How CNN distorted the truth. You can tell from this famous "tank man" video

[Nilgiri]

That's interesting. You actually talked about Zhao and Chinese politics from that time with your Mum?

Yes because of HK problems now (before not as specific, just general china stuff from time to time).

We did live there for 9 or so years (in my childhood) and we have plenty of connection/contacts with HK still....but she didnt quite read into tianenmen etc like I did....to her CPC is more of a complete faceless monolith....whereas I know bit differently etc... so I bring up some examples. I think its first time I brought up zhao ziyang with her.

So yah she is quite fascinated by all the politics/history/economics kind of stuff I often digress to....because she follows the world news a lot so naturally I like to add some context when she brings up whatever (trump, brexit, geopolitics, tech etc) outside of her more grounded expertise.

This is good for me too, because I get an idea of what world news permeates more generally....because I dont follow the mainstream media take on things that closely anymore.

 

[beijingwalker]

What's sad is that many Chinese today think these protesters 'deserved' to be killed. You may argue that what the CPC did was necessary for stability, or you may think that these protesters are too naive to demand for democracy.

But these protesters truly wanted a better China from the bottom of their heart, no matter how idealistic or naive you think they are.

1:11

To say that people like them 'deserved' to be killed just because you disagree with their ideals for democracy, I feel sad for those who sacrificed in exchange for condemn from whom they are trying to fight for, and getting labelled as 'traitors'.

I don't think they were deserved to be killed, the casualties were very small anyway, comparing to 70 people being killed by gun violence in merely 72 hours in US. and I believe they truly wanted a better China, but what happened truly also plunged China into chaos and put the nation on the brink of anarchy and civil war, which would destroy China and make the ensuing China's development mirale impossible, I believe it's a small price to pay for China's unprecedented fast development and rise.

 

[KungFuLee]

What's sad is that many Chinese today think these protesters 'deserved' to be killed. You may argue that what the CPC did was necessary for stability, or you may think that these protesters are too naive to demand for democracy.

But these protesters truly wanted a better China from the bottom of their heart, no matter how idealistic or naive you think they are.

1:11

To say that people like them 'deserved' to be killed just because you disagree with their ideals for democracy, I feel sad for those who sacrificed in exchange for condemn from whom they are trying to fight for, and getting labelled as 'traitors'.

I don't think they deserved to die, I said that was a risk you take when you involve in something like that, and it wasn't like China is going to be very open arm with protestor to begin with, so these student know that they risk their life to do these protest, they know what will happen to them, and they do it, and then get killed. I mean how else do you expect to turn out differently? You protest in China and you will get bashed or arrested or worse, I mean how else would you expect?

I will say these student is extremely naïve, or ill informed, and most likely manipulated by these so-called student leader which basically almost all of them live outside China for a comfortable life now.

If you compare it to the situation we now have in Hong Kong, that is handled differently, but I wouldn't do what I did back in June 28 years later, because I know the risk by then is different.

I think there is a better way to make your point heard, and knowingly challenge a violent authoritative regime is well, quite a dumb move in my opinion. It most likely ends up dead and nothing get done.

I don't thing US regime is involved in every protest in the world, but US regime was trying to hijack protests in Beijing in 1989.

That is quite absurd to be honest

You know how much US government did to normalise relationship since 1980s? To a point China and US are enemy during the beginning of Vietnam war, to US selling Black Hawk Helicopter to China in 1987 (they are new technology back in 1980) You don't get to buy latest US tech if you are not close to the US regime. And you are saying US support or hijack these protest so they can shoot themselves on the foot and negate what they work for in the last 10 years?

China was US friend back in 1989, Allies even and there were talks for US to supply F-16 or F-15 to China back in 1980s. Saying CIA is involved in 1989 protest is like saying CIA is involve in UK Brexit demonstration...

1989 protest is probably one of the protest that do not have any CIA involvement, or basically you are accusing CIA trying to ruin what US government do, which is quite absurd to be honest

I don't think they were deserved to be killed, the casualties were very small anyway, comparing to 70 people being killed by gun violence in merely 72 hours in US. and I believe they truly wanted a better China, but what happened truly also plunged China into chaos and put the nation on the brink of anarchy and civil war, which would destroy China and make the ensuing China's development mirale impossible, I believe it's a small price to pay for China's unprecedented fast development and rise.

