ISIS on the offensive in Iraq

[HoreTore]

But indulging in ethnic / religious genocide / mass exodous oes appear to be the preferred approach with several minorities being displaced or culled.

How many years have those minorities lived there without any of that happening?

Don't make the mistake of assuming that the current state of affairs is the natural state of affairs.

[rory_20_uk]

But once they're gone, often they're gone. Given that Sunnis view at least two groups in the area as Devil worshipers or Apostates it doesn't really fill me with hope.

The locals might still be getting on with each other as well as they ever had, and it is persons from elsewhere in the world coming into the area that are doing these things - with modern communication making this so much easier.

Alexandria was a centre of Christianity for a long time - then was razed to the ground in a very short time.

[Fragony]

How many years have those minorities lived there without any of that happening?

Don't make the mistake of assuming that the current state of affairs is the natural state of affairs.

Wouldn't call it a natural state of afairs, insanity would be a better word, but IS is just doing what their holy book tells them to do. That there are some disputes on how and what doesn't change that. I doubt the Shia's would be any less barbaric.

[HoreTore]

Wouldn't call it a natural state of afairs, insanity would be a better word, but IS is just doing what their holy book tells them to do. That there are some disputes on how and what doesn't change that. I doubt the Shia's would be any less barbaric.

If they are, the middle east christians would have been wiped out 1500 years ago.

Mao is actually relevant(for once). A hundred years ago, who would've thought China would be this unified?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

...A hundred years ago, who would've thought China would be this unified?

I have to say, while not the greatest student of Chinese history, I cannot recall reading about ANY other period where they were both this unified and had this degree of personal freedom and prosperity at the same time. I realize they are not free in the sense that Europe is, but it is pretty impressive how far they have come. I might not concur about Mao's role....but that would be for the Monastery.

[Pannonian]

I have to say, while not the greatest student of Chinese history, I cannot recall reading about ANY other period where they were both this unified and had this degree of personal freedom and prosperity at the same time. I realize they are not free in the sense that Europe is, but it is pretty impressive how far they have come. I might not concur about Mao's role....but that would be for the Monastery.

Deng Xiaoping was probably the most effective and liberal ruler they've had since Kang Xi. His technocratic dynasty has been changing chairmen with hardly any noticeable differences.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Deng Xiaoping was probably the most effective and liberal ruler they've had since Kang Xi. His technocratic dynasty has been changing chairmen with hardly any noticeable differences.

"So long as it hunts mice" eh? Strikes me as he, more than Mao, may have helped engender the shift away from peasant communism.

[Pannonian]

"So long as it hunts mice" eh? Strikes me as he, more than Mao, may have helped engender the shift away from peasant communism.

That's why I think Deng Xiaoping has been incredibly liberal by Chinese standards, even with the Tiananmen Square massacre on his record. Chinese dynasties have tended to start with mass bloodshed followed by a period of stability while the memory of said bloodshed was still fresh in everyone's mind, with periodic upheavals with each succession. Deng managed to recover from the poverty and stagnation of the Mao period (probably as low as China had ever been without being at war), and lift the country to a level where, for the individual Chinese who doesn't aspire to electing the national government, life is comparable with that of westerners in liberal democracies. And what's more, most of this was achieved long after he was dead, whilst following the direction he'd set. A quite remarkable administrator.

I read an American paper a while back (I found it whilst looking for Glantz's study of the Soviet offensive in Manchuria) examining the Sino-Vietnamese war, where PLA traditionalists wanted to demonstrate the validity of their ideas. Deng's faction disagreed and favoured a more slimline, modernised army, but gave the traditionalists their way against the Vietnamese. The PLA got thrashed by the Vietnamese reservists, without ever achieving their tactical aim of forcing the regular Vietnamese army regiments to commit and get pinned down. A regular unit did get involved late on because they got bored and wanted some of the action before it was over. In the end, the Chinese did reach their objectives and declared victory, the Vietnamese inflicted punishing losses on the Chinese with minimal losses and minimal risk without risking any of their regular army and declared victory, while Deng achieved complete political victory over his dissidents but didn't bother declaring it. As a point of interest, the Chinese declared their objectives beforehand, together with their intention not to use their air force, so as to reassure everyone (not least the Vietnamese) that this was to be a limited operation. Basically they stated their objective and their intention to use land forces only, pushed forward with exorbitant losses until they reached the objectives, declared victory and returned home, all for the purpose of settling an internal debate in the Chinese government. Hilariously incomprehensible to our western perspectives.

[HopAlongBunny]

How many years have those minorities lived there without any of that happening?

But now you have people with plans for the population/area and the people with plans have guns.
So...ya fer us or ag'in us!
Think carefully.
Mao had some appropo comments about this.