China's mass surveillance of the world for secrets and scandal

[Macrosszero]

23 minutes ago, Nolicense said:

this kishore, lky and many have said similar. just because sg has majority chinese, the prc think we should think like them, which is not so. they think "why sg having military exercise in taiwan?", but sg history we all know better. we have relations with those countries when we started, we will keep these relations close.

the prc has misread sg. sg may have majority chinese but the geopolitics and interests are all different. 

will they continue to misread? or do they already understand our position, but just want to scare a kid by with holding their toy?

they have every right to detain the terrex. we screwed up by sending it there. dont blame others because we violated their laws.

they returned it in the end at least not in bolts and nuts like for the us.

i made all the geopolitical points here. what is the lesson you want to tell us by reminding us of the terrex incident? that a strong prc will claim pedra branca?

 

The point of mentioning Terrex is that is one case where they screwed us over, despite immediate diplomatic overtures to claim and secure their release. We engaged the shipper but we aren't the ones filling the forms or spelling out the route that equipment to take between Starlight and Singapore. That's like saying I need to be a qualified pilot in order to be a passenger on a plane. 

If you went to read the facts of the case, the punishment for failing to declare the military hardware, was a $90k HKD fine for the shipping line and the $9k HKD fine with a 3 month suspended jail term for the captain, virtually a slap on the wrist. Coincidentally, the Captain of the ship happened to be a PRC national. 

Conspiracy theories aside, I'm not privy to the sequence of oversights leading to that situation, but the subsequent publicly-announced changes to shipment SOP alludes to weaknesses that other parties chose to exploit at a time of their choosing, in order to send a thinly-veiled message, through a third party. 

I'm no seasoned political commentator, just some guy who has an interest in some topics. But I think this following article sums up the meaning behind these moves better that I could.

https://www.todayonline.com/commentary/making-sense-terrex-incident

Edited June 28, 2021 by Macrosszero

[inlinesix]

58 minutes ago, Victor68 said:

Boy, I have said, we need all not China alone. Even if you are a chinese, you think China treat you as one of them? Worse, if you speak like an ang moh, you are still not ang moh, at most a good interpreter only. We need a balance power. One power gets too strong, they will push you around like rubbish. We have witnessed this many times just over the last 40 years if you are in your 60ies. 

We don't need a balance of power. 

We can't handle being squeezed by 2 giant.

[Nolicense]

38 minutes ago, Macrosszero said:

 

The point of mentioning Terrex is that is one case where they screwed us over, despite immediate diplomatic overtures to claim and secure their release. We engaged the shipper but we aren't the ones filling the forms or spelling out the route that equipment to take between Starlight and Singapore. That's like saying I need to be a qualified pilot in order to be a passenger on a plane. 

If you went to read the facts of the case, the punishment for failing to declare the military hardware, was a $90k HKD fine for the shipping line and the $9k HKD fine with a 3 month suspended jail term for the captain, virtually a slap on the wrist. Coincidentally, the Captain of the ship happened to be a PRC national. 

Conspiracy theories aside, I'm not privy to the sequence of oversights leading to that situation, but the subsequent publicly-announced changes to shipment SOP alludes to weaknesses that other parties chose to exploit at a time of their choosing, in order to send a thinly-veiled message, through a third party. 

I'm no seasoned political commentator, just some guy who has an interest in some topics. But I think this following article sums up the meaning behind these moves better that I could.

https://www.todayonline.com/commentary/making-sense-terrex-incident

yes well written article. diplomacy can be in any shape, way or form. the msg is sent during the dip in relations. 

should we choose to read it as prc sending a msg? or should we read it as prc forever screw sg?

some people just dont know how to put things in context and throw such examples around.

[Nolicense]

47 minutes ago, inlinesix said:

We don't need a balance of power. 

We can't handle being squeezed by 2 giant.

dont need 2 hands to squeeze our balls. 1 hand is just as effective. even malaysia which is by no means a giant, is enough to squeeze our balls

i remember they were playing racial politics in 2015. until the prc ambassador had to visit where the red shirts going to create trouble.

trust the us ambassador to do nothing of cos

Edited June 28, 2021 by Nolicense

[Beregond]

38 minutes ago, Nolicense said:

yes well written article. diplomacy can be in any shape, way or form. the msg is sent during the dip in relations. 

should we choose to read it as prc sending a msg? or should we read it as prc forever screw sg?

some people just dont know how to put things in context and throw such examples around.

waste time also la.

terrex is china issue, the goods went pass their port, they can do what ever shit they want with it.

like the lady went pass canada airport, never even go in, they lure her in and detain her, against all their own law

like china parcels kenna detain and open by cia or fbi i forgot. against all their own law also.

in whosever land follow whosever law . worry or scare, dun go, dun use their service.

whats there to complain about.😂

tw issue is china issue, which country dun wack their rebels, indian dun fight the tamil tigers?  the british dun fight the IRA??

u name it, every legit gov in every country have all their right to wack any rebels gov in their own country.

but which country support rebels in other country to rise up to start civil war??? so far only 1 main culprit that i know of.

Edited June 28, 2021 by Beregond

[Vinyl]

1 hour ago, Nolicense said:

this kishore, lky and many have said similar. just because sg has majority chinese, the prc think we should think like them, which is not so. they think "why sg having military exercise in taiwan?", but sg history we all know better. we have relations with those countries when we started, we will keep these relations close.

the prc has misread sg. sg may have majority chinese but the geopolitics and interests are all different. 

will they continue to misread? or do they already understand our position, but just want to scare a kid by with holding their toy?

they have every right to detain the terrex. we screwed up by sending it there. dont blame others because we violated their laws.

they returned it in the end at least not in bolts and nuts like for the us.

i made all the geopolitical points here. what is the lesson you want to tell us by reminding us of the terrex incident? that a strong prc will claim pedra branca?

He always mentioned the Terrex incident because it hurts him badly right in the emotions. Are we above the laws of other countries? The facts are laid out in the courts but emotions always get the better of some.

https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/hong-kong-court-says-shipping-firm-captain-guilty-over-seizure-of-singapore-saf

China and HK made up almost 25% of our trade, relations are good but someone stuck with wrong memories of the Terrex incident, refuse to read that article and continue to be in denial of the facts.

 

[Victor68]

1 hour ago, inlinesix said:

We don't need a balance of power. 

We can't handle being squeezed by 2 giant.

You may not like or want, but when the big power colonize you, you will hope there is another big brother to counter balance for you. 

[inlinesix]

3 minutes ago, Victor68 said:

You may not like or want, but when the big power colonize you, you will hope there is another big brother to counter balance for you. 

I don't want any form of colonisation. 

I also don't want any counterbalance as the current administration can't balance btw both.

[Victor68]

28 minutes ago, inlinesix said:

I don't want any form of colonisation. 

I also don't want any counterbalance as the current administration can't balance btw both.

Got such thing or not. Don't be so navie. Why then our government got to be so busy with these people. Just ignore them lor. 

[Nolicense]

27 minutes ago, inlinesix said:

I don't want any form of colonisation. 

I also don't want any counterbalance as the current administration can't balance btw both.

we are all just saying reality has been forced upon us. expressing zero engagement with both will make sg lose out. including both their interests that align with our interest may give us some benefit.

if that is called counter balance, ok, but i call it working for mutual benefit for all parties. the current sitting gahmen how they do things or how they are hemmed in, i dont know. 

just like australia, now china have to buy more stuff from usa becos usa start trade war, suddenly blame china for trade war. 

https://www.scmp.com/economy/global-economy/article/3133952/us-exports-china-grow-expense-australia-after-beijings-trade

and even better still, send war ships to patrol scs against china because they say they protect their trade routes. and who is their biggest trade partner? 

obviously they cant even explain themselves

[inlinesix]

4 minutes ago, Nolicense said:

we are all just saying reality has been forced upon us. expressing zero engagement with both will make sg lose out. including both their interests that align with our interest may give us some benefit.

if that is called counter balance, ok, but i call it working for mutual benefit for all parties. the current sitting gahmen how they do things or how they are hemmed in, i dont know. 

just like australia, now china have to buy more stuff from usa becos usa start trade war, suddenly blame china for trade war. 

https://www.scmp.com/economy/global-economy/article/3133952/us-exports-china-grow-expense-australia-after-beijings-trade

and even better still, send war ships to patrol scs against china because they say they protect their trade routes. and who is their biggest trade partner? 

obviously they cant even explain themselves

Simplistically, no Strong China in Singapore backyard.

That's not in the best interest of Singapore.

It does not mean ZERO engagement.

[Victor68]

6 minutes ago, inlinesix said:

Simplistically, no Strong China in Singapore backyard.

That's not in the best interest of Singapore.

It does not mean ZERO engagement.

This is just you and those with your same mind set that want it this way. For me, it is Important for Singapore to align with China given their economy strength going forward for survival. We hope someday, Korea will join in and push ASEAN to the next level. We want economy growth. We are not interested in these wars. 

Definitely we won't like to see ourselves like Iraq or previous vietnam. Imposing their democratic principle and human rights. They can have guns to shoot each other we don't care. What is the point of a big brother bombing our neighbours for their own interests? Play their game further away. 

