Could Vietnam be in Play? the suitors for primacy would be the US and China

[Nan Yang]

Stop invading your neighbors and all this anger against China wouldn't have happened. Especially Vietnam. Why did you invade Vietnam in the first place which was an ally?

To stop Vietnam dream of a Indochina Federation under Vietnam domination.

 

[EastSea]

To stop Vietnam dream of a Indochina Federation under Vietnam domination.

China have to hand back Islands to Vietnam.
Cold war is dead. For Vietnam today, is member of ASEAN.

 

[sweetgrape]

Stop invading your neighbors and all this anger against China wouldn't have happened. Especially Vietnam. Why did you invade Vietnam in the first place which was an ally?

hypocrite, you should criticise your ancestor did the thing, and I also have a advice to your American, don't make flame everywhere, at last, it will fire yourself, Young America, choose the right enemy.

China play this game first to against Vietnam for rob our Islands, that's all.

We think you play the game first, and follow America, and rob our Island, so, Let Power decide who do the Islands belong to? you can drag your DaD American, and your friend indian in, If you can, Let power decide, Yes, now we will bully your small country, we will turn into bullyer.

China have to hand back Islands to Vietnam.
Cold war is dead. For Vietnam today, is member of ASEAN.

Why "have to"? Yes Cold war is dead, but why let Cold war be in there? Do you think you are qualified to be a player of "Cold war"? hot war can be ignited easily, I am ver glad to see such a hot war between China and Vietcong happen.

And by the way, seems you viet like talking ASEAN? do you think it can protect you? Or we will afraid of it and will give up SCS to you viet?

 

[Viva_Viet]

To stop Vietnam dream of a Indochina Federation under Vietnam domination.

And China failed to stop it in 1979 and 1997 coz her army is always too bad with poor combat tactic, low morale and totally can't match with our well trained army

 

[Viva_Viet]

LOL, good question. As similar as the reason why U.S supported South Vietnam (also ROV) and spent Army directly join Vietnam War.
Both of us for the overseas national interests(including foreign policy). Do u get it?

At leats American changed their mind, accept their lost in VN war and never wanna invade us again but China never change her mind after a hummiliating defeat in 1979 plus losing her ally Pol Pot in Cambodia. She just changed the history from a loser to a winner in 1979 and make poor Chinese believe that Cambodia with its chief army is VNese is China's "best friend"

The best way for China is following American thought, stop indaving VN, admit the lost in 1979 and stop the crazy idea that Cambodia chief army is ur "best friend "

 

[cnleio]

At leats American changed their mind, accept their lost in VN war and never wanna invade us again but China never change her mind after a hummiliating defeat in 1979 plus losing her ally Pol Pot in Cambodia. She just changed the history from a loser to a winner in 1979 and make poor Chinese believe that Cambodia with its chief army is VNese is China's "best friend"

The best way for China is following American thought, stop indaving VN, admit the lost in 1979 and stop the crazy idea that Cambodia chief army is ur "best friend "

 

[jhungary]

Stop invading your neighbors and all this anger against China wouldn't have happened. Especially Vietnam. Why did you invade Vietnam in the first place which was an ally?

The guy simply misunderstood the word "Oversea Interest" to "Neighbor"

Start from 1941, we have no have any war that where we have phyical border with. The last war we have or dispute we have within our border is WHen Japanese Took Guam from us. And that dealt with swiftly.

THe problem is, many people compare China to US. And people seems to ignore 2 simple but important facts.

1.) Chinese Money is not China's Money, they belong to individual (Businessmen) not the government, in time of war, the Government cannot just confiscated all those money, and there are a very high chance those people with money are gonna be gone when war started in China

2.) Yes, we start fire everywhere, but we never set fire to our neighbor. When is the last time we screwed with Canada and Mexico?? The last time we screw with Canada when there weren't a Canada, we scred with the Brits in Canada by buying Lousiana from French. Last time we screw with Mexico is when we got Texas off them.

You can piss off people from around the world, oit take them days to get to you. But you never screw your neighnor, as they are the one who can back stab you in the back just about anytime.

If Chinese member fail to see these 2 points, then i cannot help them

 

[cnleio]

The guy simply misunderstood the word "Oversea Interest" to "Neighbor"

Start from 1941, we have no have any war that where we have phyical border with. The last war we have or dispute we have within our border is WHen Japanese Took Guam from us. And that dealt with swiftly.

THe problem is, many people compare China to US. And people seems to ignore 2 simple but important facts.

1.) Chinese Money is not China's Money, they belong to individual (Businessmen) not the government, in time of war, the Government cannot just confiscated all those money, and there are a very high chance those people with money are gonna be gone when war started in China

2.) Yes, we start fire everywhere, but we never set fire to our neighbor. When is the last time we screwed with Canada and Mexico?? The last time we screw with Canada when there weren't a Canada, we scred with the Brits in Canada by buying Lousiana from French. Last time we screw with Mexico is when we got Texas off them.

You can piss off people from around the world, oit take them days to get to you. But you never screw your neighnor, as they are the one who can back stab you in the back just about anytime.

If Chinese member fail to see these 2 points, then i cannot help them

Fail to History of the United States. 1776 U.S built, 1846 Mexican–American War.

Yes, we start fire everywhere, but we never set fire to our neighbor.

Mexican–American War.Before u write down here,pls check these quoting countries not in ur War List.

And pls read 《Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo》

ended the Mexican–American War (1846–48). With the defeat of its army and the fall of the capital, Mexico entered into negotiations to end the war.It gave the United States the Rio Grande boundary for Texas, and gave the U.S. ownership of California, and a large area comprising New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Wyoming and Colorado. Mexicans in those annexed areas had the choice of returning to Mexico or becoming U.S. citizens with full rights.

To ur neighbors, fired and took their lands, right? I can't help u, Sir.

 

[jhungary]

Fail to History of the United States. 1776 U.S built, 1846 Mexican–American War.


Mexican–American War.Before u write down here,pls check these quoting countries not in ur War List.

And pls read 《Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo》


To ur neighbors, fired and took their lands, right? I can't help u, Sir.

LOL, non-American trying to tell an American fail in American History.

Sir do you know the sucession of Texas IS the determination factor (Belli Casus) of the Last US Mexico War. Bascially, the Texan joining the USA is the direct clause of Mexican starting a war in 1846 (Texas join the union in 1845)

To those who have a brain, by now, they will see we are both talking the same incident. The thing is, i just wrote the cause, you point to the actual war. Unless you can point out to me the Texas Joining IS NOT the direct factor of US-Mexican War. Then we are talking about the same thing.

To the same degree i said we do not have any dispute with our own actual border from 1941. I talk about the invasion that off-set the WW2, I talk about the clause (I explicitly left out Pearl Harbor as that was an attack, not an occupation) and you and me both mean the period is WW2, which is what i imply. Which ended by 1945. And which the battle of Guam is ended in July 1944. Do you want to try have a go and said NO, the guam problem is solved in 1944, not 1941?

Ignorant Chinese member once again try to put a "Dumb" american view before they actually see what's the person are talking about. LOL I laugh so hard at your comment. Try harder next time

 

[Rechoice]

 

[cnleio]

LOL, non-American trying to tell an American fail in American History.
Sir do you know the sucession of Texas IS the determination factor (Belli Casus) of the Last US Mexico War. Bascially, the Texan joining the USA is the direct clause of Mexican starting a war in 1846 (Texas join the union in 1845)
To those who have a brain, by now, they will see we are both talking the same incident. The thing is, i just wrote the cause, you point to the actual war. Unless you can point out to me the Texas Joining IS NOT the direct factor of US-Mexican War. Then we are talking about the same thing.

Yep,the War due to Texas Joining. But ur Army started War first and took lands from ur neighbor Mexico including California and New Mexico,and invaded central Mexico and occupied Mexico City.

