Why did China commit 8000 PLA soldiers as UN Peacekeepers?

[theprestige]

Citation needed.

Heh. I'd say the UN does represent the interests of the west. Just not the way Tippit thinks.

 

[sackett]

I'm not no steenkin' expert 'n I'm proud!

Tripp the light to heavy fantastic:

You show very due modesty about your military expertise, but then you upset the thunder bucket by strongly disagreeing.

Comedy gold!

Okay, pewter.

Tinfoil?

 

[Andy_Ross]

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.

Why do think the Peace Keeping troops would go in as a single force?

China has personnel split between eight different peacekeeping missions

Why do you think less than a division would be enough to 'subjugate' an entire country?

 

[theprestige]

The truth is that China can't do anything properly hegemonic in Africa without UNSC approval. Which it will never get. It could provide some amount of support to an allied African hegemon, but that's about it. As for China buying raw materials with military aid, I don't really see anything wrong with that. At the very least, they should be able to play in the same league as the US, if they can put together the entry fee.

 

[Tippit]

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?

Nonsense, you're doing great, hang in there! It's perfectly on-topic. You're disputing one of my basic facts and premises, which is that the richest of the super-rich bankers have bankrolled communism from its inception and are the ones who founded the United Nations, which I've proven easily in this thread. I understand that maybe you would like to censor the last few paragraphs you wrote because it isn't going well for you, but stay positive!

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.

Good thing that that isn't what I am arguing! The Rockefellers aren't interested in the "redistribution of wealth" part. They're interested in the consolidation of wealth and control part. The trusts were formed because Rockefeller was challenged by the Supreme Court of the US under the Sherman Anti-Trust act of 1890, and it was becoming obvious to everyone that his dynasty was becoming problematic for the United States. Hence his famous quote:

"I want to own nothing, but control everything."

—John D. Rockefeller

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.

Once again, the Wall Street bankers and tycoons that backed the communists (like Jacob Schiff, son of Moses Schiff, broker to the European Rothschild banking dynasty) had no intentions of playing Robin Hood, they simply recognized that in order to further consolidate power, they needed to abolish competition and then socialize everything after they seized control of government. It might be fair to say that they weren't "pinko revolutionaries", in the sense that a lot of the mindless supporters of communism don't really understand how it benefits elites who bank governments, but, lets just say they were "big fans" of communism. Also, I never asserted that "trusts aren't a component of capitalism", that's you putting words in my mouth. Trusts are fiduciary relationships used for asset protection and tax purposes (I know, I use them), they aren't a "component" of capitalism in the sense that they aren't necessary for capitalism, and they don't appear anywhere near the definition for capitalism. It would be like saying something as ridiculous as "short selling is a component of capitalism". Well, no, it isn't. Corporations aren't even a component of capitalism. Private property would be a good example of something that is.

 

[Tippit]

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.

Good question! The answer is that the UN was created by globalist totalitarians to serve their agenda. That agenda will include the US, right up until the point that they decide to destroy the US because it has no further use.

 

[Andy_Ross]

What is your evidence for this?

All I see so far are claims.

 

[Tippit]

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.

Henry Kissinger, Rockefeller's stooge diplomat, with the help of President Nixon laid the groundwork for the ascent of China during Nixon's visit in 1972. Why would a "capitalist" banker tycoon Like David Rockefeller visit China in 1973 fresh after of the murder of sixty million (that's 60,000,000) people by Mao Tse-tung during the Chinese Communist Color Revolution that Rockefeller himself financed, unless he was sympathetic to communism?

He literally fawned over Chairman Mao, the murderer of sixty million people, before he profited from the rise of China, and the simultaneous export of US manufacturing to the same communists in the coming decades.

 

[theprestige]

Last time I checked, the US was the globalist totalitarian. They spanked the USSR in a series of matches, culminating in the world championship of 1989. Now China's putting together a team, and Russia's trying to stay in the league.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Chinese Communist Color Revolution that Rockefeller himself financed,

What is your evidence for this?

 

[Tippit]

What is your evidence for this?

This is a conspiracy theory, remember? The evidence is the thick smoke everywhere, and rhymes of history. Why else did Chairman Mao roll out the red carpet for some "capitalist" US banker? By 1973, these people had virtual consolidation of the news media. Do you want bank records? Lets fly to New York and take the elevator up to Room 5600 and ask politely. What do you think?

 

[Andy_Ross]

So no evidence?

 

[Tippit]

Lol. This is so beautiful. In doing some research about Room 5600 (I learned most of this stuff years ago), I came across this Vanity Fair article:

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/business/2014/11/rockefeller-family-leaving-30-rockefeller-center

with this priceless revelation:

A commissioned mural by Diego Rivera, to the surprise of the Rockefellers, was completed with a smiling portrait of Lenin, and depicted capitalists as having less than desirable effects on society. David Rockefeller wrote in his memoir that the family had approved Rivera’s sketch, which was less controversial than the finished product. When Rivera refused to amend the mural to remove Lenin, it was removed—a process which destroyed the piece.

What say you, "skeptics"? Was this more of a "WTF, we never told you to depict Lenin smiling so hard!!!" or "Uhh, you know, maybe this isn't such a good look, bro. Lets remove it."

I love you guys. Group hug?

 

[Andy_Ross]

IS that your evidence for him funding the 'Chinese Communist Color Revolution'?

 

[Tippit]

So no evidence?

Sometimes you either have to fill in the blanks, or, in your case, subscribe to a completely ridiculous narrative of how the world actually works that ends up with you defending communists on the internet.

 

[Andy_Ross]

So no evidence?

 

[Tippit]

So no evidence?

There is the entire thread.

Edited by xjx388: 

<SNIP> Rule 11, Rule 12

 

[Norman Alexander]

For a "history buff", you're really bad at this. Seriously.

Nobody wants to troll you. Nobody cares.

Edited by xjx388: 

<SNIP>Rule 12

 

[Tippit]

For a "history buff", you're really bad at this. Seriously.

You like how I found that part where the Rockefellers hired the avowed Marxist to paint a communist mural, and then decided it probably wasn't a good idea, don't you?

Here's a link to an article about that.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/when-nelson-rockefeller-killed-diego-riveras-communist-mural

Is it ok for conspiracy theorists to win on this forum sometimes? Because I feel like I'm winning

Maybe time for some mod white knighting? Can't let alternative history go uncensored!

 

[Andy_Ross]

There is the entire thread.

Edited by xjx388: 

Removed moderated content

All the thread contains is claims on your part.

I gave links to exact numbers and distribution of UN peacekeeping forces around the globe, all you did was claim that China increasing their commitment is some kind of invasion of Africa.
You also haven't supported your claim that the UN is some kind of totalitarian one world government.