21 replies to this topic

[Shawna11]

http://www.financialsense.com/stormwatch/g.../2005/0715.html

It seems almost impossible for most Americans to grasp the simple and very logical notion that many other nations and cultures do not think as we do, or have the same hierarchy of values. Nuclear war is not "unthinkable" or "insane" to a nation accustomed to totalitarianism, war, poverty, and hardship, one whose exalted "self-conception" has been repeatedly bruised by humiliations like foreign occupation and American economic/political "hegemony."

For all of our (remaining) virtues and strengths, Americans really are like the "teenagers" of the world: we feel invincible, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary; we resent many common-sense restrictions upon our freedom to pursue a good time (and assume that everyone else has "pursuit of happiness" at the top of their to-do lists); we want, above all, to be popular, often going to ridiculous and demeaning lengths to make sure everybody likes us; we take for granted the sacrifices made by our "elders," convinced we know better than they about virtually everything; and we look with baleful incomprehension and suspicion at notions of self-denial and deferred gratification.

A purely rhetorical question, here, to which I expect no answer: Why is JRN virtually the only analyst out there who is well-versed in history and actually takes it seriously?

[bm_cali]

It is very rare for someone with JRN's academic background to also be involved in matters of the military and to view geopolitics from a Rightist perspective.

What I find is that most miltary and geopolitical analysts are either ex military, ex defense industry or are simply geeks who like things that go boom. But few of them have the sort of training that JR does. Similarly, most with JRNs training are leftist ideologues and hate the military. JRN has a very unique combination of skills, outlook and background.

Most analysts are part of the community they analyze whereas JR is not.

I would love to see Jeff's own impressions and thoughts on this subject!

BM

[bm_cali]

There were some very interesting exchanges over on the Asiawind forum a couple or three years ago:

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128191&t=128079

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-20-04 14:49

By way of comparison, in Thailand, it was known that many non assimilated Chinese were in fact (and perhaps still are?) Communists and beholden to Beijing. The key here is assimilation. In Thailand, we see two varieties of Thai Chinese, those like me and my family, who are fully Thai in the nationalistic and geopolitical sense, and ones who are still in a distinct Chinese enclave. Some of this has to do with how many generations there have been since immigration and some has to do with educational levels.

What makes Indonesia different from Thailand is that Chinese (no matter how many generations since immigration and no matter how assimilated they are) are banned from government. One wonders to what extent this actually inhibits assimilation and promotes the divisive ethnic conflicts which exist there? Another major consideration is the "Sharia lite" governing system, a relic of Arabic imperialism several hundred years in the past, juxtaposed against the primarily Christian faith of the ethnic Chinese. What if all of ASEAN were to adopt a system modelled after the Thai system? Just some food for thought.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128242&t=128079

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-21-04 10:57

"By way of comparison, in Thailand, it was known that many non assimilated Chinese were in fact (and perhaps still are?) Communists and beholden to Beijing. The key here is assimilation."

What do you mean by "communists". Please elaborate. In what way are Chinese people communist? Please give some examples.

It shouldn't be a surprise that overseas Chinese do not want to neglict their heritage and create a new heritage like you have done. There are many who are very proud of being Chinese and do consider themselves to be Chinese. There is nothing wrong with that. I oppose assimilation, I favour integration, which means that any ethnic and cultural group can keep its own culture, while fully participating in the host country. Minority groups should be protected and not be bullied and be surrended to the majority group.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128253&t=128079

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 11:49

It is a fact that many who were engaged in Communist groups from 1945 until present were / are non assimilated Chinese. This is a matter of public record. I am direct in my definition of "Communist" - namely, Communists are those who subscribe to the doctrines of Marxism - Leninism or derivatives, and who seek to eventually overthrow the bourgeois structures of power. It is a matter of public record that groups with such goals started to form in Thailand as early as the 1920s. Directly after WW-II they blossomed, aided by Soviet and PRC assistance. These groups engaged in violent protests, fought the government and even attacked US and Thai military bases during the 1960s and early 1970s. Significantly, concurrent with the thaw in relations between Bangkok and Beijing, such groups were allowed to come back to Bangkok, and enter the open political arena. Some of the past members of them have undoubtedly, in their more advanced years of life, taken on positions of influence and authority, in politics, in education and in business.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128263&t=128079

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-21-04 13:27

"Communists are those who subscribe to the doctrines of Marxism - Leninism or derivatives, and who seek to eventually overthrow the bourgeois structures of power."

It's a very big mistake to label Chinese people as communist. Chinese who are not willing to assimilate in the host country are not immediately communist. And I don't share your definition of communism. To me communism is the persuit of a "brotherhood of men", where all men can prosper and have a good life. As Deng Xiaoping once stated: poverty is not socialism.

Chinese style communism has very strong Chinese characteristics and is pragmatic. Basically, your view of Communism is a Western Sovjet style, which is long outdated and only practised in N-Korea.

The Chinese history can be seen from as a big dichotomy. In the past and the current time. How come? It has to do with Taoism. Building bridges between apparent differences, a balance between "yin and yang". E.g. state ownership and private property, central planning and competitive markets, political dictatorship and economic and cultural freedom. Indeed, it is almost, or so it often seems to skeptics in both the Western and Marxist worlds, an attempt to combine Communism and capitalism.

You do not see this nuance, that's explains your bigoted view about Chinese people, the PRC and communism.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128273&t=128079

Author: finestra2004
Date: 01-21-04 14:20

Thailand's situation is very much similar to Indonesia's in that assimilation of the Chinese is equated with political correctness so as to escape the stigmatisation as Communists. There were once multitudes of indigenous Thais and Indonesians who appreciated Communism for what it really is, but out of history's capriciousness, most of them are ignorant about this ideology which in fact is on the wane everywhere in the world, including China.

Many overseas Chinese are reluctant to acknowledge China as their motherland precisely because of the "stigma" of Communism along with its overtones of discarding traditional Chinese virtues which they strongly adhere to in many degrees, sometimes right, sometimes erroneous. However these ignorants fail to recognise that most of their far flung kin on the mainland and elsewhere in the PRC are not bounded by ideology, the Chinese are a practical which is why they survive wherever they are in the world.

China is able to avoid the sort of the former Soviet Union by virtue of most of her people's practical wisdom, therefore whether the Chinese adhere to Communism/Socialism, Capitalism, Liberalism, Monarchism or whatever it does not matter because our perpetual age old sagesse will always guide us in facing the uncertainties of time.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128281&t=128079

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 15:09

Some of Chinese ethnic background are simply normal people, who, upon immigration to other countries, began the process of assmiliation. Some here at this forum label ones assimilated into mostly white countries as "bananas." But what about ones who are assimilated into Asian countries, not because of some psychological problem, but simply because assimilation is a normal process? What are they, papayas? In fact, I would argue that NON assimilation is more in the category of a psychological problem (e.g. some form of superiority complex or hero complex).

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128286&t=128079

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-21-04 15:44

In China, there are many ethnic minorities, diversity makes a country rich.
By knowing what you are, you won't end up in an indentity crisis. You will rather get internal strength and that strenght will enhance yourself and the host country.

In the European country where I live, I see many non-Chinese immigrants who get stuck in both worlds and cannot create a bridge between these 2. Overseas Chinese people however, are well capable of building these bridges between cultures. As the Chinese culture is very rich and advanced, I see many foreigners expressing their admiration and appreciation of the Chinese culture. The identity of a Chinese is tied with his culture. By taking away his identity, you are taking away the Chinese culture. If a foreigner can appreciate the culture and identity, why can't a Chinese?

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128288&t=128079

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 15:58

European countries are the most difficult in terms of assimilation. They are defined based on ethnic and / or racial identity. American countries are the easiest. Asian and African ones vary consierably, some are and some aren't.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128290&t=128079

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-21-04 16:08

Where do you get this wisdom? Also your comment is not a reaction to my comment.

Chinese people have contributed to "American culture". As the US is an immigrant country, whose population came from all corners of earth, you can't really speak of assimilation. The Hispanics in the US are a well aware of their cultural background, as the Afro-Americans, Chinese, Irish, Italian...To be short: your hypothesis is wrong. What makes the US attractive is the wealth and to get a better life while keeping your culture and not whitewashing your heritage.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128293&t=128079

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 16:14

I will admit that over the last few years, assimilation has slowed in the USA. This is due to the fact that Leftist politicians realized that they could create power blocs of disaffected etthnic identity groups. By slowing assimilation, newly arrived people would feel marginalized and be more likely to fall into the Leftist camp. Historically, this was not the case. In the future, it is hoped that the ill founded concepts of bilingualism and multiculturalism will be defeated, and normalcy restored.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128296&t=128079

Author: Greg Ting
Date: 01-21-04 16:24

You are still thinking of leftist and rightist?
McCarthy is your idol?
What a combination of pungent mothballs.

And you have Chinese blood ? That is ashame.

[BM's Note - Greg Ting is an alias of Asiawind's owner, Dr. S.L. Lee. Lee is a *Batelle retiree* living in Columbus, OH!]

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128297&t=128079

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-21-04 16:25

"ill founded concepts of bilingualism and multiculturalism"

Please elaborate on that. Clearly we have different values and different principles. A selfconcious Chinese vs a whitewashed Sino-Thai-American...Eventually we can only agree to disagree.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128313&t=128079

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-21-04 18:13

"The thing you cannot stand, is the idea of a unified America, diverse, multiracial, of multiethnic background, but culturally unified and normalized."

How boring it would be if there was only 1 culture. And culturally unified America...could you explain what that is? This sentence looks to me like a paradox. You only tolerate people looking differently, but they can't think or behave differently. I don't see evil in multicultural society, not at all. There is nothing wrong with Chinese people eating noodles, Italians eating pasta and pizza, Afro-Americans doing rap and R&B, Hispanics doing their stuff. Isn't the US the land of the free? Do you tolerate Muslims going to mosques, Jews to synagogues, Christians to church and Buddhists to their temples? I have one personal question: are you Christian?

