Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
January 21, 2021

The Number Of Uyghurs Has Tripled - The U.S. Calls It A Genocide - Propaganda Fails To Explain It

After being bashed with 24/7 "Trump is bad" news we are now punished with 24/7 of "Biden is great" news.

Actions which were an outrage when taken under Trump are now sold as rational endeavors when argued for by Biden acolytes.

To cover for the turnabout media are getting a bit in a twist and have to make up stupid excuses.

Consider this New York Times piece that now justifies a last minute action the former Secretary of State Mike Pompous took when he falsely declared that the Chinese development of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region is a 'genocide'.

China’s Oppression of Muslims in Xinjiang, Explained

On the final full day of the Trump presidency, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo declared that China was carrying out a genocide against Uighurs and other Muslim peoples, the toughest condemnation yet of Beijing’s crackdown against its far western region of Xinjiang.
...
The incoming Biden administration has indicated its general agreement with the designation. A spokesman for Joseph R. Biden Jr. said during the presidential campaign last year that Beijing’s policies in the region amounted to genocide.
...
Here’s a look at the Xinjiang region, China’s crackdown there and what the genocide declaration could mean for the global response.

Uh oh - the 'good Biden' endorses something 'bad Trump' has done. Some mumble is needed to explain that!

Thus follows a number of inaccurate descriptions of the historic and current situation in Xinjiang:

Xinjiang, in the far northwestern region of China, has large numbers of Uighurs, Kazakhs and other mostly Muslim groups. It is culturally, linguistically and religiously more similar to Central Asia than the Chinese interior.
...
Uighurs have long bridled at Chinese control of the region, which has seen an influx of ethnic Chinese migrants and an increase in restrictions on local language, culture and religion. Minority groups in Xinjiang say they aren’t given jobs or contracts because of widespread racial discrimination.

The resentment has sometimes boiled over into violence, including attacks on police officers and civilians. In 2009, nearly 200 people, mostly Han Chinese, were killed in riots in Urumqi, the regional capital.

Most of Xinjiang has been under 'Chinese control' for more than 2,000 years. It has always been a mixed region with several ethnic groups including a significant Han population. It has also seen fast population growth caused by high birth rates and migration following strong economic development:

In the early 1800s the population under the Qing (Manchu) Dynasty was roughly 60% Turkic and 30% Han. In 1953, a People’s Republic of China census registered 4.87 million of which 75% were Uyghur and 6% Han. In 1964 the census documented 7.44 million of which 54% were Uyghur and 33% Han. After the beginning of the economic reforms, Xinjiang registered 13.08 million of which 46% were Uyghur and 40% Han. In terms of the 2000 census, Xinjiang’s 18.46 million people are 45.21% Uyghur and 40.57% Han. The current population situation is similar to that of the Qing when many Han lived in the area.

In 1953 there were 3.6 million Uyghur in Xinjiang. In 2,000 there were 8.4 million. Wikipedia says that in 2018 Xinjiang has a total population of 25 million of which 11.3 million are ethnic Uyghur.

It is quite weird to claim that such a consistent population growth of an ethnic group is somehow a 'genocide'.

This sentence from the above quote is especially interesting:

Minority groups in Xinjiang say they aren’t given jobs or contracts because of widespread racial discrimination.

It is followed a few graphs later by this claim:

In addition, the authorities have pushed work programs in Xinjiang, including the transfer of workers within the region and to other parts of China, that critics say most likely involve coercion and forced labor.

Which is it?

Are the Uyghur excluded from labor or are they coerced to labor?

The Times won't explain that contradiction so we will have to do that.

There has been high economic growth in Xinjiang for several decades. The state owned Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps, which was founded 64 years ago to develop the region, has seen above 10% growth rates in its industries over several decades.

Some of this growth has been in rural areas with extensive cotton farming. There are also large coal, oil and gas reserves in Xinjiang that have been developed. Another growth factor has been a rapid urbanization within the province.

Cotton farming, unless highly mechanized, requires a lot of seasonal workers to pick the cotton. These often came from Han provinces. A 2009 report in the NYT said:

The first wave of workers has arrived in the annual migration to China’s restive western region of Xinjiang this year to pick cotton, according to a report on Friday by Xinhua, the state news agency.

The workers are mostly ethnic Han and are the first large batch of migrant workers to make the journey to Xinjiang since deadly ethnic rioting broke out this summer.

A Reuters piece from 2014 tried to use the fact that Han migrants came to do such work to justify Islamist terrorism in Xinjiang:

URUMQI, China (Reuters) - Hundreds of migrant workers from distant corners of China pour daily into the Urumqi South railway station, their first waypoint on a journey carrying them to lucrative work in other parts of the far western Xinjiang region.

Like the columns of police toting rifles and metal riot spears that weave between migrants resting on their luggage, the workers are a fixture at the station, which last week was targeted by a bomb and knife attack the government has blamed on religious extremists.

“We come this far because the wages are good,” Shi Hongjiang, 26, from the southwestern metropolis of Chongqing, told Reuters outside the station. “Also, the Uighur population is small. There aren’t enough of them to do the work.”

Shi’s is a common refrain from migrant workers, whose experience finding low-skilled work is very different to that of the Muslim Uighur minority.

Employment discrimination, experts say, along with a demographic shift that many Uighurs feel is diluting their culture, is fuelling resentment that spills over into violent attacks directed at Han Chinese, China’s majority ethnic group.

It is correct that some employers preferred Han workers as they were schooled and spoke the main countrywide language. But the Chinese government had long recognized that a large part of the local rural population was still underemployed and already had taken measures to change that:

The Xinjiang Uygur autonomous region, China's prime cotton-growing area, plans to pump some 20 billion yuan ($3.2 billion) into its textile industry to create jobs and maintain social stability, local officials in its Beijing representative office said on Friday.

"The push for textile development will create more jobs in the sector," said Yan Qin, a top official of Urumqi. "It is not only a matter of economic returns and social benefits, but also a political issue."
...
Local officials said the policy focus will favor the underdeveloped southern part of the region. The southern Xinjiang city of Aksu, one of the major cultivation areas, is one area where the government aims to improve employment.

The move is part of Beijing's call to attract more labor-intensive textile manufacturers from the eastern cities to Xinjiang to open up employment opportunities for local people.

In 2016 Reuters reported on the success of Beijng's development policy:

AKSU, China (Reuters) - The Youngor cotton spinning factory is one of the biggest employers in Aksu, an agricultural town on the edge of the Taklamakan desert in China’s restive Xinjiang region.

Youngor, one of China’s largest shirt-makers, opened the plant in 2011 to be closer to the main cotton-growing region in Xinjiang. Soon it will be joined by others: Beijing wants to create 1 million textile jobs in Xinjiang by 2023.
...
Almost all of the 520 employees at the Youngor factory are Uighurs. The average factory floor salary is around 3,000 yuan ($463.18)a month, and comes with food and lodging - compared with roughly 4,000 yuan for textile workers in the southern China factory belt.

“There are still a lot of people to come out of (Xinjiang’s) countryside,” said Xu Zhiwu, general manager at Youngor’s Aksu factory, referring to government data that show 2.6 million rural residents sought work in Xinjiang’s cities in 2014.

Xinjiang Youngor Cotton Spinning Co Ltd, a unit of Youngor Group, is planning to expand its factory, built among apple orchards on Aksu’s outskirts, Xu said.

Beijing's development policies were successful. The seasonal cotton picking campaign is no longer done by Han migrant worker but by locally recruited people:

The replacement of Han labor migrants from eastern China with local ethnic minority laborers who are mobilized through labor transfer schemes is taking place in all cotton-growing regions in Xinjiang. In 2018, of 250,000 cotton pickers in Kashgar Prefecture, 210,900 were locals (via labor transfer policies), 39,100 came from other regions of Xinjiang, and only 6,219 or 2.5 percent hailed from other parts of China.
The report notes the numbers of cotton pickers from other parts of China are declining. In the same year, the number of cotton pickers in Aksu Prefecture who were organized through the labor transfer mechanism increased by 21 percent. In 2020, Aksu needed 142,700 cotton pickers; of them, 124,500 were locally organized (likewise via state-arranged labor transfers).
Karakax County in Hotan Prefecture sent out more cotton pickers mobilized through labor transfer – an increase from 40,600in 2017 to 54,000 in 2018, mobilizing 15.7 percent of its population aged 18-59 years to pick cotton in other regions. A 2020 news article from Aksu explains that counties with more cotton plantations request labor from those with fewer plantations, stating that as a result the region “no longer needs to attract cotton pickers from elsewhere.”

The 'labor transfer policies' are in fact state sponsored local recruitment campaigns for well paid seasonal work. This local recruitment is what the Times calls "coercion and forced labor".

When, years ago, Han migrant workers came to Xinjiang to pick cotton and for other work 'western' media complained and used that to justify Islamist terrorism.

After China introduced a better development policy and the companies started to recruit from the local Uyghur population for cotton picking and other textile industry work the very same 'western' media complain about "coerced labor".

Instead of explaining the successful development the New York Times is using it to argue that an ethnic group, which over the last seven decades more than tripled in size, is under threat of genocide.

There is nothing that China could do to end such silly propaganda.

Posted by b on January 21, 2021 at 19:21 UTC | Permalink

Comments
« previous page | next page »

American Muslim | Jan 23 2021 19:33 utc | 175

Every time I come across a long, boring, pompous contribution, I think "American Muslim!" and I am nearly always right.

Did I say MI5 created the IRA? No. I didn't. Did I say the Irish do not have legitimate grievances? Point it out to me. I did not and I don't even think it. I think they and the Scots have enormous grievances against the English Ruling Class! (As do indeed the English working class and every other people who have come under their sway.)

Irish, Gaelic, Catholic, and not "British", English, and Church of English Monarchy.
What (If anything) does that mean?

the English ran and operated the world's first "Concentration Camps" in the Boers War.

Wrong again. The first were operated by the North for Southern POWs in the US civil war.

The answer requires us to ask why did CCP find Falun Gong so objectionable.(?)
Because they were backed by the CIA and funded by NED?

And here we note that China is a signatory to the Human Rights Charter and freedom of belief is a declared Human Right. Therefore, CCP stands accused of crimes against humanity.
And if the "belief" is that "anyone who is not the right sort of Muslim should be put to death, ASAP."? Is not a "right to life" a rather more fundamental right than "Freedom of religion"?

Posted by: foolisholdman | Jan 24 2021 19:50 utc | 201

Bemildred | Jan 24 2021 7:36 utc | 190

Samuel Butler: I can recommend "The Way of All Flesh" as a novel of growing up British at it's most tortured. Not much else unless you have a historical interest.

I can recommend "Erehwon" and "Erehwon Revisited" and "The Authoress of The Odyssey". By Butler, two satires and one piece of historical research all interesting reads.

