|
On June 19 2011 02:58 BloodNinja wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2011 02:56 jester- wrote:On June 19 2011 02:26 SpeaKEaSY wrote:![[image loading]](http://www.spratlys.org/maps/1/China-claims-Paracel-Spratly-Islands.gif) So China can just claim all the territory all the way to the coasts of other countries? I don't think so, Tim. [spoiler]http://www.alaskaultrasport.com/assets/alaska-nat-parks.jpg[/spoiler] Hrmm? Relevance to location has never been much of a boundary to claim. Alaska was purchased by the US from Russia in 1867. A quick scan the history of the islands in question do not show anything remotely similar. I question the relevance of your example, please take 3 seconds to find a better one.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On June 19 2011 02:43 Boblion wrote:
Are you working for the Chinese government ?
i was posting something like this aswell. Good one, rofl!
|
On June 19 2011 03:04 MamiyaOtaru wrote:
Why would someone create an account here to post this. What need does China have for White Knights on random unrelated web forums
I play SC thats why Im here. It just so happened this is a relevant topic at the time I joined, so I wrote it here. Please don't make unsubstantiated claims like that again.
On June 19 2011 03:06 Grettin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2011 02:43 Boblion wrote:
Are you working for the Chinese government ? i was posting something like this aswell. Good one, rofl!
Someday I'd love to. I'm only 19 now.
Why do you respond arbitrarily? You'd rather speculate about me that respond to the issue?
|
The only thing your Historical Records show is that the islands have always been contested by various countries (including Europeans) and that the only reason that China has maintained them is through its sheer power.
The difference from the Alaska example is that it hasn't been continuously contested. It was sold and obtained amicably, all sides were in agreement.
edit:
Also, how does the fact that Britain and other European countries still have territories everywhere make it right? The territories with any power at all(India, USA) have claimed their independence.
I am not taking either side, I am just pointing to the flaw in your logic in certain points.
|
On June 19 2011 02:26 SpeaKEaSY wrote:So China can just claim all the territory all the way to the coasts of other countries? I don't think so, Tim.
Why does Greece have a claim over Cyprus? Clearly Cyprus is closer to Turkey. History plays a large part of ownership.
|
heres your 50 cents. you know what i mean.
and i am very surprised why the GFW has not covered TL yet, which they should for the sake of the world.
|
On June 19 2011 03:09 lofung wrote:
heres your 50 cents. you know what i mean.
and i am very surprised why the GFW has not covered TL yet, which they should for the sake of the world.
Are you serious?
I can't wait until 2040.
|
The issue remains that the other South-asian countries have the rights to claim these territories. For example, Vietnam has been part of China for hundreds of years. Once it achieved independence from China, however, it has the rights to make claims of Chinese territories which it believes to be part of Vietnam.
The Chinese claim of these islands are as legit as UK claiming New England and the original 13-colony area to be part of UK.
Basically, this is not an simple issue to resolve, especially with the consideration of the resources there. I think it's going to be a war there eventually.
|
Canada3402 Posts
There a quite a few claims in your "why the islands must be chinese that really don't add value at all
200BC around
China firstly discovered the Spratly Islands and other Suthern Sea Islands
doesn't add much since you can't really determine who discovered it first
206BC-24AD
Most of the Paracel, the Spratlys and Pratas Island were known by Chinese geographers of the Han Dynasty
many geographers noted many things, doesnt mean its theirs
23-220AD
Yang Fu of the East Han Dynasty made the reference to Nansha Islands in his book entitled Yi Wuzi (Records of Rarities)
nor do book records...
220-280AD
General Kang Tai one of the famous ancient Chinese navigator of East Wu State of the Three Kingdoms Period mentioned Nansha Islands in his book Funan Zhuan (or Journeys to and from Phnom) (the name of an ancient state in today's Cambodia).
another book?
265-420AD
Fei Yuan of the Jin Dynasty(265-420 A.D.) wrote about the fishing and collecting of coral samples by the fishermen of China on the South China Sea in his article Chronicles of Guangzhou.
collecting samples is absolutely irrelevant.
