Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

China Refuses To Back Down On General's Nuclear Threat Over Taiwan

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by joechino
China Refuses To Back Down On General's Nuclear Threat Over Taiwan
Beijing (AFP) (SPX) Jul 16, 2005


The title was wrong. Nuclear Threat is not over Taiwan but over USA




posted on Sep, 10 2005 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
After all remember that China in the 20-40's was mostly a collection of warlod factions when the Mancho dynasty ended, and also please be sure to remember that if Taiwan was not a strategic Island we would still want it because it is a part of China.


Wrong, Taiwan is NOT a part of China. Taiwan was conquered by the Manchus four decades after they conquered China. They then surrendered Taiwan in 1895. No Han Chinese government based in China has ever had control over Taiwan. Taiwan has the right to chart its own future without ChiCom threats and coercion.



posted on Sep, 10 2005 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite

you said chinese? not communist. there is chinese democracy. its taiwan singapore and malaysia


Singapore is NOT a democracy, and neither is Malaysia, and remember that ethnic Chinese are a minority in Malaysia, with the Bumiputeras (Malay and Dyaks) forming a majority.


we are talking about the land of the Qing dynasty


The Qing were foreigners who conquered China before conquering Tibet, East Turkestan, Taiwan, and Mongolia, none of which were controlled by the Ming Dynasty. Even at the end of the Qing Dynasty, the Chinese revolutionaries referred to the Manchus as foreigners, and following the fall of the Qing, they were persecuted accordingly. That isone of the reasons they initially welcomed the Japanese in the early 1930s


I guess the names TIBET and VIET NAM don't mean a thing to you do they? Imperialist warmongering communist dogs with no honor! You make me raff!



tibet is a part of china. it is not called a invasion. its re-occupation

and vietnam was never invaded. china didn't want their land


Tibet is NOT a part of China, it was illegally invaded by China and annexed to it. This is the FIRST time in history that Tibet has been governed by a Han Chinese government.

As for Viet Nam, how can you say that China never invaded Viet Nam?!?!? China occupied Viet Nam for a THOUSAND YEARS! Even after the Kingdom of Dai Viet achieved indepedence, there were dozens of Chinese forays into Viet Nam, including in 1979, all of them ending unsuccessfully.



posted on Sep, 10 2005 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
Land bordering China with a high percentage of Chinese is easily considered part of China, places in Canada, US, etc aren't considered part of China becuase those Chinese left of their own accord to live in another nation, though in old Imperial times China considered all other people's to be Vassel states. So maybe they are a part of China.


That is simply absurd, and international law doesn't hold that claim. Please tell us all which territories you are specifically referring to? Considering that China currently controls considerable territory that is not traditionally Chinese, and is ongoing a rather unique form of ethnic cleansing att he moment, it doesn't serve you well to use the ethnic argument.



Vietnam and North Korea were not invasions, infact in Vietnam no Chinese troops have ever invaded Vietnam excpet in that one border skirmish to teach them a lesson, though I can't recal what it was about though.[/quote[

I hope you are referrign to modern history because over the past millenia, where have been dozens of Chinese forays into Viet Nam. Also, don't forget that Viet Nam endured ONE THOUSAND years of Chinese imperialism.

As for the 1979 invasion, the Chinese were doing it to punish Viet Nam for its invasion of Kampuchea which overthrew the brutal Khmer Rouge regime.



posted on Sep, 10 2005 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Haa.. Try and take Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim or an yof those northeastern states of ours..They may have people with chinese blood, but those are 100% Indian..



posted on Sep, 10 2005 @ 10:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by ludahai
Singapore is NOT a democracy, and neither is Malaysia, and remember that ethnic Chinese are a minority in Malaysia, with the Bumiputeras (Malay and Dyaks) forming a majority.


Even if its not a demoracy its a good system.
And half chinese and malaysian are counted as malaysian



The Qing were foreigners who conquered China before conquering Tibet, East Turkestan, Taiwan, and Mongolia, none of which were controlled by the Ming Dynasty. Even at the end of the Qing Dynasty, the Chinese revolutionaries referred to the Manchus as foreigners, and following the fall of the Qing, they were persecuted accordingly. That isone of the reasons they initially welcomed the Japanese in the early 1930s


No not all manchus welcomed the japanese. mostly Pu Yi. he wanted to put the manchurian royal faimly back in power so he became a puppet to japan



Tibet is NOT a part of China, it was illegally invaded by China and annexed to it. This is the FIRST time in history that Tibet has been governed by a Han Chinese government.


yeah HAN chinese.


Han chinese refers to the HAN empire. the area which most people consider that the original chinese originated.



As for Viet Nam, how can you say that China never invaded Viet Nam?!?!? China occupied Viet Nam for a THOUSAND YEARS! Even after the Kingdom of Dai Viet achieved indepedence, there were dozens of Chinese forays into Viet Nam, including in 1979, all of them ending unsuccessfully.


