Tik Shiro Car Crash Sparks Demand for Alcohol Test Inquiry

[webfact]

U.S. creating 'sensational hype' over China's military modernisation: ministry

 

Flags of U.S. and China are placed for a meeting between Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue and China's Minister of Agriculture Han Changfu at the Ministry of Agriculture in Beijing, China June 30, 2017. REUTERS/Jason Lee/Files

 

BEIJING (Reuters) - The United States has created "sensational hype" over China's military modernization, the defence ministry has said in reaction to a White House report branding China a competitor seeking to challenge U.S. power.

 

U.S. President Donald Trump's administration on Monday laid out a national security strategy based on Trump's "America First" vision, singling out of China and Russia as "revisionist powers" seeking not only to challenge U.S. power but to erode its security and prosperity.

 

China's foreign ministry said on Tuesday cooperation between China and the United States was the only correct choice.

 

The spokesman for its defence ministry, Ren Guoqiang, said in a statement posted on the ministry website late on Wednesday that the U.S. strategy had "without regard for the facts, created sensational hype over the modernization of China's defences".

 

Ren also said the strategy had "called into question the intentions of China's military development plan" and that it ran counter to peace worldwide and the development of China's relations with the United States.

 

China's contribution to world peace was plain for all to see, he said.

 

"Attempts by any country or any document to distort the facts or cast aspersions will be in vain," Ren said.

 

China's armed forces, the world's largest, are in the midst of an ambitious modernisation programme, which includes investment in technology and new equipment such as stealth fighters and aircraft carriers, as well as cuts to troop numbers.

 

The tough U.S. national security strategy comes after Trump has sought to build strong relations with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

 

Trump has called upon Xi to ensure China does more to help the United States rein in North Korea's nuclear and missile programmes.

 

The U.S. administration cited China's growing military might and its efforts to build military bases on manmade islands in the contested South China Sea as evidence of Chinese attempts to alter the status quo.

 

China says its expansion of islets in the South China Sea is for peaceful purposes only and that, as it has irrefutable sovereignty there, no other country has the right to question its actions.

 

(Reporting by Christian Shepherd; Editing by Robert Birsel)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-12-21

[Juan B Tong]

As for me,  I absolutely love to watch CCTV 7, the Chinese military channel.

 

If that's the best they can do I'll sleep soundly.

[BuaBS]

18 hours ago, webfact said:

to challenge U.S. power but to erode its security and prosperity.

I sure it has nothing to do with launching the petro-yuan.

A MSM link : https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/24/petro-yuan-china-wants-to-dethrone-dollar-rmb-denominated-oil-contracts.html

( because we can't link to real news media).

[Morch]

 

Quote

China's contribution to world peace was plain for all to see, he said.

 

Guess China's neighbors fail to see it this way. Off to re-education camps....

[Johnnyngai]

No one should worry.   China has been down and out for such a long time.  Just going back to the status of 400 years ago should please all the average Chinese citizens.   

[retarius]

It depends upon whether you want a unipolar world with the US bullying everyone and having wars all over the globe.....or if you want a multipolar world. I would much prefer a multipolar world with China and Russia and the EU running things alongside the US. 

The American Empire is no longer a force for the good.

[Morch]

11 minutes ago, retarius said:

It depends upon whether you want a unipolar world with the US bullying everyone and having wars all over the globe.....or if you want a multipolar world. I would much prefer a multipolar world with China and Russia and the EU running things alongside the US. 

The American Empire is no longer a force for the good.

 

So instead of what you apparently consider one "force for evil", we'll have 3 or 4. How does that improve things, even if one was to accept the validity of your assertion or take it at face value?

[Thaidream]

The US has the largest defense budget in the World at almost $700 Billion paid  for off the backs of the long suffering middle class and poor.  In addition, Trump has allowed a large military buildup in the Middle East  mostly hidden from the US public.

 

While I do not trust the Chinese motives- they certainly have the right to modernize their military  and with the huge American military outlay- I can see why any country may want to .

 

As an American, if I had the power, I would drastically lower the US Defense budget and use these savings to provide much needed healthcare to Americans. Trump is not making America great again- he is making most Americans poorer again- except the already wealthy 1%.

 

 

[Kiwiken]

China spreads its wealth more amongst its people than many so called Capitalist Countries do

[Morch]

16 minutes ago, Kiwiken said:

China spreads its wealth more amongst its people than many so called Capitalist Countries do

 

Says poster?

 

Edited December 22, 2017 by Morch

[james1995]

China does need to be contained but I'd say the US government is the real threat.

[tonbridgebrit]

And once again, Washington and the media are demonising China.

