South China Sea Forum

[gpit]

In the past chinese acepted East Sea (SCS) belong to Vietnam. Old map of China stated 交址洋, Sea of Giao Chỉ, Giao Chi (Kochi) was old name of Vietnam.


Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-...ina-sea-news-discussions-7.html#ixzz229sLBGLo

In the past Vietnamese used Han characters to writing, referred to original name in Vietnamese: " Dao Cat Vang" to Paracel and "Bai Cat Vang" to Spratly, Hoang Sa and Van Ly Truong Sa (brifly Truong Sa, Truong is means Long, van li) names is in Han-Viet is matter when interpreted from originality of Viet word to Chinese Han characters.

But chinese stated "Wanli Changsha." is Spratly, it is fake argument because spratly Islands is not so long to say it's wan-li (tens thousans miles). Chinese are liars.

You know nothing about Chinese language. Zero!

Li Bai the famous Chinese poet wrote: "白发三千丈， 缘愁似个长。" The first statement means white hair has 3000 丈 long. 1丈 is about 10 feet. Have you ever see hair 30000 feet long?

Dude, what makes you so difficult to stop being a laughing stock in front of the world!

 

[Martian2]

2000-year again. I wish you can show an evidence like a real single map of your ancestor (like the map 1904) to prove the water territory. Discovering, fishing or passing has no meaning for sovereignty.

Since United States, ASEAN, and U.N. have no support for Vietnam, why does China need to be afraid of an international court?

Naive Vietnamese

You are incredibly naive.

Vietnam is staring down the barrel of the big guns of the PLA Navy (see 1998 Johnson Reef battle on YouTube for a reminder).

Vietnam desperately needs international military support to survive more than a few days against the Chinese military machine.

Rational Chinese are not going to let outsiders decide their indisputable sovereignty. An international court has no jurisdiction.

In fact, the United States and China do not recognize the International Criminal Court (see United States and the International Criminal Court - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). So you see, there is no international criminal court.

Also, the International Court of Justice only issues advisory opinions, which are not binding (see What is the World Court and where is it located?).

Vietnam is left with China's mountain of evidence of historical sovereignty and the PLA Navy's guns. Either way, China's sovereignty over the South China Sea is indisputable.

 

[Rechoice]

You know nothing about Chinese language. Zero!

Li Bai the famous Chinese poet wrote: "白发三千丈， 缘愁似个长。" The first statement means white hair has 3000 丈 long. 1丈 is about 10 feet. Have you ever see hair 30000 feet long?

Dude, what makes you so difficult to stop being a laughing stock in front of the world!

stop lying. it's 市丈, (trượng unit). I talken about Ly, (Dặm unit), 市里.
In the map of Vietnam it's stating in Han character (in the past when Viet used Han characters to writing like Japanese do until now), the name is: 萬里長沙. Its 市里. 1 市里 (dặm) = 500 m. The meaning òf the name of Islands Spratly (Truong Sa in Vietnamese) is the Islands group very long, including archipelago reefs, ...

 

[dunhill]

stop lying. it's 市丈, (trượng unit). I talken about Dặm unit, 市里.
In the map of Vietnam it's stating in Han character (in the past when Viet used Han characters to writing like Japanese do until now), the name is: 萬里長沙. Its 市里. 1 市里 (dặm) = 500 m. The meaning òf the name of Islands Spratly (Truong Sa in Vietnamese) is the Islands group very long, including archipelago reefs, ...

Why do you asked him to quit his job anyway? I like him, martian2, SinoChallenger, Hongwu, .... and a few more. They are my stress relief.

 

[grandmaster]

1. I guess the envidences of Vietnam are maps and official documents, neither dicovering nor fishing. I am waiting for a new topic which proves Vietnamese water territory in more details.
2. I did not get your point but passing is not equal to a map.
3. I suppose that if US, Japan or any country now uses guns and missiles to do the talking with Vietnam, Vietnemese guys will call them robber as well. What do you call them if they aim at your country?
4. You should read the title of that topic again. The map 1904 did not focus on the sovereignty of Vietnam. It proves the soverignty of China. I always say that the proves of Vietnames sovereignty should be put into another topic.
5. Fisrt, you should read again the comment of the Chinese guy you cited ''China will lets its guns and missiles do the talking''. Then you get to know who threaten to kill whom.

