NewCelica.org Forum banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,125 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Communist China - Disarm Or Else!
By Devvy Kidd
NewsWithViews.com
3-10-03


In a scant few months, millions of words about Saddam Hussein and his "weapons of mass destruction" have been penned to paper and spoken on TV and radio. I just returned from Boston and Washington, DC. I took Amtrak from Sacramento to Boston to New Haven, CT, down to Washington, DC, back to Chicago and then home to Sacramento.

One meets a large cross section of Americans from every walk of life on such a long trip. Not one single person I spoke with wants this war with Iraq. From taxi cab drivers in Waltham, Massachusetts, to vacationers on the train off the farm in Iowa, it was the talk from coast to coast. Everyone questioned: Why? The most common comments were: Saddam Hussein is no threat to the U.S. or the Bush Administration has not been truthful to the people of these united States of America.

But what about Communist China?

From a February 29, 2000, piece titled, "China Threatens U.S. with Missile Strike," by Bill Gertz of the Washington Times reported:

"China stepped up its war of words over Taiwan yesterday, bluntly threatening to fire long-range nuclear missiles at the United States if it defends the island."


Now, that's as direct a threat as one can get against the united States of America by our mortal enemy, the Communist Chinese.

Why hasn't Mr. Bush demanded that Communist China immediately disarm and destroy those nukes pointed at US?

The answer is simple: Trade. On October 20th of 2001, President Bush was in Shanghai with President of China Jiang Zemin.

This was only a few short months after the April 1, 2001 downing of our U.S. Navy EP-3E Aries II surveillance plane by Zemin's military cowboys. The Chinese F-8 fighters that played such a dangerous game, carried air-to-air missiles sold to China by Israel. Twenty four Americans, after a miraculous emergency landing, were then held as prisoners. Eleven days later and after thoroughly stripping down this $80 million dollar airplane and breaking our sensitive defense code, the commies released our freedom fighters and sent us back a heap of salvageable airplane parts.

During those 11 days our military personnel were being held, Americans were wringing their hands in worry. The yellow ribbons went up on trees. Rightfully so, Americans were steaming big time and the families of those 24 crew members were fearful for the well being of their children, husbands and daughters.

Mr. Bush then issued an apology to the widow of the pilot who shot down our plane. Americans reeled from such a slap in the face to our honor by our own President. Mr. Bush called this international incident of deliberate aggression an accident.' Don't rock the trade boat, Mr. President. As a matter of fact, some excellent investigative reporting by Charles R. Smith on Oct. 3, 2001, exposed more of the ugly truth about America's foreign policy:

"Newly released documents show that U.S. Air Force officials met with Chinese military officers in June 2001 to discuss U.S. possible military aid for China.

"According to documents, the meetings took place inside China despite the "policy issues surrounding the (at that time unresolved) EP-3 situation."

While we were all sitting around praying for the safe return of our 24 crew members, only two months later, it was business as usual. These types of secret meetings aren't set up in two days. You can bet the arrangements were being made while our military were being held and We the People were made fools of - again. What did Ronald Rumsfeld tell Mr. Bush a mere two weeks before this downed plane, hostage incident?

"....China now perceived as the principal threat to American global dominance."

Really? That would be late March, 2001. By October 2001, Rumsfeld's boss was in Communist China, frocked in the latest fashion from Beijing and making nice with mass murderer, Jiang Zemin.

In April 1997, the Ruskies and Communist Chinese President Jiang Zemin, the butcher of Beijing, signed a formal New World Order agreement in which they pledged to replace the U.S. as the world's lone superpower.

These people are playing for keeps and anyone who thinks otherwise is either in a state of denial or hasn't done their homework on these two communist countries. Communism is not dead in Putin's world - as long as the gold goes into his own private bank accounts.

One month after the President of the united States of America was in schmoozing with Zemin:

News Telegraph, UK November 3, 2001

Beijing Produces Videos Glorifying Terrorist Attacks on 'Arrogant' US

By Damien McElroy

"The Chinese state-run propaganda machine is cashing in on the terror attacks in New York and Washington, producing books, films and video games glorifying the strikes as a humbling blow against an arrogant nation.

"Communist Party officials say President Jiang Zemin has obsessively watched and re-watched pictures of the aircraft crashing into the World Trade Center. In the immediate aftermath of the attacks, workers at Beijing Television worked round-the-clock to produce a documentary they called Attack America.

"As rescue workers pick through the rubble of the twin towers, the commentator proclaims that the city had reaped the consequences of decades of American bullying of weaker nations.

"He said: "This is the America the whole world has wanted to see. Blood debts have been repaid in blood. America has bombed other countries and used its hegemony to deny the natural rights of others without paying the price. Who until now has dared to avenge the hurts inflicted by unaccountable Americans."


Two months after 9-11, one month after Mr. Bush was in Shanghai playing nice with Zemin and what do we see? Jiang Zemin and his fellow countrymen celebrating the 9-11 attack against America. Wear Made in China or Hong Kong? I'd rather go naked.

Russia: Disarm now!

October 25, 1999 Washington Post:

"Russia Threatens U.S. Over National Missile Defense System"

"The Russian military on Monday threatened the United States over it's intention to create and implement a national anti-ballistic missile system. Nikolai Mikhailov, Russia's first deputy Defense Minister told reporters that "Our arsenal has such technical capabilities to overcome any antimissile defenses. This technology can realistically be used and will be used if the United States pushes us toward it."


It is our right to develop whatever weapons systems our talented people can create to defend our shores. Again, this was a direct threat to America by a foreign power. When will Mr. Bush demand that Vladimir Putin completely disarm and destroy all of his nukes, backed up by threats of war? It won't happen. Too many of Bush's big GOP money donors are doing big business inside Russia.

Here's a small helping of what the Ruskies and Chinese have been up to over the past few years: "The developing anti-U.S. alliance between Russia and China continues to grow. The Pentagon recently discovered a new area of alarming secret cooperation: nuclear weapons." Bill Gertz & Rowan Scarborough, January 14, 2000, WND

On the eve of Mr. Bush's inauguration, January 2001, his future and anti-American new National Security Advisor, Condi Rice, chosen for her color, gender and unwavering support for a new world order, was quoted at a cocktail party as saying: "We don't have any reason to trust Putin."

But wait! Within just a few short months, June 2001 while Mr. Bush was in in Ljubljana, Slovenia to meet with Vladimir Putin, aka The Gray Cardinal, Bush decided within two hours of meeting him that Putin was a man he could trust. Bush's remarks--"I looked the man in the eye," he said, and "I was able to get a sense of his soul."... "I trusted him or I wouldn't invite him to my ranch."

Does anyone else find these inconsistencies as frightening as I do?

Those who clamor for war aren't going to war

Popular cheerleaders for the Bush administration and his unconstitutional war, i.e. Shawn Hannity, Armstrong Williams, Dan Abrams, Newt Gingrich and so many others, have become shrill and desperate on television and radio over the past month or so as they realize the American people do not want this war.

While these 'experts' are beating the drums of war like nothing I've ever seen before, I notice that not a single one of them has gone down and enlisted in this all volunteer military force. Nor do they have sons in the military who could be deployed to the Middle East to fight Mr. Bush's war for oil. But, they're falling all over themselves to send your son, husband or father into harm's way. Why do they do this? Because they're party hacks who put party loyalty above the truth, God, flag and country.

These well paid mouthpieces don't understand the game. I say game because that's exactly what this is: a game of power. One must study how the Masters of the Globe think, what they've done over the past 227 years and how they play the people of this country for suckers. I weep for my Republic and for our precious freedom fighters being sent, once again, to become cannon fodder for the world banking cartel who own the puppets who run our government.

This unconstitutional war against Iraq isn't about terrorism, it's about solidifying a one world system by systematically knocking off one country after another, setting up puppet governments that can and will be controlled by the IMF - the cost of which will be astronomical and handed down to your children and grandchildren.

Stay tuned. Next up: North Korea
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
105 Posts
So? What will you do about it?

Its been like this since the beginning of the Cold War. Only now China wants a piece of the cake. Even if they get with Russia, attacking the US would mean destruction for both of them. The balance of terror is still there.

Just move to Canada and take a cold beer.

;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,279 Posts
US demanding China disarm? Is that a joke? China is the world's superpower right behind the US. There's nothing we have right now that can scare China. Remember they have 4-5 times the US population and will not hesistate to fight a nasty war. They can afford to lose a million men, the US can't afford to lose 100,000 because the voters won't allow it.

We can tell Iraq to eat **** because we can. But China is on a different league than Iraq.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
223 Posts
Mr. Bush then issued an apology to the widow of the pilot who shot down our plane

Hmm shot down? I thought it was a midair. There is no UN resolution against China so I find That analogy ridiculous. Maybe during the cold war we should have demanded that Russia disarm. Here is a better comparison: Japan loses war and surrenders and is forced to disarm and they havent given us **** since then. They lost and they dealt with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
Personally, I think the author of this piece needs to pull his/her head out of his/her ass.

For starters, it was a collision that downed the EP-3, was it not? It wasn't, as implied by the article, an actualy "shooting down".

Furthermore, this author seems to display the exact type of attitude that has caused America to become one of the most hated countries in the world.
That attitude is at it's finest here:
It is our right to develop whatever weapons systems our talented people can create to defend our shores
It is exactly this type of "we can do whatever we want to, to hell with the wishes of the rest of the world" attitude that got America into this trouble in the first place.


However, I do agree with the author's views on the main proponents of this war. These are people (and I use the term loosely) who don't run the risk of losing loved ones in the event of a war, but are the most willing to send American servicepeople into harm's way. These are the hypocritical bastards who hide their true intentions (economy, oil, money, power, etc.) behind half-hearted wishes for world freedom, and an end to tyranny.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,125 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
What issues do you have with this nation pursuing a weapons development course for it's stated reason [let's assume that they are both correct and right for the sake of argument] of self-defense?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
I have nothing against a nation developing weapons or means to defend itself. However, the ABM technology is a clear breach of the agreements between the Russians(former Soviets) and the Americans that prohibit the development of ABM technology, lest the threat of MAD be diminished. If any one country thinks that it has (or would have) the upper hand in a nuclear exchange, the results could be deadly.

EDIT: I should have quoted the bit about Anti-Ballistic Missile defenses too... Sorry!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
306 Posts
It doesn't matter if China has 4-5 times the manpower.. it is useless against us because they don't have enough ships or planes to send them our way.. Any planes or ships they send our way would be sunk or shot down way before they reach our part of the continent... we'll be fighting on their territory.

Now you can say that since we'll have troops on their soil that China will have the upper hand since they have the overwhelming manpower.. true.. but really if we adopted (god forbid) the stance to just destroy military targets and troops indescriminately.. we can annhilate them. All we would have to do is keep pumping out more and more cruise missles and send them China's way. Or recomission the mothballed destroyers ( if any left ) and just shell millitary installations and government installations day and night.

When it comes to ballistic missiles(non nuke) China does become a threat. One could get through once it gets back into the atmosphere after launch... but even that the missle has to travel thousands of miles to get where it wants, during that time it could be intercepted.

The real worry are nukes.. Will China use them? Maybe if they are crazy enough.

This is all assuming the milliatry doesn't give a rats ass about casualties.


nyoneway said:
US demanding China disarm? Is that a joke? China is the world's superpower right behind the US. There's nothing we have right now that can scare China. Remember they have 4-5 times the US population and will not hesistate to fight a nasty war. They can afford to lose a million men, the US can't afford to lose 100,000 because the voters won't allow it.

We can tell Iraq to eat **** because we can. But China is on a different league than Iraq.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,279 Posts
kuno said:
It doesn't matter if China has 4-5 times the manpower.. it is useless against us because they don't have enough ships or planes to send them our way.. Any planes or ships they send our way would be sunk or shot down way before they reach our part of the continent... we'll be fighting on their territory.

Now you can say that since we'll have troops on their soil that China will have the upper hand since they have the overwhelming manpower.. true.. but really if we adopted (god forbid) the stance to just destroy military targets and troops indescriminately.. we can annhilate them. All we would have to do is keep pumping out more and more cruise missles and send them China's way. Or recomission the mothballed destroyers ( if any left ) and just shell millitary installations and government installations day and night.

When it comes to ballistic missiles(non nuke) China does become a threat. One could get through once it gets back into the atmosphere after launch... but even that the missle has to travel thousands of miles to get where it wants, during that time it could be intercepted.

The real worry are nukes.. Will China use them? Maybe if they are crazy enough.

This is all assuming the milliatry doesn't give a rats ass about casualties.


If there is going to be a war, it will be fought in China and Taiwan region. China have no interest trying to take over the US. In the realistic scenerio that if China tries takes over Taiwan and the US intervenes, the US will lose.

China is very big, if the US wants to win, we will have to send troops. Planes and bombing only works if you have a base in the area. Sending Carriers near the vast coasts of China is a no-no because of their anti-ship cruise missles that have a range of around 200 nautical miles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
737 Posts
I think a more likely scenario involves the claims on the Spartley Island group. Where the US would have the Philipines (or would approach and more than likely be welcomed by the threatened Philipines) as a basing point.

The shallow ness of the water in the region negates a lot of the advantages that the US Navy has with it's quiet attack subs. so defense of a carrier group would still be a real concern.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,125 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Toy Yoda said:
I have nothing against a nation developing weapons or means to defend itself. However, the ABM technology is a clear breach of the agreements between the Russians(former Soviets) and the Americans that prohibit the development of ABM technology, lest the threat of MAD be diminished. If any one country thinks that it has (or would have) the upper hand in a nuclear exchange, the results could be deadly.

EDIT: I should have quoted the bit about Anti-Ballistic Missile defenses too... Sorry!
U are aware that Russia has NEVER followed any Treaty they've signed with the US...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,125 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
You guys need to look South. South, like into Panama. You'll find approximately 200k to 300k Chinese nationals. Combine this with WHATEVER THE FVCK is having firefights with US Border Patrol agents [there have been claims of Chinese soldiers for over one decade now] and you've got enough "terrorists" or whatever you choose to call them to raise Hell. Don't forget the Eastern European ["ex" Communist] soldier/advisors who also have been reported on our southern border combined with the Central American and Mexican soldier/drug packers that we KNOW are infiltrating our southern border. We don't even check tractor trailers anymore nor do we have detailed inspection of railway boxcars as they cross the border if they are "sealed". In fact, MX trucks are allowed to travel throughout the US now without being detained.

Our northern border is just as wide open but with no reports of small arms fire...

Then we have the fundamentalist Muslims within the nation alongside fundamentalist Israelis.

We have Cubans and Haitians in FL.

We've allowed Blacks and Whites to be driven apart.

In summary, we have PLENTY of opportunity to get "rolled" form a "ground invasion", if you will. Let's not put our guards down.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
Chui said:


U are aware that Russia has NEVER followed any Treaty they've signed with the US...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Russians have yet to move forward in a push to acquire ABM defenses.
Considering that both the Russians and the Americans possess enough nuclear weapons to destroy the Earth hundreds of times over, I would think that the ABM prohibition is more important than other broken treaties.
The consequences of having a nuclear superpower that thinks it is immune against nuclear retaliation are simply too frightful to bear.
It's not so much the American desire to create defenses that threatens the world, it's the type of defenses that they want to create.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,125 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
Russia is constantly maneuvering around it's treaties just as much as the US is trying to put up a "space shield". The same is true for Biological and Chemical agents.

I agree that true WMDs are horrible and I wish they did not exist, but there's no way to eliminate them at this point. If I were Russian I wouldn't necessarily trust the US and I surely don't trust the Russians. The same is true for China and N. Korea and to the same extent ANY of the "former" Communist nations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
737 Posts
Out of interest Chui, is there a country you would trust?

I find Americans to be nice people, but at a country to country level i would not hold out a lot of trust for your country.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,125 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Celica NZ said:
Out of interest Chui, is there a country you would trust?

I find Americans to be nice people, but at a country to country level i would not hold out a lot of trust for your country.
With the rabidly Zionist leadership [coupled with a Fundamentalist so-called "Christian" at the helm] running this place you'd be wise not to trust us...

My point is that I'd not trust the nations that are either openly declared Socialist or rushing headlong along that path.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
Chui said:
Russia is constantly maneuvering around it's treaties just as much as the US is trying to put up a "space shield". The same is true for Biological and Chemical agents.

I agree that true WMDs are horrible and I wish they did not exist, but there's no way to eliminate them at this point. If I were Russian I wouldn't necessarily trust the US and I surely don't trust the Russians. The same is true for China and N. Korea and to the same extent ANY of the "former" Communist nations.
I'm not very well-versed on the topic of treaty-breaking, but I'll take your word on it, as it seems entirely possible (and realistic) that both sides break treaties (in fact, this is definite).

To expand on your "I wouldn't trust..." thoughts, I'd say, why not include the whole world?
Sadly, it is human nature to pursue what is in OUR best interests, though not necessarily the best interests of the world or civilisation. As a result of this facet of human nature, in the grand scheme of things, no one is worthy of trust.
Every treaty is made for the benefit of one over the other. Sooner or later, the one who is not benefitting as much will decide that it is in their best interests to break the treaty.

A fairly good example of this is how cartels tend to breakdown (1st year Economics... finally something useful) because neither partner is willing to make the agreed level of profits (everyone wants 'a little more')
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
306 Posts
Chui, do you mean you do not trust any government or do not trust the people? Big differnece in that.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top