The Submarine Race in the Malaccan Strait

[jhungary]

LOL what a logic. 中國 zhongguo is not China if you translate it. The name "China" just came up in the 19 century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_China
Zhongguo is the most common name for China. The first character zhōng (&#20013 means "central" or "middle," while guó (國/&#22269 means "state" or "states," and in modern times, "nation."

he is full of it.

People in Qing Dynasty NEVER refer their land to as 中國. back then they refer to their land as 中原 (Great Central Plain) which refer to the area of Greater China.

here is what Chinese Wikipeida said about that

中原是一個地域概念，是指以河南省為核心延及黃河中下游的廣大地區，[1]這一地區是中華文明的發源地，被華夏民族視為天下中心。[2]古人常將「中國」、「中土」、「中州」用作中原的同義語

Greater China plain is a geographic idea, ripping from Henan province expand to lower basin of Yellow River. This region is the Start of Chinese Culture, Chinese called it "Center of the Earth" In ancient time, people often refer "China 中國", "Central Earth 中土" and "Central Province 中州"

ä¸*原 - ç¶*基百科，自由的百科全書

至清朝後期，“中國”一詞已經有著超過三千年的使用歷史，一直只是作為一種泛指的词汇來使用，不曾將“中國”兩字明確作為其政體的直接名稱。清廷與西方國家交流時，虽然往往按照传统的观点以世界中心自居而使用“中國”這個名稱來稱呼自己，但在多数官方正式文书上还是把“大清”作为国号，与“中国”混合使用。

Til the end of Qing Dynasty, the word "China" have already been in use for 3000 years, until then it have been a generalisational term. Never was used as a reference to political entity. When Qing Dynasty communicate with the west, although they refer themselve as the word "Center of the earth" and call themselves that, official communication would still use "Greater Qing Empire" and mixed with the word China.

ä¸*國的稱號 - 维基百科，自由的百科全书

this guy Wholegrain seems to learn history at a CPC youth school. what a epic failure! He just twistes the facts as he pleases.

I am pretty sure he know nothing about Chinese history expect maybe after Qing Dynasty. Even then, i still think he know actually nothing.

 

[Wholegrain]

Of course you did not started it, I STARTED IT, you reply my post stating 9 dash line is crap with some random crap that Vietnam does not exist. And then you come back and say i am doing stuff that irrelvent?? Gosh, how crazy are you??

My point is my point, i did not start my point by answering your point, but you did use some random point to reply my point, so, who's irrevelent now??

And 9 ndash line is NOT the claimant area of EEZ as you said, if you draw a 200 nautical mile out to all the islands in South China Sea, it is significant smaller than the whole 9 dotted area.

Jesus, you are really crazy



Give evidence that Spartly Island were terra nullis in 1930. Otherwise consider yourselves the BS point.

Did ROC done any survey before occupied said island?? Show us the result of the survey as in 1930

You were the one who stated that there was no country called China which is false and even if it were true, that has nothing to do with the fact that the Republic of China was there before Vietnam.

I challenge you to show me:

that the Spratly islands were inhabited in 1930.

That China said that it claimed the sea within the nine dotted line as its territorial waters or claimed any special privileges beyond the EEZ of the islands.

LOL what a logic. 中國 zhongguo is not China if you translate it. The name "China" just came up in the 19 century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_China
Zhongguo is the most common name for China. The first character zhōng (&#20013 means "central" or "middle," while guó (國/&#22269 means "state" or "states," and in modern times, "nation."

Kitai, as-sin, chin, cathay and China were all used to refer to the country of China and all foreigners translated Zhongguo as China. In Latin China is Sinae and in the Treaty of Nerchinsk China is referred to by its latin name. And in the Chinese version its zhongguo. No one literally translated it as middle kingdom

this guy Wholegrain seems to learn history at a CPC youth school. what a epic failure! He just twistes the facts as he pleases.

And the ad hominem attacks keep coming.

 

[Viet]

You were the one who stated that there was no country called China which is false and even if it were true, that has nothing to do with the fact that the Republic of China was there before Vietnam.

I challenge you to show me:

that the Spratly islands were inhabited in 1930.

That China said that it claimed the sea within the nine dotted line as its territorial waters or claimed any special privileges beyond the EEZ of the islands.

Kitai, as-sin, chin, cathay and China were all used to refer to the country of China and all foreigners translated Zhongguo as China. In Latin China is Sinae and in the Treaty of Nerchinsk China is referred to by its latin name. And in the Chinese version its zhongguo. No one literally translated it as middle kingdom

And the ad hominem attacks keep coming.

you are the one, who repeats posting BS, falsely stating Vietnam did not exist before 19 century. If true, then China did not exist before that century.

Actually Vietnam (or Van Lang) was founded by Viets in 2879 BC.

