godofthunder9010
Active member
The statement is repeated over and over again: "Taiwan/Formosa is part of China." This is presented as though it were an indisputable fact. What I'd like to know is this: Why is Formosa/Taiwan a part of China? When did that happen? I'd like to hear you build your case for this point, rather than just throwing it out there. I'll make the counterpoint right now. The people of Taiwan have never submitted themselves to the rulership of the People's Republic of China. That means that they are not bound by any agreement. They did not submit themselves to the Costitution (for lack of a better word, give me a better one if you like) of China. They were a part of China under an old government and Constitution that no longer exists. Since they have never bound themselves to the current government.
To your counterpoint, I'm a bit lost by your statements about California and Texas. Texas gained its independence from Mexico, appealed for statehood (thereby agreeing to be bound to the USA and its Constitution), and was turned down. There wasn't room for them because the political system required that there had to be an equal number of slave and free states. So briefly, they were their own nation. Not too long thereafter, they were admitted into Statehood (once again at their own request). California has some liberal nutjobs, make no mistake, but I can guarantee that if you hold an election tomorrow, 99.9% of Californians will vote to remain part of the United States. Texas (because of its pride in having already been a seperate country) would be more like 95%. Those movements do not represent the majority view, but apparently the majority of Taiwanese oppose being part of China. That makes Cuba a better example: 1.) Since we know the Cuban people would definitely not vote to rejoin the USA. 2.) Because we have an equal and coinciding duration of self rule to compare the two. 3.) Because neither one bound themselves to the current Constitution or government.
The US Civil War does not fall into the same category as Taiwan. Those states had bound themselves to the Constitution of the United States, and their defection was in breach of contract, if you will.
For comparison to the riots you are citing, I'd like to see the numbers on Tianamen Square. Was it 10 or 20 killed? 30? Try several thousand. That makes for a poor comparison with the riots that you are citing. Also, China didn't exactly go out of its way to NOT kill the protesters like the US ultimately did. Quite the reverse was true. Did the US torture or execute those taken prisoner? Nope. Still, despite the tremendous differences, I can see what you're getting at.
I will agree with proteinxx, the discussion has managed to remain civil for the most part. That allows us to actually try to understand each other's point of view. Still, the "lets nuke the world" business was a bit over the top.
On a different level that nobdy seems to be exploring, what is the motivating factor for Taiwan peacefully rejoining China? Per capita, Taiwanese are one hell of a lot better off without China right now. China has adopted the policy of trying to bully them into it thusfar. Why haven't the Chinese explored more diplomatic means of achieving their goal of controlling Taiwan? Can China actually claim that Taiwan will be better off by submitting to their rule?
The Tibetans can speak for themselves just fine:
http://www.tibet.org/
http://www.tibet.com/
http://omni.cc.purdue.edu/~wtv/tibet/Welcome.html
http://www.tibetinfo.net/
Or just run a search. There's a TON of information. Your Chinese sources are tainted. So, very likely, are the Tibetan sources. Do some reasearch and try to filter out the fact from the fiction.
To your counterpoint, I'm a bit lost by your statements about California and Texas. Texas gained its independence from Mexico, appealed for statehood (thereby agreeing to be bound to the USA and its Constitution), and was turned down. There wasn't room for them because the political system required that there had to be an equal number of slave and free states. So briefly, they were their own nation. Not too long thereafter, they were admitted into Statehood (once again at their own request). California has some liberal nutjobs, make no mistake, but I can guarantee that if you hold an election tomorrow, 99.9% of Californians will vote to remain part of the United States. Texas (because of its pride in having already been a seperate country) would be more like 95%. Those movements do not represent the majority view, but apparently the majority of Taiwanese oppose being part of China. That makes Cuba a better example: 1.) Since we know the Cuban people would definitely not vote to rejoin the USA. 2.) Because we have an equal and coinciding duration of self rule to compare the two. 3.) Because neither one bound themselves to the current Constitution or government.
The US Civil War does not fall into the same category as Taiwan. Those states had bound themselves to the Constitution of the United States, and their defection was in breach of contract, if you will.
For comparison to the riots you are citing, I'd like to see the numbers on Tianamen Square. Was it 10 or 20 killed? 30? Try several thousand. That makes for a poor comparison with the riots that you are citing. Also, China didn't exactly go out of its way to NOT kill the protesters like the US ultimately did. Quite the reverse was true. Did the US torture or execute those taken prisoner? Nope. Still, despite the tremendous differences, I can see what you're getting at.
I will agree with proteinxx, the discussion has managed to remain civil for the most part. That allows us to actually try to understand each other's point of view. Still, the "lets nuke the world" business was a bit over the top.
On a different level that nobdy seems to be exploring, what is the motivating factor for Taiwan peacefully rejoining China? Per capita, Taiwanese are one hell of a lot better off without China right now. China has adopted the policy of trying to bully them into it thusfar. Why haven't the Chinese explored more diplomatic means of achieving their goal of controlling Taiwan? Can China actually claim that Taiwan will be better off by submitting to their rule?
The Tibetans can speak for themselves just fine:
http://www.tibet.org/
http://www.tibet.com/
http://omni.cc.purdue.edu/~wtv/tibet/Welcome.html
http://www.tibetinfo.net/
Or just run a search. There's a TON of information. Your Chinese sources are tainted. So, very likely, are the Tibetan sources. Do some reasearch and try to filter out the fact from the fiction.
. Travel to there and setup your conclusion then.
