Comments by "Fredinno" (@innosam123) on "CaspianReport" channel.

Kiyan Hakim Ok, so you’re implying moral equivalence in terms of racism between the two sides? Here’s a hint. Only one side actually intended to destroy entire races and cultures from existence.
26
TBF, only one side was undoubtedly genocidal.
24
@user-ym1bs7om9e Japan couldn’t defeat China in WW2 because they were being beaten back by the Americans. They continued to make advances into China until the war was basically over.
18
@user-ym1bs7om9e Look at any map of the Pacific Front in WW2, and overlay it onto a map of the important parts of China. https://youtu.be/tS-BWXfFkVY The Japanese conquered almost all of the important and valuable lands in China (with the exception of Sichuan). The issue for the Japanese is that the war became a war of attrition, less because the Japanese couldn’t beat them (half of the army was being stationed in Manchuria to protect against the Soviet Union, which was busy elsewhere) but because they knew there was no point. The Japanese, for all practical purposes, had already ‘won’ after the initial invasion (as in, they got most of what they wanted). It didn’t matter, and dumping more troops into the Chinese meat grinder made no sense. Especially since they were literally months from running out of oil and they needed more ASAP. Especially once they were getting pummelled by the Americans. It’s similar to the Americans in Vietnam. The Americans were winning, but external factors unrelated to the battles themselves resulted in an American defeat. The Americans rejected sending more troops even before the Tet Offensive, because it would have been pointless. It was a war of endurance, not military strength.
13
Zachary I mean, does a homogenous nation need to maintain concentration camps against minority groups for unity?
10
@bigheadrhino So it wasn’t losing to China. It was losing to America’s oil embargo. If the US kept exporting oil to Japan, the Pacific War would never have happened. The Japanese took over Indochina because Vichy France was weak and the Japanese wanted to more effectively blockade China. The original intention, interestingly, was for Japan to only occupy Tonkin in Northern Vietnam for that purpose, but the Japanese soldiers o;the ground basically didn’t listen and they had to take the entire thing as a result.
8
Not a win-win. Just a win- for China. Iran getting payment in Yuan (which not even the Chinese want to keep their money in), Iran giving up Oil rights. China paid out a lot, but it needed more oil the infrastructure provides anyways, and Iran was never going to get any other form of investment. Iran is becoming a Chinese puppet.
7
Syed Muhammad Akbar The only countries that invest in Africa are France (because Empire) and China (because Empire). Africa has never been a profitable venture without colossal investment in human capital and infrastructure, and the recent relative stability in the region is just that- recent. The African Union could succeed in unifying Africa...or it could face a crisis like the EU and implode without any strong leadership to keep it together. Places like India at least have some of the infrastructure and human capital in place. Which is why people have been able to build things like call centres there.
5
@stabeyy Not sure why you feel the need to compare the Holocaust to British Colonialism. My point was that there would likely be similar amounts of genocide and suffering without colonization. It didn’t help, certainly, but there’s no indication the Africans acted any different than anyone else when they got good weapons and had the ability to form empires (which is to say, they formed empires and killed a ton of people.)
4
Resistance-Is- Growing So, explain how being forced to take payment in currency that only the Chinese accept is actually good for the Iranians? It’s great for the Chinese, they can use their hard currency reserves elsewhere and have forced the Iranians to buy from them. Remember that Iran ‘voluntarily’ sold out its oil to the Anglo- Iranian oil company. The two had been cooperating for thousands of years. Why is that considered imperialism and not this? In practice, both Iran then and Iran now are flat-out broke. The USA wanted Iran to give up its empire, not turn into a puppet (unless you can show me otherwise). And now it’s definitely a puppet. This is pretty similar to the conclusion in this video too-that it’s not likely to benefit Tehran much, if at all.
4
Bhangra Fan This deal sounds horrible for Iran. The Chinese would effectively be turning Iran into their puppet in this deal. The Iranians must be pretty desperate.
4
@lc9245 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ichi-Go This was accomplished in 1944, when the Americans were taking over Saipan and approaching the Home Islands. You could say the same thing with the Americans in Vietnam. The Viet Cong held down tons of American soldiers, but were actually losing overall in the war of attrition. They lost 1/3rd of their forces in the Tet Offensive, an offensive undertaken precisely because the North Vietnamese knew they were losing. China has been conquered several times despite its enormous size by much smaller armies (mostly by people on horses). It’s not Russia.
4
Pixel Smile Show me where Britain and France wanted to exterminate entire ethnic groups for Lebensraum?
4
@awddfg There is a reason manslaughter is treated as less severe than murder in the criminal justice system. And second, no nation is responsible for the actions for their ancestors. Otherwise, where do you stop? No nation would be morally superior or inferior to another nation.
4
Stephen Jenkins ROC only holds the disputes because otherwise they’d have to declare themselves as Taiwan by giving up the mainland.
3
@lc9245 The problem is that Afghanistan is a bit of a special case that isn’t really replicated by most other nations facing invasion. Japan had its own puppet government(s) over China that actually ended up being in comparable size to the Kwantung Army (though they were iffy in quality- the Japanese didn’t trust them and used them mostly for anti-partisan activity) and were (nominally) headed by Chinese/Manchus. Many warlords switched sides from the ROC to Japan out of self-interest, and honestly, if Japan managed to take out Chongqing and consolidate their gains on the Yanztghe, there really isn’t much left of China outside of rural jungle, deserts, and mountains that would not be able to supply itself without outside support. Which was kind of difficult without allied control of Burma. You could have made the same argument that no one would have turned to the brutal Communist dictatorship of Mao and that the anti-communist ROC guerrillas in the mountains would eventually have overthrown the PRC. But they didn’t.
3
Did you know? Seattle looks like a mini Bay Area.
3
Zeeshan Niazi The amount of trade in dollars dwarfs the total amount of trade in oil. People use dollars because it’s convenient to use it as a default considering it’s backed by a massive economy and the currency is kept stable (unlike the Yuan, for instance). The only other option that could conceivably be better is Gold, but there’s likely not nearly enough Gold in the world for the amount needed. Prices would go through the roof, and you’d have a situation similar to that of the Great Bullion Famine. Hence why they used to back Dollars with Gold.
2
@stabeyy To be fair, it’s not like the Zulus were saints either. Today, we act as if they were the good guys because they were the underdogs, but honestly, they were pretty genocidal. History is more complicated than good guy vs bad guy.
2
dekaaizer Yes, because the USA was definitely the expansionist one making leases on foreign ports and saber-rattling with border claims. If China was in the US’ place, Canada wouldn’t exist. Cuba wouldn’t exist.
2
Mendicant Bias That assumes Greenland doesn’t least manage to negotiate special rights like the Inuit in Canada- Puerto Rico is so bad because Washington has no reason to care about Puerto Rico, with a low population, few resources, and without voting rights. Greenland has plenty of resources and is strategically located. They have more cards to play.
2
woodensurfer Thing is that larger nations don’t always win, even with similar tech and industrialization levels. Ever heard the term “Brazil is the nation of the future- and always will?” Specifically, Japan has and can build a massive navy due to its history with the navy, and being an island. China was a great power- on land, by relying almost entirely on defences and manpower (basically Asian Russia). Korea and Vietnam were scared of pissing China off, but Japan dominated the seas, their pirates pillaging Chinese ports and ships. China didn’t even conquer Taiwan without European assistance. China will be in the same demographic situation as Japan within the next decade, and growth is thus likely to drop to 2-3% (assuming no more sanctions). China has utterly failed to develop a significant domestic market and growth still relies on exports. Even if just the USA decides to sanction China (the USA has been successful at getting its allies to sanction Iran to death despite Europe not wanting to- and a LOT of their allies hate China) it’s game over- real growth will collapse unless the Chinese government tapes up everything with even more debt- no one buying goods= no economic growth. Just Japan is likely to be able to hold Chinese power back. Add in India and the USA, and starting a war is practically suicidal.
2
GeoT91 Taiwan was also legally never given to China as part of its territory, post WW2, but as an occupied region.
2
Bhangra Fan Iran signed up the Anglo-Persian oil company a concession without the use of force on any side. Is this better for Iran? Probably, being able to sell to only China is better than not being able to sell at all. But don’t act like this (effectively a bailout) deal was made out of kindness by the Chinese. That would be out of character...honestly for geopolitics in general.
2
Bhangra Fan No. You’re misrepresenting me. The Iranian people would be better off if the Iranians capitulated to the West, which would allow it to trade with everyone and economically recover. Even if that involved not being allowed to have any real foreign policy ever again. Or nukes. What does Iran gain at this point from its Sphere in the Middle East? Prestige? Religious Authority? But it wouldn’t be good for the government. Which is why they won’t. So they had no choice but to allow the Chinese in. This is the same thing that happened in Venezuela with Maduro. The country is not better off by ‘outmaneuvering’ the West. If anything, it let the violence continue rather than let a new government stabilize the country. Now, it’s the Somalia of Latin America. Also, Iran came under the British Sphere without a shit being fired. Did they have a choice? Not really.
2
@johnjingleheimersmith9259 Yes, because it’s the US trying to claim the territorial waters of 5 different nations at once…
2
@johnjingleheimersmith9259 Point is that there’s making claims, and then there’s just taking the piss (claiming water all the way to the coastlines of other nations, like China). Australia at least had the excuse that the Timor Gap is part of its continental shelf and left most of E. Timor’s EEZ alone.
2
@johnjingleheimersmith9259 Also, LOL @ you.
2
chip Yep.
1
Bart Mika The Germans were destroying the balance of power in Europe and was the only threat to British dominance after Russia showed how incompetent it was (and other than the USA). Since war with the USA is nearly impossible-
1
Deno Moto No, the estimates are 1-1.5 mil, which is around 10% of the population being kept by China. Second, the number of Blacks in the US prison system are about 500,000, or about 1.35% of the Black population in the USA. That assumes prisons in the USA are worse than the re-education camps.
1
woodensurfer https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinicization Both the KMT and CCP were obsessed with making everyone sign up to be ‘Han’. In reality, ‘Han’ as as artificial an ethnic identity as ‘American’. They’re not genetically homogenous (there are significant genetic differences between North and South China, largely related to surviving tropical diseases) linguistically homogenous (https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=%2FkTCTj%2FL&id=A1516F0989CB1C11E595910E28105F83FBCF320A&thid=OIP._kTCTj_Ljm14KI5ErNw9fAHaGS&mediaurl=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fvku23lrh8i921.png&exph=1700&expw=2000&q=linguistic+map+china&simid=608014657379565992&ck=CAA105C5376AF551DAA416D06BB90814&selectedindex=2&qpvt=linguistic+map+china&form=EX0023&vt=4&sim=11&adlt=demote&shtp=GetUrl&shid=26de95fe-f00d-48ae-98fa-66e7f9918741&shtk=TGFuZ3VhZ2UgTWFwIE9mIENoaW5hICgyMDAweDE3MDApIDogTWFwUG9ybg%3D%3D&shdk=Rm91bmQgb24gQmluZyBmcm9tIHd3dy5yZWRkaXQuY29t&shhk=f3Q%2B4h7LfQrB3eUEEqDWz9Z7%2BulSwZx3HNqeELh8sK4%3D&shth=OSH.eIU703dkhr22f4xH9VLMBA) or culturally homogenous (again, North- South divide- the most obvious example is differences in Cuisine). Seriously, in Europe, these sorts of differences would usually create a new nation, and ethnicities have been fractured from super-ethnicities like ‘Han’ or almost fractured on less (Balkans, Ukraine, Scotland/Ireland).
1
Stephen Jenkins ROC=Taiwan...
1
Morigu “Real Socialism has never been attempted”
1