Chinese FM rejects Philippine, Japanese, U.S. claims on South China Sea issue

[vtnsx]

There is a difference between westernizing in terms of academic pursuits and in scientific inquiry (through western empiricism) from transforming socially speaking. Japan, to this day, may be westernized , but the deep core of Japanese society remains in firmament with Confucian culture. The paradigm of harmony of Confucianism, Zen-Buddhism, Shintoism, with Western Philosophy.

In other words, Japanese Society borrowed the core strengths of Western Civilization and applied it to the Japanese Context.

Or Shin Akuma!

 

[sweetgrape]

He did not explicitly say “depended” on the US. But when you “needed” the US, as he admitted, and when China decided to shake hand with the US to work together against another country, as history has shown, then that pretty much mean you were depending on the US. You may disagree with my terminology, but I’m just telling the history.

And this history is not different from what your compatriots are now accusing Viet Nam of doing. You may change the words between “depend” and “use” but it will still look pretty much the same.



And this is what is wrong with this discussion and we will never get anywhere. You are interpreting the word “use” and “depend” however you like to fit your own narrative.

Hehe, I have said, it is "depend on" problem, as you say, you are telling the history? history is recored, it is neutral, judged by people, not itself.
and, before China and USA was building relationship, all of us are against each other, the principal constradiction before cold war is between USA and Soviet, hehe, depend on? maybe for you, is China depended on USA, but USA was using China leverage against Soviet,

 

[William Hung]

Hehe, I have said, it is "depend on" problem, as you say, you are telling the history? history is recored, it is neutral, judged by people, not itself.
and, before China and USA was building relationship, all of us are against each other, the principal constradiction before cold war is between USA and Soviet, hehe, depend on? maybe for you, is China depended on USA, but USA was using China leverage against Soviet,

You are just talking in circles and not bringing anything new to the discussion.

Yes, history is what it is:

Your China once shaked hands with your former enemy (the US) to work together against your former friend (the USSR and her allies). This is the history. “Use” or “depend” I dont care.

It was your compatriots who decided to reinterpret it through their own narrative, saying that China only “used” the US and was not “depending” on the US and at the same time interpreting Viet Nam as now “depending” on the US and not merely “using” the US (and you and your compatriots have failed to explain what makes this difference). Its clear to see that you and your compatriots are desperately trying to twist history and use word plays to escape from your criticism that was laid against VietNam which have now back fired on you. It looks really silly and comical and this is all there is to this debate. You are just talking in circles now.

 

[xesy]

In fact, China's construction is mainly for civilian and scientific use, including ensuring safety of navigation. On the other, you are the pioneers of island build-up, including air strips and deep ports, which are mainly for military use.

Your impotence does not mean your intentions are also small.

Not very convincing. Firstly, we actually have civilians settle on the island, while your islands have fishes and soldiers. Secondly, our airfield is short (800m) and only capable for landing helicopters and M-28 patrol aircrafts, as well as civilians small aircrafts. On the other hands, what do you have to say about your 2km airstrips? Do you plan to have an international airport there? In land VN only has a handful of deep water ports, all except one are comercial, what makes you say we have the resource as well as need for deep water ports right in the middle of the ocean? We don't even have that much 10k tons ships.

 

[Keel]

How is that a cheap shot? It is the original picture. It tells the history of China shaking hands with its former enemy (USA) to go against its former friend (USSR). This will always be recorded down in history.


Your country have done to the USSR exactly what your compatriots are now accusing Viet Nam of doing. Maybe this is a case of Karma being a .....?

How was it not a cheap shot?
Vietcongs like you have been exploiting the photo with an intention to demean Deng
US was our ally when combating the barbaric inhuman japanese during ww2

It was not about your recent cozying with the yankies that our people have been infuriating at Vietnam for
It was about your back stabbing us after we have helped you people regain your sovereignty from the western powers and gosh, how about the defloriants

Ancient Chinese Horticultural Art of penzai

 

[TaiShang]

Firstly, we actually have civilians settle on the island, while your islands have fishes and soldiers.

You do not have. You have militarized the reefs and islands and then invited so called civilians.

Secondly, our airfield is short (800m) and only capable for landing helicopters and M-28 patrol aircrafts, as well as civilians small aircrafts.

You have plans for longer airfield to accommodate every type of aircraft. What is missing is capability to do so. Your impotence does not mean you would not want to have longer air strips.

On the other hands, what do you have to say about your 2km airstrips? Do you plan to have an international airport there?

