China's SCS Strategy Thread

[manqiangrexue]

guys, give it a rest. Save your breath.
1) some people are so biased that they think evil China cannot do any good, and so must be stopped and contained before it's too late. but OTOH, USA is a beacon on the hill, a shining glory that God has placed on Earth to govern the whole world. So if Uncle Sam wants to kill you, it must be for your own benefit. that's their logic
2) you cannot wake up someone pretending to be asleep. They won't and they can't listen to reasons and sound arguments.
therefore, just state your case and move on.

I'm not convincing him; I'm embarrassing him for everyone to see.

 

[Brumby]

The reasoning is that nobody ever listens to an international anything when it tells countries to give up sovereign territory and you've never provided an example of otherwise despite being asked many times. And this is setting the bar really low because what I should be requiring from you is an example of a rising or reining superpower relinquishing territory for an "international triunal." There's no reason whatsoever that China should be the first.


That's a pretty ironic reply (once again) from someone who wrote, "Is that the depth and quality of your rebuttal?"

Hey, nobody guaranteed you could keep up. I know this idea of free thinking beyond eating propaganda is new for you so you can take it at your pace.


And there is a reason why countries break those "rules" all the time.

Your whole argument is predicated on two wrongs make a right? Are you prepared to accept that China should renounce its claims if I am able tp provide examples? I can provide examples. The question is whether you are prepared to step up to it.

 

[manqiangrexue]

Your whole argument is predicated on two wrongs make a right? Are you prepared to accept that China should renounce its claims if I am able tp provide examples? I can provide examples. The question is whether you are prepared to step up to it.

Wowwww that's a whole lot of suspense there LOL If you owned a candy company, you'd put wrappers around wrappers. Give it if you got it.

Yes, sometimes, two wrongs make a right. When other great powers exploit a tactic to become strong, only an undeserving fool would limit himself from it. When someone hits you, you hit back.

My argument, if you could read, would be very clear by now. No other country submits itself in this way and like I said before, China is a great power comparable to the likes of the USA and Russia. These countries accept no power above themselves and always stick to their interests. China is no different and I will not renounce anything; examples provide a small support for your argument that sometimes, countries can be forced by international pressure to relinquish their own interests. However, it would not be possible to outweigh all the examples in history where countries disobeyed international decisions for the integrity of their territory.

 

[Brumby]

Wowwww that's a whole lot of suspense there LOL If owned a candy company, you'd put wrapper around wrappers. Give it if you got it.

Yes, sometimes, two wrongs make a right. When other great powers exploit a tactic to become strong, only an undeserving fool would limit himself from it. When someone hits you, you hit back.

My argument, if you could read, would be very clear by now. No other country submits itself in this way and like I said before, China is a great power comparable to the likes of the USA and Russia. These countries accept no power above themselves and always stick to their interests. China is no different and I will not renounce anything; examples provide a small support for your argument that sometimes, countries can be forced by international pressure to relinquish their own interests. However, it would not be possible to outweigh all the examples in history where countries disobeyed international decisions for the integrity of their territory.

In other words you are now trying to wriggle out of your prior position.

 

[manqiangrexue]

In other words you are now trying to wriggle out of your prior position.

In other words, you have a reading comprehension problem. My position was NEVER that China should renounce these islands if any country has ever renounced territory from international pressure.

I asked for examples to understand where you got your crazy fancy idea that China should relinquish territory based on an "international tribunal." Were there examples? I want to understand your "thinking."

But like I said, it cannot outweigh the examples and evidence of countries going against it, backing my stance. There is no logic at all that all you need is an example of something happening in world history for all the multitudes of examples against it to be overturned, is there?

Now come on, where are those "examples"? That you are so hesitant to provide them leads me to think that they don't really parallel this situation at all but instead may have some vague semblance only, and they would easily be determined to be irrelevant on closer examination.

But now that you mention it, my original argument here was that there is absolutely no reason that someone else claiming your territory somehow reduces your right to build on them. Yes, that's how everything started, because by some confusion in your mind, you said that China announcing that it has the right to build on its own sovereign territory was somehow like... Nazi... Germany? LOL Simply because another country had made a claim on it. And there's just simply no logic and no law that would support that view.

 

[broadsword]

Your whole argument is predicated on two wrongs make a right? Are you prepared to accept that China should renounce its claims if I am able tp provide examples? I can provide examples. The question is whether you are prepared to step up to it.

Obviously, you don't agree with that position. But do you agree that it applies to all countries?

 

[Gatekeeper]

You have China confused with the US. It is because your government speaks 10 lies and half a truth that you think other governments do too. You see, the Chinese said it is within our sovereign right to build on our territory; the author translated that to disputed territory. For another country to dispute it means nothing to the rights of its owner, which is China. What China said makes perfect sense to me. We can dispute Hawaii and Guam all day and all night till the end of time but it doesn't doesn't affect America's rights to build on them, does it?

The irony of your post is ineffable, with new Reich Bannon in American politics and America having invaded more countries and killed more innocent civilians in recent history than the rest of the world combined. I wouldn't even say you're throwing stones from a glass house; it's more like a house of playing cards at best.

And when the mods come in and say "Keep off the politics" and you give it a "like," remember you started it.

Why bother, he's lost all touch to reality, which is why I don't even botherto reply to him after he asked me for proof that western countries don't request their telecom companies to provide infomation on national security ground. Yet, two posters have posted conclusive proofthey do. It only goes to show he reads what he want to. With his high and mighty law and order, checks and balances yawn!

 

[manqiangrexue]

Why bother, he's lost all touch to reality, which is why I don't even botherto reply to him after he asked me for proof that western countries don't request their telecom companies to provide infomation on national security ground. Yet, two posters have posted conclusive proofthey do. It only goes to show he reads what he want to. With his high and mighty law and order, checks and balances yawn!

https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/chinas-scs-strategy-thread.t3118/page-558#post-556332

 

[Gatekeeper]

https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/chinas-scs-strategy-thread.t3118/page-558#post-556332

OMG! Sorry, I didn't even bothered to read the rest as I've got to leave for a meeting. From what you link, it's pretty obvious. He lives in his own cocoon world,

Please have mercy on him, don't embarrased him too much. I'll catch the rest when I get back. This could be entertaining!

 

[manqiangrexue]

OMG! Sorry, I didn't even bothered to read the rest as I've got to leave for a meeting. From what you link, it's pretty obvious. He lives in his own cocoon world,

Please have mercy on him, don't embarrased him too much. I'll catch the rest when I get back. This could be entertaining!

I am only the catalyst. His embarrassment is self-inflicted.

I'm not sure there will be anymore for you to catch. I asked him to produce even 1 example of something that there are basically unlimited numbers of counter-examples against and he asked me whether I'd concede the debate to him if he found one. I told him, no, it's not the "make 1 shot against me in a 21 game and you win" kind of deal so he left. LOL I didn't think he had an example anyway and he still hasn't given it, probably because it's so bogus, it'd get torn up like a chicken carcass in a piranha pool the second he mentioned it.