Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

China - and the dangerous drift to war in Asia

nanayon

Old-Salt
I don't think China should have to justify or prove legitimacy of its acts to any European entity. This game of rule of law that these former european colonisers speak of is just for their own audiences. I support China's unification with Taiwan and HongKong, even if it's by force but it would be better if they adopt internal democracy first. It doesn't have to be immediate but that's a must.
The late Liu Xiaobo once said that he would continue to write about and advocate for democracy in China even though he also said that the CCP won't let it happen even for 300 years.
 

IndiaGB

Clanker
The late Liu Xiaobo once said that he would continue to write about and advocate for democracy in China even though he also said that the CCP won't let it happen even for 300 years.
Democracy would arrive in China when it's ready for this and not vulnerable to foreigners especially those white skins. It's won't happen on UK- European terms but their own. Indians suffered from democracy where they tried to prove their democratic credentials by cuddling to the same powers who had exploited them for so long. Now Indians facing threat of great human losses from their own people. China didn't make the mistake India did. ROC may have fallen for it. I appreciate Chinese grit and resolve for this. They paid the price and got the success for standing up to rest of world. India could learn a lesson from China here.
 

nanayon

Old-Salt
Democracy would arrive in China when it's ready for this and not vulnerable to foreigners especially those white skins. It's won't happen on UK- European terms but their own. Indians suffered from democracy where they tried to prove their democratic credentials by cuddling to the same powers who had exploited them for so long. Now Indians facing threat of great human losses from their own people. China didn't make the mistake India did. ROC may have fallen for it. I appreciate Chinese grit and resolve for this. They paid the price and got the success for standing up to rest of world. India could learn a lesson from China here.

From that perspective of India, yeah, and it wasn't he first time I've seen that kind of credit given to China.

But democracy sin't coming to the PRC. Liu Xiaobo died trying to get that though.

As for Taiwan serving as an example for China.. well, if Taiwan maintained a strong embracing of its KMT legacy, maybe someday (300 years from now??) Taiwan as the ROC can insert its political structure onto the mainland. There are things that the KMT legacy has that can hold pride, such as parts of the battle of Shanghai in 1937 or the defense of Hengyang in 1944. But Chiang Kai-shek didn't leave a good legacy, forced mandarin language and so on. But with the existence of the massive CCP and its neverending insitance of the one-china policy with the implied necessity in seeing that one China being the CCP, so the KMT suffocates. If one has been paying attention, there have been many changes, little by little towards an independent Taiwanese identity in Taiwan.
 
Actually your talking out of your behind.... Taiwan is free and has 1.4% of people who see china as an opportunity. Hong Kong was returned with the two-system in place and at that point in time, how many did not support the two systems ?

Obviously, some people are rational and accepted the end to the two-systems because they're just want to go along to get along and the rising support, is linked to the imposition of force, you must be so proud !
I am quoting your own post and I am 'talking out of my behind'?

Actually, quoting you, I suppose that I am.
 
How do you think China acquired Manchuria, Korea, Uighur, Tibet and even tried to invade Japan.
Leftovers, for the first part. The QIng emerged in Manchuria (the clue's in the name) and conquered 'China' and Tibet as part of their expanding empire, then bequethed the entire polity to the subsequent Republic of China.

Uighur is an ethnic group spread across Central Asia and their presence within Imperial China was down to having been kicked out of their homeland in what's now Kyrgyzstan and finding sponsors in the Tang Emperors - think of it as a bit like the Krajina Serbs and the Hapsburgs.

Korea was never acquired by any Empire as it was just too much trouble and since it was a relatively peaceable tributary state, nobody was really bothered about conquering it. I don't recall 'China' ever attempting to invade Japan, unless you mean when the Mongols co-opted them into it as conquered subjects during the Yuan?

The uncomfortable truth is your facts, are predicated on the Imperial Chinese claim on Taiwan and by your twisted logic,
The uncomfortable truth - it certainly seems to make you uncomfortable to the point of blanket denial - is that every country that matters (and most of those that don't) state officially that Taiwan is a part of 'China' and that what 'China' actually is is a matter for the Chinese to decide.

Strange, then, that they don't seem to be able to stop themselves sticking an entire galley of oars in at the slightest opportunity. You'd think they'd be able to simple say one way or another and then stick to it, wouldn't you?
 
I am quoting your own post and I am 'talking out of my behind'?

Actually, quoting you, I suppose that I am.
You keep pumping out that Xi Dynasty propaganda. You may have bought elements in western democracy and business, to overlook the Tibetans/Uighurs. But Taiwan, has more than a few Enfield/Brens to defend themselves with and the cost of invasion will be so massive your bought and paid for types in the democracies will be the first to desert you and run for cover.
 
The late Liu Xiaobo once said that he would continue to write about and advocate for democracy in China even though he also said that the CCP won't let it happen even for 300 years.
He also said:

It is true that I was one of the last people to leave Tiananmen Square on June 4th, but I did nothing to volunteer myself during the bloody terror of the massacre’s aftermath, nothing to show that a kernel of my humanity had survived. After I left the square, I did not go to Beijing Normal University campus to check on the students from my alma mater who presumably had also left the square. Still less did I consider going out into the streets to minister to dead and wounded whom I did not know. Instead I fled to the relative safety of the foreign diplomatic housing compound. It is no wonder that the ordinary people who lived through the butchery might ask: “When great terror engulfed the city of Beijing, where were all those ‘black hands’ ”?

For all his popularity in certain Western circles, few Chinese know about him and fewer still care.
 
Leftovers, for the first part. The QIng emerged in Manchuria (the clue's in the name) and conquered 'China' and Tibet as part of their expanding empire, then bequethed the entire polity to the subsequent Republic of China.

Uighur is an ethnic group spread across Central Asia and their presence within Imperial China was down to having been kicked out of their homeland in what's now Kyrgyzstan and finding sponsors in the Tang Emperors - think of it as a bit like the Krajina Serbs and the Hapsburgs.

Korea was never acquired by any Empire as it was just too much trouble and since it was a relatively peaceable tributary state, nobody was really bothered about conquering it. I don't recall 'China' ever attempting to invade Japan, unless you mean when the Mongols co-opted them into it as conquered subjects during the Yuan?


The uncomfortable truth - it certainly seems to make you uncomfortable to the point of blanket denial - is that every country that matters (and most of those that don't) state officially that Taiwan is a part of 'China' and that what 'China' actually is is a matter for the Chinese to decide.

Strange, then, that they don't seem to be able to stop themselves sticking an entire galley of oars in at the slightest opportunity. You'd think they'd be able to simple say one way or another and then stick to it, wouldn't you?
This is a game of pandering a bully and hoping they're will grow out of the desire to dominate others has failed(Tibet) and failed(Hong Kong) and failed (Uighur) and failed(thieves of the world unite in china)....

As for the 'countries that matter'. Lets see how the Taiwanese peoples right to self determination fits with 'China decides'. I think you will find if China ever does decide to seek action against a democracy, it will by default force the world to react, otherwise the entire internationalist rhetoric will collapse in on itself.
 
Lets see how the Taiwanese peoples right to self determination fits with 'China decides'.
Our country has already decided that this doesn't matter. It's also decide nor does the Basque or Catalan, Kosovo Serb, Trans-Dniestrian or South Ossetian right. The Artsakhians were prepared to fight to defend their right and what did the international community do to help them?

The international community made its choice in 1971 and shows no sign of changing its mind.
 

nanayon

Old-Salt
He also said:



For all his popularity in certain Western circles, few Chinese know about him and fewer still care.

If you are as informed as you seem to be taken for, then surely you also know that within the CCP at the time of the 1989 protests, there was the side that wanted to ease the demands of of the protesters with a little return on the demands, and there was the hardliners that wanted to crush the protesters. If I recall correctly, June 4th wasn't the first time the PLA was ordered to use force against the protesters but was the second time. The first time was in may and the PLA didn't comply. But the second time around, the order came straight from Deng Xiaoping, so there was no saying no to that. So who was that ran out to the mass of student protesters urging them to go home before the brutal crackdown was to begin? Who was it? What happened to him? You know right?
 
If you are as informed as you seem to be taken for, then surely you also know that within the CCP at the time of the 1989 protests, there was the side that wanted to ease the demands of of the protesters with a little return on the demands
The protesters' demands primarily being an end to corruption and - incredibly ironically - the reimposition of economic controls, the lifting of which had seen rampant inflation and spiralling living costs. Hardly any of them knew what democracy even meant - one protester interviewed by a western TV crew said he thought it meant being able to choose his own work assignment after graduation.

there was the hardliners that wanted to crush the protesters.
The hardliners had all been victimised by Red Guards during the Cultural Revolution and saw events through that lens. This was particularly so after the oaf Wu'er Kaixi told Li Pen live on national TV that he didn't know how much longer the student leadership could keep control.

If I recall correctly, June 4th wasn't the first time the PLA was ordered to use force against the protesters but was the second time. The first time was in may and the PLA didn't comply.
The PLA attempted it in May but found their convoys blockaded by Beijing citizenry. Since those troops were largely from local garrisons, there wasn't much stomach for a fight with the general populace.

By the time June rolled around, things had gotten much more desperate in the capital and an ugly undercurrent of violence lent credence to talk of a counter-revolution. The Army came in better prepared and better motivated.

So who was that ran out to the mass of student protesters urging them to go home before the brutal crackdown was to begin? Who was it?
Zhao Ziyang, General Secretary of the CCP. Here he is.


The sober-looking cove in the black suit visible over his left shoulder is Wen Jiabao.

What happened to him? You know right?
30-odd years under house arrest. Party Discipline is a right bastard.

If you want to find out more about 1989, I can't recommend highly-enough Perry & Link's The Tiananmen Papers; and for a grass-roots view Philip Cunningham's Tiananmen Moon: Inside the Chinese Student. Liu appears as a minor functionary rather than a prime mover of the student movement.
 

nanayon

Old-Salt
The protesters' demands primarily being an end to corruption and - incredibly ironically - the reimposition of economic controls, the lifting of which had seen rampant inflation and spiralling living costs. Hardly any of them knew what democracy even meant - one protester interviewed by a western TV crew said he thought it meant being able to choose his own work assignment after graduation.


The hardliners had all been victimised by Red Guards during the Cultural Revolution and saw events through that lens. This was particularly so after the oaf Wu'er Kaixi told Li Pen live on national TV that he didn't know how much longer the student leadership could keep control.


The PLA attempted it in May but found their convoys blockaded by Beijing citizenry. Since those troops were largely from local garrisons, there wasn't much stomach for a fight with the general populace.

By the time June rolled around, things had gotten much more desperate in the capital and an ugly undercurrent of violence lent credence to talk of a counter-revolution. The Army came in better prepared and better motivated.


Zhao Ziyang, General Secretary of the CCP. Here he is.


The sober-looking cove in the black suit visible over his left shoulder is Wen Jiabao.


30-odd years under house arrest. Party Discipline is a right bastard.

If you want to find out more about 1989, I can't recommend highly-enough Perry & Link's The Tiananmen Papers; and for a grass-roots view Philip Cunningham's Tiananmen Moon: Inside the Chinese Student. Liu appears as a minor functionary rather than a prime mover of the student movement.

Why do you answer about Liu in such a way? As if not being immediately there when it happened as if discredit all his attempts for bringing democracy to China. Even if you are anti-democracy for China, any Chinese that would want to see democracy in China would not have to pass some sort of requirements test in have a sort of valid opinion and capacity towards that end for not being a major part of the 1989 protests. Zhao Ziyang taking that punishment served as an example to anyone else that would challenge the CCP, democracy activism being one form of a challenge.
 

nanayon

Old-Salt
This is a game of pandering a bully and hoping they're will grow out of the desire to dominate others has failed(Tibet) and failed(Hong Kong) and failed (Uighur) and failed(thieves of the world unite in china)....

As for the 'countries that matter'. Lets see how the Taiwanese peoples right to self determination fits with 'China decides'. I think you will find if China ever does decide to seek action against a democracy, it will by default force the world to react, otherwise the entire internationalist rhetoric will collapse in on itself.

Japan's second in-line defense minster said to the US in late December last year that the defense of Taiwan was a red line.
Taiwan safety key: Japan official - Taipei Times

In the meantime, Japan currently had anti-ship missiles with 200-300km range. It recently embarked on the development on 900km and 1500km range anti-ship missiles as well as hyper sonic gliders which will include anti-ship hyper sonic. That range will be able to cover Taiwan's defense from the Ryukyu islands, islands where the JGSDF is currently deploying the current crop of anti-ship missiles.

A recent message from Taiwan:
日台友情
taiwanjapan1.jpg


台灣 日本
taiwanjapan2.jpg


If there was a similar message for the PRC on Taipei101, I haven't seen it.
 
Last edited:
Japan's second in-line defense minster said to the US in late December last year that the defense of Taiwan was a red line.
Taiwan safety key: Japan official - Taipei Times

In the meantime, Japan currently had anti-ship missiles with 200-300km range. It recently embarked on the development on 900km and 1500km range anti-ship missiles as well as hyper sonic gliders which will include anti-ship hyper sonic. That range will be able to cover Taiwan's defense from the Ryukyu islands, islands where the JGSDF is currently deploying the current crop of anti-ship missiles.

I recent message from Taiwan:
日台友情
View attachment 551692

台灣 日本
View attachment 551693

If there was a similar message for the PRC on Taipei101, I haven't seen it.
Those enarmoured with china strongly remind me of the type who used to travel to Berlin and Moscow in the thirties.
 
For all his popularity in certain Western circles, few Chinese know about him and fewer still care.

Which just goes to show how effective CCP state suppression of dissenting voices is in the Celestial Empire of Emperor Xi and his predecessors
 

nanayon

Old-Salt
Those enarmoured with china strongly remind me of the type who used to travel to Berlin and Moscow in the thirties.

Some people, disheartened by any shortcomings from western governments, seek alternative but at the same time they are normalized the nature of the absolute and restrictive nature of a CCP controlled country, charmed by flashy looking sky scrapers. China is a big country.. some can argue that they need tight control to hold their country to together. But no reason for that type of regime to get toleration for expansion to places like the South China Sea or Taiwan.
 
Why do you answer about Liu in such a way?
Because it was appropriate to set the facts straight when he was being promoted as a leader of the 1989 Tiananmen Movement. He wasn't, those were all students.

As if not being immediately there when it happened as if discredit all his attempts for bringing democracy to China.
There are many more people in China who have done more to bring accountability and the rule of law to China than Liu did. He's been picked as a totem not because of what he represents to China but because of what he represents to the West.

Why didn't they pick Chai Ling, Wang Dan or Liu Gang instead?

Maybe it was related to their less than wholehearted embrace of 'western values' as a solution for China's ills?
 
Japan's second in-line defense minster said to the US in late December last year that the defense of Taiwan was a red line.
Wait, so Japan formally acknowledges Taiwan as part of China but will actively prevent any action of sovereign control - but they're entirely trustworthy and can be taken at their word?

If you say so...
 

Latest Threads

Top