Taiwan Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Max Demian said:

Which part of the history that I summarized is mendacious? All I see is an inability to face up to the historical facts so you had to resort to ad-hominem attacks instead.

The only piece of history that you brought up, was the alleged 1992 consensus. Unfortunately for your argument, the DPP has continuously since 1992 denied the existence of such a consensus, and has reiterated that position as early as this year:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

That you believe how a few semi-official representatives were actually representing the whole of ROC in a shadowy meeting and achieved a "consensus", while at the same time the president of ROC Lee Teng-Hui made a firm rebuttal of any consensus being reached, is demonstrating a complete lack of refined and precise understanding of how democracies operate.

Click to expand...

Max Demian said:

Taiwan was never in its history governed by the CCP, nor has the CCP ever held any sovereignty over that territory. A quick review of history shows that the first government on the island was established by the Dutch (who ousted the Spanish from their colony in the north), who were subsequently ejected by Koxinga, whose descendants in turn were defeated and the island annexed by the Qing, who in turn ceded the island to the Japanese, who in turn relinquished their sovereignity of the island in the Treaty of Taipei, wherein "Japan renounced all claim to them [Taiwan and the Penghu Islands] without specifying to what country they were to be surrendered". Since then, ROC has exercised sovereignty over the island.

Click to expand...

Max Demian said:

The USA has been doing a good job deterring PRC's invasion of Taiwan ever since the outbreak of the Korean war and the sailing of the 7th fleet through the Taiwan strait in 1950.

Click to expand...

manqiangrexue said:

That only proves how delusional the DPP is and how untrustworthy a dual-political party democracy can be. I had once said this before: dealing with a dual party democracy is like dealing with someone who has multiple personality disorder. How can the DPP deny that it exists? It was a meeting, a joint statement was made, written down, and signed. There is a 1992 consensus; denying it because they want to worm out of it is like trying to worm out of a commitment to become vegetarian by saying vegetables no longer exist.

There is no question whether it exists; the issue is which side should rule China, although both sides agreed that the mainland and Taiwan are both parts of China.

From wiki:

The 1992 Consensus was the outcome of a November 1992 meeting in

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

between the mainland China-based

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

(ARATS) and the Taiwan-based

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

(SEF). Three months before the meeting, the Taiwan side (on 1 August 1992) published the following statement in respect of its interpretation of the meaning of "One China":

"Both sides of the Taiwan Strait agree that there is only one China. However, the two sides of the Strait have different opinions as to the meaning of 'one China.' To

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, 'one China' means the 'People’s Republic of China (PRC),' with Taiwan to become a '

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

' after

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, on the other hand, considers 'one China' to mean the Republic of China (ROC), founded in 1911 and with de jure sovereignty over all of China. The ROC, however, currently has jurisdiction only over

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. Taiwan is part of China, and the Chinese mainland is part of China as well."

Click to expand...

zgx09t said:

That's a rather obtuse, crass and mendacious statement. 1992 Consensus laid out that both sides of Taiwan strait recognize there is only one "China": both mainland China and Taiwan belong to the same China, though each side can interpret their own presentation of what one China means. UN, including the four other veto powers, recognize PRC as legitimate ruler of China, based on one China principle, which , given the still ongoing Chinese civil war, is to be understood as there may be two governments, but only one China.
Western powers have long meddled in China's internal affairs and still would like to have China weak and divided. Thus, the poisonous words of treason spread far and wide in MSM. Those rather dull minds like the perfect specimen quoted in above preclude the delicate and yet complex historical perspectives, instead falling back on boiler plate cliche thus clearly showing the lack of precise and refined understanding of the matter they foolishly try to comment on.

Click to expand...

Max Demian said:

Has it ever occurred to you @Gatekeeper, @zgx09t that the people living in Taiwan at the end of WW2 saw the KMT as occupiers rather than brethren? Need I remind you that in 1945 ROC occupied Taiwan on behalf of the Allied Powers, as a foreign territory.

Are you familiar with the February the 28th incident? Even Mao at the time called for an independent Taiwan. Sounds funny today, doesn't it?

The historical truth is that the people of Taiwan were denied their right of self-determination (and the US bears responsibility here, as it was the US military government who was the legal overlord of Taiwan at the time of Japanese surrender). But there is still room to rectify this.

Click to expand...