Should Chen keep his trap shut on China?

The US certainly seems to think so.

Washington has delivered an exceptional rebuke to Taiwans’ President Chen Shui-bian after a speech in which he proposed abolishing a unification council with China, as well as other hardline policies.

The US State Department issued a statement on Monday evening defining US policy towards Taiwan and reminding Mr Chen that Washington “does “not support Taiwan’s independence and opposes unilateral changes to the status quo by either Taiwan or Beijing”.

“We certainly weren’t expecting [Mr Chen’s speech] and we weren’t consulted about it,” Adam Ereli, spokesman for the US State Department, told reporters at a regular briefing.

Mr Chen, who has been espousing a harder line towards China since an electoral defeat in December, proposed at the weekend abolishing the National Unification Council, a non-official advisory body whose responsibility is to co-ordinate unification with China.”What unification of China are we pursuing?” he asked.

Mr Chen also called for Taiwan to join the United Nations under the name “Taiwan” – instead of the country’s official title, the “Republic of China” – and for the drafting of a new constitution by the end of the year.

Mr Chen’s Democratic Progressive Party and many supporters of Taiwan’s independence view the “Republic of China” title, flag and constitution as relics of the Kuomintang, Taiwan’s once-authoritarian ruling party, now its main opposition.

“Most Taiwanese people want to see the country pursue national dignity and enhance its Taiwanese consciousness,” Mr Chen said.

After living there for nearly 6 months, I’d have to agree with Chen’s last statement. I have spoken to so many Taiwanese people about it, and have been surprised at how unified they all are on the topic of unification: they see the idea as patently absurd, idiotic and inconceivable. There were a couple of exceptions. One of my colleagues from Hong Kong is in favor of unification, strictly because he feels it will bring financial benefits to a shrinking Taiwan economy. But to say this is a minority opinion doesn’t say nearly enough.

With all Chen has said about this subject, I fail to see why the US should be so shocked at his statements above. They’re consistent with his worldview and with everything he’s said before. Whether it’s wise or smart of Chen to insist on pushing the envelope the way he does is a separate conversation. I’m just saying it shouldn’t surprise anyone anymore when he does it.

______________

Richard Burger is the author of Behind the Red Door: Sex in China, an exploration of China's sexual revolution and its clash with traditional Chinese values.

The Discussion: 73 Comments

I think the U.S. is more upset with the fact that Chen didn’t consult with it before he made his remarks, and Ereli’s statement seems to confirm this.

January 31, 2006 @ 1:29 pm | Comment

It is all about national interest. Right now, the US needs the help from China to handle North Korea and Iran. So I am not surprised at all that Washington said something in Beijing’s favor.

No matter people like it or not, right or wrong, Wahington and Beijing have more say in determing the fate of Taiwan than the people in Taiwan themselves.

January 31, 2006 @ 1:34 pm | Comment

Probably, this speech was just an attempt to shore up commitment from his hard-line “deep green” supporters. In reality, this kind of inflammatory rhetoric is more likely to piss off Taiwanese moderates than anything else. The fact of the matter is that Taiwan is an independent nation that has to pretend that it isn’t. When Chen makes speeches like that he alienates everyone who realizes this and doesn’t want to get blown up over the color of Taiwan’s olympic uniforms or whether their passport says R.O.C. or Taiwan.
The minor impositions that Beijing places on Taipei are hardly worth being invaded, massacred and brutally suppressed over.

January 31, 2006 @ 2:00 pm | Comment

Most Taiwanese people want to see the country pursue national dignity and enhance its Taiwanese consciousness

There’s nothing wrong with those things. Each of China’s minority groups also wants dignity and push for its own consciousness. But politicians like to hijack those “unimpeachable statements” to purse their own agendas. Bush says every country in the world deserves the blessing of freedom and democracy, and uses that as a pretext to justify his wars.

One of my Taiwanese friend told me once that the way the Greens operate in Taiwan is very similar to the way Bush operates in the US. They both deliberately polarizes the populace into two black and white camps. The Bush administration labels anyone who critizies the War on Terror as a traitor and “working for Bin Laden”. The Chen administration labels anyone who questions his anti-Mainland stance as “selling out Taiwan” and “Red Menace”. This is the tactic both employed to win their reelection, and both won with razor-thin margins and both elections were full of controversy.

Questions to all: what do you think are the chances for DPP to stay in power in the next election?

January 31, 2006 @ 3:12 pm | Comment

“Questions to all: what do you think are the chances for DPP to stay in power in the next election?”
China-Hand,
The answer to your question is dependent on how extreme the DPP leadership is in positioning itself as the anti-China party. As the last two elections illustrate, people in Taiwan are wary of Chen’s reckless rhetoric. The economy has been weakening under DPP leadership for years now, and A-Bian’s proclamations on China seem to have an inverse relationship to the shrinking GDP. The tactic has been a failure up until now and yet he can’t seem to let it go.

January 31, 2006 @ 3:23 pm | Comment

The US is shocked because it doesn’t want anything to disrupt the status quo. Even if a fly buzzed in Hu’s face, the US would still probably regard it as a crisis. In its heart of hearts it knows that Taiwan is independent, etc – but it’s a fact that it dare not say.

To be honest, I think that we can’t be China’s friend if we play the “let’s ignore the blatently obvious” game. Because one day China will find out one way or another that Taiwan isn’t going to come back – or even worse, SHOCK-HORROR, that Taiwanese people don’t want to be a part of China. And when that does, Chinese people will get very angry and probably take it out on whoever’s nearest to them at the time.

At one point you have to stop patronising a child and tell it the truth, even if you think it will throw a temper-tantrum……..

January 31, 2006 @ 3:26 pm | Comment

China_Hand

Impossible to say. It depends on who the next leader of the DPP is, what their policies are, what China does, what the KMT does, etc. At this point no one knows, so I can’t predict what will happen.

Liu

The problem is that the mainland completely isolates him. If someone did nothing but bad-mouth you and give the impression that if they had the chance they’d put you in front of a firing squad, would you seriously have anything nice to say about them?

Chen could certainly change tack – simply be vaguely conciliatory while making Beijing seem like the bad-guy because they ask he give in to all their demands first. But at the same time, he must be really frustrated that he can’t DO anything because the KMT seems to veto everything he puts through Parliament.

I don’t envy the guy the situation he’s in. Basically his country is denied recognition just to keep a human rights-abusing country sweet. If I was the PM of Britain, I’d be tempted to recognise Taiwan (while insisting to all the aid-dependant countries we have relations with to do the same) and then get the EU to deal with the trade fallout.

January 31, 2006 @ 3:35 pm | Comment

I think that abolishing the National Unification Council is really not a very good move. It will further alienate the moderate silent majority and may make it really difficult for the DPP in the next election.

January 31, 2006 @ 5:04 pm | Comment

Richard,

I’m curious as to how wide of an audience you have discussed this issue with? I’m sure you have discussed it with many young people who no doubt share a Taiwanese identity, but how does that compare with the elder generation?

The first “Chinese” girl I ever dated was from Taiwan and I know how strongly she felt about Taiwan independence. She once told me she’d rather take her chances swimming to the US than living under the CCP, but many older Taiwanese I’ve spoken to about this issue have a much different view.

January 31, 2006 @ 6:35 pm | Comment

Raj,

Unfortunately there is no way Blair could get the French on board for that. Principles get tossed out the window when there’s money to be made.

January 31, 2006 @ 6:36 pm | Comment

China_hand seems to left one important party out of the equation; how the CCP polarizes the populace into thinking issues are black and white, i.e. Japan, Taiwan, Falun Gong, etc. etc.
The only difference is that people who protest and have differning opinions under the CCP are quickly under house arrest, in prison, eliminated etc. Has China ever had a MIchael Moore who could get awards and still walk the streets.
And while we are at the idea of people polarizing things into black and white; does anyone remember Chiang Kai-shek and his son and the KMT in its forty plus years of martial law on Taiwan. Green Island, was populated by people who didn’t agree with the KMT polarization of issues.
Even now there response to anything Chen suggests gets a kneejerk rejection. The Legislative branch has hamstrung the country by refusing appointments to the Control Yuan.

I would ask what do you think Bush’s chance for re-election would be right now (hypothetically of course)? What are the chances of the CCP getting elected if they allowed other parties, let the rest of the country have a free press so people could know the unrest and dissatisfaction amont others etc.?

Asfor the DPP, two years is a long time in politics; but they do have a formidable opponent in Ma Ying-jeou who is committed to not saying anything that might appear like he is taking a stand.

January 31, 2006 @ 6:41 pm | Comment

Gordon,

You have to look at two issues: the national identity issue (i.e. bensheng ren v.s. waisheng ren) which feeds directly into the generational issue. In my experience, those who feel that an eventual reunification is necessary are generally decrepit KMT members who, not long ago (when they were in their 70′s) dreamt of retaking the motherland which they fled so many years ago. They have since abandoned that hope but retain a Chinese (i.e. mainland) identity.
Most anyone under 80 or so, including the children and grandchildren of those who came over after 1949 have little personal identity with the mainland, but hold onto a certain ethnic affinity with dalu. Of course, the further south and/or east you are from Taipei, the less likely people are to see themselves as “Chinese.”
If you don’t believe me, take a random sampling of attitudes first in Taipei and then in Tainan or Hualien. You’ll see quite a difference.

January 31, 2006 @ 6:49 pm | Comment

To China_hand, despite your friends remarks, there is more in-fighting in the DPP than your friend intimates.

January 31, 2006 @ 6:49 pm | Comment

Yixi~~

How are you? lol

Every time like this issue happens, I feel lucky I am not born in Taiwan province. lol

Just a little comment, 700 years ago, my families members would see chinese are enemy. lol.

What about now?
From Manchuria the north to South Sea the south, from Tibet the west to Shanghai the east, the white mountain, the black water, the long river, the yellow river, the grassland, the snowland, the east pearl, the precious island, where dragon was born. Trust me, we are the ONE. We are small but our country is big, we are short but our mountain is the highest in the world…one day, we will die, but China is immortal. lol

January 31, 2006 @ 8:32 pm | Comment

xin, you win government stooge of the year award.

I know for a fact that Tibetans do not feel the same way as you think they do.

I’d love to sit you in a room full of them so you could ask how much they appreciate liberation.

January 31, 2006 @ 9:01 pm | Comment

Just substitute four different provinces for Xin’s four directions:

Schleswig-Holstein to the North,
Bavaria to the South
Alsace to the West,
Ostpreusen to the East,
Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuehrer

(And at the end of Leni Riefenstahl’s propaganda movie, “Triumph of the Will”, Hitler said something almost identical to what Xin has said, about how although all individuals die, the German Nation will live forever…..)

January 31, 2006 @ 9:09 pm | Comment

Ivan, I must disagree with you on this. Even if those lines said by Xin, according to you, are similar to those said in that Nazi movie, the meanings and significance behind them are vastly different. Nazi Germany’s call for unity and love of one’s country was a very nasty and aggressive one, and is used as a foundation for Hitler to invade the entire Europe and become the master race. The Chinese yearning of unity and love of one’s country is an inward and harmonious one. For a German Nationalist, loving one’s country means justificaiton for dominating weaker nations/races. For a Chinese Patriot, loving one’s country means just that, loving one’s country. The idea of a harmony and peace is not just a slogan pushed by the CCP. It has deep roots in ancient Chinese philosophical thought. In Chinese, there are two words that denotes the sense of domination. One is called “Ba”(žP?j, the other is called “Wang” (‰¤?j?B Ba is an aggressive type of domination and leadership, one that is enforced through toughness and strength. Wang is a softer and softer domination, and is generated through good will and a sense of true leadership. It is therefore a more sophisticated level of leadership, something that China would practice if it becomes a superpower. What does it mean in practical terms? It means the following:

1) China, unlike the USA, would not have military bases around the world.
2) China, unlike the USA, would not spread her own system of values to other nations and use military force it enforce it
3) China, unlike the USA, would ask the world to coexist and keep each country/culture’s respective values and customs, and would not seek an “end of history” theory towards world affairs.

You should read more on the idea of Harmony.

January 31, 2006 @ 9:19 pm | Comment

Xin’s either is, or is being retarded. I think he knows that.

January 31, 2006 @ 9:21 pm | Comment

China Hand,

Oh yeah, tell me about how China enforces harmony, like it did on fourth of June 1989. “Harmony” which is enforced from above with guns and tanks, isn’t harmony – it’s the silence of death.

You make me sick.

January 31, 2006 @ 9:35 pm | Comment

…and, good GOD, Richard, don’t some of your commenters make you want to take a long, long bath sometimes? Simply reading any comments by China-Hand makes me feel like I’ve stepped into a pile of dogshit.

January 31, 2006 @ 9:38 pm | Comment

….oh, for any of the more moderate ones who take umbrage at my using scatalogical terms like “dogshit” when I refer to the likes of China-Hand:

Eisenhower said something like:

“The reason why you use the word ‘shit’ is so that you can use the word ‘noble’ and really mean it….”

January 31, 2006 @ 9:41 pm | Comment

Oh yeah, tell me about how China enforces harmony, like it did on fourth of June 1989. “Harmony” which is enforced from above with guns and tanks, isn’t harmony – it’s the silence of death.

That’s an absolute and horrendous misunderstanding of Harmony. First, I was talking about Harmony towards another nation, harmony on the global stage. Second, internal Harmony is an ENTIRELY different issue, and it is really rooted in the differences between internal contradictions and external contradictions. The Tiananmen Square incident is a completely different discussion and really is not relevant here.

And I would not even respond to your 2 posts immediately upstairs.

January 31, 2006 @ 9:47 pm | Comment

Ivan is completely correct. We’re not Chinese so we’re not biased or brainwashed. I majored in and teach modrn European history so I think I am more in a position to comment on Nazism than this so-caled ‘China Hand’.
1) China, unlike the USA, would not have military bases around the world.
How does this dipute the comparison with Hitler? You swarm Tibet with soldiers, no? Xinjiang is practicaly under military control, no? I was in both places- were you, or are you simply talking out of your nationalistic ass?
2) China, unlike the USA, would not spread her own system of values to other nations and use military force it enforce it.
Hitler didn’t either. He signed a pact with Stalin after all, and never told the US how to manage its affairs. Then so did Japan….
3) China, unlike the USA, would ask the world to coexist and keep each country/culture’s respective values and customs, and would not seek an “end of history” theory towards world affairs. Yeah yeah yeah. They ask for golden toilets too. The fact is it does absolutely nothing to justify its seat on the Security Council, keeping its mouth shut and getting other countries to put their heads over the paprets to try to prevent war in Iraq. Of course China wouldn’t do any of these things- its fascist gov’t is on th firing line of such principles. In other words it wants the civilised nations of the world to stand back so it can oppress its own people. By the way, it wasn’t unity that drove Hitler to attack the East, it was for lebensraum. I don’t know what educational background you have, but I suggest you don’t lecture people in such a naive and childish manner on a topic you clearly have no knowledge of (apart from pub debates with drunken mates), let alone tell Ivan to study a Disneyesque ideology you call “harmony” which, being the stuff of children, you promote not with facts or evidence but “well, this word means this, so we can see it’s admirable.” You Chinese have had so many such ideas in my lifetime, none of which panned out. Yet you expect us to take your thought seriously? Just show me the latest DVDs your selling; I won’t accept anything more than 8 RMB, mind. In the meantime, I suggest you sit and consider similarities between pre-1929 Japan and today’s China.

January 31, 2006 @ 9:52 pm | Comment

CH, so Nazi germany is different because they wanted unity out of dominating other countries, whereas the CCP only wants unity out of what’s already theirs, such as Tibet, Uyghur, and maybe you’d like Taiwan in that category. I have no wish to see China torn apart, but we should be realistic on what the cultural and human costs are to holding a country together, instead of just shouting CCP slogans.

US bases around the world began in an effort to stop Soviet influence during the cold war. As someone from the part of China that got infected by the failure that is communism, I don’t expect you to understand. But let’s say the US had no bases in Asia today.

Today, American bases act as a stabilizing and cooling agent to military hostility in may parts of the world. With out them do you believe S Korea, Japan, or even Taiwan would have stayed in the nuclear NPT these past few decades if the US presence wasn’t there? (this would have happend long before China realized communism was a stupid idea and developed a free market economy so PRC would have not been able to stop Taiwan). I’ve raised this question several times. The commies are always silent on this issue. Today, such bases supress PR China’s sphere of influence, so it’s understandable the commies would whine about the bases. But they offer small countries like Quatar, and ROC/Taiwan some sense of protection from potentially hostile neighbors.

Xin, no one in Taiwan wishes they had lived in China, under the CCP, your fun cultural revolution an all that good stuff that came along with it.

January 31, 2006 @ 9:57 pm | Comment

Kier, you have some good points, although at the end you lost me.

My uncle once said something interesting. Regarding PRC/ROC: “If you want something objective, as a white guy.” I have to agree to some extent – even though those in Taiwan no longer live under party propaganda, there is some legacy in their education, and the Taiwan (non China) perspective complicates things.

CH, the CCP regime claims – “oh, don’t intrude in other countries business” because the CCP is clearly on the defensive on this global trend. The number of democratic countries in this world have rapidly increased in recent decades. Additionally the CCP is in an official civil war in which they’re poised to win so they want to avoid international assistance to ROC.

Your claim of non-interference is BS because China clearly exports information oppression technologies and weapons to other dictatorships. This is by definition interfereing with the development of other countries, and potential popular revolutions. It’s clear that the US and the Soviets (and China today) all push their own agenda abroad. If you can find a single real example where China acted clearly on principle, while having nothing to gain, I’d be happy to hear about it.

January 31, 2006 @ 10:11 pm | Comment

Gordon wrote: “I’d love to sit you in a room full of them so you could ask how much they appreciate liberation.”

Gordon, you don’t know many tibetans! You only contacted those against china and you didn’t talk to many those support what I said! Seeing China as “Han-chinese rule others” is same as seeing USA as “White rule others”. I believe a lot of black americans would say “this is mother f**ker true!” But if this is really that true, how do you explain those black soldiers, black singers, black actors and other black peopel they working hard or even sacrificing for USA?

Tibet was a slavery society, not holy land! If PLA freed slavers and killed landlords, what made you think this is not right? As what I said, you simply didn’t talk much with grandsons or sons of those slavers! Because those people would not escaping out of china!.

Skystreaker wrote:
Xin, no one in Taiwan wishes they had lived in China, under the CCP, your fun cultural revolution an all that good stuff that came along with it.

Skystreaker, you know what really funny is? If you are a usa soldier, you can f**k south korean women or japanese women and free of panalty! How great is that? You could do the same thing in China too, but before 1949. lol.

Want more funny thing? I would say nanjing masscare. A KMT general swore that he would defend Nanjing untill death. He broke all the boats that peopel could use to escape the battle to make sure everybody will fight….hmmm, except ONE boat, which he used finnally escaped himself and left all his army to japanese. How funny was that?

Every MAN with a healthy logic would know, culture revolution was a “fun”, but not exciting as KMT’s world. lol

Sometimes I am really jealous you guys, can I f**k tibetan girls for free? Can I f**k chinese muslins for free? No!, Can I f**k taiwanese girls for free? No. If I was in army I would be sentenced straigthaway by raping women. It seems there is no such rule in american army. lol

Why all over the world wherever american want brought demoracy to them finally got against by local people? The rebels against China were so weak? From the record about raped korean girl, the record about raped japanese woman, a photo that iraqi woman giving blow job to american soldiers, captives being tortured by usa army, I think you guys confused with western democracy with your sperms. There are some americans really good, for the others, making everyone on this earth sick.

January 31, 2006 @ 11:42 pm | Comment

How many US soldiers have raped women? Some, for sure, and their stories were immediately reported in the free press, and in China’s un-free press, for sure. While the crime is inexcusable, the number is negligible, while you make it sound commonplace. I am ashamed of the American soldierswho would do such a thing, but to make it sound as though they are the norm is ignorant and pathetic. As though only American soldier rape and pillage.

I am now seriously considering throwing you out. I’ve given you lots of slack, but I won’t let you spread innuendo and falsehoods like this. You have a choice: Apologize or leave.

January 31, 2006 @ 11:52 pm | Comment

Chen’s problem is that he does not realize that the entire discussion of whether or not Taiwan is independent is increasingly irrelevant.

The fact is, economically speaking, Taiwan has limited long-term economic growth prospects without strong and growing economic ties to the mainland. Any political moves that threaten to disrupt those economic ties are a fundamental threat to Taiwan’s economy and security.

The Taiwan/PRC industrial axis should become the most powerful wealth-creating force of the 21st Century, to the benefit of all who live and work in Taiwan and the Mainland.

“National Dignity” and “Taiwan Consciousness” are great, but how much will they be worth if the island puffs itself into economic irrelevance?

Just my 0.02.

February 1, 2006 @ 12:17 am | Comment

Is the DPP REALLY pushing for full independence? Shouldn’t there be a new constitution by now? Shouldn’t I be able to go back to my hometown and get a passport that says TAIOAN on it?

That said, Pres. Tan/Chen only hurts the cause when he makes comments like these. He should seek and destroy the Reunification Council–if he can–without extra fanfare.

Naturally, the KMT stands in the way, sitting pretty on the fruit of their 45-year Sinicization / Mandarinization brainwashing campaign.

Their supporters claim to favor the status quo and hell-if-they-care whether Taioan splits off or not, but talk to one for fifteen minutes and you’ll typically find that they can’t even imagine independence for the long run.

Polarization? To most KMT supporters, any rejection of Mandarinization is polarization. KMT-supporting Waishengren, especially, harbor a vague but deeply patronizing contempt for Hokkien-Taioanese culture. KMT darling Ma Yingjiu falls inside this box of haters.

What did Taioan do to deserve such a bunch of wet blankets like these? The key thing is for a think-global, act-Taioan philosophy to trump the historically overrepresented think-China, act-China philosophy … because, at least for some years to come, the hearts and votes of the Taioanese are what’s gona make/break the effort to split.

Outside help, like what Raj suggested, sure wouldn’t hurt, either.

February 1, 2006 @ 1:11 am | Comment

********
One of my Taiwanese friend told me once that the way the Greens operate in Taiwan is very similar to the way Bush operates in the US. They both deliberately polarizes the populace into two black and white camps.
******

What a colossal crock of shit. The polarized nation of Taiwan is the result of KMT policy. The KMT built its rickety ethnic coalition by creating an anti-Taiwan political identity, which we know as _mainlander_ and which many people mistakenly call an ethnic identity. They then brought other groups into the fold, Hakkas, and Aborigines, by playing on their fears of Hoklo-majority rule. Accusing Chen of playing ethnic politics is like accusing black South Africans of playing ethnic politics.

Further, the Blues have polarized Taiwan by paralyzing the government, and demanding that the island give up its democracy and its idependence and annex itself to China. Please explain how one can have a “nuanced” position on whether or not Taiwan should be a democracy, or whether it should be independent. There isn’t any “little bit pregnant” on those issues. You can, as a matter of tactics, advocate the status quo (I do) but you cannot have an ultimate goal that isn’t either/or. China won’t let you, since it plans to annex Taiwan.

One thing I have learned over the years is that Taiwanese have a remarkable lack of understanding of their own history, situation and politics.

****
The fact is, economically speaking, Taiwan has limited long-term economic growth prospects without strong and growing economic ties to the mainland. Any political moves that threaten to disrupt those economic ties are a fundamental threat to Taiwan’s economy and security.

The Taiwan/PRC industrial axis should become the most powerful wealth-creating force of the 21st Century, to the benefit of all who live and work in Taiwan and the Mainland.
*****

Mostly a crock. Taiwan uses the PRC as an export platform and export target. The PRC is a nice market, but you don’t have to be part of the PRC to take advantage of it. As for export platforms, as China’s costs rise, Taiwanese firms have already begun to diversify to other places, particularly Vietnam. Hopefully they will move out of the PRC entirely and into other areas, particularly India.

The effect of Economic links between Taiwan and its arch-enemy are usually wildly overblown. China can only impoverish Taiwan by stealing its technology and de-industrializing it; it will hardly make Taiwan rich (although it may well benefit individual Taiwanese).

Michael

February 1, 2006 @ 1:17 am | Comment

several comments…

if china is anything like nazi germany, hell even if like the current bush regime then asia would already be up in flames already.

to most chinese, the communist government is neither a saint nor a devil. it is what it is. oppressive at times but also relatively effective. you can’t really argue against their job performance for the past decade. survey show mainland chinese to be the most optimistic, as well as capitalist country in asia. i think i can say for most chinese people, they are willing to overlook all these imperfections if your standard of living gets better every year.

to china_hand and xin, why get so riled up….i don’t think you can change their perception that we are mindless drones enslaved by the all powerful communist party waiting for their liberation

February 1, 2006 @ 1:17 am | Comment

China Hand

I have to agree with the others – your making of Chinese nationalism to be some pure, completely unthreatening, happy-clappy idea is ridiculous.

Just because China is not off conquering its neighbours does not mean that in the future this mentality might provoke a conflict. Even today Beijing has to “act tough” on Taiwan because it is worried of the consequences of “losing it”. I (seriously) don’t know that the CCP couldn’t accept a formally independent Taiwan – but it’s friggin scared of what the Chinese people would do if it did. And look at the “South China Sea”. There’s so much unreasonable ranting that the WHOLE place is China’s, even though the extent of its claims are hundreds of miles outside its natural EEZ.

Chinese nationalism is also strongly associated with having to sacrifice all your personal rights for the “greater good” – this is one reason why Beijing pushed it so much in the past. What that normally means is that people that are “alright Jack” use emotional blackmail to try and guilt-trip people that are in dire situations not to rock the boat, lest their “perfect China” be ruined.

And finally, no surprise, Chinese nationalism is also characterised by an increasing xenophobic attitude. As soon as one starts to criticise something about China, the whole “Ah, you racist China-basher” routine starts. “Hey, why you not come try push opium down our throats and rape our women again? You try again – we do Boxer Rebellion x10000 and nuke you. Hahahaha!” Or if someone is Japanese, they just have to bring up the war, start making wild accusations about how Japan is going to invade China again, etc.

That is not to say that no one can feel positively about China without being a “bad person”. But the kind of unchecked, immature nationalism that I see is not healthy at all.

February 1, 2006 @ 2:16 am | Comment

I have yet to meet a China national who does not believe that the Taiwanese yearn for reunification. Yet on the other hand, I have also never ever met a Taiwanese who feels a sense of belonging to China. ( the younger generation that is)
Its’ funny how different the overseas chinese are, in comparism to the China chinese that we are perpetually foreigners in China.

February 1, 2006 @ 3:02 am | Comment

Xin, you’re a first class idiot. If you want to learn the truth, go for a walk at night in the Tibetan capital, alone … and go up to a group of Tibetans of your own age, and say “hi, I’m a Han Chinese. Don’t you live being part of China?”

Well … actually, I strongly recommend you NOT to do this, if you plan on keeping all your teeth in your head. The response would be violent, and extreme.

February 1, 2006 @ 4:43 am | Comment

I have been away from this thread for a moment and it seems that many replies have accumulated in my absence. As Xin wrote directly to me, I feel that it is only polite to respond to what is the essence of his post:
“Every time like this issue happens, I feel lucky I am not born in Taiwan province. lol”

That sort of thinking, tongzhi, is the exact reason why no one in Taiwan “province” wishes to be liberated. Seriously, I would really like to discuss the Taiwan issue, in earnest, with dalu ren, and as it is NOT the sort of thing that I would bring up to any of my mainlander friends here in the U.S., online forums seem like the ideal way to get an understanding of the point of view held by common people in the mainland.
Too bad that you seem more interested in provocation than discussion.

February 1, 2006 @ 6:25 am | Comment

About Nationalism:
Actually the notion that the own nation is eternal is a common one to most nationalists. Even though the nation itself is a very modern phenomenon nationalists allways try to track it’s history down to an ancient past despite the fact that in this past the idea of a nation-state would have sounded quite alien to most people and no one would have described oneself as Chinese, French or German.
Mostly nationalism is desrcibed by it’s protagonists as the awakening of a people to national consiousness implicating that this consiousness latently existed under the surface for a long time. By establishing the nation the telos of history (end of history) is reached and thus the nation will live forever. Nationalism has some similarities to religion, I think, as the sacrifice of one’s own life for the surviving of the eternal nation get’s a meaning and enables the individual and his family to transcend his death.

About Tibet:
It is funny to read something like “China, unlike the USA, would not spread her own system of values to other nations and use military force it enforce it” in the context of Tibet, because that was exactly what the CCP did there.

February 1, 2006 @ 6:59 am | Comment

Filthy Stinking No.9 wrote:

–Xin, you’re a first class idiot. If you want to learn the truth, go for a walk at night in the Tibetan capital, alone … and go up to a group of Tibetans of your own age, and say “hi, I’m a Han Chinese. Don’t you live being part of China?”–

lol, to response to you, I would like to say:

1, will you go to any black american and say the similar thing? “Hi, don’t you live in part of white americans?” lol.
2, I am not Han-chinese. I already known I am Hui-chinese plus partly mongolian.

I remember you are the one studying china as your job. How come you learned all of this crap? lol.

Shulan wrote:
“About Tibet:
It is funny to read something like “China, unlike the USA, would not spread her own system of values to other nations and use military force it enforce it” in the context of Tibet, because that was exactly what the CCP did there.”

CCP is not as busy as USA, lol. And PLA never used sperm. haha. Please challenge me with this! Have you found any PLA’s sperm in other country? I think I can find them in korea, japan, taiwan and Iraq.

Shulan, when I was a child, when textbook still said imperialsm are evel, I was wondering at that time why so many people want migrate to america if it is really evil. Are you wondering more and more taiwanese prefer stay in Shanghai? Doesn’t that mean some information you heard inside taiwan wrong? :)

I just talked to my house mate who is older than me and he was old enough to understand 80s period in china. He said during the most dangerous time, the number of tibetan people against china was no more than 30%. Not as many as iraqi against america.

Yixi,
if you were grown in taiwan, I think in taiwanese class, students had to stand up and said something like “we must attach back to mainland one day”. Not now, I mean old days. One of my taiwanese friends told me. When I told this to my mainland friends, they don’t laugh, on the contrary, they respect this as a faith. A faith to be part of chian is the only thing that KMT has worth being respected. However, now, everytime Mr Chen said something, he brought us nothing but laugh, very amusing.

Richard,
You can go and ask american veterans who was in korea war. Ask them how PLA treated captives, compare it with how american army treat iraqi captives. And really please don’t say “free media”. Why a free media still hasn’t got a clue how many casualties in iraq?

While reading comments here, I kinda feel that some people thought their own country TOOOOOO perfect. lol

February 1, 2006 @ 8:46 am | Comment

Liu Yixi wrote:
“That sort of thinking, tongzhi, is the exact reason why no one in Taiwan “province” wishes to be liberated.”

Dear Yixi, lol, I don’t know whether taiwanese government told taiwanese people this or not, if you don’t know, for your information:
CCP government did not use the word “liberate taiwan” since 20 years ago. I believe you know this right? Because taiwan got such a free media. But why do you still use that? Did I use “liberate taiwan” in any of my post? lol. Be informed! take care.

February 1, 2006 @ 8:50 am | Comment

Xing wrote: (many posts ago)

“It is all about national interest. Right now, the US needs the help from China to handle North Korea and Iran. So I am not surprised at all that Washington said something in Beijing’s favor.”

I agree with this. It seems that at some level a deal has been cut to secure China’s agreement to refer Iran to the UN.

Xin wrote:

“I already known I am Hui-chinese plus partly mongolian.”

Don’t look now, but the nationalistic sentiment has grown sufficiently to consider Mongolia another province under the spurious umbrella of ‘one China’.

February 1, 2006 @ 9:33 am | Comment

Why is it, that whenever Xin goes,
“lol” I suddenly feel absolutely mirthless?

February 1, 2006 @ 9:45 am | Comment

randomchinadude, people’s perception that the hard core commies are drones is based soley on your lack of any logic in their arguments.

Xin’s comments is an example. I talked about US bases and their affects on geopolitical dynamics. Xin replies with comments on his penis, rape, and bodily fluids. Comments like this, shows us he is devoid of any time of reasoning skills. China_hand at least tries to argue his points reasonable, when he decides to respond.

Let’s just assume for a moment that Xin is not a drone.

Then I’ll ask you again, Xin, to respond to my post regarding the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and US bases abroad and how it has prevented the otherwise more severe military buildup in Asia.

Do this without bringing up your penis, your desire for sex tourism, and your other bodily functions.

February 1, 2006 @ 9:45 am | Comment

Wowww….

Xin + nukes + phallic references + “bodily fluids” = “General Jack D Ripper” of “Dr Strangelove” !!!!!

February 1, 2006 @ 10:13 am | Comment

To Xin, every thing you have said is ridiculous. What is your point, that people cum? Or that the Tibetans enjoy Chinese rule (han or not)?

Also this qoute bothered me, “And PLA never used sperm”, so in stead they used bullets and bayonets, or do you mean they are impotent. And if Americas were really that bad wouldn?ft the south Koreans and Japanese have kicked the U.S. out of their countries some time ago.

I am also incredibly insulted by this ?gI believe a lot of black americans would say “this is mother f**ker true!”But if this is really that true, how do you explain those black soldiers, black singers, black actors and other black peopel they working hard or even sacrificing for USA??h How could you say this have you ever talked to a “black american” you ignorat shit , if you had you would understand they are American not some “black american”they have every right I have SCREW YOU!. In you logic the Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice should not be in the government because she is black… Deep breath, count to ten…

I’mdone with you, peace

P.S after this post I will not reply to XIN

About Taiwan, I think that maybe if they can be recognized by the U.N. they would have protection from the CCP, like south Korea was protected from the north when it was invaded.

I would also like to see Chen stand up to Washington?fs pressure and work towards formal independence

February 1, 2006 @ 11:13 am | Comment

I have tried to be very open-minded and give the trolls like Xin and China Hand a lot of latitude, because I want to encourage as many Chinese commenters as possible. But with this “sperm” stuff, Xin is clearly abusing this forum and asking for trouble, just as China Hand did yesterday implying that US servicemen live to rape Korean and Japanese women. I won’t tolerate reckless, blatantly irresponsible stupidity like that. Two choice: 1.) Think before you comment; 2.) Leave.

February 1, 2006 @ 11:20 am | Comment

Ivan:
lol in this context means “love our leader”.

Xin wrote:
“CCP is not as busy as USA, lol. And PLA never used sperm. haha. Please challenge me with this! Have you found any PLA’s sperm in other country? I think I can find them in korea, japan, taiwan and Iraq.”

I am afraid I have to tell you that my interest in male reproduction liquids is in no way as pronounced as yours and my knowledge of the whereabouts of PLA body liquids is also close to non-existent. So I leave the noble quest of the search for american sperm in all these countries to you. Good luck and have fun.”

February 1, 2006 @ 11:21 am | Comment

Xin wrote:

Gordon, you don’t know many tibetans! You only contacted those against china and you didn’t talk to many those support what I said!

Wrong! I’ve met many Tibetans during my travels on the outskirts of “Xizang” and I’ve met even more in the US that have fled oppression in China. I’ve also met the Dalai Lhama’s brother, but of course you might consider him to be a little bias. You know…having lived through “liberation” and all.

The reason I never spoke to any that supported your quacked idea is because they’re next to impossible to find.

February 1, 2006 @ 11:22 am | Comment

“CCP government did not use the word “liberate taiwan” since 20 years ago.”

Right. I suppose that instead of sarcastically using the term “liberate,” I should have sarcastically used the phrase “return the child to the mother’s bosom,” or some other such creepy turn of phrase.
On a related note, I would like to ask the monitors of this blog not to censor the foolishness that Xin, Hongxing, et. al spout. It is important to face up to the fact that these people are expressing how they really think (although it is probably best not to reflect on it too much…)

February 1, 2006 @ 11:55 am | Comment

Re, Xin’s obsession with bodily fluids:

Sorry, now I can’t resist quoting this soliloquy by “General Jack D Ripper” from “Dr Strangelove”:

Mandrake: “Tell me Jack, when did you first develop this theory?”

General Ripper: “Well I first became aware of it during the physical act of love. Yes a, a profound sense of fatigue, of physical emptiness followed. Luckily I was able to interpret these feelings correctly. My loss of essence. I can assure you it has not recurred. Women sense my power, and they seek my life essence. I do not avoid women, Mandrake – but I do deny them my essence.”

(Then General Mandrake laughs nervously at the phallically obsessed psycho who goes on ranting about his “precious bodily fluids”…)

February 1, 2006 @ 12:11 pm | Comment

i have to say there is a tendency to vigorously defend your country with foreigners.

so even if i have a beef with the chinese gov, in a debate with westerners i would take the government’s position.

i believe if this coversation is in chinese within china, most of the cyncism would be directed at the government.

February 1, 2006 @ 12:33 pm | Comment

A good point randomchinadude. Just as it is true that I can make fun of my little brother but I’d be offended if you were to.

February 1, 2006 @ 1:06 pm | Comment

randomchinadude’s comments remind me of the observation that many Chinese speak of domestic policy as an abused child would speak about their parents. Extremely protective outside (because my dad does love me! sob sob) but scared and upset at home.

Many of my close mainland Chinese friends have told me that they are very frank and critical of their government when they are with “their own kind.” This need to save face outside is really unreasonable. Most rational americans (and certainly the ones here) generally are very open on discussing the challenges in their country.

My feeling of the reason most people reasonable come to this site is to have a similar discussioin on China – to get perspectives from all types of people on what’s going on in China, its challenges, and its realistic short term and long term potential.

We are not to blindly scream USA! USA! or CCP! CCP! Comments like “we kicked your ass in Korea,” and some of the commies similar comments regarding jizz have no place here.

It’s probably hopeless, but any time you commies want to respond to the US bases effects on stability worldwide, I’m still waiting.

February 1, 2006 @ 1:17 pm | Comment

“We are not to blindly scream USA! USA! or CCP! CCP! Comments like “we kicked your ass in Korea,” and some of the commies similar comments regarding jizz have no place here.”
A good point.
I challenge all of the shenhong tongzhis out there to hold themselves to a “only discuss China on China threads, only discuss the U.S. on U.S. threads.” That way, when faced with a genuine criticism, Xin and the other CCP backers will have to answer the question at hand, without recourse to “but in America there is problem X, Y and Z” kind of arguments.
For an example of what I mean, see the above postings on how Xin tried to avoid the point on what his reception would be if he were to stroll up to a crowd of Tibetans and inquire into their feelings on libertaion.

February 1, 2006 @ 1:31 pm | Comment

Oh, that and the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty.

February 1, 2006 @ 1:58 pm | Comment

Stuart,
Mongolia, well we called outer mongolia, and we call one of our provinces inner mongolia. You know why? lol

Chinese government does not want outer mongolia, though my opinion is different.

Skystreaker,
“how it has prevented the otherwise more severe military buildup in Asia.”
A superpower country generally has this role in region. But in asia, I would think china gonna take this role sooner or later. But we just gotta improve our rural area first. :)

Ikillspys:
If you think the topic is insulting so much, the way you talk about tibetan is doing the same way too all chinese. Tibetan are chinese since 800 years before there were a USA.

Richard:
I do considered before I comment. Recall my comment about French critisizing China’s eating dog thing. “I already took France off western democratic country list”. So for the rest, needless to talk to them. Remember my first post on this forum is “waiguoren” thing? Why do you guys use troll or commies refer to us? I said and proved “waiguoren” is not an offense and after then I never use it on this forum. So, what about troll and commies? Shall I be honored about them?

Shulan:
I love our leaders and I wish you love yours too. And your comment “PLA body liquids is also close to non-existent.” This is true, when they are soldier, they don’t use them, that’s the chinese rule. We all know that. And don’t call that “noble”.

Gordon,
You have no idea what you are doing. You are neither respecting my country, nor respecting tibet. I give you a story between mongolian and han-chinese. Mongolian’s invasion to china caused 89% population reduction in north china, as revenge, han-chinese kicked some mongolian out of china, for the rest killed. In north china, some area, people used to say :”In ZhongQiu (mid-fall), we eat moon cake, we chop mongolian heads”. I DO NOT go to any han-chinese to remind them 89% population reductioin and I DO NOT go to any mongolian to talk about han-chinese chop mongolian head. It is miracle that even such hate in history, china today is still ONE country.

Liu Yixi,
I am sure your government even said “mainland” would use nuclear weapons. This is ridiculous to the hell and your government is suck. Brainwashing taiwanese people by evil-ise everything CCP did. I remember not long time ago, I was already in australia, Lv XiuLian said something like “CCP will turn taiwan into culture revolution period”. Don’t you think is not a brashwash?

Random china dude, you are right. I do not hide problems china currently has. But it’s just no point to talk to people whose initial purpose is not for china’s benefit. When I talked to chinese friends, we simply talk everything mentioned here. I mean all the social problems.

And it is funny I was called one of commies here. I am not communist member. And I never was. I simply said something defending my country.

I start worrying about you guys mental health as most of them still learning chinese, but wait, with such mood? At least when I learn english, I didn’t see any english countries as evil imperialism. So enjoy your evil communism chinese study. lol

have a nice day. lol

February 1, 2006 @ 4:48 pm | Comment

“, I was already in australia, Lv XiuLian said something like “CCP will turn taiwan into culture revolution period”. Don’t you think is not a brashwash? ”
I agree with you 100% I think the above quote is not a case of brainwashing. I am glad that we have the same idea on some things. Based on your other postings, I am a little surprised that you recognize that the CCP would feel a need to have a cultural revolution in Taiwan to make the people into ignorant slaves.

February 1, 2006 @ 6:59 pm | Comment

Yixi,
sorry for my english, my meaning was opposite. No, CCP will not bring culture revolution to taiwan. Why should CCP do that? I can’t find a reason, you give me a reason.

February 1, 2006 @ 8:50 pm | Comment

Xin, why did the CCP feel the need to bring the cultural revolution onto mainland China? You give me a reason.

February 1, 2006 @ 9:06 pm | Comment

In one breath the US tells Chen to buy arms to fight China, and in the next it tells him not to talk up a fight in case he actually has to follow through.

Does this strike anybody else as perverse?

February 2, 2006 @ 5:17 am | Comment

ACB said:

In one breath the US tells Chen to buy arms to fight China, and in the next it tells him not to talk up a fight in case he actually has to follow through.

Does this strike anybody else as perverse?

Not really. Ever hear the saying, “walk softly, but carry a big stick”?

It’s one thing to prepare for a defensive strategy, but it’s quite another to instigate it.

I support the people of Taiwan, but I also consider Chen Shui-Bian to be a trouble-maker.

February 2, 2006 @ 5:59 am | Comment

Clarification:

I meant to say that it’s one thing to prepare for war, but it’s quite another to instigate it by antagonizing the enemy.

February 2, 2006 @ 6:00 am | Comment

“sorry for my english, my meaning was opposite. No, CCP will not bring culture revolution to taiwan. Why should CCP do that? I can’t find a reason, you give me a reason.”

Probably because the people of Taiwan have enjoyed a free media which openly criticizes politicians and libraries & bookstores full of history books which are accurate for so long. The CCP would view this as intolerable. Of course, there would not be a full-scale temple smashing teacher burning cultural revolution like the one in dalu, but there would be a swift and harsh crack-down on basic freedoms.

February 2, 2006 @ 6:12 am | Comment

Yuxi,

Don’t forget a rapid imprisonment of current political officials.

February 2, 2006 @ 6:57 am | Comment

Xin, your turn

February 2, 2006 @ 8:25 am | Comment

Richard and all the rest in the thread here:

For quite sometime, i have declined to comment on cross-straits relations, but there is still a burning urge to do so.

For a rare occasion, a social democrat and realist like me would for once praise the Bush Administration for swiftly rebuking President Chen for his proposal to scrap the National Unification Council and the guidelines it espouses.

What Bush did was a sensible, calculating and realist approach to international affairs. The US cannot afford to let Taipei have a veto on its position in regards to the status quo in the Taiwan Straits. To let Taiwan redefine the status quo that has kept the tenuous peace in Asia-Pacific is potentially dangerous and catastrophic. Chen was trying to drag the US into a head-on conflict with China. If Taiwan goes down, so does the US.

Imagine if Chen has his way, and the US kept silent about it, what will be the consequences? The Pan-Green would think that they had tacit support from Washington and push their independence agenda even further and provoke an aggressive response from China. China would no longer trust the US as a leverage to keep Taiwanese independence in check. It will set a dangerous precedent for the Pan-Green to venture on a path of further adventurism and raise the stakes for all the three parties. War would be likely.

Many here would then lament and whine and say China is the problem, it is the aggressor who threatens to wield military force on a democracy etc etc. Like it or not, China will USE FORCE ON TAIWAN, if the island declares de jure independence. But its a political fact, all the US leaders from Truman to Bush know that China will go to war should Taipei seeks formal independence. For the peace and stability of Asia-Pacific, tough to the Taiwanese, they don’t have much a choice. If Taipei maintains the status quo, they can be assured of US-Japanese help should Beijing launch an unprovoked war on the island. IF Taipei agitates unilaterally for independence, i seriously think the US will have no choice but to let Taiwan be another Hungary in Nov 1956. Look at Beijing’s threats in the past, in the 50s they said they would intervene in Korea, they did. In 1979, they told the US and the USSR that they would attack Vietnam, they followed up their threat promptly. What makes you think that they would not attack Taiwan, if they would carry out threats on foreign soil, let alone Taiwan, which they considered a renegade province?

We can argue non-stop here about whether Taiwan should be independent, whether US foreign policy is amoral or is Bejing the devil etc etc.. But folks lets face the hard facts on the ground. The Chinese will strike on Taiwan if the latter declares independence, in which they would not care whether the US would intervene or not. Thats a political fact and reality. Chen is trying to play God and change the status quo which has spared the people on both sides of the Taiwan Straits warfare and destruction, for better or worse.

Unless the US are ready to have a regime change in China, lets stop this meaningless and endless arguments here. If you cannot dictate China’s policy on Taiwan, there is really no point in all these arguments. The US would not risk a major war with a great power in the Pacific theatre for an island over 10000 miles away from the US mainland especially when it was Taiwan who was engaging on a path of adventurism to change the geopolitical framework which had kept the delicate balance of power in the region.

So it is still about realpolitik, richard. Sorry about that. Bush may be stupid, but not stupid enough to start a major war in Asia in which Chen and his Pan-Green Camp is dragging him into. He still needed Beijing’s cooperation in more urgent matters: the nuclear ambitions of North Korea and Iran.

February 2, 2006 @ 9:19 am | Comment

And to many here:

I also notice this interesting trend that as the issue of Taiwan is being brought up, Tibet and Chinese oppression will definitely be brought up simultanously…

I am not defending the illegal CCP regime and would be the last to do so with my nationalist sympathies.

However, don’t anyone think that all the rhetoric about democracy and Tibet is right but at the same time double-standard and bias? It sounds ironic but things are like that.

The Australians slaughtered the Aboriginals and with its “Stolen Generation” and Howard’s refusal to apologise for the genocide against the natives, yet few Westerners or governments ever mentioned about it, let alone criticise Canberra.

The US also built its current territory through armed conquest, chasing Amerindians off the land with all the atrocities, slaughters. Just because the Amerindians became almost wiped out does not erase that crime.

The West also remain silent on Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan on their human right records.

And the theocratic regime in Teheran which seeks nukes now is the end result of US propping the authoritarian regime of the Shah by using the CIA to overthrow a democratically-elected secular nationalist govt led by Mossedeq in 1953.

I brought up all these not to defend Beijing’s crimes or its repression in Tibet. What i want to say is, if you wanna preached sucessfully without others having a pinch of cynicism, bring a mirror along and look at yourself first.

As a true democrat, i would criticise all regime when they violate rights and engaged in repression regardless be they China, US-inclined or not.I don’t give a damn as long as they are oppressive. I suspect many here “selectively” criticise, hiding their own past and position themselves as moral arbitrators when they were so dirty and ugly themselves. Nothing beats pretence and hypocrisy. Didn’t Bush teach you that?

February 2, 2006 @ 9:45 am | Comment

We’ve covered this before – this post is mainly of people interested in Asia and China. Sure we can talk about Chechnya, Native Americans, the lost australian aboriginals, or the compromise of American principles to satisfy its energy needs, etc.

But you’ll probably find more interesting comments regarding those issues on other blogs. If websites regarding those issues were constantly referring to other issues, we’d never really get anywhere in terms of discussions.

February 2, 2006 @ 9:59 am | Comment

SP, this is a blog about China, so don’t be surprised that we focus on…China.

I have never endorsed Chen’s independence movement and constantly post that I fear he is being reckless in provoking the PRC and threatening the status quo.

February 2, 2006 @ 10:08 am | Comment

At the risk of beating a dead horse, I posted the following on this very thread yesterday:
” I challenge all of the shenhong tongzhis out there to hold themselves to a “only discuss China on China threads, only discuss the U.S. on U.S. threads.” That way, when faced with a genuine criticism, Xin and the other CCP backers will have to answer the question at hand, without recourse to “but in America there is problem X, Y and Z” kind of arguments.
For an example of what I mean, see the above postings on how Xin tried to avoid the point on what his reception would be if he were to stroll up to a crowd of Tibetans and inquire into their feelings on libertaion.”

To sidetrack a discussion of CCP policy by pointing out that Australia, America, Brazil or wherever are also not without skeletons in their closet is not to answer the initial criticism.
As a blog dedicated to China, this site posts a good number of threads related to political failings in the western world. Those are a relevant venue for such criticisms.

February 2, 2006 @ 10:22 am | Comment

Yixi,

Let me go on record now stating that I take offense to that “horse” statement.

February 2, 2006 @ 12:35 pm | Comment

Can’t resist:

A horse is a horse,
Of course, of course,
And no one can talk to a horse
Of course,
That is, of course, unless the horse
Is the famous Mister Ed!

People yakkity yak a streak
And waste your time all day,
But Mister Ed will never speak
Unless he has something to say…

February 2, 2006 @ 12:59 pm | Comment

Horse’s Mouth,

I meant nothing personal and apologize for my insensitive choice of words.

February 2, 2006 @ 1:21 pm | Comment

I’ll let it slide this time.. :-P

February 2, 2006 @ 6:58 pm | Comment

Re: Xin’s question about cum.
I don’t know that I could find any of your army’s cum in other countries, but I bet I could track down some phlegm pretty quickly.
(I know I’m fighting fire with fire here, so if ya wanna delete it, no prob).
The reason you’ll never find this army in a “foreign country” is because anywhere they land suddenly becomes an “inseparable part of China for thousands of years, whose unity with the motherland is recognized by the DPRK, and the Republic of…. blah blah blah”

February 5, 2006 @ 11:30 am | Comment

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.