Why China Will Lose the War It is Planning

[jhungary]

Here are the reasons:

1. The opening line of the article is "Chinese front Organization" is totally wrong. It is the Australia-China institute, an independent study center by the University of Technology, Sydney. Australia China Relations Institute | University of Technology, Sydney

What the studies foolishness have to do with Where the poll were done? By the way, the Australian Chinese Relation Institute is indeed a Chinese mouthpiece, they were funded by the Chinese Chairman of Yuhu Group, which just bought several Shopping centre in Sydney and Melbourne. I used to work in Eastwood, they just bought the Eastwood Shopping centre a few years ago.

Being in Australia and hiring Australian does not make it a "Australian-Chinese Institute), RT USA is an US News channel hired American and funded by Russia, would you consider RT USA is an Russian Mouthpiece or American Mouthpiece?

2. Even if it were a Chinese institute, then this presumption that a survey is a good enough reason to presume that they are preparing for war is incorrect to say the least.

The study is about view on Australia about War between China and Japan.......It's not about presuming a war is preparing from either side in reality.

So, when a study is carry out about how is the chance for war between country A and country B, by definition that mean Country A have to be in preparation to go to war with Country B?

3. Most of the publicity of the poll was done by western media, not chinese media.

Two minutes ago, you just claim the Poll was done by an Western Organisation not a Chinese Organisation. And now you do a 180 and talk about the publish is only been done in the west, not in China??

But then again, where does it published have any relation of this article being foolish?? So you saying article published in China is smarter and Article published in the west are more foolish??

4. "Firstly, it will provide legitimacy for the regime as economic growth stalls."
The above statement presumes that Chinese economic growth is going to stall, a sentiment not shared by the World Bank, IMF, and most of the leading Economists around the world. China hasn't even reached the middle income group right now, with at least 7 years left to reach there.

Rather, a war would be perhaps the only way in which Chinese economy will actually suffer.

But did the article say the war will be happening overnight or tomorrow?

5. "China will approach the war “asymmetrically, as terrorists do"
This is essentially a lame effort to insult the Chinese, by comparing asymmetric warfare with terrorism. Asymmetric warfare has been as old as warfare itself.

Did you read the whole paragraph?

He said, the terrorist would be on the low end of asymmetric warfare and China would show the US the high end of it.
And China, no matter how strong they become the past 10 year, would not survive a conventional war outside their domain, mush less in Japanese domain. and Much, Much less with the US, and if a war have to be fought between US, Japan and China, china would have no choice but to go asymmetric.

That's a quite reasonable to assume, it would be quite foolish if you assume China can survive a Japanese and US assault outside Chinese mainland.

6. "More likely they will attack US bases in the region at least as far out as Guam on the basis that the United States will be entering the war anyway and they are better off getting a surprise attack in first."

Not even the WORST crackhead in Beijing, and there are few idiots in Beijing, wants to do anything with US Bases. US can't be defeated in any forseeable future, and they know it. The worst case scenario will be that Beijing attempts to take Senkaku, even that is very unlikely.

Again, that's not foolish, in fact, that has been done before, that's why Japan attack pearl harbor during WW2, because they know attacking Singapore, Hong Kong, and Guam both colony of British and US would inevitable draw US into war. The only logical thing to do is to attack and destroy their War fighting capability before they can bring it down on you eventually.

I will think that way as a military commander Myself, and I would have done so again if I was in charge with Imperial Japanese force during WW2, Sad fact is, the Japanese did not follow up and attack US and keep the pressure, instead they gone for the route of lighting attack the Pacific Island and try to fortify it out.
This is not foolish, this is a sound military planning.

7. "After the initial Chinese onslaught, the campaign would settle down to a blockade of shipping to China conducted beyond the reach of Chinese aircraft. China wouldn’t run out of oil because they are building a large stockpile and they could easily cut consumption down to the level of domestic production of 4 million barrels per day. But 26% of the economy is export-related and so economic activity would collapse. The effect of the blockade in the rest of the world would be a major boost to economic activity as companies tried to make good the loss of Chinese supply. "


This guy doesn't make an attempt to be even consistent. Just a few paragraph before he is assuming Chinese economic collapse, to counter which they would declare a war, but then again, he is himself hypothesizing that Chinese economy will collapse after the war. Why would they then have a war to just collapse their economy?
Also, a war with China in the region will essentially paralyze the whole of Asia Pacific, which is THE most important trading area in the world. That would have global effects.

