China's 'Right to Speak'

[FairAndUnbiased]

The answer, is the West does not. NO, NADA, ZIP, NEVER trying to or going to burn Chinese to the ground. Well, if the west do really want China to disappear, there are numerous occasion the west can, but they don't, do you know why? Because the West need the Chinese more than the Chinese need the West.

By the way, talk about education, not every (100%) Chinese learn Mandarin in school

hope you didn't waste those 24 years. Heilongjiang is 100% Mandarin speaking btw. 1 billion people out of 1.3 billion have Mandarin as their primary language. Xinjiang, Tibet, etc. make up less than 1% of the population. Everyone else is required to learn Mandarin. There's no other medium of instruction even in my inland province.

Also the classification of what is "speaking Mandarin" is frequently twisted. If you speak with Mandarin grammar and vocabulary, but have a Hunan accent, the Wstrnrs will count you as a "Xiang speaker" instead of a Mandarin speaker thinking that their lack of skill entitles them to reclassifying others

For example in Tianjin people frequently pronounce sh as s, zh as z, etc. but the difference is so tiny that it is irrelevant in daily life. In my home province everyone speaks Mandarin, because they use the Mandarin vocabulary and grammar, even though the pronounciation is slightly different from standard; yes, Wu, Cantonese and Hokkien have slightly different vocabulary and grammar.

But that is as ridiculous as saying Australians and Nigerians are not speaking English simply because they have different accents.

按照你的逻辑，苏联成立后，米英法日等西方列强没有把苏联干掉是他们需要苏联，或者说，是对苏联有好感。1920年俄罗斯内战时米英法日派兵赴俄支持俄国白军没把苏维埃政权扼杀在摇篮里是出于西方对俄罗斯的仁慈。。。这种想法可笑+幼稚至极了。西方列强没有摧毁中国不是处于仁慈而是处于冷静的战略盘算；干掉中国的成本太高，以前是经济成本太高，分化和殖民化即可，而49年之后分化和殖民化都不行了，对自身威胁太大。


Do you know what these people are called? Uncle Toms.

 

[longyi]

Why do people keep tell me "We are being brainwashed by Western Media"

When people tell you: "You're brainwashed by western media", clearly they get those perceptions from what you say about China vis a vis the west. People just don't opine the same way without legitimate reasons and there must be something you said that gave them that impression. You don't realize it because, more often than not, individuals always think they are in the right. It's the same with ideological thinking, an individual would never admit he's been influenced because he thinks the same way what the mediums say. To say this is a form of institutional brainwashing, just like textbooks, is a little oversimplified.

When you said on your first post: "not pro-Western or pro-Chin". Sorry I, as a third generation ethnic Chinese who's fluent in Chinese writing and 4 Chinese dialects myself, just don't perceived that way from our conversations.

I'm by no mean saying the western political ideologies are all wrong and am sure they have their merits however different than what I think. I'm not saying, either, the CPC ruling philosophies are all right and, in fact, am not agreeing with most of them. But I would allow them to evolve and evolve they will because of the internet. For the meantime we should "hear" what they want to say without prejudging what are they are going to saying. We should also encourage them to speak with open minds, hence their "rights to speak".

 

[Bobby]

Good to see you guys have right speak

 

[jhungary]

按照你的逻辑，苏联成立后，米英法日等西方列强没有把苏联干掉是他们需要苏联，或者说，是对苏联有好感。1920年俄罗斯内战时米英法日派兵赴俄支持俄国白军没把苏维埃政权扼杀在摇篮里是出于西方对俄罗斯的仁慈。。。这种想法可笑+幼稚至极了。西方列强没有摧毁中国不是处于仁慈而是处于冷静的战略盘算；干掉中国的成本太高，以前是经济成本太高，分化和殖民化即可，而49年之后分化和殖民化都不行了，对自身威胁太大。



Do you know what these people are called? Uncle Toms.

I don't actually believe 1 billion out of 1.3 billions speak and primary understand mandarin.

