A Chinese journalist wisely answered the questions about dispute of South China Sea

Discussion in 'China' started by linda, Jan 6, 2016.

  1. Oblaks

    Oblaks Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2012
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    123
    . SO
    Based on your logic. Mongolia can now lay claim to China ang the whole SCS. How funny is that, you are claiming the seas based on history played out 2000 years ago. Move on chini man!
     
    cannonfodder likes this.
  2. Oblaks

    Oblaks Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2012
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    123
    Laughter please!!! China owned the Seas since 2000 years ago? How funny is that! How did you own it? By fishing in it? History and evidences will tell you time and again that Austronesians, Malays, Indians, Chams, where already living and harvesting the ocean in peace long before the Chinis came!
     
  3. Oblaks

    Oblaks Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2012
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    123
    On the article that you cited, here is a notable comment from a Vietnamese
     
  4. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2
    Have you really read this article I posted here before you say this?

    "Chinese fishermen were using the South China Sea as fishing ground and inhibited those islands during fishing season on regular basis since at least the Sung dynasty more than 1,000 years ago and these were recorded facts. Up to now many of the larger islands in the South China Sea still has remains of old Chinese temples built by the fishermen to beg for good fortune. There is also a book called Kan Lo Chi (更路誌) which until the introduction of the GPS was used by Chinese fishermen for navigating the SCS, and which recorded all the atolls, sand bars and reefs based on records compiled by hundreds of generations of Chinese fishermen. This shows how common Chinese fishermen used the South China Sea as its traditional fishing ground. That of course is not decisive as fishermen of other lands also fished in the SCS although probably not as extensively as the Chinese.
    However by the time of the Ming dynasty in the 15th century (i.e. preceding the invasion of the Philippines by Spain) all the surrounding lands in the South China Sea were either not developed, or were vassal states of China (such as Vietnam, Siam and Malacca). Naval control of China over the South China Sea also started in this period. At one time the Ming Emperor Young Le even appointed a governor called Ko Cha-lao in 1405 to rule Luzon during Admiral Zheng He’s epic sea voyages although his governance was short-lived after the death of Yong Le emperor and the Ming Court became disinterested in the land. Some of the islands in the South China Sea still have territorial stone plagues left by the navy of the Ming dynasty. Ironically such control was precipitated by the rampant Chinese pirates at the time which, in cooperation with Japanese pirates, infested the South China Sea and the coast of China which in turn brought the Ming navy in to control that region."
    Luzon is nowadays Philippine. I didn't deny there were other fishermen from other land did fishing in this region, they were just a few fishermen showed up there and they never ruled in that area, but China DID ruled it at country level to management this region and never changed it since then,The countries around this region are just newly established ones after world war II, yet China has already actually ruled this region far back to that time!

    You can't say that because you have built up you house near to my fishing pond then you have right to claim that pond belongs to you as it is close to your house, that is ridiculous! based on your logic should we say your country is also near to China so what Chinese should say then? the reason this mess situation appearing today is Chinese fault, Chinese are too kind and civilized people ,they didn't do like what Western Colonialists did when they were dominated in the world and .... we all know what happened in the world later, If Chinese did like western white colonialists , the world could be much peaceful and quiet. Old civilization like Chinese and Indian ones are much kind and moderate ,they are all peaceful nation, unfortunately those two great nations had suffered a lot under the Law of Jungle from western civilization in past hundred years.
     
  5. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2
    History, where did you read your so called history from? you even didn't have characters to record it! not mentioned the material that could carry that characters records (paper that invented by Chinese in 100 BC to 105 AD) , show me your evidences, where did you unearthed your records , wrote in paper or stone, what kind of characters are you using, don't tell me it is in English!
    Pity ,, you country politician cut off your connection to your culture's mother land and adopted western newly invented Latin letters for you from their own ruling sake, you read that fabricated history book and come to tell the one of oldest civilization country who have hold tons of real history records and evidence that their are fake and your claim is real ?
     