He said stuck, not collapse before the war.

The problem is, again, THIS HAD HAPPENED BEFORE.

That's when Argentina have their own Economic problem they can't solve, and they divert attention to invade a small island called Malvina in Argentina, Falklands in England.

Exact the same happens as history goes, which I don't want to talk about it again. With the only difference is UK being a lot further to Falklands than Japan is to Senkaku.

I don't understand why it is foolish if he is talking about stuff that happened BEFORE...

and you are saying World Trade will simply collapse if Chinese was destroyed or collapse in a war? Do remember trade happens before Chinese Growths or even China become . as long as there are country willing to buy and country willing to sell, there will always be trade, maybe it will not be as profitible as before, but world trade won't simply died when one part of the world gone to hell. Simply the reason is, no part of the world is bigger or more important than the world, as long as the world remain, there will be trade.

China is not that big and important and cannot be replace, again, EVERYWHERE and EVERYTHING can be replace, for a price. If the price is worth to pay by the businessman, then yes, the replacement will happens.

So, simply, a war with China will paralyse the whole Asia, is not true

8. "What if you don’t like the idea of the US being involved in a war with China? Well stop buying anything made in China. The US takes 17% of China’s exports and if that dried up, the Chinese economy would shrink by 4.5%. The social dislocation that would cause might be enough to topple the warhawk who is driving the Chinese aggression, President Xi Jinping. Until President Xi is gone, prepare for war."

He has already shown before that he knew nothing about economics. This statement is just the feather in his intellectually dishonest, manipulative, biased cap.

lol.

well, he is being patriotic, not being foolish.

Being foolish is saying Chinese trade or American trade cannot be replace.

in fact, a lot of westerner are very conscious about buying stuff that's locally made, can you say they are foolish?

Finally, the next time don't presume anything at the outset. I didn't give reason because it seemed obvious to me. This article is brainwork of a person so immersed in his hatred that he started hallucinating scenarios as crazy as that.

I did not assume or presume anything when I am commenting on something someone wrote, I read then I comment, and unless the article display utter stupidity, i will not say the article is foolish.

Indeed, it may have said something you are not agree with (In fact I did not agree with some part of what this article claim) but then it does not mean I think this article is foolish.

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

What the studies foolishness have to do with Where the poll were done? By the way, the Australian Chinese Relation Institute is indeed a Chinese mouthpiece, they were funded by the Chinese Chairman of Yuhu Group, which just bought several Shopping centre in Sydney and Melbourne. I used to work in Eastwood, they just bought the Eastwood Shopping centre a few years ago.

Being in Australia and hiring Australian does not make it a "Australian-Chinese Institute), RT USA is an US News channel hired American and funded by Russia, would you consider RT USA is an Russian Mouthpiece or American Mouthpiece?

Being funded is different from being controlled. Blackstone has funded Tsinghua to the tune of $300 million doesn't mean it controlls. Learn about voting and non-voting shares in Companies for a clear difference. Also, the institute is headed by Bob Carr the former Australian Foreign Minister. It is totally under the control of University of Technology, Sydney. RT USA is BOTH funded and controlled by its parent Organization. That's the difference.

I have never said the study is foolish because of this thing. I am saying that this is a willful act of dishonesty, which makes the author lose credibility.

Do you agree?

The study is about view on Australia about War between China and Japan.......It's not about presuming a war is preparing from either side in reality.

So, when a study is carry out about how is the chance for war between country A and country B, by definition that mean Country A have to be in preparation to go to war with Country B?

You are yourselves contradicting the article. You are saying that the survey is no reason to believe that the country A or B is preparing for war. This is the exact opposite of what the article says.

Do you agree?

Two minutes ago, you just claim the Poll was done by an Western Organisation not a Chinese Organisation. And now you do a 180 and talk about the publish is only been done in the west, not in China??

But then again, where does it published have any relation of this article being foolish?? So you saying article published in China is smarter and Article published in the west are more foolish??

Again, increase your comprehension skills. I say here that the western media has done the publicity. Not the polling organization, the media --- newspapers etc. And I said most. Anyways nobody takes Chinese media too seriously.

But did the article say the war will be happening overnight or tomorrow?

