What's new

South China Sea Forum

This is what he said

As a reality check, you should acknowledge that I'm the person with a noticeable presence in the mainstream media (such as BusinessWeek, Reuters, Washington Times, and United Press International). I have something to say.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-...a-sea-news-discussions-163.html#ixzz2US9qfh3p

but I can't find anything on him on any of the media outlet, where are your "Noticeable Present"??

So, you comment on some Article and make you a "Noticeable Person"?? How does that work??

Then I am an international sensation as I post my comment on different platform, Swedish and Danish Nu, Chinese News Media outlet and Espanol speaking outlet. :lol:
 
. .
Since when Viet defeat America in America?

Since when the 9 dash line comes out from the Chinese mouth.

If the 9 Dash line claim is true, then Viet must also had defeated US in American Soil....

Alternative history lol :lol:
 
. . .
Half of China today belong to Great Viet, with that history Viet Nam have better argument than China with those islands.

Yes, all such "Yue" Guo in China like Wo Yue, Min Yue, Nam Yue, Dong Yue... amd Bai Yue, were Lands of Viet. But after reunification we have to let them proclaim their own territories and become independence states.:coffee:
 
.
your brain are washed up by your beloved PLA


Your judgement is blurred by the hatred of China.

If you have read my post correctly I didn't mention anything about China. I was just so amazed the Great Viet lay claim on half of China so blatantly like you did.
 
.
Marty,

You are confused between the theoretical concept of 'sovereignty' versus the practical day to day issues of 'governance'. The example of convicted felons hits your argument right between the eyes.

Governance and governments are about establishing rules and regulations applicable inside political associations and boundaries. Sovereignty is the greater theory that oversees and enables governance and governments. The US is not confined to the geographically contiguous 48 states but include any territories upon which US laws rules supreme.

Do you have any university level Political Science educkashun at all?

Self governance does not equal to sovereignty.

Self governance is the FREEDOM GRANTED BY A GREATER SOVEREIGN POWER to create unique rules and regulations believed to be necessary within a territory. If we go by your flawed argument, any degrees of governing autonomy automatically completely negate sovereignty and that mean China should give up Taiwan and Tibet, no?

With the convicted felon analogy, voting rights falls under governance and this specific right is negated by certain conditions, in this case it is a high crime, but the person who is denied this privilege is still under the sovereign power of the US government.

Again, Marty: Do you have any university level Political Science educkashun at all? Do you even read any political science books, not Internet blogs, written by political philosophers or even political operatives of any level whose contents are formulated for public consumption, and that whose contents ARE NOT approved by the Chinese government?

started to lose interest talking sense to this guy...........

By the way, I should be more clarified on my point, Convicted Felon are disenfranchisement for voting are limited by some form of "retribution" being pays or paid.

Say for an example, some states in the US recognise a convicted felon to have voting right as long as he pays for his crime committed. However each states does have their unique "recovery" process and some states forbid Felon in different degree from "Recovering" their right to vote. Some states literally ban all type of felon outright. While some listed the extreme crime or crime related to sexual misconduct as a reason of non-recovery.
 
.
Your judgement is blurred by the hatred of China.

If you have read my post correctly I didn't mention anything about China. I was just so amazed the Great Viet lay claim on half of China so blatantly like you did.
I don't hate China, just hated when Chinese twist thing around.
when is the last time you or other Chinese asked them self why the whole world against China?
btw my wife is Chinese from Hainam, and she hated mainland Chinese especially the Hans.
 
.
I don't hate China, just hated when Chinese twist thing around.
when is the last time you or other Chinese asked them self why the whole world against China?
btw my wife is Chinese from Hainam, and she hated mainland Chinese especially the Hans.

lol dude, I am part Chinese I lived in China/Hong Kong for a duration of over 20 years. Yet I still got the label of Chinese Hater.

For Chinese member here, those who don't follow their stream are all Chinese Hater, what you are or to some extend what your wife is, does not give them anything :)

You can be a Chinese and hate China in their eyes, this is perfectly normal :lol:
 
.
I don't hate China, just hated when Chinese twist thing around.
when is the last time you or other Chinese asked them self why the whole world against China?
btw my wife is Chinese from Hainam, and she hated mainland Chinese especially the Hans.



Just go check your post history to see if they match your claim above. And you also by labeling me: "your brain are washed up by your beloved PLA" without knowing me and the history of my post show your bias.
 
.
I put up with you anti-China guys, because you help me think through my positions.

As a reality check, you should acknowledge that I'm the person with a noticeable presence in the mainstream media (such as BusinessWeek, Reuters, Washington Times, and United Press International). I have something to say.

You guys don't even exist.
First of all, it's not about "anti-china," it's about being against People Republic of China and its principal, the Communist Party of China's bullying behaviors toward smaller nations. A country that takes away other's land by force should not be able to claim moral superiority. Most of the posters from all over the world, besides China and Pakistan, are trying to make sure the aggressor's claim of false moral high-ground does not go unchallenged.

I must say, being an internet warrior does not mean your views are the truth. If you are ready to post opinionated misinformation, you should be ready to defend it.

I have posted in many American forums, talking about geo-politics all over the world. But I have never boasted myself as authoritative in the issues.

I have read many forum posts in my life, but your thread on "Philippine killing of Taiwanese fisherman is crime against humanity" is the most jaw-dropping one in term of its sheer ridiculousness.

I want to express my gratitude to all 35 people that supported my post on BusinessWeek against the Philippines. I only know the names of two of you (e.g. Liang and Aurorae).

I am grateful to the 33 anonymous people that voted for my comment to give it added weight during the early days of the Taiwan-Philippine dispute.

Muchas gracias!
Again, the fact that you posted on American's forum does not make you right. However, it will guarantee more people will see how ridiculous PRC's cheer-leading opinions are.
 
.
The picture is a jape
64979560201305271056032888040032474_000.jpg
 
.
Picture failure.uploading again.


September.4.1958,China government was declared Chinese territorial waters included Xi sha Islands(Paracel Islands ) and Nan sha Islands(Spratly Islands ).

September.14.1958,Vietnam government was present a note to China government. declared"agree and support".

111757yoqegige5csiijuc.jpg


111840w7por0f700fqpwp8.jpg


111054dbql3lebn9v3pbbt.jpg



“Comrade Prime Minister,

  We have the honour to bring to your knowledge that the Government of the DRVN recognizes and supports the declaration dated 4th September, 1958 of the Government of the PRC fixing the width of the Chinese territorial waters. The Government of the DRVN respects this decision and will give instructions to its State bodies to respect the 12-mile width of the territorial waters of China in all their relations in the maritime field with the PRC. I address to you, comrade Prime Minister, the assurance of my distinguished consideration”.
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom