Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Can China Invade Taiwan?

page: 180
1
<< 177  178  179    181 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 12:19 PM
link   
I think your confusing Japan with China, whether the UN recognized the KR in Cambodia is irrelevent, they attacked Vietnam and got invaded by Vietnam, we tried to prevent it but the PLA as I said got a bloody noise because we don't like to leave our own borders.




posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
The British separated Kuweit from Iraq when they partitianed the Ottoman Empire into Mandates, historically Kuweit has been part of Mesopetania.


Well Jerusalem should be the capital of Greater Arabia then. No, wait, before it belonged to Saladin the Assyrians had claim to some of the area. As did the Akkadites, and the Petrans. Mesopotamia is not Iraq, although you could say Sumer is. Mesopotamia is one the the Cradles of Civilisation, the area between and surrounding the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. Over time that has included Ur, Babylon (capital of Persia) etc. By the 19th century Persia was what is now Iran, it didn't even own its own ancient capital anymore. Heck, historically Bavaria should be a soveriegn nation, Gibralter belongs to Spain and half of southern Vietnam is Cambodian territory. Maybe Italy should lay claim to half of France and the Middle East...


Well then give me a link to any post related to a protest vs Russian chauvinism with the Chechnyans, not created within the last or next 24 hours preferably within the last month or so.


Clearly you are using an older definition of chauvinism to the one I use. I wouldn't call it chauvinism. I'd call it brutal oppression and land piracy.


your logic is similar to saying that 51% of Americans voted for Bush and will keep voting for him and his party, however even if Americans did indeed vote for Bush in 2004 (assuming the elections weren't rigged) it still doesn't mean they'll vote Republican AGAIN and AGAIN. People change their minds.


Yes, you might want to remember that last sentence.


Yes I am referring to his guns, many consider it an attempt t put together a space program that doesn't have to depend on the billions say put into NASA or Russia's Strategic Rocket Force. And Iraq did indeed have quite alot of respect in the Arab world, they were the leading miliary and economic power and carried prestige. The space program and launching a sateilleite would only have increased it.


Iraq's construction of Dr Gerald Bull's superguns had nothing to do with space and everything to do with whomping Tel Aviv, or any other unfriendly regional capital. The space program, which it never was, involved tying multiple Scuds together to create an ICBM from an IRBM. Although the launcher (kind of) worked, the re-entry did not. There was no space program.


I'm just saying Kuweit was "argueably" Iraq's


No, it wasn't. Just as the Falklands were not Argentine.


Whatever Bush is saying is not the Issue, whatever the case of human rights there may be Bush still recognizes Taiwan and so did Colin Powel who him and Kissinger were the only American State Department Ministers who I can respect.


Of course you respect Kissinger, he had nothing but disdain for democracy. Next time, check your post before you post. This looks like you're agreeing with me over Taiwan's independence. Plus, at cabinet level in the US tthey're called Secretaries, not Ministers.


I think we'll see not a single major nation actually recognizes Taiwan.


Who said anything about major?


What does the Khmer Rouge have to do with this? They had they're nation for a while then picked a fight with someone who was much bigger then they were and lacked the ability to get Russia to help and the PLA was not in any shape for peace keeping at that time and got a bloody nose.


The KR were anathema to the USSR. The USSR's local client was VN. Phnom Penh's only backer was Beijing, under the Gang of Four. You were highlighting the UN's recognition of your claim. So I gave you another example of UN recognition.

As for the PLA peacekeeping:


The thing with Iraq though is that the West Promised an Arabic fedaration and broke their deal, they're weren't any succesions were the succesion of states theory would apply, however Arguebly I'm not saying its completely true, Iraq did have a claim over Kuweit according to how the partitions were managed.

"Russian" Chauvinism is basically the belief that Russia is destined to lead the Pan-Slav's or russiye. However this turns into heavy handed Russian colonalization then heavy handed Russian control over their affairs during the days of the USSR, and now some of them are stll puppets.

Whatever Saddam planed to use his gun for is not the issue it is arguably an attempt to create an infant space program. That it might be used to knock out Tel Aviv is like saying that Star Wars is meant to defend against the Soviet Union. Its unimportant to the issue, the issue is that it could have been used for a space program, it would increase prestige in the arab world (Tel Aviv or not). That is undenyable.

Oh? How so, the Falklands could also be aruable so but due to my ignorance of the matter I'll leave it at that.

Sorry I must've misposted thanks for the heads up, Colin Powel recognizes only the PRC as being the sole representative of China and agrees that Taiwan is a renegade province that just oh so happens to currently aid US interests in its state of Limbo.

As for Kissinger, you do realize that its not him alone that sets policy, NOONE in that period had anything but disdain for democracy if you'll care to notice America's own chauvinistic attitudes towards emerging leftist democracies. Kissinger prefered to work towards detent with the USSR through realpolitik which is the only respectable means of determining foreign policy, doing it based on idealism is unworkable and always leads to failure.

And for your information only these nations matter: China, Japan, EU, America, and Russia. The nations sitting on the security council and a few other economic giants, are the only nations whose opinions MATTER in politics, what some small nation says is irrelevent to a nation who can veto it.

