South China Sea Forum

[BoQ77]

I don't do endless semantic arguments. I've said all I will say on the subject.

I only care about substance. I have something to say. Once I've made my point, the message's merit is to be decided by the reader.

I want to convey two points.

1. US encourages India to become cannon fodder in the South China Sea.
2. US doesn't care about Vietnam.

The reader decides whether my analysis is correct or not.

Ok. Done. And don't post fake news anymore !!!

 

[Martian2]

Ok. Done. And don't post fake news anymore !!!

It wasn't fake news.

I made a claim about the future. I used the word "will" repeatedly. You just don't understand English.

I never used the words "did" or "had."

Will = future tense, a future event

Did, Had = past tense, an event that already happened

So where's the problem?

 

[BoQ77]

It wasn't fake news.

I made a claim about the future. I used the word "will" repeatedly. You just don't understand English.

I never used the words "did" or "had."

Again, when describe a Chinese ship shadows 4 Indian ships with welcome greeting in international water, and lately Chinese ship move away after 12 hours. You must be loyal to the source.

You described that a single Indian ships was escorted by many Chinese bigger destroyers, subs, Aircrafts ... and would be shot if not move out.

That why I call you faked the news.

 

[Martian2]

Again, when describe a Chinese ship shadows 4 Indian ships with welcome greeting in international water, and lately Chinese ship move away after 12 hours. You must be loyal to the source.

You described that a single Indian ships was escorted by many Chinese bigger destroyers, subs, Aircrafts ... and would be shot if not move out.

That what I call you faked the news.

Get a book on grammar. You read the sentences in the way that you wanted to. That's your problem.

I used the word "will" many times. That's the best I can do.

I have a better idea. I'll start to post my views as individual threads, so I don't have to keep debating "word usage" with you.

You're just like Gambit, jhungary, and many Indians. You seem to enjoy endless argument. I just want to talk about substance.

 

[Pangu]

Those islands are looking great! I wonder how many sand bucket we used, lol.

I don't do endless semantic arguments. I've said all I will say on the subject.

I only care about substance. I have something to say. Once I've made my point, the message's merit is to be decided by the reader.

I want to convey two points.

1. US encourages India to become cannon fodder in the South China Sea.
2. US doesn't care about Vietnam.

The reader decides whether my analysis is correct or not.

Nice analysis.

 

[jhungary]

How you consider "escorted" ? describe how China escorted the USS Cowpens ?

lol this man is writing check he cannot cash........as with most of the troll here

Some time ago, he claim Huawei is the Biggest Telecommunication company in the world, but in fact it sold the most telecommunication equipment.lol

So, forget about him, you should look at more neutral news such as this

Vietnam, the US, and Japan in the South China Sea | The Diplomat

 

[Martian2]

lol this man is writing check he cannot cash........as with most of the troll here

Some time ago, he claim Huawei is the Biggest Telecommunication company in the world, but in fact it sold the most telecommunication equipment.lol

So, forget about him, you should look at more neutral news such as this

Vietnam, the US, and Japan in the South China Sea | The Diplomat

Have you been living under a rock? Everybody knows Huawei sells telecommunication equipment.

If I say "Intel is the world's largest chip manufacturer," how many people would confuse Intel with a potato chip manufacturer? Probably only you.

Oh look, he didn't say "computer chip." I thought he meant Frito Lay, the potato chip giant!

 

[BoQ77]

lol this man is writing check he cannot cash........as with most of the troll here

Some time ago, he claim Huawei is the Biggest Telecommunication company in the world, but in fact it sold the most telecommunication equipment.lol

So, forget about him, you should look at more neutral news such as this

Vietnam, the US, and Japan in the South China Sea | The Diplomat

I'm just surprised how that guy could modify the source and make a fake news in such a way.
Refer to the news, he claimed Chinese destroyers and subs, forced out an Indian ship in SCS.
Read my previous posts.

I said that's what the Indians will face when they come back again. The citation speaks for itself.

"If India does not follow the instructions of the escort commander, China will impound the Indian ship."

"Will" means future tense. A future event.

who is escort commander ? maybe escort commander in the future?

 

[russiarussia]

Martian2 do nothing wrong here. He just defended his ideas and i believe that his commets was more steady then the others. If you want to add someone’s name on a watchlist, add your name cuz you are the real troll.

 

[Martian2]

Malaysia’s South China Sea Policy: Playing It Safe | The Diplomat

 

[ahojunk]

Now back on topic.

Animation of Zhubi Island from 3 July 2014 to 27 Feb 2015.

Amazing.

22 Feb 2015 - 0.47 sq km (about the size of Taiping Island)
27 Feb 2015 - 0.93 sq km.
05 Mar 2015 - 1.18 sq km.
.

 

[areal]

Keep L-Y-ing viet, PLA have finished all jobs on clearing mine on the China side of the border.
Most mine were set during 1980s, which was against Viet army.
Your mine is yours, don't blame any others.

well, you can laugh days and nights if you like, but I say a big thank you to uncle sam for the $18 millions. it is the first time the US provides military aid. one should not forget, we receive another $10 millions for mine clearance this year.

US pledges $10 million for landmine clearance in Vietnam | Politics | Thanh Nien Daily


from all of your bullshit bla bla bla post above, only I can agree to "The Malaysians are very smart". you obviously not. If you are dumb and retard, don´t make the mistake and assume other people are as dumb and retard as you.

a quiz for you:

the US gives us $10m for mine clearance this year, how much money does China give for mine clearance, mines and granates that aren´t exploded in north vietnam after the PLA bastards came destroying our cities killing our people?

Ally with US ? only if you dare.
Viet can survive until now just because its leaders have not been so crazy as you suggest.

the US military budget is higher than yours. the balance of power will be altered if we ally with the US. you are a toast.

 

[Zero_wing]

People who think war is a game are morons

 

[ahojunk]

Vietnam has scant legal basis for South China Sea claims｜Op-Ed Contributors｜Opinion｜WantChinaTimes.com

Vietnam has scant legal basis for South China Sea claims
Chang Ching, 2015-02-12

Vietnam's claim of sovereignty to islands in the South China Sea has scant legal basis, judging from the scope of its territory at various junctures of its history.

While Vietnam was under colonial rule, France laid claim to the Paracels, saying the archipelago belonged to Vietnam from ancient times, but it failed to push the claim as the monarchs of the Nguyen Dynasty, then under the French protectorate, were lukewarm concerning the claim.

In addition, Vietnamese maps printed during the French colonial era did not cover the islands nor did any official document from the time underscore effective administration of them by France.

Moreover, there is no documentary trace showing a transfer of sovereignty over the islands by the French government to the new regime when Vietnam won independence. Since the islands were not included in Vietnam's territory under French rule, how could France return the ownership during the change of power?

At the conference in 1951 that culminated in the Treaty of San Francisco that officially ended World War II, France and Vietnam failed to win support for Vietnam's claim to South China Sea islands, even in the absence of a China representative from either side of the Taiwan Straits. This is further evidence of the lack of a legal basis for the Vietnamese claim. As a result, the San Francisco Peace Treaty only included Japan renouncing its claims to the Spratly and the Paracel islands, without specifying their ownership.

It would be advisable to have France admit its failure to secure any legal basis for Vietnam's claim to South China Sea islets during its period of colonial rule.

(Chang Ching is a researcher at the Taipei-based Society for Strategic Studies ROC. Translated by Want China Times.)

.

 

[VALKRYIE]

At least there's a few unbias, sane and rational people on this issue