Is PLA aggressive and like to fight a war?

[S10]

Niether has the Congo, or Albania. Wots yer point?

Somebody's aggressive, and it ain't us.

 

[lcloo]

Niether has the Congo, or Albania. Wots yer point?

The point is the title of this thread.

 

[jhungary]

Unfortunately we will have to agree to disagree here.

For us, the war started when North Korea invaded South Korea, and we pushed them back but failed to topple North Korea. We failed to integrate North Korea with South Korea, but South Korea was defended.
For you, it started when China entered the war, and you managed to maintain your buffer state but failed to push us off the peninsula (and no it wasn't for lack of trying).

We are simply at a disconnect, because to us the war wasn't all about China, even if to you it was all about the US.

All of this is beside the actual point of my post though. JHungary answered it in good order with his own belief, but do you think China today might have been better served by a United Korea under a 'South Korean' style government with potentially no real reason for a US troop presence, and because of this lack of threat and history, one that might view relations with the US and relations with China differently?


When I say victory i mean an objective victory. Today's state could be argued as an 'objective victory' for both China and the US, wherein both accomplished their primary reasons for the conflict but failed to follow through with the most optimum outcome for their respective interests.

Geopolitically I'd say it hasn't turned out very good for China though. North Korea has turned out to be a huge headache for China on the Geopolitical stage, and just another reason for US presence in Asia.

In the old days (15 years ago) i remember my professor called the North Korea is the Chinese's "Vietnam" where China put in serious effort to help it afloat but turns out to be a duds.

If my memory serve me right, the only time US/China fight head to toe is in Korean War

The problem is, if China did not engage, Chinese would have been more prosper than what have been now, as Chinese literally drag the North Korea (or the other way around) and let stay afloat for more than 30 years before finally letting go, with that time, China have suffer much for just giving their NK Brother a hand and indulge in the same sense as we did with Vietnam (That is, if capitalist conquer NK. China is next)

And if China did not engage with the US in Korean War, there are a big chance that they will also refused to help the Vietnamese and that would have been another game changer.

By fighting the United States, China have already lost its strategic objective, that is to kick capitalism out of Asian or at least Korean Region (That's the grand goal) but won the Tactical victory (Which is defend the NK) and the US have won a limited strategic victory (US present in Asia unchange) and tactical victory (South Korean Defended)

 

[KingMamba]

CCP hasn't launched a war in 30 years, but can you say the same for American government?

Like I said we know our government has launched some unjustifiable wars, shed a lot of blood and we have begun to wise up towards them in regards to war. The American public is so sick of war that any President in the future will have to tread lightly before he thinks of any sort of military solution. What about your CCP they are military provoking countless neighbor nations based on historical claims to lands that have no real value and they are talking about annexations. Only belligerents even try to annex areas in this day and age, colonialism is over.

In the old days (15 years ago) i remember my professor called the North Korea is the Chinese's "Vietnam" where China put in serious effort to help it afloat but turns out to be a duds.

If my memory serve me right, the only time US/China fight head to toe is in Korean War

The problem is, if China did not engage, Chinese would have been more prosper than what have been now, as Chinese literally drag the North Korea (or the other way around) and let stay afloat for more than 30 years before finally letting go, with that time, China have suffer much for just giving their NK Brother a hand and indulge in the same sense as we did with Vietnam (That is, if capitalist conquer NK. China is next)

And if China did not engage with the US in Korean War, there are a big chance that they will also refused to help the Vietnamese and that would have been another game changer.

By fighting the United States, China have already lost its strategic objective, that is to kick capitalism out of Asian or at least Korean Region (That's the grand goal) but won the Tactical victory (Which is defend the NK) and the US have won a limited strategic victory (US present in Asia unchange) and tactical victory (South Korean Defended)

How much more prosperous could the Chinese have been? You have to realize they are prosperous and the little peanuts they throw North Korea's way is for their own benefit.

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

US President Nixon went to China in the 70's and ha a chat with the Chinese Premier. "What do you think about the French revolution?" Premier leans in and responds "Its too soon to tell."

The Chinese Politico is willing wait another 5,000 years to demonstrate their muscles. The PLA I think is itching for a show of force but any "rogue" commander will be quickly be "retired" by the PLA, since they are greatly local to the CCP.

