What's new

Vietnam Defence Forum

Right. A Viet dog pretending to know Chinese mindset.

If anything, an Spanish dog and yes, I understand the chinese mindset because I spent plenty of time in china. The truth hurts huh?

Oh my god. You get some Saddam era Iraqi style SCUDs and now think you can launch ballistic missiles like they're fireworks. What do you think is going to happen if Chinese detect a ballistic missile launch heading towards a Chinese city from Vietnam?

Saddam's era scuds only in your dreams. They are just for deterrence, if china behaves, there is no need to use them.

I guess you don't read what your fellow chinese friends often say here about vietnamese in this forum? Not only you seem to be brainwashed by chinese government propaganda, but you seem to have selective vision when you read this thread.
 
Last edited:
.
This is easy for you to say, with two relatively weak and compliant nations next to you and then two oceans. Do note that the US has fought border wars with both Canada and Mexico during the first 70 years of the US's founding. It is only extremely overwhelming US relative strength that allows it a peaceful neighborhood.

That, and the fact that the US decided not to unilaterally seize disputed territories, but rather negotiated with these parties for a final settlement. It would be easier to agree with you if the US claimed the Gulf of Mexico all the way down to Cancun, but unlike China's claims all the way down to Malaysia, we don't go that far.

There's no secret to why Chinese do science. China has been the premier technological and scientific power from 500 BC to 1700 AD. There is no need to think about psychology - countries that can do science, will do science. Those that can't, don't. Science is a key indicator of national progress, especially in the materials and physical sciences.

Certainly, but this is a function of economic development and financial resources. Mocking Vietnam for doing less science than China is just reaffirming that China has a far larger economy, which isn't saying much.

There is also no gunboat diplomacy. Note that no naval forces have been deployed and no guns actually used. Why was the West's gunboat diplomacy called that? Because it literally involved gunboats sailing into harbors of Asian countries and even opening fire along rivers. There has been *nothing close* with Vietnam.

Except for ramming and sinking Vietnamese ships in disputed territories, and then dispatching armed Chinese naval vessels to guard Chinese drilling activities in disputed territories, I agree with you.

The real problem here is that unlike Mexico, Vietnam does not recognize its overwhelming weakness, because it believes it can leverage the US into helping it. It is the identical situation to if Mexico thought that the Soviet Union or Great Britain would help it get its land back by giving it (as Vietnamese here think the US will give it) IRBMs, a nuclear program, AEGIS destroyers, submarines, tanks, fighters, etc.

You're not really saying that with a straight face, are you? Is there any country that should just roll over simply because it is comparatively weak at a point in time? If so, why did China ever bother fighting back against Japan in WWII? Shouldn't it have simply "recognized its overwhelming weakness," and given in to the inevitable? I suppose in your eyes, it was ridiculous for the US to send arms and supplies to its allies in WWII (including China) to regain their territories. It's a strange view of history.

As you can see here, Vietnamese are showing their racism. They are saying "Chinese are..." while no Chinese has ever said "Vietnamese are..." Instead, Chinese have only pointed out the objective weakness of Vietnam and its inability to enforce its claims should gunboat diplomacy actually be used. There is no argument about right or wrong, because this thread is not about right or wrong - it is about the objective comparison of Vietnamese military forces to its competitors. By not condemning racism, you are condoning it. Do you see now why Chinese feel apprehensive about Vietnamese? Do you not realize that agreeing with them by saying that Chinese actions are due to preceived slights and historical trauma, rather than legitimate concerns about territorial integrity, is actually a form of racism that says the opinions of Chinese people are worth less than the opinions of Vietnamese and others, simply because of their race?

I have to say, it takes some nerve to twist my previous post into proof of racism against China.

There has been racism, and I haven't commented on it because it happens appallingly often on PDF, and I would have time for nothing else. Since you claim not to have seen it, go to the search field in the upper right hand corner and search for "vietnam monkey" and "vietnam banana" and the like--you will be shocked at what is thrown in the other direction on PDF. I don't see any pure victims, here. But for the record: I reject any and all racist stereotypes, insults, mischaracterizations, or condescention, whether it is by Vietnamese users directed at Chinese users, Chinese users directed at Vietnamese users, or any other combination of parties.

That said, is China really apprehensive about the Vietnamese, given the immense difference in size, strength, and historical direction of invasion? Isn't that like the teenager who murders his parents, and then pleads for mercy from the judge because he's an orphan? I can pity the victim of trauma, but I don't automatically sympathize with his actions simply because he's been traumatized.

There are strong pro-China factions in Vietnam, and in fact, I believe they currently govern Vietnam. Instead of encouraging them to bring Vietnam into China's orbit, China has been spitting in their faces by taking advantage of this one-sided friendliness to unilaterally conclude the territorial disputes, knowing the pro-China faction has neither the military power nor credibility with the people to respond. Are you then shocked that Vietnamese feel humiliated, and turn to others for friendship?

Right. A Viet dog pretending to know Chinese mindset.

@FairAndUnbiased Case in point.
 
.
That, and the fact that the US decided not to unilaterally seize disputed territories, but rather negotiated with these parties for a final settlement. It would be easier to agree with you if the US claimed the Gulf of Mexico all the way down to Cancun, but unlike China's claims all the way down to Malaysia, we don't go that far.



Certainly, but this is a function of economic development and financial resources. Mocking Vietnam for doing less science than China is just reaffirming that China has a far larger economy, which isn't saying much.



Except for ramming and sinking Vietnamese ships in disputed territories, and then dispatching armed Chinese naval vessels to guard Chinese drilling activities in disputed territories, I agree with you.



You're not really saying that with a straight face, are you? Is there any country that should just roll over simply because it is comparatively weak at a point in time? If so, why did China ever bother fighting back against Japan in WWII? Shouldn't it have simply "recognized its overwhelming weakness," and given in to the inevitable? I suppose in your eyes, it was ridiculous for the US to send arms and supplies to its allies in WWII (including China) to regain their territories. It's a strange view of history.



I have to say, it takes some nerve to twist my previous post into proof of racism against China.

There has been racism, and I haven't commented on it because it happens appallingly often on PDF, and I would have time for nothing else. Since you claim not to have seen it, go to the search field in the upper right hand corner and search for "vietnam monkey" and "vietnam banana" and the like--you will be shocked at what is thrown in the other direction on PDF. I don't see any pure victims, here. But for the record: I reject any and all racist stereotypes, insults, mischaracterizations, or condescention, whether it is by Vietnamese users directed at Chinese users, Chinese users directed at Vietnamese users, or any other combination of parties.

That said, is China really apprehensive about the Vietnamese, given the immense difference in size, strength, and historical direction of invasion? Isn't that like the teenager who murders his parents, and then pleads for mercy from the judge because he's an orphan? I can pity the victim of trauma, but I don't automatically sympathize with his actions simply because he's been traumatized.

There are strong pro-China factions in Vietnam, and in fact, I believe they currently govern Vietnam. Instead of encouraging them to bring Vietnam into China's orbit, China has been spitting in their faces by taking advantage of this one-sided friendliness to unilaterally conclude the territorial disputes, knowing the pro-China faction has neither the military power nor credibility with the people to respond. Are you then shocked that Vietnamese feel humiliated, and turn to others for friendship?



@FairAndUnbiased Case in point.

1. There is precedent for ramming and sinking fishing boats in disputed territory - your Japanese allies used that against both Chinese and Taiwanese boats.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Senkaku_boat_collision_incident

http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/national/national-news/2008/06/11/160421/Taiwan-fishing.htm

By failing to condemn the Japanese actions, your silence legitimizes them.

2. I'm not mocking them. I am pointing it out so that they recognize their objective weakness. Also, it is to point out that science does not have to do with wealth or size - Kenya is both smaller than and far poorer than Vietnam, yet has comparable scientific output.

3. Mexico gave up because it recognized that Britain and the Soviet Union were not going to help take the 1/3 of its territories that got annexed back. China, on the other hand, has annexed precisely zero km of Vietnamese land, settled the land borders dispute completely diplomatically, and only has maritime disputes remaining. Because of these few remaining maritime disputes, Vietnamese are dreaming of building up an IRBM stockpile. And you are amazed when Chinese laugh at this sort of wild dream?

The provocations actually began with Vietnam. Just look at what Vietnamese are saying: "cutting off the SCS" "blocking straits of Malacca" "sinking merchant ships with Kilos". Who sounds like the provocative party here?

If anything, an Spanish dog and yes, I understand the chinese mindset because I spent plenty of time in china. The truth hurts huh?

Saddam's era scuds only in your dreams. They are just for deterrence, if china behaves, there is no need to use them.

I guess you don't read what your fellow chinese friends often say here about vietnamese in this forum? Not only you seem to be brainwashed by chinese government propaganda, but you seem to have selective vision when you read this thread.

LOL ok, you have the most powerful ballistic missile arsenal on the planet.
 
.
1. There is precedent for ramming and sinking fishing boats in disputed territory - your Japanese allies used that against both Chinese and Taiwanese boats.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Senkaku_boat_collision_incident

http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/national/national-news/2008/06/11/160421/Taiwan-fishing.htm

By failing to condemn the Japanese actions, your silence legitimizes them.

2. I'm not mocking them. I am pointing it out so that they recognize their objective weakness. Also, it is to point out that science does not have to do with wealth or size - Kenya is both smaller than and far poorer than Vietnam, yet has comparable scientific output.

3. Mexico gave up because it recognized that Britain and the Soviet Union were not going to help take the 1/3 of its territories that got annexed back. China, on the other hand, has annexed precisely zero km of Vietnamese land, settled the land borders dispute completely diplomatically, and only has maritime disputes remaining. Because of these few remaining maritime disputes, Vietnamese are dreaming of building up an IRBM stockpile. And you are amazed when Chinese laugh at this sort of wild dream?

The provocations actually began with Vietnam. Just look at what Vietnamese are saying: "cutting off the SCS" "blocking straits of Malacca" "sinking merchant ships with Kilos". Who sounds like the provocative party here?



LOL ok, you have the most powerful ballistic missile arsenal on the planet.

Again, incredible selective vision, you don't seem to read when the chinese in this forum talk about what china is going to do to vietnam, etc, etc, are you for real man or are you just joking? Go back into the thread and read for a change. For someone going by the name of "fair an unbiased" you seem to have one hell of a bias.
 
Last edited:
.
If anything, an Spanish dog and yes, I understand the chinese mindset because I spent plenty of time in china. The truth hurts huh?



Saddam's era scuds only in your dreams. They are just for deterrence, if china behaves, there is no need to use them.

I guess you don't read what your fellow chinese friends often say here about vietnamese in this forum? Not only you seem to be brainwashed by chinese government propaganda, but you seem to have selective vision when you read this thread.

So you are a Spaniard, but your wife is Vietnamese. Am I right?

We have @Beidou2020 who is German-American, but he supports China because his wife is Chinese.

don´t deploy any rigs into our eez waters.

It is near our controlled EEZ near the Paracel Islands, while it is your guys who cannot take the status quo.

ha ha ha ...do you have anything with performance close to iskander missile?

It is still grossly underrated in the US report.

In fact, the DF-26 and DF-27 are our advanced mini ICBMs.

Dong Feng-26C (DF-26C) Archives | Missile ThreatMissile Threat
 
Last edited:
.
China may get all of the oil, but it may lose Vietnam to America in the process, which seems like a terrible trade-off, considering it could have had both.

Note that I didn't mention anything about Mexico's relative lack of scientific achievement.

With or without the USA , Vietnam would never give up the East Sea to China, Why is that ? 2/3 of Vietnam is Mountains and Hills, jungle, rivers, ponds ... So the East Sea is very much essential to Vietnam, if no compromise in the future of East Sea there will be war and and we going to see another David against Goliath.
 
.
China suffered two large traumas, one in the 19th century, and one in the 20th, that constitute its "Century of Humiliation." A common model for looking at the consequences of traumas in people is the Kübler-Ross model, better known as the five stages of grief. These stages are denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance.

The so called "Century of Humiliation" is overly exaggerated, if you look at the actual consequence of foreign invasion in China, you will see it's actually not that much especially compare to other countries which also suffered alot during last 2 centuries. Some got completely dismembered by the West (Ottoman Empire etc), some got ruled by colonist for so long(Indian subcontinent etc), some lost their own language system and still use what colonist left for them(Vietnam, Central Asia etc.), some still has to deal with leftover ethnic issues from colonial era(most of ex-British colony).China didn't lose much territory, nor did China suffer from foreign culture invasion. So I don't see how China's fate could possibly be more miserable than others in terms of being victim of foreign power. The whole victim rhetoric is being promoted by the authority to serve it's political agenda.



