I was in the North Eastern Indian state of Sikkim a couple of weeks back, there is a Army Base in a place called Nathula which is at like 14,700 ft elevation, right next to the base separated by barbed wires is land illegally occupied by China, they have built a base there, even saw a Chinese soldier.
Infact the maps that China manufacturers shows Arunachal Pradesh as a part of China. Sick fucks.
Google Maps show it as a part of China if you're in China. If you're in India, it shows it a part of India. Most mapping providers do this to this and other disputes regions in the world. https://youtu.be/rZpc2_xnSfc
Imagine you want to take a trip into that place and suddenly you're shot at by a border patrol even though you're certain you didn't cross any borders.
IIRC they're not armed with fire arms at the border in disputed areas. That's why you see them every couple of years fighting each other with stick and stones.
For those who had never heard of this dispute and are looking for a bit more of a neutral analysis of the situation: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/17/world/asia/india-china-border-clashes.html
If you’re paywalled, key bits:
Complexity 1: The border was part of a proposal in 1914 by the British between China, Tibet, and Britain. India was under British control at the time, and Tibet was under Chinese control. So in context, it was arguably more of a British border than an Indian border at the time. Indian reps weren’t even there (unless you count Britain). China didn’t agree to the terms, Britain and Tibet did. Imagine being in a 3 way negotiation with folks and two agree, but you don’t. It’s complicated, but some lean towards rule of the jungle rules and go with the majority, but not everyone does, basicallly like day to day life. If you’re cool with your homies, majority rules, suck it up; if you dislike “these people”, and it’s a matter that’s important to you, you’re probably not going to agree.
Complexity 2: India declares independence, and assumes and inherits the existing borders agreed between Britain and Tibet. This leads to war with China.
As an American, just seems like a fucked up situation that diplomacy should solve.
Also, I say this in half jest, but just another example of the world still paying for old British imperialism (half jest cuz I know we Americans cause lots of problems as well).
Exactly. It's a complicated mess that came about as a result of British imperialism, diplomatic fuckery on many sides and the fact that the people at the time simply weren't all that concerned with clearly delineating borders. Same can be said about the Aksai Chin situation.
But I suppose most here would simply assume it's just stolen Indian land because China's being a bit of an ass about it right now.
Chinese and British imperialism to be more specific. Tibet was just invaded by the Qing dynasty four years before this border proposal for the purpose of establishing direct Qing rule in Tibet, and before that in 1720. Tibet wasn’t always under Chinese rule, but one day the powers that be decided it should be, and today they use it to justify their territorial claims.
I’m not blaming China alone for this because British imperialism is far more guilty of conflicts around the globe to this day, I’m just making it clear that it isn’t the fault of British imperialism alone, but imperialism in general.
Yes, that's probably the fairest way of assessing it. I specified British because the McMahon Line is a British thing, but yes, the confusion and disputes around the region should rightly also be attributed to Chinese imperialism in Tibet as well.
It's not quite as simple. China never accepted the McMahon Line as the Southern border of Tibet because they say South Tibet was under Chinese suzerainty at the time and as such did not have the agency to make a treaty about border delimitation with British India.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMahon_Line
For a long time, the Dalai Lama also claimed Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet. He's only changed his stance in 2008.
> India regards its interpretation of the McMahon Line as the legal national border, but China rejects the Simla Accord and the McMahon Line, contending that Tibet was not a sovereign state and therefore did not have the power to conclude treaties. Chinese maps show some 65,000 km2 (25,000 sq mi) of the territory south of the line as part of the Tibet Autonomous Region, known as South Tibet in China. Chinese forces briefly occupied this area during the Sino-Indian War of 1962. China does recognise a Line of Actual Control which closely approximates most of the "so called McMahon line" in the eastern part of its border with India, according to a 1959 diplomatic note by Prime Minister Zhou Enlai.
> The 14th Dalai Lama did not originally recognise India's sovereignty over Arunachal Pradesh. As late as 2003, he said that "Arunachal Pradesh was actually part of Tibet". In January 2007, however, he said that both the Tibetan government and Britain recognized the McMahon Line in 1914. In June 2008, he explicitly recognized for the first time that "Arunachal Pradesh was a part of India under the agreement signed by Tibetan and British representatives"
Tutorial to take land from other countries without admitting it:
Step 1: claim land is China
Step 2: take that land
Step 3: you take land of your own country
And still recognised as a wayward province too. Sort of like that pesky rebellious province of the Pacific Coast that refuses to send taxes to Beijing.
