Source: jingsiyouwo666
This August this year, it’s very hot. At the same time, the Chinese people’s political life was particularly hot in August because of the visit of old lady Pelosi to Taiwan.
Not only that, this summer this year, the hot time is particularly long. Meteorological data show that this summer is the longest summer with high temperature since China had complete meteorological observation records in 1961. As of August 15, the high temperature in China had lasted for 64 days, exceeding the 62 days in 2013.
At the same time, the political atmosphere brought about by Mrs. Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan has also been kept warm, greatly exceeding people’s expectations. People’s normal expectation is that Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan and China’s training will bring the matter to an end, but the matter seems to be endless.
On August 7, the Vice Minister of the Ministry of transport and communications of Lithuania visited Taiwan. On August 14, Markey, head of the Asia Pacific Group of the US Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, and others rushed to Taiwan. Just yesterday, August 22, the governor of Indiana of the United States flew to Taiwan.
This is only about the scurrying visit, and the enemy’s actions in other areas have not stopped.
On August 19, about 100 aircraft and nearly 2500 military personnel from 17 countries including the United States, Australia and Britain participated in the “pitch black-2022” air joint exercise. The main locations of the exercise were Darwin base and tyndal base in northern Australia.
This is a military action.
On August 12, Campbell, the Indian Pacific Affairs coordinator of the White House National Security Council, said that the US presence in the Western Pacific region should be able to deal with China’s more provocative and destabilizing acts. He also said that he would send military aircraft and warships to the Taiwan Strait in the next few weeks to carry out the so-called “standardized sea and air passage”, falsely claiming that this was a response to China’s “pressure action”.
This is my summary of the bad things done by the enemy after the old woman fled to Taiwan. But in fact, in my mind, these things are not as important as the next thing I want to say.
The next thing I would like to say is that on August 3, the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee originally planned to consider the so-called “Taiwan policy bill”. The bill advocates strengthening the so-called “Taiwan defense” and threatens to list Taiwan, China as the “major non NATO ally” of the United States. The bill also clamors for giving priority to and strengthening arms sales to Taiwan until the Congress determines that the “threat” to Taiwan has been significantly reduced. The US “politician network” commented that once this bill is passed, it will completely change the US policy toward Taiwan for decades.
So, the real big thing is this.
However, it seems that the focus of online netizens is not so much on this matter, but on the relatively light things I mentioned earlier, because they have a strong impression and are easy to attract attention.
I don’t want to comment on this matter which I think is of great importance today. I just want to say that such a large number of things have given a strong impression to many netizens. After the old lady’s visit to Taiwan, China has conducted an unprecedented scale of training activities, and it seems that the Americans have not been scared.
So many people are very anxious, and even think that we are still weak and not strong enough. In addition, after the end of the blockade type training, China has continued to carry out military operations in the East China Sea, the South China Sea, the Yellow Sea, the Bohai Sea and other places. Some netizens said anxiously, when will it be the end of the training?
Therefore, I want to share my views on this overall situation with my friends today, without analyzing a specific matter.
Before sharing my views, I would like to ask my friends to answer my question. This question is: is the game between China and the United States around the Taiwan Strait issue like shooting a gun? Or is it like playing cards?
The so-called shooting is to find the enemy, aim, pull the trigger, and shoot bullets. In the end, there are two possibilities. Either we hit the target, the enemy died, and we won. Either we missed, we lost, and the enemy is still there. In a word, the result of one shot is the end of the game.
The so-called card playing means that everyone sits at the card table, deals cards, and each hand holds a large number of cards. Then I play one card, you play one card, I play another card, and you play another card. I don’t know how many rounds have passed, and the game ends. After that, there will be another round, and we will continue to play. The main feature of playing cards is that they come and go and see each other.
Based on my definition of shooting and playing cards, my friends think that the game between China and the United States around the Taiwan Strait issue is actually shooting? Or playing cards?
There is no doubt that this game is playing cards, not guns.