Vietnam wasn't even a empire or country. a land of barbarians which we conquered.

the 1979 was a attack not a invasion. we never intended to occupy the land



posted on Sep, 11 2005 @ 04:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite

Even if its not a demoracy its a good system.
And half chinese and malaysian are counted as malaysian


Well, is it a democracy or not? You claimed that it was a democracy? Now you say that if it isn't, it is a good system anyway? Is it a democracy, or not?

Even IF Malaysia is 50% Chinese (it most certainly is NOT), Malaysia is also not a democracy, though it is closer than Singapore is.

The only democracies in the Pacific Asia region are: Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand and Cambodia (INA and CAM are both emerging democracies.)




No not all manchus welcomed the japanese. mostly Pu Yi. he wanted to put the manchurian royal faimly back in power so he became a puppet to japan


Initially, the Manchus by-in-large DID welcome the Japanese due to the way that the Han were treating them. However, as time passed, and the brutality of Japanese rule became apparent to the people, their feelings of hostility grew. If they treated Manchuria like they did Taiwan, Manchurians would have a better feeling for the Japanese than they do. To this day, they despise the Japanese more than anyone else in China.



yeah HAN chinese.


Han chinese refers to the HAN empire. the area which most people consider that the original chinese originated.


I was referring to the myth that there is a single Han ethnicity. As for Han Empire, there were at least THREE Han Dynasties in Chinese history.


Vietnam wasn't even a empire or country. a land of barbarians which we conquered.


So, you justify Chinese imperialism by saying that the Viet Namese were barbarians??? The notion that there wasn't a Viet polity before the arrival of the Chinese is incorrect, no doubt posited by your government "scholars". There were numerous Viet polities in what is today southern Guangdong, Guangxi and the Red River Valley. They were destroyed by the Chinese, modern Guangdong and Guangxi were depopulated of Viet people and the Red River valley was controlled by imperial China for a thousand years.

Following the shaking off of the shackles of Chinese rule, the Viet Namese established an empire in their own right, something the Chinese despised. They sent more armies of invasion, but all were fought off.


the 1979 was a attack not a invasion. we never intended to occupy the land


That is an interesting new definition of "invasion." You can send in your forces, but if you get your butts kicked, it isn't an invasion? Wow, new PC language from "ChiComs R Us"



posted on Sep, 11 2005 @ 04:59 AM
link   
Sometimes sh___ happens:

"That is simply absurd, and international law doesn't hold that claim. Please tell us all which territories you are specifically referring to?

Considering that China currently controls considerable territory that is not traditionally Chinese, and is ongoing as a rather unique form of ethnic cleansing at the moment, it doesn't serve you well to use the "ethnic argument".

I say remove MFN (Lowest Duty Rate: aka: Most Favored Nation) status for China imports for Canada and the USA and start building our own things ourselves.
Hell, I'm now reading PM Martin in Canada is having China's Pres here for trade discussions. Absolute Crazyness. Canadians are out of work due to Mex-US-Can NAFTA agreement. Now China with 40 cents an hour worker fees. No benefits or holiday/sick pay trade discussions -- how can Canadian workers compete with that?

And it get's sicker by the minute. Martin's got to go. NAFTA must cancelled until at least Canada obtains it's 5 Bill from Bush -- cancel first then get the 5 Bill or go back to duty and taxes to export to Canada.

Dallas

[edit on 11-9-2005 by Dallas]



posted on Sep, 11 2005 @ 08:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dallas

I say remove MFN (Lowest Duty Rate: aka: Most Favored Nation) status for China imports for Canada and the USA and start building our own things ourselves.

[edit on 11-9-2005 by Dallas]


Unfortunately, now that China is a member of the WTO, that is impossible.



posted on Sep, 11 2005 @ 04:02 PM
link   
muahahaha.

Lol, had to laugh a little at that, its amusing how everyone seems to be taking in this so called "China scare" where you find anything good happening for the Chinese people as a disaster and anything bad as a victory for you hypocracy.

I wont bother with the argueing the ethnic arguement since anyoen with a brain realizes that victors right the history not the losers. If I may recall that there have been several territories by todays standards could be considered illegal invasion by the USA, UK, France etc etc.

The foray into Vietnam in 1979 I think could be considered more of a police action because of the Vietnamese invading Laos and Cambodia.



posted on Sep, 12 2005 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
muahahaha.

Lol, had to laugh a little at that, its amusing how everyone seems to be taking in this so called "China scare" where you find anything good happening for the Chinese people as a disaster and anything bad as a victory for you hypocracy.


I never said that. I simply want China to respect the rights of its own people as well as those of its neighbors, including Taiwan.


