What's new

Vietnam builds military muscle to face China

Inaccurate? What kind of a sad excuse is that?

How can be it excuse? Did China had a thousand year rule over Viet? No.

How many years has Putin been President of Russia? Is it 3 years because he was the Premier of Russia between 2008-2012? :rofl:

He ruled Russia as a Premier for 3(Isn't it actually 4?) years.

If a couple married for 5 years and divorced for a couple of years and remarried now for 2 years, so the couple has only been married for 2 years? :crazy:

No, their first marriage lasted five years and their second marrige is now two years, but it is not a consistent marriage because the status changed.

We got no home during the Yuan Dynasty? Now that's new to me.

That's correct because China is homeland of Chinese.

Look who is calling others ignorant when you have trouble with reasoning and using logic in your cries.

You have trouble understanding what I have wrote in my post and how am I crying?

What a bunch of losers

Who are you calling a loser?

China lost against Mongols despite being numerically far far stronger and Viet's liberated themselves several times and final expulsion in 15th century and in 20th century you failed miserably, how could you expect to win after USA and its allies withdraw from Vietnam?

Whether it be Yuan or Qing, those states considered themselves to be "China" and bore the Mandate of Heaven. Those rulers claimed the title Emperor of China; they incorporated their own original territories into the Chinese Empire so actually they helped it grow even larger.

China as an Empire was consistent in its existence and in its existence it gained and lost Viet Nam on several times until early 15th century when it lost it for good.

Finally, if we fast forward to today, Mongolia can never compete with China; it's landlocked, and their nomadic lifestyle is incompatible with societal progression. The contrast is just staggering.

Mongolia isn't continuation of original Mongol empire by any stretch of imagination except culture.

Well that's because people from more temperate climates are unfamiliar with battling in the tropical jungles. So you should thank your jungles, and not any sort of physical superiority or something.

I doubt since I am sure that China has in its vast territory a similar enviroment, specially close to border of Viet Nam and the defeat was caused by Viet Nam's military that used and had knowledge of tactics that are similar or identical to that of what Chinese military used.

Let's not ignore that Viet Nam's military has learned a lot from Viet Nam war in which it fought against USA and its allies that used superior weaponry and had vastly superior firepower available.
 
.
Mod should close the pointless thread as it has become troll fest.
However, facts are:
1. China is getting stonger in faster pace than any other country in the world.
2. Vietnam is a poor nation and suffer a lot from previous wars.
3. China wouldn't go to war with Vietnam because not worth it, they have more important tasks to do.
4. Vietnam cannot afford anyway unless they want to drive out all the investment and reverse the economy growth.
 
.
How can be it excuse? Did China had a thousand year rule over Viet? No.

IF not then why does all sources say it is?

EARLY CHINESE RULE OF VIETNAM (111 B.C. TO A.D. 938) | Facts and Details
Vietnam History
Vietnam - History
History of Vietnam - Lonely Planet Travel Information

upload_2015-12-20_2-51-12.png


I suppose you are not a scholar nor published any books and yet i have used sources from wiki, academic books etc. which clearly says >1000 years of rule. You have no credibility if you cannot find any historian, authors supporting your reasoning.

"He ruled Russia as a Premier for 3(Isn't it actually 4?) years."

I never said Putin ruled Russia as Premier for 3 years. You are not that bright are you? He has been the President of Russia since 2012 and that makes it 3 years and not 4. Before that he had been President between 2000 and 2008.
Now if someone ask how long Putin has ruled Russia as President, i certainly don't think people would say 3 years but 11 years.

I know it's embarrassing to accept the fact that Vietnam has been over a 1000 years under Chinese rule, your attempt to spin it failed miserably. :agree:
 
. . .

Just because these are sources that you decided to use that does not prove your claim that oversimplifies history between Chinese and Viet's and because these sources lack crucial details about history or lack of thereof, as I said before, Viet's have liberated themselves for several times yet these sources failed to acknowledge these historicaly crucial facts of Viet's history.

I suppose you are not a scholar nor published any books and yet i have used sources from wiki, academic books etc. which clearly says >1000 years of rule.

If you were right then your Chinese 1000 year rule of Viet's would be continuous/uninterrupted.

You have no credibility if you cannot find any historian, authors supporting your reasoning.

I (according to you) apparently have no credibility yet you are using sources that lack acknowledgement that Viet's liberated themselves several times and not to mention that is a significant amateurish oversight on behalf of the authors to not mention these crucial historical events in history of Viet's..


I never said Putin ruled Russia as Premier for 3 years. You are not that bright are you? He has been the President of Russia since 2012 and that makes it 3 years and not 4.

I miss read that part of your reply, my honest mistake since I am awake in 3 in the morning so I am sleep deprived and functioning like a person that is under influence of 0.5% of alcohol.

Now if someone ask how long Putin has ruled Russia as President, i certainly don't think people would say 3 years but 11 years.

If they counted two separate periods together then yes, that is a correct way to answer it.

A better example is to ask is how many years does Putin have a high ranking position in Goverment? Isn't it like now continuously for over 14 years having such a high ranking position in the Russian goverment?

I know it's embarrassing to accept the fact that Vietnam has been over a 1000 years under Chinese rule, your attempt to spin it failed miserably. :agree:

I can't accept a non-fact as a fact, it would be embarrassing for a individual to accept a non-fact as a fact due to their ignorance and lack of thereof knowledge involving the subject.

How did I fail? By not accepting your non-fact as a fact?
 
Last edited:
. .
Yeah britain controlled tiny Hong Kong while portugal controlled tiny Macau. China controlling vietnam for a thousand year is still funnier.

