3/02/2016

PROOF OF CHINA’S SOVEREIGNTY OVER THE ISLES & REEFS OF THE SOUTH CHINA SEA by Dan Yong


Part 1: PROOF OF CHINA’S SOVEREIGNTY OVER THE ISLES & REEFS OF THE SOUTH CHINA SEA
==========================

1. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and the Northern Island

a) China Sea Pilot compiled and printed by the Hydrography Department of the Royal Navy of the United Kingdom in 1912 has accounts of the activities of the Chinese people on the Nansha Islands in a number of places.

b) The Far Eastern Economic Review (Hong Kong) carried an article on Dec. 31 of 1973 which quotes the British High Commissioner to Singapore as having said in 1970: "Spratly Island (Nanwei Island in Chinese) was a Chinese dependency, part of Kwangtung Province… and was returned to China after the war. We can not find any indication of its having been acquired by any other country and so can only conclude it is still held by communist China."

2. France

a) Le Monde Colonial Illustre mentioned the Nansha Islands in its September 1933 issue. According to that issue, when a French gunboat named Malicieuse surveyed the Nanwei Island of the Nansha Islands in 1930, they saw three Chinese on the island and when France invaded nine of the Nansha Islands by force in April 1933, they found all the people on the islands were Chinese, with 7 Chinese on the Nanzi Reef, 5 on the Zhongye Island, 4 on the Nanwei Island, thatched houses, water wells and holy statues left by Chinese on the Nanyue Island and a signboard with Chinese characters marking a grain storage on the Taiping Island.

b) Atlas International Larousse published in 1965 in France marks the Xisha, Nansha and Dongsha Islands by their Chinese names and gives clear indication of their ownership as China in brackets.

3) Japan

a) Yearbook of New China published in Japan in 1966 describes the coastline of China as 11 thousand kilometers long from Liaodong Peninsula in the north to the Nansha Islands in the south, or 20 thousand kilometers if including the coastlines of all the islands along its coast;

b) Yearbook of the World published in Japan in 1972 says that Chinese territory includes not only the mainland, but also Hainan Island, Taiwan, Penghu Islands as well as the Dongsha, Xisha, Zhongsha and Nansha Islands on the South China Sea.

4. The United States

a) Columbia Lippincott World Toponymic Dictionary published in the United States in 1961 states that the Nansha Islands on the South China Sea are part of Guangdong Province and belong to China.

b) The Worldmark Encyclopaedia of the Nations published in the United States in 1963 says that the islands of the People's Republic extend southward to include those isles and coral reefs on the South China Sea at the north latitude 4°.

c) World Administrative Divisions Encyclopaedia published in 1971 says that the People's Republic has a number of archipelagoes, including Hainan Island near the South China Sea, which is the largest, and a few others on the South China Sea extending to as far as the north latitude 4°, such as the Dongsha, Xisha, Zhongsha and Nansha Islands.

5. Viet Nam

a) Vice Foreign Minister Dung Van Khiem of the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam received Mr. Li Zhimin, charge d'affaires ad interim of the Chinese Embassy in Viet Nam and told him that "according to Vietnamese data, the Xisha and Nansha Islands are historically part of Chinese territory." Mr. Le Doc, Acting Director of the Asian Department of the Vietnamese Foreign Ministry, who was present then, added that "judging from history, these islands were already part of China at the time of the Song Dynasty."

b) Nhan Dan of Viet Nam reported in great detail on September 6, 1958 the Chinese Government's Declaration of September 4, 1958 that the breadth of the territorial sea of the People's Republic of China should be 12 nautical miles and that this provision should apply to all territories of the People's Republic of China, including all islands on the South China Sea. On September 14 the same year, Premier Pham Van Dong of the Vietnamese Government solemnly stated in his note to Premier Zhou Enlai that Viet Nam "recognizes and supports the Declaration of the Government of the People's Republic of China on China's territorial sea."

c) It is stated in the lesson The People's Republic of China of a standard Vietnamese school textbook on geography published in 1974 that the islands from the Nansha and Xisha Islands to Hainan Island and Taiwan constitute a great wall for the defense of the mainland of China.