Roughly speaking, the non-reaction in the 19th century might be considered denial, then the upheavals in the early 20th as anger, coming to terms with itself as a new country after WWII as bargaining, the cultural revolution as depression, and then the reforms under Deng Xiaoping as acceptance. I am going to steal Wikipedia's example of the acceptance stage:


Acceptance — "It's going to be okay."; "I can't fight it, I may as well prepare for it."
In this last stage, individuals begin to come to terms with their mortality or inevitable future, or that of a loved one, or other tragic event. This stage varies according to the person's situation. People dying can enter this stage a long time before the people they leave behind, who must pass through their own individual stages of dealing with the grief. This typically comes with a calm, retrospective view for the individual, and a stable mindset.​

This is China's drive to improve its economic conditions in order to strengthen itself, and fulfill its vow of "never again." This can sometimes manifest itself as overreaction to perceived slights, and a wary defensiveness. I have referred to this in other threads as "aggressive victimhood," but call it whatever you like: China was a victim in the past, and now it's powerful enough to prevent it and do something about it.

Now on to another conceptual model that I think has some utility in understanding the thinking of some Chinese users here. We have seen suggestions that if China breaks the USD as a reserve currency, it can break US hegemony. We have seen suggestions that since China "does more science," it will be more advanced. We have seen suggestions that if China uses the same gunboat diplomacy that the West used over a century ago, it can accrue the same level of prestige as the West.

I think it's instructive to examine the cargo cult. I'm going to excerpt from Wikipedia, but read the article if you have time, it's fascinating.

The most widely known period of cargo cult activity occurred among the Melanesian islanders in the years during and after World War II. A small population of indigenous peoples observed, often right in front of their dwellings, the largest war ever fought by technologically advanced nations. First, the Japanese arrived with a great deal of supplies and later theAllied forces did likewise.

The vast amounts of military equipment and supplies that both sides airdropped (or airlifted to airstrips) to troops on these islands meant drastic changes to the lifestyle of the islanders, many of whom had never seen outsiders before. Manufactured clothing, medicine, canned food, tents, weapons and other goods arrived in vast quantities for the soldiers, who often shared some of it with the islanders who were their guides and hosts.

...

With the end of the war, the military abandoned the airbases and stopped dropping cargo. In response, charismatic individuals developed cults among remote Melanesian populations that promised to bestow on their followers deliveries of food, arms, Jeeps, etc. The cult leaders explained that the cargo would be gifts from their own ancestors, or other sources, as had occurred with the outsider armies. In attempts to get cargo to fall by parachute or land in planes or ships again, islanders imitated the same practices they had seen the soldiers, sailors, and airmen use. Cult behaviors usually involved mimicking the day-to-day activities and dress styles of US soldiers, such as performing parade ground drills with wooden or salvaged rifles. The islanders carved headphones from wood and wore them while sitting in fabricated control towers. They waved the landing signals while standing on the runways. They lit signal fires and torches to light up runways and lighthouses.

In a form of sympathetic magic, many built life-size replicas of aeroplanes out of straw and cut new military-style landing strips out of the jungle, hoping to attract more aeroplanes. The cult members thought that the foreigners had some special connection to the deities and ancestors of the natives, who were the only beings powerful enough to produce such riches.

To put it simplistically, I think China saw the trappings of wealth and prestige of the West, and decided that in order to attain such wealth and prestige for itself as well, it needed to do what the Westerners did, without fully appreciating the more profound causes of that power. The West had superior technology, so China needed to "do science." The West had used gunboat diplomacy, so China needed to assert itself in the SCS and ECS. The UK and US had the reserve currencies, so China needed to deprive them of that in order to take their place. And so forth. China didn't preoccupy itself with questions of why the Western culture was able to produce these things; it only knew that to have those things was to have power.

I really think it's not much more profound than that. Every rising power wants its place under the sun, whether it's Britain rising up through the Spanish, Portuguese, and Dutch empires, or Germany trying to surpass the British Empire, or the US dismantling the British Empire to become leader of the free world.


To put it simple, during the cold war it was all about ideology, not much about nationalism. In fact, communism is fundamentally a form of internationalism, it is ideological oppose to nationalism, there was no ethnic struggles in communism, there was only class struggles. After the cold war ended, communism ideology bankrupted, ex-communism countries fall into a faithless/directionless/confused state. In order to prevent that from happening in China, CCP decided to promoted nationalism, that's why all those traditional value once prohibited in Mao era such as Confucianism now re-emerge again. Nationalism is now the de facto legitimizing ideology of CCP.
 