If you read the article, it is calling for Xi to step down to avoid the war. This and the whole tenor of the article is sufficient to say that the article is talking about the next 5-6 years. There is no collapse coming according to most Economists.

Did you read the whole paragraph?

He said, the terrorist would be on the low end of asymmetric warfare and China would show the US the high end of it.
And China, no matter how strong they become the past 10 year, would not survive a conventional war outside their domain, mush less in Japanese domain. and Much, Much less with the US, and if a war have to be fought between US, Japan and China, china would have no choice but to go asymmetric.

That's a quite reasonable to assume, it would be quite foolish if you assume China can survive a Japanese and US assault outside Chinese mainland.

Again, increase your reading comprehension. Ask any neutral person, and he will tell you that the article implied that asymmetric warfare is associated with terrorists. NO. Asymmetry is a warfare strategy. Rather every kind of warfare has deception and manuvering. There is no such kind of CONVENTIONAL warfare. Every one wants to attack the enemy in the weakest spot, and confuse him. Better deception is an art.

Do you agree?

Again, that's not foolish, in fact, that has been done before, that's why Japan attack pearl harbor during WW2, because they know attacking Singapore, Hong Kong, and Guam both colony of British and US would inevitable draw US into war. The only logical thing to do is to attack and destroy their War fighting capability before they can bring it down on you eventually.

I will think that way as a military commander Myself, and I would have done so again if I was in charge with Imperial Japanese force during WW2, Sad fact is, the Japanese did not follow up and attack US and keep the pressure, instead they gone for the route of lighting attack the Pacific Island and try to fortify it out.
This is not foolish, this is a sound military planning.

Every Japanese person regrets that decision. That must say something. This foolish because this is based on the presumption that China is going to willingly take actions that cause US military involvement, which is foolish.

He said stuck, not collapse before the war.

The problem is, again, THIS HAD HAPPENED BEFORE.

That's when Argentina have their own Economic problem they can't solve, and they divert attention to invade a small island called Malvina in Argentina, Falklands in England.

Exact the same happens as history goes, which I don't want to talk about it again. With the only difference is UK being a lot further to Falklands than Japan is to Senkaku.

I don't understand why it is foolish if he is talking about stuff that happened BEFORE...

He said "stall."

Stall by Google dictionary means: "stop or cause to stop making progress." That means economic growth comes to near 0 or even in 1-2 regime.

Also, Argentina took on a small island, not the largest and most powerful nation on Earth. Even during that conflict both UK and Argentina kept their conflict limited to those islands. The author here is making dual fallacy, of first assuming that China's economic growth will stall, and then further expounding on that stupid assumption, that just to divert attention it will take on the most powerful country on Earth, to get itself totally wacked. Read his article, it is talking about a preemptive strike on Diaoyu/Senkaku, followed by an attack on Guam. Are you seriously telling me, that even if the economy was to stall, they would essentially pre-empt actions against both Japan and US, and start WW3.

and you are saying World Trade will simply collapse if Chinese was destroyed or collapse in a war? Do remember trade happens before Chinese Growths or even China become . as long as there are country willing to buy and country willing to sell, there will always be trade, maybe it will not be as profitible as before, but world trade won't simply died when one part of the world gone to hell. Simply the reason is, no part of the world is bigger or more important than the world, as long as the world remain, there will be trade.

China is not that big and important and cannot be replace, again, EVERYWHERE and EVERYTHING can be replace, for a price. If the price is worth to pay by the businessman, then yes, the replacement will happens.

So, simply, a war with China will paralyse the whole Asia, is not true

.

A war in that area will not be the sole collapse of China, it will be the collapse of Korean, Japanese, and Asean Trade. There is unlimited amount of investment in the area. All will be lost. World trade will for at least a decade be reduced to a fraction. I am not claiming that World Trade won't bounce back. But, when you have totally devasted an area that large, it can mathematically never be the same again.

I did not assume or presume anything when I am commenting on something someone wrote, I read then I comment, and unless the article display utter stupidity, i will not say the article is foolish.

Indeed, it may have said something you are not agree with (In fact I did not agree with some part of what this article claim) but then it does not mean I think this article is foolish.

An article filled with so much garbage is liable to be called reckless and foolish. At least that's my view

lol.

well, he is being patriotic, not being foolish.