In fact, all games in the world are playing cards, not guns, and it is impossible to settle the world in one battle. We fought the war of resistance against Japan for 14 years. What about the war of liberation? It is generally believed that they have been fighting for three years. But in detail, the current Taiwan issue is actually the end of the war of liberation. To put it this way, it has been 76 years since the war of liberation began in 1946 and has been fought to this day.
After World War II, the cold war between the United States and the Soviet Union lasted more than 40 years. The conflict between Russia and Ukraine this year has been going on for six months, and no one knows when it will end. The conflict between the DPRK and the United States has also been going on for decades. At present, the DPRK has nothing to do with the United States, and the United States has nothing to do with the DPRK. So I said it was all playing cards, not shooting.
The conflict between the United States and Iran has been going on since 1979. More than 40 years have passed and there is no end to it. The United States embargo against Cuba has lasted for more than 60 years. Now the United States is still there and Cuba is still alive and well. So this is all playing cards, not shooting.
Therefore, before I share my views today, I would like to share with my friends a perspective on issues, that is, from the perspective of playing cards or from the perspective of shooting guns? My answer is: playing cards.
The perspective of playing cards is applicable to both the strong and the weak, and to large and small countries. Otherwise, how can you explain that the United States has not dealt with Cuba for more than 60 years, Iran for more than 40 years, and North Korea for more than 70 years? The United States is a powerful country and a big country. Even in the 1990s, the United States dominated the world without any rivals. It did not solve the problems of Cuba, Iran, North Korea and so on, nor did it solve the problems of Russia and China, which are the priority of his mind.
When I say this, it is very life like. In fact, it is expressed in professional terms that in the international game, no matter whether it is a big country or a small country, no matter whether it is a strong country or a weak country, it has its own strategic advantages and its own strategic difficulties. Since both sides of the game have strategic difficulties, the manifestation is playing cards, playing repeatedly and playing all the time. Instead of shooting, one shot will bring people down, and the game is over. There is almost no such thing as a game that can be played once.
In fact, it is not only in the international game, but also in our daily life and work? There are contradictions among colleagues, between superiors and subordinates, between husband and wife, and between father and son. What can you do to defeat the enemy with one move like shooting a gun, and then the game ends?
The most typical is the contradiction between husband and wife. Some husband and wife have quarreled all their lives, but they also live a life. When the quarrel is fierce, we can’t live together. After the quarrel, we still have to live. Some couples even divorced, but because of the children’s problems are still inextricably linked.
Looking at the game between China and the United States on the Taiwan Strait issue from the perspective of playing cards, there is also an issue that I have mentioned many times in the past:
If Taiwan is reunified, will there be no problem between China and the United States? Is there no contradiction?
The answer is: there are definitely contradictions.
I have said many times before that the issue of the Taiwan Strait is not just the issue of the Taiwan Strait, but the issue of China’s rise. As long as China is rising and the United States does not want China to rise, the problem will always exist.
Even if Taiwan is reunified, the United States will certainly find a battlefield to fight with China in other places. Otherwise, how do you understand the current Sino US relations? Besides the Taiwan issue, there are also the Hong Kong issue, the Tibet issue, the Xinjiang issue, the South China Sea issue, the trade issue, the financial issue, the traceability of COVID-19, the values issue, the chip issue, the climate issue, the drug control issue, and the judicial cooperation issue?
Let’s open our minds a little more and then go on:
When China really rises and realizes national rejuvenation, as the saying goes, China has become the world’s No. 1, and the United States has been trampled into the second, third or last few, will the United States be willing to give up?
If you look at the current North Korea, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela and Zimbabwe, which are significantly weaker than the United States, and have never let the United States stop before the United States, you will know that even if China enters the center of the world stage one day, the contradictions will not disappear and the struggle will always exist. It is very likely that the United States is still the leader, but the strength of both sides has changed in one direction. The enemy is strong now and we are weak in the future, but the struggle will not disappear.
Therefore, when we look at international issues, we must not look at them with the thinking and perspective of shooting guns, but with the thinking and perspective of playing cards.
Therefore, our mode of thinking must return to the way of contradiction analysis in the dialectical materialism theory of Marxist philosophy. The contradiction theory of Marxist philosophy holds that contradiction is universal and always exists. The world is composed of contradictions, and a world without contradictions does not exist.
