China and North Korea: What Can China Do?

Red___Sword

Junior Member
Do people actually read Red__Sword's posts? I try to, but no offense, and I can't understand 80% of what he says.

Anyway, if NK ever became prosperous, what would keep them from turning against China like Vietnam?

I say 20% is a good start? (How many % of "feedback" you get from Malagasy members, when we having any thread that talks about Madagascar?)

This thread is simply a political thread so I might as well speak frankly:

I am sure EVERY RANDOM TWO NATION on this planet, if there is a "what if... " concern, they can always work out naturally / diplomatically, and if not, all the way to WAR.

The thing is, some prefers to "manipulate the situation before it is out of hand" (like all the sugguestions kind-hearted-foreign-experts on "what should China do to NK"); some others prefer "let things go naturally" first, and "deal" with what ever consequences.

China seems prefers the 2nd attitude, I don't know why, maybe it's because China have tried both in the past history and get conclusion that the 2nd one causes LESS further problems?
 
Last edited:

Schumacher

Senior Member
That did not stop PRC from supporting the Khmer Rouge government of Cambodia for many years, even though the Khmer Rouge was carrying out systematic genocide of people.

And PRC, being a permanent member of UN, made sure that the UN was not able to do anything to stop the human rights abuses in Cambodia. But I suppose this bit of history isn't mentioned by the media within PRC?

I hope you're not implying China was the Khmer Rouge's only supporter, because if you are you need to re-learn your history.
In fact, the country where you're at was one of the supporters of KR against the VietCong.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The U.S. Is Even More Guilty Than Pol Pot

(Note: Pol Pot died in April 1998, when the U.S. government was making noises about "trying" him for "genocide". Nowhere was there any mention of U.S. support for the Khmer Rouge under Pol Pot, though this had been well documented. The following letter was published in The Montclarion (weekly student newspaper of Montclair State University) of April 23, 1998, page 22, under the title "The U.S. Is Just As Guilty As Pol Pot".)

To the Editor:

In all the hubbub about the death of Pol Pot, neither the U.S. government nor the American news media have seen fit to mention that

this mass murderer was supported for fifteen years by the United States.
the U.S. bombing of Cambodia during 1970-75 killed as many or more Cambodians as Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge ever did;
Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge were not Communists.

These last two facts have been documented by anti-communist researchers (see "Who Is and Was Really Responsible for Genocide in Cambodia? Pol Pot Was Not and Is Not A Communist,"). For example: The Khmer Rouge not communist? Yes, by their own statement:

"We are not communists ... we are revolutionaries" who do not 'belong to the commonly accepted grouping of communist Indochina."(Ieng Sary, 1977, quoted by Vickery, Cambodia: 1978-1983, p. 288).

As for how many were killed by American bombing, Zasloff and Brown, in Problems of Communism, Jan.-Feb. 1979, write of the "heavy toll in lives" which "the enormous U.S. bombing and the intensity of the fighting" caused before 1975, and imply the Khmer Rouge claims of 600,000 to "more than 1 million" dead are credible. (These two authors are dedicated anti-Communists who did much research for the U.S. government during the Vietnam War.)

U.S. support of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge is thoroughly documented in an article in CAQ magazine (formerly Covert Action Quarterly) by Australian journalist John Pilger, "The Long Secret Alliance: Uncle Sam and Pol Pot."* Some quotations from that article:

"The US not only helped to create conditions that brought Cambodia's Khmer Rouge to power in 1975, but actively supported the genocidal force, politically and financially. By January 1980, the US was secretly funding Pol Pot's exiled forces on the Thai border. The extent of this support -- $85 million from 1980-86 -- was revealed 6 years later in correspondence between congressional lawyer Jonathan Winer, then counsel to Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation."

"In 1981, Pres. Carter's national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, said, "I encouraged the Chinese to support Pol Pot. The US", he added, "winked publicly" as China sent arms to the Khmer Rouge(KR) through Thailand."

"In 1980, under US pressure, the World Food Program handed over food worth $12 million to the Thai Army to pass on to the KR. According to former Assistant Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke,'20,000 to 40,000 Pol Pot guerrillas benefited. This aid helped restore the KR to a fighting force, based in Thailand, from which it destabilized Cambodia for more than a decade.'"

