What's new

1904 China map admits Paracel, Spratly not Chinese territory

we also have enough evidence showing you were part of China,as in the case of 1903 map,it's very recent so on the map it probably shows that you were part of France.

Viet Nam never be part of China. Only China invade Vietname and was defeated many times. If you said thay China invade Vietnam so Vietnam is part of China, people can say Japan occupied China early 1930's so China is part of Japan, right?

And I would like to say, do you and other Chinese feel any ashame when your contry/people invade other countries, killing men, women, children, rob property, burn books, ruin culture...

And do you support ur goverment to invade other country even if you know that you guys have no right to do that?
Look around and see people in the world feel about the red china now. Go outside and talk to them, see how do they think about ur invasion and the way u claim ur teritory by invading/did invade in the past

it's a land map,everyone see that,and where in the map shows they belong to Vietnam?

The maps should be zoom in so that people can see more clearly. But is is clear enough to see Spratly and Paracels is not belong to China.
 
Viet Nam never be part of China. Only China invade Vietname and was defeated many times. If you said thay China invade Vietnam so Vietnam is part of China, people can say Japan occupied China early 1930's so China is part of Japan, right?

And I would like to say, do you and other Chinese feel any ashame when your contry/people invade other countries, killing men, women, children, rob property, burn books, ruin culture...

And do you support ur goverment to invade other country even if you know that you guys have no right to do that?
Look around and see people in the world feel about the red china now. Go outside and talk to them, see how do they think about ur invasion and the way u claim ur teritory by invading/did invade in the past


Do you feel ashamed when your country is doing all those things you mentioned in the Middle East and other places? I do. Or you're just a hypocrite saying your country invades others for the sake of humanities.
 
yes,history is history,nothing can change it.just like the fact that Japan was defeated in Second Sino-Japanese War.and lost all they got so if they want to get them back they need to launch the third war,so you can ask them to do so and see if they listen to you.

If you say history is history, why you agree/or many Chinese agree that Tibet belong to China? China invade tibet hundred years ago, then they regain freedom. What is the reason why Chinese people call tibet is China's teritory? They were independent country for hundred of years before Mao's troop invade Tibet

Vietnam,Korea,Ryukyu are all vassals of China. They all have Kings just like Chinese王,there is no emperor in the three vassals.

Vietname is belong to Vietnmese and the King of Viet Nam at that moment is Nguyen Dynasty. What is ur reason to say that King of VietNam is also King of China. We defeat China Invasion, killed more than 50k troop by Nguyen Hue, wounded a lot, to keep Independence. Only the Chinese think other country belong to them, that is ashame

It is okie if you can say at that moment, the relationship between Vietname and China, like China and North Korea now but We are still independent country. Shame one The invaders. If Vietnam King is the Chinese King, now you cant see Vietnam as an Independence country in the world map today, look at what Chinese did with Tibet, Manchu...., they wont let the Viet alive. So I would like to say, Vietnam in the past, since 938 AD, is an independent country and we defeat many invasion of the Chinese to keep our independence. Same one the invader!
 
Regardless of which nation, map is only one way to claim, there are lot more other factors, such as power, etc. For instance , without power, India wouldn't be able to take over Goa.

The problem with many Internet Viets is that a simple partial truth can make their blood boil recklessly. And they deny themselves from the whole truth.

Taking their show of 1904 map for instance, the map doesn't even include Qing Dynasty's NE part where they considered as their "old home place"... it's a simple focus on mainland China. and the foolish and ill-educated bunch start to propaganda like their communist regime.

LOL, even today lots of maps China don't show it's peripheral parts as they are none essential to the point of the map. Does that mean China renounces those areas? :lol:

It's a joke! It's just another laughing stock from the Viets...

Your statement is not convincing. Do you fully understand what is the meaning national maps? It is the map to show all of it teritories, including land and islands.

We show you the partial of the map, cos the maps is very big, it is including all of China teritories in 1904, was made under the request of the King, and people take about 200 years to made it. IT IS a proof. Look at the national map all over the world, it all denote the teritory of that contry:

The map was created across nearly two centery (1708 – 1904), from the Kangxi Emperor who ruled China from 1661 – 1722 to the Guangxu Emperor from 1875 to 1908. The emperors asked many clergymen and gifted astronomers and mathematicians to make this map. IT IS NOT EASY TO MAKE A MAP AT THAT PERIOD, and it is very hard job. Maps, in order to be pulished, need to get authority from the King/Goverment.
More specifically, in 1708, King Kangxi recruited some western clergymen to draw the map of the Great Wall. In 1711, the King continued to ask the clergymen to survey lands in 13 provinces nationwide. After that, Chinese intellectuals and western clergymen worked together for nearly 200 years to finish this map. Among famous western clergymen helping King Kangxi with the map were Matteo Bicci from Italy, Joannes Adam Schall Von Bell from Germany, and Ferdinandus Verbiest from Belgium.

