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.

 

Can China Invade Taiwan?

page: 167
1
<< 164  165  166    168  169  170 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 02:58 AM
link   
the problem here is that people forget that almost every action done in China, has been done by many other Nation's.

Yes the Massacre was bad, but than so was the eugenics policy of America.

The idea of displaying who is "bad" is a joke at best and you need to move passed that and look at the states of the Nation's now and how far they have came...and it is sad to say, but America is the one going backwards not forwards.




posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 03:05 AM
link   
"No...................From eye witness accounts from both sides no one was actually killed in Tiananmen Square.

Yes in beijing people were killed but stilla a samll number compared to how much people there. "

People who were there and the Tiananmen Mothers said hundreds were killed and thousands given long prison sentences.

Don't the chinese on this thread have mothers? They are turning around and putting these grieving mothers in prison for asking questions about their children. The propaganda is pretty thick if you can't feel something for these woman. Oh, the poison red of the CCP flag.











PS: My little work of art is in no way to be construed as demonizing the CCP.





[edit on 10/21/2005 by bodebliss]



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 03:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV

Quote and link these eyewitness accounts.


www.sinomania.com...



Early morning June 4, 1989, Tiananmen Square was cleared by army troops. A Spanish television crew filmed the retreat of the remaining 5,000 students and hunger strikers from the square just before dawn. They had negotiated safe conduct from the military at the last minute. Deng Xiaoping wanted no deaths to result from breaking up the demonstrators and clearing Tiananmen Square. Chinese leaders instructed the army that soldiers should not turn their weapons on innocent civilians, even if provoked. For the most part, this desire was realized. But as troops and tanks made their way to the square confrontations erupted on the streets of Beijing. According to government and eye witness reports, most of the deaths occurred when tanks crashed through barricades erected at the Muxidi bridge, in the western suburbs of Beijing.

Other than the official Chinese information, no reliable evidence of deaths has ever been produced by anyone on either side of the issue. As Jay Mathews, former Beijing bureau chief for the Washington Post has said, there is no evidence anyone died in Tiananmen Square. Yet no journalist or politician outside China has ever attempted to correct the record. Instead the myth that thousands of unarmed people were deliberately mowed down by their own government is spread as part of an unacknowledged campaign of misinformation led by sinophobic press and politicians.





Notice you will never find a death in tiananmen itself.

I fyou find a picture of a dead protestor i will believe everything you tell me




Why don't you tell us, if you can. Let's see, Tibetan Buddhists armed with anything from flintlocks to bolt-actions vs PLA armed with Type 56s and PPShs, yes, I'm sure they slaughtered you.


Guerilla warfare.

I think the americans are accustomed to the type of things that are associated with these wars.




And FredT forgot to mention China's invasion and occupation of East Turkestan, which was NEVER Chinese territory. In the same way that the former Soviet Republics of Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan et al are now independent becasue they were never traditionally Russian.


That is a completey ignorant statment there

SILK ROAD ANYONE?


The HAN dynasty had controlled that area before BC.

You are comparing the soviet union which was a relatively new comer to china which has been there for over 2000 years.

The areas of east and west turkenstan has had chinese emigration since 2000 years ago.





[edit on 21-10-2005 by chinawhite]



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 03:16 AM
link   
I heard there is a new book out about how the chinese against the KMT were not communists originally, but Stalin said if you don't go communist you won't get any money from me. The leader of the long march did not even want Mao to come along, but again Stalin insisted so they grungingly took Mao w/ them . Mao did not walk the march, but was carried as if by slaves , and there was no fighting at the supposed crossing of some silly river bridge because there was no attack on the communists by the KMT because Stalin held one of Changs sons in Moscow. So there you have it the CCP's history of heroics is totally made up. A lie! A big bloody lie.



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 03:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
Hmmm from a communist offical no doubt:


Yes, because they are the only one that have proof to back theirs up instead of i saw heaps of people fall.