Being foolish is saying Chinese trade or American trade cannot be replace.

in fact, a lot of westerner are very conscious about buying stuff that's locally made, can you say they are foolish?

He maybe patriotic. But he is foolish and doesn't understand economics. Even China buys a lot of stuff from America. Also the global supply chains are complex and interlinked, and taking out such a significant part of that chain as China will put the World Economy in unimaginable risks.

 

[JSCh]

Oh, the Australian educational institution's "academic freedom" can be bought by money?
Is this why the western media complain about the "academic freedom" of Confucius Institute, because they want the money to go to them instead?

 

[jhungary]

Being funded is different from being controlled. Blackstone has funded Tsinghua to the tune of $300 million doesn't mean it controlls. Learn about voting and non-voting shares in Companies for a clear difference. Also, the institute is headed by Bob Carr the former Australian Foreign Minister. It is totally under the control of University of Technology, Sydney. RT USA is BOTH funded and controlled by its parent Organization. That's the difference.

I have never said the study is foolish because of this thing. I am saying that this is a willful act of dishonesty, which makes the author lose credibility.

Do you agree?

Not agree on the bolded part, they were funded and controlled by that guy, Dude, I used to study in UTS....for my Grad Diploma...

You are yourselves contradicting the article. You are saying that the survey is no reason to believe that the country A or B is preparing for war. This is the exact opposite of what the article says.

Do you agree?

No, my point is, the survey ask about How the survey participant feel about a War between China and Japan, what the author say does not related to the poll done by ACRI, but as a result of study itself, ie the question - Will you think China and Japan will go to war.

Again, increase your comprehension skills. I say here that the western media has done the publicity. Not the polling organization, the media --- newspapers etc. And I said most. Anyways nobody takes Chinese media too seriously.

Again, I failed to see how important it was for the West or the Chinese to do the publicity? Just something not appear in China does not mean they have no value about China...

If you read the article, it is calling for Xi to step down to avoid the war. This and the whole tenor of the article is sufficient to say that the article is talking about the next 5-6 years. There is no collapse coming according to most Economists.

No, he didn't say that, he said, As long as Xi is in place, prepare for war.

He did not call for Xi to step down, he instead call for Asia to prepare for war, as long as Xi in the chair...

Again, increase your reading comprehension. Ask any neutral person, and he will tell you that the article implied that asymmetric warfare is associated with terrorists. NO. Asymmetry is a warfare strategy. Rather every kind of warfare has deception and manuvering. There is no such kind of CONVENTIONAL warfare. Every one wants to attack the enemy in the weakest spot, and confuse him. Better deception is an art.

Do you agree?

Well, I read fine, yes, if the author did not clarified the term Chinese Use asymmetric warfare, then he is misleading the reader, but he said so himself and I quote

Some have seen this war coming well in advance. In 2005, Robert Kaplan wrote an article entitled How We Would Fight China. In it he notes that China will approach the war “asymmetrically, as terrorists do. In Iraq the insurgents have shown us the low end of asymmetry, with car bombs. But the Chinese are poised to show us the high end of the art.”

He did note equate China into Terrorist use of asymmetric warfare.

And Being a Military Commander Myself I found that your comment "There is no such kind of CONVENTIONAL warfare" foolish.

Simply you cannot use asymmetric warfare to attack, when you are capturing a territories, you have to effectively neutralise the garrison that guarding the territories, a feat you cannot do with asymmetric warfare.
Since This is not about warfare science, i am not going to derail this further

Every Japanese person regrets that decision. That must say something. This foolish because this is based on the presumption that China is going to willingly take actions that cause US military involvement, which is foolish.

Really now, did EVERY Japanese regret Japanese attacked Pearl harbor and drag US to the war which eventually leads to Japanese demise? I know for a fact that at least one Japanese think otherwise, ask our Japanese member @Nihonjin1085

As I mentioned before, If China are going to take Senkaku, they would have to expect US to response, and while do not attack US base in the area will NOT guarantee a renege in response to the American, then a sane Military planner will have to factor in that US will response to Chinese Aggression in Senkaku. And attacking America first is a very logical choice.

When I was in Officer training, we have studied in depth with pearl harbor and most of us agree that is the right move, the Japanese, however, may be regret that they did not take this and exploit it further, if they take on the fact that US force have been damage and allocate at least a thrust dedicated to harass the American, they may actually win the pacific. But fact is, most Military Historian agree Japanese fail to Pressure United States is the key factor why they lose.

and Every Japanese Person is a phase that Chinese commonly used, as it literally translate into 每個日本人 are you Chinese by any chance??

