Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

The United China

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 3456>
Poll Question: Will China reunify?
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
12 [60.00%]
8 [40.00%]
You can not vote in this poll

Author
Sino Defender View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 23-Jan-2006
Location: Hong Kong
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 413
  Quote Sino Defender Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: The United China
    Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 20:23
Originally posted by pikeshot1600

Originally posted by azimuth

i have a question

why china wants to expand more? i mean ok there are many chines living outside china but china itself is huge, and the population is huge. why adding more people to govern??

what Taiwan will add to china ?

or its just economy matters?

 

 

I think many of us feel that the Chinese are very pragmatic and reasonable people.  However, I also understand that the Chinese consider all Chinese, wherever they are, and whenever they were born, to be Chinese.  There is a certain sense that the Chinese diaspora is a "part of China."

There are large Chinese populations in Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia, not to mention Taiwan.  It is possible that, in future, China may look on those ethnic Chinese as the Germans did the Germans of Poland and Czechoslovakia - ethnic kin to be "protected."  It could be an emotional attachment, but it could also be only a pretext for controlling strategic areas and economic resources necessary for the PRC (or whatever follows that).

I do not claim expert knowledge, but there seems to be a return to the concept that the "Middle Kingdom" is the center of all; that everything radiates from there and that other cultures are "barbarian" and that there is a rightness to the expansion of superior Chinese-Confucian civilization.

Just an observation.

 

 

the issue of taiwan is completely different. it is not expansion but reunification. national unity is very important to the chinese, and thousands of wars and battles were fought for just that one reason in history.

"Whoever messes with the heavenly middle kingdom, no matter how far s/he escapes, s/he is to be slaughtered"
Back to Top
poirot View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Editorial Staff

Joined: 21-May-2005
Location: Belgium
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1838
  Quote poirot Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 20:52

Originally posted by Leonidas

Ive always liked tawain but ill trade it in for tibet, nei mongol and east turkistan any day

Part of the reason why the PRC is pressing on the Taiwan reunification issue is Tibet and Xinjiang.  If Taiwan breaks away officially, what precedent will it set for Tibet and Xinjiang?

From a strategic point of view, if I were the president of the People's Republic of China, and I had to choose between Tibet and Taiwan, I would pick Tibet.  Of course, Taiwan has its geopolicial advantages, but losing Tibet or Xinjiang officially is ten times worse strategically than seeing Taiwan break away.



Edited by poirot
AAAAAAAAAA
"The crisis of yesterday is the joke of tomorrow.�   ~ HG Wells
           
Back to Top
Sino Defender View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 23-Jan-2006
Location: Hong Kong
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 413
  Quote Sino Defender Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 21:19
Originally posted by poirot

Originally posted by Leonidas

Ive always liked tawain but ill trade it in for tibet, nei mongol and east turkistan any day

Part of the reason why the PRC is pressing on the Taiwan reunification issue is Tibet and Xinjiang.  If Taiwan breaks away officially, what precedent will it set for Tibet and Xinjiang?

From a strategic point of view, if I were the president of the People's Republic of China, and I had to choose between Tibet and Taiwan, I would pick Tibet.  Of course, Taiwan has its geopolicial advantages, but losing Tibet or Xinjiang officially is ten times worse strategically than seeing Taiwan break away.

that's because prc does not control taiwan now and enjoys no strategic advantage from taiwan. taiwan can actually provide prc with the best strategic location to access the resources in the pacific to which tibet and xinjiang cannot compare. tibet serves as a barrier for india, but with modern technology, missiles can easily fly over. so such an advantage is gone. xinjiang is mainly known for its resources and ideal position to export influence to central asia. however, the potential gain from having access to the pacific as well as south china sea is far more than what is attributing to prc by tibet and xinjiang not to mention about the total gdp of taiwan being much larger than tibet and xinjiang combined.

if i had to choose between tibet+xinjiang and taiwan, also known as the unsinkable aircraft carrier by some, i would choose taiwan.



Edited by Sino Defender
"Whoever messes with the heavenly middle kingdom, no matter how far s/he escapes, s/he is to be slaughtered"
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4221
  Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 21:19

Poirot:

I don't think Taiwan has any specific strategic value to China.  The issue seems to be more about building reputation by demonstrations of influence and power where there are no longer strategic interests on the part of former adversaries (Hong Kong - Britain; Taiwan - U.S.) or where the former adversary cannot resist (Influence in Korea - Japan).

Tough talk over Taiwan when the U.S. is not willing to go to war over it, or increasing influence in the two Koreas where Japan can no longer do anything about it and the U.S. is close to leaving, are substantial extensions of Chinese influence "on the cheap."  The reacquisition of Hong Kong was treated almost as a conquest.  Moves into Indochina, Malaya or Indonesia, and meddling in Latin America could have more serious consequences.  Those would affect vital interests of India and the U.S.

Chinese activities in Venezuela might very well provoke opposition from Brazil which is a long way from China.  The new kids are feeling their way, but they need to be careful.

 

Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4221
  Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 21:46

Originally posted by Sino Defender

singapore is dominated by ethnic chinese, but korea and vietnam are not.

Is this the "diaspora" imperative?

Today Taiwan; tomorrow Singapore, then.....what?

 

Back to Top
snowybeagle View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Singapore
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 474
  Quote snowybeagle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 21:56

Originally posted by Sino Defender

hong kong was ceded to britain in 1842, and is still part of china. china didn't control hong kong until 1997. foreign invasion doesn't make the splitting of chinese territories legitimate.

The resumption of Chinese control over HK & Macao were negotiated by the Chinese government with the governments of UK & Portugal respectively.

Can China negotiate with Japan for the return of Taiwan?

First, my point was to refute the your statement that Taiwan had always been under the ROC, I pointed out ROC which was established in 1911 only took control of Taiwan in 1945.

Second, HK & Macao were not in the position as Taiwan today. The decision of being returned to Chinese control were made by the governments of UK & Portugal respectively, the HK people and Macao people had nary a choice.

that's reality. face it.

So we're talking realpolitiks now?

Then all the claims about historical claims and Han culture etc were just excuses and superficial.

The real truth is, it is a matter of "might makes right", isn't it?

And therefore, the reason for dropping Korea and Vietnam and parts of Japan which historically accepted Chinese suzerainity was because "a bully never picks on somebody his own size".

Back to Top
Sino Defender View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 23-Jan-2006
Location: Hong Kong
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 413
  Quote Sino Defender Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 22:05
Originally posted by snowybeagle

Originally posted by Sino Defender

hong kong was ceded to britain in 1842, and is still part of china. china didn't control hong kong until 1997. foreign invasion doesn't make the splitting of chinese territories legitimate.

The resumption of Chinese control over HK & Macao were negotiated by the Chinese government with the governments of UK & Portugal respectively.

Can China negotiate with Japan for the return of Taiwan?

First, my point was to refute the your statement that Taiwan had always been under the ROC, I pointed out ROC which was established in 1911 only took control of Taiwan in 1945.

Second, HK & Macao were not in the position as Taiwan today. The decision of being returned to Chinese control were made by the governments of UK & Portugal respectively, the HK people and Macao people had nary a choice.

that's reality. face it.

So we're talking realpolitiks now?

Then all the claims about historical claims and Han culture etc were just excuses and superficial.

The real truth is, it is a matter of "might makes right", isn't it?

And therefore, the reason for dropping Korea and Vietnam and parts of Japan which historically accepted Chinese suzerainity was because "a bully never picks on somebody his own size".

why should we negotiate with japan for the return of taiwan? taiwan is no longer a japanese colony. taiwan is already part of china, known as the republic of china, a chinese government established in 1912.

both mainland china and taiwan are part of china. neither makes up entire china. they both belong to one china with the mainland under the rule of the prc and the province of taiwan and part of the fujian province under the rule of roc.

china negotiated with britain only for the terms of returning hong kong. the return of hong kong to chinese sovereighty was definite. they were only negotiating in what way hong kong was to be returned, not whether it would be.



