Beijing should back Okinawa independence, says Global Times

[USAHawk785]

Then how do ssks surface close to the us carrier battle groups without being detected,especially australian collins subs did this repeatedly in exercises.Also modern ssns or ssgns don't need to get that close.they can use dived launch of aship cruise missiles.So its a very even fight.And given subs overall stealth,where enemy never knows its there i think its pretty deadly threat.In falklands a single british ssn paralysed and grounded entire argentine navy.

During the Falklands war, the Royal Navy sank the ARA General Belgrano, which did not have the capability of detecting the nuclear submarine. Remember that the ARA General Belgrano was a Brooklyn-class light cruiser, which served in United States navy as the USS Phoenix during the Pacific Campaign against the IJN.

The Ticonderoga -class cruiser is heavily armed and practically untouchable by any sub threat due to its AN/SQQ-89(V)1/3, AN/SPY-1, AN/SQQ-89(V)1/3 systems.

Just 1 Ticonderoga-class cruiser is more than able of taking out enemy battle groups of inferior quality. Subs that are part of the PLAN are of inferior quality and efficiency, by American standards.

The Japanese Maritime SDF is almost at par with USN's Fleet Force Matrix. Given, the Japanese have a long history of naval prowess, considering the efficacy of the NIHON KAIGUN (IMPERIAL JAPANESE NAVY) during the span of the Pacific War. Before being utterly decimated by the USN, the NIHON KAIGUN, fought well, illustrating the Japanese mastery of naval warfare, despite the odds.


Regards,

 

[Snomannen]

Looking back at history, I'm really greaful for generations of Vietnamese who had lost their lives to repel Chinese invasions, especially that one event in 1946 where 200,000 Chinese Nationalist army almost succesful in taking Vietnam again. Why? Becuase if China had captured Vietnam then, this would be the rationale they use: just like Tibet, Vietnam has been on again, off again occupied by Chinese expansionists. Therefore, with this kind of logic, China would have totally "legitimately" owned Vietnam. I will tell you why that kind of logic fail:

First of all, there is no "if" in history.
Secondly, putting a "=" between Tibet and Vietnam is a big mistake.
1. Vietnam was independence from China for hundreds years, yet Tibet was always part of the central dynasty for hundreds years;
2. Vietnam was not even part of the 5 main ethnics of the Republic, you even have nothing to do with the founding of Modern China.
Therefore, "if" China really took over Vietnam recently, the PRC would have to come up a better "excuse". So don't you worry.

As for the logic thing, with respect, but you are totally wrong, since you don't even know the basics concepts:

1) Both Yuan and Qing Dynasty are foreigners that invaded China of the Han at the time. Yuan are Mongolians, Qing are Manchurians. You cannot claim lands conquered by invaders as your own. China and Tibet are distinct countries, governed by distinct people (Han and Tibetan) for thousands of years. They cannot suddenly become one because some foreign powers took them both. French colonized the whole Indochina, but Vietnam cannot claim Laos and Cambodia its land. I remember very well that the CCP supported the genocide Pol Pot regime in Cambodia due to fear that Vietnam would annex Cambodia using this exact "historical precedent" you just mentioned. How does a dose of irony tatse? Maybe if China were not a resource-hungry expantionist country, it would be easier to defend the PRC.

2) After the Ming Dynasty regained Han China independence from the Mongolians, Tibet got its independence as well. Qing Dynasty, another foreigner to Han China took Tibet again. After the Qing fell, Tibet once again became a separate country. This further proved that Tibet has always been a separate nation and were able to gain independence together with Han China after foregin invaders are expelled.

What do you even mean "foreigners".
Is Mugal Empire a foreign to India.
Is Prussia a foreign to Germany.
Is Scotland a foreign to the UK.
Is William the Conqueror not British.
Is Alexander the Great not Greek.
Is Taksin not Thai.
Chinese is not a single ethic, but a ethnics group with Mongolian, Manchurian, Hun, Tibetan, Han and etc. Manchurian and Mongolian are both Chinese. Qing and Yuan are both Chinese history. China is never a country only belongs to Han, even nowadays Han people are mixed with many ancient Chinese ethnics and the description of Han people has been changing for thousands year. Who told you that only Han people represent China's history.
Besides the Emperors of Qing consider themselves as the leaders of Zhou Dynasty replaced Shang Dynasty, which are no doubt both Chinese history & dynasties.
I know you are bringing the topic of Outer Mongolia, but the fact is:
1. More than half of the Mongolian in the world are Chinese;
2. Inner Mongolian are the direct descendants of Genghis Khan (Golden Family), yet Outer Mongolian (Khalkha) were not even Mongolian during the Yuan Dynasty;
3. Golden Family stood by the central government, yet Outer Mongolian killed all those members of Golden Family in their territory and even forbid themselves to workship Genghis Khan.
If Yuan is not China, then Yuan belongs to no one, especially for Outer Mongolia.
Can the Republic of Macedonia even represents the ancient Empire of Macedonia, not to mention that Greek people is very not amused about the Republic of Macedonia have taken one of their ancient country name in their history as their national name.
If Pakistan named their country "Mugal", can Pakistani even represent Mugal Empire.

