China & Vietnam

[huy.duong@ctsu.ox.ac.uk]

Dear friends,

     >Chinese force could go to Hanoi or Sajgon, but it doesn't matter!  
     >VN-ses are also VN-ses.  They do not (and never) become to Chineses, 
     >so chinanization doesn't work.  (Chinanization could work perfectly 
     >in the territorium, in which are no VN-ses.)  
     
     You're not serious Sonnet Nguyen !!! 
     What happens actually in Tibet ??? I wouldn't like my country dropping 
     in the same situations !!! 

Sonnet Nguyen is right here. Tibet has a small population, so it is
easy to subdue. Tibet has a large area and extremely low population density so 
it is a worthwile return for the aggression. It is much harder to subdue and 
absorb the 75mil people of Vietnam. And there is not much benefit in occupying 
Vietnam if it is too crowded for Chinese to go there and live there and if 
Vietnam has less natural resources than China. China would rather bite the juicy
bits of Vietnam than to swallow it whole.  And when it come to war, China would
seek to wreak destruction on Vietnam but not annex it.

A land offensive has to fight through mountainous areas which Vietnam can defend
well and exact high costs on the attackers. These areas are also away from 
population, industrial and commercial centres. The Chinese airforce is the most 
effective way to wreak destruction on Vietnam. This is why I hope that Vietnam 
has a strong air defence and a strong air force. A Vietnamese airforce with 
anti-ship missiles and tactics can also defend the islands and sea in a way that 
is more within Vietnam's grasp than buying and training a navy that can never 
match China's. Vietnam has the advantage of air fields near the area of 
conflicts and Chinese ships as yet have no air cover.

I think Vietnam should build up a good air force and then resist Chinese 
aggression. It would be terrible to have to borrow passage from Malaysia to
have access to marintime trade.

Huy