Look, let's consider that rubbish that's going on on the South China Sea. Washington can simply use 2% of it's firepower and knock out the bulk of China's navy and airforce.  And yet, Washington still wants Americans and others to believe that China is a threat and danger to world peace. It's absurd. What's actually happening is this, Washington needs an excuse to give contracts worth billions of dollars to America's arms manufacturers. Demonising China and having people believe this fake and false picture justifies the huge profits for the defense contractors.

 

[Kiwiken]

6 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Says poster?

 

1.379 billion people in China. Some 500 million have benefited by China's economic growth. yes this still leaves many needing and disparities but do the maths. how many Countries benefit more than a 3rd of the population? Not my figures they are well documented

[MajarTheLion]

17 hours ago, retarius said:

The American Empire is no longer a force for the good.

We are all entitled to our opinions. I gladly concede America needs to start keeping its nose out of other countries' affairs- for better or worse.

 

But just out of curiosity, when in your opinion, did the American empire stop being a force for good? I have a specific date in mind, but don't want to jump to conclusions.

[punchjudy]

1 hour ago, MajarTheLion said:

We are all entitled to our opinions. I gladly concede America needs to start keeping its nose out of other countries' affairs- for better or worse.

 

But just out of curiosity, when in your opinion, did the American empire stop being a force for good? I have a specific date in mind, but don't want to jump to conclusions.

 

I don't think there was a fixed date as such......it was general slide down the slippery slope after the cold war.

[MajarTheLion]

9 minutes ago, punchjudy said:

 

I don't think there was a fixed date as such......it was general slide down the slippery slope after the cold war.

Fair enough. Thanks for the answer. And honestly, I somewhat agree. World War II was the last war we were in in which the purpose was to fight and destroy evil. Since then, we've moved towards policing, occupation and nation-building. It has been a complete disaster. This is why I support cutting our military at least 20%. I would end a large majority of our troops stationed overseas. I would change our policy on war to this: we will not harm you. We will not attack you. But if you attack us, we will destroy you quickly, mercilessly, then return our troops back home to relax with their families. To me, a war that does not have a specific goal, with a realistic plan to achieve it relatively quickly, with the goal being either complete destruction of the enemy or their unconditional surrender- I want no part of it.

 

[punchjudy]

19 hours ago, Morch said:

 

So instead of what you apparently consider one "force for evil", we'll have 3 or 4. How does that improve things, even if one was to accept the validity of your assertion or take it at face value?

 

you don't have 3 or 4 evil's..........the multipolar world holds things somewhat in check instead of one power running around unopposed

[Morch]

58 minutes ago, punchjudy said:

 

you don't have 3 or 4 evil's..........the multipolar world holds things somewhat in check instead of one power running around unopposed

 

More superpowers, more nuclear weapons, more global level conflicting interests, more chances of nuclear conflagration. The pro-multi-polar approach seems hazy when it comes to how the "holding things in check" goes and what it entails. 

[Morch]

6 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

And once again, Washington and the media are demonising China.

Look, let's consider that rubbish that's going on on the South China Sea. Washington can simply use 2% of it's firepower and knock out the bulk of China's navy and airforce.  And yet, Washington still wants Americans and others to believe that China is a threat and danger to world peace. It's absurd. What's actually happening is this, Washington needs an excuse to give contracts worth billions of dollars to America's arms manufacturers. Demonising China and having people believe this fake and false picture justifies the huge profits for the defense contractors.

 

 

Same old nonsense.

 

Why would anyone wish for a direct military confrontation between the US and China is beyond me. Why would anyone pretend this would be limited to "simply" using 2% of firepower and that it? Because that's what plays best for pushing a pro-Chinese, anti-US stance.

 

What's going on in the South China Sea is not "rubbish", but an ongoing maritime territorial bullying effort by the PRC, directed at neighbors. China's neighbors are well aware of its expansionist goals, and the threat it represents. They do not need the USA to figure it out.

[metisdead]

Off topic posts have been removed. 

[Morch]

6 hours ago, Kiwiken said:

1.379 billion people in China. Some 500 million have benefited by China's economic growth. yes this still leaves many needing and disparities but do the maths. how many Countries benefit more than a 3rd of the population? Not my figures they are well documented

 

Even if that was relevant to the topic, what you base your "argument" upon are rough figures posted out of context and without comparison to anything much.No indication of what "have benefited" represents. No clear reference to disparity figures (but calls to "do the math"). Posing bogus questions based on fuzzy data. Not seeing where you're going with this, or even what your point was to begin with - in relation to the OP.

