| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"maff" |
| Date: |
18 Mar 2005 04:16:00 PM |
| Object: |
Beijing's recurring headache |
Beijing's recurring headache
http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,1441181,00.html
China's pledge to hang on to Taiwan by force if necessary is just the
latest symptom of the widening gulf between the two
Jonathan Watts
Friday March 18, 2005
The vote could hardly have been more clear cut: 2,896 in favour, none
against and two abstentions. Even by the sycophantic standards of the
National People's Congress - a nominally all-powerful Chinese
legislature that has never rejected a single bill in more than 50 years
- the support for the anti-secession law earlier this week was
overwhelming.
By endorsing the use of military force to block Taiwanese independence
the legislation clearly struck a chord with an increasingly
nationalistic domestic audience - so much so that a throng of Chinese
journalists broke into applause on Monday when the prime minister, Wen
Jiabao, gave an impassioned explanation of its meaning. "Taiwan is a
domestic issue," said the leader during his annual press conference.
"We don't want foreign interference; neither are we afraid of it."
Jonathan Watts
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc.culture.china/msg/b722ed59f3c51147
China
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&selm=18510aff.0410180150.390524b8%40posting.google.com
Is the wakening giant a monster?
http://tinyurl.com/iws6
A Blueprint for the Future
http://snipurl.com/a684
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
18 Mar 2005 04:23:43 PM |
|
|
maff wrote:
Beijing's recurring headache
http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,1441181,00.html
China's pledge to hang on to Taiwan by force if necessary is just the
latest symptom of the widening gulf between the two
China's going to need a lot better navy than they've got so
far if they want any teeth to their threat of hanging onto
Taiwan by force. They've got something of an air force and
some insertable commando groups, but to take that island
they're going to need to put an army on it.
Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
18 Mar 2005 06:07:51 PM |
|
|
wrote:
maff wrote:
Beijing's recurring headache
http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,1441181,00.html
China's pledge to hang on to Taiwan by force if necessary is just
the
latest symptom of the widening gulf between the two
China's going to need a lot better navy than they've got so
far if they want any teeth to their threat of hanging onto
Taiwan by force. They've got something of an air force and
some insertable commando groups, but to take that island
they're going to need to put an army on it.
Maybe you haven't been paying attention, but that is exactly what the
PLA has been concentrating upon. That plus engaging an American US
carrier task force: today they believe they have the ability to defeat
one, and they are working on being able to take on two. The days of
sending the seventh fleet through the Straights of Formosa as a show of
force seem to be over.
Mike Syvanen
Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
22 Mar 2005 08:32:00 AM |
|
|
wrote:
firelock_ny@hotmail.com wrote:
China's going to need a lot better navy than they've got so
far if they want any teeth to their threat of hanging onto
Taiwan by force. They've got something of an air force and
some insertable commando groups, but to take that island
they're going to need to put an army on it.
Maybe you haven't been paying attention, but that is exactly what the
PLA has been concentrating upon.
And they've got a ways to go yet.
That plus engaging an American US
carrier task force: today they believe they have the ability to
defeat
one, and they are working on being able to take on two.
And that ballistic missile defense program the US has been
working on and their detractors have been calling a waste
of money? The parts of it already in service call those
Chinese beliefs seriously into question.
The days of
sending the seventh fleet through the Straights of Formosa as a show
of
force seem to be over.
Not yet...it simply hasn't been politic to do so lately,
what with it being useful to have China at the negotiating
table when North Korea is being talked to.
Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mr. Snoopy" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
24 Mar 2005 02:26:16 AM |
|
|
The US military was Clintonized during the 90's and will never recover to
the 1991 Persian Gulf war ability. The Iraq war now is being fought mostly
with Reserve and National Guard troops, retention and enlistments are at an
all time record low.
China-Taiwan-USA war, will be fought mostly with Naval forces which are
almost broken, a 600 ship Navy of 1990, is now a 235 Post-Clinton Navy.
Most of the defense budget goes to the Army that needs $$ for the war on
terrorism.
So with this in mind, another war means a draft being brought back, higher
taxes, higher deficient, massive casualties, all of these things the
American people will protest about.
