No Nuclear Limit: China

[S10]

Sorry...But as much as I would like to, I do not read Chinese. This is primarily an English speaking forum. Post your sources in English. And...You may want to direct this to your pal who originally claimed that the PLA does not have a conscription program.

Well I am sure you can use google translate, since this is Chinese law. Trying to throw out excuse that it was not in English is quite pathetic on your part really. You can dodge the so called "conscription" by simply telling the recruiter you do not wish to go. It's not as if they are short on willing candidates.

And that is not good.

And that was more than 3 years ago.

A curious statement. Of course the NCO corps does not contain commissioned officers. Sounds like you do not know what you are talking about.

Where did I say NCO corp include officers? Is that funny voice in your head telling you more things now?

Here is what you do not understand...In an all volunteer force with at least half of the first-term enlistees reenlisted, and with a sufficient time in service requirement for that first term, the force would not have such an concentration of institutional knowledge into one group. We are not talking about a commando unit where all members are NCOs because they must have experience to even apply as candidates. We want those institutional and technical knowledges to be dynamic, laterally and vertically. Time to conduct training does not equal to having students to train and the more technically challening fields, the more time it will require to train new students. What is the ratio of conscripts who decide to reenlist versus those who decide not? Will the number of those who chose to reenlist compensate for the number of continuing retirees from the upper enlisted ranks? If not, then the enlisted force will inevitably have this gross disparity of NCOs versus the lower ranks and a declining number of new minds to transfer the institutional knowledge. A war's attrition rate will deplete the ranks of those with institutional knowledge faster than they could remain alive to pass it on. So regardless of the force being all volunteer or conscripts, either increase the time in service requirement or suffer the consequences at the worst time.

What I have been saying is proven over and over and over throughout history and all the world's major successful militaries, the ones that managed to project their power and dominate their enemies. In times of national emergencies, of course everyone will rally behind the flag and willing to make sacrifices. But in peace, an all volunteer force is the best guarantor of a high quality military for deterrence and increased odds of success in the event of that national emergency. What I see here is typical behavior of letting one's nationalism overrode one's common sense when presented with reasonable arguments.

The PLA is composed of a all volunteer force, comprised of commissioned officers, contract service NCOs and willing "conscripts". The number and ratio of NCOs are steadily increasing each years since the mid 1980's. The educational level of new recruits as well as the military educational system has contineously evolved, sometimes even accelerated by world events. You do not get to pick whether you reenlist when your 3 years term is up, the unit that you served in does. Your statement tells you that you have no idea how the Chinese system works, and yet you continue to rant on.

Since troops decommissioned can be recalled in times of war, their previous military training ensures they can adjust back to the life more quickly and with little training compared to a civilian in case of war.

Wrong...The US Selective Service Registration program in no way qualify as a conscription. A conscription policy does not mean everyone are automatically inducted into service. There is something called SELECTIVE CONSCRIPTION and this is what the PLA is doing. The American program does not require the person to present himself for examination. He does not even need a Social Security number. He just need to let the government know he is available for military service. He is the one doing the selection between offers.

You present yourself for registration and examination, then asked whether you want to go. If not, you get sent home and that's the end of it. No one puts a gun to the back of your head. Aside from being required to go through the trouble of visiting the recruiter, how is it different than being required to fill in a piece of paper?

And yet we have a higher than %50 retention rate across the board. It pays to have some 'sucker' programs, especially when it paid off, as in Desert Storm that shocked the PLA into changes. But if life in the PLA is so good, then would that not be enough to offset any conscription policy or even a law?

Trumpeting about retention rates means little. Promotion of Chinese NCOs are performance based, with only the top performing soldiers being offered a contract. If you bothered to read China's militar doctrine, you should know that they've always kept a mass reserve of troops. The government has the option of actually implementing full conscription in case of a mass conflict. Life in the PLA is good for those that are good enough to earn a contract, otherwise you return to your previous life.

That does not mean their attendance is mandatory.

Don't talk of things you have little ideas about.

Of course you made such an implication. Here...

The word 'even' implied that such assignments are selective and therefore that higher PME is either an option for the individual to exercise, or those assignments are at the commanders' discretions. For US, there are no options.

