What's new

PLA Navy patrols Bashi Channel between Taiwan and Philippines

only the immature and gullible will believe in such a cr@p map
The Taiwanese can produce a dozen with red blue green .. circles much higher up tsk tsk tsk!

and ONLY CHINESE IDIOTS would believe this NINE-DASH CR@P

_45552694_south_china-sea_466.gif


^^^^
Is that an UN recognized map?
If not, it is just a piece of rough toilet paper.
You want a recognized map? here

50ob5z.jpg


Now show me your Chinese recognize IDIOT MAP fool.

You never know what kind of role would Taiwan play in the future of China. So don't discount Taiwan. As for Philippines, Taiwan need to make it clear that it cannot tolerate random murder of its citizens. And only through a blockade and shoot to sink any defiant Filipino ships *would that message come across.

Talk about arrogance of the Taiwanese and its pride of stealing the resources of a peace loving country. We don't owe anything to the Taiwanese. Your doomsday will come bull$hits!

Taiwan has 200-mile EEZ except for 24 miles of territorial waters near Filipino islands
Why are you drawing the boundary 20 miles south of Taiwan's coast on the map?
UNCLOS clearly states Taiwan is entitled to a 200-mile EEZ (ie. exclusive economic zone).
You can't redraw the international boundary according to your whim.
You do know that Taiwan is conducting military drills 200 miles from Taiwan's southern coast, don't you?
Taiwan is following international law and staying 24 miles outside the waters of those little islands. Outside of those 24 miles, those waters belong within Taiwan's 200-mile EEZ.

You should know the facts and should not take sides.

Taiwan government and their media, in their justification of presence of the fishermen in Philippine waters floated the idea that the fishermen were operating within their territory by invoking the 200 nm EEZ of UNCLOS and that the fishermen were 48 nm off Batanes which is beyond the 12nm territorial limit. But again this is a misrepresentation of the fact. The fishermen were caught 48 nm SOUTH of Batanes and not NORTH. So clearly this is within Philippine waters. Taiwan can not also invoke the 200 nm EEZ. For one, the distance between Taiwan and the Philippines is only 120 nm. The Taiwanese fishermen even ascertained unknowingly that they were within Philippine territory when they admitted that they were 168 nm from Taiwan. You do the math, 120 nm from Taiwan plus 48 nm inside Philippine territory is 168 nm! Second, Taiwan can not invoke UNCLOS because they are not a signatory to it. Heck they are not even a member of UN. They even floated the idea of an overlapping EEZ. How can an exclusive economic zone have an overlap? It seems they don't even know the meaning of the word exclusive nor overlap? LMAO!
 
China's historical 1948 nine-dash line map

China's nine-dash line map is a historical boundary map from 1948. No ASEAN nation protested its boundaries for 50 years.

Your self-serving Filipino sea border map reflects Philippine wishful thinking.

UNCLOS clearly states that sea borders between two countries must be negotiated by treaty.

----------

At ArmchairPrivate, his big No Parking sign was obnoxious as hell and in every post no less.
 
China's historical 1948 nine-dash line map

China's nine-dash line map is a historical boundary map from 1948. No ASEAN nation protested its boundaries for 50 years.

Your self-serving Filipino sea border map reflects Philippine wishful thinking.

UNCLOS clearly states that sea borders between two countries must be negotiated by treaty.
You must be hallucinating! The nine dash line have been drawn by Mao during the expulsion of the Nationalist China from Mainland China to Taiwan. Since when the nine dash line was considered a map? Get a nice sleep while you dreaming for a moon moron.
 
You must be hallucinating! The nine dash line have been drawn by Mao during the expulsion of the Nationalist China from Mainland China to Taiwan. Since when the nine dash line was considered a map? Get a nice sleep while you dreaming for a moon moron.

Lack of ASEAN government formal protest means China's 1948 map stands

The 1948 map was publicly published. It had been republished for the next 65 years.