(Besides, you have to understand that there was no such country officially called "China中國" before the Republic was established, but ancient Chinese nations. Just like there was no such country called "India" )

Separate nation you say, Goa was "independence" from India for hundreds year, yet India still attempted to take it back, by forces. What is the reason for that. Think about it.

As for Indochina, of course you can never claim Laos and Cambodia, since French people are NOT even Vietnamese, just like British are not Indian. But for Mongolian and Manchurian, they are all Chinese. But it is another story if you really were up to sth about the "Second Ind-Sina" or "United South Asia" thing, for that I do not know.

Self-immolation is a higest act of sacrifice when one has no other available means of protest. Self-immolation is borned from the very heart of Buddhism where the concern of "do no harm to other" is held at the utmost importance. Gandhi's silent protest and hunger strike is what brought his country independence. His sacrifices brought over the world's sympathy and admiration. Same reactions were made to the self-immolation act of a South Vietnam monk protesting the terrorism of Buddhism of South Vietnam Ngo Dinh Diem's regime. That act shocked America to the point where it decided to dispose Diem. Most recently, hunger strike from prisoners of Guantanamo caused America to rethink its terrorist prison policy.

As you can see, that's how the civilized world act when seeing an act of self-immolation. Only in the PRC where I see such dismissive attitude toward it. On American forums, every time such news come up (immolation news occurs at least once a year in Tibet) I see a regular of mainlanders one after another insults such act. They dismiss that Tibetan using words from "stupid," "cult," "terrorist" and the most tame word is "irresponsible." They also dismiss anyone expressing sympathy to Tibetan "anti-China" or "Xenophobic," all strong condemnations but not a peep about Tibetan's plight. Your statement, which simply dismisses Tibetans ' self-immolation as silly, while never explore why they do it, shows that you have a narrow view of world events. This is perhaps shaped by years of propaganda or strong nationalist view point.

"CCP treats Tibetan much better than Han, and we don't see Han self-immolation, therefore Tibetan act is silly and/or Tibetan is not badly treated at all"- paraphrasing your argument. This circular logic is wrong on both the assumptions and conclusion. Tibet is one of the poorest regions in PRC, Tibetan's lands are confiscated and distributed to Hans, Tibetan's culture is subsided by Han's culture, and Tibetans who dare advocate for independence are jailed, beaten, persecuted. I don't see those as "better than Han," do you?!

The CCP did make some bad things like whipping off several Temples of course, but that was the thing of the past and the government has already apologized for what they did. Nowadays people are free to believe what they believe as long as they don't cross the line like standing against the government. The action of self-immolation can mean many things, you are either protecting something, or trying to find a way to heaven. But for me this people are just like those who believe in the "end of the day" and put themselves to death. Religions can either make you wise person or a stupid person.
Simple as that.

You don't even get my point at all. I never say such thing like [Tibetan act is silly] nor [Tibetan is not badly treated at all], it is a fact that the CCP treats Tibetan much better than Han, but it doesn't mean that [Tibetan is not badly treated at all]. In fact the CCP treats anyone "bad", you just said [Tibetans who dare advocate for independence are jailed, beaten, persecuted], but can Han people? Tibet is one of the poorest regions in PRC, so? Tibet was and is poor. How could you expect that such place like Tibet people can easily become rich (there are lot of rich Tibetan in Qinghai through) People are hardly breath in Tibet, yet the CCP still build lot of hospitals, schools/ Uni., roads and other constructions in Tibet. They even help Tibetan people to write a MC English-Tibetan-Mandarin Dictionary in order to help them to meet the need of increasing their knowledge to meet a modern society. Tibetan people (even if they are rich) don't need to pay for educational fees, no need to follow the 1 Child Policy, they can get bonus point by using in their own languages and their identity. These actions from the CCP have two reasons:
1. They are "poor", they have no resources, they need help;
2. Showing how nice we are treating our minorities.
Such actions even make many Han people not happy, even envy about it.
And the answer is, Yes I do.

I read all your links, and there are no proofs of your doubt. One has a poll of Okinawa residents, but it was about a totally different topic from "Okinawa independence." The residents were disagree to the notion that Okinawa were independent on the same date with Japan, which is true since America only returned Okinawa to Japan years later. They are mad not because of returning to Japan, but because they were still under American administration while the whole Japan were free. Another the link also talk about a group of Okinawa's residents who are displease that Japan does little to decrease the US presence in the islands.

So the whole issue were not about the majority Okinawa wanting to be independent from Japan, but about the majority of people who are mad with Japan's continuation to keep the US there. It's unreasonable to think that they want to separate from Japan, and even more ridiculous to dream that they want to join China.

If you translate the Japanese website (I forgot to mention that is a Japanese site), it is a similar questionnaire than those about Identity recolonization of "Chinese or Taiwanese". Many Okinawan prefer being a Okinawan than Japanese, such results just like most of the Taiwanese questionnaire. Combining with these data with the links I suggest you to read again, there are independent forces in Okinawa, and there is not really "a small group of people". This is what I want to show you. Those American bases issue are not really matter. Besides I also never think that Okinawa is actually running away nor even becoming a part of China.

My concern with the Global Times was more about layman who would look at its "international" name and mistakes it for a reputable organization. I reveal its affiliation so that next time, when a member from PRC side quote that newspaper as "truth," people will immediately be skeptical about all those Pro-CCP biases written there.

The CCP is bad doesn't make anyone else is all true, it is not a simple world with only white and black. It is okay to judge and criticize.

It's funny how you seem to understand that CCP is a tricky organization, yet you continue to vocally defend whatever it does. This is to say how much extreme nationalistic feelings can cause people to bend their beliefs.

Since when did I [defend whatever it does]?
I have my own analysis and opinion, I don't need to take side to "own" my back.
I am simply telling what I think is right, what is true and what have to be doubt with. I don't even like the CCP at all.
But you my friend, you are the one who is really preconceived, I think your last word is actually suitable for you, not for me.

PS: I haven't been typing that many words for so long, my hands hurt.

 

[VietHome]

First of all, there is no "if" in history.
Secondly, putting a "=" between Tibet and Vietnam is a big mistake.
1. Vietnam was independence from China for hundreds years, yet Tibet was always part of the central dynasty for hundreds years;

Central Dynasty that was controlled by people other than Han Chinese. I will save the discussion of ethnicity further down. Vietnam is similar to Tibet because both has been victims of "Central Dynasty." The only unfortunate thing for Tibetan now is that the country is still occupied.

Tibet actually gained independence in 20th century just to be taken away by the PRC in 1951. China is one of those few nations that annexed territory after WWII. Congratulation to the PRC for being in an exclusive club.

2. Vietnam was not even part of the 5 main ethnics of the Republic, you even have nothing to do with the founding of Modern China.

That "ethnic of the republic" banner is found when all of those lands were confiscated in to a Grand China. If China took Vietnam in 1946, Vietnamese certainly will be the sixth main "ethnic of the republic." Any keen observer with intelligent will know this. There are no other ways to make a land grab appears legitimate to the world without that claim.

What does Tibetan has to do with the founding of Modern China? Do you have any Tibetan held important CCP positions back in those days? On the other hand Vietnam was part of the Old China. The Han Dynasty controlled it back then.

Therefore, "if" China really took over Vietnam recently, the PRC would have to come up a better "excuse". So don't you worry.

Since it looks like you are so sure to know what PRC thinks, please enlighten me on another sort of excuses not similar to Tibet excuses please. Remember that the time is 1946 and you would be Mao.

As for the logic thing, with respect, but you are totally wrong, since you don't even know the basics concepts:

What do you even mean "foreigners".
Is Mugal Empire a foreign to India.
Is Prussia a foreign to Germany.
Is Scotland a foreign to the UK.
Is William the Conqueror not British.
Is Alexander the Great not Greek.
Is Taksin not Thai.
Chinese is not a single ethic, but a ethnics group with Mongolian, Manchurian, Hun, Tibetan, Han and etc. Manchurian and Mongolian are both Chinese. Qing and Yuan are both Chinese history. China is never a country only belongs to Han, even nowadays Han people are mixed with many ancient Chinese ethnics and the description of Han people has been changing for thousands year. Who told you that only Han people represent China's history.
Besides the Emperors of Qing consider themselves as the leaders of Zhou Dynasty replaced Shang Dynasty, which are no doubt both Chinese history & dynasties.

Qin Shi Huang, the first Chinese Emperor built the iconic Great Wars to prevent those Mongolian and Manchurian tribes to conquer territory of the Han Chinese.

In all of world history, China perhaps is one of the few nations that is able to incorporate foreign invaders into itself by the sheer power of population. The Yuan, Qing had to become Han-like to be able to yield legitimate power.

And Yes to all those question you just asked. Indeed those conquering empires are considered foreigners at the time such countries were taken over. If French invasion of Vietnam had persisted for example, nowadays, we would have called ourselves French. You have to contemplate my argument, which is "Qing and Yuan are foreigners to China when they invaded both China and Tibet, just like French are foreigner to Indochina when they colonized it." Please put aside what you have learnt from PRC's textbook and think

I know you are bringing the topic of Outer Mongolia, but the fact is:
1. More than half of the Mongolian in the world are Chinese;

I don't see why this is relevant at all.

2. Inner Mongolian are the direct descendants of Genghis Khan (Golden Family), yet Outer Mongolian (Khalkha) were not even Mongolian during the Yuan Dynasty;
3. Golden Family stood by the central government, yet Outer Mongolian killed all those members of Golden Family in their territory and even forbid themselves to workship Genghis Khan.
If Yuan is not China, then Yuan belongs to no one, especially for Outer Mongolia.

Now you have done it by indirectly claim that Genghis Khan is Chinese Is that mean PRC can now claim all the territories the Mongol empire has conquered Chinese? I think I have to tell Russians and Indians about this news

Can the Republic of Macedonia even represents the ancient Empire of Macedonia, not to mention that Greek people is very not amused about the Republic of Macedonia have taken one of their ancient country name in their history as their national name.

Yes, Macedonia and Greek is another case of dominance culture and population claiming ownership of ancient invading empire. Greeks are wrong to claim Macedonian's achievements theirs, just as PRC is wrong to claim Yuan and Qing their Dynasty. Unfortunate to Manchurian is that there were no country for them to return to. They are not as lucky as Mongolians and Macedonians who still able to retain their national identity.

If Pakistan named their country "Mugal", can Pakistani even represent Mugal Empire.

No, they are not and that is the point to support my argument. Pakistan cannot claim to represent the Mongol empire, and China cannot do the same. I'm still itching about the "Chinese" Genghis Khan

Separate nation you say, Goa was "independence" from India for hundreds year, yet India still attempted to take it back, by forces. What is the reason for that. Think about it.

I don't know what region you are referring to. But if you are talking about Kashmir then that's a different situation than the one with Tibet.

As for Indochina, of course you can never claim Laos and Cambodia, since French people are NOT even Vietnamese, just like British are not Indian. But for Mongolian and Manchurian, they are all Chinese. But it is another story if you really were up to sth about the "Second Ind-Sina" or "United South Asia" thing, for that I do not know.

What determine a person "Chinese," if they are not born Han?! If you say he/she is "Chinese" because of "minority" status, then there are a lot of Khmer and Laotians in Vietnam too, and they are part of the "minority" as well. What prevents Vietnam from taking Laos, and Cambodia into itself and calling other ethnicity "minorities" for legitimacy?

And yes, CCP backed Pol Pot on the basis to repel "Vietnamese invasion" since CCP was afraid that Vietnam would have taken Cambodia using the claim similar to what Mao used with Tibet.

The CCP did make some bad things like whipping off several Temples of course, but that was the thing of the past and the government has already apologized for what they did. Nowadays people are free to believe what they believe as long as they don't cross the line like standing against the government. The action of self-immolation can mean many things, you are either protecting something, or trying to find a way to heaven. But for me this people are just like those who believe in the "end of the day" and put themselves to death. Religions can either make you wise person or a stupid person.
Simple as that.

Please tell me the basis of the bold part on what you believe. Are you a psychic in those people's heads or do you read only CCP's sources on those accounts?

You don't even get my point at all. I never say such thing like [Tibetan act is silly] nor [Tibetan is not badly treated at all], it is a fact that the CCP treats Tibetan much better than Han, but it doesn't mean that [Tibetan is not badly treated at all].

I quote you again here. I did not put words in your mouth, you definitely said those people committing self-immolation were "silly," and went on to dismissed them as "cult."

As for the self-immolation thing, I suppose there is no cult in Okinawa to encourage people to join a mass suicide (they don't workship a man as a God either), which is a "common" action to those silly people around the world (expectantly when someone claiming "the end of the world").

If you are now saying that you did not generalized all Tibetan, just "those people," then your second paragraph clearly implied this by saying:

Besides If they really like to burn themselves because of the reason that the CCP is truly really bad, then this is not a Tibetan's 'job' to commit self-immolation, but Han, since the CCP is treating Tibetan much better than Han.

As for [Tibetan is not badly treated at all], I just mentioned that as a possibility of your rationale. You can understand it by rereading my texts. If that is not what you meant, then we are at least come to an agreement that "CCP treats Tibetan bad"

In fact the CCP treats anyone "bad", you just said [Tibetans who dare advocate for independence are jailed, beaten, persecuted], but can Han people?

What independent is Han people need to be from? If you only mean the [jailed, beaten, persecuted] then yeah, Han are also treated badly. But that is besides my point.

Tibet is one of the poorest regions in PRC, so? Tibet was and is poor. How could you expect that such place like Tibet people can easily become rich (there are lot of rich Tibetan in Qinghai through) People are hardly breath in Tibet, yet the CCP still build lot of hospitals, schools/ Uni., roads and other constructions in Tibet. They even help Tibetan people to write a MC English-Tibetan-Mandarin Dictionary in order to help them to meet the need of increasing their knowledge to meet a modern society. Tibetan people (even if they are rich) don't need to pay for educational fees, no need to follow the 1 Child Policy, they can get bonus point by using in their own languages and their identity. These actions from the CCP have two reasons:
1. They are "poor", they have no resources, they need help;
2. Showing how nice we are treating our minorities.
Such actions even make many Han people not happy, even envy about it.
And the answer is, Yes I do.

Let's say Imperial Japan were to take over China back then. Few decades later, Japan Emperor apologies, and then being "nice" with Han Chinese by building schools, hospitals, roads, and give Han Chinese special admittance into Imperial Universities. Would you, as the citizen of the Empire, accept that? Don't play "no ifs in history" card with me. I pointed out hypothetical situations to put you in the shoes of Tibetan right now. I want to see if you can adopt your tune to that situation. A Japanese can be jealous all he wants, but the fact remain that his Emperor now owns China, so he can be happy about that.

If you translate the Japanese website (I forgot to mention that is a Japanese site), it is a similar questionnaire than those about Identity recolonization of "Chinese or Taiwanese". Many Okinawan prefer being a Okinawan than Japanese, such results just like most of the Taiwanese questionnaire. Combining with these data with the links I suggest you to read again, there are independent forces in Okinawa, and there is not really "a small group of people". This is what I want to show you. Those American bases issue are not really matter. Besides I also never think that Okinawa is actually running away nor even becoming a part of China.

Ok, I used Google Translate for you first post link. Since your other two links clearly did not show any large group supporting independence from Japan, I was hoping for some real statistics. Boy, am I disappointed. How does "prefer being a Okinawan than Japanese" indicates independent nation tendency? Perhaps, Okinawan wants be retain their cultural identity as one of the minorities in Japan (ironically similar to you claim about Tibetan, Mongolian, and Manchurian isn't it?). No where does the questionnaire ask "hey, do you want to have a separate nation from Japan?" Please tell me how can you make apples into oranges because I don't see the connection. Perhaps you have a better translation?

Btw, issues of American base is clearly the beef that Okinawa residents have with Japan government. Please read more Japanese news to understand this issue.

The CCP is bad doesn't make anyone else is all true, it is not a simple world with only white and black.
Since when did I [defend whatever it does]?
I have my own analysis and opinion, I don't need to take side to "own" my back.
I am simply telling what I think is right, what is true and what have to be doubt with. I don't even like the CCP at all.

Ok, maybe not [whatever it does], since I don't have your whole history of commenting. However, according to what I have seen here, (and I've not been here for long) you always support CCP claim on all territories regardless of whatever conflicts. Please point out instants when you did the opposite, then I will apologize for my generalization of you.

But you my friend, you are the one who is really preconceived, I think your last word is actually suitable you, not for me.

haha, you accused me of generalizing you and then turned around to do exactly that. If I were to apologize to you, then you would have to apologize to me

 

[Sonyuke_Songpaisan]

Vietnam was part of China for 1000 years. So Vietnam is much more qualified than tibet to be part of China

 

[VietHome]

Vietnam was part of China for 1000 years. So Vietnam is much more qualified than tibet to be part of China

True true, please send to PLA welcome-home army

@KirovAirship, this is an instant example of what I was talking about. Chinese nationalists would have used the same rationale with Tibet if they were the ones invaded Vietnam in 1946. Please stop defending the undefinable by sugar-coating Chinese expansionist ideas.

 

[Rechoice]

Vietnam was part of China for 1000 years. So Vietnam is much more qualified than tibet to be part of China

Vietnam is qualified to to send all invaders: Chinese, Mongolian, Manchus, France, US and again Chinese PLA went home.

 

[faithfulguy]

China's main disadvantage in naval conflict with japan is the japanese submarine arm,i think chinese members are underestimating this threat.Too much hype is being given to carriers no ones talking about the deadly SSNs.Submarines are the present and future of naval warfare.

SSNs are certainly deadly and important in naval warfare. The problem is that Japan has zero SSNs.

 

[JSCh]

The last dynasty of China, the Qing dynasty falls in 1911. The successor to the throne, the receiver of the mandate of heaven to rule China is ROC. So naturally ROC inherit all the territories of Qing dynasty INCLUDING Tibet. When ROC published a map of China, it include Tibet but not Vietnam. When PRC succeed ROC, she of course inherit the same territory/map.

PRC claim and control Tibet and that is recognized the world over.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

SSNs are certainly deadly and important in naval warfare. The problem is that Japan has zero SSNs.

Lol,cracked me up.I'm not particularly informative on the jap subs.Just the number of subs.They seemed to have a lot of them.Their ssks in littoral operations would be a potent therat though,they are even quieter.When i spoke ssns i mostly imagine dthe seawolf virginia classes of the usn.thanks for correction.

 

[Snomannen]

Central Dynasty that was controlled by people other than Han Chinese. I will save the discussion of ethnicity further down. Vietnam is similar to Tibet because both has been victims of "Central Dynasty." The only unfortunate thing for Tibetan now is that the country is still occupied.

Tibet actually gained independence in 20th century just to be taken away by the PRC in 1951. China is one of those few nations that annexed territory after WWII. Congratulation to the PRC for being in an exclusive club.
[/QUOTE]

Who cares if they are Han or not, do British people even care about "Nauru's England", have Russian people ever felt upset about Ekaterina the German, have you ever hear that India claim that "Mongolian" Mughal Empire is not India. What is it so special that China was taking back territory after WW2, you will even find the Phil., US, India and even Indonesia in the "exclusive club", which is not exclusive at all.

That "ethnic of the republic" banner is found when all of those lands were confiscated in to a Grand China. If China took Vietnam in 1946, Vietnamese certainly will be the sixth main "ethnic of the republic." Any keen observer with intelligent will know this. There are no other ways to make a land grab appears legitimate to the world without that claim.

What does Tibetan has to do with the founding of Modern China? Do you have any Tibetan held important CCP positions back in those days? On the other hand Vietnam was part of the Old China. The Han Dynasty controlled it back then.

I see you don't even know what [the 5 main ethnics] is.
As I said, you are not even one of the 5 ethnics of the Republic, Republic, not the People's Republic. I hope you get this right. You are not even one of the color on the flag. You are not even part of the Republic, yet Tibetan "the black color one" is. What does Tibetan has to do with the founding of Modern China, you say, or maybe you should ask what did Okiniwa has to do with the founding of Japan. Tibet was a part of the Republic/ the Empire, simple as that. And what did you expect that Tibetan people (especially in Tibet) can bring much influence in the whole China. They were poor, their land is poor and the people are religious and don't care much about other ethnics. Their own language can't even meet the modern need such as Mathematics, physics and chemistry, while other minorities such as Mongolian and Korean can.

Since it looks like you are so sure to know what PRC thinks, please enlighten me on another sort of excuses not similar to Tibet excuses please. Remember that the time is 1946 and you would be Mao.

