China, Rome, and the United States

[Snomannen]

Without intervention of Soviet Union and two nuke of USA in Japan in WW II, Japanese are still a rulers in China now, you could believe that Japanese came from mainland China in the past, then Chinese could huppily say Japanese are "China 中國".

You are such a pity brainless troll

The Japanese would never ever call themselves Chinese nor their country "China 中國", therefore Chinese would never call them Chinese if your dream was really happened~ understand you silly boy

base on your logic, Mongolian and Manchurian civilized you until 1911 ACE very recently.

I can say Chinese history book is not accuracy.

Mongolian and Manchurian had to adopt Han's culture, laws and technology to rule the whole land, most of the Manchurian can't even speak Manchurian during the late Qing because they prefer Han language and culture than their own. And you are telling me that Mongolian and Manchurian civilized Han, aren't you cute~

Say the guy who can't even read a word from his ancient history book.

 

[BoQ77]

How big a country keep compare their ability to Vietnam.

It must be fun if Japan, Russia, USA bring front Vietnam as their opposer in military power.

While some clowns feel very proud to prove that their country is superior to Vietnam ... LOL

Let look at X47B ... Those X47B did better job than Chinese rich experience pilots in landing to aircraft carrier.

 

[j20blackdragon]

China's PPP GDP is 13.370 trillion. At last year's 7.6% growth rate, China will catch up to the EU in 2 years. The EU is currently experiencing near 0% growth.

The World Factbook

Vietnam's PPP GDP is 0.358 trillion. At last year's 5.3% growth rate, Vietnam will require over 70 years to catch up to China's current PPP GDP. But we already know that will never happen. Vietnam doesn't have the population, natural resources, or technology to get anywhere close.

The World Factbook

Conclusion: China can crush Vietnam like a bug anytime we want. There is no competition here. Vietnam doesn't even come close.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

PIE are not young, that why Slav-Indians carry R1a and West Europeans carry R1b. Origin of R1a is around 20,000 years back.

India mostly carries the pre-Indo-European R1a, which is older than the Proto-Indo-European R1a from Russia.

And according to Klyosov, the oldest R1a actually found in North China, which is over 20000 years old.

Some North Chinese also carry R1a, but this R1a is not from the R1a of the Aryans, it is much older and native in North China.

 

[INDIC]

India mostly carries the pre-Indo-European R1a, which is older than the Proto-Indo-European R1a from Russia.

And according to Klyosov, the oldest R1a actually found in North China, which is over 20000 years old.

Some North Chinese also carry R1a, but this R1a is not from the R1a of the Aryans, it is much older and native in North China.

Many parts of China was inhabited by Indo-European people until Han Chinese expanded in all those places. The Europeans(except Slavs) have rare amount of R1a while R1b is mostly concentrated in Western Europe which shows that Indo-European is not young but split took place long long back.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Many parts of China was inhabited by Indo-European people until Han Chinese expanded in all those places. The Europeans(except Slavs) have rare amount of R1a while R1b is mostly concentrated in Western Europe which shows that Indo-European is not young but split took place long long back.

Those Chinese individuals who have been tested for R1a are all Han Chinese guys, we exclude the SNP test from the Chinese minority groups.

 

[xunzi]

base on your logic, Mongolian and Manchurian civilized you until 1911 ACE very recently.

Again, this is why people think Vietnamese are stupid because of logic like these. Using logic only, did we adopt their government system, currency, technology, and law and order? No they are using that from us. It is more like we civilized their barbaric way. Study the Xianbei. They are a great example of keeping half nomadic from the outside and civil system heavily employed the Han Chinese. Before the Vietnam occupation and being under our subject, you are more like a tribe dancing around a fire or running around in jungle in search of fruits and foods. We then came and taught you how to set up a government, language, business, currency, taxation, architecture, law and order so you reach statehood status.

 

[bolo]

So I'm supposed to believe that somehow the vast lands of the Hung Kings was only remembered by Vietnamese and not any other ethnicity?

Give me a break,both you and other nationalistic Vietnamese conjure fanciful stories about the might Vietnamese ruling an empire that rivals the Chinese Warring States.

First off what is Cantonese?

Cantonese people are mixed no doubt there could be Baiyue,Zhuang,Xianbei,Han etc in them by now it is fruitless to assume that people don't change after thousands of years.

Neither are the Cantonese a homogenous sub ethnicty some Cantonese would have more native blood compared to Northern blood and vice versa.

I remember nationalistic Vietnamese claiming that since Cantonese speak a language other than Mandarin they aren't Chinese,Yue languages such as Cantonese are Sinitic not Vietic in origin.

Any similarities between Cantonese and Vietnamese is due to the prevalence of Ancient Southwestern Chinese spoken by the elite of Northern Vietnam,and later heavy borrowings also contributed to Sinitic lexicon.

Besides the only "proof" that EastSea ever uses is Vietnamese books that are written thousands of years after the event unfolded,I already addressed many of the inaccuracies from the Vietnamese historical books which I will delineate some below.

1.If Van Lang is so large stretching all the way to the Chang Jiang then why wouldn't it be recorded Southern states such as Chu would have maintained contact.

2.The kings of Wu and Yue never viewed themselves as one people and certainly did not mention a Baiyue sovereign.

3. Anceint Chinese texts never mention the legends of Xich Quy,Van Lang or Hung Kings.

4.There is no archaeological evidence of a bureaucracy of the supposed Van Lang empire.

