anything other than what it does do (which is basically lip service).

              I also think the term "basic human rights" is not a static term, but a fluctuating one that varies from culture to culture. What can be considered a basic right in this country (say, freedom of speech, for example) may be a luxury in other countries or even outright illegal. This doesn't make them wrong, just different.

              As f

              • Re:And this week (Score:3, Insightful)

                by Stargoat ( 658863 )
                Ab,

                Human beings are not toys. Every individual has a right to speak their mind and not be killed for doing so. It's been the standard tenant of human freedom for the past two hundred years. Some nations may not follow this, but all pay lip service, China included.

                And if China is going to sit on the security council, then it must abide by the rules put forward in the United Nations charter. For not following the rules in the United Nations charter, the Chinese government should be condemned. The Chi

                • As a libertarian, you know how important it is to protect basic human rights like freedom of speech and freedom of property.

                  One of the basic tenets of libertarianism is that you have to accept all people's rights, not just the rights of the nice ones. Someone's sig on here (I can't remember who) says it quite tersely, "The problem with libertarianism is not that I must be free, but that that other jackass must be free, too."

                  You state protect basic human rights like freedom of speech and freedom of prope
                  • I would submit that you are following a moral double standard. It is permissible to stop a man from beating his wife in the west, but not in a Muslim country. How would the woman feel? Would you stop the husband from beating the Muslim woman if she asked for help? I would suggest that as a libertarian, this is your duty. If the woman is not capable of defending herself, you should step in. She is asking you to defend her rights. She certain would believe that she has the right not to be beaten. If n
      • that's not our decision to make.
        It's not our decision to make, or interfere with, as a state. It's not something our government need concern itself with. But privately as individuals working in our own interest (which can include ethical interests, such as the desire for justice), anything can be our decision to make. Stick your nose into whatever you want to (and, likewise, be prepared to get your nose swatted).
        • agreed, my last post in response to stargoat had a paragraph on respecting rights on various levels (individuals respect other individuals' rights. Gov'ts respect other Gov't's rights) etc. Don't get me wrong through all of this, I certainly do not support China's human rights policies, but I don't think it's my place to try and change them any more than it's my business to get involved with the IRA in Ireland.

          -Ab
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • China hasn't added anything significant to world culture for almost one thousand years.

        There is a real and significant problem with Chinese culture. The Chinese of Taiwan have addressed the issue, and they are moving forward. Just bringing up the topic in the mainland will lead to imprisonment.

        What the US really has down is self-critique. The US has addressed cultural issues like racism and multiculturalism. Speaking about these things, or just hinting that China may not be the center kingdom, will

  • when all of those vicious old bastards running China are dead. The only good thing about the Chinese gov't is that it's made of up men whose days are numbered.

Slashdot Top Deals

UNIX is hot. It's more than hot. It's steaming. It's quicksilver lightning with a laserbeam kicker. -- Michael Jay Tucker

Close