B. The maps printed by other countries in the world that mark the islands on the South China Sea as part of Chinese territory include:

1. The Welt-Atlas published by the Federal Republic of Germany in 1954, 1961 and 1970 respectively;

2. World Atlas published by the Soviet Union in 1954 and 1967 respectively;

3. World Atlas published by Romania in 1957;

4. Oxford Australian Atlas and Philips Record Atlas published by Britain in 1957 and Encyclopaedia Britannica World Atlas published by Britain in 1958;

5. World Atlas drawn and printed by the mapping unit of the Headquarters of the General Staff of the People's Army of Viet Nam in 1960;

6. Haack Welt Atlas published by German Democratic in 1968;

7. Daily Telegraph World Atlas published by Britain in 1968;

8. Atlas International Larousse published by France in 1968 and 1969 respectively;

9. World Map Ordinary published by the Institut Geographique National (IGN) of France in 1968;

10. World Atlas published by the Surveying and Mapping Bureau of the Prime Minister's Office of Viet Nam in 1972; and

11. China Atlas published by Neibonsya of Japan in 1973.

C. China's sovereignty over the Nansha Islands is recognized in numerous international conferences.

1. The 1951 San Francisco Conference on Peace Treaty called on Japan to give up the Xisha and Nansha Islands. Andrei Gromyko, Head of the Delegation of the Soviet Union to the Conference, pointed out in his statement that the Xisha and Nansha Islands were an inalienable part of Chinese territory. It is true that the San Francisco Peace Treaty failed to unambiguously ask Japan to restore the Xisha and Nansha Islands to China. But the Xisha, Nansha, Dongsha and Zhongsha Islands that Japan was asked to abandun by the Peace Agreement of San Francisco Conference were all clearly marked as Chinese territory in the fifteenth map A Map of Southeast Asia of the Standard World Atlas published by Japan in 1952, the second year after the peace conference in San Francisco, which was recommended by the then Japanese Foreign Minister Katsuo Okazaki in his own handwriting.

2. The International Civil Aviation Organization held its first conference on Asia-Pacific regional aviation in Manila of the Philippines on 27 October 1955. Sixteen countries or regions were represented at the conference, including South Viet Nam and the Taiwan authorities, apart from Australia, Canada, Chile, Dominica, Japan, the Laos, the Republic of Korea, the Philippines, Thailand, the United Kingdom, the United States, New Zealand and France. The Chief Representative of the Philippines served as Chairman of the conference and the Chief Representative of France its first Vice Chairman. It was agreed at the conference that the Dongsha, Xisha and Nansha Islands on the South China Sea were located at the communication hub of the Pacific and therefore the meteorological reports of these islands were vital to world civil aviation service. In this context, the conference adopted Resolution No. 24, asking China's Taiwan authorities to improve meteorological observation on the Nansha Islands, four times a day. When this resolution was put for voting, all the representatives, including those of the Philippines and the South Viet Nam, were for it. 

No representative at the conference made any objection to or reservation about it.

 

Research and posted by Dan Yong

 

What is important to the above factual articles is whether they are truths or fabrications. Can anyone prove that they are false by quoting factual evidence to back up his claims? Why are the Americans and the western media refusing to acknowledge these facts and events? Why are the Americans and the west lying and not wanting to tell these truths?

55 comments:

Anonymous said...

PROOF OF CHINA’S SOVEREIGNTY OVER THE ISLES & REEFS OF THE SOUTH CHINA SEA
---------------------------------------
We are saved.
Proof at last.
China will flourish for the next 10,000 years.
All overseas Chinese people will return back to China because they feel safer now.
And the Chinese Emperor will look after the Chinese citizens and not treat them as digits or slaves of the Chinese empire.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76RrdwElnTU

Anonymous said...

Apologie to redbean
-----------------
Sorry for the heavy sarcasm which was totally uncalled for (@ March 02, 2016 9:53 am)
I just have a problem trusting Chinese Emperors.
They are all guilty until proven innocent in my eyes.
5,000 years of history (of abusing and bullying Chinese citizens) to support my prejudice.

Ⓜatilah $ingapura⚠️ said...

@ RB:

>> Why are the Americans and the western media refusing to acknowledge these facts and events? <<

These aren't "facts". They are merely OPINIONS, to be sure learned opinions, but still opinions.

>> Why are the Americans and the west lying and not wanting to tell these truths? <<

Because they know the fundamental difference between facts and opinion. Opinion is when people tell you something is so. Just because people say something is so doesn't make it TRUE, nor does it make what they say FACTUAL.

The is issue is not China sovereignty. The issue is freedom of navigation.

Anonymous said...

Fact is fact. Opinion is opinion. If one cannot differentiate facts from opinion, then I feel so sorry for him.
Are below facts or opinions?
b) Atlas International Larousse published in 1965 in France marks the Xisha, Nansha and Dongsha Islands by their Chinese names and gives clear indication of their ownership as China in brackets.

3) Japan

a) Yearbook of New China published in Japan in 1966 describes the coastline of China as 11 thousand kilometers long from Liaodong Peninsula in the north to the Nansha Islands in the south, or 20 thousand kilometers if including the coastlines of all the islands along its coast;

b) Yearbook of the World published in Japan in 1972 says that Chinese territory includes not only the mainland, but also Hainan Island, Taiwan, Penghu Islands as well as the Dongsha, Xisha, Zhongsha and Nansha Islands on the South China Sea.

4. The United States

a) Columbia Lippincott World Toponymic Dictionary published in the United States in 1961 states that the Nansha Islands on the South China Sea are part of Guangdong Province and belong to China.

b) The Worldmark Encyclopaedia of the Nations published in the United States in 1963 says that the islands of the People's Republic extend southward to include those isles and coral reefs on the South China Sea at the north latitude 4°.

c) World Administrative Divisions Encyclopaedia published in 1971 says that the People's Republic has a number of archipelagoes, including Hainan Island near the South China Sea, which is the largest, and a few others on the South China Sea extending to as far as the north latitude 4°, such as the Dongsha, Xisha, Zhongsha and Nansha Islands.

5. Viet Nam

a) Vice Foreign Minister Dung Van Khiem of the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam received Mr. Li Zhimin, charge d'affaires ad interim of the Chinese Embassy in Viet Nam and told him that "according to Vietnamese data, the Xisha and Nansha Islands are historically part of Chinese territory."

Or are they opinions of publishers who simply published them without checking their validity?

Anonymous said...

Hahaha China knows it doesn't have 100% concrete proof of ownership of islands, that's why it's only slowly taking them back 1 at a time by building army, airforce and navy bases on the largest and nearest islands first. Otherwise China would have long time ago sailed 1,000 warships including LSTs containing 200,000 troops and 10,000 tanks & armoured carriers to retake all the islands at 1 go.

Just like for places where there is 100% concrete proof of China ownership e.g. HK or Macau. If other countries try to say these 2 cities are theirs and plant their flags & some troops there, the Chinese response will be absolute. The reason why the Chinese response to S China Sea and E China Sea is NOT absolute is becoz they themselves don't have 100% concrete proof.

Anonymous said...

The Americans, Australians and New Zealanders have 100% proof that they owned the continents and islands?

Anonymous said...

Wah, if so many nations recognise China's sovereign right then just go to International Court sure win. Why China don't do that? Why create so much tension by building all the military stuff there? Makes you wonder about if those "facts" are truly facts or just some useless opinions that carry no weight.

Veritas said...

The reason is international court is controlled by white man.

And building Islands will erode all other claimate legitimacy in the long run, by creating facts on ground.

Also man made Island is a good base for terresterial radar, area denial missle, military base and other installations.

Right now if China wills it, USA carrier group will be sink.

Veritas said...

Also UK say she own falkland, diego gracia. France say she own Tahiti, French polynesia..etc. USA say she own Hawaii and Guam...etc.

Anonymous said...

Sweden's Migration "Industry" Vs Singapore's Foreign Talents
- any similarities?
------------------------------------
That Sweden is a humanitarian superpower, eager to lead by example, is a myth that needs exposing once and for all. The recent migration wave to Sweden has made some people poor and others very, very rich.

Every day one reads news in Sweden about the winners and the losers in the migration industry.

One of the winners in Sweden's migration industry is ICA Bank.
In November 2015, it invoiced the Swedish Migration Agency $8 million for providing asylum seekers prepaid cards.
For every cash withdrawal, ICA Bank takes a $2 fee, and for every prepaid card activated, it takes $21.
ICA Bank won the contract without any competition; its contract with the Migration Agency extends to March 2017.

Does this sound familiar?

See below for the entire article.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-01/swedens-migration-industry

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Wah, if so many nations recognise China's sovereign right then just go to International Court sure win. Why China don't do that? Why create so much tension by building all the military stuff there? Makes you wonder about if those "facts" are truly facts or just some useless opinions that carry no weight.
March 02, 2016 10:54 am

Would you go to court if someone wants to claim your wife?

Ⓜatilah $ingapura⚠️ said...

@ mathematically-challenged, 1051:

>> The Americans, Australians and New Zealanders have 100% proof that they owned the continents and islands? <<

You need to do remedial course in math. There is no such thing as 100% "proof" of things in the natural world. 100% proof exists primarily in the realm of mathematics itself, where the answer is either right or incorrect.

New Zealanders signed a treaty (Treaty of Waitungi) with the locals (Maori tribal chiefs) . The Americans and Australians claimed their lands by CONQUERING the local indigenous population and seizing the land "in the name of the King" (of England)

Back then you could do shit like this if you arrived on foreign shores, heavily armed and with military forces in "kilat" uniforms. Any shit form the locals, just massacre them and take their land. It must have been "fun times". Unfortunately you can't do this stuff any more because humanity has "progressed" and introduced the idea of "human rights"---which are also NOT FACTS, just OPINIONS, which (unfortunately) are cast into LAW, so now we are all OBLIGATED to uphold this "rights" as something so sacred. (they are not. They are just "ideas")

Ⓜatilah $ingapura⚠️ said...

P.S. I'm neither a fan of "human rights" nor "pure/ direct democracy".

Anonymous said...