You just say that Any keen observer with intelligent will know this and the sixth main ethnic things and you are telling me that I know what PRC think so sure? That makes no sense. You actually seems to be the one who knows a lot about it, so I guess you are the one who has to come up the excuse then. Besides I only said that they would have come up an "excuse" if that happened. I am not even making a prophecy, since "Any keen observer with intelligent will know this".

Qin Shi Huang, the first Chinese Emperor built the iconic Great Wars to prevent those Mongolian and Manchurian tribes to conquer territory of the Han Chinese.

So Manchurian and Mongolian were existed even in Qin Dynasty then, hmm, interesting.

In all of world history, China perhaps is one of the few nations that is able to incorporate foreign invaders into itself by the sheer power of population. The Yuan, Qing had to become Han-like to be able to yield legitimate power.

Sheer power of population you say. Why didn't British speak Indian language while India was part of the UK. Why didn't those invaders from mainland Europe speak English instead of French in England. Han culture is one of the most influential culture in China, just like you have to speak Japanese in Okinawa and English in Scotland & Wales. Nothing special.

And Yes to all those question you just asked. Indeed those conquering empires are considered foreigners at the time such countries were taken over. If French invasion of Vietnam had persisted for example, nowadays, we would have called ourselves French. You have to contemplate my argument, which is "Qing and Yuan are foreigners to China when they invaded both China and Tibet, just like French are foreigner to Indochina when they colonized it." Please put aside what you have learnt from PRC's textbook and think I don't see why this is relevant at all.

I am sorry but you argument doesn't even based on facts and the right concept.
As I have mentioned before, there was no such country officially called "China 中國" before the Republic was established, just like there wasn't a country called "India". How could Qing and Yuan invaded a country that doesn't even "existed". And yes they were indeed invaders, but to whom~? Was Prussia an invader to Germany. Was Mughal even invade a country called India. Is it make sense to say such thing like that Scotland invades Britain.
Yuan/ Mongol was an invader to Jing, Song Dynasties and Tibet, Qing was an invader to Ming, not to "China" since these countries were all ancient Chinese nations. Just like you don't say the Mughal Empire invaded India. Wales, Scottish and English had lot of wars back many years ago, they all acted as the character of invaders for times, they are still all British.
And yes if you are still under ruled by France, you can call yourself French if you like. Besides, why not. However, I don't think that the President of France nor their people are willing to claim themselves as Vietnamese and speak Vietnamese. Yet the Qing Emperors used the title the Emperor of China (中國皇&#24093 while they were doing foreign affairs such as with Russia and other countries. Besides, it is the Qing Emperors who are the first increased the position of the word [China 中國] from a meaning of a single region to a unofficially name of the whole country.
And again you are being preconceived, what if I told you I have never spent a second on PRC's textbook. We use text book from HK or Taiwan, so please stop labeling around, it's very annoying.

Now you have done it by indirectly claim that Genghis Khan is Chinese Is that mean PRC can now claim all the territories the Mongol empire has conquered Chinese? I think I have to tell Russians and Indians about this news

Indirectly? A news? Oh no no my friend, I suppose you know that [Genghis Khan is Chinese] is a common concept, and this concept has been keep telling people for hundreds year. ow could this is considered a news, Is it a news that William the Conqueror is British. Is it a news that Alexander the Great is Greek. Is it a news that Taksin is Thai. Is it a news that the leaders of Mughal Empire are Indians? Not to mention that Mongolian are indigenous people of China in Chinese ethnics group (unlike Korean and Russian). Anyway, China has already officially given up most of the former land of China that taken by Russia, in Central Asia as well.

Also I found it interesting since you as a outsider are very supporting the so called Han nationalism, which claims only Han is China, just like a Sicilian claiming only English is Britain.

Yes, Macedonia and Greek is another case of dominance culture and population claiming ownership of ancient invading empire. Greeks are wrong to claim Macedonian's achievements theirs, just as PRC is wrong to claim Yuan and Qing their Dynasty. Unfortunate to Manchurian is that there were no country for them to return to. They are not as lucky as Mongolians and Macedonians who still able to retain their national identity.

You don't need to insult Greek people and Greece just because you attempt to do the same to China. Everyone in the world knows the fact that the Empire of Macedonia belongs to Greece and its people and Alexander the Great is Greek. Just like Mughal Empire belongs to India and Qing & Yuan belongs to China. The people of the Republic of Macedonia have nothing to do with the Macedonian Empire (they are even Slavs), just like Outer Mongolian (those were not even Mongolian during the Yuan Dynasty) have nothing to do with Yuan and also Pakistan has nothing to do with Mughal Empire, simple as that.

No, they are not and that is the point to support my argument. Pakistan cannot claim to represent the Mongol empire, and China cannot do the same. I'm still itching about the "Chinese" Genghis Khan

Wrong logic. The right one should be:
Pakistan cannot claim to represent the Mughal an empire of India (it is Mughal, not Mongol), just like Macedonia cannot do the same to Greek Empire of Macedonia and Outer Mongolia cannot do the same to Yuan Dynasty of China.
I see you have a lot of "itches", don't forget William the Conqueror and those Emperors of Mughal Empire.

I don't know what region you are referring to. But if you are talking about Kashmir then that's a different situation than the one with Tibet.

That region has 3 letters, please read my post again

What determine a person "Chinese," if they are not born Han?! If you say he/she is "Chinese" because of "minority" status, then there are a lot of Khmer and Laotians in Vietnam too, and they are part of the "minority" as well. What prevents Vietnam from taking Laos, and Cambodia into itself and calling other ethnicity "minorities" for legitimacy?

You are just saying something like [what determine a person "American" if they are not born Caucasians]. Ethnic is ethnic, country is country, you have to know the difference. Laotians Vietnamese is Vietnamese, Mongolian Chinese is Chinese, simple as that. Besides the origin of Mongolian is in China, and the Golden Family who established the Yuan Dynasty are all Inner Mongolian (Chinese), as I have mentioned before Mongolian are the indigenous people in Chinese ethnics group (unlike Russian and Korean Chinese). What have Khmer and Laotians people in Vietnam even done to Vietnam, where are their origins. You don't even find the excuse that China did to claim their lands. Different stories my friend.

And yes, CCP backed Pol Pot on the basis to repel "Vietnamese invasion" since CCP was afraid that Vietnam would have taken Cambodia using the claim similar to what Mao used with Tibet.

Not similar at all, yet it is the same since they are not amused to see that happened.

Please tell me the basis of the bold part on what you believe. Are you a psychic in those people's heads or do you read only CCP's sources on those accounts?

Again, I refuse to answer such preconceived, make-no-sensed-at-all question.

I quote you again here. I did not put words in your mouth, you definitely said those people committing self-immolation were "silly," and went on to dismissed them as "cult."

If you are now saying that you did not generalized all Tibetan, just "those people," then your second paragraph clearly implied this by saying:

As for [Tibetan is not badly treated at all], I just mentioned that as a possibility of your rationale. You can understand it by rereading my texts. If that is not what you meant, then we are at least come to an agreement that "CCP treats Tibetan bad"

I said those who burn themselves to death are stupid doesn't mean that Tibetan are stupid.
And yes people (in a group/ cult) who believes in such story and encourages other people to burn themselves to heaven are indeed cult (not to the whole religion of course, just like you can't say Islam nor Christian are cults), wouldn't you think.

Bad you say, what do you think about the description of "bad" then.
Japanese think the government threats them bad, Malaysian think the government threats them bad (not to mention they have lots of news recently), the Phil (especially people from the South) dislike their government, even Taiwanese think their government threats them bad as well.
I can't even find a country which its people loves their government so much, even in yours.

What independent is Han people need to be from? If you only mean the [jailed, beaten, persecuted] then yeah, Han are also treated badly. But that is besides my point.

Why can only other ethnics claim independent but only Han can't? That's a interesting topic actually, lets think about it. Minorities and Han both run the CCP and both rule the land, and have you ever heard about the 18 Provinces?
Besides I don't think that you can stand against your government in your country either (while I can).

Let's say Imperial Japan were to take over China back then. Few decades later, Japan Emperor apologies, and then being "nice" with Han Chinese by building schools, hospitals, roads, and give Han Chinese special admittance into Imperial Universities. Would you, as the citizen of the Empire, accept that? Don't play "no ifs in history" card with me. I pointed out hypothetical situations to put you in the shoes of Tibetan right now. I want to see if you can adopt your tune to that situation. A Japanese can be jealous all he wants, but the fact remain that his Emperor now owns China, so he can be happy about that.

First of all China was not even Japan's territory like Tibet to China.
Secondly the CCP never did such thing to Tibet like those Imperials did to China.
Thirdly the Imperials wasn't that good as you image.
Therefore, the 'shoes' are not even the same side at all. Y u so bad to make me wear such shoes?
However, even through you have made such incorrect example here, I'm still not going to play with the "no ifs" card, but the "ifs" card.
If the Imperials didn't kill that much people like they actually did;
If the Imperials didn't forbid people to use their own language;
If the Imperials free the Serfs from the landlords and Lamas;
If the Imperials really provide free education;
If the Imperials help locals people to become officers or even one of the highest leaders of the country;
If the Imperials really help locals people, not only taking resources, but actually contribute into the local society;
If the Imperials really apologize and did all the list above...
So you are damn right, if these things were actually happened, if the Imperials was really that nice, then why not?
If I were a Tibetan, I would be happy to be released from the Serfs system. We no longer need to workship the Lamas. We no longer need to afraid of eyes digging or hands chopping just because we are not being good. We would be happy if there is free education, we are allowed to go to school and speak our language. Yeah the CCP destroyed (actually it was those stupid red guards) some of our temples, comparing with Lamas' Tibet, our situation is much better.
Life is good.

Ok, I used Google Translate for you first post link. Since your other two links clearly did not show any large group supporting independence from Japan, I was hoping for some real statistics. Boy, am I disappointed. How does "prefer being a Okinawan than Japanese" indicates independent nation tendency? Perhaps, Okinawan wants be retain their cultural identity as one of the minorities in Japan (ironically similar to you claim about Tibetan, Mongolian, and Manchurian isn't it?). No where does the questionnaire ask "hey, do you want to have a separate nation from Japan?" Please tell me how can you make apples into oranges because I don't see the connection. Perhaps you have a better translation?

