China's territory not allowed for sale: FM spokesman

J20!

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,541
Country flag
J20.

I have answered each one of your issue.

Don't be a typical Chinese expecting the world to revolve around you.

Address the issues raised.
You have answered none of these. Simple yes or no answers, yet all you've posted is a rant about China "getting its teeth kicked in"

Do you refute any of the info I've given? Can you prove it to be FACTUALLY incorrect? Is Taiwan a country recognized by the UN? Recognized by any country on EARTH as I said before? All your responses are "fairy tale this fairy tale that" nothing substantial.
What issues have you raised? That China is afraid of Taiwan? That China had its face kicked. Childish bull as per usual. There is a reason Taiwan hasn't attempted to declare independence: thousands of cruise and ballistic missiles facing it, and the certainty that any such act would be followed by invasion.

One minute you're accusing China of being aggressive and hegemonic, the next you say its impotent for not attacking Taiwan? Do you want a Chinese civil war? Of course you do.

Now answer the damn questions and stop hiding behind your rants.
 

J20!

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,541
Country flag
Please quote post No!
Hahaha! Are you claiming amnesia now? But judging by how much you rant, it would be easy to forget posts. There, look through this page.

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/china/2744-china-economy-news-discussion-73.html

That is what China is.

They are funkily crude and barbarians and are yet to evolve!

To imagine a 50 center trying to impress Indians as to what Chinese do!


I am not surprised that none know you.

Typical Chinese.

Big Talk without a Face!
You just posted:
No, I have never said Chinese are barbarians.

You will naturally avoid the truth since you are a paid agent of the Communist Chinese.
How exactly do you know that I'm an "agent" if you dont even know my name?

Again, you're just a liar Ray.
 
Last edited:

Oblaks

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2012
Messages
372
Likes
123
now lets see your link that shows historically diaoyu/senku belong to japan even before ming/qing acquire it.
without includin insults directed towards your post like what you are used to doing, you may find some links below

Resolving the China-Japan Conflict Over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands | FPIF

At this point, it's important to revisit the history of the Senkaku Islands dispute. The relevant sources can be found in Serita Kentarō's book, Japan's Territory (Nihon no ryōdo, Chūō Kōron Sha, 2002).

Uotsurijima [Chinese: Diaoyu] is the largest island in the Senkaku chain, which includes seven other small islands. In the days of the independent RyÅ«kyÅ« kingdom, the islands were where the court welcomed investiture missions from China, so that they formed one maritime link in the transportation network for tributary relations with the Qing court. Mentions of "Diaoyu Island" have been confirmed in sixteenth century documents from China. Such records, however, do not immediately justify territorial claims over the islands. What matters more is how these islands have been handled in the modern period, which gave birth to the concept of national territory. Japan formally claimed sovereignty over Okinawa in 1879 and subsequently expressed interest in the uninhabited islands lying to the north of Yonagunijima, including Uotsurijima, Kumeakajima, and Kubasaki. In 1885 Japan moved to claim these as its territory, proposing to include them within Okinawa prefecture, but at the time China also showed an interest in the islands, assigning them official names, including Diaoyu, and out of a reluctance to make unilateral assertions of territorial sovereignty, Japan's claim was withdrawn.
that means..roughly from 1420s to the Meiji Restoration, Senkaku islands were a part of Ryūkyū Kingdom, which was an independent nation with its own unique language and culture, but paying tribute to the emperor of the Ming Dynasty of China. Right around 1879, Japan invaded Ryūkyū Kingdom, destroyed the kingdom, and turned all lands of the kingdom, including Senkaku islands, in to Japanese territory. From that point on, all the way until the end of WWII, Senkaku islands did in fact legally belong to Japan.

Upon Japan's defeat in World War Two, by order of the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers, Okinawa was split off from Japan, a measure that naturally included the Senkaku Islands. Taiwan was explicitly returned to Chinese sovereignty, with the Republic of China incorporating it into its national territory, but apparently no records exist that indicate the Senkaku Islands were also to be incorporated into China at this point. The Senkaku Isands were not returned together with Taiwan to China and remained under the mandate of the American military government that ruled Okinawa
That means... senkaku was never part of the shimonoseki treaty and not needed to be returned to China after WW2

Furthermore, the Japanese government understands that the Senkakus have been internationally recognized as Japanese territory for more than a century—including by the Chinese themselves.

:
http://www.japanprobe.com/2010/09/29/the-senkaku-islands-japanese-territory/

  • In 1920, a Chinese boat was shipwrecked in the area. They were rescued and returned to China by the Japanese. In an official letter from the Chinese government's Nagasaki consulate thanking the Japanese, the islands are referred to as "the Senkaku Islands, Yaeyama district, Okinawa Prefecture, in the Empire of Japan." The letter uses the official Japanese name for the islands directly states that they are Japanese territory.

  • On January 8th 1953, an article about anti-American protests in Okinawa appeared in China's state-controlled People's Daily Newspaper. When it lists the islands that are part of Japan's Ryukyu archipelago, it includes the Senkaku Islands [尖閣諸島], using the official Japanese name [not Diayutai Islands 钓鱼台群岛 /釣魚台群島].



  • A classified 1969 map produced by the People's Republic of China official map authority lists the "Senkaku Islands" as Japanese territory.


  • The above picture shows a map of Japan's Ryukyu territories that was published in Beijing back in 1958. The Senkaku islands are included as part of the Ryukyus.
 
Last edited:

Oblaks

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2012
Messages
372
Likes
123
Taiwan IS China! And maybe you missed the pics, but :


Those are Taiwanese citizens there, not mainlander's, that speaks volumes on the overall Chinese feeling about what the Japanese are trying to do. *scoffs* "Buying" Chinese islands. haha! Classic joke right there.

The Diayou's WHERE in that treaty as they fall in the bracket of "islands belonging to Formosa", look it up. The fact that Japan incorporated those islands the same year the Shimonoseki treaty was signed should tell you something. What's up with all the denial here? Japan took those islands by force in a war with China, why return some islands and refuse to give up the Diayou's?

CHAPTER II

TERRITORY

Article 2

(b) Japan renounces all right, title and claim to Formosa and the Pescadores.

San Francisco Peace Treaty

where is senkaku / Daiyou on the treay???
 

s002wjh

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2009
Messages
1,271
Likes
153
Country flag
without includin insults directed towards your post like what you are used to doing, you may find some links below

Resolving the China-Japan Conflict Over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands | FPIF



that means..roughly from 1420s to the Meiji Restoration, Senkaku islands were a part of Ryūkyū Kingdom, which was an independent nation with its own unique language and culture, but paying tribute to the emperor of the Ming Dynasty of China. Right around 1879, Japan invaded Ryūkyū Kingdom, destroyed the kingdom, and turned all lands of the kingdom, including Senkaku islands, in to Japanese territory. From that point on, all the way until the end of WWII, Senkaku islands did in fact legally belong to Japan.



That means... senkaku was never part of the shimonoseki treaty and not needed to be returned to China after WW2

Furthermore, the Japanese government understands that the Senkakus have been internationally recognized as Japanese territory for more than a century—including by the Chinese themselves.

:
The Senkaku Islands: Japanese Territory? | Japan Probe

  • In 1920, a Chinese boat was shipwrecked in the area. They were rescued and returned to China by the Japanese. In an official letter from the Chinese government's Nagasaki consulate thanking the Japanese, the islands are referred to as "the Senkaku Islands, Yaeyama district, Okinawa Prefecture, in the Empire of Japan." The letter uses the official Japanese name for the islands directly states that they are Japanese territory.

