adopt a terrorist for prayer

[CardSharp]

@CardSharp

After reading this passage and the portions which follow, which are all deeply disquieting, I believe that this quotation from a classical author will speak to you:

"...for in them is an arrogance which no submission or good behaviour can escape....A rich enemy excited their cupidity; a poor one, their lust for power. East and West alike have failed to satisfy them. They are the only people on earth to whose covetousness both riches and poverty are equally tempting. To robbery, butchery and rapine, they give the lying name of "government"; they create a desolation and call it peace."

You will be very amused to learn who said this, about whom, and the name of the author reporting this speech. A hint: none of the three is Chinese, and this is from a great classic of early times.

The lesson there is that ever greater conquest did not save Rome from itself.

(I can alway count on you to expand my horizons)

 

[marshall]

You should call yourself an idiot!

How did we achieve peace in Tibet, Xinjiang? By education?

If the whole family turn against us and become terrorists, we kill the whole family. As simple as that. They want to put terror on us, we will give them more terror in return.

If they want peace, we will be gladly to co-exist with them. If they do not want that, we will be sure to comply

If you're talking terrorists, which is the most extreme of the extreme then yes, but if you're talking agitators, dissidents or various troublemakers, China has always had a policy of reform of some kind which you see reflected in its reform and reintegration to society of prisoners. It is only in the worst cases where you have intransigence, like you have with terrorists that policies of execution the way you describe exists. Your contention that it is done any other way is simply not true.

It is not only for this CCP ruling period, historically, look at the different dynasties, does it have any difference at all???

When CCP army marched through Gansu, Qinghai, Ningxia and then into Xinjiang, how did they get rid of those Hui hooligans from KMT and those Uighur separatists?

Earlier you said the Mongolians were wiped out in a genocide in northern XinJiang in the 17th+18th centuries when they rebelled against the Han where they were then replaced by Uyghurs who reoccupied those now empty lands. I said this was a vast exaggeration and quoted the existence of the Uyghur Empire occupying all of XinJiang including northern XinJiang and with the cooperation of the Mongolians, the Mongolian steppes as well. You said this was 1000 year old history and it didn't apply. That thread was closed, but here's my belated reply to this. The point was, Uyghurs have been in northern XinJiang since ancient times, not just since the 17th+18th centuries. This was absolute proof that you were twisting history to fit your argument. There was never a Mongolian "genocide" there and the Uyghurs were never displaced from northern XinJiang during this entire time because they were/are close cousins ethnically and linguistically to their Altaic cousins the Mongolians, even during the Yuan Dynasty. In other words, you're doing it again, you're interpreting history to fit your arguments and making up history while doing it by taking actual historical events and then either twisting or exaggerating what happened.

It is idiots like you who think we can pray to get peace. There are people who can never be educated to co-exist with you. If there is such possibility, there should have been peace long time ago between the Palestinians and the Israeli.

Of course you may say it is brutal and I do agree it is brutal. However, it indeed gives us peace for a long time in Xinjiang. During the end of 80s, after loosing control and giving them more freedom, those uighur separatists see hope, then put bombs in Beijing, attacked our military post, government offices and killed us. Two years ago, it has reached to such a horror scene that we won't forget that in our life time.

This has nothing to do with China's policy being more brutal in the past or not. It's always been the same policy, which is to increase prosperity of the disaffected groups, giving them autonomy, while instilling modern ideas of conduct. The only reason there has been terrorism from the 1980s is because of the worldwide growth of radical Islamic ideas which is mostly a result of Wahabism, which was a largely foreign concept to China until the 1980s and probable covert support from the Americans from the 1990s onward.

 

[Joe Shearer]

The lesson there is that ever greater conquest did not save Rome from itself.

(I can alway count on you to expand my horizons)

I am STUNNED! How did you do that? Did you get the author and the two belligerents in question? If you did, that's it; I'm burning joss-sticks to you every morning (evening, if you prefer )

 

[ephone]

I am talking about those who attacked our military post, killed our police officers, detonated bombs in our cities, butchered our citizens and etc. Well, I suppose you know what name you should call them.