 

[BJP*]

If the Chinese didn't have other powers keeping them in check, they would be trying to annex countries left and right.

they already did in case of Tibet and shamelessly declare that they want other territories as they belong to tibet in pre historic times when dinosaurs just roamed on earth!!!

 

[Oy.vey]

American exceptionalism propaganda. You know, the usual murika is the only country that invented mcdonals and freedom, despite being mediocre or even worse amongst developed nations.

It's hilarious how hard the author of this article is trying to portray the PLA as some soviet relic while portraying the US MUHRINES as some kind call of duty crack commandos. It reminds of EXACTLY like the way Americans try to shoehorn their narrative of the taliban or just about any opposition they've ever come across. Yet in the end, Americans have been getting their ***** kicked in Afghanistan for 10 years and half a century or more if you consider the middle east entirely.

But never forget kids. MURIKA IS THE GREATEST.

 

[gpit]

In the old days (15 years ago) i remember my professor called the North Korea is the Chinese's "Vietnam" where China put in serious effort to help it afloat but turns out to be a duds.

If my memory serve me right, the only time US/China fight head to toe is in Korean War

The problem is, if China did not engage, Chinese would have been more prosper than what have been now, as Chinese literally drag the North Korea (or the other way around) and let stay afloat for more than 30 years before finally letting go, with that time, China have suffer much for just giving their NK Brother a hand and indulge in the same sense as we did with Vietnam (That is, if capitalist conquer NK. China is next)

And if China did not engage with the US in Korean War, there are a big chance that they will also refused to help the Vietnamese and that would have been another game changer.

By fighting the United States, China have already lost its strategic objective, that is to kick capitalism out of Asian or at least Korean Region (That's the grand goal) but won the Tactical victory (Which is defend the NK) and the US have won a limited strategic victory (US present in Asia unchange) and tactical victory (South Korean Defended)

A completely BS! (Excuse my Midwest expression, but many your statement deserve the proper name.)

You know nothing of history, especially the modern history of west-east conflict.

Are you telling us: if China gave the West the buffer zone of Chinese civilization, the West would be stop there and willing to cooperate with China? China's economy, with 25% of the world population, was only about one percent of the world economy.

In one hand, you know nothing of the history. In another hand, you know nothing of the endless greediness of free capitalism.

If the West grabbed the buffer zone, it would surely to further request open your ports for “trade”, if you refused to open your ports for trade, they would send strong boats and force to open your ports (and trafficking drugs if appropriate).

Do you know what is “opium war” of 1840? Opium Wars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

While you may imagine post-opium war China as “more prosperous”, the Chinese call it “hundred years of humiliation”.

Do you know what is the consequence of West occupation after opium war? When CCP took over the power, Chinese life expectancy is only 35, with enormous illiteracy and infant mortality.

My study shows Korea war has positive impact on the Chinese development, economically and politically. If you only localized in Korea, it is not as big a deal. True that China regains the buffer zone, true that US war planes are not bombing over NE China heavy industry area. But far more than that, the Chinese stand up in true sense.

Do you know why US troops dared not cross 17 parallel in Vietnam War? It was because China warned if the bottom line is crossed, China would deem this war is aimed at occupying China, and China would repeat Korea War story. This saves tens of thousands of Chinese lives and China can engage in its peaceful economic development.

If it were no Korea War, US troops would immediately occupy Vietnam with no hesitation, and perhaps further set for China.

If it were not Korea War, PR China would not be in UNSC, and RO China would still sit there.

If it were not Korea War, China’s international security environment would be even more difficult: insatiable Western powers and their running jackals would either impose no-fly zone over China’s air space, or indiscriminately bomb China, if their new, greedier requests were not met. Don’t forget Iraq story.

If you forget history, you are condemned to repeat it. And obviously you don’t even know the history, much less forgetting it…

History tells you: western greedy is endless due to free capitalism, and only external resistance can check it.

Both 1840 Opium War and 1952 Korea War of China illustrate the truth from both sides.

If it were not Korea War, if it were not CPC, China could well be today’s Iraq, and the new “Eight-Nation Alliance” Eight-Nation Alliance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia would probably be USA, Russia, Japan, UK, Indian,…

Thanks to a turning point called Korea War, foreigner devils’ freewill raping and looting on Chinese land has long gone, and China has a favorable environment to ascend into the 2nd position economically!

In contrast, see how frequently foreign occupiers’ rape South Korea women and Japanese women on the land of Japan and S. Korea… and the occupied have no say on it!

Please read more, kid, then make comments.

 

[gpit]

If the Chinese didn't have other powers keeping them in check, they would be trying to annex countries left and right.

Did China occupy Afghanistan in its left?

Did China occupy Iraq in its right?

I only saw Chinese territory called Zang Nan or south Tibet being occupied by India in its lef,t and DiaoYu Island being occupied by Japan on its right, many islands being occupied in SCS in its middle.

Didn't you see that?

 

[gpit]

Like I said we know our government has launched some unjustifiable wars, shed a lot of blood and we have begun to wise up towards them in regards to war. The American public is so sick of war that any President in the future will have to tread lightly before he thinks of any sort of military solution. What about your CCP they are military provoking countless neighbor nations based on historical claims to lands that have no real value and they are talking about annexations. Only belligerents even try to annex areas in this day and age, colonialism is over.



How much more prosperous could the Chinese have been? You have to realize they are prosperous and the little peanuts they throw North Korea's way is for their own benefit.

American people is tired of blood bleeding, yet American people still occupy Afghanistan and Iraq without any base of history but modern ideology!

And precisely because GW Bush ordered occupation, American people wanted he to be on the second term of presidency.

While US occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq is a fact, you start to imaging what China would occupy!

Colonialism is over, but colonial idea and thinking is still alive, leading to the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq.

LOL! Get your fact right. It is Japan that provocatively nationalizes Diaoyu Island in an attempt to boost the PM's vote bank. But he is doomed to be failed due to strong resistance from CPC and the people of China. in this case, Democracy works in wrong way.

 

[KingMamba]

American people is tired of blood bleeding, yet American people still occupy Afghanistan and Iraq without any base of history but modern ideology!

And precisely because GW Bush ordered occupation, American people wanted he to be on the second term of presidency.

While US occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq is a fact, you start to imaging what China would occupy!

Colonialism is over, but colonial idea and thinking is still alive, leading to the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq.

LOL! Get your fact right. It is Japan that provocatively nationalizes Diaoyu Island in an attempt to boost the PM's vote bank. But he is doomed to be failed due to strong resistance from CPC and the people of China. in this case, Democracy works in wrong way.

Where is Iraq occupied??? How can I take you seriously when you do not even have your facts straight...

 

[gpit]

Where is Iraq occupied??? How can I take you seriously when you do not even have your facts straight...

Read it up, friend, don't get confused just by the name, but get the reality by the facts:

In Iraq, occupation by another name
Even as embassy population is reduced, America is projecting power by adding CIA personnel and Special Operations
February 16, 2012|By Adil E. Shamoo

Two recent reports appearing on the same day last week in The New York Times and The Washington Post illustrate U.S. intentions in Iraq. What they reveal is that despite the heralded "end" of U.S. participation in the war there, U.S. policy continues to depend on our security apparatus to influence Iraq, at the expense of Iraqis' sovereignty and dignity.

The Times report informed us that the U.S. State Departmentdecided to cut the U.S. embassy staff by 50 percent from its current 16,000 personnel. This is a good decision; the U.S. embassy in Baghdad is the largest in the world. The reason given for the decision is primarily to reduce the American footprint in Iraq with the hope of reducing Iraqi hostility toward these evident remnants of occupation.

The second report, in the Post, informs us that the U.S. is significantly ramping up the number of CIA personnel and covert Special Operations forces in order to make up for reducing the American military and diplomatic footprint. These added covert personnel will be distributed in safe houses in urban centers all across the country. This represents a new way to exert U.S. power, but it is betting on the Iraqis not noticing the increased covert personnel. Really? This is a bad decision as it contradicts the reasons for the decision to reduce embassy staff.

The Iraqis have suffered for nine years as a result of the U.S. invasion and occupation. The economic, educational and political systems in Iraq have been destroyed. Sectarianism, contrary to the belief of many in the U.S., has become the order of the day since the invasion. A significant percentage of Iraqis do not like us and do not want us to stay in Iraq. No Iraqi politicians want to openly be identified as pro-American.

Animosity toward the U.S. is on the rise because of the heavy U.S. presence in Iraq. Our projects in Iraq function to serve our interests, such as building and training security forces to keep the Iraqis in check (building the infrastructure for the promotion of democracy has taken a back seat). We have made sure that Iraq, for the foreseeable future, will depend on us for security equipment and spare parts, heavy industrial machinery, and banking. We built Iraq's security forces but made sure it has no air force. And the half-hearted democracy we built is a shambles; graft and corruption are still rampant.

Iraqis can tell the difference between mutually beneficial programs and those that create the impression that the U.S. is powerful and can do what it wants in Iraq.

Four years ago, on this page, I speculated that the massive U.S. embassy being built in Baghdad would be pillaged by angry Iraqis blaming the U.S. for destroying their country. In a follow-up article, I suggested that as a goodwill gesture, the embassy be converted into a university staffed primarily by volunteers from the Iraqi expatriates community in the U.S. The conversion of the embassy into a university surely would not cost a large portion of the embassy's current $6 billion budget. Such an institution, filling much of the compound's soon-to-be-vacated space, would serve the U.S. interest much better than boots on the ground (or in safe houses) and turn a new page in our relationship with the Iraqi people.

U.S. policy in Iraq is in need of a wholesale change — not a ramping up of covert operations and certainly not in urban centers. All of the ingredients of Arab awakening are alive and well in Iraq. U.S. policy needs to realize this and build on it, not implement policies that denigrate Iraqi aspirations, hopes and autonomy.

U.S. is still occupying Iraq - Baltimore Sun

 

[jhungary]

Like I said we know our government has launched some unjustifiable wars, shed a lot of blood and we have begun to wise up towards them in regards to war. The American public is so sick of war that any President in the future will have to tread lightly before he thinks of any sort of military solution. What about your CCP they are military provoking countless neighbor nations based on historical claims to lands that have no real value and they are talking about annexations. Only belligerents even try to annex areas in this day and age, colonialism is over.



How much more prosperous could the Chinese have been? You have to realize they are prosperous and the little peanuts they throw North Korea's way is for their own benefit.

I said a lot more prosper as Chinese help the NK in their own formation year (Which the Chinese were also building their own country.) The problem is Chinese gave the best part of their own men on their golden time to help some other third world country then turned on them (Then again on Vietnam) and it is widely because of these 2 war, it stunned Chinese growth back to stop during the whole 50s 60s and 70s. How much further growth if China were to have those fine men in those 30 years when then needed the most? And what did the Chinese Achieve by helping the NK and Vietnam? Let me answer you this, nothing.

NK still there, but so does SK is still there, what Korean War achieve is a Permanent US base in S Korea and a share defence network on the DMZ. What vietnam war achieve is they got turned on in 1978-1980.......

Imagine if China reserve those people, those work force and focus on their own business? 30 years of growth bring a long way for even a giant market like China now.

American exceptionalism propaganda. You know, the usual murika is the only country that invented mcdonals and freedom, despite being mediocre or even worse amongst developed nations.

It's hilarious how hard the author of this article is trying to portray the PLA as some soviet relic while portraying the US MUHRINES as some kind call of duty crack commandos. It reminds of EXACTLY like the way Americans try to shoehorn their narrative of the taliban or just about any opposition they've ever come across. Yet in the end, Americans have been getting their ***** kicked in Afghanistan for 10 years and half a century or more if you consider the middle east entirely.

But never forget kids. MURIKA IS THE GREATEST.

Your post is not deserved to answer until you speak proper English.

A completely BS! (Excuse my Midwest expression, but many your statement deserve the proper name.)

You know nothing of history, especially the modern history of west-east conflict.

Are you telling us: if China gave the West the buffer zone of Chinese civilization, the West would be stop there and willing to cooperate with China? China's economy, with 25% of the world population, was only about one percent of the world economy.

In one hand, you know nothing of the history. In another hand, you know nothing of the endless greediness of free capitalism.

