Post by rst0You are nothing but a sadistic crazy twisted warp-minded lunatic who
continues to show his foolish ways and ignorance and only
want to show the world his iron-willed brainwashed mind to
the world. You surely are the product of India's lowest class of
sewage from Mumbai. You should be locked in an insane asylum.
You don't even know the meaning of dictatorship. Dictators
rule their country for life and die in office and dictate who
to follow him after he dies. Kim Jung Il was a dictator.
For the last 30 years, no one in China rules for life, and
dies while still in office.
Their "ex" leaders are either still alive or died of old age.
China has a term-limit of 10 years and a mandatory retirement
age of 67.
"Dictatorship" certainly does not apply to China. China is a
"one- party" socialist capitalist country. For the last 30
years, many Chinese have become billionaires and many many
more become millionaires.
China is still a "work-in-progress" changing government.
With today's technology of cell-phones, TVs and internet,
there is no way a government can control 1.3 billion people
without the people's approval.
The German invasion of Russia in 1941 was the first step of Hitler's
attempt to acquire more land for the German people to populate. The
CCP dictatorship's brutal suppression of the Tibetans and the Uighyurs
is an adaptation of Hitler's idea of Lebensraum. So is its aggressive
but spurious claims on the South China Sea and the East China Sea.
The Pacific nations are all aware that imperialist China has come to
believe that "Today, it's all about military power, the only thing
counts." In 1979, the CCP dictatorship under Deng Xiaoping's
helmsmanship caused the death of nearly 150,000 soldiers just to
"teach Vietnam a lesson". It is another matter that a significant
proportion of the dead were Chinese soldiers. But that mattered very
little to lull the blood-lust of the CCP dictatorship in Beijing.
As far as the Pacific countries (Japan, Korea, Taiwan, the
Philippines, Vietnam, Brunei, Malaysia, Indonesia, Australia, New
Zealand etc.) are concerned, it is the CCP dictatorship in Beijing
that is the greatest menace to world peace. In fact, China's small
neighbors thank USA for the fact that China hasn't dared since 1979
to launch a bloody invasion to teach any of its small neighbors a
lesson. As far as the Pacific nations are concerned, it is the USA
that is providing a shield against the blood lust of the CCP
dictatorship.
The Munich agreement gave in to Nazi regime's demand for Sudetenland.
But this only whetted the Nazi regime's addiction to aggrandizement.
The Nazi regime went on to lay claims on Austria and then to Poland
and then to Russia and France and then to the whole world.
The Beijing bandit regime's imperialist agenda is expanding
exponentially. Now it is disputing Japan's sovereignty over Okinawa on
the basis of Okinawa's tributary relationship with China some 500
years ago. The CCP dictatorship in Beijing is becoming as much a
menace to world peace as the Tojo regime and the Hitler regime were in
their days:
**************
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/influential-chinese-commentators-dispute-japans-claim-to-okinawa/2012/07/23/gJQAQPka4W_story.html
Washington Post
Monday, July 23, 2012
Japan’s claim to Okinawa disputed by influential Chinese commentators
By Kathrin Hille and Mure Dickie, Updated: Monday, July 23, 9:29 AM
BEIJING — For many observers, rising friction between China and Japan
over a group of remote and uninhabited islands in the East China Sea
is worrying enough.
But if some influential Chinese nationalist commentators have their
way, the spat over the Japanese-controlled Senkaku islands — which
Beijing calls the Diaoyu — could widen into a dispute over a much more
important archipelago.
The CCP-dictatorship in Beijing is getting intoxicated with its
imperialist agenda. It is now seriously thinking of disputing Japanese
Okinawa on the specious plea that Okinawa had a tributary relationship
with Okinawa half a millennium ago.
The Beijing bandit regime is behaving the way the Hitler regime had.
Munich didn't appease Hitler. From claims on Sudetenland and Austria,
it was an easy step to claims on Poland and France and then on Russia
and then on the whole world.
In a fiery editorial this month, the Global Times newspaper urged
Beijing to consider challenging Japan’s control over its southern
prefecture of Okinawa, an island chain with a population of 1.4
million people that bristles with U.S. military bases.
“China should not be afraid of engaging with Japan in a mutual
undermining of territorial integrity,” the Communist Party-run paper
declared.
Maj. Gen. Jin Yinan, head of the strategy research institute at
China’s National Defense University, went even further. He told state-
run radio that limiting discussion to the Diaoyu was “too narrow,”
saying Beijing should question ownership of the whole Ryukyu
archipelago, which by some definitions extends beyond Okinawa.
While the Chinese government has offered no endorsement of such
radical views, their open espousal by senior commentators is likely to
be deeply unsettling both to Japan and other neighboring nations.
“Challenging Japan’s sovereignty over the Ryukyus would indeed be a
break from the past,” says Taylor Fravel, a Chinese security expert at
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who contends that Beijing has
tended to limit its territorial claims for the sake of clearly defined
borders.
Chinese questioning of Japanese sovereignty over Okinawa is based on
the prefecture’s roots in an independent state known as the Ryukyu
Kingdom that won control of the archipelago in the 15th century.
Ryukyu kings paid formal tribute to Chinese emperors, a practice
allowing lucrative trade that continued even after the kingdom was
conquered by a Japanese feudal domain in 1609. Okinawa only officially
became part of Japan in 1879.
For some in China, this history is enough to render illegitimate
Japanese rule over a strategically important archipelago seen as the
biggest impediment to the expansion of Chinese naval power in the
Pacific.
Tang Chunfeng, a former official at the Chinese Embassy in Tokyo, is
one of those campaigning for China to rethink its acceptance of
Japanese rule over Okinawa, saying past restraint has “done a lot of
harm.”
“When I was in Japan, I didn’t even know that the Ryukyus were once
ours,” says Tang, now a Japan specialist at a Commerce Ministry think
tank.
But such arguments could be diplomatically incendiary.
“Once you start arguing that a tributary relationship at some point in
history is the basis for a sovereignty claim in the 20th century, you
start worrying a lot of people,” says June Teufel Dreyer, a China and
Japan specialist at the University of Miami. “Many, many countries had
tributary relationships with China.”
Some Chinese hawks stop short of saying Okinawa should be Chinese,
suggesting it is enough to promote the idea that the archipelago
should be independent from Japan. Such a gambit, they say, would make
clear to Tokyo the cost of denying Chinese claims to the Diaoyu/
Senkaku.
But Zhou Yongsheng, a professor at China Foreign Affairs University,
warns against such tactics.
“Using the Ryukyu sovereignty issue to resolve the Diaoyu dispute
would destroy the basis of China-Japan relations,” Zhou says. “If this
was considered, it would basically be the prelude to military action.”
Nor can Beijing expect much enthusiasm for independence among
Okinawans. While many in the prefecture are unhappy with Japanese
government policies — and with the presence of U.S. troops —
separatist sentiment is muted. A pro-independence candidate who ran
for governor in 2006 received only 6,220 votes.
Chinese questioning of Japan’s sovereignty over Okinawa would also
invite comparisons with Beijing’s policy of suppressing pro-
independence movements among its much more restive Tibetan, Mongolian
and Uighur populations.
Yasukatsu Matsushima, a professor at Ryukoku University in Kyoto, is a
strong advocate of Okinawan independence who believes Tokyo’s rule
over the islands is illegal, but he notes that at least in Japan such
views can be openly expressed.
It would be “strange” if China supported self-determination for
Okinawans but continued to deny it to its own minorities, Matsushima
says.
“We have to consider the background” to any Chinese support for
independence, he says. “We can’t allow Ryukyu independence to be used
as a tool.”
****************
http://english.pravda.ru/world/asia/17-07-2012/121658-china_territorial_claims-0/
China has territorial claims to nearly 20 countries
17.07.2012
Chinese leader Mao Zedong not only built a strong country but also
outlined a global goal: "We must conquer the globe where we will
create a powerful state." Today, China has territorial claims to all
its neighbors. Naturally, the U.S. is dreaming of becoming a mediator
in resolving disputes in the region. But it seems that Beijing
absolutely does not care about their opinion.
Burma, Laos, Northern India, Vietnam, Nepal, Bhutan, Thailand,
Malaysia, Singapore, the Ryukyu Islands, 300 islands of the South
China, East China and Yellow Seas, as well as Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia,
Taiwan, South Kazakhstan, the Afghan province of Bahdashan,
Transbaikalia and the Far East to South Okhotsk - here is the complete
list of areas that, according to Zedong, were lost due to the fall of
the Qing empire. All of these countries and regions combined exceed
the territory of modern China. Not all complaints are voiced by the
Government of China in the international arena, but within the country
the imperialist ambitions have not been lost, but rather, are actively
promoted.