[Kiwiken]

7 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Even if that was relevant to the topic, what you base your "argument" upon are rough figures posted out of context and without comparison to anything much.No indication of what "have benefited" represents. No clear reference to disparity figures (but calls to "do the math"). Posing bogus questions based on fuzzy data. Not seeing where you're going with this, or even what your point was to begin with - in relation to the OP.

The statement about modernisation of their military is the smoke screen the truth is just jealousy because China has succeeded. Remember Nixon opened the doors

[Morch]

59 minutes ago, Kiwiken said:

The statement about modernisation of their military is the smoke screen the truth is just jealousy because China has succeeded. Remember Nixon opened the doors

 

Says poster.

[tonbridgebrit]

21 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Same old nonsense.

 

Why would anyone wish for a direct military confrontation between the US and China is beyond me. Why would anyone pretend this would be limited to "simply" using 2% of firepower and that it? Because that's what plays best for pushing a pro-Chinese, anti-US stance.

 

What's going on in the South China Sea is not "rubbish", but an ongoing maritime territorial bullying effort by the PRC, directed at neighbors. China's neighbors are well aware of its expansionist goals, and the threat it represents. They do not need the USA to figure it out.

Morch, what on earth on you on about ?  Morch, China's navy and airforce is nothing compared to Washington's navy and airforce, do you agree ?  How many aircraft carriers has China got ? How many has Washington got ? To suggest that China's combat jets are toys compared to America's combat jets would be putting it accurately.

And yet, Washington still wants people to believe that China is a threat and danger to world peace. Washington is demonising China by creating this sensational hype over China's military. About the 2% thing. I'm saying that Washington can very easily knock out most of China's navy and airforce. Washington only needs to use 2% of it's firepower (it's missiles) to do mass damage to China's military, no need for more than 2%.


And nobody is pushing for a confrontation between China and America. China simply wants to carry on stocking up the shelves of Walmart with goods, and Washington hasn't got a problem with importing the cheap Chinese stuff. Washington just wants to make it look like that China is a danger and threat to world peace. Why ?  So that Washington can give billions of dollars of profits to America's defence contractors.

And why are you claiming that China is bullying it's neighbours in the South China Sea ? Are Vietnam being bullied ? No. Vietnam beat China in a war back in the 1980s. How can Vietnam be bullied by China when they beat China in a war ?  And the Philipinnes. One of the ASEAN nations that has got a democratically elected government. Duterte is friends with Beijing, he's not being forced to jump in with Beijing. Can you see that ?

Edited December 24, 2017 by tonbridgebrit

[mrwebb8825]

On 12/23/2017 at 3:36 AM, Kiwiken said:

1.379 billion people in China. Some 500 million have benefited by China's economic growth. yes this still leaves many needing and disparities but do the maths. how many Countries benefit more than a 3rd of the population? Not my figures they are well documented

Are they?

"BEIJING -- The city government in Beijing has decided the teeming metropolis has too many people and too many dilapidated homes, so it has begun tearing them down. And the people who lived in them are on their own."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/thousands-of-migrant-workers-forced-from-beijing-homes/

[mrwebb8825]

On 12/21/2017 at 3:04 PM, webfact said:

China's foreign ministry said on Tuesday cooperation between China and the United States was the only correct choice.

And does that cooperation include cutting off NK? Maybe it should include actually enforcing the UN sanctions that it publicly supports and privately ignores.

[Morch]

2 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Morch, what on earth on you on about ?  Morch, China's navy and airforce is nothing compared to Washington's navy and airforce, do you agree ?  How many aircraft carriers has China got ? How many has Washington got ? To suggest that China's combat jets are toys compared to America's combat jets would be putting it accurately.

And yet, Washington still wants people to believe that China is a threat and danger to world peace. Washington is demonising China by creating this sensational hype over China's military. About the 2% thing. I'm saying that Washington can very easily knock out most of China's navy and airforce. Washington only needs to use 2% of it's firepower (it's missiles) to do mass damage to China's military, no need for more than 2%.


And nobody is pushing for a confrontation between China and America. China simply wants to carry on stocking up the shelves of Walmart with goods, and Washington hasn't got a problem with importing the cheap Chinese stuff. Washington just wants to make it look like that China is a danger and threat to world peace. Why ?  So that Washington can give billions of dollars of profits to America's defence contractors.

And why are you claiming that China is bullying it's neighbours in the South China Sea ? Are Vietnam being bullied ? No. Vietnam beat China in a war back in the 1980s. How can Vietnam be bullied by China when they beat China in a war ?  And the Philipinnes. One of the ASEAN nations that has got a democratically elected government. Duterte is friends with Beijing, he's not being forced to jump in with Beijing. Can you see that ?