Would I go to court if someone wants to claim my wife? What for? I have the marriage cert, not he. For China, what dickuments, I mean documents they have to show? Only hearsay from people?

The test is that TODAY, which country (other than China itself) recognises Spratly is China's?

China is a rogue nation. It is bulldozing. But American is also a rogue. So now we have a rogue country being challenged by another rogue country.

I shudder to think that among Sinkies, we have those who will fight for China instead of worrying about Singapore's vulnerable position if the two rogue nations fight.

Hermit said...

When two jumbos fight, the grass suffers.

Ⓜatilah $ingapura⚠️ said...

@1208:

>> China is a rogue nation. It is bulldozing. But American is also a rogue. So now we have a rogue country being challenged by another rogue country. <<

Exactly. It is a dynamic balance. This is THE status quo, and it is preferred to the alternative:

US and China become close allies, and military buddies---in that world, everyone will kena terok terbokok.

Think of two rogue bull elephants on a rampage. The whole jungle suffers.

Ⓜatilah $ingapura⚠️ said...

Taking the aforementioned idea further:

Imagine a world where the US, China and Russia become strong allies. Who would be the FIRST to get royally screwed BY SUCH AN ALLIANCE? 👮

The oil sheiks and their corrupt governments in the Middle East will be the first, and the immans and mullahs the second, as none of the "big powers" particularly like Islam, and definitely hate to the 💀 death all Islamofacists. 3rd on the list is the African continent---they will experience colonialism and imperialism like never before. 💀

For the rest of the world, kiss your sovereignty goodbye. Your govt better be able to suck 3 dicks, or you will be conquered and occupied. 😂

Anonymous said...

I have lived long enough to hear the same old story how the Arabs and their oil will dry up for the last half century. But time and time again, through the 70s, through the 80s and 90s and right up to the 21st Century, somehow, the Ayrabs are able to screw the white man with their oil.

You see, extracting oil in the Ayrab desert is simple. Punch a hole and the oil flows. Distribution? No problem. Plenty seafront. Cost of extraction of oil? Peanuts.

Compare that to the oil rich American states. The oil is distributed all over the place and low in pressure. To extract the same amount of oil as those Ayrabs, you need hundreds of oil wells for every one that exists in the Ayrab desert. Seafront? What seafront? Cost of extraction? A bomb. Not much any better for deep sea oil rigging.

It is the white man who needs the oil price to be high so that their cost of extraction can be covered. If white man too niow, Ayrab just open the taps (like in so many times the last 50 yrs) and the cost of extraction for the white man will be more than the oil revenue they can get. Then when white man close their oil fields to cut loss, the Ayrab tighten their taps and price goes up again - which entice white man to open and look for new oil fields, which again will see oil price drop yet again, if white man gets to niow once more.

This ding dong cycle has been going on for half a century as far as I can remember. The up down price of oil is killing the white man's $$$. The only thing that is supporting the US dollar is the oil is traded in US$. If not you can kiss the American economy goodbye.

So all you anti-Ayrabs out there, who are hoping for the demise of the Ayrab control oil, better know that for the last half century, it is the white man backside that is screwed. Because of this, the white man has been for the last few decades trying ways to control the Ayrab states through proxy wars and clandestine type mission, creating Alqaida, ISIS, ISIL, to give excuse to invade those countries.

Anonymous said...

@ March 02, 2016 1:13 pm

You are a typical daft Sinkie.
You can see that the white man is being screwed over the price of oil.

Do you think Sinkies are also being screwed over the price of gasoline?
Crude prices at record low levels.
But price of Singapore gasoline remains unchanged.

arse hole kena gang raped until bleeding.
But still majority of you are unaware.
Do you think you are a bunch of well trained PAP dogs?

Anonymous said...

To the pantat hole @ 1.32, i am telling mati that his anti-Ayrab mindset hoping for the Ayrab demise is not going to happen because it didn't for the last 50 years. How come your pantat hole suddenly talk about Sinkie, as if I support the PAPigs? Please clean your pantat hole after your shit because if you don't, that shit will travel up back to your mouth and you will spew shit like what you just did.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Two of you misreading each other's intent.

Anonymous said...

The question is whether PAP think's Singapore is better off as a China dog or US dog??? Right now, from PAP's actions it appears that they lean more towards being a US dog. Although PAP's mouth always say we are nobody's dog. Zhui kong lampar song only. Maybe in 5 years time, PAP will change mind and make Singapore to lean more towards being China dog. But ordinary Sinkies don't give a fuck lah. They just want to be happy dogs with free bones and plenty of bitches to fuck can liao.

Anonymous said...

Research..... Please lah! Do you understand what is research.....

I have already said that these "facts" is copied wholesale @http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/topics_665678/3754_666060/t19232.shtml
which is the official website of China Foreign Ministry.

So many people already voice out these are "opinions" and not facts.

Let us analyse these "facts" and do some common sense thinking....

1) These maps/atlas mentioned were all established in the 1900s onwards. Spratly islands history dates back longer than this. So if someone else produce a map even earlier, can i say these islands belong to that country?

2) This is the most important information (in my opinion) because it is like a UN meeting where so many countries are present. During the 1951 San Francisco conference on Peace treaty (after WWII) where allies countries met. The Soviets brought out the issues of spratly. Did the countries involved decide that the spratly islands belong to anyone (Jap had to surrender these islands as it lost the war) or because China reps from both side were absent (due to civil war). Without additional information, I can only conclude (guess) that no countries know what to do and leave it aside as such that it does not agree nor disagree. In short, no countries as far as 1951 is concerned officially recognized that spratly islands belong to anyone.

3) Can you explain to us why Hainan is called Hainan?

4) Did China disclosed information on the maps that itself have published in 1760, 1784, 1866 and 1897? Please note "Ancient" China did have powerful navies.....

I have not even come to the part of UNCLOS......yet where China is a signatory country.

Anonymous said...

OK, Ok, you very clever, you are right.

Anonymous said...

It is you who don't understand research. You put up a bias self-serving page from a website of an interested party (China) claiming such and such, then call it facts? So what if those maps cite such and such. Are those maps the recognised authority to claim sovereignty?

The issue is the FACT that NO country, other than China itself, recognises China's claim. So citing all those “facts”, which are nothing more than opinions (yes, opinions because they are just publications of the opinions of the publisher and not recognised authority), is like saying people say “I am gung ho therefore I am gung ho”. But when challenged to a fight, run away.

So confident meh? Then go International Court sure win lor! No need to create tension and bulldoze mah.

b said...

Solution: Just destroy them and no one can fight over them. Maybe they should combine energy to conquer other planets rather than waste their energy fighting over small islands.

Anonymous said...

@ Anon 4:28pm

Maybe it did not occur to you that others are not clever but just normal. Whereas in your case, it could just be retarded or stupidity.....

See there are always different perceptions depending on where you stand.

Anonymous said...

For a man with no nationality. What he has is only citizenship and or resident status, no motherland to talk about. He also only believes in Scientific Facts, all other issues are subjective to him.
He believes that man is just another ape. He MAYBE right as he thinks he is right.
Let's give it to him.
Cheers.

Anonymous said...

@ Anon 4:33pm

I apologize for not specific. My comments were directed at this Dan Yong and RB.
If you notice the writer did mentioned that this article was research and posted by Dan Yong. Not sure what research was done if it was copied wholesale, some more it is copied from China ministry of foreign affairs website which is one of the claimant country.

However i am glad we shared similar thoughts. These exchanges actually started in another article titled Who is "militarising the South China Sea and the world?" ie. http://mysingaporenews.blogspot.sg/2016/02/who-is-militarising-south-china-sea-and.html

You have actually kind of repeated what i said.

In this post, people use the word "opinion" but other people use the word "misleading facts"

Anon 4:12pm

Anonymous said...

@anoy 4:05

You know why our Pappies are now poised to lean towards US. Sending China a clear msg by allowing P8 deployment.

Remember a year or more ago, this China was trying to influence the Thai junta (in fact pump money) to build the kra canal to bypass us. So many years we invested in this "motherland" when we supported it to take off during it initial stage. Now when it is rich, its current generation just do what it wants without discussing.

So what blood ties at the end of the day, everywhere is the same. Everyone for himself.

Ⓜatilah $ingapura⚠️ said...

@ "muddled brain" 141:

>> i am telling mati that his anti-Ayrab mindset <<

Eh, tambi, can you point out where I have been anti Arab?

Just because I call occasionally some of them them "goat fuckers" 🐐, "sand niggers" and 👳 "rag heads" doesn't mean I'm anti-Arab.

May a camel🐫 shit into your open mouth. Salaam brother...

P.S.: I don't give a shit about what happens in the Middle East. They can all go fuck themselves, for all I care. (Compassion, not my strongest suite)

Anonymous said...

Clever people, read what Vivian said to Wang Yi in Beijing in the media?
Singapore and China very good friends and more joint projects coming up.

And so blind, cannot see 'Research and posted by Dan Yong'?

Uh ah, one can see, one cannot.

Anonymous said...

Eh mati, just because you have posted against black Africans b4 and anti-Ayrab now does not make you non-anti Ayrab. It means you are anti-black AND anti-Ayrab. Got that? Looks like try hard as you may, you have indeed swallowed that camel shit after all. Aren't you spewing that same shit from your mouth now? Piss be with you!

Anonymous said...

You believe what Vivian says?

You singaporean? Last time he was in charge of the mosquitoes.

He was never in charge of finance but in charge of budget overrun YOG project . Both are foreign ministers and talk cock only. Which is what foreign affairs do...

Our "boss" went to maryland happy land to meet the tua kee. Now that is top level "sucking".

This Wang Yi.... You should see how he shake hands with Angmo when he went to US during the korea issue/South China Sea issue sensitive times to meet kerry. Wonder if China is strong, why bother to go US? Maybe it is all acting.

Ⓜatilah $ingapura⚠️ said...

@ 1041:

Hey asshole, I can be anti anything lah. I don't give a shit about what you think about me, so do your worst.

Hope your kids get cancer!🌼 Have a nice day...anyway. 😜

Anonymous said...

Hey mati! Of course you can be anything. A camel shit swallower is anything too! You are one, and you are anything! :)

So if you dun give an asshole shit what I think of you, why did you come back here to let out more camel shit from your mouth? ;)

Your tirade and your cusses betray that you DO care what I think of you, camel shit swallower!

See you around and happy cleaning up more camel shit! LOL

Anonymous said...

you have a marriage certificate as proof.

yet, you refuse to accept China certificate as proof ( Map)

Ignorance is the biggest problem in the world.

Anonymous said...

Thai canal is a good for future of Singapore.

Singaporean people would been discourage from non constructive politicking because the future is very bleak.

Singaporean would continue to vote for Competent govt to lead them. Singaporean would not take their luxury for granted as they do now.

Singaporean would been inspired to work harder and create more miracle by transforming themselves into "innovative nation"

The success of Singapore are based on this notion.

Singaporean should support the construction of Thai canal.
Singaporean would seized those opportunity to get max benefit from Thai canal

Thai canal would completely transform the region. Only Singapore are capable enough to adapt to such new changes.

Anonymous said...

What China certificate of proof? China had to use what OTHER people say. You call that real cert or fake cert? Please lah.

Look at how so many Sinkies here on this pro-China site carry China's balls. If got war you will wonder if these traitors will betray Singapore to support China.

Anonymous said...

@ Veritas

Perhaps you are right, international court is controlled by white man. But UN, WTO, WHO...etc (list goes on) also controlled by White man. So China should quit as well. Why double standards?
Also 60% of China GDP is from exports where probably alot of goods goes to the white man. Close all the ports then and denied the western nations of all china made goods.

You think this is still in the old days where you can "build" islands to claim legitimacy. wake up lah..... Those days are gone.

There are strict guidelines on man made island in accordance to UNCLOS which has jurisdiction. Putting this aside. Man made Island is a good base for terresterial radar, area denial missle, military base and other installations. This is the most dumb idea, anybody would know such man made island is easy to capture and difficult to defend. Do you even know how far these islands are away from mainland, how to resupply fuel, water, food, ammunition during war time.

US has 11 carrier battle group with approx 990 aircraft, not to mention other weaponary. if you sink 1 group, what do you think will happen next?


Anonymous said...

The Anon Expurt here who seems to know all the International Laws in Sovereignty and Territory may like to cease his/her bags on the Geopolitical Conflicts and Relationship s.
In the First Place, he/she is an unknown or anon.
Even if he/she puts his/her identity here, no one is going to recognize his/her interpretation of whatever law he /she defines.
If readers here do not accept those international treaty and agreement; who is going to believe in a nagging anon here?

Please do not waste your time.
Think matilah is patronising to entertain himself with the Exchanges. You evil devil ms.

Anonymous said...

Matilah cheeky and horny
cumming to get fus only.

Anonymous said...

China certificate (Map) is equivalent to your land title.

Why would Sinkie go to war with China?

UN, WTO, WHO are controlled by international community.
International court are controlled by White man.

They reject hypocrisy of White man - hijacking the international law.
Why should they reject trade with white man when it is beneficial for both sides?

Do you got a brain?

Legitimacy exist first before island been built. Learn your law .

You cant built a house on someone else land.
If you can build a house , you must first owned the land.
China owned the land ( legitimacy) , China build those island ( reclamation)

Did US reclamation of island comply with UNCLOS guidelines?

Fortunately, you are only an armchair general. You know nothing about tactic and warfare. Your ignorance is very baffling.

Why should US feel so paranoid over China militarization of the islands if those island is so useless?

Do you really expect that US are going to mobilize all aircraft carriers to attack China?

Please use your brains.







Anonymous said...

Veritas, please post more your insightful perspective on global affairs.

I miss them!!!



Anonymous said...

Who cares? This is a blog...you cant be serious....

Anyone can pop in to comment legally if he wants....unless the blog owner decides otherwise.
Who knows the blog owner will be so happy instead as it boost ....

Nobody is seeking anybody approval. Whether you got a fictitious name or anon poster.... it is all the same....nobody will be interested to CSI to find out who is who.