Edited by Sino Defender
"Whoever messes with the heavenly middle kingdom, no matter how far s/he escapes, s/he is to be slaughtered"
Back to Top
poirot View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Editorial Staff

Joined: 21-May-2005
Location: Belgium
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1838
  Quote poirot Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 22:24
Originally posted by pikeshot1600

Poirot:

I don't think Taiwan has any specific strategic value to China.  The issue seems to be more about building reputation by demonstrations of influence and power where there are no longer strategic interests on the part of former adversaries (Hong Kong - Britain; Taiwan - U.S.) or where the former adversary cannot resist (Influence in Korea - Japan).

Tough talk over Taiwan when the U.S. is not willing to go to war over it, or increasing influence in the two Koreas where Japan can no longer do anything about it and the U.S. is close to leaving, are substantial extensions of Chinese influence "on the cheap."  The reacquisition of Hong Kong was treated almost as a conquest.  Moves into Indochina, Malaya or Indonesia, and meddling in Latin America could have more serious consequences.  Those would affect vital interests of India and the U.S.

Chinese activities in Venezuela might very well provoke opposition from Brazil which is a long way from China.  The new kids are feeling their way, but they need to be careful.

 

The Taiwan Strait has strategic importance.  The strategic importance of Taiwan to China is similiar to Cuba to the United States - an eyesore.  I apologize for the term, but for the PRC, the Taiwan Strait is like the Gulf of Mexico or the Caribbean.



Edited by poirot
AAAAAAAAAA
"The crisis of yesterday is the joke of tomorrow.�   ~ HG Wells
           
Back to Top
poirot View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Editorial Staff

Joined: 21-May-2005
Location: Belgium
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1838
  Quote poirot Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 22:29
Originally posted by Sino Defender

Originally posted by poirot

Originally posted by Leonidas

Ive always liked tawain but ill trade it in for tibet, nei mongol and east turkistan any day

Part of the reason why the PRC is pressing on the Taiwan reunification issue is Tibet and Xinjiang.  If Taiwan breaks away officially, what precedent will it set for Tibet and Xinjiang?

From a strategic point of view, if I were the president of the People's Republic of China, and I had to choose between Tibet and Taiwan, I would pick Tibet.  Of course, Taiwan has its geopolicial advantages, but losing Tibet or Xinjiang officially is ten times worse strategically than seeing Taiwan break away.

that's because prc does not control taiwan now and enjoys no strategic advantage from taiwan. taiwan can actually provide prc with the best strategic location to access the resources in the pacific to which tibet and xinjiang cannot compare. tibet serves as a barrier for india, but with modern technology, missiles can easily fly over. so such an advantage is gone. xinjiang is mainly known for its resources and ideal position to export influence to central asia. however, the potential gain from having access to the pacific as well as south china sea is far more than what is attributing to prc by tibet and xinjiang not to mention about the total gdp of taiwan being much larger than tibet and xinjiang combined.

if i had to choose between tibet+xinjiang and taiwan, also known as the unsinkable aircraft carrier by some, i would choose taiwan.

Just to illustrate the importance of Tibet to the PRC, the source of both the Yellow River and the Yangtze River are in Tibet/Qinghai. 

As to the importance of Xinjiang, cities like Shanghai cannot survive witouth natural gas pumped from there.

AAAAAAAAAA
"The crisis of yesterday is the joke of tomorrow.�   ~ HG Wells
           
Back to Top
Dream208 View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 22-Jan-2006
Location: China
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 176
  Quote Dream208 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 22:37

Population lived in Taiwan really don't think this is about stratgeic issue anymore...

Also, issue of Taiwan's reunification is a "totally" different issue than Chinese expansion. As I said before, the reunification right now is not about profit or strategy (or maybe only too lesser extend), it is about something more emotional and nationalistic

Back to Top
snowybeagle View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Singapore
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 474
  Quote snowybeagle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 23:11
Originally posted by Sino Defender

why should we negotiate with japan for the return of taiwan? taiwan is no longer a japanese colony. taiwan is already part of china, known as the republic of china, a chinese government established in 1912.

So why did you bring up HK in the first place?

In what way does HK reinforce any of your argument about Taiwan?

Originally posted by Sino Defender

both mainland china and taiwan are part of china. neither makes up entire china. they both belong to one china with the mainland under the rule of the prc and the province of taiwan and part of the fujian province under the rule of roc.

Reality is, historical associations is not the determining factor in whether a territory belong to a particular country.

The birthplace of the Russian identity / culture was in Kiev. Kiev today is part of Ukraine, not Russia.

It is de facto.

Whether Taiwan is part of China will not be determined by rhetorical assertions or appeal to historical precedents.

It will be determined by whether the people of Taiwan wants to consider themselves part of China, and whether they can prevail against those who oppose it.

It will be a contest of willpower, military and everything.

Everything else is just an excuse.

Back to Top
flyingzone View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 11-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2630
  Quote flyingzone Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2006 at 23:47
Originally posted by snowybeagle

It will be a contest of willpower, military and everything.

Everything else is just an excuse.

Very well said. I always insist that, even for something that is as apparently "real" as nationhood, it is nothing more than an "imagined community" constructed by historians, politicians, etc. to, paradoxically, justify their existence.

Yesterday it was a nation, today it is not, but tomorrow it may be again.  

Back to Top
Sino Defender View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 23-Jan-2006
Location: Hong Kong
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 413
  Quote Sino Defender Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Feb-2006 at 00:41
Originally posted by snowybeagle

Originally posted by Sino Defender

why should we negotiate with japan for the return of taiwan? taiwan is no longer a japanese colony. taiwan is already part of china, known as the republic of china, a chinese government established in 1912.

So why did you bring up HK in the first place?

In what way does HK reinforce any of your argument about Taiwan?

Originally posted by Sino Defender

both mainland china and taiwan are part of china. neither makes up entire china. they both belong to one china with the mainland under the rule of the prc and the province of taiwan and part of the fujian province under the rule of roc.

Reality is, historical associations is not the determining factor in whether a territory belong to a particular country.

The birthplace of the Russian identity / culture was in Kiev. Kiev today is part of Ukraine, not Russia.

It is de facto.

Whether Taiwan is part of China will not be determined by rhetorical assertions or appeal to historical precedents.

It will be determined by whether the people of Taiwan wants to consider themselves part of China, and whether they can prevail against those who oppose it.

It will be a contest of willpower, military and everything.

Everything else is just an excuse.

i brought up hong kong because it was wrong of you using the colonial period of taiwan to support your argument. so i brought up hong kong as a similar example to illustrate how wrong it would be to apply your concept. i am glad that you've realized it yourself now.

the reality is whoever is strong has the call. under no circumstances can taiwan compete with mainland china in terms of economics, military, political influence, potential, growth, and almost everything.

"Whoever messes with the heavenly middle kingdom, no matter how far s/he escapes, s/he is to be slaughtered"
Back to Top
Sino Defender View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 23-Jan-2006
Location: Hong Kong
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 413
  Quote Sino Defender Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Feb-2006 at 00:43
just a side note, if there hadn't been a similar thread called "the united korea", i am sure this thread of "the united china" would have been moved from the east asia part of the forum by our beloved moderator of this section.
"Whoever messes with the heavenly middle kingdom, no matter how far s/he escapes, s/he is to be slaughtered"
Back to Top
snowybeagle View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Singapore
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 474
  Quote snowybeagle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Feb-2006 at 02:33

Originally posted by Sino Defender

i brought up hong kong because it was wrong of you using the colonial period of taiwan to support your argument. so i brought up hong kong as a similar example to illustrate how wrong it would be to apply your concept. i am glad that you've realized it yourself now.

On the contary, it was you who made the mistake - you first claimed that Taiwan was under ROC rule all the while - but that is historically inaccurate.

When that was pointed out to you, you tried to use the example of HK being ceded from China half a century before Taiwan and now is reunified with China today.

But you forgot - HK was returned to China by the UK.

On the other hand, China cannot ask Japan to return Taiwan since  Japan had already relinquished control over Taiwan in 1945.

Taiwan today is a free agent, HK never was. There is relevancy between the case of HK & the case of Taiwan.

You already made a mistake in claiming Taiwan was always under the ROC, and instead of admitting it, you are now just coming up with more and more irrelevancies..