  • On January 8th 1953, an article about anti-American protests in Okinawa appeared in China's state-controlled People's Daily Newspaper. When it lists the islands that are part of Japan's Ryukyu archipelago, it includes the Senkaku Islands [尖閣諸島], using the official Japanese name [not Diayutai Islands 钓鱼台群岛 /釣魚台群島].



  • A classified 1969 map produced by the People's Republic of China official map authority lists the "Senkaku Islands" as Japanese territory.


  • The above picture shows a map of Japan's Ryukyu territories that was published in Beijing back in 1958. The Senkaku islands are included as part of the Ryukyus.
right i give you western independent source, you give me source from japan? heck in japanese, they even claim Najing masscare never happened. so are you saying all the claim from china/korea/taiwan on island occupied by imperial japan belong to them, lol.

from your own source

Mentions of "Diaoyu Island" have been confirmed in sixteenth century documents from China. Such records, however, do not immediately justify territorial claims over the islands. What matters more is how these islands have been handled in the modern period, which gave birth to the concept of national territory. Japan formally claimed sovereignty over Okinawa in 1879 and subsequently expressed interest in the uninhabited islands lying to the north of Yonagunijima, including Uotsurijima, Kumeakajima, and Kubasaki. In 1885 Japan moved to claim these as its territory, proposing to include them within Okinawa prefecture, but at the time China also showed an interest in the islands, assigning them official names, including Diaoyu, and out of a reluctance to make unilateral assertions of territorial sovereignty, Japan's claim was withdrawn.

Additional territorial claims to the islands were also proposed in 1890 and 1893, but these were also tabled. Finally a cabinet decision on January 14, 1895 formally claimed sovereignty over Uotsurijima and Kubajima. This came at a time when Japan was enjoying a string of victories in the Sino-Japanese War and was actively engaged in a struggle for maritime superiority
lol this sound like because japan win the war so the island become their, except wrote in a fancy way of saying it. i especially like the arthor said "In 1885 Japan moved to claim these as its territory, proposing to include them within Okinawa prefecture, but at the time China also showed an interest in the islands" which just so happen around sino-japan war, and china show interest of the island even though record shows the island since 15century, and qing dynasty occupy taiwan and the surrounding islands. so basically the arthor try to justify the island belong to japan dispite historyical record from china, japan show interest in it, few years later sino-japan war, japan win, so they got the island. is this how japanese write their history? by the arthor logic, japan show interest in china/korea, few years later they MOVED to claim it and become theirs, if US never intervene, their history book will say china/korea was part of japan because"Such records, however, do not immediately justify territorial claim, What matters more is how territorial have been handled in the modern period, which gave birth to the concept of national territory" like the arthur said.

Treaty of Shimonoseki

Articles 2 & 3: China cedes to Japan in perpetuity and full sovereignty of the Penghu group, Taiwan and the eastern portion of the bay of Liaodong Peninsula together with all fortifications, arsenals and public property.
Article 4: China agrees to pay to Japan as a war indemnity the sum of 200,000,000 Kuping taels
if you pull thing out of japanprobe or thing from japan source, i can do the same thing from chinese source says otherwise. however, from wiki and other independent source, the issue clearly state china loss taiwan and those island during the sino-japan war.

The reason to worry is that nationalists in both China and Taiwan see the islands as unquestionably theirs and think that their government has been weak in asserting this authority.

....................
So we're in the absurd position of being committed to help Japan fight a war over islands, even though we don't agree that they are necessarily Japanese.

Chinese navigational records show the islands as Chinese for many centuries, and a 1783 Japanese map shows them as Chinese as well. Japan purported to "discover" the islands only in 1884 and annexed them only in 1895 when it also grabbed Taiwan. http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/10/look-out-for-the-diaoyu-islands/
so let me guess you gonna find another japanese article says japan claim these since 1884, then MOVE to claim it :)

so from your source the arthur wrote in a fancy way of sin-japan war and how japan claim it. on wiki, nytime, and many other western source, they just wrote things a big straight foward, but both has the same meaning.

now if you want pull some japanese source on this again, i can pull some chinese source too. i put western source initially because its more independent doesn't include bias or less bias on the dispute.
 
Last edited:

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
Hahaha! Are you claiming amnesia now? But judging by how much you rant, it would be easy to forget posts. There, look through this page.

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/china/2744-china-economy-news-discussion-73.html

The reply is to funkysoul.

Funkily crude.

Barbarians are because Hans call everyone else barbarian!

The Bad manners of Chinese indicates who is a barbarian!


Got that, Steve?


How exactly do you know that I'm an "agent" if you dont even know my name?

Again, you're just a liar Ray.
One can make out by the way one posts.

One does not have to know or do they have to.

I don't lie, my good man.

Observations are not lies!

But then English is not your forte!
 

J20!

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,541
Country flag
Hahaha! Are you claiming amnesia now? But judging by how much you rant, it would be easy to forget posts. There, look through this page.

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/china/2744-china-economy-news-discussion-73.html

The reply is to funkysoul.

Funkily crude.

Barbarians are because Hans call everyone else barbarian!

The Bad manners of Chinese indicates who is a barbarian!


Got that, Steve?




One can make out by the way one posts.

One does not have to know or do they have to.

I don't lie, my good man.

Observations are not lies!

But then English is not your forte!
Judging by your grammar, its clear who is lacking in English.

So if you are a Han you are a barbarian? Or if you're Chinese you're a barbarian? Make up your mind which racist path you're choosing. Observations my foot, just lies and more hateful nonsense.

You are a liar. One minute you're claiming you haven't said something, then the next, you admit to it when faced with evidence. LIAR. And its not the first time is it? I'm bored with your lies and backtracking, lie to someone else.
 
Last edited:

fluke

New Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
7
Likes
3
I have been an inactive forum member, only read but do not contribute. I do agree with Ray that J20 does sound like "a paid agent for the chinese goverment".
 

Oblaks

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2012
Messages
372
Likes
123
right i give you western independent source, you give me source from japan? heck in japanese, they even claim Najing masscare never happened. so are you saying all the claim from china/korea/taiwan on island occupied by imperial japan belong to them, lol.

from your own source



lol this sound like because japan win the war so the island become their, except wrote in a fancy way of saying it. i especially like the arthor said "In 1885 Japan moved to claim these as its territory, proposing to include them within Okinawa prefecture, but at the time China also showed an interest in the islands" which just so happen around sino-japan war, and china show interest of the island even though record shows the island since 15century, and qing dynasty occupy taiwan and the surrounding islands. so basically the arthor try to justify the island belong to japan dispite historyical record from china, japan show interest in it, few years later sino-japan war, japan win, so they got the island. is this how japanese write their history? by the arthor logic, japan show interest in china/korea, few years later they MOVED to claim it and become theirs, if US never intervene, their history book will say china/korea was part of japan because"Such records, however, do not immediately justify territorial claim, What matters more is how territorial have been handled in the modern period, which gave birth to the concept of national territory" like the arthur said.
Its really amazing how you re-write articles to fit into your arguments. you purposely ommited the first sentences which said "Uotsurijima [Chinese: Diaoyu] is the largest island in the Senkaku chain, which includes seven other small islands. In the days of the independent Ryūkyū kingdom, the islands were where the court welcomed investiture missions from China, so that they formed one maritime link in the transportation network for tributary relations with the Qing court" which implies that Ryukyus (the kingdom where senkakus belong) were an independent state with its own culture and language which was a tributary to China. Not a part of China but trading partner of China during the Quing/Ming dynaties before the Japs conquered it (1609) and annexed it later to be part of Okinawa (1879).
That means even before the sino-jap war in 1895 and before the Shimonoseki treaty , the islands have been part of Japan already.