-if vietnam did not have anyone or official to manage and control these islands in 1904 then no one said vietnam had official sovereignty over these islands in this year. your maps are useless to prove your claims.
-you pretend not to get the point that backfires your reasoning! we can understand that. no problem!
-not yet any country use missile with vietnam. lets say the USA and Nato send missile to Afghanistan, dare vietnam officially say them robber in UN? in your case, china doesnt aim at vietnam, china aim to protect their islands or disputed islands if you want. cant tell them robber, but vietnam to china is robber! your logic is flawed!
-vietnamese guys want to kill all han people! it is hard to believe vietnam doesnt threaten china

 

[Đảo Bạch Long Vỹ]

1) your reasoning is invalid. as what you said, you said discovery and fishing do not mean sovereignty, then the evidences that you vietnamese discovered and fshed on these islands have nothing to do with your sovereignty.
2) second, as vietnamese said someone passed there would do nothing with sovereingty, therefore, the maps and whatever from the west that the vietnamese and filipino use to back your claims are invalid.
3) third, "Letting guns and missiles do the talking are the actions of a robber". your are unreasonable yourself, since US did that on vietnam but vietnam does not say them robber, japanese did that to asia and vietnam, but vietnamese still tries to suck up japanse and american
4) forth, map of 1904 you guys showed in this forum DID NOT show the sovereignty of vietnam on these islands either. it is baseless for vietnamese to claim like that.
5) your comment show your vietnamese nature, that is biased and liar. how come you state that vietnamese wants to avoid war while threatening to kill all han people? you show your biased true face! yes, chinese people have only one child and that is why china doesnt want to go for war because they afraid of losing their children. in contrast, vietnamese people have many children, that is why vietnamese and filippino are so aggressive and threaten to wage against china!

1+2) We never use discovering, fishing, passing to claim sovereignty. We use ancient maps, documents which tell clearly about "sovereignty" and "management".
3) It's chinese brainwashed propagators who told about "gun fire" first. We only said that: if you still want to attack us, just come, we will defend our motherland.
4) one map is not a problem. If every map before 193x missed Paracels, it's such a big problem.
5) We only said that: if you still want to attack us, just come, we will defend our motherland. I don't know how on earth our statement is known as a "threat to kill han people".

Our evidences (click on those links)

"Your" islands? So just tell me about the base of your buffalo's tongue claim

1) Your argument about "2000-year-old claim" is ridiculous, you said you "discovered" those islands, but in fact the "discovery" has nothing to do with sovereignty. Look at Colombo and his country, Spain.

2) We have a strong base of evidences to prove that we had sovereignty over those islands before 18th-19th century.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...tly-not-chinese-territory-13.html#post3237586
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...tly-not-chinese-territory-25.html#post3249921



3) There are many many maps from your gov before 193x which also don't have Paracel and Spartly:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-...lippines-if-china-attacks-11.html#post3244021
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...tly-not-chinese-territory-24.html#post3248733
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...tly-not-chinese-territory-24.html#post3248736

1 or 2 maps isn't a problem. But so many maps is a different story


4) Vietnam and Philippines have been asked you to go to international court, but you always avoid. Why? You know that you don't have evidence, so if you go there, you will loose. End of story

In conclusion, they have never be your islands, you just came and invaded them in 1956, 1974, 1988. So China is the thief, the robber, the bully.

-if vietnam did not have anyone or official to manage and control these islands in 1904 then no one said vietnam had official sovereignty over these islands in this year. your maps are useless to prove your claims.
-you pretend not to get the point that backfires your reasoning! we can understand that. no problem!
-not yet any country use missile with vietnam. lets say the USA and Nato send missile to Afghanistan, dare vietnam officially say them robber in UN? in your case, china doesnt aim at vietnam, china aim to protect their islands or disputed islands if you want. cant tell them robber, but vietnam to china is robber! your logic is flawed!
-vietnamese guys want to kill all han people! it is hard to believe vietnam doesnt threaten china

1) We send "Paracel Team" to control those islands at least since 17xx. We pitched the flag there in 1816. Westerners in 18,19th Century all said "Paracels is depended on An Nam empire" or "Paracels is a feature of Cochinchina kingdom".