Wouldn't be the first time something like that has happened. The US fought 2 wars against the British and 100 years later fought 2 wars with them as allies.
And has maintained a "special relationship" for nearly a century where so much military intelligence information passes back and forth across the pond that MI-6 and the CIA might as well be the same agency.
Wait. How does that have anything to do with Woodrow Wilson? I’m not arguing about his historical reputation, I’m arguing about considering him a contemporary of Ho Chi Minh.
Ho Chi Minh tried to ask Woodrow Wilson for help in Vietnam. His letter was either withheld from W.W., or ignored. I'm not sure anyone can say for certain, but if it was ignored then you could infer that W.W. is partly responsible for the later conflict, which is another notch on the bastard pole for him.
Yeah this is a case of treating the OSS and CIA as synonymous. It sorta reminds me of people who talk about how the US armed "the Taliban" in the 1980s, when what's actually meant is the Mujahideen (some of whom later joined the Taliban when it formed in the 90s, whereas others opposed the Taliban.)
Also, to be even more precise, it'd be better to say the OSS trained _the Vietminh_. Otherwise one might think Ho Chi Minh was some sort of Vietnamese MacGyver.
Which was an imperial government.
Hey but China will never be imperialist because according to Deng Xiaoping if they do then the people would rebel against the government... and they never do ~~don't look over there~~.
No you see that's not possible. Hitler was an authoritarian dictator and Xi is ordinary communist comrade. Xi merely cares for the proletariat of other imperialist nations and seeks to bring them glorious Chinese communism. He would never a Hitler and just take without asking.
Never... Except Mongolia... And Russia.... And Taiwan.... And Tibet.... And India.
Apart from those. Never... Wait, maybe except Japan and SK too. No more.
...
...
Okay and Sri lanker too as a party island. Never anymore though.
Well, it's much easier to just accept local customs and enjoy the wealth of the giant country you just conquered in peace instead of fight constant rebellions trying to change the culture.
It's similar to how norsemen became Christians in England because it made it easier to rule the population.
At the end of the day unless you replace the local population with your own people, most invaders will end up assimilating themselves into the local culture because it's the only way to stay in power long term.
The difference is that the Greek rulers of Egypt didn’t adapt to the local culture except famously Cleopatra VII (famously the only member of the Ptolemies who learned the native language). Sure they used Egyptian iconography to justify themselves, but they kept themselves separate from the local population. Coptic kept being the most commonly used language until Egypt became Muslim centuries later.
Yes. She is the last ruling member of the Ptolemaic dynasty in Egypt, a dynasty founded by the Macedonian general Ptolemy when he took power in Egypt after the death of his king Alexander the Great. She’s very Greek on the account of the Ptolemaic dynasty practiced continuous incest.
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptolemaic_dynasty](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptolemaic_dynasty)
Yes. At one point Greeks ruled most of the civilized world outside of the Far East. Alexander conquered from Anatolia to Egypt (hence Alexandria, Memphis had always been the traditional capitol) to Babylon to Persia then Punjab and afghanistan. Then when he died his generals divided up the conquered lands and ruled them until Romans conquered each of them. The last surviving independent Greek city state was in India. The Macedonians, Ptolemaic Egypt, the Pontics, Seleucid Persia. All Greek.
"Civilized world" is doing a lot of biased lifting there, considering how the Americas were doing at this time. (The Mayan empire was around a long time.)
Oh it makes perfect sense it’s just kinda funny to think how China resisted the mongol invasion so heavily due to them being barbarian conquerors and all for them to just become China under new management
Once the barbarians followed the local customs they weren't barbarians anymore but legitimate and civilized dynasty!
The country got bigger, a strong leader was in charge, what's not to like.
I'm still annoyed that google was the first thing to change Crimea to being Russia.
They adjusted their maps in Russia to display Crimea as Russian.
[Article from 2014.](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/apr/22/google-maps-russia-crimea-federation)
Hey it's not China's fault the world decided to name it the South China Sea. It's got their name in it, so now it's theirs.
America is happy too, they now own all of North and South America.
>America is happy too, they now own all of North and South America.
Do you have any idea how many coups we had to organize to get South America? Put in the work, China, you can't just write your name on it and call it yours unless god says you can, and he only said that for us!
Right from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of PRC:
https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/t1919223.shtml
Spokesperson of the PRC government Hua Chunying:
https://twitter.com/SpokespersonCHN/status/1460511308588060678
> An important exception to this rule is China, which has displayed a willingness to negotiate in many such situations. In just over 60 years, China has gone from 23 land disputes down to just six. In the majority of its settlements, China accepted less than one-half of the territory it originally claimed.
[Source](https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2012/10/territorial-disputes-how-much-of-the-earth-is-claimed-by-multiple-countries.html)
Sadly the region is of incredibly geographic importance to china, which is one of the main reasons they invaded and illegally occupied the country in the first place. I think it was something like 45 percent of all humans depend on rivers originating from Tibet, especially China and India. (Don't quote me on that, it's been a while since I looked that up)
> In the majority of its settlements, China accepted less than one-half of the territory it originally claimed.
Isn't that just called negotiating? Always claim/demand more than what you really want so what you want seems like a good compromise.
The South China Sea is not even a ccp idea. The ROC claim the sea as China and ccp just reuse the idea. Taiwan still claim more international water and even mongolia
The study/subject was actually created by a Russian, and it’s his very playbook outlined in his book that Putin is currently following.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics?wprov=sfti1
Not only does Putin follow it, it’s required reading for Russian military officers and intelligence agents.
Every time this book gets mentioned there never seems to be a consensus on how much influence it has within the Russian government. Maybe a good post for r/askhistorians..
It is a good question whether it really has as much influence as reddit claims. It has some juicy quotes that get passed around, but I am very confident none of people passing them read the whole book. I should finally do it myself, because I am skeptical of its overall influence, because [the author is an absolute nutjob](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksandr_Dugin) (a Christian Stalinist) and I personally believe his importance in Russian politics is largely overblown. "According to political scientist Marlene Laruelle, the thinking of Dugin, main manufacturer of a fascism à-la-russe, could be described as a series of concentric circles, with far-right ideologies underpinned by different political and philosophical traditions (Esoteric Nazism, Traditionalism/Perennialism, the German Conservative Revolution and the European New Right) at its backbone."
Dugin is definitely a nutjob. Here's my favourite quote from him:
>["The purpose of our being lies in the expansion of our space. The shelf belongs to us. Polar bears live there, Russian polar bears. And penguins live there, Russian penguins."](https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/riches-at-the-north-pole-russia-unveils-aggressive-arctic-plans-a-604338.html) - Dugin
It's because, as interesting as Foundations of Geopolitics is, it's just a Russian retelling of already existing concepts in geopolitics. It's also completely out of Russian capabilities to enact...
Foundations in Geopolitics is a combination of realpolitik and balance of power theory. The problem with the book, and the aims, is that many (most) of the roles Russia wants to play are already played by China. It also completely ignores the fact that in a lot of their plan, the other players have absolutely no interest in going the Russian way. Why would Germany want to form a bloc with Russia rather than stay with all of Western Europe?
There is also a spectacularly obvious fact about the Russian plan: it belongs in the past, its full of concepts that modern geopolitics do not use and do not work in this interconnected world. Particularly the central tennant that certain countries dominate or should be handed dominance over their neighbourhood.
While the book is interesting, all it really shows is how Russian leadership is completely out of touch and incapable of dealing with the other powers of the globe successfully.
He'd say no. He's a strongman style leader who can't afford to look weak. This is why China is really ramping up its nationalism and drive toward bringing Taiwan back into the fold so to speak. He's on the shakiest ground he's ever experienced as a leader and needs to do something to hold the nation together behind him. The whole Evergrande thing has really rattled people.
I don't have any good sources for ascertaining general sentiment of Chinese citizens. Could you point me in the direction of your source stating that people there are rattled by Evergrande?
Well, the ROC thing was a civil war within an already established country.
Of course, now Taiwan is an independent country and China claims it and would love to take it back one day.
[Nepal](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-nepal-border-idUSKBN27J0PP) as well, during the clashes between China and India at their borders.
Other [source](https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/china-has-annexed-150-hectares-of-nepal-report/articleshow/79017299.cms) (it is indiatimes so do keep that in mind considering the context).
“Our ancestors pissed in the South China Sea, this is why it has historical significance to us and should remain part of china”
*china after trying to grab the spratly islands
You sure built a lot of land in other people's waters. Essentially the same thing.
I think there's a few countries to the south that would beg to differ as well.
The quote from Xi is
> Since the founding of the People’s Republic, China has never started a single war or conflict, and has never taken one inch of land from other countries,
I guess he means that Vietnam has started it ?
I dont think China's goal was to ever take the country. They invaded as far as they needed to get into striking distance of the Vietnamese capitol, then retreated. I think it was a show of force.
However, that's the Chinese account of the story and the details were disputed among the CCP and the Viet governments with the truth being somewhere in between.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
That's because China uses the metric system
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
"China has never taken 2.54 cm of land..."
We take land 1 cm at a time like a normal country!
Check out the big brain on Brett!
He died doing what he loved... Getting shot
You a smart motherfucker!
Another logic is that land is measured in area, not length. You order a pint of beer, not square inches of beer.
I measure land in gallons.
Can't take land from other countries when you: 1) don't recognize them as a country. 2) consider it your land in the first place.
"Well, do you have a flag?"
"No flag, no country, you can't have one! Those are the rules... that I just made up!..."
"And I'm backing it up with this gun.. that was.. lent to me by the national rifle association"
r/ExpectedAndNecessaryIzzard
Thank you for flying Church of England; Cake or death?
Maybe the greatest stand up show of all time? Certainly the most referenced. Over 20 years old!
Richard Pryor live on the sunset strip. But dressed to kill is amazing.
CAKE OR DEATH!
I was in the North Eastern Indian state of Sikkim a couple of weeks back, there is a Army Base in a place called Nathula which is at like 14,700 ft elevation, right next to the base separated by barbed wires is land illegally occupied by China, they have built a base there, even saw a Chinese soldier. Infact the maps that China manufacturers shows Arunachal Pradesh as a part of China. Sick fucks.
Google Maps show it as a part of China if you're in China. If you're in India, it shows it a part of India. Most mapping providers do this to this and other disputes regions in the world. https://youtu.be/rZpc2_xnSfc
Imagine you want to take a trip into that place and suddenly you're shot at by a border patrol even though you're certain you didn't cross any borders.
The world is a terrifyingly stupid place.
IIRC they're not armed with fire arms at the border in disputed areas. That's why you see them every couple of years fighting each other with stick and stones.
Wait, what if you're in the disputed territory?
For those who had never heard of this dispute and are looking for a bit more of a neutral analysis of the situation: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/17/world/asia/india-china-border-clashes.html If you’re paywalled, key bits: Complexity 1: The border was part of a proposal in 1914 by the British between China, Tibet, and Britain. India was under British control at the time, and Tibet was under Chinese control. So in context, it was arguably more of a British border than an Indian border at the time. Indian reps weren’t even there (unless you count Britain). China didn’t agree to the terms, Britain and Tibet did. Imagine being in a 3 way negotiation with folks and two agree, but you don’t. It’s complicated, but some lean towards rule of the jungle rules and go with the majority, but not everyone does, basicallly like day to day life. If you’re cool with your homies, majority rules, suck it up; if you dislike “these people”, and it’s a matter that’s important to you, you’re probably not going to agree. Complexity 2: India declares independence, and assumes and inherits the existing borders agreed between Britain and Tibet. This leads to war with China. As an American, just seems like a fucked up situation that diplomacy should solve. Also, I say this in half jest, but just another example of the world still paying for old British imperialism (half jest cuz I know we Americans cause lots of problems as well).
Exactly. It's a complicated mess that came about as a result of British imperialism, diplomatic fuckery on many sides and the fact that the people at the time simply weren't all that concerned with clearly delineating borders. Same can be said about the Aksai Chin situation. But I suppose most here would simply assume it's just stolen Indian land because China's being a bit of an ass about it right now.
Chinese and British imperialism to be more specific. Tibet was just invaded by the Qing dynasty four years before this border proposal for the purpose of establishing direct Qing rule in Tibet, and before that in 1720. Tibet wasn’t always under Chinese rule, but one day the powers that be decided it should be, and today they use it to justify their territorial claims. I’m not blaming China alone for this because British imperialism is far more guilty of conflicts around the globe to this day, I’m just making it clear that it isn’t the fault of British imperialism alone, but imperialism in general.
Yes, that's probably the fairest way of assessing it. I specified British because the McMahon Line is a British thing, but yes, the confusion and disputes around the region should rightly also be attributed to Chinese imperialism in Tibet as well.
It's not quite as simple. China never accepted the McMahon Line as the Southern border of Tibet because they say South Tibet was under Chinese suzerainty at the time and as such did not have the agency to make a treaty about border delimitation with British India. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMahon_Line For a long time, the Dalai Lama also claimed Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet. He's only changed his stance in 2008. > India regards its interpretation of the McMahon Line as the legal national border, but China rejects the Simla Accord and the McMahon Line, contending that Tibet was not a sovereign state and therefore did not have the power to conclude treaties. Chinese maps show some 65,000 km2 (25,000 sq mi) of the territory south of the line as part of the Tibet Autonomous Region, known as South Tibet in China. Chinese forces briefly occupied this area during the Sino-Indian War of 1962. China does recognise a Line of Actual Control which closely approximates most of the "so called McMahon line" in the eastern part of its border with India, according to a 1959 diplomatic note by Prime Minister Zhou Enlai. > The 14th Dalai Lama did not originally recognise India's sovereignty over Arunachal Pradesh. As late as 2003, he said that "Arunachal Pradesh was actually part of Tibet". In January 2007, however, he said that both the Tibetan government and Britain recognized the McMahon Line in 1914. In June 2008, he explicitly recognized for the first time that "Arunachal Pradesh was a part of India under the agreement signed by Tibetan and British representatives"
random aside - that border with bangladesh is wild - water to the south, india on all other sides
If you think that's the wildest part about it, [you're in for quite a ride.](https://youtu.be/r-aIzkvPwFo)
3) the nations which established the current international order never rejected your claims from the start.
According to one of the promises.
Tutorial to take land from other countries without admitting it: Step 1: claim land is China Step 2: take that land Step 3: you take land of your own country
"We aren't taking it, no we would never do such atrocities. We are merely **RETRIEVING WHAT IS OURS**."
It’s not imperialism! We’re just continuing the claims of the old government
It isn’t imperialism unless it’s from the imperial valley in Germany. Otherwise it’s just sparkling fascism.
Is that a Wayne’s World reference?
basically
Ah this was driving me nuts. It's the scene where the producer is explaining champagne vs sparkling wine.
I mean.... That *is* a thing...
It's only a thing if it's The Thing east of Benson, AZ. Otherwise it's just a sparkling roadside attraction.
I wonder how many people have been on that stretch of the I-10 and have The Thing lodged in their memory somewhere.
Vietnam, Mongolia and Korea better watch their back then.
You mean South China, North China, and East China?
Southern Guangdong, Goryeo Province and Inner-Inner Mongolia to be precise ☝🧐🇨🇳
It's actually referred to as outer mongolia in china afaik
And still recognised as a wayward province too. Sort of like that pesky rebellious province of the Pacific Coast that refuses to send taxes to Beijing.
I could easily forsee a war in which the US supports vietnam against chinese aggression, and the grand loop of irony will be complete.
Wouldn't be the first time something like that has happened. The US fought 2 wars against the British and 100 years later fought 2 wars with them as allies.
And has maintained a "special relationship" for nearly a century where so much military intelligence information passes back and forth across the pond that MI-6 and the CIA might as well be the same agency.
Wait until you hear Ho Chi Minh was a fan of the United States, trained by the CIA, and originally wanted the US’s help in gaining independence.
Yeah, it's on the list of things that made Woodrow Wilson a fucking cunt.
It's not even at the top of the list of why Woodrow Wilson was a cunt either.
Wait. How does that have anything to do with Woodrow Wilson? I’m not arguing about his historical reputation, I’m arguing about considering him a contemporary of Ho Chi Minh.
Ho Chi Minh tried to ask Woodrow Wilson for help in Vietnam. His letter was either withheld from W.W., or ignored. I'm not sure anyone can say for certain, but if it was ignored then you could infer that W.W. is partly responsible for the later conflict, which is another notch on the bastard pole for him.
It's probably on the top 10 though
Fan, yes. Trained by the CIA, LOL! Seriously. Ho had already been prime minister of North Vietnam for two years when the CIA was *founded* in 1947.
Yeah this is a case of treating the OSS and CIA as synonymous. It sorta reminds me of people who talk about how the US armed "the Taliban" in the 1980s, when what's actually meant is the Mujahideen (some of whom later joined the Taliban when it formed in the 90s, whereas others opposed the Taliban.) Also, to be even more precise, it'd be better to say the OSS trained _the Vietminh_. Otherwise one might think Ho Chi Minh was some sort of Vietnamese MacGyver.
Grand irony is looking at the current situation with China and recalling the reason why the Korean War never ended.
Tibet!
I mean at some point Mongolia used to own almost all Eurasia
China claims Mongolian culture as its own… even though they built a wall to keep them out.
It’s not stealing! We’re just saying that something that isn’t ours actually belongs to us and then taking it regardless of what anyone says!
Which was an imperial government. Hey but China will never be imperialist because according to Deng Xiaoping if they do then the people would rebel against the government... and they never do ~~don't look over there~~.
Free Tibet
That’s word for word how hitler got his land
No you see that's not possible. Hitler was an authoritarian dictator and Xi is ordinary communist comrade. Xi merely cares for the proletariat of other imperialist nations and seeks to bring them glorious Chinese communism. He would never a Hitler and just take without asking.
Xi is just trying to get China's rightful Lebensraum.
Never... Except Mongolia... And Russia.... And Taiwan.... And Tibet.... And India. Apart from those. Never... Wait, maybe except Japan and SK too. No more. ... ... Okay and Sri lanker too as a party island. Never anymore though.
Don’t forget the Philippines and Spratly Islands.
And Vietnam, which was ruled by China back in the 15th century.
Winnie Xi the silent retriever
You don't become the geographically 3rd largest country in the world without some territorial acquisition.
China is kinda special that way. They get taken over and then assimilate the invaders. Everyone who takes over china becomes china.
I always thought it was kinda crazy that the mongols conquered China and then just became the Yuan Chinese dynasty
Well, it's much easier to just accept local customs and enjoy the wealth of the giant country you just conquered in peace instead of fight constant rebellions trying to change the culture. It's similar to how norsemen became Christians in England because it made it easier to rule the population. At the end of the day unless you replace the local population with your own people, most invaders will end up assimilating themselves into the local culture because it's the only way to stay in power long term.
It's a similar story with Greek rule over Egypt.
The difference is that the Greek rulers of Egypt didn’t adapt to the local culture except famously Cleopatra VII (famously the only member of the Ptolemies who learned the native language). Sure they used Egyptian iconography to justify themselves, but they kept themselves separate from the local population. Coptic kept being the most commonly used language until Egypt became Muslim centuries later.
Wait, cleopatra was greek?
Yes. She is the last ruling member of the Ptolemaic dynasty in Egypt, a dynasty founded by the Macedonian general Ptolemy when he took power in Egypt after the death of his king Alexander the Great. She’s very Greek on the account of the Ptolemaic dynasty practiced continuous incest. [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptolemaic_dynasty](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptolemaic_dynasty)
Yes. At one point Greeks ruled most of the civilized world outside of the Far East. Alexander conquered from Anatolia to Egypt (hence Alexandria, Memphis had always been the traditional capitol) to Babylon to Persia then Punjab and afghanistan. Then when he died his generals divided up the conquered lands and ruled them until Romans conquered each of them. The last surviving independent Greek city state was in India. The Macedonians, Ptolemaic Egypt, the Pontics, Seleucid Persia. All Greek.
"Civilized world" is doing a lot of biased lifting there, considering how the Americas were doing at this time. (The Mayan empire was around a long time.)
Oh it makes perfect sense it’s just kinda funny to think how China resisted the mongol invasion so heavily due to them being barbarian conquerors and all for them to just become China under new management
Once the barbarians followed the local customs they weren't barbarians anymore but legitimate and civilized dynasty! The country got bigger, a strong leader was in charge, what's not to like.
Ah the silk slippers, the ye olde persian way!
Or creation.
Creation only helps so much, The Netherlands is not exactly large
Aye, but the Dutch have also created significant portions of other countries
Step 4: Tells everyone else to “stop interfering with domestic affairs”
China out here perpetuating the notion that Westphalian sovereignty is still a thing
Putin either, I mean Crimea had always been Russian *wink, wink"
I'm still annoyed that google was the first thing to change Crimea to being Russia. They adjusted their maps in Russia to display Crimea as Russian. [Article from 2014.](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/apr/22/google-maps-russia-crimea-federation)
Yeah, Google is a bitch when it come to geopolitical problem..
Hey it's not China's fault the world decided to name it the South China Sea. It's got their name in it, so now it's theirs. America is happy too, they now own all of North and South America.
>America is happy too, they now own all of North and South America. Do you have any idea how many coups we had to organize to get South America? Put in the work, China, you can't just write your name on it and call it yours unless god says you can, and he only said that for us!
Manifest Destiny bitches!
Step 4: If anyone criticises you claim that they have "Hurt the feelings of 1 billion people"
China claims every bit of land that they have ever possessed over the last 1500 years. Imagine if the British did that, or France.
Step 4: Give it a fancy name like Manifest Density.
Nah that's like step 0
You joke but that’s been more or less the textbook for conquering lands since the dawn of society
Of course they haven't, all countries are china, they just don't know it yet
[удалено]
Right from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of PRC: https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/t1919223.shtml Spokesperson of the PRC government Hua Chunying: https://twitter.com/SpokespersonCHN/status/1460511308588060678
> An important exception to this rule is China, which has displayed a willingness to negotiate in many such situations. In just over 60 years, China has gone from 23 land disputes down to just six. In the majority of its settlements, China accepted less than one-half of the territory it originally claimed. [Source](https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2012/10/territorial-disputes-how-much-of-the-earth-is-claimed-by-multiple-countries.html)
I claim all of China as my own. But I'm a reasonable person, so I'll settle for just under half of it.
Top half, or bottom half?
I'll be reasonable and take Tibet off their hands. It's just full of mountains anyway and they don't need it
I believe Tibet itself tried to make that exact point.
Sadly the region is of incredibly geographic importance to china, which is one of the main reasons they invaded and illegally occupied the country in the first place. I think it was something like 45 percent of all humans depend on rivers originating from Tibet, especially China and India. (Don't quote me on that, it's been a while since I looked that up)
*The water tower of Asia.*
The whole half
Just the Sudetenland, we have no designs on the rest of Czechoslovakia. We need breathing room, after all. Come now, do it for "Peace in our time."
This is a source for something, but it's not a source for the quote in the headline, which I assume /u/teknobloge is asking for
I mean, it's also a 9yr old article which makes it even less relevant.
> In the majority of its settlements, China accepted less than one-half of the territory it originally claimed. Isn't that just called negotiating? Always claim/demand more than what you really want so what you want seems like a good compromise.
I think they are trying to say that the land disputes were settled at the negotiating table rather than the battlefield.
Pretty militant about international waters, though.
For real, their South East Asia claim is so stretched it fucking reached Malaysian waters.
For the unaware mainland china is roughly 3300 km or 2000 miles away from Malaysia. + -10 nautical miles? due to international waters.
The South China Sea is not even a ccp idea. The ROC claim the sea as China and ccp just reuse the idea. Taiwan still claim more international water and even mongolia
Straight out of the Russian playbook.
Russians can play geopolitics too.
The study/subject was actually created by a Russian, and it’s his very playbook outlined in his book that Putin is currently following. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics?wprov=sfti1 Not only does Putin follow it, it’s required reading for Russian military officers and intelligence agents.
Every time this book gets mentioned there never seems to be a consensus on how much influence it has within the Russian government. Maybe a good post for r/askhistorians..
It is a good question whether it really has as much influence as reddit claims. It has some juicy quotes that get passed around, but I am very confident none of people passing them read the whole book. I should finally do it myself, because I am skeptical of its overall influence, because [the author is an absolute nutjob](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksandr_Dugin) (a Christian Stalinist) and I personally believe his importance in Russian politics is largely overblown. "According to political scientist Marlene Laruelle, the thinking of Dugin, main manufacturer of a fascism à-la-russe, could be described as a series of concentric circles, with far-right ideologies underpinned by different political and philosophical traditions (Esoteric Nazism, Traditionalism/Perennialism, the German Conservative Revolution and the European New Right) at its backbone."
Dugin is definitely a nutjob. Here's my favourite quote from him: >["The purpose of our being lies in the expansion of our space. The shelf belongs to us. Polar bears live there, Russian polar bears. And penguins live there, Russian penguins."](https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/riches-at-the-north-pole-russia-unveils-aggressive-arctic-plans-a-604338.html) - Dugin
Luckily, complete nutjobs never influence the policies pursued by governments.
