Khan
10/14/2022, 18:00:35
Author Profile | Edit
|
ý@ýýýýHin reply to WT Economist
.
For China I have this question. After WWII, the [U.S concluded that the path to peace and prosperity was a set of international rules that applied to all, everywhere in the world.
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iHKtrirjlY
.
The Chinese seemed to want no rules -- you do what you want in your country, and so does everyone else, and no matter how cruel or evil it is, what happens to other people is none of your business.
.
Or at least that was the way it was two years ago. Now that Donald Trump wants no rules and no international order, the Chinese seem to be in favor of one, at least some of the time.
.
Now imagine this scenario. The Chinese are now an international people. They may not be stuck with military bases defending allies all over the world like the U.S., but there are people of Chinese descent living all over the world. And as the country's economy grows, there are Chinese doing business all over the world.
.
And China is a racial regime -- a country of Han Chinese people along with a few minorities, not a country trying to move beyond tribalism like the U.S. (once the Baby Boomers die off). China is heading in a nationalist direction, kind of like Europe 100 years ago.]
.
Rules Amelikan style:
.
{The FACTS are that the US facilitated and enabled Japan's aggression against a China in decline:
.
'One should keep in mind that it was in fact Japan, not China, that had benefited from these countries’ support. Japan’s primary source of raw materials like petroleum and scrap iron for its war in China, and of high-end technology like machine tools was the United States. In 1938 the United States (57.1 per cent), the United Kingdom and its empire (Malaya, Canada, India, Australia, 20.7 per cent), and the Dutch and Dutch East Indies (8.6 per cent) supplied 86.4 per cent of Japan’s imported war materials. The United States produced 60% of the world’s oil; the Dutch East Indies less than 10%; 55% of Japan’s oil came from the United States, 14% from the Soviet Union, and 10% from the Dutch Indies.'
.
http://apjjf.org/2012/10/37/Richard-J.-Smethurst/3825/article.html
.
And protected and nurtured Japan after WWII:
.
'The result of the U.S. role in the occupation and in controlling the treaty process has been described by John Dower in his recent book, Embracing Defeat: "One of the most pernicious aspects of the occupation was that the Asian peoples who had suffered most from imperial Japan's depredations-- the Chinese, Koreans, Indonesians, and Filipinos had no serious role, no influential presence at all in the defeated land. They became invisible. Asian contributions to defeating the emperor's soldiers and sailors were displaced by an all-consuming focus on the American victory in the Pacific War" (p. 27). The peripheralization of Asia in the SFPT therefore was no coincidence. It reflected the U.S.'s appropriation of the pan-Asian fight against Japanese imperialism as well as its determination to project its imperial values in the region. Japan would be its adjutant, a role for which Yoshida carefully fought. This required that the U.S. government fully nurture Japan's dual identity -- aligning it with the West and alienating it from Asia. Behind this manipulation also lay a deep-seated fear of Asian nationalism that was expressed through the demonization of communism."'
.
.
The US not only protected the Japanese state. It also gave protection to the known war criminals including the so-called "doctors" of Unit 731:
.
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4maLMHIR_84
.
http://apjjf.org/-Christopher-Reed/2177/article.html
.
US policy after WWII has been consistent. It punishes NOT the guilty, which is Japan, but the weak, which are Japan's former victims. It maintained "peace" in Asia NOT by dispensing justice but used its military power to perpetuate the INJUSTICE that was the cause of the war in the first place. Why should anyone be surprised that there are those who do NOT like such an arrangement??? The victims of Japan had no choice for the past 50-60 years but to swallow that injustice, because they were militarily too weak to challenge that setup. Now, however, these countries are no longer so weak and want justice!}
.
[ What happens if, in some country somewhere (and I'm not thinking of the U.S.) the Chinese minority is not only not treated fairly, but is somehow attacked and persecuted in a way inconsistent with the norms the U.S. wished to impose? Would China be in favor of non-intervention in the face of an anti-Chinese pogram?]
.
That happened EXACTLY. It was orchestrated by Amelika:
.
http://www.scmp.com/news/asia/southeast-asia/article/2115854/declassified-embassy-files-detail-us-support-indonesias
.
So, what did Amelika do in Indonesia that caused it to treat the Chinese minority "fairly"???!!!
.
The US also took a RACE view when it comes to the punishment of war-criminals:
.
{In 1945-46, representatives of the United States government made similar discoveries in both Germany and Japan, unearthing evidence of unethical experiments on human beings that could be viewed as war crimes. The outcomes in the two defeated nations, however, were strikingly different. In Germany, the U.S., influenced by the Canadian physician John Thompson, played a key role in bringing Nazi physicians to trial and publicizing their misdeeds. In Japan, the U.S. played an equally key role in concealing information about the biological warfare experiments and securing immunity from prosecution for the perpetrators. The greater force of appeals to national security and wartime exigency help to explain these different outcomes.
.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4487829/ }
.
