It belongs to China

[Battle of Bach Dang River]

---

---

so this is from Philippines media.

guess that will settle peace for this row between Phillipines and China.


by the way, what about those islands illegally occupied by Vietnam?

You give evidence to prove we "illegal occupation"? (Spratly Island)
Vietnam has managed the islands since the 15th century peacefully and continuously. We manage it in practice, not in imagination as China.
Why do you say we "illegal occupation of the islands"?
China used force to rob some reefs from Vietnam in 1988, It's illegal actions. These reefs are occupied by China, by use of force, is illegal. But china always imagines that the Spratly archipelago of hers. Even, she has claimed the waters just a few miles from Philippines' coast(!!!)
If you do not know anything about the Spratly Islands, Paracel Islands, you yourself research more about them or please shut up.

It belongs to China

I'm curious, if not too troublesome for you: Your avatar is a photo of Bo Xilai's son, Bo Guagua?

No Ferrari, no talk : Bo Xilai's son lives it up

[EastSea]

You better hurry then. Taiwan might move some F16s to the island and very soon her 4 warships will be ready for actions as well.

F16s is useless. We can take back in any time we want, however we would solve this matter peacefully.

[kawaraj]

because its beyond your 200 miles, we called illegal. it's more within the Philippines 200 nautical miles.

if you cite historic reasons, that will even justify China's claims.

you have to choose one of them, or you either wrong, nor can you have both sides.

[Battle of Bach Dang River]

because its beyond your 200 miles, we called illegal. it's more within the Philippines 200 nautical miles.

if you cite historic reasons, that will even justify China's claims.

you have to choose one of them, or you either wrong, nor can you have both sides.

Of course, historical reasons must satisfy three conditions: peacefully occupation, continuously, and in reality

You cannot sit and draw an imaginary U line, then you say it is your property history.

[kawaraj]

Of course, historical reasons must satisfy three conditions: peacefully occupation, continuously, and in reality

You cannot sit and draw an imaginary U line, then you say it is your property history.

I see your country drawing a U line towards the coast of Palawan of Philippines. why not claim Palawan is part of Vietnam?

[Battle of Bach Dang River]

I see your country drawing a U line towards the coast of Palawan of Philippines. why not claim Palawan is part of Vietnam?

Because the Filipinos were there first (Palawan). It is their country.
Vietnam is always smaller, weaker than China. If Chinese were to the Spratly and Paracel islands before, we certainly did not have any chance to occupy the islands.

[EastSea]

because its beyond your 200 miles, we called illegal. it's more within the Philippines 200 nautical miles.

if you cite historic reasons, that will even justify China's claims.

you have to choose one of them, or you either wrong, nor can you have both sides.

We controlled it officially from many hundereds years ago. It's difference. Think about Manvinas Islands.
Look at old map of Vietnam when we used chinese characters in the past.

[LetsGetRowdy]

Look at old map of Vietnam when we used chinese characters in the past.

this old map looks like it can be traced back to the early 2000s.

[kawaraj]

We controlled it officially from many hundereds years ago. It's difference. Think about Manvinas Islands.
Look at old map of Vietnam when we used chinese characters in the past.

I got a sense of what's going on....

those island was found or occupied by ancient fishmen, both from Vietnam and China, and what makes it more complicated is Tributary System to the middle kingdom. China thinks they got the islands first because they (old times) consider Vietnam/or was part of Chinese dynasty.

anyway, if that's too complicated, why not let go back to the new UNclos, I guess that's what the Philippines's appealing.

[EastSea]

this old map looks like it can be traced back to the early 2000s.

You are Chinese. Lies is Chinese habit.

I got a sense of what's going on....

those island was found or occupied by ancient fishmen, both from Vietnam and China, and what makes it more complicated is Tributary System to the middle kingdom. China thinks they got the islands first because they (old times) consider Vietnam/or was part of Chinese dynasty.

anyway, if that's too complicated, why not let go back to the new UNclos, I guess that's what the Philippines's appealing.

What does it mean tribute system ? In the past Chinese lost their independence. China ruled by Mongolian and Manchus. Servants dont have right to talk about that.
Vietnam and Philippine will solve this matter related to overlap area, base on UNCLOS. We have been do it with Malaysia and we submitted to UN common requests 2009.

[rcrmj]

lol``look at these infoerior complex Indian cheerleaders

[kawaraj]

What does it mean tribute system ? In the past Chinese lost their independence. China ruled by Mongolian and Manchus. Servants dont have right to talk about that.
Vietnam and Philippine will solve this matter related to overlap area, base on UNCLOS. We have been do it with Malaysia and we submitted to UN common requests 2009.

you mean Han people lost their independence. but China as the central dynasty was always there taking tributes from servant states such as Korea and Vietnam. Don't troll, we are talking serious history in the textbook.

If you don't recognize tribute system of old times, you don't even have any justification of those claims written by Chinese words.

regarding the disputes between Philippines and Vietnam, you'd better hand all islands in their 200 nautical miles back to Philippines. you historic claims are even contradicted yourself.

[auspice]

Seems this writer is living comfortably now, courtesy of the Chinese money paid to him to write this article for their propaganda.

What the Philippines is asking is simple. Settle the dispute before the UNCLOS. If China really has solid basis for its claim, why do they refuse?

China Stole our Mischief Reef and now the Scarborough shoal. Greedy and selfish Chinese!

[EastSea]

you mean Han people lost their independence. but China as the central dynasty was always there taking tributes from servant states such as Korea and Vietnam. Don't troll, we are talking serious history in the textbook.

If you don't recognize tribute system of old times, you don't even have any justification of those claims written by Chinese words.

regarding the disputes between Philippines and Vietnam, you'd better hand all islands in their 200 nautical miles back to Philippines. you historic claims are even contradicted yourself.

Kido.
When you are talking serious history in the textbook printed in China, I wonder about Chinese's mentality, they don't feel any shamefull when Chinese are ruled by invaders very long time in their history. Mongolia and Machus was foreigners, conquered and ruled China. China was colony of them. It's truth, such textbook printed in China is fake with lies to brainwash Chinese.
Related to Chinese characters, what do you think when Japanese use it up to now ?

[Battle of Bach Dang River]

---

---

@kawaraj,
Historical sovereignty is respected, even in UNCLOS 1982, but it must satisfy three conditions: occupation peacefully, continuously and in reality

You cannot claim historical sovereignty over the islands by the way you used force to rob them.
You cannot claim historical sovereignty over the islands by drawing the map in your imagination, not any basis, not in reality.
You cannot claim historical sovereignty over the islands, while another country is managing its peacefully and continuously long time ago, and right now.

Yes, probably because the country "vassal" of China, which helped Vietnam manage the Paracels and Spratlys peacefully and continuously for hundreds of years ago without being bothered by China?