5. Southern Han Chinese and other Chinese minorities never mentioned the Hung Kings in their myths.

6. Phong Chau is a Sui-Tang naming convention thus it could never have existed.

7. In the Dai Viet su ky toan thu the 15 regions of Van lang are all located in Northern Vietnam furthermore the concept of North is Lake Donting etc is a copy of Huayang Guozhi.

8.In the Kham dinh Viet su thong giam cuong muc admits that Van Lang could not have possibly been that big.

believe me bro, Cantonese and vietnamese do not sound the same. Not even remotely.

Again, this is why people think Vietnamese are stupid because of logic like these. Using logic only, did we adopt their government system, currency, technology, and law and order? No they are using that from us. It is more like we civilized their barbaric way. Study the Xianbei. They are a great example of keeping half nomadic from the outside and civil system heavily employed the Han Chinese. Before the Vietnam occupation and being under our subject, you are more like a tribe dancing around a fire or running around in jungle in search of fruits and foods. We then came and taught you how to set up a government, language, business, currency, taxation, architecture, law and order so you reach statehood status.

Which was also a stupid move by our ancestors. Never teach, only leech.

 

[Grand Historian]

believe me bro, Cantonese and vietnamese do not sound the same. Not even remotely.

Yea I've been to Guangzhou before so I do have a rough idea what it sounds like,my point is that Vietnamese has a heavy influx of Chinese derived vocabulary and grammar otherwise Cantonese doesn't sound like Vietnamese at all.

I can say Chinese history book is not accuracy.

You're correct the Chinese histories are not always accurate that's why archaeological evidence is brought in to compare past events.

For example the existence of Shang was questioned by many and Shiji was labeled as a forgery until oracle bones were discovered bearing the Shang kings names.

In my opinion any Chinese history preceding Shang is myth and should not be used evidence.

 

[Fattyacids]

Many parts of China was inhabited by Indo-European people until Han Chinese expanded in all those places. The Europeans(except Slavs) have rare amount of R1a while R1b is mostly concentrated in Western Europe which shows that Indo-European is not young but split took place long long back.

Another lie. Many parts? Only western most region was once inhabited by Tocharians who were driven out and went on to establish Kushan empire in South Asia. There were no Indo-Europeans in China, Aryan invaded and stayed in South Asia. R1A is common among central east asians and siberian too.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Another lie. What many parts? Only western most region was once inhabited by Tocharians who were later driven out and went on to establish Kushan empire in South Asia. There were no Indo-European in China, Aryan invaded and stayed in South Asia. R1A is common among central eastern asians too.

He failed to understand that although Aryans belong to a particular subclade of R1a, but many other subclades of R1a are simply not Indo-European, but much older.

The Russian scientist has just discovered that the oldest subclade of R1a which is native in North China, and it is uniquely found among some Chinese and Tibetans.

So the plausible theory is that Huaxia was formed as a confederation of many different tribes in East Asia, while the most dominant one was indeed O3a, then followed by N and Q, but also a minority of old R1a. When Huaxia expanded through Central/South China, they have later absorbed many O2b and O1a.

 

[Grand Historian]

He failed to understand that although Aryans belong to a particular subclade of R1a, but many other subclades of R1a are simply not Indo-European, but much older.

The Russian scientist has just discovered that the oldest subclade of R1a which is native in North China, it is uniquely found among some Chinese and Tibetans.

So the plausible theory is that Huaxia was formed as a confederation of many different tribes in East Asia, while the most dominant one was indeed O3a, then followed by N and Q, but also a minority of old R1a. When Huaxia expanded through Central/South China, they have later absorbed many O2b and O1a.

Neolithic Northern China had a lot more N* M231,N TAT,C* M216.Q* M242 etc while later on O3 P201 and other O subclades start to dominate.

What's interesting is that the the subclade of O2b K3 is dominant in Manchus while Koreans mainly have O2b L682 and Japanese have O2b 47z.

The O2b that some Han Chinese is mainly O2b K3 with some being O2b L682.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Neolithic Northern China had a lot more N* M231,N TAT,C* M216.Q* M242 etc while later on O3 P201 and other O subclades start to dominate.

What's interesting is that the the subclade of O2b K3 is dominant in Manchus while Koreans mainly have O2b L682 and Japanese have O2b 47z.

The O2b that some Han Chinese is mainly O2b K3 with some being O2b L682.

I just learn that O3a and its other cousins are latecomer that thrived maybe after the rule of the Zhou Dynasty.

While the previous Xia and Shang Dynasties may have been dominated by N and Q.

 

[Fattyacids]

He failed to understand that although Aryans belong to a particular subclade of R1a, but many other subclades of R1a are simply not Indo-European, but much older.

The Russian scientist has just discovered that the oldest subclade of R1a which is native in North China, it is uniquely found among some Chinese and Tibetans.

So the plausible theory is that Huaxia was formed as a confederation of many different tribes in East Asia, while the most dominant one was indeed O3a, then followed by N and Q, but also a minority of old R1a. When Huaxia expanded through Central/South China, they have later absorbed many O2b and O1a.

R1a has several subclades that spread across from Europe to Central and East Asia landmass, it's not surprising some east asians would have some of it. though it may not be dominant.

He knows nothing, just look at all the stupid argument he made. All he does it lie and troll chinese.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

R1a has several subclades that spread across from Europe to Central and East Asia landmass, it's not surprising some east asians would have some of it.

He doesn't know anything, all he does is lie and troll chinese.

India also mostly carries the native South Asian R1a that predates the Indo-European R1a, while later they got conquered by the Indo-European R1a folks and got linguistically Indo-Europeanized.

The Indo-European R1a is just a young mutation of the R1a subclade found in the Russian steppe, and obviously it got nothing to do with those old R1a subclades found in China and India.