  6. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2
    China had made a great effort to keep peace and harmony around this region and signed
    “Declaration on Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea” with their neiboring countries in 2002, China would set aside their argument and willing to develop this region together with those countries around. But it turns out, Chinese had kept their promise and abides this code they signed, they didn't send any oil drilling ship and equipment to this region neither sent any soldier to other islands in past decades even if they have historic relics on there . but what other countries do, huh? they were acting just like their former colonist sent their troop to the islands one by one, destroyed the Chinese old temples and monument replaced with their own one. islands expanding construction have never put in end.

    Vietnamese have occupied most of those islands and have been constructing to expand to many artificial islands and this have been ongoing for decades. http://amti.csis.org/vietnam-island-building/

    "Vietnam has 48 outposts; the Philippines, 8; China, 8; Malaysia, 5, and Taiwan, 1. In the past 20 years, according to the United States, China has not physically occupied additional features. By contrast, Vietnam has doubled its holdings, and much of that activity has occurred recently. The Vietnamese occupations appear to have increased from 30 to 48 in the last six years. " (Who Is the Biggest Aggressor in the South China Sea?) /http://thediplomat.com/2015/06/who-is-the-biggest-aggressor-in-the-south-china-sea/

    Philippine was even more ridiculous and mean , they deliberately towed a rusting, rat-infested former U.S. Navy warship grounded on Renaijiao (they call Ayungin) atoll to claim their territory which made whole world shake head and despise them. http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2014/07/world/south-china-sea-dispute/

    by August 2011, China’s neighboring countries in the South China Sea region have 1511 drilling oil wells and 1871 developing oil wells, and discovered 308 oilfields, of which 556 oil wells and 133 oilfields are within China’s dotted line. By the end of 2010, China’s neighboring countries were producing an average of 179 thousand tons of oil every day, which amounts to 65 million tons of oil and 75 billion cubic meters of natural gas yearly. Since the 1970s, China’s neighboring countries in the South China Sea region have signed 428 cooperative agreements with third party oil companies in the South China Sea, with 188 of these agreements being partially or totally within China’s dotted line
    //http://www.ciis.org.cn/english/2015-05/11/content_7894391.htm

    "Presently, roughly 200 international oil companies are contracted to explore and develop oil and gas in the South China Sea area, including Shell, Exxon, British Petroleum, Japex, Inpex, Nissho Iwai, AOC, TOTAL, Canoxy, BHP, Nestro, ONGC, Statoil and PEDCO, among other companies. It can be said that almost all big transnational enterprises have become involved in the prospecting and extraction of oil and gas in the South China Sea. Since the 1980s, third party oil companies from other regions have invested more than 100 billion USD."

    ....
    Wow. they are all acting like hungry wolves crazily seize as much profit as they can by all means, China actually are victim here but unfortunately being described and demonized as a most aggressive evil. What a unfair thing and tragedy ! Kindness and benevolence are abused terribly...

     
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2016
  7. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2
    Okay, now China has to change their policy to use the only language those wolves could understand. Learned a lesson from them, right? see those Beautiful Chinese stewardess happily step on the Chinese Yongshu Island .[​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  8. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2
    As regards Mongolia you mentioned, this is another tragedy came from the time when China was invaded and suffered killing and looting by foreign force for hundred year. Mongolia was separated from China by manipulating of Soviet Unit and Japan during the world war II again. it is a nation tragedy! China did not recognize Mongolia until 1949,united states didn't recognize it until 1987, Republic of China ROC(Taiwan) is the last one to recognize Mongolia independence in May 21th. 2012, anyway like what you said, past is past, we can't change. however there are some facts are interesting :
    Mongolia are divided into two parts, Outer Mongolia and Inner Mongolia,

