Xi's war drums

[mikhail]

Thats what western analysts like to think ,real or imaginary.The US with overwhelming "supeririority" couldn't defeat a peasant army in Korea.
It couldn't defeat the North Vietnamese.It is bleeding in Afghanistan.How is it that such a powerful military cannot win wars in Asia?
The short answer is that they are afraid to die and when casualty goes up, american troops will have to come home.
Today, with a modernised chinese military, the price of a conflict for Americans will be even higher.
And Japan prevailing over China? A country with a smaller GDP, population and no Nuclear weapon?No only that...it is totally dependent on the seas
for its survival(thats why it had to start invading the asian continent in ww2)How long can Japan last without food and oil? How did this so called expert arrived at such a conclusion?

buddy before drawing any immature conclusion about the weaknesses of Japan i would suggest you to look into the U.S.A. factor first.Japan is the closest ally of the U.S. in the Pacific ocean region,so in case of a full fleged war between China and Japan U.S. won't sit idle and will most likely join Japan against China.
secondly the U.S. has stationed around 50K troops in Japan for the past 6 decades,so an all likely scenarios they'll be the first to get involve in the war.
so i think at present PLA is in no position to fight a full fledged war against Japan as it will definitely involve the U.S.A..

 

[boris]

If your guys wants to discuss politics and ideologies, make this piece of sh1t taken out of here.

Sadly India does not come under "The Great Firewall of China" so we'll discuss what we like. You don't like it then you are most welcome to leave.

 

[sorcerer]

Initially I though this article is going to discuss how corruption has compromised PLA's war capability. PLA is a paper tiger instead of a real tough nut. But then it starts to talk about how fast PLA has modernized and how many modern hardware they have in posses to threaten other countries. At the end it draws a conclusion that everything is for Party's self protection.

After reading it, I don't know what the author really wants to convey: PLA is a threat but not that scary but we have to be careful however it's the Party dictate PLA, right?

This is what your military website says in accorance with your foreign ministers statement, who is supposed to represent Beijing.

The military site quotes Xinhua and the Foreign Ministry spokeswoman: "China and India have engaged in close contact and consultation with aims to properly handle problems along their border."
The communique adds: "In response to Indian media reports of a 'stand-off' along a western part of the China-India borderline, the two sides are communicating with each other closely through a consultation and coordination mechanism on border issues. Through this contact, both sides have learned more about each other's concerns and stance, helping to find an appropriate solution to the problems."

At the same time this is what your PLA General says

"China must recover territory 'looted' by neighbours, said PLA General "
A General of China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) called on the Chinese government to take a more aggressive line in its foreign policy as well as recover territory "looted by neighbours," in an essay that was published in the official media only two days before Premier Wen Jiabao's arrival in India.

"The neighbouring area is not peaceful, and we have outside threats," wrote Major General Luo Yuan, who is also the deputy secretary-general of the Chinese Academy of Military Sciences, in an essay published in the official Global Times, a Chinese newspaper known for its nationalistic views.

China, he said, could not call itself "a strong nation" unless it "recovered the land looted by neighbours."

While the essay did not name India or specific territorial disputes and only issued a general call for Chinese society to become more militaristic, the Communist Party-run Global Times agreeing to publish the general's comments on neighbouring countries only days ahead of Mr. Wen's arrival in New Delhi could not be ignored, diplomatic sources and analysts said.

His view, according to them, signalled the marked difference between the PLA's views and the stated "peaceful rise" position often publicly articulated by Chinese diplomats and officials. While PLA officers usually do not issue public statements on foreign policy, the PLA, unlike other militaries, has a significant influence on formulating foreign policy, analysts say.
http://www.thehindu.com/news/nation...neighbours-said-pla-general/article965958.ece

Well, nations when they say responsible,talks in unison when responding to situations. They dont talk like power centers are confused and is not in control of a situation. This makes PRC untrustable in front of the international community on various levels.

 

[Ray]

@sorcerer,

The old Red Indian saying goes - Whteman speak with forked tongue.

The variation is that the Chinaman always speaks with forked tongue and Double Speak!

From the Chinese point of view, I think that is a very clever thing to do.

Keep the adversary guessing and confused!

Unfortunately, the Indian Govt has always been a coterie that has no vision and that is gullible and easy to be confused!

Every are confused always and are great ditherers hoping for the favourable wind to blow!

But every country has ensured that it has taken the winds of the Indian sails.

Why blame China alone?

 

[sorcerer]

@sorcerer,

The old Red Indian saying goes - Whteman speak with forked tongue.

Very true.Itsanother usual tool states use.
Actually if you look it in a different angle..they both are saying the same thing..the foreign minister as well as the PLA..but they are talking in their own tones.

 

[ice berg]

This is what your military website says in accorance with your foreign ministers statement, who is supposed to represent Beijing.


At the same time this is what your PLA General says


Well, nations when they say responsible,talks in unison when responding to situations. They dont talk like power centers are confused and is not in control of a situation. This makes PRC untrustable in front of the international community on various levels.

