China Lost World War II

[Viva_Viet]

lol, I've taught graduate classes on Psychology of Political Science, bro.

And yes, I know quite a bit of communism. But perhaps i should read more into it, bro. I could always learn more ... he he he.

Those who can, do; those who can't, teach . (hope thats a good joke, bro ...but I still cant stop laughing )

 

[Place Of Space]

我怀疑什么了？你说的完全就牛头不对马嘴，要是日本人占领了中国能像满人一样被同化成中国人？全中国都说日语了还哪来的中国？

Yes, they would be assimilated the same as Manchurians were. We are just joking here, you know. Why it's necessary to argue for the illusary thing with us? Relax.

 

[Aepsilons]

I know, I know. Actually I prefer to Republic Vietnam's win, but it's worthless to say these things nowadays. Republic Vietnam politicians wouldn't filled the Vietnam history book with "Vietnamese has been doing that for thousands of years."

I live in China, I understand communism more than you. Communist always like to describe them as tragic image, suppressed by lots of "mountains", such as the rich, the feudalist, the imperialism. Vietnamese has been doing that for thousands of years. Doing what? Copy the Chinese communist view of history. The difference is unfortunately the imperialism Vietnamese described is China. Lol, China teach Vietnam to hate China, oooops.

Perhaps its best to adopt a more sympathetic view of the Vietnamese social context , namely the Vietnamese anti-imperialist struggle with the Japanese, French, American, and to an extent, the Khmer Rouge. You have to understand that the Vietnamese , well modern Vietnamese, social construct is not a purely synthetic to China's constructivism, but , rather, is a reactionary provision to external forces that have impeded Vietnamese State Identity. I suppose China hasn't been much of an existential threat to Vietnam, so to say, since the 1850s. The 1850s onward, I think Vietnam's greatest existential threat was French Imperialism, the Japanese Imperialism, second was the notion of Foreign Adventurist Interventionism (America in SVN), and to a lesser extent the role of China in Vietnam's Policy of Stabilizing Kampuchea (Cambodia) from Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge Regime.

Lastly, I would reiterate you adopt a more sympathetic constructivist view. It would diffuse misunderstanding, garner more trust, and facilitate and cultivate an environment for healthy debate and discussion rather than the typical repudiation.

Those who can, do; those who can't, teach . (hope thats a good joke, bro ...but I still cant stop laughing )

Well, in my solemn defense, I never grew up in a Communist State. I grew up in a Democracy all my life (Japan) and then for the past 10 years in the United States. So , that said, I can only infer knowledge from readings and application of political theories. I suppose you and other Vietnamese would have the ability to offer more grass-roots level application.

 

[Beidou2020]

Japan LOST WW2 and China WON WW2. Japan at its absolute best with 70% of its army invading China still lost to China at its weakest.

Now that China is getting strong, Japan is fast becoming irrelevant.

China has UNSC veto power along with the other victorious allies in WW2. That's the only thing that matters from that war nowadays, and the losers don't have veto power.

China will continue to get stronger and Japan will rot into the dustbin of history. Japan will be back being China's b*tch.

 

[DoubanJam.Yee]

Nope. Communist CN-VN-Cuba are still alive and at least VN still using communist ideal, its really usefull to widen our vision and help us predict correctly what will happen in about 10 years

CN may use wrong Communist ideal, thats why its pple's vision still so short (they could not predict the fall of CNY like VNese)

WOW! Chinese pple's vision still so short! yes very short. I guess just 10 years opening-up earlier than Viet.

 

[Abacin]

Communism has not failed. In 18th century, when the first republic of France was overturned, people might claim that republic was dead. But after 200 years, most countries in the world are republic. Great revolution in human history never achieved by a single try. Just like Confucian, when it was born, no kingdoms liked it. But after 200 years, it was the dominant ideology in China.
Communism just need some evolution, just as Capitalism evolves too.
Soviet Union (Communism 1.0) beated Europe Capitalism 1.0
United States learned communist ideas such as social security and evolved into Capitalism 2.0 and beated Soviet Union Communism 1.0
Now China learned market economy from capitalism and evolved into Communism 2.0 and competing with United states Capitalism 2.0

United States is leading but China is clearly quickly catching. Since this is an ideology competition, both sides know whoever make its own people better will be the winner. So the competition is benefiting people on both sides. The 2.0 competition will focus more on economy, not military. Japan's dream to create a cold war in Asia is doomed.

 

[Place Of Space]

Perhaps its best to adopt a more sympathetic view of the Vietnamese social context , namely the Vietnamese anti-imperialist struggle with the Japanese, French, American, and to an extent, the Khmer Rouge. You have to understand that the Vietnamese , well modern Vietnamese, social construct is not a purely synthetic to China's constructivism, but , rather, is a reactionary provision to external forces that have impeded Vietnamese State Identity. I suppose China hasn't been much of an existential threat to Vietnam, so to say, since the 1850s. The 1850s onward, I think Vietnam's greatest existential threat was French Imperialism, the Japanese Imperialism, second was the notion of Foreign Adventurist Interventionism (America in SVN), and to a lesser extent the role of China in Vietnam's Policy of Stabilizing Kampuchea (Cambodia) from Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge Regime.

Lastly, I would reiterate you adopt a more sympathetic constructivist view. It would diffuse misunderstanding, garner more trust, and facilitate and cultivate an environment for healthy debate and discussion rather than the typical repudiation.

No, no, no, the real past history was different. It's not Vietnam anti-imperialist struggle with Khmer Rouge, it's Vietnam annexed Khmer Rouge. China and Vietnam's border kept the certain area for thousand years, near the Friendship Gate.

As to China, the Great Wall was not build for resisting north nomad, it's attacking tool. Lol, China change the history view, you know.

I have said, the communist had to describe them as tragic image in order to get supports from nationality. You know, when most communism nations faced the toppled by powerful America, they have no other choice.

 

[Aepsilons]

Badly, the hypothesis has become the source of your self-comfort mentality, "that is the most glorious moment of Japan." pity that is just fictional content in the mind of Japanese indoormen.

Trust me i have no self pity, its not like I lived through the Inter-War Years. And to correct you, in my view the Inter-War Years was the most destructive time in Japanese history. If i had to choose an area in Japanese chronology that represented the 'Zenith' of Japanese culture and growth -- it would have been during the Kamakura Jidai 鎌倉時代 , which was from the 12th century to 14th century CE.

 

[Viva_Viet]

Perhaps its best to adopt a more sympathetic view of the Vietnamese social context , namely the Vietnamese anti-imperialist struggle with the Japanese, French, American, and to an extent, the Khmer Rouge. You have to understand that the Vietnamese , well modern Vietnamese, social construct is not a purely synthetic to China's constructivism, but , rather, is a reactionary provision to external forces that have impeded Vietnamese State Identity. I suppose China hasn't been much of an existential threat to Vietnam, so to say, since the 1850s. The 1850s onward, I think Vietnam's greatest existential threat was French Imperialism, the Japanese Imperialism, second was the notion of Foreign Adventurist Interventionism (America in SVN), and to a lesser extent the role of China in Vietnam's Policy of Stabilizing Kampuchea (Cambodia) from Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge Regime.

Lastly, I would reiterate you adopt a more sympathetic constructivist view. It would diffuse misunderstanding, garner more trust, and facilitate and cultivate an environment for healthy debate and discussion rather than the typical repudiation.



Well, in my solemn defense, I never grew up in a Communist State. I grew up in a Democracy all my life (Japan) and then for the past 10 years in the United States. So , that said, I can only infer knowledge from readings and application of political theories. I suppose you and other Vietnamese would have the ability to offer more grass-roots level application.

Cnese are still living in delusion as their people before WW2, they try to convince that communist VN is just a small copy of CN (just like they believed JP is a small copy of CN ) . Lu xun worte "The True Story of Ah Q" and hope Cnese could wake up and get out of delusion...but no use...

 

[Abacin]

One more example. Jesus Christ. He was crucified by Roman empire. But still Christian became the dominant ideology of Western civilization.

 

[Aepsilons]

No, no, no, the real past history was different. It's not Vietnam anti-imperialist struggle with Khmer Rouge, it's Vietnam annexed Khmer Rouge. China and Vietnam's border kept the certain area for thousand years, near the Friendship Gate.

Well can you blame the Vietnamese reaction? Prior to Vietnam's decision to invade Cambodia, the Cambodian leader Pol Pot had initiated his military to strike border regions with Vietnam and even launched an invasion to take Phu Quc island (which was then Vietnam-administered). I suppose the application to this aggression would be correlative to the 1962 Sino-Indian Border War wherein the Indian Army mobilized forces past the MacMahon Line, and into Chinese-declared territory. What was China's reaction to that? Was it peace and diplomatic council or was it a full offensive mobilization? You know the response from Beijing was the latter. So, can you blame Vietnam's decision to strike Phnom Penh and take out the Khmer Rouge (which was responsible for self-genocide ; killing 2 million of their own people)?

Please refer to the Killing Fields,
Cambodian genocide - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


For all intents and purposes, the Vietnamese did a favor for the entire Khmer people by taking out the Khmer Rouge.

 

[XiaoYaoZi]

Communism has not failed. In 18th century, when the first republic of France was overturned, people might claim that republic was dead. But after 200 years, most countries in the world are republic. Great revolution in human history never achieved by a single try. Just like Confucian, when it was born, no kingdoms liked it. But after 200 years, it was the dominant ideology in China.
Communism just need some evolution, just as Capitalism evolves too.
Soviet Union (Communism 1.0) beated Europe Capitalism 1.0
United States learned communist ideas such as social security and evolved into Capitalism 2.0 and beated Soviet Union Communism 1.0
Now China learned market economy from capitalism and evolved into Communism 2.0 and competing with United states Capitalism 2.0

United States is leading but China is clearly quickly catching. Since this is an ideology competition, both sides know whoever make its own people better will be the winner. So the competition is benefiting people on both sides. The 2.0 competition will focus more on economy, not military. Japan's dream to create a cold war in Asia is doomed.

Chess can never become the chess players, that will never happen. That is the fate of chess.

 

[Place Of Space]

Well can you blame the Vietnamese reaction? Prior to Vietnam's decision to invade Cambodia, the Cambodian leader Pol Pot had initiated his military to strike border regions with Vietnam and even launched an invasion to take Phu Quc island (which was then Vietnam-administered). I suppose the application to this aggression would be correlative to the 1962 Sino-Indian Border War wherein the Indian Army mobilized forces past the MacMahon Line, and into Chinese-declared territory. What was China's reaction to that? Was it peace and diplomatic council or was it a full offensive mobilization? You know the response from Beijing was the latter. So, can you blame Vietnam's decision to strike Phnom Penh and take out the Khmer Rouge (which was responsible for self-genocide ; killing 2 million of their own people)?

Please refer to the Killing Fields,
Cambodian genocide - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


For all intents and purposes, the Vietnamese did a favor for the entire Khmer people by taking out the Khmer Rouge.

You didn't read the posts. Do you understand he said "Vietnam has been doing that for thousands of years"?
We were not talking about the modern history.

 

[Aepsilons]

One more example. Jesus Christ. He was crucified by Roman empire. But still Christian became the dominant ideology of Western civilization.

I suppose one should consider the social and theological answers Christianity provided for the Roman Empire that the latter's own domestic religion failed to provide. I think one aspect that drew people to Christianity in the Roman World was that Christianity , well, at least the message, was that it provided a sense of Liberty. I suppose this was magnanimous considering during such times , everyone was either a slave or threatened with shear impunity by the Awesome Absolutist Powers of the Roman Senate and the Emperor. In a civil society that was so layered and built upon social classes; Christianity offered a proto-socialist vantage point by offering believers an ideation of equality before an Almighty, Omnicient, Omnipresent, All-Loving, All-Forgiving Deity.

 

[Viva_Viet]

Well can you blame the Vietnamese reaction? Prior to Vietnam's decision to invade Cambodia, the Cambodian leader Pol Pot had initiated his military to strike border regions with Vietnam and even launched an invasion to take Phu Quc island (which was then Vietnam-administered). I suppose the application to this aggression would be correlative to the 1962 Sino-Indian Border War wherein the Indian Army mobilized forces past the MacMahon Line, and into Chinese-declared territory. What was China's reaction to that? Was it peace and diplomatic council or was it a full offensive mobilization? You know the response from Beijing was the latter. So, can you blame Vietnam's decision to strike Phnom Penh and take out the Khmer Rouge (which was responsible for self-genocide ; killing 2 million of their own people)?

Please refer to the Killing Fields,
Cambodian genocide - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


For all intents and purposes, the Vietnamese did a favor for the entire Khmer people by taking out the Khmer Rouge.

Correct, Not to mention that Pol Pot is Chinese-Khmer, Ieng Sary is VNese-Khmer etc

We dont annex Kam, CN should blame hiself first when leting those bad Chinese to attack and massacre Kinh-native Khmer ethnics VNese before 1979.