Why can't you tolerate cultural diversity too? How do you want to achieve a culturally unified US and want it to be "normalised"? Do you want to persecute people who are different from the mainstream, the "McCarthy way"?

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128318&t=128079

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 18:25

I think your idea is actually the boring one. Here are the exciting ones - my American, ethnically German-Thai-Chinese friend who is an excellent chef of Southwestern food; my American ethnically Pakistani-Austrian friend who is a master of Texas Bar-B-Que; my American ethnically Choctaw-Scottish-English-African friend who is an expert in Confederate Civil War history , etc......

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128321&t=128079

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-21-04 18:39

So to summarize: you may have a different colour of skin, but you cannot have a different culture or religion. Your message is clear. I doubt there will be much support for it. You are trying to picture a "cohesive unified", almost fascist, America. With the passing of the Patriot Act, and restricting the freedom to enforce "cohesive unity", your dream of your version of America may one day become reality. The founding fathers of it will be turning in their grave.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128345&t=128079

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-22-04 11:18

The Founding Fathers would have abhored multiculturalism.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128341&t=128079

Author: Paul Yih
Date: 01-22-04 10:38

And your ethnic English-American pal named Bush had just massacred over 15,000 plus Iraquis...so what ? Your amoral American pals or Chinese pals are all butchers - by your choice ? Maybe Jeff Dahmer and Charles Manson are also your hyphenated ethnic pals ?


http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128347&t=128079

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-22-04 11:21

Mao Tse Tung massacred millions and millions more still rot in Lao Gai - their only "crime" is being anti Communists.

On the other hand, labelling your highly inflated number of Iraqi casualties of war (and mind you, many of the actual casualties were shot by the Fedayeen) as a massacre is disinformation of the typical Lula Marxist variety.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128329&t=128079

Author: Greg Ting
Date: 01-21-04 20:42

The reason why Chinese Americans are concern about the cross strait affair is because they know the situation far more than the non-Chinese Americans. It is to US's benefit that Asia is kept without war. A declaration of Taiwan independence will certainly bring war as no Chinese administration can bear the responsibility to 1.3 billion people by letting TI to happen. It is not just for China's sake. It is for the sake of US, Asia and the world.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128340&t=128079

Author: Paul Yih
Date: 01-22-04 10:29

Greg , I think the world is in transition now - In years past, as in the post old colonialism of the British - which had been taken over by the US - the old "divide and conquer" had made all old colonialists tons if not billions of dollars. England even today with the Bank of England and many more banks like HSBC are all into money laundering - be that from Africa or Asia.

While the American hidden agenda in having Germany, Korea and China split -- in the older way - the fear of the former Soviet Union -- in the meantime, the sales of arms had made US billions of dollar also - take Taiwan, now Taiwan's nuclear preparation came via US with US puppet Israel and before that South Africa - another apartheid state ( just remember now , the three former apartheid nations were US, S. Africa and as of now, Israel continues their racial repression) ------.

War and wars had made companies like Halliburton, the Caryle Groups and many more most profitable -- directly or indirectly, US had been looting from the situations in South East Asia -- even during Nam.

But , as of late, if the war in ASia spreads, or anywar or conflicts that will be widen-- the US war now in Iraq and their potential to involved Syria, Iran and much of the Islamic state will back fire - Thus, for now , the US does not want war in Asia, because, this will challenge their "omni power" of the world -------.

But we all have to think again ... and China has a tough nut to crack, but when it is needed, China should proceeed to remove this "pain" now if it is necessary before this situation deteriorates further .

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128351&t=128079

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-22-04 11:37

See there you go, talking of exterminating the USA. It is quite a natural thing. The development of weapons of mass destruction, and long range rocket and aircraft delivered munitions, now makes it possible for illiberal dictatorships to simply remove all impediments to their world domination plans. Sadly, the Westerners have never realized this. They have, since scaring themselves witless via the abortive and self curtailed nuclear strike on Japan in 1945, considered WMD to be a taboo - never to be used unless attacked with WMD first. Naturally, any student of strategy would realize that this is for all intents and purposes a policy of no use. Although there are encouraging signs of reconsideration of the suicidal loser policy of MAD, my prediction is that the West shall never develop the courage to conduct truly preemptive strategic operations on a massive scale against other large nation states. It will be the East who shall cross the rubicon first.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128348&t=128079

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-22-04 11:26

I would argue, that from a pure perspective of geopolitical power, the US would be well advised to drop the One China policy, and immediately restore direct military participation in Taiwan. Station troops there, develop the Pershing III IRBM and put it there as well. Clearly, the ongoing ambiguity is not a product of any drive for geopoltical strength, it is a product of the excessive influence of globalist business interests who want to outsource US jobs to the PRC, and yet still be able to place R&D centers on Taiwan. For the money power, there must be no war between Taiwan and the PRC, because they would lose their current (and in my opinion, RISKY) gamble. I sure would not want to be one of the beer swilling US expats who Dell has in the PRC when the balloon goes up!

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

=========================

[bm_cali]

A branching thread off of the above one.....

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128300&t=128079

Author: Paul Yih
Date: 01-21-04 16:36

Also, m ost of these Chinese are not well educated - They were very provincial and not being able to see the wider picture of the history of China - China had always feared authorities for over 600 plus years - the fear the "rulers" simply the "rulers" in China are written with "two signs of mouths" , yes the rulers and the authorities have more say, and have far greater power.

But in what Mao had all that changed --- with all the negative of the cultural revolution and more of the great leap forward - all economic mistakes that Mao had no country to borrow such economic formula.

Chinese had suffered for a long time - Chinese were humiliated and m istreated by the Manchus -- Chinese were the "yellow bellies" under the Western invasion and concession .

Yes, many of the overseas Chinese were all "run away" or social rejects in their own provinces -

And yet, all and all, China's status , China's change or metamorphosis from communist to socialist to have a social market economy will rise to give all Asians the status and maybe China will be the only power to rise and will not make the others to "kowtow" to China - By in large , most of the Asian nations are still "kowtowing" to the US and subjected to the economic racism the US had imposed u pon them and before the US , the Brits and the French . Time to think again

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128279&t=128079

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 15:02

You misunderstand, not all non assimilated Chinese [in Thailand] were / are Communists. However, among Communist groups, substantial fractions were / are non assimilated Chinese.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128280&t=128079


Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 15:04

If I have a bigotted view as you incorrectly state about "Chinese people" then that means I am bigotted against myself (!).

Do Chinese anti Communists have a "bigotted view about the Chinese people?"

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128283&t=128079

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-21-04 15:14

No, these people have a bigoted view about Chinese communism, I then mean the KMT nationalists on Taiwan and some HK people. Yes, by labelling "substantial fractions non assimilated Chinese" as immediately communist, you have a bigoted view about Chinese people. Furthermore, and I add, your entire view about communism is bigot. In most countries, including the US, it is no crime to be communist or socialist. Communists and socialists have adapted to the current time, hawks and conservatives apparently not.

You are playing the "McCarthy" card. That tragic era of American history is passed. McCarthy was a fool who never understood what American stood for. He did a witchhunt of random people and tried to make communism a crime.

The same happened in Indonesia and also in Thailand. That is just pathetic and very shallow. Chinese people should not bow for bullying and pressure. As China is growing, no Chinese needs to be feel ashamed of supporting China. That is also no crime.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128289&t=128079

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 16:03

McCarthy was a politically inept demigogue, however, McCarthy's thesis, that the institutions were being infiltrated by KGB agents and those they had recruited, was later proven to be accurate. You raised in interesting point. How much of the USA's currently tolerant attitude toward Communism is as a direct result of the infuencing and undermining operations of the infiltrated Communists? How much damage did they do? Were they responsible for bad judgement regarding the Korean War? Were they responsible for the undermining of the USA's efforts to fight Communists in SE Asia? Are they responsible for some of the chaos currently seen within the USA's geopolitical policy establishment? We may never know, since, due to the discrediting of McCarthy, there is no longer any courage to pursue investigation.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128292&t=128079

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-21-04 16:11

You raised lots of questions, I don't consider them to be rhetorical ones. Please answer your own questions if you would like.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128294&t=128079

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 16:16

Allow me to restate, that without investigating, the questions cannot be accurately answered. I will answer this - do I think an objective investigation regarding McCarthy's thesis is justified? YES!

Moragod Sinkultawongrit


http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128298&t=128079

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-21-04 16:30

McCarthy was a dumb man, he did not have a thesis. He only was able to create hysteria and slanderously accuse people randomly of something which is not criminal, namely being communist. People who are doing a withhunt and accuse people of being a witch do not have theses. McCarthy should be remembers as a fool and I hope he's burning in hell. Just like Medieval Europe was burning its witches.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128312&t=128079

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 18:05

Do you deny that Communists, not to mention other forces, have, in the past, contemplated the overthrow of the US government and the subversion of its institutions? Would the US be the first country to be concerned about such things? It is not a witchhunt, it is protection of one's institutions. Sun Tzu described many forms of attack. The non military forms are ones to defend against as well as military ones. The failure to protect one's institutions is incompetence. Is there a balance between this protective instinct and liberty? No question, there is. I argue that, since the discrediting of McCarthy, the balance has been off and the USA's institutions have been attacked over time, resulting in a long term weakening effect.

This sure is a raw nerve. Why does this concept prove to be so threatening? Are you afraid of a more robust, cohesive and unified USA?

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128328&t=128079

Author: Greg Ting
Date: 01-21-04 20:38

Where did you get the idea that China wanted to overthrow US? China could not even take a breath after 1949 before US sent troops to Korea. Did China send any troops to Canada or Mexico?

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128352&t=128079

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-22-04 11:41

Indeed, today, the PRC seeks to overthrow the US. At present, the operation is non military, consisting of front companies, spies and other forms. These other forms include the enlistment of US business interests as unwitting agents of PRC influence. Now that the business interests have become duped into believing that the PRC is either no longer Communist, or, somehow able to be Communist and free at the same time, they have become the PRC's most credible advocates within the US political process. It matters not which party is in power - neither party is willing to forgo campaign contributions from the business interests and neither are willing to anger them with a more robust geopolitical stance toward the PRC.