Posted by: foolisholdman | Jan 24 2021 20:36 utc | 202

Posted by: foolisholdman | Jan 24 2021 20:36 utc | 202

Well, I liked "Erewhon". Butler was one of my favs in my youth, and TWOAF. He seems a bit dated to me now, but my tastes are not a good guide.

Posted by: Bemildred | Jan 24 2021 20:54 utc | 203

I must say American Muslim @ 175 displays a very tortured and shaky grasp of British history, particularly the history of British treatment of Irish people, so much so that I doubt American Muslim knows anything much at all about what the British did to subject peoples in its colonies. Outlawing the use of Irish, Welsh and other Celtic languages in public, punishing children for speaking those languages at school by tying wooden blocks around their necks, structuring the Irish economy into one supplying raw materials to British industry (and forcing Irish people to migrate and put themselves into labour contracts), putting restrictions on Roman Catholic believers in participating in politics until the 20th century, even forbidding Roman Catholics from marrying into the British Royal Family ... do any of those ring bells for American Muslim?

No surprise then that American Muslim's understanding of Chinese history and culture, and the CPC's wariness of Falun Gong and similar messianic cults in particular, is shaky.

Everything in the comment @ 175 looks deliberately cherry-picked in such a way as to exhaust other MoA barflies' time to unpick all the idiocies American Muslim tries to pack in.

At least one benefit is that the more American Muslim comments and tries to look well-informed, the more stupid this person ends up looking.

Posted by: Jen | Jan 25 2021 0:51 utc | 204

Jen @204--

Yes, it's one of the new team that recently arrived as I told Grieved. It will turn out to be very stubborn, like vk and c1ue.

Posted by: karlof1 | Jan 25 2021 1:06 utc | 205

Posted by: American Muslim | Jan 22 2021 17:41 utc | 103

I've reviewed your comments and considered them in light of the actual evidence available in the media (both western and Chinese).

The first thing that strikes me is that There Is No Evidence.

That's simply it. Nothing. Nada. Zilch.

Instead, what we're seeing is a Fabric of illusions woven out of cherry picked features in the landscape of reality.

A few schools, work hostels, criminal detention facilities, factories and a few sob stories from some disgruntled useful idiots have been knitted together and embroidered with theatrical decorations into a story which looks 'real' to the common idiot but falls apart upon even rudimentary inspection.

I asked you a while back to tell me what a re-education facility looks like from satellite images.

You still have not told me. This means you do not know. Probably because there is no way to tell.

And if there is no way to tell, then what has been said to that effect is speculation ... or lies.

I made a reference to the Boys Town organisation, which is an old, global network of reform schools for boys (now girls too) because I remember how these institutions developed a reputation for abuse over many decades - internationally, not just in the US. It struck me that any kind of youth reform school, detention facility for young criminals, orphanage, madrassah could be deliberately misconstrued and spun into a narrative of "re-education camps" ... because that is essentially what they are ... and the West is replete with these institutions.

All one would need to do to create a convenient lie is pick our similar institutions in Uighurland: What is the difference between an orphanage and a re-education camp? A prison and a re-education facility? A workers hostel? A low cost housing project? A gated community?


Most of what we hear about the Uighur narrative is not real.

However the Lies are certainly real.

The lies can be inspected and examined ... one could start to ask the question:

Why The Lie?

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 1:18 utc | 206


--- In memorial of one year of Wuhan Lockdown ---


Corporate Media’s Leaked Chinese Documents Confirm China Didn’t Hide Covid-19


Who Was the First Doctor to Report Covid-19 Breakout in Wuhan


Dr. Li Wenliang, an ophthalmologist, the much celebrated "whistleblower" by Western MSM and China's so-called liberal media (Caixin, The Paper, etc.), was in fact NOT the whistleblower nor the first one to report Covid-19 to the world.


Dr. Zhang Jixian, a respiratory and intensive care specialist at the Hubei Provincial Hospital of Integrated Chinese and Western Medicine in the central city of Wuhan, on Dec. 27th informed the Wuhan health authorities that a new type of pneumonia was emerging.


3-day before Dr. Li Wenliang, would post anything at all!


December 30th, 2019 Wuhan Municipal Health Commission already issued internal notification to all hospitals asking to treat, track and report the new type of pneumonia before Li Wenliang posted his post in his Wechat group at 17:43 and at 18:42 asking not to leak his messages out of his chatting group.


FYI, Hubei CPC recommended Dr. Zhang jixian to become National Model of Worker, one of the highest honours in China.


Western MSM, also Caixin, The Paper & neo liberals in China, keeps to ignore/censor of Dr. Zhang Jixian as the first person who reported Covid-19 to the world.


Hunt for Italy’s coronavirus patient zero finds a case in November 10th, 2019


Take care everyone in the time of covid-19!

Posted by: lulu | Jan 25 2021 1:34 utc | 207

Someone in the previous page questioned China not including asymptomatic cases.

At initial, people knew very little about asymptomatic patients because it was a new virus. So no reporting before Apr 1 2020, but on Apr 15, China disclosed the total of asymptomatic cases. Till now China have continued reporting both confirmed cases and asymptomatic cases daily.

This is daily report from National Health Commission:

on Jan. 24 (0:00 - 24:00),

- 124 confirmed covid-19 cases (117 local cases, 7 imported ones).

- No death;

- 45 asymptomatic cases(of which 16 imported ones); 85 of asymptomatic cases (all local ones) turned into confirmed ones; 18 asymptomatic cases (of which 12 imported ones) are released from medical supervision;Currently 959 asymptomatic cases (of which 277 imported ones) are under medical supervision.

Posted by: lulu | Jan 25 2021 2:14 utc | 208

This is such a manufactured issue.

The island grabbing and China using American imperialism as an excuse to perform their own imperialism is a much dire issue than Xinjiang and Tibet.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 2:20 utc | 209

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 2:20 utc | 209

This China "island grabbing issue" is such a manufactured issue as well.

Aside from the fact that (almost) everyone in Asia is involved in "island grabbing", America most notably.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 2:30 utc | 210

@ 204 jen / 205 karlof1... thanks for that update...

Posted by: james | Jan 25 2021 2:31 utc | 211

@ Arch Bungle

No, it isn't, it's a potential hotbed issue that can lead to wars.

China is using "big country logic" i.e. might makes right to grab island, the fact the US does it too doesn't excuse China.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 2:34 utc | 212

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 2:34 utc | 212


China is using "big country logic" i.e. might makes right to grab island, the fact the US does it too doesn't excuse China.

No:

China is using *"Don't Get Fucked in the Ass by an Imperial Power Like the Last Time"* logic.

We are beyond the game of "right and wrong" here, we are playing the game of "Conquer or be Conquered".

States who play the game of "Right vs. Wrong" get swallowed up by states who play the game of "Conquer or be Conquered" ... who then go on to dictate what "Right vs. Wrong" means for the conquered.

There's a short history lesson for you.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 2:57 utc | 213

@ Arch Bungle

It's exactly that logic that leads to wars and suffering.

The US tried to do this "conquer or be conquered" shit in S. America and the ME and they all turn to hate the americans. The same will happen to the chinese if they try the same shit in Asia, especially when asian countries are even more nationalist and developed.

These "big countries" are always baskets of problems with people thinking they deserve to rule the world.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 3:03 utc | 214

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 3:03 utc | 214


It's exactly that logic that leads to wars and suffering.

No it is not. The logic that leads to wars and suffering precedes the logic of "conquer or be conquered".

That logic is: "I want this shit that does not belong to me and I think it's my right to have it"

Lying down and letting the USA encircle China will not prevent any wars - don't kid your self.

China has tried that strategy of appeasement before, it was called "The Century of Humiliation ... look it up. It learned that lying down and taking it in the ass does not stop wars and suffering. So your proposal is contradicted by reality.

Wars between great powers happen when one of them loses deterrent power, and is unable to maintain the balance of terror.


The US tried to do this "conquer or be conquered" shit in S. America and the ME and they all turn to hate the americans. The same will happen to the chinese if they try the same shit in Asia, especially when asian countries are even more nationalist and developed.

You're centuries behind the times. That bus left the station a long time ago.

This is the price of being a powerful country (military or other sense): They will hate you for anything.


These "big countries" are always baskets of problems with people thinking they deserve to rule the world.

It's not a big country problem either. I have a list of tiny countries who've had an overblown notion of their place in the world and gone on to seek world domination.

China is low on the list of offenders in this category - your concern should be directed elsewhere.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 3:29 utc | 215

@213 Arch Bungle

You're completely correct, as you know.

Great history lesson of how reality acts and the liars come behind to obfuscate and to make it look as if their lies were actually there first.

You're being followed, by the way, in a circular way - the tail is trying to wag the dog - but I guess you know that ;)

Posted by: Grieved | Jan 25 2021 3:36 utc | 216

Posted by: Grieved | Jan 25 2021 3:36 utc | 216


You're being followed, by the way, in a circular way - the tail is trying to wag the dog - but I guess you know that ;)

And here I thought I was just being paranoid ;-)


Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 3:38 utc | 217

@ arch... ditto grieved comments... your comments are quite insightful and bang on..

Posted by: james | Jan 25 2021 3:39 utc | 218

@ Arch Bungle

You are justifying imperialism and that shit never pays.

And no, the century of humiliation is as much as fault as the corrupted Qing dynasty as much as the westerners, and now trying to ape western imperialism in the modern age of guns and missiles are gonna end badly for any imperialist.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 3:46 utc | 220

@220

reboot that software, the word salad is getting scrambled

Posted by: Grieved | Jan 25 2021 3:55 utc | 221

@ Grieved

How is that a word salad?

And no, chinese nationalists who think they got "wronged" in the past and now have the right to conquer other countries are all crooks who will lead to more wars and suffering.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 4:00 utc | 222


murikkan muslim

we dont do re-edu camp here in USA

you[[[they]]] dont have to.
YOu guys are a very contented lot.
There aint no terrorists in USA except the fbi manufactured variety.

you can say it again man we enjoy religious freedom here not found anywhere else

But the mofoking ptb want their patriot act,
what to do, what to do ?
fbi manufactured domestic FF moslem 'terrorism'.

They get their patriot acts.
you guys get a bad name.
moslem = terrorism,

am is very impressed...

our anti terror program are more nuanced and advanced
and better then the Chinese detoxing programe


Domestic FF
think 911 was bad ?
you aint seen nuthin yet.

wot......
AQ, AL SAHAB, BOKO HARAM, ABU SAYAFF, IS, ISIS, CALIPHATE.....[tip of an iceberg]
MADE IN USA.
global Terrorism, the gift that keeps on giving.

By a very conservative estimate,
The fraudulant wot have killed at least 20M and displace another 37M worldwide.

AM

At lease we dont put them in re-ed camps

OMFG
yOU cant make this shit up.
From a 'muslim' no less. !

Posted by: denk | Jan 25 2021 4:00 utc | 223

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 3:46 utc | 220



You are justifying imperialism


You are jumping to conclusions.

My post rejected Imperialism.

