Did 26million Russians die during World War 2 ???

[Ramseth]

Gone soft to their dismay correct?

I mean i guess it's good they aren't so bloodthristy in these times but comeon ask yourself. Do you think that's the world view of chinese ppl? They always view chinese ppl as barbaric no matter how soft they have become. In fact for the chinese it's sort of become like a paradox. Ang mohs will hold chinese as more barbaric than themselves. Yet they'll still say they are more "hardcore" as in their ang moh gangs and fighters are tougher and better than chinese ones but chinese ppl still are more barbaric which is kind of an oxymoron.

It's ridiculous and should be changed.

When the Europeans first came to China, they didn't view Chinese as barbarians or inferior. In fact, they held Chinese in so high regard that they called our language Mandarin, meaning noble language. There was no way any European country could win a war or even any battle against China at anytime before mid Qing dynasty. What they wanted in or from China, they came and asked courteously and humbly. For example, Macau wasn't lost to Portugal by way of war, it was leased by imperial grace. Well, there were some terms and conditions in return of course.

The tide ebbed and turned with the western advancement in weaponry. By the time steel could be made to float, China was no match for them regardless of how many people we had, and they had a field day bullying China.

 

[Jah_rastafar_I]

When the Europeans first came to China, they didn't view Chinese as barbarians or inferior. In fact, they held Chinese in so high regard that they called our language Mandarin, meaning noble language. There was no way any European country could win a war or even any battle against China at anytime before mid Qing dynasty. What they wanted in or from China, they came and asked courteously and humbly. For example, Macau wasn't lost to Portugal by way of war, it was leased by imperial grace. Well, there were some terms and conditions in return of course.

The tide ebbed and turned with the western advancement in weaponry. By the time steel could be made to float, China was no match for them regardless of how many people we had, and they had a field day bullying China.

Oh yes those were the times. Marco polo visited china during the time it was under kublai. In any case it's pointless bringing that up now. Even during the western imperialism crap during the late 19th and early 20th century is gone and left behind with the west falling down and china again standing up. Yet what pisses me off the most is that ppl will always remember china for the early 20th century events. They forget everything else even today's events and still regard china of today as the china of the early 20th century under the qing. Don't you think that's stupid? It's just pure biasness every good thing about chinese forgotten or down played, every bad thing exggerrated overtly.

Anyway this reminds me of 1 country that sure loves to live in the past. That is mongolia. What is mongolia most famous for? Genghis khan 800 yrs ago. For a country like china there are so many emperors, conquerors, heroes etc you can choose from. yue fei or zhu geliang or qin shi huang and so on. Mongolia only has 1 and even today they still worship him cos that's all mongolia ever contributed to the world. I can bet 200 yrs later genghis khan will still be the most important figure from mongolia.

 

[Ramseth]

Mongolians and Manchurians etc. tribes north of Great Wall are considered non-Han Chinese in strict ethnic and technical sense, in contrast to Russians being considered strictly non-Chinese. They were all half-breed races from the survivors of the Warring States who fled northward, mostly Zhao and Yan. During the Warring States, where got such thing as Mongolia and Manchuria? They evolved their ethnicity mixed with Chinese settlers much later.

 

[Jah_rastafar_I]

The pt is mongolia got nothing to claim cept for genghis khan lah.

 

[eatshitndie]

china would have the world as her oyster if she carried on seaward expeditions with her treasure fleets in the 15th century. if those huge fleets and giant ships were to reach europe and especially venice from rounding africa, europeans would view chinese as masters of the sea and having unequaled culture and power from the edge of the earth where they had been dreaming about and wondering in their collective sleep. why the curiosity about china then? because italians and other europeans who wanted to be like italians had been spending much of their wealth on silk and objects of marvel from china. gold which was the preferred means of monetary exchange was paid to middlemen in the middle east and india, and in exchange these traders and merchants forwarded silk and porcelain ware from china. obviously as with all global trade both europeans and chinese wanted to cut off middlemen and do direct trading - thus the building of ships to explore and find direct passages between buyer and seller. had chinese fleets continue exploring and setting up of trading colonies under ming, history would have been different. the chinese and in this particular case the new ming emperor and his inward looking court had only themselves to blame. lesson learned is that you don't want any earth shattering and history defining decisions to be made by one stubborn fool with a myopic vision and surrounded by cowardly yesmen fuckwits.

 

[Ramseth]

The pt is mongolia got nothing to claim cept for genghis khan lah.

My point is that I have nothing against Mongolians or Genghis Khan. I consider them Chinese, except non-Han. In any case, even if they keep harping on Genghis Khan, let them be. I see nothing wrong with it. If they only have one hero to harp on, that's their problem too. By the time of Kublai Khan, Mongolians had already reintegrated back into China, losing themselves back to China by returning for conquest. Same for Manchurians by the time of Qianlong, losing themselves back to China by returning for conquest. Ironic, isn't it?

 

[Royalblood]

Chinese have gone softened by Tang dynasty. Chinese used to be most bloodthirsty, vengeful and unforgiving. Ethnic cleansing and genocide were not uncommon. More than 2,000 years ago already Qin Shihuang and Chu Bawang could order the mass execution of hundreds of thousands at one go. What went on more than 4,000 years ago to lay the foundation of China and went unrecorded could be anyone's guess.

i think it is highly inaccurate for you to say that Chinese used to be the most bloodthirtsy, vengeful and unforgiving.

which empire of that time aren't as above? do you think the persians or the greeks/ romans, etc could have carved out an empire by being mr nice guy? do u think their economy would boom without the use of slaves? From the dawn of civilization up till the age of colonialism, the victor had always been the most barbaric one, inflicting the most unimaginable cruelty on the native population and yet gained immense benefit out of their babaric actions.

Anyways i think it still apply in today's context; the most bloodthirsty and aggressive ones rule the world, which explain why the world today is dominated by white men.

The Chinese need to shake off their nice image and take on a more aggressive stance if they want to rule the world

 

[Jah_rastafar_I]

i think it is highly inaccurate for you to say that Chinese used to be the most bloodthirtsy, vengeful and unforgiving.

which empire of that time aren't as above? do you think the persians or the greeks/ romans, etc could have carved out an empire by being mr nice guy? do u think their economy would boom without the use of slaves? From the dawn of civilization up till the age of colonialism, the victor had always been the most barbaric one, inflicting the most unimaginable cruelty on the native population and yet gained immense benefit out of their babaric actions.

Anyways i think it still apply in today's context; the most bloodthirsty and aggressive ones rule the world, which explain why the world today is dominated by white men.

The Chinese need to shake off their nice image and take on a more aggressive stance if they want to rule the world

We do know of how barbaric ang mohs can be. Then can you explain to me why are chinese viewed as barbaric instead. You see this is what pisses me off. Chinese are nice and somehow ppl see them as crooked or barbaric. Ang mohs are aggressive and somehow they are seen as heroic while chinese are seen as beta. There's 2 opposing view points of chinese ppl. Firstly ppl say they are beta and yet ppl say they are barbaric How can you be beta or peaceful and yet be considered barbaric? This absolutely makes no sense and the worst thing is that there are chinese dogs out there that agree with these ang mohs views and hate on other chinese.

 

[Fook Seng]

We do know of how barbaric ang mohs can be. Then can you explain to me why are chinese viewed as barbaric instead. You see this is what pisses me off. Chinese are nice and somehow ppl see them as crooked or barbaric. Ang mohs are aggressive and somehow they are seen as heroic while chinese are seen as beta. There's 2 opposing view points of chinese ppl. Firstly ppl say they are beta and yet ppl say they are barbaric How can you be beta or peaceful and yet be considered barbaric? This absolutely makes no sense and the worst thing is that there are chinese dogs out there that agree with these ang mohs views and hate on other chinese.

The reason is found in who controls the media today. Internationally, it is the west. Nationally it is the ruling party of course. And we are all slaves to the media. Fortunately in the west, there are still the scholastic type and it is through such utterings that you see some light amidst the fog. Many of political divides you see today is a result of US intervention. US supported Chiang Kai Sek who was losing the war in China and pushed China in alliance with Russia, natural enemies. Korea split into two because US supported the South. China would not stand still with an unfriendly power so near to its border, isn't it? In Vietnam, US supported the French loyalist South against the nationalistic North who wanted independence. All it would need was for US to wait until these people settled their troubles and the world will be a much different place.

