Uberche,

One can deal with corruption in many ways. As I have inferred from your many posts, you seem to advocate internal change via revolution as one way to rid a country of corruption. Moreover, there are many historical events that definitely substantiate your position. In dealing with corruption in China, revolution is one opinion of how corruption could be dealt with; however, it just does happen to be mine.

In my earlier posts, I made very clear the operational aspects of how China could eliminate much of its corrupt elements by entering in a large war. However, as you pointed out, I made no mention of a strong political aim as to provide the basis of why China would want to persecute such a war along with whom her adversary would be.

First of all, it should be obvious as to what nation China could get into a war with. This nation is guilty of spying on its borders, giving weapons to China's enemies (i.e., Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, etc.), surrounding China with military bases (i.e., Japan, Okinawa, Philippines, Singapore, etc.), supporting all of China's internal political dissidents (i.e., Tibet, Xinjiang, Falun Gong Dafa, etc.), and not to mention voted against China getting the Past Olympic Games in 2008.

Second of all, if you're looking for a reason of why China would want to enter a war with that country, just check the Project for a New American Century. You can find it on the Internet. Once there, read the section on the containment of potential enemies via political, economic, and military means. Potential enemies includes China, by-the-way, for which those authors express no fear in dealing with China directly and share via their think tanks that something must be done and soon.

Having shared the political reason you were looking for, I just want to reiterate that I AM NOT advocating that China start bombing that potential country's bases or territory. What I AM saying is that if China is given a reason to fight back against an act of war by this theoretical aggressor, it should give war at once through which the elimination of a great part of China's own corruption can also begin as another of its domestic war aims.

Finally, the swelling of enemies of the US was not due to its use of force in meaningless small-scale wars, but rather its imperialism that many nations now have begun to resist.

anyway, when you look at China's stage of development, it just reminds you of Japan in the 1930's, when it had to invade other countries in order to capture new markets, and get more raw material...

The Chinese internal market is still very limited, and when you see CPC's nationalism, of course, it can only frighten you even more.

But i do not think they have any interest in starting war with other countries: they know how Japan did 80 years ago, and know how it ended...

They are trying to get more investment from abroad, and to achieve that, they need confidence placed in them. They are a developing country, so they need us as much as we need them, maybe even more, so they aren't gonna declare war on us.

To tackle internal corruption, i think the only way forward is a change of generations within the Party itself: the Tian An Men generation may consider the benefits of a society ruled by law, not by one party, and whereby that party itself must obey the law. That's how i think things will change, in maybe...let's say 30 years time...because you can't human nature so easily...

Wei Minghua,

Good Post.

I like your description regarding the Japanese aggression against China and the rest of Asia during the 1920's. Like you said, Japan was following its own economic policy of market expansion and ensuring its sources of raw materials, albeit, via war and invasion.

I have a few comments.

First, I would like to quickly expand your contention by stating how Japan took a calculated risk in their starting the wars of aggression and how the invasion of China was not an all-of-a-sudden thing. As most Asian historians know, Japan was and still is a resource dependent nation and at that time felt to maintain their growth by expanding their territory and natural resources. Unfortunately, they learned from the British Empire all-to-well that taking them by imperialistic means (i.e., India, Hong Kong, New Zealand, Australia, etc.) can work well. Hence, given their military successes against China and Russia in the early 20th century, they deduced that they could replace the British and take over her holdings in East Asia and beyond to a history we already know.

Second, I would like to point out that the invasion of China was a fairly planned affair. Their invasion and occupation of the Korean peninsula and Taiwan ensured the dominance of China's seas. Moreover, the taking of the Korean peninsula allowed for the massing of its troops on the border to enter China via Dongbei. Finally, they fabricated their train bombing excuse against China to which a sad time in China's history transpired that we all like to forget.

Third, although I agree wholeheartedly that China should continue its economic and militaristic growth as peaceful as possible, I want to point out that this might not be realistically possible. Those nations in power know what China is doing and probably do not like it. Moreover, where there any superpower in history that tolerated another rising nation that could one day surpass it? I did not think there was nor did they simply watch its rise to dominance and make no attempt to stop them.

Hence, as I alluded in my previous posts regarding the elimination of corruption via war, there actually might be a war persecuted against China to which China could implement a concerted effort to rid itself of its corrupted elements as part of its domestic war aims. The war, of course, would be instigated by foreign powers similar to how Japan did back in their invasion of China in 1929.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/17/2009 09:52AM by Overseas.Born.Chinese.

corruption has been around for as long as money. it is part of human nature, like greed, hate, envy, lust etc. just here in uk we have found our MPs all very democratic elected. claiming huge expenses for personal gain. corruption is not easy to eradicate. it is easy to blame some other race, religion, political system. war achieves great advance in technology, stabilize, economy, etc but destroys land people and property. Then after the dust has settled the corrupt man works his way into power, and it all starts over again.Queen Elizabeth the first. Genghis khan , Julius Caesar, Napoleon, William the conqueror, queen Victoria,king Louie of Spain, Adolph Hitler etc look through history, and you will find leaders of empires good and bad and underneath them a collection of corrupt officials riding on the tale of the leader and encouraging the leader grab more land, wealth and resources. the common man used as cannon fodder.china has corruption so has the rest of the world just hiding under surface

Stephen26,

You shed light on another great point in history regarding corruption and its universal reality.

First is the fact that all things become corrupted sooner or later, there is really no escape. Even when a new country is born under very pure foundations, that nation will eventually succumb to corruption and decay as seen with the rise and fall of all nations and empires as you illustrated.

Having said that, if we are to use history as our guide, we know there is no peaceful way to rid corruption. If I read world history correctly, nations that managed to eliminate a great degree of corruption in their society did so only by some means of force and violence or were conquered by another power. There has not been any example in history that has done the contrary.

The fact that corruption is an unfortunate human constant does not mean we do not do anything, but rather learn how history has dealt with this social ill that has plagued all nations since the beginning of time. Consequently, the last time I checked, the institution of war had a good historical byproduct of providing the means of cleaning up a nation's corruption. Hence, one could make the argument that the rise of conquerors, warmongers, megalomaniacs, and imperialists alike, which started history's wars were merely executors of this fact or as you say cycle that has no escape.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/17/2009 11:46AM by Overseas.Born.Chinese.

Overseas.Born.Chinese Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Uberche,
>
> One can deal with corruption in many ways. As I
> have inferred from your many posts, you seem to
> advocate internal change via revolution as one way
> to rid a country of corruption. .......

> it should give war at once through which the
> elimination of a great part of China's own corruption
> can also begin as another of its domestic war aims.

War doesn't get rid of corruption unless the war is against those who are perpetrating it. You claim to have shown how it would do so but you haven't. yeah during the war the corruption would be lessened because of Nationalist feelings and after the war it would go back to the way it was before. It's happened MANY times before. Read more history.

You are also insinuating you could fight a war with the US. China's building it's first Aircraft Carrier fleet now and soon will have enough missiles to keep the US's fleets in the Pacific at bay but that is a FAR FAR way from being able to carry on a full blown war with them.

> Finally, the swelling of enemies of the US was not due
> to its use of force in meaningless small-scale wars,
> but rather its imperialism that many nations now have
> begun to resist.

Right, their continued bombings of innocent countries, installing military dictatorships and then invading and killing thousands of innocents to remove the dictatorships they installed, setting up and excuting death squads throughout Central and South America, commiting sneak attacks on Middle Eastern countries and other uses of force have nothing to do with why people hate them. People just don't like Imperialism... that's all.

Quote:
There has not been any example in history that has done the contrary.

I know one: Hong Kong

In 1974, Hong Kong Royal Police was said to be "the best police money can buy".

Governor Lord Murray Maclehose created the ICAC, Independent Commission Against Corruption, now, HKP and, before 1997, RHKP, is one of the cleanest institutions in the world...

quote from wikipedia

Quote:
Hong Kong has been transformed from a graft-ridden city into one of the cleanest places in the world, as recognised by international institutions such as the World Bank, the Heritage Foundation and the Transparency International. Some countries have looked up to the ICAC as an effective model of combatting graft holistically through detection, prevention and education.
In the 1970s, eight out of 10 graft complaints were against policemen and public officers. This trend has reversed over the years. Complaints against police officers reduced by 70% - from 1,443 in 1974 to 446 in 2007. Nowadays, only three out of 10 complaints are related to public servants. Private sector cases meanwhile have been on the rise in recent years. The ICAC has stepped up efforts to help enterprises minimise corruption risks through system controls and staff training. [The statistics are provided by the ICAC.]

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Commission_Against_Corruption_of_Hong_Kong][/url]

I agree with the point made, that corruption is human and inevitable, and that it makes history progress: make a governement and a whole nation great, then makes it fall.

But i do not agree with the point that war is the only solution to get rid of corruption: the way to get rid of corruption comes by itself: when a gvt is too corrupt, it falls: in democracy, it gets swept out of power, see the Tory sleaze in the late 1990's (eventhough i like John Major), see the decline of Labour now...it can be a military coup d'état as well(see Thailand and Thakshin Shinawatra,
:in a dictatorship, there is a revolution, or a military coup d'état like the decline of the Qing dynaty and the rise of the Republic in 1912, and so on...
Then, two solutions: the ones that took the power choose to keep it for themselves, and it ends with a new dictatorship bound to collapse in a few decades, OR, a sustainable, long lasting democracy (which can be overthrown as well by a future dicator, see Napoleon, and so on...)

so i personally don't hold to view that corruption makes war inevitable...

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/17/2009 01:46PM by Wei Minghua.

Uberche,

As I recently responded to Wei Minghua, I understand that although corruption is inevitable, people should continue to try and remove it from their society.

Regarding the potential elimination of corruption via the institution of war; during a major war, a country's commitment to the war effort supplants everything else. As such, old laws that were disregarded and never adhered would be replaced with stricter laws providing fewer loopholes for those who wish to be corrupt. In addition, during the war, emergency police powers could then and only at that time arrest those corrupt individuals without their paid politicians able to stop and protect them. Of course, most of the corrupt would just leave/escape from the country and that would serve China well, as they would be identified and never allowed to return.

In regards to a potential confrontation between China and the US, I do not think victory for China is not at all unattainable. First of all, China does not need a blue water navy to defeat the US. If you recall in the Korean War in 1950 to 1951, China fought at worst a stalemate against the predominately US-led UN forces, but at best defeated the major victor of WWII (i.e., USA) with no navy at all. Moreover, the military technological gap between both countries was much bigger, not to mention China had no atomic weapons to offset those of the US. The US could have destroyed Beijing as they did to Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan with China not being able to do a thing. Regardless, the US did not use them and they loss that war, which by-the-way to my knowledge is not studied extensively among US students in their schools.

Wei Minghua,

Corruption as you stated always follows a cycle. However, if a society is to be a functioning democracy, I find it difficult for people to not execute the right to do whatever needs to be done to control the level of corruption they may have.

You mentioned two cases regarding the cycle of the rise and fall of nations. In both cases, it is time that causes the fall of a corrupt government. On this note, I just want to remind you that in all the examples you mentioned, wars did play a major role in the final collapse. With the fall of the Qing, let us not forget China's humiliating defeat at the hands of the European powers in 1900 and Japan a few years later through which China had to pay for those lost wars from its treasury that set the stage for the Qing's final fall from power.

In the end, you are right that corruption does not necessarily lead to war. However, it is the participation of a corrupt nation in a major war that will assist to end that corrupt government's hold of power that history has always shown.

Quote:
The US could have destroyed Beijing as they did to Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan with China not being able to do a thing. Regardless, the US did not use them and they loss that war, which by-the-way to my knowledge is not studied extensively among US students in their schools.

ya, Overseas.Born.Chinese, but as you said it, the US CHOSE to 'loose' the war, when Truman decided to remove Gen. Mc Arthur from the headquarters. Mc Arthur was planning to launch an atomic bomb on Beijing, and the US couldn't afford doing so, because it would have made a direct confrontation with the Soviet Union inevitable, and the US, eventhough there's no doubt they'd have won such a war, didn't want to cause such a fuss...

Quote:
On this note, I just want to remind you that in all the examples you mentioned, wars did play a major role in the final collapse. With the fall of the Qing, let us not forget China's humiliating defeat at the hands of the European powers in 1900 and Japan a few years later through which China had to pay for those lost wars from its treasury that set the stage for the Qing's final fall from power.

you're right, i forgot to mention it

both corruption and foreign powers played a significant part to downfall of the Qing, added to Cixi's attitude, getting hidden in her Forbidden City, only worrying about one thing: remaining in power. I think she played a HUGE role in the decline of China: she did not give a shit to the country she was running, all she cared about was the Forbidden City, and eliminating rival's influence...

Wei Minghua,

I am not so sure that the US could win a war in China even if atomic weapons were not used. One of the last things General Macarthur is historically quoted to have said was, "the US should never get into a land war with China."

From the literature and my own discussions with survivors from the Korean War, the US would eventually lose in the end. Many US veterans from the Korean that I spoke to on this matter agree that without the use of atomic weapons, the war would have basically be one of attrition through which there were not enough US troops to adequately overrun China.

The US Army and Marines would essentially win battles, but none decisive enough to bring the whole of China's military to her knees. Moreover, even if China's regular army were on the retreat, the resulting guerilla war would still be persecuted in all of the US captured cities by millions of Chinese, which would terrorize the entire US military fighting in China so severely, that the US would have no choice, but to withdraw as they did in Vietnam with the help of the Vietcong.

It is almost sixty years since the Korean War and despite all of its sheer hi-tech military might; the US military could not secure all of Iraq not to mention its own borders with Mexico to keep illegal immigrants out. Consequently, the US probably knows that unless China partakes in another Civil War or Revolution, there is no way without the use of nuclear weapons to bring about the total military defeat of China. Of course, China has her own nuclear weapons, so the nuclear option is pretty much off the table.

thanks for your interesting yestimony about talking to veterans from korea,

OBC very interesting

Overseas.Born.Chinese Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Regarding the potential elimination of corruption
> via the institution of war; during a major war.....most of the corrupt
> would just leave/escape from the country and that
> would serve China well, as they would be
> identified and never allowed to return.

But if the corruption goes to the top levels of government, and it'd be naive to pretend it didn't, then it's not going to help. If it was just some businessmen being bad it might have a slight chance of working but it's not.

> In regards to a potential confrontation between
> China and the US, I do not think victory for China
> is not at all unattainable. First of all, China
> does not need a blue water navy to defeat the US.
> If you recall in the Korean War in 1950 to 1951,
> China fought at worst a stalemate against the
> predominately US-led UN forces, but at best
> defeated the major victor of WWII (i.e., USA) with
> no navy at all.

You're talking about two COMPLETELY different styles of war. Korea was a land war for a country. If China were to attack the USA the US could just sit back in it's multiple bases surrounding China or it's Carrier fleets (as China still hasn't built enough bombs to even wipe them out yet) and fly bombing runs in the middle of the night leveling Chinese cities. The US doesn't land troops anymore until the planes have already leveled the country. In 1950 they were still set up to fight traditional warfare. No country in their right mind would fight a land war against China in Asia, China has too many soldiers. The USA could never invade China, but China could never fight the USA right now. Another 25-30 years down the road, maybe.

> Moreover, the military
> technological gap between both countries was much
> bigger, not to mention China had no atomic weapons
> to offset those of the US. The US could have
> destroyed Beijing as they did to Hiroshima and
> Nagasaki in Japan with China not being able to do
> a thing. Regardless, the US did not use them and
> they loss that war, which by-the-way to my
> knowledge is not studied extensively among US
> students in their schools.

The tech gap is still huge. China's stealth research is way behind and that's a huge one, the USA also has bigger bombs, better tanks, better Naval vessels and it's Airforce is stunning. The only thing China has that might be better than the US's is missile range, N. Korea's missiles are some of the farthest flying in the world but they've never really be successfully tested in war. The Nuke's are pointless as they cancel each other out so who cares?

And yes, everyone in the west who is at all intelligent knows that the USA didn't win the Korean war, or the Vietnam war. And if you really want to start comparing what is left out of history books in school you might want to look to your own country first before pointing fingers at everyone else.