I am justifying the Right To Resistance.



and that shit never pays.


Sorry, it demonstrably pays very well, if historical precedent is an indicator (The Dutch East India Company and British East India Company come to mind)
Now please don't jump to the conclusion this is justification.I'm just demonstrating how divorced from reality you are.

Profit is Amoral and Imperialism is highly profitable but China is not engaged in it.



And no, the century of humiliation is as much as fault as the corrupted Qing dynasty as much as the westerners,


No. Get your head out of your rear. You seem terribly confused.

You are now arguing for Imperialism.

You've just made a case for Imperialism under the condition the target state is 'corrupt', drawing moral equivalence between the two.

I suppose your think The Opium Wars were also equally to blame on the Qin Dynasty?

Are you remotely aware the Qin Emperor was attacked when he tried to ban the Crackhead-ization of the Chinese?

You call this corruption?

According to your logic, a rapist and victim are as much to blame.

The victim being at fault for her/his moral 'corruption'.

By your logic there would be no such thing as rape because all we'd need to do is take passively in the ass and not put up a fight. That would mean no "war", right? Just a world filled with raw assholes.

Yours is a morally bankrupt system of ethical calculus and you need to examine yourself very carefully if that is how your mind works.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 4:13 utc | 224

@ Arch Bungle

No, the Right of Resistance does not involve land-grab from neighbor countries.

China is using national security (America encirclement) as an excuse to land-grab, which is very similar to America's logic of invading Iraq.

The Qing dynasty tried to ban Opium, but also they tried to ban any attempts to modernize and reform, and instead they huddle among themselves, arrogantly thinking they were the best and thus cannot be defeated by the westerners.

The British Empire was the empire of its hayday, but after all the colonies got deposed, just like China back-then, they got reduced to nothing, that's the price of imperialism and arrogance.

we can blame the victim if the victim does stupid shit that makes it easier to get raped, the fact the rapist is evil doesn't stop the stupidity of the victim.

And no, I do not make excuse for imperialism, that's why I don't believe that the victim who got raped (China) now has the right to rape others.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 4:22 utc | 225

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 4:22 utc | 225



No, the Right of Resistance does not involve land-grab from neighbor countries.


Yes it does, specifically when neighbouring countries are using the same strategy of land-grab (e.g the US in Korea, Phillipines, Japan etc ...).
If your opponent is grabbing strategic land that can be used to attack you, you grab land that will help you defend. Simple, right?



China is using national security (America encirclement) as an excuse to land-grab, which is very similar to America's logic of invading Iraq.


Are you delusional? American encirclement is not an *excuse* it is a *reality*. Are you saying the American encirclement is imaginary?

Explain what China should do in response to the *real* American threat, I want to hear what absurdisms you can come up with ...



The Qing dynasty tried to ban Opium, but also they tried to ban any attempts to modernize and reform, and instead they huddle among themselves, arrogantly thinking they
were the best and thus cannot be defeated by the westerners.


So what you're saying is the Qin:

a) Banned Opium trade and told the white people to FOAD and stop trying to make crackheads of the Chinese.
b) Tries to ban what *the white man considered modernisation* (which meant becoming hooked on opium - the white man's notion of "modernization")
c) Stayed within their fences, like good neighbors should, telling all those nice white people not to come visiting.

That's the equivalent of a rape victim covering up modestly, refusing the advances of a rapist (Just Say "NO") and refusing to engage in further conversation with the rapist!

Your moral reasoning is broken beyond repair, dude. Get psychological help, quickly!



The British Empire was the empire of its hayday, but after all the colonies got deposed, just like China back-then, they got reduced to nothing, that's the price of
imperialism and arrogance.


Wrong on multiple counts.
The loss of Empire was the price of poor managemnt of Empire, not Empire in itself.
Not only does Britain still retain hundreds of years worth of ill-gotten profit from the Empire, but it enjoys an overblown position in world affairs due to it's imperial history.
It was *never* reduced to nothing, although that would have been nice. The British Empire was reduced to a level that the British could sustain.
Profits were certainly made and are still in posession of the British ruling Elite.



we can blame the victim if the victim does stupid shit that makes it easier to get raped, the fact the rapist is evil doesn't stop the stupidity of the victim.


No. Rape is wrong under all circumstances.
In addition, you have failed to prove what China (the victim) did during the century of humiliation to deserve blame, your points above are rubbish.

And in this era, the "stupidity of the victim" would be not making sure they are armed and allowing an Imperial Power (the US) to get too close to their shores.
If that means land grabs, so be it.



And no, I do not make excuse for imperialism, that's why I don't believe that the victim who got raped (China) now has the right to rape others.


You just did. your entire screed was a justification for why a victim of imperialism is to blame for their situation.

Further, there is no imperialism being carried out by China in any part of the world, this is a falsehood you are spreading that is not supported by the facts.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 4:51 utc | 226

@ Arch Bungle

No, the only force that tries to illegally land-grab in Asia are USA, China and India, which are all big powers. All other countries try to solve the matters diplomatically.

Again, no, American encirclement is real, but it does not excuse China trying to use it as land-grab. What China can do instead is solidarity with other asian nations and together fight the americans, NOT using the american threat for expansion. That will instead make more asian nations fall towards the american.

The Qing tried to block Sun Yan Sen and various attempt of modernization by chinese intellectuals, they were a corrupt dynasty that is hated by the populace at the time. And no, their stupidity does not excuse the white men's evil.

Well, Britain is on its way to be reduced into nothing, and will be even more reduced if the scots and irish want to leave. I'd say their imperial loot is running out.

No, rape is wrong, but I do not believe the idea that the victim is always innocent. In case of China, their powerful dynasty got reduced to rubble due to foreign invasion as well as their corrupted and backwards ruling class.

And no, where did I justify imperialism? I did not say China "deserved" to be raped, I just say the fact China got raped doesn't mean they have the right to rape others. And no, China is using their own history to grab parts of the SEA Sea and of course the tension with Japan. If China is just, they would stop using history as an excuse and ally with these countries in solidarity instead of inflaming tension and make these countries turn towards the USA.

And again, China can buff their defense, can improve its own country, but the moment it land grabs, no force in the world can justify it, it would be just another empire.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 5:05 utc | 227

smith

we've been down this road many many times before.

you've been spamming and HIJACKING entire threads on MOA, UNZ, SAKER to push your agenda/

I'll be outta the loop for now, but before that, ..
Looks like you'r gonna hijack this thread again, very bad form.

out for now.

Too much B.S.
too little time.

Posted by: denk | Jan 25 2021 5:38 utc | 228

@ denk

This proves that you can talk about the uighurs for days but people will not get tired of it.

But if you talk about China actions towards their neighbors, people get defensive immediately. Why? Because that issue is very hard to defend.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 6:03 utc | 229

Arch Bungle @ 226 says:

"Your moral reasoning is broken beyond repair, dude. Get psychological help, quickly!"

Very well said, Arch Bungle. This Smith guy has plenty of weird and twisted logic beyond any reasonable person - probably due to colonial brainwash from the White master. He claims to be a Vietnamese - if this is true, then it is very sad. My greatest sympathy.

Posted by: d dan | Jan 25 2021 6:08 utc | 230

@ d dan

That's quite an accusation, feel free to show the twisted logic I used. I always get that when arguing with chinese nationalists/sympathizers/sycophants online, but that's because they themselves justify their own imperialism by their misgivings in the past.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 6:16 utc | 231

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 5:05 utc | 227


No, the only force that tries to illegally land-grab in Asia are USA, China and India, which are all big powers. All other countries try to solve the matters diplomatically.

You are purveying falsehoods. Vietnam, Taiwan, Phillipines, Malaysia, Brunei are also occupied in 'Imperialism' (using your definition) in the Spratleys, for example:

In the 1970s South Vietnam occupied three of the Spratly Islands (including Spratly Island itself) to 'forestall a Chinese occupation'.
Troops from Taiwan remained on Itu Aba. The Philippines then moved forces onto seven of the remaining islets and built an airstrip (1976) on Pagasa Island.
Vietnam is building islands in the Spratleys, just like the Chinese are accused of.

But we don't hear so much about these because people like yourself, Agent Smith, amplify the Anglo-American Empire's narrative about "Imperial China".

So as you can see, if we use your logic the world becomes an absurd, Alice In Wonderland kind of world where Asia is a conglomerate of Imperial nations vying for power.

China's taking of the Paracels for example, was reasonable given the fact that American advisors were assisting Vietnamese forces in strengthening their position on islands which had previously belonged to China (as recognised by France):

It takes more than a "land grab" to be an empire, or else we can call 'israel' the Zionist Empire of Judah, can't we?


Again, no, American encirclement is real, but it does not excuse China trying to use it as land-grab.

Yes. It does. encirclement is a *profound* reason for seizing tactical land for self defense.
No nation would tolerate being surrounded by a gradually encroaching cordon of bases - that's just idiocy.


What China can do instead is solidarity with other asian nations and together fight the americans,

Which is *exactly* what it's been doing: ASEAN, RCEP, BRI, SCO etc.
And these projects have been *spectacularly* successful!


NOT using the american threat for expansion. That will instead make more asian nations fall towards the american.

Again, you are living in an imaginary world where you think China is 'expanding', like an empire, but you have no facts to prove this.

In fact, the facts contradict you: China is no expanding geographically at all.
They have successfully concluded most of their border disputes with their neighbours, and are in process of negotiating the remaining ones.
Just like almost every other state in the world with any kind of borders.

Unless you are under the delusion that contested borders mean imperial expansion?
If you are that is a false notion, as I've shown above that land grabs and contested borders are a common activity in Asia and have nothing to do with Imperial expansion.



The Qing tried to block Sun Yan Sen and various attempt of modernization by chinese intellectuals,
they were a corrupt dynasty that is hated by the populace at the time.
And no, their stupidity does not excuse the white men's evil.

So you agree that nothing the Qing did has anything to do with the imperial evil brought on them by the Europeans, Russians and Japanese?


Well, Britain is on its way to be reduced into nothing, and will be even more reduced if the scots and irish want to leave. I'd say their imperial loot is running out.

Wrong again.

With whatever remains it will be a country like any other country that is not an empire, fitting and peaceful end for a dark era.
It is well capable of providing for it's own needs if it governs itself wisely, with or without the scots or irish.


No, rape is wrong, but I do not believe the idea that the victim is always innocent.

So, according to your moral logic: "No, paedophilia is wrong, but I do not believe the idea that the victim is always innocent."
Right? Give some examples where the victim of paedophilia and rape "are not always innocent".


In case of China, their powerful dynasty got reduced to rubble due to foreign invasion as well as their corrupted and backwards ruling class.

It would have made not a jot of difference if the Qing had been are pure as angels and loved by their population.
The divide, corrupt and conquer strategy of Imperial Britain, USA, France, Russia, Japan and Germany would have resulted in the same.

All the holy uncorupptedness in the world would not have saved the Qing under the onslaught of not one but SEVERAL empires AT THE SAME TIME.

