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: 3
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 10:01 PM
link   
A few issues here. First of all you hit the US with a tactical nuke and its a very different situation. The war in Afgahistan no one cared who we killed there and that was just 2 buildings. The reason for the uproar on the iraq war is because its all about the juice that powers our laptops and podcasts and junk. so we are not willing to lose 2000 people or bomb innocent people for oil. But if outright war with china came i think people's attitudes would change, like in world war 2.

secondly if you take out the nuke option, say that we dont get to nukes, evreything but. explain to me how you sneak a million soldiers into the states, and wouldn't wal'mart supply everyone with enough guns and ammo to protect our damn selves.

China is thinking that we have grown soft because we dont simply annihalate Iraq, but the difference is we fight china we are not trying to occupy them, just cripple them.

This seems like a good time to maybe roll out something from the blackworld and bring it to light
like they did with the stealth bomber or F1-17 bomber. just an extra reminder to the world that we spend almost a trillion dollars a year to protect our ipods.




posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 10:16 PM
link   
if china starts the war the same plan should be used like we used against the germans, all the #ing way to beijing! that will only assure use that it wont happen again.



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 10:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Roper
The devil is in the fine print! I copied this from the link.

See the words, believed and verifying.

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.

This could be someones delusion to start up more worry.

Roper



Roper.. where are you from? ... Denver perhaps?

Anyways, I have already posted this fine piece of information. But I think people rather speculate because it is always more enjoyable then using a well founded source of information.



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by jacquescas
A few issues here. First of all you hit the US with a tactical nuke and its a very different situation. The war in Afgahistan no one cared who we killed there and that was just 2 buildings. The reason for the uproar on the iraq war is because its all about the juice that powers our laptops and podcasts and junk. so we are not willing to lose 2000 people or bomb innocent people for oil. But if outright war with china came i think people's attitudes would change, like in world war 2.

secondly if you take out the nuke option, say that we dont get to nukes, evreything but. explain to me how you sneak a million soldiers into the states, and wouldn't wal'mart supply everyone with enough guns and ammo to protect our damn selves.

China is thinking that we have grown soft because we dont simply annihalate Iraq, but the difference is we fight china we are not trying to occupy them, just cripple them.

This seems like a good time to maybe roll out something from the blackworld and bring it to light
like they did with the stealth bomber or F1-17 bomber. just an extra reminder to the world that we spend almost a trillion dollars a year to protect our ipods.


Mate, you quite obviously did not read the story. Heres a few points to get you started:


  1. They're talking gentically engineered bio-weapons.
  2. A tactical nuke won't do squat to the US anyway. You do know what one is, right?
  3. They're not talking about sneaking any troops anywhere.
  4. Its an F-117 not F1-17 and it's a fighter not a bomber.
  5. Walmart? And where are they going to get their weapons from?If China is occupying the US,you seriously think they're going to allow Walmart to sell weapons and allow factories to make them?


Try reading the story and applying some logic to a situation instead of blind patriotic idiocy.



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyIvan

Originally posted by apc
Well... history certainly does repeat itself.

Despite the fact that I feel the US military is grossly underestimated by these "
Asian officials," I think it should be pointed out that if China did decide to follow in the footsteps of Nazi Germany, the exact same thing would happen:

The rest of the world would unite against them, and crush them.



bingo

china would have to fight the Russians, Tiawanese, Japanese, South Koreans, United States, Possibly all of NATO, (hell all of europe for that matter.

and plus china would have to fight a two front war. fight the russians in the west and the americans in the east. a two front war didnt work out well for hitler.


Let's not forget India! The U.S. has been building quite an alliance with India, and although it is not at the level of military exchange more so economical, it is a parternship which has been growing and will continue to grow.



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 10:27 PM
link   
I see why the general was fired. The former general's strategy seems to be go attack the biggest baddest superpower on the planet, wipe him out, take over his land, and expect the rest of the world and survivors to simply cooperate with China afterwards. That's the worst strategy I heard of.

A better strategy for China if they really need some elbow room would be to look south and possibly assimiliate some more of Asia before attacking their economic benefactor in the West. I also believe some people are underestimating how much or nasty Americans will get when it comes to defending our land. Apparently no one outside the US hears stories about gun battles here in the US because the government wants to take 2 feet of land off the front edge of your property and pay you for it so everyone can use an expanded highway. Americans fight for the tiniest little bit of property and die for it. If you take away all of the computers, Xbox's, and other games and tv's, you'll really see Americans ready to kill.

The other Americans who aren't playing games are hiding out in their bunkers waiting to detonate their hidden explosives on any invading army. As far as some country thinking genocide on the US would work, I think they may get a surprise of their own if they believe the US or alllies dont already have some nasty surprises they can retaliate with.

Edited comment: As far as Americans fleeing because we lose a few people in a war, I don't think that has much merit. We lose over 30,000 people a year in the US due to gun deaths and over 11,000 of those are murdered each year. www.ichv.org...
I believe every free American should have the right to bear Arms to defend our country if need be.

[edit on 25-11-2005 by orionthehunter]



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 10:36 PM
link   
Hmm, I think a lot of people underestimate how nationalistic we are. I mean come on terrorists killed less than 2500 people in the wtc attacks and were going ape crap over that. You think people would stand for a million chinese soldiers marching through our streets? Most americans have at least one fire arm. Plus theres the military to deal with. PLUS the Chinese would have to find a way to get over to the Continental US without getting the crap blown out of every single ship. Good luck to he Chinese. IMO they're not coming for the US theyll go for Taiwan for awhile.



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

Originally posted by jacquescas
A few issues here. First of all you hit the US with a tactical nuke and its a very different situation. The war in Afgahistan no one cared who we killed there and that was just 2 buildings. The reason for the uproar on the iraq war is because its all about the juice that powers our laptops and podcasts and junk. so we are not willing to lose 2000 people or bomb innocent people for oil. But if outright war with china came i think people's attitudes would change, like in world war 2.

secondly if you take out the nuke option, say that we dont get to nukes, evreything but. explain to me how you sneak a million soldiers into the states, and wouldn't wal'mart supply everyone with enough guns and ammo to protect our damn selves.

China is thinking that we have grown soft because we dont simply annihalate Iraq, but the difference is we fight china we are not trying to occupy them, just cripple them.

This seems like a good time to maybe roll out something from the blackworld and bring it to light
like they did with the stealth bomber or F1-17 bomber. just an extra reminder to the world that we spend almost a trillion dollars a year to protect our ipods.


Mate, you quite obviously did not read the story. Heres a few points to get you started:


  1. They're talking gentically engineered bio-weapons.
  2. A tactical nuke won't do squat to the US anyway. You do know what one is, right?
  3. They're not talking about sneaking any troops anywhere.
  4. Its an F-117 not F1-17 and it's a fighter not a bomber.
  5. Walmart? And where are they going to get their weapons from?If China is occupying the US,you seriously think they're going to allow Walmart to sell weapons and allow factories to make them?


Try reading the story and applying some logic to a situation instead of blind patriotic idiocy.


Well... the f-117 is a Bomber... do some research...

Saying walmart will supply weapons is more so a figure of speech, regardless walmart does sell weapons... in the sports/hunting section...


You clearly didn't read all the post... doing so might help you make a logical arguement and not resort to unecessary abusive ad-hominems.



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 10:42 PM
link   
Please don't let me interrupt the virtual wargames, but I read that entire speech and something just doesn't seem....right. Frankly, it has a feeling of being the ramblings of a madman. The story is from Aug. 8 and there hasn't been much hubub about it. Until kooky and dangerous ideas like his receive widespread support in China, I wouldn't worry too much about it. His little speech caused an estimated 5.7 million party members to resign. Too bad he wasn't forced to resign as well.



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by orionthehunter
I see why the general was fired. The former general's strategy seems to be go attack the biggest baddest superpower on the planet, wipe him out, take over his land, and expect the rest of the world and survivors to simply cooperate with China afterwards. That's the worst strategy I heard of.

A better strategy for China if they really need some elbow room would be to look south and possibly assimiliate some more of Asia before attacking their economic benefactor in the West. I also believe some people are underestimating how much or nasty Americans will get when it comes to defending our land. Apparently no one outside the US hears stories about gun battles here in the US because the government wants to take 2 feet of land off the front edge of your property and pay you for it so everyone can use an expanded highway. Americans fight for the tiniest little bit of property and die for it. If you take away all of the computers, Xbox's, and other games and tv's, you'll really see Americans ready to kill.

The other Americans who aren't playing games are hiding out in their bunkers waiting to detonate their hidden explosives on any invading army. As far as some country thinking genocide on the US would work, I think they may get a surprise of their own if they believe the US or alllies dont already have some nasty surprises they can retaliate with.

Edited comment: As far as Americans fleeing because we lose a few people in a war, I don't think that has much merit. We lose over 30,000 people a year in the US due to gun deaths and over 11,000 of those are murdered each year. www.ichv.org...
I believe every free American should have the right to bear Arms to defend our country if need be.

[edit on 25-11-2005 by orionthehunter]


... clap clap clap.... well said

There is a huge economic factor people don't discuss.


And I can assure you, the U.S. DOES have a nasty suprise... the US does have the largest military budget in the world, and there is a reason for it.



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by rmatrem
[
Well... the f-117 is a Bomber... do some research...


You do know what the F designation means, don't you?


Originally posted by rmatrem
Saying walmart will supply weapons is more so a figure of speech, regardless walmart does sell weapons... in the sports/hunting section...



Yes, I know, but how the hell are they going to get away with selling weapons if:


  1. The population is dead or diseased from Bio-weapon attack
  2. And the country is under occupation


You also have to take into account about who is going produce these weapons. If people are dead or dying from Bio-Weapon attack, then the factories aren't going to be operational, are they?


Originally posted by rmatrem
You clearly didn't read all the post... doing so might help you make a logical arguement and not resort to unecessary abusive ad-hominems.


Right. That why you make lame arguments then is it?

