Cambodian and Vietnamese Soldiers Fight Over Border Dispute

[somsak]

During the Invasion of Malaya, the 25th Imperial Japanese Army was actually supported by some 20,000 (2 divisions) of the Royal Siamese Army. The Siamese had coordinated in the occupation of Singapore as well as the transferring of the British POWs to camps in Siam and Burma.





Buddy,

The Siamese didn't really have a choice at the time. If their prime minister, Phibulsongkram, had denied the Imperial Japanese Army's request to cross through Thailand, then Japan would have simply invaded and taken Siam by force and quite frankly we could have done it easily. The Siamese , are diplomatic people, they side with whoever is the dominant power. Remember, buddy, that is the reason why they remained 'independent' and were not colonized by European powers. They sacrifice pawns (cambodia, laos, shan) when they have to, in order to save and protect the queen or king (yes i'm using chess terminology here, lol).

In the end, the Siamese cooperated with Japan out of necessity. They did not have the means to resist us. Had they resisted, their entire country would have been pulverized into submission. Luckily that it was not the case.




Impressive. Japan had really armed up Siam during that time. Good to see this.

Thats why Thailand didn't have bad feeling about "east asia co prosperity shpere".

 

[Aepsilons]

Thats why Thailand didn't have bad feeling about "east asia co prosperity shpere".

Of course. Whenever I analyze the dynamic of Southeast Asia , one will see three traditional seats of power in continental Southeast Asia: Siam, Dai Viet and Burma. But in the last two centuries the dominant powers were definitely Siam and Viet Nam, with both competing with each other for supremacy over traditional states Cambodia (Lovek) and Laos (Lan Chang). Tho to be honest, the Siamese have had cultural similarities with the Laotians (Kon Lao) and the Cambodians due to the underlying Mon-Khmer culture that helped formed the Siamese identity. Siam was forced to give up its traditional territories of Cambodia and Laos to the French early in the 19th century in order to maintain her independene. To the British she had to give up various territories in the Malay Peninsula in order to maintain independence, less Siam wanted to suffer the same fate that had befallen the Burmese Toungoo Dynasty (which fought 3 brutal and unsuccessful wars with the British and only to be subsumed into British India in totality).

In that politial and socio-historical paradigm , I would say that Siam and Japan had both similar ideologies in that both were two nation states that had evaded colonization by the West through diplomacy, as well as implementing policies to advance the nation. Japan early on had pretty much focused and invested on self-sustenance , and anti-european imperialist agenda , and supported a concept of 'Asia for Asians'. This pretty much fell in line with the same policies of the political culture in Siam at the time as Siam had also detested the loss of her Cambodian and Laotian fiefdoms to the French in what Krungthep referred to as "unfair policies of spheres of influence".

One can even argue that Siamese participation in the war against the allies was an epitome of Siamese nationalism de jure. Of course history is written by the "victors" in this case the West. However, for us who study history and social developments over time, its interesting for us to analyze developments in Siam in context to the social, political and nationalist paradigm concepts. In the end, Siam fought for the interest of Siam. I think that is a mature aspect for any nation state.

 

[hongquan]

No, bro.

Vietnamese is firstly classificated to the Austri-Asiatic language faminily, not Sino-Tibetan languages. I would like to copy here the statement from Text book printed in Vietnam for students.

You misunderstood what he said. What he meant is: "During the research about how to classify Vietnamese language, the scientists at first placed Vietnamese to Sino-Tibetan. After more research and debate, they placed it in Tai-Kadai. However, other scientists didn't agree and argued that Vietnamese should be in Mon-Khmer family".

The text book accepts the 3rd conclusion. But before that conclusion is accepted and brought into text book, there are many other results being given and discussed.

 

[biendong]

You misunderstood what he said. What he meant is: "During the research about how to classify Vietnamese language, the scientists at first placed Vietnamese to Sino-Tibetan. After more research and debate, they placed it in Tai-Kadai. However, other scientists didn't agree and argued that Vietnamese should be in Mon-Khmer family".

The text book accepts the 3rd conclusion. But before that conclusion is accepted and brought into text book, there are many other results being given and discussed.

Thanks for your correction. I have mistaken J. L. Taberd (in 1838) to J. R. Logan (in 1856).

 

[Sanchez]

Map of Vietnam showing the conquest of the south (nam tiến, 1069-1834)
View attachment 226931
I guess In 50-100years the country that called Cambodia will totally disappear from the world.

Very interesting! We learn from the map at least how snaky should mean in Asia.