It was not called "The Scramble for China" for nothing!

So no, your argument is B.S, like the rest of your reasoning.


And no, where did I justify imperialism? I did not say China "deserved" to be raped, I just say the fact China got raped doesn't mean they have the right to rape others.

You did not have to say they "deserved" to be raped. All you needed to do was make equivocations of the kind where the victim was also to blame for being victims by virtue of simply existing - that is the essence of what you said.
In this, you come down on the side of imperialism without even needing to say it directly. That's what happens when you make such equivocations.



And no, China is using their own history to grab parts of the SEA Sea and of course the tension with Japan.

Rubbish. None of this was an issue until the US began it's "Pivot to Asia" and made it clear that it would focus on the SCS and make a Threat of China.
That's when China used the foil of the 9-dash line to illustrate that it was quite capable of opposing US attempts to dominate it's region and threaten it's shores.
That was a very reasonable and expected response.

Are you aware of the history between Japan and China? You must have heard of Imperial Japan's Rape of Nanjing and other atrocities? Do you think the tension may have something to do with that?
Further, what's your position on the many bases, including nuclear missile bases hosted by the USA in Japan?

Do you think this might be a contributing factor to the tension? I'm really interested to know ...


If China is just, they would stop using history as an excuse.

As I said in the beginning, this is not a game of Good vs. Evil, or "Just" vs. "Unjust". Nobody on planet earth is playing that game right now.
History is a fine excuse when life and death are in the balance.


and ally with these countries in solidarity instead of inflaming tension and make these countries turn towards the USA.

You didn't notice by response about ASEAN, RCEP, SCO, BRI, did you? Try to pay attention.


... but the moment it land grabs, no force in the world can justify it, it would be just another empire.

You have a broken notion of what an empire is.
Seizing strategic ground in response to clear, present and dire threats does not make an empire.
If that were so a dozen or more 'empires' would suddenly appear out of nowhere.
Normal countries do this to defend their weak areas, as does China - and China ONLY seizes land where it is critically vulnerable.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 7:11 utc | 232

@ Arch Bungle

These South East Asian countries military development are a reaction against China, they fear China and China in return does nothing but provoke and use "big country logic" against them. Instead of solidarity and solving the issues diplomatically, China pushes that because the americans are there, they must take these lands to counter the americans.

That's faulty logic to justify imperalism, what China should have done instead is providing support and help their neighbors, NOT using tension to inflame more tension.

And no, if the Qing has actually modernized, and the people were on their side, they would be able to resist the 8 armies invasion. Instead the Qing actually cooperated with the colonial powers and give them lands and appeasement, and this fact makes chinese nationalists and patriots hate the traitorous ruling class, which at the times were the norm in Asia (Vietnam's late Nguyen kings were of the same coward rule). Meanwhile, you see Ethiopia resisting imperialism by fighting them off.

For the part where the raped was not innocent, that's an easy find:
https://kwttoday.com/woman-saved-from-rapist-by-gay-rapist-who-raped-the-rapist/

See the rapist who got raped by a gay rapist, the rapist got turned into a victim but he wasn't innocent.

Also, the 9 dash line is pure vulgar imperialism, nothing more. Nobody in maritime SEA is gonna accept that, and if China is indeed genuine in anti-imperialism, they wouldn't try to inflame tension with their neighbors. The issue with Japan is funny because as correctly pointed out by the Japanese Communist Party, China only uses these historical reasons to bolster their own nationalism at home, during the 50s-60s, no objection was made about Senkaku, but only during the 70s afterwards that this becomes a big issue. This is a sign of revanchism.

And no, just and unjust exists, as history proves, if you try to rob and steal from people, you will not have a good end, and this is increasingly being proven by the USA's falling all over the world. Does China want to be the next USA?

And no, grabbing land from neighbors is pure vulgar imperalism. Instead of diplomacy, you want to use force to settle dispute, that kind of shit will always lead to wars and suffering. Worse, you try to justify this jungle rule shit.

Last point, trade pacts do not solve territory disputes. ASEAN has no problem trading with China, but it will also not accept China's imperialism, same for any country in the world.


Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 7:41 utc | 233

@smith

When the US has offensive military capability in Diego Garcia, Guam et cetera, then those new islands in the SCS are justified.

You may have had a point if it was gulf of Mexico instead.

Posted by: Migao | Jan 25 2021 7:42 utc | 234

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 7:11 utc | 232

I think the thing which really keeps our legacy imperialists up at night is the idea that all of those ex-colonies are going to use all those international institutions we instituted to do our will - like the ICC and UN - to take all those trillions of dollars of ill-gotten gains back. China doesn't have to do it on their own account even, they can take up the cause of E. Timor say, Diego Garcia.

Posted by: Bemildred | Jan 25 2021 8:00 utc | 235

@ Migao

How about a defense pact with ASEAN and providing weaponry to maritime SEA countries instead?

With ICBM and nukes, both China and USA have offensive capacity to smoke each other, these conflicts are just empires dividing their turf. But the time for empires are long gone, for both the USA and China.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 8:04 utc | 236

Posted by: Bemildred | Jan 25 2021 8:00 utc | 235


I think the thing which really keeps our legacy imperialists up at night is the idea that all of those ex-colonies are going ... to take all those trillions of dollars of ill-gotten gains back. China doesn't have to do it on their own account even, they can take up the cause of E. Timor say, Diego Garcia.

That's just the tip of the iceberg.

What is shortly about to happen is that all those ex-colonies are going to be nuclear armed due to the coming explosion in technological advancements (nano-tech, quantum photonics, a.i, 5/6g). Think neutron bombs delivered by loitering drones ...

My prediction is that within the coming 15 years we will see a world where every third world backwater like North Korea will have the ability to hold a superpower to ransom with the threat of nuclear annihilation - and share that ability to anyone willing to pay.

It will be a world where either global peace is guaranteed, or global apocalypse is.

History is B***h and the chickens are coming home to roost.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 9:02 utc | 237

@ Arch Bungle

Not necessarily a bad thing.

Nukes are deterrent to imperialism and military conflict in general.

This is why China actively pushes for denuclearization of Korea, along with the US and Japan. They realize a strong united Korea will actually hamper their effort to wave their "big country logic".

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 9:09 utc | 238

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 8:04 utc | 236


How about a defense pact with ASEAN and providing weaponry to maritime SEA countries instead?

How about you put the horse before the cart as it should be?

ASEAN nations like Australia, South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Thailand, Phillipines and India should stop hosting US military installations and/or carrying out military exercises around China to begin with. SK in particular should remove the THAAD system - it's a permanent gun to the head of China.

That will reduce the tension.

But the real problem is that the USA should remove itself from the South China Sea and Asian region of the Pacific - it doesn't need to be there and it's presence is the root cause of the current tensions.

After that there will not be any mention of a 9-dash line in the SCS and no need for mutual defense pacts - just free trade agreements.


With ICBM and nukes, both China and USA have offensive capacity to smoke each other, these conflicts are just empires dividing their turf. But the time for empires are long gone, for both the USA and China.

Why are you equivocating China with the USA? China is not an Imperial power, the US is.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 9:13 utc | 239

@ Arch Bungle

What a joke, the only ASEAN nations that host US troops are Thailand (which actually has deep China ties), even the Phillipines have told the US to piss off.

Instead of using this opportunity to mend relationship and build strong stable allies, China instead doubles down on the 9 dash line, knowing that no maritime ASEAN nations are gonna accept that.

And no, the only thing that will stop the USA attempt of divide and conquer is China respecting its neighbors. The fact China itself views itself as "big country" and dictating terms means the USA will always have some support in the region to deter China, in turn giving China's casus belli to ramp up their military.

And no, USA is a straight out empire, while China has imperial aspirations, the proof is that they refuse to step down and work with their neighbors.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 9:23 utc | 240

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 9:09 utc | 238



This is why China actively pushes for denuclearization of Korea, along with the US and Japan.

No.

Assuming your premise is correct that China is 'actively pushing' (it seems somewhat feeble to me), it's to do with the fact that China does not want a nuclear war on it's borders. Which is an imminently reasonable position.


They realize a strong united Korea will actually hamper their effort to wave their "big country logic".

What are you talking about? Is this more of your "Alice in Wonderland logic"?

China has been fine with a strong united Korea for centuries before the Americans decided to butcher it into half.

In fact, China has made strenuous efforts to keep Korea intact throughout it's history, reasoning that a strong stable state on it's borders was a good buffer against the marauding Japanese.

One dramatic example of this is the battle of 1592 when China sent land and naval forces to Korea in both the first and second invasions to assist in defeating the Japanese:


China sent land and naval forces to Korea in both the first and second invasions to assist in defeating the Japanese. After the fall of Pyongyang, King Seonjo retreated to Uiju, a small city near the border of China. With the First and Second Divisions rapidly approaching, King Seonjo made another desperate retreat into China. At the Chinese court, King Seonjo informed the Chinese of the crisis of the Japanese invasion.

The Ming Dynasty Emperor Wanli and his advisers responded to King Seonjo's request for aid by sending an inadequately small force of 5,000 soldiers.[14] These troops provided almost no help however. As a result, the Ming Emperor sent a large force in January 1593 under two generals, Song Yingchang and Li Rusong. The salvage army had a prescribed strength of 100,000, made up of 42,000 from five northern military districts and a contingent of 3,000 soldiers proficient in the use of firearms from South China. The Ming army was also well-armed with artillery pieces.
Chinese troops attack Pyongyang.

In February 1593, a large combined force of Chinese and Korean soldiers attacked Pyongyang and drove the Japanese into eastward retreat. Li Rusong personally led a pursuit with over 20,000 strong troops, along with a small force of Koreans, but was halted near Pyokje by the sally of a large Japanese formation. In late February, Li ordered a raid into the Japanese rear and burned several hundred thousand koku of military rice supply, forcing the Japanese invading army to retreat from Seoul due to the prospect of food shortage.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 9:27 utc | 241

"History is B***h and the chickens are coming home to roost."

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 9:02 utc | 237

Yes. :-) You might call it the democritization of violence. Mike Davis "Buda's Wagon" comes to mind. So many chickens, it sounds like thunder.

Posted by: Bemildred | Jan 25 2021 9:27 utc | 242

@ Arch Bungle

I don't know what's their actual stance lie, but every word from China regarding North Korea is that they are committed to denuclearization.

Nowadays, China also has strong ties with S. Korea, which in turn, is used to moderate North Korea. But the Kim family has other plans in mind, as well as South Korea's Moon.

History shows that China uses Korea as a buffer state against the japs, they only respond to Jap invasion as a last minute thing when the japs are near their borders, this mirrors down to the Korean-China-American war where China only responds when the US is near their borders. An actual strong united Korea with nuclear arms go against what China wishes, because then it can start to have their own policies rather than just unison, but it is China's policy to keep Korea divided because a divided Korea means they are easier to control.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 9:35 utc | 243

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 9:35 utc | 243


... but it is China's policy to keep Korea divided because a divided Korea means they are easier to control.

