China need a new geopolitical Doctrine ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

hullopilllw

Junior Member
Registered Member
You are delusional if you think Biden's team means anything good for China. The problem for China in the US today is that there is absolutely no reason for any American to speak out in favor of China, other than purely money reasons which never win out in the end. Americans are not greedy for money. At the core they are a good, decent, kind-hearted, sentimental people, and they need sentimental reasons to treat China well, such as the belief that China is moving towards respecting human rights and democracy, that it is playing a stabilizing role in the world, etc. Unfortunately that is very far out the window and it would take a long time for a Chinese government to claw back goodwill in the US.

"respecting human rights and democracy" as in by toppling governments in the middle eastern continent and render them into failed states with millions of homeless economic refugees?

"playing a stabilizing role in the world" by keeping WTO court of dispute dysfunctional? And threatening to sanction nations if they are to impose a digital tax or dare to let Huawei get in their 5G tender?
 

escobar

Brigadier
That is not entirely correct.

If you take at a number of metrics, you end up with China as roughly equal to the USA.
For example: GDP, population, military spending, R&D spending, industrial metrics, consumer spending, etc

Have a look for yourself.

Are you even serious? US is escalating and China trying to de-escalate and your are saying China roughly equal to USA?
Be realist instead of trying to project strenght you don't have.

So it's still rational for China to want a peaceful environment for domestic development.
And even when China is bigger, it is still in China's interest to have good relations with the rest of the world as much as possible.

Nobody say China should seek war

But it is also rational for China to demonstrate that there are costs if you are part of a China containment policy, irrespective of how big China is.

And for now CHina is not very good at demonstrating that. that is what I'm saying
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
When it Is between US and CHina, Like a lot here you find virtue in every China action and bad in every US action. China passiveness is for working hard instead of shouting hard. When it is between China and a weaker country, it's the opposite. it's boring and uninteresting to discuss with you. You are hypocrite and too emotional.
I see 2 countries; 1 is shouting a lot, very angry, but its economy is not doing well, its technology is eroding, and it's suffering from disease, internal strife, and global humiliation. The other country is calm and collected, its economy, technology, and military are growing in leaps and bounds. My natural conclusion is that the former is bending himself out of shape trying to achieve something beyond its control (the welfare of his rival) while the latter country is quiet and focused on its own development. A less mentally-capable person will just see that 1 country is shouting at the other while the other doesn't say much and conclude that the louder country more in control.

What you are responding to was literally half sentence and half equation, the least emotional form of expression. The emotion that you are feeling is clearly your own from your frustration that you will always be defeated by me in debate. I don't know why you added hypocritical but you are known to use English words that you do not understand so it's not all that surprising that it would recur when you are desperate and emotional.
You don't even know what you are talking about. CHina signed this stupid deal because they hope it will make Trump to de-escalate and stop tarrif. But now trump is escalating. That is how China wins for you?
You said substance, so I gave you the trade numbers for substance. Then you said that the trade war has failed for the US, which I agree based on substance since China's goal is to make America's trade war fail to yield results. But now you imply instead that China lost? You cannot even agree with yourself but try to shift and escape whenever and wherever I prove you wrong, which happens every time. It is now clear that the hypocrite you mentioned above is, once again, yourself.
I'm tired to discuss with someone with so low level IR understanding.
You think everyone else is driving the wrong way and we all see you driving the wrong way. You are tired of losing debates to me so you just repeat the claim that I am/China is bad at IR/PR despite always failing to prove it. So, in your desperation, you have resorted to a tactic that is basically like saying that Yao Ming is short 500 times hoping it will come true LOL
In SCS no country will have an absolute win but strategically the US has for now the upper hand of having more military allies and security partners than China. You are too naive to grasp that.
China is gaining land, expanding islands, and making permanent naval bases on them. The US is cursing, driving around in circles, and making announcements that they will make other announcements. You think the US has the upper hand because it has a fattest mouth? Haha Look who's as naive as he is hypocritical...
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi called for de-escalation at the opening of the China-U.S. Think Tanks Media Forum last Thursday
China has never, to anyone said it will escalate, always de-escalate... all the while continuing to chase its interests relentlessly. That's the mark of excellent IR.
Still trying to find virtue in everything linked to China. Like I said you are dull.
I have not tried nor found anything. I simply said that you are wrong in which people can endure the most suffering and that you may be confused simply because America has inflicted a lot of self-suffering on its people trying to attack China while China is much superior in management and thus, it has mostly shielded its people from suffering. You are the one who tried to twist things to sound like a nation suffering from its own incompetence is a good thing to prove its will. That's North Korea.
What is the effectiveness of this? just another display of weakness and incompetence

This is a display of your hilarious hypocrisy. When the US does something and China does not respond, it is passive and weak. When China responds in kind, it is incompetent and weak.
Are you even serious? US is escalating and China trying to de-escalate and your are saying China roughly equal to USA?
Be realist instead of trying to project strenght you don't have.
Very serious. I don't know about equal since that is a very hard thing to determine on something with as many facets to it as national power but it's clear that the US is escalating further despite already damaging itself from its previous escalation because it's desperate to change the momentum of China overtaking it. China has no such worries, which is why it's calm. So I don't know what "equal" means in this case, but I would certainly say that China is in a much better position. People with low level mental processes can really only judge a competition by who has the biggest, loudest mouth (who sounds more aggressive, who escalates more, etc...) but smarter people can see substance.
 
Last edited:

Inst

Captain
"respecting human rights and democracy" as in by toppling governments in the middle eastern continent and render them into failed states with millions of homeless economic refugees?

"playing a stabilizing role in the world" by keeping WTO court of dispute dysfunctional? And threatening to sanction nations if they are to impose a digital tax or dare to let Huawei get in their 5G tender?

A famous American quote is: "Give me liberty or give me death". Logically speaking, if they're not free, the United States should kill them because death is better than oppression, however they might define it
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
The problem for China in the US today is that there is absolutely no reason for any American to speak out in favor of China, other than purely money reasons which never win out in the end. Americans are not greedy for money. At the core they are a good, decent, kind-hearted, sentimental people, and they need sentimental reasons to treat China well, such as the belief that China is moving towards respecting human rights and democracy, that it is playing a stabilizing role in the world, etc. Unfortunately that is very far out the window and it would take a long time for a Chinese government to claw back goodwill in the US.
6be04-15678294457158-500.jpg

M'kay, you clearly took my last post too seriously as an instructional article: China need a new geopolitical Doctrine ?

StupidPostKing, you've got to be an Western shill here trying to convince Chinese people that China is the bad guy; there's no other explanation LOL I don't even want to respond to this post with serious words because it's so stupid that it's hard to decide where to start but consider this: Japan is not only a democracy, it was America's own protege after WWII. When Japan's economy (not even military) got too big, the US kneecapped it. LOLOL
 
Last edited:

gadgetcool5

Senior Member
Registered Member
6be04-15678294457158-500.jpg

M'kay, you clearly took my last post too seriously as an instructional article: China need a new geopolitical Doctrine ?

StupidPostKing, you've got to be an Western shill here trying to convince Chinese people that China is the bad guy; there's no other explanation LOL I don't even want to respond to this post with serious words because it's so stupid that it's hard to decide where to start but consider this: Japan is not only a democracy, it was America's own protege after WWII. When Japan's economy (not even military) got too big, the US kneecapped it. LOLOL

I know all about what US did to Japan. I started a whole thread about it, remember? But China is not Japan and there is a limit to what the US will do to a democratic ally. If China was liberal and democratic the US would NOT sufficiently suppress it from rising to the top of world powers. Only for the hardline China does it justify its complete containment policy with its allies.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
I know all about what US did to Japan. I started a whole thread about it, remember? But China is not Japan and there is a limit to what the US will do to a democratic ally. If China was liberal and democratic the US would NOT sufficiently suppress it from rising to the top of world powers. Only for the hardline China does it justify its complete containment policy with its allies.
I don't know; I'm not interested in those pointless threads. Either way, it seems you have no grasp of it from what you're saying here. What the US did to Japan was limited because that was enough to crush Japan so it had no reason to go further. Also, Japan's challenge to the US, as a leashed dog, was also very limited. China, on the other hand, challenges the US in every way at the highest level. If China was liberal and democratic, the US would make up other problems to accuse China of. Besides, China's not liberal or democratic and it will not become that for anybody or anything. The bottom line is that the only justification that the US needs to do anything to anyone is to defend its title at the top of the world. Only believably stupid people don't see that; not a single person here agrees with you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top