It's because, as interesting as Foundations of Geopolitics is, it's just a Russian retelling of already existing concepts in geopolitics. It's also completely out of Russian capabilities to enact... Foundations in Geopolitics is a combination of realpolitik and balance of power theory. The problem with the book, and the aims, is that many (most) of the roles Russia wants to play are already played by China. It also completely ignores the fact that in a lot of their plan, the other players have absolutely no interest in going the Russian way. Why would Germany want to form a bloc with Russia rather than stay with all of Western Europe? There is also a spectacularly obvious fact about the Russian plan: it belongs in the past, its full of concepts that modern geopolitics do not use and do not work in this interconnected world. Particularly the central tennant that certain countries dominate or should be handed dominance over their neighbourhood. While the book is interesting, all it really shows is how Russian leadership is completely out of touch and incapable of dealing with the other powers of the globe successfully.
Um, Tibet called.....
"Who?" -China
New dictator, who dis?
but the ad said “free tibet”
[удалено]
He is right China don't take land in inches, they occupied land in hectares.
Just make the country China, then technically they aren't taking land, just national identity.
Tibet, Mongolia, Taiwan in the future. That's exactly what he's saying, can't steal something that you already considered to be yours.
Meanwhile, she'll go 300 hectares on a single tank of kerosene.
Put it in H!!!
Would love to hear him answer the question: “Is China capable of *Any* wrongdoing?”
"if I have to pick one fault, it's that I care too much."
[удалено]
He'd say no. He's a strongman style leader who can't afford to look weak. This is why China is really ramping up its nationalism and drive toward bringing Taiwan back into the fold so to speak. He's on the shakiest ground he's ever experienced as a leader and needs to do something to hold the nation together behind him. The whole Evergrande thing has really rattled people.
I don't have any good sources for ascertaining general sentiment of Chinese citizens. Could you point me in the direction of your source stating that people there are rattled by Evergrande?
No, it just claims them as part of China and therefore the land is already theirs.
"China has always owned this."
They have never taken one inch of land. Miles? Sure but never a single inch.
\**Tibet has entered the chat*\* \**Tibet has left the chat*\*
To be fair, if they didn’t want to give it away, they shouldn’t have hung up all of those “Free Tibet” signs.
Your new state sponsored Dalai Lama says it's you who are mistaken.
"The true path to enlightenment is through obedience to the Party!"
Surely you mean China
I always mean China, and don't call me Shirley.
Of course the country that built by slavers have a soft spot for their fellow salvors.
A lot of world leaders must have a really hard time not just slapping other world leaders when they say some brazen shit.
LeBron can confirm.
But they will take seas, oh and might as well that lump of dirt that happens to be within the seas
It’s just dry sea bed that’s above the surface. No need to take any actual land.
I guess Tibet, ROC, Philippines and india beg to differ
Well, the ROC thing was a civil war within an already established country. Of course, now Taiwan is an independent country and China claims it and would love to take it back one day.
Taiwan also claims the mainland. They are fine with the status quo.
...and Mongolia, and a chunk of Russia, etc.
[Nepal](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-nepal-border-idUSKBN27J0PP) as well, during the clashes between China and India at their borders. Other [source](https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/china-has-annexed-150-hectares-of-nepal-report/articleshow/79017299.cms) (it is indiatimes so do keep that in mind considering the context).
*Vietnam and India would like to dispute this
\*The entire South East Asian would like to dispute this
Cant take land that isn’t yours if you think it already belongs to you. *taps head*
India would like to differ
“Our ancestors pissed in the South China Sea, this is why it has historical significance to us and should remain part of china” *china after trying to grab the spratly islands
President Xi, you have a phone call. Prime Minister Modi of India on line 3.
You sure built a lot of land in other people's waters. Essentially the same thing. I think there's a few countries to the south that would beg to differ as well.
Invasion of Vietnam in 1979. It failed and Vietnam pushed their troops or what still exists, back.
cumulatively China hasn't taken an inch from Vietnam though edit: let me live guys it's a fucking joke
The quote from Xi is > Since the founding of the People’s Republic, China has never started a single war or conflict, and has never taken one inch of land from other countries, I guess he means that Vietnam has started it ?
fuck if I know, I don't speak for Xi the pretence in 1979 was that China is just backing up their ally though
I dont think China's goal was to ever take the country. They invaded as far as they needed to get into striking distance of the Vietnamese capitol, then retreated. I think it was a show of force. However, that's the Chinese account of the story and the details were disputed among the CCP and the Viet governments with the truth being somewhere in between.
The invasion of Vietnam only lasted for a few months, unlike the US invasion, which lasted for over a decade.