You are speculating. I have already demonstrated that your point above is a falsehood. The *evidence* contradicts you.

It is in fact *American* policy to keep Korea divided because a united Korea will result in US bases being removed from the peninsula.

You are accusing China of something the Americans are guilt of. This reveals your bias.

You are not arguing from a rational point of view. You have a pro-American Imperialist agenda driven by an obvious hate for China.

If you are indeed Vietnamese, his is understandable as Vietnam was ruled by the Chinese for a thousand years. However, times have moved on and China is in no way seeking to control Vietnam any more. These are issues you will have to work through with a psychiatrist though, pissing all over the forums won't cure your problem ...

This is the only reasonable explanation for why you magnify issues with China while being largely blind to the Anglo-American root cause of these issues in Asia.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 9:43 utc | 244

@ Arch Bungle

You are speculating. I have already demonstrated that your point above is a falsehood. The *evidence* contradicts you.

Is it though? The "stable and united" Korea during China's times were never particular strong nor stable. After the jap invasion, the fallen of the Ming, and then the invasion of Qing, Korea was kept backwards and weak, which is why it has fallen to the japs during the Meiji rule.

Historical evidence shows that despite China's rule, Korea was not strong nor stable.

You are accusing China of something the Americans are guilt of. This reveals your bias.

How exactly? Do you admit that a strong and united Korea with nuclear arms would actually pose a threat to China as well as the United States and Japan, which is why it actually makes sense for these empires to keep Korea divided?

This is the only reasonable explanation for why you magnify issues with China while being largely blind to the Anglo-American root cause of these issues in Asia.

How am I being blind to Anglo-American root? Why is it wrong to point out that China directly tries to inflame tension in order to keep the Americans in, and thus justifying their own military ramp-up?

Why can't China solve their disputes with their neighbors and then push out the americans together with their neighbors? why do they have to wait for the americans to leave at all when they have the initiative on this?

It's these questions that show their ulterior motive.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 9:53 utc | 245

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 9:53 utc | 245

But they have? You're on a steady stream of anti-China agitprop, vietanon. It's time to wake up.

I remember when you were telling us on /sg/ how the filthy chinks with their paper tiger army were going to roll tanks into Hong Kong any day now. You were off the mark back then, what makes you think you've got a handle on reality right now?

I'm surprised going through the episodes of corona-chan destroyer of chinks and /tgdg/ collapse soon shitposting hasn't shattered your programming yet. What they're feeding you over there in viet media must be some strong shit!

Posted by: Anderson | Jan 25 2021 10:38 utc | 246

@ Anderson

My position on China is based on their historical and current behavior, and not any propaganda.

There is literally no excuse for the 9 dash line and Senkaku/Diaoyu than revanchism/jungle rule shit.

They know this will inflame tension but they dive headfist into this any way.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 10:49 utc | 247

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 10:49 utc | 247

>My position on China is based on their historical and current behavior, and not any propaganda.

That's what you told us back then too. Yet Tianenmen 2.0 hasn't happened.

I'll be frank, I know very little about China. I only got interested in them thanks to you and some other anons. But from what little I've seen from their interactions with India, Canada and Australia, there's always goes something like this: an attempt at diplomacy -> a warning -> stop taking calls -> nationalists get let loose to play. It's the same pattern without fail, they're painfully predictable.

Maybe you should look into your government's interactions with China regarding the SCS starting from after WWII to get a better view? Who knows, there might be something you missed.

Posted by: Anderson | Jan 25 2021 10:58 utc | 248

@ Anderson

I don't remember saying Tianenmen 2.0 would happen, Tianenman 1.0 wasn't even a big deal when it happened btw, especially when you know at the very same time the activity of China and the USA in Cambodia during this time.

Anyway, I do suggest you learn more about Asian history, and yes, China's action is very predictable, they have a deep fear of strong neighbors/rivals, so without fail, you will find their neighbors having rivals funded by China. In Korea, you have North vs South, in Japan, you have Korea, in India, you have Pakistan, in Vietnam, you have Cambodia. This is divide and conquer strategy, because when these little countries fight against each other, big brother China can effectively manage them all through by being the mediator. This is the usual tactics of empire.

Also, Vietnam did have some betrayal of China so to speak because of Pham Van Dong's letter, but I do not think that letter does legitimize any rule for the SEA Sea to China. The SEA Sea should be shared among maritime ASEAN countries, and not belonging to any empire.


Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 11:10 utc | 249

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 9:23 utc | 240



What a joke, the only ASEAN nations that host US troops are Thailand (which actually has deep China ties), even the Phillipines have told the US to piss off.


Your reading comprehension is defective - that's the real joke.

My exact sentence was:



ASEAN nations like Australia, South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Thailand, Phillipines and India should stop hosting US military installations *and/or*
carrying out military exercises around China to begin with. SK in particular should remove the THAAD system - it's a permanent gun to the head of China.


Think long and hard about what the phrase "should stop hosting US military installations *and/or* carrying out military exercises " means.

Consider that it was specifically phrased to ommit the term "bases"

Why? Because I predicted, based on your bias, you would jump to the standard pro-Imperialism defense of "But But ... we got no bases there!".

Clearly you cannot distinguish between a base and a facility.

Yet, even in your lie, you are factually wrong since there are *bases* hosted by these Asian countries:

- Japan hosts many American bases,
- the Philipines rotates US Navy continuously through Subic bay,
- Singapore has a US military base,
- South Korea as well,including THAAD installations
- at least 4 bases in Australia.

It matters not whether these countries are core members of ASEAN or associated members - the point remains the same.

So, do you admit that the Facilities are there and the *exercises* DO take place? Or will you deflect, sidestep or otherwise just ignore real facts and spout fact-free B.S as you have been doing so far?

(I have laid my bet already - $50 ...)



Instead of using this opportunity to mend relationship and build strong stable allies, China instead doubles down on the 9 dash line, knowing that no maritime ASEAN nations are
gonna accept that.


What are you talking about? Why are you going in circles making the same claims over and over again even when they've been demonstrated to be false.

a) China is ALREADY "using this opportunity to mend relationship and build strong stable allies", as I repeated twice or more: ASEAN. RCEP. BRI. AIB etc ...
b) They expend daily efforts in requesting the US to push off out of the SCS.
c) They have stated to the affected nations that they're willing to negotiate the 9-dash line with each nation involved.
d) All the ASEAN nations have similar claims in the SCS, some valid some invalid. The 9-dash line is a straw man, it's a response to "The Pivot to Asia".



And no, the only thing that will stop the USA attempt of divide and conquer is China respecting its neighbors.


You are ignorant of the meaning of "divide and conquer". By implication it involves dividing the united and exploiting weaknesses in nation. The Imperialists have done this regardless of relations between countries.

The Problem Is The Imperial Powers, not China.

China has shown more respect to it's neighbours than any of the western imperialists have.

Often, more than it's neighbours have shown each other and more than it's neighbours (e.g Japan) have shown it.



The fact China itself views itself as "big country" and dictating terms means the USA will always have some support in the region to deter China,
in turn giving China's casus belli to ramp up their military.

And no, USA is a straight out empire, while China has imperial aspirations, the proof is that they refuse to step down and work with their neighbors.


Agent Smith, you are straight out lying now.

Prove to me that China has "Imperial Ambitions"? You cannot. This is more stuff you puled from your rectum.

Prove to me that they refuse to step down and work with their neighbors? I can point to research proving the exact opposite.

Deals like RCEP, ASEAN, BRI and AIIB prove that you are lying about this point.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 11:18 utc | 250

Posted by: Anderson | Jan 25 2021 10:38 utc | 246
Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 9:53 utc | 245

Hmmm. Anderson. Agent Smith.

Am I in the Matrix here?

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 11:20 utc | 251

Arch Bungle @251

Yes, but there is no need to take the red pill again as you are still clear of its delusions.

Posted by: William Gruff | Jan 25 2021 11:29 utc | 252

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 11:10 utc | 249
>I don't remember saying Tianenmen 2.0 would happen

You may not remember but I do.

You had a 12 inch murder-boner for chinks back then, saying some really hilarious things in hindsight like how Trump's trade war was a genius move and the chinks were about to get starved to death. I even remember a week long back and forth with some other anons where you insisted that Hong Kong was about to become an independent state and achieve complete self-sufficiency and some G*rman anon made fun of you. That was some funny shit.

I remember all this clearly because you were basically a proto-/tgdg/ poster before it was a thing. Only you were doing it in a thread about the Syrian War. I alway wondered why. My guess is all the China Hate threads were just asian goreposting and you had no where else to go.

>they have a deep fear of strong neighbors/rivals, so without fail, you will find their neighbors having rivals funded by China

It's amazing how you don't see it. You name a bunch of conflicts created by Anglo empires and somehow it's China's fault they haven't been resolved. I'm not sure if your expectations of the chinks are high or low, but cognitive dissonance is a sure sign of deep conscious brainwashing.

You should get that shit checked out.

Posted by: Anderson | Jan 25 2021 11:30 utc | 253

@ Arch Bungle

Out of the ASEAN countries, the only one that has an US military base is Singapore (which is kinda hilarious), the fact ASEAN countries hold US military drills are precisely because of China's attempts to land grab.

Cut that out and you will see the countries not holding drills with the US anymore.

You yourself are engaging in faulty logic: the US is there thus China needs to be there. Never mind that China doesn't need to be there at all, what China needs to do is respecting other nations and cut out the need for US drills in the SEA sea.

Again, building trade ties do NOTHING to solve territorial disputes, actually do solve that and actually build a coalition of alliance.

Vietnam, Malaysia, Phillipines and Indonesia are fine with trading with China but resisting China imperalism at the same time, because these countries know that China will also profit from these trade, it's not charity, but it is those countries' national interests to have their EEZ and sea lane not absorbed by China.

You talk about divide and conquer, which is indeed a tactics used by China to this very day, as seen in Cambodia & Laos & Thailand vs maritime ASEA divide.

Also, the only thing China needs to do is withdrawn of 9-dash-line or go into a diplomatic talk with ASEAN countries to discuss and resolve the dispute. Why haven't they done that? You have no answer for that.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 11:33 utc | 254

@ Anderson

My position does mellow a lot since then, but I don't specifically remember saying Tiananmen 2.0 would happen.

It's amazing how you don't see it. You name a bunch of conflicts created by Anglo empires and somehow it's China's fault they haven't been resolved. I'm not sure if your expectations of the chinks are high or low, but cognitive dissonance is a sure sign of deep conscious brainwashing.

Even with the anglos gone, these conflicts are in fact beneficial to China, and thus they shan't be resolved any times soon.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 11:37 utc | 255

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 11:37 utc | 255

>I don't specifically remember saying Tiananmen 2.0

Maybe you were just shitposting. You said a lot of hilarious things about China back then, Tiananmen 2.0 was just the tip of the iceberg. I'm sure you rather not remember them all.

>Even with the anglos gone

Let's postulate when it happens, shall we?

NED's still spreading agitprop everywhere, even in Vietnam. India's gone from coquettish teasing to straight up swallowing Anglo cock, balls and all.

Let's not get started on Japan. They're as tamed as the G*rmans, probably even worse off. At least Merkel's been biting at the leash these days, where as the new guy Suga practically spread his asscheeks wide first day into office.

For a paper tiger like China, you expect too much from them. All they can do is work with the status quo, and it looks like that's what they've been doing the whole time.

Posted by: Anderson | Jan 25 2021 12:00 utc | 256

@ Anderson

I don't remember saying a lot about Tiananmen because anyone who knows about China history knows that these kind of events happen regularly.

And no, China literally has some power to mend relationship, especially between North and South Korea, and Cambodia and Vietnam but they don't because it's entirely beneficial to keep countries divided. This divide and conquer tactics dated before the anglos even come to Asia, and yes, China does benefit from this present status quo.

Japan is an occupied country, like S. Korea, pretty useless to talk about them, as it shows in recent events.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 12:08 utc | 257

@ Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 11:33 utc | 254

I don't think you understand the subject you're talking about.

UNCLOS allows any nation-state to make any sea claims. That's what China is doing. It's completely legal.

Vietnam is contesting China's claims, which is also completely legal as per UNCLOS.

What is illegal is what the USA is doing, that is, the so-called "Freedom of Navigation Operations". It is using its navy to enter third parties' disputes under the argument it is the sole arbiter on what's freedom of navigation and what isn't.

There's no concept of "Freedom of Navigation Operations" in UNCLOS. The USA pulled it out of their ass in a hasty and desperate attempt to stop China's rise. The key here is that the USA must keep its supremacy over the area in order to be able to block the influx of imported oil to China via Iran.

Posted by: vk | Jan 25 2021 12:09 utc | 258

@ vk

Nobody likes the US being there. The US has no reason being there, period.

The issue is the lack of solidarity from China, which is very weird, because instead of at least pretension of allying with neighbors, they just double down on the 9-dash-line, and this in turns makes ASEAN calling more to the USA or focusing more on their military.

It's such a dumb issue, but China will keep going on, I suspect they believe this will hold their nationalism at home and the US cannot remain there forever even with ASEAN's support, and when the US isn't there, they are just gonna grab the whole sea lane because they have held out long enough, no need for any negotiation or diplomacy.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 12:14 utc | 259

Arch Bungle,

This topic of the Uyghurs must be important to the CIA's propaganda war against China.

Witness the number of trolls sent here to re-educate us to sing from their song sheet: "China Bad. Uyghur Good."

Thanks for so patiently peeling back, exposing the insanity of Agent Smith.

You do a great service to help new MOA readers sort wheat from chaff.


Posted by: kiwiklown | Jan 25 2021 12:18 utc | 260

As said, the topic of the Uighurs is a mask of actual imperialist activities that China does in the SEA Sea, and people will always react defensively to it, because it's very hard issue for China to defend, unlike the Uighurs.

China is actively seeking fight in the SEA Sea for no reason at all.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 12:24 utc | 261

China breaks September pact, quietly makes troop positions stronger in eastern Ladakh
https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/china-breaks-september-pact-quietly-consolidates-troop-positions-in-eastern-ladakh-1762211-2021-01-24

Posted by: Antonym | Jan 25 2021 12:43 utc | 262

@smith

Can you really blame China for wanting to directly take care of its security if it can do, without having to risk relying on other countries?

China is not an imperial country as evidenced by Zheng He's voyage and reflected by the Great Wall (keep invaders out). China has more or less what it needs (except oil), and this was one of the reasons why the British used opium - Britain wanted Chinese products, but that was not reciprocated as the Chinese did't need British goods, and rather than giving them precious gold, the British gave them opium instead.

Imperialism is 800 military bases around the world and testing your nukes on other people's islands.

Posted by: Migao | Jan 25 2021 13:12 utc | 263

@ Migao

China is fine to beef up their security, nobody got a problem with them.

The problem is when beefing their security means building bases on other people's EEZ and sea lane, which makes them no better than the USA.

And no, the fact the US does bad shit doesn't mean China is right to follow the US's way and do bad shit. The imperial cycle must stop.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 13:33 utc | 264

@ Posted by: Antonym | Jan 25 2021 12:43 utc | 262

Fake news.

Here's the true story:

China-India border dispute: village built in conflict zone part of Beijing’s poverty alleviation scheme, source says

Person close to Chinese military says development of about 100 houses was built within China’s territory as part of a nationwide poverty alleviation scheme

India wants to assert its hegemony like the Ancient Romans: create a wasteland and call it peace. It will only continue to hemorrhage popular support from the region if it insists behaving like that.

Posted by: vk | Jan 25 2021 13:35 utc | 265

@ Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 13:33 utc | 264

EEZ and freedom of navigation are completely different things.

Posted by: vk | Jan 25 2021 13:37 utc | 266

@ vk

Freedom of navigation is an US's buzzword that only the US uses to justify its imperalism.

ASEAN cares about protecting its basic sea territories.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 13:41 utc | 267

@ Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 13:41 utc | 267

Freedom of navigation is when any country's vessels can pass through. EEZ is the right a given nation-state has over the exploitation of the natural resources of an area of the sea (beyond the littoral).

EEZ doesn't excludes freedom of navigation. International vessels can still roam across the Mediterranean and the Strait of Hormuz. The dispute with Vietnam is over the EEZ (some oil reserves to the east of the SCS), not freedom of navigation (which the USA claims is being violated).

But even if freedom of navigation was being violated by China (which it isn't), it doesn't change the fact that there isn't such a thing called "freedom of navigation operation". If you're militarily intervening to protect freedom of navigation, then by definition you're destroying freedom of navigation.

Posted by: vk | Jan 25 2021 14:02 utc | 268

@ vk

Again, I'm not claiming anything about freedom of nagivation.

China is free to go through the SEA Sea, as long as they follow international rules.

The issue is the EEZ, China's 9-dash line violates not only one country, but 4 freaking countries's EEZ, and it refuses to backdown when questioned of its validity.

To this date, ASEAN is drafting a Code of Conduct with China to solve this issue, and surprise, China is very hesistant on this: https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/05/15/20/experts-see-delay-in-drafting-of-asean-china-code-of-conduct-for-s-china-sea

They know that if they can hold out long enough, that SEA sea is gonna be their lake. Freaking imperalist.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 14:08 utc | 269

Posted by: kiwiklown | Jan 25 2021 12:18 utc | 260



This topic of the Uyghurs must be important to the CIA's propaganda war against China.


Divide and then Conquer. The old weapon of empire.

If it's not Opium, it's Religion.

If it's not Religion, it's ethnic differences.

And once they've done dividing, they eat the flesh of their victims.



Thanks for so patiently peeling back, exposing the insanity of Agent Smith.


This is a great meditation in truth-determination and very fruitful, thanks.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 15:17 utc | 270

@ Arch Bungle

What truth exactly? You don't even know the Qin from the Qing, Asian and ASEAN.

Study more and be smug less.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 15:24 utc | 271

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 13:33 utc | 264



The problem is when beefing their security means building bases on other people's EEZ and sea lane, which makes them no better than the USA.


You are talking bullshit.

They are not building bases on anyone's territorial sea (as defined by UNCLOS).
They are not violating the rights of countries to exploit resources of the EEZ.
The concept of EEZ doesn't legally bind any country from building 'bases' on it.

Note:

The difference between the territorial sea and the exclusive economic zone is that the first confers full sovereignty over the waters, whereas the second is merely a "sovereign right" which refers to the coastal state's rights below the surface of the sea. The surface waters are international waters.


So, explain to me *exactly* how China is 'violating other's EEZ' ???



And no, the fact the US does bad shit doesn't mean China is right to follow the US's way and do bad shit. The imperial cycle must stop.


I will repeat again: It is not about "right" or "wrong" or "bad shit" and "good shit".

It is about Survival or Death - the enemy they face does not care about good or bad.

Is this concept so hard for you to grasp?

PS.:

If you're Vietnamese at all,as rumour has it, I expect you know exactly what the Chinese are facing. They murdered millions of your own.
Although, I suspect you are of the South Vietnamese persuasion. Those who joined with white imperialists to butcher and enslave their own kind.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 15:33 utc | 272

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 15:24 utc | 271



You don't even know the Qin from the Qing, Asian and ASEAN.

Don't be absurd. Of course I do. I know everything that is written about every dynasty Chinese or otherwise.

I particularly know the difference between ASEAN and Asian. Despite what you *think* you saw a couple of posts above, which was put there specifically to trigger your response above ... and it worked. You are as predictable as every government operative on this site.

(Antonym is another head-case like yourself, but much stupider)


What truth exactly?

The exact set of defects in your moral calculus and logical reasoning patterns.

I'm cataloguing them as we go along.

It is quite entertaining.



Study more and be smug less.


No need. You do need to, however.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 15:41 utc | 273

@ Arch Bungle

China is militarizing islets, has fishing fleet and coast guards running all over the SEA sea, and regularly get into trouble with Vietnam, Phillipines and Indonesian ships.

They claim the 9 nine dash as their exclusive fishing zone, which violates the EEZ of 4 countries.

When asked to solve issues via a Code of Conduct, they delay the drafts, citing "security" issues i.e. the US of A.

How is any of that NOT violating the other countries's EEZ?

And no, it's not about Survival or Death, USA can nuke China with or without the SEA sea, and vice versa. it's Imperialism or Respect. Do you choose to respect your neighbors, or do you want to squat on their pond?

China always uses the USA as reason, but everybody knows that's an excuse. China would rather be an empire to usurp the USA, but not an ally with respect for other nations.

Also, people will always say those who Viets who are anti-China as South Vietnam, but if you come to Viet Nam, you would know the northerners have the biggest beef while the South is full of Hoa people. The hatred of chinese comes from their racism and disregard of their neighbors, not any kind of propaganda, where they regard their neighbors as inferior to take land from.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 15:43 utc | 274

@ Arch Bungle

I do notice you mentioned the Qin when we were talking about Qing, and you talked about S. Korea, Australia and Japan as ASEAN countries.

As said, study more.

Do feel free to point out the flaw of my moral and reasoning.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 15:45 utc | 275

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 15:45 utc | 275



I do notice you mentioned the Qin when we were talking about Qing, and you talked about S. Korea, Australia and Japan as ASEAN countries.

So how do those two typos lead you to conclude I don't know the difference? Especially since I use Qing everywhere else?


As said, study more.

I've been point out your logical idiocy all along everywhere. This means you're the one who needs to study - particularly how to think straight.


Do feel free to point out the flaw of my moral and reasoning.

I have been doing so all along and in every post and will continue to do so.
Whether you are able to apply the fixes to your defects is your own issue.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 15:56 utc | 276

@ Arch Bungle

Oh, so it's a typo now? You said Qin dynasty and then Qin Emperor right after, do pardon me.

Also, do point out the logical fallacy that I have made since that's a huge accusation.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 16:00 utc | 277

Self-correction, the 9-dash line is claimed by China to be "traditional fishing zone" not exclusive, which means they can go there and fish any times they want.

Their own definition is very vague and they never want to clarify, another sign of treachery.

The only way China to solve this is to resolve it diplomatically with ASEAN, but they love their ambiguity since it allows them to do whatever they want.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 16:10 utc | 278

Let's break down this badly deluded Agent Smith's argument, shall we? The poster supposedly claims to be Vietnamese, though obviously is completely Americanized. Of course, contemporary Americans can be anything they want. Men can be women and women can be men and either can be mountain panda, or even Vietnamese if that is their fancy, so I don't intend to question the poster's cherished "identity". It is just useful to keep in mind when evaluating the poster's fractured thoughts.

First the poster constantly references China's "land grabs" and suggests that these imaginary "land grabs" are some kind of "imperialism" on par with what Europe and the US have been doing for centuries. Oddly the poster never mentions anything specific about these "land grabs", leaving them as just vague concepts to rest his entire thesis upon.

That's pretty weak, but apparently it is all Agent Smith has. Our minds are not as fractured as his, though, so perhaps we can determine what the poor deluded individual has in mind but is afraid to say out loud. What clues do we have to start from?

"...the only thing China needs to do is withdrawn of 9-dash-line..."

In other words, in the fractured mind of Agent Smith the entire extent of China's "imperial ambitions" lies within the area encompassed by the "9-dash line". There are only a couple hundred acres of "land" in the entire area that remain above high tide, and the only inhabitants of any of that land are Chinese. Perhaps the deluded fool Agent Smith can specify precisely which "land" he is talking about being China "land grabbed"? Perhaps there is a densely inhabited land mass there with a population in the millions that I have overlooked?

While he is at it, perhaps the hysterical freak can point out the villages of native inhabitants that the Chinese exterminated with napalm like America did in his supposed homeland. I am sure many here would be eager to correct their ignorance of such momentous historical events.

Of course there is no such land in the South China Sea and there has never been a population there for the Chinese to displace or "genocide". The small "features" in the area that the Vietnamese (rather sheepishly) assert any claim to were never Vietnamese at all, and instead were claimed by the French as part of "French Indochina". Vietnam was just a part of French Indochina, and the territories of French Indochina did not automatically become part of Vietnam when French Indochina was dissolved. In fact the French voluntarily handed the small patches of sand and rocks over to China at the end of the civil war in China, so the claim by Vietnam is just empty nonsense to annoy the Chinese. Even worse it was South Vietnam that claimed the "features" in the South China Sea, not Vietnam, and where is the country called "South Vietnam" today? That's right, not only does "French Indochina" no linger exist, neither does "South Vietnam". Today's Socialist Republic of Vietnam is thus doubly removed from any serious claim to the "features" China controls in the South China Sea.

Let us set aside the vague nonsense that poor deluded Agent Smith spouts to distract from the fact that his argument is utter garbage and cut straight to the chase. The issue at hand is about oil and other hydrocarbon resources that might be found under the seafloor of the South China Sea. Other than China none of the claimants on the region have the industrial or technological capacity to mount extraction efforts. That means that any claimant other than China would have to contract the oilfield development work out to either China or corporations in the American Empire like Exxon or BP. Everyone who has not been living under a rock for the last few hundred years knows that imperial corporations just throw some cheap baubles to the natives, buy off the minimum necessary local political leadership to protect their extraction, and direct the profits to themselves.

To put it simply none of the claimants to the South China Sea other than China count. Even if the Chinese are as abusive in their resource extraction as the Empire is (no evidence is ever provided to support this) the non-China claimants who contract with China for the resource extraction will just get the same bad (for the population, though good for a few political leaders) deal that the Empire's corporations would offer. If anyone other than China somehow achieves control of the South China Sea, that just means that the American Empire has control over the resources present in the South China Sea. There are no scenarios in which Vietnam or the Philippines gets that control.

What this means is that every single argument against China's "9-dash line" is not an argument for the sovereignty of some nation in the region but rather an argument for American imperialism. Agent Smith is quite well aware of this which is why he stays vague and hand-waves away important details like what exactly this "imperialism" is that he is accusing China of pursuing.

Posted by: William Gruff | Jan 25 2021 16:19 utc | 279

William Gruff @279--

Bravo!!! A similar situation exists with those rocks East of Taiwan that Japan still thinks it owns. What's really at issue is the continuing viability of the Outlaw US Empire's Western Pacific Island Defensive Arc it gained through its Imperialism that it refuses to relinquish.

Posted by: karlof1 | Jan 25 2021 17:21 utc | 280

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 15:43 utc | 274



China is militarizing islets, has fishing fleet and coast guards running all over the SEA sea, and regularly get into trouble with Vietnam, Phillipines and Indonesian ships.
.
.
.
How is any of that NOT violating the other countries's EEZ?

Study more. Stupid Less. Go study what an EEZ is that will answer your persistent stupidity you demonstrate above.

Although, you show a glimmer of intelligence as efforts of people on this site to educate you begin to sink in by your 'self correction' below:


Self-correction, the 9-dash line is claimed by China to be "traditional fishing zone" not exclusive, which means they can go there and fish any times they want.

Their own definition is very vague and they never want to clarify, another sign of treachery.


Now do you understand why your visions of 'violation' are figments of your imagination?



And no, it's not about Survival or Death, USA can nuke China with or without the SEA sea, and vice versa.
it's Imperialism or Respect. Do you choose to respect your neighbors, or do you want to squat on their pond?
China always uses the USA as reason, but everybody knows that's an excuse.
China would rather be an empire to usurp the USA, but not an ally with respect for other nations.


No.

It is about survival and death. The last 200 years of Chinese history has demonstrated that. Are you being deliberately obtuse?

And no, the fact that both possess nukes doesn't change the fact that:

a) the US will attempt to contain and constrain China by conventional means.
b) There are those who *believe* that ABM will protect the US from a Chinese nuclear strike AND those who believe China will fold without a nuclear strike, choosing instead to save themselves and become vassals rather than risk a nuclear war.
c) The US may embargo and constrain/dominate the region around China to a degree enough to severly disadvantage China while not raising the threshold of response to nuclear level - slow starvation as is the strategy with North Korea and was the strategy with the USSR.
d) The US may imagine that an invasion, coupled with an attempt to neutralise the Chinese nuclear chain of command from infiltration within may have the desired effect, and proximity would serve that purpose.

This debunks your above argument. To be clear, your reasoning here is defective in this way:

a) You assume that possession of nuclear weapons precludes a purely conventional war where both parties decide to fight it out without nukes.
b) You assume the possession of nuclear weapons is sufficient to prevent strangulation tactics

You also engage in logical fallacy here by creating something which is commonly called a "false choice":


Imperialism or Respect

The two have nothing to do with each other. You are proposing a choice between Chickens and Apples.

These are mistakes a rank amateur makes.


Also, people will always say those who Viets who are anti-China as South Vietnam, but if you come to Viet Nam, you would know the northerners have the biggest beef while the South is full of Hoa people. The hatred of chinese comes from their racism and disregard of their neighbors, not any kind of propaganda, where they regard their neighbors as inferior to take land from.

So, let's delve deeper into this. Which part of the vietnamese political ethnic mix are you from?

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 17:37 utc | 281

Posted by: William Gruff | Jan 25 2021 16:19 utc | 279

Mr. Gruff, that is exactly right.

In fact, what I and Agent Smith are engaging is a sort of "Meta Argument" based on the premise that the imaginary artifacts he raises ('violations' of a vague defined EEZ, imaginary 9-dashed lines, imaginary "land" to be grabbed, imagined violations of even more imaginary "laws") are real.

They are of course as real as unicorns and succubi. As are his *opinions* on what he imagines China's imperialist intentions may be.

So we are having a discussion within an imaginary world of artifacts which only exist in Agent Smith's head and do not accord with reality.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 17:46 utc | 282

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 16:10 utc | 278



Self-correction, the 9-dash line is claimed by China to be "traditional fishing zone" not exclusive, which means they can go there and fish any times they want.

Oh, it's self-correction now? Do I get a self correction card for my 2 typos too or is that "white privilege"?



Their own definition is very vague and they never want to clarify, another sign of treachery.

Yeah, so inconvenient, right? Would it be nice if they can just put it in black and white so you could nail it down.

So, here's a challenge for you: Can you produce a definition from any country for the EEZ which is precise, unambigous and easy to understand? Let's say from all the other contestants in the SCS and Paracels?



The only way China to solve this is to resolve it diplomatically with ASEAN, but they love their ambiguity since it allows them to do whatever they want.

All governments love their ambiguity.
The Chinese are not unique in this.

So your singling out of the Chinese falsely obscures the role of the other parties in creating ambiguous situations.

The only way for ASEAN to solve this is to remove American and 5-eyes military presence in the SCS and Asian-Pacific. As I have said before.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 17:55 utc | 283

Smith | Jan 25 2021 4:00 utc | 222

And no, the century of humiliation is as much as fault as the corrupted Qing dynasty as much as the westerners, and now trying to ape western imperialism in the modern age of guns and missiles are gonna end badly for any imperialist.

Smith asks:

How is that a word salad?

Answer:let's take this "clause":
"And no, the century of humiliation is as much as fault as the corrupted Qing dynasty as much as the westerners,"
No verb, hence no subject and no object!
Let's see if we can be charitable and assume some typos:

"And no, the century of humiliation is as much the fault of the corrupted Qing dynasty as much as it is of the westerners,"

The Qing Dynasty died in 1911, it's a bit late to blame them for anything!
"and now trying to ape western imperialism in the modern age of guns and missiles"
Who is trying to ape Western Imperialism? The Century of Humiliation? The Qing Dynasty? Presumably it is not the Westerners themselves! No, presumably Smith is trying to imply that China is currently rampaging around the World setting up colonies? I wonder where.

And no, chinese nationalists who think they got "wronged" in the past and now have the right to conquer other countries are all crooks who will lead to more wars and suffering.

Chinese is usually, spelt with a capital C. Presumably Smith thinks that the Chinese "who think they got "wronged""(!) are exaggerating their suffering under the combined depredations of the Western powers and Japan!
Chinese Nationalists fled to Taiwan in 1949 and as far as I know have conquered nothing since. Presumably, he does not mean them. However, this is, at least reasonably coherent.

Next we have: "in the modern age of guns and missiles are gonna end badly for any imperialist." It is not grammatically clear whom he is threatening with a sticky end but I think one can presume that he is threatening the present Chinese government. Yeah! And who is going to do it to them? Presumably not Smith himself.

Yes, beyond doubt, a word salad.