President James K. Polk ordered General Taylor and his forces south to the Rio Grande, entering the territory that Mexicans disputed. Mexico laid claim to all the lands as far north as the Nueces River—about 150 mi (240 km) north of the Rio Grande. The U.S. claimed it was the Rio Grande, citing the 1836 Treaties of Velasco. Mexico rejected the treaties and refused to negotiate; it claimed all of Texas.[21] Taylor ignored Mexican demands to withdraw to the Nueces. He constructed a makeshift fort (later known as Fort Brown/Fort Texas) on the banks of the Rio Grande opposite the city of Matamoros, Tamaulipas.[22]
Mexican forces under General Mariano Arista prepared for war. On April 25, 1846, a 2,000-strong Mexican cavalry detachment attacked a 70-man U.S. patrol that had been sent into the contested territory north of the Rio Grande and south of the Nueces River. In the Thornton Affair, the Mexican cavalry routed the patrol, killing 16 American soldiers.

Mexican–American War

Combat operations lasted a year and a half, from spring 1846 to fall 1847. American forces quickly occupied New Mexico and California, then invaded parts of Northeastern Mexico and Northwest Mexico; meanwhile, the Pacific Squadron conducted a blockade, and took control of several garrisons on the Pacific coast further south in Baja California. Another American army captured Mexico City, and the war ended in victory of the U.S.

The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo specified the major consequence of the war: the forced Mexican Cession of the territories of Alta California and New Mexico to the U.S. in exchange for $15 million.

Mexican territory, prior to the secession of Texas, comprised almost 1,700,000 sq mi (4,400,000 km2), which was reduced to just under 800,000 by 1848. Another 32,000 were sold to the U.S. in the Gadsden Purchase of 1853, for a total reduction of more than 55%, or 900,000 square miles.

Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo

It gave the United States the Rio Grande boundary for Texas, and gave the U.S. ownership of California, and a large area comprising New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Wyoming and Colorado. Mexicans in those annexed areas had the choice of returning to Mexico or becoming U.S. citizens with full rights.

California and New Mexico were quickly occupied by American forces in the summer of 1846, and fighting there ended by January 1847 with the signing of the Treaty of Cahuenga and end of the Taos Revolt. The U.S. spent 1847 invading central Mexico and occupying Mexico City, but Mexico was still reluctant to agree to the loss of California and New Mexico, offering only sale of Alta California north of the 37th parallel north (north of Santa Cruz, California and Madera, California and the southern boundaries of today's Utah and Colorado) which was already dominated by Anglo-American settlers

I talk about the invasion that off-set the WW2, I talk about the clause (I explicitly left out Pearl Harbor as that was an attack, not an occupation) and you and me both mean the period is WW2, which is what i imply. Which ended by 1945. And which the battle of Guam is ended in July 1944. Do you want to try have a go and said NO, the guam problem is solved in 1944, not 1941?
Ignorant Chinese member once again try to put a "Dumb" american view before they actually see what's the person are talking about. LOL I laugh so hard at your comment. Try harder next time

Grenada, a North-America/ Caribbean island nation. Do Grenada belong to ur neighbor?
1983 Invasion of Grenada

The Invasion of Grenada, codenamed Operation Urgent Fury, was a 1983 United States-led invasion of Grenada.It was controversial due to charges of American imperialism, Cold War politics, the involvement of Cuba, the unstable state of the Grenadian government, the illegality under international law and Grenada's status as a Commonwealth realm.

Panama, a Mid-America nation/location also North-America. Do Panama belong to ur far neighbor?
1989 United States Invasion of Panama

The United States Invasion of Panama, code-named Operation Just Cause, was the invasion of Panama by the United States in December 1989. It occurred during the administration of U.S. President George H. W. Bush,During the invasion, de facto Panamanian leader, general, and dictator Manuel Noriega was deposed, president-elect Guillermo Endara sworn into office, and the Panamanian Defense Force dissolved.

LOL, non-American trying to tell an American fail in American History.

Im a Chinese.I teach the American History because u r a liar through and through.A liar try to be a gentleman really make ppl s@ck~!

 

[terranMarine]

White aggression, they go invade neighbors themselves and dare to criticize China for claiming the islands in SCS? Mexicans had good reasons to attack these white invaders but lost eventually. Guess these Americans needed a Chinese to show them a map and some history lessons.

 

[jhungary]

Yep,the War due to Texas Joining. But ur Army started War first and took lands from ur neighbor Mexico including California and New Mexico,and invaded central Mexico and occupied Mexico City.

Lol stupid people made stupid comment again.

Let set aside the fact that it is THE MEXCICAN WHO STARTED THE MEXICAN-AMERICAN WAR first. The problem is we gain land during the same conflict, does that mean the land we gain is not on the complexion of the conflict?? No.

Let's look at the WW2 again.

From the start of WW2, Guam is ours and CNMI is Japanese Protectorate. By the end of WW2, both Guam and CNMI is ours. Does that mean we have a seperate engagement for the Commonwealth of North Mariana Islands? NO

There are only 1 war and 1 clause for both of the incident. One Chinese member trying to say Mexican-American war are Not related to Texas splited up, then you are trying to say Occupying California is another different incident?? Dude. Your logic amaze me.

Let me try to dumb down for you.

Texas Split from Mexcio - Casus Belli
Mexican - American War - the progressing war lead by the Casus Belli
Seding California and NM - Result of said war.

All of which is the same things. The reason and result of mexican-american war.

By the way, WHERE IS GRENADE BORDERING THE US?

Did Grenada have any Land and sea border touching the US? NO

for your reference this is the map

So, no, Grenade is NOT AN AMERICAN NEIGHBOR,. It is the neighbbor of Mexico, Cuba and Venezuela.

If i have to say Grenade is our neighbor, then we should also say the United Kingdom, an atlantic ocean away, should also be our next door neighbor.

Dude, your American History and logic is appaling, i suggest you go find another line of work.

 

[Kiss_of_the_Dragon]

The guy simply misunderstood the word "Oversea Interest" to "Neighbor"

...
2.) Yes, we start fire everywhere, but we never set fire to our neighbor. When is the last time we screwed with Canada and Mexico?? The last time we screw with Canada when there weren't a Canada, we scred with the Brits in Canada by buying Lousiana from French. Last time we screw with Mexico is when we got Texas off them.

You can piss off people from around the world, oit take them days to get to you. But you never screw your neighnor, as they are the one who can back stab you in the back just about anytime.
If Chinese member fail to see these 2 points, then i cannot help them

What is the point for U.S to set fire on neighbors when they can ask the neighbors to set fire on themself fail to do so will face U.S sanction and retaliation, the best example of Canadia's AVRO fighter jet project, it was the most advance at that time evern better than what ever U.S had but under U.S pressure Canada had destroy the project to please American...sure you Americans are really angels to your neighbors.

Under Monroe doctrine and under U.S economical sanction or economic manupulation to screw up latino countries with mountain of debt, verually all threats had been supressed, so you wonder why you dont set fire on your neighbors because there has not wood left for you to do so...comprendo?

I'm wondering should China implement U.S Monroe doctrine in our region...once we suppressed all the threat...then we can claim the we're peacefull to our neighbors..and never set fire on them...LMAO

 

[Viet]

Good idea, but ignore above countries all have huge trade with China each year. Do they really help Vietnam when risk of losing big interest and huge market? I don't think so.

80s~90s in South America, U.S.A invaded Panama and Grenada to defend U. S interests. This also would happen in everywhere when powerful country need to defend her interests. 2012 China Military expenditure over 100billion dollars(seized 2% China GDP),nearly as same as whole 2012 Vietnam national GDP(113billion dollars).

So confrontation isn't suitable for Vietnam, can't afford the game. As above i said, today who have a big & good economy, who will win next war; ruin enemy's economy, army automatically crush.

Sure, China is a large economy, making it important to others. But it is worthless, if confrontation arises, e.i. China-Japan island dispute. For Vietnam, it is similar. Again, I think the best policy for Vietnam is to secretly keep China busy (in conflicts) with other powers, to distract attentions from itself.