"In 1982, the US and China, supported by Singapore, invented the Coalition of the Democratic Government of Kampuchea, which was, as Ben Kiernan pointed out, neither a coalition, nor democratic, nor a government, not in Kampuchea. Rather, it was what the CIA calls a 'master illusion.' ... Cambodia's former ruler, Prince Norodom Sihanouk, was appointed its head; otherwise little changed. The KR dominated the two "non-communist" members, the Sihanoukists and the Khmer Peoples' National Liberation Front (KPNLF). From his office at the UN, Pol Pot's ambassador, the urbane Thereon Parish, continued to speak for Cambodia. A close associate of Pol Pot, he had in 1975 called on Khmer expatriates to return home, whereupon many of them disappeared."

(I have also put another article from Covert Action Information Bulletin No. 34, Summer 1990, on this subject: Jack Colhoun, "On the side of Pol Pot: U.S. Supports Khmer Rouge".*

The United States government pressured the United Nations to retain Pol Pot's representative as the "official" representative of Cambodia to the UN, to keep the pro-Vietnamese government out.

During the past year or two the Khmer Rouge guerrilla forces have begun to disintegrate, and Pol Pot's usefulness to the Western imperialists has evaporated. Therefore the U.S. government has talked vaguely about putting Pol Pot on trial for genocide. His death last week spared the imperialists a potentially embarrassing situation.

.............................
 

vesicles

Colonel
@ vesicles
Me quoting the Texas (alternative) history, is simply hoping you feeling, that "what if you are being chest-thumbed?" (that IF Texas didn't successfully get away from Mexico or get independent or what so ever... only because some 3rd party superpower "INTERVENED", in an alternative and very "realiablly reasoned" history, where "I coup you, you coup him", being very acceptable International Relationship) you pissed? Cause NK people will (eventually) pissed, if what you sugguested has took place in the reality. - Human rights hah?...

What's with the alternative history? No one intervened the independence of Texas. That's it. That's history. No "what if's"! And NO "alternative history" or "what if" should be used in any argument. Also, why do you keep thinking that what happened in Texas should have anything to do with what would happen to NK? I honestly don't see any logic in your argument.

Since not many are confortable of "putting his own feet to others' shoes" kind of debate, please ignore the ACTUAL HISTORY OF TEXAS part. Simply put (for you), China, being kind enough, don't freaking bother the idea of "mess other people's life by putting up a puppet to their home", and eventually suffers whatever shit, like what all the WOULD-BE-SUPERPOWER country in the history.

China's "Being superpower for 5000 years minus recent 200 years" of MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE WISDOM, knows better not to mess up other people's life to show your own superpowering. - CAUSE WE WITNESSED OTHER SUPERPOWER DYING, BY DOING THAT, throughout the history.

OK, let's see. China was in Korea for a thousand years, changing govn'ts and putting puppets in the throne. Let's face it, in the Ming dynasty, Korean emperors needed blessings from the Chinese emperor just to name their own successors. I don't know what you call that, but I see it as intervening a foreign govn't if the said govn't needs your approval just to name their successor.

China was in Vietnam for over a thousand years, doing pretty much the same thing as they were doing in Korea.

What do you think Zhen He was doing on his seven voyages to the oceans? Why do you think he brought that many troops and battle ships with him? You think the great Zhu Di would invest that much money and time on some simple PR stunt? Zhen He was "promoting commerce and enhance Ming's influence". In other words, he was manipulating all those nations to do things in the China's way. If you agree, fine. If you don't, we'll talk with our big and bad army and gun ships.

China IS in Tibet and Xinjiang, doing the same. The Dalai Lama, the original ruler of Tibet, named his successor a while back. However, China's CCP named another boy as the next Dalai Lama and the boy chosen by the current Dalai Lama either disappeared or is now under house arrest. I would call it manipulation.

Yes, China has been a very powerful nation for a long long time. However, if you look at it from another perspective, China did not become and stay that strong by being innocent. Let's face, that's what you do when you become big and strong. It's the nature of things.

I honestly don't see anything wrong with it. That's what big nations do. They manipulate smaller countries to maximize their interests. That's why everyone wants to be big and strong. Smaller nations play a different game. They find their alliance with a big boy (that's what the US did during and after the revolution. They allied with the French). That's why I believe that a multi-polar world would work a lot better than a uni-polar world with a sole superpower since there is no monopoly and smaller nations can play their alliance games with the big boys and maximize their interests.
 
Last edited:

Spartan95

Junior Member
And honestly, I don't find Singapore is wrong when people have nothing better to do to make accuse on Singapore's human right record.

Can't make out what you are trying to say there.

Oh, I forgot to direct answer: Like I post in some-other thread, Chinese people, simply LIKES to review their (our) past experience, the bit of history regarding Cambodia, I personally having had watched a Chinese mainland TV program, of reviewing the mistake of supporting "Red-Khmer-Movement", only because they used the "Red" title.