For example...

Enlisted professional military education: Air Force - Air Force Careers - Air Force Times

Not only about PME, senior US military NCOs of all branches have university degrees and some gone as high as Doctorate. Looks to me you are ignorant about the differences between professional military education (PME) versus university level education. Take some time and read up on them. So either YOU are wrong and that the PLA does require its senior NCOs to attend PME, or that the PLA is being shortsighted with this selective PME policy. Which is it?

No NCOs get commissioned as officers in United States after they started their career? And you claimed to have spend time in the military? Heh I think I found my cheap laugh of the day. It was you that failed to properly interprete my statement, which a reasonable person would have little trouble of doing. Military academies are not to be used interchangebly with NCO schools in China.

士官学校 = NCO School
军官院校 = military academies

A conscript reject is calling a 10-yr veteran 'ignorant' about the military...

Let's see, I was 10 years old when I left China, and I am a conscript reject? Hmm, something about that story doesn't add up. If I had to take a guess, you were a 10 year veteran mental health patient somewhere.

 

[below_freezing]

Well I am sure you can use google translate, since this is Chinese law. Trying to throw out excuse that it was not in English is quite pathetic on your part really. You can dodge the so called "conscription" by simply telling the recruiter you do not wish to go. It's not as if they are short on willing candidates.


And that was more than 3 years ago.


Where did I say NCO corp include officers? Is that funny voice in your head telling you more things now?


The PLA is composed of a all volunteer force, comprised of commissioned officers, contract service NCOs and willing "conscripts". The number and ratio of NCOs are steadily increasing each years since the mid 1980's. The educational level of new recruits as well as the military educational system has contineously evolved, sometimes even accelerated by world events. You do not get to pick whether you reenlist when your 3 years term is up, the unit that you served in does. Your statement tells you that you have no idea how the Chinese system works, and yet you continue to rant on.

Since troops decommissioned can be recalled in times of war, their previous military training ensures they can adjust back to the life more quickly and with little training compared to a civilian in case of war. I would even go


You present yourself for registration and examination, then asked whether you want to go. If not, you get sent home and that's the end of it. No one puts a gun to the back of your head. Aside from being required to go through the trouble of visiting the recruiter, how is it different than being required to fill in a piece of paper?


Trumpeting about retention rates means little. Promotion of Chinese NCOs are performance based, with only the top performing soldiers being offered a contract. If you bothered to read China's militar doctrine, you should know that they've always kept a mass reserve of troops. The government has the option of actually implementing full conscription in case of a mass conflict. Life in the PLA is good for those that are good enough to earn a contract, otherwise you return to your previous life.


Don't talk of things you have little ideas about.


No NCOs get commissioned as officers in United States after they started their career? And you claimed to have spend time in the military? Heh I think I found my cheap laugh of the day. It was you that failed to properly interprete my statement, which a reasonable person would have little trouble of doing. Military academies are not to be used interchangebly with NCO schools in China.

士官学校 = NCO School
军官院校 = military academies


Let's see, I was 10 years old when I left China, and I am a conscript reject? Hmm, something about that story doesn't add up. If I had to take a guess, you were a 10 year veteran mental health patient somewhere.

Forget it. He's a cold war era conscript radar technician that still never got over North Vietnam rolling over his regime and freeing the slaves.

 

[Tin Man]

Forget it. He's a cold war era conscript radar technician that still never got over North Vietnam rolling over his regime and freeing the slaves.

You are nothing more than a racist who expects vietnamese to be subversient to you. First of all, he is an american. Secondly, he is/used to be a soldier and much more qualified than you when it comes to defence. As for me, being a soldier myself, cannot stand to see another being subjected to abuse and racial prejudice. Online or not.

 

[tanlixiang28776]

You are nothing more than a racist who expects vietnamese to be subversient to you. First of all, he is an american. Secondly, he is/used to be a soldier and much more qualified than you when it comes to defence. As for me, being a soldier myself, cannot stand to see another being subjected to abuse and racial prejudice. Online or not.

Gambit is a hardcore racist himself. When I first joined the forum he constantly attacked my credibility by calling me a communist and racist before even my 10th post just because I am a "Chinese boy".

I don't appreciate racism and I feel no sympathy for a person that does exactly what he tells others not to. Read some of his posts before now and you'll understand.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Gambit is a hardcore racist himself. When I first joined the forum he constantly attacked my credibility by calling me a communist and racist before even my 10th post just because I am a "Chinese boy".

I don't appreciate racism but I feel no sympathy for a person that does exactly what he tells others not to.

Exactly right.

 

[Akasa]

You are nothing more than a racist who expects vietnamese to be subversient to you. First of all, he is an american. Secondly, he is/used to be a soldier and much more qualified than you when it comes to defence. As for me, being a soldier myself, cannot stand to see another being subjected to abuse and racial prejudice. Online or not.

Oh, so since he used to be a soldier, he's qualified to insult forum members and Chinese nationals whenever he wants to?

Aren't I glad he wasn't a politician instead.

 

[gambit]

Read it carefully I didn't call him a gook,

I have...And I said you used that derogative word unnecessarily. I doubt that you have the balls to stand up to your fellow Chinese should any of them resort to racist attacks against me. Why for when you did pretty much zilch when those attacks were personal? Chinese solidarity means too much for you even in the face of a wrong. If you do not have the courage to stand up for what is right and reasonable in this electronic arena, I doubt you have the spine to stand up for the same in real life.

Buddy we don't care if you're nice to us,...

That is a laugh. But it is also revealing in that it proved you Chinese boys never cared to be nice in the beginning since I WAS polite to you Chinese boys.

...we just want to seek professional help for the childhood trauma you endured. Hell we'll a "help gambit find a shrink fund". I'm sure everyone would donate.

Ah...So now you are saying that anyone who challenge a Chinese with a reasonable argument, stayed on subject, and provide sources suffers from psychological problems. I notice how all you Chinese boys shied away from the truth -- that I had no reasons to be hostile to anyone regardless of their nationalities. If you want a sample, go to sinodefence where I occassionally participated under the same handle as here. You will see that I stayed on subject, was reasonable, and provided sources in my arguments. Same as here. But here you Chinese boys took offense and construed my challenges to your claims as being anti-Chinese. So if challenging a Chinese mean one suffers from mental problems, that says much about your racism being on a par with the KKK. I like that. It must have something to do with that 'Mandate of Heaven' thing.

 

[gambit]

Oh, so since he used to be a soldier, he's qualified to insult forum members and Chinese nationals whenever he wants to?

Absolutely no such 'qualifications'. I only give such insults to those who earned it. By the way, I was in post-Saddam Kuwait, like when the Iraqi Army were still on the running out of the country. So given your oh-so-scary handle, what is the extent of YOUR military experience?

 

[gambit]

I never made racist attacks against you as a Viet. I talked about you being a low IQ redneck american. Don't think that people hate you due to your race. People hate you because you're you.

No...You Chinese boys hate me for what I am, first because am an American, then because am a Viet who does not kow-tow to a Chinese and that says more about you than about me.

And no, China doesn't have conscription in anything but name. 0.015% of the population is in the military, we really don't need conscription for that. If you want to be technical I guess the military training for high school students is "conscription"

What a low 'eye-cue' argument...!!! A conscription policy is when the person has no choice IF he is selected for induction. The number of selectees is irrelevant. The issue is 'choice'. But I guess it is difficult for commies to understand choice to start.

 

[gambit]

Does the article talk about other countries' nuclear programs? Does it talk about the world's current nuclear situation? This isn't about the world, buddy. This is about China's nuclear warheads, and about their production specifically. The NTP is aimed to reduce the spread of nuclear warheads. China's arsenal, as far as I know, is not an open supermarket with checkout lanes. Hence the term "proliferation". And please keep informed with the news and realize that China is against North Korea's and Iran's nuclear program.

Like the article said, China is increasing its number of nuclear warheads because the US and Russian arsenals are many times larger than China's. So what if the US and Russia reduced their number of warheads? They still have a crapload of these babies, and it's not like few thousand warheads less is going to make a difference if a nuclear conflict is to break out. You may disagree with me, but my logic is that once China has achieved rough parity with Russia or the US, production will slow down or eventually stop.