He said "stall."

Stall by Google dictionary means: "stop or cause to stop making progress." That means economic growth comes to near 0 or even in 1-2 regime.

Also, Argentina took on a small island, not the largest and most powerful nation on Earth. Even during that conflict both UK and Argentina kept their conflict limited to those islands. The author here is making dual fallacy, of first assuming that China's economic growth will stall, and then further expounding on that stupid assumption, that just to divert attention it will take on the most powerful country on Earth, to get itself totally wacked. Read his article, it is talking about a preemptive strike on Diaoyu/Senkaku, followed by an attack on Guam. Are you seriously telling me, that even if the economy was to stall, they would essentially pre-empt actions against both Japan and US, and start WW3.

.
Well, Stall can mean a lot of thing, it can mean not being sustainable, a growth need not to be zero (Stopped) to be unsustainable, growth need to be persist and when you get to a point where your growth rate is lower than inflations rate, that's unsustainable

and China is NOT the world LARGEST (That goes to Russia or Canada if you count the Canadian Artic territories), and nor the most powerful, that title goes to the USA

Plus, you don't even understand the principle of warfare, Yes, China have 2 millions strong PLA, but does that mean they can use 100% (all 2 million) PLA to fight in Senkaku? How many troop PLA can use is not How many they have, but rather how many they can support. Even Senkaku cannot hold 2 millions people to begin with.

Comparison wise, comparing Argentina and England during Falkland war is similar to Comparing China and Japan + US if a war of senkaku materialised? Why? The offensive and defensive power is similar in both country. Argentina is not a walk over in` 1982, not like the Argentina now, they become the Argentina now because of the war of 1982. The ability to conduct operation is similar between UK and Argentina and between China and Japan + US, you may want to think otherwise, that does not mean it is true.

The article talking about an imaginary regional war between China and Japan with US aide, it's not about WW3 which US will start if only China uses Nuclear Weapon. You cannot trigger a World War by simply attacking Guam with a few missile.

A war in that area will not be the sole collapse of China, it will be the collapse of Korean, Japanese, and Asean Trade. There is unlimited amount of investment in the area. All will be lost. World trade will for at least a decade be reduced to a fraction. I am not claiming that World Trade won't bounce back. But, when you have totally devasted an area that large, it can mathematically never be the same again.

Why Korea, ASEAN will be collapse with a Japan-China war?

Again, the whole Asia will not collapse when China and Japan go back, because there are something called "Parallel Product" Whatever Chinese Buying, not only the Chinese is buying, same thing is whatever Japanese Buying, not only the Japanese is buying and Whatever Chinese is selling, the world are also selling and so does the Japanese's. You said as if the Market cannot be replace when Japan's and China go to war.

Cold War sees the better of 50 years in last decade, did US-Soviet Trade relation gone during those period? Even as Ukrainian is fighting the Russian now, both are trading with each other and the purposed war above is not even in Cold War scale, with Multiple Regional War. What you are saying, Asian-wise economic collapse, will simply not happens

An article filled with so much garbage is liable to be called reckless and foolish. At least that's my view



He maybe patriotic. But he is foolish and doesn't understand economics. Even China buys a lot of stuff from America. Also the global supply chains are complex and interlinked, and taking out such a significant part of that chain as China will put the World Economy in unimaginable risks.

You cannot say something you don't agree with as Garbage or Foolish, it's just something you don't agree with, and as we can all see, even you have your own interpretation system, and I have mind, Did I call your point foolish and garbage when I don't agree with you (Beside you calling Conventional warfare is useless)

Oh, the Australian educational institution's "academic freedom" can be bought by money?
Is this why the western media complain about the "academic freedom" of Confucius Institute, because they want the money to go to them instead?

dude,Australian Education system in tertiary level are all about money, how do you think Australian Institute have on average 50% oversea student and have more enrolment outlet in overseas then within Australia??

You do know if you are a international student, you have 4+ ways to get into University in Australia, while you only have 2 if you are an Local student.