You cannot stop someone from wasting his time (his time mah) just because you cannot convince him or her. If it is 技不如人,Perhaps you should go back to school and study more in order to gain more knowledge.

Anonymous said...

Hello US was not a signatory country with UNCLOS.....

Hello You cannot reclaim from a reef. island is different. Check 1st before you talk and what others claimant country is claiming.

Hello, only got 5 UN permanent member - 4 members are white man..... only china - asian......what talking you? I let you check on the other 2 on who are the chairman... hahahah..... UN, WHO, WTO are international community..... This i give you credit.... very creative.....

Wah lau.... Spanish, French, British also all have maps dating back at least 100 year or more before China maps that dispute China claims otherwise. Map or time race, huh? so many map? which is real or accredited????????

Whether China wants to reject trade with white man is up to china. One thing for sure, trade deficit is so high and getting higher. Things will change... it already started. Moody just did something to reflect that as China reserves surprisingly drops last year.

Sinkie go to war with China.... maybe we dun need to go to china to fight them... we only choke the straits..... dun know this consider war or not?

Anonymous said...

No worries lah, no need to become general to know all this. Just read more and travel more. I am not sure you are referring to our Singapore Generals or what?

US is not paranoid about china militarization of south china sea islands. Of course there is oil and gas underneath but more importantly it is about containing them within the 1st island chain. I believe there is a even more sinister plot behind this.... Otherwise there is no need to get India, taiwan, Japan, SK, Asean, even bloody Aussies....to surround it.... Russia will not yield so they will try to destabilize it as now Russia is a country that will have to go through elections. Shooting down of russian SU24 by turkey F16, getting russia suck into syria when oil price is down......sigh...

If one US carrier group is sunk, 5000 ++ US sailors are gone. What do you expect the kind of response it will give? During 1st Iraq war, it gather 5 carrier battle groups to provide support. Just to also let you know 11 US carrier battle groups are operational groups. There are more decommission convectional aircraft carriers (not to mention other warships) being mothballed in US ports. You think it is for fun?

To give credit, UN secretary general Anand and this Bang kee mun (whatever) are non white man. But it seems like nobody listen to them.... I believe the white man are using them as puppet....

Anonymous said...

annonymous 12.08

are you so stupid? Everyone know that Spain, France , British are foreign invader in the Asian region. They only come to Asia in the late 17th century.

If they really owned a map to claim Europe, nobody would dispute that claims.

Imagine China or Russia owned a map to claim Europe, does it make any sense to you?


Please use your brains to think first.

China are using the map 1947 ,not so called "outdated map" centuries ago.

Philippine are using Spain map - 18th century ago.

Dont twisting the real fact. We are talking about UN ( whole community) . You try to change the subject matter to UN security council ( part of UN )

Please use your brains.

Can UN security council (one of those department) exist before UN ( whole company)

Why would Sinkie choke the strait against China on behalf of the White man?

Sinkie love white man so much?

Sinkie love to commit suicide by choking their own trade line ?

Trade deficit is getting higher? learn some economic.

of course, you can reclaim from the reef.

The law dont prohibit such acts.











Anonymous said...

The answer is very simple - US wont wage war over South China Sea.
The risk is too high.
US is only a paper tiger.
US cant defeat Taliban.
Why dont you compare the strength of Taliban vs US military?



Anonymous said...

When china deploy defensive weapon on their island,

US make the most noises.

US is not one of claimant to those dispute.

It had nothing to do with oil and gas.

Russia and African have abundant natural resources. Yet,they remain so poor. Why?

Singapore have limited natural resources. Yet, they are so rich. Why?

Singapore use their brains to think.



Anonymous said...

Aiyoh, Precisely like what you say on these spanish, chinese, philipine map or whatsoever. Outdated, inaccurate, infactual..... China claims its one is correct....other says he is correct... Mind you some of these european maps contain native names of the islands. 1951 San Francisco Conference already have so many countries not deciding anything when Soviets brought out the subject. What i think is not of no effect. What the claimant countries thinks or superpower thinks that is essential.
.... who will then decide who has legitimacy? through showing of muscles in 2016???

To me, UN is controlled by white man. Thanks...You got the right word... UN security council will play a role in this if war breaks out. Why in denial when even our country Singapore (and like all other smaller countries) will suck up to these masters...whether it is yellow or white. There is no justice lah....world is never fair. Our boss just suck and came back...

Whether Sinkie will choke the strait against China on behalf of the White man. Perhaps i was not specific. Initially i thought of this even when US carrier is able to dock in changi waters. I mean what the hack these carriers are meant for deep water operations maybe it is just a logistic and transit point. Then they allowed US littoral combat ships suitable for shallow operations to deploy here, i mean can fight the type 052, 54, 56 series chinese destroyers meh?. Why do they need that for? Otherwise why China wants to build the kra canal? You have no idea how this action of sg pisses off the public in China not to mention the China govt. Some more further approve deploy of P8. You think China stupid. Most likely they will smile to vivian and then give middle finger behind the back.