With such an ideological weapon, we can see a lot of things after old lady Pelosi fled to Taiwan and China launched a series of military exercises and training around Taiwan Island, and you will be suddenly enlightened.
Since it is a card game, the card on the Taiwan Strait issue has been played for decades. It began with the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950. The United States sent the seventh fleet across the Taiwan Strait to prevent China’s reunification.
On August 2, 2022, old lady Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan was regarded as setting up a new card table, so everyone sat down and played. The United States first played cards and threatened to visit. China then played cards and began a public opinion and diplomatic war. Finally, Pelosi landed in Taiwan. Then the Chinese played a series of military exercises and training and a series of countermeasures. And then? The Americans are playing cards again, that is, the things I mentioned at the beginning of today, and the Chinese are also playing cards, such as imposing sanctions on the Lithuanian Deputy Minister of transport who visited Taiwan in a string, and protesting in Foreign Affairs
Of course, China is still playing cards at present. It can be expected that the United States will continue to play cards against China, and the matter will not end in three days and two mornings.
This is the basic situation of the current game between China and the United States around the Taiwan issue. You know this is playing cards, not shooting, so you won’t worry.
Now that the situation is clear, let’s talk about what we care most about: winning or losing.
Let’s take playing cards as an example. Each card has a winning or losing judgment. After playing many cards, it can be regarded as a game of cards, and there is also a winning or losing calculation. After playing a lot of cards, there will be an overall accounting. For example, after playing cards all afternoon or all night, who wins and who loses, there will be an account.
Well, how should we judge the outcome of the new card game opened by old lady Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan so far? I think it’s best to use comparison.
From the perspective of the Chinese people, when the old woman spread the word that she was going to visit, we fought a public opinion war and a diplomatic war. Then she really came, and we launched a military war. Then we looked at the outcome of this military war.
First, what is the background of our blockade military training? The answer is very clear, because the old woman came to visit. By contrast, what was the cause of our last military exercise in the Taiwan Strait? It was Lee Teng – Hui who flew to the United States.
In terms of weight, Lee Teng Hui’s visit to the United States is much heavier than Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan. If you have any doubt about my judgment, you can imagine that in 1998, also around 1996, when US House Speaker Gingrich visited Taiwan, China did not conduct military exercises, but simply made a diplomatic protest.
What does this mean? This shows that the threshold for China to conduct military operations is decreasing.
I can make a hypothesis that in China today, when Pelosi visits Taiwan, we will conduct military training. If the current puppet governor of Taiwan province visits the United States, the war of indefinite reunification will officially begin, not just a training or exercise.
This is the first comparison.
For the second comparison, we can’t find a specific comparison object, because we have imposed a siege and blockade on Taiwan in this training exercise, which has never been done before. We have talked about this issue a lot before, so we will not discuss it today.
What is the third comparison? That is the reaction of the Americans after our military operations.
In 1996, when we carried out military operations, two aircraft carrier formations of the United States entered the Taiwan Strait. This time, we carried out military operations. The US aircraft carrier “Reagan” was originally near Taiwan, but it was withdrawn several hundred kilometers after our training began.
As I said earlier, we should not simply think that it is an American aircraft carrier. After all, the US military is the most powerful military in the world, especially the Navy. It is not accurate enough to say simply that once we launch military operations, it will be scared back.
However, we can also see from the comparison why he did not ship the aircraft carrier to the Taiwan Strait as in 1996. The answer I gave in the past analysis was that he did not want to escalate the situation. But the question is, why did he not fear the escalation of the situation in 1996? Isn’t this the result of the balance of power?
What is particularly important is that in the game of great powers in peacetime, both sides seem to be aggressive and tense on the surface. In fact, both sides virtually abide by a bottom line, that is, to avoid major power conflicts and nuclear wars. Therefore, it is a common practice for everyone to play a game: when you conduct military operations, I do not conduct them, but I only talk. When you’re finished, I’ll launch military operations. At that time, you won’t launch military operations, but you’ll just shoot. Or both sides may conduct military operations at the same time, but not in one place. If we conduct military operations in the South China Sea, he will conduct military exercises and training in the Philippine Sea; I conducted military exercises in the East China Sea, and he conducted military exercises in the South China Sea.