789
The Tang Dynasty, China included the Nansha Islands into its administrative map
adding it to your map doesnt make it yours.
990
Spratley Islands became a part of the Northern Song area in Hainan
they were claimed and does not necessarily mean its now a part of Hainan.
regardless of the rest this just shows how open ended your "proof" is
I really didn't examine everything but these first few are definitely not proof.
Just saying...
|
I love hearing from TL members from across the world about issues that are important to them. Starting an account to blabber away is just retarded though. Are you some sort of internet guerilla spokesman for the chinese government?
|
On June 19 2011 02:59 Qi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2011 02:46 Mordiford wrote:
I don't really know about the "undeniable historical claim" over the Islands, they've been claimed by a number of surrounding countries in the past and have been on older maps of other countries too, that doesn't really mean anything.
Also, looking at the map SpeaKEaSY posted, I'm not surprised at all that some of those countries want the Islands, it's right off their coast. That's an incredibly strange line of claim to stretch out and if it goes undisputed, great for them, but since it isn't, I don't think I would say, "Yeah, it clearly belongs to China". What older maps? Show it? Nansha was on China's maps as early as when the Philippines was just represented by its northern island in the Chinese maps (c 200BC) That geography thing is ignorant of geopolitics. Why is Hawaii, Guam, etc American territories when they are thousand of kilometers away from US mainland. What about Greenland? There is more to geography than mere proximity. Please read the OP.
Like I said, if they're disputed, they have a right to be disputed, if they aren't disputed, good for the nation that has laid claim to them.
As for the the maps of other nations, none go as far back as the pre-1000 AD but I don't know how relevant that really is, but from quick searches, I found some simple records referring to them as Bãi Cát Vàng through the Vietnam, and some other Vietnamese references. Regardless, the historical claim isn't too relevant in my opinion in this particular case.
|
Canada3402 Posts
On June 19 2011 03:13 Ghad wrote:
I love hearing from TL members from across the world about issues that are important to them. Starting an account to blabber away is just retarded though. Are you some sort of internet guerilla spokesman for the chinese government?
Pretty much, but it is "general" so he's posted in the correct places. at least TL is worldly.
However QI, I have to say coming from China, posting about China (as your first post) doesn't add credibility
|
On June 19 2011 03:12 Sufficiency wrote:
The issue remains that the other South-asian countries have the rights to claim these territories. For example, Vietnam has been part of China for hundreds of years. Once it achieved independence from China, however, it has the rights to make claims of Chinese territories which it believes to be part of Vietnam.
The same already applied to Falkland Island.
Basically, this is not an simple issue to resolve, especially with the consideration of the resources there. I think it's going to be a war there eventually.
Vietnam has no claim to any land outside its mainland. It barely had enough civilization in its mainland when China was already exploring the South China Sea. We hope it doesn't reach war. We want peace. But we also want our rightful claim to these islands. The problem is that other countries are aggressively claiming it without talking to China and respecting history.
|
On June 19 2011 03:15 Mykill wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2011 03:13 Ghad wrote:
I love hearing from TL members from across the world about issues that are important to them. Starting an account to blabber away is just retarded though. Are you some sort of internet guerilla spokesman for the chinese government? Pretty much, but it is "general" so he's posted in the correct places. at least TL is worldly. However QI, I have to say coming from China, posting about China (as your first post) doesn't add credibility
Well, it's not exactly his first post. He does have two random spam posts too lol but I do think he just made his account to talk about this.
|
On June 19 2011 03:13 Mykill wrote:There a quite a few claims in your "why the islands must be chinese that really don't add value at all Show nested quote +
200BC around
China firstly discovered the Spratly Islands and other Suthern Sea Islands
doesn't add much since you can't really determine who discovered it first Show nested quote +
206BC-24AD
Most of the Paracel, the Spratlys and Pratas Island were known by Chinese geographers of the Han Dynasty
many geographers noted many things, doesnt mean its theirs Show nested quote +
23-220AD
Yang Fu of the East Han Dynasty made the reference to Nansha Islands in his book entitled Yi Wuzi (Records of Rarities)
nor do book records... Show nested quote +
220-280AD
General Kang Tai one of the famous ancient Chinese navigator of East Wu State of the Three Kingdoms Period mentioned Nansha Islands in his book Funan Zhuan (or Journeys to and from Phnom) (the name of an ancient state in today's Cambodia).