The PRC has much to leverage in terms of the past excellent work by the KGB in all of these regards.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128355&t=128079

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-22-04 12:18

A big conspiracy theory that has no credibility at all. You are anti-China. You have a very bigoted view that can easily be refuted. The US was a strong immigrant country, but with immigrants like you coming, the US will implode from within. The dangers of the US are not overseas, but from within, those who wish to destroy the foundation of this country and the liberties it has. I then mean Bush and those neo-cons who control him as a puppet. I am monitoring these rightist bigited views expressed on websites such as newsmax.com, and you are much worse compared to newsmax.com

I greatly admire the US for being a home to so many cultures and the living proof of cultural diversity existing in peace and prosperity.

As I know, the "Asiawind forums promote cultural diversity, harmony and world peace". Clearly you do not wish to contribute to this goal. Why are you posting here? I believe people that oppose cultural diversity, harmony and world peace, and have such a negative and very anti-China view, should lose their posting privilege.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128356&t=128079

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-22-04 12:46

Most in the PRC who think like me are locked up in Lao Gai. I also want peace, but not peace due to Communist world domination. My version of peace is one where freedom has taken over and the Lao Gai are emptied.

It is interesting that you are trying to slyly paint me with a fascist stripe and get me banned. I must make you somehow uncomfortable with my contrary views.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

================================================

[FrankNorman]

bm_cali, on Aug 8 2006, 07:44 PM, said:

While the American hidden agenda in having Germany, Korea and China split -- in the older way - the fear of the former Soviet Union -- in the meantime, the sales of arms had made US billions of dollar also - take Taiwan, now Taiwan's nuclear preparation came via US with US puppet Israel and before that South Africa - another apartheid state ( just remember now , the three former apartheid nations were US, S. Africa and as of now, Israel continues their racial repression) ------.

Amazing the nonsense these people will spout! America responsible for keeping Germany split? Actually it was the USSR that refused to allow the section under its control to merge with the new Federal Republic - formed from the American, British and French sections.

Oh, and Israel has apartheid, huh? Seperate "group areas" for blacks and whites, and blacks can't vote? News to me...

[bm_cali]

More telling debates from Asiawind:

====================================================

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...31&t=128331&v=t

Author: Kobo-Daishi
Date: 01-21-04 23:30
Dear all,
The following is a January 20, 2004 International Herald Tribune article titled “An Ancient Model for China's New Power” that I am posting in full because it will be archived soon:

Eric Teo Chu Cheow IHT

Paying tribute to Beijing

SINGAPORE Asia is being reshaped by two fundamental trends - a new security environment that resembles the ancient Chinese tributary system, and the rise of China's soft power.

The increase of China's influence and power over a major part of Southeast Asia has been remarkable lately. The summit meeting in Tokyo in December of Japan and members of Asean, the Association of Southeast Asia Nations, could be interpreted as a direct response by Japan to this emergence of China as a major actor - and rival - on the Asian stage.

Eisuke Sakakibara, a professor at Keio University and a former Japanese deputy finance minister, spoke recently in Kuala Lumpur of the re-emergence of China as a great power after a lull of 150 years. China seems to be recreating its imperial security system and environment once again, but in a more benign and discreet way.

A recent publication by Beijing University's Institute of International Relations put forward a novel perspective on China's new security environment, which clearly has profound implications for Beijing's relations with its Asian neighbors.

Beijing's new environment could have been modeled after ancient China's tributary system, which was started under the Ming dynasty and perfected under the Qing. China's Ming/Qing tributary system was based on three cardinal points:

First, China considered itself the “central heart” of the region; this tributary system assured China of its overall security environment.

Second, to ensure its internal stability and prosperity, China needed a stable environment immediately surrounding the Middle Kingdom.

Third, the Chinese emperor would in principle give more favors to tributary states or kingdoms than he received from them; for this generosity, the emperor obtained their respect and goodwill.

According to the Beijing University publication, the royal Qing archives indicate that this well-established arrangement laid out a meticulous system of tribute to the Chinese court. Korea had to pay tribute once a year, the Ryukyu Kingdom (comprising the present-day Okinawan islands) once every two years, Annam (Northern Vietnam) once every three years, Siam (Thailand) once every four years, Sulu (in Southern Philippines) once every five years, and Burma (Myanmar) and Laos, once every 10 years.

There are echoes of the ancient tributary system in certain geopolitical trends in Asia.

The stabilization of China's immediate external environment is proceeding at an impressive pace, as is shown by its rapprochement with India, separate naval exercises with India and Pakistan in the South China Sea, an active role in the six-party talks on the Korean Peninsula and ongoing negotiations on an Asean-China free trade area by 2010.

The free-trade area project could be perceived as a continuation of China's tributary system across Southeast Asia, especially as Beijing gives more than it receives, in according most-favored nation status to Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia before they even join the World Trade Organization.

China has conceded trade surpluses to its smaller Asian neighbors - including Japan since 2003 - in line with the tributary principle of "give more, take less." These trade surpluses are funneling economic growth to the smaller countries, thus confirming China as the heart of the Asian economic system today.

China has also become a "brotherly example" to Vietnam, just as it had been culturally in the past; Vietnamese leaders' current reforms are inspired by China's. Similarly, India appears to be finding inspiration in China's "external stabilization" efforts, setting its own South Asian region in order and focusing on Chinese-style economic reforms.

There is a fundamental difference, however, between China's new regionalism and that of the Ming and Qing dynasties. China's current leaders, President Hu Jintao and Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, are more humble, down-to-earth and "polished" than the great emperors of Beijing. The current Chinese slogan of "more confidence, more cooperation" gives China a better chance of becoming the "central heart" of the region once again.

Ethnic Chinese communities in Southeast Asia have risen in influence and stature as China's soft power has increased. Joyous celebrations of the Chinese New Year across Asia this month are a symbol of this new geopolitical trend.

The writer, a corporate consultant based in Singapore, is also council secretary of the Singapore Institute of International Affairs.

XXXXX

The article can be found at the following link:

http://www.iht.com/a...les/125735.html

Kobo-Daishi, PLLA.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128362&t=128331

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-22-04 15:01

How discreet is it that the PRC, can, within 30 minutes, completely flatten Singapore, Jakarta, KL or BKK? Soft power? PLEASE!

Back in the 1980s, when the Kremlin deployed SS-20 IRBMs within minutes of trajectory of the major European capitals, the USA responded with a program to build a competing system. In addition, cruise missiles with thermonuclear warheads were deployed in the UK.

Today, the PRC has its deployments of similar (but technologically more advanced) types of road mobile missiles, namely DF-15s and DF-21s, in Yunnan province and throughout Tibet. They have been there for years. Since there are no longer Western politicians with the courage of Ronald Reagan, and now only lapdogs for globalist business interests who are told not to rattle too many sabres in the directions of major nations (naturally, doing so toward minor nations is a different matter....), therefore there has been no counterforce response to the PRC's nuclear threat. From Chiang Rai to the southern shores of Sumatra, there is not a single nuclear missile, or for that matter, a single IRBM with any type of warhead, let alone intercontinental bomber, in opposition to the nuclear mennace to the north.

No doubt, being defenseless against the PRC's weapons of mass destruction, and correctly doubting the resolve of the US, UK or any other friendly nuclear power to lift so much as a finger in the event of military attack or lesser forms of coercion by the PRC, the wise leaders of ASEAN nations pragmatically pay tribute, kowtow and appease. The living hell of having no geostrategic way out in the short term weighs heavily. So, therefore, we have the smiles, the business cooperation and forced tolerance of the overlords of the day. However, somewhere, a student is learning things that will allow indigenous inventions to occur. And elsewhere, one of his friends is cultivating his early political career. Between the nations of ASEAN, there will soon be 1/2 billion people - there are already more there than in the entire USA. Perhaps an army the size of the PLA cannot be raised, but nonetheless, a credible opposition can be built. So, even if the traditional protective nations such as the UK, USA or even, as theorized more recently, Japan, prove unwilling to ally, then other strategies will take effect.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128363&t=128331

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-22-04 15:47

You are trying to setup other nations against China, simply because of outdated anti-communist reasons. Clearly you try to portray China as a threat, which she is not, and you use old fashioned cold war rhetorics. Been there, done that.

Luckily for the world, all countries see China as a keyfactor for peace and stability in Asia and the world at large. China contributes positively to the development of Asean through trade, equality, mutual benefit and non-interference. China is having friendly relations with all its neighbours, including India and Japan.

China is much like the US before the second world war. Only interested in developing itself and raising the standard of living of its people. Please do not try antagonizing China. Only China decides at what pace and what way she wants to develop.

I think this is a rather moderate voice, but won't be heard by hawkish deaf people.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128365&t=128331

Author: suen.kuen
Date: 01-22-04 15:56

A ethnic Thai speaking like the imperialists. I find it odd!?
Something with the air they breathe or the food they eat in the west!?

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128402&t=128331

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-22-04 18:35

Sorry to tell you but I am ethnic Chinese, but that really doesn't pertain to this discussion thread.

As for your implication that somehow, yellow skin should automatically result in some prescribed view point, some sort of "non imperialist" viewpoint in your argot, is quite offensive and is a crass example of ethnic and racial stereotyping. As if, they white skinned man is a natural imperialist, whereas the yellow or brown skinned man is a natural anti Imperialist? To what infantile depths will Mankind sink with thinking like this?

Now I will reveal what for this forum will constitute something horrible - there are *many* people in the Thai military today who would love nothing more than to have their own IRBMs, with state of the art thermonuclear weapons as a countermeasure. Furthermore, they would love nothing more than to have a jointly developed (Thai-Japanese-Israeli) ABM system. But they are prevented from this by political pressures, which are characterized by the current kowtow. The kowtow is nothing more than appeasement and stalling for time. Some argue, restart SEATO. Others say, make the military component of ASEAN more robust. Still others say, reach out to India. In general though, not all are in the camp of defenselessness. Not at all.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128407&t=128331

Author: suen.kuen
Date: 01-22-04 19:37

More like a Taidu than anything else calling on China to disarm! Naive to the extreme.
The last time China was in that position was having the Empress Dowager in charge who emptied the country's coffer on parks and gardens. And look at the hordes of bandits swarming in for the kill from all over Europe and Americas.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128410&t=128331

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-22-04 19:53

But why position nukes to threaten ASEAN? Do you honestly think ASEAN will try to colonize China? No, there must be other reasons for those DF-15s and DF-21s than fear of European or American domination. Oh, and by the way, I do note that the connection of the nearly completed PRC superhighway network is proceeding very well, and the connection though Laos to the M1 in Thailand, should be complete sometime in 2006. This does raise unique possibilities. Whereas, when the Red Army faced NATO across the Fulda Gap, there was a large level of potential opposition to overcome if the Warsaw Pact wanted to lunge toward the Pyranees, the PLA faces nothing of the sort. What an easy cruise all those high speed tanks, optimized for rapid highway travel, would have all the way down to Bangkok. In fact, with the excellent highways all the way down the Malay Peninsula, why stop at Bangkok? Imagine it, the PLA, nearly unopposed, going 1000 miles in 3 days' time. On the heels of the phalanx of tanks and other armor, why those DF-15s and DF-21s could provide great utility and rapidly expand the PLAAF's mobile and easily hidden nuclear forces. Perhaps, even Australia might be threatened. But oh, what am I thinking. The only motivation for the CCP's large investments into connecting up with the ASEAN highway system are PURELY based on economic considerations. There is NO geopolitical or military reason for building them.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

=================================================

Another branch of the thread ......

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128363&t=128331

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-22-04 15:47

You are trying to setup other nations against China, simply because of outdated anti-communist reasons. Clearly you try to portray China as a threat, which she is not, and you use old fashioned cold war rhetorics. Been there, done that.

Luckily for the world, all countries see China as a keyfactor for peace and stability in Asia and the world at large. China contributes positively to the development of Asean through trade, equality, mutual benefit and non-interference. China is having friendly relations with all its neighbours, including India and Japan.

China is much like the US before the second world war. Only interested in developing itself and raising the standard of living of its people. Please do not try antagonizing China. Only China decides at what pace and what way she wants to develop.

I think this is a rather moderate voice, but won't be heard by hawkish deaf people.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128367&t=128331

Author: Kobo-Daishi
Date: 01-22-04 16:27

Dear Sjalesho,

Maybe he's really a Heritage Foundation stooge posing as an ethnic Chinese Thailand national? :-)

Kobo-Daishi, PLLA.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128401&t=128331

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-22-04 18:28

You think I am the only person who looks at things this way? You can only hope so but you are wrong. There are people who are becoming very dissatisfied with being in the shadow of those DF-15s and DF-21s. Do you deny that these missiles exist? Do you deny that ASEAN is defenseless against them? Do you deny that this *might* just be a behavior influencing factor?

If the PRC is so peace loving, then why not dismantle those missiles?

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128409&t=128331

Author: de Fake Canuck
Date: 01-22-04 19:46

If the PRC is so peace loving, then why not dismantle those missiles?

>>> are you implynig that the US of A is a 'peace hating' nation? If not so, why have 100 times more number of 100 times more powerful missiles than China? If I was the PRC, knowing how many missiles the US of A and other Western nation and the Japs have pointing at me, I would have developed 10 times more. For the same reason, the US of A has so many missiles in their stocks. If you are so objetive in debating, I would have to assume that you are hardcore anti-war activist in the US. Care to share with us when was the last anti-war rally you participated, Mr. Dear Peacelover?

de Fake Canuck

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128412&t=128331

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-22-04 19:58

I specifically addressed the IRBMs threatening ASEAN, not ICBMs designed to counter US nuclear rocket forces. Of what utility are DF-15s and DF-21s in the Mekong River headwaters, for detering anything the US may or may not do?

It seems that no one wants to address the actual point I have made. Why?

Oh, and by the way, I do note the vigor with which the PRC has insisted that ASEAN remain a "nuclear free zone." How convenient that is if one's purpose is to glower over ASEAN. Imagine Western Europe, during the 1970s, if neither France, nor the UK, nor the US, had nuclear capabilities. How they would have kowtowed to the USSR.

Is this not an analogous situation in the purely regional context?

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128442&t=128331

Author: de Fake Canuck
Date: 01-23-04 12:11

You seemed to totally fail my analogous situation as well. Why are you holding PRC morally higher than the USofA, for God's sake? Why are you asking PRC to do things that the USofA would absolutely refuse to do? Since you are such a big advocate of disarmaments, why not start at home? You know what they say about charity, eh?

de Fake Canuck

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128463&t=128331

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-23-04 15:25

The last I looked, the US does not have SRBMs or IRBMs at all. And even if we did, it is doubtful they would be deployed anywhere near Canada. If we had them, and kept them here instead of forward deploying them in other regions, we would locate them close to Cuba.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

================================

'nother branch .....

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128412&t=128331

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-22-04 19:58

I specifically addressed the IRBMs threatening ASEAN, not ICBMs designed to counter US nuclear rocket forces. Of what utility are DF-15s and DF-21s in the Mekong River headwaters, for detering anything the US may or may not do?

It seems that no one wants to address the actual point I have made. Why?

Oh, and by the way, I do note the vigor with which the PRC has insisted that ASEAN remain a "nuclear free zone." How convenient that is if one's purpose is to glower over ASEAN. Imagine Western Europe, during the 1970s, if neither France, nor the UK, nor the US, had nuclear capabilities. How they would have kowtowed to the USSR.

Is this not an analogous situation in the purely regional context?

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128461&t=128331

Author: John Mak
Date: 01-23-04 14:50

Moragod,

Are you really Chinese who does not know a shread of Chinese history.

For the past 800 years,China was under the rule of outsiders,except the Mings,if the Chinese had the mentality of colonization,Zheng He would have colonized some of the nations by her expeditions. But China did not,China mothballed her navy. You can ask the questions about Manchuria,Inner Mongolia,Tibet. Because they are the questions that people like you like to justify your point of view. All the peripheral lands were brought in by the conquerors themselves. China had grown out of her conquerors rather than colonized them.

You are a really a Chinese by wanting China to be a impotent nation, so that Tom,Dick and Harry can humiliate her people,may be you memory is so short to forget the humiliation the East Asians people suffered under the Japanese domination. Now you bring the alliance of Thailand-Japan-Israel in whatever plot they are making,their objectives were clear to encircle China. Moragod,you and many people like you like to see Chinese humiliated for generations,fortunately the world has people like Mohathir Mohamed, ex-president Wahid, and other SE Asian leaders are seeing light,they see their interests are with China,a nation that had not colonized them. You want to flog the dead horse SEATO,while most of them a greater East Asia friendship and peace. China has the lower military budget PER CAPITA than Japan,and Japan is encouraged by the US to increase it. Tell us why,when Japan was the nation which brought suffering to many Asians.

Short memory or no memory at all.

john

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128462&t=128331

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-23-04 15:21

You are evading the specific question. What credible threat do ASEAN present which requires the need for DF-15s and DF-21s along the PRC's southern borders? If the real threat is from the USA or Japan, then move them to the NE. Why is that not done? I saw one argument that its to keep outside powers from using ASEAN as a stepping stone. This is the *only* half way reasonable counter argument I've thus far seen. I can equally argue that nuclear weapons in Yunnan, help to extract tribute from ASEAN. Please don't be naive. Don't tell me Beijing would not be capable of such a strategy. That would be nonesense to claim any such thing.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...144704&t=128331

Author: Bao An
Date: 12-02-04 19:04

Ms. Sinkultawongrit (that's right, Ms. <----- Moragod is a woman's name) I wanted to point out that I am well aware of the collective strength of ASEAN. Should such strength ever be harnessed by a hegemonic entity, such as the USA or maybe, India at some future point, I will surely be heartened by whichever defences we have put in place to guard the southern and western borders. It is the noble thing to do, to protect all the beautiful cultural wonders across the great expanse, and to allow the hard working, loving people in cities from South to North, to sleep well at night.

Bao An ;=)

==========================

And another ....

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128363&t=128331

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-22-04 15:47

You are trying to setup other nations against China, simply because of outdated anti-communist reasons. Clearly you try to portray China as a threat, which she is not, and you use old fashioned cold war rhetorics. Been there, done that.

Luckily for the world, all countries see China as a keyfactor for peace and stability in Asia and the world at large. China contributes positively to the development of Asean through trade, equality, mutual benefit and non-interference. China is having friendly relations with all its neighbours, including India and Japan.

China is much like the US before the second world war. Only interested in developing itself and raising the standard of living of its people. Please do not try antagonizing China. Only China decides at what pace and what way she wants to develop.

I think this is a rather moderate voice, but won't be heard by hawkish deaf people.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128399&t=128331

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-22-04 18:16

You evaded the point I made about the PRC's nukes Vs. ASEAN's defenselessness. Why?

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128405&t=128331

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-22-04 18:47

Let me reverse your statement: what do you think about the nukes of the US. Isn't Canada, Mexico and South-America at large vulnerable to these WMD? Doesn't the US have more nukes to destroy the world at least 20 times?

Why complaining that China has nukes?

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128408&t=128331

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-22-04 19:44

You have raised an excellent point. Witness the upity attitude of the countries you have mentioned toward the USA. Clearly, the constantly diminishing US nuclear force does not scare other countries in the Americas. Therefore, there must be something in addition to simply possessing nuclear weapons and that something is actually having the will to use them.

Read the PLA doctrine regarding use of nuclear weapons, particularly semi strategic and non strategic ones. It is clear about demonstrating the will to use them.