On the surface of bronze drum (Van Lang age)


Names of Vietnam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The modern Chinese name for Vietnam (Chinese: 越南; pinyin: Yuènán) can be translated as "Beyond the South", leading to the folk etymology that the name is a reference to the country's location beyond the southernmost borders of China. Another theory explains that the nation was termed as such in order to emphasize the division of those who stayed in China in contrast to the people living in Vietnam.[14]

 

[jhungary]

You were the one who stated that there was no country called China which is false and even if it were true, that has nothing to do with the fact that the Republic of China was there before Vietnam.

Again, what have Vietnam do with China's 9 Dash line? Is it if Vietnam not a country back in 1945, the content of 9 Dash line is more acceptable??

You are putting 2 unrelated fact together, and try to support your own argument with it, which I still don't know what has Vietnam have to do with the 9 Dash claim.....Beside they are against it.

I challenge you to show me:

that the Spratly islands were inhabited in 1930.

I don't need to show you jack shiite, I am not the one that said Spartly is uninhabited and I am not the one who claim whatever to Spartly.

That China said that it claimed the sea within the nine dotted line as its territorial waters or claimed any special privileges beyond the EEZ of the islands.

Do you actually know what does "Territorial Water" mean before you make your point?

Territorial waters - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Territorial water is within country own boundary. not EEZ. EEZ is international water.

Kitai, as-sin, chin, cathay and China were all used to refer to the country of China and all foreigners translated Zhongguo as China. In Latin China is Sinae and in the Treaty of Nerchinsk China is referred to by its latin name. And in the Chinese version its zhongguo. No one literally translated it as middle kingdom

And the ad hominem attacks keep coming.

Please refer to my quote for this, I am seeing you say stuff, but not any reference, give me some reference that Qing Dynasty officially call their land China, then I will shut up about this. Otherwise it's just you blowing hot air out, and it's breathy

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

This is about Law of War, maybe USAHawk had a real aggressive side in it but let me explain to you further.

You can declare a Chinese Citizen in India a "Persona Non-Grata" and expel him or simply lock him up. You cannot destroy his home in India or kill him if that person has no Military Connection to China enough to call that Person a Enemy Combatant.

Same law applies in the Sea.

Merchant ship = Civilian. Under Law of war, in case of a Indian/Chinese War scenario, India have the right to say "Ok, you are not welcome here) if the ship flying Chinese flag enter Indian water. And what you can do is Board the ship and turn them around.

Unless you classified that shipping is "War Ship" IN cannot fire upon civilian shipping, even if the shipping is registered to a country you are currently at war.

If the Chinese shipping did only carry Resource and or Goods. There are no justification for IN to open fire. Fire on a civilian ship of any region (Regardless of status of war) are in violation of Geneva Convention Law of the war. Broad it, if you did find the good turns out to be armament or ammunition, then you can sink them. But if you are talking about oil, gold, food or any product, you can turn them around and not let them come in Indian water, but you have no right sinking them.

It is the same way it's a war crime to sink Hospital Ship even if that's your enemy hospital ship....

You talking about rights while chinese killing our soldiers?Invading our borders?
And u think we will watch as oil tanker after tanker goes from gulf to chinese ports to further fuel the war machine?
The only justification is WAR.Blockade is legitimate war tactics that has been used by all countries numerous times.
What was USA doing in ww2 to japan?Or britain to germany in ww1?
Again i reiterate i don't see how any economies will be devastated when we sink chinese tankers carrying oil from gulf to home ports.Oil is war economy product and legitimate war material.By sink i don't mean kill all sailors abroad,give them warning to leave ship..then seize or sink it.
As for earlier posts,ofcourse we will not mine the straits or something..thats crazy.That would mean killing innocent sailors from around the world who have nothing to do with conflict.Only china pays for aggression.See even in this thread how chinese insult their neighbours..refusing vietnam's identity altogether.It is this neo imperialistic sino attitude that is cause for this hostility.

 

[jhungary]

You talking about rights while chinese killing our soldiers?Invading our borders?
And u think we will watch as oil tanker after tanker goes from gulf to chinese ports to further fuel the war machine?
The only justification is WAR.Blockade is legitimate war tactics that has been used by all countries numerous times.
What was USA doing in ww2 to japan?Or britain to germany in ww1?
Again i reiterate i don't see how any economies will be devastated when we sink chinese tankers carrying oil from gulf to home ports.Oil is war economy product and legitimate war material.By sink i don't mean kill all sailors abroad,give them warning to leave ship..then seize or sink it.
As for earlier posts,ofcourse we will not mine the straits or something..thats crazy.That would mean killing innocent sailors from around the world who have nothing to do with conflict.Only china pays for aggression.See even in this thread how chinese insult their neighbours..refusing vietnam's identity altogether.It is this neo imperialistic sino attitude that is cause for this hostility.

Relax, claim down, I am just stating the facts and the law of war.