If the West grabbed the buffer zone, it would surely to further request open your ports for “trade”, if you refused to open your ports for trade, they would send strong boats and force to open your ports (and trafficking drugs if appropriate).

Do you know what is “opium war” of 1840? Opium Wars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

While you may imagine post-opium war China as “more prosperous”, the Chinese call it “hundred years of humiliation”.

Do you know what is the consequence of West occupation after opium war? When CCP took over the power, Chinese life expectancy is only 35, with enormous illiteracy and infant mortality.

My study shows Korea war has positive impact on the Chinese development, economically and politically. If you only localized in Korea, it is not as big a deal. True that China regains the buffer zone, true that US war planes are not bombing over NE China heavy industry area. But far more than that, the Chinese stand up in true sense.

Do you know why US troops dared not cross 17 parallel in Vietnam War? It was because China warned if the bottom line is crossed, China would deem this war is aimed at occupying China, and China would repeat Korea War story. This saves tens of thousands of Chinese lives and China can engage in its peaceful economic development.

If it were no Korea War, US troops would immediately occupy Vietnam with no hesitation, and perhaps further set for China.

If it were not Korea War, PR China would not be in UNSC, and RO China would still sit there.

If it were not Korea War, China’s international security environment would be even more difficult: insatiable Western powers and their running jackals would either impose no-fly zone over China’s air space, or indiscriminately bomb China, if their new, greedier requests were not met. Don’t forget Iraq story.

If you forget history, you are condemned to repeat it. And obviously you don’t even know the history, much less forgetting it…

History tells you: western greedy is endless due to free capitalism, and only external resistance can check it.

Both 1840 Opium War and 1952 Korea War of China illustrate the truth from both sides.

If it were not Korea War, if it were not CPC, China could well be today’s Iraq, and the new “Eight-Nation Alliance” Eight-Nation Alliance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia would probably be USA, Russia, Japan, UK, Indian,…

Thanks to a turning point called Korea War, foreigner devils’ freewill raping and looting on Chinese land has long gone, and China has a favorable environment to ascend into the 2nd position economically!

In contrast, see how frequently foreign occupiers’ rape South Korea women and Japanese women on the land of Japan and S. Korea… and the occupied have no say on it!

Please read more, kid, then make comments.

Lol bunch of really BC (Bullcrap, 'cuse me on my southern accents.)

There are 2 points in my agruement

I don't need to know History as i am telling a story of ALTERNATIVE HISTORY. Although i do think i know more history than you.

AMERICA WILL NEVER ABANDON ASIA, SO DOES CHINA, but how much chinese have to put in to have a fight to us is another question altogether. What you are asking, a total withdrawal of the America in the Asiatic region, is simply CANNOT BE DONE, keep the buffer zone, even if you can occupied South Korea, the US will still got forward operating base in Japan, in Taiwan and their own territories in Guam, Mariana Island and most of all, Hawai'i. What you arrogant Chinese don't realise is, even with the buffer zone, the end game will be the same, just how long it take til you get there.

The world does not work the same now as in 1840, you still think we are still under the world of Boston Tea party or Louisanna Purchase? No, today world is, either you are with us, you are against us, there are no many strong, one weak theory, but today world are everybody are equal game, doesn't matter China, Japan, S Korea, USA, Canada or whatever country in the world. You can saw China is strong, but there will always be a super entity that's just stronger than China, same thing apply to USA.

USA alone is not strong, alone, USA have no power, they are just a bunch of people with a lot of guns and ammo and no place to go, what make US strong is their allies, what make US Strong is the pact they signed, the problem is not with the US itself, but rather the allied organistion the US Signed.

Let's say, what is the world without South Korea? It will be the same, you know how i know? It's simple, we do not have South Vietnam anymore, yet we still hold a significant influence in Asia, we can lose japan to China, we can lose Philippine to China, we can lose Taiwan to China, again, the end will be the same, as long as there are 1 (ONE) landmass in Asia thta have their policy aligned to the US, the game will not change, and there will ALWAYS be 1 landmass that aligned to the US as US own land in Asian-Pacific. Unless China are foolish enough to say attack Guam or the Mariana, nothign will change.

What Chinese do is to alter the course of history and did what we did in Vietnam, only they still hope the game has change becuase they helped North Korea, the thing is, they will never, you should be glad they do not jump you in the back like Vietnam does. The fact is, China itself is doing what the America is doing in the world, only more foolish and in a lesser scale in Asia. Yeah you stand up to the big bad capitalism, yet you yourselve have to bend down on capitalism (You can call that whatever you want but having a free trade market is a form a capitalist) YOU can say you help your Northern Brother, but what do you gain in return? Nothing. It's only slightly better than Vietnam as you don't get stab in the back. How much money you havee got froM Trading with North Korea? Nothing, cause they can't pay you with anything. And the seat in the UN is not a firect product of Korean war (DID you even know when did the PRC gain entry to UNSC??) The seat in UNSC is a certain, you can say Korea help pave the way but i would say if China were not involve in Korea, they may got there sooner as they will be like now in the 1980s, fully prosper.

Don't tell me Chinese Kick American butt in Korea, nor Vietnam. And definitely not because of Chinese Warning so the American do not dare to cross the 17th Paraelle, think what you want, but American policy of Vietnam is BODYCOUNT, not grapping land, hence WE DO NOT NEED TO CROSS THE 17th PARAELLE and face it, you and vietnam were not so Buddy buddy after 1968 and Vietnamese actually expelling Chinese Advisor after the tet. So China is actually a non-factor for most of the war (From 1968-1975) and in the end, it simply back fired and got jumped on the back. You did not win the bigger war in Korea, America still in Asia, worse yet, america is closer as there are no america present in Korea BEFORE korean war, and you got kicked out yourselve in vietnam half way through.

What you have achieve in Korean war is the buffer zone, that's it, which as i explained will not do anything, and what you get in Vietnam is a Fuxk-off by the vietnamese and a war to vietnamese in 1979, face it, if China were not helping Vietnam, they may not start the whole Chinese-Vietnam Border conflict. What you Chinese are doing is exactly what you accuse of the West are doing, while you appraise your own work of getting nothing done (There are not much changed from 1950 til now, with the exception of South Vietnam is gone) America still have military power in Japan, Taiwan still stand, South Korea still stand, Vietnam is still hostile toward China, North Korea have nothing to do with China, India is still hostile toward China, America still own the territories she own in Asia and Pacific. Really, i did not see much changed as China is still surrounded by Enemies. Tell me, what has changed since 1950??

The MOST IMPORTANT problem is what we are talking is China backyard, it's not American backyard. So, if you say this is what you have done, then you have no different than in 1840, only you are fighting under another banner and in a grandier scale.

 

[anon45]

A completely BS! (Excuse my Midwest expression, but many your statement deserve the proper name.)

You know nothing of history, especially the modern history of west-east conflict.

Are you telling us: if China gave the West the buffer zone of Chinese civilization, the West would be stop there and willing to cooperate with China? China's economy, with 25% of the world population, was only about one percent of the world economy.

Oh no surely not, It was still red China, and we surely wouldn't cooperate with them in that day and age with how pervasive cold war mentality was, but we were kind of operating off the assumption that China's falling out with the Soviet Union and Nixon's visit to China would still happen. But yes, I believe the US would have stopped short of invading China and been content with a unified capitalist Korea, given the Korean Peninsula was the only AO mandated by the UN (afaik). If nothing else I'd assume even if China didn't move over the border it would still have a sizable army on its side keeping guard. The US and the Soviet Union were able to keep a stable border in Germany, I think the US and China could keep a stable border on the northern Korean border.


There is of course merit to debate whether The Sino-Soviet Divide and Nixon's visit would still happen.

In one hand, you know nothing of the history. In another hand, you know nothing of the endless greediness of free capitalism.

If the West grabbed the buffer zone, it would surely to further request open your ports for “trade”, if you refused to open your ports for trade, they would send strong boats and force to open your ports (and trafficking drugs if appropriate)..

You seem to be stuck in the 1800's? Please recall that red China is not dynastic China, and the US is not the British Empire. Your biggest logical failure is to exclude the Soviet Union from the equation, considering it was the Cold War. The Soviet Union was almost always relevant.

