Pajamas Media

58 Comments

1. kabud:

War Is Not Far from Us and Is the Midwife of the Chinese Century. Leading CCP official argues for exterminating U.S. population Aug 08, 2005

The following is a transcript of a speech believed to have been given by Mr. Chi Haotian, Minster of Defense and vice-chairman of China�s Central Military Commission. Independently verifying the authorship of the speech is not possible. It is worth reading because it is believed to set out the CCP�s strategy for the development of China. The speech argues for the necessity of China using biological warfare to depopulate the United States and prepare it for a future massive Chinese colonization.

Comrades,

I�m very excited today, because the large-scale online survey sina.com that was done for us showed that our next generation is quite promising and our Party�s cause will be carried on. In answering the question, �Will you shoot at women, children and prisoners of war,� more than 80 percent of the respondents answered in the affirmative, exceeding by far our expectations [1].

Today I�d like to focus on why we asked sina.com to conduct this online survey among our people. My speech today is a sequel to my speech last time [2], during which I started with a discussion of the issue of the three islands [3], mentioned that 20 years of the idyllic theme of �peace and development� had come to an end, and concluded that modernization under the saber is the only option for China�s next phase. I also mentioned we have a vital stake overseas. Today, I�ll speak more specifically on these two issues.

The central issue of this survey appears to be whether one should shoot at women, children and prisoners of war, but its real significance goes far beyond that. Ostensibly, our intention is mainly to figure out what the Chinese people�s attitude towards war is: If these future soldiers do not hesitate to kill even non-combatants, they�ll naturally be doubly ready and ruthless in killing combatants. Therefore, the responses to the survey questions may reflect the general attitude people have towards war.

Actually, however, this is not our genuine intention. The purpose of the CCP Central Committee in conducting this survey is to probe people�s minds. We wanted to know: If China�s global development will necessitate massive deaths in enemy countries, will our people endorse that scenario? Will they be for or against it?

When we decide to revitalize China based on the German model, we must not repeat the mistakes they made.

Specifically, the following are the fundamental causes for their defeat: First, they had too many enemies all at once, as they did not adhere to the principle of eliminating enemies one at a time; second, they were too impetuous, lacking the patience and perseverance required for great accomplishments; third, when the time came for them to be ruthless, they turned out to be too soft, therefore leaving troubles that resurfaced later on.

Let�s presume that back then Germany and Japan had been able to keep the United States neutral and had fought a protracted war step by step on the Soviet front. If they had adopted this approach, gained some time to advance their research, eventually succeeded in obtaining the technology of nuclear weapons and missiles, and launched surprise attacks against the United States and the Soviet Union using them, then the United States and the Soviet Union would not have been able to defend themselves and would have had to surrender. Little Japan, in particular, made an egregious mistake in launching the sneak strike at Pearl Harbor. This attack did not hit the vital parts of the United States. Instead it dragged the United States into the war, into the ranks of the gravediggers that eventually buried the German and Japanese fascists.

Of course, if they had not made these three mistakes and won the war, history would have been written in a different fashion. If that had been the case, China would not be in our hands. Japan might have relocated their capital to China and ruled over China. Afterwards, China and the whole of Asia under Japan�s command would have brought into full play the oriental wisdom, conquered the West ruled by Germany and unified the whole world. This is irrelevant, of course. No more digressions.

Ostensibly, in comparison, today�s China is alarmingly similar to Germany back then. Both of them regard themselves as the most superior races; both of them have a history of being exploited by foreign powers and are therefore vindictive; both of them have the tradition of worshipping their own authorities; both of them feel that they have seriously insufficient living space; both of them raise high the two banners of nationalism and socialism and label themselves as �national socialism�; both of them worship �one state, one party, one leader, and one doctrine.�

And yet, if we really are to make a comparison between Germany and China, then, as Comrade Jiang Zemin put it, Germany belongs to �pediatrics��too trivial to be compared. How large is Germany�s population? How big is its territory? And how long is its history? We eliminated eight million Nationalist troops in only three years. How many enemies did Germany kill? They were in power for a transient period of little more than a dozen years before they perished, while we are still energetic after being around for more than eighty years. Our theory of the shifting center of civilization is of course more profound than the Hitler�s theory of �the lords of the earth.� Our civilization is profound and broad, which has determined that we are so much wiser than they were.

Our Chinese people are wiser than the Germans because, fundamentally, our race is superior to theirs. As a result, we have a longer history, more people, and larger land area. On this basis, our ancestors left us with the two most essential heritages, which are atheism and great unity. It was Confucius, the founder of our Chinese culture, who gave us these heritages.

These two heritages determined that we have a stronger ability to survive than the West. That is why the Chinese race has been able to prosper for so long. We are destined �not to be buried by either heaven or earth� no matter how severe the natural, man-made, and national disasters. This is our advantage.

Take response to war as an example. The reason that the United States remains today is that it has never seen war on its mainland. Once its enemies aim at the mainland, they enemies would have already reached Washington before its congress finishes debating and authorizes the president to declare war. But for us, we don�t waste time on these trivial things. Comrade Deng Xiaoping once said, �The Party�s leadership is prompt in making decisions. Once a decision is made, it is immediately implemented. There�s no wasting time on trivial things like in capitalist countries. This is our advantage.� Our Party�s democratic centralism is built on the tradition of great unity. Although fascist Germany also stressed high-level centralism, they only focused on the power of the country�s executive, but ignored the collective leadership of the central group. That�s why Hitler was betrayed by many later in his life, which fundamentally depleted the Nazis of their war capacity.

What makes us different from Germany is that we are complete atheists, while Germany was primarily a Catholic and Protestant country. Hitler was only half atheist. Although Hitler also believed that ordinary citizens had low intelligence, and that leaders should therefore make decisions, and although German people worshipped Hitler back then, Germany did not have the tradition of worshipping sages on a broad basis. Our Chinese society has always worshipped sages, and that is because we don�t worship any god. Once you worship a god, you can�t worship a person at the same time, unless you recognize the person as the god�s representative like they do in Middle Eastern countries. On the other hand, once you recognize a person as a sage, of course you will want him to be your leader, instead of monitoring and choosing him. This is the foundation of our democratic centralism.

The bottom line is, only China, not Germany, is a reliable force in resisting the Western parliament-based democratic system. Hitler�s dictatorship in Germany was perhaps but a momentary mistake in history.

Maybe you have now come to understand why we recently decided to further promulgate atheism. If we let theology from the West into China and empty us from the inside, if we let all Chinese people listen to God and follow God, who will obediently listen to us and follow us? If the common people don�t believe Comrade Hu Jintao is a qualified leader, question his authority, and want to monitor him, if the religious followers in our society question why we are leading God in churches, can our Party continue to rule China?

Germany�s dream to be the �lord of the earth� failed, because ultimately, history did not bestow this great mission upon them. But the three lessons Germany learned from experience are what we ought to remember as we complete our historic mission and revitalize our race. The three lessons are: Firmly grasp the country�s living space, firmly grasp the Party�s control over the nation, and firmly grasp the general direction toward becoming the �lord of the earth.�

Next, I�d like to address these three issues.

The first issue is living space. This is the biggest focus of the revitalization of the Chinese race. In my last speech, I said that the fight over basic living resources (including land and ocean) is the source of the vast majority of wars in history. This may change in the information age, but not fundamentally. Our per capita resources are much less than those of Germany�s back then. In addition, economic development in the last twenty-plus years had a negative impact, and climates are rapidly changing for the worse. Our resources are in very short supply. The environment is severely polluted, especially that of soil, water, and air. Not only our ability to sustain and develop our race, but even its survival is gravely threatened, to a degree much greater than faced Germany back then.

Anybody who has been to Western countries knows that their living space is much better than ours. They have forests alongside the highways, while we hardly have any trees by our streets. Their sky is often blue with white clouds, while our sky is covered with a layer of dark haze. Their tap water is clean enough for drinking, while even our ground water is so polluted that it can�t be drunk without filtering. They have few people in the streets, and two or three people can occupy a small residential building; in contrast, our streets are always crawling with people, and several people have to share one room.

Many years ago, there was a book titled Yellow Catastrophes. It said that, due to our following the American style of consumption, our limited resources would no longer support the population and society would collapse, once our population reaches 1.3 billion. Now our population has already exceeded this limit, and we are now relying on imports to sustain our nation. It�s not that we haven�t paid attention to this issue. The Ministry of Land Resources is specialized in this issue.

But the term �living space� (lebensraum) is too closely related to Nazi Germany. The reason we don�t want to discuss this too openly is to avoid the West�s association of us with Nazi Germany, which could in turn reinforce the view that China is a threat. Therefore, in our emphasis on He Xin�s new theory, �Human rights are just living rights,� we only talk about �living,� but not �space,� so as to avoid using the term �living space.� From the perspective of history, the reason that China is faced with the issue of living space is because Western countries have developed ahead of Eastern countries. Western countries established colonies all around the world, therefore giving themselves an advantage on the issue of living space. To solve this problem, we must lead the Chinese people outside of China, so that they could develop outside of China.

The second issue is our focus on the leadership capacity of the ruling party. We�ve done better on this than their party. Although the Nazis spread their power to every aspect of the German national government, they did not stress their absolute leadership position like we have.

They did not take the issue of managing the power of the party as first priority, which we have. When Comrade Mao Zedong summarized the �three treasures� of our party�s victory in conquering the country, he considered the most important �treasure� to be developing the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and strengthening its leadership position.

We have to focus on two points to fortify our leadership position and improve our leadership capacity.

The first is to promote the �Three Represents� theory [8], stressing that our Party is the pioneer of the Chinese race, in addition to being the pioneer of the proletariat. Many citizens say in private, �We never voted for you, the Communist Party, to represent us. How can you claim to be our representatives?�

There�s no need to worry about this issue. Comrade Mao Zedong said that if we could lead our allies to victory and make them benefit, they would support us. Therefore, as long as we can lead the Chinese people outside of China, resolving the lack of living space in China, the Chinese people will support us. At that time, we don�t have to worry about the labels of �totalitarianism� or �dictatorship.�

Whether we can forever represent the Chinese people depends on whether we can succeed in leading the Chinese people out of China.

The second point, whether we can lead the Chinese people out of China, is the most important determinant of the CCP�s leadership position.

Why do I say this?

Comrade Xiaoping said then that the main themes in the world were peace and development. But the June 4 riot gave our Party a warning and gave us a lesson that is still fresh. The pressure of China�s peaceful evolution makes us reconsider the main themes of our time. We see that neither of these two issues, peace and development, have been resolved. The western oppositional forces always change the world according to their own visions; they want to change China and use peaceful evolution to overturn the leadership of our Communist Party. Therefore, if we only develop the economy, we still face the possibility of losing control.

That June 4 riot almost succeeded in bringing a peaceful transition; if it were not for the fact that a large number of veteran comrades were still alive and at a crucial moment they removed Zhao Ziyang and his followers, then we all would have been put in prison. After death we would have been too ashamed to report to Marx. Although we have passed the test of June 4, after our group of senior comrades pass away, without our control, peaceful evolution may still come to China like it did to the former Soviet Union. In 1956, they suppressed the Hungarian Incident and defeated the attacks by Tito�s revisionists of Yugoslavia, but they could not withstand Gorbachev thirty some years later. Once those pioneering senior comrades died, the power of the Communist Party was taken away by peaceful evolution.

After the June 4 riot was suppressed, we have been thinking about how to prevent China from peaceful evolution and how to maintain the Communist Party�s leadership. We thought it over and over but did not come up with any good ideas. If we do not have good ideas, China will inevitably change peacefully, and we will all become criminals in history. After some deep pondering, we finally come to this conclusion: Only by turning our developed national strength into the force of a fist striking outward�only by leading people to go out �can we win forever the Chinese people�s support and love for the Communist Party. Our Party will then stand on invincible ground, and the Chinese people will have to depend on the Communist Party. They will forever follow the Communist Party with their hearts and minds, as was written in a couplet frequently seen in the countryside some years ago: �Listen to Chairman Mao, Follow the Communist Party!� Therefore, the June 4 riot made us realize that we must combine economic development with preparation for war and leading the people to go out! Therefore, since then, our national defense policy has taken a 180 degree turn and we have since emphasized more and more �combining peace and war.�

Our economic development is all about preparing for the need of war! Publicly we still emphasize economic development as our center, but in reality, economic development has war as its center! We have made a tremendous effort to construct �The Great Wall Project� to build up, along our coastal and land frontiers as well as around large and medium-sized cities, a solid underground �Great Wall� that can withstand a nuclear war. We are also storing all necessary war materials. Therefore, we will not hesitate to fight a Third World War, so as to lead the people to go out and to ensure the Party�s leadership position. In any event, we, the CCP, will never step down from the stage of history! We�d rather have the whole world, or even the entire globe, share life and death with us than step down from the stage of history!!! Isn�t there a �nuclear bondage� theory? It means that since nuclear weapons have bound the security of the entire world, all will die together if death is inevitable. In my view, there is another kind of bondage, and that is, the fate our Party is tied up with that of the whole world. If we, the CCP, are finished, China will be finished, and the world will be finished.

Our Party�s historical mission is to lead the Chinese people to go out. If we take the long view, we will see that history led us on this path. First, China�s long history has resulted in the world�s largest population, including Chinese in China as well as overseas. Second, once we open our doors, the profit-seeking western capitalists will invest capital and technology in China to assist our development, so that they can occupy the biggest market in the world. Third, our numerous overseas Chinese help us create the most favorable environment for the introduction of foreign capital, foreign technology and advanced experience into China. Thus, it is guaranteed that our reform and open-door policy will achieve tremendous success. Fourth, China�s great economic expansion will inevitably lead to the shrinkage of per-capita living space for the Chinese people, and this will encourage China to turn outward in search for new living space. Fifth, China�s great economic expansion will inevitably come with a significant development in our military forces, creating conditions for our expansion overseas. Even since Napoleon�s time, the West has been has been alert for the possible awakening of the sleeping lion that is China. Now, the sleeping lion is standing up and advancing into the world, and has become unstoppable!

What is the third issue we should clinch firmly in order to accomplish our historical mission of national renaissance? It is to hold firmly onto the big �issue of America.�

Comrade Mao Zedong taught us that we must have a resolute and correct political orientation. What is our key, correct orientation? It is to solve the issue of America.

This appears to be shocking, but the logic is actually very simple.

Comrade He Xin put forward a very fundamental judgment that is very reasonable. He asserted in his report to the Party Central Committee: The renaissance of China is in fundamental conflict with the western strategic interest, and therefore will inevitably be obstructed by the western countries doing everything they can. So, only by breaking the blockade formed by the western countries headed by the United States can China grow and move towards the world!

Would the United States allow us to go out to gain new living space? First, if the United States is firm in blocking us, it is hard for us to do anything significant to Taiwan and some other countries! Second, even if we could snatch some land from Taiwan, Vietnam, India, or even Japan, how much more living space can we get? Very trivial! Only countries like the United States, Canada and Australia have the vast land to serve our need for mass colonization.

Therefore, solving the �issue of America� is the key to solving all other issues. First, this makes it possible for us to have many people migrate there and even establish another China under the same leadership of the CCP. America was originally discovered by the ancestors of the yellow race, but Columbus gave credit to the white race. We the descendents of the Chinese nation are entitled to the possession of the land! It is said that the residents of the yellow race have a very low social status in United States. We need to liberate them. Second, after solving the �issue of America,� the western countries in Europe would bow to us, not to mention to Taiwan, Japan and other small countries. Therefore, solving the �issue of America� is the mission assigned to CCP members by history.

It is historical destiny that China and United States will come into unavoidable confrontation on a narrow path and fight each other! The United States, unlike Russia and Japan, has never occupied and hurt China, and also assisted China in its battle against the Japanese. But, it will certainly be an obstruction, and the biggest obstruction! In the long run, the relationship of China and the United States is one of a life-and-death struggle.

relationship between China and United States is one of a life-and-death struggle.� Of course, right now it is not the time to openly break up with them yet. Our reform and opening to the outside world still rely on their capital and technology, we still need America. Therefore, we must do everything we can to promote our relationship with America, learn from America in all aspects and use America as an example to reconstruct our country.

How have we managed our foreign affairs in these years? Even if we had to put on a smiling face in order to please them, even if we had to give them the right cheek after they had hit our left cheek, we still must endure in order to further our relationship with the United States. The United States is the most successful country in the world today. Only after we have learned all of its useful experiences can we replace it in the future. Even though we are presently imitating the American tone �China and United States rely on each other and share honor and disgrace,� we must not forget that the history of our civilization repeatedly has taught us that one mountain does not allow two tigers to live together.

The hidden message is: we must put up with America; we must conceal our ultimate goals, hide our capabilities and await the opportunity. In this way, our mind is clear. Why have we not updated our national anthem with something peaceful? Why did we not change the anthem�s theme of war? Instead, when revising the Constitution this time, for the first time we clearly specified �March of the Volunteers� is our national anthem. Thus we will understand why we constantly talk loudly about the �Taiwan issue� but not the �American issue.� We all know the principle of �doing one thing under the cover of another.� If ordinary people can only see the small island of Taiwan in their eyes, then you as the elite of our country should be able to see the whole picture of our cause. Over these years, according to Comrade Xiaoping�s arrangement, a large piece of our territory in the North has been given up to Russia; do you really think our Party Central Committee is a fool?

To resolve the issue of America we must be able to transcend conventions and restrictions. In history, when a country defeated another country or occupied another country, it could not kill all the people in the conquered land, because back then you could not kill people effectively with sabers or long spears, or even with rifles or machine guns. Therefore, it was impossible to gain a stretch of land without keeping the people on that land. However, if we conquered America in this fashion, we would not be able to make many people migrate there.

Only by using special means to �clean up� America will we be able to lead the Chinese people there. This is the only choice left for us. This is not a matter of whether we are willing to do it or not. What kind of special means is there available for us to �clean up� America? Conventional weapons such as fighters, canons, missiles and battleships won�t do; neither will highly destructive weapons such as nuclear weapons. We are not as foolish as to want to perish together with America by using nuclear weapons, despite the fact that we have been exclaiming that we will have the Taiwan issue resolved at whatever cost. Only by using non-destructive weapons that can kill many people will we be able to reserve America for ourselves. There has been rapid development of modern biological technology, and new bio weapons have been invented one after another. Of course we have not been idle; in the past years we have seized the opportunity to master weapons of this kind. We are capable of achieving our purpose of �cleaning up� America all of a sudden. When Comrade Xiaoping was still with us, the Party Central Committee had the perspicacity to make the right decision not to develop aircraft carrier groups and focus instead on developing lethal weapons that can eliminate mass populations of the enemy country.

From a humanitarian perspective, we should issue a warning to the American people and persuade them to leave America and leave the land they have lived in to the Chinese people. Or at least they should leave half of the United States to be China�s colony, because America was first discovered by the Chinese. But would this work? If this strategy does not work, then there is only one choice left to us. That is, use decisive means to �clean up� America, and reserve America for our use in a moment. Our historical experience has proven that as long as we make it happen, nobody in the world can do anything about us. Furthermore, if the United States as the leader is gone, then other enemies have to surrender to us.

Biological weapons are unprecedented in their ruthlessness, but if the Americans do not die then the Chinese have to die. If the Chinese people are strapped to the present land, a total societal collapse is bound to take place. According to the computation of the author of Yellow Peril, more than half of the Chinese will die, and that figure would be more than 800 million people! Just after the liberation, our yellow land supported nearly 500 million people, while today the official figure of the population is more than 1.3 billion. This yellow land has reached the limit of its capacity. One day, who knows how soon it will come, the great collapse will occur any time and more than half of the population will have to go.

We must prepare ourselves for two scenarios. If our biological weapons succeed in the surprise attack [on the United States], the Chinese people will be able to keep their losses at a minimum in the fight against the United States. If, however, the attack fails and triggers a nuclear retaliation from the United States, China would perhaps suffer a catastrophe in which more than half of its population would perish. That is why we need to be ready with air defense systems for our big and medium-sized cities. Whatever the case may be, we can only move forward fearlessly for the sake of our Party and state and our nation�s future, regardless of the hardships we have to face and the sacrifices we have to make. The population, even if more than half dies, can be reproduced. But if the Party falls, everything is gone, and forever gone!

Therefore, we must emphasize the importance of adopting resolute measures. In the future, the two rivals, China and the United States, will eventually meet each other in a narrow road, and our leniency to the Americans will mean cruelty toward the Chinese people. 　　 Here some people may want to ask me: what about the several millions of our compatriots in the United States? They may ask: aren�t we against Chinese killing other Chinese?

These comrades are too pedantic; they are not pragmatic enough. If we had insisted on the principle that the Chinese should not kill other Chinese, would we have liberated China? As for the several million Chinese living in the United States, this is of course a big issue. Therefore in recent years, we have been conducting research on genetic weapons, i.e. those weapons that do not kill yellow people. But producing a result with this kind of research is extremely difficult. Of the research done on genetic weapons throughout the world, the Israeli�s is the most advanced. Their genetic weapons are designed to target Arabs and protect the Israelis. But even they have not reached the stage of actual deployment. We have cooperated with Israel on some research. Perhaps we can introduce some of the technologies used to protect Israelis and remold these technologies to protect the yellow people. But their technologies are not mature yet, and it is difficult for us to surpass them in a few years. If it has to be five or ten years before some breakthroughs can be achieved in genetic weapons, we cannot afford to wait any longer.

Old comrades like us cannot afford to wait that long, for we don�t have that much time to live. Old soldiers of my age may be able to wait for five or ten more years, but those from the period of the Anti-Japanese War or the few old Red Army soldiers cannot wait any longer. Therefore we have to give up our expectations about genetic weapons. Of course, from another perspective, the majority of those Chinese living in the United States have become our burden, because they have been corrupted by the bourgeois liberal values for a long time and it would be difficult for them to accept our Party�s leadership. If they survived the war, we would have to launch campaigns in the future to deal with them, to reform them. Do you still remember that when we had just defeated the We were apprehensive that some young people today would be trembling with fear when they hear about wars or people dying. During wartime, we were used to seeing dead people. Blood and flesh were flying everywhere, corpses were lying in heaps on the fields, and blood ran like rivers. We saw it all. On the battlefields, everybody�s eyes turned red with killing because it was a life-and-death struggle and only the brave would survive.

It is indeed brutal to kill one or two hundred million Americans. But that is the only path that will secure a Chinese century, a century in which the CCP leads the world. We, as revolutionary humanitarians, do not want deaths. But if history confronts us with a choice between deaths of Chinese and those of Americans, we�d have to pick the latter, as, for us, it is more important to safeguard the lives of the Chinese people and the life of our Party. That is because, after all, we are Chinese and members of the CCP. Since the day we joined the CCP, the Party�s life has always been above all else! History will prove that we made the right choice.

Now, when I am about to finish my speech, you probably understand why we conducted this online survey. Simply put, through conducting this online survey we wanted to know whether the people would rise against us if one day we secretly adopt resolute means to �clean up� America. Would more people support us or oppose us? This is our basic judgment: if our people approve of shooting at prisoners of war, women and children, then they would approve our �cleaning up� America. For over twenty years, China has been enjoying peace, and a whole generation has not been tested by war. In particular, since the end of World War II, there have been many changes in the formats of war, the concept of war and the ethics of war. Especially since the collapse of the former Soviet Union and Eastern European Communist states, the ideology of the West has come to dominate the world as a whole, and the Western theory of human nature and Western view of human rights have increasingly disseminated among the young people in China. Therefore, we were not very sure about the people�s attitude. If our people are fundamentally opposed to �cleaning up� America, we will, of course, have to adopt corresponding measures.

Why didn�t we conduct the survey through administrative means instead of through the web? We did what we did for a good reason.

First of all, we did it to reduce artificial inference and to make sure that we got the true thoughts of the people. In addition, it is more confidential and won�t reveal the true purpose of our survey. But what is most important is the fact that most of the people who are able to respond to the questions online are from social groups that are relatively well-educated and intelligent. They are the hard-core and leading groups that play a decisive role among our people. If they support us, then the people as a whole will follow us; if they oppose us, they will play the dangerous role of inciting people and creating social disturbance.

What turned out to be very comforting is they did not turn in a blank test paper. In fact, they turned in a test paper with a score of over 80. This is the excellent fruition of our Party�s work in propaganda and education over the past few decades.

Of course, a few people under the Western influence have objected to shooting at prisoners of war and women and children. Some of them said, �It is shocking and scary to witness so many people approving of shooting at women and children. Is everybody crazy?� Some others said, �The Chinese love to label themselves as a peace-loving people, but actually they are the most ruthless people. The comments are resonant of killing and murdering, sending chills to my heart.�

Gorbach�v Foundation, funded by the United States, gathered 500 of the world�s most important statesmen, economic leaders and scientists, including George W. Bush (he was not the US president at the time), the Baroness Thatcher, Tony Blair, Zbigniew Brzezinski, as well as George Soros, Bill Gates, futurist John Naisbitt, etc., all of the world�s most popular characters, in the San Francisco Fairmont hotel for a high-level round table conference, discussing problems about globalization and how to guide humanity to move forward into the 21st century. According to what He Xin had in hand, the outstanding people of the world in attendance thought that in the 21st century a mere 20% of the world�s population will be sufficient to maintain the world�s economy and prosperity, the other 80% or 4/5 of the world�s population will be human garbage unable to produce new values. The people in attendance thought that this excess 80% population would be a trash population and “high-tech” means should be used to eliminate them gradually.

Since the enemies are secretly planning to eliminate our population, we certainly cannot be infinitely merciful and compassionate to them. Comrade He Xin’s article came out at the right time, it has proven the correctness of our tit for tat battle approach, has proven Comrade Deng Xiaoping�s great foresight to deploy against the United States military strategy.

Certainly, in spreading Comrade He Xin�s views, we cannot publish the article in the party newspapers, in order to avoid raising the enemy�s vigilance. He Xin’s conversation may remind the enemy that we have grasped the modern science and technology, including “clean” nuclear technology, gene weapons technology as well as biological weapons technology, and we can use powerful measures to eliminate their population on a large-scale.

The last problem I want to talk about is of firmly seizing the preparations for military battle.

Currently, we are at the cross road of moving forward or backward. Some comrades saw problems flooding everywhere in our country�the corruption problem, the state-owned enterprise problem, the bank�s bad accounts problem, environmental problems, society security problems, education problems, the AIDS problem, various appeals problem, even the riots problem. These comrades vacillated in the determination to prepare for the military battle. They thought; they should first grab the political reform problem, that is, our own political reform comes first. After resolving the domestic problems, we can then deal with the foreign military battle problem.

Now, it seems like we are in the same critical period as the �horses were drinking water� in the Yangtze River days in the revolutionary era, as long as we firmly seize the most basic principle of preparing for the military battle. The central committee believes, as long as we resolve the United States problem at one blow, our domestic problems will all be readily solved. Therefore, our military battle preparation appears to aim at Taiwan, but in fact is aimed at the United States, and the preparation is far beyond the scope of attacking aircraft carriers or satellites.

Marxism pointed out that violence is the midwife for the birth of the new society. Therefore war is the midwife for the birth of China�s century. As war approaches, I am full of hope for our next generation.

Jul 30, 2008 - 1:55 am 2. kabud:

link to the source of the above:
http://en.epochtimes.com/news/5-8-8/31055.html

Jul 30, 2008 - 1:56 am 3. Concerned Citizen:

Wow! Thanks, kabud. Scary stuff.

Epoch Times is a reliable news source on the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Most Americans don’t realize that the CCP now owns or controls all the major Chinese language newspapers in the U.S. You should also check out what the CCP is doing in Flushing, NY right now — 36 members of Congress are asking for an investigation:

http://en.epochtimes.com/n2/united-states/flushing-1876.html

Jul 30, 2008 - 7:46 am 4. always right:

Right now American public do not ‘give a damn’ about Taiwan, as long as commiChina does not do an all-out bombing or invasion. Even if there were aggression towards Taiwan, I’ll bet more than half of the country would think we shouldn’t get involved.

All they want is to kick the Two China problem down the road, “If the Chinese can ’solve’ it themselves, great! We can’t be bothered right now”.

/I grew up in Taiwan, been here for the last 23 years

Jul 30, 2008 - 8:40 am 5. kabud:

Concerned Citizen:

well, man it is much more serious then we think, it is NOT a Hollywood entertainment or speculation. IT IS REAL.

Here is strategic analisys on the subject:

kabud
1. It may be a hoax, those speeches. We don’t know. And it doesn’t matter.

2. 9-11 was real. We only have Kremlin and Beijing who are our fundamental enemies.

3.Is it a good propaganda material against communism? Not sure. Will have to test it on people.
It may be considered as a right wing fantasies.

bottom line: we MUST consider a war against us an inevitable option.

As far as Chinese plans or Kremlin plans: they are doing things against us for almost a century.
There is nothing to discuss unless participant is brainwashed by shopping mall regime))

How do we make these ideas popular- is a BIG question, but we will have to
or the collapse of our economy and attacks on us will do it

So it is up to the two-legged creatures getting indecently fat under the shopping mall regime)))
——————–
JRN:
——————–
This commentary should be included as part of a chapter in a future book. We should call this chapter, “Authenticating China’s Strategy”

You suggest (1) that the speech is a hoax. This is entirely possible, although close analysis tends in another direction. Strategy is my subject and my life-long study. Believe it or not, it is possible in strategy to know certain things indirectly, by inference and analysis. After careful consideration, with regard to the speeches attributed to General Chi, I think it is unwise to say “we don’t know” and “it doesn’t matter.” In fact, it’s not impossible to analyze a document to determine its authenticity. Here is a task entirely within the reach of a strategic analyst. Furthermore, if the document is authentic then it matters a great deal; for the enemy’s intentions are laid bare, with countless implications (and potential war-winning insights).

When we first encounter an unfamiliar text, we don’t know how to judge it. We are completely lost, and this is normal. Those who claim to understand something on first contact are deceiving themselves. Nothing worth knowing is understood immediately. When I first read the two speeches attributed to General Chi Haotian my reaction was to dismiss them as you did. When I read the first paragraph of the second speech, I rolled my eyes and laughed at what seemed to be an obvious fraud. At first reading they were not credible. (This is the same reaction I had to Golitsyn in 1984).

Two years elapsed and, as chance would have it, I was doing some research on Mao Zedong’s strategic ideas. In this midst of this research I was stunned by Mao’s determination to build a fleet and invade North America. I was also struck by the brutality and cynicism of his statements. I went back and started re-reading Sun Tzu and the commentaries on Sun Tzu. My mind suddenly drifted back to the two speeches attributed to General Chi Haotian. On my second reading I realized these speeches are only incredible from a Western point of view. From a Chinese strategist’s point of view, these speeches are consistent with 2,500 years of Chinese history and thought. There is nothing inauthentic in these two speeches. If they are a hoax, then a genius produced them. More than that, this aforesaid genius possesses authentic tidbits of military intelligence that are not known by the general public — but were revealed to me by a high-ranking Russian military defector with more than three years experience in China.

Mao once said that the first Chin emperor was nothing compared with himself. The first Chin emperor only killed a thousand Confucian scholars. Mao had killed hundreds of thousands of Confucian scholars. This was Mao’s boast. Such boasting is unknown to Western history, except to figures who are dismissed as madmen. One is reminded of the Chinese warlord whose father was taken prisoner and held hostage by a rival. In this instance, the rival threatened to boil the old man alive. The war lord sent his reply: “Save me some of the soup.” One has to dig through the Dark Ages of Western history to find anything like it. Or else it is something from the history of Caligula or Nero or Eliagabulus, who were considered evil madmen — dreadful failures and misfits. In China such behavior has long been normalized. The Western ethic, which followed from the hero-worship of the ancient Greeks and Romans, places nobility as the true standard of greatness. Chinese civilization places a high premium on realistic thinking, brutality and success. This is greatness in the Chinese context.

How does this point argue the authenticity of the alleged speeches of General Chi? A person who disagrees with the strategic culture of China, favoring freedom and humane government, doesn’t possess the mentality needed to reproduce such a brilliant piece of mimicry. One would have to be a student of Sun Tzu and the Chin emperor and Mao Zedong, not a student of Thomas Jefferson or Lincoln. Such a student would not value freedom, having absorbed a philosophy entirely at odds with Western culture. More than that, it is a culture that believes in the West’s weakness and inevitable fall.

If you were going to advance a fraudulent speech by a Chinese communist leader, would you dare put into his mouth the statement that Nazi Germany was “too soft”? Would you dare open your first paragraph with the assertion that you are pleased that 80 percent of Chinese polled would kill women and children in a war? Anyone with the sophistication to produce this document would have avoided going so far, fearing that the reader would laugh out loud at such an obvious propaganda fraud. Only a simple person would start Chi’s second speech with that kind of paragraph, and a simple person did not compose this speech! To make a credible fraud, you have to downplay the wickedness of the Communists. You must be subtle in your presentation so that the fraud has a chance to sound credible. But the Chi speech is not subtle as a fraudulent presentation would have to be. Instead, it is deep and profound and brilliant in its totalitarian perspective. The compassion for the American victims comes late in the second speech, long after the skeptics would’ve stopped reading it.

I do not know if the speech is genuine. But if I had to lay a bet, then I’d wager on its authenticity. That is to say, I suspect it is authentic. And the way to test its authenticity is to see if Chinese actions are consistent with its program.

There is something more, as well. I know from my discussions with a Russian defector, that Russia and China agreed to split North America between them as follows: Russia would get Alaska and parts of Canada, while China would get the lower 48 states (which contains the best land). The agreement on this was affirmed by the Russian General Staff in early 1992. This joint agreement on a future war against America is the basis for the Sino-Russian alliance. And if you read General Chi’s speech carefully, you will see that he brilliantly lays out the logic of the Chinese offensive and their means of advancing. He does not mention Russia’s role because Party cadres don’t need to know about Russia’s military contribution. They only need the most general strategic outline and why the war is necessary.

You must read this speech several times in order to understand its profound science. If this speech is counterfeit, the counterfeiter spent many years devising it. In fact, a hoax of this type could only be produced, as I noted before by a genuis. If General Chi was not the author, then the author should be a general — and ought to have General Chi’s job.

In point (2) you mention 9/11. Chi’s speech explains why a false flag terror attack is necessary in advance of a biological offensive against the United States. As would be proper, General Chi gives nothing away. He merely implies that the Americans will not know who is really attacking them. This is intrinsic to his speech, even though he doesn’t say a word.

In point (3) you ask if this is good propaganda material against communism. Since our goal is to understand the enemy, the propaganda value is of secondary importance. If these speeches are authentic, our activism must counter the Chinese strategy. Furthermore, authentic information has the tendency of winning minds in the long run.

And yes, we are at war. At this stage in the war, however, weapons of mass destruction are not being used because the attackers are waiting for the right moment. The fact of the shopping mall regime indicates what we are given to work with.

Jul 30, 2008 - 10:51 am 6. Michael Hiteshew:

The above piece is certainly Taiwanese propaganda. There is no provenance to the supposed speech other than “Trust us. He really said that!” Sure he did.

Henry Kissinger recently warned that a war between the USA and PRC would resemble WWI. He suggested we’d destroy each other but accomplish nothing else.

In addition, what business it of Americans? Why do I need to send my son or daughter to die for the Taiwanese because they have unresolved occupied land issues dating back to their civil war?

If there were still Confederate holdouts on an island off of the Carolinas should the Taiwanese engage in warfare with the USA should we invade that island and take it back?

How many Taiwanese have volunteered to die in American wars?

Sell you war to some other fool.

Jul 30, 2008 - 3:08 pm 7. kabud:

Michael Hiteshew:

the can u explain Chinese unprecedented war preparations?

why in the hell needs to attack CHINA? This land that can not produce no decent crop or important ideas for humanity? This billions of non-individual collective ants?

And they seem to like it in a majority, not every one of course, i admire decedents and heroic resistance in China, but look at th masses!

No, communist gangtsers plan a WAR and unless we destroy this dangerous regime, by reaching to CHINESE PEOPLE -
we are at danger

Jul 30, 2008 - 5:20 pm 8. kabud:

Michael Hiteshew:
Many citizens say in private, “We never voted for you, the Communist Party, to represent us. How can you claim to be our representatives?”

There’s no need to worry about this issue. Comrade Mao Zedong said that if we could lead our allies to victory and make them benefit, they would support us. Therefore, as long as we can lead the Chinese people outside of China, resolving the lack of living space in China, the Chinese people will support us.
——————
How else can u explain Chinese unprecedented war preparations?

who in the hell needs to attack CHINA?

There land can not produce no decent crop. And the only thing they managed to sell to the outside world so far- is the slave labour

i admire decedents and heroic resistance in China, but look at the masses- 80% would love to kill you and your son and your daughter!!

It is REAL. Find someone from China, talk to them.

Communist gangsters plan a WAR and unless we destroy this dangerous regime, by reaching to CHINESE PEOPLE -
we are at danger

Jul 30, 2008 - 5:38 pm 9. MikeT:

The only problem with this Chinese plan is that the US Navy alone has enough nuclear weapons to exterminate the entire population of China. Furthermore, unlike most of our nuclear arsenal, the Navy’s arsenal is mobile, constantly moving around the world and if the US came under an existential attack from China, could be deployed with minimal input from the rest of the military command structure against China.

Even one of our ballistic missile submarines could send China back into the deepest depths of poverty if it unloaded its full armament on China’s coastline.

Jul 31, 2008 - 6:48 am 10. kabud:

MikeT:
May i suggest you re-read the article:

according to the plan USA population will be exterminated by the biological weapons

It is planed to be COMING FROM NOWHERE

In 2001 there were 2 tests conducted :

terror attacks by the civilian plains,

anthrax attacks.

here you may find some details on Iran and kremlin involvement in the attack:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/3328383/loftuswmdfinal

kremlin never seized to manufacture their bio weapons

Today we may draw a picture of the way USA will be attacked to the tiniest detail:

1.it will happen at the time of economic recession, deeper recession or depression will be- more chances we will be attacked, but not necessarily under it.

2.today’s financial crisis may lead to economical chaos if coupled with fuel shortages that may happen in the result of a war in Persian Gulf.

3.If it gets worse, and it may actually come to the fall out of our financial system, as you may hear sometimes in the news, and as analysts say- to the level of great depression.

4.This year elections may create a political instability and other risks due to a very leftish candidate running and another one who was imprisoned by soviets and may have been compromised. We have to consider this option if we care about national security

5.Attacks may begin from acts of terror from UNKNOWN STATELESS totally falsely named `islamists`. There were never `islamic terrorism` without support, training and coordination from KGB: a super-criminal special forces with90 years of extensive sabotage experience in all places of the world, with millions of peole they employed in their ranks and millions of agents and connections everywhere. It is not an exaggeration- it is a fact documented in thousands of sources.

AND IT REMAINS AT WORK TODAY:
connection of 9-11 operatives to KGB is uncovered from many angles and witnesses

And dont forget that Kremlin and Beijing are in military cooperation to the unprecedented degree:
billions of dollars a year, for over 10 years at least

Don’t forget that China has it nukes transfered from KREMLIN.

Communist China and later Kremlin are the sources and architect of massive drug trafficking into USA since the 50s.

As we know sometimes illegal drugs are seized in USA in the amounts of over 20 tons.

Drug trafficing is an ideal way to bring in biological weapons.

And dont forget about small size nukes: there were severa hearings on that matter in US Senate and House

One of the recent hearings was devoted to Electromagnetic Pulse Attack that IRAN cam launch over US territory from a ship, with NO explicit STATE ASSOCIATION

Yes, we have nukes.

BUT DO OUR CORRUPTED RULERS HAVE A WILL TO USE EM?

There are many questions.

I PRAY THAT GOD MAKE ME WRONG IN THIS ANALISYS BUT I ADMIT TO 1% doctrine:

if the EVENT of low probability may have catastrophic consequences we MUST consider it probable:
It is the only way to secure our national survival in the most precise sense of this word

Jul 31, 2008 - 8:56 am 11. MikeT:

May i suggest you re-read the article:

according to the plan USA population will be exterminated by the biological weapons

2 problems:

1) It is highly unlikely that the Chinese have a bioweapon that is 100% effective (or close enough) that can kill the population quickly enough for the federal government to have no idea who is behind it.

2) That bioweapon is not going to get to US warships out at sea, who would get a final authorization for a total nuclear retaliation from the remainder of the CENTCOM.

The pivotal piece of MAD in the Cold War came with the introduction of ballistic missile submarines and such. They’re the nation’s dead man’s trigger finger. Any nation stupid enough to launch an existential attack on the U.S. gets its population wiped out within 45 minutes of the attack taking place. Best part is, it doesn’t matter how much chaos is going on in the continental United States, since the Navy is out at sea.

Jul 31, 2008 - 9:13 am 12. kabud:

MikeT:

well, we don’t have their plans, but we can figure out some ways:

kremlin HAS biopweapons. Was transferring them to IRAQ and we had people killed in a ANTHRAX test with a dozen envelopes- i think 2 died. It looks like an excellent result for the enemy.

Warships in the ocean may be attacked in a different way, remeber in te past it DID happen.

What if CENTCOM is all gone by suitcase explosion and by EMP the remainder is paralyzed?

What if CENTCOM is ALREADY offered an escape rout and partake in a future world government? There are signs for that. Imagine OBAMA is president.

And again: attacks will be made as if stateless terrorist conduct them-

THE MOST IMPORTANT POINT: nowhere to retaliate!!!

Tune to the secretary Paulson LIVE. Economy is bad((

Jul 31, 2008 - 10:11 am 13. kabud:

by the way, here:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/3328383/loftuswmdfinal

is explained that anthrax spores were of a different strains and virtually untraceable

Jul 31, 2008 - 10:12 am 14. always right:

MikeT @Jul 31, 2008 – 6:48 am

It is not the question of whether we have the weapon capability. It is a question of the will of the people. Right now, I just don’t see Americans care enough about the China problem. To us/them, it is a “30 to 50 year later” problem. And no president can build a case up to go along (destroying China).

Jul 31, 2008 - 12:36 pm 15. I don't think so:

What a puff piece!

What kind of a “friend” is Taiwan? Are there Taiwanese troops in Iraq or Afghanistan?. If there are, I haven’t heard they’re in combat.

If Taipei couldn’t agree to pay for the jets in a blink, why must we be in a lather about it now? The deal is probably just recycled US aid anyway. Or heavily laden with favorable terms that sticks us with the bill somehow. Who needs that?

Taiwan would be overwhelmed by Mainland China in minutes. What strategic value does it have?

I’m not too worried about losing face in the area. Midway, Korea and even a decade in Vietnam while South Vietnamese refused to fight in any significant numbers for their own country. People there know we will fight if we want. But why invest in what appears to be a country that has no strategic value, doesen’t help us when we need it, and seems a bit divided on whether they want to pay for jets or not?

I’d rather pump the money into Japan or Australia.

Jul 31, 2008 - 1:08 pm 16. P. Ami:

Kabud,
1st, It is rude to take over the comment thread with a full blown essay that can, and was, easily linked to. If people are interested they can click and go into flights of fancy all they want. Instead you hijacked the comment thread. I understand that one believing what you believe might rationalize your method by saying, this is much too important and pressing to hold to the rules of civil discourse. I would counter that with the response that most people aren’t going to to be persuaded by unsubstantiated essays such as was wholly reproduced in the comment thread.

2nd, your own vision of history, the events you point to are often unsubstantiated, to be taken on trust and worked out by visions of plans created from events. Just because you can frame events into a plan does not mean the plan existed before the events. Conspiracy thinkers often consider history whatever they are predisposed to believing, not on hard evidence but on inference. It is not unlike Lenin’s idea that you discover who committed a crime by finding out who benefited. This assumes that all results are planned out, that every event had a primer that framed it, and that every great fortune was founded on a great crime. While this is sometimes true, it is often not the case and to base a whole global strategy on such assumptions is, at best, ridiculous.

Jul 31, 2008 - 2:03 pm 17. MikeT:

It is not the question of whether we have the weapon capability. It is a question of the will of the people. Right now, I just don’t see Americans care enough about the China problem. To us/them, it is a “30 to 50 year later” problem. And no president can build a case up to go along (destroying China).

The will of the people is irrelevant when it comes down to a brazen attack on the population by a foreign power that is or is supposed to represent an existential attack on our country. The federal government would either freely respond with with overwhelming nuclear force or the military would do it anyway.

Jul 31, 2008 - 2:32 pm 18. always right:

I don’t think so@Jul 31, 2008 – 1:08 pm

Proven my case. Losing face is the least thing we should worry about. Didn’t you understand the article? Do you think strategically?

Jul 31, 2008 - 2:34 pm 19. kabud:

P. Ami:

rude? yeah, right. you are pathetic.
u will talk about `rude` when your wife, children and parents will be dieing from anthrax-
then i will listen, thru my gas mask.

—————————-
Mike, i would not put any substantial trust in Feds. They did nothing before- 9-11 happened
nothing changed- they are hiding the truth from us

I understand that wishful thinking is tempting.

I am 100% confident that the only way we should treat this threat and threat from kremlin-

OPENLY DISCUS it on national level

TELL THE PUBLIC about all dirty deals with enemy cut by DC in the past, and there were plenty

Deny diplomatic recognition and immidiately stop ANY (NO-FREE) TRADE with the slave masters from
kremlin, beijin, Chavez, Wahabists, Tehran and their allies.

Build civil defense all over USA: bombshelters, first responding military structure and so on

Reach to PEOPLE in those countries and SUPPORT politically and morally THEIR ASPIRATION TO FREEDOM DEMOCRACY- help them to change the regimes

—————
BIOLOGICAL WARFARE 101
In the 1960s the most effective method for using anthrax against the United States was called “polar outbreak.” In fall and winter months Arctic cold air masses form in Canada. These are hundreds of miles long and several thousand feet thick. In a typical attack, a small number of planes would disperse the anthrax into the cold air mass. This could be accomplished by aerial spraying. Ideally, an anthrax spore should be one to five microns in diameter. By spraying the anthrax through pressurized hoses, the size of the spores could be regulated during dispersal.

The cold air mass, once filled with anthrax, would move south at about twenty miles per hour. It would enter the United States with 6,000 feet of thickness. Being cold, the air mass would gradually sink as it advanced, dumping spores along the way. Sweeping across the Midwest, the Arctic air mass would turn east and exit the country along the New England coast with 3,000 feet of thickness remaining. A leading U.S. military authority in the 1960s estimated that one-third of those in the path of this cold air mass would become infected.

Confirming this estimate, Major General Marshal Stubbs, one-time head of the U.S. Army Chemical Corps, stated that an attack of “dry biological material,” delivered by no more than ten aircraft, could kill or incapacitate 30 percent of our population.
http://www.west.net/~antipas/protected_files/news/europe/biological_warfare.html

Jul 31, 2008 - 3:06 pm 20. always right:

/Sorry, I was only half way through my previous comment.

Re: I don’t think so@Jul 31, 2008 – 1:08 pm

What you said was not only morally wrong, but too short-sighted and not possible that communist Chian could ‘overwhelm Taiwan in minutes’.

How can the US proclaim herself the friends for freedom and justice, if she abandon her ally the first instant another country attack it? As you suggest to focus on Japan and Australia only, what would people in those two countries think of the value of US support?

Did you know Taiwan send the first wave of monetary and personnel help during 2004 Tsunami, well before other regional country mobilized for aid?

Taiwan did not have troops in Iraq or Afghanistan, true. Not because Taiwan does not want to, but because of other logistic reasons.
They simply don’t have the type of combat troops trained for those warfare.

Jul 31, 2008 - 3:18 pm 21. pch1013:

I almost believed that essay was for real, until I came to this part:

As for the several million Chinese living in the United States, this is of course a big issue. Therefore in recent years, we have been conducting research on genetic weapons, i.e. those weapons that do not kill yellow people. But producing a result with this kind of research is extremely difficult. Of the research done on genetic weapons throughout the world, the Israeli�s is the most advanced. Their genetic weapons are designed to target Arabs and protect the Israelis. But even they have not reached the stage of actual deployment. We have cooperated with Israel on some research. Perhaps we can introduce some of the technologies used to protect Israelis and remold these technologies to protect the yellow people.

Utter rubbish. Either Chi is a lunatic, or whoever wrote that essay is a moronic conspiracy theorist of the worst order.

Jul 31, 2008 - 4:22 pm 22. kabud:

pch1013:

oh, dear, you have no idea of communist rulers speeches)

i spent 27 years in USSR: THEY ALWAYS say rubbish like this may be different a little

You know, you should understand that DECEPTION is their main weapon:

1.his audience LIKED IT, that there could be BIO weapon that CHINESE are immune

His audience is VERY SPECIFIC PEOPLE

2.He also figured that if published – some one a. like u will have exactly this reaction

Just answer me: WHY CPC has a military budget almost on the USA level? WHY they buy russian arms on the level of i guess we may say over 10 bil a year if not more- who knows, they will never say the truth.

And if u r really serious in this, REALLY want to learn, here is more:
————————–
some more thoughts
————————–
Well, i kind of suggest that EVEN IF IT IS HOAX we still know that China may start a war. disregarding the fact if this particular speech was given.

China is very dangerous and remains dangerous either that speech was real or not. I tried to publish excerpts from it some months ago and saw the readers reaction. We need to explain this to people with facts like:

-China still has a population growth more then 0.6% annually.
-China imports not just energy agents but food.
-Chinese system is bound to political and economic crisis which is going to be inevitable.
-Chinese government pays for one way tickets and expenses for its citizens to go to different countries and STAY. One way!
-Chinese military spending are already almost the second to US and are growing.
-China and Kremlin always share same interests and support each other
-China is the biggest buyer of kremlin weapons and most of chinese weapons are imported from Russia
-China is the most influential power in Africa, which was achieved through military operations frequently the kind that created mass genocide of people there

I totally support the warning on China aggression against USA. I believe that they have it in plans: grey terror, bio-chem weapons. A friend of mine analyzed 9-11 report to Congress. Even from that report it was obvious that Al Quada or whatever the buzz word will be – is FOR HIRE. And China or Kremlin is hiring. That was his conclusion

Honestly- i will not be surprised if every single word there is true.
Chinese may have leaked it to see the reaction.

You know, people who lived under communism are used to speeches and claims like that. From 1917 they say this things in Russia an later in China.

This is a complicated issue that requires further comment: Chinese dissidents do not experience the strategic thinking of the Chinese leaders directly. What they experience is the cruelty and brutality of the Communists. In this they have plenty of material to write about in terms of torture, executions and labor camps. When Chinese hear that the Chinese Communists are planning to attack the United States they do not believe it. In fact, the dissident Chinese leaders believe that the Communist Party’s push to war against the United States is a trick to win the Chinese nationalists over to their side. By saying China must fight America, they are appealing to the nationalism of all Chinese people to unite against a common enemy. Of course, the strategy of preparing war against America does indeed solve the Taiwan problem in more than one sense. It makes the independence of Taiwan an irrelevant side issue. It forces all patriotic Chinese to accept Communist Party leadership.

The dissidents themselves dare not make an issue, in all seriousness, of the Communist war plans. Spreading such an idea hurts the dissident movement and strengthens the Communists. That is why the EPOCH TIMES site rarely touches on the issue of China’s war preparations. You have to hunt for these articles, which are long buried and rarely discussed — and for good reason. Discussion of this issue inflames Chinese nationalism and argues for Chinese unity in the face of American power. No Chinese dissident would want to promote the idea of an impending Sino-American war. This plays into Beijing’s hands, so the dissidents like to say that the Communists are playing a trick and we must not take them seriously.

“well, they do have an appetite to swallow,
BUT WHO WILL GIVE IT TO THEM ?”

TIME. All things come to those who wait.
Patience is all.

————————————-

Yes, we have no proof. You are exactly right. We need to establish the truth of the speech. It is something that should be done, for the future and for history. To my thinking, the speech appears to be authentic. Of course, few American readers would accept its authenticity.

In terms of using the speech as anti-Communist propaganda, it is very good. You cannot have better anti-Communist propaganda than this speech. A document like this would have sent shivers through Washington in 1960. Analysts would have quickly determined its authenticity. Failing that, the U.S. government would have treated it AS TRUE. But we live in another age altogether. The problem is that few in the West are psychologically prepared to absorb anti-Communist messages in 2008. Even if absolute proof existed of the speech’s authenticity, few would care and the media would still ignore it.

We need to discuss this further, because it shows what a desperate position we’re in.

Consider what KGB defector Bezmenov has to say about the 15-year process of changing the psychology of Americans:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaoX_SgNO70&NR=1

He is telling the plain truth. The soil in this country is no longer fertile for any message except one that facilitates the psychological warfare campaign of the Communist Bloc.

You will note: any fact we muster is ignored by the mainstream. What happened after Litvinenko’s specatcular death? Did the West launch a new Cold War? Bush came forward to affirm that Putin, after all, was his friend. The West’s psychology has been infected so that most people cannot absorb facts that contradict the concepts they long ago accepted. What we must do, in shocking fashion, is present the overall picture to as many people as possible — because the starting point of reorientation is acceptance of certain concepts:

(1) Russia and China are enemy powers determined to destroy America
(2) Americans must be united against all enemies
(3) The United States has been penetrated by foreign agent networks and faces progressive paralysis
(4) 9/11 is part of the Soviet-Chinese long range strategy and begins the phase of Gray Terror
(5) Enemy disinformation has entered into mainstream opinion and the public is confused.

With most people concepts come first and facts come later. Consider the average reader or radio listener. A person has to be willing embrace these five propositions before the facts come into focus. Otherwise, any fact affirming these points is dismissed out of hand. This is the way people’s minds work today. They begin with certain propositions and they look for evidence to support it. They tend to discount all evidence that refutes it. Until you get them to entertain the above ideas, they will not consider YOUR FACTS at all. Such facts merely bore them, having nothing to do with reality (as they understand it).

My greatest caution, in this regard, is to constantly look for evidence that refutes the five above-listed points. This is the only thing that keeps me honest. And I want to disbelieve what I’m saying. Believe me, I would prefer to think like everyone else.

Jul 31, 2008 - 4:46 pm 23. pch1013:

kabud: If you believe that speech is for real, then does that mean you believe the Chinese are in cahoots with the Israelis?

Wow.

Jul 31, 2008 - 8:47 pm 24. kabud:

pch1013:
no, it is a `little` more complicated:

I posted analysis of the speech, based on a dialog of doubt to try to give a reader pros and contras

Chinese may have joint projects with israelis in biology and genetics, no warfare agreed?

General has his agenda: to feed the nationalistic feelings of his audience.

His audience may like his style, no matter if 100% of the speech is scientifically correct

It could’ve been leaked to test the reaction

That particular idiotic part could be there just for the purpose to have it dismissed like you and i did at the beginning

My opinion is:

if China did have 10s of millions of its people mass murdered in the recent past
and
they have enormous arms race together with Russia
done very secretly

And they DO face big problems as a nation including but not limited to legitimacy of regime, population growth, limitation of natural resources:

we have to give it a very serious attention

Jul 31, 2008 - 9:21 pm 25. P. Ami:

Kabud,
Pathetic is you thinking your idiotic rambling is going to make a difference. Yours is a pathetic, narcissistic wail of a child when faced up against your complete smallness in the human scheme of things, let alone in nature. Pathetic are your delusions built by your need to be correct, listened to and regarded in exponential degrees above your station. You are a cell bundle the size of a human being wrapped around daddy issues that most people overcome by age 13. D&D gaming does not count as high level strategy games even if you did manage to collect a few similar social outcasts insecure enough to be impressed with your dungeon masters’ skill.

Next time you curse my family you’ll find my resources put to some tests in making your efforts on any comment thread to be recognized by the editors for the trolling it is. Why don’t you come up with a blog that enough people find interesting and plausible so that you are invited to peddle your ridiculous world view rather then hijacking the works of other people who have earned the space in which they post.

Aug 1, 2008 - 2:02 pm 26. P. Ami:

“That particular idiotic part could be there just for the purpose to have it dismissed like you and i did at the beginning”

“Consider what KGB defector Bezmenov has to say about the 15-year process of changing the psychology of Americans:”

—The KGB defector was released to trick us into thinking that KGB was effecting the psychology of of Americans, so that when a speech put out by a Chinese general was leaked we would first think it was real then believe it so we would go to war with the Chinese while the Russians were spared and allowed to take over the world. Your thinking is an enigma wrapped in a tortilla.

Aug 1, 2008 - 2:09 pm 27. kabud:

Pathetic is you thinking your idiotic rambling is going to make a difference. Yours is a pathetic, narcissistic wail of a child when faced up against your complete smallness in the human scheme of things, let alone in nature. Pathetic are your delusions built by your need to be correct, listened to and regarded in exponential degrees above your station. You are a cell bundle the size of a human being wrapped around daddy issues that most people overcome by age

13. D&D gaming does not count as high level strategy games even if you did manage to collect a few similar social outcasts insecure enough to be impressed with your dungeon masters’ skill.

very funny, but there is nothing inside this
multi talented text of any value)))
I bet in real life i would kick the balls of that author and he would be beging to let him go)))

By the way what is: 13. D&D ? The lot number you secured for yourself in the cemetery in case of anthrax attack?))))

So you think i cursed your family by saying this:

rude? yeah, right. you are pathetic.
u will talk about `rude` when your wife, children and parents will be dieing from anthrax-
then i will listen, thru my gas mask.

You have to be thankful that i waned you in a very straight way. You owe me one, young man.

you’ll find my resources put to some tests in making your efforts on any comment thread to be recognized by the editors for the trolling it is.

Love your threats. Your internal communist demand censorship. BRAVO COMRADE! Good work!

Why don’t you come up with a blog that enough people find interesting and plausible so that you are invited to peddle your ridiculous world view rather then hijacking the works of other people who have earned the space in which they post.

Click on my name, but it is not going to be entertainment. And you will not find pictures of naked girls there either. It is not written for a victims of shopping mall regime like you are,
mr. Troll.

ps

You are excessively sensitive, may be you really feel unsecured: thats the only reason i can see for your reaction.

My advice: buy more guns, gas masks, read more classics, learn to accept reality even if it does not have a bubble gum flavor.

get some decency.

And to the point of discussion, i will do it even though i feel i am wasting time here:

You should realize what unlimited political power is. It is very much different from what we have in the West:

enemy can plan things for decades and work with unlimited resources:
the don’t report to voters, courts or ANYONE

They don’t report to God as well.

They exploit all the flaws our society has and will get us if we don’t realize what is going on
————-

And finaly: if you in your heart would not be feeling that danger is coming: you would never react to my warning that you and your family may actually die very soon from bio attack as may as well happen to me and anyone in USA.

So in that sense i consider my work yielded perfect results.

Think about it.

Aug 1, 2008 - 2:39 pm 28. kabud:

P. Ami:

well, if you are a female, of course i am sorry.))
It is a war game, dear. It requires concentration ability to perform under pressure, etc

Yeas i mean this blogging and writing as well. May be one day i will write about my past and other things so u will understand why i can see so clear what is coming and AM trying to wake up as many people as i can- the only reason i am writing here.
——————-

To your other idea that Russia is fooling us, but of course, u just HAVE to read all my posts here in detail:
——————–
1) Russia and China are enemy powers determined to destroy America
(2) Americans must be united against all enemies
(3) The United States has been penetrated by foreign agent networks and faces progressive paralysis
(4) 9/11 is part of the Soviet-Chinese long range strategy and begins the phase of Gray Terror
(5) Enemy disinformation has entered into mainstream opinion and the publiac is confused.

Aug 1, 2008 - 3:07 pm 29. P. Ami:

Kabul,
Cry censorship all you want. You deface other people’s work with your cut and paste graffiti. Censorship would be the expectation that you not publish on any forum. I’m not saying that. I’m just telling you your thinking is flawed, your conjecture too broad, your facts skewed and methods rude. You hijacked the article. By your thinking methods I might conclude that your intention was to turn the conversation away from the reasonable point being made in the editorial by introducing your too strange to believe ideology, its stupid logic, and faux-aggressive posture. Should I then guess what CCP cheif is transfering funds to your accounts? Is the plan to put the plan out in clear sight so we won’t believe it even as it happens. How much are the commies paying you?

— I don’t own a TV, I don’t spend my time in malls and I’ve spent considerable time in the too and throe of life. I’ve lived in villages on rivers in the backwaters of third world countries, I’ve lived in capital cities, I’ve spent weeks at a time in the Sierra-Nevada back-country. So, while I’m aware of the shopping mall culture, I’m certainly not a victim.

“My advice: buy more guns, gas masks, read more classics”

— Done, done and done. We know things can go horribly wrong. I just don’t think you’re so tuned in as to know how its going to happen.

“enemy can plan things for decades and work with unlimited resources:
the don’t report to voters, courts or ANYONE”

— Blah, blah, blah, blah. I’ve heard plenty of these introductions to conspiracy theories. Your rant can’t do s@#t to change it. If its true, its over. You need a little Epicurus reading to help untie your twisty thoughts. You ain’t no Steppenwolf.

Aug 1, 2008 - 3:27 pm 30. pch1013:

Re: China, a good first step would be to impose sanctions on it that are at least as Draconian as those currently in place against Cuba.

But that, of course, will never happen — because unlike Cuba, China has the U.S. by the b@lls. And why? Because without Chinese goods, our consumer economy would collapse. Kabud, I’m willing to bet you have at least some Chinese-made products in your home. I certainly do. We all do — and it’s all in the name of hyper-capitalism, which makes all of your red-baiting particularly ironic.

I’ll leave you two to your bickering, but one final thought: Kabud, it would be interesting to know why you selected the letters “xyu” as your LiveJournal account name. Does this have anything to do with your exhortation to “get some decency”?

Aug 1, 2008 - 4:41 pm 31. I Still Don't Think So:

Always Right: Pardon me while I hold my wallet and keep my hands in my pockets:

I don’t see the value of pledging to defend Taiwan as if it “were” the US. Its not. Pledges to defend someone are real deals, with real consequences. Why should I pledge my money, my kids and my country to defend Taiwan, when it has little if any strategic value to the US?

It can’t be Taiwan’s value a freedom-loving “ally”: you admit it hasn’t seen fit to send a single soldier to combat in either Afghanistan or Iraq. Some ally. The Aussies did: the Brits did; the Poles did; even the Canadians. But not Taiwan, which wants me to defend it as if it were the US. Hmmmm.

About that lack of “training.” What–they couldn’t even do guard duty? And of course, they’ve had since 2001 -7 years-to “train” for Afghanistan. What training are they taking–correspondence school courses? Even England’s Prince William was in Afghanistan.

But if Taiwan’s troops aren’t “trained” for warfare, just what are they trained for? Parades? How do they expect to resist Mainland Chinese troops? Oh yeah I forgot–with my kids.

The article in issue concedes Taiwan was squabbling over the very need to appropriate money for those jets. And I notice you don’t contradict my suspicion that the US is somehow paying for them.

You find it offensive to note the probable inability of Taiwanese to resist MC for more than a few minutes: but you don’t really disagree on the facts (Ok it might take a few hours). That is something to consider before I imprudently pledge the US to defend it when it cannot defend itself and probably won’t. Especially when it appears that the “ally” business is pretty much one way.

Not worried that Australia or Japan will construe a “less than total” pledge for Taiwan as evidence of weakness: they’ll undoubtedly see it as sanity and common sense. Only an idiot flings money and resources into indefensible exposed areas (ask the german 6th army).

Frittering away money and people for Taiwan simply makes it harder to defend A and J.

Yes I would park money and efforts behind Australia, a “real” ally and Japan, another ally. No your response hardly convinced me.

Aug 1, 2008 - 5:21 pm 32. kabud:

P. Ami:

yeah i realised the limitations of your reading skills and analytical abilities, well, too bad.

The 2 point are to be made:

1.Kremlin and Beijing are planing this war.

You will never admit this unless you are attacked. You are not better then political and industrial high-flyers that this massage was delivered to in the last 15 years thru different means.

2.Arming Taiwan may become very contrproductive when the war will start: because Taiwan garanteed will take part of kremlin and beijing, -
otherwise they will be wiped out in a second

And wjhen they go along with Beijing- beijing will get a hold of all the weapons we transfered to Taiwan

believe me the censorship is the least of mine concerns

Aug 1, 2008 - 7:04 pm 33. kabud:

pch1013:

i do have stuff made in China

you should hear me swearing when i have no choice to buy other stuff.

I remember times when we did not use any of it: i came to USA in 1988. Made in China was labeled only at some junk in 99c stores

Aug 1, 2008 - 7:07 pm 34. kabud:

I Still Don’t Think So:

I tend to agree with you:there is good rational to it.

When we will be attacked by joint forces of `unknown terrorists` with anthrax and our submarines will get attacked by nukes:

taiwan will have no choice but go with Beijing.

And then beijing will get all the weapons we transfer to taiwan today.

Aug 1, 2008 - 7:09 pm 35. kabud:

pch1013:
xyu

1.that journal i created in 2001 to read other bloggers. Back then BLOGGING was not existing. It was called JOURNALS.

I pressed some keys: it happened to be XYU. Well, i thought to myself, -

my place of birth was founded by the man named KYI: KYIV

KYI means exactly the same as XYU in russian

i understand you know what it means.

This is the most widely used word in russian and ukrainian language.

It is a phallic symbol. So i liked it and kept it.

There is nothing indecent in it whatsoever unless you have a problem with it)))

Also i found later that in slavic circles this word serves as an idiot filter.

i dont want idiots to read my blog, i practice cultural discrimination: only readers who have an ability to think interest me.

When an idiot looks at the blog name and sees XYU- the go away. Exactly what i want them to do.

Aug 1, 2008 - 7:17 pm 36. P. Ami:

taiwanese I speak to seem fairly ambivilant regarding their relationship a the mainland. Half of them are ready to join up with their communist brethren. It’s pathetic but we have to pick our battles. I still don’t understand why we let the UK give HK to the Chinese and have handed the Panama Canal to them as well.

Aug 1, 2008 - 8:20 pm 37. kabud:

P. Ami:
My answer would be :
OUT OF FEAR AND HELPLESSNESS

Back then Nixon and may be Greenspan later formulated this approach that if we trade with China- it will gradually turn them to change and they will become friendly and civilized

Exactly the same approach was exercised toward USSR

we mistakenly project our mentality on the rulers in charge of the bloodiest regimes there

it is almost incomprehensible for a westerner to grasp WHAT KIND OF DIABOLICAL CREATURES those animals are. Their only hope is to kill everyone who may put them to justice

this
http://torrents.thepiratebay.org/4217790/The.Soviet.Story%5BDivX.2008.Eng%5D.4217790.TPB.torrent
should give u an idea, well not an idea, but a shocking revelation, well, not even that, – it is unspeakable.

And they keep the largest arsenals of weapons of mass destruction.

Aug 1, 2008 - 9:23 pm 38. Markus:

To get the topic back to Taiwan…what I never understood until I visited Taiwan was the extent to which this was an ethnic conflict between “mainlanders” who came over in 1949, declared martial law and ran the country for nearly a half century, and “native” Taiwanese, whose ancestors emigrated from Fujian province in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, intermarried with lots of aboriginals (Pacific Islanders, basically), and always had very limited connection with the mainland. THIS conflict is what is happening on Taiwan. The appropriate analogy is to imagine if the United States had had a civil war during the thirties between communists and non-communists, and the non-communists lost and established a government in exile in Peurto Rico, or Hawaii, declaring martial law and dominating the native people on one of those islands.

Neither of these two sides wants to reunite with mainland China right now. Both want to preserve the current de facto independence. The problem is the people who see themselves as Taiwanese are politically stupid. They are so eager for de jure independence, so eager to assert their non-chinese identity, that they are willing to jeopardize the de facto situation that exists right now. And these same Taiwanese are being exploited by the neocons, eager to have mainland China as a backup enemy in case the “islamo-fascist” menace resolves itself.

Aug 1, 2008 - 11:09 pm 39. kabud:

People’s Republic of China, Mao Zedong’s regime (1949-1975):

* Agence France Press (25 Sept. 1999) citing at length from Courtois, Stephane, Le Livre Noir du Communism:
o Rural purges, 1946-49: 2-5M deaths
o Urban purges, 1950-57: 1M
o Great Leap Forward: 20-43M
o Cultural Revolution: 2-7M
o Labor Camps: 20M
o Tibet: 0.6-1.2M
o TOTAL: 44.5 to 72M
* Jasper Becker, Hungry Ghosts : Mao’s Secret Famine (1996)
o Estimates of the death toll from the Great Leap Forward, 1959-61:
+ Judith Banister, China’s Changing Population (1984): 30M excess deaths (acc2 Becker: “the most reliable estimate we have”)
+ Wang Weizhi, Contemporary Chinese Population (1988): 19.5M deaths
+ Jin Hui (1993): 40M population loss due to “abnormal deaths and reduced births”
+ Chen Yizi of the System Reform Inst.: 43-46M deaths
* Brzezinski:
o Forcible collectivization: 27 million peasants
o Cultural Revolution: 1-2 million
o TOTAL: 29 million deaths under Mao
* Daniel Chirot:
o Land reform, 1949-56
+ According to Zhou Enlai: 830,000
+ According to Mao Zedong: 2-3M
o Great Leap Forward: 20-40 million deaths.
o Cultural Revolution: 1-20 million
* Jung Chang, Mao: the Unknown Story (2005)
o Suppression of Counterrevolutionaries, 1950-51: 3M by execution, mob or suicide
o Three-Anti Campaign, 1952-53: 200,000-300,000 suicides
o Great Leap Forward, 1958-61: 38M of starvation and overwork
o Cultural Revolution, 1966-76: > 3M died violent deaths
o Laogai camp deaths, 1949-76: 27M
o TOTAL under Mao: 70M
* Dictionary of 20C World History: around a half million died in Cultural Rev.
* Eckhardt:
o Govt executes landlords (1950-51): 1,000,000
o Cultural Revolution (1967-68): 50,000
* Gilbert:
o 1958-61 Famine: 30 million deaths.
* Kurt Glaser and Stephan Possony, Victims of Politics (1979):
o They estimate the body count under Mao to be 38,000,000 to 67,000,000.
o Cited by G & P:
+ Walker Report (see below): 44.3M to 63.8M deaths.
+ The Government Information Office of Taiwan (18 Sept. 1970): 37M deaths in the PRC.
+ A Radio Moscow report (7 Apr. 1969): 26.4M people had been exterminated in China.
+ (NOTE: Obviously the Soviets and Taiwanese would, as enemies, be strongly motivated to exaggerate.)
* Guinness Book of World Records:
o Although nowadays they don’t come right out and declare Mao to be the Top Dog in the Mass Killings category, earlier editions (such as 1978) did, and they cited sources which are similar, but not identical, to the Glaser & Possony sources:
+ On 7 Apr. 1969 the Soviet government radio reported that 26,300,000 people were killed in China, 1949-65.
+ In April 1971 the cabinet of the government of Taiwan reported 39,940,000 deaths for the years 1949-69.
+ The Walker Report (see below): between 32,2500,000 and 61,700,000.
* Harff and Gurr:
o KMT cadre, rich peasants, landlords (1950-51): 800,000-3,000,000
o Cultural Revolution (1966-75): 400,000-850,000
* John Heidenrich, How to Prevent Genocide: A Guide for Policymakers, Scholars, and the Concerned Citizen: 27M death toll, incl. 2M in Cultural Revolution
* Paul Johnson doesn’t give an overall total, but he gives estimates for the principle individual mass dyings of the Mao years:
o Land reform, first years of PRC: at least 2 million people perished.
o Great Leap Forward: “how many millions died … is a matter of conjecture.”
o Cultural Revolution: 400,000, calling the 3 Feb. 1979 estimate by Agence France Presse, “The most widely respected figure”.
* Meisner, Maurice, Mao’s China and After (1977, 1999), doesn’t give an overall total either, but he does give estimates for the three principle mass dyings of the Mao years:
o Terror against the counterrevolutionaries: 2 million people executed during the first three years of the PRC.
o Great Leap Forward: 15-30 million famine-related deaths.
o Cultural Revolution: 400,000, citing a 1979 estimate by Agence France Presse.
* R. J. Rummel:
o Estimate:
+ Democide: 34,361,000 (1949-75)
# The principle episodes being…
* All movements (1949-58): 11,813,000
o incl. Land Reform (1949-53): 4,500,000
* Cult. Rev. (1964-75): 1,613,000
* Forced Labor (1949-75): 15,000,000
* Great Leap Forward (1959-63): 5,680,000 democides
+ War: 3,399,000
+ Famine: 34,500,000
# Great Leap Forward: 27M famine deaths
+ TOTAL: 72,260,000
o Cited in Rummel:
+ Li, Cheng-Chung (Republic of China, 1979): 78.86M direct/indirect deaths.
+ World Anti-Communist League, True Facts of Maoist Tyranny (1971): 64.5M
+ Glaser & Possony: 38 to 67M (see above)
+ Walker Report, 1971 (see below): 31.75M to 58.5M casualties of Communism (excluding Korean War).
+ Current Death Toll of International Communism (1979): 39.9M
+ Stephen R. Shalom (1984), Center for Asian Studies, Deaths in China Due To Communism: 3M to 4M death toll, excluding famine.
* Walker, Robert L., The Human Cost of Communism in China (1971, report to the US Senate Committee of the Judiciary) “Casualties to Communism” (deaths):
o 1st Civil War (1927-36): .25-.5M
o Fighting during Sino-Japanese War (1937-45): 50,000
o 2nd Civil War (1945-49): 1.25M
o Land Reform prior to Liberation: 0.5-1.0M
o Political liquidation campaigns: 15-30M
o Korean War: 0.5-1.234M
o Great Leap Forward: 1-2M
o Struggle with minorities: 0.5-1.0M
o Cultural Revolution: .25-.5M
o Deaths in labor camps: 15-25M
o TOTAL: 34.3M to 63.784M
o TOTAL FOR PRC: 32M to 59.5M
* July 17, 1994, Washington Post (Great Leap Forward 1959-61)
o Shanghai University journal, Society: > 40 million
o Cong Jin: 40 million
o Chen Yizi: 43 million in the famine. 80 million total as a result of Mao’s policies.
* Weekly Standard, 29 Sept. 1997, “The Laogai Archipelago” by D. Aikman:
o Between 1949 and 1997, 50M prisoners passed through the labor camps, and 15,000,000 died (citing Harry Wu)
* WHPSI: 1,633,319 political executions and 25,961 deaths from political violence, 1948-77. TOTAL: 1,659,280
* Analysis: If we line up the 14 sources which claim to be complete, the median falls in the 45.75 to 52.5 million range, so you probably can’t go wrong picking a final number from this neighborhood. Depending on how you want to count some of the incomplete estimates (such as Becker and Meisner) and whether to count a source twice (or thrice, as with Walker) if it’s referenced by two different authorities, you can slide the median up and down the scale by many millions. Keep in mind, however, that official Chinese records are hidden from scrutiny, so most of these numbers are pure guesses. It’s pointless to get attached to any one of them, because the real number could easily be half or twice any number here.
* Perhaps a better way of estimating would be to add up the individual components. The medians here are:
o Purges, etc. during the first few years: 2M (10 estimates)
o Great Leap Forward: 31-33M (14 estimates)
o Cultural Revolution: 1M (13 estimates)
o Ethnic Minorities, primarily Tibetans: 750-900T (8 estimates, see below)
o Labor Camps: 20M (5 estimates)
o This produces a total of some 54,750,000 to 56,900,000 deaths. The weak link in this calculation is in the Labor Camp numbers for which we only have 5 estimates.
* Notice that many early body counts (such as Walker) completely miss the famine during the Great Leap Forward, which was largely unknown in the west until around 1980. There are two contradictory ways to assess those early estimates which ignore the famine:
1. “If these are the numbers that they came up with without the famine, imagine how high the true number will be once you add the famine deaths.”
2. “Can we trust any of these numbers? After all, if they missed such a huge famine, they can’t have known very much about what was going on inside China.”
* … so this line of reasoning will get us nowhere. In fact, the median of the 7 estimate that predate 1980 is 45.7M, which is almost the same as the median of the 7 estimates that post-date 1980 — 58M. (At this scale, a 12M difference counts as “almost the same”.)

# Tibet (1950 et seq.): 600 000

* Chinese occupation. (For the most part, it’s already been included in the numbers above.)
o Free Tibet Campaign [http://www.freetibet.org/info/facts/fact1.html]
+ Tibetans killed by the Chinese since 1950: 1,200,000
+ Died in prisons and labour camps between 1950 and 1984: up to 260,000
+ 1959 Uprising: 430,000 died
# K. in Reprisals: 87,000
o Our Times: 1,200,000
o Courtois: 600,000 – 1,200,000
o Walker, Robert: 500,000-1,000,000 (all ethnic minorities)
o Rummel: 375,000 democides inflicted on etnic minorities
+ … incl 150,000 Tibetans
o Porter: 100,000 to 150,000.
o Eckhardt:
+ 1950-51 War: 2,000 civ.
+ 1956-59 Revolt: 60,000 civ. + 40,000 mil. = 100,000
o Harff and Gurr: 65,000 Tibetan nationalists, landowners, Buddhists killed, 1959
o Small & Singer say that China lost 40,000 soldiers in Tibet between 1956 and ‘59.

# Chinese Civil War (1945-49): 2 500 000 [make link]

* Bercovitch & Jackson: 100,000
* Dan Smith: 1,000,000
* Eckhardt: 1,000,000 from all causes
* Small & Singer: 1,000,000 battle deaths
* Wallechinsky: 1,200,000 battle deaths
* Walker, Robert L., The Human Cost of Communism in China (1971): 1,250,000
* Gilbert, citing Ho Ping-ti: 2,000,000 to 3,000,000 total deaths
* Our Times: 3,000,000
* Rummel:
o War Dead: 1,201,000
o Democide by Guomindang: 2,645,000
o Democide by Communists: 2,323,000
o Famine: 25,000
o TOTAL: 6,194,000
——————————–
FROM
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm#Mao

Aug 1, 2008 - 11:21 pm 40. always right:

Re: I Still Don’t Think So@Aug 1, 2008 – 5:21 pm

You still did not get it. I have said US will not defend Taiwan as if she’s defending the 50 states.

As a real fact of life, not many other countries in the world ‘recognize’ Taiwan as a separate entity. Their citizens will not enjoy the same kind of political leverage and protection other countries can provide for its citizens. Let’s say, Koreans/Japanese/Philipines in Iraq were kidnapped. What power and how does the Taiwanese government will be in a position to bear? The only thing they can do is thru 3rd party to negotiate ‘ransom money’.

As for your argument that you see very little if any strategic value of Taiwan in the Pacific Rim, let’s just say the military saw things differently than you.

Aug 2, 2008 - 8:40 am 41. P. Ami:

markus.
From my experience, Taiwanese may prefer political independence but are certainly not bothered as much by the prospects of re-uniting as I would imagine. Many think it inevitable and I never get the sense they were particulally bothered by it.

Hey Kabul,
I’m waiting for you to link to The Protocols of the Elders of Huang Chuan.

Aug 2, 2008 - 11:20 am 42. kabud:

P. Ami:
may be you work in the circus?

tell me why kremlin and beijing keep and develop WMD?

Kremlin has BW and CW even though we dont keep those since 1972?

why do they need this?

It is very expensive toy, u know

Why ?

Aug 2, 2008 - 1:48 pm 43. Still Don't Think So (3):

So, “Always Right,” you’ve abandoned the idea of Taiwan as an “ally,” since you’ve conceded its done nothing like our [real] allies. (Unless having its hand out all the time is a new definition of a US ally).

Rather it seems to be a greedy, self-appointed dependent that takes but never helps and won’t spend the money or raise the troops to protect itself. Did they think that was our job? Surprise!!!

Taiwan’s approximately 350,000 “untrained” troops will stay on parade duty, and MC will always be able to swat them in an afternoon.

Haven’t seen any push in Australia or Japan
to waste money or lives on Taiwan. In fact it appears the opposite: who can blame them? What’s Taiwan done for them? Why waste resources defending Taiwan (especially since I just know its citizens will flee Taiwan at the first sign of an MC advance).The Aussies woouln’t; the Japanese wouldn’t; the Brits wouldn’t….

So we’re down to what value the rock off MC has in the “How Many US cities should be at risk for Taiwan?” equation: I’ll tell you: zero.

Its not defensible except at prohibitive cost using nuclear weapons or large numbers of troops, or large numbers of US navy vessels.

Many Taiwanese apparently don’t care if they are reunited with MC. Those that do don’t care to pay for an usable army. Let their kids defend it. Let their taxes pay for their airforce.

Aug 2, 2008 - 2:45 pm 44. c:

I came into this post without an opinion on the China-Taiwanese conflict.

But, the utter nonsense of Chang’s article and kabud’s paranoid comments have made me lean China’s way. Guys, you have to understand how to develop a logical argument. All you’re repeating are conspiracy theories and lies.

We want facts, not paranoid schizophrenic hate arguments.

Go China. Wipe Taiwan off the map!!!

Aug 2, 2008 - 5:18 pm 45. P. Ami:

Kabud,
Let me know which asylum you’ve been assigned to. I’ll be sure to arrange a performance there.

Aug 2, 2008 - 6:48 pm 46. kabud:

P. Ami:

Just answer the simple question:

why communists in russia and china keep 10s of thousands of nukes aimed at you develop more of that and develop bio and chemical weapons at the scale to kill hundreds of millions of people

Answer me. Don’t give me that: Let me know which asylum you’ve been assigned to. I’ll be sure to arrange a performance there.

Have courage to admit what it is.

WHY?

Aug 2, 2008 - 10:14 pm 47. kabud:

c:
you should teach yourself a little history of mass murder in ussr and china

and watch this
http://torrents.thepiratebay.org/4217790/The.Soviet.Story%5BDivX.2008.Eng%5D.4217790.TPB.torrent

Aug 2, 2008 - 10:16 pm 48. always right:

Still Don’t Think So (3)@Aug 2, 2008 – 2:45 pm

Do I have to SPELL it out for you? Why can’t you use your braincells just a bit?

DID CHINA SEND ANY TROOPS TO AFGAHNESTAN? TO IRAQ?

AND WHY NOT?

So if Taiwan offer to send its troops to the coalition effort, what would US do?

If US accepted Taiwan’s troops, is it an official recognition now as Taiwan’s Indepenenc status? What does China have to say about that?

Think just one second, will you??!!! Instead of using EMOTIONAL argument that you won’t send your kids to ‘defend Taiwan’, as if US personnel is ever going to shoot chicom on the streets of Taipei.

Geeze!

Aug 3, 2008 - 8:34 am 49. P. Ami:

Kabud,
Everyone is well aware of the mass murder in China and the USSR. I am well aware of what human beingscare capable of. I’m not argueing that Russia and/or China would never do such a thing. I just don’t follow lock-step the logic; the Chinese and Russians are actingvfriendly, both have killed millions, they are engaged in a plan to kill millions more. It’s not a simple x ergo y senario you’ve put together.

The Chinese and Russians, as far as I know, would have very little chance to succeed in a plan to wipe us out without getting wiped out themselves. So, that whole livingspace theory is bunk.

Who exactly do you think we are? Are we State Department workers holding weekly meetings with Secretary Rice, advising her on the Red Menace? Am I a general working as head of the nuking plans in the Pentegon? Are you trying to convince us to vote for the “Kill a Commie for your Mommy” candidate in this year’s presidential election?

Plenty of the facts you propose are refutable by sources much better then you. Two years ago the Pentagon expressed displeasure that China was spending 1/10th of what we do on weapons. China and Russia have an open and serious dispute with one another over claims over Mongolia. Never in history has there been a co-hegemony of a region. Two ambitious Empires cannot and do not cooperate to the extent you suggest.

There are plenty of weaknesses in your senario, in it’s facts, it’s logic, it’s premise, and in what you think you’ll achieve by convincing us. Let’s try and focus on the very reasonable, provable and effectable reasons to hate China and Russia both.

Aug 3, 2008 - 10:41 am 50. pch1013:

“that whole livingspace theory is bunk”

Besides, if the Chinese really wanted living space, it would make a lot more sense for them to grab the Russian Far East and Siberia. Those areas are much closer, and much less populated. If they paid the Russians enough, they might even get them without a fight.

Aug 3, 2008 - 12:36 pm 51. Will Never Think So:

Always Right: calm down: using caps is a signal that you’re blood pressure is up, not that you’re convincing anyone.

You’ve now scuttled to another lame explanation for Taiwan’s miserable failure to send any troops to help the US in either conflict in 7 years. 7 years!!!

Your first excuse” “they aren’t trained,” a transparently laughable explanation that you’ve now abandoned.

Now its “Oh Gosh! If Taiwan offered to send troops the US couldn’t take them! So that’s why Taiwan didn’t offer them!” This is so strained and silly I’m tempted to conclude you may be the author of the lamentably reasoned article that started this debate

In urging the US to defend Taiwan–which won’t defend itself or help anyone else–you have to do better than claim status as a reliable ally–Taiwan isn’t; you can’t insist on being valuable–its not.

We have enough commitments. Enough money being spent. Enough soldiers dying for someone else’s country. Taiwan isn’t Britain, Australia, Japan, Poland…Even Canada–Canada!-sent a few people to Afghanistan!

I was so put off by the article’s overbearing tone and your mindless desire to cement the US to defending Taiwan, I Googled up an article by the Cato Institute in 2003, concluding: (1), Taiwan doesen’t spend enough money on its own defense because it leans on us; it reccomends selling them more weapons–but says Taiwan hasn’t appropriated the money to buy them; (2), China’s economy is growing 4 times as fast as Taiwan’s; (3), [listening carefully?] it would be ILL-ADVISED for the US to intervene in a MLC/Taiwan dispute given (among other things), the potential for escalation to a nuke exchange between MLC and the US.

So Always Right, skip the caps: do some reading: tell your pals in Taiwan to spend their own money for advanced weapons and train an army for more than parade duty.

Right now I suspect the wealthy and middle classes –that won’t spend their own money for weapons–there would stream out at the first sign of trouble leaving it to “someone else” to put up a fight.

If the upper classes hadn’t been so bloody corrupt in the first place, they might not have been ousted from MLC.

This is the end of this issue for me. Enjoy all.

Aug 3, 2008 - 7:59 pm 52. Danny:

Will Never think so, firstly Taiwan produces something like 95% of the components of the computer u are using to type your crap on a website. Secondly, Taiwan hasn’t received aid from the US for decades. Thirdly, Taiwan provides plenty of intelligence information to US. Fourthly, I notice you have no problem defending Europe whose members at times have actively worked against the US. Fifthly, this nonsense about Afghanistan is just that – nonsense. So the Taiwanese should send a token force – like the Poles did – so that ignorant dick in the US will feel good about defending a democracy of 23 million people. Finally, you think that the PRC is going to get into a nuclear exchange with the US over Taiwan? Be honest.

Aug 3, 2008 - 11:00 pm 53. always right:

“Don’t Think So”, what you wrote reveals a lot about yourself.

Are you just as callously dissing others’ contributions according to your narrow definition? For example, I am not shooting bad guys in Afghanistan and Iraq, therefore I am not contributing to the GWoT? No troop presence in Afghanistan or Iraq, therefore those countries are not our allies?

Because Taiwanese themselves have different opinions about how to deal with chicom, you just dismiss them as not even defending themselves? Isn’t it a perfectly good example of the democratic process in Taiwan? You would rather everyone ‘speak’ just one voice?

Most of your arguments could be applied to Israel and its people, you know. Did Israelites send troops to Afghanistan or Iraq? What is the strategic value of that small piece of land in the ME region to US? Isn’t it true that Israelites themselves are just as spilt to different approaches dealing with their neighbors? Well, according to you and your pre-set standards, let the Arabs nuke them to pieces. We shouldn’t be sending any money, equipment, or your kids to fight “FOR them”.

Aug 4, 2008 - 7:19 am 54. P. Ami:

I think I actually prefer the use of Israelite rather than Israeli. I suppose the latter was initiated in the 40s to distinguish the contemporary from the ancient. I’m thinkin that perhaps too much distinction has been made between the two, to Israel’s detriment.

It is certainly true that allies make different contributions to an alliance. I wonder what Taiwan contributed, as i have no information regarding what Taiwan offers in the WonT. Taiwan, btw, is not producing much on the island. They themselves rely on their commie brothers for labor. Ironic?

Aug 4, 2008 - 11:58 am 55. W::

This spirited exchange is very interesting and revealing.

“Don’t Think So” cites facts and a study: “Always Right” cites nothing and when challenged with facts, pulls out another unsupported claim. But if I have it right, Taiwan didn’t send troops, ever. “Always Right’s” original justification for not doing so was abandoned as untenable.

Always Right fails to grasp that the US is under no legal, moral or treaty obligation to defend people who won’t help theselves by buying weapons they need or help the US. “Always Right” what’s your explanation for Taiwan not buying the weapons they need? Why should the U.S. pick up their slack? Do you really think US citizens and taxpayers have some obligation to prop up rich Taiwanese who won’t help themselves?

Your “democratic” “one-voice” issue is a red-herrring: Taiwan is entitled to decide tis own defense of course–but not look to us to compensate for its sloth and cheapness.

Taiwan cannot compare itself to Israel: the Israeli army does fight; its airforce knocked out Saddam’s reactor in 1982, doing us all a world of good; just being there serves as a base for US planes contiguous to a lot of oil and potential rogue states. Taiwan’s mere proximity to China hardly lends a similar value. It instead seems to be a liability: people that choose not to spend to defend themselves. At least that’s what I am gleaning from these exchanges.

“Danny” makes better points, but he’s so busy characterizing opposing views as “crap” and calling other people names, he grossly overstates them:

Fact: Taiwan is one of several silicon chip mfg countries, with Japan, ROK etc. In 1999 Taiwan made about 10% of the silicon chips.

Fact: Taiwanese businessman don’t seemt to consider the chips strategic: they had invested about $50 billion in making chips–in China.(New York Times, November 2000)

Many believe that China is going to be the largest chipmaker soon.

Danny claims that Taiwan gives the US “lots” of intelligence: that’s like a boast at a bar: but even if we credit it, so does Japan and ROK. I’m not sure and Danny doesen’t favor us with facts as to why Taiwan’s claimed contribution is unique. Danny’s claim is also suspect: Spy sattelites are better sources than some Taiwanese coast watcher with a pair of binoculars.

I have to say “Always Right” and Danny” both seem to become extremely agitated and abusive when their claims are questioned, defensive when facts are used to rebut their claims and dismissive of the other point of view. Still, Danny may have more facts here and I hope he posts them. “Always Right,” I’d quit now if I were you.

Aug 4, 2008 - 12:02 pm 56. kabud:

>The Chinese and Russians, as far as I know, would have very little chance to succeed in a plan to wipe us out without getting wiped out themselves

It would be true if them never killed as many of their people as they did:

Kremlin: up to 50% of their population

CPC : well, we are not sure, but at least 100 million or much more: no way to find out exactly

So for them it is: kill our people as many as you can : we will kill all yours anyway

Also is was never planned by them to be a direct conflict.

Grey terror, unknown islamic terrorist , no state association

american mad scientists))

Well, say Obama is elected and cuts military by 70%, creates a total disaster in the country, rallies the worst scum for the civil war

AND here ANTHRAX attack comes that takes lives of 100 millions of americans

and suit cases bombs go off

all the above is not a fantasy but absolutely likely to happen events, of course if you give it a thought and research :

at least research official sources: Senate, Congress, FBI

Aug 5, 2008 - 12:38 pm 57. bc:

chanswaybing former taiwan president’s money should go to taiwan people as stimulus checks. how much each give the country in tax they get back accordingly. csb is a
crook. eye for eye all criminals or only bad guys left = end of the world.

Oct 3, 2008 - 3:52 pm 58. Tom:

kabund, I don’t really intend to offend but I have to say you sucks.

Don’t you think your claim that Chinese people are offensive and overly controlled of the government can hurt us Chinese people? While I was reading you say how much we hate the US, don’t you think you are showing how much you hate us, simply because of we are Chinese?

It seems that in your eyes we are just worthless, lower-level of beings compared with you guys. And therefore it is justifiable to wage a war which could cost thousands of innocent life against us?

Shit!

Oct 5, 2008 - 9:11 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: