Sorry, I have to answer all the people the quoted my post.
Sorry what?
Read the bold part again, this proves that you are completely out of tune with me because I always focus on the China-Vietnam issue since it's related to the topic matter. If you want to discuss world history, I know a bit but unfortunately do not have time to follow you.
Nope, nothing's wrong there.
Just take your time.
You should read my comment again, I laid out 2 ifs statement. The first if assume that you are an independent observer, therefore, you cannot understand the feelings involve in those historical victories.
The second if does assume that you are bias. If you are not defending anyone, I'm sorry that I view you as such
What is an "independent observer" anyway.
A person can never be completely neutral, but in our communication, I see you are the one who is always assuming around and setting up the "ifs". I think you are the one here who is related to the word bias.
Emotional statement from you, but I can understand that. However, you accuse me of boasting as "holy God," which I have to disagree.
I didn't even move a single face's muscle when I was typing. I was actually tired as well since I have been standing up all the night. You can tell someone's emotion by see through the screen (miss), that is an indeed amazing ability.
Sorry, you may have misunderstood me since my concern was about the "control of your whole country for thousand year" part and "serious internal problems."Let me make myself clear, I consider China a worthy opponent and a worthy friend to have if they stop bullying us
Good good, that's what I wanna hear from you.
And your example is irrelevant when victory/defeat is concerned. I don't think we should try to split hair here anymore.
Who said that.
I was talking replying with multiple people at the time. Since you can see that my post tick a lot of people off. I understood their feelings, so I stayed to talk with them. By the time I got to you, I have not had sleep the entire night. I saw that you were talking about the same thing anyways.
Arr Another guy who doesn't like to have beauty sleep.
Yes indeed those are the same thing, since you are keeping making the same wrong concept.
I'm happy to obligate
Taksin is second generation Chinese-Thai heritage, did he brought an army to conquer Siam from China?
Catherine married to Russian Court, she is Russian
Good good, glad you actually know that.
So I suppose that your statement about "each ruler belongs to his originated lands" doesn't not work on that way then.
Pakistan can call themselves whatever, as long as they don't claim Mongolian. China can all itself Yuan, but it does not mean Yuan was not the conquerors of China.
What's with the reverse logic? If the people of Kaliningrad can rebel to recover their lost country, then yeah, history of Prussia should belong back to the new Prussia. So you are saying Mongolian were not a country before the Mongol empire invaded Han China created a huge Yuan country?
You are obviously getting yourself into a double standards.
Also Mughal and Mongolian are not really the same. You always mixed them up.
You can accept a "new Prussia" and "new Prussian", yet those people (Russian) from "new Prussia" have nothing related to ancient Prussia. Just like those Slavic people calling themselves Macedonian, yet they have nothing related to ancient Macedonian.
You can accept a "new Mughal", yet you are not okay with that if they call themselves "people of Mughal" (I suppose that is what you mean) who are nothing related to Mughal. Why are you so mean.
Again, Mughal Empire is an Indian Dynasty, Yuan Empire is a Chinese Dynasty. Simple as that.
"Mongolian" was of course not a country, but Mongolia. And what makes you think of that.
There is an objective history my friend. People used to say history is written by the winner, but it's not entirely true as it has to be based on irrefutable facts. For example:
-History acknowledged that Pilgrims took over and murder Native Americans for their lands. That's a fact in history even though early British Empire's book denied it.
-History acknowledged Genghis Khan a Mongolian hero, not some Chinese's minority ruler like many Chinese claims
Based on irrefutable facts and history acknowledged, Genghis Khan was a Mongolian hero, and Mongolian is an indigenous of China since their origin is in China. Also Inner Mongolian are the direct descendants from Genghis Khan. Chinese's minority. Genghis Khan for sure was a hero of China's minority Mongolian Chinese (Chinese).
"Golden Family," you mean "Golden Horde, which is a totally different branch of Mongol Empire?" or you mean direct descendants from Genghis Khan? So now you can claim the granddad Chinese hero because the grandson somehow became the Yuan Emperor by conquering China
I suppose everyone knows that there is only a description for the term Golden Family? (right?)
As I have told you many times. Yuan is China, just like Mughal is India. Mongolia never conquered a country called "China" just like Mughal never conquered a country called "India".
There are Mongolians in Russia, and Kazakhstan who are descendants of Orda Khan, ruler of the Golden Horde country. Orda Khan is also the grandson of Genghis Khan. Can Russia claims Genghis Khan their hero?
As I have mentioned above, China was the origin of Mongolian people and most of the Golden Family is in China. More than half of the Mongolian are Chinese. How could Russia even own the right to claim that.
Indian is not where the Mongol come from, but so is China. Remember that ancient Han Chinese countries are a lot smaller than they are today. Furthermore, Mongols people are the collection of wandering tribes that live throughout Russia, Mongolia, and present-day China as well.
Again please don't mixed Mongol with Mughal, also China is for sure the origin of Mongolian.
I see that you always try to put Han on the table, which is unrelated to the topic and, you are talking as if only Han people are Chinese and only them own Chinese history. Just like some people only consider Jing are the only Vietnamese.
So William is somehow a British and a subjugate at the same time? I have to question your "never consider him as a non-British" statement, since you claim to know the thinking of many nations in the world, yet two statement in one sentence are contradictory
Why not.
