China's Blueprint For Global Power

[remake it + 288]

21 minutes ago, DayTrader said:

Would it be in English then? I think that's Tom's point, he has no idea what it says. I'd be quite surprised if he was asking without looking at both sides first haha. 

Tom could have shown a picture of the reverse but for reasons best known to him chose not to.

[Guest]

He likes to remain mysterious, plus I think he's been up about 4 days. What do those sides say anyway in the photos?

[remake it + 288]

34 minutes ago, DayTrader said:

He likes to remain mysterious, plus I think he's been up about 4 days. What do those sides say anyway in the photos?

Probably a picture of a dragon in the center and English writing showing the province and the weight of the silver coin - but Tom has the coin so he will know, won't he!

[Guest]

No the side you can see in the photos, what does that say?

I'm not asking you to be a psychic about the other side.

Edited November 1, 2019 by Guest

[Marcin + 519]

I spent 40 minutes scanning the thread and found out I also contributed to this topic, but 2 weeks ago :-)))

@remake it and @Otis11 it seems you just have different definition of "historical claims narrative" relating to Chinese territory.

Definition of @remake it is more realistic one: "You grabbed some plot of land in the past, (as China during Qing dynasty), and you have it at present you have historical claims".

@Otis11 definition is more idealistic and just one: "You need to have land for much of the written history and then you own it".

You both waste your time, you both are right according to own definition, and wrong according to definition of the other guy.

You both miss the major point : Every claim is only valid when backed by strong weapons. Country deserves territory that it can control through own military power (9 countries: US, China, Russia, India, Pakistan, France, Great Britain, Israel, North Korea) or as a vassal country through the power of superior country (the other 190 countries).

Nobody is stupid enough to question the rights of US to whole North American continent (although Canada and Mexico are technically sovereign countries) or China to their current territory including:Tibet, part of Mongolia, Xinjiang or Taiwan.

Large countries have territory and spheres of influence.

Now US has whole world apart from some countries in South East Asia (belong to China) and Central Asia (dual ownership of Russia/China). Africa does not belong to anybody as nobody wants it (although China is somehow willing to have it lately)

China wants Eurasia (although technically at present only East and South East Asia) and US is damn right to oppose.

 

[Guest]

Speechless

[nerapath 0]

>Beijing apologists depict China as a non-predatory power, comparing it favorably to Europe's colonial countries in the past and to today's United States.

The truth is not apologia. It is an objective and verifiable fact that China has hardly started any conflicts since the foundation of the PRC in 1949 (the exception being Vietnam, which was peanuts compared to what America did there at the same time), while the US has started many dozens of wars all around the world and has overthrown the governments of dozens more countries.

20-30 million is only a low end estimate of how many people died as a direct result of American interventionism that is, not counting casualties that were the result of poverty or political instability in those places for many decades afterwards. Poland has a very fitting figure of speech for these cases which unfortunately has a very racist historical connotation - to cry out in pain as you strike them - but that is exactly what western powers are doing with regards to China here.

Edited November 1, 2019 by nerapath

[remake it + 288]

1 hour ago, DayTrader said:

No the side you can see in the photos, what does that say?

I'm not asking you to be a psychic about the other side.

The center names the emperor and tells you its a precious coin, and the rest says the same as what will be in English on the reverse, but why don't you ask Tom?

[Guest]

Because he can't read Chinese, hence he is asking you.

It's 'centre' by the way Doug.

Edited November 2, 2019 by Guest

[Guest]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlcYs4GjOaU

@James Regan  

China military / The Proclaimers 

🤣🤣🤣

Edited November 2, 2019 by Guest

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

8 hours ago, DayTrader said:

Speechless

Gobsmacked!

[Guest]

Amazing isn't it? 40 minutes of studying the thread apparently, and that was his comment. Some of the most shite I've ever read on here, and that's saying something. Time to block him again clearly. 

USA has rights to whole North America, only the stupid don't see that, this has to be a joke? Oh no wait, few paragraphs later, USA has whole world apart from a few places by China. Well duh. Enthalpic will love that one. Trump has every right to your land apparently. And your claim to anything anyway is only valid if you have loads of weapons.

That is the 'major point' being mssed by Otis and Remake. Oh and only the stupid don't see that China had every right to kill Buddhist monks in Tibet. It was their right, clearly. And Africa is 'wanted' for mining so you know. But no one 'owns' it. Then he says USA is right to oppose China wanting Eurasia? Well a minute ago, as long as you had weapons, anything goes. Seriously, how much was the crack you're currently smoking? 

I hope people read this shit seriously. I get comments about copying and pasting etc and have had comments from Marcin even, and meanwhile he posts utter bullshit like this above. In fairness to Remake, what he posts he believes in and I actually respect that he doesn't give up, however much I disagree with him, but compared to what I just read, Remake is like fucking Newton. 

Edited November 2, 2019 by Guest

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

8 hours ago, Marcin said:

I spent 40 minutes scanning the thread and found out I also contributed to this topic, but 2 weeks ago :-)))

@remake it and @Otis11 it seems you just have different definition of "historical claims narrative" relating to Chinese territory.

Definition of @remake it is more realistic one: "You grabbed some plot of land in the past, (as China during Qing dynasty), and you have it at present you have historical claims".

@Otis11 definition is more idealistic and just one: "You need to have land for much of the written history and then you own it".

You both waste your time, you both are right according to own definition, and wrong according to definition of the other guy.

You both miss the major point : Every claim is only valid when backed by strong weapons. Country deserves territory that it can control through own military power (9 countries: US, China, Russia, India, Pakistan, France, Great Britain, Israel, North Korea) or as a vassal country through the power of superior country (the other 190 countries).

Nobody is stupid enough to question the rights of US to whole North American continent (although Canada and Mexico are technically sovereign countries) or China to their current territory including:Tibet, part of Mongolia, Xinjiang or Taiwan.

Large countries have territory and spheres of influence.

Now US has whole world apart from some countries in South East Asia (belong to China) and Central Asia (dual ownership of Russia/China). Africa does not belong to anybody as nobody wants it (although China is somehow willing to have it lately)

China wants Eurasia (although technically at present only East and South East Asia) and US is damn right to oppose.

 

To the best of my knowledge, the US has NEVER claimed the North American continent. If you have information that suggests otherwise, please provide it.

So how would you address the ownership of artificial islands, built in international waters (forget that adolescent 9-Line-Map bullshit)? Does the country that constructed the islands own them, or since they are in international waters, does EVERYONE own them?

Can we expect Club Meds opening on these islands which the Chinese have graciously provided? They all seem to be sprouting runways, so access shouldn’t be a problem.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

“Remake is like fucking Newton. “

....maybe Fig Newton!!!

[Marcin + 519]

I was talking about spheres of influence, it is that simple.

US has military on territory of otherwise sovereign country and this country political & sometimes economic  decisions are mainly subordinate to the US goals = US owns the country in its sphere of influence.

The same definition applies to spheres of influence of Russia and China.

 

[Marcin + 519]

14 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

To the best of my knowledge, the US has NEVER claimed the North American continent. If you have information that suggests otherwise, please provide it.

So how would you address the ownership of artificial islands, built in international waters (forget that adolescent 9-Line-Map bullshit)? Does the country that constructed the islands own them, or since they are in international waters, does EVERYONE own them?

Can we expect Club Meds opening on these islands which the Chinese have graciously provided? They all seem to be sprouting runways, so access shouldn’t be a problem.

Read what I have written " Canada and Mexico are technically sovereign countries".

Mexico is now worth sh*t with lagging oil output so US even do not care.

Please tell me 1 important independent decision of Canada, independent means not in line with US goals, last 40 years should be easy.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

Name one decision which the US forced on Mexico or Canada! The US presence on foreign soil is at the pleasure of whatever sovereign country we are discussing. In many cases it is a symbiotic relationship where that country gets a huge boost to its economy and security while the US gets a base of operations outside of the US. Furthermore, the nations where the US base is located have a very strong input as to what operations can be performed from that base.

These countries are not ‘technically’ sovereign, they ARE sovereign! 

Edited November 2, 2019 by Douglas Buckland
Miss spell

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

39 minutes ago, Marcin said:

Read what I have written " Canada and Mexico are technically sovereign countries".

Mexico is now worth sh*t with lagging oil output so US even do not care.

Please tell me 1 important independent decision of Canada, independent means not in line with US goals, last 40 years should be easy.

Good way to ask a question as it can not be proven either way! If Canada did make a decision independent of US influence, that fell in line with US desires, you would simply say they were coerced....but you could not possibly prove this!

[Guest]

Trump didn't insist on the blackface policy? That was an independent decision.

And we own their ass anyway, not America. And Mexico eat hot stuff and speak Spanish.

Sorted. Next?  #DT2020 (and DT is not Trump).

#Smith bad  #politics is easy 

Edited November 2, 2019 by Guest

[Marcin + 519]

47 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

The US presence on foreign soil is at the pleasure of whatever sovereign country we are discussing.

Accidentally I believe it is the argument used most by any power having military on foreign soil, for thousands of years.

China wants to take over Tibet -> Kills thousands monks -> Spin Unit, Propaganda Ministry, CCP -> Only to liberate millions of enslaved peasants -> job well done comrade.

US needs to control this or that country -> US needs military on this territory -> Spin Unit, NSA, US -> Only at the pleasure of guest country, it is a good deal in economic terms -> job well done citizen.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

11 minutes ago, Marcin said:

Accidentally I believe it is the argument used most by any power having military on foreign soil, for thousands of years.

China wants to take over Tibet -> Kills thousands monks -> Spin Unit, Propaganda Ministry, CCP -> Only to liberate millions of enslaved peasants -> job well done comrade.

US needs to control this or that country -> US needs military on this territory -> Spin Unit, NSA, US -> Only at the pleasure of guest country, it is a good deal in economic terms -> job well done citizen.

I am starting to think that most of your arguments are “accidentally”! (see your reply above).

NSA = Spin Unit? Show me a single thing on mainstream media that EVER came out of the headquarters at Fort Meade! You can’t! It is, by mandate, a top secret (and above) organization. The GCHQ in the UK is exactly the same....they do not do press releases!

So essentially all that you said was that China kills thousands to take over Tibet while the US rents bases in other countries in an effort to subjugate their foreign policy. Even if you were correct, don’t you see a vast difference in policy? Rent vs Murder.

Edited November 2, 2019 by Douglas Buckland
Spelling

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

13 hours ago, remake it said:

Does it not say on the reverse? - perhaps from Kiang Nan province with their weight in silver described?

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Closer look

 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Since I'm randomly posting photos of really old stuff from China, here's a hand made curio.

 

 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

And more really old curios from China... marble balls with hand carved decorations.