Why did China commit 8000 PLA soldiers as UN Peacekeepers?

[Andy_Ross]

Perhaps a better question would be:

Why did the USA commit 97,000 American soldiers as UN Peacekeepers?

The United Nations is a globalist, New World Order foundation of unelected technocrats serving the wealthiest bankers in the world, ever since it's founding. A couple years later on October 20th, 1947 John D. Rockefeller Jr., the son of one of the wealthiest men in one of the wealthiest families in the world, cut a check for $8.5 million dollars to the first UN Secretary General, Trygve Lie for the UN HQ in New York.

Etc.

Get a new song, guy.

At the moment the USA has only 29 active UN military peacekeepers

https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/troop-and-police-contributors

 

[Norman Alexander]

At the moment the USA has only 29 active UN military peacekeepers

https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/troop-and-police-contributors

Yep. But this number varies considerably over time.

 

[sackett]

It's the Yellow Peril! The Rising Tide of Colorfast, I mean Color! (Goddamn AutoCorrupt. An ASIAN invention for sure. Bet ya anything.) Just as Mr. Stoddard warned us! And the Kaiser! And Mr. Novikov, who was a REAL Russian, not some commie race-mixer!

Somebody should tell Mr. Hearst. He'll know what to do: civilize 'em with a Krag!

 

[Foster Zygote]

Good question. Your homework assignment is to discover who uttered the phrase "Competition is a sin."

Ha!

Oh, that's so cute that you think that J.D. Rockefeller was advocating some sort of communist even distribution of wealth. He was lamenting that he and Rothschild were reducing their profits by competing with one another. Drilling more oil wells and competing in the market was driving down the price of oil. He and Rothschild agreed to divide the market up into territories where they would each hold a monopoly. Oil princes climbed and they both got richer.

A modern analogy is U.S. cable provider's "Summer of Love" in which they wrote legislation for lawmakers to pass. This did the same thing - dividing the market into regions where each company could have a monopoly. They didn't have to compete with each other for the consumer's patronage. Consequently, cable service in the U.S. is dismal compared to the rest of the industrialized world. We pay much higher prices for much less bandwidth. And the prices keep going up because they've got consumers over a barrel, because it's either this one company or nothing.

Rockefeller wasn't advocating communism, he was advocating a ruthlessly capitalist scheme in which he and another oligarch could better **** the consumer for higher profits. You're demonstrating such an ignorance of fundamental concepts of economics that it's no wonder you can't distinguish communism from socialism. It seems you can't even distinguish it from capitalism.

 

[theprestige]

The US does the vast majority of its global peacekeeping missions under its own banner. As far as I can tell, UN peacekeepers serve partly as a jobs program for small and underfunded militaries. It's a great way to give your armed forces some field experience without actually having to start a whole-ass armed conflict with someone.

I figure that's the main reason China is doing this. Not so much for the UN funding stream itself. But to build a cadre of soldiers with wider experience in foreign operations, joint operations, and such like that.

 

[Tippit]

First, a PLA Army Division is around 12,000 soldiers. 8,000 spread around the global hell-holes is not a force to be reckoned with. Ethiopia has 6,000 troops wearing blue helmets. The UN has 95,000 peacekeepers total.

The United States currently has 30 UN peacekeepers. Plus we owe a bunch of money because former President Clownstick refused to pay up.

Quiet simply put, the US has stepped on its wee-wee creating a vacuum that China has slid into because they have the cash and are looking for political credibility on a global scale.

8000 is enough to support China's neo-colonialist aspirations in Africa, however, unless directly opposed by another nation-state with a capable military.

 

[Tippit]

Ha!

Oh, that's so cute that you think that J.D. Rockefeller was advocating some sort of communist even distribution of wealth. He was lamenting that he and Rothschild were reducing their profits by competing with one another. Drilling more oil wells and competing in the market was driving down the price of oil. He and Rothschild agreed to divide the market up into territories where they would each hold a monopoly. Oil princes climbed and they both got richer.

Of course he wasn't interested in "even distribution of wealth", that should be obvious. But in order for the communist to presumably distribute the wealth evenly, he must first consolidate the wealth. That's the part that the apex "capitalists" are interested in, not so much the "distribution" part.

A modern analogy is U.S. cable provider's "Summer of Love" in which they wrote legislation for lawmakers to pass. This did the same thing - dividing the market into regions where each company could have a monopoly. They didn't have to compete with each other for the consumer's patronage. Consequently, cable service in the U.S. is dismal compared to the rest of the industrialized world. We pay much higher prices for much less bandwidth. And the prices keep going up because they've got consumers over a barrel, because it's either this one company or nothing.

