angmoh new queen 2100 to apolgize to the Chinese

on illegal opium trade war in 1800s with the Chinese and their 八国联军 against the Chinese.

By 2100 Chinese will be the most powerful nation beyond 2100.


Charlotte has emerged as a late bookies' favourite name for the new royal princess, and it could leave the betting industry facing a seven-figure payout to punters.

A late surge in bets for the name has pushed it into first place at 3/1 with Ladbrokes and Paddy Power, and level with Alice, the previous favourite, at the same odds with Coral.

Olivia has also made inroads in the betting market and is now being offered at around 4/1 or 5/1, while Victoria and Elizabeth remain popular



http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/surge-of-bets-on-princess-charlotte/ar-BBj5ric?ocid=iehp

She probably won't be queen... she's 4th in the succession line.

There is no need to apologize to China for any foreign aggression or whatever war crimes. China does not apologize to its own people for war crimes their own leaders committed. Just look at the Cultural Revolution and the Great Leap Forward and the Tiananmen Square incident. Those events are whitewashed in China's own history books or simply mentioned briefly.

illegal foreign trades drug trafficking to destroy a country is difference from internal civil war in one's own country.

JohnTan said:

There is no need to apologize to China for any foreign aggression or whatever war crimes. China does not apologize to its own people for war crimes their own leaders committed. Just look at the Cultural Revolution and the Great Leap Forward and the Tiananmen Square incident. Those events are whitewashed in China's own history books or simply mentioned briefly.

Click to expand...

JohnTan said:

There is no need to apologize to China for any foreign aggression or whatever war crimes. China does not apologize to its own people for war crimes their own leaders committed. Just look at the Cultural Revolution and the Great Leap Forward and the Tiananmen Square incident. Those events are whitewashed in China's own history books or simply mentioned briefly.

Click to expand...

Not only have they not apologised, they honor the world's worst mass murderer with a giant portrait overlooking the most coveted location in the whole of China.

What sort of moronic society treats a dictator responsible for the genocide of tens of millions of his own people like a God?? Answer : the chinks. No other nation could be that stupid.

tanwahtiu said:

illegal foreign trades drug trafficking to destroy a country is difference from internal civil war in one's own country.

Click to expand...

War crime is a war crime, regardless whether it is committed by a local or a foreigner. If you only want to go after the foreigner, then your case is more about massaging your bruised ego rather than seeking justice. In that case, I tell such people to fcuk off!

Mao did not make a fortune for himself unlike the Brit their fortunes were built on illegal Opium trade with Chinese and slavery from other nations, Africa, Micronesia etc, for the Brit nation people.

Worst still other nations joined the opium trades at the expense of Chinese people.

This is the worst history of China and the Brit are responsible for making Chinese poor in the 1900s having to pay UK60M pound in damages.

Leongsam said:

Not only have they not apologised, they honor the world's worst mass murderer with a giant portrait overlooking the most coveted location in the whole of China.

Click to expand...

JohnTan said:

War crime is a war crime, regardless whether it is committed by a local or a foreigner. If you only want to go after the foreigner, then your case is more about massaging your bruised ego rather than seeking justice. In that case, I tell such people to fcuk off!

Click to expand...

Well said. I have added to your points.

tanwahtiu said:

Mao did not make a fortune for himself unlike the Brit their fortunes were built on illegal Opium trade with Chinese and slavery.

Click to expand...

Are you kidding me he didn't need a bank account with a lot of zeros. That despot owned the whole damned country.

Can you consider LKY using ISA against opposition a war crime then?

LKY committed war crime against the locals?

How about PAP committed war crime against a local 16 y.o boy?

JohnTan said:

War crime is a war crime, regardless whether it is committed by a local or a foreigner. If you only want to go after the foreigner, then your case is more about massaging your bruised ego rather than seeking justice. In that case, I tell such people to fcuk off!

Click to expand...

tanwahtiu said:

Can you consider LKY using ISA against opposition a war crime then?

LKY committed war crime against the locals?

How about PAP committed war crime against a local 16 y.o boy?

Click to expand...

LKY was a dictator too but when it comes to genocide he's no match for Mao.

Compared to Mao's murderous regime, the PAP are saints.

As for the Opium wars the Chinks brought those misfortunes upon themselves by signing the treaty of Nanking.

The Brit went over to Asia and China to build fortune against the wish of the Asians and China as drug traffickers.

Can you can say the fortune of a group of local Brit drug traffickers built in their fortune in their own Brit country and you are OK with them?

Indonesia just hanged 2 Aussies drug traffickers this week. If not caught the 9 Aussies built their fortunes from drug trafficking at the expense of the Indonesians, you are happy with it?

Leongsam said:

Are you kidding me he didn't need a bank account with a lot of zeros. That despot owned the whole damned country.

Click to expand...

Uncle, war crime are crime lah. There are many ways to kill a chicken.

Leongsam said:

LKY was a dictator too but when it comes to genocide he's no match for Mao.

Compared to Mao's murderous regime, the PAP are saints.

As for the Opium wars the Chinks brought those misfortunes upon themselves by signing the treaty of Nanking.

Click to expand...

Treaty of Nanking, you may reconsider your assessment.


Surrender A devastated China surrendered. Under the Nanking Treaty (June 26, 1843), China agreed to pay an indemnity of £6,000,000 for the destroyed opium (three times its value) and cede Hong Kong to Britain. This settlement infuriated Lord Palmerston, who complained that six million did not cover the cost of the destroyed opium or the punitive expedition. The Times ridiculed this claim, arguing that Britain owed China compensation for “pillaging her towns and slaughtering her citizens in a quarrel which would never have arisen if we had not been guilty of an international crime.”

The Crown countered critics by arguing that the war was over free trade, not opium. And Sir John Davis, who became governor of Hong Kong in 1844, declared that the Chinese weren’t sincere about prohibiting opium, and that Britain had never forced the issue. He protested that ritain “only supplied the poison, which the Chinese were not obliged to take.”

http://www.amoymagic.com/OpiumWar.htm

Leongsam said:

LKY was a dictator too but when it comes to genocide he's no match for Mao.

Compared to Mao's murderous regime, the PAP are saints.

As for the Opium wars the Chinks brought those misfortunes upon themselves by signing the treaty of Nanking.

Click to expand...

tanwahtiu said:

Treaty of Nanking, you may reconsider your assessment.


Surrender A devastated China surrendered. Under the Nanking Treaty (June 26, 1843), China agreed to pay an indemnity of £6,000,000 for the destroyed opium (three times its value) and cede Hong Kong to Britain. This settlement infuriated Lord Palmerston, who complained that six million did not cover the cost of the destroyed opium or the punitive expedition. The Times ridiculed this claim, arguing that Britain owed China compensation for “pillaging her towns and slaughtering her citizens in a quarrel which would never have arisen if we had not been guilty of an international crime.”

The Crown countered critics by arguing that the war was over free trade, not opium. And Sir John Davis, who became governor of Hong Kong in 1844, declared that the Chinese weren’t sincere about prohibiting opium, and that Britain had never forced the issue. He protested that ritain “only supplied the poison, which the Chinese were not obliged to take.”

http://www.amoymagic.com/OpiumWar.htm

Click to expand...

The Brits were pretty lenient with China. They didn't slaughter lots of Chinese or take much money.

You should go read on what Asiatic warlords and their armies would have done, if they were the ones who conquered other Asiatic cities.


The Manchus slaughtered Chinks to their heart's content in Yangzhou (Ten Days of Yangzhou Slaughter in 1645). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yangzhou_massacre

Zhang Xianzhong depopulated Sichuan in the 1646. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhang_Xianzhong

Genghis Khan slaughtered tens of millions of people. http://www.history.com/news/history-lists/10-things-you-may-not-know-about-genghis-khan

As conquerors or foreign invaders, the Brits seem rather mild by comparison. You are just upset that a small country like Britain could make a large country like China its bitch. That's what your rant is about, isn't it?

tanwahtiu said:

Mao did not make a fortune for himself

Click to expand...

Are you absolutely sure?

JohnTan said:

War crime is a war crime, regardless whether it is committed by a local or a foreigner. If you only want to go after the foreigner, then your case is more about massaging your bruised ego rather than seeking justice. In that case, I tell such people to fcuk off!

Click to expand...

your logic makes no sense. it is the Chinese people's rights to go after who first. war crime is a war crime. the foreigners should be heavily condemned for their military aggression. whether or not Bandit Mao killed more Chinese than them is not relevant and unconnected to the above at all.