In short, either the time is misplaced or the place is misplaced. It is precisely based on such a common rule that in July 2016, the two armed forces of China and the United States engaged in military confrontation in the South China Sea at the same time and in the same place. The meaning is extraordinary, that is, prepare to do it. That is the most dangerous time.
According to such a logic, when China conducts blockade type military exercises and training around the Taiwan Strait, the United States is silent, and it can not be simply assumed that the United States is afraid.
However, the problem is that when China is finished, it is the United States’ turn to play. The most likely option is that after China is finished, the aircraft carrier “Reagan”, which was originally withdrawn, will return and cross the Taiwan Strait.
Remind friends that in 1996, when China was working on it, he brought the aircraft carrier to the Taiwan Strait. This time, the standard I set for him was that he would come again after China finished.
I mean, when China is finished, he will always come to explain it? There was a lot of controversy about this matter a while ago. However, on August 19, the US aircraft carrier “Reagan” retreated several hundred kilometers while conducting military operations in China. After China completed its operations, it returned to the surrounding area of the Taiwan Strait and swayed back and forth. Finally, it simply did not swam into the Taiwan Strait and directly swayed back to its home port, Yokosuka military port in Japan.
Another thing that needs to be mentioned is that on August 4, when the PLA was conducting military exercises, the United States announced that it would postpone the test firing of the Minuteman 3 intercontinental ballistic missile originally scheduled for August 4 to August 7.
To sum up, on the one hand, the level of China’s military action has been greatly raised, and on the other hand, the response of the United States has been greatly reduced.
This is my basic evaluation of winning and losing. The answer is self-evident.
But there is an important question, that is, we can not say that we have won a great victory. Why? Because although his aircraft carrier did not come when we were engaged in military operations, and he did not dare to come when we were finished, he still did something. He was not idle. For example, as mentioned at the beginning of today, he conducted “pitch black 2022” military exercises in the north of Australia, and he conducted military exercises with South Korea. In addition, he is talking and threatening to send warships and planes to carry out “standardized sea and air passage operation” in the Taiwan Strait. Although he has not done so far, he may do it. Even if he does not do it in the end, he is talking and talking hard, and we should record it in the account book.
Therefore, when we compare this military action with the military action in 1996, we can clearly see that China is more stubborn than in the past, and the United States is more arrogant than in the past. However, the United States has not counseled to zero, while China’s hard work has not risen to the sky.
This is an analysis in the military field.
In the political field, on August 3, the Foreign Affairs Committee of the US Senate was supposed to examine the so-called “Taiwan political bill”, but suddenly, the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the US Senate and Democratic Senator Menendez had other things to do, so he put it down. In short, this is an empty cannon.
We should also analyze this air cannon according to the principle of dialectics in the dialectical materialism of Marxist philosophy. We should look at it in two ways. On the one hand, he dared to move this bill, which shows that he is still determined to be a thief. On the other hand, he gave up for the time being, which shows that he was soft again.
We should not simply say that he has been completely egged on, nor should we simply say how awesome he is. If it is completely soft, why does it still plan to do this? If he wants to be a real cow, why should he give up temporarily? Did he really have anything else to do these days? Even if there are other things, it means that other things are more important than this thing, and it means that the importance level of this thing has not reached a certain level.
Let’s take a look at the cats and dogs who visited Taiwan before and after China launched military operations. One is a deputy minister of Lithuania. In a small country like Lithuania, we are hardly willing to mention him. Secondly, he is only a deputy minister of the Ministry of transport of Lithuania. In Chinese words, give him some face. He is a deputy minister level official. Therefore, we still analyze this situation in two. On the one hand, it is a vice ministerial level after all. Even if it is a small country’s vice ministerial level, I also consider it a vice ministerial level. Because China’s diplomatic philosophy is that countries are big or small, so when giving him a face, we should also give him a face according to the vice ministerial level. When hitting him in the face, we should also hit him according to the vice ministerial level. Therefore, we sanctioned him.
But no matter what, he is a vice minister, and he can’t compare with that crazy woman from America. From the perspective of Chinese philosophy, crazy women can be regarded as national level.
Let’s talk about the group headed by the Asian group of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee who visited Taiwan on 12 August. From the level, let’s say that Pelosi is a national level. Then, the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee is a ministerial level, and the head of the Asian group below is a department level. From the level, he is lower than the Deputy Minister of transportation of Lithuania.
Let’s talk about the governor of Indiana’s visit to Taiwan on August 22. In terms of rank, he can be regarded as a provincial governor and a ministerial level.
I analyze the matter from the human level to analyze it in two. On the one hand, we can’t simply think that a cat and dog has come, just like that crazy woman. On the other hand, we have to admit that since a cat and dog dare to come, it shows that the United States has not been completely defeated.
As for the fact that the United States has not been completely defeated, please go back to the thinking of playing cards I mentioned earlier. The Americans play a card, we play another card, the Americans play another card, we play another card, and then what? Then he still wants to play cards in the United States, because the cards are not finished yet. Therefore, it is normal for opponents to keep playing cards, because this is playing cards, not shooting.
Therefore, what we should pay attention to is not whether it is still playing cards, but the size of his cards.
At present, the cards played by the Americans are getting smaller and smaller, but they are still playing cards. We should not simply think that we have won a complete victory, nor should we simply think that we can do nothing with the enemy. This is my analysis of the current situation.
The matter of winning or losing has been made clear. Next, I’ll talk about how to play cards.
Come back to the card table. Your last family will give you a 5. What’s your next card? There are two choices. You can either issue a bigger one, and then an a or a king. This is the best and the best. But do you always issue an A and then a king? Do you have so many a’s and so many kings? Therefore, when the other side makes a 5, you may only make a 5. Although it is a little bigger than him, it is not much bigger and will not have a fundamental deterrent effect.
These two methods of playing cards have their advantages and disadvantages. If you are a king, your next family may not score, because you will catch the score. However, if you give 5, he may give 10, that is, divide. After he gives 10, your opponent, that is, your next family, can be a king or only a, and catch the score.
What I mean by this analogy is that playing cards does not necessarily mean that every card is tit for tat. Playing cards must be big and small, just as there are advances and retreats in a war.
But I want to say that this is not the most important thing.
The most important thing is that you must play cards according to your own ideas, and you cannot be led by the enemy. I have a king in my hand. My family has a 5. Do I have to be a king?
At this point, we must go back and say why China is conducting blockade type military training this time?
The most direct logic is: because the crazy woman is here, we need to practice.
Is this right? I used to say that, but today I have to be very careful to tell my friends that this statement is only half right, not all right.
Why is this not all true?
I don’t want to make a positive analysis. I would like to ask my friends to think about it in turn: if we say that the reason why we conduct blockade training in Taiwan is that crazy women come, how can we answer the next question? If crazy women don’t come, will we never conduct blockade training in Taiwan? We should know that conducting blockade type training on Taiwan is the only way for us to reunify Taiwan and a threshold we must cross.
There is no doubt that whether crazy women will come or not, we must find a time to conduct blockade training on Taiwan.
Then why do we have to logically link the crazy woman’s coming to Taiwan with our training in public opinion? That’s because we not only need to conduct training and get what we want directly from the training, but also let crazy women bear the responsibility of destroying stability in the Taiwan Strait. Only in this way can we give full play to the maximum effect of the training. Therefore, the crazy woman’s visit to Taiwan only set a specific time for our training. More importantly, let us add a little more value to the effect of our training. That’s it.
Therefore, we have to train crazy women whether they come or not. Just as our diplomatic officials have declared to the world, Taiwan is an inseparable part of China. China conducts military operations around its own country whenever it wants.
But if the crazy woman insists on coming here at the right time and in the right way, we should let her bear the responsibility for the bad things when we perform the training.
We also need to think about such a question. If we have to wait for the crazy woman to come for our performance and training, won’t we be played around by the crazy woman? She will come when she wants us to play, but she won’t come when she doesn’t want us to play. Is there such a way of fighting? Is there such a way to play cards? What kind of cards do you play when you are always led by others? What kind of war was it?
Therefore, fundamentally speaking, what we do is our business, and we cannot follow the enemy’s footsteps.
By the same token, after the crazy woman’s visit to Taiwan and China’s military operations, a vice minister of Lithuania came, the head of the Asian group of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee of the United States came, and a governor of the United States came. Do we have to take similar tit for tat measures? Is the enemy the final say? Or do we have the the final say? That must be our the final say.
Therefore, when these cats and dogs come, we will make a diplomatic protest. This is a required action and must be done. In addition, we will the final say what cards we play. If we don’t play big cards this time, please think about playing cards. If the family gives five, you may give three. If it is a landowner, I can let you pass without playing cards.
In this game between China and the United States, several things happened after the end of China’s military training. Some netizens feel that China is a bit soft. I think this is a deduction and emotion guided by a kind of linear thinking.
Some people also like to make a simple comparison between the current situation and individual events in history, reflecting that we are not as tough as we were in the past.
For example, some people mentioned that China dared to open fire on the British warship “Amethyst” docked on the Yangtze River in 1949, and some people said that in 1950, we dared to resist US aggression and aid Korea. All these show that China was tough at that time and imply that China is not tough at present.
This involves the understanding of the word “hardness”.
My understanding is that hardiness refers to essence, not strategy.
Chairman Mao has been tough all his life, but this is his attitude at heart, but he is also very strategic. The old man is not so simple as being stubborn when dealing with any problems. On the contrary, he is a master of strategy. As long as we talk about strategy, we must talk about two hands, even opponents, rather than one hand.
For example, when Chairman Mao led the Autumn Harvest Uprising in 1927, the Party Central Committee gave him the task of attacking Changsha. As a matter of fact, before he was given the task of attacking Changsha, he was given the task of carrying out a riot in Hunan Province. Later, the troops were indeed insufficient. After his repeated persuasion, the central authorities agreed not to carry out a riot in Hunan Province but only to attack Changsha. However, when he found it impossible to attack Changsha, he decided not to attack Changsha and went to Jinggangshan. Later, Chairman Mao was punished and dismissed from the position of alternate member of the Political Bureau. Moreover, he made a mistake in conveying his dismissal instruction. At first, it was announced that he was expelled from the party. Later, it was discovered that he was not expelled from the party, but only expelled from the alternate member of the Political Bureau.
If we watched Chairman Mao’s series of operations in the autumn and winter of 1927, would you also think that he was not tough enough. However, no one can question his tenacity throughout his life. Therefore, hardness refers to the hardness in the bones, not the simplicity in strategy. On the other hand, only by being flexible in strategy can we ensure that we can fundamentally achieve the hard spirit in our bones.
Let’s take another look at the 16 character formula of guerrilla warfare summed up by Chairman Mao and his family with commander in chief Zhu De on the Jinggangshan mountain: “when the enemy advances, I retreat; when the enemy is stationed, I harass; when the enemy is tired, I fight; when the enemy retreats, I pursue.” Please pay attention to the first four words of the 16 character formula: the enemy advances and I retreat. Feel it. When the enemy advances, I retreat. Isn’t it a bit tough? If you were in Jinggangshan in 1928, would you also think it was not hard enough?
What is hard gas? Tenacity is to fight the enemy from the bottom of our bones and never compromise, but it does not mean that we will die hard in every specific battle. Therefore, the first four words of the 16 character formula of Jinggangshan guerrilla war are: the enemy advances and I retreat.
Let’s take another look at Chairman Mao’s most classic saying on the strategic nature of struggle, that is, “use revolutionary hands to deal with counter revolutionary hands”.
He said this in August 1945. At that time, Chiang Kai Shek was preparing to launch a civil war to encircle and suppress the Communist army, but at the same time he released smoke bombs to invite the Communist Party to Chongqing for negotiations. If you were in August 1945, what do you think of and how to respond to Chiang Kai Shek’s negotiation initiative? Chairman Mao’s choice is: you talk, I talk to you; You fight, I fight with you. The enemy has both hands in fighting and peace talks, so I have both hands in fighting and peace talks. So he personally went to Chongqing to participate in the Chongqing negotiations. At that time, many people did not understand that Chiang Kai Shek’s wolf ambition to encircle and suppress the liberated areas had been exposed. What else should we talk about with him? Moreover, as the leader of our party, Chairman Mao’s life is in danger when he goes to Chongqing to negotiate. Why should he go? What are we talking about? But he’s gone. If you were in August 1945, would you think that it was not hard enough for him to go to Chongqing and risk his life to negotiate?
To carry out revolution and construction, we must be firm in our bones, but in terms of strategy, we must have two or even more hands as Chairman Mao said.
Let us talk about the incident of the people’s Liberation Army shelling the British warship “Amethyst” docked on the Yangtze River in April 1949. This is a tough thing! However, friends should not forget that it was also in 1949, when the PLA troops arrived in Hong Kong, his instructions were not to liberate Hong Kong under British rule for the time being. Facing the same enemy — Britain, one is the British warship “Amethyst” and the other is Hong Kong under the actual administration of Britain. When you faced these two instructions from the old man in 1949, do you think he was tough or not?
Shelling the Amethyst, there is a reason for shelling the Amethyst; There is a reason why Hong Kong should not be liberated for the time being. All these are tactics of struggle, not the root of struggle. Basically, they are rigid, and they need to have revolutionary or even multi skilled tactics.
Let’s talk about the current problems.
The current Taiwan issue is actually part of the war of liberation. At the stage after the end of the three major campaigns of the war of liberation, it is controversial whether or not to cross the Yangtze River to liberate the whole of China. Chairman Mao put forward the rigid instruction of “it is advisable to chase down the poor aggressors with the remaining courage, and not to learn from the overlord for the sake of fame”. However, when the mainland was completely liberated and the seventh fleet of the United States crossed the Taiwan Strait, we suspended the pace of Liberating Taiwan. Is it not hard? It was also in 1950 that we made the great decision to resist US aggression and aid Korea, but at the same time, we temporarily shelved the process of Liberating Taiwan. If we simply analyzed China in 1950 with a rigid attitude, would you like to ask whether the answer should be rigid or not? That’s almost impossible to answer.
In the final analysis, when we talk about hard work, we should say it fundamentally, not in terms of concrete measures.
During this period of time, some people always use the thoughts of great men to reflect the weakness of the present. In this case, I have to discuss the thoughts of great men with my friends seriously, comprehensively and accurately.
However, the discussion of the thoughts of great men should not be too complicated. It should be as simple as possible and accurate. How should we discuss it? That should return to the essence of the great minds.
What is the essence of Mao Zedong Thought? In other words, if you can use the simplest words to summarize the thoughts of great people, how should you summarize them? This is an extremely common and basic question in the political class. It is estimated that many friends have answered this question on the test paper.
Please read the textbooks. What is the essence of Mao Zedong Thought?
The answer is: the essence of Mao Zedong thought is seeking truth from facts.
This means that if the thoughts of great men are summed up in the least words, it is the four words of “seeking truth from facts”.
So what is seeking truth from facts? Seeking truth from facts means concrete analysis of specific problems, that is, choosing different struggle strategies for different struggle situations under different struggle scenarios. Since the struggle strategies are different, there must be many kinds of struggle strategies, not only one.
Therefore, many of the ideas of some people at present are the manifestation of weak strategic awareness. Their insinuation of the great man’s thoughts just shows that they have not really understood the great man’s thoughts.
According to this idea, how should we fight against Lithuania’s Deputy Minister of transportation, the US senator, and a US governor when they visit Taiwan?
My answer is that no matter how we fight, we must be clear that there are many ways to fight.
Even, we may not care much about it directly.
Yes, you heard me right. Maybe I don’t care about him directly.
This is called “you hit you, I hit me” militarily.
This kind of play originated from the thirty-six stratagem of encircling Wei and saving Zhao. In 354 BC, the state of Wei attacked the state of Zhao, and the state of Zhao was in danger. The state of Qi wanted to save the state of Zhao, but it did not directly send its troops to the state of Zhao. In other words, the state of Qi wanted to save the state of Zhao, but it did not care about the state of Zhao. What about it? He went directly to fight the state of Wei, so the state of Wei had to turn back to save his nest, so the problem of the state of Zhao was solved.
In fighting, there are many methods, such as direct fighting, indirect fighting, frontal fighting and lateral fighting.
In the fourth campaign to resist US aggression and aid Korea, the US army launched an attack on the volunteer army. The main direction of the attack was on the western front, and the strategy formulated by the volunteer army was to “top the West and release the East”. The core of this strategy is that in the western front, the main offensive direction of the US military, we do not regard it as the main battlefield, but only for defense, and then we transfer the main force to the eastern front. Finally, under the direct leadership of Deng Hua, deputy commander of the volunteer army, on February 11, 1951, the volunteer army launched a counterattack in Hengcheng area on the eastern line. By the early morning of February 13, Hengcheng had won an unprecedented victory in the counterattack, annihilating 12000 enemy troops, reducing our army’s personnel by more than 4000, and the war damage ratio was 3.72:1, that is, the enemy suffered 3.72 casualties and our army suffered 1 casualty. It was a great victory and completely smashed the attack launched by the US Army in the fourth campaign. If in February 1951, in the face of the fierce attack launched by the US military on the western front, the Volunteer Army decided not to fight with the US military on the western front, would you think that the volunteer army was not tough enough? On the other hand, if we stick to your line of thinking, can the volunteers still win the fourth campaign to resist US aggression and aid Korea?
Therefore, in the face of some cat and dog visits to Taiwan, how we fight, or even whether we fight him directly, has nothing to do with being tough or not.
Some friends may ask, you said so much, how do you fight?
To be honest, I could have analyzed this problem a little. However, many people now hope that people in the media like me will be as clever as immortals. Once they make a mistake, they will sneer and ridicule, which makes me a little afraid to speak to anyone. I admit that I am not an immortal, so I will not analyze it today. I changed the channel and asked a question. On February 11, 1951, did every ordinary soldier need to know the deployment of the volunteer army? Do we need to know the overall deployment of the volunteer army to “top the West and release the East”?
So what I want to express today is that you can not worry about some hearts. What you need to do is to trust the commander, the commander of the volunteer army and the leader.
I think there is a problem in the public opinion field now, that is, it seems that the specific arrangements and deployment of the headquarters must be made known to every soldier in advance, and the logic behind them must be clearly explained. In addition, the soldiers must be convinced and approved by the soldiers. Otherwise, the soldiers will not step on the ground, will not be able to sleep, and will even pick their noses at the headquarters. I don’t think it’s necessary for the commander to do a good job of the commander and the soldiers to do a good job of the soldiers. The commander doesn’t need to ask the soldiers for instructions on everything, nor can he report everything to the soldiers in place, because some things can’t be said.
The primary duty of a soldier is to follow orders in all actions.
Therefore, how does China’s headquarters arrange and deploy the current situation that some cats and dogs continue to visit Taiwan? We won’t discuss it today.
I am a soldier. The primary duty of a soldier is to follow the command in all actions. I am a soldier. I believe the commander’s level is higher than mine. This is my basic trust and respect for the commander. Otherwise, I would not be a qualified soldier.
I am a soldier, and it is not my duty to instruct the commander every step of his arrangement. The bounden duty of a soldier is to follow the command and be a good soldier, not to be a commander offside.
If you really make a good soldier, you may become a commander. When you become a commander, you can perform the duties of a commander. In a war, we must not allow every soldier to become a commander instead of being a good soldier. If every soldier becomes a commander and there are a lot of commanders in the world, there are no soldiers. Which commander should we listen to? Who is charging on the battlefield? Is the commander going to charge? Is the soldier in command?
Isn’t it all a mess?