Skip to main content

Epoch Times: Chinese-India "Bloodletting" & is Chinese Regime's Dam may be about to Burst?

If the Chinese owned anti-Communist Epoch Times is correct the totalitarian Chinese regime's dam may be about to burst:

The bloodletting on the IndiaChina border caught the world by surprise, but if one looks eastward to what is happening in Beijing, the events may make sense.

India and China share a long and undefined border. However, each side has a controlled area. In the past 58 years since the 1962 Indo–China War, the two countries have learned to keep the peace while dealing with the grey areas.
  
I have heard stories from friends who were in the Chinese army. Both sides at the border know how to play a game asserting their competing territorial claims. Neither army carries guns when patrolling near the border. One side can build a temporary tent in the disputed area or even in the other side’s controlled area, and the other side can take the tent down. Both sides have lived in peace with this game.

Last week, when an Indian patrol went to tear down a tent China had erected, they were attacked by CCP soldiers wielding clubs studded with nails. Twenty Indian soldiers were killed.

This was a planned and deliberate attack. To kill anyone of a neighboring country is a major diplomatic and military issue. Without the direction of the top leaders of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), it would never have happened.

This border conflict has a few benefits for the CCP: It diverts attention away from the Chinese regime’s internal crises; it tests the military, to see whether it follows the top CCP leader; and it shows India that the country will get into trouble if it doesn’t follow China in its fight with the United States.

In the CCP’s history, each time it has faced a severe crisis, it has looked to an outside target and deliberately created a fight. Since the CCP can not afford a real war, it picks a target with which it can control the scale of the fight. India is a good fit.

At the peak of the border conflict, on June 17, the AIIB (Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, led by China) approved a $750 million loan to India for its response to COVID-19. The loan sent a signal that the CCP wants to keep the scale of conflict under control.

The CCP has been very unhappy that India did not take China’s side during the U.S.–China trade war. India declined to join the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership led by China. Punishing and attracting India with money is a typical CCP tactic.

The result might be the opposite of what the CCP wants. India is officially trying to turn down the heat, but the Indian people have begun boycotting products made in China. The border incident will definitely push India to draw closer to the United States.

This conflict has distracted the media; it has been the top news everywhere. Few media outlets are paying attention to how serious is the spread of the CCP virus in Beijing...

...  Protesters in Hong Kong carry signs saying “Heaven is killing the CCP.” It is no joke. Seemingly every week, we hear news of events that threaten the very existence of the CCP.

This week, rains have been causing flooding in many areas, especially in Sichuan Province. Land, sand, and water are piling up behind the controversial Three Gorges Dam.

Some experts are calling it a bomb, one more powerful than an atomic bomb. The dam sits in the western edge of densely populated central China. If it collapses under mounting water pressure, it will inundate an area that produces over 50 percent of China’s GDP, and where hundreds of millions of people live.
[ https://epochtimes.today/chinas-conflict-with-india-born-of-crisis-in-beijing/]

  
Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Mass and the Church as well as for the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...