And last time I checked each one of those nations mentioned recognizes that there can only be one China. english.people.com.cn... and Bush confirms it.



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom

We just had about 2-3 pages of discussion on this please reread the last 10 or so pages, Taiwan ie Formosa was given back to China ie The Republic of China in 1945.

There was a revolution and the CCP took power away from the GMD and expelled them from the mainland. Now we are China and according to succesion of states theory Taiwan is also part of China, unless by your logic the ROC has no claim over Taiwan either.



Actually, Taiwan was never legally given to the ROC. The ROC was exercising its powers as a belligerant occupier on behalf of the Allies pending the final status being determined by a peace treaty. Technically, de jure sovereignty of Taiwan still resided in Tokyo until that treaty took effect. It was signed in 1951 and entered into full force in 1952. By that time, the ROC government had fallen and was in exile in Taiwan. Once the treaty took effect, that occupation became null and void (legally) because the island was not transferred from Japan to China. According to international law, for a territory to be transferred from one state to another, there must be a legally binding properly ratified peace treaty that SPECIFICALLY has articles regarding a transfer of sovereignty. In the Treaty of SF, Japan surrenders its sovereign claim, but in no way is there a transfer to China (either the ROC or the PRC.) As such, the UN Charter guarantees the right of the Taiwanese people the right to self-determination. The KMT criminals denied the Taiwanese people this right. Now the KMT criminals want to collude with the ChiCom criminals in Peiping to continue to deny what is rightfully due the Taiwanese people.



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Please reframe from calling Beijing Peiping, I consider that insulting, next what you say is completely moot, according to the Potsdam Declaration it was to be given back to "China" and at that time ROC was China, and in 1945 ROC occupied Taiwan, there was no doubt then or now that Taiwan belongs to "China" and since 1949 "China" is now the PRC and offically so since 1972 with the "One China Policy". And since 1998 with the "Succesion of states theory" when a revolution happens to a nation that nation has claim to all lands previously owned by the previous government and thus Taiwan having been owned by ROC now belongs to PRC.

Also please reframe from Tom Clancy speak such as "ChiComms" its just a modern word for "Chink" and no less insulting.

And finally your talk about the KMT (GMD is the proper prounciation) and the PRC being in bed together is simply funny, imagine bitter enemies in a civil war suddenly becommng allies lol. Course' I'm not denying that they're criminals you've just confirmed some.. lets see since 1929.... 76 years of Anti-GMD propoganda thanks.

[edit on 22-11-2005 by The Middle Kingdom]



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
Whatever Saddam planed to use his gun for is not the issue it is arguably an attempt to create an infant space program. That it might be used to knock out Tel Aviv is like saying that Star Wars is meant to defend against the Soviet Union. Its unimportant to the issue, the issue is that it could have been used for a space program, it would increase prestige in the arab world (Tel Aviv or not). That is undenyable.


It is easily deniable. Saddam's intentions are the whole issue and the only issue. It wasn't that it might be used to knock out Tel Aviv, that's all it was for. Do you know what happened when the Israelis paid a visit to Osirak?

Star Wars wasn't meant to defend against the Soviet Union, it was meant to bankrupt the Soviet Union. Which it did. The US didn't need it for a space program, they already had the strongest space program on earth. Your analogies are becoming even wider of the mark.


As for Kissinger, you do realize that its not him alone that sets policy, NOONE in that period had anything but disdain for democracy if you'll care to notice America's own chauvinistic attitudes towards emerging leftist democracies. Kissinger prefered to work towards detent with the USSR through realpolitik which is the only respectable means of determining foreign policy, doing it based on idealism is unworkable and always leads to failure.


Kissinger was the driving force behind the recognition of Lon Nol after the coup against Sihanouk. He was the driving force behind the secret, and illegal, bombing of Cambodia. He was the driving force behind the recognition of Pinochet after his coup against the democratially-elected Salvador Allende. He was the driving force behind the US shift away from India and towards Pakistan, destabilising South Asia in the process.

Which one of those was a Realpolitik success? Which one of those promoted detente?


And for your information only these nations matter: China, Japan, EU, America, and Russia.


And for your information the EU not a nation. Japan doesn't matter, it can't enforce its foreign policy through force of arms and its economy is still in the grip of a ten-year slump, it hasn't recovered from the bubble bursting. China doesn't matter, yet. It's still attempting to find its way through the world of 3rd-world aid assisted diplomacy. It's making all sorts of promises to African countries in return for their support. Wait until those countries call those debts due.

As for Chicomms...When I call a man black, I am describing him in easily recognisable terms. I am white, he is black, I am not saying ni@@er. When someone says Chicomms, they are describing the gov't in Beijing in easily identifiable terms. They are Chinese and they call themselves communist. If we want to be insulting we'll just say chink.

We call the Vietnamese Viets, to insult them is to call them Gooks. We call the Americans Yanks and the English Poms. There are some who come from south of the Mason-Dixie line who find Yank a dreadful insult, we don't care, all US citizens are tin tanks. If you come from north of Hadrian's Wall Pom is a real insult, they're Jocks.

edit: and keep your posters straight. I'm not confusing China with anyone.

