| Home | News | Business | Living in China | Language Tips | SMS |  
 
  Login Register Profile Message FAQ  
 
 
   
News Talk > Taiwan Issue > ta1wan did not always belong to china
    Reply   Email   Tree-style   
Total 21 in 2 pages: 1 2
Author Topics
tsupasat

+ Send message
+ Posts: 1268
+ Joined:
   2003-12-13

ta1wan did not always belong to china

"america has always belonged to white people!!"

ha. got your attention.

nobody would ever say that statement today, right? native americans, or indians, had their land taken from them in the 16th and 17th centuries.

however, many mainland chinese continue to say, "ta1wan has always belonged to china!!" this is not true. native ta1wanese had their land taken from them in the 16th and 17th centuries.

ta1wan was ruled by the portugese, then by the manchu dynasty in the 19th century. the japanese took over in the 1890s and then the republic of china was given control after world war II.

therefore, i think the statement that "ta1wan has always belonged to china" is just as credible as the statement "america has always belonged to white people."

ts

2004-08-06 02:59 Reply    

chineseyang

+ Send message
+ Posts: 332
+ Joined:
   2004-05-25

hello, "tssss": your poor lobbyist with brain damage

"ta1wan did not always belong to china" --- false statement.
""america has always belonged to white people!!"" ---- both are false statement.

"nobody would ever say that statement today, right?" --- No. you just foolishly said that statement, even though you know both are lies. but you can't help yourself. You are a habitual liar, as evidenced here, again.

"native americans, or indians, had their land taken from them in the 16th and 17th centuries" ---- Evidence provided by you here, proving your bloody barbaric american history of blood bath. It's not news. I've already known the truth.

Your statement made about "nobody would ever say that statement today" of "america has always belonged to white people!!" evidenced your knowledge about

1. the robbery conducted by the american government
2. american oppressive government, ruling people with intimidation
3. status of existing racial, suppressive ruling in america over native americans, or indians
4. others

""however, many mainland chinese continue to say, "ta1wan has always belonged to china!!"" --- Giving the different facts, and circumstance from what happened in america, Chinese people are in the right position to tell the truth. Isn't that great to be Chinese.

"native ta1wanese had their land taken from them in the 16th and 17th centuries" ---- that's the shame left in Chinese history that China had been invaded.

"ta1wan was ruled by the portugese", ----- one of the specific instances when China suffered from barbaric invasion crimes by the aggressor in Chinese history.

"then by the manchu dynasty in the 19th century" --- Manchu is part of China, and Chinese people, willfully merged themself into China. You idiot.

"the japanese took over in the 1890s and then the republic of china was given control after world war II." ---- Another historical specific instances when China was invaded by the barbaric invaders.

The above two pieces of Chinese history you quoted also evidenced the power of Chinese, isn't it? China and Chinese always possess the undisputable power in defeating the invaders eventually, whoever it was, in protecting her integrity in history, let alone today. Now you can see the result of separatist, don’t even try to be suicidal with China, and Chinese. Attempted arm sales to Taiwan are the american attempted murder to Chinese people in TW, in addition to attempted robbery of TW people's wealth, equivalent to minimum over 15 years' hard work by people in TW, excluding the foreseeable damage should the war being started by your american incitement. It's not a good bargain to america, either. you know it.

"therefore, i think the statement that "ta1wan has always belonged to china" is just as credible as the statement "america has always belonged to white people." ---- evidence proving your Little Brain that is suffering from thinking disability, the same as what "crazyazn" has been suffering. Let me tell you: the former is true; the latter is false.

"ha. got your attention." ---- you are boring. wording technique. you don't deserve the payment you received from doing this your job.

2004-08-06 05:20 Reply    

chineseyang

+ Send message
+ Posts: 332
+ Joined:
   2004-05-25

"tsss" aka....: I answered your post, which is being held by the mods who might been been paid by

US propoganda tyranny to block the voice of truth made by Chinese, leaving your blatant attacks on China "balanced" on CD.

2004-08-06 05:45 Reply    

Paper Tiger

+ Send message
+ Posts: 237
+ Joined:
   2004-07-06

The Island has not always been such a threat to the Mainland, perhaps.

I am just a student here, so perhaps you experts could correct me. In my analysis the real issue is not about the distant past. It is about the recent past, the present and possible futures.

Recent past: The KMT used the Island to control the airspace over the Mainland coastal provinces until gradually driven out by the PLAAF during 1958. (Kenneth W. Allen, The PLAAF: 1949-2002)

Present: The Island remains a potential security threat to the mainland: as a base for military aircraft, missiles and submarines. The Mainland is 4 minutes away from the Island by fighter jet (at 1,500 miles per hour).

