“After several weeks of standoffs and violent confrontations between the army and demonstrators left many on both sides severely injured, a meeting held among the CCP’s top leadership on 1 June concluded with a decision to clear the square.[15][13][14] The troops advanced into central parts of Beijing on the city’s major thoroughfares in the early morning hours of 4 June and engaged in bloody clashes with demonstrators attempting to block them, in which many people – demonstrators, bystanders, and soldiers – were killed. Estimates of the death toll vary from several hundred to several thousand, with thousands more wounded.[16][17][18][19][20][21]”
When you go to Wikipedia, click on those numbers in the brackets
As with any historical event, the context and events proceeding and following it are vital to be able to actually understand it.
No AES state is or was a utopia, and we can’t learn from their mistakes if we don’t understand how and why they made them, and how they responded to them.
You do know that the pictures support what he said right? There’s pictures of dead soldiers because they weren’t given ammo when marching into the city. Once they started getting killed, they gave them ammo and they just started shooting everybody. Before then the protesters smashed their heads, stripped them, and burned them.
The ones who stayed in the square were mostly the peaceful hunger strikers and not the fighters so the square itself was cleared without much trouble compared to the march into the city.
Armed troops and tanks made their way to the square on the night of June 3 and into the morning hours of June 4. They soon shot those who stood in their way and crushed those who wouldn’t move out of it.
Once again, that’s not out of line with what he and I said. There were barricades and fighting in the streets of Beijing and the army killed whoever got in their way to the square, but the people occupying the square were negotiated with and peacefully dispersed. They then once again took all the ammo from the soldiers.
I don’t understand why you think it’s important to insist that nothing happened precisely inside Tiananmen Square, but you are perfectly happy for a massacre to have occurred in, say, Changan Avenue.
Anyway, to respond to the original challenge rather than argue your questionable morals.
Because it’s what happened. It’s not a point of morals or anything else. The other poster is making a value argument that I don’t particularly agree with, but when it comes to the reality of what happened, they’re grounded. Go read the Wikipedia article.
A handful of protesters killing cops and soldiers does not justify indiscriminate murder, particularly when you consider it the government’s responsibility to make sure protesters never get to the point that they feel the need to employ violence to achieve their aims. I didn’t think I needed to spell that out.
The thing to keep in mind is there were a massive amount of people occupying the square. The key point is, the army did not massacre those people. They left after negotiations with the army. There was no gunning down the occupiers or crushing them with tanks. One person picked up in CIA/SIS Operation Yellowbird said that the tanks ran over tents with people sleeping inside them in the square, but that’s frankly dumb, nobody would be sleeping. The others that were actually there noted that it was a largely peaceful dispersal if you compare it to what happened before with the protesters fighting the PLA on the streets of Beijing and the soldiers indiscriminately opening fire on entire apartment blocks because someone threw a rock.
Frankly the best evidence of it is Yellowbird itself, which smuggled more than 400 people out of China, many of them the leaders of the protest themselves. If they had kettled in and slaughtered the occupants, that wouldn’t have been possible.
I am not deflecting, I am trying to understand what you think I am denying.
Everything I’ve said happened, protesters lynching police and police gunning down protesters in the streets surrounding the square, is reflected in the wikipedia article, the only thing that I’ve denied, that masses of unarmed students were gunned down and run over by tanks in the square, is proven false in the tankman video, which I linked.
Wait I also denied that China claims nothing happened at Tienanmen square, that’s also proven by the official Chinese account of what happened in the Wikipedia article.
The chinese narrative isn’t that nothing happened , it’s that there was a battle outside the square, including protesters lynching and burning cops and cops gunning down unarmed protesters on bikes from their trucks. This is corroborated by videos and pictures.
The western narrative of tanks going into the square and gunning down tens of thousands of protesters (after getting delayed by tank man) is blatantly false, as you can see in the uncut tankman video pans over to show the square the tanks are leaving was empty except for some bikes.
Wikipedia indicates there wasn’t a massacre in Tiananmen square: “Several people who were situated around the square that night, including former Beijing bureau chief of The Washington Post Jay Mathews[f] and CBS correspondent Richard Roth[g] reported that while they had heard sporadic gunfire, they could not find enough evidence to suggest that a massacre took place on the square”
“In 2011, three secret cables from the United States embassy in Beijing agreed there was no bloodshed inside Tiananmen Square.[244] Instead, they said Chinese soldiers opened fire on protesters outside the square as they fought their way from the west towards the center.[244] A Chilean diplomat who had been positioned next to a Red Cross station inside the square told his US counterparts that he did not observe any mass firing of weapons into the crowds in the square itself, although sporadic gunfire was heard. He said that most of the troops who entered the square were armed only with anti-riot gear.”
While they do provide sources that say the student death toll was likely high, most sources estimate around 500. (Again, not in the square itself)
I’m just trying to be factual- the students were funded and supported by Western forces including the United States, probably not to help the students and spread democracy and capitalism, but to create division. The students clashed with China’s fucked up communist government and military. There’s not too many possibilities when a civilian force clashes with a state military.
I support you if you oppose China’s actions here, I just think saying there was a massacre in Tiananmen square is insincere.
Well he’s incredibly popular, so probably quite long unless he starts fucking up or gets coup’d by capitalists in the party ala Yeltsin.
Unlike Hu Jintao’s path, he isn’t struggling to manage the contradictions between the interests of the national bourgeoisie against those of the working class.
I’d examine why you think that’s how China works, but we’re at conspiracy-theory level nonsense where you’ll just keep making up shit to justify your original position.
Instead lets stay on solid ground: What policies or actions has Xi Jinping taken that you feel hurt his popularity? (Or would have, if everyone in China wasn’t afraid to say so for fear of getting disappeared)
You’re never going to convert sinophobes. It’s like trying to convert white supremacists, except even more unlikely to work since there is zero pressure to not be sinophobic in society.
Criticizing a “regime” run by democracy, both direct and representative, is criticizing the people. It’s also criticizing a race, in this case, as you people never evolved past the “sneaky Chinaman” stereotype in your criticisms.
Every communist state to my knowledge has instant recall; if an elected official isn’t doing what you want, you can get signatures to force a recall vote.
The implication of what they’re saying is that the Chinese government’s actions generally represent the will of the Chinese people so you can’t just separate them like you can with America.
Do you agree with this implication or did you just explain it to me? Because I would never equate the actions of the government of a nation state with the people who happen to live there
Removed by mod
“After several weeks of standoffs and violent confrontations between the army and demonstrators left many on both sides severely injured, a meeting held among the CCP’s top leadership on 1 June concluded with a decision to clear the square.[15][13][14] The troops advanced into central parts of Beijing on the city’s major thoroughfares in the early morning hours of 4 June and engaged in bloody clashes with demonstrators attempting to block them, in which many people – demonstrators, bystanders, and soldiers – were killed. Estimates of the death toll vary from several hundred to several thousand, with thousands more wounded.[16][17][18][19][20][21]”
When you go to Wikipedia, click on those numbers in the brackets
As I said, there were clashes at major thoroughfares surrounding the square, there was not tanks gunning down masses of protesters inside the square.
Who said anything about tanks shooting people? Did you just make that up and denied it yourself? Lmao.
Student protesters where shot up and killed. Indiscriminataley. I could not fucking care less what type of pew pew was used.
Yeah but if you don’t know what exact bullet they used or what they had for breakfast that morning then your argument is invalid I’m afraid /s
Removed by mod
ACAB
If that’s the cops’ response to being attacked then they (like all cops) deserved it. ACAB
I hope you didn’t read “cops responding with indiscriminate murder” to imply anything else.
Idk what to read from you, if you think cops responding with indiscriminate murder is bad, why the ccp apologia?
My take doesn’t begin and end with “china bad”.
As with any historical event, the context and events proceeding and following it are vital to be able to actually understand it.
No AES state is or was a utopia, and we can’t learn from their mistakes if we don’t understand how and why they made them, and how they responded to them.
ACAB 😄🖕
Only when someone denies the massacre do I link to these horrific NSFL photos.
You do know that the pictures support what he said right? There’s pictures of dead soldiers because they weren’t given ammo when marching into the city. Once they started getting killed, they gave them ammo and they just started shooting everybody. Before then the protesters smashed their heads, stripped them, and burned them.
The ones who stayed in the square were mostly the peaceful hunger strikers and not the fighters so the square itself was cleared without much trouble compared to the march into the city.
Once again, that’s not out of line with what he and I said. There were barricades and fighting in the streets of Beijing and the army killed whoever got in their way to the square, but the people occupying the square were negotiated with and peacefully dispersed. They then once again took all the ammo from the soldiers.
I don’t understand why you think it’s important to insist that nothing happened precisely inside Tiananmen Square, but you are perfectly happy for a massacre to have occurred in, say, Changan Avenue.
Anyway, to respond to the original challenge rather than argue your questionable morals.
A tank set ablaze by protesters burns in Tiananmen Square on June 3.
A Chinese armored personnel carrier, with crushed bicycles stuck to its side, sits in Tiananmen Square on June 4.
Because it’s what happened. It’s not a point of morals or anything else. The other poster is making a value argument that I don’t particularly agree with, but when it comes to the reality of what happened, they’re grounded. Go read the Wikipedia article.
The other poster is trying to claim nothing bad happened inside Tiananmen Square itself, and it was the protestors that were the real aggressors.
This is bullshit.
The situation escalated because reserves from outside Beijing were drafted in, who had no friends or relatives protesting.
A handful of protesters killing cops and soldiers does not justify indiscriminate murder, particularly when you consider it the government’s responsibility to make sure protesters never get to the point that they feel the need to employ violence to achieve their aims. I didn’t think I needed to spell that out.
The thing to keep in mind is there were a massive amount of people occupying the square. The key point is, the army did not massacre those people. They left after negotiations with the army. There was no gunning down the occupiers or crushing them with tanks. One person picked up in CIA/SIS Operation Yellowbird said that the tanks ran over tents with people sleeping inside them in the square, but that’s frankly dumb, nobody would be sleeping. The others that were actually there noted that it was a largely peaceful dispersal if you compare it to what happened before with the protesters fighting the PLA on the streets of Beijing and the soldiers indiscriminately opening fire on entire apartment blocks because someone threw a rock.
Frankly the best evidence of it is Yellowbird itself, which smuggled more than 400 people out of China, many of them the leaders of the protest themselves. If they had kettled in and slaughtered the occupants, that wouldn’t have been possible.
Removed by mod
So we are now trying the, it’s only 300 people so it’s not a massacre argument. Seeing as you bring up the 10,000 number, let’s look at the source.
The Chinese army crackdown on the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests killed at least 10,000 people, according to newly released UK documents.
Combined with the above photos, this seems closer to the truth than the official 300 Chinese story.
Removed by mod
Like clockwork you’re here to deny the many atrocities of authoritarian despots.
What do you even get out of constantly getting your metaphoric-cock beaten into the dirt 2 dozen times a day?
What exactly do you think happened, and what do you think I am claiming happened?
Please don’t deflect.
I am not deflecting, I am trying to understand what you think I am denying.
Everything I’ve said happened, protesters lynching police and police gunning down protesters in the streets surrounding the square, is reflected in the wikipedia article, the only thing that I’ve denied, that masses of unarmed students were gunned down and run over by tanks in the square, is proven false in the tankman video, which I linked.
Wait I also denied that China claims nothing happened at Tienanmen square, that’s also proven by the official Chinese account of what happened in the Wikipedia article.
Deflect away, coward.
No, I’m not playing your games.
Answer the question:
What do you get out of having your metaphoric-cock beaten into the ground 24 times a day?
Your comment after being imported into China:
The chinese narrative isn’t thatnothing happened, it’s that there was a battle outside the square, including protesters lynching and burning cops and cops gunning down unarmed protesters on bikes from their trucks. This is corroborated by videos and pictures.The western narrative
of tanks going into the square and gunning down tens of thousands of protesters (after getting delayed by tank man)is blatantly false,as you can see in the uncut tankman video pans over to show the square the tanks are leaving was emptyexcept for some bikes.Removed by mod
https://youtu.be/kMKvxJ-Js3A
Fuck you.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Thanks, it’s called a typo.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Yes, I did. Tianmen square massacre deniers make me mad.
It should make you mad as well, if you were a decent person.
Wikipedia indicates there wasn’t a massacre in Tiananmen square: “Several people who were situated around the square that night, including former Beijing bureau chief of The Washington Post Jay Mathews[f] and CBS correspondent Richard Roth[g] reported that while they had heard sporadic gunfire, they could not find enough evidence to suggest that a massacre took place on the square”
“In 2011, three secret cables from the United States embassy in Beijing agreed there was no bloodshed inside Tiananmen Square.[244] Instead, they said Chinese soldiers opened fire on protesters outside the square as they fought their way from the west towards the center.[244] A Chilean diplomat who had been positioned next to a Red Cross station inside the square told his US counterparts that he did not observe any mass firing of weapons into the crowds in the square itself, although sporadic gunfire was heard. He said that most of the troops who entered the square were armed only with anti-riot gear.”
While they do provide sources that say the student death toll was likely high, most sources estimate around 500. (Again, not in the square itself)
I’m just trying to be factual- the students were funded and supported by Western forces including the United States, probably not to help the students and spread democracy and capitalism, but to create division. The students clashed with China’s fucked up communist government and military. There’s not too many possibilities when a civilian force clashes with a state military.
I support you if you oppose China’s actions here, I just think saying there was a massacre in Tiananmen square is insincere.
Fucking delusional.
https://www.reuters.com/world/china/chinas-tiananmen-square-demonstrations-crackdown-2022-06-02/
Okay, that’s Wikipedia that I quoted
Removed by mod
Don’t have a hissy fit about someone else’s emotions. It’s just a comment.
Removed by mod
No nuance, only china bad evil commees who kill their own people because they hate freedom.
Nah, China kills it’s own people because the ruler can’t ever tolerate handing power to anyone else.
Nice try tho 🤡
The average CPC presidency length over the last 70 years is like 8 years.
And how long do you think Winnie’s reign will be?
Well he’s incredibly popular, so probably quite long unless he starts fucking up or gets coup’d by capitalists in the party ala Yeltsin.
Unlike Hu Jintao’s path, he isn’t struggling to manage the contradictions between the interests of the national bourgeoisie against those of the working class.
Of course the authoritarian cunt who mandates his servant-citizens like him is “popular”. It’s illegal for him not to be lmao.
Hitler is popular as well, I suppose that means he deserves our respect right?
Easy to seem popular when you make people who are against you disappear
I’d examine why you think that’s how China works, but we’re at conspiracy-theory level nonsense where you’ll just keep making up shit to justify your original position.
Instead lets stay on solid ground: What policies or actions has Xi Jinping taken that you feel hurt his popularity? (Or would have, if everyone in China wasn’t afraid to say so for fear of getting disappeared)
Removed by mod
You’re never going to convert sinophobes. It’s like trying to convert white supremacists, except even more unlikely to work since there is zero pressure to not be sinophobic in society.
Criticizing a regime isn’t racism against the people living under that regime.
The people control that regime in a much more robust democracy than the US has.
This has nothing to do with what I was saying. Try again.
Criticizing a “regime” run by democracy, both direct and representative, is criticizing the people. It’s also criticizing a race, in this case, as you people never evolved past the “sneaky Chinaman” stereotype in your criticisms.
No, again, it’s not. Once elected the government can go against the people’s will. Try again.
Every communist state to my knowledge has instant recall; if an elected official isn’t doing what you want, you can get signatures to force a recall vote.
So because you assume China to be a democracy, other people are racist for criticizing the government?
So any criticism of the U.S. is racism?
Let’s agree that both are bad. What is your goal with this whataboutism?
The implication of what they’re saying is that the Chinese government’s actions generally represent the will of the Chinese people so you can’t just separate them like you can with America.
Do you agree with this implication or did you just explain it to me? Because I would never equate the actions of the government of a nation state with the people who happen to live there
I would if the people overwhelmingly support that action, yes.
Well, do they ever?
Imagine knowing what words mean.
At this point I should ask for a delicious cookie recipe…
This is no different from calling critics of Israel antisemites even though plenty of us Jews do it too.
There are a huge number of Chinese people not living in China who are very open about their contempt for Xi’s regime.