.
I wish, basically everyone wishes in the region, China would copy the ways of what America peacefully contributes to the region. Or Germany does to the region after the defeat in the WW II. to understand China what it does, why it does, one must understand Chinese psyche.

What is Chinese psyche?

actually today the Chinese are stuck between "middle kingdom"´s mindset, extreme nationalism, racism, egoism, arrogance and aggression. In this combination, they are worse than the Japanese in their dark times period.

Do you think they want a peaceful region, a stable neighborhood, a properous Vietnam? Nope. As the foreign minister of Australia Julia Bishop recently put it: China doesn't respect weakness. The only thing Chinese respect is power, or you can put it: violence. Chinese admire US military power. they despise the rest of the world as inferior. the most important thing they want is money and how to accumulate the money. Because they believe money can buy everything including friends or stooge like Cambodia.

Chinese calculus is so: China is big and rich, so it can have all. Vietnam is small and poor. Conclusion: we should give in their demand and surrender our money to them to make them richer. Otherwise they will come with warships and fighter jets.

I bet, if we have a squadron of nuclear submarines with nukes, Chinese will become peaceful and return to negotiating table. So if you want a peaceful region in Southeast Asia, pls provide us with necessary means.

You won't get that in the next 50 years.
 
.
that's why all those traditional value once prohibited in Mao era such as Confucianism now re-emerge again. Nationalism is now the de facto legitimizing ideology of CCP.

I disagree. Mao was a nationalist first. He was all about building socialism in one country and using socialism as a tool to build up the country, just like Stalin was. Otherwise, there was no reason for him demand independence, with zero leverage whatsoever, from the USSR in all aspects.
 
.
The so called "Century of Humiliation" is overly exaggerated, if you look at the actual consequence of foreign invasion in China, you will see it's actually not that much especially compare to other countries which also suffered alot during last 2 centuries. Some got completely dismembered by the West (Ottoman Empire etc), some got ruled by colonist for so long(Indian subcontinent etc), some lost their own language system and still use what colonist left for them(Vietnam, Central Asia etc.), some still has to deal with leftover ethnic issues from colonial era(most of ex-British colony).China didn't lose much territory, nor did China suffer from foreign culture invasion. So I don't see how China's fate could possibly be more miserable than others in terms of being victim of foreign power. The whole victim rhetoric is being promoted by the authority to serve it's political agenda.


To put it simple, during the cold war it was all about ideology, not much about nationalism. In fact, communism is fundamentally a form of internationalism, it is ideological oppose to nationalism, there was no ethnic struggles in communism, there was only class struggles. After the cold war ended, communism ideology bankrupted, ex-communism countries fall into a faithless/directionless/confused state. In order to prevent that from happening in China, CCP decided to promoted nationalism, that's why all those traditional value once prohibited in Mao era such as Confucianism now re-emerge again. Nationalism is now the de facto legitimizing ideology of CCP.

That's very correct; that's why I was telling him that its mainly a cultural issue and that cultural issue also receives a boost from the living conditions in china during the last century, where chinese people went through wars, famines, long periods of poverty and low education or very ideological type of education, etc, etc. When people say that typical mainland chinese are rude, impolite, aggressive, etc, that's in great part a reflection of those living conditions during last century.
People are a byproduct of their environment.

On the other hand, chinese from Singapore, Taiwan, etc didn't have that type of hardships (and the cultural influence has been diluted also) and its easy to see the difference. I would say that Singaporean chinese are at the top of the ladder. Many American chinese, particularly from families that are more culturally open are also like that, they are very nice people. Met many of them when I was living in USA.

So you are a Spaniard, but your wife is Vietnamese. Am I right?

We have @Beidou2020 who is German-American, but he supports China because his wife is Chinese.
/quote]

Correct, but I support Vietnam because I see Vietnam as the correct party, not because my wife is vietnamese, if my wife were to be chinese I still would have the same position.
 
Last edited:
.
That's very correct; that's why I was telling him that its mainly a cultural issue and that cultural issue also receives a boost from the living conditions in china during the last century, where chinese people went through wars, famines, long periods of poverty and low education or very ideological type of education, etc, etc. When people say that typical mainland chinese are rude, impolite, aggressive, etc, that's in great part a reflection of those living conditions during last century.