Future: With the Island not in its control, the Mainland government will always be a strategic disadvantage vis-¨¤-vis its major global Rival.

My point? Whatever the history of the Island, the Mainland strategists need it.

2004-08-06 05:57 Reply    

tsupasat

+ Send message
+ Posts: 1268
+ Joined:
   2003-12-13

right you are, pt

i think your analysis is spot-on. (is that how you say it?)

ts

2004-08-06 06:55 Reply    

theshepherd

+ Send message
+ Posts: 48
+ Joined:
   2004-03-24

not a suitable analogy

Tsupasat

Guess you chose to use a wrong analogy here.

First, the natives are Indians, and the whites took their land and developed it into what is now the States. And the whites did not, do not and will not allow the indians in any particular state to declare independence, right?

Second, go to the library and borrow some history books. Yes, the island was colonized by the portuguese and japanese in history. After the founding of new china in 1949, the chinese government has become the sole legitimate government of china, and this is recognized by many, many countries in the world. By your logic, these countries were wrong for not recognizing the island government. They are not, your logic is.

2004-08-06 13:33 Reply    

chineseyang

+ Send message
+ Posts: 332
+ Joined:
   2004-05-25

"tsss": you applied facts-twisting, lobbyists' wording techniques, misleading the readers

in your interference in China's domestic affairs, continuously serving your purposes of arm sales, war-mongering, splitting China's integrity, knowingly ignoring the facts, and violating international law.

you applied your shrewish, aversive lobbyists' techniques in your response to "paper tiger" dated "2004-08-06 06:55" , re-enforcing the purpose and objectives of your initial posting.

2004-08-06 16:37 Reply    

chineseyang

+ Send message
+ Posts: 332
+ Joined:
   2004-05-25

to "Paper Tiger":

"The Island has not always been such a threat to the Mainland, perhaps" ---- you omitted material facts: the island has not been such a threat to the split of China's integrity if not because of the american's incitements, and the desparation for arm sales to save your debts on the expenses of the foreseeable bloodshed of people in TW, accommodated by the puppet a-bian. Chinese government has always articulated, stressed the policy, putting the efforts in peaceful unification.

“I am just a student here, so perhaps you experts could correct me?---- there is no need to forge your humbleness on CD.
Evidence: American government One China Policy that you ought to knowledge about.

“In my analysis the real issue is not about the distant past. It is about the recent past, the present and possible futures.?---- forging your “disagreement?with “tsss”’ points, foreshadowing the non-existing “logic?of your false evidence followed.

“My point? Whatever the history of the Island, the Mainland strategists need it.?---- your point? Your points are falsely made. The point is that TW is inseparable part of China by fact. The point is that the Chinese government has the duty to protect the integrity to protect China’s integrity, by Law. The point is that your disgraceful american government “strategists?needed it to subverting China’s independence on other nations?human bloods, as well as ordinary americans, creating a foothold for your american government, threatening the safety and security to other nations not limited to China in APAC, by waging the war for the financial benefits of a few. Any of your such attempts should be foiled by Moral.

Of course the liar “tsss?agreed with you!!! You served the same purposes.

You lousy lobbyists correspondents as shown in the posts all over the CD.

2004-08-06 19:04 Reply    

straighttalk

+ Send message
+ Posts: 232
+ Joined:
   2004-03-31

Chineseyang

I agree with TS and Paper Tiger too. Unfortunately my posts in this little 'debate' keep getting deleted.


The only reason I can think that my posts would be deleted is that the mods are afraid people like you would not be able to effectively dispute them. After all, if they could be easily disputed then why not leave them up?

2004-08-06 19:11 Reply    

straighttalk

+ Send message
+ Posts: 232
+ Joined:
   2004-03-31

What Fact????????

Chineseyang, you said: 'The point is that TW is inseparable part of China by fact.'

What fact???? The fact that your government says so or is there a real fact?

Please, please tell me.

2004-08-06 19:29 Reply    

crazyazn

+ Send message
+ Posts: 834
+ Joined:
   2003-08-19

the same as what "crazyazn" has been suffering

Do not use my name in vain!!!!!

Which of your leaders since the OLD dead Commie leader ( The guy that tried a great leap forward) Died , has set foot on this territory of the R O C Name me one Idiot. Let me tell you : Not one

chinatousu.org fanfubai.com yuluncn.com - Why did those sites get shut down?? Because they found out the truth and published it.

Why will David Wallechinsky's Complete Book of the Summer
Olympics, a 1,171-page guide filled with anecdotes and event details, not be available in Chi nese

The publisher informed him that government censors
felt that some of the sections in question were 'confidential to the
public in mainland Ch ina' and that 'even though they might be
facts', they were not going to be allowed.

You facts are wrong because your Govt is lying to you all the time - 24/7 from the time you were born.

2004-08-06 21:08 Reply    

tsupasat

+ Send message
+ Posts: 1268
+ Joined:
   2003-12-13

re: theshepherd

thanks for your reasonable response. maybe if gtnbia is around, he can clarify what native americans think about independence and u.s. history. unfortunately, the u.s. government supported a "sanitized" view of american expansion for many years.

so you are right, the analogy is not perfect, but it does show that mainland chinese should not say, "ta1wan has always belonged to china." it has not *always* belonged to china. it only became an official province of china in the 1890s under the manchu dynasty. it was only officially part of china for eight years until after world war II.

i don't disagree with you about the last 100 years, but ta1wan did not *always* belong to china. it's just not true. chinese immigrants went there and eventually marginalized the native people, with the help of the portugese.

the reason we should have this discussion is because ta1wan is a very dangerous issue. if china prepares to go to war over this, then the mainland chinese people should not make incorrect assumptions such as "ta1wan has always belonged to china."

ts

2004-08-06 21:37 Reply    

chineseyang

+ Send message
+ Posts: 332
+ Joined:
   2004-05-25

to "straighttalk": what fact??? what are the facts that you can disprove my points beyond doubt

have you ever heard about American government, country, international legislation called: "One China Policy"???

I tell you one thing, you may have to pay for 100 times more economic loss than the profit that you attempted to gain from arm sales to TW, plus your blood. you american shameless trash.

2004-08-07 00:13 Reply    

meiguoracing

+ Send message
+ Posts: 319
+ Joined:
   2004-01-09

arms sales profit

Actually, our government does not produce or sell the arms, nor do they profit from it. The US does not have nationalized industries, unlike comm. countries. Arms sales are from private companies who get government export licenses to sell their products abroad. And those companies most certainly will not be losing money if war breaks out over the island and the US gets involved. You think the loss will exceed 100 times the profit of arms sales? Who do you think will be resupplying our military or that of the island, once they've expended their stockpiles of bombs, bullets and missiles? Yes, those same companies who profit from arms sales will get even more and larger contracts to do more of the same. Better yet, every time our navy and air force get a chance to remind potential clients whose military hardware is best, those companies get more orders for arms from other countries. Everyone will want the F22 and Joint Strike Fighter after they've seen how badly they beat any opponent. It just amazes me how Mainland bravado on this BBS trumps any sense of military reality.

2004-08-07 04:15 Reply    

Paper Tiger

+ Send message
+ Posts: 237
+ Joined:
   2004-07-06

Belief and morale

I can understand why an averagely nationalistic Chinese person would feel angry about foreigners debating what is perceived to be an ¡®internal issue¡¯. There are issues in my own country that I have resented Americans discussing like it was any of their business. But I tried to put these resentments aside and to see if there was any validity in what they were saying. Sometimes there was, and sometimes I decided they should **** off and mind their own business, too.

The Mainland people appear overwhelmingly to long for the return of the Island to Mainland political control based on *historical fact*. US people are frequently told by their government that the US is the *defender of democracy*. For a war to be feasible the people must have such beliefs to sustain morale.

I believe the US *defender of democracy* myth is not based on a complete objective reading of the facts. (Haiti, Chile, Nicaragua etc. etc.) The Mainland *historical fact* line? As true as you like. But, sorry, it still may serve to justify the unjustifiable: war and civilian death.

Maybe there is hope though. Perhaps those governing the Island will become more discrete. Perhaps on the Mainland the 4th Generation will be allowed to get on with their program of peaceful economic development and coexistence. Perhaps the US will advocate arms limitation rather than an arms race. Let¡¯s hope so. Arms races tend to make war more likely rather than less likely.

2004-08-07 08:18 Reply    

AndyDob

+ Send message
+ Posts: 351
+ Joined:
   2004-07-07

Straighttalk

Your posts get deleted. Mine as well.
In the latest one I passed an unaccaptable message to Chineseyang.
I wrote that beside her lengthy rejection of tss words, she has not presented any fact/info . Only bla,bla.

2004-08-07 09:32 Reply    

tsupasat

+ Send message
+ Posts: 1268
+ Joined:
   2003-12-13

hey pt

the entire point of my post was that the statement "ta1wan has always belonged to china" is not true.

it is an important point, and basically the undermines china's current claim to the island. i agree, however, that the more realistic reason is that ta1wan is a military threat, as you stated earlier. it's basically the same reason the u.s. still has a hard time with cuba (imagine if the soviet union was still around).

if america has learned anything from the iraq war, it should be that a country should be honest with itself about the reasons for war. i think china should be honest with itself and acknowledge that ta1wan has not always belonged to china.

ts

2004-08-07 10:49 Reply    

Paper Tiger

+ Send message
+ Posts: 237
+ Joined:
   2004-07-06

There is no accounting for differences in how people see things

ts: I agree with the thrust of your 2nd and 3rd paragraphs above but not entirely with the ¡®always belonged¡¯ thing.

I don¡¯t find our interlocutor¡¯s assertion of an historical pattern of Mainland dominance over the Island to be untenable. Sure, the Island has been under foreign domination, or allied to a foreign power, for 150 of the past 350 years but there is plenty of time before that to consider. The Island has been inhabited for 50,000 years and the existence of a Mainland civilisation can be traced back for 4,500 of these.

Consider how Mainland hegemony in the region historically has not always expressed though direct rule or even by the levying of tribute. So long as the rulers of subject territories kow-tow¡¯d to the emperor, physically and metaphorically, that was the deal. So wouldn¡¯t it be quite valid to call the desire for the Island to fall into line with Mainland wishes a desire for a return to how things used to be, always were? (Though admittedly taking a pretty long view - but then some people like to do that.) I confess I have no direct evidence that the Island was under Mainland hegemony prior to the arrival of the Portuguese - but it would be surprising if it wasn¡¯t: Korea and Viet Nam and other territories were for considerable periods.

I don¡¯t remember the details of the offer currently on the table from the Mainland, but I believe it recognises a degree of autonomy - possibly analogous to the relationship which pertained in those much earlier days.

This isn¡¯t to say that I think such an historical approach to the affairs of mankind is beneficial: how many Argentines (and Brits) died, how many mothers lost their sons, how many kids lost their fathers, over a much smaller and more desolate island group based on much more tenuous claims to right of possession? And I feel I still don¡¯t know the real reason - was it all just a ghastly mistake? A war over the Island certainly would be.

2004-08-07 13:56 Reply    

crazyazn

+ Send message
+ Posts: 834
+ Joined:
   2003-08-19

Hi Paper Tiger

Currently the Tai wanese really have no "connection" with the mainland other than it is a place for business, travel and some of them have relatives there.

They do not have that historical feeling. The K M T is on it's way out, they are fragmenting . These are the '49ers who are the people who came over with C K S and they were the only ones who had any reason for unification. Their feelings today are in the report below. I will pm you the link if it does not get in here.
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/eyeoneastasia/story/0,4395,265740,00.html?

The 23 Million people here have a Democratic Multi Party Govt Now . Before that it is as it is in the P R C today,an totalitarian One Party Govt. They have no reason to go and unify with the P R C under the C C P. They know about One Party Rule Promises as well,They lived with it for 50+ years.

As for whats on the table: One look at H K will tell you that this high degree of Autonomy is nothing but words.
In 1997, Bei jing promised that it would allow the region to operate under the principle of "one country, two systems," and a "high degree of autonomy."

The Chi nese government's new interpretation of the Basic Law means that electoral reforms can only be initiated by Bei jing's hand-picked Chief Executive, and bars Hong Kong's legisl.ature from taking any action without his approval.

The key words "new interpretation" means that they can go back on their word anytime and re interpret anything to suit themselves. That is not acceptable and the people here and their Elected Govt knows it as well.

Once the OC2P is accepted by the Tai wan Govt, there will be no turning back and Tai wan will go the way of H K.

2004-08-07 20:34 Reply    

dazzman

+ Send message
+ Posts: 9
+ Joined:
   2004-08-05

omg

of course tw did not always belong to china
but it has the right to claim it.

u need to read more history about tw

2004-08-09 06:32 Reply    

  Total 21 in 2 pages       | First | Previous | Next | End |   go to page
 
 
 
  Login name
Password:
 
   
  Register  
  Sign-in help  
  Validate account  
  Password lookup  

 


 
Forum Rules Feedback Privacy
 
Copyright 2003 By chinadaily.com.cn. All rights reserved