The West must stand up to China's Bullying

maomao

Veteran Hunter of Maleecha
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2010
Messages
5,033
Likes
8,354
Country flag
Please do not insult dogs this way. Even dogs suffering from hydrophobia will have some gratitude and will not betray someone as much as Pakistan will. They (Pakistan) are more like rodents or bed-bugs that keep coming back. Even if the State of Pakistan ceased to exist, the mess will take eons to clear up.
I apologize from deep within my heart and head, I never meant to insult "man's best friend" by calling it pakistan, it was more of a figure of speech. I love dogs and I take their name with great respect, so I believe that this mistake was an honest mistake and would not be repeated.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
I guess France is not the West? We stand up to China all the time.
You are quite correct, Sir.

France has been rather under-appreciated despite standing up to policies and politics that they do not find logical. The French have stood up to, not only PRC, but also the US despite being a member of NATO when it came to Russo-Georgia conflict. For the French, who can build a metal tower designed on muscle fibres (Eiffel Tower), create architecture of marvelous grandeur, make some of the best wine and run one of the finest trains (TGV), cannot be so gullible to be swayed by lies (read WMD in Iraq), bullying, monetary honey-trap (read share of the spoils of war as in the Iraqi oil), trade embargoes, cultural nomenclature (French Fries to Freedom Fries) or emotional blackmail.
 
Last edited:

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
Renault is banned from the country missing out on the biggest market in the world... we don't care. We don't bow to economic black mail. We just work around it, now we sell Nissan. CCP is too stupid to know Renault owns it. :happy_2:
 

nitesh

Mob Control Manager
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
7,550
Likes
1,307
Isn't French itching to sell weapons to China?
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
From recent activities, the French, IMHO, are more keep on fostering a strong European cooperation and to that effect, the French have the European countries as their points of primary focus. Countries such as Germany, Italy and Russia are more important for trade and military ties. Recent investments in AutoVAZ at Togliatti, Russia and Mistral Class shipbuilding collaboration with Russia indicate a very independent policy on the part of the French. The French, at least at the moment, are not desperate to sell weapons to China, although, they surely will if a deal went through, from a practical standpoint. The French have been very objective about what is good for them. They felt that they needed energy, so they went ahead with rapid nuclearisation of power generation and there wasn't much obstruction from 'concerned environmentalists' and activists at the domestic level. They felt that they needed to preserve the French identity and banned garments that tend to attenuate the role of women in society in the name of religion. The French are quite pragmatic when it comes to most issues.
 

badguy2000

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
5,133
Likes
746
The west must stand up to China

Western liberals who assume they can gradually influence China are wrong – it is an expansionist power without a conscience

Pity the Chinese. The inhabitants of the world's next superpower cannot search the internet or assemble or travel or speak or read or write or even reproduce without restriction. Yet in the lands where freedom is abundant, China, rather than earning well-deserved rebukes, continues to be championed as the ineluctable future. This disgraceful journey began with a liberal assumption: the west, it was claimed, is more likely to influence China by partnering with it, by giving it a prominent position inside, rather than pushing it outside, global institutions.

But in the decades since, far from moulding the Chinese state's behaviour, it is the west that has incrementally given up on its own values in order to appease Beijing. It has been customary since the early 1990s for American presidents to invite the Dalai Lama to Washington. Last year Barack Obama did away even with this minor gesture of solidarity with the Tibetans for fear of offending Beijing. Even the brief private audience Obama eventually granted the beleaguered Tibetan leader was accompanied by humiliation: the Dalai Lama was made to exit the White House through the back doors.

Contrary to the claims made by western apologists, China is not a substantially freer country today than it was a decade ago. The tools that have empowered the Chinese people – the internet, for instance – have strengthened the state in equal, perhaps even greater, measure: an ordinary Chinese citizen's ability today to communicate instantly with the outside world is matched by the state's capacity to silence him equally rapidly. Freedoms mean nothing if they are not accompanied by corresponding restrictions on the state's power to check them on a whim. Liu Xiaobo may be celebrated as a hero in the west, but in China he does not even have recourse to an appeal.

Liu's plight casts light also on the fundamental uselessness of the so-called "social networking" sites. If Facebook could foment revolutions, Liu's Charter 08 would have attracted many more signatories than the 8,000 it managed. If Twitter could bring down governments, the number of "netizens" detained following Liu's win would not be limited to 20. In 1989, millions of Chinese marched through Beijing and thousands were killed. The symbol of their struggle was the Goddess of Democracy. They did not "tweet".

In any event, Beijing, with its empirical success in crushing dissent with extraordinary force, is unlikely to yield to nonviolent calls for substantive reforms, especially when control of the Chinese state today offers significantly richer rewards than it did a decade ago. But the plight of the oppressed has rarely deterred western liberals from exalting the oppressor. Mao's cultural revolution – ignited in response to a play by Beijing's vice-mayor that was considered to be mildly critical of the ageing megalomaniac – dispossessed hundreds of thousands, resulted in as many deaths, and in some rural parts led to cannibalism.

But one visiting leftwing British academic at the time (the late Joan Robinson) could not see beyond the romantic "long marches" in which the Chinese "learned more about their own country in a few months than they ever could have learned out of books".

This trend continues today. Even a shrewd observer such as Martin Jacques makes the absurd case in his authoritative recent book, When China rules the world, that China's rise is "peaceful". Jacques is driven by sympathy for the non-western world. But his premature exoneration of China as a potentially peaceful power is based on a western-centric reading of the world, because it overlooks the violence Beijing is inflicting on people in the non-western world, either directly or by shielding dictators from international action. China's neighbours expressed their own fears at the Asean summit in Hanoi.

And to millions in Darfur and Burma, Xinjiang and Tibet, China's rise is anything but peaceful. Besides, Beijing's early support to the rogue nuclear programme of Pakistan's AQ Khan – who subsequently went on to sell nuclear secrets to bidders in Iran and North Korea, among others – demonstrates China's indifference to global security when it comes to furthering its own interests.

Erasing its own history, massacring its own people, shielding genocidal dictatorships abroad, bullying its neighbours, China is an expansionist power without a conscience. There is much that is wrong with the west – and liberal democracies elsewhere – but imagine a world in which China can no longer be held to account. That future is not very far. But if the west continues to cower, it will be here sooner than we think.
On seeing the bold stereotyped expression, I decided to directly ignore the following paragraphes.

the writer is a typical democracy crusader and a yesman of west official ideology.

After "shaped" and "trained" by CNN-style medias for long time, such a guy has lost the ability to "questioning,investigation and rethinking".

The more such guys are there in west nations, the more easily CHina can asskick west countries.
 
Last edited:

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
While one can pity the Chinese for all the omissions and commissions of the CCP, yet, if the Chinese man on the street is not complaining, then it would be rather difficult to justify imposing our or the world's moral standards on them. If there were rebellion or dissensions, then there is the justification as is the international indignation over Tibet and Xingjian. Or even, showing solidarity with single or group dissensions over improprieties is justified as in the case of Tiananmen Square massacre, Falun Gong and Liu Xiabo.

Is the West partnering China because they believe that they can change the CCP mindset? If so, the West is smoking Afghanistan's best. They are partnering China since it serves their interests and of that if there is a second opinion, then it is well camouflaged and hidden!

It was unfortunate that a nation that applauds Patrick Henry and his 'give me liberty or give me death' speech, fought shy to honour HH the Dalai Lama, at least, one such President of the USA. The fact that he did not give due pageantry and State Honour due to a world religious leader (as was done for the Pope in the UK) to the visit, puts paid to the theory that China can be changed by partnering it. Events in the world in foreign affairs and economics indicate it is the West that requires China's markets than the other way around!

China has never been a free country. The proletariat's thought is manipulated and regulated to suit the CCP's theories of the season. The concept of Legalism that historically shaped the Chinese mindset wherein they accept the supremacy of the Govt over the individual gives the impression that Chinese are but automatons and zombies. This mindset is not uniquely orchestrated by the CCP. The CCP has only honed this concept into a stranglehold.

It is democracies like India, who try to be more loyal than the King himself, to showcase as the world's most liberal democracy, which allows secessionists and rabid anti national to congregate with a single aim – how to destroy the Indian Union! This attitude of India is most asinine. It is like cutting the trunk of the tree on which one is sitting! Other nations are not that foolish as India! Each nation takes sedition very seriously excepting India. Chidambaram may huff and puff, but then the Govt is a kowtowing organisation paying obeisance to the vote bank. Maoists and scoundrels in Kashmiri have to be appeased in the same way as the West kowtows to China! Self interest! Like China, the Maoists and separatists reap a rich harvest, exploiting the weakness!

If China is peace loving as Martin Jacques claims it to be, then Lucifer must be a greater Saint than Jesus himself!

It does not matter how the West appeases and panders to China and Pakistan. What is important is that we do not follow the West like Hamlin's rats and instead put both these Nations in their place where they belong. It does not mean going to war, but to ensure that they know through diplomacy that they can go this far and no further!
 
Last edited:

badguy2000

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
5,133
Likes
746
While one can pity the Chinese for all the omissions and commissions of the CCP, yet, if the Chinese man on the street is not complaining, then it would be rather difficult to justify imposing our or the world's moral standards on them. If there were rebellion or dissensions, then there is the justification as is the international indignation over Tibet and Xingjian. Or even, showing solidarity with single or group dissensions over improprieties is justified as in the case of Tiananmen Square massacre, Falun Gong and Liu Xiabo.

Is the West partnering China because they believe that they can change the CCP mindset? If so, the West is smoking Afghanistan's best. They are partnering China since it serves their interests and of that if there is a second opinion, then it is well camouflaged and hidden!

It was unfortunate that a nation that applauds Patrick Henry and his 'give me liberty or give me death' speech, fought shy to honour HH the Dalai Lama, at least, one such President of the USA. The fact that he did not give due pageantry and State Honour due to a world religious leader (as was done for the Pope in the UK) to the visit, puts paid to the theory that China can be changed by partnering it. Events in the world in foreign affairs and economics indicate it is the West that requires China's markets than the other way around!

China has never been a free country. The proletariat's thought is manipulated and regulated to suit the CCP's theories of the season. The concept of Legalism that historically shaped the Chinese mindset wherein they accept the supremacy of the Govt over the individual gives the impression that Chinese are but automatons and zombies. This mindset is not uniquely orchestrated by the CCP. The CCP has only honed this concept into a stranglehold.

It is democracies like India, who try to be more loyal than the King himself, to showcase as the world's most liberal democracy, which allows secessionists and rabid anti national to congregate with a single aim – how to destroy the Indian Union! This attitude of India is most asinine. It is like cutting the trunk of the tree on which one is sitting! Other nations are not that foolish as India! Each nation takes sedition very seriously excepting India. Chidambaram may huff and puff, but then the Govt is a kowtowing organisation paying obeisance to the vote bank. Maoists and scoundrels in Kashmiri have to be appeased in the same way as the West kowtows to China! Self interest! Like China, the Maoists and separatists reap a rich harvest, exploiting the weakness!

If China is peace loving as Martin Jacques claims it to be, then Lucifer must be a greater Saint than Jesus himself!

It does not matter how the West appeases and panders to China and Pakistan. What is important is that we do not follow the West like Hamlin's rats and instead put both these Nations in their place where they belong. It does not mean going to war, but to ensure that they know through diplomacy that they can go this far and no further!
oh, yes, the democratical bronze in a democracy is better than the communist gold !
the starvation and slum in a democracy is better than gold cage in communist states!
pls keep on your preaching,Mr crusader!

BTW, in 1970s,Chinese Red Guards,once also insisted that " cockspur grass in communist societys be better than bread in capitalism societys"!

Aren't you the cousin of Chinese Red Guards?
 
Last edited:

The Messiah

Bow Before Me!
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
10,809
Likes
4,619
Lets us not fool ourselves here! One day the west will stand up against us aswell.

It is all but inevitable.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,799
Likes
48,279
Country flag
The west is in dismal state of chaos with little to no leadership and economic turmoil. Now that China has almost defeated the West in an economic angle the only solution the West has is a military angle. But with a Chinese buildup advancing along there is a very narrow window in this angle for a conventional war. The idiotic Nixon -kissinger policies will be looked back upon as one of the major factors in the end of Western power and the rise of the East.
 
Last edited:

badguy2000

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
5,133
Likes
746
The west is in dismal state of chaos with little to no leadership and economic turmoil. Now that China has almost defeated the West in an economic angle the only solution the West has s a military angle. But with a Chinese buildup advancing along there is a very narrow window in this angle.
in fact there has not been such a "narrow window in military angle" ,since CHinese owned nuke in 1964.

Indeed, Chinese military power now is not powerful to "offend" effectively,but it is powerful enough to protect Chinese from any invasion.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,799
Likes
48,279
Country flag
in fact there has not been such a "narrow window in military angle" ,since CHinese owned nuke in 1964.

Indeed, Chinese military power now is not powerful to "offend" effectively,but it is powerful enough to protect Chinese from any invasion.

The angle is not that narrow China's 200-400 nukes compared to USA's 7000-10,000 ,China is not in the same league.
 

Parthy

Air Warrior
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
1,314
Likes
149
I apologize from deep within my heart and head, I never meant to insult "man's best friend" by calling it pakistan, it was more of a figure of speech. I love dogs and I take their name with great respect, so I believe that this mistake was an honest mistake and would not be repeated.
I will not go with labeling a nation like 'Dog'. If you say Nation that refers to the entire nation including people.. The people there in Pakistan are once our brothers/Sisters before Independence. Its the British who tricked in dividing India and Pakistan and the leaders(both countries) we had during independence.. Things could have been solved in a different way.. Who knows, British could have foreseen India to rise as a mighty nation and they could have done so....

If you call as Dog, refer it to either ISI who feeds terrorist to act against India or the Pakistan Army who always violates policy along the LOC or the Extremists (who call themselves as Muslim world leaders or Jihadees).... Don't refer the entire nation..
 

badguy2000

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
5,133
Likes
746
The angle is not that narrow China's 200-400 nukes compared to USA's 7000-10,000 ,China is not in the same league.
1.as for the destructive power for any country, I don't think there is a big difference between 300 nukes and 30000 nukes.

2."300 nukes' is just from west resourse and never proved by any CHinese offical resource. I don't think such a data deserve much credit.
 

Parthy

Air Warrior
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
1,314
Likes
149
in fact there has not been such a "narrow window in military angle" ,since CHinese owned nuke in 1964.

Indeed, Chinese military power now is not powerful to "offend" effectively,but it is powerful enough to protect Chinese from any invasion.
I don't understand.. Who's going to invade China??? :emot15: No country who's sharing the boundary with China has no interest over any integral parts of China.. :emot159:
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,799
Likes
48,279
Country flag
1.as for the destructive power for any country, I don't think there is a big difference between 300 nukes and 30000 nukes.

2."300 nukes' is just from west resourse and never proved by any CHinese offical resource. I don't think such a data deserve much credit.
There is a big difference when the delivery is faster by USA, just remember China has no SLBM, last time China almost killed
everyone in the sub crew when they tested one, and they have failed for the last 20 years trying to develop one.The qualilty and
delivery is also lacking in Chinese nuclear capability. USA can easily place nukes in Taiwan or OHIO subs to deliver nukes to the
Chinese mainland in minutes, giving little to no chance for a Chinese retaliation.
 
Last edited:

badguy2000

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
5,133
Likes
746
There is a big difference when the delivery is faster by USA, just remember China has no SLBM, last time China almost killed
everyone in the sub crew when they tested one, and they have failed for the last 20 years trying to develop one.The qualilty and
delivery is also lacking in Chinese nuclear capability. USA can easily place nukes in Taiwan or OHIO subs to deliver nukes to the
Chinese mainland in minutes, giving little to no chance for a Chinese retaliation.

oh,come on,pls don't comfort yourself by cheating yourself and your own wshiful credit on those unproven rumores ..it is not a good habit!

CHina has no effective SLBM? proven ,rumor or wishful thinking? failed for 20 years?
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top