Yet China didn't rule Viet's for thousand years and China could't manage to liberate Macau and Hong Kong by its own compared to Viet's who manage to liberate themselves from Chinese several times.

China had to stare and wait... If Portugal and UK didn't had domestic pressure, it could have been in UK's and Portugals hands forever.
 
.
Yet China didn't rule Viet's for thousand years and China could't manage to liberate Macau and Hong Kong by its own compared to Viet's who manage to liberate themselves from Chinese several times.

China had to stare and wait... If Portugal and UK didn't had domestic pressure, it could have been in UK's and Portugals hands forever.
Oh please quit dreaming, China's might is too much already that once a powerful countries uk and portugal have to give up their claim without fighting.

Weak people sympathize with weak people, that's why you keep on propping the vietnamese. This is to be expected, just like the vietnamese, croats were ruled by the Serbs for a very long time. :agree:
 
.
Yet China didn't rule Viet's for thousand years and China could't manage to liberate Macau and Hong Kong by its own compared to Viet's who manage to liberate themselves from Chinese several times.

China had to stare and wait... If Portugal and UK didn't had domestic pressure, it could have been in UK's and Portugals hands forever.

Lol no. Portugal and UK didnt have a chance in hell in holding onto HK/Macau from Mao Zedong's liberated China. The PLA would simply pour in and take it and nothing would have stopped it. However, there are other factors to take into consideration. China was free but it was very weak in terms of economy and diplomacy.

From the way things turned out for HK and Macau I'd say the decision to wait it out paid off quite well.
 
.
Oh please quit dreaming, China's might is too much already that once a powerful countries uk and portugal have to give up their claim without fighting.

I guess you are unaware about colonialism in Europe and how populus was against it before Macau and HK were given to China.

Weak people sympathize with weak people, that's why you keep on propping the vietnamese. This is to be expected, just like the vietnamese, croats were ruled by the Serbs for a very long time. :agree:

You're ignorant.

Lol no. Portugal and UK didnt have a chance in hell in holding onto HK/Macau from Mao Zedong's liberated China. The PLA would simply pour in and take it and nothing would have stopped it. However, there are other factors to take into consideration. China was free but it was very weak in terms of economy and diplomacy.

From the way things turned out for HK and Macau I'd say the decision to wait it out paid off quite well.

That is why I wrote that they could only stare... I could have mentioned political and economical aspects too. :P
 
.
That is why I wrote that they could only stare... I could have mentioned political and economical aspects too. :P

Nah i think you meant China was militarily too weak to take back Macau and HK. But you were already proven wrong. Portugal gave up all her colonies and England had no choice but to honor the end of the lease when Deng addressed that issue with Thatcher. It was Thatcher who wanted to keep HK but England knew they couldn't beat China. The rest is history. And yeah everybody knows Vietnam is under Chinese rule for over a millenium, you can keep living in denial. That won't change any of the facts that all the books out in the shops and (university) libraries from around the globe explicitly mention the 1000 years :azn:
 
.
I guess you are unaware about colonialism in Europe and how populus was against it before Macau and HK were given to China.



You're ignorant.



That is why I wrote that they could only stare... I could have mentioned political and economical aspects too. :P

No. By saying "they could only stare" you are insinuating that China was basically held hostage and could do nothing to take back HK/Macau but "stare" but that is incorrect. What about the political and economical aspects? I already said China was very weak in these two regards during that time, unless you have a different opinion, I would take to hear it.
 
.
And yeah everybody knows Vietnam is under Chinese rule for over a millenium, you can keep living in denial. That won't change any of the facts that all the books out in the shops and (university) libraries from around the globe explicitly mention the 1000 years :azn:

A non-fact isn't a fact and simplifying it won't make it a fact, ignoring historical fact that Viet's have liberated themselves several times in those supposed thousand year rule and ask yourself this, how can it be a 1000 year rule when Viet's had in first revolt managed to have their country liberated for 4 years and then later on for 58 years thus how is it a 1000 year rule when it isn't continuous due to Chinese losing control over Viet twice....

I can't be in denial when history proves my claim/point that thousand year rule didn't happen thus it is a non-fact, if it was a fact then Chinese would't lose control over Viet's once.

How can you rule a territory that you don't control, please explain me that... :omghaha:

No. By saying "they could only stare" you are insinuating that China was basically held hostage and could do nothing to take back HK/Macau but "stare" but that is incorrect.

China could only stare which isn't insinuating that it was held hostage, that is your own assumptions and conclussion...

China could only stare because taking any agressive action would do more bad than good, China wanted Macau and HK back sooner, but they knew that they could only stare and wait.

What about the political and economical aspects? I already said China was very weak in these two regards during that time, unless you have a different opinion, I would take to hear it.

I only said that I could have mentioned that in that post.
 
.
A non-fact isn't a fact and simplifying it won't make it a fact, ignoring historical fact that Viet's have liberated themselves several times in those supposed thousand year rule and ask yourself this, how can it be a 1000 year rule when Viet's had in first revolt managed to have their country liberated for 4 years and then later on for 58 years thus how is it a 1000 year rule when it isn't continuous due to Chinese losing control over Viet twice....

I can't be in denial when history proves my claim/point that thousand year rule didn't happen thus it is a non-fact, if it was a fact then Chinese would't lose control over Viet's once.

How can you rule a territory that you don't control, please explain me that... :omghaha:

Maybe you should explain why all the books mention the 1000 years of rule? So all historians and academics are wrong and you are the only one who knows what fact is? :rofl:
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom