China accuses US of 'stirring up' South China Sea tensions

[peacefan]

JoeB131 it's clear we're just talking past eachother, selectively ignoring eachother's points (much like your average politician or massmedia news person would), to prove that the side we support is right.

you're an apologist, Joe.
that's worse than being an appeaser.
an appeaser merely hopes for the best, and can still be pursuaded to come around to a defensive position before it's too late.
an apologist however, shoves the past and present under the rug to put a misbehaving group (with even worse plans), in a positive light.

and for the record : i stopped being an appeaser when i realized that 'going around the SCS' would cost tons of extra shipping cost, and thus market advantage for western companies.

the Chinese are like locusts these days : moving from field to field to consume everything in such a field ("to become the dominant player..").

 

[JoeB131]

it's clear we're just talking past eachother, selectively ignoring eachother's points (much like your average politician or massmedia news person would), to prove that the side we support is right.

When you are devoted to your hate to the point you can't be reasoned with, and take on a name like "Peacefan", but want us to get into a conflict with another nation that has really done us no harm and would be ultimately disastrous, then yes, there really isn't much point talking to you.

I challenge you warmongers to expose your lies... I'm really not interested in changing your minds.

you're an apologist, Joe.
that's worse than being an appeaser.
an appeaser merely hopes for the best, and can still be pursuaded to come around to a defensive position before it's too late.
an apologist however, shoves the past and present under the rug to put a misbehaving group (with even worse plans), in a positive light.

I'm not an appeaser or an apologist, I'm a pragmatist.

China has been around for 4000 years. China is not going anywhere. China will be here long after America has collapsed into squabbling tribes. I'm less worried about what China might do to us and what we are doing to ourselves.

and for the record : i stopped being an appeaser when i realized that 'going around the SCS' would cost tons of extra shipping cost, and thus market advantage for western companies.

Why are you under ANY impression that "Market Advantage" for Western companies is important to your life? These Western Companies could have kept the good paying jobs in their own countries, and kept manufacturing nearby. They didn't. They rushed to move 12,000 factories to China and then wonder why China suddenly looks big and scary.

So you don't think I'm flailing pom-poms for the Middle Kingdom, I see some fairly serious bumps in the road ahead for China. One of them is that decades of the idiotic "One Child Policy" have resulted in a huge demographic bomb where they will have too many old people and not enough young people to support them. China has invested tons into its internal real-estate market that will probably go bust like the US did in 2008. They built "Ghost Cities" that they don't need, which sit vacant now.

China isn't Nazi Germany. They aren't seeking to take over the whole of Asia. Even if they were, they are mostly hemmed in by India and Russia, countries that are more than capable of defending themselves.

Here's the main reason why I'm not sitting at home panicking because they "might" invade Taiwan.

Amphibious invasions are fantastically difficult to pull off. For instance, the invasion of France in 1944 involved two million men, resulting in 124K casualties against some 640K Axis defenders. And this was ONLY after achviing complete air and naval superiority, and having the element of surprise, and just a bit of Axis incompetence. Not to mention an active French Underground helping the allies.

Taiwan, on the other hand, has had 50 years to prepare for an invasion. In a simple cost-benefit analysis, invading Taiwan would not be worth the costs.

the Chinese are like locusts these days : moving from field to field to consume everything in such a field ("to become the dominant player..").

Locust? Really? Seems like you are pretty keen on dehumanizing them.

If the Chinese are besting us in certain fields, it's because we've not worked hard enough. I don't fault people for working harder or being smarter.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Again, what "History"? Only three military actions since 1949, two of which were justified.

They didn't "invade" Tibet; they reasserted their authority over what the international community recognized as part of China. They just deposed a rather nasty theocracy that abused the crap out of the Peasants. But Richard Gere goes around with a gerbil up his ass with the Dalai Lama and say, "Oooh, poor Tibet." Noboy in Tibet really wants the Lamas back in charge.



They attacked Vietnam for three weeks to make a point. We invaded Vietnam for 8 years, inflicted untold misery on the country, are still weepy about it.


And so? China had the ability to enforce her claim... Vietnam did not.


Why you are right. IN 10,000 years, they might take over the world at that rate!

The reality is, India is currently run by a Trump-esque Hindu bigot who is looking for trouble, that's why you had a border conflict.



You are using the Falklands Wars as an example. That war was stupid, and Thatcher and Galtiri both should have been tried as war Criminals.





Seems to me the people are benefiting from improved infrastructure. "I'm going to come in and build a road" seems like a much better policy than "I'm going to invade you over weapons that don't exist and then totally fuck up the occupation, leaving you at the mercy of crazy militias."



Again, you don't know Chinese people very well. The Chinese still hate Japan for what they did in WWII. They don't need Xi to tell them that. I know we don't hear much about it like we do about the Nazis in this country because the Chinese don't control Hollywood.

In fact, the only movie I've seen about Japanese atrocities in China made by Hollywood was a film about the Rape of Nanking, where it was focused on how the white people in Nanking had a sad.

"Justified" is the same as the US does. The US was "justified" in invading Afghanistan and Iraq, if you feel like that.

Tibet was conquered by the Mongol Yuan empire of China. But when the Yuan dynasty was overthrown, the Ming lost control of Tibet. The Qing then went and invaded again in 1720. But they weakened and their influence over Tibet also weakened.

So, China had controlled Tibet for two periods, under the Yuan for about 110 years 1244-1254 and the Qing dynasty 1720 to about 1911-1913, so a little less than 200 years. And China wasn't always that much in control there.

But in terms of modern history, it doesn't much matter. How many times the US has invaded doesn't tell the whole story. The 2002 coup d'etat in Venezuela was US supported, perhaps even started by the US. It's not considered so important because ultimately it failed after a week. However invading Iraq and deposing Saddam, or forcing a coup in Venezuela to oust Hugo Chavez amounted to the same thing.

China hasn't had the armed forces to win a war. They lost to Vietnam in 1979, and that must have been galling and no leader of China would have been willing to make such a mistake. Like I said, even in 2012 when Xi took over, the Chinese military was not very good. It was big but ineffective. Even after 10 years, it's still learning, still developing technology, most of which is designed to scare, rather than fight. They have "stealthy" jets, but they're not that stealthy, they're literally designed to look like US fighter jets, nothing more.

So, China's first objective is to take Taiwan. Until they do this, they're not going to be doing much in the way of invading, unless things change. And they can't take Taiwan. So.... There's no point in looking at how many times China has invaded this or that place, because it doesn't equate to the situation in reality.

Yeah, China invaded Vietnam because Vietnam went into Cambodia to rid them of the Khmer Rouge, the evil group who the US supported, China supported and everyone, except the Cambodians, seemed to love.

China went in, then withdrew, and Vietnam continued occupying Cambodia for another 10 years. Well done China.

As for the Paracel Islands, yes, China wasn't fighting the US, so it could "enforce its claims", same with the US in Iraq. You're justifying big countries being assholes.

"Again, you don't know Chinese people very well."

你以为你了解我吗？

 

[peacefan]

When you are devoted to your hate to the point you can't be reasoned with, and take on a name like "Peacefan", but want us to get into a conflict with another nation that has really done us no harm and would be ultimately disastrous, then yes, there really isn't much point talking to you.

I challenge you warmongers to expose your lies... I'm really not interested in changing your minds.

you shove China's and your own flaws under the rug,
but are all too eager to expose supposed flaws i might have (and btw, i'm no warmonger; i just really like the peace through strength stance)

Amphibious invasions are fantastically difficult to pull off. For instance, the invasion of France in 1944 involved two million men, resulting in 124K casualties against some 640K Axis defenders. And this was ONLY after achviing complete air and naval superiority, and having the element of surprise, and just a bit of Axis incompetence. Not to mention an active French Underground helping the allies.

Taiwan, on the other hand, has had 50 years to prepare for an invasion. In a simple cost-benefit analysis, invading Taiwan would not be worth the costs.

easy for you to say, typing from your comfy safe home in the US.

Locust? Really? Seems like you are pretty keen on dehumanizing them.

If the Chinese are besting us in certain fields, it's because we've not worked hard enough. I don't fault people for working harder or being smarter.

i was just trying to illustrate a point dude.
i wasn't trying to dehumanize them, it's called 'projecting a metaphor'.
which is entirely related to China's not so hidden desire to become a globally dominant player in nearly all fields of relevance.

 

[JoeB131]

"Justified" is the same as the US does. The US was "justified" in invading Afghanistan and Iraq, if you feel like that.

I think we were justified in attacking Afghanistan, but not Iraq, but that's off topic.

Their intervention in Korea was justified, because US Forces were making incursions into China and were very close to their border.
India, they were justified, in that the border is very much in dispute. Again, this is a case of the British messing stuff up and indigenous people needing to fix it.
Vietnam in 1979, we'll discuss below.

Tibet was conquered by the Mongol Yuan empire of China. But when the Yuan dynasty was overthrown, the Ming lost control of Tibet. The Qing then went and invaded again in 1720. But they weakened and their influence over Tibet also weakened.

So, China had controlled Tibet for two periods, under the Yuan for about 110 years 1244-1254 and the Qing dynasty 1720 to about 1911-1913, so a little less than 200 years. And China wasn't always that much in control there.

Point is, you are admitting that Tibet was part of China for much of recent history. Even when Tibet was semi-independent, the international community recognized it as part of China, not an independent country. Tibet did have certain levels of Autonomy, but it has autonomy now. It is classified as one of China's five Autonomous regions.

But in terms of modern history, it doesn't much matter. How many times the US has invaded doesn't tell the whole story. The 2002 coup d'etat in Venezuela was US supported, perhaps even started by the US. It's not considered so important because ultimately it failed after a week. However invading Iraq and deposing Saddam, or forcing a coup in Venezuela to oust Hugo Chavez amounted to the same thing.

So that was one coup that failed, and how many that succeeded? The term "Banana Republic" comes from our habit of overthrowing government we don't like to keep access to banana markets in Central America. Batista, Somoza, and a whole host of other dictators the US put into power. China doesn't act in Asia nearly as obnoxiously as the US has acted in Latin America.

China hasn't had the armed forces to win a war. They lost to Vietnam in 1979, and that must have been galling and no leader of China would have been willing to make such a mistake. Like I said, even in 2012 when Xi took over, the Chinese military was not very good. It was big but ineffective. Even after 10 years, it's still learning, still developing technology, most of which is designed to scare, rather than fight. They have "stealthy" jets, but they're not that stealthy, they're literally designed to look like US fighter jets, nothing more.

Well, I would argue that they didn't really "lose" in Vietnam; they just considered it not worth the trouble. And it only took them three weeks to figure that out, as opposed to 8 years for the US.

Again, the problem with you Sinophobes is that don't really understand Chinese history in the context of the "Century of Humiliation". For them, Taiwan, Tibet, Hong Kong are matters of national sovereignty, parts of their country that are ONLY separate because of the interference of outside powers. The Opium Wars, the Boxer Rebellion, Unequal Treaties, the Warlord Era, the Invasion by Japan. China is like the wimpy kid who hits the gym and takes martial arts because other people picked on him too much.

So, China's first objective is to take Taiwan. Until they do this, they're not going to be doing much in the way of invading unless things change. And they can't take Taiwan. So.... There's no point in looking at how many times China has invaded this or that place because it doesn't equate to the situation in reality.

Except China could have taken Taiwan at any time if it really wanted to, that's the thing. It would cost them way too much to do in terms of international relations and the loss of Taiwanese investment in the mainland, which is why they won't unless Taiwan's leaders do something as utterly reckless as declaring independence.

Yeah, China invaded Vietnam because Vietnam went into Cambodia to rid them of the Khmer Rouge, the evil group who the US supported, China supported and everyone, except the Cambodians, seemed to love.

China went in, then withdrew, and Vietnam continued occupying Cambodia for another 10 years. Well done China.

The US didn't support the Khmer Rouge. We were responsible for putting them in power, as we undermined their legitimate neutral government and then bombed the shit out of the place, causing resentment by rural people against city dwellers who ran the country, and the Killing Fields resulted.

China invaded Vietnam, but gave up after about three weeks. Wow. That's actually kind of impressive. We occupied Afghanistan for 20 years, everyone knowing the minute we left, the Taliban would be back in power. Biden pulled the bandage off, and people are still mad at him for doing it.

As for the Paracel Islands, yes, China wasn't fighting the US, so it could "enforce its claims", same with the US in Iraq. You're justifying big countries being assholes.

Except the two things aren't comparable at all. China claimed an Island that it had a pretty good claim to. We invaded Iraq over weapons that didn't exist, ignoring all attempts to peacefully resolve the situation because Bush wanted to get Saddam for humiliating his father.

你以为你了解我吗？

I understand you perfectly well.

You are like a lot of other Americans who need to think China is an enemy because our Military Industrial Complex needs an enemy to justify huge military spending while we let people sleep on the streets and go hungry.

 

[JoeB131]

you shove China's and your own flaws under the rug,
but are all too eager to expose supposed flaws i might have (and btw, i'm no warmonger; i just really like the peace through strength stance)

Except that never really works, does it? We spend 5% of our GDP on the military (and yes, I personally benefited from that... the military bought my college degree and my first house) and have we had "Peace" since the end of WWII? It seems we find ourselves in one conflict after another, expending hundreds of billions with very little to show for it.

We spend more on our military than the next 10 countries combined, and 7 of those are allies.

easy for you to say, typing from your comfy safe home in the US.

Except I served in the US Military for 11 years (Active Duty and Reserve) so I kind of get to sit and pontificate about military matters. You can thank me later.

i was just trying to illustrate a point dude.
i wasn't trying to dehumanize them, it's called 'projecting a metaphor'.
which is entirely related to China's not so hidden desire to become a globally dominant player in nearly all fields of relevance.

Really? The US seems to be more what you are describing. We have 4% of the world's population and consume 18% of its energy resources. We use 1/3rd of the world's paper. The ironic thing is that China has gotten rich selling us stuff we want. Ah, but China is the bad guy.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I think we were justified in attacking Afghanistan, but not Iraq, but that's off topic.

Their intervention in Korea was justified, because US Forces were making incursions into China and were very close to their border.
India, they were justified, in that the border is very much in dispute. Again, this is a case of the British messing stuff up and indigenous people needing to fix it.
Vietnam in 1979, we'll discuss below.



Point is, you are admitting that Tibet was part of China for much of recent history. Even when Tibet was semi-independent, the international community recognized it as part of China, not an independent country. Tibet did have certain levels of Autonomy, but it has autonomy now. It is classified as one of China's five Autonomous regions.



So that was one coup that failed, and how many that succeeded? The term "Banana Republic" comes from our habit of overthrowing government we don't like to keep access to banana markets in Central America. Batista, Somoza, and a whole host of other dictators the US put into power. China doesn't act in Asia nearly as obnoxiously as the US has acted in Latin America.



Well, I would argue that they didn't really "lose" in Vietnam; they just considered it not worth the trouble. And it only took them three weeks to figure that out, as opposed to 8 years for the US.

Again, the problem with you Sinophobes is that don't really understand Chinese history in the context of the "Century of Humiliation". For them, Taiwan, Tibet, Hong Kong are matters of national sovereignty, parts of their country that are ONLY separate because of the interference of outside powers. The Opium Wars, the Boxer Rebellion, Unequal Treaties, the Warlord Era, the Invasion by Japan. China is like the wimpy kid who hits the gym and takes martial arts because other people picked on him too much.



Except China could have taken Taiwan at any time if it really wanted to, that's the thing. It would cost them way too much to do in terms of international relations and the loss of Taiwanese investment in the mainland, which is why they won't unless Taiwan's leaders do something as utterly reckless as declaring independence.



The US didn't support the Khmer Rouge. We were responsible for putting them in power, as we undermined their legitimate neutral government and then bombed the shit out of the place, causing resentment by rural people against city dwellers who ran the country, and the Killing Fields resulted.

China invaded Vietnam, but gave up after about three weeks. Wow. That's actually kind of impressive. We occupied Afghanistan for 20 years, everyone knowing the minute we left, the Taliban would be back in power. Biden pulled the bandage off, and people are still mad at him for doing it.



Except the two things aren't comparable at all. China claimed an Island that it had a pretty good claim to. We invaded Iraq over weapons that didn't exist, ignoring all attempts to peacefully resolve the situation because Bush wanted to get Saddam for humiliating his father.


I understand you perfectly well.

You are like a lot of other Americans who need to think China is an enemy because our Military Industrial Complex needs an enemy to justify huge military spending while we let people sleep on the streets and go hungry.

No, I'm not like "a lot of other Americans".

China is an enemy to the US because of what China is and what China wants to be, rather than what I think.

 

[JoeB131]

No, I'm not like "a lot of other Americans".

China is an enemy to the US because of what China is and what China wants to be, rather than what I think.

Except you haven't really made that case. It most certainly is not the old Soviet Union, which encouraged revolutions all over the world and dominated the nations of Eastern Europe.

 

[beautress]

Joe B "I am going to try to take this apart, a bit, although it's bordering on hysteria. Full disclosure, my wife is from China and I get to watch a LOT of Chinese media. They aren't the bogeyman you make them out to be."

So are you saying that Mao didn't murder millions of Chinese citizens in and for years following WWII while the Western world were focused on getting rid of Hitler's murderous Nazi empire? Well, whatever you're thinking the Marxist-socialist Mao was tends to say he was somewhat worse than the average bogeyman who merely scares people. Mao cleansed the Chinese people with starvation, mass killings and totalitarianism. I just can't go along with China "cleansing" in countries near and bordering China.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1994/07/17/how-many-died-new-evidence-suggests-far-higher-numbers-for-the-victims-of-mao-zedongs-era/01044df5-03dd-49f4-a453-a033c5287bce/

 

[frigidweirdo]

Except you haven't really made that case. It most certainly is not the old Soviet Union, which encouraged revolutions all over the world and dominated the nations of Eastern Europe.

No, it's not like the Soviet Union. China is totally different, has a different way of looking at things. It does want influence and it is spreading its influence with loans, with the Belt and Road initiative, it's forcing countries to choose between trading with mainland China or with Taiwan, not both.

China, at present, says it does not interfere in other countries' affairs, which is totally not true. They helped the Russians hack the Ukraine at the beginning of the war. They then saw that the war wasn't going to be won quickly and publicly announced it would get Putin to stop the war, then got rather silent when Putin told them to politely "eff off"

It's been using hacking and other electronic means to control other countries. Democracies like Australia, the US, the UK have seen a lot of influencing through social media from "fake accounts" or whatever you want to call them.

It's also getting Chinese Americans to spy for China.

It's the stage at which China is at. It's not at the warring stage, because it can't afford it.

The US attacked Iraq and Afghanistan with a GDP per capita of somewhere around $50,000, China is below $13,000 per person.

The Iraq and Afghan wars cost the US so much, China can't afford to spend that money. They're spending it in other areas, the world has changed a lot on the last 10 years. The future of modern international politics and warfare is going to be hacking and influencing rather than full on invasions. Even the US invades then usually pulls out, like in Iraq, which was different to how things happened 100 years previously.

China is doing things in China's way. Communism "with Chinese characteristic", in the same way the rice is bread "with Chinese characteristics".

And to make my case. Xi is a politician. His father was a politician. Xi must have hated Mao because Mao sent him to Shaanxi to work in the countryside and Xi ran away from that and got arrested for it. Xi's father also got purged and sent to Luoyang to work in a factory. Xi was branded a "Child of a criminal", his mother was beaten and a sister was probably "persecuted to death".

But Xi now uses Mao, uses Mao's "legitimacy", anything to present the right image. Xi is very conservative, yet pushes Socialism and Communism.

Xi is a politician who has become successful by attacking other politicians, by having purges under the name of an "anti-corruption drive", a guy who gets everyone to say "Democracy, freedom" etc and has an iron fist and doesn't let anyone say anything against him.

He hasn't grown because of military action. He's grown because of political action. It's who he is, and he'll attack other countries in the same way, he'll grow China in the same way he grew his own career.

 

[JoeB131]

So are you saying that Mao didn't murder millions of Chinese citizens in and for years following WWII while the Western world were focused on getting rid of Hitler's murderous Nazi empire?

Yes, that's exactly what I am saying. Hitler was defeated in 1945. Mao didn't win the Chinese Civil War until 1949.

While there were a lot of unnecessary deaths during the time Mao ruled, a lot of that was due to natural disasters and economic mismanagement, particularly the "Great Leap Forward" which lead to the famine of 1959-1962.

Well, whatever you're thinking the Marxist-socialist Mao was tends to say he was somewhat worse than the average bogeyman who merely scares people.

Um, Mao died in 1976. Mao isn't the topic here. The thing is, most Chinese STILL rever Mao because he took China from a defeated country that was being abused by the other powers to one that became a power in her own right. Were there some major league fuckups like the Great Leap and the Cultural Revolution? You betcha.

Mao cleansed the Chinese people with starvation, mass killings and totalitarianism. I just can't go along with China "cleansing" in countries near and bordering China.

Well, good thing they aren't doing that, then.

 

[JoeB131]

No, it's not like the Soviet Union. China is totally different, has a different way of looking at things. It does want influence and it is spreading its influence with loans, with the Belt and Road initiative, it's forcing countries to choose between trading with mainland China or with Taiwan, not both.

China, at present, says it does not interfere in other countries' affairs, which is totally not true. They helped the Russians hack the Ukraine at the beginning of the war. They then saw that the war wasn't going to be won quickly and publicly announced it would get Putin to stop the war, then got rather silent when Putin told them to politely "eff off"

So those evil Chinese are helping poor countries - GASP - Build roads and infrastructure! Those FIENDS!!!

Okay, let's get serious here, for a second. The reality is that Taiwan is heavily invested in the mainland. It's a source of resources and cheap labor. The relationship isn't nearly as adversarial as you make it out to be.

It's been using hacking and other electronic means to control other countries. Democracies like Australia, the US, the UK have seen a lot of influencing through social media from "fake accounts" or whatever you want to call them.

Oh, wait, now you guys are concerned about hacking? Didn't seem to bother you when the Russians were doing it to help Trump.

It's also getting Chinese Americans to spy for China.

Um. Okay, so what? You don't think we have spies over there?

She can spy on me any time, though! Just don't tell my wife.

The US attacked Iraq and Afghanistan with a GDP per capita of somewhere around $50,000, China is below $13,000 per person.

The Iraq and Afghan wars cost the US so much, China can't afford to spend that money. They're spending it in other areas, the world has changed a lot on the last 10 years. The future of modern international politics and warfare is going to be hacking and influencing rather than full on invasions. Even the US invades then usually pulls out, like in Iraq, which was different to how things happened 100 years previously.

Actually, you are making my point. Military force isn't a particularly valuable commodity. So China probably COULD invade Myanmar tomorrow if they wanted to, but Myanmar is already a hot mess. Why would they want the grief?

And to make my case. Xi is a politician. His father was a politician. Xi must have hated Mao because Mao sent him to Shaanxi to work in the countryside and Xi ran away from that and got arrested for it. Xi's father also got purged and sent to Luoyang to work in a factory. Xi was branded a "Child of a criminal", his mother was beaten and a sister was probably "persecuted to death".

But Xi now uses Mao, uses Mao's "legitimacy", anything to present the right image. Xi is very conservative, yet pushes Socialism and Communism.

I think this says a lot about how Mao is considered by the Chinese people. We may not like it, but they hold him in the same reverence we hold Lincoln or Washington.

Xi is a politician who has become successful by attacking other politicians, by having purges under the name of an "anti-corruption drive", a guy who gets everyone to say "Democracy, freedom" etc and has an iron fist and doesn't let anyone say anything against him.

Um, okay. Here's kind of how I see China. China is the first true Technocracy, and Xi is just the head technocrat. Is this a good thing? Maybe. We put a game show host in charge of the country and he ran it like a game show. I gave up the best years of my life defending the constitution. I'm kind of sorry most Americans didn't treat it the same way.

He hasn't grown because of military action. He's grown because of political action. It's who he is, and he'll attack other countries in the same way, he'll grow China in the same way he grew his own career.

Again, I'm seeing a lot of fear and not much to back it up. Demonization isn't a way to run a foreign policy. What I see when discussing China is a lot of people who really don't understand Chinese history or culture inserting their own fears into the gaps.

 

[frigidweirdo]

So those evil Chinese are helping poor countries - GASP - Build roads and infrastructure! Those FIENDS!!!

Okay, let's get serious here, for a second. The reality is that Taiwan is heavily invested in the mainland. It's a source of resources and cheap labor. The relationship isn't nearly as adversarial as you make it out to be.



Oh, wait, now you guys are concerned about hacking? Didn't seem to bother you when the Russians were doing it to help Trump.


Um. Okay, so what? You don't think we have spies over there?

View attachment 869813
She can spy on me any time, though! Just don't tell my wife.




Actually, you are making my point. Military force isn't a particularly valuable commodity. So China probably COULD invade Myanmar tomorrow if they wanted to, but Myanmar is already a hot mess. Why would they want the grief?



I think this says a lot about how Mao is considered by the Chinese people. We may not like it, but they hold him in the same reverence we hold Lincoln or Washington.



Um, okay. Here's kind of how I see China. China is the first true Technocracy, and Xi is just the head technocrat. Is this a good thing? Maybe. We put a game show host in charge of the country and he ran it like a game show. I gave up the best years of my life defending the constitution. I'm kind of sorry most Americans didn't treat it the same way.



Again, I'm seeing a lot of fear and not much to back it up. Demonization isn't a way to run a foreign policy. What I see when discussing China is a lot of people who really don't understand Chinese history or culture inserting their own fears into the gaps.

"So those evil Chinese are helping poor countries - GASP - Build roads and infrastructure! Those FIENDS!!!"

Helping? Mostly China is looking for opportunities for itself.

I went to Lesotho, lowest region in the country for HIV/AIDS is 19%. In the capital Masaru for child bearing age women, it's estimated to be 50%. Also met a German water engineer who was asked to go to Lesotho to help improve water infrastructure but left because the minister in charge was wanting his bribes.

So, China was building a new parliament building for the government. Using all Chinese labor too. So, what was Lesotho getting out of this? The govt gets a new building, the other 99.99% of people got NOTHING out of this.

Montenegro wanted to build a road, western countries said "no, this isn't feasible, you can't afford it", China said "Sure, we'll build it", it's not finished, may never, ever be finished because Montenegro can't afford it and has to pay huge amounts of interest now.

Also, I didn't say "evil Chinese". They're not doing this out of the goodness of their heart, but then who does?

The Taiwan-China relationship was getting better and better, same with Hong Kong, until Xi got into power. He's looking to the past. The new city near Beijing and Tianjin is HIS city, just like Shenzhen was some other president's pet project. He wants people to read about his achievements, he wants future politicians to have to study him. Taiwan is the biggest goal. Kids in schools will know where TWO regions are on the map, Xinjiang and Taiwan. They won't know the regions close by, they might not even be able to point to their own region, nor point to Hainan (the easiest). Why? Because they teach this in schools.

I'd reckon most Chinese have a default setting now of "invade Taiwan".

"you guys"? I'm sure I'm not "you guys", certainly I've never voted Democrat (or Republican) and I don't support main political parties.

Did it bother me? Yes, hacking is an issue that needs to be dealt with, especially if it's foreign countries manipulating.

Does the US have spies? Yes, but no. Not like China has in the West. Why? China found loads of spies and killed them. Xi found spies everywhere, whether real or not, some were very real and spies get executed in China. And the US is struggling to figure out what's going on in China. Visas and all the checks you have to do make it hard to be a spy.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Actually, you are making my point. Military force isn't a particularly valuable commodity. So China probably COULD invade Myanmar tomorrow if they wanted to, but Myanmar is already a hot mess. Why would they want the grief?



I think this says a lot about how Mao is considered by the Chinese people. We may not like it, but they hold him in the same reverence we hold Lincoln or Washington.



Um, okay. Here's kind of how I see China. China is the first true Technocracy, and Xi is just the head technocrat. Is this a good thing? Maybe. We put a game show host in charge of the country and he ran it like a game show. I gave up the best years of my life defending the constitution. I'm kind of sorry most Americans didn't treat it the same way.



Again, I'm seeing a lot of fear and not much to back it up. Demonization isn't a way to run a foreign policy. What I see when discussing China is a lot of people who really don't understand Chinese history or culture inserting their own fears into the gaps.

China doesn't need to invade Myanmar, it's already doing what China wants for the most part, and if it doesn't, they can manipulate it to do something else. Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam and Thailand are all dictatorships who aren't unfriendly to China.

Military force is a commodity, hence why China is building up its armed forces into a professional force.

Why? India, Taiwan, the US.

India is important because China controls the water that India gets from the Himalayas. India is going to get angry with China and China needs to defend itself. So important the most foreigners can't go to Tibet without a special permit and a tour guide.

Taiwan, because of access to the sea. China doesn't have direct access to the sea, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines all block this access.

The US, well, that's just a "we want to be number one" show off kind of thing, like buying a BMW then getting a Mercedes when you can.

Mao is held in reverence to a certain degree, but mostly it's manufactured, I think a lot of people learned about him at school, but don't feel that much affinity with him.

Is China a "technocracy"????

It claims to be. It also claims to be Communist, it is not.

Technocracy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"Technocracy is a form of oligarchy government in which the decision-makers are selected based on their expertise in a given area of responsibility, particularly with regard to scientific or technical knowledge."

So, Xi studied Chemical Engineering. Xi went to Iowa and stayed in some kid's bedroom in 1985 because he was looking into agricultural practices in the US.

Yet became a politician who ran cities. He didn't study how to make a city better. He didn't study how to run a country. He ended up going back to university and studied ideology, not practicalities.

Yes, they become politicians for life (or until found guilty of supporting the wrong dude) but a lot of these politicians' main skill is consuming huge amounts of alcohol to impress people, learning how and when to bribe and shaving their heads every so often.

The one child policy is a perfect example of how all the "technocrats" had no skills in understanding what was going on. The supposed story is they asked some dude about it, he looked at the wrong data and said "you need to limit how many kids are going to be born because everyone's having 6 kids" when they were having, on average something like 2.5 kids. And look how that worked out..... "technocrats".... the weren't.

Xi attacked Taiwan and Hong Kong. Not physically, but he changed the attitude of the people there from being more and more pro-mainland China and CCP to simply fearing them. Look at Hong Kong, 50 years of freedom and Xi said "fuk dat sheet" and engineered a crisis so he could justify Beijing controlling Hong Kong more way before the 50 years was up. He's been sending fighter jets and other planes over Taiwan to try and force Taiwan into make a "mistake" that justifies invading. He's using ships to ram Filipino ships, using very intimidating tactics in the South China Sea. He's manufactured a crisis on the Indian border.

These things are happening, and they're happening the same way they do anything (expect opening up from Covid). Even after Covid they put a policy in place to leave the country, then slightly changed it multiple times until they took away the need to declare any illnesses that are Covid like in the last few months. They almost never go full in.

Why? Because you've always got to protect your career. The whole system is like that. Who was to blame for Covid? Not Xi, they blamed the mayor of Wuhan. Everything is a blame game, make sure someone else takes the fall, always have vague policies, then tell people to implement them, then if it all messes up, it's not the top guy's fault, it someone else's and they can take the blame for it.

So with fighting. Same mentality. Make the other side make a mistake, then blame them for increasing the tension. China has literally said that if other countries don't do what China wants them to do, then that country is provoking China into upping the ante.

 

[JoeB131]

"So those evil Chinese are helping poor countries - GASP - Build roads and infrastructure! Those FIENDS!!!"

Helping? Mostly China is looking for opportunities for itself.

I went to Lesotho, lowest region in the country for HIV/AIDS is 19%. In the capital Masaru for child bearing age women, it's estimated to be 50%. Also met a German water engineer who was asked to go to Lesotho to help improve water infrastructure but left because the minister in charge was wanting his bribes.

So, China was building a new parliament building for the government. Using all Chinese labor too. So, what was Lesotho getting out of this? The govt gets a new building, the other 99.99% of people got NOTHING out of this.

Okay, let's look at that.

China–Lesotho relations - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

In June 2020, The People's Republic of China donated 1 million Maloti to Lesotho in order to combat the hunger caused by drought and COVID-19.[7] In August 2020, the aid assistance from China continued. Deputy Minister of Health Nto Moakhi explained the Chinese Embassy had donated medical equipment to Lesotho in an attempt to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. The equipment is supposedly “the best quality there is on the market”.[9] China has since contributed six batches of PPE to Lesotho.
An example of this is the HaMpiti to Sehlabathebe 91 km Road Project, costing US$128 million, it has the potential to generate over 300 employment opportunities through local procurement and contracting.[4]

Further examples of beneficial projects to both China and Lesotho include; The Radio and Television Network Expansion Project, Technical Cooperation Project of Land use and Physical Planning, the New Lesotho State Library Project and the Chinese Enterprise and Textile Investment in Lesotho.[4]

From 2000 to 2012, there are approximately 33 Chinese official development finance projects identified in Lesotho through various media reports.[6] These projects range from an MOU between ZTE and Lesotho government for the provision of industrial communication devices, training, and a stake in Telecom Lesotho in 2006,[6] to funding the construction of a new parliament building in Maseru in 2007.[6]

Sounds like Lesotho is getting a lot out of the deal.

Also, I didn't say "evil Chinese". They're not doing this out of the goodness of their heart, but then who does?

Exactly. Seems to me that China's actions are a lot more benevolent than ours. We spend very little of foreign aid and what we do spend has to be spent with American companies.

Montenegro wanted to build a road, western countries said "no, this isn't feasible, you can't afford it", China said "Sure, we'll build it", it's not finished, may never, ever be finished because Montenegro can't afford it and has to pay huge amounts of interest now.

Okay, whose fault is that? Sounds like some bad decisions made by Montenegro, not China.



Montenegro's government says the first section put it in so much debt that it can no longer afford to build the rest of the highway. "I think we will pay not maybe this generation, but future generations," says Soc, the former justice minister. "But I don't think this is a problem from China. It is our bad decision."

He's not the only one blaming the country's previous government for catapulting the country into historic debt with this project, which was signed in 2014 with the China Road and Bridge Corporation, and funded by the Export-Import Bank of China. "We are now [a] victim of the extremely bad decision of the former government," said an exasperated Montenegrin Deputy Prime Minister Dritan Abazovic to Euronews this spring in an effort to appeal to the EU to come to Montenegro's rescue; the country aims to be an EU member one day.

Does the US have spies? Yes, but no. Not like China has in the West. Why? China found loads of spies and killed them. Xi found spies everywhere, whether real or not, some were very real and spies get executed in China. And the US is struggling to figure out what's going on in China. Visas and all the checks you have to do make it hard to be a spy.

America's problem isn't a lack of intelligence about China so much as its ignorance of China.

China doesn't need to invade Myanmar, it's already doing what China wants for the most part, and if it doesn't, they can manipulate it to do something else. Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam and Thailand are all dictatorships who aren't unfriendly to China.

Thailand is actually a constitutional monarchy, but let's move on

the problem in Myanmar is that the Junta has pretty much fucked things up and the country is fragmenting. Rebel groups and criminal gangs have kidnaped Chinese nationals to belong to hacking rings. Despite pretty clear threats to China's interests, they aren't intervening militarily- yet.

Military force is a commodity, hence why China is building up its armed forces into a professional force.

Why? India, Taiwan, the US.

Okay, given China's history of being invaded and bullied by foreign powers, that doesn't sound like an unreasonable position.

Mao is held in reverence to a certain degree, but mostly it's manufactured, I think a lot of people learned about him at school, but don't feel that much affinity with him.

Again, I've had a lot of conversations with my wife, who actually was teenager when Mao kicked it. She hasn't exactly had the best time with her government (her father was blacklisted and she was part of an underground church), but she still respects Mao for what he did for the country.

You have to understand the history of China before Mao. The Opium Wars, the unequal Treaties, the Boxer Rebellion, the Warlord Era and then finally Japan's invasion.

 

[JoeB131]

Xi attacked Taiwan and Hong Kong. Not physically, but he changed the attitude of the people there from being more and more pro-mainland China and CCP to simply fearing them. Look at Hong Kong, 50 years of freedom and Xi said "fuk dat sheet" and engineered a crisis so he could justify Beijing controlling Hong Kong more way before the 50 years was up. He's been sending fighter jets and other planes over Taiwan to try and force Taiwan into make a "mistake" that justifies invading. He's using ships to ram Filipino ships, using very intimidating tactics in the South China Sea. He's manufactured a crisis on the Indian border.

Um, again, all of those things seem to fall into the category of China asserting it's sovereignty. Frankly, China has been pretty tolerant of Hong Kong, especially given how Hong Kong got it's special status. Look up the Opium Wars for more information on that. China would have been justified in invading it at any time during the Cold War when the British Empire was declining. Instead, it honored its treaty until 1997 and THEN allowed HK to have a certain level of Autonomy for the next 26 years. Then Hong Kong arrogantly said it would not honor extradition treaties from Beijing.

Same thing with Taiwan. They could have invaded at any time, but instead tolerated the West building a rebel government in one of their provinces.

Why? Because you've always got to protect your career. The whole system is like that. Who was to blame for Covid? Not Xi, they blamed the mayor of Wuhan. Everything is a blame game, make sure someone else takes the fall, always have vague policies, then tell people to implement them, then if it all messes up, it's not the top guy's fault, it someone else's and they can take the blame for it.

How is that any different from this country? Hey, talk to some of the MAGA guys on this board. Not a freaking thing that went wrong in 2020 was Trump's fault. And he has a very good chance of getting elected against despite all those fuckup.

These things are happening, and they're happening the same way they do anything (expect opening up from Covid). Even after Covid they put a policy in place to leave the country, then slightly changed it multiple times until they took away the need to declare any illnesses that are Covid like in the last few months. They almost never go full in.

Seems to me that China has managed Covid better than we did, given they were the first country hit, and are about 30 years behind us in Medical Technology.

So with fighting. Same mentality. Make the other side make a mistake, then blame them for increasing the tension. China has literally said that if other countries don't do what China wants them to do, then that country is provoking China into upping the ante.

Yet China hasn't launched a major invasion of one of its neighbors since 1979.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Okay, let's look at that.

China–Lesotho relations - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

In June 2020, The People's Republic of China donated 1 million Maloti to Lesotho in order to combat the hunger caused by drought and COVID-19.[7] In August 2020, the aid assistance from China continued. Deputy Minister of Health Nto Moakhi explained the Chinese Embassy had donated medical equipment to Lesotho in an attempt to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. The equipment is supposedly “the best quality there is on the market”.[9] China has since contributed six batches of PPE to Lesotho.
An example of this is the HaMpiti to Sehlabathebe 91 km Road Project, costing US$128 million, it has the potential to generate over 300 employment opportunities through local procurement and contracting.[4]

Further examples of beneficial projects to both China and Lesotho include; The Radio and Television Network Expansion Project, Technical Cooperation Project of Land use and Physical Planning, the New Lesotho State Library Project and the Chinese Enterprise and Textile Investment in Lesotho.[4]

From 2000 to 2012, there are approximately 33 Chinese official development finance projects identified in Lesotho through various media reports.[6] These projects range from an MOU between ZTE and Lesotho government for the provision of industrial communication devices, training, and a stake in Telecom Lesotho in 2006,[6] to funding the construction of a new parliament building in Maseru in 2007.[6]

Sounds like Lesotho is getting a lot out of the deal.



Exactly. Seems to me that China's actions are a lot more benevolent than ours. We spend very little of foreign aid and what we do spend has to be spent with American companies.



Okay, whose fault is that? Sounds like some bad decisions made by Montenegro, not China.



Montenegro's government says the first section put it in so much debt that it can no longer afford to build the rest of the highway. "I think we will pay not maybe this generation, but future generations," says Soc, the former justice minister. "But I don't think this is a problem from China. It is our bad decision."

He's not the only one blaming the country's previous government for catapulting the country into historic debt with this project, which was signed in 2014 with the China Road and Bridge Corporation, and funded by the Export-Import Bank of China. "We are now [a] victim of the extremely bad decision of the former government," said an exasperated Montenegrin Deputy Prime Minister Dritan Abazovic to Euronews this spring in an effort to appeal to the EU to come to Montenegro's rescue; the country aims to be an EU member one day.