However, the storm troopers were very efficient and no doubt many were killed. Is it true that they bill the family for the bullet they use to execute a loved one for crimes against the state?


The american government figure of 180-500 eludes you?



Well that makes me sleep better, but hey as Stalin said, one death is a tragedy, a million is a statistic. Thats the best you can offer here? the percentage killed was low :shk:


500:7,000,000

That is a very large ratio

5:70,000




Im gonna wager that it was far less than the 1.2 million people that died from communist rule. Whats with you guys and the large scale killing of people? I mean think about it. Mao, Stalin, Pot do you guys HAVE to kill in the million all the time? But hey, I spent some time at a Jesuit run boarding school in Switzerland and those Monks can be tough


And from where are these figures taken from?

A census or chit-chat?



www.acu.edu:9090...


Can a source get any better with yellow and purple as their colour of choice




My guess is yes, or at least handle it in a better manner. You guys blew it with your heavy handed action in Hong Kong, what incentive do they have for ever coming back. Actually if you want to get technical The rebels really are Mao and perhaps Taiwan should be demanding that the oh so proud middle kingdom come back into the fold.


Pardon me.

They want something that never was theirs.


Let puri fill you in why.



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 03:41 AM
link   
"Taiwan ever gains de facto and de jure independance it will mean that quite officially that China has been split into two, also it will mean as pointed above a loss of face for our government for we've been for years stating that Taiwan has been culturally a part of China and its split would mean a spliting of the Chinese Destiny. "


Taiwan already has defacto independence.



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 03:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by bodebliss
I heard there is a new book out about how the chinese against the KMT were not communists originally, but Stalin said if you don't go communist you won't get any money from me.


The chinese communist created in 1921, the majority was french educated Not soviet



The leader of the long march did not even want Mao to come along, but again Stalin insisted so they grungingly took Mao w/ them .


THat is not true.

Stalin didn't like Mao because of the way Mao taught communism. Stalin believed that the industrial workers or working class were the ones which could cause revolution but Mao said that peasants were the key.

Also the soviet union only polictially supported mao in 1949 because he thought that the KMT were still going to win the civil war.



Mao did not walk the march, but was carried as if by slaves ,


Is this some type of personal attack on mao?



and there was no fighting at the supposed crossing of some silly river bridge because there was no attack on the communists by the KMT


You been reading that new book ay?



because Stalin held one of Changs sons in Moscow. So there you have it the CCP's history of heroics is totally made up. A lie! A big bloody lie.


You sumed up your argument in your own quote.

A big bloody lie.



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 03:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
SILK ROAD ANYONE?


The HAN dynasty had controlled that area before BC.

You are comparing the soviet union which was a relatively new comer to china which has been there for over 2000 years.

The areas of east and west turkenstan has had chinese emigration since 2000 years ago.


The Karokorams, the Oxus, Kokand et al are all Muslim, all of south-central Asia (the roof of the world) is except for Tibet/Bhutan/Nepal, and the city-states were independent Emirates. They acknowledged no higher authority other than Allah and paid tribute to no-one. Until Czar Alexander's men arrived. These guys all thought they were on a par with Queen Victoria, the Empress of India and head of the world's largest empire.

It's called the Silk Road because caravans (camel trains) carried silk from China to the Middle East, not because it was Chinese owned or built.

No, I'm saying that the Soviet Union simply carried forward the Russian occupation and with the end of the USSR that occupation ended as well. And Russia's occupation began in the 1800s, China's occupation of East Turkestan began less than half a century ago.


Tiananmen:

news.bbc.co.uk...

...About the time I reached some trees along the avenue the soldiers opened up on the crowd at the top of the square. There was panic as people were being hit....

...I counted 64 wounded or killed in a short space of time...

...About noon, we heard the APCs start up and begin to leave the square. In order to clear Changan Avenue some f the machine-gunners opend up on the crowd...

