Aboriginals died mostly by disease, and then over the span of 100's of years, most of it pre-Enlightenment, compare to Qing Dynasty policies and wars at your leisure.
This kind of bad moral relativism is at the heart of Chinese logic and it just doesn't hold up.
Thankfully the US holds the 5th Fleet in the Gulf and ensure trade, mostly Oil is free for everyone including China who are by far the greatest recipients of Oil. The same thing for Suez, Panama Canal, Red sea and other parts of the world. The peace between Egypt and Isreal is pinned down by the US otherwise.
Given a choice between having China take your land/sea, or, having the US patrol it so that either sovereignty is protected - or international waters are kept open - which deal do you think nations will take? Even with having to put up with an ugly US diplomatic corps now and again, everyone will take Option B, it's perennially going to be better than Option A.
There's no excuse for doing what's going on in Xinjiang, and arguably Tibet as well, not in 21st century.
Disease was purposely spread in the Americas as part of a biological warfare operation (the quotes from military leaders are easy to find)...
> “I will try to inoculate the Indians by means of blankets that may fall in their hands, taking care however not to get the disease myself. As it is a pity to appose good men against them, I wish we could make use of the Spaniards’ method, and hunt them with English dogs, supported by Rangers and some light horse, who would, I think, effectively extirpate or remove that vermin.” — Col. Henry Bouquet, 13 July, 1763
> ”You will do well to try to inoculate the Indians by means of Blankets, as well as to try every other method that can serve to Extirpate this Exorable Race. I should be very glad your scheme for hunting them down by Dogs could take effect, but England is at too great a distance to think of that at present.” — Gen. Jeffery Amherst, 16 July 1763
...Which is part of the reason I believe covid may have been dropped in China by our allies. We have a long history of doing this to our economic competitors, China does not.
China also doesn't have a history of sending regime change operatives into countries, completely decimating them and killing millions of innocent foreign civilians. We follow this pattern almost every decade. The idea that the Chinese are a threat at your border and the US are not, is comical (as we see in the case of Xinjiang).
You seem to know nothing about Xinjiang other than what you are fed through media by CIA assets (Zenz, NED, Radio Free Asia). US/Turkey assisted extremists are being branded genocide victims to stop the belt and road project, unfortunately the ISIS/AlQ trained ones are also given Turkish passports and exported to other places in the world with the aid of and under the blind eye of the US.
The US killed the most innocent Muslim civilians in the past 2 decades and you really believe they care about the Muslims in Xinjiang? If the US was actually interested in stopping Uyghur extremism, you would see a large % of the population dead, instead we get 0 mass murder and the Chinese training civilians so economic prosperity leaves little room for extremism...
~3+ million dead innocent Iraqi/Syrian/Yemeni civilians would rather have had the Chinese approach than a guaranteed death sentence from the US, I expect.
This kind of bad moral relativism is at the heart of Chinese logic and it just doesn't hold up.
Thankfully the US holds the 5th Fleet in the Gulf and ensure trade, mostly Oil is free for everyone including China who are by far the greatest recipients of Oil. The same thing for Suez, Panama Canal, Red sea and other parts of the world. The peace between Egypt and Isreal is pinned down by the US otherwise.
Given a choice between having China take your land/sea, or, having the US patrol it so that either sovereignty is protected - or international waters are kept open - which deal do you think nations will take? Even with having to put up with an ugly US diplomatic corps now and again, everyone will take Option B, it's perennially going to be better than Option A.
There's no excuse for doing what's going on in Xinjiang, and arguably Tibet as well, not in 21st century.