|
Post by haplotype on Jul 14, 2009 16:17:27 GMT -5
I'm not saying they couldn't pull it off - I'm saying I'm not sure China would really notice if they did. Do you really think they have the same fragile psyche of New Yorkers, who are naturally nervous people to begin with? I could be totally wrong about this, as I don't read the Chinese news media, but aren't people there a little more inured to terror (at least the older generation that lived through the great leap forward, cultural revolution, etc.)? I just don't see the Chinese going all crazy in the same way that the Japanese and Koreans do when Al-Quaeda or some other group kidnaps some of their workers in Iraq or Afghanistan (or in North Africa in this case since the Chinese aren't involved Iraq or Afghanistan). China has a frail national self-esteem that is easily set off by e.g. maritime territorial disputes with Japan, cultural disputes with South Korea, spy plane incidents with the USA, France bestowing honorary treatment upon the Dalai Lama. (South Korean scholars have made dubious claims that Confucius, Sun Tzu, etc. were ethnically Korean.) In every case, government-encouraged Chinese mobs went all crazy and staged huge violent demonstrations, burning foreign flags, beating up tourists, and making cyber-attacks. Chinese kid jumps on Japanese flag during 2005 riot Anti-French rioters in 2008 Anti-American rioters in 1999 Muslims have a long history of being a nuisance to China through their occasional raids into Han-held territory, so a major attack will easily set off Han fury. So far, Uighurs have been no match against Chinese security forces. They are isolated from other Muslims. They will naively welcome any form of help.
|
|
|
Post by palaver on Jul 14, 2009 19:39:50 GMT -5
I have also said "Oil-exporting Muslim countries can kill multiple birds with one stone -- by pleasing their own people, pleasing the West with lower oil prices, and pleasing the West with 'support of human rights'. [snip] The above sounds like a fine strategy to me. I think you are confusing Western strategy/goals with the Middle East strategy/self interest. But those weren't the comments that had me wondering. I also think you're underestimating the Chinese, that they'd trade access to a vital energy resource for Uighurs. They would actually... but not in the direction you're thinking. Money speaks louder than a mob of angry protesters. The Iranians aren't talking because they're about to sign a $43 billion oil investment deal with China. We've all got our principles until money gets thrown on the table. With that much cash on hand, I don't think the Chinese are going to have trouble navigating Middle East politics. An OPEC embargo against China--the 2nd largest consumer of oil--just sounds like a Western fantasy.
|
|
|
Post by haplotype on Jul 14, 2009 22:03:30 GMT -5
I think you are confusing Western strategy/goals with the Middle East strategy/self interest. The strategy of Middle Eastern oil-producing Muslim countries is to spread their influence to other oil-producing regions of the world, including Xinjiang. Iran has been aggressively expanding its religious missions in Central Asia. If the money works, anyway. Iranians do not worship money as the Chinese do; they will not abandon their political ideology wholesale in the pursuit of money, as the Chinese have. Saudis, Kuwaitis have plenty of money and do not care how much the Chinese offer. A Muslim government that appears to cave in to Chinese money will incur more wrath from its own people than if they stood their ground. If OPEC was willing to embargo against the entire world before, why wouldn't they be willing to boycott against a #2 country?
|
|
|
Post by palaver on Jul 15, 2009 12:50:26 GMT -5
The strategy of Middle Eastern oil-producing Muslim countries is to spread their influence to other oil-producing regions of the world, including Xinjiang. Iran has been aggressively expanding its religious missions in Central Asia. I think you've crossed into the realm of conspiracy theories. Anywho, this is the distribution of remaining oil reserves by region. All the other regions have already peaked except for the Middle East. Don't be fool by North America and their inflated 16%. Canada is playing a numbers game with their tar sands. Take that away and it is actually less than 2%. Eurasia=Russia. They don't care about money??? That's the only reason why the OPEC cartel exists. If you're going to subtract economic considerations from Middle East politics, then your strategic assessment of their goals and interests is going to be seriously flawed. Also, OPEC did not embargo the entire world in 1973 and they lifted the embargo immediately after Arab and Israeli forces agreed to another truce. There are also no caliphate/theocratic governments in the Middle East. There are monarchies, dictatorships, and token democracies. Economic and military issues are always going to take priority.
|
|
|
Post by Subuatai on Jul 24, 2009 9:54:30 GMT -5
In modern times, it seems when a country is occupied, the invaders are known as "Liberators" or "Rightful leaders", while the ones resisting the invaders are known as "Terrorists". Take the Chechens for example. The "Liberators" of course are very righteous indeed in bombing thousands of civilians, destroying cities, destroying their way of life and raping their women.