Yes, we want a dual use air-strip so that we can conduct search and rescue missions when our friendly neighbors are in distress.

What is wrong with that? Just because you cannot do that, we should not do that, either?

In land VN only has a handful of deep water ports, all except one are comercial, what makes you say we have the resource as well as need for deep water ports right in the middle of the ocean?

I do not know. But you definitely want to build and working on it.

 

[sweetgrape]

You are just talking in circles and not bringing anything new to the discussion.

Yes, history is what it is:

Your China once shaked hands with your former enemy (the US) to work together against your former friend (the USSR and her allies). This is the history. “Use” or “depend” I dont care.

It was your compatriots who decided to reinterpret it through their own narrative, saying that China only “used” the US and was not “depending” on the US and at the same time interpreting Viet Nam as now “depending” on the US and not merely “using” the US (and you and your compatriots have failed to explain what makes this difference). Its clear to see that you and your compatriots are desperately trying to twist history and use word plays to escape from your criticism that was laid against VietNam which have now back fired on you. It looks really silly and comical and this is all there is to this debate. You are just talking in circles now.

Oh, man, did I say you vietnam depend on USA? Here I argue with you is that China use or depend on USA, Ok? and same kind of picture, you interpret the one you post is China depend on USA, but other my compatriot is nothing? you don't care? hehe, man, you think we care whether you care?

I need rice, mean I depend on rice to live? I need key to open the door, mean I can't enter into the house without key? you criticze we don't explain it clear, why not check whether it is understanding problem? I said, it is "depend on" problem, or understanding problem.

we desperatly twist the history? hehe, of course, it is your judge, I don't care, not expect somemore from you, and talking about history, Chinese know much more than you, at least, the history are recorded by Chinese.

You say I talk in circle? so, what else you want to debate on? and, from you comments, I don't find anything new, not hard to understand, but not right.

As the relationship between Vietnam and USA now, it is "using", not depend on, My opinion, because you are not allies now, whether will slip to "depend on", hard to say. and, give you some examples in my opinion, Japan and SK' national security "depend" on USA, China and Russia use each to leverage against USA.

 

[William Hung]

How was it not a cheap shot?
Vietcongs like you have been exploiting the photo with an intention to demean Deng
US was our ally when combating the barbaric inhuman japanese during ww2

It was not about your recent cozying with the yankies that our people have been infuriating at Vietnam for
It was about your back stabbing us after we have helped you people regain your sovereignty from the western powers and gosh, how about the defloriants

Ancient Chinese Horticultural Art of penzai

You still don’t get it? Read again my replies and your words in red....what you are acussing Viet Nam of doing, is what China have done in the past to the USSR. Not to mention, since the US was your allies against the IJA, are you now backstabbing the US after they have have helped you defeat the IJA? “gosh”, the Americans must be “infuriated”.

See, it is better for you guys to stop the trolling otherwise it will just keep back firing on you.

And my last comment for this dicussion:

 

[Keel]

You still don’t get it? Read again my replies and your words in red....what you are acussing Viet Nam of doing, is what China have done in the past to the USSR. Not to mention, since the US was your allies against the IJA, are you now backstabbing the US after they have have helped you defeat the IJA? “gosh”, the Americans must be “infuriated”.

See, it is better for you guys to stop the trolling otherwise it will just keep back firing on you.

And my last comment for this dicussion:

Read some history about the USSR's crazy ambition on controlling China's sovereighty and territories before you talk

 

[William Hung]

Oh, man, did I say you vietnam depend on USA? Here I argue with you is that China use or depend on USA, OK...

Your compatriot @Place Of Space said Vietnam depended on others or is currently depending on others while China never.

If you dont agree with this depend/use terminology in the first place then this is not your debate.

Read some history about the USSR's crazy ambition on controlling China's sovereighty and territories before you talk

Doesnt matter, did your China shaked hand with your former enemy (the US) to go against another country, yes or no?

This is all that matter for this debate. Read it again starting from Place of Space and you will see.

 

[xesy]

You do not have. You have militarized the reefs and islands and then invited so called civilians.



You have plans for longer airfield to accommodate every type of aircraft. What is missing is capability to do so. Your impotence does not mean you would not want to have longer air strips.



Yes, we want a dual use air-strip so that we can conduct search and rescue missions when our friendly neighbors are in distress.

What is wrong with that? Just because you cannot do that, we should not do that, either?



I do not know. But you definitely want to build and working on it.

Your reply is full of your own speculatiosn of plans and intentions that we are supposed have yet somehow not a single one of us heard a rumor. Who are you? A high level inteligence agent?