Since you trust wiki a lot, here is the link: Ryukyu Islands - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 1609, Shimazu Tadatsune, Lord of Satsuma, invaded the Ryūkyū Kingdom with a fleet of 13 junks and 2,500 samurai, thereby establishing suzerainty over the islands. They faced little opposition from the Ryukyuans, who lacked any significant military capabilities, and who were ordered by King Shō Nei to surrender rather than to suffer the loss of precious lives.[24] After that, the kings of the Ryukyus paid tribute to the Japanese shogun as well as to the Chinese emperor. In 1655, the tributary relations between Ryukyu and Qing were formally approved by the shogunate.[25] In 1874, the Ryukyus terminated tribute relations with China.[26]

In 1872, the Japanese government established the Ryukyu han under the jurisdiction of the Foreign Ministry. In 1875, jurisdiction over the Ryukyus changed from the Foreign Ministry to the Home Ministry.[26]

In 1879, the Meiji government announced the annexation of the Ryukyus, establishing it as Okinawa Prefecture and forcing the Ryukyu king to move to Tokyo.


Treaty of Shimonoseki



if you pull thing out of japanprobe or thing from japan source, i can do the same thing from chinese source says otherwise. however, from wiki and other independent source, the issue clearly state china loss taiwan and those island during the sino-japan war.



so let me guess you gonna find another japanese article says japan claim these since 1884, then MOVE to claim it :)

so from your source the arthur wrote in a fancy way of sin-japan war and how japan claim it. on wiki, nytime, and many other western source, they just wrote things a big straight foward, but both has the same meaning.

now if you want pull some japanese source on this again, i can pull some chinese source too. i put western source initially because its more independent doesn't include bias or less bias on the dispute.

Like I said. The islands were already part of Japan way before the sino-jap war and the Shimonoseki Treaty. I just gave you a wiki link. Happy?

By the way, lol...the links you provided are both case studies from Chinese authors. The links I provided in my last post were from raw Japanese history:
-Draft Author: Cheng-China Huang (June 1997)
-Joyman Lee
 
Last edited:

s002wjh

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2009
Messages
1,271
Likes
153
Country flag
Its really amazing how you re-write articles to fit into your arguments. you purposely ommited the first sentences which said "Uotsurijima [Chinese: Diaoyu] is the largest island in the Senkaku chain, which includes seven other small islands. In the days of the independent Ryūkyū kingdom, the islands were where the court welcomed investiture missions from China, so that they formed one maritime link in the transportation network for tributary relations with the Qing court" which implies that Ryukyus (the kingdom where senkakus belong) were an independent state with its own culture and language which was a tributary to China. Not a part of China but trading partner of China during the Quing/Ming dynaties before the Japs conquered it (1609) and annexed it later to be part of Okinawa (1879).
That means even before the sino-jap war in 1895 and before the Shimonoseki treaty , the islands have been part of Japan already.


Since you trust wiki a lot, here is the link: Ryukyu Islands - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia








Like I said. The islands were already part of Japan way before the sino-jap war and the Shimonoseki Treaty. I just gave you a wiki link. Happy?

By the way, lol...the links you provided are both case studies from Chinese authors. The links I provided in my last post were from raw Japanese history:
-Draft Author: Cheng-China Huang (June 1997)
-Joyman Lee
you know we can go on like this forever, but when you ask any independent expert on this. they all recognize, china lost those island in the 1s sino-japan war.

and as i indicate in MULTIPLE quote from SEVERAL INDEPENDENT souce, it clearly indicate china has record of these island since ming, qinq dynasty etc, during sino-japan war. japan grab it forcibly even your aritcle say this(except in a fancy way). next thing you know youll be pulling out things from japanese history book that says nanjing masscare never happen.

even just by looking at the map anyone will recognize the approximately of daoyu island with respect to taiwan. and in ming/qing, taiwan was already part of those dynasty, and the island near taiwan are documented/claimed.


NOW here is the source from the dsiputed island.