During the 50-year period from 1948 to 1998 (or so), no ASEAN country filed a formal protest against the Chinese government. Hence, under the legal principle of implicit waiver, the Chinese 1948 map delimiting China's sea boundary with its neighbors is a valid document reflecting China's international borders.
 
MAIN201305101558495125422401318.jpg


Pinoy murderers used high caliber machine guns to fire at unarmed Taiwanese fishermenmen resulting from the death of 1 skipper and the damage of the fishing vessel in disputed waters!

Where is the video tape that the Pinoy government claimed they have the incident recorded?

Pinoy government is playing funny games!
 
The 1948 map was publicly published. It had been republished for the next 65 years.

During the 50-year period from 1948 to 1998 (or so), no ASEAN country filed a formal protest against the Chinese government. Hence, under the legal principle of implicit waiver, the Chinese 1948 map delimiting China's sea boundary with its neighbors is a valid document.
China is pretty obvious in this matter trying to twist facts and change the true issue.

The nine-dash cr@p line has never been clarified by China. No coordinates were even sent to the UN to clarify which features China claims. See the map above that's a clear indication of being greed. How can you say that such territory is China?

Chinese are tired of making fake items, now they are making fake stories and even making fake historical accounts. LMAO!

MAIN201305101558495125422401318.jpg


Pinoy murderers used high caliber machine guns to fire at unarmed Taiwanese fishermenmen resulting from the death of 1 skipper and the damage of the fishing vessel in disputed waters!

Where is the video tape that the Pinoy government claimed they have the incident recorded?

Pinoy government is playing funny games!
What a moron you have not gotten the Coast Guard's side of the story, so your 'investigation' is one sided, flawed and biased.

It does not tell the whole story. No one denies that shots were fired. Taiwan's President inflamed the situation by calling it cold-blooded murder without first getting all the facts. Also, Taiwan insists it happened inside Taiwan's EEZ when the truth is Taiwan does not even have an EEZ - it is not a member of the UN.
 
China is pretty obvious in this matter trying to twist facts and change the true issue.

The nine-dash cr@p line has never been clarified by China. No coordinates were even sent to the UN to clarify which features China claims. See the map above that's a clear indication of being greed. How can you say that such territory is China?

Chinese are tired of making fake items now, now they are making fake stories and even making fake historical accounts. LMAO!

Land border precedents

Quibbling over a few miles does not detract from the general outline of China's nine-dash line map. China is free to negotiate its precise boundary with neighbors within 10 miles or so. China underwent a similar process with its land neighbors.

The general outlines of a map are the accepted historical approximation of the actual international border. Chinese negotiations with its numerous land neighbors have lead to shifts of a few miles. However, the old maps reflecting the approximate location of the land borders were never invalidated due to lack of submission to the UN or for lack of precise coordinates.

----------

http://www.globaltimes.cn/china/diplomacy/2011-01/612563.html

"Tajikistan ratifies border agreement with China
Source: Global Times
January 14 2011
By Yu Miao

Tajikistan's lower house of parliament ratified an agreement Wednesday that was signed with China in 2002 for resolving a century-old border dispute, Reuters reported.

Under the agreement, China gains control over an area of 1,000 square kilometers, about 3.5 percent of the disputed 28,500-square-kilometer land that had been under discussion.

Tajikistan took control of the land after independence in 1991 but China had never accepted the ruling, according to China News Service.

The two nations signed the border treaty in 1999, and added an amendment to it three years later, thus establishing a joint committee for demarcation, the agency said.

During a visit to Beijing in May 2002, Tajik President Emomalii Rahmon agreed with the amendment that allows China to take over 1,000 square kilometers of the disputed land.

The two sides then carried out two demarcation works in 2006 and 2008, building 101 border stones.

Hong Lei, a spokesman of China's Foreign Ministry, said Thursday the deal thoroughly resolved "a historical boundary issue," the AP reported.

The dispute was resolved "according to universally recognized norms of international law through equal consultations," Hong said, without advancing more details.

Tajik Foreign Minister Khamrokhon Zarifi hailed the ratification of the agreement as "a great victory for Tajik diplomacy," Reuters reported.

"This is an important political event and will promote further expansion of Tajikistan's ties with China," the Times of India quoted Zarifi as saying.

However, some Tajik officials voiced opposition to the agreement, saying it contradicted the country's constitution that states the territory of Tajikistan is inseparable and inviolable, the Times of India reported.

Sun Wenbin, a press officer of the Chinese embassy in Dushanbe, told the Global Times that the disputed land is in the sparsely populated Pamir Mountains.

"We don't know how many people are living in the area and how they will be resettled," he said.

As the Global Times went to press, the Tajik embassy in Beijing had not commented on the issue.

Xing Guangcheng, an expert with the Research Center for Chinese Borderland History and Geography of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times that the settlement of the dispute provided a good example for resolving other border issues.

"It is significant because China and Tajikistan reached consensus after peaceful dialogue, showing that compromise is vital in solving border disputes," he said.

Due to historical reasons, China has border issues with a number of its neighbors.

Beijing and Moscow completed the demarcation of their 4,300-kilometer border in 2008, after co-revealing border markers that split the Heixiazi Island (known as the Bolshoi Ussuriysky Island in Russia).

In February 2009, China and Vietnam inaugurated two border stones, the last of 2,000 such markers built during their eight-year land demarcation efforts, the Xinhua News Agency reported.

Beijing and New Delhi concluded their 14th round of border talks in November with a joint pledge to "seek a fair and reasonable solution acceptable to both sides," Xinhua reported.

Li Wei, director of the Institute of Security and Strategic Studies at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, told the Global Times that the Sino-Tajik resolution will have a positive impact on other territorial disputes.

"Historical experience has proved that the settlement of territorial disputes by force brings nothing but hatred and worsened discord," he said.

Liu Linlin and Song Shengxia contributed to this story"
 
Land border precedents

Quibbling over a few miles does not detract from the general outline of China's nine-dash line map. China is free to negotiate its precise boundary with neighbors within 10 miles or so. China underwent a similar process with its land neighbors.

The general outlines of a map are the accepted historical approximation of the actual international border. Chinese negotiations with its numerous land neighbors have lead to shifts of a few miles. However, the old maps reflecting the approximate location of the land borders were never invalidated due to lack of submission to the UN or for lack of precise coordinates.
Does it have a defined boundary showing the coordinate point that bound this demarcation line? No! It is a big pie in the sky, when your forefathers were dreaming of a bigtime landgrab.

You and your Chinese government have a caveman-like and uncivilized emotional and intelligent quotient (EQ & IQ) which are very much lower than that of a civilized child. Chinese grabbed our territories like candies only. What a hell-kind people you are.
 
Does it have a defined boundary showing the coordinate point that bound this demarcation line? No! It is a big pie in the sky, when your forefathers were dreaming of a bigtime landgrab.

You and your Chinese government have a caveman-like and uncivilized emotional and intelligent quotient (EQ & IQ) which are very much lower than that of a civilized child. Chinese grabbed our territories like candies only. What a hell-kind people you are.

China's nine-dash line map speaks for itself

You're not making any sense. The general boundary is already written on the map. You simply measure China's map for scale and you should be able to come within a few miles of the actual boundary.

This is the map that your government accepted for 50 years without a formal complaint.

CXd4xDB.gif
 
China's nine-dash line map speaks for itself

You're not making any sense. The general boundary is already written on the map. You simply measure China's map for scale and you should be able to come within a few miles of the actual boundary.

CXd4xDB.gif
Your nine-dashed cr@p line is not anywhere in UNCLOS, so basically, it's an excessive claim. Nothing in UNCLOS documents could legally substantiate that line. Of course, China has resorted to "ancient" maps, which in itself are dubious.

