MANILA: China to Philippines: Quit Scarborough Shoal

Tell your government misleading just for the short time only.

Anti-virus wrote:

<quoted text>
I believe you know the map of china in 1904, but your government keep silent in 1907 and 1909. I still have more, do you want me to show you?

Shut up chink what are you doing inn australia? You're always out to occupy other peoploe lands without feeling any guilt or sdhame that's lunacy.

Americans so easily fool wrote:

Now the subject has moved from: "Does Philippines has a legitimate claim over Scarborough Shoal?" to "War between China and USA over an insignificant former colony, the BANANA Republic of Philippines." Hahahahahaha
Low IQ PINOY are really living in DENIAL in here.
1. USA has already openly declared that she does not want to be involved in any part in the TERRITORIAL DISPUTES in the South China Sea. Does that means USA is SCARE, Prudent or SMART?
I says she is SMART! Use Philippines and let them be CRUSH!!!

You Chinese are so in denial of the reality. This may be brought about by your EXTREME FEAR of the United States. You will recall the reality of the situation, especially the recent events, wherein the US openly criticized China about his actions in Scarborough and Spratlys.

The US is also moving 60% of his naval forces to China’s backyard.

And the US is also moving their equipment used in Afghanistan to the Philippines in preparation for a potential clash with the Chinese military.
Don’t live in denial of the truth, as you would say, tough shet on you Chinese.

Americans so easily fool wrote:

2. Malaysian PM Najib told the visiting Chinese FM recently that Malaysia will engaged in a bilateral discussion with China over those disputed island once she settled her ownership disputes with her immediate neighbours meaning Philippines and Vietnam. That is why Malaysian wanted ASEAN to sign a Code of ethnic for the CONDUCT of the South China Sea.

Of course! Malaysia knows that China will LOSE in the International Court because his claims are groundless!!! LOL. With the signing of the Code of Conduct, China will be obligated to resolve this dispute through the International Courts and not with bilateral talks.

If China cannot claim Vietnamese and Philippine territories, what how has he to claim Malaysian and Brunei territories? NONE! LOL

Americans so easily fool wrote:

3. No nations including ASEAN will ever come to the aid of Philippines although she is practically on her knee begging for them to come to help her. She is shivering now understanding the oblivious danger is ahead.
Even Vietnam is silent nowadays and is quietly engaged in bilateral discussions with China on the sideline leaving PHILIPPINES to be all by herself. The rest of ASEAN are not claimants and will not want to be involved.

Yet all ASEAN nations support the Philippines stance except for your pet Cambodia. This is the truth contrary to your misinformed statement. LOL. Are you in denial with the reality happening in ASEAN as well?

All of us are silent nowadays. Philippines, Vietnam and China are all silent because we are waiting for the Code of Conduct to be passed. China cannot risk another issue in the disputed area because having another one will take away his capacity to negotiate for a better deal for him in the formation of the Code of Conduct.

Americans so easily fool wrote:

Talking about War between China and USA.
1. China and USA is already fighting a WAR. An ECONOMIC one and USA is virtually CRUSH! Can you see that?

An economic war? Is that a one sided war with the Chinese on the offensive? LOL

Because if the US fights an economic war with you Chinese and enforces a ban on all Chinese products, HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF CHINESE will lose their jobs and die of hunger, and will revitalize the US economy by returning the jobs to their country.

When that time comes, that will be a real economic war, and you Chinamen are on the losing end.

Americans so easily fool wrote:

2. The U.S. is virtually broke and running its day to day operation on borrowed money. Can any nation fight such a large scale war by just printing more cash?

Yep. Using the borrowed money from you, they can fund their war against you and after winning, I don’t think they would have to pay you a cent.

Americans so easily fool wrote:

3. If there is a real war it will be a war of endurance. Question is: Can USA afford the attrition of her high-priced military hardware in a high rate and for a long time?

What war of endurance? Are you kidding me? The US has a superior navy and technology to destroy China. Worst case scenario, wanna count each other’s nukes?

Americans so easily fool wrote:

4. How about logistic? Fighting in China TURF! Certainly not.
In fact right now, China does not have to do anything, in a couple more years, you may see the real face of USA i.e. DSA = DECLINED States of America..

Countries with conflict with China, surrounds China.(Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Philippines, Vietnam, India) are willing to lend the US their areas for the US to mobilize their troops.

And you’re talking of a country with VAST experience with conducting distant wars. So who are you kidding? Are you trying to come up with a reason to validate your denial that the US can and will attack you?:D

Americans so easily fool wrote:

5. China with its proven and tested anti-SAT weapons can blew every USA SATELLITES out of the sky over China, tell me then how is USA weapons which are so dependent on these satellites for guidance going to operate.

And the US can blow up all of China’s satellites by using a remote operated ship that he’s currently using to spy on Chinese assets in space. Tell me, how are you going to shoot US satellites, when your satellites are already disabled?:D

Americans so easily fool wrote:

6. Simulation by RAND INTERNATIONAL envisage that the war in China Turf will be over before USA forces can even arrived. China missiles and rockets can practically destroyed every USA installation near to China.

So, how can you claim you actually won, when the main US force have not yet arrived? Also, I’m sure you’ve heard of the new anti-missile defence system of the US.. so, good luck. Lol.

Americans so easily fool wrote:

7. China has the world's largest foreign reserves and is also U.S. largest creditor. China can and will freezes U.S. overseas assets.
So you see why it is NOT in USA interest to fight a WAR with China.

What makes you think you can actually freeze US assets when a war is in effect? And by overseas, are you pertaining to assets in the US or US allied countries?:D

Maybe the US will be the one to freeze your assets, by making you the enemy of the Allied forces. What a joke. All you did by the way is to lend the US money. If a war breaks out, you can consider it as giving the US the money you lent him already.

Americans so easily fool wrote:

PINYOY might as well accepted the fact that all these islands and shoal are lost forever. Should I use the word "LOST" since Philippines never owns them in the first place and their ownership claims are WEAK whether it is MILITARILY or LEGALLY.
Hahahahahahah

So you say, yet it is contrary to the evidences presented here in this forum.

Is there such a thing as a military claim in this modern age, chinaman? LOL.

All I know is that since the Philippines claim is superior to Chinese claims legally, China is trying to use his military to bully the Philippines and Vietnam.

Not working though, coz China just pissed both countries off, and is now finding himself becoming the enemy of the world.

Anti-virus wrote:

<quoted text>
Australian support Phil 12nm sovereignty, Not 200nm. Because it is the Law (UNCLOS). Australia never say abandon china's historical evidences. Australia not the Judge. Australia have 12nm sovereignty and 350nm for the economic zone. Do Not compare to Australia, We have the right! But I believe Phil not getting jelous of Australia, because you need Australia. Anyway, the right on China. If Phil ask Australia to assist Phil, and we'll say No. USA said No and gave some $$$$$$$$ I can tell you that we not going to give you $$.

Australia supports the Philippine claims via UNCLOS, and asked China to respect UNCLOS.

Australia also entered into a sort of defense arrangement with the Philippines.

Australia is one of our allies.

You are a Chinaman in Australia, your views are contrary to Australian views, so I do not think you have the right you speak in behalf of a country not your own.

Anti-virus wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, UK have the Falk island in south america. China are the owner, they establised the sovereignty hundred years ago, they lived on it thousands years.
Do you want to know more?

The Falklands is a British colony with the local residents there wanting to be British citizens.

You want to know more?

China does not have a colony in Spratlys, much less the Terra Nulius Scarborough Shoal.

So China owns shet.

Anti-virus wrote:

<quoted text>
Tell you somethings your government forgot to tell you!
The chinese history: far as 2,000 years ago, Chinese ancestors first discovered and gave names to the South China Sea islands, some dynasties named it "Shitang" and "Changsha,", until in this century renamed ‘south china sea islands’. Before 960 Chinese living and farming on the islands, but did not draw in the maps of the country, after 960, they draw a map (but without a navy patrol). Until 971 the naval patrolled Paracel islands only. Chinese naval patrolled Paracel islands and Spratly islands after the year 1271. In 1292 to RadenVijaya (Indonesia) for the war, China sent 20 thousands soldiers to fought this war. The Paracel islands and The Spratly islands also had been recorded in the poetry, documents, fishermen’s songs and ect...

