China preparing for war aginst Vietnam?, S. China Sea Options

[Alpha]

You're quite the wiki scholar. A brazen one too.

BTW, the nguyen records I'm talking about were posted on this website 1-2 years ago, in the Vietnamese section.

Sorry, but we are the most recent legit owner.

[Mid-Night_Sun]

Sorry, just using your own logic against you.


Nope, the most legit recent owner of northern Vietnam are the Vietnamese.

Get it thru your thick skull:

1. Vietnam was the most recent legit owner of these islands.
2. Nguyen records predate the French.
3. If you go by oldest claims, then China would cease to exists. There are so many claimants who lived in what is now modern China long before the arrival of the Han, Tan, Yuan (Mongol), etc.

through? whats wrong? tiny hot head cant stay clear enough to spell properly?

1. no, vietnam was not the most recent legit owner. it wasnt even second last.
2. and chinese predate viet
3. if you are talking about places such as inner mongolia/manchuria, western china, southern china. yes china was originally much smaller. and viet was some puny villages. what is your point.

You're quite the wiki scholar. A brazen one too.

BTW, the nguyen records I'm talking about were posted on this website 1-2 years ago, in the Vietnamese section.

Sorry, but we are the most recent legit owner.

keep telling yourself that. just like you keep telling yourself China didnt get those islands by walloping viets.

nobody cares. as far as records go Chinese predate everyones. as far as recent owner viet isnt even second last.

This post has been edited by Mid-Night_Sun: Dec 19 2011, 02:16 AM

[Yerroperil]

Sorry, just using your own logic against you.


Nope, the most legit recent owner of northern Vietnam are the Vietnamese.

Get it thru your thick skull:

1. Vietnam was the most recent legit owner of these islands.
2. Nguyen records predate the French.
3. If you go by oldest claims, then China would cease to exists. There are so many claimants who lived in what is now modern China long before the arrival of the Han, Tan, Yuan (Mongol), etc.

Han records predate French. If you go by oldest claims then Vietnam would also cease to exist same with other nations,Cham would form Southern Vietnam,not sure how you are going to give back Southern China to an extinct people such as the Baiyue,lmao did you even read what Mid-Night_Sun posted Taiwan is the most legit recent owner since Japan lost WW2. Central China all the way to the Yangtze would still be Han.

[Alpha]

and Chinese records all predate viet ones. not that it matters, i thought you were all about last owner. which viet is not. LMAO clown.

signed it? no, you viet got OBLITERATED.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Paracel_Islands
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson_South_Reef_Skirmish

THAT is what happened. haha signed it for safe keeping. viets sure are funny.

whatever delusion you want to have the ancient past is up to you. i really dont care. the major ancient civilizations of the world has been established and in school levels as low as middle school for decades now.

Hey genius, how exactly do your wikileaks sink my argument? They don't. No contradiction whatsoever.

North Vietnam signed over these one or both of these islands to the PRC before the end of the war. FOR SAFE KEEPING.

"i thought you were all about last owner. which viet is not."
---Don't forget the illegit role of the colonists. You don't accept what your Brit, Ruskie, and Japanese masters did to you. Don't expect us to accept how the French carved up Vietnam.

Long story short, we were the last legit owners.

And keep this in mind, the oldest claim means nothing, which in the case of China is often dubious to begin with.

[Mid-Night_Sun]

Hey genius, how exactly do your wikileaks sink my argument? They don't. No contradiction whatsoever.

North Vietnam signed over these one or both of these islands to the PRC before the end of the war. FOR SAFE KEEPING.

"i thought you were all about last owner. which viet is not."
---Don't forget the illegit role of the colonists. You don't accept what your Brit, Ruskie, and Japanese masters did to you. Don't expect us to accept how the French carved up Vietnam.

Long story short, we were the last legit owners.

And keep this in mind, the oldest claim means nothing, which in the case of China is often dubious to begin with.

LOL yes. safe keeping. k China still keep it safe. decide to keep other islands safe for you as well. whats the problem.

oh thats rich. yeah, the problem is even without french you STILL ARE NOT THE LAST OWNER. what part of the Japanese administrating the entire area through Taiwan can you not comprehend exactly?