"The greater force" was, in fact, RACE. Race was the biggest factor that "explained these different outcomes". Uncle Sam had a much greater "security and wartime exigency" in Europe with respect to the Soviet Union, as it had in Asia with respect to China-- simply because the USSR was far, far more powerful than China was and so the Soviets got their justice by The Rape of Berlin, while the Chinese got none.
.
{'No, the Koreans and the Chinese bear a large share of the blame...'
.
http://nation.time.com/2012/12/11/why-japan-is-still-not-sorry-enough/ }
.
The Amelikans bear the LARGEST share of the blame. Even Kirk Spitzer is being dishonest, or being racist! China could in no way be compared with the Soviet Union and so there was no "security and wartime exigency" problem in the East.
.
Spitzer clearly is not a Chinese or a Korean. So, to him "gooks don't count". To be fair, that mentality is not restricted to the Whites. The Indonesians have their own version too:
.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/11/10/indonesia-selfie-museum-stirs-outrage-with-nazi-display.html
.
To Spitzer, putting salt on Chinese or Korean wounds is just like ' "fun" for teenagers '!!!
.
Devil's
|
For China I have this question. After WWII, the [U.S concluded that the path to peace and prosperity was a set of international rules that applied to all, everywhere in the world.
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iHKtrirjlY
.
The Chinese seemed to want no rules -- you do what you want in your country, and so does everyone else, and no matter how cruel or evil it is, what happens to other people is none of your business.
.
Or at least that was the way it was two years ago. Now that Donald Trump wants no rules and no international order, the Chinese seem to be in favor of one, at least some of the time.
.
Now imagine this scenario. The Chinese are now an international people. They may not be stuck with military bases defending allies all over the world like the U.S., but there are people of Chinese descent living all over the world. And as the country's economy grows, there are Chinese doing business all over the world.
.
And China is a racial regime -- a country of Han Chinese people along with a few minorities, not a country trying to move beyond tribalism like the U.S. (once the Baby Boomers die off). China is heading in a nationalist direction, kind of like Europe 100 years ago.]
.
Rules Amelikan style:
.
{The FACTS are that the US facilitated and enabled Japan's aggression against a China in decline:
'One should keep in mind that it was in fact Japan, not China, that had benefited from these countries’ support. Japan’s primary source of raw materials like petroleum and scrap iron for its war in China, and of high-end technology like machine tools was the United States. In 1938 the United States (57.1 per cent), the United Kingdom and its empire (Malaya, Canada, India, Australia, 20.7 per cent), and the Dutch and Dutch East Indies (8.6 per cent) supplied 86.4 per cent of Japan’s imported war materials. The United States produced 60% of the world’s oil; the Dutch East Indies less than 10%; 55% of Japan’s oil came from the United States, 14% from the Soviet Union, and 10% from the Dutch Indies.'
.
http://apjjf.org/2012/10/37/Richard-J.-Smethurst/3825/article.html
.
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4maLMHIR_84
.
http://apjjf.org/-Christopher-Reed/2177/article.html
.
US policy after WWII has been consistent. It punishes NOT the guilty, which is Japan, but the weak, which are Japan's former victims. It maintained "peace" in Asia NOT by dispensing justice but used its military power to perpetuate the INJUSTICE that was the cause of the war in the first place. Why should anyone be surprised that there are those who do NOT like such an arrangement??? The victims of Japan had no choice for the past 50-60 years but to swallow that injustice, because they were militarily too weak to challenge that setup. Now, however, these countries are no longer so weak and want justice!}
.
[ What happens if, in some country somewhere (and I'm not thinking of the U.S.) the Chinese minority is not only not treated fairly, but is somehow attacked and persecuted in a way inconsistent with the norms the U.S. wished to impose? Would China be in favor of non-intervention in the face of an anti-Chinese pogram?]
.
That happened EXACTLY. It was orchestrated by Amelika:
.
http://www.scmp.com/news/asia/southeast-asia/article/2115854/declassified-embassy-files-detail-us-support-indonesias
.
The US also took a RACE view when it comes to the punishment of war-criminals:
.
{In 1945-46, representatives of the United States government made similar discoveries in both Germany and Japan, unearthing evidence of unethical experiments on human beings that could be viewed as war crimes. The outcomes in the two defeated nations, however, were strikingly different. In Germany, the U.S., influenced by the Canadian physician John Thompson, played a key role in bringing Nazi physicians to trial and publicizing their misdeeds. In Japan, the U.S. played an equally key role in concealing information about the biological warfare experiments and securing immunity from prosecution for the perpetrators. The greater force of appeals to national security and wartime exigency help to explain these different outcomes.
.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4487829/ }
.
{'No, the Koreans and the Chinese bear a large share of the blame...'
.
http://nation.time.com/2012/12/11/why-japan-is-still-not-sorry-enough/ }
.
.
Spitzer clearly is not a Chinese or a Korean. So, to him "gooks don't count". To be fair, that mentality is not restricted to the Whites. The Indonesians have their own version too:
.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/11/10/indonesia-selfie-museum-stirs-outrage-with-nazi-display.html
.
To Spitzer, putting salt on Chinese or Korean wounds is just like ' "fun" for teenagers '!!!
.
Devil's