That's why you can't wax your fairy tale arguments and those fake maps that you pulled straight out from Davy Jones locker will be useless in legal court of course LMAO!
 
Your nine-dashed cr@p line is not anywhere in UNCLOS, so basically, it's an excessive claim. Nothing in UNCLOS documents could legally substantiate that line. Of course, China has resorted to "ancient" maps, which in itself are dubious.

That's why you can't wax your fairy tale arguments and those fake maps that you pulled straight out from Davy Jones locker will be useless in legal court of course LMAO!

China's 1948 map preceded 1982 UNCLOS

China's 1948 map is not part of UNCLOS, because its existence pre-dates UNCLOS by 34 years. A subsequent convention cannot invalidate pre-existing maritime rights. This is covered under the "grandfather clause" in UNCLOS on historical claims.

Who said anything about a court? China specifically excluded historical maritime territorial boundaries from its agreement to UNCLOS. You have to fight the PLA Army and Navy if you disagree with China's 65-year-old nine-dash line map.
 
China's 1948 map preceded 1982 UNCLOS

China's 1948 map is not part of UNCLOS, because its existence pre-dates UNCLOS by 34 years. A subsequent convention cannot invalidate pre-existing maritime rights. This is covered under the "grandfather clause" in UNCLOS on historical claims.
China is a perfect example of greediness of the worst kind. No one owns the South China Sea, especially if its within 200 miles of any countries border per international law. These are international waters, not Chinese territory.

Obviously you stilll have that pre-WWI and WWII mentality where coveting territories is worth a war. LMAO!
 
China is a perfect example of greediness of the worst kind. No one owns the South China Sea, especially if its within 200 miles of any countries border per international law. These are international waters, not Chinese territory.

Obviously you stilll have that pre-WWI and WWII mentality where coveting territories is worth a war. LMAO!

Pre-existing maritime boundaries cannot be changed by UNCLOS

We seem to have a problem communicating here.

China already owned the territory within the nine-dash line map. UNCLOS cannot confer territory that already belonged to someone else. You Filipinos are not entitled to a 200-mile EEZ, because that sea territory belonged to China since 1948.

Do you understand the explanation?

----------

Let me try a simple chronological explanation.

1948: China's nine-dash line map shows the sea border between China and neighboring countries. No neighboring country filed a formal protest and the printed sea border is now the accepted border.

1948-1981 (33 years passed): China's neighbors remain silent and it is understood by all countries that China's map shows the sea border between the countries.

1982: UNCLOS says you're entitled to a 200-mile EEZ only if the sea territory does not belong to someone else.

----------

http://cil.nus.edu.sg/wp/wp-content...CLOS-and-the-South-China-Sea-26-July-2011.pdf

"cil.nus.edu.sg/.../AsianSIL-Beckman-China-UNCLOS-and-the-South-Chi...‎
by R Beckman - Cited by 1 - Related articles
Jul 22, 2011 – However, the provisions of UNCLOS on baselines, the ... disputes relating to maritime boundary delimitation and historic waters, some legal ..."
 
Pre-existing maritime boundaries cannot be changed by UNCLOS

We seem to have a problem communicating here.

China already owned the territory within the nine-dash line map. UNCLOS cannot confer territory that already belonged to someone else. You Filipinos are not entitled to a 200-mile EEZ, because that sea territory belonged to China since 1948.

Do you understand the explanation?
The UNCLOS provides, among others, that the EEZ of a sovereign country covers the 200-nautical mile from the shoreline/baseline. Panatag (Scarborough) Shoal is within 137 miles from mainland Zambales and 1100 miles from Hainan. Worth mentioning also is the Mischief Reef which you stealthily annexed, which is just 130 miles from mainland Palawan.

I advise you to study the geography of SCS/WPS before you argue with us.

China's rejection of Manila's suggestion that both countries elevate their dispute in the SCS/WPS to the United Nations' International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) is an indication that you may not be able to validate your territorial claim. LMAO!
 
Back
Top Bottom