2009-07-07, 16:45 | Link #3261 | |
Not Enough Sleep
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: R'lyeh
Age: 48
|
Quote:
judging form the recent articles in NYTimes and Wash Post there would be more outrage in the west if it a 156 Uighurs that was kill by a Han mob
__________________
|
|
2009-07-07, 23:02 | Link #3262 | |
*frustrated*
|
Quote:
I find the wording here quite weird. It seems that the coverage I've read so far wants to give out the message that the deaths are mainly Uighurs. According to ifeng, at least 140 of them are Han Chinese. Ironically, there is nothing such as "peaceful demonstrations" here in China (in these days), since we are not a country used to protesting and other "peaceful" appeals. Violence in Xinjiang is nothing new, and it's also quite usual that in Xinjiang, an ordinary Han Chinese may be cornered and bullied by Uighur gangs. Shortly after the incident (riot or demonstration? you decide), bloody pictures were circulated around the internet showing girls and little kids with their throats cut. Now most of them are deleted. You may only find those by xinhuanet and other state media. Policies in Xinjiang Autonomous Region have been sickingly weird. Uighur criminals are generally under-punished. Yet Uighurs don't have equal opportunities in jobs and education. Money and other resources are mainly taken by the Han Chinese, thus Uighurs feel marginalised even in their own region. It's also notable that whenever similar group events occur in China, the government *always* labels them as "being used by those who have ulterior motives", which is, IMO, nothing less than neglecting their own responsibilities and fasten the blame on others. Rebiya is used as such kind of target.
__________________
Last edited by dec4rhapsody; 2009-07-07 at 23:28. |
|
2009-07-08, 00:48 | Link #3263 | ||||
NYAAAAHAAANNNNN~
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 35
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Alright I got something to do, be right back with an edited post later.
__________________
|
||||
2009-07-08, 02:41 | Link #3264 | |||
Aria Company
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
So relying on what they can steal? That doesn't seem like a plan for success to me, especially when you're trying to invade a country.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
|||
2009-07-08, 04:40 | Link #3265 | |
封鎖された渋谷で
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Shibuya, Tokyo, Japan
Age: 36
|
Quote:
And for those on the DPRK issue, remember the (US-)Vietnam War. The Viet won due to the terrain and environment... And there's the likelihood of DPRK losing if it fought on foreign soil, yet so will the US if they went to NK. It's like fighting in Siberia. |
|
2009-07-08, 05:04 | Link #3266 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: PMB Headquarters
|
On the issue of North Korea, I don't think a military conflict will break out anytime soon as that such a idea is absolutely out of the question under the leadership of Obama. Considering that Iran was a bigger threat towards to the United States yet Obama went on a tour of apologies, I doubt he will do anything about North Korea since their recently improved missile technology can at most hit Hawaii and none of the US mainland.
Although the Japanese government will be meeting Obama very soon to discuss on North Korea's missile and nuclear threats, as well as China's military buildup, I believe nothing much will come out of it with the exception of a few pretty words. Quote:
|
|
2009-07-08, 08:08 | Link #3267 | |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Imperial Manila, Philippines
|
Quote:
Most probably though, NK's own troops might embarrass the regime with mass defections. Imagine an army of starving men waving their hands up and surrendering en masse... after all that propaganda and shows of "strength". All the more reason for Nutjob Kim to not use the "military option". The Chinese? Paper tigers. Aside from numbers, what do they have? Their troops don't have quality nor experience in actual warfare. That's something the Americans (and to a lesser extent, Russians) have |
|
2009-07-08, 08:21 | Link #3268 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
|
Quote:
And if history means anything, it says navy has always been the game of the West and that Chinese navy history (and its military in general) is pretty much pathetic saved some instance of showmanship. |
|
2009-07-08, 08:26 | Link #3269 |
Observer/Bookman wannabe
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 39
|
Well, the Chinese were very good at fighting among themselves. Its modern military history is indeed unremarkable, but the reversal of fortunes for the Red Army is something to be reckoned with. As for Chinese warfare B.C., oh boy...
__________________
|
2009-07-08, 08:44 | Link #3271 | |
勇者
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Tesla Leicht Institute
Age: 34
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2009-07-08, 08:52 | Link #3273 | |
Observer/Bookman wannabe
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 39
|
Quote:
And along the way came the Art of War, Romance of the Three Kingdoms, and many Tang poems.
__________________
|
|
2009-07-08, 09:13 | Link #3274 |
勇者
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Tesla Leicht Institute
Age: 34
|
Not really, the North used guerrilla tactic and if you are losing tons of men while killing only few enemies then that tactic pretty much failed. So eventually the communist would have lost imo.
__________________
|
2009-07-08, 09:16 | Link #3275 |
Observer/Bookman wannabe
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 39
|
That would mean prolonging a war which the US should have never gotten into in the first place. Ho Chi Minh understand this all too well. Remember: he did not live to see the fall of Saigon, but he predicted that his side would win. Well, they did, but at a very high cost. Wonder why you see mostly young Vietnamese these days? This is the reason. Their casualties were high, but their morale did not break.
__________________
|
2009-07-08, 09:36 | Link #3276 | |
Apathy moe~
Scanlator
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Atlanta, USA / Seoul, Korea
|
Quote:
On NK, I've been curious. What makes people think that Dear Leader(TM) is a megalomaniac hell bent on conquering the world? If anything my impression of him is a brilliant, but shrewd and ruthless politician who can run circles around SK, Japan and US's foreign policy makers. I don't really see anything that points to him wanting to invade other countries (SK being "illegitimate"). If anything, I see their conventional force deteriorating. No, NK doesn't speak power, NK speaks coercion, lies and propaganda. IMO, the nukes and advanced rocketry are there to threaten Japan and the US into letting NK wreck havoc in the South (not to mention some extra cash on the side). "Themselves" being former foreign nations. All this infighting wasn't purely among the Han Chinese, remember.
__________________
|
|
2009-07-08, 11:46 | Link #3277 | |
勇者
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Tesla Leicht Institute
Age: 34
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2009-07-08, 12:16 | Link #3278 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: China
|
Quote:
Yesterday's news from The NY Times: Quote:
They are also trying to get a bill passed to allow people to use these IOUs to pay for taxes and services' bills. http://www.sacbee.com/state_wire/story/2007369.html Quote:
__________________
|
|||
2009-07-08, 23:37 | Link #3280 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: PMB Headquarters
|
Quote:
Quote:
Yes, the Chinese lacks military technology that rivals the Americans but this is only what we perceive through obtainable information and the media, not that it is entirely true since China is a communist country known to be hiding their true military capabilities while that it is almost an established fact that Americans tend to show off their military capabilities, even when it is still in the process of development. This is a plus on China's side. Secondly, China's military might and technology isn't as weak as unreasonable assumption based on hatred as that they had recruited a large number of Russian scientists during the disbandment of the Soviet Union using a large amount of cash flow. For that matter, China's capabilities should actually be close to that of the former Soviets at the time of its disbandment while currently, they are most likely improved as that they are also working closely with the Russians. I wouldn't underestimate their military capacity. The image in which China gives that their strength is in numbers could most likely be a "false image" as that it is not uncommon for nations to adopt such a tactic in the global affairs stage for various reasons. Another strength and weakness between the Chinese army and the American army would be the same concept adopted from the Vietnam War. China considers its people as expandable and are willing to sacrifice them for whatever purposes necessary, whereas if an American dies on foreign soil due to some military operation, the people in American will become outraged in which the American government in-charge of the military operation will fall to constant blows of criticism which drags down their overall approval rate and in the long-run, the government will collapse before the end of the military conflict itself. Taking just these 2-3 points into consideration, I wouldn't say that the American military has any advantage in a military conflict against North Korea if China provides military support to the Kim Jong-Il just like what had previously occurred in the Korean War. The US is actually at a disadvantage. South Korea who despise war and conflicts with North Korea will no doubt not get involved in any possible military conflicts even if 2MB agrees, their people would protest about it. As for Japan, without the revision of Article 9.. It is actually illegal for the SDF to aid allies outside Japanese waters and airspace, even if allies are in grieve danger. It can't be helped.. |
||
Tags |
current affairs, discussion, international |
|
|