 

I'd ask you to stop trolling, but guess you can't.

 

The USA's overall military might is more formidable than the PRC's. However, the USA does not concentrate all of its military might in a single arena, hence the simplistic presentation your offer is bogus. That you, and the PRC, may have an interest as alternating between painting the PRC as a force to be reckoned with and being a paper tiger is little to do with accuracy or honesty.

 

The military ratio power between countries does not imply the weaker one is not a danger to world peace or that it cannot wreck havoc. Your nonsensical reference to a supposed 2% (with, of course, nothing much to actually support that) does not change facts. You may also pretend to forget that the PRC is a military nuclear capable country, and it again won't change facts. Not that your posts indicate a whole lot by way of knowledge of things military, but the bit about "easily knocking out" is simply out of touch with reality. If you have trouble figuring out, may refer to past USA military engagements vs. weaker foes than the PRC. Knocking out is not actually as easy as you try to paint it.

 

As for "nobody is pushing for a confrontation", a quick review of your posts will reveal that you do push a bring-it-on, put-up-or-shut-up, and using the lack of a direct military confrontation as "proof" for whatever propaganda nonsense you push at a given time.

 

Some of the PRC's actions are a danger and a threat to world peace. That you, and the  PRC, try to minimize, ignore or deflect these claims does not change facts. The PRC's belligerence with regard to neighboring countries is another fact, whether you like to pretend otherwise or not. The fact stands that the PRC is not a good neighbor, and that it does have an expansionist agenda. That you wish to spin things otherwise, pushing the PRC's propaganda nonsense is not going to change facts as well.

[Johnnyngai]

3 hours ago, Morch said:

 

I'd ask you to stop trolling, but guess you can't.

 

The USA's overall military might is more formidable than the PRC's. However, the USA does not concentrate all of its military might in a single arena, hence the simplistic presentation your offer is bogus. That you, and the PRC, may have an interest as alternating between painting the PRC as a force to be reckoned with and being a paper tiger is little to do with accuracy or honesty.

 

The military ratio power between countries does not imply the weaker one is not a danger to world peace or that it cannot wreck havoc. Your nonsensical reference to a supposed 2% (with, of course, nothing much to actually support that) does not change facts. You may also pretend to forget that the PRC is a military nuclear capable country, and it again won't change facts. Not that your posts indicate a whole lot by way of knowledge of things military, but the bit about "easily knocking out" is simply out of touch with reality. If you have trouble figuring out, may refer to past USA military engagements vs. weaker foes than the PRC. Knocking out is not actually as easy as you try to paint it.

 

As for "nobody is pushing for a confrontation", a quick review of your posts will reveal that you do push a bring-it-on, put-up-or-shut-up, and using the lack of a direct military confrontation as "proof" for whatever propaganda nonsense you push at a given time.

 

Some of the PRC's actions are a danger and a threat to world peace. That you, and the  PRC, try to minimize, ignore or deflect these claims does not change facts. The PRC's belligerence with regard to neighboring countries is another fact, whether you like to pretend otherwise or not. The fact stands that the PRC is not a good neighbor, and that it does have an expansionist agenda. That you wish to spin things otherwise, pushing the PRC's propaganda nonsense is not going to change facts as well.

"  The fact stands that the PRC is not a good neighbor, and that it does have an expansionist agenda.  " 

 

The country was down and out for almost 200 years.   China just wanted to regain the status of 400 years ago. 

It is just a nationalism thing.         Every old fart country has the same desires.                               

[tonbridgebrit]

3 hours ago, Morch said:

 

I'd ask you to stop trolling, but guess you can't.

 

Morch, above is a photo of Duterte visiting Beijing. Duterte is in the Great Hall or whatever it's called. Notice there is a big painting of the Great Wall of China in the background.

Duterte has been democratically elected, and he is taking the Philipinnes towards China. Duterte is accepting whatever trade deals, investments, loans, etc, from Beijing. He's not being forced to do it, he's not actually being bullied.

And looking at a map of the South China Sea, well, yes, the Philipinnes is very much involved in the South China Sea dispute. Morch, do you really reckon that the Philipinnes is being bullied by China ? I'd say that it is more to do with people like you, being angry about Duterte wanting to be allied to Beijing.

[Morch]

39 minutes ago, Johnnyngai said:

"  The fact stands that the PRC is not a good neighbor, and that it does have an expansionist agenda.  " 

 

The country was down and out for almost 200 years.   China just wanted to regain the status of 400 years ago. 

It is just a nationalism thing.         Every old fart country has the same desires.                               

 

Oh...it's "just a nationalism thing". Guess that makes it alright then. Nothing to see here.