Japan controlled the islands from 1895 until its surrender at the end of World War II. The United States administered them as part of the United States Civil Administration of the Ryukyu Islands from 1945 until 1972
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senkaku_Islands

and on your last source, the daiyo was include in there because japan take it after 1895 war. i don't even know where you get the idea when japan control a part of group island, it automatically control the entire group
island.
so unless you have an independent source indicate the daoyuisland was part of japan recode before ming, and not try find other ariticle and twist and say its part of japan, i rest my case.

I already put several link from muliple source with VERY STRAIGHTFOWARD facts, no BS fancy word "after 1895 war daoyu was seize by japan, and dayoisland was show in china record since ming dynasty" and i didn't even bother to put in a fancy way saying it belong to china, cause all the fact are already there.


The Ryukyus are commonly divided into two or three primary groups:

either administratively, with the Northern Ryukyus being the islands in Kagoshima Prefecture (known in Japanese as the "Satsunan Islands") and the Southern Ryukyus being the islands in Okinawa Prefecture (known in Japanese as the "Ryukyu Islands"),
or geologically, with the islands north of the Tokara Strait (ÅŒsumi and Tokara) being the Northern Ryukyus, those between the Tokara Strait and Kerama Gap (Amami and Okinawa) being the Central Ryukyus, and those south of the Kerama Gap (Miyako and Yaeyama) being the Southern Ryukyus.
Following are the grouping and names used by the Hydrographic and Oceanographic Department of the Japan Coast Guard.[3] The islands are listed from north to south where possible.

Nansei Islands (南西諸島, Nansei-shotō?)
Satsunan Islands (薩南諸島, Satsunan-shotō?)
Ōsumi Islands (大隅諸島, Ōsumi-shotō?) with:
Tanegashima, Yaku, Kuchinoerabu, Mageshima in the North-Eastern Group,
Takeshima, Iojima, Kuroshima in the North-Western Group.
Tokara Islands (吐噶喇列島, Tokara-rettō?): Kuchinoshima, Nakanoshima, Gajajima, Suwanosejima, Akusekijima, Tairajima, Kodakarajima, Takarajima
Amami Islands (奄美群島, Amami-guntō?): Amami Ōshima, Kikaijima, Kakeromajima, Yoroshima, Ukeshima, Tokunoshima, Okinoerabujima, Yoronjima
Ryukyu Islands (琉球諸島, Ryūkyū-shotō?)
Okinawa Islands (沖縄諸島, Okinawa-shotō?): Okinawa Island, Kume, Iheya, Izena, Aguni, Ie (Iejima), Iwo Tori Shima (Iōtorishima) [4]
Kerama Islands (慶良間諸島, Kerama-shotō?): Tokashiki, Zamami, Aka, Geruma
Sakishima Islands (先島諸島, Sakishima-shotō?, the "Further Isles")
Miyako Islands (宮古列島, Miyako-rettō?): Miyakojima, Ikema, Ōgami, Irabu, Shimoji, Kurima, Minna, Tarama
Yaeyama Islands (八重山列島, Yaeyama-rettō?): Iriomote, Ishigaki, Taketomi, Kohama, Kuroshima, Aragusuku, Hatoma, Yubujima, Hateruma, Yonaguni
Senkaku Islands (尖閣諸島, Senkaku-shotō?, claimed by the PRC and the ROC): Uotsurijima, Kuba Jima, Taisho Jima, Kita Kojima, Minami Kojima
Daitō Islands (大東諸島, Daitō-shotō?): Kita Daitō, Minami Daitō, Oki Daitō
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryukyu_Islands

of course i trust wiki/NYtimes and other independent link i provided more than Japanfocus.com :rolleyes: would you trust my source if the link was chinadaily.org ;)
 
Last edited:

ani82v

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2012
Messages
1,006
Likes
707
Country flag
I don't understand this. China has disputes with a lot of nations claiming this island or that piece of land based on historical maps. Which era of history did they chose to define their boundary because history is dynamic and borders keep changing over the period of centuries.
 

s002wjh

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2009
Messages
1,271
Likes
153
Country flag
I don't understand this. China has disputes with a lot of nations claiming this island or that piece of land based on historical maps. Which era of history did they chose to define their boundary because history is dynamic and borders keep changing over the period of centuries.
in 19/early 20th centuray china was really weak and was invade by all western power and japan. island such as daoyu was taken by japan after the 1895 war, both taiwan and china claim it. even korea claim some other island that was taken by japan in early 20th century.
as for south china sea. All the claiming partys vietnam, china, phillippine, mala has records or live off the resource(fishing) from SCS for years. so all has somewhat legit claim one way or the other, none should have sole claim of the entire area though.

but the fact is all raising power is gonna assert its influence somewhat, british empire, US in 19/early 20th century, soviet, etc etc. china been a weak power in 19/20th century is not in any position to influence or assert its power, but now its different. But this does not mean they gonna turn up like imperial japan/nazi. just like US in early 20th century they gonna use economy and influence to assert their power. they are not gonna do something stupid nor do they have any reason too, cause there is US checking on them.
 

Oblaks

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2012
Messages
372
Likes
123
you know we can go on like this forever, but when you ask any independent expert on this. they all recognize, china lost those island in the 1s sino-japan war.

and as i indicate in MULTIPLE quote from SEVERAL INDEPENDENT souce, it clearly indicate china has record of these island since ming, qinq dynasty etc, during sino-japan war. japan grab it forcibly even your aritcle say this(except in a fancy way). next thing you know youll be pulling out things from japanese history book that says nanjing masscare never happen.

even just by looking at the map anyone will recognize the approximately of daoyu island with respect to taiwan. and in ming/qing, taiwan was already part of those dynasty, and the island near taiwan are documented/claimed.


NOW here is the source from the dsiputed island.

Senkaku Islands - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and on your last source, the daiyo was include in there because japan take it after 1895 war. i don't even know where you get the idea when japan control a part of group island, it automatically control the entire group
island.
so unless you have an independent source indicate the daoyuisland was part of japan recode before ming, and not try find other ariticle and twist and say its part of japan, i rest my case.

I already put several link from muliple source with VERY STRAIGHTFOWARD facts, no BS fancy word "after 1895 war daoyu was seize by japan, and dayoisland was show in china record since ming dynasty" and i didn't even bother to put in a fancy way saying it belong to china, cause all the fact are already there.


Ryukyu Islands - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

of course i trust wiki/NYtimes and other independent link i provided more than Japanfocus.com :rolleyes: would you trust my source if the link was chinadaily.org ;)


Now you are going round and round with you arguments again. Like I told you, the independent sources you were bragging about we're case studies from Chinese authors published in western websites which is a lot biased than the article that I posted. Now that I am quoting wiki you still don't believe it. There are a lot of independent sources that i can cite..some are biased towards japan and a lot biased towards china. So why not use history and your own judgement based on the facts of history. Again If you put the events together. Senkaku is a part of Ryukyu kingdom which was an independent nation (not part of china) during the ancient times around 1400s before Japan conquered it during 1609, and annexed it 1879. 1895, The senkakus was physically occupied by the japs simultaneous with the Sino-jap war. And since then has been legally possessed by Japan, in terms of history and in terms of effective occupation. no treaty has mentioned the islands were given to Japan nor they are given up by Japan. China has also recognized japan's ownership of the islands wirhin the last century until vast reaources were discovered during the 1970s did china began to claim these islands. Sources are from the links I have posted in previous posts.
 