So what? You think that will help you in your claim?

You did not assert ownership of the area. Another country did, and you tried to do it only recently and filed an official claim in 2009.

So bullshet on your naming and poetry shet. And bigger bullshet on Chinese navy patrolling it when China had shet for navies during those periods.

Anti-virus wrote:

Later in Chinese history more exposure to these islands, especially chinese fishermen and traders generally exposure to these islands. Also there a lots of witnesses can prove it!
History and the witnesses: In 1905 Lee Jun become Guangdong Admiral. Lee Jun in 1907 had been patrol the Paracel and Spratly islands, and he had written down his name and year on the stone and left it on the island.
In 1909 Lee Jun patrol South China Sea, and had a exercise which was to establish Chinese sovereignty over the islands in south china sea. French history certify : August 22, 1921, the French Cabinet of Prime Minister and Foreign Minister (Aristide Briand) on the Paracel and spratly Islands issue, admitted: "As the Chinese government since 1909 had been established the sovereignty of the islands, if we take any request is impossible...”. In 1933 French invasion of these islands, the chinese government had protested but no power to fight back!
Before 1974 South Vietnam admitted Paracel and Spratly islands belong to China, even history subject in the school told the students the islands belong to china. In 1958 the Prime minister of north Vn had admitted the islands belong to china too! The very popular history book of Vietnam “Phu Bien Tap Luc” had clearly admitted the Paracel islands and Spratly islands belong to China.
In 1989 and 1900, the United States and Spain signed a treaty of the Philippine territory, the treaty clearly defined territory of the Philippines, does not include the Spratly Islands. In 1951 Philippine-US military alliance treaty this was further confirmed! In 2009 Philippines newspaper admitted the islands belong to china, history of philippines admitted the islands belong to china too!
October 27, 1955, held the first session of the ICAO the Pacific Flying meeting in the Philippine capital of Manila. Attended the meeting in addition to Australia, Canada, Chile, Dominican Republic, Japan, Laos, South Korea, the Philippines, Thailand, United Kingdom, the United States, New Zealand, France, South Vietnam, China, Taiwan. The meeting requested china and taiwan authorities to improve meteorological observation on the Spratly Islands (four times a day).
The British Department of the Navy Bureau of Surveying and Mapping "published in 1912 sailing blog (China Sea Pilot), contains many the footsteps of the Chinese people in south sea islands. In 1971, the British High Commissioner in Singapore said ‘ the islands belong to china, and will return it to china after the war’.
In september 1933, France magazine ( LE MONDE COLONIAL ILLUSTRE ) had records: 1930 the French navigators found 3 chinese living one of the spratly islands. In april 1933 French naval invaded nine of the Spratly islands. And they found 16 chinese living in three islands, and one of the other island had no people but there was house, well, god tower ect.
International maps drawn all the islands in south china sea belong to china. From ancient times to the present, China's absolute territorial sovereignty over the islands. I don’t want to see the war happen because of the reserves and not respect history. Some countries to use politics to want to get the advantages and benefits, they do not care the world hate war!

WITNESSES????? LOL

BRING YOUR DEAD, IMAGINARY WITNESSES TO COURT

Stupid chink.

And so much bullshet in your posts. Bring it to court you lying chink. We'll know who's telling the truth then.

Anti-virus wrote:

<quoted text>
I believe you know the map of china in 1904, but your government keep silent in 1907 and 1909. I still have more, do you want me to show you?

How about the year 1270's map used as a basis for the 9 dash LIE?

Although the people were trying to prove they own scarborough shoal, the reality is Chinese own Scarborough shoal when filipinos was still monkeys.

Cev wrote:

<quoted text>
Yep. Using the borrowed money from you, they can fund their war against you and after winning, I don’t think they would have to pay you a cent.
<quoted text>
What war of endurance? Are you kidding me? The US has a superior navy and technology to destroy China. Worst case scenario, wanna count each other’s nukes?
<quoted text>
Countries with conflict with China, surrounds China.(Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Philippines, Vietnam, India) are willing to lend the US their areas for the US to mobilize their troops.
And you’re talking of a country with VAST experience with conducting distant wars. So who are you kidding? Are you trying to come up with a reason to validate your denial that the US can and will attack you?:D
<quoted text>
And the US can blow up all of China’s satellites by using a remote operated ship that he’s currently using to spy on Chinese assets in space. Tell me, how are you going to shoot US satellites, when your satellites are already disabled?:D
<quoted text>
So, how can you claim you actually won, when the main US force have not yet arrived? Also, I’m sure you’ve heard of the new anti-missile defence system of the US.. so, good luck. Lol.
<quoted text>
What makes you think you can actually freeze US assets when a war is in effect? And by overseas, are you pertaining to assets in the US or US allied countries?:D
Maybe the US will be the one to freeze your assets, by making you the enemy of the Allied forces. What a joke. All you did by the way is to lend the US money. If a war breaks out, you can consider it as giving the US the money you lent him already.
<quoted text>
So you say, yet it is contrary to the evidences presented here in this forum.
Is there such a thing as a military claim in this modern age, chinaman? LOL.
All I know is that since the Philippines claim is superior to Chinese claims legally, China is trying to use his military to bully the Philippines and Vietnam.
Not working though, coz China just pissed both countries off, and is now finding himself becoming the enemy of the world.

Hahahahahahah This SHAMELESS and IGNORANT chinaman trying to answer on behalf of USA?

1. Tell how much do you understand yourself first before you attempt to the above which both beyond you and furthermore it is NOT INTENDED for low IQ character like you!

2. You BOASTS about your loan to your BILLIONAIRE relative in Beijing and I asked you a SIMPLE and STRAIGHTFORWARD question, how many BILLIONS did you lend him?
NO ANSWER!!!!! Because you are a freaking LIAR!!!!

3. You admit you are a chinaman and you called your own race, chaink and chinaman!!! WHat are you if you are NOT a 100% APE like Resistance it Fertile described.

4. Don't FANTASIZED too much about the POPULARITY of USA when she is SINKING!
$$$$$$$ is the KING! And USA is BROKE!!!
The TRUTH is NOBODY like a lapdog like Philippines in ASEAN because WE CONSIDERED PHILIPPINES a LACKEY and an OBEDIENT PROXY of USA. But USA will never find your WAR!

5. Don't even HOPE for a WAR between USA and China as the only way USA has a change is a THERMONUCLEAR WAR and China will definitely send a couple of dozen to Philippines esp. Manila since she is USA proxy and you will be all soul but NO BODY! Hahahahaha

6. Your statement suggested HOW LOW IQ and STUPID you are! USA forces can never arrived if her forward bases are already destroyed, STUPID!
SO she will have to relied on her projectile force e.g. AIRCRAFT CARRIERS which will then be SITTING DUCKS for DF21D or Sunburn or YJ85 or CJ10 cruise nuclear warhead missiles. The safe distance is 3000km away from China coast which means USA aircraft are practically USELESS!! UNDERSTAND!!! Or do I have to make it SIMPLER for low IQ character like you!!! IDIOT!! Hahahahah

I do not like to answer to LOW CLASS, low IQ and SHAMELESS chainaman like you who pretend to be a real PINYOY!

I am Bugger wrote:

Although the people were trying to prove they own scarborough shoal, the reality is Chinese own Scarborough shoal when filipinos was still monkeys.

It is boring, I wait for Viet to reply, but take so long!!! May be he searching for somethings! when they found it, I think we already claim 99 dashes.

china_bully wrote:

<quoted text>
Then what do you base on to claim it belongs to china? china is thousands miles away from it and the Spratly/Paracel. Claim based on few hundred years ago history? Then can Portugal/Spain claim US, claim Canada, claim entire America continent now? Your head is full of shit logic. Answer by above question before you say the islands belong to china again OK?

Nuts, you vietnamese are ungrateful.
We have helped you for resisting US while in the Vietnam war.
Ho chi minh said, the Sino-Vietnamese friendship for generations.
but you forgot it, and to provoke us, to violate our territory.

We are also in common belief. we should have been like brothers.

However, You see what you have done for China.

This is easily the most RELEVANT and it is written by HONEST Filipino!!! Hahahaha

Whereas the other low IQ AstronesianGuy continue to post UNCLOS without rebuking his own fellow PINYOY explanation as to why UNCLOS does not apply in Scarborough Shoal case.

One even claimed that 2,000 years ago

Aquino’s greatest BLUNDER: USA does not recognize UNCLOS.
----------
Rigoberto Tiglao
May 10, 2012

It’s been awkward—even COMICAL —for the Aquino administration to be BEGGING the United States for arms to DEFEND our Scarborough Shoal claim, which it DECLARED is based on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS): the Americans aren’t with the convention.
The US—together with Israel and Turkey—is among 34 nations that have NOT RATIFIED Unclos; they therefore OFFICIALLY DO NOT RECOGNIZE it. State Secretary Hillary Clinton lied in 2009 when she said the US Senate WOULD RATIFY it soon. Three years later, it HASN’T EVEN SCHEDULE a vote on it.

The US’ rejection of UNCLOS—ratified by 162 nations including China and Russia—in fact unmasks American foreign policy’s basic guideline:“MIGHT IS RIGHT.” Why would the US allow these 162 UNCLOS military weaklings tell what its all-powerful navy can and cannot do, where it can or cannot go?

Two UNCLOS provisions illustrate this point.

Article 20:“In the TERRITORIAL sea, submarines and other underwater vehicles ARE REQUIRED TO NAVIGATE ON THE SURFACE and to SHOW THEIR FLAG.”. Would American nuclear submarines, which routinely, secretly traverse Chinese and Russian waters want that?

Article 88:“The high seas shall be reserved for peaceful purposes.” But international waters make up the base of US warships, from which it projects its military power globally.
President Aquino and his officials have been banging their fists on the table complaining to the world that China is refusing to have the dispute settled by the International Tribunal for UNCLOS.

They’re in for a surprise: The Philippines isn’t ALSO with UNCLOS—when it comes to SOVEREIGNTY disputes like that on Scarborough.

The Marcos government RATIFIED UNCLOS in 1984. But it did not ratify the treaty in full, declaring that it doesn’t recognize UNCLOS on certain issues. Guess which?

On issues of SOVEREIGNTY. Our country formally filed an eight-paragraph document then it ratified Unclos, which declared that NOTHING in the treaty would APPLY to its TERRITORIAL claims.

Its Paragraph 4 reads:“Such signing SHALL NOT in any manner IMPAIR or PREJUDICE the SOVEREIGNTY of the Philippines over any territory over which it exercises sovereign authority, such as the KALAYAAN Islands, and the waters appurtenant thereto.”

In other words, we’ve DECLARED that we DO NOT RECOGNIZE UNCLOS when it comes to our TERRITORIAL DISPUTES, such as that on Scarborough.

The only body that can revise that restriction is the Philippine Senate.

And what were China’s qualifications when it ratified UNCLOS in 1996?

On issues of sovereignty.
China in its own declaration said that it “REAFFIRMS its SOVEREIGNTY over all its archipelagos and islands as listed in article 2 of the Law of the People’s Republic of China on the territorial sea and the contiguous zone, which was promulgated on 25 February 1992.” That LAW DECLARED as part of China what it called the Zhongsha Islands, which included Huangyan (Panatag to us).

china_bully wrote:

<quoted text>
Then what do you base on to claim it belongs to china? china is thousands miles away from it and the Spratly/Paracel. Claim based on few hundred years ago history? Then can Portugal/Spain claim US, claim Canada, claim entire America continent now? Your head is full of shit logic. Answer by above question before you say the islands belong to china again OK?

Trung Qu&#7889;c &#273;ã giúp Vi&#7879;t Nam trong th&#7901;i gian chi&#7871;n tranh, Vi&#7879;t Nam thu&#7897;c v&#7873; Trung Qu&#7889;c

I am Bugger wrote:

Although the people were trying to prove they own scarborough shoal, the reality is Chinese own Scarborough shoal when filipinos was still monkeys.

That's a stupid presumption it's the same as sayinbg chinese own all of asia when the chinese creature first appeared on earth. Fack you all sick greedy chinks.

china_bully wrote:

<quoted text>
Then what do you base on to claim it belongs to china? china is thousands miles away from it and the Spratly/Paracel. Claim based on few hundred years ago history? Then can Portugal/Spain claim US, claim Canada, claim entire America continent now? Your head is full of shit logic. Answer by above question before you say the islands belong to china again OK?

Trung Quoc da giup Viet Nam trong thoi gian chien tranh, Viet Nam
thuoc ve Trung Quoc

PINYOY claims are WEAK as opined by many EXPERTS including this one in the USA.

This is written by an Indian American, Sourabh Gupta who is a Senior Research Associate at Samuels International Associates, Washington DC, and a 2012 EAF Distinguished Fellow.

Excerpt:
In 1952, Japan RENOUNCED all right, title and claim to the Spratly and Paracel Islands to the Republic of China, by way of Article 2 of the bilateral Japan–Taiwan Treaty of Taipei. This treaty followed — and referenced — the territorial renunciations of the Islands by Japan under the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty, which had not identified the beneficiary at the time — a treaty that was ratified by both the Philippine and (South) Vietnamese governments. And although neither country is bound by provisions in the bilateral Japan–Taiwan treaty, NEITHER can produce a Spratlys/Paracels cession or reversion clause in their own bilateral treaties with Japan. Rather, their claims are supplementarily based on historical cartography in the case of Vietnam or, for the Philippines,‘historical discovery’ that is (INCREDIBLY) of a post-World War II vintage!

At the end of the day, ultimate title cannot be said to rest with any one party so long as a territorial claim is not resolved by way of a binding instrument between claimant states. At best, there are better claims and less-better claims to the territory in question. But given CHINA'S LAW-BASED claim is SUPERIOR to that of rival claimants, why does it persist with the infamous nine-dashed line?

----------
Historically in 1947, China under KMT submitted a 11 dash lines.

Americans so easily fool wrote:

PINYOY claims are WEAK as opined by many EXPERTS including this one in the USA.
This is written by an Indian American, Sourabh Gupta who is a Senior Research Associate at Samuels International Associates, Washington DC, and a 2012 EAF Distinguished Fellow.
Excerpt:
In 1952, Japan RENOUNCED all right, title and claim to the Spratly and Paracel Islands to the Republic of China, by way of Article 2 of the bilateral Japan–Taiwan Treaty of Taipei. This treaty followed — and referenced — the territorial renunciations of the Islands by Japan under the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty, which had not identified the beneficiary at the time — a treaty that was ratified by both the Philippine and (South) Vietnamese governments. And although neither country is bound by provisions in the bilateral Japan–Taiwan treaty, NEITHER can produce a Spratlys/Paracels cession or reversion clause in their own bilateral treaties with Japan. Rather, their claims are supplementarily based on historical cartography in the case of Vietnam or, for the Philippines,‘historical discovery’ that is (INCREDIBLY) of a post-World War II vintage!
At the end of the day, ultimate title cannot be said to rest with any one party so long as a territorial claim is not resolved by way of a binding instrument between claimant states. At best, there are better claims and less-better claims to the territory in question. But given CHINA'S LAW-BASED claim is SUPERIOR to that of rival claimants, why does it persist with the infamous nine-dashed line?
----------
Historically in 1947, China under KMT submitted a 11 dash lines.

Crazy Filipinos. They are mean, selfish, irrational and shameless.

They are being a race of the colored people discriminate their Asian counterparts. They think they speak English and are westernised/Americanized. So they look down upon other Asians without thinking illogically who they are and what they have.

But they are far from being civilised by the standards of international communities. So their behaviors are weird.

Despite they boast their own merits all the time, and relentlessly smear other Asians and Chinese with racial slurs, they are in fact very uncivilised. See the following post:

http://www.topix.com/forum/world/canada/TTPA6...

excartpuller wrote:

<quoted text> That's a stupid presumption it's the same as sayinbg chinese own all of asia when the chinese creature first appeared on earth. Fack you all sick greedy chinks.

The SAME can be said of USA who has be carrying a BIG STICK around wherever she go until NOW! Heard of UGLY American!

Now she is practically BROKE!!!! The whole world esp. the MUSLIM NATIONS does not respect her any more.

Can we change it to "Fack you all sick greedy seppo."

When you have NO MONEY to invest or loan to Africa to buy their resources, you called the Chinese NEO-COLONIALIST making USA the laughing stock of the AFRICA! Hahahahah