Vietnam acknowledged Chinese sovereignty over South China Sea in 1958

[NiceGuy]

yes S.VN controlling those islands disagree with out statement
that's enough prove behavior of your government not is Broken promises.?

Ungrateful（Alias​​: Vietnamese）definition：
who promise something X belong to someone
but X is controlled by someone's enemy at then
who get something X from someone's enemy
who changed idea, say :" X should belong to me".

Oki, so we VN promise Washington will belong to China if you can take it.those islands are too small for Big guy like CHina, so let argue with US right now

 

[gpit]

Oki, so we VN promise Washington will belong to China if you can take it.those islands are too small for Big guy like CHina, so let argue with US right now

Couldn’t believe you keep bring shames to your motherland … that your education system can only produce mentally handicapped people like you is a tragedy of Vietnam!


You parallel Washington with Spratly, thinking that Washington is a part of USA and China wants to occupy USA, just as North Vietnam thought Spratly was a part of South Vietnam and North Vietnam wanted to occupy South Vietnam.

Do you see the fallacy of your inane logic here, caused by your rotten and crippling education system?

FOOL!

 

[NiceGuy]

Couldn’t believe you keep bring shames to your motherland … that your education system can only produce mentally handicapped people like you is a tragedy of Vietnam!


You parallel Washington with Spratly, thinking that Washington is a part of USA and China wants to occupy USA, just as North Vietnam thought Spratly was a part of South Vietnam and North Vietnam wanted to occupy South Vietnam.

Do you see the fallacy of your inane logic here, caused by your rotten and crippling education system?

FOOL!

You should understand the story first. N.VN did not have the sovereignty over those islands, so why China wanted N.VN to accepted their claim ?? Ok , N.VN accepted it to make China happy, just like if CHina claim Wasington city and want me to accept it, I will accept it to make CHina happy,if China promise to return South China back to Baiyue people, that all.

btw: Washington belong to US, my acceptance is totaly useless but I got the land from CHina .

 

[Peter]

Although such diplomatic letter is not a TREATY 。but about decision on Broken promises ,International court already have some case decision to Broken promises, result is Broken promises party lost the case .
overall how to decision on the Broken promises there is no a uniform opinion.

If it is a promise, then you must have a PROMISSORY NOTE (usually in banking activities)- instead, PVD's letter is not like that. In his letter, he had not promised but to acknowledge or recognize what China had declared in 1958's declaration.

you can see ,for this letter.even Vietnamese coalition government has admitted this is Broken promises，but PDF's Vietnamese with a variety despicable excuses to deny this fact.
This is unacceptable.

If "Vietnamese coalition government has admitted this is Broken promises" then neither they've not known what a promise meant nor what they were talking about. Either way, that is Vietnamese coalition government's problem, but I can assure you that PVD's letter has no legal obligation whatsoever. It is just like VERBAL TALKs between the leaders or high-rank officers of the two countries.

Ungrateful（Alias​​: Vietnamese）definition：
who promise something X belong to someone
but X is controlled by someone's enemy at then
who get something X from someone's enemy
who changed idea, say :" X should belong to me".

BTW, ungrateful is not define as such, but showing no gratitude toward a benefit that one has received or will receive. However, as you said:

who promise something X belong to someone
but X is controlled by someone's enemy at then
who get something X from someone's enemy
who changed idea, say :" X should belong to me"

it only meant as "shifty" or "devious."

 

[Peter]

Promised ?? Social republic of VietNam have No promise with CHina. Democratic Republic of Viet Nam promise some thing with CHina,but she had NO soveriegnty to those islands

You are not speaking the TRUTH!

Pham Van Dong (March 1, 1906 – April 29, 2000) was an associate of Ho Chi Minh. He served as Prime Minister of North Vietnam from 1955 through 1976, and was Prime Minister of reunified Vietnam from 1976 until he retired in 1987.

Therefore, if you said that "Democratic Republic of Viet Nam" (in 1958) is different from "Social republic of VietNam" (in 1979) then who was Pham Van Dong and his title at those two periods of time?

Pham Van Dong served as as Prime Minister from both of those periods of time.

Also, if you want to use this statement below:

2. The Chinese interpretation of the September 14, 1958 note by the Prime Minister of the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam as recognition of China's ownership over the archipelagoes is a gross distortion since the spirit and letter of the note only mean the recognition of a 12 -mile limit for Chinese territorial waters.

to deny the fact that Prime Minister Pham Van Dong of the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam is a different person from Prime Minister Pham Van Dong of the Social republic of VietNam - then you have to prove it: Pham Van Dong is not the same man.

Furthermore, Prime Minister of the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam recognized of China's ownership over the archipelagoes was not a gross distortion since Pham Van Dong had signed and agreed with what China's claim.

 

[happycanuck]

Taiwan also claims sovereignty over these two islands, so you should know that China claims these two island not based on your letter. But this letter is make us evidence more credible . But you have deliberately said China claims these two island is based on your letter.
To completely clear the entire chain of evidence is a big project, so this thread is only relevant debate for the this letter

It is going the way I wanted. You keep on weaving your own web to trap yourself by making up whatever you think will convince others to support your stand.

DO the following things before replying to my post.

1. Check all your reponses to different forum users and you will find that
it has been your consistent statement about the Letter given to
China by North Vietnam Government of that time confirming China
Government stand that the disputed Islands are the territory of
China.
2. I have always quoted what you have been professing onthe forum.
3. I am not of Vietnamese heritage but I take the stand to fight lies
and injustice any where it takes place.
4. Your statement that "China claims Islands based on Your letter".
5. I am citizen of Canada and have never issued any letter to your
Government. If you have any proof than show us the copy.
6. Besides Taiwan which is part of China but not under your direct
control. There are other countries in the SCS who lay their claim on
those Islands as well.
7. Besides the "letter form North Vietnam" , do you have any credible
evidence which is admissiable in the International Courts?

 

[NiceGuy]

You are not speaking the TRUTH!

Pham Van Dong (March 1, 1906 – April 29, 2000) was an associate of Ho Chi Minh. He served as Prime Minister of North Vietnam from 1955 through 1976, and was Prime Minister of reunified Vietnam from 1976 until he retired in 1987.

Therefore, if you said that "Democratic Republic of Viet Nam" (in 1958) is different from "Social republic of VietNam" (in 1979) then who was Pham Van Dong and his title at those two periods of time?

Pham Van Dong served as as Prime Minister from both of those periods of time.

Also, if you want to use this statement below:



to deny the fact that Prime Minister Pham Van Dong of the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam is a different person from Prime Minister Pham Van Dong of the Social republic of VietNam - then you have to prove it: Pham Van Dong is not the same man.

Furthermore, Prime Minister of the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam recognized of China's ownership over the archipelagoes was not a gross distortion since Pham Van Dong had signed and agreed with what China's claim.

Pham Van Dong is one man but he got diffrent position after 1976. in 1958 he only was the PM of N.VN, in 1976 he was the PM of Social republic of VietNam after General election .

Dated 25-4-1976, people around the two North - South Slave cried the general election vote to participate in the National Assembly. This is the second general election held throughout the country, following the first held on 6-1-1946. More than 23 million voters (98.8% of voters) to vote and 492 deputies were elected. Results of a general election victorymeaningful decision on the path towards complete unification of the surface state.

Dated 24-6-1976, the National Assembly of Vietnam agreed, known as the National Assembly VI succeeded to the meaning of 5 key business before Congress, the first public meeting in Hanoi.

Congress decided to name the country is reunified Vietnam Socialist Republic of VietnamSouth, through domestic policy, foreign affairs, elected bodies, the highest leadership positions of the State, defined the principles of construction machinery governments at all levels, regulation, national flag, national anthem, elected Constitution drafting committee.

25-4-1976: general election general parliamentary elections are held in the country. - The encyclopedia of Vietnamese culture

What happend if people of New VN did not chose him as the PM and let him retired ??Can CHina still say : MR. Pham broke promise after 1976 ??

 

[Vietnam.Duong]

Why lack of oil？because you invaded our oil region.

Why many Chinese always say Vietnam invaded China ?, they are blinded. It is like rabbit catch tiger. Vietnam invaded China or China invaded Vietnam in 1956, 1974, 1979 and 1988 ?

 

[happycanuck]

Excuse.
This is nothing to do whether North Vietnam owned sovereignty.

of course you did not sovereignty, the sovereignty of these two islands belong to China.
Prime Minister Phạm Văn Đồng recognized China's sovereignty through official channels . Also means that do not recognize other countries own the sovereignty of these two islands （Include South Vietnamese and North Vietnam）.

these two island South Vietnamese not own sovereignty
So sovereignty can not be used to make excuses

I have been reading your posts and would like to ask you two specific questions.

1. What is distance between the nearest province shore of China to the nearest Island's shore?
2. When did the first Chinies national land on the shores of the Island and how long did they live there?

 

[Peter]

Pham Van Dong is one man but he got diffrent position after 1976. in 1958 he only was the PM of N.VN, in 1976 he was the PM of Social republic of VietNam after General election .

Yes, Pham Van Dong is one man. He also got the same position as Prime Minister before and after 1976 and it was not like you said differently.

25-4-1976: general election general parliamentary elections are held in the country. - The encyclopedia of Vietnamese culture

What happend if people of New VN did not chose him as the PM and let him retired ??Can CHina still say : MR. Pham broke promise after 1976 ??

Are you sure it was a fair election back then while millions of South Vietnam soldiers were being imprisonment in Concentration Camps? However, it is besides the point here and to reply to your questions:

If people of New VN did not chose Pham Van Dong as the PM, then Vietnam government still would be responsible for its former PM's signature. Why? Pham Van Dong had signed the letter on the behalf of his government at that time, had he not!?

 

[Peter]

Why many Chinese always say Vietnam invaded China ?, they are blinded. It is like rabbit catch tiger. Vietnam invaded China or China invaded Vietnam in 1956, 1974, 1979 and 1988 ?

Read the words more carefully Vietnam.Duong ... Akittya wrote: "because you invaded our oil region"

 

[gpit]

Promised ?? Social republic of VietNam have No promise with CHina. Democratic Republic of Viet Nam promise some thing with CHina,but she had NO soveriegnty to those islands

Only your crooked thinking, or otherwise your miserable education, will allow you to draw such funny conclustion.

If you owe somebody something, mere change of the name after your growth of business won't forgive you what you owe.

SRV evolves out from DRV after the business expands.

2. The Chinese interpretation of the September 14, 1958 note by the Prime Minister of the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam as recognition of China's ownership over the archipelagoes is a gross distortion since the spirit and letter of the note only mean the recognition of a 12 -mile limit for Chinese territorial waters.

Ok, let me call you s.o.b. , and you should feel that my spirit is to praise you.

 

[gpit]

I have been reading your posts and would like to ask you two specific questions.

1. What is distance between the nearest province shore of China to the nearest Island's shore?
2. When did the first Chinies national land on the shores of the Island and how long did they live there?

1. What is the distance between Falkland Islands and UK? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islands
2. When did the first UK citizen land on Falkland and how long did they lived there?

 

[NiceGuy]

Are you sure it was a fair election back then while millions of South Vietnam soldiers were being imprisonment in Concentration Camps? However, it is besides the point here and to reply to your questions:

If people of New VN did not chose Pham Van Dong as the PM, then Vietnam government still would be responsible for its former PM's signature. Why? Pham Van Dong had signed the letter on the behalf of his government at that time, had he not!?

1. MP Pham signed somthing did not belong to North VietNambefore 1976, so Ok VN government will say sorry for that mistake,and hope China should not ask new VietNam to accept any thing esle doen't belong to VN any more.

2. If China claim US belong to China and wanted Pm Pham accept it. PM Pham worte:" VN eccept that US belong to CHina coz CHina discoverd American continent earlier than the West", so pls tell me what responsibility should VietNam take for his mistake sir ??

 

[akittya]

It is going the way I wanted. You keep on weaving your own web to trap yourself by making up whatever you think will convince others to support your stand.

DO the following things before replying to my post.

1. Check all your reponses to different forum users and you will find that
it has been your consistent statement about the Letter given to
China by North Vietnam Government of that time confirming China
Government stand that the disputed Islands are the territory of
China.
2. I have always quoted what you have been professing onthe forum.
3. I am not of Vietnamese heritage but I take the stand to fight lies
and injustice any where it takes place.
4. Your statement that "China claims Islands based on Your letter".
5. I am citizen of Canada and have never issued any letter to your
Government. If you have any proof than show us the copy.
6. Besides Taiwan which is part of China but not under your direct
control. There are other countries in the SCS who lay their claim on
those Islands as well.
7. Besides the "letter form North Vietnam" , do you have any credible
evidence which is admissiable in the International Courts?

Do you know why no one replies to your post ?
You're not trying to find the truth, maybe you are really from Canada, but I think no one feel you have a bit like a Canadian when see you post at this thread .
Your stand is completely without any analysis stand on Vietnamese stand, attention is without any analysis .
Your criteria for judging is that China views must all be err, the Vietnamese views must be all be sure. Have not been your own analysis.

Check all post before you send , compared to above I said, and if different, please get me the link of your post. .
I have explained, clear the entire chain of evidence is a big project, Whether you and I can not afford to complete，This thread only discuss the note and statement.
but you still want to bring this thread in entire chain of evidence and attempt to destroy this thread.