OBC, your true colors are showing clearly in your more recent posts. You don't care one iota about giving the Chinese health-care, improving their standard of living, or fighting corruption. You seem obsessed by one thing only: to have China engage in a war with the country you hate so much, i.e. the US. This would be tantamount to a world war and the loss of life resulting from this bloodbath would be unimaginable. You're one helluva sick, twisted individual! Hope China doesn't breed too many of your kind because your ilk doesn't bode well for it or for the rest of the world.

As to the Korean War, Truman indeed mentioned dropping the bomb on Beijing. It isn't publicly known whether he made a faux pas or made a threat (empty or otherwise). This avenue was not pursued not because of fear that China couldn't be defeated but because of pressure by NATO as Russia would undoubtedly have invaded Europe.

Neither China nor the US would be so stupid to contemplate going to war with each other. If it were to happen, don't count too much on China winning. Russia might be willing to supply China with oil so that the two main parties in the conflict would have enough fuel to inflict maximum damage to each other. But other than that, it would sit back and laugh while watching the show. Besides NATO, South Korea and Japan, there's a country that certainly would join the fight against China: India. In terms of headcount, that would even the score. You're right about the insurgents but it's debatable whether the people in the "Autonomous" Regions and the other ethnic minorities would necessarily be loyal to China.

I'm done with your posts as reading them brings to mind footage of the Nuremberg Rallies. When i have no respect for a poster, there's little point in wasting time posting replies (that, at best, will be considered only selectively); simply ignoring the poster is the better course of action.

Edit: Uberche and i were posting at the same time, as i discovered after hitting "submit." I agree with him that the US would not contemplate a land war.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/18/2009 10:13AM by Tangerine.

A war between China and the US huh?? It wouldn't matter who won both sides would be so horribly decimated they wouldn't be able to defend themselves in the end.

Plus, both China and the US know fighting each other would be pointless. Not to mention the richest men on the planet own both China and the US and they have no reason to send the armies after each other. All China is there for is to keep the rest of Asia under considerable control. The US is there to invade and take over the middle east. Other than that, that is it.

We can talk politics and military strength all we wish. The real truth is there are a few extremely rich european families that own somewhere between 65% to 70% of the planet. The countries they don't really own yet are the countries that are considered to be part of the "axis of evil".

So O.B.C since you seem to do a lot of looking into things. Why don't you go ahead and see who's been funding the Communist party for all these years. Find out where Mao got a lot of his money. Also look into where China's getting its money to buy the US debt. Seriously this will take you a while to track it down. But you'll see it all either comes from the banks either owned by the Rockerfellers or the Rothchilds...I forget which family funds China...

Pretty sure it's Rockefellers in China. They have tons of "charity" groups and such setup anyway.

I also wouldn't be so sure they'll never orchestrate a war... they need to lower the population, I could see them putting China vs US and bring in India, keeping most of the fighting in Asia to lower the world population considerably... I'd hope they wouldn't but I wouldn't really put it past them as the population is getting way out of control lately....

I didn't think of population control. Damn you got a good point on that.

Lordarithon,

I am so glad to read your post, since your contentions are perhaps the most pressing issues that only are understood by few and unknown by many. By that, I mean the powers that really control this planet.

Based on your post, I infer that you know the truth when it comes to those who really owns most of the businesses, resources, and policies of our planet Earth. In particular, you mentioned two of the most powerful single individuals that make most of the decisions for most nations, Rothschild and Rockefeller. Indeed, those two men and their fellow power brokers through their monopoly of international banking and a system of national political corruption of bribery, sex, and drugs have subverted most governments of the first world nations under their direct will with the only real exceptions being China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran.

If you have been reading many of my posts in this thread, I never advocated any war between China and the US. I merely stated that one way China could rid itself of much of its own corrupt elements is through engaging in some war with another formidable nation, which could be any nation, but most likely the US. Such a war would be bloody, but most of the corrupt elements in the country would have been eliminated or forced to relocate outside China.

More importantly, based on Uberche and your assessments, a war between the US and China could very well be a possibility given the depopulation programs those shadow elements that you mentioned make no secret of hiding. I happen to also believe in what that group has planned for China. Hence, war between the US and China is a real possibility.