Originally posted by Sino Defender

the reality is whoever is strong has the call. under no circumstances can taiwan compete with mainland china in terms of economics, military, political influence, potential, growth, and almost everything.

That is just an empty boast.

Even if all the advantages you cited mainland China holds is true (a BIG PRESUMPTION), Taiwan need not yield if it did not want to.

Those advantages count only if mainland China actually declares war, and that is an unlikely event under the present circumstances.

Unless the people of mainland China can become so cold-blooded to attack and kill their supposed fellow citizens, war is just an empty threat.

And as long as the USA continues its commitment to defend Taiwan against invasion, there is little chance of victory by the PRC.

And because mainland Chinese leaders recognise that the use of force is counter-productive and mutually devastating, war is not even a viable option - any victory would be Phyrric and leave the CCP government weak, precipitating a break up of China which the central government would be powerless to stop.

Back to Top
poirot View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Editorial Staff

Joined: 21-May-2005
Location: Belgium
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1838
  Quote poirot Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Feb-2006 at 04:11

Might and economics make right.  In the real world, strength determines outcome.

Of course, it is right to respect the wishes of inhabitants of Taiwan.  It is the right thing to do.  But reality may be different.

In terms of Hong Kong, I always harbored a theory about it: The PRC actually did not want Hong Kong back earlier than 1997.  The reason?  Hong Kong served as a middleman between the PRC and Europe/Southeast Asia. 

The PRC could have easily taken control of Hong Kong circa 1949, but it decided not to.  Opponents of my theory would argue that the British fleet yadda yadda, but the truth is, the British were nonfactors in the Chinese Civil War and would not be able to resist a communist invasion of Hong Kong.  In an age when the reckless PRC crossed the Yalu to confront Americans in Korea, the British were an afterthought.

Then why didn't the PRC take Hong Kong between 1949 and the start of the Korean War?  Well, because the PRC needed Hong Kong as a window to the West.  Hong Kong's importance emerged later when the U.S. blockaded the PRC.  Important supplies exchanged hands with Hong Kong businessmen serving as valued middlemen.  In a sense, Hong Kong merchants were true Chinese patriots.

An added benefit of the PRC intentionally keeping Hong Kong outside of direct PRC control: Britain was the first major allied power to recognize the PRC's legitmacy, in 1954.

From 1949 to the late 1970s, Hong Kong's independent status from the PRC reaped benefits for the PRC.



Edited by poirot
AAAAAAAAAA
"The crisis of yesterday is the joke of tomorrow.�   ~ HG Wells
           
Back to Top
snowybeagle View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Singapore
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 474
  Quote snowybeagle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Feb-2006 at 04:31

Originally posted by poirot

In a sense, Hong Kong merchants were true Chinese patriots.

Never has patriotism been so lucrative!

Back to Top
poirot View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Editorial Staff

Joined: 21-May-2005
Location: Belgium
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1838
  Quote poirot Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Feb-2006 at 04:34
Originally posted by snowybeagle

Originally posted by poirot

In a sense, Hong Kong merchants were true Chinese patriots.

Never has patriotism been so lucrative!

AAAAAAAAAA
"The crisis of yesterday is the joke of tomorrow.�   ~ HG Wells
           
Back to Top
Sino Defender View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 23-Jan-2006
Location: Hong Kong
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 413
  Quote Sino Defender Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Feb-2006 at 10:05
Originally posted by snowybeagle

Originally posted by Sino Defender

i brought up hong kong because it was wrong of you using the colonial period of taiwan to support your argument. so i brought up hong kong as a similar example to illustrate how wrong it would be to apply your concept. i am glad that you've realized it yourself now.

On the contary, it was you who made the mistake - you first claimed that Taiwan was under ROC rule all the while - but that is historically inaccurate.

When that was pointed out to you, you tried to use the example of HK being ceded from China half a century before Taiwan and now is reunified with China today.

But you forgot - HK was returned to China by the UK.

On the other hand, China cannot ask Japan to return Taiwan since  Japan had already relinquished control over Taiwan in 1945.

Taiwan today is a free agent, HK never was. There is relevancy between the case of HK & the case of Taiwan.