Objectively, does Mexico have as much reason to fear being nuked by the USA, as, for example, Malaysia has to fear being nuked by the PRC? And don't give me the old, stale "the US nuked Japan." Yes, the US nuked Japan, and scared itself witless. The US mentally promised itself to never again nuke anyone unless as a retaliation to being nuked (a prescription for losing). Whereas, the PRC, not saddled with a psychological complex about some past nuking of an adversary [complete with teary eyed hippies chanting outside the gates of Oak Ridge every anniversary of the attack on Hiroshima] can think clearly regarding how they would use their nuclear weapons. There must be some reason for the ongoing increases in them. Especially given the fact that the US is decreasing its own arsenal. Now why is that?

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128411&t=128331

Author: de Fake Canuck
Date: 01-22-04 19:53

>>> The US mentally promised itself to never again nuke anyone unless as a retaliation to being nuked

You are joking? If you read any declassified US government documents regarding the US participations in the Korean conflict, the US military had repeated urged the its government to use nuclear weapons to attack Chinese strategic cities, such as Beijing, Shanghai, etc. If the US government did not fear the USSR to retaliate against the US, it may have agreed to it. The PRC is the only one of the nuclear nations declares that it would not use its nuclear weapons in the first strike. Mr. Sinkultawongrit, please read Rumsfeld's latest proposal on its stretegic nuclear weapons to take out enemies hidden in the bunkers. And you are here to accuse the PRC of trying to scare off other nations?

de Fake Canuck

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128413&t=128331

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-22-04 20:00

Yes, and MacArthur was fired for making such suggestions, so flaccid was the actual nature of the US in terms of the prospect of direct warfare against the PRC.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128414&t=128331

Author: suen.kuen
Date: 01-22-04 20:10

....just take the contemporary example of the DPRK KimII asking for a peace treaty in exchange of total de-nuking!
And what's the answer USA gave?...'I reserve the right...da da-dah da-dah..
You are one son of a Bush to take on a hayghty-daughty profile on a forum full of righteous and reasonable posters.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128415&t=128331

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-22-04 20:12

Why the personal attack? I have attacked no one here personally, well, except for, in some subtle way, perhaps Goodman. Argue the ideas, do not attack the man.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128443&t=128331

Author: suen.kuen
Date: 01-23-04 12:12

Attack the issue indeed, Maragod!
That China to timidly disarm and learn to listen to the dictates of the imperialists and hegemons. That its OK for you to have U.S. maintain base on Taiwan and so forth.
Do you really don't reflect on all these ideas of yours that how they would sound to a Chinese?

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128440&t=128331

Author: de Fake Canuck
Date: 01-23-04 12:08

From your comment, I take it that you would have supported MacArthur in nuking Chinese cities when all it wanted to do was to fend off immiment attacks from the US and its coalition forces which was marching up to the Yalu River? China had repeatedly warm that it would join the war if they US came up against the Chinese border.

And I am sorry, you were saying earlier that China should dis-arm its missiles in southern China?

de Fake Canuck

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128452&t=128331

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-23-04 13:42

According to these hawks, everything is allowed to fight "communism". It's like talking to zombies.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128482&t=128331

Author: FM Liew
Date: 01-23-04 23:39

According to this Hawk, anything made in US is good.
Did I ever tell you that Americanism has became a religion.

It's an icon for "Good".

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128591&t=128331

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-26-04 18:19

To the contrary, American style Liberalism is an abomination. American style worship of the global shopping mall culture, as an end, is not only incredibly shallow, but is actually a formula for geopolitical disaster and eventual destruction of the USA's power. American foreign policy is sentimental and rambling. And American geopolitically strategy is like a child's game against adult gamblers. See, I don't think everything made in the USA is good! The USA still has much to learn. Although, in spite of my critique here, I *do not* believe that the USA is a bad seed. A spoiled child perhaps, but one who can be reformed and one who has a good heart.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128593&t=128331

Author: suen.kuen
Date: 01-26-04 18:31

Charles Manson's female followers say the same thing....that he is basically good too. You like to have him released and live right next door to you?

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128597&t=128331

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-26-04 19:05

Of course not, he ought to have been put to death.

Interesting that you attempt to demonize the US this way! This is always something that happens when one country, one with a truly global vision of conquest, is about to attack another one, which only attempts to be an empire, but, failing to have a sufficiently cold outlook, is only the world's policeman.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

=================================

This is your brain. This is your brain on SCOist atomic Napoleonism...... any questions?

[bm_cali]

More from Asiawind. This one is sort of interesting. Goodman is an American expat in Singapore. The classic Panda Hugger businessman. Another very telling debate here:

===========================================================

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128188&t=128188

Author: GOOD MAN
Date: 01-20-04 14:36

After having toned down an originally offensive proposition as the topic of a Taiwan referendum (that China dismantle its missiles pointed at the separatist forces in Taiwan), the world breathed a sigh of relief and wondered why China would not grab this new version and run away with it, until China pops the question back, "What will China do with this new version if it passes?" Obviously, not a lot of goodwill is likely to flow back to Taiwan from this referendum.

First of all, the Taiwanese people being bound to the land their houses are built on, their men being prevented from leaving the island from a tender 12 years old until well into middle age, can be realistically said to be voting under duress. It is one thing if Taiwan has not provoked China before with declarations of independence. She had done so a dozen or so times at all levels, raising the tension unilaterally by these provocative statements, increasing her arms purchases abroad, leading to the deployment of these missiles in response by China, and now having put their entire populace at risk, ask them if they would like to remove that risk -- not by accepting the historical fact of the one China principle, but by having China remove her defensive missiles against the partitioning of her territory. That duress that the people are under is due entirely to the reckless rhetoric of the separatists that brought the 500 missiles to be pointed at them. Asking hostages if they would want the police to stop pointing their long-range rifles at them (aimed really at the terrorists) is not what we consider the ideal conditions for a referendum. And yet, this is what the so called defensive referendum of the hostage Taiwanese population is being touted as, by the separatists. Since anybody in such a situation would vote to have all the missiles removed, it stands to reason to expect that the referendum would lead only to one conclusion -- the further increased armamentation of the Taiwanese military with anti-missile systems that by their very nature have a dual use as offensive surface-to-surface systems. This would constitutute a definite escalation of the straits tensions, and by any definition, would constitute a departure from the status quo. If indeed any change in the status quo is to be avoided, then this referendum, and its inescapable consequence, must be avoided at all cost. There is no way that China could sit back and allow Taiwan to further arm itself with dual use weaponry that not only threaten her sovereignty (by armed secession) but also her security (by missile attacks on her coastal cities).

Secondly, based on the near certain passage of the referendum, the expected response from China is likely to be a further escalation of the number and quality of her missiles, including perhaps, for the first time, tactical nuclear weapons. This is the linkage that leads to WWIII, because the stakes now become so enormous that a nuclear victory by China over Taiwan would drive fear into all countries tangling with her, that an international effort will be made to see to it that it would fail. What happens to Taiwan in such a scenario is really not the concern of the separatists, since they would have dragged America and China into a lose-lose war in accordance with their Imperial Japanese master plan.

Thus, we see that the referendum could only lead to worsening strait relations, greater risk for escalation of conflict, and greater risk of involvement of all nuclear powers.

In contrast, no referendum would lead to business as usual -- peace across the straits -- Taiwan in her democracy and China in her sovereignty. The choice is so obvious, it is absurd that the separatists are touting their phoney referendum as even a competitive alternative to the status quo.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128195&t=128188

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-20-04 16:01

Some years ago, specifically during a past robust age when the USA was still actively fighting against the Communists in Asia, the USA actually stationed troops in Taiwan, and used it as a base for forward deployment. What a loss it was when, following the lead of the Nixon and Kissinger, duped by the so called "Sino Soviet Split" and subsequent "China card," we acquiesced to the recognition of Communist Red China and derecognition of Taiwan. From there proceeded the sequence of events which have led the US to:

1. Become overly dependent economically on the PRC.

2. Take an ambivalent and ambiguous stance toward Communism in Asia ("we'll ignore their ideology so long as they engage us in Free Trade...")

3. Decommit from aggressive and direct involvement in the defense of free nations in Asia, the waning commitments to Japan and S. Korea notwithstanding, leading to the demise of SEATO.

4. Allow lobbyists for the PRC, political front companies conveying PRC funds, and, US businessmen who have major conflicts of interest due to their dealings with the PRC and other Communist countries (not to mention countries who have supposedly reformed from it), to influence both the political process as well as the ongoing geopolitical strategy of the USA.

Naturally, all mistakes can be corrected, and all perpetrators of diminished security due to their allegience to foreign adversaries can be arrested and punished. Nothing is cast into stone.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128198&t=128188

Author: GOOD MAN
Date: 01-20-04 16:40

We are indeed glad that Nixon and Kissinger by their foresight were able to elicit the cooperation of China in dividing the Soviet forces into two theaters that ultimately bankrupted that evil empire without firing a single shot. And further encouraged that by engaging China in free trade, the Chinese economy has been transformed from a totalitarian command economy into a free market economy that permits of all things, the possession of private property by all its people.

When people are allowed to own the fruits of their labor, there will be no way for the government to take away again in the name of the people what belongs to them individually -- paving the way for China to transition towards a more benevolent country that respects individual rights and freedoms without firing a shot, either. The genius of Nixon and Kissinger cannot be diminished by a few separatist self-serving apologists who have been attempting to carry away an entire province of China into their private possession, in the name of a democracy that they claim for themselves but deny to the rest of their Chinese countrymen -- a position that benefits the few at the expense of the many, and moreover a position that paints democracy as the tool of warlords and demagogues, rather than as the best form of government that the Chinese people should adopt for themselves. This was the mistake of the KMT that lost China to the CCP, now, we cannot allow that mistake to be repeated, as the CCP is about to return China back to the Chinese people in every sense of the word, as the sovereigns of their own nation to which their government must answer. The process of economic reform is already bearing fruits in political reform, gradually as the Chinese would have it, but inevitably as they also would want it.

A return to the Cold War mentality of decades past, when China has now abandoned the aggressive stance of world revolution and class wars could only alienate the Chinese people upon whom we pin our hopes for a truly democratic transformation of Chinese politics into one which we know to work well and to work for peace. The sellers of snake oil separatism have only one interest to serve, themselves and their Imperial Japanese masters, who have planned all along to bring two of their WWII victors into direct conflict with each other, for their entertainment and benefit, so that the Imperial Japanese empire can rise again from its ashes of defeat. We do not need immediate reunification. We only need to maintain the status quo and China will become in another decade into a partner for democracy and peace, which will ensure that its Taiwan province will enjoy the same benefits of such a system in perpetuity without fear of any attacks or oppression. Clearly, the separatist pseudo-patriots seeks to prevent this outcome because their interests lie not in democracy, the rule of China by the Chinese people, but in their rule of a Chinese province by the loyalists of a defeated Imperial Japanese empire -- a goal that is diametrically opposed to that of the free world before WWII and after it as well.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128210&t=128188

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-20-04 18:19

Imperial Japanese masters? Please. My ancestors fought them in WW-II. Why do you persist in the twisted belief that the anti Communist position is the sole realm of those with some narrow Japanese imperialist vision? I suppose it is convenient for you, since to admit that regular Americans (be they of recent immigrant stock or from the Mayflower) may actually hold anti Communist beliefs would be an annoying hinderance to your globalist mercantile world view. God Bless my freedom to hold my own views. Certainly, you have yours as well. May the correct views win.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128226&t=128188

Author: GOOD MAN
Date: 01-21-04 01:31

The father of the so-called "Taiwan democracy" openly identifies himself with his Imperial Japan, telling reporters that until he was about 22 years old, he was a true Japanese. This means that until Imperial Japan surrendered in 1945, he was loyal to the Imperial Japanese throne. Why mention it without any further qualifications that it was indeed a misguided notion to support a fascist power against democratic nations? Have we heard of any German leader claiming that up until they were in their early twenties they were Nazi loyalists? If German politicians are not allowed to publicly identify themselves with the Nazi government, then how on earth could Asian politicians be allowed to publicly adore Axis Imperial Japan, by proudly declaring they were its loyal subjects up to 1945? By keeping silent on the much needed qualifications to such a statement, the message is clear -- it was indeed much better to have been a loyal subject of Imperial Japan. Indeed, he referred to the re-taking over of Taiwan by the ROC Chinese government in 1945 an example of "foreign domination". How can any person who shows such deep affection for a fascist regime claim to be a lover of democracy?

We cannot achieve democracy in China by denying the 1.29 billion peace-loving people of China their equal rights to the soverignty over their historic province of Taiwan. We want democratic reforms in China by Chinese -- the only way to make it really happen and take root. Separatists can only alienate democracy from the Chinese people. We need true Chinese patriots who respect their own country to lead their own people towards democracy, true democracy, not some banana republic type of "democracy" of strong men pretending to love freedom while denying their countrymen the same privileges they demand for themselves.

True Chinese democracy is governance of the people of China, by the people of China, and for the people of China. Is America afraid of such a Chinese democracy? Not at all -- we welcome it.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128252&t=128188

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 11:41

The truth is many in Taiwan have a real, and undeniable Japanese cultural influence. Some are even ethnically part Japanese. Why run away from this fact? While my family fought strongly against Japanese Imperialism during the 1940s, I can certainly still understand the torn alignment of Taiwanese whose families were there during the 1895 - 1945 era. Shall we pretend that such people do not exist and imagine that instead, post 1949 Taiwanese are the only ones? That would be silly.

It is a complicated geopolitical situation, no matter how much Goodman tries to turn it into a black and white one.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128257&t=128188

Author: GOOD MAN
Date: 01-21-04 12:57

You have just confirmed our worst suspicions that a significant portion of the separatist movement derives from those whose loyalties are torn between being the loyal subjects of their Imperial Japanese masters and being the loyal brothers to their fellow Chinese countrymen.

Obviously, these people, being fewer than the unconflicted majority who view being Taiwanese and being Chinese as identical in their persons, can only give the separatist party at the most, the 39% support that it has been getting through these elections, a percentage that in most true democracies would have barred their assuming office, but which in the electoral code of Taiwan instead gives them the power to rule over the majority that they do not represent.

The fact that Taiwan independence is based not on the majority sentiment but on the minorty pro-Imperial-Japanese loyalists' nostalgia for their colonial days is of course of great geopolitical significance, in that the proper conclusion to the Taiwan Crisis should first be the total defeat of the remnants of the WWII Imperial Japanese forces in Taiwan, and then, the peaceful reunification of the Chinese people on both sides of the straits, minus their invidious and provocative influence.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128274&t=128188

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 14:26

So, in order to clearly understand your idea, you believe that, the post 1949 (or, if you want to split hairs, post 1945) arrivals in Taiwan, should repress or silence that minority of those who were there already? And also, you believe, those who were there before, being of understandably conflicted alignment, ought to be treated as completely non-Chinese, Japanese aggressors? Is my understanding correct?

If so, then what SPECIFICALLY would you propose to be done with those unfortunte, annoying, and inconveient factions of those who happened to be in Taiwan prior to the end of WW-II?

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128277&t=128188

Author: GOOD MAN
Date: 01-21-04 14:51

The separatist pro-Imperial-Japanese loyalists pride themselves in being the loyal standard bearers of the defunct Imperial Japanese empire, and refuse to accept the surrender of Imperial Japan of Taiwan to China as stipulated under Japan's terms of surrender respecting the Cairo Declaration. Convincing these Imperial-Japanese-diehards that WWII has ended in the defeat of their Axis motherland is next to impossible, as they believe that short of another war, they have not been defeated.

This is what is holding up the peaceful reunification of Taiwan and China, that otherwise would have proceeded smoothly and equitably, with full guarantees of democracy for Taiwan and mutual recognition of the joint sovereignty of all the people on both sides of the strait to both the mainland and Taiwan (the One China Principle).

We do not want to repress the already oppressed Taiwanese, being forced even in the post-War era to accept their identity as the colonials of their oppressor, the Imperial Japanese regime, rather than as the brave Chinese resistance fighters who finally overcame the cruel and crushing humiliation of having their women sent to military brothels as comfort women and their men as the slave workers and suicide brigades of the Taiwan Army under the command of Imperial Japan in WWII.

Restoring to the Taiwanese people their true identity as the Chinese victims of Japanese aggression is the only way to lift the repression imposed on them by the separatist Imperial-Japanese-loyalists.

Defending the defenders of Imperial Japan, is, on the contrary, the surest way to perpetuate their repression under one of the most oppressive regimes in human history, made doubly worse by the fact that such historical revisionism and cultural annihilation is carried out under the banner of a fake democracy that has never obtained the mandate of the majority of Taiwanese people.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128278&t=128188

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 14:58

You still have not stated, specifically, what you would propose to do with that pre 1945 faction and their proteges, who, according to you are "defenders of Imperial Japan." What SPECIFICALLY, do you propose to be done with them? Legal action? Deportation? What?

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128282&t=128188

Author: GOOD MAN
Date: 01-21-04 15:12

They are Chinese, and as Chinese, are of course welcome to stay in the Taiwan province of China. But, if they want to be part of Japan, and Japan has ceded Taiwan back to China, then Japan should accept them into Japan as her nationals. They have the right to follow their masters, and in some cases, their fathers, back to Japan. If Japan does not recognize them, then they should rectify their notion of being non-Chinese and accept themselves as the Chinese that both the Chinese and the Japanese say they really are. However, accepting historical reality and the capacity for truth are not the hallmarks of the separatist mindset. Thus, their inability to accept their Chinese brothers and sisters as their own countrymen is not surprising.

================================

Branch .......

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128195&t=128188

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-20-04 16:01

Some years ago, specifically during a past robust age when the USA was still actively fighting against the Communists in Asia, the USA actually stationed troops in Taiwan, and used it as a base for forward deployment. What a loss it was when, following the lead of the Nixon and Kissinger, duped by the so called "Sino Soviet Split" and subsequent "China card," we acquiesced to the recognition of Communist Red China and derecognition of Taiwan. From there proceeded the sequence of events which have led the US to:

1. Become overly dependent economically on the PRC.

2. Take an ambivalent and ambiguous stance toward Communism in Asia ("we'll ignore their ideology so long as they engage us in Free Trade...")

3. Decommit from aggressive and direct involvement in the defense of free nations in Asia, the waning commitments to Japan and S. Korea notwithstanding, leading to the demise of SEATO.

4. Allow lobbyists for the PRC, political front companies conveying PRC funds, and, US businessmen who have major conflicts of interest due to their dealings with the PRC and other Communist countries (not to mention countries who have supposedly reformed from it), to influence both the political process as well as the ongoing geopolitical strategy of the USA.

Naturally, all mistakes can be corrected, and all perpetrators of diminished security due to their allegience to foreign adversaries can be arrested and punished. Nothing is cast into stone.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128239&t=128188

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-21-04 10:49

"Anti-communism" is outdated. Communism is no more. China is an enlighted dictatorship, economically it has become more capitalist than the US. What you mean "fighting communism" is a reversed way of saying to promote "Western democracy" in the non-Western world. With that ideology, the Americans hope to win the world. Does the world want to be won by the US?

In the 21th century, the realists will be on the winning side. Countries will be looking at their own national interests, instead of thinking in simplistic terms of "ideologies". Countries will do what's the best for them.

It seems to be you have a hard time adjusting to this reality.

As the world is tied together by capitalism and free trade (economy), the economic ties with bring the world together, regardless of political and social systems. As there are many cultures and many peoples with different social and political values, there will be different social and political systems. Will the superpower the USA accept this reality, or will it sink in its traditional agressive attitude of "You will do it my way!". Such an imperialist and hegemonist view is causing wars and is a danger to world peace.