    Inner Mongolian: Mongolia population about 4.25million. All of descendants of Genghis Khan and a member of the Mongolian royal family have been living in the area inside of China, Inner Mongolian people speak bilingual language Chinese and Mongolia language and still remain their own characters- Mongolia letters“ᠬᠠᠯᠬ᠎ᠠ ᠠᠶᠠᠯᠭᠣ ”Inner Mongolia forest area from 2.8 million hectares to 3.2 million hectares, the forest coverage rate increased from 14.8 percent to 17.5 percent, an average annual increasing forest coverage of 0.56%, ten times of the 80s in the last century . GDP over $10,000 per capita in 2015

    Outer Mongolian : It was separated from China by intervention of Soviet Union and Japan's while China was in struggling in World War II in 1946. People are Khalkha tribe who were conquer by Genghis Khan tribes in 15th.they are regarded as subgroups of mongol. Now they have abandoned their own language and character to adopted Slavic language and characters ‘гадаад монгол” , population is 2.4 million. 42.5 percent of Mongolia's Desertification of land at 13% annual growth rate . GDP $4,353 per capita 2015.
     
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2016
  9. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2
    Again, I just noticed the format of this article that I pasted to here seems little messing and not easy to read. I just edited and adjusted a little bit to make it easier to view. Sorry about that.

    h t t p s://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iU0R8mysZ2E

    chiupo lini 4 months ago (edited)

    There appears to be a lot of misconception in the web about China's claim over the South China Sea. The one most often seen is that China is too far away to claim it. This is a gut reaction to which I once shared when this topic first heated up in recent years. However as I discussed this topic on the web with others, I carried out research, and this changed my mind as the historical facts are revealed.

    There are many ways a person may come to own a property. One way is he inherited it from his parents, and his parents from his grandparents. Similar principle applies to nations.

    China is an old country and it was invaded but has never been colonized by western powers. However Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Indonesia did, and they only gained independence after WWII. Their nationhood are therefore defined by their colonial masters. In that sense what territorial rights each of these once colonized countries have, or inherited, must be traced to that claimed by their previous colonial masters. As the claims of Brunei and Indonesia are insignificant, I shall concentrate only on the main contenders, i.e. Vietnam, the Philippines and, to certain extent, Malaysia, and contrast that with the historical claim of China.

    Below is a summary of the facts of China's claims to the South China Sea I collated through my research, some of which are from old records written in Chinese before the dispute even arose. Most of them may however be found in the internet if you care to do some research. While I do not claim they are the full facts, they are at least much richer in contents than some of the arguments presented in the internet or the so called “forums”. If you think you are open minded, try to read them. Whether you agree with China's stance of not, it does show that the South China Sea issue is not a recent invention by China but "it may be that some of the claims are legitimate", a phrase used by the US President Obama on 1st June 2015 in a meeting with the young South East Asian leaders.

    Chinese fishermen were using the South China Sea as fishing ground and inhibited those islands during fishing season on regular basis since at least the Sung dynasty more than 1,000 years ago and these were recorded facts. Up to now many of the larger islands in the South China Sea still has remains of old Chinese temples built by the fishermen to beg for good fortune. There is also a book called Kan Lo Chi (更路誌) which until the introduction of the GPS was used by Chinese fishermen for navigating the SCS, and which recorded all the atolls, sand bars and reefs based on records compiled by hundreds of generations of Chinese fishermen. This shows how common Chinese fishermen used the South China Sea as its traditional fishing ground. That of course is not decisive as fishermen of other lands also fished in the SCS although probably not as extensively as the Chinese.

    However by the time of the Ming dynasty in the 15th century (i.e. preceding the invasion of the Philippines by Spain) all the surrounding lands in the South China Sea were either not developed, or were vassal states of China (such as Vietnam, Siam and Malacca). Naval control of China over the South China Sea also started in this period. At one time the Ming Emperor Young Le even appointed a governor called Ko Cha-lao in 1405 to rule Luzon during Admiral Zheng He’s epic sea voyages although his governance was short-lived after the death of Yong Le emperor and the Ming Court became disinterested in the land. Some of the islands in the South China Sea still have territorial stone plagues left by the navy of the Ming dynasty. Ironically such control was precipitated by the rampant Chinese pirates at the time which, in cooperation with Japanese pirates, infested the South China Sea and the coast of China which in turn brought the Ming navy in to control that region.

    In 1844, 1867 and 1889 the British sent expedition forces to survey South China Sea. Germany did the same in 1883. They were met with strong protests from the Qing Government.

    In the late 19th Century, France and China entered into the Sino-French war over Indo-China. The result was China agreed to cede Vietnam (then still a vassal state of China) to France which then became its protectorate. In 1887 under the Sino-French Treaty the border of China and Vietnam was ascertained by the joint border commission which did not include the Paracel and Spratly Islands into Vietnamese territory.

    Soon after the Sino-French Treaty, the French colonial government in Vietnam sough to lay claim to Paracel Islands on the basis of the historical presence of Vietnamese fishermen on those islands. To counter the demand, in May 1909 a fleet of 3 fully armed warships led by the Qing Admiral of Guangdong province, Li Zhun "李准" , made an official survey of all the islands and atolls of Paracel Islands and other islands in the South China Sea and compiled a report to the Qing court with 8 proposals of further exploit the resources of the islands. His proposal was approved. Before implementation, however, the Qing court collapsed in 1911. However after 1911 the Republic of China placed continued to administer the Paracel and Spratly Islands by granting licenses to exploit guano and other resources.

    After the expedition of Li Zhun and the publication of the survey records setting out the islands in the South China Sea as Chinese territories, the then French prime minister Aristide Briand stated on 21 May 1921 that the Chinese sovereignty over Paracel Islands were impossible to dispute: see the book entitled "Security Flashpoints: Oil, Islands, Sea Access and Military Confrontation" edited by Myron Nordquist and John Moore from the University of Virginia, Center for Oceans Law and Policy.

    In the dawn of WWII, due to the threat of Japan to the British and French colonies in Indo-China, the French landed a force on Xisha (Paracel) and Nansha (Spratly) in 1931 and later in 1933 to prevent the Japanese from using them as outposts against Vietnam. The Chinese government protested and reserved its rights on both occasions but was otherwise powerless to take action due to the civil war and the Japanese invasion at the time. But in 1939 Japan threw out the French and annexed the two island groups as their colonies and renamed them Shinnam Gunto (New Southern Islands) and incorporated them under the Taiwan administration (which was then ruled by Japan). When France protested, Japan said that as they were in war with China they could annex China's territories,

    Note that in 1939 the Philippines was still a colony of the US. And Malaysia was under British rule. Japan did not go to war with the US and Britain until December 1941. If the islands the Japanese occupied were part of the territories of the Philippines or Malaysia (or Brunei), the US and Britain would surely have declared war against Japan as early as 1939. But they did not even raise a word of protest. This throw the “inheritance” theory of the Philippines and Malaysia out of the window.

    After Japan's defeat and unconditional surrender in 1945, Japan had to give up all the islands it stole from China 'by violence and greed' under the Potsdam Declaration, which formed part of the Japanese Instrument of Surrender signed in September 1945.

    In October and November 1946 the Nationalist Government of China repossessed the South China Sea islands (with the help of the US navy), and reiterated its sovereignty over the islands.(including the islands now the Philippines claimed to be theirs), France tried to take Woody island (the largest island in Paracel Islands) from China but failed, and never has it raised any claim again. After a comprehensive survey in 1947 the Republic of China (RoC) then renamed the islands and published in Feb. 1948 an official map called "The Southern China Sea Island Location Map" with the 11 dotted lines around the South China Sea as China's territorial water. There was no protest from any nation.