As I said, I gave you the links just to show you there is a power in Okinawa supporting self-independence. I never say that the group is big, nor it is that small as you have mentioned. What are you even disappointed to Okinawan wants be retain their cultural identity as one of the minorities in Japan you say. Well I suppose that you have to know the different between 大和人 (Japanese) and 日本人 (Japanese) first. Also how does this related to Chinese minorities "ironically". Besides Mainland Chinese even label their ethnic identity in their ID cards.

Moreover, here is another similar questionnaire result from Hong Kong.

表六 香港、台灣、澳門、沖繩民眾的「統獨」意識比較（2005年）
香港 澳門 臺灣 沖繩
應該獨立 22.0% 9.2% 59.3% 24.9%
不應該獨立 68.3% 78.9% 18.9% 58.7%
由當地居民自己決定 3.9% 3.9% 3.1% 2.8%
其它 5.8% 8.0% 18.7% 13.6%
1．本問題是（臺灣例）：如果中國政府允許臺灣人民自由選擇臺灣的前途，您認為臺灣應該獨立嗎？
2．本問卷也設有「如果中國政府不允許」的問題。
3．「其它」包括不知道、納說、無反應。也包括臺灣問卷裏的「維持現狀」。
4．臺灣問卷裏的「應該獨立」包含回答「堅持臺灣本來就是獨立」的受訪者。

To sum up, in my opinion, I consider even the independence party has not much power, such data can also mention that the group of people seek for independence (or simply just have the idea of not be too closed with "mainland Japan") is not that small as you mentioned nor large.
it is funny because when I say this is an egg, you keep saying oh my god how did you call this apply a orange.

Btw, issues of American base is clearly the beef that Okinawa residents have with Japan government. Please read more Japanese news to understand this issue.

You don't say.

Ok, maybe not [whatever it does], since I don't have your whole history of commenting. However, according to what I have seen here, (and I've not been here for long) you always support CCP claim on all territories regardless of whatever conflicts. Please point out instants when you did the opposite, then I will apologize for my generalization of you.

With respect, but I find that your logic is weird.
Firstly China =/= CCP, yet you always put a "=" between them;
Also you make a lot of wrong concepts in talking about history.
Secondly I don't support every actions from the CCP, especially this Ryukyu thing (Although I did say the "pay back" thing in this thread doesn't mean that I really think that supporting the independence movement in Ryukyu is practical). Ryukyu is not Timor-Leste, the same story in Timor-Leste can't happen in Ryukyu. As what if I told you that I don't even support the Diaoyu island issue.

But in the other hand, I do totally support the CCP freeing Tibet, since it was a few good things that the CCP have ever done.

haha, you accused me of generalizing you and then turned around to do exactly that. If I were to apologize to you, then you would have to apologize to me

I am not the one who labeling around and keep pushing people to take side. You are the bad guy here. @Viet What say you? You both own me a pho and some spring rolls now. (damn it my hands are freaking hurt)

 

[Snomannen]

True true, please send to PLA welcome-home army

@KirovAirship, this is an instant example of what I was talking about. Chinese nationalists would have used the same rationale with Tibet if they were the ones invaded Vietnam in 1946. Please stop defending the undefinable by sugar-coating Chinese expansionist ideas.

Don't care.
Why should you and I care, does he represent to the government or what.
I heard that some Vietnamese on internet are claiming Guangdong and Guangxi according to the ancient 南越國, such I give a flying fork to them as well.

 

[longyi]

Let's say Germany won the WWII and permanently annexed France. For those French that didn't want to be ruled by Hitler migrated to Vietnam, included de Gaulle, and set up a dynasty by the his name. Today the de Gaulle Dynasty is dissolved and took over by the communist.

Facts:

1) All the French people that remain in Vietnam today are Vietnamese under the French ethnicity.

2) de Gaulle was a Vietnamese emperor and a Vietnamese; Napoleon was/is neither.

Conclusion:

All the Mongolians that remained in China after the fall of Yuan Dynasty were Ming subjects and their descendents today are subjects of China, hence Chinese with Mongolian ethnicity. Kublai Khan was a Chinese Emperor and Genghis Khan was neither.

 

[Snomannen]

Let's say Germany won the WWII and permanently annexed France. For those French that didn't want to be ruled by Hitler migrated to Vietnam, included de Gaulle, and set up a dynasty by the his name. Today the de Gaulle Dynasty is dissolved and took over by the communist.

Facts:

1) All the French people that remain in Vietnam today are Vietnamese under the French ethnicity.

2) de Gaulle was a Vietnamese emperor and a Vietnamese; Napoleon was/is neither.

Conclusion:

All the Mongolians that remained in China after the fall of Yuan Dynasty were Ming subjects and their descendents today are subjects of China, hence Chinese with Mongolian ethnicity. Kublai Khan was a Chinese Emperor and Genghis Khan was neither.

This is actually very easy to explain.
If Yuan Empire does not belongs to China, then Mughal Empire doesn't belongs to India.
If Kublai Khan wasn't a Chinese Emperor, then Babur wasn't a Indian Emperor either.

 

[Enemy]

Its a matter of pride to have the great Khan's blood flowing through someone's veins. That unites.

 

[Ahiska]

lol Timucin was a chinese thats really funny.
China and chinese have a great and proud history why do you have the need to steal mongolian and turkic history?
Oh and this main ethnic of china i dont think it had the uyguhrs and dont come with the colour for muslims this was for the Hui not the uyghurs.