Moreover, I would also add their plan for China after its defeat in the war entails a type of Balkanization as they similarly intend for Russia. In essence, they intend for a reorganization of China into more manageable parts based on natural resource significance. In their proposed schemes, Xinjiang and Tibet are to be independent nations, while Inner Mongolia will be reconnected with Mongolia, and the whole of Dongbei reconstituted as a Neo-Manchuria. Notice that those areas mentioned are either the areas that contain natural resources (Xinjiang) or in the direct routes were oil pipelines (Tibet, Inner Mongolia, and Dongbei) to the Middle East or to Russia are situated.

Having said that, I hope those who have read my previous posts regarding this matter and have deemed me an advocate of war to reconsider their opinion. If those power broker's plans are conducted, there will be war against China. Hence, if that is true, then every Chinese should be ready for their attack via their proxy (i.e., US, Japan, South Korea, etc.) and determined to win.

As for the current government in China, they are not directly controlled by those internationalists, but are sometimes bribed by NGOs owned and operated by Rothschild and Rockerfeller as Uberche stated earlier.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/18/2009 09:47PM by Overseas.Born.Chinese.

Uberche,

I applaud your knowledge regarding those internationalists and which of their cabal plays a major role in bribing many elements in China.

I just wanted to share with you a quick history snippet regarding those same international bankers and their attempts to control China during the 20th century. In particular, I wanted to share with you what I was told regarding the defeat of the Kuo Min Tang (KMT) in 1949. In Chinese and most foreign history regarding the victory of Mao over the KMT, we are summarily told that it was the righteousness and greatness of Mao winning the majority of the hearts and minds of China that ultimately sealed the defeat of the KMT.

However, during a chance meeting, I met a survivor of the Korean War who became a historian focusing his research during that period. From his studies, he claimed to have found evidence to refute the generally accepted macro-reasons for Mao's victory over the KMT. Simply, he told me that it was the end of US funding that effectively doomed the KMT.

All throughout China's Civil War, the KMT received tremendous amounts of financial resources from the US. This money, of course, was not from the direct taxation from the people of the US, but from loans from the international bankers of that day; similar to the funds received by Japan at that same time under the Marshal Plan, which coincidentally has kept Japan and her people controlled by those same international bankers today.

When China's Civil War resumed in 1945 with Japan's defeat in WWII, those international bankers happily lent the KMT all the money it wanted to defeat Mao. However, since Chiang Kai Shek's wife was from the Soong banking family, who themselves were waiting to assume being the Central Bank of China after Mao's hopeful defeat, was not about to allow those international bankers to take control of China.

Hence, not wanting to surrender China's future banking authority to those international bankers, financial support for the KMT dwindled and the KMT became fiscally unable to continue the war. Those funds intended for the KMT were slowly transfered North to begin the preparations for the Korean War, as the bankers saw as their next best ticket to control China's banking system, given the tired state of Mao's forces that they thought would be easily defeated by the US military and her UN coalition.

Luckily, China under Mao proved much tougher than expected and China's unbelievable victory on the Korean peninsula thwarted those international bankers' dreams of controlling all of East Asia as they did in the US and Western Europe.

By-the-way, the man I met was an American.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/18/2009 10:37PM by Overseas.Born.Chinese.

Nah dude they are beyond bribed. They are told what to do and they do it. No country can be a world power without it. Again this is why China is not an axis of evil. But Russia..Russia is a weird one. I can't find out a lot of info regarding Russia...I've been trying but everything seems to lead to dead ends...

But yes I know about the restructuring of China. I heard Tibet was going to be 100% part of China instead of just a territory like it is now. But I heard about the Mongolian aspect of it all. It's supposed to happen in the next 5 to 7 years, but this is supposed to be after they have an "Asian Union". Which means something crazy is going to happen in Asia sometime soon....

But basically all borders will be open there and the areas that are taken away or reorganized are as for what you say. For the sake of natural resources.

Lordarithon,

Finding information regarding the international cabal's plan is not easy. There are only a small handful of published books that remotely speak of this issue and there are no classes that anyone can take in school or college to learn these details. As I am sure from your experience, information regarding this topic is gathered from either the Internet, independent media, or word-of-mouth; and even then be taken carefully, since there is a great number of disinformation circulated as well.

Regarding Russia, we do know that many international bankers have been arrested or forced to live in exile in Great Britain, one of the safe havens for most of the international banking clique. Hence, it appears Russia under Putin is no real friend of those international bankers. Moreover, given the Cabal influenced US plans for a missile shield, expansion of NATO, and balkanization plans from President Obama's foreign advisor Brzezinski, it is probable that Russia is one of the last nations outside of the control of those international bankers.

As for an Asian Union, I have heard rumors and am not at all surprised of this prospect. Generally, only a war combined with a economic/financial crisis could bring about a union of Asian nations. Should it become reality, you can be sure it was instigated by those international bankers via their proxy nations under their control (i.e., US, Japan, South Korea, etc.). Moreover, it would be no surprise to see that the central bank of that union be under the control of that same Cabal and the fate of all Asian peoples as professional or labor based neo-serfs, similar as in the days of ancient feudal China.

Overseas.Born.Chinese Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Uberche,
>
> I applaud your knowledge regarding those
> internationalists and which of their cabal plays a
> major role in bribing many elements in China..... and the KMT
> became fiscally unable to continue the war. Those
> funds intended for the KMT were slowly transfered
> North to begin the preparations for the Korean
> War, as the bankers saw as their next best ticket
> to control China's banking system, given the tired
> state of Mao's forces that they thought would be
> easily defeated by the US military and her UN
> coalition.

Mao was just as bought and paid for as the KMT.

> Luckily, China under Mao proved much tougher than
> expected and China's unbelievable victory on the
> Korean peninsula thwarted those international
> bankers' dreams of controlling all of East Asia as
> they did in the US and Western Europe.

You need to temper your Chinese Nationalism with a bit more logic and common sense. First North Korea was also there so it wasn't just China fighting and it wasn't a Victory for anyone. Communism's unbelievable stalemate would be more accurate.

Uberche,

Although I do not doubt the level of corruption that currently exists in the communist regime in China, I will argue that the infiltration of the International Banking Cabal in unison with their NGOs operating in China did not take strong root until the reforms authorized by Deng Xiaoping.

From my own studies on the rise of the communist movements in the 20th century, there is now evidence that most of those movements in Europe were financed by international bankers and their lesser associates. For example, banks in New York under the control of Rothschild authorized great sums of money to be given to Trotsky (i.e., Bronstein) and Lenin (i.e., Ulyanov) to begin their communist revolution in Russia.

However, I have not yet seen any evidence of international banking support to Mao during his struggle with the KMT. It was only during Deng's administration that records that details Deng Xiaoping’s agreements with International Banking and other foreign businesses exist on file. Moreover, I had the opportunity to meet some surviving Western advisors to Deng Xiaoping at an academic seminar, who spoke of how Deng essentially surrendered all of China's markets to the West.

Having said that, I do believe that the International Banking Cabal has already bribed many government officials holding power in China's current government. However, those International Bankers have not, but are currently working to attain total financial dominance in China as we speak. If they did have total control of China's financial system, you can always tell by inspecting to see whether China's Central Bank is still under the direct control of the government. Nations who are under the direct influence of International Banking have a privately owned central bank as in the case of US, England, and etc.

it's quite funny to hear these people protesting against "international bankers controlling the world:let's let them control it, if it can let people live in peace and espescially live good lives, with comfort , education, and so on...

personally, i wish Chiang Kai-Shek/KMT would have won the Civil War and flushed out all that commie scum, and made it a propsperous contry like Taiwan today, with the Chinese Culture preserved, avoiding that suicide, the cultural revolution, and so on

Wei Minghua,

You would be right if the International Bankers' goal of gaining total financial and banking systems control of the whole World to spread the good life to all people was true. Unfortunately for the people of the World, peace, harmony, allowing people to earn money to live good lives are not the outcomes they intend.

As for your example of Taiwan, I don't think your description is correct. The Taiwan under Chiang Kai-Shek that I learned about from older Chinese from Taiwan spoke of a highly corrupt, oppressive, and anti-democratic regime that resulted in many killing of people living in Taiwan.

Taiwan went through hell too, neither government was without it's problems sadly.