Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This forum so weird ?
As many as thread related to the aggression of China in moving Oil rig 981, was removed ?
in favor of Chinese ...
So this forum is just for Pk and cn to mastubate each other ?
New Recruit
1. There is no dispute in Paracel. We own it 100% when UNCLOS was sign in 1982. There is no dispute, do you understand? Just because your Northern VN regime changed tactic and decided to call it a dispute does not mean it is a dispute. In order to be a dispute, you need to occupy and control at least one or two islands in Paracel Archipelago. Spratly is a dispute because multiple parties occupy and are in control of various islands, reefs, and rocks. At Paracel, there is none. We control and administer all. You want to talk fact, let do it but you better answer and reason with me here.
2. Paracel is a contest territory. In international term, it is open to relevant state to impose their jurisdiction and administrative rights in according with legitimate ownership. Since no one owns Paracel completely. Your Southern VN regime at the time owned the Southern part while we owned the Northern part. But it is not important as I have said Paracel is a contest territory, claimed by both at the time. It is open to anyone to take before any maritime international agreements are signed, such as UNCLOS. In international law, it is fait accompli because we control 100% by the time UNCLOS was sign in 1982. Nobody gives a shit if you own it in 18th century. We can also say we have Ming general outpost in one of the Paracel's island back in 1500s (believe it was the Woody island). It was established to be an extension of Hainan at the time. But you see, nobody gives a shit whatever happen prior to international law taken place which is pre-UNCLOS. The solution is clear, who control what when UNCLOS was sign should be given full consideration for EEZ.
I want to see a westerner reason with me over this. You, on the other hand, is not at my level when it comes to international law dispute, justice.
SECTION 2. LIMITS OF THE TERRITORIAL SEA
Article3
Breadth of the territorial sea
Every State has the right to establish the breadth of its territorial sea up to a limit not exceeding 12 nautical miles, measured from baselines determined in accordance with this Convention.
Article4
Outer limit of the territorial sea
The outer limit of the territorial sea is the line every point of which is at a distance from the nearest point of the baseline equal to the breadth of the territorial sea.
Article5
Normal baseline
Except where otherwise provided in this Convention, the normal baseline for measuring the breadth of the territorial sea is the low-water line along the coast as marked on large-scale charts officially recognized by the coastal State.
Article6
Reefs
In the case of islands situated on atolls or of islands having fringing reefs, the baseline for measuring the breadth of the territorial sea is the seaward low-water line of the reef, as shown by the appropriate symbol on charts officially recognized by the coastal State.
Article7
Straight baselines
1. In localities where the coastline is deeply indented and cut into, or if there is a fringe of islands along the coast in its immediate vicinity, the method of straight baselines joining appropriate points may be employed in drawing the baseline from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured.
2. Where because of the presence of a delta and other natural conditions the coastline is highly unstable, the appropriate points may be selected along the furthest seaward extent of the low-water line and, notwithstanding subsequent regression of the low-water line, the straight baselines shall remain effective until changed by the coastal State in accordance with this Convention.
3. The drawing of straight baselines must not depart to any appreciable extent from the general direction of the coast, and the sea areas lying within the lines must be sufficiently closely linked to the land domain to be subject to the regime of internal waters.
4. Straight baselines shall not be drawn to and from low-tide elevations, unless lighthouses or similar installations which are permanently above sea level have been built on them or except in instances where the drawing of baselines to and from such elevations has received general international recognition.
5. Where the method of straight baselines is applicable under paragraph 1, account may be taken, in determining particular baselines, of economic interests peculiar to the region concerned, the reality and the importance of which are clearly evidenced by long usage.
6. The system of straight baselines may not be applied by a State in such a manner as to cut off the territorial sea of another State from the high seas or an exclusive economic zone.
1. Which country recognized that you owned it legally. Give me a list and their respective position on Paracel sovereignty prior to 1974s.1. You have gone nowhere with your 'invisible historical sovereignty'.
Now you are turning into International Laws? It's absolutely interesting, China is talking about International Laws! How ironic =))
You occupy it 100% does not mean that you have the legal right. We were owning those legally and you invaded us by force. Can you understand that simple thing?
Besides, the South Vietnam protested your invasion. The new Vietnam (SRVN) protested it too. So, your invasion is protested.
Again, the North Vietnam has nothing to do with Paracel. They have no right with that. I have said before and I won't say it again. Just read.
2. We own them not only in 18th Century, but from that point to the modern time until you invaded us by force. We protested it too and haven't quit claiming our sovereignty. If you invaded us in Ming or Qing dynasty time and stuffs, it's a different thing. But you invaded us in 1974, in the modern time when international laws are applied.
3. You just know nothing about UNCLOS and stuffs. In short you have no idea about international laws. Even if we own Paracel now, we can't extends our EEZ from our islands, since we are not an Archipelago Nation.
Your EEZ must extends only from your low-water line, understand?
Read this if you can read:
You china just know nothing about international laws and UNCLOS. You know nothing about what you signed. Next time remember to read what you are going to sign before signing it!
New Recruit
1. Which country recognized that you owned it legally. Give me a list and their respective position on Paracel sovereignty prior to 1974s.
South Vietnam regime no longer existed in Vietnam. In fact, they are exiled and have no international political recognition. It's fact that you need to accept that it's fait accompli
2. I said it before and I will say it again, anything prior to international agreement is sheep talk. It is all open and free to take because the whole South China Sea island chains are uninhabited. No in 1974s, there was no agreement on maritime territorial rights. You can cry all you want but the regime that owned half of Paracel no longer exist in international arena so it's a moot point to talk about ownership. We are still the same one and currently the owner of Paracel, completely 100%. No dispute.
3. Go read UNCLOS regarding EEZ. It does not matter whether a country is archipelago nation or not. EEZ will apply to any territory that can "sustain life on its own". Paracel fits this description. In 1998 agreement, we settle this with UNCLOS already and was given an EEZ. Stop wasting my time to argue whether Paracel has its own EEZ. If Haiwaii archipelego has an EEZ, then Parcel deserves to have one. That the end of the talk. I'm sorry, my friend. Our American friends are free to discuss this with us over legal term.
bla bla bla...as usual you use bullshit language. escort and so on. what is your solution for Vietnam now?
I assume we shall surrender?
pls send more oil rigs and more warships to Vietnam. we enjoy it.
one thing I can see in your bahavior is you like to lick the boots of the Russians despite they raped you and took a big chunk of your country. Do you have any dignity at all?
money is just a part of the equation.
answer yourself this question: why do America and Japan support Vietnam in this conflict?
bla bla bla...as usual you use bullshit language. escort and so on. what is your solution for Vietnam now?
I assume we shall surrender?
Evidently you don't, otherwise you wouldn't be screaming in despair right now. Terrible liar, you are .pls send more oil rigs and more warships to Vietnam. we enjoy it.
one thing I can see in your bahavior is you like to lick the boots of the Russians despite they raped you and took a big chunk of your country. Do you have any dignity at all?
I went to chinese defence section one or two times, then I stopped.no problem bro, is just putting in one thread. In chinese defence forum, we should be baned after some our post.
New Recruit