Vietnam was a subjugate to Champa, yet Champa is still Vietnam.
Mughal was a a subjugate to ancient Indian countries, yet Mughal is still India.
What is it to question about.
1. Nobody calming such thing like Norman Dynasty was a "subjugation period" of Britian.
2. William was a King of England (don't compare it with the title "Emperor of India", they are not the same story), according to the discretion of British people, he was a British character.
In conclusion, I oppose your claim that Genghis Khan is Chinese based on:
- Mongolian is still a country in the world so no one can take away that country's hero. You gave me a bunch of hypothetical question regarding various nations. I have answered all of them
Answering everything doesn't mean answering currently.
Moreover, nobody is taking away the hero of Modern Magnolia. Genghis Khan is Chinese (hero of Inner Mongolian) yet Mongolian, just like William is Norman yet British.
- You claimed there are Mongolian living in China, and Yuan Emperor is direct descendant of Genghis (grandson), thus, you claim his granddad. For the sake of argument we assume grandson dictates the ethnicity of granddad, although that is ridiculous. I gave you the case of Russia where another direct descendant (grandson) control it, and Mongol people are living in Russia as well. How come I don't see Russia claim Genghis Khan?
As I have mentioned above, China is the origin of Mongolian. Also most of the Mongolian in the world are Chinese and most of the Golden Family are as well. They are indigenous of China, just like other ethnics like Hun Tibetan Han Baipho etc.
Because you are not even thinking on the right path, that's why.
- You claimed origination determine belongs. By asking me if Mongol people were from India, you were implying that Mongol people originated from China, thus Genghis is Chinese. I refuted by saying that ancient Han China was not that big to cover Mongol's land up north, as well as pointing out that the Mongols were wandering tribes who lived everywhere from East Russia, Mongolia, and present-day China. Again I don't see Russia claim Genghis Khan?
Again bring up the 'unrelated' Han people on the table.
You always try to put a "=" between China and Han, yet everyone knows that China is not a Nation-state like Korea, but a country formed by a ethnics group.
I suppose you don't know much what "China中國" means.
There was not such country officially called "China中國" before the Republic was formed, just like there was not such country called "India" before the Republic was formed as well. Modern China is a country formed by Chinese ethnic group which included Mongolain Hun Han Tibetan and others. Han people have the largest population doesn't mean that they are everything of China and its history.
- You claimed Inner Mongolia are true Mongol while Outer Mongolia (present-day Mongolia) are not on the other thread. I cannot stress enough how ridiculous that sounds. It's like you claim Viet people Chinese and people who live in Vietnam right now are not true Viet??
I never say such thing like Inner Mongolia are true Mongol. Again you are punching a scarecrow, with stressful sound.
All I have been saying is, Inner Mongolian and Outer Mongolian are both Mongolian, they are no doubt own their history.
BUT,
it was Inner Mongolian who formed the Great Yuan;
it was Inner Mongolian who "enslaved" Outer Mongolian;
it was Inner Mongolian who still loyal to the Chinese central government while the Soviet was up to no good;
it was Outer Mongolian who forbid themselves from workshipping Genghis Khan, and murdered all the members of Golden Family with in Outer Mongolia;
Outer Mongolian speaks Khalkha dialect Mongolian, yet Inner Mongolian speaks Chahar Mongolian.
Therefore:
If China can't claim Yuan and Inner Mongolians (Chinese) can't own their hero, then no body can. Especially for Outer Mongolia.
- The fact is, if you ask anyone not indoctrinated by Chinese Textbooks who is Genghis Khan, they will answer Mongolian.
The fact is that in Chinese Textbooks Genghis Khan is also considered as Mongolian like other text books else.
But of course, the fact about Genghis Khan was an ancestor of the Mongolian a monitory of China, is also mentioned.
- Lets me ask you this, Japan Emperor Akihito never got that far at conquering China just like Genghis Khan, if his grandson were to succeed, would you then call Akihito Chinese?
I just knew you will ask such question like this. I suppose you mean his dad Hirohito.
Well the answer is no of course, let me tell you why:
1. Japanese was not even part of Chinese ethnic group;
2. Japanese was not even an indigenous of China;
3. If his grandson were really that outstanding, then I'm telling you, the country called China would have no longer existed. Mughal conquered those ancient Indian nations, India is still existed. Mongolia conquered Jing, Song and Tibet China is still existed.
Actually, if Japan really have conquered China and other lands and called all the people living in their Empire "Eastasian", then of course Hirohito would be called "Eastasian" and Japanese as well. Just like Genghis Khan is called both Chinese and Mongolian. By the way, Hirohito would be a hero of Japanese ethnic in the Empire, but not the hero of other ethnic such as Chinese, Vietnamese and Korean ethnics. Just like Genghis Khan was a hero of Mongolian ethnic, yet he was not a hero of Manchurian, Tibetan and Han ethnics.
All in all, your theory is nice and I appreciate the conversation. But sometimes I don't see the point of discussing anymore when something is so off the scale like this. Poor Mongolians, there are Chinese who claim Mongolians are not real Mongolians, their national Hero is actually Chinese, and their land actually belongs to China as well.
Stop punching scarecrow already
Well if you are not willing to talk then let's go back to polity which is much more funnier than history then. I am tired of correcting people on this stuff anyway.
mate who is seeking American balance monkey perhaps ?