The nuclear capability of the USA is extreme and powerful with enough
nuclear weapons in just the submarine forces to nuke all of China. I do not
feel this is a valid option for China, Taiwan and the USA to nuke each other
over this issue.
I feel once China becomes more powerful in economic living standards with
more jobs in mainland China, the Taiwanese will look at the reunification
issue as a good idea and to better their own economic standards.
Most Chinese (99.9%) are against killing their fellow Chinese over this
issue, however this Taiwan issue is almost the same as the US Civil War
issue, very touchy and emotional for all.
<firelock_ny@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111501920.078862.279990@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
syvanen@ucdavis.edu wrote:
firelock_ny@hotmail.com wrote:
China's going to need a lot better navy than they've got so
far if they want any teeth to their threat of hanging onto
Taiwan by force. They've got something of an air force and
some insertable commando groups, but to take that island
they're going to need to put an army on it.
Maybe you haven't been paying attention, but that is exactly what the
PLA has been concentrating upon.
And they've got a ways to go yet.
That plus engaging an American US
carrier task force: today they believe they have the ability to
defeat
one, and they are working on being able to take on two.
And that ballistic missile defense program the US has been
working on and their detractors have been calling a waste
of money? The parts of it already in service call those
Chinese beliefs seriously into question.
The days of
sending the seventh fleet through the Straights of Formosa as a show
of
force seem to be over.
Not yet...it simply hasn't been politic to do so lately,
what with it being useful to have China at the negotiating
table when North Korea is being talked to.
Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
24 Mar 2005 02:16:55 PM |
|
|
Mr. Snoopy wrote:
The US military was Clintonized during the 90's and will never
recover to
the 1991 Persian Gulf war ability. The Iraq war now is being fought
mostly
with Reserve and National Guard troops, retention and enlistments are
at an
all time record low.
China-Taiwan-USA war, will be fought mostly with Naval forces which
are
almost broken, a 600 ship Navy of 1990, is now a 235 Post-Clinton
Navy.
The US Pacific Fleet has over 200 ships by itself, and composes less
than half of the US Navy. How dated is the rest of your information?
Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Walsh" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
19 Mar 2005 12:11:25 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 16:07:51 -0800, syvanen thought carefully and wrote:
... The days of sending the seventh fleet through the Straights of
Formosa as a show of force seem to be over.
Not in the foreseeable future.
--
Love, Jim
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
19 Mar 2005 12:30:49 AM |
|
|
You are right. Not in the forseeable future. The seventh fleet will
keep its distance.
Mike Syvanen
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Walsh" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
19 Mar 2005 05:46:47 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 22:30:49 -0800, syvanen thought carefully and wrote:
You are right. Not in the forseeable future. The seventh fleet will
keep its distance.
The Taiwan Strait is regularly patrolled by the US fleet. In conjunction
with the ROC military, and with logistics assistance from Japan, I can
assure you that any attempted invasion of Taiwan will fail.
--
Love, Jim
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
| User: "John" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
20 Mar 2005 07:35:25 AM |
|
|
"Jim Walsh" <jiSPm_walAMsh_iii@oOKperamNOail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.03.19.11.46.47.692019@oOKperamNOail.com...
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 22:30:49 -0800, syvanen thought carefully and wrote:
You are right. Not in the forseeable future. The seventh fleet will
keep its distance.
The Taiwan Strait is regularly patrolled by the US fleet. In conjunction
with the ROC military, and with logistics assistance from Japan, I can
assure you that any attempted invasion of Taiwan will fail.
That is rubbish, Jim. I can assure you both US fleet and Japanese will
stay put if there is war and Jim will try to get onto the next available
flight
home as soon as he hear there is a possibility of war.
--
Love, Jim
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
21 Mar 2005 02:32:54 PM |
|
|
John wrote:
"Jim Walsh" <jiSPm_walAMsh_iii@oOKperamNOail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.03.19.11.46.47.692019@oOKperamNOail.com...
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 22:30:49 -0800, syvanen thought carefully and
wrote:
You are right. Not in the forseeable future. The seventh fleet
will
keep its distance.
The Taiwan Strait is regularly patrolled by the US fleet. In
conjunction
with the ROC military, and with logistics assistance from Japan, I
can
assure you that any attempted invasion of Taiwan will fail.
That is rubbish, Jim. I can assure you both US fleet and Japanese
will
stay put if there is war
One can only wish. Even if it were Kissinger's intention in 1972 for
that to occur, we cannot count on the current government. Many lower
level neocons and other Pentagon officials have been visiting Taiwan
and giving them quiet assurances that the US would intervene. Even if
the US is bluffing, a mistake could still set off war.
Mike Syvanen
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Walsh" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
21 Mar 2005 06:03:21 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 00:35:25 +1100, John thought carefully and wrote:
"Jim Walsh" <jiSPm_walAMsh_iii@oOKperamNOail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.03.19.11.46.47.692019@oOKperamNOail.com...
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 22:30:49 -0800, syvanen thought carefully and
wrote:
You are right. Not in the forseeable future. The seventh fleet will
keep its distance.
The Taiwan Strait is regularly patrolled by the US fleet. In
conjunction with the ROC military, and with logistics assistance from
Japan, I can assure you that any attempted invasion of Taiwan will
fail.
That is rubbish, Jim. I can assure you both US fleet and Japanese
w....
One can hope that the leaders of the PLA knows better.
--
Love, Jim
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
22 Mar 2005 10:17:40 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 20:03:21 +0800, Jim Walsh
<jiSPm_walAMsh_iii@oOKperamNOail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 00:35:25 +1100, John thought carefully and wrote:
"Jim Walsh" <jiSPm_walAMsh_iii@oOKperamNOail.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.03.19.11.46.47.692019@oOKperamNOail.com...
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 22:30:49 -0800, syvanen thought carefully and
wrote:
You are right. Not in the forseeable future. The seventh fleet will
keep its distance.
The Taiwan Strait is regularly patrolled by the US fleet. In
conjunction with the ROC military, and with logistics assistance from
Japan, I can assure you that any attempted invasion of Taiwan will
fail.
That is rubbish, Jim. I can assure you both US fleet and Japanese
w....
One can hope that the leaders of the PLA knows better.
They do. If China invades Taiwan goes down. The US is a paper tiger.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
23 Mar 2005 07:57:32 AM |
|
|
stoney wrote:
If China invades Taiwan goes down. The US is a paper tiger.
The "paper tiger" that, if you listen to Beijing media,
the Chinese are most afraid of.
Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
23 Mar 2005 08:06:00 PM |
|
|
On 23 Mar 2005 05:57:32 -0800, wrote:
stoney wrote:
If China invades Taiwan goes down. The US is a paper tiger.
The "paper tiger" that, if you listen to Beijing media,
the Chinese are most afraid of.
Only if the madmen in Washington go nuclear. In which case we all
die. I was speaking of conventional forces and weapons. (I haven't
read Bejiing media. Perhaps I'll take a look for some in English)
Thanks for the suggestion.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "MsAnthrope" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
23 Mar 2005 08:07:02 PM |
|
|
On 23 Mar 2005 05:57:32 -0800, wrote:
stoney wrote:
If China invades Taiwan goes down. The US is a paper tiger.
The "paper tiger" that, if you listen to Beijing media,
the Chinese are most afraid of.
Paper tiger with GPS guided bombs.
--
MsAnthrope
http://web.newsguy.com/rubyred
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
24 Mar 2005 08:16:56 AM |
|
|
MsAnthrope wrote:
On 23 Mar 2005 05:57:32 -0800, wrote:
stoney wrote:
If China invades Taiwan goes down. The US is a paper tiger.
The "paper tiger" that, if you listen to Beijing media,
the Chinese are most afraid of.
Paper tiger with GPS guided bombs.
And, for the truly cynical:
In the US, each arm of the military (Army,
Navy, Air Force) is the natural enemy of the
other two. They compete with each other for
attention, which leads to funding, which is
the lifeblood of militaries everywhere. Right
now, the US Army and US Air Force are getting
all the attention - all that activity in
Afghanistan and Iraq, not much chance for the
US Navy to shine. The US Navy wants spotlight
time too. Now, guess which US military arm
gets to shine if the task is to repel a seaborne
invasion of Taiwan?
Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jez" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
19 Mar 2005 08:09:39 AM |
|
|
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 22:30:49 -0800, syvanen thought carefully and wrote:
You are right. Not in the forseeable future. The seventh fleet will
keep its distance.
The Taiwan Strait is regularly patrolled by the US fleet. In conjunction
with the ROC military, and with logistics assistance from Japan, I can
assure you that any attempted invasion of Taiwan will fail.
US troops can't hack it against Iraqi insurgents, what makes you think
they could defeat the Chinese ?
--
Jez
'Realism is seductive because once you have accepted the reasonable
notion that you should base your actions on reality, you are too often
led to accept, without much questioning, someone else's version of what
that reality is. It is a crucial act of independent thinking to be
skeptical of someone else's description of reality.'-
Howard Zinn
NFS Underground2, Americas Army And MOH-PA
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
22 Mar 2005 08:23:55 AM |
|
|
Jez wrote:
US troops can't hack it against Iraqi insurgents, what makes you
think
they could defeat the Chinese ?
Check the body count - the Iraqi insurgents have been hacked
a *lot* more than the US troops. The western media reports
it when a roadside bomb kills a US soldier, they seldom report
it when Iraqi civilians warn the US troops and US snipers
take out a half-dozen bomb-planting insurgents without
loss.
Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
24 Mar 2005 09:21:13 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Jez wrote:
US troops can't hack it against Iraqi insurgents, what makes you
think
they could defeat the Chinese ?
Check the body count - the Iraqi insurgents have been hacked
a *lot* more than the US troops. The western media reports
it when a roadside bomb kills a US soldier, they seldom report
it when Iraqi civilians warn the US troops and US snipers
take out a half-dozen bomb-planting insurgents without
loss.
Say Walt, you do realize by that calculation we won the war in Viet Nam
(circa 1956 - 1975). The Vietnamese Communist lost over 1 million, and
by some estimates nearly 2 million, soldiers while we lost only 55,000
dead US soldiers (wounded not counted here). When all this bloodshed
was over who controlled Saigon (or for you historically limited types)
who controlled Ho Chi Minh City.
Mike Syvanen
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
24 Mar 2005 10:04:46 PM |
|
|
wrote in
news:1111720873.392587.114720@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
firelock_ny@hotmail.com wrote:
Jez wrote:
US troops can't hack it against Iraqi insurgents, what makes you
think they could defeat the Chinese ?
Check the body count - the Iraqi insurgents have been hacked
a *lot* more than the US troops. The western media reports
it when a roadside bomb kills a US soldier, they seldom report
it when Iraqi civilians warn the US troops and US snipers
take out a half-dozen bomb-planting insurgents without
loss.
Say Walt, you do realize by that calculation we won the war in Viet
Nam (circa 1956 - 1975).
Say Mike, you do realize that Vietnam is not a valid comparison to Iraq?
The Vietnamese Communist lost over 1
million, and by some estimates nearly 2 million, soldiers while we
lost only 55,000 dead US soldiers (wounded not counted here). When
all this bloodshed was over who controlled Saigon (or for you
historically limited types) who controlled Ho Chi Minh City.
The difference being that our side controls Baghdad and is fully in
control of the rest of the country too. The "minutemen" have lost all
support from the populace and their outside support is waning too.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You know you're over the target when you start receiving flak."
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
24 Mar 2005 11:07:46 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
syvanen@ucdavis.edu wrote in
news:1111720873.392587.114720@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
firelock_ny@hotmail.com wrote:
Jez wrote:
US troops can't hack it against Iraqi insurgents, what makes you
think they could defeat the Chinese ?
Check the body count - the Iraqi insurgents have been hacked
a *lot* more than the US troops. The western media reports
it when a roadside bomb kills a US soldier, they seldom report
it when Iraqi civilians warn the US troops and US snipers
take out a half-dozen bomb-planting insurgents without
loss.
Say Walt, you do realize by that calculation we won the war in Viet
Nam (circa 1956 - 1975).
Say Mike, you do realize that Vietnam is not a valid comparison to
Iraq?
The Vietnamese Communist lost over 1
million, and by some estimates nearly 2 million, soldiers while we
lost only 55,000 dead US soldiers (wounded not counted here). When
all this bloodshed was over who controlled Saigon (or for you
historically limited types) who controlled Ho Chi Minh City.
The difference being that our side controls Baghdad
As we controlled Saigon until 1975.
and is fully in
control of the rest of the country too.
Delusional.
The "minutemen" have lost all
support from the populace and their outside support is waning too.
So say you.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You know you're over the target when you start receiving flak."
Mike Syvanen
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
26 Mar 2005 04:21:30 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 04:04:46 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:
syvanen@ucdavis.edu wrote in
news:1111720873.392587.114720@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
firelock_ny@hotmail.com wrote:
Jez wrote:
US troops can't hack it against Iraqi insurgents, what makes you
think they could defeat the Chinese ?
Check the body count - the Iraqi insurgents have been hacked
a *lot* more than the US troops. The western media reports
it when a roadside bomb kills a US soldier, they seldom report
it when Iraqi civilians warn the US troops and US snipers
take out a half-dozen bomb-planting insurgents without
loss.
Say Walt, you do realize by that calculation we won the war in Viet
Nam (circa 1956 - 1975).
Say Mike, you do realize that Vietnam is not a valid comparison to Iraq?
The Vietnamese Communist lost over 1
million, and by some estimates nearly 2 million, soldiers while we
lost only 55,000 dead US soldiers (wounded not counted here). When
all this bloodshed was over who controlled Saigon (or for you
historically limited types) who controlled Ho Chi Minh City.
The difference being that our side controls Baghdad and is fully in
control of the rest of the country too. The "minutemen" have lost all
support from the populace and their outside support is waning too.
ROFLMAO.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
| User: "STOP_George" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
27 Mar 2005 11:15:16 AM |
|
|
My pictures of the 326 Protest:
<<<< Newsclip Autopsy >>>>
ONE MILLION Protest China
http://newsclipautopsy.blogspot.com/2005/03/one-million-protest-china.html
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
25 Mar 2005 09:33:27 AM |
|
|
wrote:
firelock_ny@hotmail.com wrote:
Jez wrote:
US troops can't hack it against Iraqi insurgents, what makes you
think
they could defeat the Chinese ?
Check the body count - the Iraqi insurgents have been hacked
a *lot* more than the US troops. The western media reports
it when a roadside bomb kills a US soldier, they seldom report
it when Iraqi civilians warn the US troops and US snipers
take out a half-dozen bomb-planting insurgents without
loss.
Say Walt, you do realize by that calculation we won the war in Viet
Nam
(circa 1956 - 1975).
By that calculation, by the fact that when US forces
withdrew the NVA had long since ceased major combat
operations and the Viet Cong had been completely
expended in North Vietnam's disaster known as Tet,
and by the fact that North Vietnam sued for peace in
Paris, the US *DID* win the war in Vietnam. The North
Vietnamese then waited for political winds to turn,
and started a war that *didn't* involve the US more
than a year after the US military was gone.
Will the Iraqi insurgents manage this some years from
now when US presence in Iraq is reduced? Hard to
say...but at least the 85 insurgents killed by Iraqi
government commandos during the raid in Tikrit earlier
this week won't be part of it.
Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
25 Mar 2005 11:43:50 PM |
|
|
wrote:
syvanen@ucdavis.edu wrote:
wrote:
Jez wrote:
US troops can't hack it against Iraqi insurgents, what makes
you
think
they could defeat the Chinese ?
Check the body count - the Iraqi insurgents have been hacked
a *lot* more than the US troops. The western media reports
it when a roadside bomb kills a US soldier, they seldom report
it when Iraqi civilians warn the US troops and US snipers
take out a half-dozen bomb-planting insurgents without
loss.
Say Walt, you do realize by that calculation we won the war in Viet
Nam
(circa 1956 - 1975).
By that calculation, by the fact that when US forces
withdrew the NVA had long since ceased major combat
operations and the Viet Cong had been completely
expended in North Vietnam's disaster known as Tet,
and by the fact that North Vietnam sued for peace in
Paris, the US *DID* win the war in Vietnam.
Hey Walt I love it. Finally someone who will come out and assert that
the US won the war in Viet nam. No one doubts that the US military won
every battle that they fought against the Viet Cong. Just like we are
winning in Iraq. But keep in mind, by your logic, the Germans defeated
the Soviet Union in the second world war. After all, the Russians
killed only 6 million Germans durning that war whereas the Germans
killed about 20 million Russians.
You must be part of that faith based universe that we have been hearing
about as opposed to those of us who are reality based.
Mike Syvanen
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
28 Mar 2005 08:25:28 AM |
|
|
wrote:
firelock_ny@hotmail.com wrote:
wrote:
firelock_ny@hotmail.com wrote:
Jez wrote:
US troops can't hack it against Iraqi insurgents, what makes
you
think
they could defeat the Chinese ?
Check the body count - the Iraqi insurgents have been hacked
a *lot* more than the US troops. The western media reports
it when a roadside bomb kills a US soldier, they seldom report
it when Iraqi civilians warn the US troops and US snipers
take out a half-dozen bomb-planting insurgents without
loss.
Say Walt, you do realize by that calculation we won the war in
Viet
Nam
(circa 1956 - 1975).
By that calculation, by the fact that when US forces
withdrew the NVA had long since ceased major combat
operations and the Viet Cong had been completely
expended in North Vietnam's disaster known as Tet,
and by the fact that North Vietnam sued for peace in
Paris, the US *DID* win the war in Vietnam.
Hey Walt I love it. Finally someone who will come out and assert that
the US won the war in Viet nam.
Every *military* analyst agrees with me. You obviously
have a purer source of information...I'll leave others
to speculate about your source being pure horseshit
or not.
No one doubts that the US military won
every battle that they fought against the Viet Cong. Just like we are
winning in Iraq. But keep in mind, by your logic, the Germans
defeated
the Soviet Union in the second world war. After all, the Russians
killed only 6 million Germans durning that war whereas the Germans
killed about 20 million Russians.
Would you like to actually read what I wrote, instead of
just what I responded to? Are you forgetting that the
German army was rendered incapable of combat operations
in the process of getting their 6+ million people killed?
Notice any similarities there to the plight of the NVA
and Viet Cong before they ran to the peace talks tables
in Paris?
You must be part of that faith based universe that we have been
hearing
about as opposed to those of us who are reality based.
You obviously sucked your "reality" out of the same teat
that Walter Cronkite made his millions off of.
Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
25 Mar 2005 02:13:05 PM |
|
|
On 25 Mar 2005 07:33:27 -0800, wrote:
syvanen@ucdavis.edu wrote:
wrote:
Jez wrote:
US troops can't hack it against Iraqi insurgents, what makes you
think
they could defeat the Chinese ?
Check the body count - the Iraqi insurgents have been hacked
a *lot* more than the US troops. The western media reports
it when a roadside bomb kills a US soldier, they seldom report
it when Iraqi civilians warn the US troops and US snipers
take out a half-dozen bomb-planting insurgents without
loss.
Say Walt, you do realize by that calculation we won the war in Viet
Nam
(circa 1956 - 1975).
By that calculation, by the fact that when US forces
withdrew the NVA had long since ceased major combat
operations and the Viet Cong had been completely
expended in North Vietnam's disaster known as Tet,
and by the fact that North Vietnam sued for peace in
Paris, the US *DID* win the war in Vietnam. The North
Vietnamese then waited for political winds to turn,
and started a war that *didn't* involve the US more
than a year after the US military was gone.
Will the Iraqi insurgents manage this some years from
now when US presence in Iraq is reduced? Hard to
say...but at least the 85 insurgents killed by Iraqi
government commandos during the raid in Tikrit earlier
this week won't be part of it.
What 85 insurgents? LOL, they screwed that up too.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Beijing's recurring headache |
25 Mar 2005 02:30:44 PM |
|
|
(Kate ) wrote in news:42887074.767936546@news-
west.newscene.com:
On 25 Mar 2005 07:33:27 -0800, wrote:
syvanen@ucdavis.edu wrote:
wrote:
Jez wrote:
US troops can't hack it against Iraqi insurgents, what makes you
think
they could defeat the Chinese ?
Check the body count - the Iraqi insurgents have been hacked
a *lot* more than the US troops. The western media reports
it when a roadside bomb kills a US soldier, they seldom report
it when Iraqi civilians warn the US troops and US snipers
take out a half-dozen bomb-planting insurgents without
loss.
Say Walt, you do realize by that calculation we won the war in Viet
Nam
(circa 1956 - 1975).
By that calculation, by the fact that when US forces
withdrew the NVA had long since ceased major combat
operations and the Viet Cong had been completely
expended in North Vietnam's disaster known as Tet,
and by the fact that North Vietnam sued for peace in
Paris, the US *DID* win the war in Vietnam. The North
Vietnamese then waited for political winds to turn,
and started a war that *didn't* involve the US more
than a year after the US military was gone.
Will the Iraqi insurgents manage this some years from
now when US presence in Iraq is reduced? Hard to
say...but at least the 85 insurgents killed by Iraqi
government commandos during the raid in Tikrit earlier
this week won't be part of it.
What 85 insurgents? LOL, they screwed that up too.
What are you LOL'ing about now, Klueless Kate?
http://www.strategypage.com//fyeo/qndguide/default.asp?target=IRAQ.HTM
March 24, 2005: More Iraqis are losing their fear of terrorists, and
it's hurting the anti-government forces. In the last three days, tips
from Iraqis have led Iraqi police and troops to several terrorist
hideouts. This has resulted in some spectacular gun battles, and the
deaths of over 130 terrorists (and about a dozen police and soldiers.)
The Iraqis have been using their growing force of SWAT teams to carry
out the raids, with American forces providing backup and air cover. One
raid, north of Baghdad, left 85 terrorists dead, and revealed a suicide
car bomb workshop, as well as documents and weapons. The dead terrorists
included men from many foreign countries (Persian Gulf states, Algeria,
Morocco, Afghanistan, and the Philippines.) The government was quick to
let the local media film the crime scenes and interview people. The
police and army commandos have become national heroes, with their fame
increasing after each successful raid. The traditional Iraqi style for
such work was heavy handed, time consuming and clumsy. The SWAT teams
are quick, efficient, and cause little collateral damage. This is in
sharp contrast to the terrorists, who continue to set off bombs in
crowded civilian areas, killing women and children in the process. The
terrorists have also been hitting schools, and killing children, with
mortar shells. This is probably a matter of an unskilled terrorist
aiming the mortar, but the damage to the terrorists reputation is done.
However, there have been deliberate killings of women and children by
terrorists recently, apparently in an attempt to terrorize Iraqis into
not supporting the government. This tactic isn't working, and the
government is jumping all over this barbaric behavior to encourage
Iraqis to stand up and turn in terrorists.
There appear to be no more than 3-4,000 terrorists and anti-government
fighters out there. This was deduced when American intelligence paid
close attention to terrorist operations last January, in an attempt to
get a better idea of just how many terrorists, and anti-government
gunmen, there actually were in the country. It was believed that the
terrorists would make a maximum effort in January to derail the
election, and would get all of their people out for this. Since January,
there appear to have been substantial defections from anti-government
groups, and the terrorists can no longer depend on Sunni Arabs to keep
mum about where terrorist safe houses and workshops are set up.
American casualties continue to decline. U.S. combat deaths are down
some 40 percent from February, and are only about a third of what they
were in January. Casualties haven't been this low since the Spring of
2003, right after Saddam was toppled. The hard core Sunni Arabs who
continued to support Saddam and the Baath Party are a broken force, with
most of their leaders either captured, or negotiating deals with the
government. Al Qaeda continues to see Iraq as their most important
battleground. But the terrorists coming to Iraq find themselves fighting
Iraqis, not Americans. The Iraqis, not happy about being the target for
al Qaeda bombs, has gone after the terrorists with a vengeance. Al Qaeda
is also being hammered in countries throughout the Middle East. This is
not quite the sort of war Osama bin Laden had in mind, but it's what
he's got, and it doesn't play well for bin Laden in the Arab media.
More...
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You know you're over the target when you start receiving flak."
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