I do not care about the article itself. I only care about the larger issue, which is nuclear weapons proliferation. Nuclear WEAPONS. Not nuclear TECHNOLOGY. Am all for the latter. As to your support that China should increase her nuclear weapons stockpile...

Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT)

Initially, China did not sign the NPT in 1968 and denounced the treaty as a "conspiracy concocted by the USSR and the US to maintain their nuclear monopoly." China viewed the NPT as a way for the nuclear powers, mainly the US and Soviet Union, to perpetuate their power by limiting the military capabilities of other countries. China maintained that it stood for the complete abolition of nuclear weapons and did not advocate or encourage nuclear proliferation, but that the nuclear superpowers had no right to prevent non-nuclear weapons states from acquiring nuclear weapons until the nuclear superpowers committed themselves to complete disarmament.

In the 1980s, China's position on nuclear proliferation started to change. Beijing continued to criticize the NPT as an imbalanced, discriminatory treaty, but also indicated that it accepted in principle the norm of nuclear nonproliferation. In 1984, China became a member of the IAEA and agreed to place all of its exports under international safeguards; that same year a senior Chinese official during a trip to the US provided the US with oral assurances that China did not advocate or encourage nuclear proliferation. In 1990, though still not a member of the NPT, China attended the fourth NPT review conference and, though China criticized the treaty for not banning the deployment of nuclear weapons outside national territories and for not including concrete provisions for general nuclear disarmament, China also stated that the treaty had had a positive impact and had contributed to the maintenance of world peace and stability. In August 1991, shortly after France acceded to the NPT, China also declared its intention to join, though it again expressed its reservations about the treaty's discriminatory nature.

China formally acceded to the Treaty in March 1992 as a nuclear weapon state--the last nuclear weapon state to do so. In its statement of accession, China called on all nuclear powers to issue unconditional no-first-use pledges, to issue negative and positive security assurances to the non-nuclear weapon states, to support the development of nuclear weapons free zones, to withdraw all nuclear weapons deployed outside national territories, and to halt the arms race in outer space.

Since its accession, China has praised the NPT's role in preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and China supported the decision to indefinitely extend the NPT at the 1995 Review and Extension Conference. However, China has continued to state that it views nonproliferation not as an end in itself, but rather as a means to the ultimate objective of the complete prohibition and thorough destruction of nuclear weapons.

As highlighted, China is under a moral obligation NOT increase any nuclear weapons stockpile. China is free to withdraw from the treaty if she wishes and that is the honorable thing to do. Make it official. Do you support such withdrawal?

How does being insulted by forum members relate to conscription? It's one thing to reply to an insult. It's another to generalize and call everybody a "conscript reject". Aren't you doing the same thing that you accuse the forum members of doing to you?

Do not like the taste of your own medicine? Tough doody.

Really, you are not hostile to anyone regardless of nationalities? What about your comments about Chinese being "communist liars"? You claim to be a victim of this yet you are also a perpetrator. Hypocrisy can come a long way.

How many Pakistani members can claim I treated them badly?

 

[gambit]

Well I am sure you can use google translate, since this is Chinese law. Trying to throw out excuse that it was not in English is quite pathetic on your part really.

Wrong...If I wanted to, I can flood my technical arguments with paywalled sources and edit them in ways that none can verify for himself. But do you think that is fair to those who have no relevant experience and have no such access? Many here can tell you that there are only two instances that I really had no choice but use paywalled sources out of the many technical explanations I presented and everyone can tell you that I strive very hard to find publicly available third party sources to support my arguments. You are no exception in this matter. Support your arguments in English.

You can dodge the so called "conscription" by simply telling the recruiter you do not wish to go. It's not as if they are short on willing candidates.

That still does not mean there is no conscription policy. Under a SELECTIVE CONSCRIPTION policy, a person serves at the leisure of the government. At the LEISURE. With no conscription policy, it is the other way around.

And that was more than 3 years ago.

And the only way to balance the ratio is to increase the number of recruits AND increase the time in service. But since the PLA is decreasing the time in service, if not already, this imbalance will get worse.

Where did I say NCO corp include officers? Is that funny voice in your head telling you more things now?

Here...With this funny statement...

The number of NCO in the military in 2007 made up roughly half the military enlisted, not counting officers.

The Non-Commissioned Officers (NCO) corps never count commissioned officers, the latter is casually called 'officers'. So when you include the phrasing 'not counting officers' you included commissioned officers and proved you have not a clue of what you are talking about.

The PLA is composed of a all volunteer force, comprised of commissioned officers, contract service NCOs and willing "conscripts".

If there is a conscription policy, and you cannot deny it, then the force is not all volunteer.

The number and ratio of NCOs are steadily increasing each years since the mid 1980's. The educational level of new recruits as well as the military educational system has contineously evolved, sometimes even accelerated by world events.

A 'ratio' imply a comparison between two items. So what 'ratio' are you talking about? The educational level of the force and the recruits is a separate issue. I call this 'filler material' when the person wishes to distract attention from his cluelessness.

You do not get to pick whether you reenlist when your 3 years term is up, the unit that you served in does. Your statement tells you that you have no idea how the Chinese system works, and yet you continue to rant on.

If the person will not be discharged when his time of service obligation is up -- regardless of reason -- then you do not have an all volunteer force. In war, that is a different story. You do not understand the differences so it is YOU who are doing the ranting.

Since troops decommissioned can be recalled in times of war, their previous military training ensures they can adjust back to the life more quickly and with little training compared to a civilian in case of war.

Advances in technology can render their training obsolete and if time is a factor, the training might as well be all over. Age is also a factor.

You present yourself for registration and examination, then asked whether you want to go. If not, you get sent home and that's the end of it. No one puts a gun to the back of your head. Aside from being required to go through the trouble of visiting the recruiter, how is it different than being required to fill in a piece of paper?

The difference here is that you are the one doing the asking of the government, not the other way around. You ask the government what does it has to offer you. With a selective conscription policy, the government is merely being more choosy with the crop. So as long as you are compelled to present yourself IN PERSON to the government's agent, you have a conscription policy.

Trumpeting about retention rates means little. Promotion of Chinese NCOs are performance based, with only the top performing soldiers being offered a contract. If you bothered to read China's militar doctrine, you should know that they've always kept a mass reserve of troops. The government has the option of actually implementing full conscription in case of a mass conflict. Life in the PLA is good for those that are good enough to earn a contract, otherwise you return to your previous life.

Retention rate in peace time is the best indicator of the future force, even more so if the military is truly all volunteers, not made up by dancing around semantics.

Don't talk of things you have little ideas about.

Since you left China at such a young age and never served in the military at all, may be you should take your own advice.

No NCOs get commissioned as officers in United States after they started their career? And you claimed to have spend time in the military? Heh I think I found my cheap laugh of the day. It was you that failed to properly interprete my statement, which a reasonable person would have little trouble of doing.

You should laugh at yourself. A commission is not an automatic thing. The person has to apply and be selected. Further, a person does not even need to be an NCO to apply and selected for a commission. That situation is extremely rare but not unknown. The military can offer a commission as well to an exceptional performer and it is his discretion to accept. I know four SSGTs who declined their commanders' recommendations for applications, let alone offers from the USAF.

Military academies are not to be used interchangebly with NCO schools in China.

士官学校 = NCO School
军官院校 = military academies

You are still laughable. Professional Military Education (PME) is a broad phrase. It includes everything from correspondence courses to formal in residence classrooms instructions, from courses for enlisted to those for officers. Am willing to bet that the PLA is no different from US in this respect. You have an understandably flawed association of the word 'academy' to mean university level only.

Let's see, I was 10 years old when I left China, and I am a conscript reject? Hmm, something about that story doesn't add up. If I had to take a guess, you were a 10 year veteran mental health patient somewhere.

Then you are excused from this 'conscript reject' label from now on, but that still does not excuse you from the 'ignorant' label.

 

[S10]

Wrong...If I wanted to, I can flood my technical arguments with paywalled sources and edit them in ways that none can verify for himself. But do you think that is fair to those who have no relevant experience and have no such access? Many here can tell you that there are only two instances that I really had no choice but use paywalled sources out of the many technical explanations I presented and everyone can tell you that I strive very hard to find publicly available third party sources to support my arguments. You are no exception in this matter. Support your arguments in English.

Chinese law written in Chinese language, how dare they! I've already provided the entire law with source, and I've even highlighted the aritcle number. Yet you are still throwing excuses around. But since I have such a soft spot for the borderline retarded, I did this for you:

第十八条　义务兵服现役的期限：陆军三年；海军、空军四年
Article 18 Conscription service term limit: Army 3 years; navy, airforce 4 years
ÖлªÈËÃñ¹²ºÍ¹ú±øÒÛ·¨¡¾1984-05-31¡¿

That still does not mean there is no conscription policy. Under a SELECTIVE CONSCRIPTION policy, a person serves at the leisure of the government. At the LEISURE. With no conscription policy, it is the other way around.

Let's see, one way requires to fill out information on a piece of paper. The other requires you to go in front of recruiter to fill it out along with basic medical check. Yet the latter = serving at the leisure of the governent?

Your "no pressure" Selective Service Registration:

"Registration is the law. A man who fails to register may, if prosecuted and convicted, face a fine of up to $250,000 and/or a prison term of up to five years."
Selective Service System: Fast Facts

Nope, no one being forced at all ~

And the only way to balance the ratio is to increase the number of recruits AND increase the time in service. But since the PLA is decreasing the time in service, if not already, this imbalance will get worse.

Pure speculation on your part. The new NCO rank structure system allows people with technical certificates/diplomas/degrees to become a junior NCO upon entry, bypassing having to serve the three year (soon two) term for those without. In addition, there is a possible 300 thousand force cut later this year. Guess which group gets on the chopping block?

Here...With this funny statement...

The Non-Commissioned Officers (NCO) corps never count commissioned officers, the latter is casually called 'officers'. So when you include the phrasing 'not counting officers' you included commissioned officers and proved you have not a clue of what you are talking about.

NCOs and officers both provide leadership to the enlisted.
I believe that sentence explicitly stated NCO corps does not include officers. You arrived at that retarded conclusion of yours because you wanted to. Its meaning would not have escaped any person with the slightest hint of intelligence.

If there is a conscription policy, and you cannot deny it, then the force is not all volunteer.

There is a conscription policy, but it is not currently being practiced. It is no more conscriptive than your Selective Service Registration.

"...to serve the emergency manpower needs of the Military by conscripting untrained manpower, or personnel with professional health care skills, if directed by Congress and the President in a national crisis."
Conscription in the United States

A 'ratio' imply a comparison between two items. So what 'ratio' are you talking about? The educational level of the force and the recruits is a separate issue. I call this 'filler material' when the person wishes to distract attention from his cluelessness.

In 2007, the ratio of NCOs to "conscripts" were 1:1 amongst the non-commissioned ranks. That was more than 3 years ago. Educational level of new recruits and military education system have been steadily improving. That says an increasingly sophisticated force, not some filler material.

If the person will not be discharged when his time of service obligation is up -- regardless of reason -- then you do not have an all volunteer force. In war, that is a different story. You do not understand the differences so it is YOU who are doing the ranting.

The unit, base upon the person's performance, decide if a future contract is extended to the solider upon the end of his service terms. There is no one forcing him to take the contract. Keep up the comedy act.

Advances in technology can render their training obsolete and if time is a factor, the training might as well be all over. Age is also a factor.

Who can be retrained and integrated quicker in case of war? Former soldiers or civies?

The difference here is that you are the one doing the asking of the government, not the other way around. You ask the government what does it has to offer you. With a selective conscription policy, the government is merely being more choosy with the crop. So as long as you are compelled to present yourself IN PERSON to the government's agent, you have a conscription policy.

You graduate from high school and gets a notification letter to appear. You go the the recruiter, and does not like the condition or pay in the military so you declined. That was the end of your military career with PLA. You will never be contacted again unless WWIII starts. You are free to pursue post-secondary education or get a job in the private market.

Yeah sounds like a horrible slavery system. Those poor unwilling conscripts being forced out of their lives.

Retention rate in peace time is the best indicator of the future force, even more so if the military is truly all volunteers, not made up by dancing around semantics.

Performance not impressive in PLA = no retention by the unit. It's not up to you to decide if you can stay or not, get it? If not, flip open a grade 5 english text and start learning.

Since you left China at such a young age and never served in the military at all, may be you should take your own advice.

Since I spend a good 3 months a year in China and have several relatives serving in different branches of PLA, I think you should keep that ignorant crap to yourself.

You should laugh at yourself. A commission is not an automatic thing. The person has to apply and be selected. Further, a person does not even need to be an NCO to apply and selected for a commission. That situation is extremely rare but not unknown. The military can offer a commission as well to an exceptional performer and it is his discretion to accept. I know four SSGTs who declined their commanders' recommendations for applications, let alone offers from the USAF.

Again, you've diplayed reading comprehension skills on par with a 5 years old. As if that isn't enough, you kept on inventing ideas in your head and attempt to misrepresent those as mine. Outstanding NCOs are approached by their immediate superiors if there was a spot in officer academies. In no way is the process automatic like that wild claim of yours.

You are still laughable. Professional Military Education (PME) is a broad phrase. It includes everything from correspondence courses to formal in residence classrooms instructions, from courses for enlisted to those for officers. Am willing to bet that the PLA is no different from US in this respect. You have an understandably flawed association of the word 'academy' to mean university level only.

First you claim that continuing education is optional for NCOs, because you've somehow got the idea that only NCOs being sent to military academies do. When I told you that NCOs have seperate schools for further training than officers, you again invented some gibberish idea that somehow I equate university level course with military education. News flash dumbo, this is all coming out of your head.

Then you are excused from this 'conscript reject' label from now on, but that still does not excuse you from the 'ignorant' label.

Wait so you put out some false label and I am suppose to be happy I'm "excused" from it. You are laughable. On top of ignorant, you might want to see a shrink for your narcissism. I guess they cheaped out on your meds in special needs school.

 

[Tigershark]

You are nothing more than a racist who expects vietnamese to be subversient to you. First of all, he is an american. Secondly, he is/used to be a soldier and much more qualified than you when it comes to defence. As for me, being a soldier myself, cannot stand to see another being subjected to abuse and racial prejudice. Online or not.

You're supporting a guy who keeps calling every Chinese member of the forum draft-dodgers and cowards and dirty commies. Just check the contents of one of his rambling posts yourself. Gambit loves to stir up a hornet's nest with his species of "abuse and racial prejudice". While gambit may have been a soldier, that does not make him an expert on everything Chinese. He just admitted he can't read Chinese and would rather rely on English sources on Chinese military laws!

 

[Akasa]

Absolutely no such 'qualifications'. I only give such insults to those who earned it. By the way, I was in post-Saddam Kuwait, like when the Iraqi Army were still on the running out of the country. So given your oh-so-scary handle, what is the extent of YOUR military experience?

Sure, so posting that all Chinese were "communist liars" was justified? So, in your theory, all Chinese people deserve to be insulted? And in these cases no one even made a comment to you before you posted.

Again, I ask, does your military experience allow you to act like a child on forums? I don't see how my relation with the military relate to this discussion.

And since you ask, no, I'm not enlisted. I don't wish to work with people likewise you.

 

[Akasa]

I do not care about the article itself. I only care about the larger issue, which is nuclear weapons proliferation. Nuclear WEAPONS. Not nuclear TECHNOLOGY. Am all for the latter. As to your support that China should increase her nuclear weapons stockpile...

Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT)

As highlighted, China is under a moral obligation NOT increase any nuclear weapons stockpile. China is free to withdraw from the treaty if she wishes and that is the honorable thing to do. Make it official. Do you support such withdrawal?

Again, read my post. Is the Chinese weapons arsenal a supermarket? Do you see people walking into Chinese missile bases and come out with warheads and a receipt? Proliferation relates to spread, and as far as I know, not a single Chinese nuclear warhead has made it out of the country.

Uh, no, China is not under any obligation or rule to stop production. Any so-called "moral obligation" is only for words, not actions.

Do not like the taste of your own medicine? Tough doody.

You certainly do. Should I add some sugar to make it milder, little boy?

How many Pakistani members can claim I treated them badly?

Diverting the subject won't work here, buddy. Why don't you interview some Chinese members and see how your "professionalism" worked out?