HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: u9259236@cc.uow.edu.au (Leslie Shing Chi Tong)
Subject: Re: F-16's fear?
Organization: University Of Wollongong
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 16:29:41 GMT

v999qx29@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu writes:

>In article <65500095@acf3.NYU.EDU>, yangze@acf3.NYU.EDU (Ze Yang, , , ) writes...
>> 
>>Taiwan is a piece of land got back by China after we defeated Japan, I don't
>>understand why Mr. Chang says it is a country, if it is a country as
>>Mr. Chang claimed, there must be very few people know this.
>> 
>>By the way, when those asian countries were fighting Japan's invasion,
>>where were those taiwanese boys and girls, they were not defending
>>"their own country", I am sure some of them are serving their Japanese 
>>masters, how did they become so tough in recent years?  
>> 
>>They don't have the right to say taiwan is a independent country now, 
>>it's a piece of land owned by Chinese.
>> 
>> 
>>Ze Yang

>Lets not talk about history in this matter. Or , how can you explain
>that taiwan defended China against Japanese invasion in the Sino-Japanese
>war but deserted by China . Where were mainland boys and girls when
>Taiwanese succesfully stopped Japanese landing on the island. Probably
>sucking Opium pipe on the bed then sold their brothers in Taiwan to
>Japanese so that they can keep sucking their pipes. The wound Taiwanese
>have suffered is painful enough and dosen't need anybody to worsen it.

As far as it can remember from reading history books,when the Japanese
first invaded china,the Nationalist didn't fight the japs to defend china,
but instead let the communist do the fighting,so they can preserve their 
resources to fight the communist when they(communist) has defeated japan,
there were some nationalists soldiers who choose to fight the japanese to
defend their country but Cheng Kai Shek decided to cut off their supplies
to force them to withdrawn,it wasn't until Shek was kidnapped in the
**** **** incident(can't remember the english name) in which he was forced
to co-operate with the communist to fight the japanese.
When the war is over,Shek was eventually defeated by the communist and 
escaped to Taiwan,many nationalist soldier(about a million) was left in china
and eventually masscare by communist,
can I get a explaination for the above incident?
(note: I'm not a communist supporter nor a TIers,I just wanted to know why
Shek was such a shit-head,while he has "awarded" himself many medals,but I 
don't think that he has actcaully took part in any battle at all)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: xi@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Subject: Re: To those pro-Shen Tong guys
Reply-To: xi@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Organization: Brandeis University
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 20:21:24 GMT

In article <92249.140601CHENJC@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>, CHENJC@QUCDN.QueensU.CA writes:
>Shen Tong simply plays an idiot role in this international politics
>game, directed by his AMERICAN ADVISOR. That's why many chinese don't
>give a shit on his arrest (or you can call it grabbed/seized, as much
>as you like).  You guys probably enjoyed ST's recent show too much,
>and forgot you are just watching a play/game.
>Unlike three years ago, now few and few people trust those so-called
>D-fighters.
>
>JC

American can sale F-16 fighter to Taiwan, and why can't CCP arrest ST?
Maybe they can make a deal. Anyway, after 20 years from now, F-16 will
be garbage, and ST ? no predictions.
From: ping@bnlux1.bnl.gov (Shiping Zhang)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Anonymous Mail
Date: 5 Sep 92 05:33:47 GMT
Article-I.D.: bnlux1.1992Sep5.053347.22755
Organization: Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973

In article <2SEP199221434292@deimos.ucc.umass.edu> s9874194@deimos.ucc.umass.edu (s9874194) writes:
>
>Hello, young fellow.
>
>There is a lot of people believe that anonymous posting is possible and 
>a lot do not. I could not see the point here and do not care.
>I personaly would not post anything anonymous and I do not oppose
>anybody post anything anonymous.
>
>What I intent to say is that please do not use Mao's name to make joke.
>I do not care what do you think about him. I do have my respect to
>him and I believe that alot of other people on the net may also do.
>So, please respect our rights.
>
>Regards.
>
>c.q.

  Can't see how your rights are violated by others using Mao's name
  to make joke.  And seems you DO care what others think about Mao.

-ping
From: pi@spica.bu.edu (GARMARHARD)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: A thought on Shen Tong's arrest
Date: 4 Sep 92 23:57:16 GMT
Organization: Boston University Space Physics
In-reply-to: LXH108@psuvm.psu.edu's message of 4 Sep 92 00:08:05 GMT

In article <92247.200805LXH108@psuvm.psu.edu> LXH108@psuvm.psu.edu writes:

>   There many ways to make changes (bad or good) in China. If you do it
>   smart and legaly, you will achieve some progress; if you do it
>   no-so-legally (not abide by ALL the relevent Chinese laws and policies
>   and more importantly, the leaders's directives), you have to pay the
>   price. I am not saying who is right who is wrong. Even though (assume)
>   Shen Tong did not violate the law and so forth, his arrest was expected.

What a lowful society you are plotting here! Don't you forget the 
Dictatorship of Wu2 Can3 class (= Dictatorship of CCP). Don't try 
to use a legal system to replace our dictatorship!

>   He wanted to establish some shit of fund for democracy and did not
>                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>   intend to overthrow the current Chinese goverment? Come on! You are
>   talking to kids or what? 

Tell me which shit smells better? You mean the dictatorship shit smells much
better? 

>                             If you have had a chance to read Shen Tong's
>   book "Almost a Revolution", you will come up with the fact that he is
>   a one of those who want to overhtrow the goverment. Onece again I am
>   not saying he is wrong. May be these guys are right, but not now.
>   Waht the Chinses ordinary people need is a better life which is composed
>   of more money. Freedom of expression or speech? not the first priority.
>   Pro-freedom-of-speech-ers, you are not getting along with the mainstream
>   of Chinese people.

1)  Lao3 Mao2 said: 
	A revolution is not that you invite a guest for dinner. 
	A revolution is actions of violence! A revolution is violent
	actions that a class overthows another class.
    According to this brilliant thought, Shen Tong even is not a 
    revolutionalist. I guess he was "grabbed" because he did not use violence
    to overthrow the government so that he was a "conuter-revolutionary".

2)  According to our brilliant morden history, overthowing a government
    should not be a crime. Instead, it should be praised. Otherwise every
    CCP members should have done everything "legally" and handed themselve
    in KMT's prisons, or police stations.

3)  It is understandable that you don't care about freedom of expression
    or speech. What is very hard to understand is that why don't you shut 
    up!
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: s9874194@phobos.ucc.umass.edu (s9874194)
Subject: Re: Shall we support CCP use force to TI?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 02:19:00 GMT

In article <1992Sep15.161603.10213@unixg.ubc.ca>, wangf@unixg.ubc.ca (Frank Wang) writes...
>After reading so many articles, follow ups on F16, I have a question
>to  us well educated mainlanders, DO WE SUPPORT CCP TO USE FORCE
>IF TAIWAN CLAIMS INDEPENDANT LIKE THE YOUGOSLAVIAN ARE DOING?
> 
>F. Wang 
> 
Not use force to attack! I do believe that there is better ways
like the economic blockade. To achieve that, some force may be necessary!
c.q.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: cyc@dip.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang)
Subject: Re: 150 F-16 to Taiwan
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 19:57:09 GMT

>
>So what, can Taiwan spend all her $90 billion on buying F-16, as TIer's day
>dream? don't you think one country can win a war only depend on inported
>arms? Isreal can win Mid-East was, Isreal can make hi-tech fighters and tanks.
>Can taiwan do that? Don't you think USA will still sell F-16 to taiwan
>after the war break someday?

Isreal won all Mideast wars when they can't make any of those hi-tech
weapons. They relied 100% supply from USA to win every Mideast war. But, they
know that they cannot depend on any other country except themselves in the
long run. So, they have developed technologies to build those high-tech 
weapons in the past 10 years, after ended the last Mideast war. 
Note that, as I said the sell of F-16 is good news to TIers, I didn't 
say its good news to KMT. It is KMT who always want to recover mainland 
China by whatever means they must use. For TIers, we only want to secure 
our safety and build a country not too much different than Swissland. 
It is those Chinese warmonger who forced Taiwanese and KMT to arm themselves 
by constantly threatening the attack to Taiwan. So, TIers are forced to 
fight just like Swissland people they want peace but they are prepared 
to fight for all kinds of war if any one dare to invade Swissland.

Yi-Chieh
From: yangze@acf3.NYU.EDU (Ze Yang, , , )
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: 150 F-16 to Taiwan
Date: 6 Sep 92 04:56:00 GMT
Organization: New York University

shi6@chaos.uchicago.edu (Sheldon Shi) writes:

>apparently China is in advantage. Even in terms of tech, don't you see

Why did you use the word "even", there is no doubt in most ereas, their
technology is incomparative to ours, only in a few ereas, because
the USA has a weaker control on technology export to them, they
do better than mainland.
They are eventually feeded up by USA, they do not have too much things
feel proud of.

>Sheldon

Ze Yang
Xref: sparky soc.culture.china:25269 soc.culture.japan:7935 soc.history:8165
From: jewell@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Larry Jewell)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.japan,soc.history
Subject: Re: US Ironclads (Was: Re: US colonializing )
Date: 11 Sep 92 02:43:45 GMT
Organization: Purdue University

In article <jwb.716175987@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au> jwb@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au (Jim Breen) writes:
>cb@tamarack13.timbuk (Chris Brewster) writes:

>>The first important iron ship was, I believe, the Dreadnought (I could
>>have the name wrong).  It was an English ship of about 1870.  

>HMS Dreadnought was launched in 1905. There were plenty of important 
>iron or iron-clad ships before then (Warrior, Monitor, ..) but the 
>Dreadnought began a revolution in naval architecture.

The importance of the Dreadnought was that the myriad guns of different
calibre were replaced by a heavy main battery of guns and a few smaller
ones to use against fast moving targets.

Fewer men manning fewer guns, fewer sizes of ammunition, "centralized" 
armour schemes, uniform flight time for shells.  All of this were 
advantages, but the real clincher for the theory of the Dreadnought
was demonstrated at Tsushima, where there weren't any.  The British
Naval Attache, on board Mikasa, observed that the lighter calibre 
weapons were never imployed.  Togo opened fire at best range for his
heavy guns and stayed at that range as long as it was advantageous.

>-- 
>Jim Breen                           JIS:$B%8%`!!%V%j!<%s(J
>Department of Robotics & Digital Technology. Monash University. 
>PO Box 197 Caulfield East VIC 3145 Australia (ph) +61 3 573 2552 
>(fax) +61 3 573 2345  AARNet/Internet:jwb@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au  

Larry J

-- 
#L.W. Jewell Moderator at the Veterans Information Site (veteran@cc.purdue.edu)#
#& WWII-L Listowner: "Sunday's horoscope is note worthy because of its strange,#
#sudden and wholly unpredictable and inexplicable occurrences, affecting all   #
#phases of life." "Your Horoscope" L.A. Evening Herald Express, Sat, 12/06/41  #
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: x0y3510@tamuts.tamu.edu (Xuejun Yang)
Subject: Re: Insensitive mainland chauvinist view.
Organization: ~/lib/organization
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 22:48:28 GMT

In article <1992Sep12.001230.15450@shmps.ohio-state.edu> jchang@shmps.ohio-state.edu writes:
>For all you insensitive, bloody thirsty, chavinistic pigs from mainland,
>go back to hell, that is where you belong.
>
>For all you scum bags who want to take Taiwan using force, may your
>descendants be cursed and suffer.
>
>For all you shit face who hate Taiwanese and support CCP's agression
>toward Taiwan, go home and f**k yourself.
>

A typical TI with no class. This IS your trademark. Let's ignore him.
I would be ashamed if this were part of my culture!


Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
From: s9874194@deimos.ucc.umass.edu (s9874194)
Subject: Re: a few question about taiwan
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 01:15:00 GMT

In article <BuG8zJ.7GE@rlyeh.multisys.com>, rot@rlyeh.multisys.com (Republic of Taiwan) writes...
>In article <BuFuKD.7wL@news.orst.edu> heathd@ucs.orst.edu (Du Shi-hua Heath) writes:
>=I have a question about what percent of Taiwanese are born in Taiwan,
>=and what percent of Taiwanese have mainland origins.
> 
>Does it matter? KMT believes and believed it is matter, do you?
>It does matter how people recongize themselve.
>If you does not deem Taiwan as a home, why bother arguing
>with people saying his or her home is somewhere else.
>Just go back to your REAL home.
> 
>=
>=Another question is that if Taiwan put the independency in vote, how many
>=Taiwanese would vote for it.
> 
>Such a strange question!
>If Taiwan is not an independent country, then who is the
>government on top of KMT?
>If Taiwan is an independent country, why waste people's
>time to declare independent again.
>Your question should be,
> 
>Shoud people in Taiwan force KMT to drop KMT's claim of
>'KMT owns KMT's Tibet, Mongolia and Mainland China and
>KMT has been preparing for 40 some years to RECOVER or
>INVADE Mainland China, Tibet and Mongolia'?
> 
>Should people in Taiwan elect their own president by
>population vote?
> 
>Should people in Taiwan decide their own fate or let
>KMT or CCP decides Taiwanese future?
> 
>=
>=About Taiwan independency, I think it's all up to the people who live in
>=Taiwan now.  So I want to know how many people will vote for it in Taiwan.
> 
> 
> 
Excuse me, Sir. Why you are so hostile to the above questions? I
assume those questions were from a person who did not know too
much about the situation in Taiwan like me. Why can not we ask 
you or somebody some question about Taiwan? If you believe that 
you have the truth, why can you clearly state it? Why do you need
to be anger about those simple questions? I have been called
insensitive chauvinist. I guess you have been too sensitive.

Calm down, all right?
c.q.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: wang@math.psu.edu (Feng Wang)
Subject: Re: English Usage
Organization: Penn State Department of Mathematics
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 03:40:24 GMT

In article <1992Sep5.011806.26322@mcshub.dcss.mcmaster.ca> yu@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca (Fan Yu) writes:
>In article <9209042248.AA14516@einstein.physics.buffalo.edu> xiaofei@einstein.physics.buffalo.edu (XiaoFei Wang) writes:
>>* >  The discussion reminds me of this most stupid thing (I think) in English.
>>* >You say 1 meter, 2 meters, 10 meters, 0.5 meters, 0.001 meters, and you
>>* >even have to say -72 meters, -0.975 meters, and of course, ZERO METERS!  
>>* >Everything except 1 is plural.  Now what about -1?  Is it singular? :-)
>>* 
>>* >dhsy@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
>>  
>>The correct usage is for | X | <= 1, we say X meter, otherwise X meters.
>
>Is it? I didn't know that English native speakers were so mathematical:-)
>
>	Fan
>

I think XiaoFei's right.  To be a little serious: in most people's mind,
mathematics is far far from real life.  It is not.  It is in everyday life.
From: pierccm@wkuvx1.bitnet
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Martial Arts in Chinese Life
Date: 13 Sep 92 00:49:08 CDT
Organization: Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, KY

In the beginning of the Communist rule of China, martial arts took a swift
decline (at least that is my understanding).  But through out the life span
of China martial arts has always played a big role.  What I would like to 
know is:  How much of a factor is martial arts in the lives of people in 
China today?

I guess I could have posted this to rec.martial.arts, but they talk more about
Japanese and Korean arts rather than Chinese.  I think that people who read 
this category will have a better knowledge on the subject.

Thanks,

Chris
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: xiong@fzi.de (Xiong Xun)
Subject: Re: ShaanBei folk song
Reply-To: xiong@fzi.de
Organization: Forschungszentrum Informatik (FZI), Karlsruhe, Germany
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 15:41:31 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.084036.3030@swanee.ee.uwa.oz.au>, zhang@swanee.ee.uwa.edu.au (Zhang Ya Xin) writes:
|>     I like ShaanBei folk song very much. I very enjoyed the songs like
|> "Lan2 Hua1 Hua1" and "Gan3 Sheng1 Ling2" which were posted in this group
|> and on the Hua2 Xia4 Wen3 zhai1. Recently I got another Shaanbei folk
|> song, sorry, I don't know its name, on a cassette tape. Following is its
|> words:
|> 
|>     xin1 li3 tou2 you3, yan3 li3 you3, kou3 li3 mei3 you,
|>     qing2 ge1 ge1 ni3 xin1 si1 nan3 chu1 kou3.
|>     hong2 luo2 bu1 de1 ge1 bo1 bai2 luo2 bu1 de1 tui3,
|>     hua1 xin1 xin1 de1 lian3 pang2 hong2 du1 du1 de1 zui3.
|>     xiao3 mei4 mei4 he2 qing2 ge1 yi1 dui4 dui4,
|>     dao1 ya1 zai4 bo2 zi1 shang4 ye3 bu4 hui3.
|>     qing2 ge1 ge1, qing2 ge1 ge1,
|>     zhen1 jiao4 ren2 xin1 qian1 gua4,
|>     pie3 dong1 pie3 xi1,
|>     wei2 du2 ni3 pie3 bu4 xia4.
|> 
|>     Could someone out here post the simplified music of this song to me
|> or send the whole song to the editor of Hua2 Xia4 Wen3 zhai1?
|>     Thanks a lot.
What were you meaning by the "simplified music"? This must be a word you've
invented to arouse misunderstanding. I guess you'd mean the chinese
special "numbered music score" instead of that?
From: s245@cs.utexas.edu (Spring Class Account)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: 150 F-16 to Taiwan
Date: 5 Sep 1992 00:14:22 -0500
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
NNTP-Posting-Host: nada.cs.utexas.edu

Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: 150 F-16 to Taiwan
Summary: 
Expires: 
Followup-To: 
Distribution: 
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
Keywords: 
>
>Well, probably not too much. But it is only the beginning, isn't it ?
>The total cost of 150 F-16s is about $4 billions, it is not a big deal based on
>Taiwan's trade surplus, its about $90 billions now.
>
>Yi-Chieh

Looks like we have a warmonger here; however, I don't believe most people

in Taiwan would like to spend too much money on arms.
---------------------------------

Can the sale actually go through?   

The sale of F-16s will certainly lead to serious consequencies in Sino-US 

diplomatic relations.  

China will cancel its $6b airplane order with the US.

Also, it is very likely that China will risk its entire trade relationship
with the US.  

Given the huge ammount of Chinese exports through HK, it seems HK will 
be the most to suffer in a trade war.

The Chinese govn has consistantly retaliated against all countries which

sold  arms to Taiwan.
---------------------------------------------------------------

It seems the sale is neither politically nor economically beneficial to the

US, maybe it is another "READ MY LIPS".  

After all, the actual sale will come after the presidential elec.
From: haiqiu@ducvax.auburn.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: To those pro-Shen Tong guys
Date: 7 Sep 92 17:56:20 GMT

In article <1992Sep7.012926.1719@ucbeh.san.uc.edu>, guang@ucbeh.san.uc.edu writes:
> In article <92249.140601CHENJC@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>, CHENJC@QUCDN.QueensU.CA writes:
>> Shen Tong simply plays an idiot role in this international politics
>> game, directed by his AMERICAN ADVISOR. That's why many chinese don't
>> give a shit on his arrest (or you can call it grabbed/seized, as much
>> as you like).  You guys probably enjoyed ST's recent show too much,
>> and forgot you are just watching a play/game.
>> Unlike three years ago, now few and few people trust those so-called
>> D-fighters.
> 
> Screw "those so-called D-fighters".  What is interesting, however, is  many
> ass-holes don't even HAVE the courage to go back to do whatsoever. All they
> can do is try to pretend to be cool and "analyze" whatever goes on.  
> Just fuck off.
> I don't care who ST is and what role he played, all I care is a PERSON along
> with other two is now in prison.  And if you say you don't give shit, you
> might really deserve to be sent to Rostock.
> 
> Guang Yang  (yangg@acfcluster.NYU.edu)       on my old account

  There's one thing I admire Mr. Shen Tong: He has the courage to do what he
want to do, even though it's very risky. But other than that, there's nothing
I can appreciate him: Neither what he is doing nor the way he is doing. I can
only say he is just an idiot when he insists to go back while expecting an
arrest 100% for sure. Even if he will not be arrested, I will still doubt how
much his action worth: establishing a "democratic China fund". I have seen 
too many play/games of those "d-fighters" these two years. I am sure what they
are doing will do more harm than good to China's democracy future.

  I can never forget the bloodshed in Beijing three years ago. I can't forget
the bloody photographes one of my friend shown me when he came back from
Beijing. Those killed by the CCP, their blood remains on the TAM square, those
are very clean, very grorious blood. However CCP tried every mean to clean up
those blood, they remained grorious and clean there. HOWEVER, in these three
years those "d-fighters" did something that the CCP are unable to do: they
contaminated those blood, they made those grorious blood dirty! How sad!!!

--HAMLET
From: zhengs@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Shunfeng Zheng)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Looking for Li Rufeng
Date: 9 Sep 92 20:24:01 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

Dear netters:

I am looking for Li Rufeng, who came to the USA in 1991 and was then
in University of Washington at Seattle. Anyone who know his whereabout
please tell me. If you happen to be in that university, I would ask you
to distribute this message in your university's chinese network. Your
help is highly appreciated.

Shunfeng Zheng
From: yong@minster.york.ac.uk
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: China's education
Date: 6 Sep 92 15:47:34 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of York, England

China Education (1965 - 1986), what is the problem?

1. net enrollment of age group in education
	primary		secondary	tertiary (higher)
1979	93%		46%		0.1%

2. student-teacher ratio
	primary		secondary	tertiary
1979	27:1		19:1		4.3:1
1982	25.4:1		16.4:1		4:1

3. education expenditure divisions
	central governt.	local governt.	tuition fee
1979	56.8%			27.2%		15.9%

4. the percentage of Chinese population over 25 years old, who 
have no education at all, occupy 38% in 1979.

5. percentage of age group enrolled in education (1965 - 1986)
		 primary	secondary	tertiary
	        1965  1986	1965  1986	1965  1986
China		89%   129%	24%   42%	0.1%  2%
S. Korea 	101%  94%	35%   95%	6%    33%
Australia	99%   106%      62%   96%       16%   29%
USA		      102%            100%      40%   59%
Germany (West)	      97%	      72%	9%    30%
France		134%  112%      56%   95%       18%   30%
UK		92%   106%      66%   85%	12%   22%
Italy		112%  97%	47%   76%	11%   25%

6. numbers of schools in China
	universities	professional colleges 	secondary	primary
1991(?) 2,448		8,018			?		764,000	

7. Oversea Chinese, who study higher degrees (M.Sc or Ph.D) from China,
are less than 200,000 since 1979 up to now (1991) inclusive.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china