200 replies to this topic

[Kulong]

P.S. The US never had any intentions to invade China, encircle yes, but not invade. MacArthur wanted to, but he does not represent US government foreign policy. He got sacked for trying to play as a politician against Truman as a result.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Judging from U.S. actions in the past hundred years or so, U.S. has no interest in occupying or even conquering foreign countries as that costs money. What U.S. is interested in is to "install" a foreign government that obeys the U.S. so that U.S. gets what they want and they "appear" to be the "bad guys".

When U.S. aided KMT, they were hoping that KMT would turn into a U.S. puppet government like South Korea, Japan and numerous other governemtns around the world.

[Koolasuchus]

Judging from U.S. actions in the past hundred years or so, U.S. has no interest in occupying or even conquering foreign countries as that costs money.  What U.S. is interested in is to "install" a foreign government that obeys the U.S. so that U.S. gets what they want and they "appear" to be the "bad guys".

When U.S. aided KMT, they were hoping that KMT would turn into a U.S. puppet government like South Korea, Japan and numerous other governemtns around the world.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually the case for aiding KMT is something different. Soviets gave military aid KMT to turn them away from addiction of Nazi German arms. Then the United States gave KMT military aid to turn them away from addiction of Soviet arms.

But really, you got to remember tha FDR is an idealist, he really believe that foreigners can make China a better place for the Chinese. The hope for a united China holding democratic elections to elect their government USA style was one of the reasons for FDR to stop Jiang from going after the CCP during the WW2.

[Kulong]

Actually the case for aiding KMT is something different.  Soviets gave military aid KMT to turn them away from addiction of Nazi German arms.  Then the United States gave KMT military aid to turn them away from addiction of Soviet arms. 

I know that... I was only talking about the last part when U.S. was trying to turn KMT into it's lapdog since we weren't talking about Germany or the former Soviet Union...

But really, you got to remember tha FDR is an idealist, he really believe that foreigners can make China a better place for the Chinese.  The hope for a united China holding democratic elections to elect their government USA style was one of the reasons for FDR to stop Jiang from going after the CCP during the WW2.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Who cares what FDR thinks. He isn't Chinese, he is an American attempting to force American ideals and values on to rest of the world.

[TMPikachu]

I know that... I was only talking about the last part when U.S. was trying to turn KMT into it's lapdog since we weren't talking about Germany or the former Soviet Union... 
Who cares what FDR thinks.  He isn't Chinese, he is an American attempting to force American ideals and values on to rest of the world.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Do you think Truman would've done a worse job than Mao?

[Kulong]

Do you think Truman would've done a worse job than Mao?

I don't think Truman was better or worse than Mao. But at least Mao was Chinese and any mistakes he made was a Chinese mistake and not an foreign one made on the expense of the Chinese people. But with that said, it doesn't mean Mao's mistakes should be overlooked.

He was a Chinese who forced his own brand of communist ideals and values upon China.
I personally think China would've been much better off as a 'lapdog' to the US than what happened to it with Mao. For one thing, Americans wouldn't have tried to exterminate Chinese culture the way Mao did. Americans wouldn't have murdered landowners.  And, nlike Korea or Japan, China is huge, really huge, really really huge. S. Korea has to rely on the US against NK, Japan lost a war, China would've been a different situation. The 'dog' would be bigger than the 'master'.

U.S. is not stupid. U.S. would only "give" enough to China so it would be remain a U.S. lapdog but never surpass the U.S.

Compare N and S Korea. The North is happily run by Koreans alone, they've kept their independence from American influence. The South has whored themself to the west, allowing America to trample them under the heel of tyranny. Which country would you rather live in.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

North and South Koreas are EXTREMEs of such examples. But compare mainland China to Taiwan, now that's MUCH closer. To answer your question, though I was born in Taiwan and I love the island, I'd much rather live in mainland China solely because PRC is not a U.S. lapdog.

[TMPikachu]

At least Mao was Chinese...

I can't agree with that attitude. Mao, Chinese or not, still lead the murdering of landowners and attempted destruction of Chinese culture. I can't call Mao a 'real' Chinese, he turned his back on the culture of his birth.
But at least he's Chinese. Our very own, home grown dictator. At least he's one of us.

Instead of a hypothetical US puppet government ( I think you're really overrating American power), China has an oligarchy. Yes, they're Chinese, they run the country, but is it really for the better of the Chinese people?

Arrogance has always been the weakness of China.




I do realise the China of today is hardly what it was in Mao's time, it's improving, yeah. But I feel like it could have been faster, much faster, y'know?

[Daniel]

When U.S. aided KMT, they were hoping that KMT would turn into a U.S. puppet government like South Korea, Japan and numerous other governemtns around the world.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

South Korea and Japan are not U.S. puppets. The post-occupation Japanese government has been chosen by Japanese voters from the beginning, the South Korean government was a dictatorship at first but is now accountable to its own national electorate also. To make South Korea or Japan puppets, the Korean or Japanese leaders would have to be dependent on the U.S., not their own citizens, to remain in power. Both South Korea and Japan have pursued policies against U.S. interests when it suited them. Japan has proven a major economic competitor for the U.S. in steel, automotive, electronic, and other industries despite U.S. objections, and closes its market to U.S. food exports. In South Korea, America's policy to deny nuclear weapons to North Korea has been hampered by the South Korean government's unwillingness to regard North Korea as a major threat, and the South Korean government appeals to anti-U.S. feelings among its younger generation. This is not how puppets behave.

Japan and South Korea have long been allies, because they shared a common enemy in the Soviet Union. Now that the Soviet Union is gone, they are drifting further apart (helped, unfortunately, by the Bush government's diplomatic incompetence).

It could be that Roosevelt or Truman meant to make KMT a puppet government; we can't know for sure since KMT lost the war. But Jiang would have been a poor candidate for a puppet. He had been a very difficult and uncooperative ally from the beginning. For example, Jiang's brutal secret police chief Tai Li threatened to kill any OSS agents spying on the Japanese in China unless they were placed under his control.

[Kulong]

At least Mao was Chinese...

I can't agree with that attitude. Mao, Chinese or not, still lead the murdering of landowners and attempted destruction of Chinese culture. I can't call Mao a 'real' Chinese, he turned his back on the culture of his birth.
But at least he's Chinese. Our very own, home grown dictator. At least he's one of us.

Instead of a hypothetical US puppet government ( I think you're really overrating American power),  China has an oligarchy. Yes, they're Chinese, they run the country, but is it really for the better of the Chinese people?

Arrogance has always been the weakness of China.
I do realise the China of today is hardly what it was in Mao's time, it's improving, yeah. But I feel like it could have been faster, much faster, y'know?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"Could've", fact is, no one can predict the future and talking about hypothetical scenarioes is simply pointless.

Regarding Mao being Chinese, you either purposely ignored my statement regarding his mistakes should not be overlooked or you don't read carefully enough.

China should NEVER sell out to the U.S. Do you want another Yuan or Qing dynasty? Call it what you will.

South Korea and Japan are not U.S. puppets. The post-occupation Japanese government has been chosen by Japanese voters from the beginning, the South Korean government was a dictatorship at first but is now accountable to its own national electorate also. To make South Korea or Japan puppets, the Korean or Japanese leaders would have to be dependent on the U.S., not their own citizens, to remain in power. Both South Korea and Japan have pursued policies against U.S. interests when it suited them. Japan has proven a major economic competitor for the U.S. in steel, automotive, electronic, and other industries despite U.S. objections, and closes its market to U.S. food exports. In South Korea, America's policy to deny nuclear weapons to North Korea has been hampered by the South Korean government's unwillingness to regard North Korea as a major threat, and the South Korean government appeals to anti-U.S. feelings among its younger generation. This is not how puppets behave.

Japan and South Korea have long been allies, because they shared a common enemy in the Soviet Union. Now that the Soviet Union is gone, they are drifting further apart (helped, unfortunately, by the Bush government's diplomatic incompetence).

It could be that Roosevelt or Truman meant to make KMT a puppet government; we can't know for sure since KMT lost the war. But Jiang would have been a poor candidate for a puppet. He had been a very difficult and uncooperative ally from the beginning. For example, Jiang's brutal secret police chief Tai Li threatened to kill any OSS agents spying on the Japanese in China unless they were placed under his control.

Do you realize how much control U.S. has over South Korean and Japanese governments? If either one dares to displease the U.S., U.S. government can easily destroy their economy.

It's true that Jiang would've made a horrible puppet, which is why after the KMT retreated to Taiwan, U.S. attmpted to overthrow him but failed miserably.

[TMPikachu]

I didn't ignore your statement. I disagree with it. I don't think Mao being Chinese makes him any less a stain on Chinese history, if not more. You're saying "Yes, he slaughtered his countrymen and tried to destroy Chinese culture, at least he wasn't American".

Yuan or Qing? That would be if the US invaded, planted an American president to China, and banned Chinese from holding public office. I think you really overrate the power of the US.

Yes, Yuan and Qing set up Oligarchy's where successors were picked by those in power. So did Mao.

But Yuan and Qing also accepted Chinese culture, Mao wanted to destroy it. How ironic that foreigners appreciated Chinese culture more than a 'native'.

That mindset is like... a Republican voting for bush, solely on the basis of party loyalty.



Puppets can do pretty well too. Japan a decade ago was seen as a huge 'danger'. Their economy was overtaking the US. Unless the bubble popped due to secret CIA ninjas, the US didn't do much to stop them.


I'm not saying China is in an aweful state now, they're recovering rather quickly from Mao, I'm saying things could have been better. Yes, it is only a hypothetical present that I'm thinking of, but I really would gamble on a Nationalist, US allied Chinese government not having killed landowners and destroy the culture.


You're right, you should be proud of your people, support your people. Let not China become the dog of another nation
I am also right, we should do the best for our people. Let not the Chinese suffer, at the hands of any tyrant.

I do not want to seed any bad feelings between us. I have heard your case, I am showing you mine. I can live with you believing what you wish, as you can with me believing what I do. With something as fine as opinion being our differences, arguement will not create any advancement, only the souring of feelings. When it comes down to it, arguing over 'what if' on something that none of us can change (unless you've got a time machine and aren't telling us ) is pretty silly.

Kulong, you are a fine poster, it is always of interest to read what you have to say. I will withdraw from this conversation. Feel free to have the last word. I mean not to insult you (because you back up your beliefs with logic, you are not letting emotions dictate) with what I have said. We just disagree.

[Koolasuchus]

TMPikachu, you kept saying how Mao "slaughtered" his country men and "destoryed" China's culture in all the different, it seems that you were so inset of your beliefs that nothing anyone said on an online forum can change your opinion.

Death result from policy mistakes can be attributed to one person, but when looking historically should be weighted against any positive results of his policy. The great fame was really bad for only a few years, and at end Mao realized his mistakes and stopped those policies that caused the fame. The farms in China was never collectivelized to the extent of that of USSR. The industrial CEOs and landlords were around and tolerated by the CCP until the Cultural Revoltuion. During the Cultural Revoltuion most of the damages were done by the crazed Red Guards, young plebesians keen to exercise their "democratic" rights. It was truly a people's power in action, a democracy in the truest sense. The memories of horrors of such demcoracy (or mobcracy) was believed to be one of the main motivations for Deng Xiaoping to order troops into Beijing during 6/4 protests.

[cniht]

The decision for the PVA to cross the 38th was certainly flawed:
- Mao made the same mistake as Truman made earlier when he authorized MacArthur to liberate North Korea.

The Chinese People's Volunteers went to war only when the US army had already driven to the Yalu River that separates Korea from China, and US warplanes bombed Dandong that faces Sinuiju of Korea across the river, as well as other northeastern Chinese cities.

http://www.china.org...a/actives/b.htm

P.S. The US never had any intentions to invade China, encircle yes, but not invade. MacArthur wanted to, but he does not represent US government foreign policy. He got sacked for trying to play as a politician against Truman as a result.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The U.S. did invade China in 1900. Its intervention in the civil war and later was on the verge of an invasion.
If an American general who was closest to China did not represent the U.S. foreign policy, how was he put in charge of the U.S. troops in Korea? Would you tell me an American commander-in-chief did not understand his government's foreign policy?

So that by 1900, China is essentially looked at as a nation and a people that can not defend itself. Later, China would be described as a "bone among the dogs". The dogs in this case are, of course, the imperial powers. And the United States is one of the dogs competing for the bone.

http://www.pbs.org/w...ioninchina.html

1900: the anti-western Boxer (Yihetuan) rebellion is crushed by foreign troops (Russia, Britain, France, Japan, USA) and Tsu Hsi flees to the mountains

http://www.scaruffi....cs/chinese.html

Besides, China could not sit back when a close neighbour was in deep trouble.

[cniht]

Actually the case for aiding KMT is something different.  Soviets gave military aid KMT to turn them away from addiction of Nazi German arms.  Then the United States gave KMT military aid to turn them away from addiction of Soviet arms. 

Stalin did not support CPC. He played a double sided game in the CPC-KMT struggle, playing down KMT against CPC. He secured U.S.S.R.'s interests in Northeast China, split Outer Mongolia from China, and played a lot with the position of Xinjiang.

[cniht]

During the Cultural Revoltuion most of the damages were done by the crazed Red Guards, young plebesians keen to exercise their "democratic" rights.  It was truly a people's power in action, a democracy in the truest sense.  The memories of horrors of such demcoracy (or mobcracy) was believed to be one of the main motivations for Deng Xiaoping to order troops into Beijing during 6/4 protests.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I would call it mobcracy. The Red Guards raged at any hierarchy yet built their own. For them, a judge, an official or a specialist in any field was a product of non-democracy thus needed relentless revision.