Luckily, I have grown up in Europe and not in the US. Oldman Europe is very wise. Ancient China is even wiser. The New world has lots to learn.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128246&t=128188

Author: GOOD MAN
Date: 01-21-04 11:04

China is not opposed to "Western democracy" nor is America trying to sell "Western democracy". China is attuned to Chinese democracy for the very simple reason that if democracy is to thrive in China, it must be adapted to Chinese needs and Chinese traditions. The debate is how Chinese democracy should be implemented, not whether China should have Chinese democracy, which is the only realistically practicable form of democracy for China, under any circumstances.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128254&t=128188

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 11:59

One must note, vis a vis the PRC, that while the ruling Communist Party has allowed certain areas of the economy to be liberalized, the fundamental fact of Communist power has not been changed. Such periods of economic liberalization are not unknown in Communist dicatatorships. Witness the 1920s in the USSR and to a lesser extent, the late 1950s. Some would argue that what happened to the USSR after the late 1980s was in fact such liberalization on a grand scale. Note that, even after the "termination" of the USSR, those who ran it retained substantial positions of power, influence and authority. Therefore, to argue that some sort of pure counterrevolution happened in the USSR would be inaccurate. It is also intersting to note, that in the case of the CIS (nee USSR) those who were junior aparatchiks during the pre 1989 era are now the core power structure.

Do not assume that simply because a duck was nenamed as a chicken, that it is no longer a duck. If it quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, it is still a duck. If those who are in power in a supposedly liberalizing Communist dictatorship, or a supposedly defunct one, are of the initial dictatorship, then it would be highly naive to assume that at the core, the fundamental nature has been changed in a permanent, or meaningful sense.

Finally, I shall close by noting how much those nations who were once the bastions of anti Communism, have, due to what apparently happened in the USSR and what is happening in the PRC, demobilized from readiness for large scale war between major nation states. Such was always a stated goal of Communism - to trick its enemies into laying down their arms, only to suddenly attack when the adversary was not expecting it. Didn't Sun Tzu write something about that?

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128266&t=128188

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-21-04 13:36

"Such was always a stated goal of Communism - to trick its enemies into laying down their arms, only to suddenly attack when the adversary was not expecting it. Didn't Sun Tzu write something about that?"

War is not an option and because there was never real war during the cold war, both sides didn't want war. The cold war could be prevented and was unnecissary. By antagonizing the non-Western world communist world, the West had created the enemy themselves. Learn from history, as the world is being tied together by capitalism and economic freedom, by trade and commerce, all major powers are interdependant. That is what you do not see. I cannot understand how someone can have such an outdated hawkish view. It's created by ignorance, a hidden fear and a feeling to dominate the other and be supreme. Instead of living and working together, hawks do not. Hawks want to dominate and think they survive this way. While you do not need to dominate and antagonize other peoples/countries/systems to survive, you could engage them with peace and work this way for worldpeace and a "Kingdom of God" on earth.

I agree with you that Russia is a scam democracy, and that Russia proves how right Deng was!

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128276&t=128188

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 14:51

My own personal view is irrelevant to this discussion. My observations regarding the nature of Communism, and the subsequent analysis of (false?) liberalizations, and the possible geopolitical reasons for such liberalizations, are based on cold, analytical and realistic accounting of the long history we have of geopolitics, sociology, economics and state craft which is available. The body of knowledge to draw from is immense.

Take for example, the fact that, with each new radical advance in weaponry, there proceeded a war or series of them considered at the time to be the ultimate in horrors. Statecraft then came into play, attempting to avoid further wars at all costs. Unfortunately, trying to get the distinct and peculiar characteristics of all nations to conform to any international system of order has been in the long run, thus far, demonstrably impossible. Inevitably, some nation or group of them feels that whichever international order was put in place in order to enforce peace amongst nations is unfair to them. They then seek to change the rule of the order and are overruled by the majority. Frustrated, they break the order and yet another false peace is broken. As a slight variant to this, even a civilized nation may be taken over by despotic groups, and remove the affected nation from the order.

While the so called Cold War was a relative peace of extraordinary length (one must go back several hundred years to find anything even remotely comparable) it was nonetheless a peace predicated upon a series of treaties and agreed to balance of power. Even then, one might argue that, slowly, the West was losing. Over time, the position of relative Western strength, which was inarguable as of the early 1950s, was gradually eroded. Bit by bit, countries fell to anti Western power. Over time, the Soviets and eventually the PRC, developed technology which cast doubt upon Western vigor.

Here is an instructive sequence of events. By the early 1980s, the Soviets developed new IRBMs which threatened Western Europe. The US countered this with a program (on paper) to deploy its own system - the first credible road mobile IRBM ever for the US. As a result, a treaty was proposed by the Soviets to ban IRBMs. The US signed it and since no US system had been developed, there was nothing to dismantle. The USSR may have dismantled their system, or, they may have cheated on the treaty and hid part or all of it, replacing it with decoys which Western disarmament inspectors would witness the destruction of. Other nations, such as the PRC, Pakistan, the DPRK and Iran, were not signatories to this treaty at all. Today, the US has no road mobike IRBMs, and a number of other countries do. Who has the net advantage?

In any case, assuming that history is instructive, we can expect the current trend whereby the Peace of San Francisco of 1950, and its modifier, the Peace of Paris of 1990 are unravelling, to reach full fruition. Indeed, we have seen much rhetoric issued forth from the usual suspects, the nations of the (former?) Communist bloc, and their second tier of supporters, grousing in unison regarding their displeasure with the international order put in place in 1945 and modified in 1990. Meanwhile, the group of nations who led the creation of that order after WW-II, are themselves doubting its effectiveness. Now that the US has incurred the precursor strike of 9/11/2001, there is understandable questioning of even the UN's charter. What evidence is there that the UN will not go the way of previous attempts at international peacekeeping?

As for the business community, heady with optimism and ego, I suspect that their grasp on global control is also slipping. Mostly, the Communist and "formerly" Communist countries have bilked Western businesses and taken technology from them. They have also benefitted from the bilking of Western investors and used outside money to build infrastructure. The Western investors shall never realize returns, for long before the supposed dramatic market growth occurs in places like the PRC, indigenous concerns will take over those markets. Let us not forget, die hard optimitsts (some call them less flattering things) such as Henry Ford traded with the Nazis until they were banned from it. Earlier, many Westerners were robbed by Lenin. They never learn.

In the end, this peace, like all others, will likely fail. Then what?

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128284&t=128188

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-21-04 15:34

You are such a pessimist and have such a negative worldview. All mankind contributes to its development and progress. It should be no surprise that the Russians and Chinese have tried to submit their contribution of the advancement of progress. That is not bad. If humanity does not try to stick together working for peace and progress, the alternative way may be the scenario that you are trying to describe.

I would like to add that facts are not sufficient if you put them without a context and proper cohesive background. There is a Newtonian law "action and reaction". If the US did develop such deadly advanced weapons, why should other countries who are vulnerable to these not develop them to for defense? As the US is the sole military hyperpower, who is to blaim?

The world is interdependant. The biggest danger to mankind and worldpeace is terrorism, terrorist groups wish to destroy the global link of countries. People have different views, but one thing the civilized world, which includes both democratic Western and authoritarian eastern countries, wants is progress and better lifes for the peoples. You may not agree with the social and political system, as I do not agree with the American social and political system.

We've had so many wars, including 2 World Wars, we had a 5 decade old ideological warfare which was entirely unnecissary...when do we learn and work towards peace? The world is surely moving towards peace, and globalisation, mutual understanding is the key to achieve peace. Try to understand your fictious "enemy" and you may discover it's not an enemy at all.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128291&t=128188

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 16:10

Do you refute the facts I've presented?

As for the historical analysis I've made, why don't you do a Monte Carlo analysis of historical variability and see how likely it is that an infinitely long period of peace is. What is your evidence that such as thing is possible? The evidence must be more than utopian dreaming, or emotional reactions. The evidence must be based on a stochastic view of all the data points which are available. We have 10000 years of history as our data set. What is the confidence level that any specific condition is a stable system, which will return to a steady state no matter how large the perturbation? Or, do you imagine that it would be possible to predict the entire solution set of all possible perturbations, and thereby predict and control each one? Seriously, I am not kidding here. Use logic.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128295&t=128188

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-21-04 16:22

You remind of a previous poster who was warning us constantly of a new war. As you are probably well aware of the selffullfilling prophecy...I don't need to explain it. Also, yes history has shown mankind is being torn by infinite wars and conflicts. But humanity makes progress. That cycle of violence will one day be broken, because men will change. In the past there was slavery in the US. It's practically gone now. We are different peoples. We are evolving too. Russian style communism couldn't work in the 20th century, because humanity is evolving, it could be working in the 24th century. Never say never.

You can't solely look at some data and predict what will happen in the future. Don't you think you are then missing something essential? The world is being shaped by more than simple maths. If you refuse to help make the world a better place, and keep insisting the inevitability of war, there will be war caused by peoples like you. Do you want war or do you rather want peace?

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128308&t=128188

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 17:48

Have you ever contemplated the possibility, that, to deny the possibilities and probabilities of war, is actually to bring it on, whereas, that to work on the assumption of its inevitability, is to, if not prevent it, lessen its impact and swiften its resulting peace treaties? This is nothing new - it's called contingency management. Plan for the worst, work for the best.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

========================================

Branch .....

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128254&t=128188

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 11:59

One must note, vis a vis the PRC, that while the ruling Communist Party has allowed certain areas of the economy to be liberalized, the fundamental fact of Communist power has not been changed. Such periods of economic liberalization are not unknown in Communist dicatatorships. Witness the 1920s in the USSR and to a lesser extent, the late 1950s. Some would argue that what happened to the USSR after the late 1980s was in fact such liberalization on a grand scale. Note that, even after the "termination" of the USSR, those who ran it retained substantial positions of power, influence and authority. Therefore, to argue that some sort of pure counterrevolution happened in the USSR would be inaccurate. It is also intersting to note, that in the case of the CIS (nee USSR) those who were junior aparatchiks during the pre 1989 era are now the core power structure.

Do not assume that simply because a duck was nenamed as a chicken, that it is no longer a duck. If it quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, it is still a duck. If those who are in power in a supposedly liberalizing Communist dictatorship, or a supposedly defunct one, are of the initial dictatorship, then it would be highly naive to assume that at the core, the fundamental nature has been changed in a permanent, or meaningful sense.

Finally, I shall close by noting how much those nations who were once the bastions of anti Communism, have, due to what apparently happened in the USSR and what is happening in the PRC, demobilized from readiness for large scale war between major nation states. Such was always a stated goal of Communism - to trick its enemies into laying down their arms, only to suddenly attack when the adversary was not expecting it. Didn't Sun Tzu write something about that?

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128275&t=128188

Author: Greg Ting
Date: 01-21-04 14:37

Moragod,

Your version of communism is way way outdated. In Chinese (unforunately you cannot read) there is a story about a guy marking on ths side of the boat where he dropped his sword in water, hoping he will find it next time where the mark is.

Capitalism progresses, so does communism. In fact, that is merely a continuous gradation of planned economy and market economy. US and China are working on different scales between the two extremes.

The word Communism came from commune, communal life. The most communistic society is really the kibbutz of Israel. People live together in a big family and the elders decide on the distribution of wealth more or less on equal basis and on need. This prevents individuals from grabbing excessive share than he/she needs and ripping off the others. This kind of ideal society has been described in Chinese classics. It is natural that the Chinese like the system when it came from Russia. The problem is absolute equality also destroys incentive and triggers corruption of the tricky few.

Thus, a society should strike in the middle with less inequality. An income ratio of 1:20 or 1:50 may be ok, but 1:1000, or 1:100,000 is really excessive.

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128320&t=128188

Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 18:31

So who decides which ratio is correct? You or me? And what if I really am the best CEO in the world, does that mean I still cannot be paid more than other CEOs? And finally, why even have a board of directors if there is no freedom to decide who gets what pay?

Now, I do believe that corporations need to be controlled, but not in terms of their financial decisions. No, they need to be controlled where there are conflicts between national duty and globalist impulses. No corporation should be allowed to undermine national defenses. No corporation should be allowed to make direct deals with representatives of Communist or other hostile governments - this latter is actually forbidden - it is illegal for non government entities to conduct foreign policy.

Moragod Sinkultawongrit

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128323&t=128188

Author: sjalesho
Date: 01-21-04 18:46

Lots of people are conducting "foreign policy", such as Heritage Foundation's John J. Tkacik, the neo-cons of the New American Century, Taiwan separatists lobby, etc.

How come unelected people have such powerfull influences? It's part of American "democracy".

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=...128335&t=128188

Author: suen.kuen
Date: 01-22-04 03:49

It stinks of hypocrisy. A lot of those NGO (s) are in fact govt. funded.
This ability of the Americans to stare you in the eyes and
say things opposite to realities really turns me off.

====================================

[mohawk]

BM,

Do you think these guys believe what they are stating, or messing with you? If the former, what comes to mind is how much damage Darwin has done to the minds of men. As you stated, utopian fantasies. The thinking that "men are changing/evolving" towards a time of bliss and peacefull coexistance. GOOD MAN and sjalesho completely ignore your historical analysis. They don't even make an attempt at a counter argument dealing with facts. Just their emotional view. I don't know if it's blinders due to their view of human nature and they're view of where man is heading, or just toying with us via deception.

Mohawk

bm_cali, on Aug 11 2006, 03:46 PM, said:

Bump.

[bm_cali]

mohawk, on Aug 11 2006, 01:46 PM, said:

BM,

Do you think these guys believe what they are stating, or messing with you? If the former, what comes to mind is how much damage Darwin has done to the minds of men. As you stated, utopian fantasies. The thinking that "men are changing/evolving" towards a time of bliss and peacefull coexistance. GOOD MAN and sjalesho completely ignore your historical analysis. They don't even make an attempt at a counter argument dealing with facts. Just their emotional view. I don't know if it's blinders due to their view of human nature and they're view of where man is heading, or just toying with us via deception.

Mohawk

Sadly, many people among the ranks of both the Communist / anti Western and the Western liberal utopian camps believe this stuff. They hated the Cold War and were gleeful when it was ended unilaterally by a despirited and willess West. They indeed believe Man can be perfected on Earth, in the worst tradition of Marx.

[goodcomdeadcom]

Greetings, and God bless


Author: Moragod Sinkultawongrit
Date: 01-21-04 11:59

"One must note, vis a vis the PRC, that while the ruling Communist Party has allowed certain areas of the economy to be liberalized, the fundamental fact of Communist power has not been changed. Such periods of economic liberalization are not unknown in Communist dicatatorships. Witness the 1920s in the USSR and to a lesser extent, the late 1950s. Some would argue that what happened to the USSR after the late 1980s was in fact such liberalization on a grand scale. Note that, even after the "termination" of the USSR, those who ran it retained substantial positions of power, influence and authority. Therefore, to argue that some sort of pure counterrevolution happened in the USSR would be inaccurate. It is also intersting to note, that in the case of the CIS (nee USSR) those who were junior aparatchiks during the pre 1989 era are now the core power structure.

Do not assume that simply because a duck was nenamed as a chicken, that it is no longer a duck. If it quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, it is still a duck. If those who are in power in a supposedly liberalizing Communist dictatorship, or a supposedly defunct one, are of the initial dictatorship, then it would be highly naive to assume that at the core, the fundamental nature has been changed in a permanent, or meaningful sense.

Finally, I shall close by noting how much those nations who were once the bastions of anti Communism, have, due to what apparently happened in the USSR and what is happening in the PRC, demobilized from readiness for large scale war between major nation states. Such was always a stated goal of Communism - to trick its enemies into laying down their arms, only to suddenly attack when the adversary was not expecting it. Didn't Sun Tzu write something about that?"

Wow, this guy Moragod gets it. He must have the constitution of Job to hang out at aisawind and throw those pearls before the swine with such patience, rationality and civility. It's inspiring. I wonder if he drops in here at TFP now and then.

[bm_cali]

OCcsdude, on Aug 14 2006, 10:33 AM, said:

This is very interesting. Apparently, China constructed a huge 500:1 scale terrain of a disputed area with india. With GoogleEarth, people have been doing their own intelligence work.



link

Read some of the posts and see more pics in the above link. This does not look good.

Well, I created a relief map of the PRC when I was only a lad.

Now I am reaping the benes.

But it is still going to be an uphill battle. The worst ever.

[SAWGunner]

What are those string grid things for? Does it have something to do with setting up bombing runs?? Does anyone have an idea?

Have a great weekend. Take a kid shooting. But don't let him trip and shoot himself like the poor little tyke in Utah last Saturday.

SAWGunner

[InTheTrenches]

Chinese envoy tells US to stuff the complaining about the Chinese military buildup because the Chinese are peace loving and no threat. Sure, they are spending billions building and acquiring arms, and stealing military and technology secrets, just because they didn't have anything else to do with the money.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060818/ap_on_...na_us&printer=1

Chinese envoy tells U.S. to 'shut up' Thu Aug 17, 9:07 PM ET

The United States should "shut up" with its concerns about China's growing military spending because the increase is no threat, a Chinese ambassador said Thursday.

Sha Zukang, China's ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva, told British Broadcasting Corp. radio that American concerns about his country's growing military might were misguided.

"It's better for the U.S. to shut up," Sha said. "Keep quiet. It's much, much better."

Sha said the world need not worry about China's growing economic and military might because "China basically is a peace-loving nation."

"China's military buildup is not threatening anyone," Sha said. "This is a legitimate defense."

China's 2.3 million-member People's Liberation Army is the world's largest fighting force, and Beijing has alarmed its neighbors with double-digit percentage increases in military spending nearly every year for a decade.

U.S.-China military relations have been strained over a number of issues in recent years, including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's push for Beijing to be more open about its defense priorities, its military budget and its nuclear arsenal.

[bm_cali]

A teaching moment ....

Here we see the true face of a certain type of Chinese "master race" mentality.

There is a certain egotistical side that the true believers in Han superiority will show, typically inadvertantly.

You know where we also saw this? During the E3P incident.

InTheTrenches, on Aug 18 2006, 08:30 AM, said:

Chinese envoy tells US to stuff the complaining about the Chinese military buildup because the Chinese are peace loving and no threat. Sure, they are spending billions building and acquiring arms, and stealing military and technology secrets, just because they didn't have anything else to do with the money.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060818/ap_on_...na_us&printer=1

Chinese envoy tells U.S. to 'shut up' Thu Aug 17, 9:07 PM ET

The United States should "shut up" with its concerns about China's growing military spending because the increase is no threat, a Chinese ambassador said Thursday.

Sha Zukang, China's ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva, told British Broadcasting Corp. radio that American concerns about his country's growing military might were misguided.

"It's better for the U.S. to shut up," Sha said. "Keep quiet. It's much, much better."

Sha said the world need not worry about China's growing economic and military might because "China basically is a peace-loving nation."

"China's military buildup is not threatening anyone," Sha said. "This is a legitimate defense."

China's 2.3 million-member People's Liberation Army is the world's largest fighting force, and Beijing has alarmed its neighbors with double-digit percentage increases in military spending nearly every year for a decade.

U.S.-China military relations have been strained over a number of issues in recent years, including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's push for Beijing to be more open about its defense priorities, its military budget and its nuclear arsenal.

[bm_cali]

I tried to look at Asiawind and now, they require a login simply to see the posts, let alone write onto the threads.

Very interesting .......

[Brian]

bm_cali, on Feb 15 2007, 11:01 PM, said:

I tried to look at Asiawind and now, they require a login simply to see the posts, let alone write onto the threads.

Very interesting .......

Do you think that they are receiving more attention than they like?

[bm_cali]

Brian, on Feb 16 2007, 06:24 PM, said:

Do you think that they are receiving more attention than they like?

Yep! That's exactly what I think. Of course, the NSA can still snoop the threads, assuming they actually have the cajones to do something like that.

[SJL]

Rat poison from "made in China" pet food...came through Canada and Nafta... no less.

http://lucianne.com/...p?artnum=330642

It's starting to make sense, these proxy means and fronts they use to sneak in poison our way.