Chinese nationalists, Wumao Propaganda and the Rise of China

[Elegiac]

The burden of evidence is on the accuser, all you do is make claims, with zero proof chelly.

It's very easy to claim people have no proof if you just say their proof isn't real.

/yawn

Stop making excuses for ethnic cleansing. It's gauche.

[Ihavewaffles]

you are dealing in conspiracy theories, now go find your missing iraqi WMDs

[Elegiac]

you are dealing in conspiracy theories, now go find your missing iraqi WMDs

You mean the WMDs that every NGO and their dog was saying didn't exist, which is entirely the opposite of every NGO and their dog agreeing that Xinjiang is China's ethnic cleansing capital? Those WMDs?

Apples and oranges, bruh. Doesn't change the fact you are making excuses for ethnic cleansing.

[Ihavewaffles]

You mean the WMDs that every NGO and their dog was saying didn't exist, which is entirely the opposite of every NGO and their dog agreeing that Xinjiang is China's ethnic cleansing capital? Those WMDs?

Apples and oranges, bruh. Doesn't change the fact you are making excuses for ethnic cleansing.

Are you saying the word of a ngo (in ur pockets) is proof? lol?

[Elegiac]

Are you saying the word of a ngo (in ur pockets) is proof? lol?

Yes, and it's fairly telling you're repeating the same bullshit about them as was said about them when they pointed out that Therensienstadt was actually a concentration camp.

[Ihavewaffles]

The guy already rejected proof of reality when someone else linked proof of the genocide going on at Xinjiang.

There's no helping tankies like him or "both sides are just as bad" people like you. Which western mainstream media are you talking about? Because ho-boy there are thousands of different mainstream news in the west - compared to your single Soviet Pravda comparison.

Absolutely ridiculous the both of you. What's next? Are you going to deny there being concentration camps in North Korea? Are we all just blinded by western media and North Korea is actually heaven on earth?


Gee I wonder how many countries and mainstream media sources disagreed with there being WMDs in Iraq.

Get real mate.

You guys never linked any proof.

NEVER.

You guys say genocide, China says it's forcefully re-educating terrorists n extremists, while doesn't sound pc (neither is guantanamo bay) but neither is it "ethnic cleansing"

considering we are talking about china, especially how they can make decisions n put so much efforts when tackling pandemic, somehow they are control of xinjiang, somehow they are lots of uighurs still around, are the chinese shit at ethnic cleansing but good at everything else?

This is like the north korea starvation claims "they are all starving to death" year after YEAR, AFTER YEAR. Shouldn't they all be dead by now?

It doesn't add up. And why are there people coming out of those re-education camps having learned new skills n professions started working? Why give that to uighurs, weren't the chinese meant to kill 'em all??

[Elegiac]

You guys say genocide, China says it's forcefully re-educating terrorists n extremists

So, genocide then?

Genocide does not just mean "kill everyone", sweetheart. If you're going out of your way to eradicate their cultural practices and cultural identity, that is also genocide. See: The Stolen Generations.

[Ihavewaffles]

So, genocide then?

Genocide does not just mean "kill everyone", sweetheart. If you're going out of your way to eradicate their cultural practices and cultural identity, that is also genocide. See: The Stolen Generations.

Don't several EU countries prohibit headwear now? OMG EU IS DOING GENOCIDE!!!1111oneone

[uuuhname]

"reeducation doesn't count as genocide" uuuuh you sure about that?

[Elegiac]

Don't several EU countries prohibit headwear now?

Yes, and that's also bad.

Your whataboutism is noted, though.

[uuuhname]

Don't several EU countries prohibit headwear now? OMG EU IS DOING GENOCIDE!!!1111oneone

I mean it serves no purpose other than oppressing people different from you. this isn't the dunk you think it is.

[Elegiac]

I mean it serves no purpose other than oppressing people different from you. this isn't the dunk you think it is.

I really don't understand why they think trying to insult the West as a deflection tactic would work on people that regularly criticise the West anyway. Lol.

Some people do have consistent ethical principles, y'all.

[Easo]

So our local China expert avoided the implied question about how, exactly, do Chinese post those videos on Youtube, when it is blocked in the country for the average person? Interesting indeed...

You mean the WMDs that every NGO and their dog was saying didn't exist, which is entirely the opposite of every NGO and their dog agreeing that Xinjiang is China's ethnic cleansing capital? Those WMDs?

Apples and oranges, bruh. Doesn't change the fact you are making excuses for ethnic cleansing.

Technically, they did exist. Ask Kurds (best example why USA should have finished the job first time around). They were, however, dismantled some time before 2003 war, leading to the modern "they didn't exist" argument about reason for invasion being made up on a shaky ground.