About "Uyghurs have been in northern XinJiang since ancient times, not just since the 17th+18th centuries", nobody including I have said Uyghurs have never been in North XinJiang. I said that North XinJiang was the power base for the mogolian tribes who rebelled against Qing Dynasty. Because Mongolian tribes was so powerful in North Xinjiang, there are much fewer Uyghurs and much less influence for them to have. It is after those mongolians being wiped out by Qing's generals by emperor's order, then Uyghurs was able to move north to become the majority in the whole XinJiang: North and South. They may be there around 1300 years ago but that is not the point.

About "Mongolian "genocide" ", why don't you tell me besides 准格尔盆地，where are those mogolian 准格尔 tribes? What was that tribe's destiny???

" worldwide growth of radical Islamic ideas " is one reason for sure for increase of terrorist activities in Xinjiang. However, that is not the only or main reason. Corresponding with our open and reform, CCP has to take the pressure from foreign powers regarding human rights. So throughout the countries, CCP has loosed control and Hu Yaobang and Zhao Ziyang made more compromise 怀柔政策 there to exchange for unity. Well, the policy is not good at all.

The only thing for those terrorists to understand is iron fist from us and nothing else.

If you're talking terrorists, which is the most extreme of the extreme then yes, but if you're talking agitators, dissidents or various troublemakers, China has always had a policy of reform of some kind which you see reflected in its reform and reintegration to society of prisoners. It is only in the worst cases where you have intransigence, like you have with terrorists that policies of execution the way you describe exists. Your contention that it is done any other way is simply not true.

Earlier you said the Mongolians were wiped out in a genocide in northern XinJiang in the 17th+18th centuries when they rebelled against the Han where they were then replaced by Uyghurs who reoccupied those now empty lands. I said this was a vast exaggeration and quoted the existence of the Uyghur Empire occupying all of XinJiang including northern XinJiang and with the cooperation of the Mongolians, the Mongolian steppes as well. You said this was 1000 year old history and it didn't apply. That thread was closed, but here's my belated reply to this. The point was, Uyghurs have been in northern XinJiang since ancient times, not just since the 17th+18th centuries. This was absolute proof that you were twisting history to fit your argument. There was never a Mongolian "genocide" there and the Uyghurs were never displaced from northern XinJiang during this entire time because they were/are close cousins ethnically and linguistically to their Altaic cousins the Mongolians, even during the Yuan Dynasty. In other words, you're doing it again, you're interpreting history to fit your arguments and making up history while doing it by taking actual historical events and then either twisting or exaggerating what happened.

This has nothing to do with China's policy being more brutal in the past or not. It's always been the same policy, which is to increase prosperity of the disaffected groups, giving them autonomy, while instilling modern ideas of conduct. The only reason there has been terrorism from the 1980s is because of the worldwide growth of radical Islamic ideas which is mostly a result of Wahabism, which was a largely foreign concept to China until the 1980s and probable covert support from the Americans from the 1990s onward.

 

[marshall]

I am talking about those who attacked our military post, killed our police officers, detonated bombs in our cities, butchered our citizens and etc. Well, I suppose you know what name you should call them.

The language that you use when speaking about terrorists is about retaliation and killing 10 of them for each Chinese. That isn't about killing just terrorists, that's killing their families as well. Whether you want to admit it or not, this is a giant escalation from killing blatant terrorists to becoming a terrorist, like the Americans.

About "Uyghurs have been in northern XinJiang since ancient times, not just since the 17th+18th centuries", nobody including I have said Uyghurs have never been in North XinJiang. I said that North XinJiang was the power base for the mogolian tribes who rebelled against Qing Dynasty. Because Mongolian tribes was so powerful in North Xinjiang, there are much fewer Uyghurs and much less influence for them to have. It is after those mongolians being wiped out by Qing's generals by emperor's order, then Uyghurs was able to move north to become the majority in the whole XinJiang: North and South. They may be there around 1300 years ago but that is not the point.

Again, they were not "wiped out" in some non-existent exaggerated genocide that you keep making up. The leading tribes of that region were enacted marshall justice by the victorious Qing who as you would put it killed 10 on the losing side for each of them who were killed during the wars. This is akin to terrorism but it is NOT a genocide. Otherwise, there would be almost no Mongolians living in northern XinJiang today but they form a very large proportion of the population which shows what a poor job the Qing did.

About "Mongolian "genocide" ", why don't you tell me besides 准格尔盆地，where are those mogolian 准格尔 tribes? What was that tribe's destiny???

You said all the Mongolians were killed in northern XinJiang and that was the reason why there are many Uyghurs there today because they took all of the empty land as a result. You didn't refer to the specific Mongolian tribes who lost to the Qing, you were speaking in context to all Mongolians in north XinJiang, why else would you say the land was emptied for Uyghurs to take over? Go read your own message.

" worldwide growth of radical Islamic ideas " is one reason for sure for increase of terrorist activities in Xinjiang. However, that is not the only or main reason. Corresponding with our open and reform, CCP has to take the pressure from foreign powers regarding human rights. So throughout the countries, CCP has loosed control and Hu Yaobang and Zhao Ziyang made more compromise 怀柔政策 there to exchange for unity. Well, the policy is not good at all.

The only thing for those terrorists to understand is iron fist from us and nothing else.

This is falling into the hands of the hostile foreign powers who want China to do exactly what you advocate. I agree that some of this has to do with walking on eggshells due to expected Anglo-Saxon world order, aka. "Western" eyes ready to pounce. However, I think a more pressing concern is the overt foreign support of hostile internal forces such as Uyghur separatists which is a much greater threat. They will use any violence against them as justification to enhance their ranks and martyrdom. China has realized its present support through its GOOD DEEDS not through FORCE, contrary to what you or hostile foreign forces might want to be true.

 

[ephone]

First, do not always twist my words. I do not advocate killing innocent people and that has never been our policies. I only advocate brutality against terrorists. About what I said "If they hurt one of us, we will make sure we kill 10 or more of them.", "10 or more" does not refer to exact quantity and does not refer to their family if they are not terrorists. It only means that if terrorists hurt us, we will make sure kill more of them if they do have many. Do not take it quantitatively. I suppose you do not quantitatively interpret "飞流直下三千尺,疑是银河落九天“ either.

Second, it is only about your lack of knowledge. Throughout the posts, I have talked about those mogolian tribes in Xinjiang, not anywhere else. There are many tribes that have marriage with Qing emperors as well as generals, they are Qing's big allies throughout its rule. There is no need for Qing to raise it knife. Qing only raised its knife since that tribe has rebelled so many times and caused so many damages and threats to Qing Empire. From KangXi, YongZheng up to QiangLong, warfare was continuous involved there. So finally QianLong made the final decision. The following must be written by an anti-China and anti-Qing mongolian and even he/she refer to the history of that time:

准噶尔王朝

and another one:
http://hi.baidu.com/zeng1010/blog/item/e335ffc4fc7f1baa8226ac0e.html/cmtid/b97c212afd92db365243c16d

Well, there are tons of such related to the history of that time.

"GOOD DEEDS not through FORCE", what a joke. Such soft compromise has got so many of us killed. I do not see those terrorists have softened any bit less, but 甚嚣尘上。

Such policy is useful towards those minorities who want to co-exist with you peacefully. However, it is useless for those whose only goal is to exterminate you forever. You are either giving it up and leave, or fighting back to exterminate them.


North XinJiang was controlled by ZhunGeEr mongolian Tribe and nobody else then. You have no history knowledge about those period and attack me purely from your imagination.

The language that you use when speaking about terrorists is about retaliation and killing 10 of them for each Chinese. That isn't about killing just terrorists, that's killing their families as well. Whether you want to admit it or not, this is a giant escalation from killing blatant terrorists to becoming a terrorist, like the Americans.


Again, they were not "wiped out" in some non-existent exaggerated genocide that you keep making up. The leading tribes of that region were enacted marshall justice by the victorious Qing who as you would put it killed 10 on the losing side for each of them who were killed during the wars. This is akin to terrorism but it is NOT a genocide. Otherwise, there would be almost no Mongolians living in northern XinJiang today but they form a very large proportion of the population which shows what a poor job the Qing did.


You said all the Mongolians were killed in northern XinJiang and that was the reason why there are many Uyghurs there today because they took all of the empty land as a result. You didn't refer to the specific Mongolian tribes who lost to the Qing, you were speaking in context to all Mongolians in north XinJiang, why else would you say the land was emptied for Uyghurs to take over? Go read your own message.


This is falling into the hands of the hostile foreign powers who want China to do exactly what you advocate. I agree that some of this has to do with walking on eggshells due to expected Anglo-Saxon world order, aka. "Western" eyes ready to pounce. However, I think a more pressing concern is the overt foreign support of hostile internal forces such as Uyghur separatists which is a much greater threat. They will use any violence against them as justification to enhance their ranks and martyrdom. China has realized its present support through its GOOD DEEDS not through FORCE, contrary to what you or hostile foreign forces might want to be true.

 

[CardSharp]

I am STUNNED! How did you do that? Did you get the author and the two belligerents in question? If you did, that's it; I'm burning joss-sticks to you every morning (evening, if you prefer )

lol thanks I've not heard of Tacitus’ Agricola, until you came up with that lovely quote. Google and a little thinking was required to get your meaning.

 

[Joe Shearer]

lol thanks I've not heard of Tacitus’ Agricola, until you came up with that lovely quote. Google and a little thinking was required to get your meaning.

OK, buddy-boy, joss sticks it is.

I was re-reading my Tacitus on Agricola and Germania when this discussion on the forum was going on. This is intimidating; I surrender.

Any particular fragrance?

 

[CardSharp]

OK, buddy-boy, joss sticks it is.

I was re-reading my Tacitus on Agricola and Germania when this discussion on the forum was going on. This is intimidating; I surrender.

Any particular fragrance?

Sandalwood is always a classic.

 

[marshall]

First, do not always twist my words. I do not advocate killing innocent people and that has never been our policies. I only advocate brutality against terrorists. About what I said "If they hurt one of us, we will make sure we kill 10 or more of them.", "10 or more" does not refer to exact quantity and does not refer to their family if they are not terrorists. It only means that if

Terrorists are NOT INNOCENT people get it? So, suggesting that China should kill 1 terrorist instead of all 10, because it depended on how much they terrorize China, is ridiculous because it would mean the government was purposely letting 9 terrorists get away with murder. That's why what you say is absolute nonsense because it's OBVIOUS the 9 "terrorists" would be innocent civilians since the government isn't treating them the same way. That means killing 10 so-called "terrorists" instead of just 1 actual terrorist would be the same thing as killing 1 terrorist+9 civilians. This is the same logic that Israel uses on Palestinians and why the entire world unanimously condemns their methods, which in practice is killing civilians as you are advocating even though you sadly do not understand it.

Second, it is only about your lack of knowledge. Throughout the posts, I have talked about those mogolian tribes in Xinjiang, not anywhere else. There are many tribes that have marriage with Qing emperors as well as generals, they are Qing's big allies throughout its rule. There is no need for Qing to raise it knife. Qing only raised its knife since that tribe has rebelled so many times and caused so many

Like I said, it's all in your own past messages. You referred to northern XinJiang being emptied obviously alluding to all the Mongolians there being killed. You didn't say so and so tribes were targeted until MUCH later, you said the land was emptied, as in all killed. You then went on to say this now emptied land was ripe for Uyghurs to occupy since it was all empty land they could just take. Changing the context of your story progressively as messages are written simply confirms your argumentative mindset isn't interested in facts but simply to reaffirm your own altered version of history.