I wont bother with the argueing the ethnic arguement since anyoen with a brain realizes that victors right the history not the losers. If I may recall that there have been several territories by todays standards could be considered illegal invasion by the USA, UK, France etc etc.[/qoute]

That doesn't address the completely illogical and baseless claims by the CCP that Taiwan belongs to China.


The foray into Vietnam in 1979 I think could be considered more of a police action because of the Vietnamese invading Laos and Cambodia.


Punishing Viet Nam for ousting one of the most brutal regimes the planet has known since WWII? Or rewarding a brutal regime that was buddy-buddy with the nearly equally brutal Chinese regime?



posted on Sep, 12 2005 @ 09:24 PM
link   
Sorry, but just as hundreds of poll indicated, most Chinese people in mainland want to take Taiwan back.

Originally posted by ludahai

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
muahahaha.

Lol, had to laugh a little at that, its amusing how everyone seems to be taking in this so called "China scare" where you find anything good happening for the Chinese people as a disaster and anything bad as a victory for you hypocracy.


I never said that. I simply want China to respect the rights of its own people as well as those of its neighbors, including Taiwan.


I wont bother with the argueing the ethnic arguement since anyoen with a brain realizes that victors right the history not the losers. If I may recall that there have been several territories by todays standards could be considered illegal invasion by the USA, UK, France etc etc.[/qoute]

That doesn't address the completely illogical and baseless claims by the CCP that Taiwan belongs to China.


The foray into Vietnam in 1979 I think could be considered more of a police action because of the Vietnamese invading Laos and Cambodia.


Punishing Viet Nam for ousting one of the most brutal regimes the planet has known since WWII? Or rewarding a brutal regime that was buddy-buddy with the nearly equally brutal Chinese regime?



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 03:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by ludahai
Well, is it a democracy or not? You claimed that it was a democracy? Now you say that if it isn't, it is a good system anyway? Is it a democracy, or not?
Even IF Malaysia is 50% Chinese (it most certainly is NOT), Malaysia is also not a democracy, though it is closer than Singapore is.
The only democracies in the Pacific Asia region are: Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand and Cambodia (INA and CAM are both emerging democracies.)


i used the wrong word. i ment free speech.



Initially, the Manchus by-in-large DID welcome the Japanese due to the way that the Han were treating them. However, as time passed, and the brutality of Japanese rule became apparent to the people, their feelings of hostility grew. If they treated Manchuria like they did Taiwan, Manchurians would have a better feeling for the Japanese than they do. To this day, they despise the Japanese more than anyone else in China.


take your rubbish elsewhere. i think Han chinese despise japanese more than any other people in china. they did just kill only 30million chinese

i have never read any reports of manchus having any bad feelings to the occupying japanese.

the manchus were puppets of the japanese and we persecuted by chinese later on




So, you justify Chinese imperialism by saying that the Viet Namese were barbarians??? The notion that there wasn't a Viet polity before the arrival of the Chinese is incorrect, no doubt posited by your government "scholars". There were numerous Viet polities in what is today southern Guangdong, Guangxi and the Red River Valley. They were destroyed by the Chinese, modern Guangdong and Guangxi were depopulated of Viet people and the Red River valley was controlled by imperial China for a thousand years.


modern day principals of terrioty cannot be appiled to this. this happened in the days during the roman empire.

It was fighting for survival

How does the americans explain for taking over native american terrioty?




That is an interesting new definition of "invasion." You can send in your forces, but if you get your butts kicked, it isn't an invasion? Wow, new PC language from "ChiComs R Us"



a limited war to teach the vietnamese a lesson. if we were going to wage a war of agression than we would have sent in more than 120,000 men and used out airforce.


It is not new. these words getting to difficult?

Removed profanity. *Please don't circumvent the censors*

[edit on 13-9-2005 by sanctum]



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 05:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite

i used the wrong word. i ment free speech.


It is debatable whether Singapore or Malaysia have free speech, but that IS a far cry from saying that they are both democracies.


take your rubbish elsewhere. i think Han chinese despise japanese more than any other people in china. they did just kill only 30million chinese


Gee, Mao Zedong killed more than 30 million Chinese. Why aren't you mad at him?

Have you ever been to Manchuria? Initially, they welcomed the Japanese due to the way that they were being treated by the Chinese since the fall of the Qing Dynasty. Remember, the Chinese considered them to be foreigners. However, when it became obvious that Japanese rule was becoming more brutal than even the Chinese had been to the Manchus, they became more and more bitter toward the Japanese, a bitterness that remains to this day.


i have never read any reports of manchus having any bad feelings to the occupying japanese.

the manchus were puppets of the japanese and we persecuted by chinese later on


They were persecuted by the Chinese both before and after the Japanese occupation.



modern day principals of terrioty cannot be appiled to this. this happened in the days during the roman empire.


True, but you can't say the same concerning Taiwan. Modern principles of territoriality rule there, and there, CHina has no claim.

Same with the South China Sea. According to the Law of the Sea, China's claim goes up in smoke.


It was fighting for survival


China was fighting for survival against a small kingdom to its south? Dai Viet never threatened China's survival. It was the steppe peoples of the north who continually threatened the Chinese, NOT the Viet Namese.


How does the americans explain for taking over native american terrioty?


Actually, the U.S. gained all of its territorial claims from European nations who were regarded as having legal title to the land. You should perhaps ask that question of the English, French, Spanish, and Mexicans.


a limited war to teach the vietnamese a lesson. if we were going to wage a war of agression than we would have sent in more than 120,000 men and used out airforce.


The lesson was to stop overthrowing brutal dictatorships because they are the best friends Beijing has? The rest of the world heard that lesson, LOUD AND CLEAR. Beijing has to invade others to preserve their dictator friends, or else China wouldn't have any friends.



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by ludahai
It is debatable whether Singapore or Malaysia have free speech, but that IS a far cry from saying that they are both democracies.


i kind of exaggerated there.



Gee, Mao Zedong killed more than 30 million Chinese. Why aren't you mad at him?


because that never happened.



Have you ever been to Manchuria? Initially, they welcomed the Japanese due to the way that they were being treated by the Chinese since the fall of the Qing Dynasty. Remember, the Chinese considered them to be foreigners. However, when it became obvious that Japanese rule was becoming more brutal than even the Chinese had been to the Manchus, they became more and more bitter toward the Japanese, a bitterness that remains to this day.


I still dont care what you say about their feelings towards japanese. they welcomed them in and were their puppets.

they are traditors in my eyes



They were persecuted by the Chinese both before and after the Japanese occupation.


and HAN chinese and Han chinese persecuted each other. whats the difference




True, but you can't say the same concerning Taiwan. Modern principles of territoriality rule there, and there, CHina has no claim.


i think you know that the civil war never ended?. even america , taiwans biggest supported, supports the one china policy



Same with the South China Sea. According to the Law of the Sea, China's claim goes up in smoke.


Law of discovery. chinese markers dating from the HAN dyasty are still on some islands



China was fighting for survival against a small kingdom to its south? Dai Viet never threatened China's survival. It was the steppe peoples of the north who continually threatened the Chinese, NOT the Viet Namese.


needed land to continue to grow. we couldn't expand north any more further so we decided to go south.



Actually, the U.S. gained all of its territorial claims from European nations who were regarded as having legal title to the land. You should perhaps ask that question of the English, French, Spanish, and Mexicans.


If they recieved the land ilegally, why dont they give it back?

Just like chinas claim to tibet




The lesson was to stop overthrowing brutal dictatorships because they are the best friends Beijing has? The rest of the world heard that lesson, LOUD AND CLEAR. Beijing has to invade others to preserve their dictator friends, or else China wouldn't have any friends.


Why did the vietnamese invade cambodia then?


Hasn't every shown they are willing to support a bloodthristy dictatorship?

south vietnamese government. ring any bells



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 07:46 AM
link   
Malaysia is a democracy:

www.windowstomalaysia.com.my...

In strict terms, it's a constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary democracy, exactly the same as the UK.



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chris McGee
Malaysia is a democracy:

www.windowstomalaysia.com.my...

In strict terms, it's a constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary democracy, exactly the same as the UK.


It is not a democracy in practice when opposition leaders are rounded up and thrown in jail. The notion that Malaysia is a democracy is quite laughable. Citing a Malaysian government website is NOT convincing. No one who has ever been there would consider it democratic.



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 01:45 AM
link   
i knew it. it is a demoracy



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
i knew it. it is a demoracy


Freedom House ranks their political liberties as a 4 (out of 7) - 1 and 2 consdered as being free.

They have "free" elections, but they are not "fair."

Ethnic Chinese are FORCED to join UMNO or not be involved in politics at all. They are not even allowed to question the New Policy, that has given ethnic Malays preferential treatment for 35 years.

While in many respects, it is more advanced in areas of freedom and democracy than China is, it certainly is not democratic, at least not yet.

www.freedomhouse.org...

see page 50 of the PDF file (page 396 overall) to read about Malaysia.



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 03:52 PM
link   
Taiwan was where the Nationalists retreated to in 1949, now we are reconsidering peaceful unification inorder to save lives. But that doesn't detract from the fact that it is part of Han China, always has been and always will be. They speak a subdialect of Mandarin, they write with traditonal chinese, they eat our kind of food and share our cultures and religions, how are they not Chinese?

Tibet has always been a vassal state to the Emperors, just more of an advisory basis because of the distances and the religious significance of Tibet. However that doesn't detract form the fact that if things had gone differently the Nationalists would have invaded Tibet as well. Tibet is also a part of China historically, it is "Our Land" under Heaven.






top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join