While the "Terrorists" are of course evil holding up a hundred civilians in a theatre desperately begging for the invaders to withdraw. Propaganda, is just another weapon of war. And it is war, not in terms of national diplomacy, but it's war. The motherland now bleeds. Sure Uyghurstan isn't Chechnya yet, but it's getting there.
National Chinese people can't justify their killings; the land is simply not yours, the people is simply not yours, the culture is simply not yours. And no, there is not even a right of conquest. The land was inherited by Chinese from assimilated Manchu nomads.
|
|
|
Post by haplotype on Jul 29, 2009 12:53:13 GMT -5
All the other regions have already peaked except for the Middle East. Don't be fool by North America and their inflated 16%. Canada is playing a numbers game with their tar sands. Take that away and it is actually less than 2%. Eurasia=Russia. All the more reason for middle eastern countries to assert themselves politically. National Chinese people can't justify their killings; the land is simply not yours, the people is simply not yours, the culture is simply not yours. And no, there is not even a right of conquest. The land was inherited by Chinese from assimilated Manchu nomads. So instead, the real estate can be ceded to the natives, who can continue their killings between tribes, clans, and siblings. Having weak -stan states serve the interests of Iran and Turkey, who would like to expand their spheres of influence.
|
|
|
Post by volume on Jul 29, 2009 21:41:22 GMT -5
China will grow larger.
|
|
|
Post by Subuatai on Aug 14, 2009 8:09:21 GMT -5
So I guess all Kazakhs, Mongols, and other independent Altaic states are still in an endless spiral of civil war. Wow! Thanks to reading your post, I think I have just lost an IQ point
|
|
|
Post by haplotype on Aug 14, 2009 10:55:42 GMT -5
Yup. If it isn't civil war, then it's rule by brutal dictators or the anarchy of incompetent governments. Nationalists would argue this outcome is desirable over a meritocratic system dominated by other ethnic groups. Is the desired outcome an increased average standard of living? Or the abstract perception of "independence" while everyone lives in poverty and violence? I know you are a nationalist, so you would prefer the latter.
|
|
|
Post by palaver on Aug 14, 2009 12:04:59 GMT -5
Forgive my fellow American for his jingoist theories. Some of us were schooled too heavily in American exceptionalism. Have you read the 1958 classic The Ugly American?
|
|
|
Post by haplotype on Aug 14, 2009 13:03:31 GMT -5
Forgive my fellow American for his jingoist theories. Some of us were schooled too heavily in American exceptionalism. ^ America supports the independence of Central Asian states, so any "jingoism" would be Chinese or Russian.
|
|
|
Post by Subuatai on Aug 16, 2009 3:32:24 GMT -5
While independent Altaic states continue to develop at a rapid rate especially Kazakhstan, having a strong developing tourism industry with renowned hospitality. You still fail to acknowledge this fact with your ignorant pre-assumptions of "poverty and violence". And I'm sorry but I've yet to see your so-called "Brutal Dictator" or "Incompetent governments" in central-Asian states, your every post continues to embarrass yourself thanks to your ignorance. Meritocracy is the way of central-Asian states, not the P.R.C. I've been in East Turkistan less then a year ago, I know the situation there. Comparing the behaviour of mainland Han Chinese people to my wife's family in Singapore, I can only say this: I understand why the Uyghurs are pissed as f--k. Unlike you I'm not locked up in America to make up theories about the rest of the world you've never been in. The P.R.C. has no right over E.T., Tibet, or Inner-Mongolia. China rules these lands by inheritance rather then legitimacy, by discrimination rather then meritocracy, by cultural genocide rather then autonomy. Forgive my fellow American for his jingoist theories. Some of us were schooled too heavily in American exceptionalism. Meh, I think I've wasted enough time anyway. I can forgive his religious views but when it comes to this topic I've not seen such ignorance in a very long time.