In 1904, Shanghai Publishing House printed this map and distributed it to all provinces of the Qing Dynasty, the last imperial dynasty of China ruling from 1644 to 1912. The introduction of the map was written by the director of a Chinese observatory

I would like to suggest you read about the history of the map, lot of document still in China so you can understand how that map was made!
Furthermore, the people who take order from the King, if he made anything serious problem, like missing some teritories, islands.., will be punished to the dead, all of us know that is the law of the Chinese Emperror, it is a serious problem, not a joke
 
China printed more maps like 1904 map.

It's 1935中華民國全圖.

2.jpg


http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-far-east/198394-south-china-sea-news-discussions-6.html
 
Do you feel ashamed when your country is doing all those things you mentioned in the Middle East and other places? I do. Or you're just a hypocrite saying your country invades others for the sake of humanities.

You can ask Mr Obama and Mr Bush, I prefer not US troop not to go there. Just killing Bil Laden is good enough.
By the way, I am not US citizen, just come here to work and have permanent resident.

I believe that you live in NY so you are like Chinese international student.

Look around and see what people fee about Chinese in real. I am pretty sure that people in America have enough informaition (not only information from the Gov like in PRC) and they are not affected much by the government.

If the gov did something wrong 100%, the president will be lost in his campaign. You can see lot of demonstration to show their opinion against the gov. Can you do that in China? Can people from China accept the fact? I strongly believe that people in the US are cos we are civilized enough to see what is right or wrong

I used to live in NYC for 8 years. I know NYC well
 
Hi everybody, I'm newbie here

Let's discuss in reasonable manner.

To me, all sides need to study "the map", if you disagree on it, you could do it and follow you decision and fully follow it if you agree on its correctness.

To Chinese members, when you disagree with "the national map" prepared by your former dynasty, do you think that
from whom you get the right to declare for ownership ? ... let me guess "you derive China from previous declaration of permanent ownership from Qing dynasty ... if not you get it from whom ?

The map itself brought more evidence to everybody all over the world and Chinese guys , much much more technical than the recent "estimated map" that China show to the world.

An old dynasty with "son of the heaven" in the period of time that someone could occupy and merge small nations into their own land,
COULD BRING more technical evidence than a modern China , a member of UN Commitee. Does it make sense ? We are not in the era of occupation first then make up history ...

And Your history printed that "we do not care about what below the Hainan island" because Hainan is the South pole of our country.
 
Just wondering whether old maps are enuf evidence in the international courts for such claims ? If so the British may open their old maps from the history museums and claim half of the world !!!!:what:

I would rather expect all nations surronding SCS to follow EEZ according to UNCLOS instead of depending on "old maps"

The old British maps will be nonsense cos they covered other countries' land by invasion and therefor it is not accepted. Here is the map of China and the King of China made it. It state the Chinese territory in 1904 so it is convincing in the court
 
There is an old Chinese saying: “普天之下莫非王土”。Do you know the meaning of it? It means" All lands under the sky belong to the great Chinese emperor". That concept had been widely accepted by all Chinese for thousands years. So ancient Chinese had no motivation to draw their border line on map. It's a useless work for them. Ancient Chinese took it for granted that the land they found belongs to Chinese.

It's quite obvious that islands in SCS were first discovered by Ancient Chinese. Ancient Chinese were far more advanced in navigation field. When Chinese ancestors crossed SCS and got to Arab countries and other SEA countries by their huge ships. Vietnamese could barely leave their coast line with their shabby boats.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...y-not-chinese-territory-14.html#ixzz21uyCEl9X

Oh well, you can bring this to international court. this is really funny !
 
IF Chinese guys now doubt on "the map" of the Son of the heaven, you should abandon his land and sea. If you want more than what he owns, it must be robbed from other's hands, after The dynasty fallen ... means after year 1912, less than 100 years until now.

