Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Asian History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Asian History Asian History Forum - China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand, and the Asia-Pacific Region


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old September 1st, 2017, 09:31 AM   #21

rvsakhadeo's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: India
Posts: 7,562

Quote:
Originally Posted by heylouis View Post
none of the listed reasons sounds actually reasonable.
the OP asks something beyond the historical study.
I fully agree with you, heylouis . And surprisingly the O.P. has come from a person from Poland, a most unfortunate nation which has been trampled all over from both sides of its border for years together, and hence one who should have realised the value of Freedom.
I want to ask the O.P. what is this obsession with ' Power ' ? If to acquire that ' Power ', you have to enslave other countries, what good is that power for ? Does the O.P. think that the countries he so casually mentions as candidates for getting grabbed by China, are toys to be seized by a spoiled child ? Do you think that the people who are to be grabbed will not fight for their freedom ?
rvsakhadeo is offline  
Remove Ads
Old September 1st, 2017, 10:50 AM   #22

Rajeev's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Oct 2015
From: India
Posts: 311

Quote:
Originally Posted by rvsakhadeo View Post
I fully agree with you, heylouis . And surprisingly the O.P. has come from a person from Poland, a most unfortunate nation which has been trampled all over from both sides of its border for years together, and hence one who should have realised the value of Freedom.
I want to ask the O.P. what is this obsession with ' Power ' ? If to acquire that ' Power ', you have to enslave other countries, what good is that power for ? Does the O.P. think that the countries he so casually mentions as candidates for getting grabbed by China, are toys to be seized by a spoiled child ? Do you think that the people who are to be grabbed will not fight for their freedom ?
Dear Ram,

The ethic laid down for the kings were different from those have today as a good UN Citizen, or common man had in ancient time. It was the duty of every king to expand his kingdom and guidelines applicable for success in expansion were also laid down. See following three quotes from Chanakya Sutra (Indian).


"The 4 essential works (karya) of kingdom / state (rajya) are (i) obtaining what has not been obtained (ii) protecting what has been obtained, (iii) increasing what is protected, & (iv) applying it to work of the kingdom and spending it correctly." - Chanakya Sutra-42

"Peace (Sandhi) and War (vighaha) with other countries is a continuing process." - Chankaya Sutra-47 {Translator says that the intelligent king should know when there is profit in a war and when in peace/sandhi. This this political (raja-niti) intelligence.}


"Strong should attack only the weak." - Chanakya Sutra-56

Similar values must be available Sun Tzu's 'Art of War' (Chinese) because contents of Chanakya and Sun Tzu are very similar. Chinese Emperors have throughout history tried to conquer other nations - they have also been conquered by other nations.

Lawnmoverman (Post#2) has given recent example. Another example is repeated conquest of Tibet. They have had wars with Mongolia and Japan. If we dig there are more.

Regards

Rajeev
Rajeev is offline  
Old September 1st, 2017, 07:48 PM   #23

Aupmanyav's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2014
From: New Delhi, India
Posts: 2,166

Quote:
Originally Posted by helmen View Post
I wonder why the Chinese didn’t use the chance to expand their country, especially in the climate of the Cold War, right after the WW2. Why didn’t it happen?
Simple. Do you think the Western powers would have allowed it? Perhaps US wanted India to intervene when China annexed Tibet, but India and Nehru were not interested. Heylouis will know more about it.
Aupmanyav is offline  
Old September 1st, 2017, 07:58 PM   #24
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2013
From: China
Posts: 4,912

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rajeev View Post
Similar values must be available Sun Tzu's 'Art of War' (Chinese) because contents of Chanakya and Sun Tzu are very similar.

Regards

Rajeev
i just do not understand the point of using the word "must" and "because"
the attempt of these words appears to try to make the logic sounding correct, without the presence of any proof.

does the logic actually is correct? why don't cite several sentences of sun tze?

the pattern of this strange usage has been noted and pointed out by me, with the known example of tibet (which appear again in the last post). i want to ask Rajeev: have you gotten the answers to my questions last time you failed to answer?

Last edited by heylouis; September 1st, 2017 at 08:07 PM.
heylouis is offline  
Old September 3rd, 2017, 04:55 PM   #25

Blue's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Feb 2016
From: ROK
Posts: 326

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawnmowerman View Post
The US stopped them in Vietnam.
I didn't know that. Maybe you meant indirectly?
Blue is offline  
Old September 4th, 2017, 08:43 AM   #26

Rajeev's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Oct 2015
From: India
Posts: 311

Quote:
Originally Posted by heylouis View Post
i just do not understand the point of using the word "must" and "because"
the attempt of these words appears to try to make the logic sounding correct, without the presence of any proof.

does the logic actually is correct? why don't cite several sentences of sun tze?

the pattern of this strange usage has been noted and pointed out by me, with the known example of tibet (which appear again in the last post). i want to ask Rajeev: have you gotten the answers to my questions last time you failed to answer?
Hi Heylouis,

I checked out. Art of War by Sun Tzu, does not have the ethic which I was saying.

So you are right.

Thanks

Rajeev
Rajeev is offline  
Old September 4th, 2017, 10:07 AM   #27

rvsakhadeo's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: India
Posts: 7,562

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rajeev View Post
Dear Ram,

The ethic laid down for the kings were different from those have today as a good UN Citizen, or common man had in ancient time. It was the duty of every king to expand his kingdom and guidelines applicable for success in expansion were also laid down. See following three quotes from Chanakya Sutra (Indian).


"The 4 essential works (karya) of kingdom / state (rajya) are (i) obtaining what has not been obtained (ii) protecting what has been obtained, (iii) increasing what is protected, & (iv) applying it to work of the kingdom and spending it correctly." - Chanakya Sutra-42

"Peace (Sandhi) and War (vighaha) with other countries is a continuing process." - Chankaya Sutra-47 {Translator says that the intelligent king should know when there is profit in a war and when in peace/sandhi. This this political (raja-niti) intelligence.}


"Strong should attack only the weak." - Chanakya Sutra-56

Similar values must be available Sun Tzu's 'Art of War' (Chinese) because contents of Chanakya and Sun Tzu are very similar. Chinese Emperors have throughout history tried to conquer other nations - they have also been conquered by other nations.

Lawnmoverman (Post#2) has given recent example. Another example is repeated conquest of Tibet. They have had wars with Mongolia and Japan. If we dig there are more.

Regards

Rajeev
I understand your pov, it is the right Dharma of a King. But in modern times we are far from those days and new humanitarian principles apply. So I was surprised to read these statements coming from a Polish person.
rvsakhadeo is offline  
Old September 7th, 2017, 01:59 PM   #28
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,116

.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aupmanyav View Post
Simple. Do you think the Western powers would have allowed it? Perhaps US wanted India to intervene when China annexed Tibet, but India and Nehru were not interested. Heylouis will know more about it.
For the US to intervene in Tibet, it would have needed the active cooperation of India and Nepal to provide basis, and neither expressee getting involved to that extent. The US ground troops in Tibet would be facing the Chinese army on more or less equal terms, the US equipment not fundamentally better than the Chinese army.

In Taiwan, the powerful US navy could have prevented the Chinese invasion force or prevented the Chinese from resupply its army if did land on Taiwan. The Chinese, and nobody else, not even the Russians, had a navy that could match the US. The US would not needed cooperation from other countries (I think Japan was still occuppied). Frankly, it would have been suicidal for the Chinese to invade Taiwan if the US chose to act. Unlike a ground war, naval comflicg with the Chinese would not lead to many captured US prisoners that the US would have worry about. In the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Soviets had to humiliatingly back down in fromt of the whole worle before the powerful US Navy, because they couldn't the match the US naval power. Neither could the Chinese.

Also, invading a hostile country by sea is difficult at the best of times - look at the Mongols failure in invading Japan. Neither Napoleon nor Hittler tried crossing the mere 20 miles of sea to invade England, and the Spanish Armada invasion was a disaster. With an enemy waiting for you , such an invasion would have been difficult, especially since the Chinese did not boast much of a navy at the time.

Finally, the Chinese were more interested in consolidating their hold on the mainland, figuring there was time later to take over Taiwan.
Bart Dale is offline  
Old September 7th, 2017, 02:04 PM   #29
Lecturer
 
Joined: Aug 2015
From: Los Angeles
Posts: 407

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart Dale View Post
. The US ground troops in Tibet would be facing the Chinese army on more or less equal terms, the US equipment not fundamentally better than the Chinese army.
Can you elaborate on this? I am under the impression that even if we don't bring in much heavy equipment, our guns will still be better.
mariusj is online now  
Old September 9th, 2017, 01:36 PM   #30

Rajeev's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Oct 2015
From: India
Posts: 311

Hi Helmen,

My answers below.

