It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: China prepares to invade "inferior white race's" countries

page: 11
7
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 05:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
The only reason the USSR and the USA didn't "push the button, Max" was that they had parity and thus MAD, Mutually-Assured Destruction.


With chinas nuclear weapons its a deterant againest american atacks because they know how much civillains they will lose by attacking china. Same goes for china.

That is why no one is wiling to use nukes




posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 07:55 AM
link   
thats ok china canada is open for more people living here.make an application and join our land we are under populated.we need workers here so come on over.just make sure you have your papers done lol.there are many places that china could go towards without war.they need more policy voice if they wish to fix there looming problems.....



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Majic Said: quote: From the source article:


Independently verifying the authorship of the speech is not possible.

If I read this correctly, the presenter of this information seems quite confident that no corroboration for this article can be found.


Yes, that statement is from the first link Netchicken posted. Here it is again for clarification:

english.epochtimes.com...


The following is a transcript of a speech believed to have been given by Mr. Chi Haotian, Minster of Defense and vice-chairman of China’s Central Military Commission. Independently verifying the authorship of the speech is not possible. It is worth reading because it is believed to set out the CCP’s strategy for the development of China. The speech argues for the necessity of China using biological warfare to depopulate the United States and prepare it for a future massive Chinese colonization. “The War Is Not Far from Us and Is the Midwife of the Chinese Century” was published on February 15, 2005 on www.peacehall.com and was published on www.boxun.com on April 23, 2005. This speech and a related speech, “The War Is Approaching Us” are analyzed in The Epoch Times original article “The CCP’s Last-ditch Gamble: Biological and Nuclear War.”

So as we see, there is a web history of the speeches, according to the ET site. I don't read chinese, but if these sites are also Falun Gong sites then that could indicate a fake. Until we know for sure, it's worth looking into.

Here's the second link which I posted in my first reply:

english.epochtimes.com...



This plan is laid out in two speeches written by Chi Haotian, Minster of Defense and vice-chairman of China’s Central Military Commission, and posted on the Internet. The background surrounding the speeches is still shrouded in mystery. The titles of the two speeches are “War Is Approaching Us” [1] and “War Is Not Far from Us and Is the Midwife of the Chinese Century.” The two, judging from their similar contexts and consistent theme, are indeed sister articles.

I guess the mystery is how they got posted to the web on the two sites mentioned.

If they are forgeries, then shouldn't we be able to determine that? It's amazing to me how many people want us to run away from this thread. Heck, there should be more Chinese citizens here helping because I'm sure they have as much real information on their party bosses as we do.



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
I've read the article, and after discussing it with my teachers and fellow students we came to only one possibly conclusion.

THAT IT IS A JOKE! A child's prank! A digusting and immoral joke, a horrible and not funny joke... but a joke no less.



[edit on 28-11-2005 by Thomas Crowne]



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 01:04 PM
link   
After reading the speech in its entirety it has done nothing but validate my fears that ive personally had towards china for years..nd to those who said that this country is too big for any invader to hold obviously didnt read the whole speech...their plan is to use bio or gene weapons to "clean up" america...in other words through use of bio weapons they can get rid of a vast majority of our population and thusly make it much easier to invade and conquer. Most americans are so self assured in their own superiority that we think we are invicible...thinking that china is nothing more than a bunch of underdeveloped morons... quite the contrary.. facts show that china is rated number 1 and three in the world in math and science.. whereas we in america are rated 22 and 28th respectively...our over confidence could be our own undoing



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by TONE23
facts show that china is rated number 1 and three in the world in math and science.. whereas we in america are rated 22 and 28th respectively...our over confidence could be our own undoing

Do the facts also show that most of the world most advanced research goes on in the US and the US has the most number of nobel prize winners than anyother nation ??
You are afraid needlessly, the USA was ready to end it all with the USSR, burning the whole world to dust and glass and we still prevailed. The Chinese with all the hem and hawing are nothing compared to the erstwhile soviet unions might or scope anywhere militarily or technologically, what they become in the future is mere speculation and guess work. So I wouldnt be the least bit concerned about any chinese invasion or such nonsense if I were you.
These are mostly the rantings of a lonely old man who wants some attention, such rhetoric is common in communist nations, crowd pullers antics thats all.
Just as Castro says that he'll defeat the US and the Iranians having grandiose plans of fighting and winning against America .