Posted by: foolisholdman | Jan 25 2021 18:23 utc | 284

Posted by: foolisholdman | Jan 25 2021 18:23 utc | 284

I think we're done with the troll now.

He knows nothing of geopolitics, history, Chinese History, logic, international law or morality. Just another Antonym.

Between yourself, Gruff and others it's been shown that Agent Smith is just another poorly written virus that can be sent to the recycle bin.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 18:33 utc | 285

Arch Bungle | Jan 25 2021 18:33 utc | 285
Thanks for your post. Yes let's hope so!
I have just noticed that there is a verb in that first sentence, though its function is not that clear. My bad.

Posted by: foolisholdman | Jan 25 2021 19:31 utc | 286

«I really never got the play with the uyghurs during the Trump administration. For that matter I didn't get the game plan with Hong Kong.»

The play is very simple and it is always the same: surround, isolate and breakup enemy nations. See USSR, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Syria, Libya.

Posted by: Blissex | Jan 25 2021 20:05 utc | 287

«Xinjiang has been under Chinese control for more than 2000 years? I wonder what scholarly source the author had in mind when he wrote this.»

China and the Tarim basin have indeed an ancient history (just like China and Tibet), with many twists and turns:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protectorate_of_the_Western_Regions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquest_of_the_Western_Turks
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tang_campaign_against_Kucha

Posted by: Blissex | Jan 25 2021 20:23 utc | 288

«Also, the 9 dash line is pure vulgar imperialism, nothing more. Nobody in maritime SEA is gonna accept that, and if China is indeed genuine in anti-imperialism, they wouldn't try to inflame tension with their neighbors.»

Actually the biggest claim on the South China Sea is that made by the Communists of Vietnam, and it is enormous:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/de/South_China_Sea_claims_map.jpg

and it is the Communists of Vietnam that have built the biggest numbers if not the majority of the military bases in that area:

https://www.voanews.com/east-asia-pacific/how-vietnam-quietly-built-10-islands-asias-most-disputed-sea
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/36/Spratly_with_flags.jpg

The obvious purpose of the Communists of Vietnam in claiming sovereignty over such an an enormous area and building military bases there is to be able to choke the sea trade among their ASEAN neighbours, and in particular to blockade if they wanted the vital oil supplies from the Persian Gulf to China-mainland (and to Japan, China-Taiwan and south Korea).

Posted by: Blissex | Jan 25 2021 20:46 utc | 289

Blissex @289

Sure, but Vietnam's claims are hardly realistic. If someone is going to fantasize they may as well dream big, right?

As for trying to close traffic, that would be ill-advised. The only major maritime engagement between China and Vietnam this century ended very badly for the Vietnamese even though they got the first shots in and had the Chinese enormously outgunned (using donated American warships). China's navy has dramatically modernized since then and is being built up to counter the US navy. Defeating Vietnam's entire navy wouldn't even be a good warm-up exercise for a day of practice for the Chinese today.

Posted by: William Gruff | Jan 25 2021 21:44 utc | 290

Lot of hysteria over here:

This is the definition of the EEZ:

an area of sea around a country where only that country has the right to take something valuable such as fish or oil:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/exclusive-economic-zone

When the chinese claim "traditional fishing ground", with that kind of ambiguity, they can go into anywhere they want, fish, research, dig oil.

And yes, ONLY the chinese and the americans are using bogus argument to justify this kind of occupation of the SEA Sea. If they are just, they would settle with their neighbors in order to settle a legal and fair rule on this issue, but they have been resistant to this because it obviously benefits them.

When pointed out, you have chinese nationalists/sympathizers/sycophants who claim that this is a Survival or Death issue for China, or China must take hold of it or the USA hold it, meanwhile in reality, this is an ASEAN issue, to be solved by the locals. Not any of the empires at all.

And South Vietnam doesn't exist anymore. Vietnam only claims the 200 miles off the coast, not the whole South East Asia Sea, that's China, as you can clearly see with their 9-dash-line.

Regarding trying to ape western imperalism, that is exactly the 9-dash-line they claimed? If they are different than the westerners, why don't they try to work with their neighbors? Why do they try to use big stick policy instead?

Can anybody answer that?

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 21:55 utc | 291

@ William Gruff

Naval battle nowadays simply isn't just big ships vs small ships anymore in this modern age of anti-ship missiles.

As long as Vietnam maintains good position in ASEAN, it will have an advantage over China in the distance covered, and a good missile force in Vietnam, Phillipines, Malaysia and Indonesia would render the China navy AND the US navy very vulnerable.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 22:02 utc | 292

@ foolisholdman

Since this dude acts like he knows history, let's talk about it.

The Qing Dynasty died in 1911, it's a bit late to blame them for anything!

The century of humiliation starts somewhere in the 1839, with the various appeasement and the various invasions of China, by this time, the Qing dynasty still holds this reins.

Who is trying to ape Western Imperialism? The Century of Humiliation? The Qing Dynasty? Presumably it is not the Westerners themselves! No, presumably Smith is trying to imply that China is currently rampaging around the World setting up colonies? I wonder where.

Precisely, they are claiming "traditional fishing zones" which are not accepted by any of its neighbors, and use no legal or historical evidences to substance these claims. So what are they there but stealing?

Chinese is usually, spelt with a capital C. Presumably Smith thinks that the Chinese "who think they got "wronged""(!) are exaggerating their suffering under the combined depredations of the Western powers and Japan!
Chinese Nationalists fled to Taiwan in 1949 and as far as I know have conquered nothing since. Presumably, he does not mean them. However, this is, at least reasonably coherent.

chinese nationalists are not only limited in Taiwan, you have chinese nationalists/sympathizers/sycophants everywhere on Earth who believe they got wronged in the past, and thus deserving to occupy and steal from others.

It is not grammatically clear whom he is threatening with a sticky end but I think one can presume that he is threatening the present Chinese government. Yeah! And who is going to do it to them? Presumably not Smith himself.

I am threatening any imperialist, China included. And yes, if I'm forced by China to enter a defensive war to defend the national interests, and I would partake in it. But does China have the guts to do a China-maritime ASEAN war? Especially in this political atmosphere?

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 22:13 utc | 293

In fact, let's go on and debunk the NECESSITY argument, as proposed by Arch Bungle:

a) the US will attempt to contain and constrain China by conventional means.
And?

These attempts will fail IF China works with its neighbors instead of antagonizing them.

b) There are those who *believe* that ABM will protect the US from a Chinese nuclear strike AND those who believe China will fold without a nuclear strike, choosing instead to save themselves and become vassals rather than risk a nuclear war.

Belief is not factual, if the US believes that, they would hit China a long time ago.
c) The US may embargo and constrain/dominate the region around China to a degree enough to severly disadvantage China while not raising the threshold of response to nuclear level - slow starvation as is the strategy with North Korea and was the strategy with the USSR.

These attempts will fail if China works with their neighbors, namely ASEAN. Meanwhile, China acts as if its neighbors do not matter at all, thus creating tension and a self-fulfilling prophecy.
d) The US may imagine that an invasion, coupled with an attempt to neutralise the Chinese nuclear chain of command from infiltration within may have the desired effect, and proximity would serve that purpose.

Yeah, imagination. There's no realistic scenario of that drawing out without the complete destruction of the US fleet and US military bases in Asia, and that's why they haven't tried it yet.

This debunks your above argument. To be clear, your reasoning here is defective in this way:

a) You assume that possession of nuclear weapons precludes a purely conventional war where both parties decide to fight it out without nukes.
b) You assume the possession of nuclear weapons is sufficient to prevent strangulation tactics


How does it debunk my argument? Nukes alone is the deterrent of conventional warfare, it's the force which makes any imperialist (China included) trembles, because there's no verifiable or plausible way to counter them yet. And in a case of China-US conflict, nukes would be on the table, make no mistake.
And the second, strangulation tactics is only possible because you refuse to work with people close to you. China sees ASEAN as the enemy, and thus enemy shall it become.
So, let's delve deeper into this. Which part of the vietnamese political ethnic mix are you from?

I'm a Vietnamese nationalist/communist with Marxist leaning.

And William Gruff

If anyone other than China somehow achieves control of the South China Sea, that just means that the American Empire has control over the resources present in the South China Sea. There are no scenarios in which Vietnam or the Philippines gets that control.

No, ASEAN will continue to develop and thus will have their own tech to extract these resources, no need for either American or China.

You are using imperialist tone, because it's there, I must get it. That kind of logic does lead to war and suffering, and it comes from a greedy mind.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 22:41 utc | 294

Smith

Please tell me what your thoughts are about public versus private finance? How does China get to be empire with public finance.....the public surely is not going to pony up for the cost of war, are they?

I think you are confusing dynasties with empires

Posted by: psychohistorian | Jan 25 2021 22:58 utc | 295

@ psychohistorian

That's a weird way to determine empire. The public will push for war due to their perceived interests. You already have brainwashed chinese sycophants who think they alone must hold the SEA sea, or they will die.

Now put this into mind of chinese racists that it is their God-given right to control Asia, that can get out of control real quick.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 23:08 utc | 296

@ Smith # 296 who wrote
"
You already have brainwashed chinese sycophants who think they alone must hold the SEA sea, or they will die.
"
Projection on your part without a link and other supporting documentation


Posted by: psychohistorian | Jan 25 2021 23:21 utc | 297

@ psychohistorian

In this thread alone, there is documented argument used by these chinese sycophants, see:

Arch Burgle

It is about Survival or Death - the enemy they face does not care about good or bad.

Or William Gruff

If anyone other than China somehow achieves control of the South China Sea, that just means that the American Empire has control over the resources present in the South China Sea. There are no scenarios in which Vietnam or the Philippines gets that control.

They already rationalize chinese control of the SEA sea out of necessity of economic or survival. And these guys aren't even the chinese nationalists, it's how deep the rabbit hole goes.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 26 2021 0:08 utc | 298

Posted by: Smith | Jan 25 2021 23:08 utc | 296



You already have brainwashed chinese sycophants who think they alone must hold the SEA sea, or they will die.


If you're referring to my argument, then you are lying.

At no point did I claim the Chinese "alone must hold the SEA sea".

Neither is that my position.

My position is that the Chinese should hold as dominant a position in the SEA sea as any other dominant for there, for it's own defense.

If you're not lying, you are guilt of the mental defect of jumping to conclusions based on no evidence.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Jan 26 2021 2:50 utc | 299

@ Arch Bungle

If you support the 9-dash-claim, it pretty much gives China's enough ambiguity to do whatever they want there, not only fishing, but researching, extracting resources and building military bases and even freaking pushing away other nation's ships and facilities, even INSIDE these countries' EEZ.

That position is indefensible except for anyone who isn't a chinese sycophants.

And yes, to William Gruff, the above is the clear example of chinese imperialism. Until they get that shit sort out with ASEAN with clear rules, this remains true.

Posted by: Smith | Jan 26 2021 2:56 utc | 300

« previous page | next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.