And everybody know which islands the PLA robbed in 1956 and 1974 ( Paracels ) and 1988 ( Spratlys ). Where were you before those milestones ? Until the emperor fallen 1912 you still not count above islands into yours.

And the information that I know is, at the end of WW2 as signed with US, Japanese surrendered to Kuomintang, should we consider China belong to the ROC ( Taiwan ) ? In Manchuria, Japanese surrendered to USSR, then ... ??? ROC still be alive, either Kuomintang.

LOL so who inherit the lands and sea of the son of the heaven ?
 
1635 Netherlands:
plate2-color400dpi.jpg

This figure, the top of the long strip Note Doa Javaquero, right indicate Pracel, on the left coast of Vietnam on Pulo S Polo, Pulo Cotan, Lan tam, a long strip at the bottom of Pulo Citi

1680 Netherlands:
plate4-color400dpi.jpg

Long strip superscript Pracel, On the left labeled Pulo Cham, Strip form began to close to Vietnam coast , Nansha Islands in the lower right corner of display.

1747 United Kingdom:
plate5-color400dpi.jpg

The long rectangular label of Shoal of Pracel, The top right of a few small islands marked as "the Triangle", Xisha Islands from a long strip of "Paracels" separation, independent of an archipelago

1750 United Kingdom:
Figure17grayscale200dpi_s.jpg

Long strip marked with "Pracel its upper right is the separation of a separate Islands labeled" of Li Ochiali

1775 United Kingdom:
Figure18grayscale200dpi_s.jpg

Long strip marked with "Pracel its upper right is the separation of a separate Islands labeled" of Li Ochiali

1812 United Kingdom:
Figure4grayscale400dpi.jpg

Long strip marked with "Pracel its upper right is the separation of a separate Islands labeled" Amphitrite, Dry Lime Shoali


1851 United Kingdom:
plate6color400dpi_s.jpg

This diagram Note North Sh (oa) l, Paracels, Amphitrite Is, Crescent, Discovery Shoal, Bombay Shoal, Macclesfield Bank, Scarborough Shoal and other words, the various reefs group label has basically modern naming. a very modern map began on the map to remove the long strip, But the “Paracels” this name transferred to now the real xisha islands.

Western understanding of the China Sea is the ancient Chinese map in the transmission of information, Once the central Vietnam coast not far from some of the shoals, sandbars painted a long strip, And called Parcel / Pracel (s) / Paracels, But Until 1747, they discovered that the Xisha Islands of China, And began to draw in the upper right corner of the long strip of the Xisha Islands, and gave several different names, Later, a very modern (for example ,1851 United Kingdom) map began on the map to remove the long strip, But the “Paracels” this name transferred to now the real xisha islands.

《The Complete Map of Unified Great Nam》,Longitude point of view, these two Islands is too close to the coast of Vietnam, After all, this time in the 19th century, other territories in Vietnam is probably more accurately described why such a big difference of the two Islands? Latitude and Islands and the distribution of the shape difference is also great, from the map, the two Islands together to form a long strip, but in fact the Paracel Islands and Spratly Islands are far apart, the distribution is not a long strip, At this time no matter how backward mapping technology, nor will the two Islands to draw so close! Contrast map of the Western release above, we can find, “黄沙" and "萬里長沙”, In fact, from the 1613 British Captain John Sullivan wrote 《Sailing log 》, Map described in the "long zone". Regardless of position or shape point of view, the two maps are the same. In the long strip zone on the map, The top label (Pulon Cham), Central label (Pulou Canton), Bottom marked(Pulou Gambir). It can be predicted this long zone(《The Complete Map of Unified Great Nam》“黄沙"and"萬里長沙”), Is along the direction parallel with the coast of central Vietnam, the distribution of some small islands and sandbars. John Sullivan in the book describes the long strip, its shaped like a foot, foot, thumb towards the southwest, located at latitude 12 °~ 16 ° 30 east longitude 110 ° ~ 111 °. In the long strip northwest, north latitude 16 ° to 17 °, longitude 111 ° 30 'to 112 ° 42', (Les Lunet tes), the island was lateral distribution. The Xisha Islands (latitude 15 ° 42 '~ 17 ° 08', longitude 111 ° 10 '~ 112 ° 55). They are able to judge, (Les Lunet te) Chinese Xisha Islands.