As for capitalism, its history and how its affected progress on the planet speaks for itself. There are losers, but humanity as a whole is a winner when it comes to increased life expectancy and quality of life increases for more humans than ever before.

Do you know what is “opium war” of 1840? Opium Wars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

While you may imagine post-opium war China as “more prosperous”, the Chinese call it “hundred years of humiliation”.

Do you know what is the consequence of West occupation after opium war? When CCP took over the power, Chinese life expectancy is only 35, with enormous illiteracy and infant mortality.

I'd imagine that is as much due to the Civil war along with the imperial Japanese invasion as anything else. China was a real basket-case at that time, and not just due to the British, though many Chinese would love to blame it all on an outside power. It is also a total strawman

My study shows Korea war has positive impact on the Chinese development, economically and politically. If you only localized in Korea, it is not as big a deal. True that China regains the buffer zone, true that US war planes are not bombing over NE China heavy industry area. But far more than that, the Chinese stand up in true sense. .

I don't know about your study, but you clearly didn't study American administration thought during the Korean war. The Soviet Union essentially protected and sheltered China at that time, China was safe. Also the US had no appetite to expand the war to China in anycase, I don't doubt that at the northern line we would be met with a Chinese army or 2 guarding the border.

Do you know why US troops dared not cross 17 parallel in Vietnam War? It was because China warned if the bottom line is crossed, China would deem this war is aimed at occupying China, and China would repeat Korea War story. This saves tens of thousands of Chinese lives and China can engage in its peaceful economic development.

Arguably more lives would have been saved if China simply did not engage, so its a moot point. It does bring up JHungary's thought that if China did not engage in Korea it would probably not engage in Vietnam. If the US didn't have that point of deterrance then the ROE would have been less restrictive, unless the Soviet Union intervened. Would it have effected China if South Vietnam was the victor instead of North Vietnam? I'd say not much. China would still be able to engage in peaceful economic development.

If it were no Korea War, US troops would immediately occupy Vietnam with no hesitation, and perhaps further set for China.

Agreed re: the lack of hesitation in American forces crossing over the northern boundary, but your notion that the US was set on invading China or flooding it with drugs is something I disagree with and sounds a bit ludicrious.

If it were not Korea War, PR China would not be in UNSC, and RO China would still sit there.

This just illustrates your ignorance of how China got its UNSC seat. It may or may not have been delayed by a few years, but China would have gotten it.

If it were not Korea War, China’s international security environment would be even more difficult: insatiable Western powers and their running jackals would either impose no-fly zone over China’s air space, or indiscriminately bomb China, if their new, greedier requests were not met. Don’t forget Iraq story.

Now you are just falling into rhetoric, prejudice, and bias. You have said nothing here that meshes with Cold War history, and you still utterly ignore the Soviet Union, your single biggest failing in your absolutely ludicrous argument. Don't ignore the Soviet Union during the Cold-War!

History tells you: western greedy is endless due to free capitalism, and only external resistance can check it.

Both 1840 Opium War and 1952 Korea War of China illustrate the truth from both sides.

If it were not Korea War, if it were not CPC, China could well be today’s Iraq, and the new “Eight-Nation Alliance” Eight-Nation Alliance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia would probably be USA, Russia, Japan, UK, Indian,…

Thanks to a turning point called Korea War, foreigner devils’ freewill raping and looting on Chinese land has long gone, and China has a favorable environment to ascend into the 2nd position economically!

In contrast, see how frequently foreign occupiers’ rape South Korea women and Japanese women on the land of Japan and S. Korea… and the occupied have no say on it!

Please read more, kid, then make comments.

I'm starting to think replying to your argument (which i'm now starting to think was just xenophobic ignorance) was a mistake... aside from your fascinatiing and astoundingly weird tendency to associate all dealings with the US with the Opium war, a war where we didn't play a significant role... are you genuinely interested in discussion, or are you just a brainwashed mouthpiece? Make it clear. Because this tired rhetoric of 'foreigner devils' and 'greedy capitalists' doesn't serve any argument you might have, it just makes you look like a fool, a xenophobe, a 2 dimensional learner, and unworthy of discussion.

 

[Viet]

Vietnam is a communist party controlled country, you don't have right to comment here.

So the Chinese people? do they have a choice to select their leaders?