"GOOD DEEDS not through FORCE", what a joke. Such soft compromise has got so many of us killed. I do not see those terrorists have softened any bit less, but 甚嚣尘上。

Such policy is useful towards those minorities who want to co-exist with you peacefully. However, it is useless for those whose only goal is to exterminate you forever. You are either giving it up and leave, or fighting back to exterminate them.

No minorities have ever wanted to "exterminate" the Han. It has always been about killing off ideas and organizations harmful to their own interest. This is not something you comprehend, that's why you use generalizations to justify terrorizing entire minorities instead of targeting the actual troublemakers.

North XinJiang was controlled by ZhunGeEr mongolian Tribe and nobody else then. You have no history knowledge about those period and attack me purely from your imagination.

You said Mongolians were all wiped out even though large numbers of Mongolians are still around in these areas. You said north XinJiang have Uyghurs today because it was emptied of Mongolians because the Qing supposedly killed them all and the empty land was free to take by the Uyghurs which I then disproved by quoting the existence of the Uyghur Empire in northern XinJiang before this time. You then said this didn't matter because it was 1000 years ago but then explain their living there today not because they were ALREADY there in large numbers 1000 years ago but due to some historically unsupported theory that the land was free for them to take, yet the Qing/Han didn't occupy these supposed empty land themselves which they controlled? Poor attempt at BS by exaggerating punitive Qing revenge into a non-existent genocide. I think you are simply projecting what you would personally like to see happen to Uyghurs and maybe Mongolians considering how eager you are to suppress and kill China's minorities.

 

[ephone]

Are you nuts? What the heck are you talking about? If you cannot read what I have written, go back to school to learn that again.

What a waste of time to deal with this idiot.

Terrorists are NOT INNOCENT people get it? So, suggesting that China should kill 1 terrorist instead of all 10, because it depended on how much they terrorize China, is ridiculous because it would mean the government was purposely letting 9 terrorists get away with murder. That's why what you say is absolute nonsense because it's OBVIOUS the 9 "terrorists" would be innocent civilians since the government isn't treating them the same way. That means killing 10 so-called "terrorists" instead of just 1 actual terrorist would be the same thing as killing 1 terrorist+9 civilians. This is the same logic that Israel uses on Palestinians and why the entire world unanimously condemns their methods, which in practice is killing civilians as you are advocating even though you sadly do not understand it.


Like I said, it's all in your own past messages. You referred to northern XinJiang being emptied obviously alluding to all the Mongolians there being killed. You didn't say so and so tribes were targeted until MUCH later, you said the land was emptied, as in all killed. You then went on to say this now emptied land was ripe for Uyghurs to occupy since it was all empty land they could just take. Changing the context of your story progressively as messages are written simply confirms your argumentative mindset isn't interested in facts but simply to reaffirm your own altered version of history.


No minorities have ever wanted to "exterminate" the Han. It has always been about killing off ideas and organizations harmful to their own interest. This is not something you comprehend, that's why you use generalizations to justify terrorizing entire minorities instead of targeting the actual troublemakers.


You said Mongolians were all wiped out even though large numbers of Mongolians are still around in these areas. You said north XinJiang have Uyghurs today because it was emptied of Mongolians because the Qing supposedly killed them all and the empty land was free to take by the Uyghurs which I then disproved by quoting the existence of the Uyghur Empire in northern XinJiang before this time. You then said this didn't matter because it was 1000 years ago but then explain their living there today not because they were ALREADY there in large numbers 1000 years ago but due to some historically unsupported theory that the land was free for them to take, yet the Qing/Han didn't occupy these supposed empty land themselves which they controlled? Poor attempt at BS by exaggerating punitive Qing revenge into a non-existent genocide. I think you are simply projecting what you would personally like to see happen to Uyghurs and maybe Mongolians considering how eager you are to suppress and kill China's minorities.