You study UNCLOS 1st before we talk further.... I repeated again, again and again liao.....i also wonder why US so smart that it did not signed. You can also check who is representing the case for philippines.

Like someone who mentioned here, US is not a claimant country. Why does it want to get involved and start all this moving to Asia thing? you ever think of that? What is it that it wants and is making China fall for it all in a legitimate means ---- In the name Freedom of Navigation...like you very creative? You string up all the events happening together....and think again. Last time they are interested in Middle East due to oil supply issue. Now US dun give a shit about middle east anymore as itself can even export shale oil/gas.

China reserves drop and stock market is volatile... i wonder where the money all gone to?
The poor china man who is in charge of stock exchange authority takes the blame.... You think it is so simple. Taiwan DPP won the election and we still do not know who is the idiot behind Wang An's plot? HK is another example.........Maybe it is coincidence. sigh...This coming May...

Anonymous said...

Do you think US is interested in the freedom of Navigation, fighting for the rights of these smaller countries, oil/gas (where it has abundance now), talk talk about UNCLOS (where itself is not a signatory country)? Why does it want to contain China especially with regards to the 1st island chain? Raising tensions by sending warship and B52 (Vietnam Bird) into the area instead of doing things in a peaceful manner.

Returning back to Asia means a lot more than what it sounds especially in the next 5 years or more or so?

1) All these have to do with US Foreign policy that existed since day 01. All conflicts have to be outside of US, only Osama and Japan (technically) broke this rule. Was American lifestyle being affected during the Vietnam and korea wars. Go and do some real research. On the contrary China lifestyle were severely affected then.

2) In the eyes of International world, protray China as a big bully in the region with or without UN involvement.

3) Alienate China from its "allies". Last time still got NK, Vietnam, cuba, maybe Soviets as allies.... now only got pakistan, NK (kanna force out), Vietnam (now change gun direction), Russians...(2 head snake nabei go and sell similar and deadier weapons to vietnam). Pakistan even having FC-1 fighter still want to buy more F16.....Cuba (u know what happen).

3) Using proxies to spark more and direct tensions with China while it is watching behind and step out as and when like a big brother to upheld so called justice.

4) Using so call international laws (so as to act legitimately) to say what this China is doing is wrong, wrong and more wrong.

5) Using TPP (or whatever) to create new allies or own gang and set up its own terms and alliance and no more such thing as free trade.

Doing all the above things is to make China and the region seems to be in danger and thus seem less attractive for investment in the hope of sucking the money away. You should be aware what is happening to US now (it is in debts ----sibei jialut amount).

6) This is the most insulting part, they are doing all these and these "smaller" countries are so happy to buy arms from them. Russia also happily selling in order to earn some currency. Only China did not gain anything or much, it was so near to selling subs to Thailand but it was aborted last min.

7) If all else fail, the big stick is ready... as they know their stick is def bigger.

Isnt this no different to the so called 八国联军侵略中国 or the Opium war?Soup colour is different but ingredient and outcome still the same?

Do you get it? dumb dumb...no brainer (you convince now you or the researcher Dan Yong are the one that got no brain).... Right now, they are in Phase - Point 2 and you all still so happy that oh China should act tough....against all these smaller countries. The other party is so happy that someone is biting the bait. How i wish Mr Deng is still around.

Anonymous said...

Choking Straits of Malacca? Isthmus of Kra Canal? The canal is only good to China to run high speed train to Singapore. Its value of a canal is long gone useless. China can import goods direct from Europe by high speed train, nearer, cheaper and faster. It can import goods from Africa through ports in Pakistan and Myanmar. What is the use of cutting the Kra canal?

Want to choke Malacca Straits, go and choke lah. The countries that would suffered would be Asean states like Vietnam, Ppines and those east of the straits.

Anonymous said...

It can import goods from Africa through ports in Pakistan and Myanmar. What is the use of cutting the Kra canal?

You underestimate the US, today these countries can lean towards China, tomo can change position as these countries need to go through election unlike the China system. Myanmar is a good example. Thailand Junta also seems to be shaky as they also afraid of being punished as traitors when next govt takes over. This is the reality and it has being repeated in history time and time again.

High speed train.... This is even more difficult to predict. It passes through so many countries and you need to ensure these countries do not block the goods when political situation changes. That goes your money into the drain.

What China is trying to do is to be self sufficient even in oil supply, commercial aircraft, military hardware....etc and also build up multiple channels so as not to put all eggs into one basket.

Anonymous said...


@ Anony March 04, 2016 1:01 am

Trade deficit is getting higher? learn some economic.

Its all over the news, the US-China trade deficit is really getting higher.....