You are comparing Government sanctioned murder to crime. That's 2 different concept. Because everyone can do crime and you cannot stop crime from happening, unless we have what vanilla sky has. If you compare the people killed during riot to what US gun crime victim, you may as well compare to how many people the Japanese kill in Nanking during 72 hours

I can snap and go to China can kill any amount of people in 3 days if I so wish, yes I will be dead at the end of it, but I can certainly do that before the police catch me. Government sanction murder is different, you can only legally kill a certain amount of people for breaking the law without people looks at your government as a totalitarian regime.

You better comparison is US death Penalty. And they are no where near that number.

 

[Piotr]

That is quite absurd to be honest

You know how much US government did to normalise relationship since 1980s? To a point China and US are enemy during the beginning of Vietnam war, to US selling Black Hawk Helicopter to China in 1987 (they are new technology back in 1980) You don't get to buy latest US tech if you are not close to the US regime. And you are saying US support or hijack these protest so they can shoot themselves on the foot and negate what they work for in the last 10 years?

China was US friend back in 1989, Allies even and there were talks for US to supply F-16 or F-15 to China back in 1980s. Saying CIA is involved in 1989 protest is like saying CIA is involve in UK Brexit demonstration...

1989 protest is probably one of the protest that do not have any CIA involvement, or basically you are accusing CIA trying to ruin what US government do, which is quite absurd to be honest

You don’t understand how US empire of evil operate. They sold some weapons to China ? So what ? They also send weapons to Iraq under Saddam because they wanted war between Iraq and Iran. Only to invade Iraq a few years later.

“Friend” ? O really ? Has US any “friends” ? Japan had US military bases since the end of World War II, and was officially US ally in 1980s, but it didn’t stop US from imposing Plaza Accord on Japan ending period of rapid economic growth for Japan. US saw China as counterbalance to Soviet Union back in late 1970s and early 1980s. But in late 1980s when Soviet Union had massive internal problems they didn’t need China any more.

US empire is not a charity fund. They want global hegemony and don’t want competitors. They don’t want Russia, China or any other competitor to suceed.

Best US operatives were involved in trying to make protests violent: guys like James Lilley, George Soros, Gene Sharp and US organisations like CIA, NED, VoA. Violence during Tiananmen Square protests has US fingerprints all over.

From https://militarywatchmagazine.com/a...are-massacre-opinion-piece-by-dr-dennis-etler :
(...)
James R. Lilley, top CIA Asia operative, was U.S. ambassador to China before, during and after the Tiananmen incident. George Soros, instigator of later "color revolutions" had a China based NGO called the Fund for the Reform and Opening of China that supported the protests and General Secretary Zhao Ziyang - a neo-liberal in waiting who would later be called China's Gorbachev. Ambassador Lilley had a fascinating history, being born in China to a U.S. oil executive stationed there in the pre-WW2 years. He had a Chinese nanny and was thus a native speaker of Chinese. Returning to the United States before the U.S. entered WW2 he subsequently went to Phillips Exeter Academy prep school and Yale University. His fluency in Chinese and upbringing led him to the CIA where he became its top Asian operative. "As a CIA operative, Lilley worked in countries across Asia, including Laos, Japan, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and China. In Laos, he worked to undermine the Communist insurgency, and he helped to insert a number of CIA agents into China. By 1975, Lilley was appointed to the position of national intelligence officer for China, which made him the highest-ranked expert on China in the American intelligence community. Early in the administration of Ronald Reagan, he was appointed to the National Security Council, where he served as the senior expert on east Asia. From 1981-1984, he served as Director of the American Institute in Taiwan, which serves as the unofficial diplomatic liaison to the government of the Republic of China.." So much for Lilley.

