HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: utingli@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (Tingli Pan)
Subject: Re: ROC vs PRC
Organization: Educational Computing Network
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 19:01:31 GMT

In article <1992Sep28.175106.8622@odin.corp.sgi.com> yu@chang.asd.sgi.com (Yu Chang) writes:
>In article <80570@ut-emx.uucp>, joe@astro.as.utexas.edu (Joe Wang) writes:
>|> 
>|> Had the United States fought only to save South Korea, it is very
>|> unlikely that the Chinese would have entered the Korean War.  The
>|> problem was that once American troops crossed the 38th parallel and
>|> headed northward, Mao and his friends became very nervous.  What
>
>I had never been a great student on the subject of history but
>was not it n-korea crossed 38th parallel first. CCP+n-korea won quite a few
>battles and captured a few US generals inclding a 2-star before MacArthur
>came in. If I remeber it right, even seoul was (or soon-to-be) lost to n-korea.
>
I don't think CCP went to Korea before MacArthur went there although N.
Korea attacked first. I heard a story that before invasion, Kim went to
Moscow asked Stalin's support. Stalin didn't say a word. And Kim just
assumed that he had Stalin's support and launched the invasion.

>|> worried them was the possibility that American troops would not stop
>|> once they reached the Yalu River and would continue into Manchuria.
>|> Even if the United States did stop at the Yalu River, China would have
>|> to garrision a lot of troops at its border with Korea to defend itself
>|> against a hostile regime.
>|> 
>|> Also, I agree with you that Chiang Kai-Shek had almost no influence in
>|> the American decision to enter the Korean War. 
>
>Not only that, Chiang did not get US help and support after 1949 after
>korea-war broke out. US then realized that they could not make friends with
>CCP and then decided to send 7th fleet to taiwan strait and continue support
>KMT.

US had withdrawn all the support after 1949 not only because they tried
to contact CCP, but it perfered a third party to replace Jiang. CIA
organized some previous KMT generals and politicians for the third
party. They also said that around 1949, the antigovernmet groups, like
"Zhuo Shang Diao" in "Zhi Qu Wei Hu Shang" and the agents in the movie
"Railroad Guards" were all belong to this group. (I mean the groups in
Northeastern China). After the Chinese crossing Yulu River, accouding to
Truman's official announcement. The 7th Fleet sent there was to
neutrolize the Taiwan Strait. Maybe that was his original intention.

Tingli Pan
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: wtuntaw@lark.utah.edu (Wisanu Truntawiroon)
Subject: Re: Economic Report	
Organization: University of Utah
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 92 00:37:38 GMT


Hi Everybody.
	One of my friend taking a class about chiness culture and economic. But she doesn't have access to the network. So to make the story short, Could somebody kindly mail me anything about culture and economic for china.
						Thank in advance.
 










Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: yawei@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (~{QG9p~})
Subject: Re: Oct 1, our National Day
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 01:41:34 GMT



A few years back students in Bloomington would find Oct. 1 to be an 
good excuse for partying. One year they managed to invite the
mayor of Bloomington, Ms. Tomi Allison, to address the assembly.
Ms. Allison started, "today is the thirty X anniversary of the
national day of China. Thirty X years, such a young nation,
such an old culture ... blah blablah ...".

Which just goes to show that Oct. 1 is not, and should not be,
China's national day!  We are NOT a "YOUNG" nation!  Oct. 1 is
nothing but the day the Communist Party of China came to 
power, calling it the "national day" of China is as ridiculous
as George Bush's (hyperthetically) calling Jan 20, 1989 as the
USA's national day.

In article <BvGqGx.3AF@cs.psu.edu> jyw@phys.psu.edu (Jin-Yuan Wu) writes:
>Dear Chinese Friend:

>What China won 43 years ago was a real INDEPENDENCE which China had not been
>having for about 100 years. Nothing can be more valuable than
>independence to a country.

Independence from whom?  As far as I know, the ruler of China 
43 years ago, Mr. Chiang Kai-shek, and his government, were as
Chinese as they can be.  Most if not all of China's present day
territory were under Chinese control back then.  China was NOT
a colony of anybody. So tell me, what was that "independence" 
about?

The Communists of China had good reason to cerebrate their 1949 
victory, just like the Republican Party had reason to cerebrate 
George Bush's victory.  Just don't call it China's "national day" 
and give us the "indepedence" bullshit.
 


Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: s075198@mercury.carleton.ca (Jun Liu)
Subject: Re: Oct 1, our National Day
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 13:15:54 GMT

In <6831@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> yding+@pitt.edu (Yijun Ding) writes:

>I am objective since I only speak for myself, and I am not a d-fighter
>either professionally or amateurly.  I do hope that your attitude could

I am sorry to say that I find this "d-fighter" phrase very objcetionable.
You may fail to agree certain acts of certain people, but one of 
consciousness and duty, give the situation of China, should feel obliged
to promote democracy and the awareness of human rights. Yet there still 
many people wouldn't give a damn to it, but that is exactly what we should 
not be so glorious of. On the contray, it is this mentality of the Chinses 
people that is partly responsible for the mess we are in now. I understand
that you are refering to certain people when you say "d-fighter", rather
than anybody who is avocating democracy and human rights. But this blanket
definition of "d-fighter" with its negative undertone make me really wonder
wether there is any hope for China to become a truely democratic country 
for democracy is already so notorious even before we have the slightest 
taste of it.

Regards

Jun Liu @ Ottawa
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: Sanyee_Tang@mindlink.bc.ca (Sanyee Tang)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: History of Xinjiang?
Date: 1 Oct 92 06:18:48 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

    This post is not intended to argue whether Xinjiang should be a part of
China or not.  But currently it is a part of China.

    In article <1992Sep30.113647.59298@cc.usu.edu> (30 Sep 92) ma@cc.usu.edu
writes,

> There were guerrilla, or may called Tu3 Fei3 (remember KMT called CCP Gong4
> Fei3) everywhere in China at that time.  Some claimed their own
governments,
> as CCP did.  But they were all cleaned up after 1949.

    The "East Turkistan Republic" mentioned in the original post is not a
bandits' bastion.  If my memory serves, it is called "San Shan Uprising"
in CCP's history book.  Forget what the "three mountains" (San Shan) means.
The capital is Yinin, but CCP said it was a _local_ government (covering a
couple of counties in the west part of Xinjiang), and CCP members led the
revolt to kick the KMT out of Xinjiang.  Well, Saifuding (this is Pinyin)
was said to be one of the leaders, later he became the Governor of Xinjiang.
But the uprising should be around 1947, not 1944, as said in the original
post.

    It seems the real story is very different from CCP's version.

    Don't know why I didn't ask locals about this event, when I visited
this area in the end of '60s.  At that time I should be able to recall
more about this uprising.  Kazakh girls' dance must have been too enchanted
:-).

    One thing I still remember clearly: those nomads have no conception of
national state at all.  They still couldn't understand why now they were not
allowed to go to Soviet in the grazing season, as they did before 1962.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: Congzhong.Wang@info.unine.ch
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: ROC vs PRC
Date: 4 Oct 92 09:18:45 GMT
Organization: University of Neuchatel, Switzerland

In article <1992Oct2.180816.17639@awdprime.austin.ibm.com>, tylee@austin.ibm.com (Ter-Yuan Lee) writes:
> 
> In article <BvGqD5.HuC@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu>, bihkyan@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (Yang Yuanxin) writes:
>                                                              
>> 
>>  I borrowed 4 books about Korean war from Chicago public library monthes
>> ago, at least two of them mentioned the POW incident, very very close to
>> what I heared in China. Also, I found that books published after 1980
>> are more reliable, less propaganda. 
>>  If you wanto know the books names I borrowed, I can give you next week,
>>  According to these books written by American, I can say, CCP is too
>> honest on this issue, they could have gain much more if they have 1/10
>> of the propaganda/brain wash ability as KMT has. If they had 1/100 of
>> the courage of lying as KMT has, I can't imagine...
>> 
>> YY
>> 
> 
> I was not talking to you but CongZong. He said in China he saw certain
> reports on the Korean war. Then, I asked him to provide me the reference.
> OK, since you volunteered, send the titles to me. I will check them out,
> and, maybe give a summary.
>    
> As I said if CongZong could provide me the reference from China, I would
> gladly consent your point that communist Chinese is "too" honest according
> to communist Chinese side of view. But, don't imply that I was brainwashed
> by CNP. Because, by saying so, the ground and bottom line for this debate
> will be shattered. How could you claim that CNP was lying? Have you read the
> the publications from communist China and CNP about this? Or, you only believe
> what "American" said?

  OK, I'm here. sorry about the missing information.
  There were 2 articles, one is hei1 xue3 ("Black Snow"), which described
mostly the beginning of the war(how the situation then was, how CCP decided to)
Another is zhi4 yuan4 jun1 zhan4 fu2 ji4 shi4(sth. like "Story of Chinese
Volunteer Army POWs").
 
> 
> 
> -- 
> /* The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of IBM's.         *\
>  * Take care and have a nice day.                                            *
> \* Ter-Yuan Lee                                                              */
From: ccliu@amy.next.com (Chang-Chi Liu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: How good is the phone line quality in China?
Date: 2 Oct 92 23:40:40 GMT

Are modems popular in China?  What speed can we achieve with voice grade  
lines?  Is 9,600 bps feasible?
From: zzhang@ruhets.rutgers.edu (ZhiZhong Zhang)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Michael Chang's family sacrificed for him
Date: 1 Oct 92 20:17:13 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

utingli@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (Tingli Pan) writes:

>In article <1992Oct1.124417.1115@acd4.acd.com> jjs@iedv7.acd.com ( James J. Song       ) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep24.190528.26844@tamsun.tamu.edu> chen@cs.tamu.edu (Jianer Chen ) writes:
>>>
>......
>>
>>I only heard that Michael Chang's family had sold their house to 
>>support his training. The similar stories have also taken places 
>>in other tennis stars' families. It is not cheap to be among the 
>>best in sports like tennis.
>>___
>I heard that they moved from Minnesota to the South as for a better
>place for Michael Chang's training. Not for the financial reason. But I
>did read something nasty about his father. Who cares.

>Tingli Pan

It is not unusual for a chinese family to "sacrifice" everything for
the success of one member. However, the family odesn't do that for
nothing. Usually, the family expects to share the benifits of the
success of that one member. For example, I don't think Michale is
able to claim the prize money to be only his. It is rather like
a family business. In western countries, it would be highly unlikely
for things like this to happen. Therefore I am not suprised to see
people have nasty things to say about Chang's father(maybe Michale's
father is nasty, I don't know) or his family. Chang's family is more
chinese than american. There is the culture difference here.
ZZZ
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: gang@ms.uky.edu (Gang Li)
Subject: Re: Oct 1, our National Day
    <1992Oct5.144430.27532@news.acns.nwu.edu> 
    <1992Oct5.102905.25813@doug.cae.wisc.edu>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 16:14:34 GMT
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences

yidao@cae.wisc.edu (Yidao Cai) writes:

>In article <1992Oct5.144430.27532@news.acns.nwu.edu> usenet@news.acns.nwu.edu 
>(Usenet on news.acns) writes:
>  
>>> 
>>Don't forget that Mao awarded so called "mather heros" in late 1950s for
>> having  
>>more than 7 children. Many Chinese were as stupid as you still are now. They  
>>simply did not question the authoritis. They simply followed their "great  
>>leeader".
>>
>>Carl

> I am just wondering WHY they did not follow their "great leader" in the 
>late 60's and early 70's.  I remember that he instructed them to have fewer
>children.

Yea, he instructed people to learn from Lei Feng, but people still blame him
for the decay of spirit. I wonder what the world would be if every one is
like Lei Feng.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: usenet@news.acns.nwu.edu (Usenet on news.acns)
Subject: Re: Mailing address for Mr. Steve Lin
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 22:14:34 GMT

In article <ld1e3eINNp5v@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> stlin@stevelin.Eng.Sun.COM (Steven  
Lin) writes:
> >
> >>>>Please make your check payable to:
> >>>>China SOS Education Fund
> >
> Do not mail your check to Steve!
> Do not follow up with this subject!
> 
> Please provide more information what kind of children need help?`
> What kind of help needed?
> 
> I thought to adopt some children, but I worry that they become CCP. :-)

No, they won't become CCP as long as you adopt them before 6 years old. In  
fact, CG has tighten their control on adoptions. A friend of mine planed to do  
so but gave up because of the policy change. So, even you want to save them,  
somebody won't allow you. Some ultra-patriots think leaving China is a great  
sin. Only evil and spineless people would dare and be willing to leave their  
homeland. If you see mainland movies, especially the movies in 60s and 70s, you  
can sometimes hear conversations like this: (mother to son): "My son, don't  
leave. We are family. Even we starve to death, we should die together. We  
should not lose our spines and spirits."

So, for those who promote going back to China right now, think twice. You have  
already looked quite patriot here in the USA, however, in the eyes of those  
ultra-patriots, you are still evils. At least you leave China once while they  
stay there for whatever reasons. So, people, especially like Shi Chunde, you  
might still be prosecuted even you have already kissed CCP for many times. You  
might realize this in a Niu2 Peng2 (place where people raise cows), or  
re-education camp, or behind bars.

Carl
Xref: sparky soc.culture.china:26769 talk.politics.china:1552
From: 129.83.161.10 (H. Chao)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: Do Something For Yourself, Guys--Protection Bill.
Date: 2 Oct 92 20:13:42 GMT
Organization: MITRE

In article <BvIEE7.x1@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>, aguo@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu
(aihua guo) writes:
> 
> In article <1992Oct2.010952.1@gsbacd.uchicago.edu> phd_d8@gsbacd.uchicago.edu writes:
> >In article <1992Oct2.012336.2587@news.iastate.edu>, zzuo@iastate.edu (Zhiqi Zuo) writes:
> >> In article <1992Oct1.181651.27728@linus.mitre.org> 129.83.161.10 (H. Chao) writes:
> >> ...
> >>>> >> ..., ...
> >>>> > Yes, I will do something for myself, but not by using other people's blood
> >>>> >and telling lies. I am against this bill.
> >>>> 
> >>>> If Bush signs the bill and move the date to current, are you still hate the 
> >>>> bill? Why don't you call Bush and ask him to do so. That is what to do sth
> >>>> for yourself.
> 
> >>>Yes, I still hate the bill, unless this bill can cover all Chinese student.
> >> 
> >>     I still hate the bill, unless this bill can cover all WORLD students.
> >> 
> >	I still hate the bill, unless this bill can cover ALL WORLD PEOPLE.
> >
> 
> OK, guys, that is enough. I think only those people who are not confident
> for themselves do like this bill. Since they dare not take the competition
> in the job market, so they have to ask somebody to protect them. But
> shame on these opportunists!
> 
> 
Yes, I wrote the above sentence to comment this so called protection bill. 
I don't know if I can be qualified as an opportunist who dares not to take
the competition in the job market.  I had a job in U.S 10 years ago, and I
still have a job (not being layoffed). 
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: ylg1122@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Yongming Li)
Subject: Authors Needed for a BioBook
Summary: Need authors for a molecular biological book
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 03:14:34 GMT
Keywords: Biological book



     AUTHORS FOR A BIO-MEDICAL BOOK ARE NEEDED

     Do you have experience in molecular biology? 
     Do you want to share your expertise with your
country fellows?
     Do you want to be an author of a book?

     If you do, please read the following and contact
with us promptly.
     Bio-medical group, Association of Chinese
Professionals (ACP) in USA, decided to edit a
professional book entitled "Practical Methods in
Molecular Biology".  The purpose of this book is to
introduce most current and practical techniques of
molecular biology into China.  The book will be
published in both English and Chinese.  A publisher in
P. R. of China has already agreed to publish this book
next year.
     Now we are seeking qualified Chinese authors for
different sections of this book.  ACP membership is
not required for being an author of this book.  If you
are interested, please send some brief information to
us.

     A. General information
     Name, address, e-mail and phone number, current
working institution, education background, working
experience, current status, and publication. 

     B. Specific Information
     Please indicate your most familiar techniques in
molecular biology, list more that three in order if
you could. Do you have any publication by using this
technique?  Which section you can contribute to this
book.  Can you access to e-mail? Do you have your own
e-mail account?  Can you write your English manuscript
with Wordperfect 5.1?  Can you write your Chinese
manuscript with Chinese word processor in GB file?

     C. Your suggestions or proposal (if any)

     Based on your response to above questions, the
committee for this book will make final decision about
the content and authors of this book.  Please notice
that academic information is more important than
technical information.  Some technique like writing GB
file is only preferred but not absolutely required for
an individual contributor.    Should you need any more
information about this call, please feel free to
contact us.


Address:  Yong Ming Li
          706 S. Gregory
          Urbana IL 61801
         (217) 328-3437 (evenings)
         (708) 442-1539 (weakends)
E-mail:   ylg1122@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
From: yding+@pitt.edu (Yijun Ding)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Oct 1, our National Day
Date: 4 Oct 92 05:12:29 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <BvJ3D7.9v@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> xlli@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (xiao-lin li) writes:
>
>Let us see on what points D-fighters would win if there were a free
>election in China. D-fighters will win on the point of 6/4 killing.
>D-fighters will win on the point of democracy, D-fighters will win
>on the point of free market, D-fighters will win on the point of
>Japanese compensation, D-fighters will win on the point of diplomacy.
>What else will D-fighters win?

Green card!

-- 
//Yijun Ding, Pittsburgh //Go your way, be happy.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.china:26800 talk.politics.china:1567
From: lix@yangtze.bu.edu (Xiaowen Li)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: Do Something For Yourself, Guys--Protection Bill.
Date: 3 Oct 92 02:49:57 GMT
Followup-To: soc.culture.china
Organization: Boston University

In article <1992Oct3.020334.27936@news.Hawaii.Edu> wendong@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Wen-Dong Tang) writes:
>
>    Such a fresh, tasty grape!  But ......
>    I am NOT eligible to eat!

Glad to see another SCC poet appearing on netland. However, I suggest
not to use such language to flame each other. The date 4/11/92 is not
anyone's fault, nothing to be proud of if one came before that date.

Well, following is from BU S1216 task force. I have nothing to do with
them (or him or her, because s/he used an "I", though signed as a task
force), but I found it is a good article. I forward it without consent.

     A constructive approach to post-04/11/90 issue

The concern over the interests and opportunities of the
post-04/11/90 students is both reasonable and fair: a serious
issue to be addressed seriously. Verbal complaints are 
inadequate. Concrete actions are necessary. The only 
constructive and workable approach to this issue is to 
draft a post-S1216 proposal to extend the benefits and 
protection date to cover a larger constituency. It is hard
work. 

But it is absolutely necessary: only a positive, constructive
and workable alternative will relieve the concern of post-
04/11/90 students. Most S1216 supporters, I am confident,
will support this new proposal: their experience and skills 
in lobbying S1216 will give a competitive edge to the new
protection bill. I have hard evidence for this prediction:
many students who already have green card actively support
S1216. The fear that S1216 beneficiaries will turn against
their new friends and late comers is not well-grounded.

That is why it is the best interests of post-04/11/90 Chinese
students to support S1216, not to oppose it. To empower your
friends, you strengthen yourselves. To support S1216, you
win over all the friends who back your won protection bill
in the future. To oppose S1216, you are alienating your own
potential supporters.

One thing should be as clear as daylight: in our struggle for
our best interests, we should value unity and friendship;
we should work hard with sincerity, generosity and good will.
Bitterness, hostility and hatred will achieve nothing.

BU S1216 task force
--
From: yding+@pitt.edu (Yijun Ding)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Oct 1, our National Day
Date: 2 Oct 92 13:23:09 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <92276.022303XXX100@psuvm.psu.edu> XXX100@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>            Chinese people deserve much better.
>            You remind me a word: Guo2 Fu4 Min2 Qong2.

You mean, you deserve better.  You mean, you are not rich enough.  Just
a feeling...

-- 
//Yijun Ding, Pittsburgh //Go your way, be happy.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china