 

[Aepsilons]

.....

Your reply is full of your own speculatiosn of plans and intentions that we are supposed have yet somehow not a single one of us heard a rumor. Who are you? A high level inteligence agent?

Perhaps one should focus on internal development, my friend, as am sure their side will continue to do the same. Focus on Vietnamese island genesis updates.

 

[TaiShang]

Your reply is full of your own speculatiosn of plans and intentions that we are supposed have yet somehow not a single one of us heard a rumor. Who are you? A high level inteligence agent?

It has historically been proven that Vietnam and the Philippines, among others, are the pioneers of island reclamation and build up.

This is what really matters to me.

Once this situation is emphasized, your argument that reads "But China is a big country and their reclamation dwarfs ours" is just hyperbole.

We are agreed, at least, that, you want to build up, as your past actions prove, but might lack the same capabilities as China.

That's the point I want everybody to hear.

China is responding in kind and do not give a bloody hell about foreign criticism. Besides, we are not the largest island disputants.

Japan has disputes with almost all of its neighbors. The only difference is, they do not whine and ***** around.

 

[xesy]

.....



Perhaps one should focus on internal development, my friend, as am sure their side will continue to do the same. Focus on Vietnamese island genesis updates.

You are right. I am having a headache and talking with him makes it worsen. Maybe I should call it a day and leave PDF for the night or two. See ya!

 

[Place Of Space]

Yes, Viet Nam got screwed by the French, and yes, they imposed their authority on us. However, you’ve ignored the fact that there were always resistance and rebellion from the Vietnamese population, which eventually lead to the battle of Dien Bien Phu and the withdrawal of the French.

You say China could still decide her fate? so ceding some territory of HK to Britain and renting out the rest of HK and Macau to Portugal/Britain was your decision? What about the opium trade once widespread in China, was that your decision too? What about the northern territories gained by Russia, it was entirely your decision too?




Yes, China fought against the IJA, but nearly all historians says that the US was the decisive factor that caused the defeat and withdrawal of the IJA from China. You needed the US.

And yes, the Viet Minh and other Vietnamese factions did fought against the IJA in VN. The Viet Minh and the IJA were officially enemies. Were we effective and did we singlehandledly forced the IJA out? No, just like China, we were not and the IJA withdrew largely due to US involvement in the Pacific theater. The difference is we don’t twist history and pretend that it was completely due to our effort and not someone elses.




Your statement is still a contradiction. You said you needed the US in the cold war but dont need the US for the Vietnam-Soviet alliance. You do know the cold war was a struggle primarily between the West lead by the US and the Communist bloc lead by the Soviet? So you needing the US during the cold war is to say that you needed the US to go against the Soviet, who had its presence in Viet Nam. Almost all historians says China shaked hands with the US to leverage against the Soviet.

So in fact, what you are accussing of Viet Nam doing right now is exactly like what China have done to the Soviet.

You might know who this person is in the following foto. You know how he became Vietnam's emperor, how he was drove out to Indian Ocean island by govt.

This is called fate. This great Vietnamese young emperor wanted to reform, wanted to rebuild the country, but the result is that he was forcely abolished. He had no chance to control his country, he even couldn't control his familiy's fate. His children don't have familiy name Nguyễn, but the weird family name Vinh San. Why? the stupid French didn't know his family name places ahead the given name. They thought his family name is Vinh San. He served in French navy as a lieutenant.

Chinese fought against Japnese is national officially resistance. Government could organize whole nation's army, material enter into the battlefield. During the whole WWII, America didn't deploy troops to China to enter any a battlefied. America and Japan fought in Pacific Ocean. After WWII, America got control of Kyukyu, Korea, Pacific islands, took back Philippines, meddled into South Vietnam, Indonesia, allied with Thailands, Singapore. America got what they want, these all the benefits they joined in the pacific battle. Who organized the Vietnamese fought against Japanese? When Japanese defeated, why the French came back? Because as to law, they hadn't lost the sovereign rights of Vietnam.

I said China and US needed each other in the cold war. Read my post twice before you reply. China's direction was in Vietnam, America's direction was in Afghanistan and Africa. The result speak for the action, the coming years situation tell us the deal is successful.

I guess you must think the Vietnam is now on the right way. If you 100% assure it, I think just the coming time can speak for us. I repeat that sentence: if Vietnam in cold war didn't ally with USSR, invaded neighbors after 1975, Vietnam would have started peaceful national rebuilding since then.