George Soros' anti-communist credentials are also well-documented and his sponsorship of neo-liberal causes, think tanks and NGOs well known and documented. "Soros is a well-known supporter of progressive-liberal political causes. He played a significant role in the peaceful transition from communism to capitalism in Hungary (1984–89) and provided one of Europe's largest higher education endowments to Central European University in Budapest. Soros is also the chairman of the Open Society Foundations." As documented by Godfree Roberts in 'Tiananmen Square, 1989 – Revisited': “In 1986 Soros endowed his Fund for the Reform and Opening of China with one million dollars – a huge sum for China those days – to promote cultural and intellectual exchanges with Zhao’s Institute for Economic Structural Reform. In 1988 the National Endowment for Democracy opened two offices in China, gave regular seminars on democracy, sponsored select Chinese writers and publications and recruited Chinese students studying in US. In February 1989, two months before the CIA launched its Tiananmen destabilization campaign, President Bush paid his first and only visit to China.

“When the student protests erupted in late April the NED mailed thousands of inflammatory letters from Washington to recipients in China and aroused public opinion through Voice of America (VOA) shortwave radio broadcasts, in Mandarin, across China on the days of the protests. In Nanjing, university students had boom-boxes turned high as the VOA described events in China. “Deng had CIA strategist Gene Sharp arrested and expelled to British Hong Kong, whence he directed the insurrection, as he recounts in his memoir, Non-Violent Struggle in China. Another CIA operative, VOA’s Beijing chief, Alan Pessin, provided encouragement, provocation, strategic guidance and tactical advice in round-the-clock broadcasts and students who were there still talk of the VOA’s promised land of “freedom and democracy”. […]” So much for Soros.

 

[KungFuLee]

You don’t understand how US empire of evil operate. They sold some weapons to China ? So what ? They also send weapons to Iraq under Saddam because they wanted war between Iraq and Iran. Only to invade Iraq a few years later.

“Friend” ? O really ? Has US any “friends” ? Japan had US military bases since the end of World War II, and was officially US ally in 1980s, but it didn’t stop US from imposing Plaza Accord on Japan ending period of rapid economic growth for Japan. US saw China as counterbalance to Soviet Union back in late 1970s and early 1980s. But in late 1980s when Soviet Union had massive internal problems they didn’t need China any more.

US empire is not a charity fund. They want global hegemony and don’t want competitors. They don’t want Russia, China or any other competitor to suceed.

Best US operatives were involved in trying to make protests violent: guys like James Lilley, George Soros, Gene Sharp and US organisations like CIA, NED, VoA. Violence during Tiananmen Square protests has US fingerprints all over.

Wow, many thing that were wrong.

First of all, US did NOT sell weapon to Iraq until after 2003 after the American topple the Saddam Regime. Us sold weapon to Iran, under contra affair, which basically a trade off. The most American do during that period is help Saddam design and build Nuclear Power Plants and enrich uranium, which basically come back to bite them in the arse in 2003.

Second of all, US support of China is before the sunset of Soviet Russia. Nobody in the US government saw the SU collapse in 1991 (2 years after Tiananmen Square) You live in Poland, right? Ask around your country what do they see in Poland during 1989.

Third of all, this is where you probably lack the most. You don't even know the extend US goes to please China back in 1970s and 1980s, US was willing to help China to recapture/reunited the runaway province of Taiwan by agree to rearm China, that is where all the military hardware going to go, also there are massive technology influx back in ate 1980, which lead to industry boom in China, or else how else can China have all these industry coming out all of a sudden? The Chinese cannot even make raw tool back in early 1980s. US have move on from Taiwan to Mainland after normalisation of relation. The 80s is arguably the worse time for US-Taiwan relationship, only after 1989, US did refocus on Taiwan.

You speak like you were there in China during 1989, my parent was actually in Beijing in 1989, and they know what they saw. I went to a Pro-China secondary school in Hong Kong, even they don't say it was the US behind the 1989 protest, lol, and I have to be taught Chinese history by a Pole?

 

[Piotr]

Wow, many thing that were wrong.

First of all, US did NOT sell weapon to Iraq until after 2003 after the American topple the Saddam Regime. Us sold weapon to Iran, under contra affair, which basically a trade off. The most American do during that period is help Saddam design and build Nuclear Power Plants and enrich uranium, which basically come back to bite them in the arse in 2003.

