QUOTE (Byron @ Jan 28 2005, 10:35 PM)
Look at your previous post. You QUOTED me, and then said that Vietnam could that back then. Since you quoted me it was obvious you were talking to me.
Bah! Whatever.
Full Version: Our relationship with China
Bah! Whatever.
QUOTE (nomadder @ Jan 19 2005, 10:44 PM)
China ruled Vietnam for a thousand year. Had she been more generous with her policy, Vietnam would have been part of China and we wouldn't have to have this discussion.
No , not true ,Chinese han are seen as aliens , Viets would and will fight them forever if need be...
QUOTE (DaiNamViet @ Jan 29 2005, 04:37 PM)
QUOTE (nomadder @ Jan 19 2005, 10:44 PM)
China ruled Vietnam for a thousand year. Had she been more generous with her policy, Vietnam would have been part of China and we wouldn't have to have this discussion.
No , not true ,Chinese han are seen as aliens , Viets would and will fight them forever if need be...
being generous and stayed in Vietnam for a thousand years !! Vietnamese will fight with u Chinese to our last blood , and that was a proof , 1000 years cannot make us stop fighting !!
QUOTE
I don't know remember the Damansky island incident where a few Soviets killed thousands of Chinese.
Brush up on your history. Even according to russians themselves(they start to scrap the Soviet era propaganda and facing up to the truth), the Soviet troops had their a$$ handed to them on Damanskii Island, the mere fact that Soviet/Russian force never set foot again on Damanskii after the brief military conflict is an indication of PLA's triumph over Soviet Red Amy.
In any case, I, as a Vietnamese person, find it very offensive that many of the Chinese people stubbornly insist that Vietnam originally belonged to China and that Vietnamese ethnic was derived from Chinese one. I also find it annoying that the Chinese government even goes so far as to attempt to 'rob' OUR land and sea. That makes me really angry since it is just totally inexcusable to me.
But on the other hand, I am also extremely against racism. While these incidents with the Chinese are in fact true, this does NOT mean ALL Chinese are ignorant, pig-headed, narrow-minded, stupid, barbaric...people. It is important to criticize or even hold the responsible guilty for their involvment, yet it is also important that we not produce racist statements about the Chinese as a whole. This is just racism. WHY? Because there are ignorant, pig-headed, narrow-minded, stupid, barbaric...people in EVERY race. Because ALL countries have done things in their past which they are ashamed of. It is of great importance that we be clear in distinguishing between the responsible and the innocent. PERIOD.
But on the other hand, I am also extremely against racism. While these incidents with the Chinese are in fact true, this does NOT mean ALL Chinese are ignorant, pig-headed, narrow-minded, stupid, barbaric...people. It is important to criticize or even hold the responsible guilty for their involvment, yet it is also important that we not produce racist statements about the Chinese as a whole. This is just racism. WHY? Because there are ignorant, pig-headed, narrow-minded, stupid, barbaric...people in EVERY race. Because ALL countries have done things in their past which they are ashamed of. It is of great importance that we be clear in distinguishing between the responsible and the innocent. PERIOD.
QUOTE (RGR101 @ Feb 9 2005, 11:14 AM)
Brush up on your history. Even according to russians themselves(they start to scrap the Soviet era propaganda and facing up to the truth), the Soviet troops had their a$$ handed to them on Damanskii Island, the mere fact that Soviet/Russian force never set foot again on Damanskii after the brief military conflict is an indication of PLA's triumph over Soviet Red Amy.
Big deal, its like throwing your victim a nickel after you just rob him of a million dollars just to keep his mouth shut
QUOTE (RGR101 @ Feb 9 2005, 10:14 AM)
QUOTE
I don't know remember the Damansky island incident where a few Soviets killed thousands of Chinese.
Brush up on your history. Even according to russians themselves(they start to scrap the Soviet era propaganda and facing up to the truth), the Soviet troops had their a$$ handed to them on Damanskii Island, the mere fact that Soviet/Russian force never set foot again on Damanskii after the brief military conflict is an indication of PLA's triumph over Soviet Red Amy.
Oh really then? if the Soviets never took over Damansky Island, then why did they sign it away to China in 1991, decades after the incident? How can they sign away something they never had? So the fact that they signed it away shows that they were in control of the island until 1991 until they gave the island away on their own free will
Not only Damansky island, the Soviets also bombed Manchuria, and stormed Damansky island and suffered relatively low casualities.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/encyclopedia/s..._conflict__1969
QUOTE
Two weeks later the Soviets retaliated by bombarding Chinese troop concentrations in Manchuria and by storming the island. The result was a Soviet victory with at least 800 Chinese soldiers killed or wounded while the Soviets only had 60 killed or wounded
Becareful, Viets...The China use his massive power to devastate your regime system because he wants to take over the South VN and become a leader. So!!!
