China asks army to be ready for regional war

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by NotAnAspie
JUST LIKE I FREAKING SAID.

Ya Bra!

WE WERE THERE!

edit on 23-12-2012 by NotAnAspie because: (no reason given)

If all you have is a Ya Bra and repeating the same thing with no supporting evidence you should stop. Back up your claim Taiwan was given to the Nationals before the treaty and was used as a staging area against Japan in the war. If you give me paragraphs of your opinion with zero facts I will just ignore it.

Ignore it? No, you won't.

No, you will go on and on and on about it and now act like you are demanding proof from me and I'm already tired of giving you examples of the obvious. kinda sick. All you really have to do is ask yourself why the US would need a regional ally. Regional allies serve as a way to have some sort of trans-national base. That's what it's all about and is really a matter of common sense. It's seldom about true loyalties and more about the purpose they serve. You don't just waltz into a region and pick sides without a history in the politics and just hand out territory like it's a secret santa party. You're being naive for an ATSer.
I also cannot believe that someone who criticizes my ww2 knowledge would disgrace this subject so bad... because it's as though you pretend to have some kind of interest in this subject.... yet I guess you think that no American or Nationalist blood was shed on those Islands. Imagine how that would sound to the people who died there in these conflicts that you are arguing for no reason about other than some insane need to tell someone on the internet they are wrong. That's crazy. At least pick something easier for you to argue about if you are just wanting to troll.

No...no guy.... We absolutely made no military moves on the Islands involved in those agreements No blood was shed on them. No Nationalist were involved in any of that, they just hit the Allied lottery one day.

Hell, tell that to the POWs on ALL sides.

Yeah, whatever, Toucan Sam.

OccamsRazor, I'm afraid you may have believed the disinformation spread by Western media.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by diqiushiwojia
Starred and flagged.
While the Diaoyu Islands are most certainly Chinese, it would be unwise to attack Japan just for them.

edit on 21-12-2012 by diqiushiwojia because: Starred and flagged.

Since when? If this is true why were they not given to China after WWII like all the other Chinese territory Japan had?

That's because the Treaty of San Francisco violates previous treaties, but China was not invited to San Fran.

Before Japan occupied those islands, maps worldwide, including Western and Japanese maps, displayed the Diaoyus as Chinese territory. Moreover, the Diaoyus are geographically located in Taiwan. Per the Cairo Declaration and Potsdam Declaration, that means they should have been returned to China.

I agree, very stupid to go to war over islands China never cared about until they were found to be resource rich and China wanted to be a bully. Here is to hoping for peace.

That's where you seem to have been 'brainwashed'. The fact is that Japan started this. Kakuei Tanaka and Zhou Enlai have earlier agreed to shelf the dispute, but Naoto Kan decided to bring it up again and provoked China.

Please don't believe everything your media says. In Hong Kong, we have access to both pro-CCP and pro-US media and one should understand the arguments from both sides before coming to a conclusion. Only then can ignorance be denied.

Originally posted by diqiushiwojia
OccamsRazor, I'm afraid you may have believed the disinformation spread by Western media.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by diqiushiwojia
Starred and flagged.
While the Diaoyu Islands are most certainly Chinese, it would be unwise to attack Japan just for them.

edit on 21-12-2012 by diqiushiwojia because: Starred and flagged.

Since when? If this is true why were they not given to China after WWII like all the other Chinese territory Japan had?

That's because the Treaty of San Francisco violates previous treaties, but China was not invited to San Fran.

Before Japan occupied those islands, maps worldwide, including Western and Japanese maps, displayed the Diaoyus as Chinese territory. Moreover, the Diaoyus are geographically located in Taiwan. Per the Cairo Declaration and Potsdam Declaration, that means they should have been returned to China.

I agree, very stupid to go to war over islands China never cared about until they were found to be resource rich and China wanted to be a bully. Here is to hoping for peace.

That's where you seem to have been 'brainwashed'. The fact is that Japan started this. Kakuei Tanaka and Zhou Enlai have earlier agreed to shelf the dispute, but Naoto Kan decided to bring it up again and provoked China.

Please don't believe everything your media says. In Hong Kong, we have access to both pro-CCP and pro-US media and one should understand the arguments from both sides before coming to a conclusion. Only then can ignorance be denied.

How did Japan provoke China?

I know there has been some activists from both sides on that Island, but what is your perspective on exactly what started it.... or what rehashed it.

I've read articles about it. I know Japan decided to build a light house on one of the Islands at one time.... but the story seems to be put into very sterile terms so I choose to assume it's connected to other current events. There are a lot of countries getting all fluffed up about this that aren't even that close to the Islands.

I just assume it's connected to a larger issue and is not all that we are reading about or seeing on TV.

So, what's your take on the escalation of this? How did it get started? Why isn't it resolved and why is the rest of the world so concerned about what seems to be just a small aggravation?

Originally posted by diqiushiwojia
OccamsRazor, I'm afraid you may have believed the disinformation spread by Western media.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by diqiushiwojia
Starred and flagged.
While the Diaoyu Islands are most certainly Chinese, it would be unwise to attack Japan just for them.

edit on 21-12-2012 by diqiushiwojia because: Starred and flagged.

Since when? If this is true why were they not given to China after WWII like all the other Chinese territory Japan had?

That's because the Treaty of San Francisco violates previous treaties, but China was not invited to San Fran.

Before Japan occupied those islands, maps worldwide, including Western and Japanese maps, displayed the Diaoyus as Chinese territory. Moreover, the Diaoyus are geographically located in Taiwan. Per the Cairo Declaration and Potsdam Declaration, that means they should have been returned to China.

I agree, very stupid to go to war over islands China never cared about until they were found to be resource rich and China wanted to be a bully. Here is to hoping for peace.

That's where you seem to have been 'brainwashed'. The fact is that Japan started this. Kakuei Tanaka and Zhou Enlai have earlier agreed to shelf the dispute, but Naoto Kan decided to bring it up again and provoked China.

Please don't believe everything your media says. In Hong Kong, we have access to both pro-CCP and pro-US media and one should understand the arguments from both sides before coming to a conclusion. Only then can ignorance be denied.

I am well versed on the subject. Technically they would be ROC, Taiwanese islands, and not Mainland China. The PRC acknowledge this, yet want them anyway. Hypocrisy at it's finest.

The Japanese had control since 1895. They were not taken during WWII, and as such were not part of the territory returned after the war. China did not dispute Japanese rule of the islands until 1971, AFTER resources were discovered in 1968.

newsimg.bbc.co.uk...

That image right there paints the picture of China in the area.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by diqiushiwojia
OccamsRazor, I'm afraid you may have believed the disinformation spread by Western media.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by diqiushiwojia
Starred and flagged.
While the Diaoyu Islands are most certainly Chinese, it would be unwise to attack Japan just for them.

edit on 21-12-2012 by diqiushiwojia because: Starred and flagged.

Since when? If this is true why were they not given to China after WWII like all the other Chinese territory Japan had?

That's because the Treaty of San Francisco violates previous treaties, but China was not invited to San Fran.

Before Japan occupied those islands, maps worldwide, including Western and Japanese maps, displayed the Diaoyus as Chinese territory. Moreover, the Diaoyus are geographically located in Taiwan. Per the Cairo Declaration and Potsdam Declaration, that means they should have been returned to China.

I agree, very stupid to go to war over islands China never cared about until they were found to be resource rich and China wanted to be a bully. Here is to hoping for peace.

That's where you seem to have been 'brainwashed'. The fact is that Japan started this. Kakuei Tanaka and Zhou Enlai have earlier agreed to shelf the dispute, but Naoto Kan decided to bring it up again and provoked China.

Please don't believe everything your media says. In Hong Kong, we have access to both pro-CCP and pro-US media and one should understand the arguments from both sides before coming to a conclusion. Only then can ignorance be denied.

I am well versed on the subject. Technically they would be ROC, Taiwanese islands, and not Mainland China. The PRC acknowledge this, yet want them anyway. Hypocrisy at it's finest.

The Japanese had control since 1895. They were not taken during WWII, and as such were not part of the territory returned after the war. China did not dispute Japanese rule of the islands until 1971, AFTER resources were discovered in 1968.

newsimg.bbc.co.uk...

That image right there paints the picture of China in the area.

Yes they were... It's called "The United States administration of the Ryukyu Islands.... as part of the United States Civil Administration of the Ryukyu Islands from 1945 until 1972, when the islands reverted to Japanese control under the Okinawa Reversion Treaty between the United States and Japan"

Funny... They gave Taiwan to the Nationalists, then "assumed" it back to China at the same time they gave other Islands that originally went to the ROC, back to Japan.

Look at the crap WE started. Talk about Indian givers... and we just pretty much gave up on the Nationalists from making a come back despite a strong economy... we could at least recognize their sovereignty but I guess we owe China too much... so they all have a claim. I guess that is what happens when you make too many deals.

I don't see how they are not laughing about this.... especially when we are STILL trying to tell them what to do about it. Maybe they just want to see how much we will involve ourselves.

You know why?... Because while they were thinking about pulling out of Viet Nam, they were thinking *maybe we don't want to help the Nationalists take back China after all"

And then look what happened to their loyalty.

That's why to the UN... The ROC is an extension of China.

That was originally the plan and we decided we didn't want to do it that way anymore.

Originally posted by NotAnAspie
Talk about Indian givers

Please refrain from using racist remarks. Much like your Pacific history, you need to brush up on your history of the US with the Native populations it seems.

As i said, I am no longer engaging you in this discussion as you make comments with no basis in fact then refuse to answer simple questions because it blows a hole in your belief system and proves you are wrong. If you choose to answer the earlier questions we can continue.

Originally posted by diqiushiwojia
Before Japan occupied those islands, maps worldwide, including Western and Japanese maps, displayed the Diaoyus as Chinese territory.

What year are we talking? By WW2 these Islands had been legaly ceded to Japan by China for over 50 years. Japanese maps of this time most certainly had these islands as part of the Japanese Empire. One of us has bought the dis-info, it's not me.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by NotAnAspie
Talk about Indian givers

Please refrain from using racist remarks. Much like your Pacific history, you need to brush up on your history of the US with the Native populations it seems.

As i said, I am no longer engaging you in this discussion as you make comments with no basis in fact then refuse to answer simple questions because it blows a hole in your belief system and proves you are wrong. If you choose to answer the earlier questions we can continue.

yeah, yeah.... blah blah blah... Indian giver isn't a racist remark in this case because of how it's used. Americans coined the term but they are the one's doing stuff like this in this case. That's why I say "talk about Indian givers" as if to say ".... as in "look in the mirror, America... you say this about others, but look what you do" You are just not very good at getting stuff.

I'm not sure how you can deny what I just supplied for you.

I'm sorry you cannot handle the correction but it's there right for you to see. Those islands were taken from Japanese control and control was administered by the US as they helped set up Government for those Islands. Just those small Islands had it's own US run government... of the Ryukyu Islands...then they gave them to Japan. China and Taiwan then said, no they belong to us and say they have various proof of this. Now we don't even hardly recognize Taiwan because we don't care about that cause anymore since it doesn't serve us... and that was also one of the territories of these deals.

Don't tell ME to get it straight if you don't even have the BASICS straight. Here it is again and this is under the entry for said Islands in dispute.

"The United States administered them as part of the United States Civil Administration of the Ryukyu Islands from 1945 until 1972, when the islands reverted to Japanese control under the Okinawa Reversion Treaty between the United States and Japan"

Don't make me tell you a third time.

reply to post by xmaddness

Originally posted by xmaddness
With Japan being an ally, does this mean that the US will be dragged into this war as well?

NO.. Fight China over Japan???? No....



let it sink in..

no


Edit: Sorry, never say never, but I dont see it. They call it the Military Theatre for a reason though, so you never know.

Personally I love the Chinese Human beans I have met.
We need to enjoy massages and herbal things they want us to buy.
I love them so much ...I want to weep for every one of them who were exterminated in the last few decades.

I would weep approx 100m milion tears.

But hey they sure do sell cheap clothes in the west

reply to post by OrionsWitness

Originally posted by OrionsWitness
Personally I love the Chinese Human beans I have met.
We need to enjoy massages and herbal things they want us to buy.
I love them so much ...I want to weep for every one of them who were exterminated in the last few decades.

I would weep approx 100m milion tears.

But hey they sure do sell cheap clothes in the west

Why did I have to post and see this.. Really?

THAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

#n' read it! That is the problem. That thinking.

Chinese people are people, just like your pampered a$$!

Some god rolled dice for a 1/4 of the planets #n population to be Asian/Chinese and you want to show prejudice?

Spoiled. Rotten.

Originally posted by 1/2 Nephilim
reply to post by xmaddness

 

Originally posted by xmaddness
With Japan being an ally, does this mean that the US will be dragged into this war as well?

NO.. Fight China over Japan???? No....

let it sink in..

no


Edit: Sorry, never say never, but I dont see it. They call it the Military Theatre for a reason though, so you never know.

edit on 23-12-2012 by 1/2 Nephilim because: (no reason given)

You are completely clueless. The US has an obligation to defend Japan with 100% of it's military might against any and every threat. It's a defense treaty which we have no choice in the matter. This treaty is the sole reason Japan has little to no military. Please brush up on a subject before posting about it.

,,, and God knows the US would never break a treaty.


BWAHaaHaaaHaaaHAAA!!!

reply to post by OccamsRazor04


Ohhh, I was under the impression that the US ignored UN treaties..