We Aussie (Yes I am claiming Aussie this time) already know our education institute is a sell-out, where they rather have cooperation/partnership with oversea uni rather than giving well deserved places to the local student, just because the local only pay 3000 a years instead of 30,000.[/quote][/QUOTE]

 

[mike2000]

To be honest, i agree with the Indian and Chinese member who said this article is pure bullshit/nonesense. Cant even believe someone as knowledgeable like Carlosa will even take such an article seriously. I dont even know from where to be begin. Almost everything this guy said is pure Fantasy/wishful thinking, and to be fair anybody who has a brain can see he is VERY BIASED.lol

The article is pure BULLSHIT to be honest. No need for me to even go into any details/discussion about this. There are other more valuable threads on here for us to discuss fully about and spend some time, not this one. loool

 

[Carlosa]

To be honest, i agree with the Indian and Chinese member who said this article is pure bullshit/nonesense. Cant even believe someone as knowledgeable like Carlosa will even take such an article seriously. I dont even know from where to be begin. Almost everything this guy said is pure Fantasy/wishful thinking, and to be fair anybody who has a brain can see he is VERY BIASED.lol

The article is pure BULLSHIT to be honest. No need for me to even go into any details/discussion about this. There are other more valuable threads on here for us to discuss fully about and spend some time, not this one. loool

The posting of the article is meant to encourage an exercise in the military strategy of a possible conflict between Japan and China, that's all. It is expected that it will be biased and its up to the members here to exposed whatever is there that is not right or makes no sense and to analyze the pros and cons of what the article mentions.

If by posting the article it will be seen like if I agree with it, well, then I'll have to be a lot more picky next time when selecting an article. I didn't expect that type of reaction.

Edit: I just posted another articles, I do like and agree with it. Look forward to get your feedback.


China thinks it can defeat America in battle

 

[AndrewJin]

It seems that many trolls were banned because of their comments in this thread.

 

[kyle Chiang]

China thinks it can defeat America in battle

Don't abandon the premise to think over question.
Chinese believe we can defeat America in a self-defense battle which is near our land and to be everlasting.
Three reasons:
1.China will avoid confronting America in hard ways as your article said:America is far behind from China in military equipment and global influence.
2.America can't cost all his power to fight against China for a little island or similar things.(Refer first point,such conflicts will not infringes on the core interests of America)
3.If the war comes to everlasting,willpower and just-in-time supplies will be the most important element.(America has lost two war for that:Vietnam War and Korean War)

Many articles which write by western propaganda are really partial and irresponsible.You can't analyse anything according to them.

Please read more books and get rid of the daydream way of thinking.It won't benefit you and maybe will make you a loser.

Finally,although I don't like them in some issues,Chinese policy-makers are far more cogitative and wiser than you thought

 

[Carlosa]

Don't abandon the premise to think over question.
Chinese believe we can defeat America in a self-defense battle which is near our land and to be everlasting.
Three reasons:
1.China will avoid confronting America in hard ways as your article said:America is far behind from China in military equipment and global influence.
2.America can't cost all his power to fight against China for a little island or similar things.(Refer first point,such conflicts will not infringes on the core interests of America)
3.If the war comes to everlasting,willpower and just-in-time supplies will be the most important element.(America has lost two war for that:Vietnam War and Korean War)

Many articles which write by western propaganda are really partial and irresponsible.You can't analyse anything according to them.

Please read more books and get rid of the daydream way of thinking.It won't benefit you and maybe will make you a loser.

Finally,although I don't like them in some issues,Chinese policy-makers are far more cogitative and wiser than you thought

I think you forget that I'm not the writer of the article, I suggest you redirect your comments to him.
I posted the article for debate about its military merits, that's all.
Have you seen how many articles of this type are posted by chinese members all the time? Do you ever complain to them the same way you complained here?

 

[kyle Chiang]

I think you forget that I'm not the writer of the article, I suggest you redirect your comments to him.
I posted the article for debate about its military merits, that's all.
Have you seen how many articles of this type are posted by chinese members all the time? Do you ever complain to them the same way you complained here?

When we write an paper and list some reference documents,it means we agree their opinions and they are credible.Dont you think such article worth reading?
Chinese is an multiple population,too.We have many different voices though foreigners usually dont know.If you think some Chinese are not wise enough(maybe I am one of them),I will agree with you without any excuse.
Please dont post such unmeaning articles for whatever debate.Because we will only focus on how funny it is.Thanks.

 

[Carlosa]

When we write an paper and list some reference documents,it means we agree their opinions and they are credible.Dont you think such article worth reading?
Chinese is an multiple population,too.We have many different voices though foreigners usually dont know.If you think some Chinese are not wise enough(maybe I am one of them),I will agree with you without any excuse.
Please dont post such unmeaning articles for whatever debate.Because we will only focus on how funny it is.Thanks.

I will agree with you when I see that you tell chinese posters the same thing about the articles that they post. You guys always jump to complain about articles that you don't like and then post far worse articles next. Double standards seems to be the right word for the situation.

 

[kyle Chiang]

I will agree with you when I see that you tell chinese posters the same thing about the articles that they post. You guys always jump to complain about articles that you don't like and then post far worse articles next. Double standards seems to be the right word for the situation.

"You guys"?Can you find I ever post such foolish article?It really show how simple your brain is!
Chinese population is a huge combination of 1.4 billion singles.
I understand you are an anti-Chinese principle man,but I don't think such way of thinking will help you living better.

Let's calm down to think over the problems:
1.the article you post is unmeaning
2.I stand up to criticize it(many other members do so)
3.You excuse is that many Chinese post news as that(You think they are terrible and wrong)
4.since you don't think you are wrong and I am double standards.
My reply:
1.If you think someone do fool things,you shouldn't follow them to do the same.
2.If others criticize you in right way,you should learn from it and change yourself.
3.If I see Chinese or others post such unmeaning articles,I will say the same:"Please don't post rubbish"
4.Welcome give me some advice or meaningful criticisms.I will thank you a lot.
5.Last but not least,please give up some bias,communication and deeper understand will help us to see truth,or we will only be the puppet of some irresponsible medias.

 

[Carlosa]

"You guys"?Can you find I ever post such foolish article?It really show how simple your brain is!
Chinese population is a huge combination of 1.4 billion singles.
I understand you are an anti-Chinese principle man,but I don't think such way of thinking will help you living better.

Let's calm down to think over the problems:
1.the article you post is unmeaning
2.I stand up to criticize it(many other members do so)
3.You excuse is that many Chinese post news as that(You think they are terrible and wrong)
4.since you don't think you are wrong and I am double standards.
My reply:
1.If you think someone do fool things,you shouldn't follow them to do the same.
2.If others criticize you in right way,you should learn from it and change yourself.
3.If I see Chinese or others post such unmeaning articles,I will say the same:"Please don't post rubbish"
4.Welcome give me some advice or meaningful criticisms.I will thank you a lot.
5.Last but not least,please give up some bias,communication and deeper understand will help us to see truth,or we will only be the puppet of some irresponsible medias.

"You guys" meaning the whole group of chinese posters that derail threads that they don't like and then at the same time post similar or worse threads and frankly, I don't see much complaining from you to those threads.

No, I'm not anti chinese per se, I don't like the chinese regime and many of their actions and when I go to china, everybody that I talk to tell me that they don't like or trust the government, are they anti chinese also?
If china were to have a better type of regime and no aggressive actions in SCS bases on invalid claims, then I would have no issues with china.

I also don't like the so called American regime and their actions in Ukraine, Iraq or Libya but I don't consider myself anti American; when they do things right, I support them.

 

[kyle Chiang]

"You guys" meaning the whole group of chinese posters that derail threads that they don't like and then at the same time post similar or worse threads and frankly, I don't see much complaining from you to those threads.

No, I'm not anti chinese per se, I don't like the chinese regime and many of their actions and when I go to china, everybody that I talk to tell me that they don't like or trust the government, are they anti chinese also?
If china were to have a better type of regime and no aggressive actions in SCS bases on invalid claims, then I would have no issues with china.

I also don't like the so called American regime and their actions in Ukraine, Iraq or Libya but I don't consider myself anti American; when they do things right, I support them.

I think I will understand your words better if you use "such guys".
Yeah,what you said means maybe we are similar in some standpoints.

And when taking about China,we should distinguish the Chinese government(firmly in the charge of CPC) from Chinese society and Chinese nation.It's true that few people love Chinese government,especially local governments,thought it doesn't means most Chinese don't support its policy(because autocracy government usually doesn't need to please voters and can make some good long-term decisions).

To some extent,I really appreciate you,referring to your words that you are an internationalist.That's over,thank you for your patient reply.