[edit on 22-11-2005 by HowlrunnerIV]



posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
Please reframe from calling Beijing Peiping, I consider that insulting, next what you say is completely moot,


Why should I care what you call Peiping? How many people in China call Taipei "Taibei" and how about your newspapers now using Taipei, China? People here don't want to be called that, but you don't care. What about the people in Korea who want 首爾 to be the Chinese name for Seoul and now 漢城? As far as I know, the Chinese government still uses the old name despite the fact that the Korean government has asked them to use their new name for the city. Since the Chinese have no such regard, why could I care that the Chinese say? Heck, you would hate my blog. I use the phrase Chinese Peiping there. We also still say Peiping Duck in Taiwan as well.


according to the Potsdam Declaration it was to be given back to "China" and at that time ROC was China,


As I have said elsewhere, the Potsdam Proclamation is not a legally binding document, but rather is a state of intention. A properly ratified peace treaty what specifically states the transfer is required under public international law for territory to be transferred from one state to another. Potsdam is NOT a peace treaty.


and in 1945 ROC occupied Taiwan, there was no doubt then or now that Taiwan belongs to "China" and since 1949 "China" is now the PRC and offically so since 1972 with the "One China Policy".


There is plenty of doubt. The ROC occupied Taiwan on behalf of the Allies pending a final resolution, which can only be determined by a peace treaty. The ROC was in belligerant occupation of Taiwan pending that peace treaty. De jure sovereignty over Taiwan still resided with the Japanese. When the Peace Treaty was ratified and took effect, the ROC occupation transformed from legal belligerant occupation to an illegal occupation. The people of Taiwan should have been granted the right to self-determination because Chinese occupation was never transformed to de jure sovereignty. Of course, the Chinese KMT (the official rendering of the political party - if you won't respect local uses in Taiwan, I don't respect local uses in China) criminals didn't allow that to happen.


And since 1998 with the "Succesion of states theory" when a revolution happens to a nation that nation has claim to all lands previously owned by the previous government and thus Taiwan having been owned by ROC now belongs to PRC.


Succession of States theory is far older than 1998. However, it is irrelevant because when the Chinese Civil War ended in 1949, Taiwan was still technically under Japanese de jure soveriegnty.


Also please reframe from Tom Clancy speak such as "ChiComms" its just a modern word for "Chink" and no less insulting.


ChiCom is simply short for Chinese Communist. If you don't like it, abandon your Communist, totalitarian, expansionist form of government.


And finally your talk about the KMT (GMD is the proper prounciation) and the PRC being in bed together is simply funny, imagine bitter enemies in a civil war suddenly becommng allies lol. Course' I'm not denying that they're criminals you've just confirmed some.. lets see since 1929.... 76 years of Anti-GMD propoganda thanks.


The KMT (the proper rendition for the Chinese KMT - NOT GMD) has no choice. They have been steadily losing popularity in Taiwan since the mid 1990s. Their candidates are in the minority for the first time in the electoral history of Taiwan (a fact that began last year). Their only hope for long term power in Taiwan is the CCP. Without the cooperation of the CCP, they would forever be a minority party in Taiwan. They are trying to present their good relations with the CCP as a reason to vote for them. Their denial of funds to the GIO, MAC and for arms purchases are in the direct interest of China and the CCP, NOT Taiwan.



posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 02:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
As for Chicomms...When I call a man black, I am describing him in easily recognisable terms. I am white, he is black, I am not saying ni@@er. When someone says Chicomms, they are describing the gov't in Beijing in easily identifiable terms. They are Chinese and they call themselves communist. If we want to be insulting we'll just say chink.


A easily word for australians are bogons, skips. But do they refer to themselves like that?

No they have names like aussie. which they created themselves.

Chicom is offesive to many on-line chiense like the word chink. It is degratory because when a member say that it is meant to make you feel the other person is worse or in a sense evil. Most members use Chicom to refer to indivual members or groups of members not the chinese government

These other names were given to them and not home-made.

Like the names curry, jap, paki



We call the Vietnamese Viets, to insult them is to call them Gooks.


Viets call themselves viets. they themselves thought of that name.

I have many viet friends any it is a complement to them

[edit on 23-11-2005 by chinawhite]



posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 03:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
A easily word for australians are bogons, skips. But do they refer to themselves like that?


Bogan is an Australian slang term used in a derogatary form to refer to working class people who listen to AC/DC, wear stretch denim jeans, check shirts and ugg boots. To anyone from a another country it is meaningless gobbledigook.

Skip is a term that Asians have tried to apply to Aussies as an insult. It doesn't work. Skippy was so long ago that almost no-one remembers it.


No they have names like aussie. which they created themselves.


and your point is? Some black people use the word ni@@er, too.


Chicom is offesive to many on-line chiense like the word chink. It is degratory because when a member say that it is meant to make you feel the other person is worse or in a sense evil. Most members use Chicom to refer to indivual members or groups of members not the chinese government

These other names were given to them and not home-made.

Like the names curry, jap, paki


In the UK Paki is an insult. In Australia it is not. Have you ever watched the Benson and Hedges/VB World Series?

As for the others, Nip is offensive, Jap has pretty much lost its offensive nature, it's simply a short form of Japanese, it is not a racially-based insult when we describe a Toyota, for instance, as Jap-crap . And if you're talking about Indians then they're called Curry-munchers, not curries.




We call the Vietnamese Viets, to insult them is to call them Gooks.


Viets call themselves viets. they themselves thought of that name.

I have many viet friends any it is a complement to them


Oh, for God's sake, would you read before you post?



posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 08:26 PM
link   
GMD is short for "Goumindang" which is the proper prounciation. Now Peiping is the GMD way of saying Beijing when they had occupied it that is what I find pronouncing, as for Seoul, c'mon english people call Moskva Moscow and I don't see and Russians complaining.

Next, please remember for those reading my posts I generally don't mention who I'm directing my posts to, sometime I direct it to one person and another part at someone else if they is something mentioned which has nothing to do with you I was probly not directing it at you and this is just the general "you".

Next, if the GMD occupation of Taiwan is an illegal occupation how come the GMD are a legal political party? How come the Allies didn''t recognize this as so and "force" the GMD to leave Taiwan or become more democratic and no kill 20,000 peaceful protestors?

Because it wasn't illegal, ROC was given Taiwan when they were China and now we are China and we want Taiwan back because legally it is ours, if what you said is true then how come NONE of the major nations with any kind of say confronting this? GWB, possibly one of the biggest American Imperialists I've seen even testifies to his determination to honour the One China Policy?

Also the "Taiwanese people" no more exist then Palistinians, they;re Chinese/Japanese colonists who since the 16th centuary colonized Taiwan, and with the 1898 Sino-Japanese war Japanese infusion of colonists. Any Abiriganols in Taiwan are probably so Sinosized since the 1600's and with the more brutal Japanese colonalization in the 1sr half of the 20th centaury that any real semblance of a ethnic "Taiwanese" nationalilty probably no longer exists.

"Taiwanese" itself is a subdialect of Mandarin see wikipedia.org and dictionary.com just as cantonese is, if you think that Formosa deserves its own nation just because of that then by that reasoning, Quebec, Scottland, parts of greece, Kurdistan, Nubia, Kashmir, Guangdong, Yunnan, Tibet, Manchuria, Hawaii, Wales, and areas in South America would by your definition deserve independance, arguement is now moot.

And once more, just becuase you wish it so doesn't make it true. The UN recognizes us as being China and recognizes Taiwan as technically belonging to us but just doesn't want a vivid war over it and are willing for gradual peaceful unification, since afterall they prefer quiet secretive wars that don't get any media attention.



posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
Bogan is an Australian slang term used in a derogatary form to refer to working class people who listen to AC/DC, wear stretch denim jeans, check shirts and ugg boots. To anyone from a another country it is meaningless gobbledigook.


And everyone in china or any chinese is called a Chicom?

Your post defeats your argument


Sorry, but i and most people refer to a bogon as a australian. merrick and rosso are bogans while they dont listen to AC/DC or check shirts ugg boots.

merrick and rosso are self proclaimed australian bogans.

A bogan is any white australian. particulary VB drinkers or sunde arvo type people.

The probelm with bogans are they think there top and dont know they are bogan



Skip is a term that Asians have tried to apply to Aussies as an insult. It doesn't work. Skippy was so long ago that almost no-one remembers it.


It doesn't now?

And i got into a fight over nothing



and your point is? Some black people use the word ni@@er, too.


To show other people that they dont care what the others think. you ever heard a asian call each other gooks? or a bogon a bogon?



In the UK Paki is an insult. In Australia it is not. Have you ever watched the Benson and Hedges/VB World Series?


Paki is a insult to some people. Note all people but it is a inslut to others



As for the others, Nip is offensive, Jap has pretty much lost its offensive nature, it's simply a short form of Japanese, it is not a racially-based insult when we describe a Toyota, for instance, as Jap-crap . And if you're talking about Indians then they're called Curry-munchers, not curries.


A nip? the funny thing was me and my friends were joking about that a week ago. why is it offensive. or does that word have a alter meaning

Well, talk to our japanese members to see if it is offensive or not. because i got a warming for calling someone a jap.

Curry-muncher.....keep is simple. curry is what most people use.


Wog is also degratory, but the meaning western oriented gentlemen is not offensive to any of my serb or albanian friends


Dandenong is the most racially diverse place in this country. 130+different ethnic groups sharing the place. heaps of fights over little things



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 08:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
GMD is short for "Goumindang" which is the proper prounciation. Now Peiping is the GMD way of saying Beijing when they had occupied it that is what I find pronouncing, as for Seoul, c'mon english people call Moskva Moscow and I don't see and Russians complaining.


Actually, Kuomintang is simply a different way of representing the same pronunciation. It is the official romanization system that has been used in Taiwan for decades, and is the official English rendering of that party as used by themselves.

As for the name of Seoul, the Koreans ARE complaining and the Chinese government shows absolutely no respect. Moscow offers no insult to the Russians, but the use of Hancheng (City of the Han) is most certainly an insult to the Koreans. They have asked that the Chinese designation be changed. China's government, in their typical supreme arrogance, refused. Taiwan's government, on the other hand, has changed the official usage. It is now also used in the media and in student's textbooks.


Next, if the GMD occupation of Taiwan is an illegal occupation how come the GMD are a legal political party? How come the Allies didn''t recognize this as so and "force" the GMD to leave Taiwan or become more democratic and no kill 20,000 peaceful protestors?


The KMT made themselves "legal" because they imposed a party-state form of government in Taiwan from 1949 to the early 1990s. As for the Allies, there is a simple reason. That would be the Cold War. Political expediency trumped law in many situations during the Cold War. THis was one. As for the 28,000 killed in the 228 massacre, that was even before the end of the civil war as that occurred in 1947.


Because it wasn't illegal, ROC was given Taiwan when they were China and now we are China and we want Taiwan back because legally it is ours, if what you said is true then how come NONE of the major nations with any kind of say confronting this? GWB, possibly one of the biggest American Imperialists I've seen even testifies to his determination to honour the One China Policy?


Taiwan was NOT given back. There is no legally binding peace treaty that designates Taiwan as a part of China. All of the statements you are referring to are POLITICAL statements, not legal statements. If you are confident of the legality, why is your government afraid to have this dispute heard before the International Court of Justice? GWB has no authority to determine the legal status of any territory. If you are so dependent on the statements of major nations, major nations of the world recognize Senkaku (Tiaoyu) as a part of Japan. Why don't you agree with that statement?


Also the "Taiwanese people" no more exist then Palistinians, they;re Chinese/Japanese colonists who since the 16th centuary colonized Taiwan, and with the 1898 Sino-Japanese war Japanese infusion of colonists. Any Abiriganols in Taiwan are probably so Sinosized since the 1600's and with the more brutal Japanese colonalization in the 1sr half of the 20th centaury that any real semblance of a ethnic "Taiwanese" nationalilty probably no longer exists.


Also not true. Since you are so keen on citing the opinions of foreign governments, the U.S. CIA factbook recognizes that there is a separate Taiwanese ethnic identity. They have a separate history and many traditions that have evolved that are different from those in China. They meet the criterion for separate ethnic status. For the most part the Palestinians do not. The parallel is not there because for the most part, the Palestinians have been politically tied to other Arabs for most of the past 500 hundred years. The same can't be said for the Taiwanese. They have been separate from China for more than 100 years, and have developed their own separate identity over that time. Furthermore, the only time Taiwan and China were under the same sovereignty was when both were conquered by foreigners known as the Manchus.


"Taiwanese" itself is a subdialect of Mandarin see wikipedia.org and dictionary.com just as cantonese is, if you think that Formosa deserves its own nation just because of that then by that reasoning, Quebec, Scottland, parts of greece, Kurdistan, Nubia, Kashmir, Guangdong, Yunnan, Tibet, Manchuria, Hawaii, Wales, and areas in South America would by your definition deserve independance, arguement is now moot.


Taiwanese is a dialect of Minnanyu. They are a separate and distinct language from Mandarin. Cantonese is also a separate language. Dialects are mutually intelligible, distinct languages are not. Taiwanese and Mandarin are NOT mutually intelligible, hence they are considered distinct languages. Same with Cantonese. As for the regions you mentioned, they are legally the territories that they are currently a part of. Taiwan is NOT legally a part of China. Quebec and Scotland have had votes on independence or devolution. The Scots are getting devolution and the Quebecois narrowly turned down independence in a free and fair vote.


And once more, just becuase you wish it so doesn't make it true. The UN recognizes us as being China and recognizes Taiwan as technically belonging to us but just doesn't want a vivid war over it and are willing for gradual peaceful unification, since afterall they prefer quiet secretive wars that don't get any media attention.


Actually, it doesn't. There is no legally binding resolution by which Taiwan is declared a part of China. The website and registry of the Secretariat is NOT legally binding. It is also a political statement. The only two organs in the UN whose dictates are legally binding are those of the Security Council and the ICJ. THis is a dispute that is in the realm of the ICJ and Chian refuses to allow the case to be heard. Most certainly because they must be afraid of the result.



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 01:39 PM
link   
But your clinging to a legal technicallity, do you think even for a moment that the allies wouldn't have made sure it stated that Taiwan would be given back to ROC had ROC won the civil war? They left it hanging on purpose because we won and the GMD didn't.

Now you think the GMD are criminals, what do you think of the CPC given recent events and its results in making China stronger and wealthier? Also factoring in how we won the civil war as well.

Next, Taiwan is culturally Chinese to say that they aren't is akin to saying that the Manchurians or the Yunnanese aren't Chinese. Justification #1, next even if as you say Taiwanese is a distinct language it is still based off of its "Chinese" roots, like they may be a bit different but its no more different then say Shangai being different from Macau or Beijing.

I'm not arguing geneology since its so vague and impercise that it can be manipulated either way and also I am a officer in training not a biologist. However this is only common sense imho.

As for a plebicite there will be a plebicite but only once we're both confident of the results, there's been too much bitterness for us to even think for a glimmer of a second that it would be favorable but in 10-20 years? When there's been opening up and more trade and maybe less friction, I can be optimistic.