The PRC authorities talk out loud only about the areas that, at least
theoretically, can be taken away from Japan and Korea. Tokyo is
regularly frustrated not only because of the travel of the Russian
leaders to the Kuril Islands, but also about the Chinese ships freely
entering the disputed Senkaku Islands waters. Beijing believes that
the Islands are called Diaoyu, and they belonged to China, but the
malicious Japanese tricked the U.S. into giving them to Japan because
after World War II the uninhabited archipelago was in the US
jurisdiction.
Significant reserves of natural gas were found on the islands. For the
growing industry of China and stagnant Japan it is more than a serious
argument in favor of the struggle for the archipelago, no matter what
it is called. Not to mention the fish that is found there in large
quantities. To date, the only agreement the parties have reached in
the negotiations is on the joint development of oil fields. In
addition, if the Japanese behave more or less decently, the Chinese
are regularly caught for illegal fishing in the area.
Any territorial dispute, but rather, its resolution, is a serious
precedent. If China's claim in respect of at least one territory from
the list of the "lost" is satisfied, the Chinese machine would be
unstoppable. Despite the fact that the Chinese are very pleased to
partner with Russia and have always supported Russia in the UN
Security Council, in person, on the sidelines, its diplomats
supposedly jokingly hint to their Russian colleagues: you must
understand that soon you will have to share the Far East? China has
more than a billion people, while Russia's vast territory barely has
150 million.
These dangerous trends - demographic, and as a result, geopolitical -
must sound scary to the Russian government, but so far it seems that
it is happy with the fact that Beijing makes territorial claims only
to Seoul and Tokyo. In 2005 Russia had already given China a bounty in
the form of 337 square kilometers of land in the area of Big Island
(upper Argun River in the Chita region) and two sites in the vicinity
of the islands Tarabarov and Big Ussuri near the confluence of the
Amur and Ussuri.
However, none of the leaders of the military departments of ASEAN that
includes all debating countries agree to recognize, for example, the
fact that Diaoyu belongs to Japan. Instead, the defense ministers of
Vietnam, Indonesia, Australia, Thailand and Singapore urged the
Japanese authorities to proceed with caution and within the framework
of the international law. These countries certainly do not need a
resolution to the dispute because in that case their territory will be
separated from China only by perseverance of the latter.
They are silent about the "Iodo island" (the Chinese version is
Suenchzhao. - Ed) in the East China Sea. The sneaky Chinese took the
principle of dividing the Arctic as an example and now claim that the
underwater ridge of this tiny piece of land is under close control of
the Chinese. Since the Iodo is closer to Korea, in 2003 the Koreans
built an uninhabitable marine research station there. From the
standpoint of the international law, this rock in general should not
be the subject of a debate.
In any case, the controversy continues, Japan and South Korea remain
to be supported by their all-time ally - the United States. For the
US, the unification of Southeast Asian Nations is a chance to save
their own economy, because in that case the World Trade Center will
move there, where currently there are no transnational corporations in
the amount sufficient for the U.S.
The success of the White House in the region does not depend on the
strength that America loves to show any chance it has, but rather,
diplomacy, as the countries of ASEAN and Asia-Pacific region do not
trust each other or anyone outside the regional boundaries. However,
Washington is trusted here because of the support of Seoul and Tokyo.
However, China has already pushed Japan out of the ranks of the
largest economies in the world, and the structure of the region is no
longer formed on spatial basis.
Therefore, territorial claims of China, and not Russia, India or, for
example, Australia are so important for Washington. Beijing is the
only capital of the world, ready to use force in the struggle for the
sake of expansion. During the last ten years, while America was
blowing up its financial bubble, China has not only developed the
industry, but also equipped its area of interest with military
equipment. China has placed 38 new diesel and nuclear submarines in
the region, purchased four destroyers of class "Modern" from Russia
and built another dozen on its own, and has launched a network of
ground-based ballistic missiles to destroy naval targets.
Only one other country has done this before - the Soviet Union during
the "Cold War". It is no wonder that the Americans are very concerned
with the regular quarrels between China and its major allies.