I never said anything like that. Please point me to where I said that Baltic states were living good life under communism. Please do. What I do remember posting is that baltic states were piss poor during independence between WW1 and WW2, which is true, but extrapolating from that that communists were good is big straw man.

I wonder what counts as poor for you. Compared to whom, USSR? Lol. We were roughly at the same development level as Finland of the time. Next time you gonna go full Shalcker and say that they educated us and brought culture? xD

[Elegiac]

Technically, they did exist.

Technically I don't give a shit because I wasn't incorrect about them not existing by 2003, which is what was being referred to originally.

[Easo]

Technically I don't give a shit because I wasn't incorrect about them not existing by 2003, which is what was being referred to originally.

Chill out. I never said or implied you were incorrect.

[jonnysensible]

yo @Easo @Rasulis
you see this? its low on details tho https://www.defenseone.com/policy/20...-fight/184050/

[Easo]

yo @Easo @Rasulis
you see this? its low on details tho https://www.defenseone.com/policy/20...-fight/184050/

You just said it yourself - it is low on details. We have seen such articles countless times. Like the "mosquito fleet from Iran is gonna sink the proper warships of USN" which was floating around for years. For example, in this article there is a mention of hypersonic weaponry, the new scary all powerful weapon (lookin at you, Zircon, hype generated has reached stupid levels). What they don't tell is that said weaponry is basically still being tested by all nations who are developing them and it will be years until they are in service in respectable quantities.
This actually also could be an intel op by USA military, or it could be 146% real, we will never know (until China finally comes to Taiwan).
P.S.
That webpage really does not play very well with Chrome...

[Rasulis]

yo @Easo @Rasulis
you see this? its low on details tho https://www.defenseone.com/policy/20...-fight/184050/

Yes. This article expanded a bit on that.

'We're going to lose fast': U.S. Air Force held a war game that started with a Chinese biological attack

The interesting part of the whole exercise.

In the most recent war game, the Pentagon tested the impact of potential capabilities and military concepts that are still on the drawing board in many cases. The Blue Team, which represented U.S. forces, adopted a more defensive and dispersed posture less reliant on large, vulnerable bases, ports and aircraft carriers in a conflict with the Red Team, which represented China.

The strategy strongly favored large numbers of long-range, mobile strike systems, to include anti-ship cruise missile batteries, mobile rocket artillery systems, unmanned mini-submarines, mines and robust surface-to-air missile batteries for air defense. A premium was put on surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities for both early warning and accurate intelligence to enable quicker decisions by U.S. policymakers, and a more capable command-and-control system to coordinate the actions of more dispersed forces.

“We created a force that had resiliency at its core, and the Red Team looked at that force and knew that it would take a tremendous amount of firepower to knock it out,” said Hinote. The biggest insight of the war game, he said, was revealed when he talked afterward with the Red Team leader, who played the role of the PLA’s top general.

“The Red Team leader is the most experienced and aggressive officer in these war games across the Defense Department, and when he initially looked at the resiliency of our defensive posture both in Taiwan and the region, he said, ‘No, I’m not going to attack,’” recalled Hinote. “If we can design a force that creates that level of uncertainty and causes Chinese leaders to question whether they can accomplish their goals militarily, I think that’s what deterrence looks like in the future.”

The lessons learned from these exercises were less Abrams and F-16s, and more missiles, smart sea and land mines, and long-range land cruise missiles. From the recent flooding in China, we know that China's 87,000 dams are vulnerable, and there is no way that China can defend that many targets from cruise missile attacks.

[Kellhound]

yo @Easo @Rasulis
you see this? its low on details tho https://www.defenseone.com/policy/20...-fight/184050/

It basically had no details....

Without knowing the rules of engagement, or the force structures, or the exact scenario, there is little to learn from the article.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes. This article expanded a bit on that.

'We're going to lose fast': U.S. Air Force held a war game that started with a Chinese biological attack

The interesting part of the whole exercise.



The lessons learned from these exercises were less Abrams and F-16s, and more missiles, smart sea and land mines, and long-range land cruise missiles. From the recent flooding in China, we know that China's 87,000 dams are vulnerable, and there is no way that China can defend that many targets from cruise missile attacks.

Tanks and tactical land based aircraft have long had little place in a war against China. Really, the Army (and to a lesser extent the Air Force) would be there to ensure the US would endure casualties should China attempt to invade Taiwan. If the US had enough time to move heavy armor to Taiwan then the Army would be able to defend the beaches. The Chinese military would be facing the same issues of bases being targeted that the US would, so their local superiority may be fleeting. A smart US commander would also use this time to go on the offensive and take all of China's manned outposts in the SCS.

Also, the confirmed use of offensive biological warfare would likely result in the US retaliating with nuclear strikes.

[uuuhname]

Yeah, use those children's deaths to stick it to china.

because China sure is totally above doing that to a minority population...?