You are wrong. Even wikipedia admit US did sold weapons to Iraq under Saddam:

"The United States sold Iraq over $200 million in helicopters, which were used by the Iraqi military in the war. These were the only direct U.S.-Iraqi military sales. At the same time, the U.S. provided substantial covert support for Saddam Hussein. The CIA directed non-U.S. origin hardware to Saddam Hussein's armed forces, "to ensure that Iraq had sufficient military weapons, ammunition and vehicles to avoid losing the Iran-Iraq war."[4] And "dual use" technology was transferred from the U.S. to Iraq."
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_aid_to_combatants_in_the_Iran–Iraq_War

Second of all, US support of China is before the sunset of Soviet Russia.

Sunset of Soviet Union was for everybody to see already in 1989.

Nobody in the US government saw the SU collapse in 1991 (2 years after Tiananmen Square)

You are naive by saying that US government are bunch of idiots.

Third of all, this is where you probably lack the most. You don't even know the extend US goes to please China back in 1970s and 1980s, US was willing to help China to recapture/reunited the runaway province of Taiwan by agree to rearm China, that is where all the military hardware going to go, also there are massive technology influx back in ate 1980, which lead to industry boom in China, or else how else can China have all these industry coming out all of a sudden? The Chinese cannot even make raw tool back in early 1980s. US have move on from Taiwan to Mainland after normalisation of relation. The 80s is arguably the worse time for US-Taiwan relationship, only after 1989, US did refocus on Taiwan.

So you are basicaly saying that US wanted China to become strong and become major competitor to US. How naive you are.

You speak like you were there in China during 1989, my parent was actually in Beijing in 1989, and they know what they saw. I went to a Pro-China secondary school in Hong Kong, even they don't say it was the US behind the 1989 protest, lol, and I have to be taught Chinese history by a Pole?

I am free to express my opinion. I already proved you were wrong.

 

[Mista]

I don't think they deserved to die

Well I don't mean you, but some other Chinese. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[Mista]

I don't think they were deserved to be killed

No true patriotic Chinese who love his fellow countrymen will think they deserved to be killed for holding different political views. Those who think so are being keyboard warriors who probably sacrificed nothing for the country, that's why it's easy for them to put down other peoples' sacrifices.

the casualties were very small anyway, comparing to 70 people being killed by gun violence in merely 72 hours in US

These are two very different concepts which I'm surprised that you, from Beijing, actually conflated. That's like saying millions of people die in China every year anyway, what's killing a few hundred or a few thousand more? So many died in WW2, what's wrong with another revolution to kill a couple more?

You do know it's these sort of mentality why HK and Taiwan doesn't want to integrate or identify politically with the mainland?

I believe they truly wanted a better China, but what happened truly also plunged China into chaos and put the nation on the brink of anarchy and civil war, which would destroy China and make the ensuing China's development mirale impossible, I believe it's a small price to pay for China's unprecedented fast development and rise.

Hunger strikes and sit-ins are common in the rest of the world. The protest could've been put to rest by employing non-lethal means, such as employing water cannon or tear gas. There isn't a need to bring in battle tanks to escalate the situation and shoot real bullets to clear the square.

Even from a purely utilitarian view with zero regards for human lives to weigh the benefits and costs, it's still a bad decision.

Economic and military sanctions from the international community swiftly followed, and many of these sanctions are still in place today. Respect and trust in the international community fell and many countries became wary of a rising China. And of course, the perception of the mainland turned for the worse in HK and Taiwan, and it's still influencing the course of events today.

With the sanctions, can you be sure that China wouldn't grow faster otherwise?
Wouldn't there be lesser prejudice in the world, whether it's justified or unjustified, against China today?

Even the Global Times implied that China wasn't 'mature' and 'sophisticated' enough at that time to employ such drastic methods.

 

[beijingwalker]

These are two very different concepts which I'm surprised that you, from Beijing, actually conflated. That's like saying millions of people die in China every year anyway, what's killing a few hundred or a few thousand more? So many died in WW2, what's wrong with another revolution to kill a couple more?
.

I was not just saying the number was very small and nowhere even lose to what the western media portrayed as a "massacre", it's a necessary measure to restore law and order so the country won't plunge into total chaos and another civil war. if the government just let them, millions or tens of millions could die from conflicts like what happened right after collapse of Qing dynasty. The majority of the Chinese population believe this and foreigners have no say on what we Chinese should do or believe, we know it much better and we are the ones to suffer or enjoy by what we do, not foreigners, so we are also much more careful.

With the sanctions, can you be sure that China wouldn't grow faster otherwise?
Wouldn't there be lesser prejudice in the world, whether it's justified or unjustified, against China today?

Check out what happened in the former super power USSR a couple of years after 1989, see where they were and where we were then and where we are and where they are now.

You do know it's these sort of mentality why HK and Taiwan doesn't want to integrate or identify politically with the mainland?

Not all of them, some of them, it's quite natural, Taiwanese didn't want to be part of China after WW2 after being under Japanese rule for 50 years, when you colonize a place for so long you can change their mentality and loyalty, that's why we see many Hong kong protestors waving UK flags. What 国民党 did in Taiwan was not as nice as China's policy toward Hong Kong now.

 

[Mista]

I was not just saying the number was very small and nowhere even lose to what the western media portrayed as a "massacre", it's a necessary measure to restore law and order so the country won't plunge into total chaos and another civil war. if the government just let them, millions or tens of millions could die from conflicts like what happened right after collapse of Qing dynasty. The majority of the Chinese population believe this and foreigners have no say on what we Chinese should do or believe, we know it much better and we are the ones to suffer or enjoy by what we do, not foreigners, so we are also much more careful.


Check out what happened in the former super power USSR a couple of years after 1989, see where they were and where we were then and where we are and where they are now.

So you're saying that if tanks were not rolled in, millions could die and China would've collapse like the USSR?

 

[beijingwalker]

So you're saying that if tanks were not rolled in, millions could die and China would've collapse like the USSR?

It could happen, it happened before in China in late Qing dynasty and it happened to other countreis which share many traits in common with China.

China always needs a strong, powerful and centralized government, it always spelled disaster when China didn't have one throughout the whole Chinese long history, the Tiananmen students were not happy with the government and wanted to overthrow it, but they didn't have alternatives either, the vaccum of power is always doomsday for China, all Chinese provinces or even cities declared independence right after the fall of Qing dynasty, it took over half a century and hundreds of millions lives for China to regain her feet as a real nation under Mao, that's what we Chinese people don't like to go through again.

 

[Piotr]

It could happen, it happened before in China in late Qing dynasty and it happened to other countreis which share many traits in common with China.

Nobody can beat US regime when it comes to sending tanks and other heary equipment to quell riots.

M41 Walker Bulldog on the streets of Detroit during the 1967 Detroit Riot (source)

A Michigan National Guard armored personnel carrier stands guard along with five tanks and a small fleet of helicopters in an attempt to quell the rioting in Detroit in July 1967. (source)

The difference is that China only killed US agents that attacked soldiers, while US kills peaceful protesters.

 

[beijingwalker]

Nobody can beat US regime when it comes to sending tanks and other heary equipment to quell riots.
View attachment 574560 M41 Walker Bulldog on the streets of Detroit during the 1967 Detroit Riot (source)

View attachment 574563 A Michigan National Guard armored personnel carrier stands guard along with five tanks and a small fleet of helicopters in an attempt to quell the rioting in Detroit in July 1967. (source)

The difference is that China only killed US agents that attacked soldiers, while US kills peaceful protesters.

US is better at sending tanks to other countries though, it creates so many regional conflicts all across the world and then sells weapons to them and make them kill each other, sometimes US also travel to do the killings themselves.Global polls show that the world sees US the biggest threat to the world peace and they have the shame to talk about China.

 

[KungFuLee]

You are wrong. Even wikipedia admit US did sold weapons to Iraq under Saddam:

"The United States sold Iraq over $200 million in helicopters, which were used by the Iraqi military in the war. These were the only direct U.S.-Iraqi military sales. At the same time, the U.S. provided substantial covert support for Saddam Hussein. The CIA directed non-U.S. origin hardware to Saddam Hussein's armed forces, "to ensure that Iraq had sufficient military weapons, ammunition and vehicles to avoid losing the Iran-Iraq war."[4] And "dual use" technology was transferred from the U.S. to Iraq."
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_aid_to_combatants_in_the_Iran–Iraq_War

lol, so it appear in Wikipedia, and it must be right?

Tell me, which type of Helicopter did the US transfer to Iraq andd how many?

Sunset of Soviet Union was for everybody to see already in 1989.

Well, at least NOT according to the memoir of the last Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev

In his memoir, he stated the 2 main reason why Soviet Union failed, it's Perestroika, which lead to the revolution of 1989 and the political fallout of Chernobyl, both were after Tiananmen Protest. Revolution of 1989 started the same day as the massacre, 4th June 1989, and the Chernobyl incident happens in 26th April, 1989, then handling is much later on. While the Tiananmen Massacre was in 4th June, 1989, the protest that leads to it started back in 15th April, 1989.

You are naive by saying that US government are bunch of idiots.

And you are saying either US directly caused the Soviet to dissolve or the US can see into the future.

So you are basicaly saying that US wanted China to become strong and become major competitor to US. How naive you are.

No, US want to control China like they control Taiwan, by making them defence partner, which is like what the US has been doing, by selling them arms and pulling them into a dependence circle with the US. Which is the same thing you lot have been accuse of US doing in all these post.

China was not as big and develop back in early 1980, so US try to target it by selling arms and making promises, for better and for worse, the two relation break down and China develop on her own, and but this time with US injected money, US injected technology.

Or else how do you think China can turn its head from a Farming and Agricultures based society in early-mid 1980 to Industry Powerhouse in just 10 years time in the 1990s? By Miracle?

I am free to express my opinion. I already proved you were wrong.

Of course you are free to express your opinion, but you have proven nothing. The only thing we know about you is that most of what you know is wrong, and you have thick skin.

Oh one more thing, CIA support Non-States Insurgency such as the Kurd Resistance movement in Iraq during the 80s, The 2506 Brigade during The Bay of Pigs invasion, the Mujahedeen during Afghan Soviet War, Vietminh (Later turn into Vietcong) during WW2 and so on. They do not support unarmed Student Movement, because they cannot win an insurgent fight, and during the whole world history, only one type of ideology is known to support Student Movement, and that is communism, that is how Communism started and coincidently, this is what the world have been accused of China doing at the moment.

Well I don't mean you, but some other Chinese. Sorry for the confusion.

No problem, you don't need to apologise.

 

[Piotr]

lol, so it appear in Wikipedia, and it must be right?

Tell me, which type of Helicopter did the US transfer to Iraq andd how many?

US transfered 60 military helicopters MD 500 to Saddam Hussain. You see how easy it is to prove you were wrong.

Well, at least NOT according to the memoir of the last Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev

So Gorbachev claimed it and it must be right?

And you are saying either US directly caused the Soviet to dissolve or the US can see into the future.

Yes US regime played big part in dismemberment of the Soviet Union. Since the end of World War II US supported pro nazi Banderovites from the Ukraine. And immediately after the fall of the Soviet Union US worked to destabilise Russia eg. by supporting terrorists attacking Russia.

No, US want to control China like they control Taiwan, by making them defence partner, which is like what the US has been doing, by selling them arms and pulling them into a dependence circle with the US. Which is the same thing you lot have been accuse of US doing in all these post.

China was not as big and develop back in early 1980, so US try to target it by selling arms and making promises, for better and for worse, the two relation break down and China develop on her own, and but this time with US injected money, US injected technology.



Or else how do you think China can turn its head from a Farming and Agricultures based society in early-mid 1980 to Industry Powerhouse in just 10 years time in the 1990s? By Miracle?

You are free to think that way. And what it has to do with US efforts to hijack protests in China? I already proved that US was involved. Another prof of US involvement is that some of protesters fled to US.

Of course you are free to express your opinion, but you have proven nothing.

I proved that your claim that US didn't sell weapons to Saddam was false.

The only thing we know about you is that most of what you know is wrong,

Where exactly was I wrong ? Prove it if you can, like I proved you were wrong.

and you have thick skin.

It is you who have thick skin.