    Also in 1947 the Collier's World Atlas and Gazetteer included a map made by Rand McNally entitled "Popular Map of China, French Indochina, Siam and Korea". That map clearly marked Paracel Islands (the one now claimed by Vietnam as its territory) as Chinese territory (with the word China in parenthesis over the islands), and all other islands in the Spratly Islands group (some now claimed by the Philippines) with Chinese names. And none was marked as belonged to the Philippines. Bear in mind that this US map was made in 1947 which was intended to reflect the post WWII territories of the region, it would be very odd indeed if the Rand McNally would have ignored any claim to those Islands if they were “traditionally” part of the Philippines territory, which just got independent from the US the year before under the Treaty of Manila 1946. Rand McNally was a well-established map maker in the US. While its map is not conclusive, it does accurately reflected how the world saw the South China Sea in the immediate post WWII era.

    In 1948 the People's Republic of China (PRC) took over the government of China and forced the RoC government to flee to Taiwan. In 1951 when the San Francisco conference was held, neither the PRC nor the RoC was invited to attend as there was a dispute as to which government represented China. At the time the then Chinese Premier and Foreign Minister Zhou Enlai made a declaration warning against the participants of the San Francisco Convention that China reaffirmed its sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea whatever be the outcome of the Convection. Vietnam (then still under French administration) did make a claim in the Convention based on previous occupation by France. But at the end the San Francisco Treaty only included the Japanese renunciation of its claims over the islands without stating to whom they belonged, hence implicitly rejected French Vietnam’s claim.

    In 1953 the PRC entered into friendly negotiation with Vietnam (the part administered by Viet Ming under Ho Chi Ming who was fighting the French colonial power) and ceded to it part of the sea in Gulf of Tonkin including an island now called Bach Long Vi (with the few Chinese fishermen living on that island told they would became Vietnamese). In the same year the PRC also amended the original 11 dotted lines to 9 by deleting the lines over the Gulf of Token to reflect that friendly arrangement.

    After the Battle of Dien Bien Phu and the defeat of the French colonial by the Viet Minh, in the Geneva Convention of 1954 Vietnam was formally divided into North Vietnam and South Vietnam.

    On 4 Sept, 1958, China declared that the breadth of its territorial sea shall be 12nm, and this applied to all of its territories. The declaration included a map which clearly depicted sea borders and sea territories including Paracel and Spratly Islands. North Vietnam published the declaration on the front page of the official Nhan Dan newspaper on 6 Sept.

    Then on 14 September 1958, North Vietnam’s Prime Minister Pham Van Dong wrote a diplomatic note to Premier Zhou Enlai which stated that: "We would like to inform you so that you may be clear that the Government of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam has noted and support the September 4, 1958 declaration by the People’s Republic of China regarding territorial waters of China. The government of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam respects this decision and will direct the proper government agencies to respect absolutely the 12 nautical mile territorial waters of China in all dealings with the People’s Republic of China on the sea. We would like to send our sincere regards."

    This diplomatic note was published on the official Nhan Dan newspaper on 22 Sep 1958.

    The Philippines, which became independent in 1946, also did not object to China's 11 dotted line declaration published in 1948 nor the subsequent 4 Sept 1958 declaration. That is little wonder since the territorial limits (including its territorial sea) of the Philippines are in fact defined in Article III of the Treaty of Paris 1898 when the Spanish sold the Philippines and its other overseas possession to the US for US$20,000,000. That is the same territory when the US ratified the Treaty of Manila in 1946 when the Philippines gained its independence. Anyone who cares to read Article III will find that the territory sea boundary lines do not include any of the islands/atolls in the South China Sea claimed by China. Two other treaties before the Philippines became independent, namely the Cession Treaty 1900 (which dealt with the territories of Cagayan, Sulu and Sibutu) and the Boundaries Treaty of 1930 (which delimited the boundary between the State of North Borneo and the Philippines) did not affect the Paracel or Spratly Islands claimed by China at all.