2) Fire back is illegal?
3) Vietnam, according to China and its influenced countries (Pakistan, Cambodia, North Korea...), is a robber. Thanks to the effort of brainwashed propagators like Martian2 and gpit, who always talk about China's invisible evidence which we can't even see it. But according to the rest of the world like Japan, India, Philippines, Russia, US..., China is the one who is bullying smaller nations in South China Sea.
4) We want to kill han chinese invaders if they attack our motherland. Is it a threat when you compare to HongWu and some other chinese who always want to nuke Vietnam?
------
@all: don't feed Martian2 and gpit, make those brainwashed propagators troll themselves.

 

[grandmaster]

1+2) We never use discovering, fishing, passing to claim sovereignty. We use ancient maps, documents which tell clearly about "sovereignty" and "management".
3) It's chinese brainwashed propagators who told about "gun fire" first. We only said that: if you still want to attack us, just come, we will defend our motherland.
4) one map is not a problem. If every map before 193x missed Paracels, it's such a big problem.
5) We only said that: if you still want to attack us, just come, we will defend our motherland. I don't know how on earth our statement is known as a "threat to kill han people".

Our evidences (click on those links)




1) We send "Paracel Team" to control those islands at least since 17xx. We pitched the flag there in 1816. Westerners in 18,19th Century all said "Paracels is depended on An Nam empire" or "Paracels is a feature of Cochinchina kingdom".

2) Fire back is illegal?
3) Vietnam, according to China and its influenced countries (Pakistan, Cambodia, North Korea...), is a robber. Thanks to the effort of brainwashed propagators like Martian2 and gpit, who always talk about China's invisible evidence which we can't even see it. But according to the rest of the world like Japan, India, Philippines, Russia, US..., China is the one who is bullying smaller nations in South China Sea.
4) We want to kill han chinese invaders if they attack our motherland. Is it a threat when you compare to HongWu and some other chinese who always want to nuke Vietnam?
------
@all: don't feed Martian2 and gpit, make those brainwashed propagators troll themselves.

your english is very limited! what you have tried to prove is that china map did not show these islands. that is all and nothing more than that. that is normal. and somehow, chinese people can find any vietnam's map without these islands, then they can prove the same thing to vietnam. and all the maps you show did not prove vietnam had sovereignty over these islands.

you are very lying when you pretent and did not recite what vietnamese guys said that vietnam sent troops to cambodia to kill all chinese people in cambodia and thailand.

 

[dunhill]

your english is very limited! what you have tried to prove is that china map did not show these islands. that is all and nothing more than that. that is normal. and somehow, chinese people can find any vietnam's map without these islands, then they can prove the same thing to vietnam. and all the maps you show did not prove vietnam had sovereignty over these islands.

you are very liar when you pretent and did not recite what vietnamese guys said that vietnam sent troops to cambodia to kill all chinese people in cambodia and thailand.

Wait a minute, before you can tell him as a liar then you have to do very first 2 things:

1./ He did on his side that to prove whatever he demand to provide that the other can not. Even you too, base on the thing you just said/posted on your own opinion.

2./ You have to prove that yourself not to become as a liar, once you just said "Vietnam sent troops to Cambodia, Thailand to kill all Chinese people" This you have to prove, to convince that yourself as an honor with fully evidence.

Can you do that? If you can do, I'll will take his place (if him allow) due to you claim "His English very limited).

 

[Đảo Bạch Long Vỹ]

your english is very limited! what you have tried to prove is that china map did not show these islands. that is all and nothing more than that. that is normal. and somehow, chinese people can find any vietnam's map without these islands, then they can prove the same thing to vietnam. and all the maps you show did not prove vietnam had sovereignty over these islands.

you are very lying when you pretent and did not recite what vietnamese guys said that vietnam sent troops to cambodia to kill all chinese people in cambodia and thailand.

1) You have just avoided my evidences from ancient texts and maps.
2) I have said that: one map (or some maps) that do not have Paracels is not a problem. But every map before 193x missed Paracels, it's such a big problem.
China don't have a single map that has Paracels before 193x. We have maps from 17xx, 18xx that have Paracels. It's the difference. Clear?
3). You need source to prove that "Vietnamese come to Cambodia, Thailand to kill chinese people"

 

[grandmaster]

1) You have just avoided my evidences from ancient texts and maps.
2) I have said that: one map (or some maps) that do not have Paracels is not a problem. But every map before 193x missed Paracels, it's such a big problem.
China don't have a single map that has Paracels before 193x. We have maps from 17xx, 18xx that have Paracels. It's the difference. Clear?
3). You need source to prove that "Vietnamese come to Cambodia, Thailand to kill chinese people"

here we go, what did the vietnamese admit?
http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...eady-patrols-disputed-seas-9.html#post3121270

what you said like is like this:

The truth was what you took from us are just unimportant islands and shoals, they're completely have No use , killing chinese in Camb-Laos-Thailand and looted their properties from 1979 to 1988 is much better idea

 

[Battle of Bach Dang River]

here we go, what did the vietnamese admit?
http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...eady-patrols-disputed-seas-9.html#post3121270

what you said like is like this:

It's your "source"?

 

[Đảo Bạch Long Vỹ]

here we go, what did the vietnamese admit?
http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...eady-patrols-disputed-seas-9.html#post3121270
what you said like is like this:

That kind of source? Oh well, so look at my signature, your chinese friends even want to rule the world

when china speaks, the world listens!

you know why?

because this is china's world, everybody else just lives in it!

And you have accepted the fact that chinese "invisible historical evidences" are just for fun

 

[dunhill]

here we go, what did the vietnamese admit?
http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...eady-patrols-disputed-seas-9.html#post3121270

what you said like is like this:

Granmaster:

Thank you for your hard trying to provide what I asked you, but seems to me that is not enough and concrete for so-called evidence will back you up for whatever you just said from your previous posted.

Let me ask you this before we could go any futher: "If you see 1 people of any nations has something wrong, or abnormal, will you consider that person is represent for the entire of that/this nation?"

It must be nice that you'll looks for me a credibility of the sources from other nations said that "We are loves to kill Han's people or same statement what NiceGuy did" then I believe in you.

 

[grandmaster]

Granmaster:

Thank you for your hard trying to provide what I asked you, but seems to me that is not enough and concrete for so-called evidence will back you up for whatever you just said from your previous posted.

Let me ask you this before we could go any futher: "If you see 1 people of any nations has something wrong, or abnormal, will you consider that person is represent for the entire of that/this nation?"

It must be nice that you'll looks for me a credibility of the sources from other nations said that "We are loves to kill Han's people or same statement what NiceGuy did" then I believe in you.

oh, OK! you are so illogic upon asking other nations about what vietnamese people do. otherwise, i.e if your logic is true, then i would do what you said and ask cambodia or china what vietnam did. yeah, there are a bunch of chinese guys in this forum! what that vietnamese Niceguy said and talked showed clearly the propaganda/information he got into his/her mind!

 

[dunhill]

oh, OK! you are so illogic upon asking other nations about what vietnamese people do. otherwise, i.e if your logic is true, then i would do what you said and ask cambodia or china what vietnam did. yeah, there are a bunch of chinese guys in this forum! what that vietnamese Niceguy said and talked showed clearly the propaganda/information he got into his/her mind!

Come on, I wish you are better than that for any conditions. So far, what I see at you that some kind of bias. I don't blame you, I respect what you think that is right, but I confidence that YOU are not represent for all Pakistanis, even though you worn that Pakistan flag.

Ever since you have not enough evidence to backing up your statement, I considering that you are failed. Have a nice w/end.

Hope next time or anytime before you tell anyone as a liar, you have to get enough that to convince them as a liar. Otherwise, that is not nice shots.