|
|
|
Post by haplotype on Aug 16, 2009 14:53:21 GMT -5
While independent Altaic states continue to develop at a rapid rate especially Kazakhstan, Really? I show that Kazakhstan's economy shrunk by 2.3% in the first half of this year. www.forexyard.com/en/reuters_inner.tpl?action=2009-08-13T124528Z_01_LD384428_RTRIDST_0_KAZAKHSTAN-GDP-UPDATE-2Kazakhstan's temporary growth surge was spurred by high oil prices, when Russia allowed Kazakhstan to export oil. Now that oil pricers have dropped, their economy has collapsed. In recent years, Kazakhstan has increasingly antagonized Russia on military cooperation, so Russia only needs to turn off the faucet to make Kazakhstan instantly go belly up. As it stands, all the Central Asian republics including Kazakhstan have severe problems with electricity supply, since they kicked out the Russians who knew how to run the power plants. www.eturbonews.com/10678/economic-meltdown-only-latest-woe-oil-rich-kazakhstanwww.nytimes.com/2009/02/27/world/asia/27briefs-POWERGRIDWIT_BRF.html?scp=12&sq=kazakhstan&st=cseReally? According to the US State Department, people can only enter Kazakhstan once, after they have receive a visa from the Kazakh embassy. Anybody that wants to visit Kazakhstan more than once must receive an invitation, and they are not issued to private citizens interested in travel. Tourist visas cannot be extended in Kazakhstan. The government forbirds foreigners from visiting various cities in Kazakhstan. Kazakhstani security personnel may at times place foreign visitors under surveillance. Hotel rooms, telephones and fax machines may be monitored, and personal possessions in hotel rooms may be searched. Taking photographs of anything that could be perceived as being of military or security interest may result in problems with authorities. Extremist groups such as the Islamic Jihad Union, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, al-Qaeda, and the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement explicitly target Western civilians. Terrorists do not distinguish between official and civilian targets. Terrorists are targeting “soft” civilian targets such as residential areas, clubs and restaurants, places of worship, hotels, schools, outdoor recreation events, resorts, beaches, maritime facilities, and aircraft. Is this your idea of "hospitality"? travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1150.htmlSo let's see, Uzbekistan is run by dictator Islam Kharimov, with a proclivity for building concrete walls around his country and suddenly forbidding all foreigners from entering the country for any reason. As far as political dissidents go, Kharimov likes to literally boil them alive. enews.ferghana.ru/article.php?id=2561www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/may/26/nickpatonwalshOr shall we talk about Turkmenistan, where the "Turkmenbashi" president-for-life Saparmurat Niyazov elicited laughs from around the world for naming months of the year after himself, a giant golden statue of himself that turned on electric motors to face the sun, where applying to college meant memorizing the rambling quotes of the dictator? www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/12/31/60minutes/main590913.shtmlBut I know, Turkmenbashi croaked in 2006. Now the country is run by a one-party system of former communists who outlaw all activities by other political parties. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkmenistan#PoliticsSo, what gives anyone the right to rule anywhere? There is inheritance ("we have lived here for 10000 years!!!!"), exclusion of foreigners, and imposing whatever arbitrary culture they have invented.
|
|
|
Post by Subuatai on Aug 16, 2009 16:27:15 GMT -5
So it seems you have decided to go off topic to support P.R.C. tyranny and tank-rolling of civilians further. I don't have much time to discuss this on the net nowadays compared to you, but here we go nonetheless:
First of all, Kazakhstan's economy suffered what? GLOBAL economic crisis, mentioning Kazakhstan's hampered growth recently due to a global crisis ends up achieving nothing except to prove your continual ignorance. And I guess by your comment you are assuming with obvious racism that Kazakhs have no idea which buttons to push to run a power plant properly. How typical of you. I expected no less however.