LMAO, are you here to embarass yourself again. Do us a favour and read your own links first.

The article from the PLA general is from December 21, 2010.



Good that you can hide behind keyboards like that.

That are tons of OMG China will attack us in 2000. 2010, 2XXX from indian generals. Dont bothered to post.

There are hawks in every country. Dont throw stones at a glass house, show we?

 

[Ray]

LMAO, are you here to embarass yourself again. Do us a favour and read your own links first.

The article from the PLA general is from December 21, 2010.



Good that you can hide behind keyboards like that.

That are tons of OMG China will attack us in 2000. 2010, 2XXX from indian generals. Dont bothered to post.

There are hawks in every country. Dont throw stones at a glass house, show we?

That may be true, but then no one can state things in the media or to the media in China without CCP Govt approval.

Look at those who are jailed/ under house arrest, who thought they could criticise the CCP or Chinese Govt publicly without approval.

Unlike China, if a Indian military officer/ General has spoken his mind at a seminar or otherwise about China's capability and that is not the view of the Govt, the Govt rebuts such a claim pronto.

In China, the same thing happens?

No.

Because it is another way of China's Govt spelling out their mind without officially saying so!

 

[sorcerer]

LMAO, are you here to embarass yourself again. Do us a favour and read your own links first.

The article from the PLA general is from December 21, 2010.



Good that you can hide behind keyboards like that.

That are tons of OMG China will attack us in 2000. 2010, 2XXX from indian generals. Dont bothered to post.

There are hawks in every country. Dont throw stones at a glass house, show we?

I just pointed out the obvious that it can be read in its many forms..
unlike you who believes whatever your CPC says.
Actually you are hiding your ignorance behind your laughs and smilies and you Chinese will die laughing even without knowing the cause..How pathetic for a human low life.
Born slaves of commie thugs..you will never understand freedom and free expression nor have the spine to look things from a different perceptive.
Pathetic..

 

[amoy]

For the servicemen in every country they're either fighting or prepared for a fight. That's their duty.

It's just natural for them to ring the bell "the enemy is at the gate", either to put the public on alert, or to justify the budget allocated to the military.

For a nation it's necessary to have an "enemy". Create one if there's not Our great thinker, also follower of Confucius, Mencius points out: 入则无法家拂士，出则无敌国外患者, 国恒亡。生于忧患，死于安乐。

But those generals or officers shall not be given a free hand. That's ultra dangerous. Peace/War shall always be left with the political leadership.

 

[average american]

I agree with amoy in that its the militarys job to protect us against all potential enemys including China remote or not. I think there is a 50 percent chance that China is so conflicted in so many ways that it may tear its self apart. Corruption, censorship, economics disparities, poltical freedom, totalitarianism capitalism by in the name of communism and the list goes on and on. Maybe amoy could tell us objectivly that the average Chinese thinks of their goverment with out getting in trouble.

 

[ice berg]

I just pointed out the obvious that it can be read in its many forms..
unlike you who believes whatever your CPC says.
Actually you are hiding your ignorance behind your laughs and smilies and you Chinese will die laughing even without knowing the cause..How pathetic for a human low life.
Born slaves of commie thugs..you will never understand freedom and free expression nor have the spine to look things from a different perceptive.
Pathetic..

So instead of admitting you are wrong and move on, you come with another of your pathetic preach. It is obvious who is the pathetic one here. It is you who cant even admit you are wrong. But do carry on with your preach of freedom and democracy.

 

[ice berg]

I agree with amoy in that its the militarys job to protect us against all potential enemys including China remote or not. I think there is a 50 percent chance that China is so conflicted in so many ways that it may tear its self apart. Corruption, censorship, economics disparities, poltical freedom, totalitarianism capitalism by in the name of communism and the list goes on and on.

I dont see any of those things you mentioned are unique for China. Care to name one country that is free of all that?

 

[sorcerer]

So instead of admitting you are wrong and move on, you come with another of your pathetic preach. It is obvious who is the pathetic one here. It is you who cant even admit you are wrong. But do carry on with your preach of freedom and democracy.

ofcourse we can carry on with preach on freedom and demorcacy which you will not know in your life time. No matter where you are , you are way myopic.

I was not wrong, what I said was "contrary to your so Beijing saying that PLA is under their jurisdiction all the time, news media reports stuff which is contradictory. So I just pointed out the fact from both the angles. We have the freedom and spine to do that unlike you.That is how we make light of certain situation.

But you, who is used to take things literally and think in its one way approach(something that you are allowed to do, with only with regards to your Commie Gods) wont understand it-ever.

 

[ice berg]

ofcourse we can carry on with preach on freedom and demorcacy which you will not know in your life time. No matter where you are , you are way myopic.

I was not wrong, what I said was "contrary to your so Beijing saying that PLA is under their jurisdiction all the time, news media reports stuff which is contradictory. So I just pointed out the fact from both the angles. We have the freedom and spine to do that unlike you.That is how we make light of certain situation.

Still trying to dig out? ROFl. The article was posted 3 years ago. You tried to draw connection between todays scenario with a comment by smoe general 3 years ago. Just pathetic.

But you, who is used to take things literally and think in its one way approach(something that you are allowed to do, with only with regards to your Commie Gods) wont understand it-ever.

See you still are unable to stick to topic. Everytime you got debunked, you resort to preaching about democracy and freedom like some kind mantra.
Maybe you should learn to
1. stick to topic
2. read your own link( 3 years old article?????muhhahahahha)

 

[sorcerer]

See you still are unable to stick to topic. Everytime you got debunked, you resort to preaching about democracy and freedom like some kind mantra.
Maybe you should learn to
1. stick to topic
2. read your own link( 3 years old article?????muhhahahahha)

Ofcourse, we preach democracy, cuz we have the right.

You should say that to yourself.
Its not the date of the article that matters its the context. My point was PLA talking in its own terms.
What makes you think that I didnt check the date of that article and I was quick to extract content to prove my point?
You dont simply jump into conclusion..you gallop into it.

Just like your commies, you try so hard to prove someone wrong though they are right and their intentions are clear ,but you didnt get it. If this was some land, you would pitch a tent here too.

 

[ice berg]

Ofcourse, we preach democracy, cuz we have the right.

You should say that to yourself.
Its not the date of the article that matters its the context. My point was PLA talking in its own terms.

The date is out of the context. Thus making your point moot.

What makes you think that I didnt check the date of that article and I was quick to extract content to prove my point?

Cause you are using a 3 years old article to describe todays scenario.

You dont simply jump into conclusion..you gallop into it.

LOL, you cant even read your own link.

Just like your commies, you try so hard to prove someone wrong though they are right and their intentions are clear ,but you didnt get it. If this was some land, you would pitch a tent here too.

I think the last commie died with the USSR, probably long before you were born.son. Or you were in a coma these years?

 

[sorcerer]

I think the last commie died with the USSR, probably long before you were born.son. Or you were in a coma these years?

The way you was so bend, i thought you was one, old man.

 

[average american]

I dont see any of those things you mentioned are unique for China. Care to name one country that is free of all that?

The USA does not have 50,000 internet censors, cant think of any other country that does, and we seem to be short on poltical prisoners, no Nobel Prize winners in jail.

 

[nimo_cn]

The USA does not have 50,000 internet censors, cant think of any other country that does, and we seem to be short on poltical prisoners, no Nobel Prize winners in jail.

Indeed, those 5000 Internet censors only exist in your wonderland.

And we dont have a Nobel prize winner as the commander of the largest war machine.

Sent from my HUAWEI T8951 using Tapatalk 2

 

[average american]

Indeed, those 5000 Internet censors only exist in your wonderland.

And we dont have a Nobel prize winner as the commander of the largest war machine.

Sent from my HUAWEI T8951 using Tapatalk 2

The size of the Chinese Internet police is rumored to number in the 50,000s. According to Amnesty International, China "has the largest recorded number of imprisoned journalists and cyber-dissidents in the world." Many of those imprisoned or punished were targeted for their activity on the Internet; activity in regards to communication with groups abroad, signing online petitions that challenge governmental regulations and calling for improvements for the people of China.

There is a clear goal towards the repression of free flow of information in China. The main target for this repression is via control of the Internet. The internet censorship in China is considered one of the more extensive and advanced in the world, comparable to regimes running countries, such as Iran and North Korea. Internet service and access in the the People's Republic of China is conducted under various laws and regulations, most of which correspond to some kind of internet censorship. There is no overarching internet censorship law, but the more than sixty internet regulations imposed by the government are strictly maintained across the provincial branches of state-owned internet service providers (ISPs).

There was a push for stricter control by the government after a series of protests against many of China's policies and conditions. The escalation was deemed necessary in order to quell online opinions and discussions after a series of anti-pollution, anti-corruption, anti-Japanese protests, and ethnic riots. Many of these protests where driven and organized via online mediums such as chat rooms and instant messengers.

Luckily the censorship is not applied in Hong Kong and Macau, as they are special entities recognized by international treaty. Therefore they have their own judicial power and are not subject to most laws of the Republic. Unfortunately the rest of mainland China is closely monitored and regulated. On top of blocking website content, the tracking and monitoring of the Internet access of individuals is a common occurrence. The Chinese big brother is watching.


Read more: 50,000 Chinese Internet Police Responsible for Censorship | Why My Country Sucks



The mechanics of China's internet censorship | UNCUT


The mechanics of China's internet censorship



Even rainstorms can be sensitive in China. The recent storm in Beijing which killed at least 77 people caused the censors to come out in force, with newspapers told to can coverage and online accounts of the deluge snipped.

But with 500 million internet users, the obvious question is, how does China do it? What are the mechanics of China's internet censorship?

It makes things simpler if we divide the censorship first into two camps: censoring the web outside China and censoring domestic sites.