dong_yang_nan_yang_hai_dao_tu.jpg


The Map of South and East Ocean Sea Routes was drawn in between 1712-1721 by Qing (Ching) Dynasty Fujian (Fuchien) Province Navy Commander Shi Shibiao, the son of a famous early Qing Dynasty Imperial Officer. This map shows clearly the sea routes, time and decriptions from Chinese coastal ports to Japan, Laos, Vietnam, Indonesia,Brunei, Cambodia and the Phinllipines. In this map, the locations and names of the Southern Sea Islands(Nanhai Zhudao) are very accurate. The map shows clearly Chinese sovereignty over the South China Sea Islands including Nansha Islands, Xisha Islands, Zhongsha Islands and Dongsha Islands.Also note the "long bar area" shown in this map which locates close to the Vietnamese coast, which clearly tells that the so called "Truong Sa" and "Hoang Sa" as shown in the 1838 "Complete Map of Unified Great Nam" are not the Nansha (Spratlys) and Xisha (Paracels) Islands of China at all, but refers to the Pullo Canton near the central Vietnamese coast, which was also once been identified as "dangerous group" and named Paracels before Paracels was used to refer to China's Xisha Islands later in the history.
 
You can ask Mr Obama and Mr Bush, I prefer not US troop not to go there. Just killing Bil Laden is good enough.
By the way, I am not US citizen, just come here to work and have permanent resident.

I believe that you live in NY so you are like Chinese international student.

Look around and see what people fee about Chinese in real. I am pretty sure that people in America have enough informaition (not only information from the Gov like in PRC) and they are not affected much by the government.

If the gov did something wrong 100%, the president will be lost in his campaign. You can see lot of demonstration to show their opinion against the gov. Can you do that in China? Can people from China accept the fact? I strongly believe that people in the US are cos we are civilized enough to see what is right or wrong

I used to live in NYC for 8 years. I know NYC well


I don't care who you are or what you say. But if you're not an American citizen you should change one of your flag otherwise others will perceived you speak on American's perspectives.

You talk a big game, my friend, as if you're an international geopolitical analyst and a fair worldview thinker. In truth you're nothing but a devious promoter of hates between people, and hide behind another country's flag at that.

You lost all your credibility when you presume: "I believe that you live in NY so you are like Chinese international student". How can you, or anyone for that matter, label me as who am I without knowing anything about me?
 
1635 Netherlands:

This figure, the top of the long strip Note Doa Javaquero, right indicate Pracel, on the left coast of Vietnam on Pulo S Polo, Pulo Cotan, Lan tam, a long strip at the bottom of Pulo Citi

1680 Netherlands:
Long strip superscript Pracel, On the left labeled Pulo Cham, Strip form began to close to Vietnam coast , Nansha Islands in the lower right corner of display.

1747 United Kingdom:
The long rectangular label of Shoal of Pracel, The top right of a few small islands marked as "the Triangle", Xisha Islands from a long strip of "Paracels" separation, independent of an archipelago

1750 United Kingdom:
Long strip marked with "Pracel its upper right is the separation of a separate Islands labeled" of Li Ochiali

1775 United Kingdom:
Long strip marked with "Pracel its upper right is the separation of a separate Islands labeled" of Li Ochiali

1812 United Kingdom:
Long strip marked with "Pracel its upper right is the separation of a separate Islands labeled" Amphitrite, Dry Lime Shoali


1851 United Kingdom:
This diagram Note North Sh (oa) l, Paracels, Amphitrite Is, Crescent, Discovery Shoal, Bombay Shoal, Macclesfield Bank, Scarborough Shoal and other words, the various reefs group label has basically modern naming. a very modern map began on the map to remove the long strip, But the “Paracels” this name transferred to now the real xisha islands.

Western understanding of the China Sea is the ancient Chinese map in the transmission of information, Once the central Vietnam coast not far from some of the shoals, sandbars painted a long strip, And called Parcel / Pracel (s) / Paracels, But Until 1747, they discovered that the Xisha Islands of China, And began to draw in the upper right corner of the long strip of the Xisha Islands, and gave several different names, Later, a very modern (for example ,1851 United Kingdom) map began on the map to remove the long strip, But the “Paracels” this name transferred to now the real xisha islands.

