Once again, that’s not out of line with what he and I said. There were barricades and fighting in the streets of Beijing and the army killed whoever got in their way to the square, but the people occupying the square were negotiated with and peacefully dispersed. They then once again took all the ammo from the soldiers.
I don’t understand why you think it’s important to insist that nothing happened precisely inside Tiananmen Square, but you are perfectly happy for a massacre to have occurred in, say, Changan Avenue.
Anyway, to respond to the original challenge rather than argue your questionable morals.
Because it’s what happened. It’s not a point of morals or anything else. The other poster is making a value argument that I don’t particularly agree with, but when it comes to the reality of what happened, they’re grounded. Go read the Wikipedia article.
A handful of protesters killing cops and soldiers does not justify indiscriminate murder, particularly when you consider it the government’s responsibility to make sure protesters never get to the point that they feel the need to employ violence to achieve their aims. I didn’t think I needed to spell that out.
I have no idea what story you, OP, or others learned, but if it says no-one was killed in Tiananmen Square and the protesters instigated the violence then it is fiction.
Only 300 deaths is also likely to be fiction. I hope the British hearsay from Chinese sources of 10,000 deaths is exaggeration.
The thing to keep in mind is there were a massive amount of people occupying the square. The key point is, the army did not massacre those people. They left after negotiations with the army. There was no gunning down the occupiers or crushing them with tanks. One person picked up in CIA/SIS Operation Yellowbird said that the tanks ran over tents with people sleeping inside them in the square, but that’s frankly dumb, nobody would be sleeping. The others that were actually there noted that it was a largely peaceful dispersal if you compare it to what happened before with the protesters fighting the PLA on the streets of Beijing and the soldiers indiscriminately opening fire on entire apartment blocks because someone threw a rock.
Frankly the best evidence of it is Yellowbird itself, which smuggled more than 400 people out of China, many of them the leaders of the protest themselves. If they had kettled in and slaughtered the occupants, that wouldn’t have been possible.
Once again, that’s not out of line with what he and I said. There were barricades and fighting in the streets of Beijing and the army killed whoever got in their way to the square, but the people occupying the square were negotiated with and peacefully dispersed. They then once again took all the ammo from the soldiers.
I don’t understand why you think it’s important to insist that nothing happened precisely inside Tiananmen Square, but you are perfectly happy for a massacre to have occurred in, say, Changan Avenue.
Anyway, to respond to the original challenge rather than argue your questionable morals.
A tank set ablaze by protesters burns in Tiananmen Square on June 3.
A Chinese armored personnel carrier, with crushed bicycles stuck to its side, sits in Tiananmen Square on June 4.
Because it’s what happened. It’s not a point of morals or anything else. The other poster is making a value argument that I don’t particularly agree with, but when it comes to the reality of what happened, they’re grounded. Go read the Wikipedia article.
The other poster is trying to claim nothing bad happened inside Tiananmen Square itself, and it was the protestors that were the real aggressors.
This is bullshit.
The situation escalated because reserves from outside Beijing were drafted in, who had no friends or relatives protesting.
A handful of protesters killing cops and soldiers does not justify indiscriminate murder, particularly when you consider it the government’s responsibility to make sure protesters never get to the point that they feel the need to employ violence to achieve their aims. I didn’t think I needed to spell that out.
I agree with this statement, but it’s very different from the “defence of the Chinese narrative, westerners are wrong” ship you sailed in on.
The westerners ARE wrong though, like the story I and I’m sure many others, including OP learned is directly contradicted by the evidence.
I have no idea what story you, OP, or others learned, but if it says no-one was killed in Tiananmen Square and the protesters instigated the violence then it is fiction.
Only 300 deaths is also likely to be fiction. I hope the British hearsay from Chinese sources of 10,000 deaths is exaggeration.
The thing to keep in mind is there were a massive amount of people occupying the square. The key point is, the army did not massacre those people. They left after negotiations with the army. There was no gunning down the occupiers or crushing them with tanks. One person picked up in CIA/SIS Operation Yellowbird said that the tanks ran over tents with people sleeping inside them in the square, but that’s frankly dumb, nobody would be sleeping. The others that were actually there noted that it was a largely peaceful dispersal if you compare it to what happened before with the protesters fighting the PLA on the streets of Beijing and the soldiers indiscriminately opening fire on entire apartment blocks because someone threw a rock.
Frankly the best evidence of it is Yellowbird itself, which smuggled more than 400 people out of China, many of them the leaders of the protest themselves. If they had kettled in and slaughtered the occupants, that wouldn’t have been possible.
Removed by mod
So we are now trying the, it’s only 300 people so it’s not a massacre argument. Seeing as you bring up the 10,000 number, let’s look at the source.
The Chinese army crackdown on the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests killed at least 10,000 people, according to newly released UK documents.
Combined with the above photos, this seems closer to the truth than the official 300 Chinese story.
Removed by mod
The million protesters were peaceful. The local Beijing army regiment were largely sympathetic to the protesters and were not aggressive.
many of the soldiers in the People’s Liberation Army did not follow the orders to enforce martial law that night. Some soldiers were emotionally conflicted and were hesitant to turn their weapons on the students. They believed that the PLA belonged to the people and that they were supposed to fight for them and not against them
I’m quoting from Wikipedia and British diplomatic cables. It’s you who is trying to whitewash history.
The British government’s public releases about China are not credible, even less so when they conflict with evidence.
The Chinese story conflicts with the photo evidence and witness testimonials
If mods removed the above comment then I disagree with this censorship.