Wait, we do! We don't even care what the world thinks..

"You dont like it, get some." < Period.

The US has Trillions in its military & we export NOTHING. We import well over 1/2 of our recources in the US, WELL OVER. How long do you keep taking IOU's from a neighbor that is not necassarily a friend? Nottttt forever

Originally posted by 1/2 Nephilim
reply to post by OccamsRazor04

 

Ohhh, I was under the impression that the US ignored UN treaties..

Wait, we do! We don't even care what the world thinks..

"You dont like it, get some." < Period.

The US has Trillions in its military & we export NOTHING. We import well over 1/2 of our recources in the US, WELL OVER. How long do you keep taking IOU's from a neighbor that is not necassarily a friend? Nottttt forever

Well if you would care to show me recent defense treaties we have ignored I am willing to listen. Otherwise I am glad we can both agree you are misinformed and move on.

We do export, why in the world would you think we don't? That right there makes anything you say suspect.

Japan is a friend, our strongest ally in the Pacific. If anything it would be a chance for the US to take control of vast stretches of Chinese resources, reaffirm ourselves as the only Superpower, place China under our boot, take control of their factories, dissolve communism in China, and many more positive outcomes, not the least of which would be cancelling all debt to China.

reply to post by NotAnAspie


There have always been activists from China and 'activists' from Japan, so those can't explain why the dispute has been escalating. The way I see it, Naoto Kan started it by arresting the ship captain in 2010. Then Yoshihiko Noda decided to 'nationalise' the islands, another provocation from Japan. The protests in China and 'military actions' (those, in my opinion, don't really count as military) are reactions of these provocations. It seems that most Westerners on the Internet don't get this and think China is the one doing the provoking.

reply to post by OccamsRazor04


That's because the PRC is supposed to be the only legitimate government of China. That is the official PRC opinion and the opinion of most countries. However, I (and probably most other Chinese as well) would be cool with Taiwan getting it; when they reunite with the Mainland, the Diaoyu Islands will be back as well. However, there is no reason AT ALL for the Japanese to have them.

No, the islands weren't taken during the Second World War, but neither were Taiwan or the Penghu Islands. All of these territories were taken by Japanese Imperialists during the last decade of the 19th century and should be returned if the Cairo Declaration is to be followed.

"The Three Great Allies are fighting this war to restrain and punish the aggression of Japan. They covet no gain for themselves and have no thought of territorial expansion. It is their purpose that Japan shall be stripped of all the islands in the Pacific which she has seized or occupied since the beginning of the first World War in 1914, and that all the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa, and The Pescadores, shall be restored to the Republic of China. Japan will also be expelled from all other territories which she has taken by violence and greed. The aforesaid three great powers, mindful of the enslavement of the people of Korea, are determined that in due course Korea shall become free and independent.

Assuming that the PRC is the successor of the ROC after the regime change brought about by the Chinese Civil War, the PRC's claim is the legitimate one. If you do not recognise the PRC, then the ROC is the one to get the islands. In neither case is Japan the legitimate claimant.

Also, your diagram doesn't show the Diaoyus. It's a diagram of the Nan Hai.

Originally posted by diqiushiwojia
reply to post by NotAnAspie

 

There have always been activists from China and 'activists' from Japan, so those can't explain why the dispute has been escalating. The way I see it, Naoto Kan started it by arresting the ship captain in 2010. Then Yoshihiko Noda decided to 'nationalise' the islands, another provocation from Japan. The protests in China and 'military actions' (those, in my opinion, don't really count as military) are reactions of these provocations. It seems that most Westerners on the Internet don't get this and think China is the one doing the provoking.

They belong to Japan. Japan can nationalize them all they want. China is being a bully, it's very clear. How can the Chinese expect anyone to take them serious after looking at a map showing what they claim as their territorial waters, and compare that to what their territorial waters are under internationally recognized standards. It's laughable. Japan took the islands in the 1800's. It was not until AFTER resources were found that China said gimme gimme.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by diqiushiwojia
They belong to Japan. Japan can nationalize them all they want.

I have already explained why Japan's claim is against the Cairo Declaration.

China is being a bully, it's very clear. How can the Chinese expect anyone to take them serious after looking at a map showing what they claim as their territorial waters, and compare that to what their territorial waters are under internationally recognized standards. It's laughable.

That is a red herring. The Nan Hai and the Diaoyu Islands are two different disputes altogether.

Japan took the islands in the 1800's. It was not until AFTER resources were found that China said gimme gimme.

The PRC protested against the San Fran Treaty.