《The Complete Map of Unified Great Nam》,Longitude point of view, these two Islands is too close to the coast of Vietnam, After all, this time in the 19th century, other territories in Vietnam is probably more accurately described why such a big difference of the two Islands? Latitude and Islands and the distribution of the shape difference is also great, from the map, the two Islands together to form a long strip, but in fact the Paracel Islands and Spratly Islands are far apart, the distribution is not a long strip, At this time no matter how backward mapping technology, nor will the two Islands to draw so close! Contrast map of the Western release above, we can find, “黄沙" and "萬里長沙”, In fact, from the 1613 British Captain John Sullivan wrote 《Sailing log 》, Map described in the "long zone". Regardless of position or shape point of view, the two maps are the same. In the long strip zone on the map, The top label (Pulon Cham), Central label (Pulou Canton), Bottom marked(Pulou Gambir). It can be predicted this long zone(《The Complete Map of Unified Great Nam》“黄沙"and"萬里長沙”), Is along the direction parallel with the coast of central Vietnam, the distribution of some small islands and sandbars. John Sullivan in the book describes the long strip, its shaped like a foot, foot, thumb towards the southwest, located at latitude 12 °~ 16 ° 30 east longitude 110 ° ~ 111 °. In the long strip northwest, north latitude 16 ° to 17 °, longitude 111 ° 30 'to 112 ° 42', (Les Lunet tes), the island was lateral distribution. The Xisha Islands (latitude 15 ° 42 '~ 17 ° 08', longitude 111 ° 10 '~ 112 ° 55). They are able to judge, (Les Lunet te) Chinese Xisha Islands.


The Map of South and East Ocean Sea Routes was drawn in between 1712-1721 by Qing (Ching) Dynasty Fujian (Fuchien) Province Navy Commander Shi Shibiao, the son of a famous early Qing Dynasty Imperial Officer. This map shows clearly the sea routes, time and decriptions from Chinese coastal ports to Japan, Laos, Vietnam, Indonesia,Brunei, Cambodia and the Phinllipines. In this map, the locations and names of the Southern Sea Islands(Nanhai Zhudao) are very accurate. The map shows clearly Chinese sovereignty over the South China Sea Islands including Nansha Islands, Xisha Islands, Zhongsha Islands and Dongsha Islands.Also note the "long bar area" shown in this map which locates close to the Vietnamese coast, which clearly tells that the so called "Truong Sa" and "Hoang Sa" as shown in the 1838 "Complete Map of Unified Great Nam" are not the Nansha (Spratlys) and Xisha (Paracels) Islands of China at all, but refers to the Pullo Canton near the central Vietnamese coast, which was also once been identified as "dangerous group" and named Paracels before Paracels was used to refer to China's Xisha Islands later in the history.

So you are going to prove that Westerners are all "mistaken" real Paracel with some Vietnamese "near-coast islands"?
All I want to say is...

y-u-no-read-thumb.jpg


All you can do is avoiding my points? Oh what a pity!

You mean thousands of Westerners who had crossed South China Sea in 400 years were all "mistaken" Paracel with some Vietnamese near-coast islands?
So why don't they draw the "other" Paracel? It's bigger, more noticeable than some "islands near Vietnamese coast", right? They are mentally retarded or what? Or if you want to say that they "miss" the Paracel, well, hundreds, thousands of Westerners who go around South East Asia sea for 400 years but all of them "miss" the "real Paracel"? What a pity of Western's sailing :rofl"

Then now they are what you had missed:

In Yesterday 02:19 PM, I said
----
Traité élémentaire de géographie: contenant un abrégé méthodique de Précis ... - Conrad Malte-Brun - Google Books
Traité élémentaire de géographie: contenant un abrégé méthodique de Précis ... - Conrad Malte-Brun - Google Books

The French book "Traité élémentaire de géographie: contenant un abrégé méthodique du Précis de la géographie universelle en huit volumes" (volume 2) was published in Paris, 1831. Page 221 said that: "equal-spaced between Hainan and Cochinchina, Paracels archipelago was depended on Annam Empire". "A une egale distance de la cote de Cochinchine et de l'ile d'Hai-nan, l'archipel de Paracels est une dependance de l'empire d'Annam"
----

An archipelago (which isEqual-spaced between Vietnam and Hainan) is near Vietnamese coast? Oh logic :rofl: I had some other books with told that Paracel is equal-spaced between Vietnamese coast and Hainan, do you need more?

I also said
----
The map-drawing technique in that period was still poor, so the map can't provide the extract distance. That's why we need texts to back-up our maps.
----

Just check out these map:

Hoang-Sa-Truong-Sa-giaoduc.net%20(1)_copy.JPG

compare to this
southeast2.gif

In the older map, The distance from Southern Vietnam to Western Malaysia is too close than the fact, the size of Thailand Gulf is also too small than it has to be, so do you mean there have to be another Malaysia or another Thailand Gulf? :rofl:

As the time goes, the distances in maps are farther from the coast because the map-drawing technique is advancing, so the distances are more accurate.
Such as this 1833 map:

AnNamDaiQuocHoaDo.jpg


Is that too close to the coast?

And in Yesterday 07:08 PM, I said:

----
Now give me the name of what archipelago is as large and far from the coast as the archipelago in our map so Westerners can be mistaken with Paracels and described "equal-spaced between Hainan and Cochinchina, Paracels archipelago was depended on Annam Empire". If there is no archipelago like that, it means the archipelago in the map is Paracels, ok?

One thing, our Paracel Teams (Đội Hoàng Sa and Đội Bắc Hải) start from our near coast islands to go to Paracel. For example, Ly Son island, just go and search it on google, oh if you have google there
----

The "long bar area" you mentioned in your last paragraph is too close and our map has it too, and definitely separated from Paracel:
bcc7d91d84dc52814016406fd25056e1_47652811.hoangsatruongsagiaoduc.jpg




So in conclusion, you mean that Westerners had mistaken Paracel with some other near-coast islands, and my points are:
1) There is no near-coast archipelago which is big and far enough to be mistaken with the more noticeable Paracels. Why don't you just go to google maps and find an archipelago like that?
2) It's an awkward moment when thousands of Westerners had gone around South China Sea for 400 years but all of them just couldn't found the real Paracel "until recent times", only found some near-coast islands to draw in their maps.
3) The French book "Traité élémentaire de géographie: contenant un abrégé méthodique du Précis de la géographie universelle en huit volumes" (volume 2) was published in Paris, 1831. Page 221 said that: "equal-spaced between Hainan and Cochinchina, Paracels archipelago was depended on Annam Empire". "A une egale distance de la cote de Cochinchine et de l'ile d'Hai-nan, l'archipel de Paracels est une dependance de l'empire d'Annam". So the archipelago which was found by Westerners is real Paracel, because only Paracel is equal-spaced between Hainan and Vietnamese coast.
4) The map-drawing technique in that period was still poor, so the map can't provide the extract distance. They even drew Western Malaysia too close to Southern Vietnam than what it has to be. That's why we need texts to back-up our maps.
5) Our Paracel Teams (Đội Hoàng Sa and Đội Bắc Hải, check our 1776 book) started their annual journeys from our near-coast islands to go to Paracel. For example, Ly Son island, just go and search it on google, oh if you have google there.

And finally, if you Chinese are confident in your "evidences", why don't go to an international court instead of this:

8caecc91930aa46fb62bb320feb31fab_47633545.7292012122157am.jpg
 
8caecc91930aa46fb62bb320feb31fab_47633545.7292012122157am.jpg

to#253, the Vietnamese guy. Since you quoted my post. In case there is a misunderstanding. I think I have to explain more. What kind of court the thieves want to go? It's a court that would never punish thieves for their crime, but only decides who has the things stolen by thieves, thieves or victims. This kind of court is heaven for thieves, hell for victims. Unfortunately, the Philippine and Vietnamese guys are falling in love with this court.
 
8caecc91930aa46fb62bb320feb31fab_47633545.7292012122157am.jpg

to#253, the Vietnamese guy. Since you quoted my post. In case there is a misunderstanding. I think I have to explain more. What kind of court the thieves want to go? It's a court that would never punish thieves for their crime, but only decides who has the things stolen by thieves, thieves or victims. This kind of court is heaven for thieves, hell for victims. Unfortunately, the Philippine and Vietnamese guys are following in love with this court.

Then what are you want to do?
You're government doesn't want to start a war to claim "YOUR" so called lands.
They resort to bullying which is disgustful and unrespectable to the eyes of the other nation

Dude we are not on the ancient eras anymore.
You can't just go around yelling anyone labeling them thieves

You need proofs, evidences, documents
You need to backup your claims

China is the one who avoids the court for some weird reason
Didn't they teach you political science on your school?
No offense bro but you are really blinded by your government.

The only way to end this conflict is via diplomat or war
Tell your government to grow some BALLS and stop bullying FFS :lol:
 
Back
Top Bottom