Get one thing straight, I am not advocating, supporting or any other way backing up this Chinese dudes ideas, however, blind patriot chest beating ignoring the facts will get you no where.

He has stated the plan involves a genetically engineered bio-weapon attack preceeding any invasion and occupation, but you are still thumping away and claiming that you'll go shopping at Walmart before sniping the commies...


And your the one saying I dodn't read the post.....

Thats sad....



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 10:53 PM
link   
How do you know they have genetically engineered bio weapons?? You have said that so much. Is there any proof that they have them? I think if they had them we'd be worrying a lot more. They're just an idea. It would be beyond hard to produce them. Besides if china decides to use bio weapons then the chinese homeland will be one giant crater.



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by truttseeker
How do you know they have genetically engineered bio weapons?? You have said that so much. Is there any proof that they have them? I think if they had them we'd be worrying a lot more. They're just an idea. It would be beyond hard to produce them. Besides if china decides to use bio weapons then the chinese homeland will be one giant crater.


Oh dear..... I don't know, it is what the Chinese dude said.

The whole point of this thread is what some retired Chinese General matey has been saying and discussing it.

Did I say that they have these weapons?

No

I said that was their plan. The Chinese dude said they have them and the plan was to use them....

Seriously, some people really should read the story before posting their comments. It would make for a much more meaningful discussion.

[edit on 25/11/05 by stumason]



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 11:01 PM
link   
Here, from Netchickens second post in the thread:



In it, he spoke openly about China's need for "more living space" and stated bluntly that The United States, Canada and Australia are the only places large enough to accommodate future Chinese needs.

He notes the need for a quick, effective biological attack upon the U.S. to depopulate it as a prelude to conquest, and plainly states that China is working on genetic bio-weapons to kill everyone except "yellow people."

More frightening was his admission of an ongoing deliberate deception of the U.S., with China portraying itself as a peaceful business partner, while actually planning to kill "one or two hundred million Americans."



Netchicken being the author of the thread.

Did you read the whole thread or did you just read the last page and start thumping your chest about how you will beat the commies?

Makes me wonder why I bother sometimes....


apc

posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 11:03 PM
link   
The idea for the existance of genetically engineered bio-weapons targeting non-Chinese is based purely on the speech in question.

Now... assuming such a weapon existed... it would be reasonable to believe that we would have no idea we had been attacked until most of us were dead. That would be the point of utilizing such a weapon. Say, fused with the dye in our chinese produced clothing, on a molecular timer. Just an example of the countless ways our trading partner could deliver such a weapon with any number of products that come over from China.

Even if this former minister is out of a job and has sparked a few million deserters of the Communist Party... I am still concerned about the fact that someone with such extreme viewpoints and desired actions rose to a position of this magnitude in China. Very dangerous.

And btw, stumason just to point out...

4. Its an F-117 not F1-17 and it's a fighter not a bomber.

While it is a fighter by name, it is a bomber by nature. Stealths are typically escorted by F-15/16s to defend them against enemy aircraft until they cannot follow.



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 11:05 PM
link   
1.)Yes, I know, but how the hell are they going to get away with selling weapons if:

The population is dead or diseased from Bio-weapon attack

2.)Mate, you quite obviously did not read the story. Heres a few points to get you started:

They're talking gentically engineered bio-weapons.

You my friend have talked about it. Plus americans are only fat and lazy until their fat and lazy way of life is disturbed. Then we rise up and slap the opposition.



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 11:06 PM
link   


While it is a fighter by name, it is a bomber by nature. Stealths are typically escorted by F-15/16s to defend them against enemy aircraft until they cannot follow.


Yes..I know...It is still a fighter. Hence why it is called a Stealth Fighter, has the F designation etc etc.

The F-16 is a fighter, but can be used for ground attack and bombing missions, but it is still a fighter. The way it is used is interchangeable, but that doesn;t detract from the fact it is a fighter.



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 11:11 PM
link   
Hmm, I seem to have misunderstood. My bad dawg. No hard feelings eh?



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by truttseeker
You my friend have talked about it. Plus americans are only fat and lazy until their fat and lazy way of life is disturbed. Then we rise up and slap the opposition.


Debating the point with seems pointless, but I will try anyway.

I did not claim they had these weapons.

The Chinese matey who gave the speech, which is what this thread is about, said they had them.

There is no point being hypothetical about how you would rise up and kill the commies if, in that same hypothetical situation, you ignore what they plan to do first to get to the point where you would be invaded.

Do you understand this? Or is your logic impaired?

The Chinese General claimed they have the weapons. He claimed the would use them. Then invade.

How can you say you will rise up and throw them out if this situation took place, or worse still, start claiming that I made up the point about the weapons in the first place when the General whose speech we are discussing said it? I am merely trying to make you see that if such an attack took place, a rebellion is hardly likely to happen.

Jesus, its not that hard to understand, is it? Or am I speaking in Zwahili?



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by truttseeker
Hmm, I seem to have misunderstood. My bad dawg. No hard feelings eh?


Finally....I was starting to lose my hair...

No hard feelings...



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join