The CCP has a habit of reviewing past history to glorify themselves. The 90th anniversary of CCP is coming and apparently there is very little mention of the Great Leap Forward, Cultural Revolution and Tiananmen.

Weren't the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution something that the CCP was very proud of? Has the CCP now decided that they are no longer so proud of it and hence don't really want to mention too much?

I wonder what else got "censored" out in the process of reviewing history?
 

i.e.

Senior Member
Can't make out what you are trying to say there.



The CCP has a habit of reviewing past history to glorify themselves. The 90th anniversary of CCP is coming and apparently there is very little mention of the Great Leap Forward, Cultural Revolution and Tiananmen.

Weren't the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution something that the CCP was very proud of? Has the CCP now decided that they are no longer so proud of it and hence don't really want to mention too much?

I wonder what else got "censored" out in the process of reviewing history?

so what's your point?

well I did a google on the united states bicentennial celebration,
no, not a mention of slavery nor slaughter of Native Americans or Jim Crow.

my point?

why does anything positively related to china or the commies has to be a historical confessional session or else a lie/coverup/whitewash? do they have some sort of original sins or something?


f*ing ridiculous if you ask me.
 
Last edited:

solarz

Brigadier
The CCP has a habit of reviewing past history to glorify themselves. The 90th anniversary of CCP is coming and apparently there is very little mention of the Great Leap Forward, Cultural Revolution and Tiananmen.

Weren't the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution something that the CCP was very proud of? Has the CCP now decided that they are no longer so proud of it and hence don't really want to mention too much?

I wonder what else got "censored" out in the process of reviewing history?

Geeze, when you celebrate your birthday, do you start reflecting on all the bad things that happened in your life, as well as the good?

When the US celebrates July 4th, does the US media run stories about slavery and genocide against Natives?

When the Brits celebrate their whatever anniversary, do they reminisce about the Opium Wars?

Every nation has good and bad in their history.
 

T-U-P

The Punisher
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
You guys are getting quite off topic. Watch out for the fat pilot!
 

Spartan95

Junior Member
My point is very simple. Some countries acknowledge their past mistakes and put in place measures to prevent it from happening again. Some countries apologise for their past mistakes and make amends as necessary. Others censor it from their own history and textbooks.

It is quite clear what PRC and DPRK does with their own history.
 

plawolf

Lieutenant General
You mean like how the British teach all their school kids about the opium wars? How the atrocities committed by US troops in the pacific is mentioned every time there is a celebration for the US armed forces?

Every nation and people have parts of their history they are not proud of and are not fond of remembering.

The popular western version of what happened during the great leap forward is also ridiculously biased, and the massive death toll conjured up from pathetically thin and circumstantial support.

My parent's generation actually lived through it, and they know for a fact that its all BS nonsense. And I am far more inclined to believe their first hand accounts, that are corroborated by every one of that generation that I know, than some crap conjured up by people with massive bias and accounts told by defectors who have a huge personal interest in painting the scene as horrific as possible for their new western patrons.

So excuse me if the Chinese people don't lap that distorted account up as the absolute truth when they themselves have far more accurate and compelling accounts of what happened.
 

Schumacher

Senior Member
...........

The popular western version of what happened during the great leap forward is also ridiculously biased, and the massive death toll conjured up from pathetically thin and circumstantial support.
..........

That's true, CIA and western media etc basically did a bidding war to see who could come up with a higher death number attributed to the great leap forward.

Well, if one really wants to look at deaths caused by governments, here's one to think about for yourself rather being forced fed by western propaganda.
An extremely rich and powerful nation of 300 million screwed up their health policies.
The number of deaths is enough to cause the life-expectancy to fall behind other nations of comparable development stage for decades.
Since you won't find any western media talking about numbers on this, you'll have to think for yourself. Number of premature deaths, enough to show up in the life-expectancy measure, in a 300 million population over decades ? I'd say it can easily go into tens of millions.
So what do we call this ? Tiny Step Backward ?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


"Despite High Spending, U.S. Life Expectancy Continues to Fall Behind Other Countries

Growth in U.S. Life Expectancy Continues to Fall Behind That of Other Countries

Obesity, Smoking, Traffic Fatalities and Homicide Are Not to Blame. Research Points to Defects in Our Healthcare System

America continues to lag behind other nations when it comes to gains in life expectancy, and commonly cited causes for our poor performance—obesity, smoking, traffic fatalities and homicide—are not to blame, according to a study by researchers at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health................."
 
Top