When you talking about sinking a ship, you cannot "Assume" you won't kill anyone over the sinking.

Let's take US Navy downing Iranian Flight 655 as an example.

US was in a state of war with Iran. And flight 655 squawk Military IFF code, which is more than enough reason for the USS Vincennes to believe the flight was a Military flight, warning have been sent and ignored and finally Vincennes launch 2 standard missile and down the jet.

Do you think the US Navy is justified on downing an airliner which done everything they are require to do and follow a pre-set route?? Even when US are at war with Iran??

The problem with law of war is, it is to protect both side of the party, not just a single aspect. Yeah, in the height of war, your hatred have to be thru the roof to make you kill your enemy, trust me, I have been there. But is it important to still follow the rule of war?? Yes, definitely. Just imagine next time when you are at war, if you capture an enemy soldier, just before you are thinking of killing him and torturing him, try thinking this, would you wanted them to have the same thought process when yourselves was captured.

Then you tell me what you want to do afterward.

It only take one party not to follow the rule and the whole fiasco comes out. Yeah in WW1 the German gassed the Brits, then the Brits Gas them back, but man, even the US cannot get away with the whole Iranian 655 incident, do you think India or China have a chance to break the law of war and survive the aftermath??

War is insane, you don't want to break the only thing that hold the insane action together. Otherwise the meaning of the war is simple pure violent.

 

[faithfulguy]

you are the one, who repeats posting BS, falsely stating Vietnam did not exist before 19 century. If true, then China did not exist before that century.

Actually Vietnam (or Van Lang) was founded by Viets in 2879 BC.

On the surface of bronze drum (Van Lang age)


Names of Vietnam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The modern Chinese name for Vietnam (Chinese: 越南; pinyin: Yuènán) can be translated as "Beyond the South", leading to the folk etymology that the name is a reference to the country's location beyond the southernmost borders of China. Another theory explains that the nation was termed as such in order to emphasize the division of those who stayed in China in contrast to the people living in Vietnam.[14]

2879 BC? Any written record dated back that long?

 

[Rechoice]

Ancient full map of China 1904, in Kangxi emperor proves China's sovereignty included only Hainan Island.

 

[Snomannen]

Ancient full map of China 1904, in Kangxi emperor proves China's sovereignty included only Hainan Island.

The full map of the 直省s of China. An ancient Chinese administrative division.

 

[ViXuyen]

2879 BC? Any written record dated back that long?

No written record but you can't deny archeological record. Anyway, I will have to continue hearing "deficating, rape, and 2030 vision" from you.

 

[faithfulguy]

No written record but you can't deny archeological record. Anyway, I will have to continue hearing "deficating, rape, and 2030 vision" from you.

Than that is not history of a country. But just people who happened to live there.

I do not talk about crapping or rape. And I don't have 2030 vision, but 2020 vision. With the adjustment of my glasses.

 

[Snomannen]

Please refer to my quote for this, I am seeing you say stuff, but not any reference, give me some reference that Qing Dynasty officially call their land China, then I will shut up about this. Otherwise it's just you blowing hot air out, and it's breathy

Me me me, let me answer this:

[夫對遠人頌述朝廷，或稱天朝(China)，或稱中國(China)，乃一定之理。]

--清高宗實錄 卷784

[大清國(China*)遣大臣與鄂羅斯國議定邊界之碑：一，將由北流入黑龍江之綽爾納，即烏倫穆河，相近格爾必齊河為界。循此河上流不毛之地，有石大興安以至於海。凡山南一帶，流入黑龍江之溪河，盡屬中國(China)。山北一帶之溪河，盡屬鄂羅斯。一，將流入黑龍江之額爾古納河為界，河之南岸屬於中國(China)，河之北岸屬於鄂羅斯...]

--Treaty of Nerchinsk

*Obviously they put a = between 大清國 & 中國.

 

[EastSea]

The full map of the 直省s of China. An ancient Chinese administrative division.

Don't lie, before 1956 China occupied illegally with force, China didn't had administration there.




Vietnamese have been living in Paracels Islands under control of An Nam Kingdom in Hue.

 

[Okemos]

China is just a term that Chinese empires had to use in dealing with foreign countries since China is a term familiar to foreigners. Just like the term dragon to represent "Long" even though they are kind of different. Why would any Chinese living in China that have not learned English and no contact with foreigners call itself China?

Such stupid debate. Now lets get back to the topic.

P.S. why the heck is this thread now about Vietnam again? Gee, don't we have enough such threads, even the sticky?

 

[Snomannen]

Don't lie, before 1956 China occupied illegally with force, China didn't had administration there.

Silly head *Pet pet pet*,
The title of the map is 皇朝直省地輿全圖, which means "The full map of the 直省s of China" in English, not the so-called "full map of China". Most importantly, I am not even debating about the ownership of those island.
Now who is lying ad who is the silly head, hrr~?