 

[Liquigas]

The pt is mongolia got nothing to claim cept for genghis khan lah.

Not exactly correct because Babur the founder of the Mughal Dynasty in India is a direct descendant of Genghis Khan on his mother's side. The early Mughals are a Mongolian people speaking Turki language but practice Persian culture. India enjoyed much economic and cultural progress under the Great Mughals and the country was the dominant power in the Indian subcontinent in the 17/18 century.

 

[Jah_rastafar_I]

Not exactly correct because Babur the founder of the Mughal Dynasty in India is a direct descendant of Genghis Khan on his mother's side. The early Mughals are a Mongolian people speaking Turki language but practice Persian culture. India enjoyed much economic and cultural progress under the Great Mughals and the country was the dominant power in the Indian subcontinent in the 17/18 century.

Yup the mongols spawned many kingdoms in many countries etc. Yet the problem is these shit skins probably won't even accept the munghals at all simply cos they aren't caucasian.

 

[GOD IS MY DOG]

china would have the world as her oyster if she carried on seaward expeditions with her treasure fleets in the 15th century. if those huge fleets and giant ships were to reach europe and especially venice from rounding africa, europeans would view chinese as masters of the sea and having unequaled culture and power from the edge of the earth where they had been dreaming about and wondering in their collective sleep. why the curiosity about china then? because italians and other europeans who wanted to be like italians had been spending much of their wealth on silk and objects of marvel from china. gold which was the preferred means of monetary exchange was paid to middlemen in the middle east and india, and in exchange these traders and merchants forwarded silk and porcelain ware from china. obviously as with all global trade both europeans and chinese wanted to cut off middlemen and do direct trading - thus the building of ships to explore and find direct passages between buyer and seller. had chinese fleets continue exploring and setting up of trading colonies under ming, history would have been different. the chinese and in this particular case the new ming emperor and his inward looking court had only themselves to blame. lesson learned is that you don't want any earth shattering and history defining decisions to be made by one stubborn fool with a myopic vision and surrounded by cowardly yesmen fuckwits.

velly nice................

 

[Conqueror]

Mao Was The Betrayer Here

Chiang Kai Shek gave away Outer Mongolia in the Treaty of Friendship and Alliance, August 1945 signed by Republic of China and Soviet Union.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Friendship_and_Alliance_(China_–_Soviet_Union) ( read the detailed Chinese version )

First thing, first. Wikipedia cannot be trusted 100% like as if it is a bible truth. Some one may have misunderstood and wrote that. The map says, "Administered by Mongolia but claimed by ROC." Not PRC here. PRC sold it away to Stalin (then USSR). I told you about China was actually divided into 3 - Russia (Mao run dog), Japan and ROC (Chiang) during WWII.

 

[Conqueror]

Only One To Boast About

Oh yes those were the times. Marco polo visited china during the time it was under kublai.

For a country like china there are so many emperors, conquerors, heroes etc you can choose from. yue fei or zhu geliang or qin shi huang and so on. Mongolia only has 1 and even today they still worship him cos that's all mongolia ever contributed to the world. I can bet 200 yrs later genghis khan will still be the most important figure from mongolia.

Yah, quite true. Mongolians are losers ! Mongolia has nice apples like this pic above. Conquer and rape them !

 

[Conqueror]

Confusion Analects ?

i think it is highly inaccurate for you to say that Chinese used to be the most bloodthirtsy, vengeful and unforgiving.

which empire of that time aren't as above? do you think the persians or the greeks/ romans, etc could have carved out an empire by being mr nice guy? do u think their economy would boom without the use of slaves? From the dawn of civilization up till the age of colonialism, the victor had always been the most barbaric one, inflicting the most unimaginable cruelty on the native population and yet gained immense benefit out of their babaric actions.

Anyways i think it still apply in today's context; the most bloodthirsty and aggressive ones rule the world, which explain why the world today is dominated by white men.

