It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Can China Invade Taiwan?

page: 173
1
<< 170  171  172    174  175  176 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 25 2005 @ 12:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom


Next, I think that whatshisname arguement is slightly in the wrong in regarding chinese culture overseas, though a large difference between Taiwan and them is that the Chinese in San Fran or Vancover left China to pursue a different life in North America,


I talked about Bendigo, in Australia. The Chinese there were (originally) for the same reason as the Chinese in SF, they were chasing a gold rush in the 1850s. It had nothing to do with "a different life in North America". I used SF as an example of "non-culture". If Bendigo and SF have no Chinese culture, why do they have the longest imperial dragons in the world? Why do the lions dance every year to wake them?



the Chinese in Taiwan did not leave China they were taken from China so its only natural we want them back to come home.


Really, the retreating KMT were "taken" from China were they?




posted on Oct, 25 2005 @ 02:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
Doesn't matter what generation they are. Now who's appearing ignorant? So, the ethnic Chinese of Bendigo don't follow their own culture, then why assume the ethnic Chinese of Taiwan do? Or the ethnic Chinese of San Francisco? Hell, maybe all your time in Australia has removed you from your culture.


Actually i got gerneations wrong.

5th-6th generation. the average years assimilating to australian culture is over 150years.


The difference between your comparison of chinese in taiwan or chinese in San fransico is because the bendigo population is much smaller and spread out.

In San fransico they have whole streets full of chinese, And the chiense in San fransico have many conecctions to other chinese overseas.

Taiwan is fully chinese culture, live, speak like a chiense.

While the chinese in Bendigo have no connection to outside chiense or other overseas chinese




Ever lived in Bendigo? Read extended media reports about it? Spoken to people who live or have lived there?


I have been to bendigo(i dont think i know anyone that hasn't)

Anyway people that live in Bendigo dont represent the average australian opinion. located deep with-in australis inside it is isolated from mainstream australian culture.




I was turning your argument back on you. Do pay attention.


Turning it back on me? I never made that argument



Aah, even although we have never met, had no extended discussions of the Australian political scene or corresponded over a period of years, you know how I think, with such confidence that you can make declarations about me without seeing how they might apply to you.


Is this sarcasm? i seriously dont know what to make of the above comment.



You can also assume that I voted for Mark Latham, without knowing which electorate I vote in or even if I voted ALP, but I'll keep the technical lesson for another time.


I just assumed that you did because the other parties have little votes(3% max?)

so labour or the coalition.



That is controlling someone's life. And they control the media, which is also controlling someone's life.


No it isn't.

They dont tell you what to eat or how much you make



For someone living in Australia you have a poor understanding of Aussie slang. The verb was slag (to spit or insult (n) waste metal), the preposition was off, to slag off - to insult, to slag on - to spit.


Because no one here talk likes that. maybe in bendigo but not over in melbourne

If you slag on him then you will be arrested.




The Chinese don't need to resort to violence to get their views across, they suffer from the government's violence when they try peacefully. At least the Taiwanese are able to discuss issues that arouse such passion and that's what matters.


The government is chinese



[edit on 25-10-2005 by chinawhite]



posted on Oct, 25 2005 @ 02:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
true a majority favor the status quo, but also don't support complete What about Hawaii? They have a sessesion movement but America


THis has been brought up before in this thread. The movement in Hawaii is a very small one. I visiti there alot and have friends and family that call the Islands thier home. However, the constitution does not have a provision for a state leaving. If Hawaii voted to leave the Union, could something been done from a contitutional standpoint? It would be in the courts for a long time. Lots of questions like debt percentage, nationalities etc.



posted on Oct, 25 2005 @ 01:30 PM
link   
Howlrunner I wasn't refering to you, I have this problem often that people will occasionally thnk I'm refering to them when I refer to someone else.

Also, how does a quote box say "The Middle Kangdom" without editing it?

Next there has been a time when a state(s) have tried to leave the Union, in fact the Confederate States had tried to leave the Union and the responce was for the Union to crush them after a bitter 4 year war.

There have been plenty of times throughout history where a province have tried to leave but failed because the nation controlling them crushed them.

As for Taiwan, the aboriginal people's in it are a minority within a mostly Han Chinese population.

Next as I said before I recognize that the communities in Vancover and San francisco do a good job preserving their culture.

Finally Bodebliss I am not name calling I am simply stating a fact considering your behaviour on this thread.

[edit on 25-10-2005 by The Middle Kingdom]



posted on Oct, 25 2005 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV

Originally posted by Taishyou

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
My point still stands. Being a Chinese national, or living in China is no reason to automatically assume one has more knowledge of Taiwan or the situation in Taiwan than any other foreigner.

Did you even read what I wrote? I only said the source of information of certain members living in China may be from common knowledge rather than from specifically searched web links. I didn't say either source of information (these being common knowledge vs specifically searched web links) is more accurate, more unbiased, or more in quantity or quality.

Is exactly what you said.
And again, I say "consider the source."

I said "neither source of information (these being from common knowledge or from specifically searched web links) is higher in accuracy, more unbiased, or more in quantity or quality"

You think I said "Chinese people in China know about Taiwan from common knowledge which is a better source (



posted on Oct, 25 2005 @ 03:34 PM
link   
ANYWAYS, here's something about the CCP's argument which I think is not very popularly known or well understood

The CCP's argument about their ownership of Taiwan is based on the Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of Treaties a.k.a Succession of States Theory, which was adopted August 22, 1979 by the United Nations and entered force on November 6, 1996.

Here's the whole dang treaty if anyone wants, it's like 50 articles long
www.un.org...
Basically the whole thing talks about what happens to possessions and territories of a state when it is replaced by a successor state. That means, when a revolution happens, what to do with all the territory and possessions of the previous government when a new government takes over. The treaty says, if a new government takes over, all territories and possessions of the previous government is automatically handed over to the new government.

Following WWII, Japan handed Taiwan over to the KMT, and the island became territory of the Republic of China which then included both the mainland and the island. This was part of the Cairo Declaration in 1943, which is a demand made by the Allies to Japan that Taiwan be returned to the ROC if Japan is defeated. So after the war, Taiwan belonged to the ROC under the KMT.

Then in 1949, the CCP overthrew the KMT on the mainland, but the KMT was not completely defeated and they escaped to Taiwan. It wasn't a complete revolution of the whole ROC, but more like a 90% revolution (since Taiwan is still ROC) and the civil war was left unfinished since.

From then up to 1971, the UN did not recognise the PRC as the legiminate government of China but rather it still considers both the mainland and Taiwan to be territory of the ROC under the KMT

Then on October 25, 1971, the UN general assembly passed resolution 2758 shifting recognition of China from the ROC to PRC. It's not exacly clear what they meant by "China" (whether or not it includes Taiwan), but technically since Taiwan was included in the ROC and the ROC was then referred to as China, then "China" in this resolution should refer to both the mainland and island.

However, at that time the Succession of States Theory was not in place, so nobody knew what exactly they should do with Taiwan, which was a possession of the ROC but was not under the control of PRC, so they just left it hanging

Then in 1996, when the Succession of States theory came to effect, the CCP said "hey, in 1971 ROC (mainland + island) was replaced by the PRC, so Taiwan, which was in ROC's possession, should belong to the PRC"

[edit on 25-10-2005 by Taishyou]



posted on Oct, 25 2005 @ 03:45 PM
link   
if China believes they own Taiwan then they should enforce dat belief by taking it over by force right? i mean the Taiwanese people would easily welcome them right? why is it so hard to retake Taiwan wen its their own people? why point weapons on yer own territory?



posted on Oct, 25 2005 @ 05:58 PM
link   
Back when the recognition of China was shifted from the ROC to the PRC, I'm sure the CCP did try to enforce their rule on Taiwan but obviously the KMT is not just going to leave. And they have their own military on the island too. It's not until recently that the PRC has come close to building an adequate military force for an invasion.

Also it is my belief that the CCP would rather get this resolved peacefully and use war as last resort because a war would be very costy as well as worsen their reputation

[edit on 25-10-2005 by Taishyou]



posted on Oct, 25 2005 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by bodebliss

Bodebliss, you should not even be arguing here anymore, you have been "Pwned"

Until you can honestly answer my question and STOP evading it for the 8th time, I don't think ANYONE here can take you seriously.

Someone just read the recent posts that I made and read Bodebliss' replies... It is so funny the way he avoids my questionsn and calls me childish for asking a VERY appropiate question to his VERY unappropiate comment.


This part of your post makes you sound Like You Are 5 Years Old!

Did your mom let you get on the internet again? How sweet of her.




His Comment: "It will be a short war filled with nuke exchanges.

You'll hurl your 23 nukes and we'll hurl our 7,000 10 megaton warheads."


That is the US's stated policy that it's always ready to use all it's nuclear arsenal.








[edit on 10/24/2005 by bodebliss]


You are pathetic... You have to talk crap because I gave you a good argument and STILL you have evaded my question for the 10th time. Wow, Bodebliss if you are at least slightly intelligent, you know you have been owned.



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 02:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Taishyou
ANYWAYS, here's something about the CCP's argument which I think is not very popularly known or well understood

The CCP's argument about their ownership of Taiwan is based on the Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of Treaties a.k.a Succession of States Theory, which was adopted August 22, 1979 by the United Nations and entered force on November 6, 1996.

Here's the whole dang treaty if anyone wants, it's like 50 articles long
www.un.org...
Basically the whole thing talks about what happens to possessions and territories of a state when it is replaced by a successor state. That means, when a revolution happens, what to do with all the territory and possessions of the previous government when a new government takes over. The treaty says, if a new government takes over, all territories and possessions of the previous government is automatically handed over to the new government.

Following WWII, Japan handed Taiwan over to the KMT, and the island became territory of the Republic of China which then included both the mainland and the island. This was part of the Cairo Declaration in 1943, which is a demand made by the Allies to Japan that Taiwan be returned to the ROC if Japan is defeated. So after the war, Taiwan belonged to the ROC under the KMT.

Then in 1949, the CCP overthrew the KMT on the mainland, but the KMT was not completely defeated and they escaped to Taiwan. It wasn't a complete revolution of the whole ROC, but more like a 90% revolution (since Taiwan is still ROC) and the civil war was left unfinished since.

From then up to 1971, the UN did not recognise the PRC as the legiminate government of China but rather it still considers both the mainland and Taiwan to be territory of the ROC under the KMT

Then on October 25, 1971, the UN general assembly passed resolution 2758 shifting recognition of China from the ROC to PRC. It's not exacly clear what they meant by "China" (whether or not it includes Taiwan), but technically since Taiwan was included in the ROC and the ROC was then referred to as China, then "China" in this resolution should refer to both the mainland and island.

However, at that time the Succession of States Theory was not in place, so nobody knew what exactly they should do with Taiwan, which was a possession of the ROC but was not under the control of PRC, so they just left it hanging

Then in 1996, when the Succession of States theory came to effect, the CCP said "hey, in 1971 ROC (mainland + island) was replaced by the PRC, so Taiwan, which was in ROC's possession, should belong to the PRC"




It's an interesting way to look at it , Taishyou.

Here is my view. The Japanese signed a treaty, The San Francisco treaty, giving up all rights to Taiwan this treaty took effect 4/28/1952.

They signed a peace treaty with the ROC giving the ROC possession of Taiwan which took effect 8/5/1952.

The part where Japan gave sovereignty of Taiwan to the ROC is void because you can't give away something you don't possess any more.

www.taiwanbasic.com...

www.taiwanbasic.com...

This has been argued here a couple times (maybe more) Here.

www.abovetopsecret.com...







"Finally Bodebliss I am not name calling I am simply stating a fact considering your behaviour on this thread. "

You can try to dish it out , but you can't take it. It appears there may be room to grow there. What do you think?

Your fact, my fiction.



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 02:12 AM
link   
"You have to talk crap because I gave you a good argument "


You have come up with no arguments that an adult would recognize. Try harder. I'm sure if you work at it you will be able to better yourself.











[edit on 10/26/2005 by bodebliss]



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 03:00 AM
link   
Knock it off the two of you OR I will start handing out more than a terse message like halloween candy



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 03:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by bodebliss
You have come up with no arguments that an adult would recognize. Try harder. I'm sure if you work at it you will be able to better yourself.


He actually asked you polictly a few times and brought up his question about nuclear weapons even more.

Now bodebliss are you going to answer them?



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 06:23 AM
link   
I'm sure that's the way you would see things, chinawhite.

I don't and that is my prerogative.







[edit on 10/26/2005 by bodebliss]



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 09:04 AM
link   
Actually I mentioned the succesion of states theory several times a few pages ago.

Bodebliss there comes a time in everyone's life where they have to stop talking. or in this case typing.

"You have come up with no arguments that an adult would recognize. Try harder. I'm sure if you work at it you will be able to better yourself. "

Comments like that are childish and patronizing and have no place in an open discussion.

"It's an interesting way to look at it , Taishyou.

Here is my view. The Japanese signed a treaty, The San Francisco treaty, giving up all rights to Taiwan this treaty took effect 4/28/1952.

They signed a peace treaty with the ROC giving the ROC possession of Taiwan which took effect 8/5/1952.