    In 1971 President Marcos of the Philippines announced a claim over 53 islands in part of the Spratly Island group and named them the Kalayaan Island Group purportedly on the basis of terra nullius (prior to that the group of islands were declared by a Filipino freak called Tomas Cloma to be his own independent country). RoC immediately sent a diplomatic note of protest on 12 July 1971 to Manila, which protest was seconded by PRC even though the two were still in hostility. At the same time South Vietnam also issued a protest based on its own claim: See the book: Contest for the South China Sea by Marwyn Samuels published in 1982. President Marcos forcefully purchased the "Free Territory of Freedomland" (i.e. Kalayaan islands), from Tomas Cloma for one peso (after imprisoning him for several months) in 1974. Then on 11 June 1978 Marcos issued a presidential decree no. 1596 and annexed the Kalayaan Island Group as a municipality under Palawan province and sent human settlement on the largest island there. In the international context, the legal basis Marco's decree was not recognized by China or Vietnam and the islands remain in dispute.

    In 1974, China and South Vietnam broke into military conflict over Paracel Islands. It ended with a decisive victory for China. After South Vietnam was annexed by North Vietnam in 1975, however, Vietnam and China fell out as the former was trying to extend its influence over all of Indo-China, sided sought help from Russia, which was then in serious border dispute with China.

    In 1979 a war broke out between Vietnam and China. Since then Vietnam went back on its position and annexed some islands in the South China Sea. In 1988 a mini sea war broke out between China and Vietnam over the Spratly Islands ending with a decisive victory for China. Yet today Vietnam has obtained the benefit of over 1 billion bbls of oil produced from the sea it occupied. China has not even built any oil well in the area occupied by China so as not to escalate tension.

    Malaysia annexed 6 features in 1979, twenty-two years after its independence from the British who never handed them any such island/atolls in the South China Sea. The islands, reefs and atolls it now occupies is now increased to 14.

    Brunei only claim the Louisa reef, which is also contested by Malaysia and China.

    Hence it can clearly be seen that the claims by Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei are all of recent origins. After WWII and before the 1970s, no one disputed China's claims to the islands in the South China Sea. And before WWII, only the French and Japanese did but they have since raised no claim.

    UNCLOS is the law which many claimed China should be subject. However anyone who actually reads its provisions will find that it is the sea law which seeks to settle certain issues over open sea resources. It does not determine sovereignty issues, in particular what is the “baseline” against which the sea territory and EEZ were measured.

    In any event when China rectified the UNCLOS in 1996, it expressly declared that its accession was subject to its sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea as well as Diaoyu Islands. Such declarations are not unique as many member nations also made their own declarations. The UNCLOS was hence studded with more exceptions than rules.

    In 2006 China further declared under Article 298 of UNCLOS that the jurisdiction of the tribunal set up under the UNCLOS was excluded from any dispute with China. That is not something exceptional as a long list of countries also wholly or partially excluded the jurisdiction of the international tribunal e.g. Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ecuador etc.

    However it seems that the UNCLOS is now being used by some nations to justify extending rights into territories which did not belong to them before by the concept of Exclusive Economic Zone created in UNCLOS. What they forgot was EEZ did not extend sovereignty, but to regulate right based on their original sovereignties, which the UNCLOS provides no answer. So an instrument of peace has now been distorted and used as a justification for aggression.

    Since the turn of the century China had extended invitation to enter talks among parties in dispute over the South China Sea. But with the interference with the US, any talk between the disputed parties are not possible. Yet ironically the US has not even ratified the UNCLOS because its provisions are against the US interest over its “extended continental shelf” claim which translates to hundreds of billions of dollars in royalties over oil exploration off Alaska.

    Hence when the US calls for China to settle the dispute of the South China Sea in accordance with International Law (which many in the web support), it is not clear which international law the US is talking about - UNCLOS (which does not apply to determine sovereignty issues and which US does not itself ratify) or some US home-made international law based on the "customary law of the sea" made by the colonial powers, to which China never subscribed.