First of all, don't seperate the language, i call cantonese and all sort of dialect Chinese or Offical Chinese okay? But was it all Chinese Citizen are able to speak the official language?

Think of this, not all Chinese are educated depend from figure to figure, it can go as high as UNICEF estimated 94% Literacy rate in China to CIA estimate of 90 and down to 86% with Amensty International. Take the mediam of those are 90% of Literacy and you get 1.17 Billions people are elementary level educated. And then you got your 17% of Mongol doesn't speak Chinese At Home, as well as about all 3 millions Tibetian speak only Tibetian at home. As i said, you can teach those people Mandarin but will they use it is up to them, it's the same as the time when Japanese Invaded China, most Chinese City under japanese Rule are compulsory to learn Japanese, does that mean all those city are capital on Japanese? No.

Then you got different variation of Chinese, this is a hot spot now, from what people see, Chinese is Chinese but different set of Chinese have different meaning to different people, you can still communicate (ie Able to converse, listen and compose) with an Australian and and American, but literally, you cannot do it with Cantanese and Mandarin , which you can only use written communcation.

In Cantonese, there are 8 tones instead of 4 in Mandarin, and there are multiple meaning in Cantonese rather then mandarin single or dual meaning, a native Mandarin speaker cannot mutally understand a native Cantonese unless the conversation resort to Writing. I don't know if you know, but the relationship between Cantonese and Mandarine is NOT like Australian English and British English or American English but rather German and Swedish, (If yo uspeak both, which i did) Although the two language are both from Norse Region, either side would not understand each other unless they use visual aid.

And so it goes, you got another 10 millions people (8 mil from Hong Kong and Macau and 2 mil from Shenzeng)

Even with the right estimate of 90% literacy rate (Which i very much doubt they do have 90%) you get about 500 millions who either were not literate or does not use traditional Mandarin and it's almost 39% of population does not speak or use Mandarin as part of daily life. I very much doubt this figure is even point to the truth too, i think it may be more.

蘇聯唔同中國,當蘇聯二次世界大戰後,冇錯蘇聯元氣大傷,但同盟國亦不見得好好,唔係同盟國唔想攪點蘇聯,而系根本冇可能.
而中國情況唔同,聯合國(美&#22283可在1951年使用原子彈對付中國,而然杜魯門總統反對,原因不是因為美國怕蘇聯介入,由於蘇聯冇核載具(TU-95轟炸機1952年才試飛,蘇聯冇可能打到美國本土,而中國側冇核&#27494

There are 3 reason behind why Truman does not want to use Nuclear Weapon, generally accepted by Western Historian (Yes the west only as Mao, at that time proclaim if the US uses Nuclear Weapon, IT will mutally destroy US and Russia and China will come out ahead) well, that was wrong as the only HEavy Bomber at that time used by Soviet is the Tu-4 Which is the same as B-29 and the Tu-4 are not capable to get in US Mainland (I am saying US Mainland where the tu 4 have around 3000 mile range Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky to seattle is just out of range at 3360 mile)...

So there are 3 reason why Turman does not want to esclate the war

1.) Korea is too far to capitalise on the war
2.) UN does not want to invest further capital in the war.
3.) The UN think they can manage the war into a local conflict and esclation would serve the template on WW3.

While 1 is very easy to understand, 2 is what the UN always wanted (They don't want the US Force to cross the 38 in the first place,) on the get go, theywanted to limit the war and localise the fighting. Everything they did after going pass the 38th does not interest the UN much.

The 3rd point, however, is quite complicated. While as i said, there are no bomber in Russia in 1951 that can reach the US Mainland, and the US can bomb the Russia and China by launching from Korea. The problem was, the Russia could and will attack Korea using Atomic bomb for almost certain if the US attack first. I am definitely sure that the Whole Korean Peninsula will be wasteland. As well as South Eastern Russia and North Eastern China. Even tho the toll to China and Russia will be high, but there will still be a considerable force left behind and the US on the other hand will see as if the whole liberation is in null if they do attack with Nuclear Weapon resulting the Destruction of Korea. There are chances that the Public will not support subsequent fight unless there is a good reason. Don't get me wrong, that doesn't mean the US will never consider using Atomic bomb on Korea Issue, in 1953, then president Eisenhover have issue the order to use Nuclear Weapon if the peace talk failed yet again, luckily, they succeed
As yet, the nuclear weapon plan have been forced into a "Last Resort"

 

[jhungary]

When people tell you: "You're brainwashed by western media", clearly they get those perceptions from what you say about China vis a vis the west. People just don't opine the same way without legitimate reasons and there must be something you said that gave them that impression. You don't realize it because, more often than not, individuals always think they are in the right. It's the same with ideological thinking, an individual would never admit he's been influenced because he thinks the same way what the mediums say. To say this is a form of institutional brainwashing, just like textbooks, is a little oversimplified.

When you said on your first post: "not pro-Western or pro-Chin". Sorry I, as a third generation ethnic Chinese who's fluent in Chinese writing and 4 Chinese dialects myself, just don't perceived that way from our conversations.

I'm by no mean saying the western political ideologies are all wrong and am sure they have their merits however different than what I think. I'm not saying, either, the CPC ruling philosophies are all right and, in fact, am not agreeing with most of them. But I would allow them to evolve and evolve they will because of the internet. For the meantime we should "hear" what they want to say without prejudging what are they are going to saying. We should also encourage them to speak with open minds, hence their "rights to speak".

I don't quite understand your point.

The problem is, What is Pro-West? What is Pro-China (by the way that is a typo)

I just want to ask, not that i am but what about Pro-Hong Kong? Pro-Macau? or Pro Taiwan? or Pro-Tibet?, or Pro Mongol? They are part of China right? But they do have a different attitude toward the Whole Chinese issue, or in your case, Pro-Beijian View. Are you dang sure that Pro_Whatever i said before has the same view than the Pro-Beijian view? I am pretty sure they are not.

However, if we have to seperate China like this where if You pro-Taiwan then you are not Pro-Chinese, then you have already literated my point. That's in your view, China can be seperated and their value are not of the same, even if you are right, maybe they speak the same language but if you said a Pro-Hong Kong View is not a Pro-China or Pro-Chinese view, then brother, you just made my point.

I am not gonna say i am not Bias, i don't think anyone anywhere can achieve an unbias view toward things. but the truth is, when i am saying i am not Pro-West nor Pro-China, i am actually saying i will not grant concession to Chinese and so will i NOT grant concession to Western Thinking.

You, on the other hand, i don't really care about how many generation ethnic chinese you are, but you are obiviously set into a tradition Chinese Protection Regime flow, i am not saying you have the worng idea, but is this the case here? Apprently not.

The problem is, to achieve Neutral Comment, you need to consider the situation on THE OTHER PARTS of China. facts and information are what you spin and how you spin on things. When you are given a facts, they are already manipulated by someone. So to speak, when you show your facts, if you does not compare to other view, that's just one side of a story, you should understand if you claim you are 3rd generation American Chinese......

I am not saying China is not a good place nor do chinese post a threat to the world, and i am obiviouslt suggested that the west DOES NOT think Chinese post a threat to Them as i explained on the economic point of view, but if you insist i am brainwashed by the western media that Chinese is a bad bad yellow man who will corrupt the western idea, then go ahead, i got nothing to say as i don't think we are on equal term and you sir are not open to other idea.

 

[asianamerican]

Why do people keep tell me "We are being brainwashed by Western Media"

For your information, i was eduated in Shenzhen and Hong Kong, i have been living in China for 18 out of my 32 years of my life, i speak and read and write Chinese (Both Simplify and Tradition) and my wife has been in China even longer, 24 out of 34.

What you preceived as a Western propoganda is what the Chinese Conspiracy Theory begin, the problem with China is, they are supicious about the west, this is kind of an old news really, but have any Chinese actually stop for one second and ask why, why the west conspire with each other and try to bring down China?

The answer, is the West does not. NO, NADA, ZIP, NEVER trying to or going to burn Chinese to the ground. Well, if the west do really want China to disappear, there are numerous occasion the west can, but they don't, do you know why? Because the West need the Chinese more than the Chinese need the West.

From what i see, the west have power, they do, but the Chinese do have one thing that the West does not have, that's again, its population. If you add the whole Europe and North America together they only have about half the population in China(314 million in US 40 million in Canada and about 500 million in EU). China is a big market, there are no point we trash the Chinese in anyway conceivable, why would the west, which capitalist in nature, want to trash your own brand?? That i want to know. For a business alliance, this is not a smart move...........

The problem with China is, Chinese does not believe this, at least the general Chinese does not. They think the west must have some kind of conspiracy to seperate China, isolationist and stuff like that. Well, you do need to know, Conspiracy cut both way, i am afraid this is not the Western Conspiracy but rather the Chinese Conspiracy that base on ignorance and protectivism. If you ask any economist, east or west, s/he will tell you this, if China suddenly stop all ties to the west, it's NOT the chinese whose gonna suffer, but the west.

By the way, talk about education, not every (100%) Chinese learn Mandarin in school, have you ever been to Hong Kong and Macau and Northern China(Tibet, Heilonggong, inner mongol)? Those 100 millions people do not speak a word of mandarin, and yes, maybe the Elementry school in China are 100% teaching Mandarin but do you know how many children are able to go to school? They teach them is one business, will the people learn them is another, and then will the people speak of them is another business.

Granted, you may know more about China, but you know nothing about the West. The Chinese are right about the West trying disintegrate China. The Soviet Union is a prime example how the West has won. Balkanization of China is a Western strategy.

You need only speak with an ordinary American to see how they see China. After the Opium and the how West and Japan tried to slice their own piece of China for themselves, you can still say with a straight face that the West isn't out to disintegrate China to make it more "manageable" for the West. If that is the case, you are even a bigger idiot that I thought.

If China stops all ties with the West, China is going to have a hard time getting all the raw material its need to survive. There would be a civil war in China. The West have more leverage than you think and controls pretty much all of the world sea lanes. How do Chinese expect to feed 1.3 billion people when the Western alliance along with Japan, and Korea conspire to choke the Chinese to death? It almost happened once before and you still think Chinese have more leverage than the West in international affairs.

China should be very suspicious of the West. Chinese have every reason to. The West objective is to control. Currently, the only way to control China is to break it up to manageable parts and use each parts and society to create conflict within China, that way the West have more leverage in exerting its control.

 

[jhungary]

That's a good point, but you missed out one very important detail, how did you define a "Ordinary" american.

I do speak to many american either back in the states or studied in Lund with my wife, the problem is, you can't always trust single or minor entity. WHen you talk to an average joe, chances are teh ydon't even know where China is and when you ask them if the country you don't know is a thread, he will said yes, because he is a mentally retarted hillbilly......

let's be serious shall we. I wasn't gonna quote because i am forbit to quote (since i have less than15 post) but i am not just saying West (Not just america) do not really see Chinese as a threat. Both militarily and economically.

According to a CNN survey, released on 17 November 2010, done 3 days eariler.

from CNN website http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/11/17/cnn-poll-americans-see-china-as-economic-threat/

46% of the interviewee said China is a Superpower
50% of the interviewee said China is a threat to America's Economic
58% of the interviewee said China is a threat to the National security to America
41% of the interviewee said Chinese market is an oppuntities to America

However when you break down the survey (Which was published mean you can watch it anytime you want) you will find the survey does not include people who are under the ages of 34 and of those 58% said Chinese was a threat to national security, 67% of thsoe are people over 50.

Now, we take a look of a Chinese Poll by China Daily and Horizon Research Consultancy Group conducted in 2011

from china daily website
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2011-01/17/content_11862479.htm

69.9 % say Economic affair between Chinese and America are both competitive and partners
54% of interviewee think the relation between CHina and USA are becoming important
80% of interviewee think the Sino-American Relation is deteriority and the blames is on the US
85% of interviewee think the US-Japan Relationship is threaten China

Remark of this poll is people under 30 is generally more favorable to the relation to the USA rather than any other age group.

There are more (Literally more i mean in number) think America is a threat to China rather than America think China is a threat to them. You can agrue it's because of the West Conspiracy theory but i can say it's chicken and egg problem.

As i said, i think China is very important to the west, not only to the American, but Swedish, Britian, Australia and so on. The problem is, after all that comes within range of the chinese modern history, i can't say i don't understand why the chinese think every superpower is a threat. Being in a point that they were lie to (By the russian), spat at (By the vietnamese and Indian) and bullied (by the USA) , i actually did see why Chinese think West is a threat, i would. When i just came past all the adversity and disadvantagous, now i have a relative easy position, i would be scare that it would just be taken away.

The problem is, time changed, it's not about good vesus evil anymore, it's not like we have another hilter to kill, now, threat comes from nowhere, it can be from your friend or from your foe, one thing the Vietnam did taught us is, you cannot always distinguish friend from foe in a glance, and you will never know, and when it's time to strike, you will know nothing until it have struck.

The fact is, even thought chinese help vietnam fought the vietnam war, they don't understand that. You can't point your gun to your "Enemy" everytime and while you have poise to attack your enemy, someone from the back will ALWAYS stab you in the back. That's what we learn in Vietnam, and that what the Chinese still don't get at this moment. Maybe they emerge victor in that war, i don't know.

In this globalisational world, you will always be friend if you mine your own business, and you have to have a lot of friend to survive. I don't see Chinese as a threat, at least 42 % of other american did not see it as a threat. I saw Chinese is a big market if US have to survive, which is the only market we need to get our hand into. But that did stamp out the protectivism from the Chinese, hence 85% think the japanese -US relationshp is a threat and 80% of those point the finger to the US.

So what do you want us to do, don't do trade at all and strav ourselve to death??

Again, one more post and i will quote you the soruce of the poll

 

[longyi]

China plans 80 books on Japan war trials

A visitors takes a photograph of the skeletons of Chinese prisoners who were buried alive by Japanese soldiers during the 1930s and 1940s at a memorial in Shenyang. (AFP/File - Teh Eng Koon)



BEIJING: China is compiling a series of 80 books documenting the post-World War II "Tokyo trials" of Japanese war criminals, state media said on Friday, at a time of souring ties between the historic rivals.

"Many right-wing Japanese politicians and historians doubted the justice of the trials and distorted the reality... so we have to accelerate our research to counter their version of events," said Zheng Zhaoqi, head of the centre producing the series, as quoted in the China Daily newspaper.

News of the project comes a week after two Japanese ministers visited a controversial Tokyo shrine that honours 14 war criminals, provoking an angry response from China, as prior visits by Japanese politicians were also done.

Sino-Japanese relations had already been strained over a decades-old dispute about an island chain that flared up again in August, and Beijing has long resented what it sees as Japan's failure to fully atone for its aggression in the early 20th century.

"It's only the beginning," Zheng said, adding that the full volume of books, containing 50,000 pages, would be published by the end of 2013. "We plan to expand relevant research based on this original file."

The 1946-48 Tokyo trials, formally known as the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, were akin to the Nuremberg trials of the Nazis, set up after World War II by the victorious Allied forces to convict war criminals.

All 28 Japanese defendants were convicted by 11 judges from Allied nations, with sentences ranging from seven years in jail to execution. Scholars have since debated if the process was one of unfair "victor's justice".

The Chinese have protested against atrocities committed when Japan invaded and occupied parts of China, from forced labour and sex-slave "comfort women" to mass killings including the infamous 1937-38 massacre known as the Rape of Nanjing.

The collection of documents will be the first project undertaken by the centre, which was set up specifically to study the tribunal by the National Library of China and Shanghai Jiao Tong University.

Bilateral ties between Japan and China have deteriorated since Tokyo last month nationalised disputed East China Sea islands which Beijing also claims.

The move sparked massive protests across China and forced Japanese firms in the country to suspend operations as both governments traded insults and refused to back down.

China plans 80 books on Japan war trials - Channel NewsAsia


Kudos to China! This is one of a way to fight back the US led media, under the influences of their respective regimes, who've been spinning everything China did to negative lights for the past decade. Hopefully some sympathetic media from friendly countries can contribute and join China's efforts to fight back.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

edited to make length manageable

1. You cite minorities as "not speaking Mandarin so oh 50% can't speak Mandarin" - no. Minorities make up only 8% of the population and most of them are Zhuang, Korean and Manchu who are totally assimilated.

2. The Mandarin speaking zone spans most of the regions of high population density except Fujian and Guangdong. In addition the map shown is "historically speaking", meaning that the actual usage region is far larger. For example southern Jiangsu is historically Wu speaking but today no one speaks Wu, they all speak Mandarin. Hu Jintao can't even speak Wu despite being a Jiangsu native because he's from Jiangbei, a Mandarin speaking region. It turns out that every province except the 2 I listed have Mandarin speaking regions which means that Mandarin is indeed a native language to that province, and it is easy to expand Mandarin coverage through primary schooling which is universal and free.

Also literacy is defined differently, since it requires 2500+ characters to be considered "literate" but you don't need 2500 characters to survive. Only 1500 are commonly used and others can be guessed through radicals; the ability to guess pronounciation from radicals and context is what constitutes actual "fluency". This is much more stringent than other literacy requirements around the world which if you can write a sentence you're literate, but unfortunately functionally illiterate. Our standard is one of FUNCTIONAL literacy.

3. I don't understand your argument about Cantonese. I didn't even talk about Cantonese, I talked about different types of Mandarin. Do you have a reading comprehension problem? Sichuan Mandarin doesn't sound like Beijing Mandarin doesn't sound like Jiangsu Mandarin but they all have 4 tones, same vocab and same grammar, they're Mandarin with different accents.

 

[jhungary]

1. You cite minorities as "not speaking Mandarin so oh 50% can't speak Mandarin" - no. Minorities make up only 8% of the population and most of them are Zhuang, Korean and Manchu who are totally assimilated.

Wow, i saw a lot of Wikipedia quote.

The problem is, you say only 8% of Chinese Resident are Minority, i agree with you, the problem is of those 91.51 % of Han Chinese, not all of them speak Mandarin or uses mandarin as daily life, again, i am saying Chinese people who live in Mongolia, Hong Kong, Macau, Tibet, Xinjian. There are degree of some people living in those area who don't speak Mandarin at home or at work officially, i am not just saying Minority.

What you are saying is well, only minority doesn't speak Mandarin, then you will also need to count the Mandarin speaker Outside China, disable people, mentally challenge people. Which i am not prepare to do.

2. The Mandarin speaking zone spans most of the regions of high population density except Fujian and Guangdong. In addition the map shown is "historically speaking", meaning that the actual usage region is far larger. For example southern Jiangsu is historically Wu speaking but today no one speaks Wu, they all speak Mandarin. Hu Jintao can't even speak Wu despite being a Jiangsu native because he's from Jiangbei, a Mandarin speaking region. It turns out that every province except the 2 I listed have Mandarin speaking regions which means that Mandarin is indeed a native language to that province, and it is easy to expand Mandarin coverage through primary schooling which is universal and free.

Also literacy is defined differently, since it requires 2500+ characters to be considered "literate" but you don't need 2500 characters to survive. Only 1500 are commonly used and others can be guessed through radicals; the ability to guess pronounciation from radicals and context is what constitutes actual "fluency". This is much more stringent than other literacy requirements around the world which if you can write a sentence you're literate, but unfortunately functionally illiterate. Our standard is one of FUNCTIONAL literacy.

How to define Literacy is irrevelant (By the way, the way you define literacy is plain wrong, according to United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, literacy define as "ability to identify, understand, interpret, create, communicate and compute, using printed and written materials associated with varying contexts. Literacy involves a continuum of learning in enabling individuals to achieve their goals, to develop their knowledge and potential, and to participate fully in their community and wider society" Baically is not simple "You know how much vocabuary" but rather a more complex creative and understanding exercise to determine if a person is literate.

Anyway, since you don't expect illiterate people to NOT speak at all, they maintain some sort of commnuication skill, the problem is, what it officially declare as official language, not really many people are actually speaking it. It doesn;t really matter how or the degree of iliteracy there are in your country, but the fact is, you can speak English or even Portugese at home while your country still put together as a Mandarin Speaking Country, even majority of population does not use it.

Case in point, both English and Cantonese are official language in Hong Kong, yes, all Hong Kong Resident undergo 9 years of English education but will you consider English is an official language in Hong Kong?

3. I don't understand your argument about Cantonese. I didn't even talk about Cantonese, I talked about different types of Mandarin. Do you have a reading comprehension problem? Sichuan Mandarin doesn't sound like Beijing Mandarin doesn't sound like Jiangsu Mandarin but they all have 4 tones, same vocab and same grammar, they're Mandarin with different accents.

See point 1, i am using cantonese population in Chinese to explain not all Han Chinese Speak Mandarin

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't think we can agrue anymore as clearly you stand on a different ground with me, i am talking about how language is different and hence people with different language will create a secular society if China were to allow American Style Freedom. The problem is, you keep talking about the Official Language and its definition. Which are 2 different thing. That is why i don't like to agrue with technicality.

Even if i agree with you, the Official Language are Mandarin and nearly all the people are speaking them in China, the situation in my case is unchange as A) In fact not all Chinese are speaking Mandarin B) Even with different dialect, they are not generally communicable with other. A person speaking Shanghai Mandarin usually cannot commnuicate with Southern mandarin. And the culture, citizen standard is too different in the same country. And their dialect reflect that. Agruing if the different dialect is the same language is like agruing whether Dalecarlian is Swedish or Catalan is Spanish, a lot of people will say yes and a lot of people will say no and there are probably no definite answer. You do know those language unlike English Dialect, have a cultural reference comes with the language.

But if it make you sleep better at night, i am prepare to say yes, the official language is Mandarin, but what did that change?

 

[Zero_wing]

Anyway how can this be good for china?

 

[JSCh]

There are 3 reason behind why Truman does not want to use Nuclear Weapon, generally accepted by Western Historian (Yes the west only as Mao, at that time proclaim if the US uses Nuclear Weapon, IT will mutally destroy US and Russia and China will come out ahead) well, that was wrong as the only HEavy Bomber at that time used by Soviet is the Tu-4 Which is the same as B-29 and the Tu-4 are not capable to get in US Mainland (I am saying US Mainland where the tu 4 have around 3000 mile range Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky to seattle is just out of range at 3360 mile)...

Korean War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On 5 April 1950, the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) issued orders for the retaliatory atomic bombing of Manchurian PRC military bases, if either their armies crossed into Korea or if PRC or KPA bombers attacked Korea from there. The President ordered the transfer of nine Mark 4 nuclear bombs "to the Air Force's Ninth Bomb Group, the designated carrier of the weapons ... [and] signed an order to use them against Chinese and Korean targets", which he never transmitted.[226]

After his statement caused concern in Europe, Truman met on 4 December 1950 with UK prime minister and Commonwealth spokesman Clement Attlee, French Premier René Pleven, and Foreign Minister Robert Schuman to discuss their worries about atomic warfare and its likely continental expansion. The US's forgoing atomic warfare was not because of "a disinclination by the Soviet Union and People's Republic of China to escalate" the Korean War, but because UN allies—notably from the UK, the Commonwealth, and France—were concerned about a geopolitical imbalance rendering NATO defenseless while the US fought China, who then might persuade the Soviet Union to conquer Western Europe.[116][230] The Joint Chiefs of Staff advised Truman to tell Attlee that the United States would only use nuclear weapons if necessary to protect an evacuation of UN troops, or to prevent a "major military disaster".[227]

The Soviet bombers might not be able to reach US, but it sure can rake havoc in Germany, France and Great Britain plus a lot of US servicemen stationed there.

 

[jhungary]

The Soviet bombers might not be able to reach US, but it sure can rake havoc in Germany, France and Great Britain plus a lot of US servicemen stationed there.

Geopolitical, yes, Militaristically, no.

Yes, if US were to use A-Bomb on Russia, the only place russia can strike is Germany and europe, But you do also need to realise that, it's a 2 way street, Where Russia can Strike Europe from Germany, US and the UK can strike Russia from Germany too. The fact is, Militaristically, Russia would actually be in lower hand as Russia will be strike at 2 side by US/UK Nuclear Force while the UN would only be attacked from one front. When you out into the fact that there are more nuclear ordinance between US and UK to Russia, i am pretty sure Allied will come out ahead. Do remember the NATO warplan to Massive Russian Armored Invasion is tactical nuclear strike on Mainland Europe up until the Soviet Desolve

What i was saying, is if we were to strike Russia and China and try to wipe it off the map, we could do it in that time in Korea War, undoubtedly, if we have to use a Nuclear Strike on Russia and China, there are no better time than when in 1951.

Again, the problem is if the blood and guts defence on South Korea was totally destroyed by a Russian Nuclear strike the public will be of one outrage sentiment, you can actually allow to see the place where a lot of soldier died for become wasteland, in the eye of the public, those are not acceptable, there will be a big reprecussion to the administration if they allow that top happen. Not because of what the UK and French told them not to. I can assure you this, doesn't matter back in korea or now, public opinion worth the number 1 spot in US administration, not what other country might think as they are not the one who vote them into the administration, hence US have a lot of enemy due to this foreign policy.

 

[JSCh]

Geopolitical, yes, Militaristically, no.

Yes, if US were to use A-Bomb on Russia, the only place russia can strike is Germany and europe, But you do also need to realise that, it's a 2 way street, Where Russia can Strike Europe from Germany, US and the UK can strike Russia from Germany too. The fact is, Militaristically, Russia would actually be in lower hand as Russia will be strike at 2 side by US/UK Nuclear Force while the UN would only be attacked from one front. When you out into the fact that there are more nuclear ordinance between US and UK to Russia, i am pretty sure Allied will come out ahead. Do remember the NATO warplan to Massive Russian Armored Invasion is tactical nuclear strike on Mainland Europe up until the Soviet Desolve

What i was saying, is if we were to strike Russia and China and try to wipe it off the map, we could do it in that time in Korea War, undoubtedly, if we have to use a Nuclear Strike on Russia and China, there are no better time than when in 1951.

Again, the problem is if the blood and guts defence on South Korea was totally destroyed by a Russian Nuclear strike the public will be of one outrage sentiment, you can actually allow to see the place where a lot of soldier died for become wasteland, in the eye of the public, those are not acceptable, there will be a big reprecussion to the administration if they allow that top happen. Not because of what the UK and French told them not to. I can assure you this, doesn't matter back in korea or now, public opinion worth the number 1 spot in US administration, not what other country might think as they are not the one who vote them into the administration, hence US have a lot of enemy due to this foreign policy.

Well for whatever reason why that did not happen, I am sure glad that it did not and hope that it will never happen.
FYI, I do not think Chinese ever thought of US as someone that have the intention of wiping China off the map.

 

[jhungary]

Actually the US is not very much into fighting in Korea, the overall aim is limited the war into a "small scale conflict" apart from one guy, that's Douglas MacAuthur......

They guys, while militarially is a geninus, but the guy is nuts. I would say almost most other general if appointed to his seat, that general will stop at pushing the NK from 38 but will not invade NK itself.

Right from the start the US were actually like the Russian think, they don't want to get into the conflict in the first place, you can see it quite clearly from the troop number you can see the deployment troop were actually even less than Vietnam. What they were to do is exactly the same as what we are suppose to do in Vietnam, with the only different is the South Korean really don't want to be governed by the North and fought like hell, where the South Vietnamese really don't care