What's new

Does this count as Propaganda?

Genesis

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Mar 26, 2013
Messages
4,599
Reaction score
24
Country
China
Location
China
Beijing Is Tempting Fate | The Diplomat

I mean how much more biased can one get? This author failed to mention Japanese did the same fly by with way more frequency.

American ships were spying or at least keeping an eye on the Chinese carrier. It's not like China went to the American coast and started blocking ships.


Do these kind of articles count as propaganda? I mean they have a clear objective to make China look like the bad guy.

Define: information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.

Let's not even say whether these views are biased, why didn't the author mention, the facts I have written above? Don't include my feelings, just Japanese did it way more, and a lot closer to our mainland than to theirs. That's not my feeling, that's math.

So for all those that says China has propaganda, well, guess what, the grass is not greener on your hill.






For the second time in as many weeks, Chinese fighter jets have conducted dangerous flybys over the East China Sea, approaching within 100 feet of Japanese surveillance planes. This is only the most recent in a string of dangerous incidents in the waters and skies on China’s periphery.

Last December, a Chinese warship nearly collided with the USS Cowpens, cutting off the American cruiser in international waters in the South China Sea. In recent years, Chinese ships have periodically harassed unarmed U.S. naval vessels in seas off the Chinese coastline, but this was the first incident involving two armed warships.

Earlier in 2013, Chinese ships used fire control radars to “lock on” to a Japanese destroyer and a Japanese helicopter. It is difficult to imagine a more aggressive act short of opening fire.

In all of these cases, potentially deadly accidents were avoided due to the forbearance of those on the receiving end of Chinese aggression. If not for the calmness of Japanese pilots, the experience of American captains, and the steady hands of MSDF commanders, any of these incidents could have ended very differently than it did.

Why are Chinese forces acting so recklessly? The fact that Chinese military officers are repeating the same behaviors over and over again suggests that these are not the acts of hot-dogging mavericks. The actions, rather, are part and parcel of China’s strategy to gain control of its near seas and change norms of behavior in international waters and airspace off China’s coast. If the PLA makes it dangerous for U.S. and Japanese forces to operate as they always have, the thinking goes, perhaps they will cease to do so.

China’s “I dare you” policy rests on several assumptions. First, China assumes that its rivals are more eager than it is to avoid deadly accidents. Second, and similarly, China assumes that its rivals are more intent on avoiding actual conflict. Third, China assumes that the Japanese and American militaries in particular, due to their training and experience, can be counted on to exercise self-restraint in the face of Chinese taunting.

These are dangerous assumptions. For Japan, at stake are issues of sovereignty and territorial integrity and the future of a region that has, at least until now, been safe for liberal democracies. And while Washington has sent mixed messages about its commitment to the region, the stakes are likewise high for the United States, whose security and prosperity are tied to the international liberal order that Beijing appears intent on overturning.

Perhaps it is true that leaders in Tokyo and Washington value human life more than their Chinese counterparts. Certainly, neither Japan nor the United States wants to see an accident or hostilities break out in Asia, but neither do they consider allowing China to get its way to be a viable option. Indeed, Chinese success in establishing control over disputed territories and in forcing others to operate at greater distance from Chinese shores will make China’s neighbors and the United States less secure and more vulnerable, potentially further heightening the risks of conflict.

Moreover, while it is true that members of the American and Japanese militaries are well trained and highly disciplined, they are also human beings operating in stressful situations whose behaviors may not be entirely predictable. Is it so difficult to imagine that a Japanese destroyer captain, having a foreign vessel lock firing radar onto his ship, might decide that the best way to protect his crew is to return the favor or even fire first?

China is intentionally using its forces in a way designed make a clash or mishap more likely, while counting on others to ensure such an eventuality is avoided. Put simply, Beijing is tempting fate. Will Xi Jinping recognize this is folly before his good fortune runs out?

Michael Mazza is a research fellow in foreign & defense policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.
 
yea I am just going to keep posting here of what I think are propaganda, but I'm not complaining, in the world of politics, if you are not trying to sink your enemies, well, I wouldn't need to talk to you, becauseyou don't exist anymore.

But don't pretend to be something you are not, I don't and I don't like others living a lie.


The great leap forward is Chinese fault, don't get me wrong, but the American embargo is also guilty. This is like I shot a person by accident, because I didn't know what I was doing, America came along and destroyed the phone, so no help can be given, and the person dies.

MAo didn't know crap about the Economy, his actions constitutes crimes against humanity because he was given the fate of a country and he ruin it, also, he probably would have taken into account at least some may die, so this is also bad, but if we are to go by intentions, America knows exactly what it was doing and what the result would be, and hence, this.

If this story ran, who's more guilty? Why don't we both step into the light and see what the world thinks. I shouldn't be playing with the gun and thus guilty, but America is also guilty of stopping the help.

I'm not blaming the US, I be doing the same thing, and somewhere right now we probably are, but we don't pretend to be the forces of good, neither should you.

If you want proof, there is conclusive report on Western Sanctions on post Korea Communist China.


When the Chinese leadership was aware of the scale of the famines they stopped the great leap forward, cut investments in the industry, imported millions of tons of wheat. But worldwide trade restrictions and embargo’s against the country in need were not eased. The western economic warfare against the Peoples Republic of China was aimed at causing problems in its economy, hoping for a collapse of communist China. Indeed China faced economic problems, the famines. Although facts and figures show that the capitalist economic warfare caused China tremendous hardships, the embargoes and trade restrictions are nowadays not known of, and their effects denied. Anyhow, by waging the economic warfare against China, the west also turned their backs to one fifth of world population, those who already were almost drowning. A realistic view on China needs the acknowledgement of the role of the capitalist world.

Trade embargoes against China
 
Back
Top Bottom