As for Kazakhstan's policy in regards to immigration laws, these policies never hamper on the hospitality and culture of the people you meet in Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan is not in the same situation as America, but I guess you fail to see that. Kazakhs have no coast rendering economical trade more difficult yet at the same time they themselves are recovering from past Soviet-occupation. Considering the circumstances in which I doubt you will ever understand I would say they are doing quite well.
Kazakhs are not people born in a spoiled lifestyle such as yourself with the attitude to point the figure at the less fortunate. Despite their conditions they are managing themselves very well and developing their newly independent country to the best of their ability. However, if you wish to compare a fully-developed nation such as America to a new developing nation such as Kazakhstan, then it would seem I'm wasting my time on a completely ignorant bigot.
Sure I can always do what other Mongols do and say "Forget the Muslim Turks", but being in E.T. and witnessing firsthand Han Chauvanism - which is completely in contradiction with the culture and people I have met and experienced in Singapore... I'd rather stand for the "Allah oh Ackbar" chanting Turks then to be against them.
Money money money, So I guess that's all mainland Chinese think about, happiness = money. Many Mongolian herders still live on the steppe with only minor modern modifications (such as unlimited wireless internet access in their gers - lucky bastards); are happy and content with their lives being close to nature. But I guess economics is everything, typical chinaman.
And as for Kazakhs; If you have complaints, feel free to tell the Kazakhs you meet (in which you have met none), unfortunately I guess you have no complaints of the people, since you have never been there, except from what you see on the internet and media such as the movie Borat rather then to meet Kazakhs themselves.
Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan are far west of Central Asian republics, their problems other Altaic states are already hoping to remedy within the C.A.U., oh in which I'm so sorry that the CAU isn't part of China which you love so dearly.
Uzberkistan and Turkmenistan, their actions are no less severe then the P.R.C. itself. The only strength within the People's Republic of China has are economics, strong industrial foundation and global recognition, allowing it to destroy Tibetan culture robbing them of the rights promised to them by Manchurians as well as massacring Uyghurs with impunity with nothing more to deal with then a few protests on the streets. Unfortunately genocide is something I can't support unlike yourself.
As for who has the right to rule: Kalmykia had a chance to be independent at the fall of the U.S.S.R., Kalmyks chose to remain. How? Why? Kalmyks themselves have suffered in the past due to Stalin, Soviets were responsible for the second genocide of my people. But we are not stupid enough to blame the actions of an entire nation due to one man who has massacred enough of Slavics as well. But the current Russian Federation is respecting Kalmyk automony (it's not even our territory - we stole it from the Turks). Can we say the same for E.T.? I'm sorry but no. As much as Russian imperialism continues, P.R.C. imperialism is a much stronger threat and something no Mongol or Turk would accept.
The right to rule in the end is dictated by natural law and order, those who are strong yet fair enough to rule. The P.R.C. fails in this. I've seen how they fail, and I'm simply not impressed by your Pro-HuJinTao nationalism despite the fact you live in America unexposed to the reality to the situation at present. If Uyghurstan would indeed prosper under P.R.C. rule, there would be no rebellion. No one fights for no reason, religion is only an enforcer, political situations are always the motivator. Learn this.
Sure those Turkeymen have a lot of crap I don't agree with it. But they have the right to stand up for themselves in E.T. China would be smart to remember the ways of Manchurians rather then the genocidal culture of the Han in regards to dealing with steppe people. You want China to stay together, you better realise your tank-rolling ain't working.
Fanatical islam is a problem, that I can agree with at least. I know from what I've seen, but for what's it worth, it's helping Uyghurs find the resolve to stand against a tyrant. Lesser of two evils.
|
|
|
Post by EAgent on Aug 17, 2009 11:39:39 GMT -5
Fanatical islam is a problem, that I can agree with at least. I know from what I've seen, but for what's it worth, it's helping Uyghurs find the resolve to stand against a tyrant. Lesser of two evils. Sick, sick, sick. How can this be the "lesser evil"? This is not some threat. This is reality... You guys don't understand.Got nothing against the Uyghurs, if they dare go jihad I'll be cheering the Chinese with gusto. Let us pray the Uyghurs free themselves from the tentacles of this death cult and return to their life-loving Buddhist traditions. Perhaps then their mandate for independence will be moral.
|
|