another book? Show nested quote +
265-420AD
Fei Yuan of the Jin Dynasty(265-420 A.D.) wrote about the fishing and collecting of coral samples by the fishermen of China on the South China Sea in his article Chronicles of Guangzhou.
collecting samples is absolutely irrelevant. Show nested quote +
789
The Tang Dynasty, China included the Nansha Islands into its administrative map
adding it to your map doesnt make it yours. they were claimed and does not necessarily mean its now a part of Hainan. regardless of the rest this just shows how open ended your "proof" is I really didn't examine everything but these first few are definitely not proof. Just saying...
Those don't even matter. The map of China before 990 AD is a lot smaller than what is now. If we assume his argument is valid, then China also does not have any claim to Tibet, Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia, etc. because they weren't part of Chinese control until about 400 years ago.
|
On June 19 2011 03:09 Kamille wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2011 02:26 SpeaKEaSY wrote:So China can just claim all the territory all the way to the coasts of other countries? I don't think so, Tim. Why does Greece have a claim over Cyprus? Clearly Cyprus is closer to Turkey. History plays a large part of ownership.
greece has no claim over cyprus, cyprus is a seperate country that got invaded about 25 years ago and lost half its territory
|
On June 19 2011 03:09 lofung wrote:
heres your 50 cents. you know what i mean.
and i am very surprised why the GFW has not covered TL yet, which they should for the sake of the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party ?
man i thought it was something to do with curtis jackson lol
|
On June 19 2011 03:11 Consolidate wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2011 03:09 lofung wrote:
heres your 50 cents. you know what i mean.
and i am very surprised why the GFW has not covered TL yet, which they should for the sake of the world. Are you serious? I can't wait until 2040.
yes. although it is ethically and epically wrong to limit freedom of information by building a firewall to stop people from reading this and that, china has unintentionally done a good job in stopping stupidity spreading on the internet outside china. i am quite sure that they have not stop chinese from reading TL yet for some reason.
|
The level of shit one liners for such a detailed post is abhorrent. This is such an interesting issue that I'm hesitant to weigh in immediately, though I find the geographical distance from China curious. Despite repeated historical claims by China I still do not understand how they have a right to the islands more so than the Philippines, Vietnam or even Malaysia.
My uninformed gut reaction opinion is if China claims ownership and the Philippines engages in open military conflict, the United States should not become involved. I'll post more once I've thought more in depth.
Thank you for this thread, it is very interesting.
|
On June 19 2011 03:15 Mykill wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2011 03:13 Ghad wrote:
I love hearing from TL members from across the world about issues that are important to them. Starting an account to blabber away is just retarded though. Are you some sort of internet guerilla spokesman for the chinese government? Pretty much, but it is "general" so he's posted in the correct places. at least TL is worldly. However QI, I have to say coming from China, posting about China (as your first post) doesn't add credibility
Thanks Mykill for this sensible reply. I don't mind being labelled not credible because I'm Chinese, as long as the discussion is civil and informed. I don't expect someone from France or Africa to post this. And I already replied earlier that this is only unfortunate that the month I join TL and this issue comes up. What I don't get is people replying without basis.
On June 19 2011 03:18 Probe1 wrote:
The level of shit one liners for such a detailed post is abhorrent. This is such an interesting issue that I'm hesitant to weigh in immediately, though I find the geographical distance from China curious. Despite repeated historical claims by China I still do not understand how they have a right to the islands more so than the Philippines, Vietnam or even Malaysia.
My uninformed gut reaction opinion is if China claims ownership and the Philippines engages in open military conflict, the United States should not become involved. I'll post more once I've thought more in depth.
Thank you for this thread, it is very interesting.
Thank you also. Somehow I'm doubting about the people here. I'll just assume not all TL are like this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/62/Location_of_the_BOTs.svg/735px-Location_of_the_BOTs.svg.png)
