China's military closing the gap with U.S. of A., page 1


Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times
Topic started on 17-6-2005 @ 10:19 AM by deltaboy
www.washtimes.com...

China's military capability is catching up with that of the United States according to a Rand Corp. study.
A Rand report quoted by the Russian newspaper Pravda Thursday said the gap was expected to further narrow in the next few years.
Pravda said excerpts from the report drawn up for U.S. intelligence chiefs detailed China's military breakthroughs and development over the past few years.
The newspaper said the report had probably been leaked to the public to increase support for higher budget allocations for the Pentagon and U.S. intelligence agencies.


maybe China is closing the gap, but i dont think its moving dat fast. in anicase the U.S. shouldnt worry about China's military for another decade or 2. this is probably just to make excuse in putting more money on big military projects as well as funding for black projects.


reply posted on 17-6-2005 @ 02:20 PM by orangetom1999
I took this from your posting...good point.

"if you think that the Chinese are better than the US when it comes to treating humans you are sorely mistaken."

This is such a overlooked view ..when the media gets ahold of it ..they are so slanted ..both historically and in current terms. The buisness at Gitmo is textbook.
Historically the French in thier colonies were never known for giving the locals a even break and pretty much treated the peoples in their colonies horribly ..while looting them and not investing much.
The British under the "Crown" policys were not much better.The history of India/China is a classic example giving rise to famous people like Mahatma Ghandi. You do however..need to know that there is a difference in a Crown colony and a Commonwealth.
People who dont know much of the history and who are easily lead by their teachers and the media do like go gang up on America. Not that we wear the white hats mind you ..but there is much more going on than meets or has met the eye.

The militarys with all thier tools ...have always been a extention of the merchants and the merchantile fleets...protecting these investments. This has never changed..no matter what rhetoric one learns in school as the standard line. This merchantile war has been going on since the Greeks and Romans...if not before. It has only changed or altered faces as empires come and go..and technology arrives to change the way things are done and the reasons for this. New wealth is not in spices and silks anymore but in Oil, ores,electronics...and the energy/knowhow to put them into usable form. Also in control of trade routes by which to ship these goods.
By the way ..one of the other forms of merchants today ...though they have always been around..is banks and insurance companys. They are just merchants in moneys and just as ferverently intend to protect their investments.
When you know and understand this it will change the way you look at conflicts and the reasons behind them.
This also in history has had much to do with how people are treated and why.

Good point you made there..Char2c35t..

Thanks,
Orangetom


reply posted on 17-6-2005 @ 09:15 PM by chinawhite
Originally posted by orangetom1999
I never said democracy is best for China! Where did you get that Idea??

I have news for you Chinawhite...all man made systems are corrupt or fall in to corruption eventually. This is obvious in the history of the Chinese governments before the advent of the present one. They fell quickly into corruption making them vulnurable to outside manipulation. The opium wars are a classic example of this.
I said ...by Western powers..I meant the merchants. Decendents of the same merchants and merchant powers who put opium in China to cover their losses in silver paid for Chinese silks and teas. Various governments are the tools of the merchants and always have been.
There has been plenty of corruption to go around under the communists also..as one group or another falls into or out of power. History under the communists is replete with this. It is just another variation of feudalism..
We have variations of the same thing going on here in the USA under the guise of the two party system...feudalism. Same merchants!! Its just that today they are more international that ever.

Thanks,
Orangetom


my post wasn't directed to you...its for nationlist americans
*cough* westpoint*cough*

It you look at chias history when there is a strong leader(communist china is very calm properous society when there is a weak leader(demoracy) there is chaos. the weaker government is more inclined to be currput because of the smaller punishment for being caught.



At the time of the opium wars there was a very weak leader..china population in the 19th centuray had skyrocketed from 100million when they took power in 1644 to 400million in 1850 . also half of china at that time was in some sort of rebellion..


reply posted on 17-6-2005 @ 10:19 PM by chinawhite
Chinese is considered an ethnic group by convention, but in fact we Chinese know it's not true.

Because overwhelminly majority of Chinese belong to "Han" ethnic group, and the written language of Chinese is called "Han language" in China, the world usually thinks a person from China is usually considered to belong to the "Chinese" ethnicity, although in China, people thinks "Chinese" does not define ethnicity, it's merely a term for nationality.

There are 56 ethnic groups in China, 91% are Hans, even including Russians living in the northwest and Koreans living near the border of China and North Korea.

Well, if a Tibetan who possesses Chinese passport comes to US, then by looking at the passport, people think that guy is a Chinese. Only by furthur inquiry can one know he's Tibetan. Everyone know the west wants Tibet to be independent, so they consider Tibetan as non-Chinese. But in which ways do the apperances of Tibetans differ from average Chinese? hardly. But people in China knows he is not Han, because every Chinese citizen, on his/her profile, says the ethnic group that person belongs to and the province of origin (usually on the farther's side). Well, it's similar to racial profiling in US to say if a person is white, black, or latino.

But most westerners do not know that Han means, they know Chinese, they know Tibetans, and Mongols (the great mongol Genghis Khan leader who conquered all Asia), they know Koreans. It would be ironic for an ethnic Korean who lived in China to come to North America, then people ask him about the ethnicity, he would say he's Korean, he would also say he's Chinese because he's CHinese citizen. Then many people would be surprised to see a Korean Chinese who came from China who could not even speak Korean well, but still, he's treated as a Chinese by the agencies because of the passport. But in China, most people know Korean belong to one of the 56 ethnicities and how can you say a Korean Chinese isn't CHinese?

Same thing would apply to Mongol Chinese, most Mongol Chinese would consider themselves as Chinese instead of Mongol because China is a better country than Mongol. Would a Korean Chinese consider himself a Korean because Korea is richer than China?

There are also Turkish groups living in the western China, who look similar to Afghans, or even southern Europeans, but they are Chinese, aren't they? (they are not Han)

There are Muslims living all over China, their history can trace back to almost a century ago when somne Arabs came to western part of China to spread Islam, then they were mixed with Hans, and they formed Muslim ethnic group. Most of them still believe in Islam. Aren't they Chinese? Yes they are.

So Chinese should not be considered as a term for ethnicity, but a nationality like "American", which does not tell whether a person is white, black or brown,..

Although 1% of Japanese aren't ethnicly Nippon, we often think Japanese is a word for ethnic group because 99% people living in Japan are Nippon.

But 9% of Chinese aren't Hans, which is over 100 million people! So we can't ignore them. Yes, they are Chinese because they have chinese citizenship, but they aren't Hans., and some have thier own history and language. But most non-Chinese refer Chinese as Hans, which is a mistake.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



Top 10 Non-Lethal Weapons
  Posted 5 days ago with 8 member flags
A Different look at the Tunguska Event
  Posted 2 days ago with 7 member flags
The Robots Of Boston Dynamics Inc.
  Posted 5 days ago with 4 member flags
Camouflage face paint \'resists intense heat from bombs\'
  Posted 19 days ago with 3 member flags
Freeze Dried Food
  Posted 1 days ago with 1 member flags
Asia’s New Arms Race: Missiles, Missile Defenses
  Posted 15 days ago with 0 member flags