That's right. Competition, and the freedom to compete, is an integral part of capitalism, because it allows the consumer to ultimately hold the producer to account by withholding business in favor of another, versus relying on a massive, corrupt, and bureaucratic state to (presumably) hold producers to account. Oh wait, who was advocating against competition again? It was the globalist banker! I like how easily you are making my case for me.

Rockefeller wasn't advocating communism, he was advocating a ruthlessly capitalist scheme in which he and another oligarch could better **** the consumer for higher profits. You're demonstrating such an ignorance of fundamental concepts of economics that it's no wonder you can't distinguish communism from socialism. It seems you can't even distinguish it from capitalism.

Unfortunately, here is where your coincidence theory ***** the bed. Rockefeller was either one of a handful of the wealthiest men on the planet at the time, or he was an actual agent of the Rothschild banking dynasty (possibly like J.P. Morgan, who was definitely a Rothschild agent). By the time he had consolidated his massive oil and banking empire, he had enormous influence over the US Government, so much so that he was able to retain equity in each of his 34 companies that Standard Oil was broken into. The largest were Std. Oil of NJ (Exxon), Std. Oil of NY (Mobile), and Std. Oil of California (Chevron). This not only pacified the anti-trust concerns, but it also created the illusion of competition where there was little to none. He then proceed to use his enormous influence over the US government, and the proceeds from his fiat money/fractional reserve banking empire (the proceeds of legal counterfeiting far exceed the profits of selling oil) to erect competitive barriers against his oil and banking empire.

You see, communism represents the ultimate monopoly, and the annihilation of competition, which is why the apex predatory tycoons funded, and continue to fund it to this day. Not so much the "even distribution of wealth" part.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Currently, there are 12 U.N. peacekeeping missions. Four of the 5 most complex missions are in Africa (Mali, the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Central African Republic, and South Sudan).

By fat the vast majority of troops are from other African nations.

China putting in 8000 is an increase of around 5000 on their current world commitment.
It hardly shifts the balance of forces.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Rockefeller was either one of a handful of the wealthiest men on the planet at the time, or he was an actual agent of the Rothschild banking dynasty.

He died a long time ago.

 

[The Atheist]

Meh, need moar Joos, trilateral, Bill Gates, etc.

Here you go:

...Rockefeller...Rothschild...

Ask and ye shall receive.

 

[Tippit]

I figure that's the main reason China is doing this. Not so much for the UN funding stream itself. But to build a cadre of soldiers with wider experience in foreign operations, joint operations, and such like that.

The main reason why China is doing this, is to colonize Africa and grab its resources. They could presumably just send in the PLA, but that might raise some eyebrows not only in the surrounding African nations, but developed nations.

UN Peacekeepers give the CCP a type of credibility that they otherwise would not have if they had just used the PLA. This begs the question, why would the United Nations, presumably created as a object of western hegemony by one of the most powerful western banking families in the world (The Rockefellers), possibly assent to China's neo-colonialistic aspirations in Africa. The answer is disturbing.

I think giving the PLA some live action is probably a secondary objective.

 

[theprestige]

8000 is enough to support China's neo-colonialist aspirations in Africa, however, unless directly opposed by another nation-state with a capable military.

A quick look at UN peacekeeping missions in Africa strongly suggests that 8,000 is not nearly enough of a force to contest anything in Africa except maybe some poachers. Even if it were all together as a single unit. Which it isn't.

 

[Tippit]

David Rockefeller

David Rockefeller: “The Social Experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s Leadership is One of the Most Important and Successful in History.”

“One is impressed immediately by the sense of national harmony…. Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution it has obviously succeeded… in fostering high morale and community purpose. General social and economic progress is no less impressive….The enormous social advances of China have benefited greatly form the singleness of ideology and purpose…. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in history.”

New York Times, 8-10-1973

Well, I guess the apple didn't fall far from the tree in David Rockefeller, for John D. Rockefeller Jr. Praising Mao Tse-tung is about as capitalist as it gets, wouldn't you agree? Competition is a sin indeed.

 

[Andy_Ross]

The main reason why China is doing this, is to colonize Africa and grab its resources. They could presumably just send in the PLA, but that might raise some eyebrows not only in the surrounding African nations, but developed nations.

UN Peacekeepers give the CCP a type of credibility that they otherwise would not have if they had just used the PLA. This begs the question, why would the United Nations, presumably created as a object of western hegemony by one of the most powerful western banking families in the world (The Rockefellers), possibly assent to China's neo-colonialistic aspirations in Africa. The answer is disturbing.

I think giving the PLA some live action is probably a secondary objective.

What is your evidence for this?
What 'neo-colonialistic aspirations' do you mean?

You have not presented a single piece of evidence to support your claims.