Japan occupied some of the islands in 1939 during World War II, and used the islands as a submarine base for the occupation of Southeast Asia. During the occupation, these islands were called Shinnan Shoto (新南諸島), literally the New Southern Islands, and put under the governance of Taiwan together with the Paracel Islands (西沙群岛). In 1945, The Republic of China sent its Naval ships to take control of the islands after the surrender of Japan. It had chosen the largest and perhaps the only inhabitable island, Itu Aba Island, as its base, and renamed the island under the name of the naval vessel as Taiping. The KMT force of Republic Of China briefly abandoned the islands after its defeat in China's civil war in 1949, but re-established the base in 1956. Today, Itu Aba Island is still administered by the Republic of China.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spratly_Islan...matic_dialogues

the BIGGEST and ONLY island with fresh water is administered by Taiwan and HAS been since 1940s and 50s and no other claimant seems to think that is a glaring problem in their claim.

This post has been edited by Mid-Night_Sun: Dec 19 2011, 02:30 AM

[Alpha]

Han records predate French. If you go by oldest claims then Vietnam would also cease to exist same with other nations,Cham would form Southern Vietnam,not sure how you are going to give back Southern China to an extinct people such as the Baiyue,lmao did you even read what Mid-Night_Sun posted Taiwan is the most legit recent owner since Japan lost WW2. Central China all the way to the Yangtze would still be Han.

Hey genius, how many times does it need to be said: I'M NOT GOING BY OLDEST CLAIM. I'm going by MOST RECENT LEGIT CLAIM.

If you sell your Chery clunker car to your buddy, you no longer own it even though your ownership is older. Your buddy is the most recent legit owner.

COMPRENDE?

All you're doing is incessantly making mindless MIGHT MAKES RIGHT and "We have the oldest records/claims!" arguments all the while citing wikileaks.

This post has been edited by Alpha: Dec 19 2011, 02:37 AM

[Alpha]

LOL yes. safe keeping. k China still keep it safe. decide to keep other islands safe for you as well. whats the problem.

oh thats rich. yeah, the problem is even without french you STILL ARE NOT THE LAST OWNER. what part of the Japanese administrating the entire area through Taiwan can you not comprehend exactly?


Japan occupied some of the islands in 1939 during World War II, and used the islands as a submarine base for the occupation of Southeast Asia. During the occupation, these islands were called Shinnan Shoto (新南諸島), literally the New Southern Islands, and put under the governance of Taiwan together with the Paracel Islands (西沙群岛). In 1945, The Republic of China sent its Naval ships to take control of the islands after the surrender of Japan. It had chosen the largest and perhaps the only inhabitable island, Itu Aba Island, as its base, and renamed the island under the name of the naval vessel as Taiping. The KMT force of Republic Of China briefly abandoned the islands after its defeat in China's civil war in 1949, but re-established the base in 1956. Today, Itu Aba Island is still administered by the Republic of China.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spratly_Islan...matic_dialogues

the BIGGEST and ONLY island with fresh water is administered by Taiwan and HAS been since 1940s and 50s and no other claimant seems to think that is a glaring problem in their claim.

Why am I not surprised that you keep citing wikileaks? And keep making MIGHT MAKES RIGHT ARGUMENTS? LOL.

Eh, the Japanese were also in control of Vietnam and the Vichy French colonial administration in Vietnam. The French were not legit, neither were the Japanese.
Got it?

The French didn't leave Vietnam until after Dien Bien Phu in 1954. Vietnam, the last rightful owner, was helpless to stop any Tom, D!ckhead, and Harry Wu from ILLEGALLY occupying the islands thru their relative military might.

This post has been edited by Alpha: Dec 19 2011, 02:43 AM

[Mid-Night_Sun]

Why am I not surprised that you keep citing wikileaks? And keep making MIGHT MAKES RIGHT ARGUMENTS? LOL.

Eh, the Japanese were also in control of Vietnam, the Vichy French colonial administration in Vietnam. The French were not legit, neither were the Japanese. Got it?

lololol nobody was legit except vietnam.

[Alpha]

In this case? Yeah.

[Yerroperil]

Hey genius, how many times does it need to be said: I'M NOT GOING BY OLDEST CLAIM. I'm going by MOST RECENT LEGIT CLAIM.

If you sell your Chery clunker car to your buddy, you no longer own it even though your ownership is older. Your buddy is the most recent legit owner.

COMPRENDE?

All you're doing is incessantly making mindless MIGHT MAKES RIGHT and "We have the oldest records/claims!" arguments all the while citing wikileaks.

Qing claimed at the same time at Nguyen,why are Vietnamese the only the legit claimants?

[Alpha]

Qing claimed at the same time at Nguyen,why are Vietnamese the only the legit claimants?

Because, from what I understand, we actually controlled these islands. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Also, if you want a MIGHT MAKES RIGHT argument, then Nguyen kicked Qing's @$$, BIG TIME.

Seriously, I'd have to look further into Qing's and Nguyen's claims, i.e. precise timeline etc. And look at who actually physically controlled these islands.

