Does this article defend Israel? Does Israel being bad make China good?

In 1947, the Arabs were offered equal partnership in the nation of Israel. Given their radical association with the Nazi's in WW2, the Arab leadership decided they wanted all of Israel and instead of a stable and prosperous country we have conflict. This is what terrorism has given the region because what does a terrorist do if there is peace?

First of all, there are no "western powers." There is the US and a bunch of second-rate Euro countries. It isnt the 1870's anymore.

More importantly, it is foolish to see what the Chinese are doing as in any way different. Cooperating with regimes that only hold power through force and fear somehow gives them the moral highground? Im not defending the US, I dont need to here. The only reason China can look good is that it hasnt been a world power long enough to make any big screwups. It will. And then, what is preferable: a democracy that is sometimes hypocritical, or an openly oppressive and amoral single-party dictatorship? You need to maintain a more open frame of reference.

Poor Taliban, bullied into submission! That's only supposed to happen to women and non-muslims! I heard the western infidels are even building schools in afghanistan, oh such brutality, thank allah the moderate muslim ummah is either siding with the taliban or not supporting the infidels. And that thuggish theocracy on the persian gulf, only wants to live in peace, chants every friday for world peace, but here comes america and the west to bully it - after mercilessly destroying peaceful iraq - and they just won't cooperate no matter how many times the ayatollahs call for its death as the centrifuges keep spinning and enriching uranium. It seems like North Korea maybe be a victim of this bullying too, perhaps the capitalist west couldn't handle the sophistication and prosperity and happiness that communism brought that NK that now it wants an excuse to destroy it.

It's funny but then I think that such ignorant and juvenile thinking is significant, if not the majority, in the world and I'm reminded against why I'm a misanthrope.

If one day the spread of nuclear weapons, especially their spread in one of the most fanatical and backward regions of the world, results in a nuke going off in a western city and hundreds of millions dying in retaliation - and who knows about a nuclear winter - I would really like to see what the useful idiots think then.

A point would be helpful. Why do flaws in some countries make other countries better? I just dont get it

i dont get your question. flaws in some countries dont make other countries better. US and UK are bad. an elaboration would be helpful.

Yes, you can talk about the US support for corrupt and evil regimes, as many people do. However, China also exists, and it also does stuff. Do you really think that we should just never think about Chinas support for evil regimes? The US may be the biggest arms supplier in the middle east, (though I think Russia must be really close) but China is certainly the biggest arms supplier in south-east asia, another often violent region. In southern Africa, it probably is more involved than us. You only thought of the middle east, there is violence elsewhere. You seem to be unaware that multiple things can exist at once. Your thinking is like that of a large, non-human mammal, you seem to assume that only the thing you are focusing on at any given moment exists.

I'm from neither of those countries, but I'm from one of the small countries on the gulf, and it's hilarious reading stuff like this. All those regimes can survive w/o the US, except in the case of an invasion or something, in which case the US is also protecting the people. In my case, most people here from what I see are living pretty good and there's a lively press too, it won't cross some taboos but those are cultural more than political. Citizens have many rights, institutions like the police are much more developed and closer to a 'first world' country than 'democracies' like India. I could go on and on but there's no point.

The US nagging everybody about human rights is better than not, but ultimately it's the people that must change. Oh, and if there is democracy here, we'd be much worse. And if the US leaves on top of that, and there's nothing to nudge them in a better direction or protect the country from foreign invasion, well we're screwed. The US plays a positive role here, no matter how many idiots of different colors say otherwise, and it doesn't control/run the region like it wants, otherwise there would be no damn OPEN and everybody would have supported the iraq war (which I did/still do) and so many other damn things.

Those countries, those 'bad' allies of the US, and China too, are the responsibility of their people. It's their values and culture that dictate how their government runs more than anything. It's their support, and there's plenty of it, that helps those regimes survive more than american support - whatever that is, and more importantly it's their apathy or half-hearted opposition where they do oppose it that perpetuates those government. Basically, you get the government you deserve, democracy or not.

The US doesn't run the world, it has interests and builds alliances with necessary countries, just like everybody else. If it didn't you'd be screaming about arrogance and what have you, but then when they engage it's oh appeasement and America is responsible for that dictatorship, not the damn people that let it rule them, or in most cases actually support them.

In some cases where the US gives aid to countries, like Jordan and Egypt, I think it has a responsibility to use that to promote democracy and human rights, but that's it. Most likely it would still get blamed for everything, for 'interfering' and whatever.

Thanks N, but the topic was specifically China's embrassing allies. The South East as you pointed is there; even there the US is perhaps further away from "base" so to speak whereas China is at the door step. In Africa, the US supported Siad Barre, Mobutu and even the sham democracy in Nigeria under Obasanjo.
Realities are everywhere but as we say " it is the rain that drencged you that is rain". The US policies have hurt far too many people even though it has its own good side. You may need to reassess your world view. The US is not the only country with interest in development od peace. We are all stake holders though some are louder than others. Surely Beijing has helped and it is just recently that her economic might came into focus.

Ive never been one to stress "peace" by itself, which has long been a defense of oppression. The Chinese government does want peace, a peace where it remains entrenched in power and doesnt have to fight to keep it. That is an ideal peace for them. Im kind of glad to have another world power; things never work when one entity holds all the cards. However, China is clearly worse than the US. Simply put, a country that legitamately tries to be a free country (the US) has done bad things on scale X. Now there is a country that will probably be like the US over the next century, except they hold power through force and blatant manipulation. If their capabilities are equal to the US, the bad things they will do will be on a greater scale than X. I have no doubt the Chinese want peace, I want peace and freedom. The Chinese still kill several thousand of their own people every year as a means of political control, how nice will they be to foreignors?

Isn't funny how all of Beijing's allies resemble Beijing in controlling the populations of their countries. I wonder how many more millions will die in Africa and Asia like died in China under Mao?

The People's Republic of China (PRC) plays a key role in U.S. policy toward the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK or North Korea). The PRC is North Korea's closest ally, largest provider of food, fuel, and industrial machinery, and arguably the country most able to wield influence in Pyongyang. China also is the host of the Six-Party Talks (involving the United States, China, North Korea, South Korea, Japan, and Russia) over North Korea's nuclear program. xerox workcentre ink The close PRC-DPRK relationship is of interest to U.S. policymakers because China plays a pivotal role in the success of U.S. efforts to halt the DPRK's nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs, to prevent nuclear proliferation, to enforce economic sanctions, and to ensure that North Korean refugees that cross into China receive humane treatment. Since late 2008, China has been not just the largest, but also the dominant, provider of aid and partner in trade with North Korea. Beijing and Pyongyang are currently going through a period of amicable diplomatic and economic relations following the negative response by Beijing to the DPRK's nuclear and missile tests in 2009 and China's support of new United Nations Security Council sanctions directed at North Korea. China's enforcement of those U.N. sanctions, however, is still unclear. workcentre xi70c ink cartridges China has enforced some aspects of the sanctions that relate directly to North Korea's ballistic missile and nuclear programs, but Beijing has been less strict on controlling exports of dual use products. Chinese shipments of banned luxury goods to the DPRK continue to increase.

This is an argument. An argument I might disagree with, but a solid argument. This is what can change peoples minds, and promote discussion, not emotional venting, pedantic displays of facts, or self-satisfied smugness. Please, early commenters, take a picture. If you wrote like this, you would cease to be a waste of a conscious mind. I even would stop making fun of you.

I have some sympathy for the earlier commenters. True; the article never claims that America could not as easily be substituted for China with a list of some of the US's more dubious friends as the rogue states. It is, however, of a kind with a lot of such pieces which highlight unpleasant states and then condemn their friends by association. Most of these are done straight faced, without any sense irony, with the author oblivious to the fact it applies just as well to them.
That is not to say the same kind of thing is not happening elsewhere in reverse. The US's terrorist problem is largely due to its aiding and abetting Israel which - as Ian points out - is the obvious one with which to tar the US. I would like to add a few more names for consideration that I think the US would be well advised to distance themselves from.
Yemen - Up for a $115m military aid package. Not a nice regime with dubious legitimacy and writ over almost none of the country. All is forgiven/brushed under the carpet because one of the groups they are fighting are Shiite and get some of their backing form Iran.
Ethiopia - The government has just been democratically re-elected - again. Mugabe would be proud of the high electoral standards. This is a country that needs many blind eyes. It was very useful in supplying the man power to invade and destroy Somalia. Shame it has just made it more radical and destroyed the only stability for decades.
Kenya - not the nice holiday destination it once was. Tricky to think of a bunch of politicians less hell bent on feathering their own nests. It is enough to make you feel all warm and fuzzy about the US house of representatives.
These are - naturally - all GWOT bed fellows. In times past we would be talking about communism and the likes of Noriega.
The US needs to perform a serious re-evaluation of where states lie in on the line from good to bad in reality and in the mind of the Government, media and - through these lenses - the people. You will get little disagreement around the world that Myanmar, N. Korea and Zimbabwe are not nice states but there are some very strange discrepancies between the global average view and the US view. The most glaring are Israel, Cuba, Iran and Venezuela. For instance I am not sure how you would split Saudi Arabia and Iran they seem about equally in most respects and yet I would venture to suggest most Americans would favour the KSA. From the other direction opinion polls show the citizens of each view the US and Israel equally unfavorably, the only difference is in their rulers. Should the House of Saud go the way of the Shah or the KSA become a democracy -Allah forfend - then only by ethnicity and the Sunni/Shia distinction could you tell them apart. Then there are the governments that would not exist (literally, not like the friends of China list) Somalia, Iraq and Afghanistan (and possibly Israel?).