Miscellaneous News

solarz said:

The reason the UN didn't change its recognition of China in 1949 was because the US blocked it.

Click to expand...

ROC still existed in 1949, so that is why UN didn't change it's recognition. The civil war was not conclusively over despite Mao declaring PRC, since ROC is still alive, albeit a significantly reduced rump state in Taiwan island. UN is not obligated to recognize PRC because ROC still existed in 1949, not because some UN is beholden to US dictatorship.

solarz said:

The reason it changed the recognition was because the US stopped blocking it.

Click to expand...

If that's the case, then why did US still voted in UNGA resolution against PRC replacing ROC after it allegedly "stopped blocking it"?

solarz said:

The reason the US stopped blocking it was because China grew strong enough that the US needed its support against the USSR.

Click to expand...

If US stopped blocking it, then why did US vote against PRC to replace ROC at UNGA, and why did USSR voted in favor of PRC membership (allegedly a US plot to counter USSR)?

Gotta have some consistency bro. Either US is against it completely or it's against it but UNGA still overruled US objections anyways. The fact that Soviet Union supported PRC in UNGA vote (while US voted no) is the complete opposite of your argument that US "allowed it" to "counter USSR".

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

solarz said:

The world runs on power, not idealism.

Click to expand...

And yet UNGA's 2/3 majority overrode US objections to PRC membership in UN (and US also voted No during UNGA vote). If there was no mechanism for UNGA to override, then UN would repeat the flawed nature of League of Nations. Good thing it's UN Charter creator foresaw superpower abuse of power, and allows UNGA to override superpowers unjust exclusion of PRC.

solarz said:

Nobody is going to evict Russia from the UN because Russia is simply too powerful.

Click to expand...

I'm saying technically there is no reason why a draft resolution could not be introduced to invalidate Russia's claim to legal successor state to Soviet Union, as a response to it's power abuses. Perhaps retain permanent membership but strip it of veto rights. Whether it will pass is anyone's guess, but saying "it won't happen cuz it's powerful". People said the same thing about PRC replacing ROC because US is too powerful and objected. Well, thank goodness for power of UNGA majority.

Phead128 said:

ROC still existed in 1949, so that is why UN didn't change it's recognition. The civil war was not conclusively over despite Mao declaring PRC, since ROC is still alive, albeit a significantly reduced rump state in Taiwan island. UN is not obligated to recognize PRC because ROC still existed in 1949, not because some UN is beholden to US dictatorship.

If that's the case, then why did US still voted in UNGA resolution against PRC replacing ROC after it allegedly "stopped blocking it"?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

If US stopped blocking it, then why did US vote against PRC to replace ROC at UNGA, and why did USSR voted in favor of PRC membership (allegedly a US plot to counter USSR)?

Gotta have some consistency bro. Either US is against it completely or it's against it but UNGA still overruled US objections anyways. The fact that Soviet Union supported PRC in UNGA vote (while US voted no) is the complete opposite of your argument that US "allowed it" to "counter USSR".

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

And yet UNGA's 2/3 majority overrode US objections to PRC membership in UN (and US also voted No during UNGA vote). If there was no mechanism for UNGA to override, then UN would repeat the flawed nature of League of Nations. Good thing it's UN Charter creator foresaw superpower abuse of power, and allows UNGA to override superpowers unjust exclusion of PRC.

I'm saying technically there is no reason why a draft resolution could not be introduced to invalidate Russia's claim to legal successor state to Soviet Union. Whether it will pass is anyone's guess, but saying "it won't happen cuz it's powerful". People said the same thing about PRC replacing ROC because US is too powerful and objected. Well, thank goodness for power of UNGA majority.

Click to expand...