Like I said, prior to the age of oil, these islands were really worthless but to the odd fisherman here and there. It's hard for me to believe that China would spend any serious resources on controlling these islands which are much closer to Vietnam, especially Hanoi, than to distant Beijing--prior to the age of oil, that is.

BTW, please tell your buddy Midnight to stop citing wikileaks... It would help.

[Yerroperil]

Because, from what I understand, we actually controlled these islands. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Also, if you want a MIGHT MAKES RIGHT argument, then Nguyen kicked Qing's @$$, BIG TIME.

Seriously, I'd have to look further into Qing's and Nguyen's claims, i.e. precise timeline etc. And look at who actually physically controlled these islands.

Like I said, prior to the age of oil, these islands were really worthless but to the odd fisherman here and there. It's hard for me to believe that China would spend any serious resources on controlling these islands which are much closer to Vietnam, especially Hanoi, than to distant Beijing--prior to the age of oil, that is.

BTW, please tell your buddy Midnight to stop citing wikileaks... It would help.

French kicked Nguyen @ss shouldn't they get the lands for your logic,China was never in whole colonized by Europeans while your precious Vietnam was... How did Nguyen dynasty control please elaborate,Did Nguyen dynasty spend serious resources on those islands. Mid-Night_Sun has a more intelligence than what lies in your thick skull,can you not deny that Taiwan does infact control Taiping island,and PRC kicked Vietnams @ss to regain those islands?

[Alpha]

French kicked Nguyen @ss shouldn't they get the lands for your logic,China was never in whole colonized by Europeans while your precious Vietnam was... How did Nguyen dynasty control please elaborate,Did Nguyen dynasty spend serious resources on those islands.

Please. The allusion to the Nguyen defeating the Qing, or the Manchu, who pwned all of China, was sarcasm. This should have been understood the colloquial term/phrase that immediately followed: "Seriously,...."

China's enormous. China's colonizers (Brits, Ruskies, Japanese, etc.) were plenty happy with the plunder they were getting. A typical Chinese province is as geographically big as Vietnam, Japan, Britain, etc. Eh... Apples to oranges. Typically Chinaman logic.

can you not deny that Taiwan does infact control Taiping island,and PRC kicked Vietnams @ss to regain those islands?

This is a MIGHT MAKES RIGHT ARGUMENT. It's not a moral or legal argument.

And a pathetic MIGHT MAKES RIGHT argument at that: These maritime skirmishes were very small in scale, so don't get too uppity. Vietnam has repeatedly destroyed enormous Sino-Fabolous armies invading Vietnam for the last millennium.

Don't cherry-pick. It's a form of deception. It's also sign of stupidity when you try to pimp it off as a legit argument.

Mid-Night_Sun has a more intelligence than what lies in your thick skull,

Sorry, but your buddy Twilight is nothing more than a wikileaks scholar. There's only and always two threads of logic running brazenly beneath his arguments:

1. MIGHT MAKE RIGHT. This is imperialism and hegemony, which he incessantly tries to pimp of as morality and legality. Typical Chinaman.

2. WE HAVE THE OLDEST RECORDS. Sorry, but this argument trumps only if you're writing history, assuming all else being equal.

When it comes to ownership, the only argument one can make is: THE LAST LEGIT OWNER IS THE RIGHTFUL OWNER.

Now, there is a "statute of limitations", if you will. You can't claim land going back 800 years as the Jews do in Israel. The Thai, the Hmong, the Mongol, the Manchu, etc., can't claim Chinese real estate going back 1000-2200 years. This is especially true of the Mongols and Manchus who surrender their rights to anything and everything due to their own aggression.

On the flip side, if a government severely oppresses its minorities, e.g. GENOCIDE, those minorities have the right to break away, regardless of whether or not the statute of limitations has expired. Case in point: Tibet.

When you clowns make imperialistic, hegemonistic, and misguided historical records arguments (which when applied back on you, China would cease to exist), don't try to pimp it off as morality, legality, and proper ownership.

Besides, your historical records can not be entirely trusted. You don't trust others' records on you, why then would you expect everyone else to blindly accept yours on them. Pot, meet kettle.

Good job, genius.