Last edited:

Oblaks

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2012
Messages
372
Likes
123
. i don't even know where you get the idea when japan control a part of group island, it automatically control the entire group
island.
;)
Ryūkyū Kingdom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Ryūkyū Kingdom (Japanese: 琉球王国 Ryūkyū Ōkoku; Ryukyuan: 琉球國 Ruuchuu-kuku, traditional Chinese: 琉球國, Chinese: 琉球国; pinyin: Liúqiú Guó; historical English name: Lewchew, Luchu) was an independent kingdom which ruled most of the Ryukyu Islands from the 15th century to the 19th century. The Kings of Ryūkyū unified Okinawa Island and extended the kingdom to the Amami Islands in modern-day Kagoshima Prefecture, and the Sakishima Islands near Taiwan. Despite its small size, the kingdom played a central role in the maritime trade networks of medieval East and Southeast Asia.



Sakishima Islands (先島諸島 Sakishima-shotō?, the "Further Isles")
- Miyako Islands (宮古列島 Miyako-rettō?): Miyakojima, Ikema, Ōgami, Irabu, Shimoji, Kurima, Minna, Tarama
- Yaeyama Islands (八重山列島 Yaeyama-rettō?): Iriomote, Ishigaki, Taketomi, Kohama, Kuroshima, Aragusuku, Hatoma, Yubujima, Hateruma, Yonaguni
- Senkaku Islands (尖閣諸島 Senkaku-shotō?, claimed by the PRC and the ROC): Uotsurijima, Kuba Jima, Taisho Jima, Kita Kojima, Minami Kojima

In 1609, Shimazu Tadatsune, Lord of Satsuma, invaded the Ryūkyū Kingdom with a fleet of 13 junks and 2,500 samurai, thereby establishing suzerainty over the islands. They faced little opposition from the Ryukyuans, who lacked any significant military capabilities, and who were ordered by King Shō Nei to surrender rather than to suffer the loss of precious lives.[24] After that, the kings of the Ryukyus paid tribute to the Japanese shogun as well as to the Chinese emperor. In 1655, the tributary relations between Ryukyu and Qing were formally approved by the shogunate.[25] In 1874, the Ryukyus terminated tribute relations with China.
 
Last edited:

mahesh

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2010
Messages
607
Likes
476
Country flag
If every country including India feel that Taiwan is China, then how come that the Taiwanese don't believe the same.

They are daft?'

It could be that they believe China as it is today is not China, but a robotic image what China actually is!


And they are waiting for the day, China discovers itself from the stupidity called Communism!
i might be wrong here, but i believe china have it's embassy is Taiwan and Tibet, or is it ?
 

s002wjh

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2009
Messages
1,271
Likes
153
Country flag
Now you are going round and round with you arguments again. Like I told you, the independent sources you were bragging about we're case studies from Chinese authors published in western websites which is a lot biased than the article that I posted. Now that I am quoting wiki you still don't believe it. There are a lot of independent sources that i can cite..some are biased towards japan and a lot biased towards china. So why not use history and your own judgement based on the facts of history. Again If you put the events together. Senkaku is a part of Ryukyu kingdom which was an independent nation (not part of china) during the ancient times around 1400s before Japan conquered it during 1609, and annexed it 1879. 1895, The senkakus was physically occupied by the japs simultaneous with the Sino-jap war. And since then has been legally possessed by Japan, in terms of history and in terms of effective occupation. no treaty has mentioned the islands were given to Japan nor they are given up by Japan. China has also recognized japan's ownership of the islands wirhin the last century until vast reaources were discovered during the 1970s did china began to claim these islands. Sources are from the links I have posted in previous posts.
right uh-huh. seem like all the western link use these source instead the japanese souce by you? the island was occupied after 1st sino-japan war, that is a fact you try to ignore
 

Oblaks

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2012
Messages
372
Likes
123
right uh-huh. seem like all the western link use these source instead the japanese souce by you? the island was occupied after 1st sino-japan war, that is a fact you try to ignore
They were not part of china even before they were occupied by the japs. That is the fact that you ignore!!!
 

s002wjh

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2009
Messages
1,271
Likes
153
Country flag
They were not part of china even before they were occupied by the japs. That is the fact that you ignore!!!
right, more japanese propaganda. not facts. read wiki and other source said differently
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top