Is China planning a Military Strike beyond its borders?

Roger604

Roger604

Senior Member
Violet Oboe said:
A certain degree of deniability would be welcome..., even the Soviets became during the 70's and 80's well behaved and used their proxies like Bulgaria for doing the ´dirty work´. (e.g. the failed hit on the pope in 1981 is still surrounded by a massive mist of disinformation!)

Iran was rather successful in neutralizing many opposition figures during the 80's and early 90's in Europe and the Middle East but Tehran was in a situation of fighting for survival and today China should have better methods to deal with creatures like Kadeer.
Click to expand...

You want to intimidate, not deny it. Part of the effectiveness is that as soon as they know they are "marked," they need to live in fear of every single person they come across. They become afraid to do public events.

And this program can be expanded. Say some Hollywood actor or athlete decides to aggressively support anti-China causes. Bam, they're on the hit list. Or even further, suppose a reporter writes biased news reports against China. Bam, they're on the list.
 
bladerunner

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
Roger604 said:
You want to intimidate, not deny it. Part of the effectiveness is that as soon as they know they are "marked," they need to live in fear of every single person they come across. They become afraid to do public events.
Click to expand...
All you are doing is preventing "freedom of speech". Now that would really go down well in the West.
I would have thought the idea in these covert ops, would be to "Whack them" within an environment of deniability

And this program can be expanded. Say some Hollywood actor or athlete decides to aggressively support anti-China causes. Bam, they're on the hit list. Or even further, suppose a reporter writes biased news reports against China. Bam, they're on the list.
Click to expand...

Now that's really being stupid and wont get you far.
Click to expand...
 
FriedRiceNSpice

FriedRiceNSpice

Captain
And this program can be expanded. Say some Hollywood actor or athlete decides to aggressively support anti-China causes. Bam, they're on the hit list. Or even further, suppose a reporter writes biased news reports against China. Bam, they're on the list.
Click to expand...

If a major western celebrity was attacked, then you can kiss goodbye any sorts of positive relations between China and the West. China will be made to look a hundred times worse in the media than it does currently, and China can kiss goodbye to all the goodwill programs such as what the NBA is doing in China now. No one would want to carry Chinese goods or do business with China.
 
Roger604

Roger604

Senior Member
Other governments might not be happy, but that's the whole point. You let them know where the red line is.

In the end, they will realize that they need China a lot more than China needs them. If they want to isolate themselves from China, go ahead.



FriedRiceNSpice said:
If a major western celebrity was attacked, then you can kiss goodbye any sorts of positive relations between China and the West. China will be made to look a hundred times worse in the media than it does currently, and China can kiss goodbye to all the goodwill programs such as what the NBA is doing in China now. No one would want to carry Chinese goods or do business with China.
Click to expand...

Don't you see, that's the beauty of it. If somebody wants to pillory China for creating the hit list, then.... they're on the hit list too.

That's the beauty of it, because the whole idea involves persuading people in other countries to serve Chinese interests, simply because China has money. We use the money in a way that extends our power.
 
Last edited:
A

adeptitus

Captain
VIP Professional
To do an off-shore strike, you need:

1) The capability
2) Politically feasible target

Most of the people who were involved in 9-11 were from Saudi or Egypt? US has the capability to strike against suspects within those two countries, but it's not politically acceptable to hit your own allies. So the US hit Afghan instead because the Taliban was expendable.

The 2008 Mumbai attacks came from terrorists inside Pakistan. Again, India may have the military capability, but it was politically unacceptable to use the military against suspected Lashkar-e-Taiba training camps inside Pakistan. That would risk escalating the incident to a war against two nuclear powers.

If the PRC leadership really wanted to, I'm sure they can send ships somewhere to launch a few land-attack cruise missiles. But there's no politically acceptable targets to hit with the military, nor can you trust some supposed Islamic group abroad claiming responsibility being real -- anyone can create videos and upload them. There are governments, political factions, and even business people who'd benefit from worsened relations between China and Turkey/Algeria/etc.

If Beijing primary concern is Xinjing breaking away, then the simple solution would be to send sufficient immigrants to the region and take away that possibility. Compared to other past Imperial powers, China is one of very few that was able to come out of 19th-20th century with the majority of its territory intact. The PRC is the 3rd or 4th largest country in the world today and there's still much territory that is under-developed. Rather than looking across the sea, perhaps the government should invest more effort in the "Go West" program to settle the 60% under-populated regions of China.

Bumping people off is a short-term fix, vs. settling Xinjing with people is the long-term solution. Rather than sending migrants into existing cities and clashing with long-time Uighur residents, maybe planning and creating brand new cities dotted across Xinjing would be better? As a LAST resort, allocate a Singapore-sized piece of territory and send all the Uighur nationalists there -- you can have your own territory but you must stay on your side and we'll stay on our side. You cross the line to cause trouble, we shoot you.
 
Last edited:
bladerunner

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
Roger604 said:
In the end, they will realize that they need China a lot more than China needs them. If they want to isolate themselves from China, go ahead.
Click to expand...

That is not necessarily so. It depends on how you look at it and how far one is prepared to go.
 
bladerunner

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
adeptitus said:
Rather than sending migrants into existing cities and clashing with long-time Uighur residents, maybe planning and creating brand new cities dotted across Xinjing would be better?
Click to expand...

Not a bad idea, but they have to be more than dormitory towns/cities, and serve some economic purpose.

As a LAST resort, allocate a Singapore-sized piece of territory and send all the Uighur nationalists there -- you stay on your side and we stay on our side. You cross the line to cause trouble, we shoot you.
Click to expand...

I cant see that working, look at S. Africa and its old apartheid policy, utter disaster.
Click to expand...
 
Engineer

Engineer

Major
Roger604 said:
You want to intimidate, not deny it. Part of the effectiveness is that as soon as they know they are "marked," they need to live in fear of every single person they come across. They become afraid to do public events.

And this program can be expanded. Say some Hollywood actor or athlete decides to aggressively support anti-China causes. Bam, they're on the hit list. Or even further, suppose a reporter writes biased news reports against China. Bam, they're on the list.
Click to expand...

First of all, I think that is too extreme. Secondly, I think public-figures and celebrities are the wrong targets. They are only media-whores, and are actually pretty useless otherwise.

You want the targets to be crucial, yet nobody would give them a second thought until it is too late. One example would be secretaries. Do you have any idea how much time a secretary would need before getting used to the job? Months. Imagine you kill their secretaries, then a few months later you kill the new ones, then repeat.
 
Last edited:
vesicles

vesicles

Colonel
adeptitus said:
If Beijing primary concern is Xinjing breaking away, then the simple solution would be to send sufficient immigrants to the region and take away that possibility. Compared to other past Imperial powers, China is one of very few that was able to come out of 19th-20th century with the majority of its territory intact. The PRC is the 3rd or 4th largest country in the world today and there's still much territory that is under-developed. Rather than looking across the sea, perhaps the government should invest more effort in the "Go West" program to settle the 60% under-populated regions of China.
Click to expand...

I know that China has been implementing the "go west" program for a while. Why isn't it working? It's probably not long enough. It's been only about 10-15 years since they started it. Also the harsh conditions in Xinjiang probably discourage people from going.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top