It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by rapier28
If Soong is a crook then what is Lee Teng Hui?
The only reason why the KMT investigated Soong was for political gain, Soong broke away to form the PFP, the KMT were pissed off.
In the 2000 elections, if it wasn't for Soong breaking away, Chen would never have being elected.
Ahem, the guy "shot himself" one day before the elections and magically recovered in the afternoon.
Reagan took weeks to recover but not "President" Chen who was making speeches in the afternoon.
The Hong Kong protests were over Article 23, a Chinese Patriot Act as well as a slowing economy.
The "one-China" principle is not the 1992 consensus. It is the "One-China, different interpretations" principle, in effect, both sides agree to be China.
Think of the Taiwan issue from this perspective. Mao in 1949 changed the name of China from the Republic of China (the current Taiwan name) to the People's Republic of China and later recounted in 1970 saying that this was the biggest mistake in his life (YES, before you mention cultural revolution, he recounted that in 1976, just before his death but not then).
I tend to agree, if Mainland China still maintained the name "Republic of China", the Name founded by Sun Yat-Sen, the Taiwan issue would be solved much more readily.
The current state of affairs is sad for all Chinese worldwide, in other places like Korea and Germany, people supports unification, but when it comes to China, whether due to racism or otherwise, people actively campaign against China even opposing unification with a democratic China in the future.
It's truly sad for all Chinese to still be manipulated by foreign powers.
Originally posted by stumason
I find it puzzling that Americans advocate a "free and sovereign" Taiwan, when if the same thing were to happen to the US.........oh, it already did. Silly me, I forgot about the Civil War when the South tried to succeed from the Union.
Lets for one moment forget about "politics" and look at the real issue. Taiwan is China's Territory and has been for a long while. The losing side (The Nationalists) in the Civil War fled there in 1947 and setup shop to oppose the Communists as it was somewhere secure the "Commies" couldn't get at them due to having bugger all naval power. It has been the status quo for nigh on 50 years.
The bottom line is that Taiwan is for all intents and purposes Chinese.
The document officially renounces Japan's treaty rights derived from Boxer Protocol of 1901 and its rights to Korea, Formosa (Taiwan), the Kuril Islands, the Pescadores, Spratly Islands, Antarctica and the Sakhalin Island. The treaty does not formally state which nations are sovereign over these areas, a fact that some supporters of Taiwan independence use to justify Taiwanese self-determination according to Article 77b of the Charter of the United Nations.
And Universal Suffrage. And control of the media. And control of the the Hong Kong parliament. People saw a chance for democracy after the British rule ended, but what the people want doesn't matter to the CCP.
You can debate back and forth until the cows come home, but there's one single, defining issue to this whole debate, and that is people don't want to live in a country where they can't choose their own government. It's called democracy, and until the CCP moves into the 21st century and allows it in China, they can dream on about retaking Taiwan unless it's by force. End of story. Thanks for comin'. Watch your step.
Yep, he's a crook too. The KMT was founded and run on Triad money, even before they went to Taiwan. We seem to agree.
Originally posted by rapier28
after WW2, Taiwan was clearly given back to the Republic of China under control of the Nationalists, which is the then Chinese Government. We can argue about this all day long but the fact of the matter is that the U.S gave Taiwan to China just like all of the Japanese colonies were regiven to there former owners.
The British delegate stated that "In due course a solution must be found in accord with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations." The Egyptian delegate stated that specifying the recipient is "to afford the opportunity to take into consideration the principle of self-determination and the expressed desire of the inhabitants of Taiwan." The French delegate stated that: "Taiwan's legal status must be determined one of these days, taking the wishes of the Formosan population into consideration."
It was thus the specific intention of the attendants of the San Francisco Peace Conference that the people of Taiwan should determine the future status of the island based on the principle of self-determination. Such process was not possible at the time, because the island was occupied by the losing side of China's Civil War, Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalists.
Resolution in the US Congress
In the US Congress, the 50th Anniversary of the conclusion of the San Francisco Peace Treaty was marked by the introduction of a resolution in support of Taiwan's self-determination. The resolution, HCR-221, states that it is the sense of Congress that "It is United States policy that the future of Taiwan should be resolved peacefully, through a democratic mechanism such as a plebiscite and with the express consent of the people of Taiwan". The full text can be found at www.taiwandc.org...
The resolution specifically refers to the fact that under the provisions of the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty, Japan renounced all right, title and claim to Taiwan, and the status of the island was left undetermined.
The resolution then states that under the universal principle of self-determination as enshrined in Article 1 of the United Nations Charter, the people of Taiwan have the right to determine their own future. It emphasizes that the United States, as a signatory to the UN Charter, supports that fundamental right. The resolution was introduced by a bi-partisan group of Congressmen led by Rep. Bob Wexler (D-FL).
Originally posted by rapier28
And now, you say that Chinese territory taken by the Japanese prior to the war should not be returned?
To be honest, China has taken a really long term view on Taiwan.
Why Taiwan is not part of China
A close look at the island's history shows that Taiwan was only very briefly a part of Imperial China (from 1887 until 1895). Before that time, it was a loose-lying area, not ruled by anyone. In fact, when the Dutch East India Company established a settlement in the southern part of the island in the 1620s, they found no signs of any Chinese administrative structure.
The people who emigrated from the coastal areas of China in the 17th and 18th century moved to the island to escape wars and famines in China, not to conquer the island on behalf of the Imperial dynasty. In fact, in the 1870s, when the governments of the United States, Japan and France protested to the Manchu emperor in Peking that pirates around Taiwan were attacking ships passing the island, they were told by the Chinese authorities: "Taiwan is beyond our territory."
In 1895, the island became Japanese territory, having been ceded "in perpetuity" to Japan by the Chinese Manchu rulers under the Treaty of Shimonoseki in 1895. For the following 50 years, it was an integral part of the Japanese Empire.
In 1945, it was "temporarily occupied" by the Chiang Kai-shek's troops on behalf of the Allied Forces. When Chiang lost his Civil War in 1949, he moved the remainder of his troops and government to Taiwan, and ruled with an iron fist. In the "February 28" incident of 1947, his troops massacred between 18,000 and 20,000 Taiwanese elite. The Taiwanese people, who comprise 85% of the island's population, were thus oppressed, and became unwilling pawns in a bigger chess-game between the two Chinese adversaries.
It is the immediate task of China to regain all our lost
territories, not merely to defend our sovereignty below the
Great Wall. This means that Manchuria must be regained. We do
not, however, include Korea, formerly a Chinese colony, but when
we have re-established the independence of the lost territories
of China, and if the Koreans wish to break away from the chains
of Japanese imperialism, we will extend them our enthusiastic
help in their struggle for independence. The same thing
applies for Formosa. As for Inner Mongolia, which is
populated by both Chinese and Mongolians, we will struggle to
drive Japan from there and help Inner Mongolia to establish an
Source: Edgar Snow, Interview with Mao Tse-tung,
quoted in "Red Star Over China",
New York:Random House, 1948, pp.88-9
Originally posted by rapier28
To be honest, China has taken a really long term view on Taiwan.
Originally posted by Muaddib
As always, the communists did not keep their word, and instead oppressed those they were supposed to set free and help.
[edit on 15-5-2005 by Muaddib]
your dc source
In 1662 Dutch were defeated by a Chinese pirate, Cheng Cheng-kung (Koxinga), a loyalist of the old Ming dynasty, who himself was on the run from the newly established Ching dynasty. Cheng Cheng-kung himself died shortly afterwards, his son took over, but in 1683, this last remnant of the Ming Dynasty was defeated by the Ch'ing troops.
The shooting is not that far-fetched a conspiracy, the truth of the matter is, he could've down it without actually getting shot by a gun.
Universal Suffrage, why would you expect to have it under Chinese rule when you didn't have it under British rule considering that China don't elect they own leaders and Britain does.
Control of the media?? Please, read the Reporters without Border's latest report on Hong Kong.
Hong Kong's Muzzled Media
Muzzling a pesky free press with the least possible international reaction is a difficult act these days. Yet, in a place long regarded an oasis of free speech in Asia and renowned for its free market and entrepreneurial initiative, the solution may be at hand. In Hong Kong, pro-Beijing forces don't fight the media, they buy it.
Hong Kong's free press environment has been altered not by government action, but by the movement into media ownership of "pro-Beijing" tycoons and the use of advertising dollars as the weapon of choice in disciplining non-conforming media outlets. In a perverse twist on Hong Kong's wonderful free market environment, capital allocation and capital deprivation have come together in the media industry to serve as an effective clamp on dissenting views in Hong Kong.
Government information sources such as radio and the television station RTHK, which was modeled on the BBC, have become heavily politicized. RTHK remains independent, but there is little doubt that within a few years, and the likely ongoing management and staff changes made in deference to the political desires of the Hong Kong government, the station will resemble the old Soviet PRAVDA more than the BBC.
Billionaire tycoon Li Kai Shing, owner of Hong Kong radio station Metro Broadcasting and a major shareholder in media company Tom.com, has multibillion dollar investments in China. Television group TVB has its sights on the mainland as its growth area. Tobacco magnate Charles Ho (owner of the once mighty Sing Tao newspaper) sells cigarettes on the mainland, and the Kouk family (the South China Morning Post owners) holds dozens of major properties, including the mainland Shangri-La Hotel group. Is it any wonder that independent minded reporters and editors have a short life span with these new owners? (See China Brief, vol. 1, no. 4, by former SCMP editor Danny Gittings, "More Malaise")
Don't be fooled by Xin Hua, the CCP propaganda mouthpiece, telling you that all is well in Hong Kong. You need to dig deeper.
Why I Was Fired in Hong Kong - Jasper Becker
After the handover of Hong Kong to China in 1997, one of the toughest challenges facing the Chinese Communist Party was to gain control over the freewheeling media there. For more than a century, Hong Kong had been a refuge for dissenting voices in the Chinese world and the prime marketplace for trading rumors and leaks.
The Chinese-language press was the first target, and the process of subduing its boisterous members began even before 1997. Critical voices were targeted, often in creative ways. Some were flattered and won over, others bribed or threatened. Some journalists were fed stories to bring them into a collaborative and dependent relationship. Others were helped with favors; in one case Chinese officials paid the debts of a reporter's mistress.
With the South China Morning Post, the problem was more difficult. It is in English and therefore widely read in the rest of the world so it serves as a barometer of Hong Kong's freedoms, which are supposed to be preserved for 50 years under the "one country, two systems" mantra.
Thus the process of bringing it around to take a pro-Beijing stance is being carried out in a step-by-step way to avoid creating alarm. First, it was acquired by a Chinese tycoon, Robert Kuok, who has big investments in China.
Then the independent-minded editor, Jonathan Fenby, was replaced, followed by the features editor, Charles Anderson, and then Willy Lam, the China editor and prominent China-watcher, who was replaced by an editor trained at the mainland's China Daily. Other dismissals followed.
When I went to express my concerns to the editor, and my fears that the change was becoming all too obvious to readers, I was quickly sacked for "insubordination" and refusing to buckle under to the China editor.
The remolding of the South China Morning Post mirrors what is happening throughout Hong Kong. Chief Executive Tung Cheehwa has started his second term in office apparently determined to give further proof of his loyalty to Beijing. He is tightening his control over the civil service and taking other steps to lessen Hong Kong's autonomy.
...if Taiwan were to be reunited, it would not be "One Country, Two Systems". Even the late Deng Xiaoping has said that if Taiwan were to be reunited, the only thing that would be changed was Chinese control of the foreign policy. Nowdays, even a federation is possible, Taiwan would continue to elect it's own leaders and even maintain a military.
I think that was just a throwaway comment on your part but anyway, you know that the KMT were not founded and run by Triads. It was a legitimete political party that ruled over one of China's most tumoultous times. It was just sad that Mao and Chiang could not agree or put the best interests of the country forward after the war.
Iron, Blood Symbols of a Past Era
There is too much tension hidden in the phrase "iron and blood." It is readily associated with triads and their blood oaths. Many KMT revolutionaries were indeed triad members.
Sun Yat-sen was a member of the Red Gang and Chiang Kai-shek was a member of the Green Gang. After the Republic of China was founded, Sun drifted away from the triads, but Chiang continued to maintain a close relationship with them. He even used triads to eliminate his political enemies. Green Gang boss Du Yuesheng assisted with the slaughter of communists in Shanghai, for example.
The alliance of iron and blood between the KMT and the triads had still not been completely dissolved by the time Henry Liu was murdered in California in 1984 for writing an unflattering biography of then president Chiang Ching-kuo. Some have alleged that triads cannot be completely discounted from the 1993 murder of navy captain Yin Ching-feng as part of the Lafayette frigate scandal.
Sun Yat Sen's successor was warlord Yuan Shik Kai, who worked with the triads in corruption. The Nationalist government set up in 1927 in Nanking was headed by a known killer and criminal member of the Shang Hai Green Gang, Chiang Kai Shek. The triads took over the government of southern China, and fought the Communists, later under Mao Tse Tung, for total control. The Western powers used this "Green Tang" organized crime group to suppress any labour unrest, and to kill off communists.
Lien Chan: Making Al Gore Look Exciting
...there is a long history of links between the KMT's wealth _ "gold" in Taiwan's terminology _ and the not insignificant underworld of gangs and triads _ "black" in Taiwan's political spectrum.
...A number of well-known figures in the underworld were able to "buy themselves clean" by running for office and even being elected to positions such as the Legislative Yuan and County Magistrate. The Kuomintang has traditionally condoned such activities and has done very little to stem the influence of the underworld and money in politics.
Until the Liu killing, the Justice Ministry's focus has shifted more toward corruption -- with results that get more spectacular, but also more embarrassing for the government, week by week. Pingtung county chief Wu Tze-yuan, a Kuomintang politician whose career owes much to the patronage of President Lee Teng-hui, was detained on Oct. 14 over a kickback scandal involving a waste-water treatment plant. Taichung city's mayor has also been indicted in corruption charges, and Tainan city's is under investigation. A probe in Shenkeng in Taipei county revealed that virtually every aspect of town administration was influenced by triads.
Taiwan is still learning how to practice democratic politics, and it still has a long way to go. Like many developing (and some developed) countries, corruption is a serious obstacle. Right now, Taiwan is ruled by corporate interests and gangsters -- yes, the Chinese mafia (the Triads, as traditionally known) have their hands in a shockingly large amount of business that goes on here.
Originally posted by rapier28
Now, no matter how you dress up facts, it remains.
Taiwan was formally taken into Chinese control in 1662 by remnants of the Ming dynasty.
You cannot distort history.
Let's not argue anymore.
I do agree that attacking Taiwan would be a very bad idea, a peaceful resolution of this will occur one way or another.