In general, people are aggressive to those who are aggressive to them. You make aggressive racial comments about Chinese, don't expect no protest, especially when you are the weaker party. You apparently have "defending yourself" and "correcting misunderstandings" confused with "aggression".

When I first came here, literally none of the Chinese members had ill feelings towards Vietnamese. Guess who started the chain of insults?
 
.
In general, people are aggressive to those who are aggressive to them. You make aggressive racial comments about Chinese, don't expect no protest, especially when you are the weaker party. You apparently have "defending yourself" and "correcting misunderstandings" confused with "aggression".

When I first came here, literally none of the Chinese members had ill feelings towards Vietnamese. Guess who started the chain of insults?

You got the facts very wrong, the aggressiveness of the chinese members is very well documented here, just go back on the thread. I used to see that same behavior from the chinese members all the time since way before I became a member here, when I just used to come to read.

When you don't like criticism of real facts you call them racist, never mind when I explained why, like I just did and never mind when I speak very well of chinese from Singapore, Taiwan, etc. I fail to see how that qualifies as racist. I guess the truth hurts huh?
 
.
You got the facts very wrong, the aggressiveness of the chinese members is very well documented here, just go back on the thread. I used to see that same behavior from the chinese members all the time since way before I became a member here, when I just used to come to read.

It is very easy to refute this: what reason do Chinese have to be aggressive to Vietnamese unless provoked? There's nothing you have that Chinese are jealous of, no crimes that you have committed against Chinese, and are no threat to Chinese in any way.

Meanwhile, many Vietnamese have a chip on their shoulder due to their "victimization" by long gone Chinese empires, conveniently forgetting much more recent crimes by other countries.

I don't know what facts you have, but your previous posts were essentially fact-free. I don't like to generalize an entire people, so I do not want to get into a mud slinging contest based on insults and to lower the quality of this thread. However, if you truly want that sort of time wasting activity, I'm happy to oblige.
 
.
It is very easy to refute this: what reason do Chinese have to be aggressive to Vietnamese unless provoked? There's nothing you have that Chinese are jealous of, no crimes that you have committed against Chinese, and are no threat to Chinese in any way.

Meanwhile, many Vietnamese have a chip on their shoulder due to their "victimization" by long gone Chinese empires, conveniently forgetting much more recent crimes by other countries.

I don't know what facts you have, but your previous posts were essentially fact-free. I don't like to generalize an entire people, so I do not want to get into a mud slinging contest based on insults and to lower the quality of this thread. However, if you truly want that sort of time wasting activity, I'm happy to oblige.

Maybe you didn't read this, I think its self explanatory.

"That's very correct; that's why I was telling him that its mainly a cultural issue and that cultural issue also receives a boost from the living conditions in china during the last century, where chinese people went through wars, famines, long periods of poverty and low education or very ideological type of education, etc, etc. When people say that typical mainland chinese are rude, impolite, aggressive, etc, that's in great part a reflection of those living conditions during last century.
People are a byproduct of their environment.

On the other hand, chinese from Singapore, Taiwan, etc didn't have that type of hardships (and the cultural influence has been diluted also) and its easy to see the difference. I would say that Singaporean chinese are at the top of the ladder. Many American chinese, particularly from families that are more culturally open are also like that, they are very nice people. Met many of them when I was living in USA."

I like to talk about countries's peoples in general terms because every country has typical charactheristics, but at the individual level, I never do, each individual is a unique case, there are bad, good individuals and everything in between in all countries, that's how I see this issue and I explained this before. Time to go back to topic.
 
.
Maybe you didn't read this, I think its self explanatory.

I like to talk about countries's peoples in general terms because every country has typical charactheristics, but at the individual level, I never do, each individual is a unique case, there are bad, good individuals and everything in between in all countries, that's how I see this issue and I explained this before.

OK. The Vietnamese high school graduation rate in Japan is 40%. The Japanese rate is 99%.

Vietnamese people in Japan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kenya produces equal scientific research despite having 60% of Vietnam's GDP per capita and half the population.

SJR - International Science Ranking

There are some conclusions (in general, of course, the way you think is appropriate) that you can draw from these facts - do you want to start thinking about those?
 
.
Back
Top Bottom