    In the absence of any applicable law, the issue can only be resolved by force or by bilateral talk. China and Malaysia prefer the latter. Vietnam seems to favour the former as it has been engaged continuously in island building in SCS for decades. The Philippines? I am not quite sure as it insists any talks must involve its US military protector or based on the UNCLOS law which does not even apply.
    Show less
     
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2016
  10. Indx TechStyle

    Indx TechStyle War Mongerer Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    12,146
    Likes Received:
    19,974
    Location:
    21°N 78°E / 21°N 78°E
    @linda If China can claim sea on the base of oldest establishments (2000 years ago), then, India's candidacy must be strong (our civilization is 5000 years old, much older than China). :rofl:
     
  11. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2
    Have you really read that article? anyway no matter what historical or legitimacy base that China's neighboring countries claim this region by or what, China has stronger evidence and right to claim much more than others, But if you want to ignore those bases just want to seize it by force, Lol. Then , who is gonna afraid of whom, guess?

    Beside, South China Sea has nothing to do with India, Why do you try to get Indian involved it, is that strange? China and Indian are both great old civilization. Are you trying to instigate and incite those two great nations to fight or not ? Pathetic.

    Chinese civilization is much much older than you thought, Go to google do some homework . China is the only world's 'oldest continuous civilization nowadays. Chinese still can read the books of 3000 years ago. that is why the records from Chinese old history book that kept in tons of national museums,institutes and schools and even online, the history knowledge have been known by common people, it is the real authentic materials and nobody could deny ! it is not like other so called history book ( with no evidence whatsoever) that written in newly invented characters by somebody deliberately for untold purpose!

    Chinese history:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_China

    Rice Culture in China
    http://www.cofcorice.com/en/nutritions/1063.aspx

    Oldest pottery' found in China (13000 years ago)


    [​IMG]

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8077168.stm


    Wine pottery from 9000 years ago discovered in China


    [​IMG]

    https://www.sciencenews.org/article/chinas-fermented-past-pottery-yields-signs-oldest-known-wine

    JARRING FINDS. A 3,000-year-old Chinese bronze jar (left) was found to still contain a rice or millet wine. Researchers have also discovered remnants of a fermented drink in fragments of 9,000-year-old Chinese vessels such as the three on the right.
    Z. Zhang/Inst. of Cultural Relics and Archaeol. of Henan Province

    That's the oldest known evidence of an intoxicating beverage, says archaeological chemist Patrick E. McGovern of the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology in Philadelphia. He led the international team that scrutinized the ancient pottery.

    http://www.nbcnews.com/id/6661424/n...e-science/t/hints--year-old-wine-found-china/

    9,000 Year Old Chinese Flutes

    http://www.shakuhachi.com/K-9KChineseFlutes-Nature.html
    [​IMG]

    List of Chinese cultural relics forbidden to be exhibited abroad

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chinese_cultural_relics_forbidden_to_be_exhibited_abroad
     
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2016
  12. Indx TechStyle

    Indx TechStyle War Mongerer Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    12,146
    Likes Received:
    19,974
    Location:
    21°N 78°E / 21°N 78°E
    If you consider, Chinese establishment before 3000 years ago then, India has consideration of four Yugas periods of 5-500 years ago written in history. Current is fourth one according the that.
     
    OneGrimPilgrim likes this.
  13. OneGrimPilgrim

    OneGrimPilgrim Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2015
    Messages:
    5,238
    Likes Received:
    6,767
    Location:
    whr invaders hv been eulogised, heroes binned!!
    goes far far beyond that if Yugas were to be considered in their entirety...the Chinese brain may turn chopsuey learning about it. :laugh:
     
    Indx TechStyle likes this.
  14. Oblaks

    Oblaks Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2012
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    123
    Amidst all these blah blah blah, the clear conclusion that we can make is that whoever wrote or said these piece of crap clearly speaks with bias towards the CCP. bilateral talks is the least effective method or resolution as there are multiple parties to the dispute. This also clearly show that China do not subscribe to anything which is civil such as international law. It only recognizes anything which can favor its selfish claims
     
  15. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Which international Law is? show me! There is no such international law could apply on South China Sea ! Obviously you didn't read this article, it has clearly refuted this kind of argument. Read it!,
    I don't want to wast time to explain it over and over again. Gosh!
     

Share This Page