China aiming to become one of the biggest threats to world security

[CrusaderFrank]

So, the US is probably the biggest threat to world security right now, having started the Iraq War in 2003 which has led to ISIS, led to bombings and killings in Madrid, London, Paris, Brussels and many other places in the US and Europe, alongside destabilizing the Middle East, with Turkey becoming less Democratic by the day as a result, Egypt more unstable, etc etc.

However Russia has been attempting to get there, what with annexing the Crimea and a host of other games including hacking.

But the Chinese are the up and coming players in the game that mimics the imperial powers during the 1700s and 1800s, scrambling to increase their power.

While China claims often enough that they're not trouble makers, and they just want peace, they simply mean that they want peace because it means they've got what they want, otherwise they might use their developing armed forces. After getting kicked by the Vietnamese when they tried to invade in 1979, the Chinese have had a massive chip on their shoulder. Well, actually they've had one ever since they found out they weren't a world power any more and the English, Americans, French, Germans, Portuguese turned up and made themselves comfortable, and China feels like it missed out.

There was the book they "found" that "proved" that China controlled the South China Seas, however they forgot to mention that the book was thrown out and unreadable anyway. Also they forgot to mention that it proved that one Chinese fisherman had been fishing there, not inhabiting the place.

Well, move on to today and the Chinese and their "peace" has turned into this: Threatening the Australians because they perceive them as being weak, and too far away to give a damn about, but close enough to the Americans to make a point.

Major Chinese state paper calls for a military strike on Australian ships that enter the South China Sea

"China must take revenge and let it know it's wrong. Australia's power means nothing compared to the security of China. If Australia steps into the South China Sea waters, it will be an ideal target for China to warn and strike."

This was written in the Global Times, Chinese usually only write what the govt wants them to write, and this appears to be the very sort of thing the govt might want the paper to write, while being able to claim they didn't write it.

China is growing in strength, the US won't be able to control the Chinese soon. War is coming.

Thanks, Obama

 

[Rambunctious]

Yes, the Iraq War destabilized the region.

Wrong! Leaving Iraq before the job was completed in order for Obama to win re election is what destabilized the region...

 

[frigidweirdo]

So, the US is probably the biggest threat to world security right now, having started the Iraq War in 2003 which has led to ISIS, led to bombings and killings in Madrid, London, Paris, Brussels and many other places in the US and Europe, alongside destabilizing the Middle East, with Turkey becoming less Democratic by the day as a result, Egypt more unstable, etc etc.

However Russia has been attempting to get there, what with annexing the Crimea and a host of other games including hacking.

But the Chinese are the up and coming players in the game that mimics the imperial powers during the 1700s and 1800s, scrambling to increase their power.

While China claims often enough that they're not trouble makers, and they just want peace, they simply mean that they want peace because it means they've got what they want, otherwise they might use their developing armed forces. After getting kicked by the Vietnamese when they tried to invade in 1979, the Chinese have had a massive chip on their shoulder. Well, actually they've had one ever since they found out they weren't a world power any more and the English, Americans, French, Germans, Portuguese turned up and made themselves comfortable, and China feels like it missed out.

There was the book they "found" that "proved" that China controlled the South China Seas, however they forgot to mention that the book was thrown out and unreadable anyway. Also they forgot to mention that it proved that one Chinese fisherman had been fishing there, not inhabiting the place.

Well, move on to today and the Chinese and their "peace" has turned into this: Threatening the Australians because they perceive them as being weak, and too far away to give a damn about, but close enough to the Americans to make a point.

Major Chinese state paper calls for a military strike on Australian ships that enter the South China Sea

"China must take revenge and let it know it's wrong. Australia's power means nothing compared to the security of China. If Australia steps into the South China Sea waters, it will be an ideal target for China to warn and strike."

This was written in the Global Times, Chinese usually only write what the govt wants them to write, and this appears to be the very sort of thing the govt might want the paper to write, while being able to claim they didn't write it.

China is growing in strength, the US won't be able to control the Chinese soon. War is coming.

Thanks, Obama

You write a whole load of stuff, then someone comes up with a two word reply. Why do you bother?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yes, the Iraq War destabilized the region.

Wrong! Leaving Iraq before the job was completed in order for Obama to win re election is what destabilized the region...

You know, i'm getting a bit annoyed with simplistic nonsense today.

 

[Unkotare]

...

Yes, the Iraq War destabilized the region.....

The Iran-Iraq War.

 

[Unkotare]

...

You know, i'm getting a bit annoyed with simplistic nonsense today.

Then stop posting it.

 

[Freewill]

So, the US is probably the biggest threat to world security right now, having started the Iraq War in 2003 which has led to ISIS, led to bombings and killings in Madrid, London, Paris, Brussels and many other places in the US and Europe, alongside destabilizing the Middle East, with Turkey becoming less Democratic by the day as a result, Egypt more unstable, etc etc.

However Russia has been attempting to get there, what with annexing the Crimea and a host of other games including hacking.

But the Chinese are the up and coming players in the game that mimics the imperial powers during the 1700s and 1800s, scrambling to increase their power.

While China claims often enough that they're not trouble makers, and they just want peace, they simply mean that they want peace because it means they've got what they want, otherwise they might use their developing armed forces. After getting kicked by the Vietnamese when they tried to invade in 1979, the Chinese have had a massive chip on their shoulder. Well, actually they've had one ever since they found out they weren't a world power any more and the English, Americans, French, Germans, Portuguese turned up and made themselves comfortable, and China feels like it missed out.

There was the book they "found" that "proved" that China controlled the South China Seas, however they forgot to mention that the book was thrown out and unreadable anyway. Also they forgot to mention that it proved that one Chinese fisherman had been fishing there, not inhabiting the place.

Well, move on to today and the Chinese and their "peace" has turned into this: Threatening the Australians because they perceive them as being weak, and too far away to give a damn about, but close enough to the Americans to make a point.

Major Chinese state paper calls for a military strike on Australian ships that enter the South China Sea

"China must take revenge and let it know it's wrong. Australia's power means nothing compared to the security of China. If Australia steps into the South China Sea waters, it will be an ideal target for China to warn and strike."

This was written in the Global Times, Chinese usually only write what the govt wants them to write, and this appears to be the very sort of thing the govt might want the paper to write, while being able to claim they didn't write it.

China is growing in strength, the US won't be able to control the Chinese soon. War is coming.

You were not two sentences in until the misrepresentation of facts started. The Iraq war did not destabilize the region. The Iraq war did not cause ISIS to gain the power they have today. Both of those things were caused by the destabilizing Libya and the arming of the Syrian, ISIS, rebels. That is so well known I am fearing you might have a short circuit.

China doing what it is doing is just another example of failed foreign policy all on Hillary and Obama.

Yes, the Iraq War destabilized the region.

Yes the Iraq Was did give ISIS the training ground and the destabilized area in which to foment.

It doesn't all have to do with Libya. Libya was FAR TOO LATE for that to be the case.

Libya didn't start until 2011.

ISIS actually precedes the Iraq War. It started around 1999. However the Iraq War was where they actually gained prominence. We're looking at al-Zarqawi who founded all of this. His militant group was going around Iraq from 2003 onwards blowing things up, and killing lots of US soldiers and others.

Al-Zarqawi died in 2006. After that ISIS really emerged as ISIS and wanted to make an Islamic fundamentalist state in the region. So how this managed to happen after 2011 is beyond me. Bush though had a surge in troop numbers and operations and ISIS was severely damaged.

People on the right blame Obama for pulling troops out and allowing ISIS to grow again. While not Obama's fault, as he had to pull troops out, the pulling of troops out had an impact on ISIS. In 2011 however the Syrian Civil War also then presented ISIS with an even great chance at taking land, Syria totally destabilized was a great breeding ground for ISIS to grow and grow, which it do.

Syria wouldn't have happened if Saddam was still in power, there's no way any of those anti-Assad groups would have been able to do anything without having the power vacuum in Iraq and the destabilized Iraq to work with.

A brief history of ISIS

 

[Tehon]

Fair enough, show me the information that leads you to believe China has imperialist aspirations. You know, something more substantial than "they want to emulate us", lol.

I didn't say imperialistic aspirations. The US wasn't imperialistic.

The days of the Empire have gone. Now it's the days of the superpowers, this is what China wants to become. However controlling that land around it which it has claims to is its first desire. I'm not sure how much they actually want the issues to be resolved, they want to use such situations to further their nationalistic agenda, useful when you're not democratic to keep the people on your side. Such as the anti-Japanese protests in China in 2012, when no anti-CCP protests are ever allowed, even anti-a specific company protests are put down by the police, but they allowed this anti-Japanese one to go on for days.

They're even made an anti-Japan day, officially Nanjing massacre day.

You don't think the US is an empire?

Superpower is a euphemism.

No, it's not an empire. It's different. Clearly imperialism included a lot of foreign land grabbing, the US changed things, keep your land at home, setup bases in places on foreign soil, and play around with those who don't do what you want them to do. It's not nice, but it's not imperialism.

Imperialism implies control of one nation by another. Colonization is but a tool to exert control but by no means the only one as the US empire has demonstrated.

It might mean that in a certain sense, but which countries are NOT trying to do this? I mean, I'd say all of them are to some extent. If China goes to Lesotho then China is trying to use it's power or influence to get what it wants. But Lesotho is also using its power and influence to get what it wants too.

China wants votes in the UN, it got it from Lesotho, Lesotho wanted a nice brand new parliament building, it got it.

So using the term Imperialism in this manner doesn't get us very far.

The Latin Imperium means to rule over large areas. There's a difference, rule, rather than simply influence. The Age of Imperialism was from like 1600s through to WW2 where is managed to then disintegrate and was mostly over by 1980 (Zimbabwe for example gained independence in this year, although there are still imperial places, Gibraltar, Falkland Islands, and many other places the French, Dutch, British etc still have, and the US has Guam, Puerto Rico etc)

Imperialism here is not just influence over a country, but actively being in a country and manipulating it, taking resources, controlling the politics of the country, things like that.

China isn't doing that, at least not yet, and doesn't seem to aspire to that.

China IS trying to influence other countries. Read the China Daily if you want a good old laugh (or cry).

I read about Hong Kong and democracy. "Well, we chose the people they can vote for, but they still get to choose which Beijing stooge they want, so they've got Democracy, it's what they wanted so they should shut the fuck up" (well maybe they didn't exactly say it like that, but the meaning was the same.

China slams Japanese defense minister's remarks - China - Chinadaily.com.cn

Here's a nice one about the Nanjing Massacre.

China opens S China Sea website - China - Chinadaily.com.cn

This one is more relevant to the South China Seas thing

"China on Wednesday opened a website on the South China Sea, complete with historical maps, articles and research, according to the State Oceanic Administration (SOA)."

""We hope that this website will enable domestic and overseas people to better understand it and learn about the truth behind the 'dispute' over it.""

In other words, learn the truth as Beijing has decided to make it.

""The website is founded with the aim of positively publicizing our policies, claims, historical proof, legal basis and international cooperation while serving as a reliable channel for domestic and overseas government departments, research groups and individuals to learn about the South China Sea," said SOA spokesman Shi Qingfeng."

Yep, it's all a govt propaganda site designed to legitimize the ownership of islands China has already taken.

发现和命名-中国南海网

"Eastern Han Dynasty (AD 25 - A 220) Yang Fu book "foreign body" records: "Kawasaki head up the sea, shallow and more magnet." "Up the sea" as the title of the South China Sea in ancient China, "Kawasaki head" was ancient China called on the sea islands and reefs." (curtosy of Google translate).

All of it will be from China's perspective, anything that disproves, or at least shows the opposite of what China claims to "prove" its claim, will be completely missing.

Colonization and Imperialism differ in that one is about an Empire, the other is about colonies, not much difference, but a slight one.

The United States has between 700 and 800 military bases around the globe. Supported by a command structure broken up into geographical regions. All designed to protect american interests. Read american interests as its empire. Why do people try to deny the undeniable.

 

[Unkotare]

....
The United States has between 700 and 800 military bases around the globe. ....

And all those bases are in countries we have conquered and annexed as parts of the United States?

 

[Tehon]

....
The United States has between 700 and 800 military bases around the globe. ....

And all those bases are in countries we have conquered and annexed as parts of the United States?

Irrelevant.
The word empire originates from the Latin imperium. No requirement for territorial gain is even implied.

imperium (n.)
"authority to command the national military forces," in extended use "an empire," 1650s, from Latin imperium "command, supreme authority, power" (seeempire). Hence Latin phrase imperium in imperio "a state within a state."
Online Etymology Dictionary

 

[Unkotare]

....
The United States has between 700 and 800 military bases around the globe. ....

And all those bases are in countries we have conquered and annexed as parts of the United States?

Irrelevant.
The word empire originates from the Latin imperium. No requirement for territorial gain is even implied.

.....

Get back to me after you complete a remedial English class.

 

[frigidweirdo]

So, the US is probably the biggest threat to world security right now, having started the Iraq War in 2003 which has led to ISIS, led to bombings and killings in Madrid, London, Paris, Brussels and many other places in the US and Europe, alongside destabilizing the Middle East, with Turkey becoming less Democratic by the day as a result, Egypt more unstable, etc etc.

However Russia has been attempting to get there, what with annexing the Crimea and a host of other games including hacking.

But the Chinese are the up and coming players in the game that mimics the imperial powers during the 1700s and 1800s, scrambling to increase their power.

While China claims often enough that they're not trouble makers, and they just want peace, they simply mean that they want peace because it means they've got what they want, otherwise they might use their developing armed forces. After getting kicked by the Vietnamese when they tried to invade in 1979, the Chinese have had a massive chip on their shoulder. Well, actually they've had one ever since they found out they weren't a world power any more and the English, Americans, French, Germans, Portuguese turned up and made themselves comfortable, and China feels like it missed out.

There was the book they "found" that "proved" that China controlled the South China Seas, however they forgot to mention that the book was thrown out and unreadable anyway. Also they forgot to mention that it proved that one Chinese fisherman had been fishing there, not inhabiting the place.

Well, move on to today and the Chinese and their "peace" has turned into this: Threatening the Australians because they perceive them as being weak, and too far away to give a damn about, but close enough to the Americans to make a point.

Major Chinese state paper calls for a military strike on Australian ships that enter the South China Sea

"China must take revenge and let it know it's wrong. Australia's power means nothing compared to the security of China. If Australia steps into the South China Sea waters, it will be an ideal target for China to warn and strike."

This was written in the Global Times, Chinese usually only write what the govt wants them to write, and this appears to be the very sort of thing the govt might want the paper to write, while being able to claim they didn't write it.

China is growing in strength, the US won't be able to control the Chinese soon. War is coming.

You were not two sentences in until the misrepresentation of facts started. The Iraq war did not destabilize the region. The Iraq war did not cause ISIS to gain the power they have today. Both of those things were caused by the destabilizing Libya and the arming of the Syrian, ISIS, rebels. That is so well known I am fearing you might have a short circuit.

China doing what it is doing is just another example of failed foreign policy all on Hillary and Obama.

Yes, the Iraq War destabilized the region.

Yes the Iraq Was did give ISIS the training ground and the destabilized area in which to foment.

It doesn't all have to do with Libya. Libya was FAR TOO LATE for that to be the case.

Libya didn't start until 2011.

ISIS actually precedes the Iraq War. It started around 1999. However the Iraq War was where they actually gained prominence. We're looking at al-Zarqawi who founded all of this. His militant group was going around Iraq from 2003 onwards blowing things up, and killing lots of US soldiers and others.

Al-Zarqawi died in 2006. After that ISIS really emerged as ISIS and wanted to make an Islamic fundamentalist state in the region. So how this managed to happen after 2011 is beyond me. Bush though had a surge in troop numbers and operations and ISIS was severely damaged.

People on the right blame Obama for pulling troops out and allowing ISIS to grow again. While not Obama's fault, as he had to pull troops out, the pulling of troops out had an impact on ISIS. In 2011 however the Syrian Civil War also then presented ISIS with an even great chance at taking land, Syria totally destabilized was a great breeding ground for ISIS to grow and grow, which it do.

Syria wouldn't have happened if Saddam was still in power, there's no way any of those anti-Assad groups would have been able to do anything without having the power vacuum in Iraq and the destabilized Iraq to work with.

A brief history of ISIS

Oh, ffs. Don't just post a bloody source with nothing. I'm not opening it. Either you make your argument or you don't. You didn't.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I didn't say imperialistic aspirations. The US wasn't imperialistic.

The days of the Empire have gone. Now it's the days of the superpowers, this is what China wants to become. However controlling that land around it which it has claims to is its first desire. I'm not sure how much they actually want the issues to be resolved, they want to use such situations to further their nationalistic agenda, useful when you're not democratic to keep the people on your side. Such as the anti-Japanese protests in China in 2012, when no anti-CCP protests are ever allowed, even anti-a specific company protests are put down by the police, but they allowed this anti-Japanese one to go on for days.

They're even made an anti-Japan day, officially Nanjing massacre day.

You don't think the US is an empire?

Superpower is a euphemism.

No, it's not an empire. It's different. Clearly imperialism included a lot of foreign land grabbing, the US changed things, keep your land at home, setup bases in places on foreign soil, and play around with those who don't do what you want them to do. It's not nice, but it's not imperialism.

Imperialism implies control of one nation by another. Colonization is but a tool to exert control but by no means the only one as the US empire has demonstrated.

It might mean that in a certain sense, but which countries are NOT trying to do this? I mean, I'd say all of them are to some extent. If China goes to Lesotho then China is trying to use it's power or influence to get what it wants. But Lesotho is also using its power and influence to get what it wants too.

China wants votes in the UN, it got it from Lesotho, Lesotho wanted a nice brand new parliament building, it got it.

So using the term Imperialism in this manner doesn't get us very far.

The Latin Imperium means to rule over large areas. There's a difference, rule, rather than simply influence. The Age of Imperialism was from like 1600s through to WW2 where is managed to then disintegrate and was mostly over by 1980 (Zimbabwe for example gained independence in this year, although there are still imperial places, Gibraltar, Falkland Islands, and many other places the French, Dutch, British etc still have, and the US has Guam, Puerto Rico etc)

Imperialism here is not just influence over a country, but actively being in a country and manipulating it, taking resources, controlling the politics of the country, things like that.

China isn't doing that, at least not yet, and doesn't seem to aspire to that.

China IS trying to influence other countries. Read the China Daily if you want a good old laugh (or cry).

I read about Hong Kong and democracy. "Well, we chose the people they can vote for, but they still get to choose which Beijing stooge they want, so they've got Democracy, it's what they wanted so they should shut the fuck up" (well maybe they didn't exactly say it like that, but the meaning was the same.

China slams Japanese defense minister's remarks - China - Chinadaily.com.cn

Here's a nice one about the Nanjing Massacre.

China opens S China Sea website - China - Chinadaily.com.cn

This one is more relevant to the South China Seas thing

"China on Wednesday opened a website on the South China Sea, complete with historical maps, articles and research, according to the State Oceanic Administration (SOA)."

""We hope that this website will enable domestic and overseas people to better understand it and learn about the truth behind the 'dispute' over it.""

In other words, learn the truth as Beijing has decided to make it.

""The website is founded with the aim of positively publicizing our policies, claims, historical proof, legal basis and international cooperation while serving as a reliable channel for domestic and overseas government departments, research groups and individuals to learn about the South China Sea," said SOA spokesman Shi Qingfeng."

Yep, it's all a govt propaganda site designed to legitimize the ownership of islands China has already taken.

发现和命名-中国南海网

"Eastern Han Dynasty (AD 25 - A 220) Yang Fu book "foreign body" records: "Kawasaki head up the sea, shallow and more magnet." "Up the sea" as the title of the South China Sea in ancient China, "Kawasaki head" was ancient China called on the sea islands and reefs." (curtosy of Google translate).

All of it will be from China's perspective, anything that disproves, or at least shows the opposite of what China claims to "prove" its claim, will be completely missing.

Colonization and Imperialism differ in that one is about an Empire, the other is about colonies, not much difference, but a slight one.

The United States has between 700 and 800 military bases around the globe. Supported by a command structure broken up into geographical regions. All designed to protect american interests. Read american interests as its empire. Why do people try to deny the undeniable.

I'm not denying the US has a large military presence which is used to protect American interests.

What I'm saying is it isn't called Imperialism.