Chinese General news resource thread

[Doombreed]

Notice you didn't compare the BBC to the NHK for doing the exact same thing either?

The UK is not being accused of limiting religious freedoms of Muslims. China is. You comes back with, "Oh the Poms treat their muslims mean too". That make you the Osaka mayor. Not the other way around.

 

[Blackstone]

South Korea nudges closer to China as Japan returns to its militaristic roots. As Japan continues to rearm, we'll see more and more nervous nations.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

When Chinese President Xi Jinping touches down in Seoul around midday Thursday, he will be landing very much in friendly territory.

Increasingly, South Koreans view the rise of their giant neighbor to the west with a favorable eye, preferring to accentuate the positive as Beijing and Seoul strengthen their political and economic ties.

According to a new survey by the Asan Institute for Policy Studies, a Seoul-based think tank, South Koreans are far more likely to view China as a cooperative partner (61%) rather than as a competitive rival (33%). For Asan, which has conducted a monthly poll of 1,000 South Koreans since January 2013, that is near a high watermark.

More broadly, South Koreans’ view of China has remained steadily near peak levels in recent months, the survey found.

It helps that — with apologies to Ieodo – South Korea doesn’t have a major territorial spat with China, and that the two countries draw from the same well of historical animosity against Japan.

South Koreans also increasingly believe that Beijing is slowly shifting its allegiance away from its historical ally in Pyongyang. When it comes to the two countries’ shared neighbor, South Koreans are fairly evenly split on whether China would aid the North in the case of war.

Just 35% of respondents said they expected China to help the North in a resumption of hostilities, compared to 76% expressing that view in 2012. While methodological differences in how respondents were polled may account for the sharp drop, Asan’s analysts chalk up the difference to a perception of China’s tougher stance on North Korea and its nuclear weapons program since Mr. Xi assumed the presidency in November 2012.

Of course, all of this isn’t to say that South Koreans are fully trusting of the Chinese either. Though China’s rise doesn’t directly threaten South Korea, respondents said, Beijing’s rapid military ramp-up is likely to raise the temperature in northeast Asia — by deepening existing disputes, increasing U.S.-China competition and triggering a regional arms race.

On economic matters, too, China isn’t seen as an unalloyed positive. Indeed, as China works its way up the economic value chain, it threatens to rival and even overtake Korean companies — much as companies like Samsung Electronics and LG Electronics overtook their Japanese rivals.

Asan’s poll found 72% of respondents describing China as an economic threat, up from 53% two years ago.

 

[AssassinsMace]

The UK is not being accused of limiting religious freedoms of Muslims. China is. You comes back with, "Oh the Poms treat their muslims mean too". That make you the Osaka mayor. Not the other way around.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Bigger hypocrite. And it's from the BBC...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Maybe that's different, right?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Look at the similar fallacious attacks to divert attention away from the hypocrisy. The people who can care less about Muslim rights pointing the finger at another for violating Muslim rights? Yeah that says there's a lot of credibility.

 

[Doombreed]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Bigger hypocrite. And it's from the BBC...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Maybe that's different, right?

You're still not getting it. You're being an apologist for religious persecution in China. That's not cool dude. What you're trying to imply is that the banning of fasting in Ramadan is not a big deal, since the Europeans are treating their Muslim population harshly too. One wrong does not make another wrong right.

And that's the same arguement that the Osaka mayor was trying to make. Think about how you feel when you read the comment from the Osaka mayor. Now think about what you're saying.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Educate yourself.

 

[T-U-P]

Enough! No more personal attacks here.

- TUP

 

[Blitzo]

You're still not getting it. You're being an apologist for religious persecution in China. That's not cool dude. What you're trying to imply is that the banning of fasting in Ramadan is not a big deal, since the Europeans are treating their Muslim population harshly too. One wrong does not make another wrong right.

And that's the same arguement that the Osaka mayor was trying to make. Think about how you feel when you read the comment from the Osaka mayor. Now think about what you're saying.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Educate yourself.

Going through this last chain of posts, I don't see how A Mace was being an apologist for anything. Rather he is highlighting hypocrisy. The way I see it, his posts are saying the subliminal messages perceived from the BBC about China being all anti muslim are rich considering the rise of anti Islam actions in the UK (and larger Europe) as well, which usually lacks the same "omg china authoritarian -- religious persection aslfja;sldf" spark.

I don't think he said anywhere that China has a right to do X or Y because other countries have done X or Y.

As for cognitive dissonance, well, everyone should experience it in some regard because no one ever holds completely concordant beliefs. Invoking cognitive dissonance doesn't add much to your chain of argument.
You can accuse him of a Tu Quoque fallacy at best, but I've always disliked that particular fallacy, because while the position they may make is valid, positions are not ever made in a vacuum, and in the larger scheme of things (whether it be world history or a conversation), hypocrisy and holding positions differing from one's actions is not irrelevant.

---


Edit: I see the last few posts were removed. Mods can remove this one too, if appropriate. That said, I don't think I'm making any personal attacks.

 

[Blackstone]

It seems the Red Emperor's overture to President Park isn't going down well in Pyongyang, and Abe is taking advantage of the spat.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

This week will witness two unusual bilateral meetings. The first was held in Beijing as Japan and North Korea continue talks over the investigation of abducted Japanese citizens. The second occurs today in Seoul as Chinese President Xi Jinping makes a rare visit to South Korea before visiting North Korea. While bilateral topics will likely take center stage, issues of mutual concern between the pairs will also factor in. Japan’s new interpretation of collective self-defense will give all parties cause to take notice, while North Korea’s intransigence toward China and recent opening toward Japan is likely a factor in the order of Xi’s visits.

There has been little information as yet from the meetings in Beijing. At the opening, Japan’s head delegate Junichi Ihara said it would “be an important step in resolving the outstanding issues that lie between Japan and North Korea.” Japan brought up Pyongyang’s firing of a short-range ballistic missile this weekend, with North Korea defending itself by saying it did not agree to the U.N. Security Council’s ban on such tests, according to the Wall Street Journal. However, given the limited nature of the current negotiations, neither side has much to lose, no matter how the talks pan out. Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe would simply revert to his hardline approach to North Korea’s insincerity on the negotiations and the constant endangering of regional security through Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile tests. For North Korea, falling back on its decades-long policy of denouncing Japan as an untrustworthy former colonial power usually plays well at home.

However, the potential upsides to the negotiations are significant. A satisfactory settlement for Japan of the abductees issue would be a political coup for Abe, who this week made significant headway in his attempts to normalize Japan’s military posture. North Korea reaching a settlement (albeit a minor lift in sanctions and increased aid) would be a clear indication to China that Pyongyang can create more options for itself in the region, and thus less relative dependence on Beijing.

The meeting between Xi and South Korean President Park Geun-hye will also give Japan and North Korea reason to take pause. The Chinese media has been highly critical of Japan’s move this week to change the interpretation of Article 9 of its pacifist Constitution. Both Beijing and Seoul have also expressed outrage at Japan’s recent reinvestigation into the possible South Korean influence behind the 1993 Kono statement, which apologized for Japan’s use of “comfort women” during the Second World War. As Xi signals favoritism to Seoul over Pyongyang during his visit, and the two sides resume free trade agreement talks, Xi may likely use Japan’s colonial past to further stoke anti-Tokyo sentiment, much as he tried to do in March this year when visiting Germany. Experts also expect China and South Korea to find common ground on North Korea. Shi Yinhong, an international relations professor at China’s Renmin University, expects that “During the summit talks, China is expected to guarantee that it will continue to seriously implement U.N. Security Council resolutions and maintain its stern attitude toward North Korea because North Korea sticks to nuclear weapons,” according to an interview with Yonhap News Agency.

This unusual shift by China toward the shared U.S.-South Korean-Japanese position on North Korea’s nuclear weapons, even as Japan and North Korea enter bilateral talks and Pyongyang attempts to reduce its dependence on Beijing, suggests that the regional security calculus is in flux. Granted, at this point it would not take much effort for all parties to revert to status quo ante. It is the duration and persistence of the shift, particularly with regard to Japan and North Korea that is interesting, and that change may be the catalyst for further unusual behavior from Beijing. If China perceives that its relative control over North Korean foreign policy is declining, particularly at the expense of greater Japanese influence, it may well be tempted to use its remaining influence (like Pyongyang’s dependence on Chinese energy) to pull North Korea back into line, and away from Tokyo.

 

[Blackstone]

Going through this last chain of posts, I don't see how A Mace was being an apologist for anything. Rather he is highlighting hypocrisy. The way I see it, his posts are saying the subliminal messages perceived from the BBC about China being all anti muslim are rich considering the rise of anti Islam actions in the UK (and larger Europe) as well, which usually lacks the same "omg china authoritarian -- religious persection aslfja;sldf" spark.

I don't think he said anywhere that China has a right to do X or Y because other countries have done X or Y.

As for cognitive dissonance, well, everyone should experience it in some regard because no one ever holds completely concordant beliefs. Invoking cognitive dissonance doesn't add much to your chain of argument.
You can accuse him of a Tu Quoque fallacy at best, but I've always disliked that particular fallacy, because while the position they may make is valid, positions are not ever made in a vacuum, and in the larger scheme of things (whether it be world history or a conversation), hypocrisy and holding positions differing from one's actions is not irrelevant.

---

Edit: I see the last few posts were removed. Mods can remove this one too, if appropriate. That said, I don't think I'm making any personal attacks.

The original topic was China banning Ramadan fasting Xinjing and possible consequence of it, and he tried to steer it off on a tangent.

 

[Blitzo]

I don't really see how much traction Abe can gain with NK even despite a falling out between NK and China (and things haven't quite gotten that bad yet).

Japan can hardly pursue a meaningful relationship without the US's tacit approval, and I doubt the US would be too keen on Japan siding with NK if NK doesn't do anything to change its nuclear ambitions. And the US can't exactly keep quiet with its most important ally in east asia cosying up with the most backwards, despotic and self destructive nation on the planet, which happens to be an enemy of both the US and its second most important ally in east asia.


He might score a few short term points, but I think the chances of a more beneficial and longer term (and more geopolitically significant) relationship between China and SK is far more likely than one occurring between NK and Japan, at least in the short to medium term.

 

[Blitzo]

The original topic was China banning Ramadan fasting Xinjing and possible consequence of it, and he tried to steer it off on a tangent.

This isn't a thread about China banning Ramadan that limits us to only talking about the consequences of it in China, it is a general news thread.

So there is no circle for a tangent to steer off. Anything is fair game so long it is related to general Chinese news.

And again, I repeat, Doombreed's assertion that A Mace was using examples in the UK and Europe to "justify" China's banning of ramadan is off the mark, as A Mace never said that and was only pointing out the hypocrisy of media reporting. Whatever other conclusions he or others may have drawn was their own prerogative.