I think ultimately when peaceful unification happens it will be more then just as with Hong Kong "One Nation, Two Systems". I recognize that while Taiwan isn't different enough or strayed enough from the mainland to justify breaking away, I think however that like with Tibet and Sinking its enough to justify autonomy.

I believe it would be in the best interests of the People Republic of China and the people's of Taiwan that in addition to peaceful unification and economic prosperity there should be also political autonomy to act as a guiding beacon to let us know should we strive from the true path of socialism and head towards tyranny. This political independance that I speak of could consists of the maintenance of Taiwanese elections for self government under the confines of being part of more then just a subject of the state or a member of the Shanghai Cooperation I think 2 Governments, 2 Systems, One Nation could work, free trade, open borders, and the extension of the PLA, PLAAF, and PLAN to defend China from Taiwan could justify this, a free and autonomus Taiwanese people under the protection and mutual aid and benefits of the PRC and our elephantine economy and our economy growth and such grater sharing of reosurces and a sharing of the Free People's of China's Destiny will not only be acceptable but the only way to truly reflect the needs of the 21st centuary and to accomodate the Chinese position in international Politics.

The controvalversal issue of the Taiwan question will one day path the way for our future and the determination of our future. So we should all hope for this future a future for the Free People's of China.



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
Bogan is an Australian slang term used in a derogatary form to refer to working class people who listen to AC/DC, wear stretch denim jeans, check shirts and ugg boots. To anyone from a another country it is meaningless gobbledigook.


And everyone in china or any chinese is called a Chicom?

Your post defeats your argument


How? Bogan is not a term used to describe all Australians. Bogan in an indigenous Australian term coined by Australians to describe other Australians of a lower socio-economic strata with less taste.

Chicomm is term that was coined specifically to refer to the government in Beijing and was then extended to refer to the people of mainland China. It specifically does NOT refer to overseas Chinese, such as those in San Francisco or Taiwan.


Sorry, but i and most people refer to a bogon as a australian.


I can't help it if you misuse the slang terms of a culture you don't understand.


merrick and rosso are bogans while they dont listen to AC/DC or check shirts ugg boots.

merrick and rosso are self proclaimed australian bogans.


That's called irony. The Oxford on-line dictionary defines it thus:

noun. 1. The expression of meaning through the use of language which normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous effect. 2. A state of affairs that appears perversely contrary to what one expects.

It's a form of humour that is particularly British but is practiced extensively in Australia, Canada and New Zealand. The yanks are not so good at it.

Have you seen Merrick and Rosso when they begin their "Portagutta" characterisations? That's bogan for Port Augusta, in South Australia.

Every afternoon shift JJJ have had have been comedians who revel in irony and the stupid things Aussies do. To be in on the joke you actually have to BE an Aussie. Just witness Merrick and Rosso's performances on American media during the Sydney Olympics. It was funny to any JJJ-listening Australian, the American media personalities didn't have a clue.


A bogan is any white australian. particulary VB drinkers or sunde arvo type people.


I salute your hubris. Again you are trying to tell me about my culture. In Adelaide bogans drink West End Draught, not VB. In Sydney they drink Tooheys. A bogan is not any white Australian. See previous explanations. Colour has nothing to do with Bogan. John Howard is not a Bogan, neither is Jeff Kennet. They are both private school boys. That automatically discounts them as bogans.


The probelm with bogans are they think there top and dont know they are bogan


No, the problem with Bogans is they have neither fashion sense nor a clue and don't care. Go listen to Area 7.

www.letssingit.com.../area-7-nobody-likes-a-bogan-kf7lq91.html


Nip? the funny thing was me and my friends were joking about that a week ago. why is it offensive. or does that word have a alter meaning


Nippon being the historical name for Japan, the Japanese were called the Nipponese. Westerners, being naturally superior, shortened it to Nip. With the coming of world war two, Nip became the dismissive and then derogatary way to refer to Japanese. Byt the late '70s Nip and Jap were relatively interchangeable. This was due to the recent sudden influx of cheap Japanese products, particularly cars, that appeared to be of less quality. By the '90s Nip had fallen from use and Jap had pretty much lost its connotations. Unless you were a Queenslander unhappy with the amount of property the Japanese were buying.


Well, talk to our japanese members to see if it is offensive or not. because i got a warming for calling someone a jap.


Well then take it up with the mods.


Wog is also degratory, but the meaning western oriented gentlemen is not offensive to any of my serb or albanian friends


Who are not wogs. Wogs are Greek and Italian, with Macedonians squeezed in. Haven't you ever seen the work of Nick Gianoppolous?

In America they say wop. In Australia dagoe and wop died sometime in 70s and wog became the sole term for Greeks and Italians.

Watch Pizza.


Dandenong is the most racially diverse place in this country. 130+different ethnic groups sharing the place. heaps of fights over little things


And?



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
But your clinging to a legal technicallity, do you think even for a moment that the allies wouldn't have made sure it stated that Taiwan would be given back to ROC had ROC won the civil war? They left it hanging on purpose because we won and the GMD didn't.


You may consider it a legal technicality, but it is a pretty important one. However, seeing as that CHina is NOT a nation that abides by law and legal precedents, no one can expect China to take international convention and the primacy of international law seriously.


Now you think the GMD are criminals, what do you think of the CPC given recent events and its results in making China stronger and wealthier? Also factoring in how we won the civil war as well.


The KMT were criminals. The CPP ARE criminals. One is the past tense, the later is the present tense. I will have more respect for the CPP if they begin to abide by even minimal standards of human rights, become more transparent (the recent ten-day delay in reporting the recent crisis in the Songhua River is a case in point) and stop pointing hundreds of missiles at a peaceful island-country that is absolutely no threat to Taiwan! Until Peiping cleans up its act, don't expect any respect for them on this front.


Next, Taiwan is culturally Chinese to say that they aren't is akin to saying that the Manchurians or the Yunnanese aren't Chinese. Justification #1, next even if as you say Taiwanese is a distinct language it is still based off of its "Chinese" roots, like they may be a bit different but its no more different then say Shangai being different from Macau or Beijing.


I didn't say that Chinese culture didn't predominate here, it certainly does. However, that doesn't make the place a part of the Chinese state. Again, you seem unable to separate distinct subjects such as politics, international law and now culture. While they do have some overlap, they have distinct principles that govern them. Taiwanese is related to Mandarin in the way that English is related to German or Icelandic. They are sister tongues derived from the same route. However, that has no bearing on the legal status of Taiwan.


I'm not arguing geneology since its so vague and impercise that it can be manipulated either way and also I am a officer in training not a biologist. However this is only common sense imho.


The common sense that is relevant to Taiwan is that the people here are of Minnan stock with Taiwanese aboriginal admixture. There is also a Hakka minority along with the Hsinjhumin 新住民.


As for a plebicite there will be a plebicite but only once we're both confident of the results, there's been too much bitterness for us to even think for a glimmer of a second that it would be favorable but in 10-20 years? When there's been opening up and more trade and maybe less friction, I can be optimistic.


Actually, there should have been a plebiscite in the early 1950s shortly following the ratification of the San Francisco Peace Treaty. The KMT criminals wouldn't allow that to happen. The time for a plebiscite is now! Not for when China thinks that the time is ripe from their point of view. Perhaps if the plebiscite were sooner, China would actually behave like a civilized entity and Peiping would abide by the norms of international law and discourse.


I think ultimately when peaceful unification happens it will be more then just as with Hong Kong "One Nation, Two Systems". I recognize that while Taiwan isn't different enough or strayed enough from the mainland to justify breaking away, I think however that like with Tibet and Sinking its enough to justify autonomy.


Unification should ONLY happen with the express consent of the Taiwanese people in a free and fair referendum free of any undue pressure from China. Even if there were a vote right now, it wouldn't be valid due to China's constant threat of the use of force to claim a territory that doesn't belong to it.


I believe it would be in the best interests of the People Republic of China and the people's of Taiwan that in addition to peaceful unification and economic prosperity there should be also political autonomy to act as a guiding beacon to let us know should we strive from the true path of socialism and head towards tyranny. This political independance that I speak of could consists of the maintenance of Taiwanese elections for self government under the confines of being part of more then just a subject of the state or a member of the Shanghai Cooperation I think 2 Governments, 2 Systems, One Nation could work, free trade, open borders, and the extension of the PLA, PLAAF, and PLAN to defend China from Taiwan could justify this, a free and autonomus Taiwanese people under the protection and mutual aid and benefits of the PRC and our elephantine economy and our economy growth and such grater sharing of reosurces and a sharing of the Free People's of China's Destiny will not only be acceptable but the only way to truly reflect the needs of the 21st centuary and to accomodate the Chinese position in international Politics.

The controvalversal issue of the Taiwan question will one day path the way for our future and the determination of our future. So we should all hope for this future a future for the Free People's of China.


I believe that independence with mutual respect and cooperation is the best course. Taiwan and China are complementary economies in many respects and we are seeing that, to the mutual benefit of the two countries. However, there are simply too many differences to think that unification will work. I guarantee you that if Taiwan's independence were recognized by Peiping, you would see a far more positive attitide from people in Taiwan regarding China than you do with China doing everything it can to diplomatically isolate Taiwan and pointing hundreds of missiles at the country. However, the government in Peiping has backed itself into a corner by assuring the Chinese people that Taiwan belongs to it and they will get it back, despite the fact that international LAW is NOT on their side. However, as I have already noted, Peiping doesn't care about the niceties of international law.



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
How? Bogan is not a term used to describe all Australians. Bogan in an indigenous Australian term coined by Australians to describe other Australians of a lower socio-economic strata with less taste.


Nigga was coined by white people while black people now use it to refer to themselves.

Other cultures in australia have taken it and used it to refer to australians



Chicomm is term that was coined specifically to refer to the government in Beijing and was then extended to refer to the people of mainland China. It specifically does NOT refer to overseas Chinese, such as those in San Francisco or Taiwan.


Your confusing yourself

But calling someone a chinese communist whilist he is not a communist is the same as calling a australian a bogan if it isn't a bogan. First it was used to refer to AC/DC listeners jean wearers etc. but was extended to refer to all white australians



Every afternoon shift JJJ have had have been comedians who revel in irony and the stupid things Aussies do. To be in on the joke you actually have to BE an Aussie. Just witness Merrick and Rosso's performances on American media during the Sydney Olympics. It was funny to any JJJ-listening Australian, the American media personalities didn't have a clue.


Triple J?

Is that still on?





I salute your hubris. Again you are trying to tell me about my culture. In Adelaide bogans drink West End Draught, not VB. In Sydney they drink Tooheys. A bogan is not any white Australian. See previous explanations. Colour has nothing to do with Bogan. John Howard is not a Bogan, neither is Jeff Kennet. They are both private school boys. That automatically discounts them as bogans.


As back to my second reply.

There are only 63million communist members in china while the restof the population gets automacticly conied as communist?




Nippon being the historical name for Japan, the Japanese were called the Nipponese. Westerners, being naturally superior, shortened it to Nip. With the coming of world war two, Nip became the dismissive and then derogatary way to refer to Japanese.


That was my conclusion. But nip i was told was used to refer to all asians





Who are not wogs. Wogs are Greek and Italian, with Macedonians squeezed in. Haven't you ever seen the work of Nick Gianoppolous?
In America they say wop. In Australia dagoe and wop died sometime in 70s and wog became the sole term for Greeks and Italians.Watch Pizza.


Wogs are all those South-east european countries. Nick Gianoppolous just represents one type of wog.

In Pizza, their are lebos there and they still call them wogs. Now they extended the meaing of wog to lebanese



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
Chicomm is term that was coined specifically to refer to the government in Beijing and was then extended to refer to the people of mainland China. It specifically does NOT refer to overseas Chinese, such as those in San Francisco or Taiwan.


Your confusing yourself


No, you're confusing yourself. I'm explaining that it doesn't refer to all ethnic Chinese. I'm also showing the origin and meaning of the word. To use it to refer to the CCP/government in Beijing is perfectly acceptable. To use it to refer to mainland Chinese as a whole may be unacceptable and is certalinly lazy.


But calling someone a chinese communist whilist he is not a communist is the same as calling a australian a bogan if it isn't a bogan. First it was used to refer to AC/DC listeners jean wearers etc. but was extended to refer to all white australians


Only by you.




Just witness Merrick and Rosso's performances on American media during the Sydney Olympics. It was funny to any JJJ-listening Australian, the American media personalities didn't have a clue.


Triple J?

Is that still on?


Don't avoid the issue. The fact is you don't get it. The joke or the usage.




I salute your hubris. Again you are trying to tell me about my culture. In Adelaide bogans drink West End Draught, not VB. In Sydney they drink Tooheys. A bogan is not any white Australian. See previous explanations. Colour has nothing to do with Bogan. John Howard is not a Bogan, neither is Jeff Kennet. They are both private school boys. That automatically discounts them as bogans.


As back to my second reply.


[irony]Oh, my bad. I'm sorry, you do know more about Australia than I do.[/irony]



But nip i was told was used to refer to all asians


Only by those too lazy to differentiate. A little like Chicomm.

In Pizza they call them Lebs. Pizza is a commentary by (more than) one ethnic group about the stupidity of people in general. They just use ethnicity as the medium of the story. When people refer to them as Wogs they are always quick to identify themselves as Lebs.



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV

No, you're confusing yourself. I'm explaining that it doesn't refer to all ethnic Chinese. I'm also showing the origin and meaning of the word. To use it to refer to the CCP/government in Beijing is perfectly acceptable. To use it to refer to mainland Chinese as a whole may be unacceptable and is certalinly lazy.


your exact words,

and was then extended to refer to the people of mainland China

Now explain that



Only by you.


Not by me, but by everyone that calls australians bogans.

You might like to think your not a bogan but that is your opinion about yourslef not others



Don't avoid the issue. The fact is you don't get it. The joke or the usage.


I didn't aviod the issue i choose not to answer because its utterly stupid example. Your saying they do it because its not real

There is no irony in what merrick and rosso do. They act the way bogans act. at times a little exaggerated.



[irony]Oh, my bad. I'm sorry, you do know more about Australia than I do.[/irony]


Sure do



Only by those too lazy to differentiate. A little like Chicomm.


The gernal population




In Pizza they call them Lebs. Pizza is a commentary by (more than) one ethnic group about the stupidity of people in general. They just use ethnicity as the medium of the story.


They are called Lebos.


When people refer to them as Wogs they are always quick to identify themselves as Lebs.


Who is greek and when is wog culture higlighted? since this show is wog (accoding to you) it will be easy

[edit on 24-11-2005 by chinawhite]



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 07:33 AM
link   
How much longer will this verbal sparring about who knows more about their own culture? Like I am learning alot about austrialia from this that I didn't know before but how much longer will it be? I live in Beijing but it doesn't automatically make me an expert on Tibetan or say Sichuan culture.



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
I live in Beijing but it doesn't automatically make me an expert on Tibetan or say Sichuan culture.


No, but it probably makes you an expert on one of my favorite foods - Beiping Duck. Despite our differences, just beware the Avian Flu.



posted on Nov, 25 2005 @ 11:16 AM
link   
Beijing/Peking Duck is too boney for my liking, I prefer General Tao chicken.





new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 177  178  179    181 >>

log in

join