Photographer Charlie Cole.



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 03:56 AM
link   
"You sumed up your argument in your own quote.

A big bloody lie. "

I think you are being hasty in your analysis.

Maybe after you've thought about it a while you'll reconsider.



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 04:06 AM
link   
"SILK ROAD ANYONE? "

The silk road is a latter version of a one way drift eastward of proto-celtic civilization.

There is some evidence that in 10,000-6,000 bc ancient caucasians gave china civilization and it was trade with these people that helped the chinese advance.

www.science-frontiers.com...

What do you think?

"the problem here is that people forget that almost every action done in China, has been done by many other Nation's. "

And every country that has done such has had to face criticism at home and abroad for their actions. The CCP doesn't like to be confronted at home or abroad. Which is typical of dictatorships. They can dish it out , but they can't take it.




[edit on 10/21/2005 by bodebliss]



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 04:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by bodebliss

Taiwan already has defacto independence.


maybe it's true, but dont u think that kind of "independence" is so weird. cant do this cant do that.

just curious that after many years when china get far more stronger than what it is now, what will be happen to this vague relationship, will chinese ppl change or Taiwanese change.

[edit on 21-10-2005 by tobycd]



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 04:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
The Karokorams, the Oxus, Kokand et al are all Muslim, all of south-central Asia (the roof of the world) is except for Tibet/Bhutan/Nepal, and the city-states were independent Emirates. They acknowledged no higher authority other than Allah and paid tribute to no-one. Until Czar Alexander's men arrived. These guys all thought they were on a par with Queen Victoria, the Empress of India and head of the world's largest empire.


What has this got to do with turkestan?

The muslims there are Uygurs or in chinese Huihe.

Not from central asia but from mongolia and then converted to islam.



It's called the Silk Road because caravans (camel trains) carried silk from China to the Middle East, not because it was Chinese owned or built.


I am refering to the chiense cities on the silk road.

Stretching all the way to western turkestan



No, I'm saying that the Soviet Union simply carried forward the Russian occupation and with the end of the USSR that occupation ended as well. And Russia's occupation began in the 1800s, China's occupation of East Turkestan began less than half a century ago.




A map sufficient?
www.mnsu.edu...



Tiananmen:
news.bbc.co.uk...
...About the time I reached some trees along the avenue the soldiers opened up on the crowd at the top of the square. There was panic as people were being hit....
...I counted 64 wounded or killed in a short space of time...
...About noon, we heard the APCs start up and begin to leave the square. In order to clear Changan Avenue some f the machine-gunners opend up on the crowd...
Photographer Charlie Cole.


Wow such a dramatic tale.

Even through the offical USA government figure is 180-500

Can anyone say exaggeration


[edit on 21-10-2005 by chinawhite]



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 04:56 AM
link   


The silk road is a latter version of a one way drift eastward of proto-celtic civilization.
There is some evidence that in 10,000-6,000 bc ancient caucasians gave china civilization and it was trade with these people that helped the chinese advance.
www.science-frontiers.com...


Helped china advance?

4000-6000 years ago chian was not even in xingjiang. and did not have contact with the west until the HAN dynasty



And every country that has done such has had to face criticism at home and abroad for their actions. The CCP doesn't like to be confronted at home or abroad. Which is typical of dictatorships. They can dish it out , but they can't take it.


China is not one man rule anymore.

hu jin tao cant make decisions all by himself.

[edit on 21-10-2005 by chinawhite]



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 05:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
The Karokorams, the Oxus, Kokand et al are all Muslim, all of south-central Asia (the roof of the world) is except for Tibet/Bhutan/Nepal, and the city-states were independent Emirates. They acknowledged no higher authority other than Allah and paid tribute to no-one. Until Czar Alexander's men arrived. These guys all thought they were on a par with Queen Victoria, the Empress of India and head of the world's largest empire.


What has this got to do with turkestan?

The muslims there are Uygurs or in chinese Huihe.

Not from central asia but from mongolia and then converted to islam.


The Uighars live in central Asia, you (self-censored), Turkic is a central-Asian language. Do you know what any of the three things I named are?

Who said anything about 180-500? I only show a quote that says 60+ killed or wounded. And you said none in the Square, he clearly says they were shooting in the square.

So who's exagerating?



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 05:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
The Uighars live in central Asia, you (self-censored), Turkic is a central-Asian language.


Yes the Uygurs live in central asia now but came from mongolia.

They came to mongolia before they converted to islam..So i dont know how they believed in god more than their lives



Do you know what any of the three things I named are?


Cities on the silk road.



Who said anything about 180-500? I only show a quote that says 60+ killed or wounded. And you said none in the Square, he clearly says they were shooting in the square.
So who's exagerating?


180-500 killed in the tiananmen square massacre is the offical USA government figure

60+killed or wounded in one shooting is a large percentage of it. Just for one journalist.


The protestors were already evacuated before the troops even arrived.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also how was a western journalist meant to have seem that? martial law was already declared for over one week. they were all confined in their hotel rooms.

His statements are totally useless unless you can come up with a picture of it.



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blobber
Perhaps I am weird, but what's the point of having a nuclear armageddon just to save your face?

Oh, and I find it an irony that some Chinese here claim that the Taiwanese are their brothers, yet they may annihilate their brothers if they claim their independence. Furthermore, a big majority of these brothers do not want to be reunited with the PRC - at least that's what the polls in Taiwan have shown.

So, why not forget Taiwan: it's (I shall refrain from using the word peanuts as it apparently had offended some people here) nothing compared to the potential of the land of Qin.

So again, why can't the USA and China just work together to achieve greater things for mankind rather than a nuclear armageddon to save faces?

Blobber


[edit on 20-10-2005 by Blobber]


Blobber:

That peanut is a Chinese peanut, not American peanut. So why can't the USA forget Taiwan: it's nothing compared to the potential of the land of America.

So again, why can't the USA and China just work together to achieve greater things for mankind rather than a nuclear armageddon to save faces?

LOL



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 09:30 AM
link   
6000 bc there was no caucasian civilization unless you mean egypt which if I'm correct never had contact with the Chinese.

As for grieving mothers please supply a link that is not from the taipei times or the epoch times.

Next that cartoon is demonizing China because A) its a bloody skull wearing the flag of the People's Republic on it! Please remove it. You can't post something like that and then print a disclaimer absolving yourself of responsibility.

As for the 1.2 million figure...


The number of military and civilian Tibetans that have died in the Great Leap Forward, violence, or other unnatural causes since 1950 is often quoted at approximately 1.2 million, which the Chinese Communist Party vehemently denies. According to Patrick French, a supporter of the Tibetan cause who was able to view the data and calculations, the estimate is not reliable because the Tibetans were not able to process the data well enough to produce a credible total. There were, however, many casualties, perhaps as many as 400,000. This figure is extrapolated from a calculation Warren W. Smith made from census reports of Tibet which show 200,000 "missing" from Tibet. Even The Black Book of Communism expresses doubt at the 1.2 million figure, but does note that according to Chinese census there was a population of 2.8 million in 1953, but only 2.5 million in 1964 in Tibet proper.

It is reported that when Hu Yaobang, the general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, visited Lhasa in 1980 he cried in shame when he viewed the misery and described the situation as "colonialism pure and simple". Reforms were instituted, and since then Chinese policy in Tibet has veered between tolerance and repression. Most religious freedoms have been officially restored, but monks and nuns are still sometimes imprisoned, and thousands of able-bodied Tibetans continue to flee Tibet yearly.


en.wikipedia.org...

"I heard there is a new book out about how the chinese against the KMT were not communists originally, but Stalin said if you don't go communist you won't get any money from me. The leader of the long march did not even want Mao to come along, but again Stalin insisted so they grungingly took Mao w/ them . Mao did not walk the march, but was carried as if by slaves , and there was no fighting at the supposed crossing of some silly river bridge because there was no attack on the communists by the KMT because Stalin held one of Changs sons in Moscow. So there you have it the CCP's history of heroics is totally made up. A lie! A big bloody lie."

[qoute]..and Stalin told a closed meeting in Moscow that Chiang Kai-Shek had no choice but to support the revolution. Once he played his part he would be 'squeezed out like a lemon and flung away'.

Doesn't sound like Stalin didn't support the CCP or forced them to be communists in context of the book.


After 7 years of warfare, three of them as Head of State of the Chinese Soviet Republic, his future was as uncertain as ever. All his [Mao] worldly possessions amounted to two blankets, a cotton sheet, an oil cloth, an overcoat, and broken umbrella and a bundle of books... When the Red Army halted at Zunyi, in January 1935, Mao achieved for the first time a dominant position in the Party Leadership because his colleages recognised that he had been right when everyone else had been wrong... This time he was competing not for a subordinant position, as a political commissar if an army. Now at the age of 41 he was aiming for the top...

...Finally, at the end of febuary, the communists' luckk turned. The battle of Loushan Pass allowed them tor retake Zunyi, capturing 3000 prisoners and routing 2 Goumindang divisions led by one of Chiang's top commanders. That spring the Red Army became once again the 'Zhu-Mao Army'... for the next two months, Mao engaged in a dazzling, pyrotechnic display of mobile warfare. criss-crossing Guizhou and Yunnan, that left pursuing armies bemused, confounded Chiang Kai-Shek's planners and perplexed even many of his own commanders... Mao himself called the Guizhou strategy the proudest moment of his military career. IN Shanghai, the China Weekly Review admitted: 'The Red Army forces have brainy men. It would be blind folly to deny it.' A Goumindang garrison commander said tersely: 'They had Chiang Kai-Shek by the nose.'...


The book is Mao: A life by Philip Short copyright 1999 by Hodder and Stoughton. Printed in London.

So its not printed in China and is a reliable source and it mentions nothing about Mao travelling in luxury, nor does it mention Mao as being some sort of inconvenience for the Communists, he was one of the major generals who through his brilliance allowed the Communists to escape Yunnan! As far as mentioned Mao travelled in absolute poverty like every other Red Army officer and soldier.


[edit on 21-10-2005 by The Middle Kingdom]



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 09:35 AM
link   
Technically People's Republic of CHina and Republic of China are still in a civil war that had lasted for more than 2/3 of a century.

Why can't everybody just stand back and let them finish what they had started, and ley the winner take all.

While the USA have the Taiwan Relation Act, China has also got herself a Anti-secession Law. How convenient!

The Taiwanese who are for independence are welcome to leave. They are free to become American or Japanese or Mauritian citizens. They are free take their assets with them. China will gladly furnish them free flights.

But if they deny that they are Chinese and still insist on ocuppying Chinese small peanut, they should consider themselves doomed and comdemned. They will be among the first to die, doesn't matter it's a small conflit, large war, or the armargeddon.

It is their unwavering faith on the US that has made them go this far: If they were destroyed by CHina, the USA will revenge by destroying CHina.
How could the USA let them down.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Taiwanese are exellent business people. They figured out that the American are trying to sell them out-dated weapons at bloated prices. They know they could get much better weapons from China at such prices.

Meantime, the Americans are not ready to deliver to Taiwan their F-117s or Virginia class subs, because they know such delivery could end up in PLA's hands - Sure China could use some of the technologies.

LOL



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by bodebliss
PS: My little work of art is in no way to be construed as demonizing the CCP.
[edit on 10/21/2005 by bodebliss]


Than why did you post it?



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 03:01 PM
link   
Please see my completed post above now.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 164  165  166    168  169  170 >>

log in

join