What's new

East Sea: Luck and unluck

.
I give up. You guys don't even try to understand What I posted.

I understand you are trying to deny the evidences that we show, which affirmed Vietnam's sovereignty over the two archipelagos.

When there are disputes between countries, using of evidence is needed to resolve disputes peacefully, why you say that "any proofs of ownerships is useless and unrecognized by any laws" (at #24) ???
 
.
I understand you are trying to deny the evidences that we show, which affirmed Vietnam's sovereignty over the two archipelagos.

When there are disputes between countries, using of evidence is needed to resolve disputes peacefully, why you say that "any proofs of ownerships is useless and unrecognized by any laws" (at #24) ???


I couldn't find any international law that supports claims on faraway island that can not sustain human habitats, can you?
 
.
I couldn't find any international law that supports claims on faraway island that can not sustain human habitats, can you?

First the claimants must agree together to go to an international court, where judges will consider the evidences of all sides, then international laws will be applied....
 
. .
Who's talk about judges. I'm referring to written down internationals laws like the UNCLOS.

The judges will review the terms of international laws which will be applied to resolve the disputes.

UNCLOS does not deny the sovereignty of the countries owns the uninhabited islands, if that is legal. But it stipulated that the uninhabited islands so only 12 nautical mile territorial sea around which there is no exclusive economic zone 200 nm.

You forget that China has used of force illegally to invade Paracel Islands of South Vietnam from 1974, then occupied illegally Paracels of Vietnam until today, and recently it established illegally so-called "shasa city" on Phú Lâm (Woody) island on Paracels of Vietnam...
 
.
The judges will review the terms of international laws which will be applied to resolve the disputes.

UNCLOS does not deny the sovereignty of the countries owns the uninhabited islands, if that is legal. But it stipulated that the uninhabited islands so only 12 nautical mile territorial sea around which there is no exclusive economic zone 200 nm.

You forget that China has used of force illegally to invade Paracel Islands of South Vietnam from 1974, then occupied illegally Paracels of Vietnam until today, and recently it established illegally so-called "shasa city" on Phú Lâm (Woody) island on Paracels of Vietnam...


1) Again you keep saying legal. What constitutes legal and who decides the legality? When China ratified, as did the Philippines, the UNCLOS one of the items she stipulated was its law does not bind her to the sovereignty disputes. I'm sure Vietnam must have some kind of provisions that are similar like this. So the UNCLOS can not be court to judge the cases here since it's not empowered by said countries.

2) China's view: She used force to reclaim her islands and it was a big risk considered the US was fighting the war along side with South Vietnam. Today your country claims China robbed your islands by force. Once your country verbally says that sentence the only way she's going to get those islands is to use force and that will be a declaration of war. No other way because Vietnam did not give China an alternative.
 
.
1) Again you keep saying legal. What constitutes legal and who decides the legality? When China ratified, as did the Philippines, the UNCLOS one of the items she stipulated was its law does not bind her to the sovereignty disputes. I'm sure Vietnam must have some kind of provisions that are similar like this. So the UNCLOS can not be court to judge the cases here since it's not empowered by said countries.

UNCLOS1982 is a common standard for countries can rely on it to resolve disputes.
If your government [China] has signed UNCLOS1982, China's parliament has ratified UNCLOS1982, then there is no reason for China refuses to comply it.

2) China's view: She used force to reclaim her islands and it was a big risk considered the US was fighting the war along side with South Vietnam. Today your country claims China robbed your islands by force. Once your country verbally says that sentence the only way she's going to get those islands is to use force and that will be a declaration of war. No other way because Vietnam did not give China an alternative.

China took advantage of the time when North Vietnam and South Vietnam were flooding in the war, while U.S Army was forced to pull out Vietnam in 1973, In January 1974 China used warships to attack S.Vietnam Navy on Paracel Islands of South Vietnam and occupied it illegally until now.
Action to use of force to invade the territory of other country is illegal. That is the act of the invaders, and there is no way to justify that.
 
.
UNCLOS1982 is a common standard for countries can rely on it to resolve disputes.
If your government [China] has signed UNCLOS1982, China's parliament has ratified UNCLOS1982, then there is no reason for China refuses to comply it.



China took advantage of the time when North Vietnam and South Vietnam were flooding in the war, while U.S Army was forced to pull out Vietnam in 1973, In January 1974 China used warships to attack S.Vietnam Navy on Paracel Islands of South Vietnam and occupied it illegally until now.
Action to use of force to invade the territory of other country is illegal. That is the act of the invaders, and there is no way to justify that.

There's nothing else more clear than that.
 
.
I give up again. You guys sound like broken records, ranting the same ting over and over and over and over...........
 
. . .

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom