The state of Asia in WARNO?

[u/Icy_Rage_2512]

So, recently I saw a lot of posts about expanding WARNO to other theaters, especially regarding Red Dragon and Airland Battle. In this post I am more interested in Red Dragon.

Now, as far as I know, East and Southeast Asia in 1989 can be a goldmine for WARNO content. The Koreas were on the brink of making Korea bloody again, China just had a war with Vietnam and, well, Tianamen Square, plus the fallout with the Soviet Union. Vietnam is stuck in a war with the Khmer Rouge, with unwanted skirmishes with Thailand. Myanmar just went through the revolution of 88, etc. In short, just so many things to dig in. Do anyone here have more suggestions?

[u/ComradeCaniTerrae]

I’d love to see an Asian theater in WARNO. Not sure Khmer Rouge would be very interesting, as Vietnam had ousted Pol Pot a decade prior, and Khmer Rouge was just a U.S.-backed genocidal guerilla army hiding in Thailand at the time. But the Koreas and China/Vietnam and China/USSR via the Sino-Soviet Split could be very interesting—and China trying to reunify Taiwan and Japan, South Korea, and the U.S. intervening. On the subject of China, it’s worth noting that “Tiananmen Square” never happened. It’s atrocity propaganda manufactured by the west. There was never a massacre in Tiananmen Square, nor any mass slaughter of innocent civilians on June 4th, 1989.

I think the biggest theater would be the Asian Pacific over the U.S. and its allies reacting to China reunifying Taiwan. But WARNO doesn’t have any naval combat, so that might be somewhat anticlimactic to represent in game.

[u/LilDewey99 → u/ComradeCaniTerrae]

If you’re going to use a youtube video to support your argument, Hakim is just about the last person you ought to use

[u/ComradeCaniTerrae → u/LilDewey99]

A genetic fallacy, lovely. Hakim's videos are well thought out and researched, as a rule. It's a convenient primer to the subject from a perspective that is sorely lacking in Western media--which is laughably empirically baseless when discussing this subject. The BBC, as an example, claimed 10,000 dead on that night. A number that would've seen Beijing cleaning up corpses for days if not weeks. A thing that never occurred.

If you'd like to engage with the video and point out where you think it erred, I'm all ears. If you'd like further resources on this subject from Western sources and Chinese ones, I'd be happy to oblige. Only about 300 people died that night: and of those were a few dozen PLA soldiers who got killed by violent terrorists in the heart of the capital, a significant portion were said terrorists (the photographic evidence of their violence that night exists and is in no short supply: 1, 2,

3

, 4, 5), and the remainder were innocent bystanders who were out after curfew during martial law after being warned repeatedly for days--still tragic. It's not like the PRC considers that night a great victory to be celebrated. The PLA soldiers interviewed on that night admit to a breakdown in communications and commmand after they were attacked, far more innocent civilians than should have died, died. However, that isn't the narrative that the Western press and US government would like you to take away from that night. They want you to envision an absolutely unhinged unprovoked massacre of thousands of unarmed peaceful civilians who got mown down as if the PLA were shooting fish in a barrel. That never happened.

Even Western media outlets like the Los Angeles Times and The Nation report accurately that the "peaceful protestors" threw molotov cocktails and burning blankets onto, as well as rolled burning vehicles into, the troops. If that shit happened in Washington D.C. the response would've been at least as violent.

I know it may seem odd, but it's an extremely common occurrence for the Western press to just fabricate narratives whole cloth and lie about stories by reframing the narrative in a way that better suits their interests. There exists a long and storied tradition of the Western press lying.