In Australia’s Backyard – China Inks Pact With Solomon Islands To Set Up A Possible Military Base In The Region

[Atomic Kid]

Indeed, from July 1965 to December 1974, more than 6000 generals and officers and more than 4,500 soldiers were sent to Vietnam as specialists. Of those around 16 were fatalities.

I assume you're talking about Soviet involvement here. Who did partake in combat against US forces and let's just say your claim of just 16 Soviet fatalities is a bit sketchy. Unless you can provide verifiable sources supporting your hypothesis,

People's Liberation Army (PLA) forces first entered (North) Vietnam in July 1965 to help defend Hanoi and its major transportation systems. The total number of Chinese troops in (North) Vietnam between June 1965 and March 1968 amounted to over 320,000. There is no record of any of those troops serving in (South) Vietnam nor in combat against American forces.

No record you say? China admits that such records do indeed exist.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1989/05/17/china-admits-combat-in-vietnam-war/6b9cb8a4-4d18-48bf-80d2-bea80f64057c/

"China admitted today that it sent 320,000 combat troops to Vietnam to fight against U.S. forces and their South Vietnamese allies. In a report monitored in Hong Kong, the semi-official China News Service said China sent the soldiers to Vietnam during the 1960s and spent over $20 billion to support Hanoi's regular North Vietnamese Army and Viet Cong guerrilla units. The disclosure was made a month after military officials in the Soviet Union admitted that a contingent of Soviet advisers in Vietnam took part in combat against U.S. forces and helped shoot down American planes. Moscow had previously denied its troops played a combat role in the war. The agency report cited "The History of the People's Republic of China," published by the official State Archives Publishing House, as saying more than 4,000 Chinese soldiers were killed during the war. Fighting finally ended when victorious North Vietnamese tanks battered their way into the grounds of Doc Lap Palace in Saigon on April 30, 1975. During the war, U.S. intelligence reports said U.S. combat units had found soldiers dressed in Chinese combat gear and wearing Chinese insignia, but Beijing at the time repeatedly denied U.S. allegations that its soldiers were operating in Vietnam. During the 10 years of direct U.S. involvement, American troop levels reached over 500,000. Estimates of North Vietnamese Army units varied, but Hanoi maintained throughout the war that its soldiers went only as volunteers to help the southern Viet Cong guerrilla movement."

Those number make the mere (roughly) 2,700,000 American men and women that served in Vietnam seem like a drop in the bucket.

320, 000 troops is not a drop in the bucket given the timeframe of China's involvement as opposed to the US's troop rotations spanning over 12 years.

 

[Atomic Kid]

Well, the US and the CIA most certainly weren't - and got their way in an election in which the "pro-Russia" areas were largely denied the vote. Of course the "duly elected" President turned out to be more than slightly corrupt.

They weren't denied the vote. Much of Crimea didn't get to vote because Ukraine had lost control over Crimea because Russia had already unilaterally annexed Crimea. But the Ukrainians in Crimea who had kept their Ukrainian citizenship were allowed to vote elsewhere in Ukraine. In the Donbass region only 20% of ballot stations were open because of threats by pro-Russian separatists The GRU and FSB were very heavily involved in the Ukraine Maiden/ Revolution of Dignity. That the duly elected later turned pro-Russia President turned out to be highly corrupt shouldn't come as any real surprise given the post Soviet politics of corruption and nepotism that had continued to plague Ukraine's political and social system. The people there were sick of it and they let their frustrations with it become loud and clear

In the parts of Ukraine that Russia isn't actively interested in, you are quite correct.

Whether or not Russia is going to be able to hold on to the areas of Ukraine that it is actively interested in is still undecided. Don't go any higher than your lunch money, and bet whichever way you feel like betting.

Wherever Russia remains 'actively interested in' the Ukraine, there will never be any peace so long any Russians remain there. Ukraine is winning this fight and will continue to win so long as they keep fighting. Russia simply doesn't have the troops or the resources to take and hold Ukraine. They're getting their asses handed to them on the field of battle of which Ukraine has no intention of ever quitting. They're tough,. Much tougher than Putin had ever expected them to be. And they are going to remain that way towards Russia for a long, long time. Where they were once blood relatives, they are now blood enemies.

 

[uptower]

I have to ask why the **** Australia didn’t make such a deal with the Solomons years ago? Australia and NZ are always sending troops to bail them out during unrest, they should have planned for a joint presence and some decent economic assistance. I know China is richer, but they didn’t have to wait for China to get that rich. Typically nearsighted foreign policy in the pacific.

Of course as usual western help comes with caveats, where as China doesn’t care if the local government steals cash or abuses its population as long as they get the base.

Still, **** me...

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

I assume you're talking about Soviet involvement here. Who did partake in combat against US forces and let's just say your claim of just 16 Soviet fatalities is a bit sketchy. Unless you can provide verifiable sources supporting your hypothesis,

It isn't a "hypothesis".

The figures are the official ones released by the Russian government. That, of course, means that they are all lies and the **R*E*A*L** number of Russian fatalities was more like 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 - right?

No record you say? China admits that such records do indeed exist.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1989/05/17/china-admits-combat-in-vietnam-war/6b9cb8a4-4d18-48bf-80d2-bea80f64057c/

"China admitted today that it sent 320,000 combat troops to Vietnam to fight against U.S. forces and their South Vietnamese allies. In a report monitored in Hong Kong, the semi-official China News Service said China sent the soldiers to Vietnam during the 1960s and spent over $20 billion to support Hanoi's regular North Vietnamese Army and Viet Cong guerrilla units. The disclosure was made a month after military officials in the Soviet Union admitted that a contingent of Soviet advisers in Vietnam took part in combat against U.S. forces and helped shoot down American planes. Moscow had previously denied its troops played a combat role in the war. The agency report cited "The History of the People's Republic of China," published by the official State Archives Publishing House, as saying more than 4,000 Chinese soldiers were killed during the war. Fighting finally ended when victorious North Vietnamese tanks battered their way into the grounds of Doc Lap Palace in Saigon on April 30, 1975. During the war, U.S. intelligence reports said U.S. combat units had found soldiers dressed in Chinese combat gear and wearing Chinese insignia, but Beijing at the time repeatedly denied U.S. allegations that its soldiers were operating in Vietnam. During the 10 years of direct U.S. involvement, American troop levels reached over 500,000. Estimates of North Vietnamese Army units varied, but Hanoi maintained throughout the war that its soldiers went only as volunteers to help the southern Viet Cong guerrilla movement."

320, 000 troops is not a drop in the bucket given the timeframe of China's involvement as opposed to the US's troop rotations spanning over 12 years.

Almost all (say 99+%) of the Chinese combat troops served in (North) Vietnam.

If there had been even a single PLA person killed by the US/RVN forces in (South) Vietnam, that would have been splashed all across the UN media. No such "splash" took place as far as I know. However, I do eagerly look forward to you providing a link to the US media coverage of such a happening.

On the other hand, it is always nice to see an admission (even an inadvertent one) that there was ONLY ONE Vietnam.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

They weren't denied the vote. Much of Crimea didn't get to vote because Ukraine had lost control over Crimea because Russia had already unilaterally annexed Crimea.

The area was not "annexed" in the traditional international law sense in that there was no "forced" amalgamation of territory. There was a referendum held and the results in "The Autonomous Republic of Crimea" were 97+% in favour of union with Russia.

True, the holding of the referendum was "not legal" under either the constitution of Ukraine or of "The Autonomous Republic of Crimea", but there are only a very few countries in the world that make "legal provision" for parts of the country to separate and become a different country. (The US is not one of those countries.)

But the Ukrainians in Crimea who had kept their Ukrainian citizenship were allowed to vote elsewhere in Ukraine. In the Donbass region only 20% of ballot stations were open because of threats by pro-Russian separatists The GRU and FSB were very heavily involved in the Ukraine Maiden/ Revolution of Dignity. That the duly elected later turned pro-Russia President turned out to be highly corrupt shouldn't come as any real surprise given the post Soviet politics of corruption and nepotism that had continued to plague Ukraine's political and social system. The people there were sick of it and they let their frustrations with it become loud and clear

But their doing so was "not legal" in exactly the same sense as the desire of the vast majority of the people of Crimea NOT to be part of Ukraine was.

Wherever Russia remains 'actively interested in' the Ukraine, there will never be any peace so long any Russians remain there.

I really doubt that Mr. Putin is much interested in any part of Ukraine that isn't willing to actually be a part of Russia and which isn't mostly populated with persons of Russian ethnic extraction. He could be (in a theoretical sense), but I doubt it in a practical sense.

Ukraine is winning this fight and will continue to win so long as they keep fighting. Russia simply doesn't have the troops or the resources to take and hold Ukraine.

Not all of it, that's for sure.

They're getting their asses handed to them on the field of battle of which Ukraine has no intention of ever quitting. They're tough,. Much tougher than Putin had ever expected them to be.

Indeed.

And they are going to remain that way towards Russia for a long, long time. Where they were once blood relatives, they are now blood enemies.

The Ukrainians are of several ethnic origins. Those of Russian ethnic origin have different desires than those who are not of Russian ethnic origin.

BTW, the US and China both averaged around 100,000 troops per year in Vietnam. The first main difference is that the Chinese troops operated in (North) Vietnam and the American troops operated in (South) Vietnam, and Cambodia, and Laos. The second main difference is that the Chinese troops operated in support of an honest government that had the support of the majority of the people of the northern half of Vietnam and (likely) the support of a plurality of the people of the southern half of Vietnam and was primarily interested in the de-colonialization and reunification of their own country rather than the financial welfare of its leadership while the American troops operated in support of a dishonest government that likely did not have the support of a plurality of the people of the southern half of Vietnam and which was primarily interested in the financial welfare of its leadership rather than the de-colonialization of Vietnam.

Quite frankly the US would have done one hell of a lot better in Vietnam if its government had taken the advice of its intelligence agencies and supported "America's best friend in Asia" - Ho Chi Minh - rather than being guided by knee-jerk ideological blindness.

 

[Atomic Kid]

It isn't a "hypothesis".

The figures are the official ones released by the Russian government. That, of course, means that they are all lies and the **R*E*A*L** number of Russian fatalities was more like 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 - right?

The 'official' Russian government's figure of 16 is likely as facetious as 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 is. Because you know Russian state media is renowned all over the world for their factuality. Just wait until the 'real' dimensions of the horrific cost of Russia's failed invasion of Ukraine start become known to the Russian people. They're going to be absolutely shocked.

=Almost all (say 99+%) of the Chinese combat troops served in (North) Vietnam.

If there had been even a single PLA person killed by the US/RVN forces in (South) Vietnam, that would have been splashed all across the UN media. No such "splash" took place as far as I know. However, I do eagerly look forward to you providing a link to the US media coverage of such a happening.

On the other hand, it is always nice to see an admission (even an inadvertent one) that there was ONLY ONE Vietnam.

Almost all you say, Apparently not all of them served in North Vietnam. No US ground forces entered North Vietnam proper at any time during the war. Apparently you didn't read the link I provided all that well because right there within it US forces counting enemy casualties after firefights with enemy forces reported finding dead soldiers with Chinese combat gear and uniforms bearing Chinese military insignia. The Johnson Administration likely didn't want to make a big fuss over it because he was wary of another Chinese military intervention a la Korea style if US forces invaded North Vietnam and he restricted US military activity in North Vietnam to be comprised solely of aerial bombing . And Johnson was criticized as being soft for adopting that stance, but it turned out he was right. There did exist a secret agreement between China and North Vietnam that China would intervene militarily if US forces pushed too hard or invaded North Vietnam and not allow the US to defeat Hanoi.

China Contributed Substantially to Vietnam War Victory, Claims Scholar

www.wilsoncenter.org

And I have no idea what inadvertent admission you are talking about. But if it that what makes you feel better about defending brutal autocratic regimes than I guess so be it.

 

[Atomic Kid]

The area was not "annexed" in the traditional international law sense in that there was no "forced" amalgamation of territory. There was a referendum held and the results in "The Autonomous Republic of Crimea" were 97+% in favour of union with Russia.

No it was annexed in the traditional use of force by invasion sense. Funny how you are so quick to point out the historical "invasions" by the US of foreign countries even though the great bulk of them occurred during WWII...well because it was a "world" war, as in being global in scope. But also who can forget 'invasions' such as John Paul Jones raid upon Whitehaven England, where half of his force ended up getting drunk in an English pub they happened upon along the way, or the famous Panamanian Watermelon riot of 1856. Not to mention some of the rest of the low threshold, even trivial details, that constituted US military presence in foreign countries, such as a US Naval vessel calling on a port in a foreign country, or a US Air Force plane transporting a and discharging an ambulance to a foreign country. But for some reason you aren't able to somehow bring yourself around to calling Russia's insertion of armed "little green men" along the insertion of Russian attack helicopters and tanks into Crimea for what it is. An invasion

True, the holding of the referendum was "not legal" under either the constitution of Ukraine or of "The Autonomous Republic of Crimea", but there are only a very few countries in the world that make "legal provision" for parts of the country to separate and become a different country. (The US is not one of those countries.)

But their doing so was "not legal" in exactly the same sense as the desire of the vast majority of the people of Crimea NOT to be part of Ukraine was.

The referendum was as bogus as the 670,000 Russian passports it issued in Donbass in pretty much in the same manner of a Publisher's Clearinghouse sweepstakes direct mailing that most all the other sovereign nations in the world will refuse to recognize as being legitimate, Come on man, really? How can such a 'referendum' have any legitimacy whatsoever when Russian armed forces are present? For Christ's sake there were Russian soldiers armed with AK 47's and RPG's watching over them as they voted. There wasn't anything remotely free and fair about it. And there were only two choices offered. Neither of which offered to preserve the status quo as what had existed before the Russian invasion, Both choices amounted to the de-facto separation of Crimea from Ukraine. Actually I feel very sorry for the young people of Russia and Crimea as Putin's actions have basically scuttled any hopes they may have had for a better future for themselves and their families. As it stands now they essentially have nothing to look forward to.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

No it was annexed in the traditional use of force by invasion sense. Funny how you are so quick to point out the historical "invasions" by the US of foreign countries even though the great bulk of them occurred during WWII...well because it was a "world" war, as in being global in scope. But also who can forget 'invasions' such as John Paul Jones raid upon Whitehaven England, where half of his force ended up getting drunk in an English pub they happened upon along the way, or the famous Panamanian Watermelon riot of 1856. Not to mention some of the rest of the low threshold, even trivial details, that constituted US military presence in foreign countries, such as a US Naval vessel calling on a port in a foreign country, or a US Air Force plane transporting a and discharging an ambulance to a foreign country. But for some reason you aren't able to somehow bring yourself around to calling Russia's insertion of armed "little green men" along the insertion of Russian attack helicopters and tanks into Crimea for what it is. An invasion

The referendum was as bogus as the 670,000 Russian passports it issued in Donbass in pretty much in the same manner of a Publisher's Clearinghouse sweepstakes direct mailing that most all the other sovereign nations in the world will refuse to recognize as being legitimate, Come on man, really? How can such a 'referendum' have any legitimacy whatsoever when Russian armed forces are present? For Christ's sake there were Russian soldiers armed with AK 47's and RPG's watching over them as they voted. There wasn't anything remotely free and fair about it. And there were only two choices offered. Neither of which offered to preserve the status quo as what had existed before the Russian invasion, Both choices amounted to the de-facto separation of Crimea from Ukraine. Actually I feel very sorry for the young people of Russia and Crimea as Putin's actions have basically scuttled any hopes they may have had for a better future for themselves and their families. As it stands now they essentially have nothing to look forward to.

Virtually everyone acknowledges that Crimeans wanted to be in Russia and not Ukraine. And also Crimea was not invaded, the Russian forces were already there and Ukrainian forces in Crimea defected.

 

[Atomic Kid]

I really doubt that Mr. Putin is much interested in any part of Ukraine that isn't willing to actually be a part of Russia and which isn't mostly populated with persons of Russian ethnic extraction. He could be (in a theoretical sense), but I doubt it in a practical sense.

Not all of it, that's for sure.

Putin's goals was to seize Kyiv and overthrow the Ukrainian government and thereby subsequentially placing of all of Ukraine under Russian control. He has to know that none of that isn't even remotely 'practical' now

 

[sanman]

Virtually everyone acknowledges that Crimeans wanted to be in Russia and not Ukraine. And also Crimea was not invaded, the Russian forces were already there and Ukrainian forces in Crimea defected.

Putin's goals was to seize Kyiv and overthrow the Ukrainian government and thereby subsequentially placing of all of Ukraine under Russian control. He has to know that none of that isn't even remotely 'practical' now

Notice how easily this Australia thread is easily derailed toward the One UberTopic of Ukraine. Ukraine Uber Alles.

With the Chinese going into the Solomons, there are going to be nuclear missile bases there -- because they're going there in response to AUKUS.

I know that never occurred to you, and that you couldn't care less about it, since you're so busy yelling "Slava Ukraini!"

But that would mean Australia is ****ed. Because that'll be like Soviet missiles in Cuba pointed at America.

Just try and pull your noses out of that Ukraine potboiler you're so immersed in, even for a brief moment, to contemplate these things.

 

[sanman]

 

[Atomic Kid]

Virtually everyone acknowledges that Crimeans wanted to be in Russia and not Ukraine. And also Crimea was not invaded, the Russian forces were already there and Ukrainian forces in Crimea defected.

The vast majority of the international community has not recognized the validity of the referendum and have not recognized the ascension of Crimea into Russia. Primarily because Crimea was considered to be under military occupation by Russia itself. The local reports of a turnout of 83% with 97% voting to join Russia seem highly implausible given Ukrainians and Crimean Tartars accounted for almost 40% of the peninsula's population. Not to mention those who favored remaining a part of Ukraine under the current constitution had no box for them to check. Indeed a leaked report from the Russian president’s Human Rights Council put turnout at only 30%, with about half of those voting to join Russia. Ukrainian forces in Crimea stayed in garrison. If there was going to any shooting Kyiv wanted the world to see Russia fire first.

 

[sanman]

The vast majority of the international community has not recognized the validity of the referendum and have not recognized the ascension of Crimea into Russia. Primarily because Crimea was considered to be under military occupation by Russia itself. The local reports of a turnout of 83% with 97% voting to join Russia seem highly implausible given Ukrainians and Crimean Tartars accounted for almost 40% of the peninsula's population. Not to mention those who favored remaining a part of Ukraine under the current constitution had no box for them to check. Indeed a leaked report from the Russian president’s Human Rights Council put turnout at only 30%, with about half of those voting to join Russia. Ukrainian forces in Crimea stayed in garrison. If there was going to any shooting Kyiv wanted the world to see Russia fire first.

Totally off-topic for this thread. Apparently, all threads must degenerate into discussions about Ukraine.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

The 'official' Russian government's figure of 16 is likely as facetious as 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 is. Because you know Russian state media is renowned all over the world for their factuality.

The Russians have two sayings "В Истине нет новостей, и в Новостях нет правды." (There is no news in Truth and there is no truth in News.) and "Всегда есть два правительства — то, которое говорит, что оно правительство, и то, которое на самом деле добивается цели." (There are always two governments - the one that says it is the government and the one that actually gets things done.)

Just wait until the 'real' dimensions of the horrific cost of Russia's failed invasion of Ukraine start become known to the Russian people. They're going to be absolutely shocked.

Almost all you say, Apparently not all of them served in North Vietnam. No US ground forces entered North Vietnam proper at any time during the war. Apparently you didn't read the link I provided all that well because right there within it US forces counting enemy casualties after firefights with enemy forces reported finding dead soldiers with Chinese combat gear and uniforms bearing Chinese military insignia.

Did you know that wearing Chinese combat gear and/or uniforms bearing Chinese military insignia does not transform a Danish Hippie into a Chinese Communist soldier?

The Johnson Administration likely didn't want to make a big fuss over it because he was wary of another Chinese military intervention a la Korea style if US forces invaded North Vietnam and he restricted US military activity in North Vietnam to be comprised solely of aerial bombing .

Actually not wanting to have the US army run full tilt into the PLA in the middle of hostile territory probably wasn't all that bad an idea.

And Johnson was criticized as being soft for adopting that stance, but it turned out he was right. There did exist a secret agreement between China and North Vietnam that China would intervene militarily if US forces pushed too hard or invaded North Vietnam and not allow the US to defeat Hanoi.

Just like the "secret" agreement between the DPRK and the PRC or the agreement between the US and Germany.

China Contributed Substantially to Vietnam War Victory, Claims Scholar

www.wilsoncenter.org

And I have no idea what inadvertent admission you are talking about. But if it that what makes you feel better about defending brutal autocratic regimes than I guess so be it.

There is a difference between acknowledging their existence and pretending that they are "bastions of freedom and democracy".

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

No it was annexed in the traditional use of force by invasion sense. Funny how you are so quick to point out the historical "invasions" by the US of foreign countries even though the great bulk of them occurred during WWII...well because it was a "world" war, as in being global in scope. But also who can forget 'invasions' such as John Paul Jones raid upon Whitehaven England, where half of his force ended up getting drunk in an English pub they happened upon along the way, or the famous Panamanian Watermelon riot of 1856. Not to mention some of the rest of the low threshold, even trivial details, that constituted US military presence in foreign countries, such as a US Naval vessel calling on a port in a foreign country, or a US Air Force plane transporting a and discharging an ambulance to a foreign country. But for some reason you aren't able to somehow bring yourself around to calling Russia's insertion of armed "little green men" along the insertion of Russian attack helicopters and tanks into Crimea for what it is. An invasion

The referendum was as bogus as the 670,000 Russian passports it issued in Donbass in pretty much in the same manner of a Publisher's Clearinghouse sweepstakes direct mailing that most all the other sovereign nations in the world will refuse to recognize as being legitimate, Come on man, really? How can such a 'referendum' have any legitimacy whatsoever when Russian armed forces are present? For Christ's sake there were Russian soldiers armed with AK 47's and RPG's watching over them as they voted. There wasn't anything remotely free and fair about it. And there were only two choices offered. Neither of which offered to preserve the status quo as what had existed before the Russian invasion, Both choices amounted to the de-facto separation of Crimea from Ukraine. Actually I feel very sorry for the young people of Russia and Crimea as Putin's actions have basically scuttled any hopes they may have had for a better future for themselves and their families. As it stands now they essentially have nothing to look forward to.

All I can say (politely) about the "legitimacy" of the Donbas (and other) referendum is "Iraq elections", "Philippine Elections", "Iranian Elections", "Afghan Elections", ...

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Putin's goals was to seize Kyiv and overthrow the Ukrainian government and thereby subsequentially placing of all of Ukraine under Russian control. He has to know that none of that isn't even remotely 'practical' now

Thank you for giving us your personal and inside knowledge of what Mr. Putin intended (and intends).

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Notice how easily this Australia thread is easily derailed toward the One UberTopic of Ukraine. Ukraine Uber Alles.

With the Chinese going into the Solomons, there are going to be nuclear missile bases there -- because they're going there in response to AUKUS.

I know that never occurred to you, and that you couldn't care less about it, since you're so busy yelling "Slava Ukraini!"

But that would mean Australia is ****ed. Because that'll be like Soviet missiles in Cuba pointed at America.

Just try and pull your noses out of that Ukraine potboiler you're so immersed in, even for a brief moment, to contemplate these things.

The PRC does NOT need to put nuclear missiles in the Solomon Islands in order be able to deliver nuclear warheads to Australia since it can already deliver nuclear warheads to the US (and Canberra is 2,000 km closer to Beijing than Washington DC is).

 

[Atomic Kid]

Notice how easily this Australia thread is easily derailed toward the One UberTopic of Ukraine. Ukraine Uber Alles.

With the Chinese going into the Solomons, there are going to be nuclear missile bases there -- because they're going there in response to AUKUS.

I know that never occurred to you, and that you couldn't care less about it, since you're so busy yelling "Slava Ukraini!"

But that would mean Australia is ****ed. Because that'll be like Soviet missiles in Cuba pointed at America.

Just try and pull your noses out of that Ukraine potboiler you're so immersed in, even for a brief moment, to contemplate these things.