America's problem isn't a lack of intelligence about China so much as its ignorance of China.


Thailand is actually a constitutional monarchy, but let's move on

the problem in Myanmar is that the Junta has pretty much fucked things up and the country is fragmenting. Rebel groups and criminal gangs have kidnaped Chinese nationals to belong to hacking rings. Despite pretty clear threats to China's interests, they aren't intervening militarily- yet.



Okay, given China's history of being invaded and bullied by foreign powers, that doesn't sound like an unreasonable position.


Again, I've had a lot of conversations with my wife, who actually was teenager when Mao kicked it. She hasn't exactly had the best time with her government (her father was blacklisted and she was part of an underground church), but she still respects Mao for what he did for the country.

You have to understand the history of China before Mao. The Opium Wars, the unequal Treaties, the Boxer Rebellion, the Warlord Era and then finally Japan's invasion.

Yes, no, yes, no.

From the same link.

"Among the Basotho people, there is a consensus that the Chinese migrant's impact negatively on the business sector as they threaten small-scale wholesale and retail businesses."

I saw this in various places in southern Africa. In Inhambane in Mozambique the only supermarket was Chinese. The locals would sit around with their sheet and their produce on top waiting for people to buy their stuff, but the supermarket was way more convenient.

Like with foreign aid from western countries. Often it benefits the western countries more, but it's difficult to pin it down exactly. But let's look at GDP per capita.

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/LSO/lesotho/gdp-per-capita#:~:text=Lesotho%20GDP%20Per%20Capita%20-%20Historical%20Data%20,%20%20-5.89%25%20%2059%20more%20rows%20

In 2022 it was at $1,107 per person.
In 2010 it was $1,105 per person.

Essentially since 2010 the GDP per capita has remained the same. Doesn't seem like China's influence is having much impact there.

At a glance: HIV in Lesotho

Giving you the data and context you need to understand the HIV epidemic in Lesotho.

www.beintheknow.org

The HIV/AIDS rate is "20.9% adult HIV prevalence". Doesn't seem like much has changed.

"Exactly. Seems to me that China's actions are a lot more benevolent than ours. We spend very little of foreign aid and what we do spend has to be spent with American companies."

Well, a lot of Chinese aid is done with Chinese workers. Same as I saw in Lesotho. China has merely learned from the west on this matter.

Montenegro:

Yes, there were bad decisions made in Montenegro. But Montenegro went to the west first, and the west said "this isn't good for your country". China will do things that benefit China, and only China. China, had they bothered, would have seen it could never really benefit Montenegro.

Ys, Thailand is a "Constitutional Monarchy" with a Monarch living in Germany (or he was at some point while king) and he does not run the country in the slightest. Never has, and the previous King didn't either.

I know the history of China before, and I know the history of China during Mao's era too.

Mao oversaw the biggest loss of life of any leader of China during his reign. There are only estimates of how many millions died, 30 million? 40 million? Certainly a lot.

He also did nothing for the economy. His problem was he was a bit like Trump. He was more interested in himself than he was in improving the country. He latched onto the Communist movement, but wasn't Communist himself, just power hungry and he could never get power through the old system.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Um, again, all of those things seem to fall into the category of China asserting it's sovereignty. Frankly, China has been pretty tolerant of Hong Kong, especially given how Hong Kong got it's special status. Look up the Opium Wars for more information on that. China would have been justified in invading it at any time during the Cold War when the British Empire was declining. Instead, it honored its treaty until 1997 and THEN allowed HK to have a certain level of Autonomy for the next 26 years. Then Hong Kong arrogantly said it would not honor extradition treaties from Beijing.

Same thing with Taiwan. They could have invaded at any time, but instead tolerated the West building a rebel government in one of their provinces.



How is that any different from this country? Hey, talk to some of the MAGA guys on this board. Not a freaking thing that went wrong in 2020 was Trump's fault. And he has a very good chance of getting elected against despite all those fuckup.


Seems to me that China has managed Covid better than we did, given they were the first country hit, and are about 30 years behind us in Medical Technology.


Yet China hasn't launched a major invasion of one of its neighbors since 1979.

I doubt China could have invaded Taiwan at any time. Taiwan got rich, Hong Kong got rich, Macao got rich, and mainland China didn't. China started to get rich because of Deng Xiaoping completely going against Mao and his policies. Taiwan has protected itself, and taking an island isn't very easy.

I'm not necessarily saying that China is that much different from any other country. Each country will have its idiosyncrasies of government, elections or whatever. China has its own. I'm explaining things as I see them.

China's political system, its "technocrat" system, it's system of making money by selling land to property developers leads to mass corruption. It's way of passing the buck is different to the west, and the way it leads to vague laws, and different interpretations is an important thing to understand when talking about China.

Did China deal with the coronavirus better than other countries? Yes, no, yes, no.

Firstly China had the coronavirus because of the system. The Wuhan politicians were too afraid to tell Xi. Xi's system, Xi's power, caused this.

Then China forced countries to remain open, like Pakistan and possibly Indonesia. They threatened them, if they closed their borders to China, they'd suffer economically.

Then China saw the scale of things and went into lockdown.

They kept the lockdown way too long, a lockdown they couldn't possibly hope to have as effective, which is one reason they opened up so suddenly. It was causing political problems and it wasn't dealing with the coronavirus well any more.

And since they opened up, it's not been much of a problem at all. The politicians were afraid, and they had good reasons to be afraid, because of how things happened at the beginning and the whole origins issues.

 

[Unkotare]

When you are devoted to your hate to the point you can't be reasoned with,...

That's YOU, bigot.

 

[Unkotare]

... Tibet did have certain levels of Autonomy, but it has autonomy now. It is classified as one of China's five Autonomous regions.


....

Spoken like a bigmouth who has never seen what "autonomy" really is permitted by the communist occupiers there.