PRC replaced ROC in the UN cause the US indirectly allowed it, by letting its dogs off the leash. To save face, the US still had to vote no, but that doesn't mean privately Nixon and Kissinger didn't support PRC replacing ROC. Read the first/second-hand biographic materials from Nixon, Kissinger, and Bush regarding this issue if you want further proof.

enroger said:

That and a lot of people just can't resist getting baited into those debate.... I swear every time some troll post some brainless comments, you guys would scramble over each other writing entire PHD thesis to counter it... Every. Single. Time.

Click to expand...

allowing misinformation to stand is akin to accepting it as factually true.

On March 02, Zhang Jun, China's ambassador to the UN, calls out the "theft" by the US for stealing the 7 billion USD assets of the Afghan people.

把别人的钱全部归还，不是慷慨美德，而是天经地义。把别人的钱还一半又扣一半，不是施舍而是偷窃。这是最简单不过的道理。美国的作法既不合法，也不合理，更不人道。中方再次呼吁相关国家立即、无条件将这些资产全额归还给阿富汗人民，不要再做雪上加霜的事，更不能在人道问题上搞双重标准。

Click to expand...

Google translation:

Returning all other people's money is not a virtue of generosity, but a matter of course. Paying back half and deducting half of other people's money is not alms but stealing. This is the simplest truth. What the United States does is neither legal, nor reasonable, nor humane. China once again calls on relevant countries to immediately and unconditionally return these assets to the Afghan people in full, and not to make things worse, let alone set double standards on humanitarian issues.

Click to expand...

Full text (in Chinese) of Zhang's speech in the UNSC meeting on Afghanistan on March 02:


Interestingly, CGTN softened the tone in its report (in English):

Zhang Jun, China's permanent representative to the United Nations, on Wednesday criticized Washington's "ruthless freezing or misappropriation" of Afghan assets at a time when Afghanistan battles a humanitarian crisis.

Click to expand...

AssassinsMace said:

Taiwan has been occupied as long as the Russians "occupied" the Kurils. Japan wants to setup up that excuse...?

Click to expand...

The Kurile Islands is strategic for Russia! Russia won't hand those few islands over to Japan. But Japan can take them if Japan is strong enough to do that. Just as simple as that -- every one should live under no illusion!



Another important reason that Russia is taking a hard stance when it comes to giving up the Kuril Islands is a STRATEGIC ONE. The SOUTH KURIL ISLANDS have always been of strategic importance to Russia as they are located between the PACIFIC OCEAN and the SEA OF OKHOTSK. Russia thus views it as the LINKING TERRITORY between the country and the Pacific Ocean. Giving up the territories would damage the efficiency of Russia’s Pacific Fleet’s and Russian security in the North Pacific (Haines, 2014). Additionally controlling the islands, located between the Sea of Okhotsk and the North Pacific Ocean, gives Russia the option to cut off means of entry to the Sea of Okhotsk. During a conflict, this then gives the military the opportunity to deploy nuclear submarines in relative safety (Felgenhauer, 2010).

The Kuril islands are located between the Sea of Okhotsk and the North Pacific

IN THE PAST TEN YEARS Russia has put more emphasis on the STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE of the islands, as part of its plans to develop the RUSSIAN FAR EAST. Since 2006 Russia has been implanting policies aimed at developing the Russian Far East dubbing this regional development a national priority. In 2010 it also started modernising it’s military on a large scale, particularly emphasizing it’s military strength in the East (Brown, 2016, p. 57). As part of this the Kremlin has sought a MORE FORCEFUL POLICY towards the KURIL ISLANDS.

It has begun MODERNISING THE MILITARY FORCES PRESENT IN THE ISLAND and has invested in socio-economic development of the islands (Kato, 2013). In 2011 it reiterated it’s more assertive stance when it carried out the biggest military exercises since the end of the Soviet era in and around the islands (Kazumine, 2013). In 2015 Russia installed modern weapon systems such as COASTAL DEFENCE SYSTEMS and ANTI-SHIP MISSILES SYSTEMS IN THE FOUR DISPUTED ISLANDS and in 2017 its Minister of Defence stated that a NEW ARMY DIVISION WOULD BE SENT TO THE ISLANDS.