Well that Cuba thing didn't exactly work out all that well for them, did it? And if I were you I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a Chinese nuclear missile base to materialize in Solomons either

 

[RealityNow]

Australians would probably be freer under Chinese rule given how insane their leadership has gotten with the mild cold virus

Yet, Another INSIDIOUS comment!!!

 

[Atomic Kid]

Thank you for giving us your personal and inside knowledge of what Mr. Putin intended (and intends).

He thought this was going to be another cakewalk like Crimea was. He thought that this large force he had assembled would be able to walk right in to Kyiv, be greeted as liberators, with the Ukrainian army laying down their arms, take Zelensky and friends out, put his man and his friends in, hold another bogus referendum, and that would be that, with practically no cost to them in blood and treasure. Instead the exact opposite has happened it's costing them plenty in blood and treasure with Russian soldiers in Ukraine seeing old ladies who look a lot alike their own grandmothers boldly walking straight up to them to cuss them out, yelling at them to get out and go the **** back home.

 

[Atomic Kid]

All I can say (politely) about the "legitimacy" of the Donbas (and other) referendum is "Iraq elections", "Philippine Elections", "Iranian Elections", "Afghan Elections", ...

Whataboutism politely noted.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Whataboutism politely noted.

If you want to complain about what your neighbour is doing, then it is a very good idea not to be doing the same thing yourself.

If you ARE doing the same thing that your neighbour is doing then getting into a "moral outrage" over them doing it really makes you look silly.

 

[WIGDViking]

Ask Vladimir Putin if he thinks he's dealing with "Neville" Biden.

Idiotic post of the day - so far.

They are not dealing with trump anymore!!!

 

[Atomic Kid]

The Russians have two sayings "В Истине нет новостей, и в Новостях нет правды." (There is no news in Truth and there is no truth in News.) and "Всегда есть два правительства — то, которое говорит, что оно правительство, и то, которое на самом деле добивается цели." (There are always two governments - the one that says it is the government and the one that actually gets things done.)

Maybe you can read this one for us.

Did you know that wearing Chinese combat gear and/or uniforms bearing Chinese military insignia does not transform a Danish Hippie into a Chinese Communist soldier?

Yeah, well maybe it was a laundry mix up. Kind of like soldiers wearing uniforms with no insignia or markings doesn't mean they aren't Russian.

Actually not wanting to have the US army run full tilt into the PLA in the middle of hostile territory probably wasn't all that bad an idea.

If the US had decided to prosecute the war there as a full out combined forces conventional war North Vietnam would not have stood a chance. China knew that. As it was US forces didn't lose a single battle of any consequence in Vietnam

Just like the "secret" agreement between the DPRK and the PRC or the agreement between the US and Germany.

Refer to post #71

There is a difference between acknowledging their existence and pretending that they are "bastions of freedom and democracy".

??? I'm not aware of anyone here claiming Vietnam doesn't exist.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Maybe you can read this one for us.

I comply with the rules and provide translations for the stuff that I post when it isn't in English. Please do the same.

Yeah, well maybe it was a laundry mix up. Kind of like soldiers wearing uniforms with no insignia or markings doesn't mean they aren't Russian.

Did you know that ARVN soldiers wore American military equipment and had "American" insignia on their uniforms?

If the US had decided to prosecute the war there as a full out combined forces conventional war North Vietnam would not have stood a chance. China knew that. As it was US forces didn't lose a single battle of any consequence in Vietnam

No one (of any rationality higher than that of three day old roadkill) has ever argued that the US military was militarily defeated in Vietnam.

Now, if the US military was not militarily defeated, how come the (North) Vietnamese ended up unifying the whole country under THEIR leadership rather than the (South) Vietnamese either unifying the whole country under their leadership or maintaining control over the half of the country that they already had?

Refer to post #71

??? I'm not aware of anyone here claiming Vietnam doesn't exist.

No, but there have been a whole lot of people who thought that there were TWO Vietnams. Mind you, there are also a whole lot of people who think that there are TWO Koreas. The problems with those beliefs are [1] the Vietnamese never believed that there was more than ONE Vietnam and [2] the Koreans never believed that there was more than ONE Korea.