Construction of a naval base on Hainan Island does not add confidence
to the U.S. The proximity to the Malacca Strait poses a threat to the
smooth supply of Washington's main allies in the region - Japan, South
Korea and Taiwan - this is the way the US sees the situation. The
American senators have already decided that such behavior is a threat
to Beijing's regional peace and stability, economic development and
even "food security". The international community is well aware what
usually follows such wording.
Ilona Raskolnikova
Pravda.Ru
*******************
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/oct/26/inside-china-436801701/?page=all#pagebreak
Threat against ‘little countries’
By Miles Yu
***@gmail.com
China’s official communist newspaper, the Global Times, published a
chilling editorial warning several “little countries” that are
disputing China’s maritime claims in the South China Sea, notably the
Philippines and Vietnam, to “get ready to hear the sound of gunfire.”
Headlined “China Cannot Resort Only to Negotiations Over Maritime
Conflicts, We Must Kill One to Deter One Hundred If Necessary,” the
editorial published Tuesday asked, in a tone of condescension, where
these “little neighboring countries” got the nerve to challenge China.
It called such challenges an “opportunistic strategic offensive
launched by little countries against a big country.”
The newspaper further threatened that the game these countries play
against China would not be easy to win because “China possesses the
force to end such game anytime.”
The report said any fear of a naval war is unnecessary because the
Chinese public had been psychologically getting used to such a naval
conflagration in recent years.
According to the newspaper, the root cause of China’s trouble with
these “little countries” is the United States. “At present various
disputants behave with imperial swagger [against China],” the
commentary said, “as if with the support from the United States, they
all had the force and capabilities to subjugate China.”
The newspaper used the phrase “bodies of waters in East Asia” to
include areas other than the South China Sea where China has
territorial disputes — a clear reference to South Korea and Japan.
Since April 2010, China began deliberately sending regular fishing
fleets accompanied by official government escort ships to disputed
areas of the Spratly’s Island, Senkaku islands, the Korean littoral
area and other murky waters.
These China fishing and escort ships routinely clash with other
nations’ naval patrol ships, including incidents with the Philippine
navy, the South Korean navy and the Japanese coastal patrol vessels
just within the past week, dramatically escalating tensions with
several “little countries.”
Underground Great Wall
The U.S. government this week announced that it had dismantled and
destroyed the last and the largest Cold War-era nuclear weapon, the
B53 gravity bomb, in Amarillo, Texas.
Meanwhile, China is increasing its stockpile of nuclear weapons under
the rubric of a mammoth project called the Underground Great Wall that
includes a 3,000-mile-long subterranean tunnel system used to store
and operate the many thousands of China’s nuclear-carrying missiles.
The system is under the direct supervision of China’s strategic
missile forces known as the Second Artillery Corps.
First reported by the Chinese state television in March 2008 and
confirmed by the Chinese military a year later, the Underground Great
Wall runs several hundred feet below the ground, said James Holmes of
the U.S. Naval War College.
Mr. Holmes wrote in the Japanese-based electronic journal the Diplomat
in August that “the very scale of the underground network opens up new
vistas for Chinese nuclear strategy.”
On Tuesday, the Wall Street Journal quoted former Pentagon nuclear
weapons specialist Philip Karber as fundamentally challenging the
West’s conventional assumption about the size of China’s nuclear
stockpile, officially estimated to include several hundred warheads.
Mr. Karber said gauging the size of China’s nuclear arsenal is
difficult, but the Wall Street Journal article urged an immediate
reconsideration of the underestimated arsenal because “the alternative
is for China, steeped in a 2,500 year military tradition of
concealment, deception and surprise, to announce — at a time and in a
manner of its choosing — its supremacy in a field that we have
foolishly abandoned to our dreams.”
Anti-terrorism law proposed
China announced Monday that it would enact a sweeping law to combat
what the communist state would define as “terrorists” or “terrorist
acts.” These acts include creating public disorder and social panic,
causing public property damage and threatening government agencies.
The law would target international organizations and all others that
abet and finance such “terrorists” and “terrorist acts.”
Human rights activists and thousands of netizens immediately reacted
with anger and protest. Li Tiantian, a Shanghai-based human rights
lawyer, was quoted by overseas Chinese news media as saying: “This law
aims to protect the power structure of the state, to guarantee the
security, stability and power of the government. It is the same as
calling all actions jeopardizing the regime’s rule terrorism,
deserving suppression.”
*************