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
The only reason the USSR and the USA didn't "push the button, Max" was that they had parity and thus MAD, Mutually-Assured Destruction.

Maybe, maybe not. But China would cause an awful lot of havoc anyway.


Originally posted by chinawhite
With chinas nuclear weapons its a deterant againest american atacks because they know how much civillains they will lose by attacking china. Same goes for china.

That is why no one is wiling to use nukes

Again, maybe, maybe not. A Chinese general said that China would not hesitate to use nukes against America if they'd intefere with whatever China has in store for Taiwan, he also said and I quote “We Chinese will prepare ourselves for the destruction of all of the cities east of Xian. Of course the Americans will have to be prepared that hundreds…of cities will be destroyed by the Chinese."
Maybe he was just stating his own opinion, however it is somewhat frightening that such a man has gotten into such a high position in the military.
www.armscontrol.org...

Putting this whole thing in a NWO perspective, it kinda makes sense. I mean, even in that speech the author mentions "According to what He Xin had in hand, the outstanding people of the world in attendance thought that in the 21st century a mere 20% of the world’s population will be sufficient to maintain the world’s economy and prosperity, the other 80% or 4/5 of the world’s population will be human garbage unable to produce new values. The people in attendance thought that this excess 80% population would be a trash population ..."
What better way to do that, than a worldwide all-out nuclear, biological and chemical war?

The point would not be for China to win, but for China to start this third world war to further the NWO agenda. He's fooling some Chinese people with the illusion that they are somehow superior to others and that they will rule the earth after China defeats everybody, just like Hitler. That is not even rationally thinking likely, and far from what this guy's true intentions are. It's called social engineering.
If I remember correctly, the NWO plan is to make all nations fight eachother to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion in a all-out world war, in which most of us humans will die. Then the NWO gang will basicly crawl out from under the rocks that they've been hiding, with their hidden armies and pick up the pieces.

In this clip from the movie "The Sum of All Fears" a fascist conspirator is trying to do just that, but only with the U.S. and Russia (not that other countries wouldn't eventually jump in), then I reckon Europe would come and pick up the pieces, in the movie that is. In the end of the clip he says, and I quote "One more thing. Let no man call us crazy, they called Hitler crazy, but Hitler wasn't crazy, he was stupid. You don't fight Russia and America. You get Russia and America to fight eachother ... and destroy eachother."
Right click, and save target as ...


That's my take on this anyway.

[edit on 28/11/2005 by SwearBear]



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 02:51 PM
link   
Forging Ahead


Originally posted by smallpeeps
If they are forgeries, then shouldn't we be able to determine that?

Not according to the source itself, and that's my point. In fact, this article can't even be considered a forgery, because it doesn't even present itself as something real or legitimate.

That's what the weasel words like “believed to have been given” tell us. Believed by whom?

Not me, obviously, and whomever does believe it is telling me it can't be verified, which is a claim that can honestly be made only if the source knows the article to be a work of fiction.

The source of this article is telling us things that can be true only if this article is bogus, is therefore lying about something, and thus my dismissal of it as a credible source.

Authentic sources don't tend to discredit themselves and effectively tell you they're lying.

Dry Run


Originally posted by smallpeeps
It's amazing to me how many people want us to run away from this thread.

What point is there in basing discussion on a demonstrable lie? Everything which proceeds from it becomes tainted by it, and cannot be trusted as a result.

This is equivalent to basing a thread on a piece by The Onion in which President Bush is claimed to be a Martian. All the “pro-Bush-Martian” and “anti-Bush-Martian” rhetoric which would follow would itself be comically absurd and hopelessly irrelevant.

Likewise, discussion predicated on a self-discrediting hoax has no more legitimacy than the hoax itself.

If someone has something meaningful to say, there are far better threads for it than one based on patent falsehood. Mao knows, we have no shortage of such threads around here.


Of course, discussion of the hoax itself is certainly of interest to me and others who find such things intriguing, but with independent verification being deemed “impossible” by the source, I don't see much point in spending too much time on it.

Obviously not all members share my opinion on this, as the size and content of this thread demonstrate eloquently, but likewise, I doubt that I'm alone in not taking interest in nationalist political debates sparked by a bogus source in ATSNN.

That's what we have PTS for, is it not?


China Syndrome


Originally posted by smallpeeps
Heck, there should be more Chinese citizens here helping because I'm sure they have as much real information on their party bosses as we do.

If this thread is any guide, we don't have much to work with, then, as reliable, undoctored and credible information on Chinese leaders seems to be a very scarce commodity around here.

If more Chinese citizens actually knew what was going on, we might see more of it, but even then, the cloud of disinformation and deceit which surrounds all affairs of the Chinese government would make it difficult to determine truth from falsehood.

That's why source attribution is so important on ATS. Without it, we subject ourselves to running on an endless treadmill of delusion guided by those who seek to deceive us.

Which is why I have such little regard for bogus sources: they serve only to mask the truth, and that is the exact opposite of the reason why I'm here.

Considering how many people are in the business of lying to us, I see no reason why we should see fit to lie to ourselves.

Let's leave that to the professionals.



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Simon666

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
While you're at it you might as well add the estimated 1/5 to 1/4 of the Cambodian population killed by the Khmer Rouge as China was their only backer and gave them full support.

Actually, the US supported the Red Khmer as well and gave them support for revenge motives. see, the red Khmer had the nasty habit of regularly making military incursions into Vietnam, with which the US had just suffered humiliating defeat. The Chinese also lost miserably when they thought they'd teach the Vietnamese a lesson.

[edit on 28-11-2005 by Simon666]


Uh, no, Simon, the Red Khmers never had a habit of making regular military incursions into VN after the Vietnamese invasion of '78/9. Those incursions were the reason for the invasion (and were irregular but brutal) and prior to the invasion the KR received 0 support from the US.

The US support for the KR came in the form of the "triumvirate" or "tri-partite" representation. Cambodia's seat at the UN was held by Sihanouk's party (FUNCINPEC), the KR and Son Sann's Khmer People's National Liberation Front (KPNLF) together, thus denying it to the Vietnamese backed (and controlled) government in Phnom Penh.

The US gave their support to Son Sann, the Chinese to the KR and a little for their old buddy Sihanouk and the Thais were the conduit for this support. The KR were living in the jungles along the Thai border for the entirety of the 80s except for the little bit of the province of Kampot where the three tourists were killed and some of Koh Kong.

The only backer the KR had while they were in power was China.

Google Mayaguez to see how much support the US gave the KR.



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
Well then, why don't you tell us how many people died in the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution and the invasion of Tibet. While you're at it you might as well add the estimated 1/5 to 1/4 of the Cambodian population killed by the Khmer Rouge as China was their only backer and gave them full support.


all together 10-15million.

That is my overestimate


You read that off some random website, I presume...



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
The only reason the USSR and the USA didn't "push the button, Max" was that they had parity and thus MAD, Mutually-Assured Destruction.


With chinas nuclear weapons its a deterant againest american atacks because they know how much civillains they will lose by attacking china. Same goes for china.

That is why no one is wiling to use nukes


You're not getting it. The orginal position is that China will start the war and use nukes to do it.

If that happens then China will send its numerically vastly inferior nuclear arsenal into the sky. Many, many Americans will die. Of that there is no doubt.

However, America's response would be to wipe China from the face of the earth. And no-one in the international community would condemn them for defending themselves from unprovoked attack. However, there will be many condemnations of the effects such an action by the US would have on third parties, ie the nuclear fallout that would circle the earth.

Thus SAD, Self-Assured Destruction. The US would survive as a nation. China would not. On a per capita basis the US might lose more people. On a straight numbers basis China would lose many, many more people.

It would be your Pearl Harbour. Only it wouldn't take 4 years for the US to decide to nuke you.

Do you remember September 12? There wasn't a person in the US who didn't give their full support to President Bush to go invade Afghanistan. And that was for 3,000 dead Americans, not 30,000,000. They would demand an end to term-limits to keep the shrub in power if China attacked with nukes tomorrow. And he's at the lowest approval ratings he's ever had at the moment.



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 06:24 PM
link   
Howl, even Wikipedia will attest to the doubtfulness of most estimates for the GLF.

Next, China will never use nukes to attack America, why? Because we will never attack America. This article is a fake.



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
Howl, even Wikipedia will attest to the doubtfulness of most estimates for the GLF.

Next, China will never use nukes to attack America, why? Because we will never attack America. This article is a fake.


"And finally, you do not have the strategic leverage that you had in the 1950's when you threatened nuclear strikes on us. You were able to do that because we could not hit back. But if you hit us now, we can hit back. So you will not make those threats. In the end you care more about Los Angeles than you do about Taipei."

Remember this? It was back in 95. What if we got involved in fighting China's invasion over Taiwan, will China use nukes as a resort to counter America's superior firepower?



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 07:07 PM
link   
Nope, we have a policy of never using nuclear weapons first. Besides we'ld only force the issue with Taiwan if a) if all other peaceful recourses failed, and b) if we knew we could win said conventional war.

Its only a matter of time for good or ill.



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 08:33 PM
link   
Why are people willing to post in this "worthless" thread but nobody wants to dig deeper to find the truth? Whattup wit' dat?! If we find that the ET site is lying, haven't we improved our data collection skills here at ATS? I mean, this article was posted by a super-mod and a graphic was posted on the ATS main page. I'd like to know if this speech is true or not.

The ET site says this speech was originally posted on two other sites: peacehall.com and boxun.com ...Now these two sites appear to be the same site, so that's the first clue that maybe something's not right. Still, the boxun site does have some very interesting news on China in English, so maybe it is a credible site. it's also possible that the post exists only in Chinese.

Here's an example of stories I found on boxun.com (lots of good reading about China there).

Journalist faces possible life sentence for posting Tiananmen document on website

Editor of literary review gets three years in prison

Chinese blog shut down just days after being nominated for free expression contest

President Bush's speech at the church in Beijing

I think it's safe to say that lots of news coming out of China will be released by just one or two people or some group that's being persecuted. As a result, the presentation and references may not always be there. Now can someone tell me if boxun.com is also a Falun Gong site? Maybe then we'll be closer to the truth.

Since it's difficult for Chinese people to post anything critical on the web, I am willing to accept that some factual news may come out of China in strange ways. Does anyone read Chinese and can they see if the dated links mentioned in my response above exist on the chinese version of the boxun/peacehall site? How did Hal get the Chinese version on his page unless it did exist in Chinese first?

[EDIT]

I added some more links from boxun.com... Cool site, but perhaps all this news is being manufactured by a cult also. Uh yeah. Also, CCP Internet shills do not exist.



[edit on 28-11-2005 by smallpeeps]



posted on Nov, 28 2005 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by smallpeeps
I think it's safe to say that lots of news coming out of China will be released by just one or two people or some group that's being persecuted. As a result, the presentation and references may not always be there. Now can someone tell me if boxun.com is also a Falun Gong site? Maybe then we'll be closer to the truth.

No one has ever been able to connect Boxun.com/Abundant News with FLG or The Epoch Times. Boxun.com is more of a 'news portal' where members post things which could be considered subersive or get them in a lot of trouble. Kind of like ATSNN in a way, but without the emphasis on having proof or good sources. There is a lot of independant reporting by members. I'm taking this article as it is presented, an unsubstantiated report.

You can find good stories on Boxun.com. It is the site that first broke the news of SARS in China.

I hope this helps you a bit.



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 03:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
You read that off some random website, I presume...


Nope.



You're not getting it. The orginal position is that China will start the war and use nukes to do it.
If that happens then China will send its numerically vastly inferior nuclear arsenal into the sky. Many, many Americans will die. Of that there is no doubt.


It will only use nukes if its attacked. If china gets attacked by the US it will respond. What will the world community be after the US bombs china first?

China only needs to launch its twenty or so nuclear weapons with 5megatons each it will make the american continent to poluted to sustain life. Throw in some other missles in the region and the whole world is un-sustainble thanks to the american attack.

China only gets to the sunshine quicker.

Numbers dont mean anything in a nuclear excahnge because the more you launch the more radioactivity that is coming your way. The russians and americans built up their nuclear arsenal to launch pre-emptive strikes.



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
You read that off some random website, I presume...


Nope.


Your estimate is as worthless as the one you deride. If you want to discount something, bring some evidence.




You're not getting it. The orginal position is that China will start the war and use nukes to do it.
If that happens then China will send its numerically vastly inferior nuclear arsenal into the sky. Many, many Americans will die. Of that there is no doubt.


It will only use nukes if its attacked. If china gets attacked by the US it will respond. What will the world community be after the US bombs china first?


Chinawhite, Middle Kingdom...

It doesn't matter what you think. What you think is your government's policy is not the issue here. The issue is what the General allegedly said.

The General (if the speech is real) is threatening to attack the US. ie to START the war with a nuclear exchange.


China only needs to launch its twenty or so nuclear weapons with 5megatons each it will make the american continent to poluted to sustain life. Throw in some other missles in the region and the whole world is un-sustainble thanks to the american attack.

China only gets to the sunshine quicker.

Numbers dont mean anything in a nuclear excahnge because the more you launch the more radioactivity that is coming your way. The russians and americans built up their nuclear arsenal to launch pre-emptive strikes.


Chinawhite, in nuclear war, as in conventional war, numbers mean everything. So, you can destroy, or at least seriously damage, America's 20 greatest cities.

But what if you throw two nukes at Washington to guarantee you really decapitate the US? Then you've only got 18 left for the population centres.

And you still have to take out NORAD at Cheyenne Mountain. And the US' nuclear arsenal. AND the Canadians, who are an integral part of the DEW line.

And you still need to kill every CBG and Boomer at sea, which are all nuclear armed.

And you need to destroy the US bases in the UK, which store nukes.

And the US bases in Japan and South Korea.

And Guam.

And Rammstein in Germany.

The US has no such problem. 100% of your military is on mainland Asia. And their arsenal is large enough that they can hit their primary targets in Russia, China and North Korea almost simultaneously.

I hope you like that sunshine being brought to your home in Minuteman form.

The Russians and the US built up their arsenals to launch pre-emptive and counterstrikes, to include tactical battlefield nukes and to guarantee the destruction of not only each other but also NATO and the Warsaw Pact. Thus the need for the US to own 3,000 nukes.

The US don't rely only on ICBMs. They also developed the nuclear-armed cruise missile. Such examples include the Hound Dog, which was designed to be ASM, air to surface, launching from a B52.

Is your navy good enough to hunt US boomers lurking in the Taiwan Straits?



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 06:49 PM
link   
I can guarantee you that if 20 5 megaton weapons hit the US, there wouldn't be much enthusiasm for the victory party even if we did technically "win".

A bragging contest about who would "win" a major nuclear exhange is infinitely childish. Even the victor would lose, badly, by any sane standard.

[edit on 11/29/05 by xmotex]



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
Your estimate is as worthless as the one you deride. If you want to discount something, bring some evidence.


I cant bring edvidence if i dont have a break down of figures to go over. If he or you have figures for each event then i could do that easily.




It doesn't matter what you think. What you think is your government's policy is not the issue here. The issue is what the General allegedly said.
The General (if the speech is real) is threatening to attack the US. ie to START the war with a nuclear exchange.


No the general did not say start war with nuclear weapons but defend with nuclear weapons.

Dont even read any articles properly. I have the entire speech made by him and it says if any chinese matieral is touched it will respond with nuclear weapons



Chinawhite, in nuclear war, as in conventional war, numbers mean everything. So, you can destroy, or at least seriously damage, America's 20 greatest cities. But what if you throw two nukes at Washington to guarantee you really decapitate the US? Then you've only got 18 left for the population centres.


Numbers dont mean squat. China has never was going to use nuclear weapons to decapitate the US but only cause it a very large amount of casulties so it would attack. a deterant.

No one here is trying to say chian can destory the entire US arsenal(But it seems you are)



And you still have to take out NORAD at Cheyenne Mountain. And the US' nuclear arsenal. AND the Canadians, who are an integral part of the DEW line. And you still need to kill every CBG and Boomer at sea, which are all nuclear armed.


You only need to take out things like that if you were going on a first strike to make sure the enemy has not counter attack. That was the US and SOviet plan not chinas.

Chinas nuclear arsenal has always been small for deterant not as a first strike weapon to kill the others capability.

From what i am aware of the americans have a escalation poliicy not a first general strike



And you need to destroy the US bases in the UK, which store nukes.
And the US bases in Japan and South Korea.
And Guam.
And Rammstein in Germany.


China has other missiles. the DF-5 is a missile to hit the US mainland.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join