These actions are a consequence of Russia’s aim to boost its presence in the area and ITS AWARENESS OF THE CHANGING SITUATION IN THE ARCTIC (Pajon, 2017). The melting of the ice caps of the Arctic Ocean OPENS UP THE NORTHERN PASSAGE to increased ship traffic; this has drawn strong interest from among others China which has been carrying out Arctic exploration.

When China’s ships use the route through the SOYA STRAIT TO GET TO THE ARCTIC OCEAN, they have to sail across the KURIL ISLANDS, through Paramushir or the contested islands of Etorofu and Kunashir. These islands are thus expected to become more influential; as they are part of a ZONE CONTROLLING THE SHIPS ON THEIR WAY TO THE ARCTIC (Kato, 2013). Russia’s expanding military activities on and around the Kuril Islands are thus seen by many as a way of SHOWING ITS POWER NOW THAT CHINA IS BECOMING MORE INVESTED IN THE ARTIC.



Besides sending a message to China, Russia also uses the islands as a way of FENDING OFF THE PRESENCE OF THE U.S. IN EAST-ASIA, as the U.S deploys missile-defence systems to the region (Pajon, 2017). Russia is anxious that Japan is allowing the U.S. to use its territory as a base for a military build-up in north Asia under the guise of countering North Korea (Reuters).

Phead128 said:

ROC still existed in 1949, so that is why UN didn't change it's recognition. The civil war was not conclusively over despite Mao declaring PRC, since ROC is still alive, albeit a significantly reduced rump state in Taiwan island. UN is not obligated to recognize PRC because ROC still existed in 1949, not because some UN is beholden to US dictatorship.

Click to expand...

Again, you don't seem to understand. The UN does what it's most powerful constituents want it to do.

The UN isn't some kind of democratic body for countries. It's a treaty between the most powerful countries in the world to not kill each other because it would end humanity as we know it.

Phead128 said:

If that's the case, then why did US still voted in UNGA resolution against PRC replacing ROC after it allegedly "stopped blocking it"?

Click to expand...

It's called diplomacy. You think 1668 and 2758 just happened out of the good will of the international body? It took years of effort and maneuvering from the PRC. You think it was a coincidence that Nixon visited China shortly after? The recognition of the PRC in the UN was a pre-requisite for normalization of relations with the US. It was all part of the Cold War.

enroger said:

That and a lot of people just can't resist getting baited into those debate.... I swear every time some troll post some brainless comments, you guys would scramble over each other writing entire PHD thesis to counter it... Every. Single. Time.

Click to expand...

FairAndUnbiased said:

allowing misinformation to stand is akin to accepting it as factually true.

Click to expand...

I have different opinion! I guess some trolls are trying to shut the platform/thread posting the info updates on the Russia - Ukraine - US/NATO conflict by deliberately instigating heated polemic... then borrowing the hands of Mods to kill off such platform/thread!

When such lockdown happens, the venue ceases to exist, then it's a clear win for the trolls as one less resource be available... while propaganda and fakenews outlets are omnipresent! Actually the right thing to do is to lock out those trolls... but admittedly it's a daunting task for Mods to track on and identify the trolls and to shut them off... so a simple and quick lockdown is more workable... but it's a loss for every one who's seeking the truth, to sieve the actual information out of the sea of abundant propaganda / disinformation / misinformation, twists and spins,...

Now the Ukraine Conflict Thread is frozen, less info is available HERE!

That's why I am quite reluctant to respond to the trolling posts at great length, not only wasting my time & resources but also add oil to the flame that may cause such thread be locked out by Mods! If I ever respond I will just make it short and blunt... try to pinpoint at best, I have no interest to extend their trolling efforts flooding the thread with saturation! And frankly I am far from having such passion to entertain trolling acts!

It is absurd to harass temporary refugees.

Quality of the US presidential candidates have been deteriorated for years now. It is getting worse.

Quad Jr partner initiation ritual?