Regards

Rajeev

.................................................. ......


Quote:
Originally Posted by helmen View Post
China is undoubtedly currently one of the most powerful countries in the world - in terms of territory, population as well as already economy. Yet it seems that it could have easily been even more powerful than it is right now.
Today China is one of the most powerful countries, going by size of Army, Airforce, and Navy.

But we live in the nuclear age - where each country has enough bombs to destroy not only the enemy but the whole world. In this scenario, whom will you call most powerful? All are equally powerful. As on date North Korea thinks it is equal to USA!

PS: North Korea is a proxy of China. Pakistan is, in my view, only slightly less brash than North Korea but runs an additional risk of passing the technology to "non-state actors".


Quote:
Originally Posted by helmen View Post
That additional power could have come from either annexation or vassalization of Mainland Southeast Asia (Myanmar, Laos, Thailand, Vietnam, West Malaysia, etc.). I wonder why the Chinese didn’t use the chance to expand their country, especially in the climate of the Cold War, right after the WW2. Why didn’t it happen?
China look good from when seeing from a far place like Poland. In the years till 1976, China could not have caputured SE Asian countries because they were themselves confused and exploring the ways to improve their economy.

Till 1976, they were busy with Great Leap Forward (1958-1962, killed 55 million) [3] and Cultural Revolution (1966-1976, killed 1.5 million Chinese) [1],[2], in which Mao Tse Tung managed to kill millions of Chinese.

China could get its act together only by 1976 when the purged Deng Xiao Ping came to power after death of Mao.

Since then China has made enviable progress. Democracies cant learn anything from China but we can feel inspired that high economic growth rates are achievable.

PS: I just returned from a tour of Indonesia and passed via Malysia. They are doing fine and dont need Chinese to rule over them. They are happier countries than China.

[1] Cultural Revolution - Facts & Summary - HISTORY.com
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward

Quote:
Originally Posted by helmen View Post
It looks right now like the USA treats China like its sworn enemy, even though China probably doesn’t see itself as such.
The USA is an imperialist, chauvinist country. Their crypto-fascist culture made it exterminate Native Americans and steal a large part of the Mexico territory and they apparently have no remorse about that, yet they hypocritically try to lecture others. They see the world of international relations as a darwinist world where the great powers bully smaller countries, invade them, pillage them and even steal their territory. Apart from that, they have that jingoistic idea that they are somehow exceptional. They cannot coexist with countries that are or even may be as powerful as they are. That is the reason why they go so crazy about the rise of China, or any other country for that matter. No matter what China does, they will be treated as enemies by Americans, they just cannot change their mentality. China must be surely aware of that by now.
USA may be angry with China because it has the worst trade deficit with China. It does not have any other issue with China.

On the contrary China has created an issue in South China Sea which has antagonised USA, Vietnam, and many other nations. In fact China has boundary disputes with all, repeat all, its neighbours!

America is a great country in the sense they have managed to increase the standards of living to high levels in their country. They have good systems for everything - police, judiciary, scientific research, and so on. There may be some points to criticize but our focus has to be on what we can learn from the USA for our respective countries.

PS: I repeat, in the nuclear world, all nuclear powers are equal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by helmen View Post
What are the relations between China and these countries today? Are they in its sphere of influence?
My impression is that Chinese are influential but disliked in all of them. In Vietnam now they are perceived as enemy nation.

Pew Research shows how much it is disliked: China is most disliked by Vietnam, Japan, India, South Korea, - all of whom are neighbors. They are disliked by more than 50% population in USA and UK.

[1] Opinion of China - Indicators Database | Pew Research Center

.................................................. ......

The last PS: Are you really Polish or Chinese-Polish or Chinese?

Last edited by Rajeev; September 9th, 2017 at 01:45 PM.
Rajeev is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Asian History

Tags
annex, asia, china, communist, mainland, southeast



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why Has There Been Significant Chinese Migration to Southeast Asia? Senyokbalgul Asian History 28 August 9th, 2016 09:13 AM
Sushi origin is southeast asia? Zoopiter Asian History 1 October 7th, 2013 05:02 AM
Islam in Southeast Asia El Kaiser Asian History 8 January 17th, 2010 06:48 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.