Would you guys think that you can handle on that matter???? Or need assistant from someone??? I believe the China is a strongest in Asian country!!! Just more becareful!!!
Would you guys think that you can handle on that matter???? Or need assistant from someone??? I believe the China is a strongest in Asian country!!! Just more becareful!!!
China wants to be more powerful in its economic so it wont dare to go to war against Vietnam
^Depends on how limited the warfare is. If they just do limited war it probably won't hurt the economy or might even help the economy.
And just why would China go to war with Vietnam?
I really can't imagine the dispute in the south China sea escalating into a full fledged war.
I really can't imagine the dispute in the south China sea escalating into a full fledged war.
QUOTE (DaiNamViet @ Jan 29 2005, 03:37 PM)
QUOTE (nomadder @ Jan 19 2005, 10:44 PM)
China ruled Vietnam for a thousand year. Had she been more generous with her policy, Vietnam would have been part of China and we wouldn't have to have this discussion.
No , not true ,Chinese han are seen as aliens , Viets would and will fight them forever if need be...
how dare u vietnamese say something like that.....
even japanese won't say they will fight against china forever....dude little viet.. look at ur country... little vietnam... super little
QUOTE (康师傅 @ Feb 21 2005, 09:24 PM)
QUOTE (DaiNamViet @ Jan 29 2005, 03:37 PM)
QUOTE (nomadder @ Jan 19 2005, 10:44 PM)
China ruled Vietnam for a thousand year. Had she been more generous with her policy, Vietnam would have been part of China and we wouldn't have to have this discussion.
No , not true ,Chinese han are seen as aliens , Viets would and will fight them forever if need be...
how dare u vietnamese say something like that.....
even japanese won't say they will fight against china forever....dude little viet.. look at ur country... little vietnam... super little
Watch your dirty mouth you sinocized namman, we fought them han for more than a thousand and will fight for another thousand if need be...
the circumstances is very different though now.. china has nukes and better technological weapons. you guys aren't duking it out with swords and spears anymore buddy 2
2
QUOTE (nombaingsachko @ Feb 21 2005, 09:54 PM)
the circumstances is very different though now.. china has nukes and better technological weapons. you guys aren't duking it out with swords and spears anymore buddy 2
2It don't matter
yes it does...
QUOTE (nombaingsachko @ Feb 21 2005, 10:02 PM)
yes it does...
Its not soo easy nowadays just to nuke whom ever you want, just for the heck of it, nukes are for last resort use only.. if that is the case then VN should definitely work secretly procure them...
I believe the Chinese also had nukes back in 1979 when they invaded Vietnam but was cut down and tens of thousands died more wouded for life, all because of a venture into lands they should never be in..
QUOTE (DaiNamViet @ Feb 22 2005, 02:48 AM)
Watch your dirty mouth you sinocized namman, we fought them han for more than a thousand and will fight for another thousand if need be...
lol, just who exactly is a sinicized namman here, DaiNamviet?
QUOTE (Emperor @ Feb 21 2005, 10:40 PM)
QUOTE (DaiNamViet @ Feb 22 2005, 02:48 AM)
Watch your dirty mouth you sinocized namman, we fought them han for more than a thousand and will fight for another thousand if need be...
lol, just who exactly is a sinicized namman here, DaiNamviet?
What are you insinuating? Vietnamese aren't even sino
2
QUOTE (DaiNamViet @ Feb 21 2005, 09:45 PM)
QUOTE (Emperor @ Feb 21 2005, 10:40 PM)
QUOTE (DaiNamViet @ Feb 22 2005, 02:48 AM)
Watch your dirty mouth you sinocized namman, we fought them han for more than a thousand and will fight for another thousand if need be...
lol, just who exactly is a sinicized namman here, DaiNamviet?
What are you insinuating? Vietnamese aren't even sino
2nam man is what we chinese call u vietnamese.. dude
QUOTE (康师傅 @ Feb 22 2005, 06:13 PM)
QUOTE (DaiNamViet @ Feb 21 2005, 09:45 PM)
QUOTE (Emperor @ Feb 21 2005, 10:40 PM)
QUOTE (DaiNamViet @ Feb 22 2005, 02:48 AM)
Watch your dirty mouth you sinocized namman, we fought them han for more than a thousand and will fight for another thousand if need be...
lol, just who exactly is a sinicized namman here, DaiNamviet?
What are you insinuating? Vietnamese aren't even sino
2nam man is what we chinese call u vietnamese.. dude
I didnt call you a namman , I said sinicized namman read again ...
The original nanman were the people who lived just north of Vietnam, Yunnan province. Guangdong, Fujian and other southeastern province were already annexed since the Han dynasty, the aborininals were called Yue (later Bai Yue) not Nanman.
I don't think you can call someone else's family aborinal, since you look like a aboriginal yourself.
I don't think you can call someone else's family aborinal, since you look like a aboriginal yourself.
QUOTE
Guangdong, Fujian and other southeastern province were already annexed since the Han dynasty
I was talking about before Han started moving southwards..
QUOTE
I don't think you can call someone else's family aborinal, since you look like a aboriginal yourself.
Not really, but I guess I know why you nevered showed yourself
QUOTE
The 'MAN' Barbarians
In the Prehistory section, we mentioned the terminology of 'Nan Man', namely, southern barbarians. The 'Man' designation is categorical. Chinese classics said the 'Man' barbarians were the descendants of Pan Hu. The Quanrong or Doggy Rong in northwestern China, i.e., ancestors of later Huns, were said to be descendants of Pan-hu, too.
The 'Man' people were not a group of passive people as they seemed. They had rebelled against the Chinese numerous times. They also expanded into Chinese territories frequently. In the valley of the Xiangjiang River, there was a major rebellion in AD 157, and rebellion was seen in the northern part of Changsha, Hunan Province. Disturbances were seen in Xiangjiang River basin and extended across the Nan Ling Mountains to the south. Rebellions were quelled in AD 164.
By the time of the Three Kingdoms, the 'Man' had migrated out of southwestern China and the Three Gorges areas. According to "History of The North Dynasties", the 'Man' people were scattered between the Yangtze River and the Huai River. They were seen as east as Shouchun of Anhui Province, as west as Sichuan Province, and as north as Henan Province. They were not a threat during Ts'ao Ts'ao Wei Dynasty of the Three Kingdoms time period. But they began to multiply by the end of Jinn Dynasty. As a result of devastation dealt by Hunnic Han & Zhao Dynasties, the central areas of China became vacant. Hence, the 'Man' people began to migrate northward.
In the Prehistory section, we mentioned the terminology of 'Nan Man', namely, southern barbarians. The 'Man' designation is categorical. Chinese classics said the 'Man' barbarians were the descendants of Pan Hu. The Quanrong or Doggy Rong in northwestern China, i.e., ancestors of later Huns, were said to be descendants of Pan-hu, too.
The 'Man' people were not a group of passive people as they seemed. They had rebelled against the Chinese numerous times. They also expanded into Chinese territories frequently. In the valley of the Xiangjiang River, there was a major rebellion in AD 157, and rebellion was seen in the northern part of Changsha, Hunan Province. Disturbances were seen in Xiangjiang River basin and extended across the Nan Ling Mountains to the south. Rebellions were quelled in AD 164.
By the time of the Three Kingdoms, the 'Man' had migrated out of southwestern China and the Three Gorges areas. According to "History of The North Dynasties", the 'Man' people were scattered between the Yangtze River and the Huai River. They were seen as east as Shouchun of Anhui Province, as west as Sichuan Province, and as north as Henan Province. They were not a threat during Ts'ao Ts'ao Wei Dynasty of the Three Kingdoms time period. But they began to multiply by the end of Jinn Dynasty. As a result of devastation dealt by Hunnic Han & Zhao Dynasties, the central areas of China became vacant. Hence, the 'Man' people began to migrate northward.
QUOTE (DaiNamViet @ Feb 23 2005, 03:18 AM)
QUOTE
Guangdong, Fujian and other southeastern province were already annexed since the Han dynasty
I was talking about before Han started moving southwards..
QUOTE
I don't think you can call someone else's family aborinal, since you look like a aboriginal yourself.
Not really, but I guess I know why you nevered showed yourself
The Nanman version was used for the Yunnan aboriginals only. Btw. this article make it seem like all barbarians were "Man", which is far from the truth. The aboriginals of other s. provinces were referred to as barbarians, just not as Nanman.
QUOTE (Byron @ Feb 19 2005, 04:00 PM)
QUOTE (RGR101 @ Feb 9 2005, 10:14 AM)
QUOTE
I don't know remember the Damansky island incident where a few Soviets killed thousands of Chinese.
Brush up on your history. Even according to russians themselves(they start to scrap the Soviet era propaganda and facing up to the truth), the Soviet troops had their a$$ handed to them on Damanskii Island, the mere fact that Soviet/Russian force never set foot again on Damanskii after the brief military conflict is an indication of PLA's triumph over Soviet Red Amy.
Oh really then? if the Soviets never took over Damansky Island, then why did they sign it away to China in 1991, decades after the incident? How can they sign away something they never had? So the fact that they signed it away shows that they were in control of the island until 1991 until they gave the island away on their own free will
Not only Damansky island, the Soviets also bombed Manchuria, and stormed Damansky island and suffered relatively low casualities.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/encyclopedia/s..._conflict__1969
QUOTE
Two weeks later the Soviets retaliated by bombarding Chinese troop concentrations in Manchuria and by storming the island. The result was a Soviet victory with at least 800 Chinese soldiers killed or wounded while the Soviets only had 60 killed or wounded
Again, like I said in the last post, you should brush up on your history, instead of citing from tabloid source(I believe it's steep in racist mantra: occidental can always triumph over oriental, hence, it's probably a direct quotation of the Soviet-era propaganda).
I will recommend "A 4,000 Kilometer Journey Along the Sino-Russian Border" by IWA$hitA Akihiro(Professor of Russian foreign policy and Sino-Russian relations at the Slavic Research Center, Hokkaido University) to you. The english version of this book is released in 2004. I've got myself of copy of it, and it's definitely worth reading.
Iwa$hita has provided very detailed and insightful informations on the demarcation of the China-Russia border, after spending well over a decade on field research in the China-Russia border region. According to him, Damanskii island is under the de facto control of China after the 1969 military conflict. The 1991 signing is only for the Russians to offcially renouncing their claim on this tiny island.
QUOTE (DaiNamViet @ Feb 22 2005, 09:18 PM)
QUOTE
Guangdong, Fujian and other southeastern province were already annexed since the Han dynasty
I was talking about before Han started moving southwards..
QUOTE
I don't think you can call someone else's family aborinal, since you look like a aboriginal yourself.
Not really, but I guess I know why you nevered showed yourself
QUOTE
The 'MAN' Barbarians
In the Prehistory section, we mentioned the terminology of 'Nan Man', namely, southern barbarians. The 'Man' designation is categorical. Chinese classics said the 'Man' barbarians were the descendants of Pan Hu. The Quanrong or Doggy Rong in northwestern China, i.e., ancestors of later Huns, were said to be descendants of Pan-hu, too.
The 'Man' people were not a group of passive people as they seemed. They had rebelled against the Chinese numerous times. They also expanded into Chinese territories frequently. In the valley of the Xiangjiang River, there was a major rebellion in AD 157, and rebellion was seen in the northern part of Changsha, Hunan Province. Disturbances were seen in Xiangjiang River basin and extended across the Nan Ling Mountains to the south. Rebellions were quelled in AD 164.
By the time of the Three Kingdoms, the 'Man' had migrated out of southwestern China and the Three Gorges areas. According to "History of The North Dynasties", the 'Man' people were scattered between the Yangtze River and the Huai River. They were seen as east as Shouchun of Anhui Province, as west as Sichuan Province, and as north as Henan Province. They were not a threat during Ts'ao Ts'ao Wei Dynasty of the Three Kingdoms time period. But they began to multiply by the end of Jinn Dynasty. As a result of devastation dealt by Hunnic Han & Zhao Dynasties, the central areas of China became vacant. Hence, the 'Man' people began to migrate northward.
In the Prehistory section, we mentioned the terminology of 'Nan Man', namely, southern barbarians. The 'Man' designation is categorical. Chinese classics said the 'Man' barbarians were the descendants of Pan Hu. The Quanrong or Doggy Rong in northwestern China, i.e., ancestors of later Huns, were said to be descendants of Pan-hu, too.
The 'Man' people were not a group of passive people as they seemed. They had rebelled against the Chinese numerous times. They also expanded into Chinese territories frequently. In the valley of the Xiangjiang River, there was a major rebellion in AD 157, and rebellion was seen in the northern part of Changsha, Hunan Province. Disturbances were seen in Xiangjiang River basin and extended across the Nan Ling Mountains to the south. Rebellions were quelled in AD 164.
By the time of the Three Kingdoms, the 'Man' had migrated out of southwestern China and the Three Gorges areas. According to "History of The North Dynasties", the 'Man' people were scattered between the Yangtze River and the Huai River. They were seen as east as Shouchun of Anhui Province, as west as Sichuan Province, and as north as Henan Province. They were not a threat during Ts'ao Ts'ao Wei Dynasty of the Three Kingdoms time period. But they began to multiply by the end of Jinn Dynasty. As a result of devastation dealt by Hunnic Han & Zhao Dynasties, the central areas of China became vacant. Hence, the 'Man' people began to migrate northward.
how can u call me ab. according to history of Fujian, most Fujian people were migrated from North and Central China during the Song Dynasty..Fujian always been the land of immgrants, because we don't really have native people and my ancestor are taoist.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.