i finally finished my blog. my internet was down for the past week and sadly could not do anything on the net.

went to kieran's house yesterday for football viewing. 11 people went. They can be divided like this.
Man Utd fans: shou jian, shihang, matthew, kieran, shanzhi, me, koon chong
Liverpool: thom
Arsenal: theo(dore)
Chelsea: Jarrell

i forgot hern wei supported which team 0_o.

man utd lost. we were like so sad. words cannot express our feelings. imagine the shock and horror when drogba scored. we nearly caused the great singapore flood with our tears.

0 0
' '
-----

Article

After reading the article, I wondered: what is the point of creating yet another opposition party, which will further undermine their already weakened state? This is because the opposition really would have to get their act together before the next elections to win over more voters.

To win over people, you will need to appeal to their emotions and intellect. Yet how do you expect to convince people that you are better, when you do ridiculous things like slandering, sit-ins in the middle of the road and misplacing your electoral application form? There are many examples in these instances, notably the Chee siblings for the first two examples, and James Gomez in the latter. Would slandering the PAP for corruption help, like what Dr Chee Soon Juan did? It leaves you to wonder the childishness of their actions.

Also, I believe one reason the opposition did considerably well at the previous election was more due to the population’s increasing dislike of the PAP’s electoral methods than their increasing favouring of the opposition. There is a difference, between voting for someone because he is good, and because I dislike the other, so it is better him than the other. This shows that the opposition has not succeeded in convincing, only that the PAP has failed.

The naivety of our democracy is also revealed in our elections. Our political leaders prefers to concentrate more on their opponents’ weaknesses and character flaws, than on the real important issues, like policies and laws. Our democracy resembles that of Taiwan’s chaotic model, where more emphasis is placed on the process than the end result of helping the common good. The opposition is guilty of this (Chee, Chee and Gomez). Then again, so is the PAP. Think MM Lee, slander, court, bankruptcy, HDB upgrades and Hougang.

All these lead us to questioning the usefulness of creating a new political party in the name of democracy. Jeyaretnam laments about the lack of political freedom in this country. But with more freedom, what can he or anyone of the opposition do? The opposition does not even look capable handling responsibly what little freedom they have now. Would you let your son travel to South Africa, when he cannot even travel from Khatib to Yishun without getting lost? Ultimately, we must remember that be it communism or democracy, all must be done for the common good, not just for the sake of it. Would giving Jeyaretnam and gang more freedom mean Singapore would be spurred on to greater heights and progress? Judging from the behaviour of our politicians from both sides of parliament, I doubt it.

(437 words)

Article

The above article seems to indicate that all is well with North Korea and her diplomatic partners, but in fact it is just another exemplification of how North Korea is abusing the trust shown by other nations.

Just as recently as February, six-nation party talks agreed on something for once, agreeing that North Korea would shut down its nuclear processing plant in return for monetary incentives among others. To ensure this, the United Nations would be sending officials down to the ground in North Korea. There was a meeting to discuss the warning time North Korea would be given, but why they would need some warning time if they had no weapons is baffling. That is beside the point here though, for North Korea had yet to shut down its nuclear plants.

In spite of all their actions, other nations still give some sort of preferential treatment to North Korea, with her actions resembling that of a spoilt child at a candy shop. China, a close ally of North Korea, still gives North Korea regular aid and ration supplies despite delivering empty promises. Russia, another considerably close ally of the north, also has avoided applying any considerable pressure to North Korea to start delivering. The same can be said of South Korea, who refuses to do so for fear of damaging an already fragile relationship.

However, at this point we must understand the circumstances surrounding North Korea’s supposedly weird and irrational actions. North Korea, despite increasing contact with the outside world, is still weary of so-called foreign powers, which according to their true ideology of communism is a detriment to progress towards to common good. Also, North Korea refuses to take the first step of the agreement for fear of betrayal by the others. Say for example, they shut their nuclear power plants, but the United States instead of normalising relations, instead take advantage of the situation and refuse to grant aid. North Korea is then stuck in a seriously disadvantaged situation with everything to lose.

North Korea realises how influential possessing nuclear technology can be. They may not have the economical might like Japan, but what they have is pure brute power, in a world where anarchy still rule. They believe that having a nuclear weapon is what stops the United States from, say, invading them.

Ultimately, all these actions stem from a lack of trust with each other, a lack of willingness to take the first step and put oneself at a temporary disadvantage by offering the olive branch first. This is diplomacy at its most delicate state. Diplomacy is give and take, a two-way affair. For it to work, both parties must be willing and gracious players, able to promise and compromise.

(455 words)