This post has been edited by Alpha: Dec 19 2011, 01:37 PM

[Mid-Night_Sun]

theres viet logic for you. they dont even get to be their own colony and instead stuffed into a group called indo china. meanwhile China was never a colony of anybody. Hong Kong was. China was not. speaking of europeans. i think vietnam might be the only asian country that had their script changed because of them. how embarrassing. course you didnt have your own script in the first place so what the europeans replaced was basically just Chinese. so maybe its not that bad...

very amusing imagination you have. yet again you claim all these victories and dont have a shred of anything to show for it. the greatest gain was recognition as a tributary by Chinese Emperor. the worst was you losing territory flat out.

you keep talking about wikipedia, which has had a credible citation system for years now, meanwhile you spout nothing. proved nothing. talking about tibet and pretending vietnam was the last legit owner. wasnt even the 2nd last legit owner.

pretty much all viet "records" were copied and taken from Chinese ones. yeah i think our records are more than good enough for you.

oh, and my arguments have substance and proof. all yours are made up by you. imaginary stipulations of time limits. how 'genocide' breaches whatever pre mentioned imaginary rule you had. how clear administration just magically doesnt count. viet claim is unfortunately placed where it is neither the original claimant nor was it the latest. which is where your "rightful" comes in. well aware of how viets can slither around all sorts of rules and assumptions like snakes and make up your own so that it isnt a problem. but it should be.

This post has been edited by Mid-Night_Sun: Dec 19 2011, 02:03 PM

[Alpha]

Sematics... LOL

Sorry, but they owned you. The Brits sent opium grown and produced in India and made you smoke it. A whopping estimate is that about 1/3 of your people were opium addicts at a time when China's population was 300,000,000. That works out to 100,000,000 crack heads.

Mexico may be the world's biggest narco-terrorist state, but the US of A is the world's biggest narco consuming state: The US now has a population of about 300,000,000, but only about 8%, as opposed to 33% in Brit owned China, abuses illicit drugs. But it's mostly pot, which is like alcohol. Opium is much stronger than pot. It's a whole 'nother animal.

After the first millennium, you couldn't take Vietnam if you tried. And you did, about 10 times. A GIANT FAIL everytime too.

"pretty much all viet "records" were copied and taken from Chinese ones. yeah i think our records are more than good enough for you."
---Hey, genius, where are you getting this? Were you there with the Ming bandits? Not all records are official. Each province or state in the sphere of China or India is going to have its own unique records. Such records are the ones most valuable to them.

You never disappoint, do you, Dumbo?

This post has been edited by Alpha: Dec 19 2011, 02:22 PM

[Alpha]

all yours are made up by you. imaginary stipulations of time limits. how 'genocide' breaches whatever pre mentioned imaginary rule you had. how clear administration just magically doesnt count. viet claim is unfortunately placed where it is neither the original claimant nor was it the latest. which is where your "rightful" comes in.
[ well aware of how viets can slither around all sorts of rules and assumptions like snakes and make up your own so that it isnt a problem. but it should be.

quote]
No dumbo, check the arguments and counter-arguments at the UN and the Hague concerning all cases of genocide.

well aware of how viets can slither around all sorts of rules and assumptions like snakes and make up your own so that it isnt a problem. but it should be.

Stop projecting.

oh, and my arguments have substance and proof.

Yeah, but only in your dreams.

[Mid-Night_Sun]

no, see while you made up your own viet rules. imaginary stipulations of time limits. how 'genocide' breaches whatever pre mentioned imaginary rule you had. how clear administration just magically doesnt count.

things were more clear in the real world. where you were UNDER the French Crown. China was NEVER under the British Crown like Hong Kong was.

you say fail, but vietnam never stopped being a tributary state. the only way you can claim success, is if that was your goal. which would be hilarious.


records are unreliable until viets try to use them. signing away territory temporarily instead of getting slaughtered in battle and losing it. poor bullied vietnam

The French didn't leave Vietnam until after Dien Bien Phu in 1954. Vietnam, the last rightful owner, was helpless to stop any Tom, D!ckhead, and Harry Wu from ILLEGALLY occupying the islands thru their relative military might.

helpless to defend its imaginary rightful ownership. a very intricate web of convenient half truths and fantasy to remain that rightful owner. a web thats needed because you arent the first, nor are you the last claimant. you are stuck unfortunately in between. which is where all this "rightful" comes into play. everyone else who either predate you or fully administer after you doesnt count.

This post has been edited by Mid-Night_Sun: Dec 19 2011, 02:14 PM

[Alpha]

Does this ring a bell?

[Mid-Night_Sun]

not for your argument no. there were unfair economic policies, ports forced open to trade as well. so what?

here is something even a viet can understand. Hong Kong was a British Colony, much like Indo China was Frances. now if China was also a British colony, then Hong Kong was what? colonyx2?

[Alpha]

Manchukuo was a Japanese colony.

The Europeans and Japanese devasted your country at least as bad as they did in Vietnam and elsewhere.

You're quite pathetic good at semantics.