The Chinese need to shake off their nice image and take on a more aggressive stance if they want to rule the world

Confucius analects was making Chinese to become sissy and nice. In the biblical time, both the Babylonian army and the Assyrian army practised killing of civilians if those kings did not surrender their besieged cities. Cutting of ears and putting out of their eyes were common. Evil armies that use intimidation to gain cities without any fight.

 

[sukhoi-30]

Re: Confusion Analects ?

To the Ang moh in the 18/19th century, the conditions of barbaric is simple. Those who do not believes in the Christian religion n those who practice a culture whom they do not understand is barbaric. For ordinary Ang mohs today..it is not so pervasive but some of their political leaders still do. In fact, it is now the Chinese themselves who sees those who do not profess the religion or are too cheena as somwhat inferior...which is quite sad.

 

[Conqueror]

Wasteland Is Good Too

Did china get back those lands from burma, india, tajikstan etc?

I read some article that china didn't manage to get back the sarklin or how you spell islands near the manchuria region. Also outer mongolia which is just desert wasteland anyhow. The better part of mongolia is of course inner mongolia.

It can be used as a military buffer against Russia. Bury more landmines.

 

[Conqueror]

Spanish Conquistador Killed Many

To the Ang moh in the 18/19th century, the conditions of barbaric is simple. Those who do not believes in the Christian religion n those who practice a culture whom they do not understand is barbaric. For ordinary Ang mohs today..it is not so pervasive but some of their political leaders still do. In fact, it is now the Chinese themselves who sees those who do not profess the religion or are too cheena as somwhat inferior...which is quite sad.

The joint forces of Tlaxcala and Cortés proved to be formidable. One by one they took over most of the cities under Mexica control, some in battle, others by diplomacy. At the end, only Tenochtitlan and the neighboring city of Tlatelolco remained unconquered.

Cortés returned to Tenochtitlan and mounted a siege of the city that relied on cutting the causeways from the mainland, while controlling the lake with armed brigantines constructed by the Spanish. The siege of Tenochtitlan lasted eight months. The besiegers cut off the supply of food and destroyed the aqueduct carrying water to the city. Even worse, many of the inhabitants of the city were also being ravaged by the effects of smallpox, which spread rapidly across most of Central Mexico (and beyond), killing hundreds of thousands. In fact, a third of the inhabitants of the entire valley died in less than six months from the new disease brought from Europe. Despite the resistance (during which the defenders cut the beating hearts from 70 Spanish prisoners-of-war at the altar to Huichilobos[16]), Tenochtitlan and Tlatelolco fell on 13 August 1521 when the last Aztec emperor, Cuauhtémoc, surrendered to Cortés. Cortés then ordered the Aztec gods in the temples taken down and replaced with icons of Christianity. He also announced that the temple would never again be used for human sacrifice.

The city had been almost totally destroyed by fire and cannon shot during the siege, and once it finally fell the Spanish continued its dismantlement, as they soon began to establish the foundations of what would become Mexico City on the site. Meanwhile the surviving Aztec people were forbidden to live in Tenochtitlan and the surrounding isles. The survivors went to live in Tlatelolco.

 

[Sideswipe]

Re: Mao Was The Betrayer Here

First thing, first. Wikipedia cannot be trusted 100% like as if it is a bible truth. Some one may have misunderstood and wrote that. The map says, "Administered by Mongolia but claimed by ROC." Not PRC here. PRC sold it away to Stalin (then USSR). I told you about China was actually divided into 3 - Russia (Mao run dog), Japan and ROC (Chiang) during WWII.

only read little bit of the Wikipedia Chinese version on this so can't comment.
Outer Mongolia independence got nothing to do with Mao. Chiang gave it away for free in the 1945 treaty. Mao acknowledged the independence of Outer Mongolia in 1950. the ROC Legislative Yuan in 1952 had abrogated that treaty based on the evidences that the Russians did not abide by the treaty terms. ROC then claimed back Outer Mongolia under her constitution.

notice the green part joining Yunnan. that is Burma State of Shan, 3 times the size of Taiwan. Mao ceded it away to Burma for free just for the sake of evicting Li Mi troops on Chinese soil.