I have shown breakdowns of figure s for current missions and numbers involved.

By far the vast majority of troops involved in peace keeping operations in Africa are African troops.
Even boosting the numbers to 8000 is still a minority of soldiers involved.

 

[Tippit]

A quick look at UN peacekeeping missions in Africa strongly suggests that 8,000 is not nearly enough of a force to contest anything in Africa except maybe some poachers. Even if it were all together as a single unit. Which it isn't.

I'm not an expert on that, but I would have to strongly disagree. 3/4ths of a division of one of the most powerful militaries in the world, with modern military tech is easily enough to subjugate any one African country, and definitely enough to police their mines.

 

[Tippit]

What is your evidence for this?
What 'neo-colonialistic aspirations' do you mean?

You have not presented a single piece of evidence to support your claims.

I have shown breakdowns of figure s for current missions and numbers involved.

By far the vast majority of troops involved in peace keeping operations in Africa are African troops.
Even boosting the numbers to 8000 is still a minority of soldiers involved.

You can start by watching this video:



There is tons of other evidence of China's activity in Africa, but I won't hold your hand.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Of course he wasn't interested in "even distribution of wealth", that should be obvious. But in order for the communist to presumably distribute the wealth evenly, he must first consolidate the wealth. That's the part that the apex "capitalists" are interested in, not so much the "distribution" part.



That's right. Competition, and the freedom to compete, is an integral part of capitalism, because it allows the consumer to ultimately hold the producer to account by withholding business in favor of another, versus relying on a massive, corrupt, and bureaucratic state to (presumably) hold producers to account. Oh wait, who was advocating against competition again? It was the globalist banker! I like how easily you are making my case for me.



Unfortunately, here is where your coincidence theory ***** the bed. Rockefeller was either one of a handful of the wealthiest men on the planet at the time, or he was an actual agent of the Rothschild banking dynasty (possibly like J.P. Morgan, who was definitely a Rothschild agent). By the time he had consolidated his massive oil and banking empire, he had enormous influence over the US Government, so much so that he was able to retain equity in each of his 34 companies that Standard Oil was broken into. The largest were Std. Oil of NJ (Exxon), Std. Oil of NY (Mobile), and Std. Oil of California (Chevron). This not only pacified the anti-trust concerns, but it also created the illusion of competition where there was little to none. He then proceed to use his enormous influence over the US government, and the proceeds from his fiat money/fractional reserve banking empire (the proceeds of legal counterfeiting far exceed the profits of selling oil) to erect competitive barriers against his oil and banking empire.

You see, communism represents the ultimate monopoly, and the annihilation of competition, which is why the apex predatory tycoons funded, and continue to fund it to this day. Not so much the "even distribution of wealth" part.

NOTE TO MODS: Since this discussion is obviously off topic, but nevertheless hilarious, perhaps it could be split off to its own thread before being flushed to AAH?
The notion that J. D. Rockefeller was some sort of closet communist who was forming trusts in order to accumulate all the wealth so that he could then redistribute it in a communist social order is an hysterically ludicrous argument.

Nearly as funny is the baseless assertion that trusts aren't a component of capitalism. But I'm sure that a pathological inability to admit that you don't know what you're talking about will lead you to declare that Rockefeller, Rothschild, Morgan, Carnegie etcetera were all a bunch of pinko revolutionaries bent on taking wealth from the rich and distributing it among the proletariat.

 

[Foster Zygote]

David Rockefeller: “The Social Experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s Leadership is One of the Most Important and Successful in History.”



Well, I guess the apple didn't fall far from the tree in David Rockefeller, for John D. Rockefeller Jr. Praising Mao Tse-tung is about as capitalist as it gets, wouldn't you agree? Competition is a sin indeed.

Sorry, you don't get to slip J.D. Rockefeller's grandson in there and pretend he's his grandfather. Just because David Rockefeller was impressed with a no doubt staged tour meant to impress foreigners, it doesn't retroactively make his grandfather a communist.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

why the **** would the UN, which purportedly represents interests in the west...

Citation needed.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

The main reason why China is doing this, is to colonize Africa and grab its resources.

May heaven forefend that any foreign power should ever attempt to colonise any part of Africa and grab its resources.

China's approach to making friends and influencing people in Africa differed from Western countries mainly in that instead of providing development aid money to build infrastructure, which sadly often got siphoned away into the pockets of those in power, it provided people and resources to build infrastructure directly.

Other than that, as a permanent member of the UN security council it would be weird if they were excluded from peacekeeping duties in areas where they don't appear to have any fundamental conflict of interest. The only thing that seems to make it appear odd to you is your starting premise that the UN is intended to be the West's private club and the Chinese should mind their manners. For which a citation is eagerly awaited.