You already made a mistake in claiming Taiwan was always under the ROC, and instead of admitting it, you are now just coming up with more and more irrelevancies..

Originally posted by Sino Defender

the reality is whoever is strong has the call. under no circumstances can taiwan compete with mainland china in terms of economics, military, political influence, potential, growth, and almost everything.

That is just an empty boast.

Even if all the advantages you cited mainland China holds is true (a BIG PRESUMPTION), Taiwan need not yield if it did not want to.

Those advantages count only if mainland China actually declares war, and that is an unlikely event under the present circumstances.

Unless the people of mainland China can become so cold-blooded to attack and kill their supposed fellow citizens, war is just an empty threat.

And as long as the USA continues its commitment to defend Taiwan against invasion, there is little chance of victory by the PRC.

And because mainland Chinese leaders recognise that the use of force is counter-productive and mutually devastating, war is not even a viable option - any victory would be Phyrric and leave the CCP government weak, precipitating a break up of China which the central government would be powerless to stop.

i said taiwan was under the rule of china. i didn't say it was the roc! the ming general, zheng, formed a chinese kingdom of dengling to resist the manchu until his grandson surrendered in the late 17th century. why dun we place a beg on this. 1000000000000 usd. if you would please copy me the text where i said taiwan was under roc control, then i will give you 100000000 usd.

one thing is for sure: if taiwan were to declare independence, china would attack. it's not a matter of anyone being cold-blooded. it's about national unity. i would prefer china destroyed along with taiwan to an independent taiwan.

taiwan is no longer part of japan. it is part of china, known as the republic of china. taiwan is currently part of china under a different government from the mainland. it's not a seperate entity trying to aviod invasion. it is a chinese region trying to break up with china.

do not assume mainland to be china and taiwan to be taiwan. none of these make entire china. mainland china is also part of china to which taiwan belongs to. rpc and roc are only chinese regimes governing different parts of china.

yes, no one wanna solve this by force. but that's only taiwan remains part of china. if taiwan declared independence, there would be no choice but to solve it by miliatary means. letting it independent is not an option. be it the devastation of the entire country's economy. we would have no choice if that's the case.



Edited by Sino Defender
"Whoever messes with the heavenly middle kingdom, no matter how far s/he escapes, s/he is to be slaughtered"
Back to Top
Sino Defender View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 23-Jan-2006
Location: Hong Kong
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 413
  Quote Sino Defender Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Feb-2006 at 10:13
Originally posted by poirot

Might and economics make right.  In the real world, strength determines outcome.

Of course, it is right to respect the wishes of inhabitants of Taiwan.  It is the right thing to do.  But reality may be different.

In terms of Hong Kong, I always harbored a theory about it: The PRC actually did not want Hong Kong back earlier than 1997.  The reason?  Hong Kong served as a middleman between the PRC and Europe/Southeast Asia. 

The PRC could have easily taken control of Hong Kong circa 1949, but it decided not to.  Opponents of my theory would argue that the British fleet yadda yadda, but the truth is, the British were nonfactors in the Chinese Civil War and would not be able to resist a communist invasion of Hong Kong.  In an age when the reckless PRC crossed the Yalu to confront Americans in Korea, the British were an afterthought.

Then why didn't the PRC take Hong Kong between 1949 and the start of the Korean War?  Well, because the PRC needed Hong Kong as a window to the West.  Hong Kong's importance emerged later when the U.S. blockaded the PRC.  Important supplies exchanged hands with Hong Kong businessmen serving as valued middlemen.  In a sense, Hong Kong merchants were true Chinese patriots.

An added benefit of the PRC intentionally keeping Hong Kong outside of direct PRC control: Britain was the first major allied power to recognize the PRC's legitmacy, in 1954.

From 1949 to the late 1970s, Hong Kong's independent status from the PRC reaped benefits for the PRC.

very well said. that's completely true. china didn't take hk back in 1949 not because it could not as indicated by snowy. it could legally and realistically. but hk could provide china with a channel to the west.

"Whoever messes with the heavenly middle kingdom, no matter how far s/he escapes, s/he is to be slaughtered"
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 3456>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.203 seconds.