[inlinesix]

2 minutes ago, Victor68 said:

This is just you and those with your same mind set that want it this way. For me, it is Important for Singapore to align with China given their economy strength going forward for survival. We hope someday, Korea will join in and push ASEAN to the next level. We want economy growth. We are not interested in these wars. 

Definitely we won't like to see ourselves like Iraq or previous vietnam. Imposing their democratic principle and human rights. They can have guns to shoot each other we don't care. What is the point of a big brother bombing our neighbours for their own interests? Play their game further away. 

By aligning to China, would it put us in a similar situation as with CURRENT CECA?

Anyway, there is RCEP as well as Sg-CN FTA in place now.

[Nolicense]

19 minutes ago, inlinesix said:

Simplistically, no Strong China in Singapore backyard.

That's not in the best interest of Singapore.

It does not mean ZERO engagement.

like i said. reality is forced upon us. china and india has been the worlds largest economies for more than 2000 years. the last 200 years is an aberration. thats a fact. the wheel of fortune turns and powes rise and fall.

time does not stand still. but people can live in the past. 

strange that you say china is in sg backyard. i didnt know our back yard is so big..

 

[Nolicense]

9 minutes ago, inlinesix said:

By aligning to China, would it put us in a similar situation as with CURRENT CECA?

Anyway, there is RCEP as well as Sg-CN FTA in place now.

god no. not another stupidly lop side agreement. since when china wages lower than india or sg? since when they start to issue fake certs? sg better dont be this stupid.

unless ceca was signed on purpose for reasons only pap knows

[Beregond]

1 hour ago, Victor68 said:

Got such thing or not. Don't be so navie. Why then our government got to be so busy with these people. Just ignore them lor. 

some ppl very naive.

the counterbalance of the superpower of the world have all along be in play since ww2 end.

there is no such thing as i choose to stay out.

if there is no S.U to counter usa. usa might have nuke N.V already . when NV defeated the french, france requested usa to drop 3 nuke on them. down right evil right? i cannot own u , i destroy u . but usa rejected the ideal. 1 key reason is SU  own nuke also. they might drop on usa allies if usa drop on viet.

after the fall of SU, there is no 1 to counter the west. what happen? middle east become their playground. 

asia is lucky , why? cos china is rising all the while. if china didnt step in to take over SU role of countering usa. asia could easily become their next play ground.

due to british clever way of drawing borders in africa, africa have been west playground all the while, cos they busy fighting themself.

we must alway remember this clearly in our mind. superpower dun need any valid reason to start a war and invade u .

remember iraq wmd? 

remember viet? ( yes the story  to invade viet is make up, sold to the usa congress to get the vote to start a war)

[Lala81]

On 6/22/2021 at 11:03 AM, Scion said:

 

another "myth" was that Japan surrendered due to the atomic bombs..

actually the 2 atomic bombs were no worse than the fire bombing of Tokyo that killed more Japanese than what happened at Hiroshima and Nagasaki

by the time the atomic bombs were dropped, Japan already could no longer continue the war and the defeat was imminent 

(US was said to drop the bombs anyway because firstly they wanted to end the war quickly, and secondly to awe other potential enemies, ie Soviet Union... although by that period, they were still "allies")

there was also a saying that Japan "chose" to surrender to US as they believed a democratic US would treat them better after the war

Soviet Union had declared war on Japan on 8 Aug 1945 and their troops were rapidly marching into the puppet state of Manchukuo

Japan was extremely afraid that Soviet Union would go on to occupy and slaughter them to revenge their humiliating defeat during the Japan-Russia war in 1905

 

history is just interesting to read 😁

I believe Truman ordered the atomic bombs cos of the DoD estimates of american casualties if a land invasion of the mainland japan was attempted.
Iwo Jima and Okinawa were already pretty brutal.

Don't believe that Japs had reached out to America in peace overture/armistice before hiroshima/nagasaki.

[Scion]

37 minutes ago, Lala81 said:

I believe Truman ordered the atomic bombs cos of the DoD estimates of american casualties if a land invasion of the mainland japan was attempted.
Iwo Jima and Okinawa were already pretty brutal.

Don't believe that Japs had reached out to America in peace overture/armistice before hiroshima/nagasaki.

from what i read, the hawkish faction in the Jap govt wanted to fight to the last soldier...

they were prepared to deal a big blow to the US invasion of the Japan mainland 

 

towards the end of war, the significant dates were:

6 Aug - 1st atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima

8 Aug - Soviet Union declared war on Japan and rapidly mobilizing its armies to the east

9 Aug - 2nd atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki

15 Aug - Jap emperor announced surrender 

 

some historians think that the Soviet Union one was the most significant of the three major dates, the one that really crushed the hawks' hopes of continuing the war to the very end