The part where Japan gave sovereignty of Taiwan to the ROC is void because you can't give away something you don't possess any more. "

Wrong, Taiwan was legally Japanese since the first Sino-Japanese war, thus Japanese still has to legally cede ALL rights and CLAIMS to the island that the government or some corporate bodies may still have for the Island. Or else Japan could still claim it and sieze it in some future conflict (a hypothetical situation trust me).

Thus you can cede something away even if you don't physically still own it.

Like in the late 1700's when France ceded New France (AKA the province of Quebec for the historically/geographically challenged) to England in the Quebec Act dispite the fact that Quebec had already have been militarily defeated and Quebec was occupied by the English.

So your arguement while theoretically correct Bodebliss in reality is technically incorrect in internation law. And still doesn't change the fact that by International Law that Island belongs to us regardless of the views of the populas.

[edit on 26-10-2005 by The Middle Kingdom]



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 12:47 PM
link   
"So your arguement while theoretically correct Bodebliss in reality is technically incorrect in internation law. And still doesn't change the fact that by International Law that Island belongs to us regardless of the views of the populas. "

Well the President of Taiwan disagrees with you. The purpose of the lies of the KMT and CCP is to blur the lines so that China can annex Taiwan.


""The real meaning of `retrocession' is Taiwanese having the freedom to rule their own country," he said."
Source 1

"The 1951 San Francisco Treaty states that Japan renounces all right, title and claims to Formosa and the Pescadores. But nowhere does it specify that sovereignty was returned to the Republic of China (ROC), let alone the People's Republic of China"

Source 2

My guess is if you tell a lie enough times to enough people maybe, maybe someone will believe you! This is the CCP's tactic. Arm yourself with the truth and you can maintain your freedom!

Source 3



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 04:16 PM
link   
So what if the president of Taiwan disagrees with me or PRC policy? Another one may very well be elected who does agree with me, what are you going to do about it? Invade Taiwan to force another of your "regime changes"?

When Japan made peace with the ROC they didn't make peace with ROC they made peace with the entirety of Zhonggou or else Japan would still be at war with us, and they made peace under the guidlines of the Potsdam and Cairo declearations finalized with the signing of surrender on the battleship Missouri in 1945.

www.ndl.go.jp...


8 The terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out and Japanese sovereignty shall be limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku and such minor islands as we determine.
(emphasis mine)



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 06:39 PM
link   
The Potsdam Declaration is another declaration. It is on the same level as Cairo Declaration I assume.

Also, that statement is talking about Japan, it doesn't mention Taiwan and ROC, etc.



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 06:51 PM
link   
The Cairo declaration said the Japan had to return Manchuria, Formosa, etc to ROC. Since China had a revolution, the PRC is now the current government. And according to the succesion of states theory PRC gets all lands that belonged to previous governements such as Taiwan.



posted on Oct, 26 2005 @ 06:56 PM
link   
I'm Taiwanese. When people ask me if I'm Chinese, I say no, I'm Taiwanese. If China ever does INVADE (And I use Invade, not reunite on purpose) I will still tell people I'm Taiwanese. So deal with it.

If China wasn't pointing missles, I would say "declare independence." Since they are pointing missles, I say "status quo"

Regarding Japanese... In an earlier post, somebody mentioned Taiwanese not assimilating into Japanese culture when Japan took over... OH REALLY? And you know this how?

Fact: ALL citizens in Taiwan over the age of 60 can read and speak Japanese FLUENTLY. In fact, everyone living outside of Taipei over 60 can speak Japanese better than Mandarin (The "official" dialect brought over by the KMT). Many cannot even speak Mandarin. They speak the Native Taiwanese (Ming-Nan to the mainlanders) or Japanese.

So just because you live in China and watch China's news about Taiwan, doesn't mean you understand or know anything about Taiwan at all. YOU DON'T LIVE IN TAIWAN.

Oh one more thing. Talk about BITING THE HAND THAT FEEDS YOU. Taiwan is the biggest investor in China of Manufacturing Knowledge, Capital, and Skills. Just see how many factories are Taiwanese owned. So we contribute all these benefits to China. The U.S. is the largest consumer of products from China. So without Taiwanese know-how and U.S. consumption, China would be a joke. Yes, biting the hand that feeds you. Bad doggy. So get off your high horse. The MAJOR factor powering China's economy is Taiwanese Brains and U.S. Money.

My two cents.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 170  171  172    174  175  176 >>

log in

join