| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Do you support Taiwan's bid for U.N. Membership? |
| Yes |
|
60% |
[ 9 ] |
| No |
|
40% |
[ 6 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 15 |
|
| Author |
Message |
nautilus
Joined: 26 Nov 2005
Location: Je jump, Tu jump, oui jump!
|
 Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 7:54 pm Post subject: As China grows, what future for Taiwan? |
 |
|
I find it disturbing that as China's influence grows, Taiwan finds itself with fewer and fewer friends. It appears that to be friends with China you have to first betray Taiwan and the concept of democracy.
This week you have the presidents of Russia and Indonesia sucking up to the smugly smiling Hu Jin Tao as they simulataneously shake hands over the One China policy and then affirm economic partnerships.
It seems Taiwan has no chance as China steamrolls its way in world politics.
Even the U.S. is now opposing Taiwans admission to the United nations!
Disgusting..
Taipei Times, Sunday, Sep 09, 2007
"President Bush should live up to the promise he made in his inaugural address, `when you stand for your liberty, we will stand with you,' and support Taiwan's bid to join the UN," he said. "Taiwan is by all measures a sovereign and independent nation and I hope the United States and other free nations of the world will finally muster the courage to stand up and say so."
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2007/09/09/2003377915 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nautilus
Joined: 26 Nov 2005
Location: Je jump, Tu jump, oui jump!
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 3:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nobody cares I see?
Typical traitorous westerners. Sell out your allies but suck up to your enemies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yushin
Joined: 14 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Taiwan should be part of China...pure and simple and the sooner the better... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
I support Taiwan but IMHO Taiwan is a dead duck.
They should have declared independence in the 1950s while they had the chance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| yushin wrote: |
| Taiwan should be part of China...pure and simple and the sooner the better... |
Why? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Many in Taiwan started shifting their factory production to mainland China. Taiwan's future is the same as Manhattan. They don't slaughter pigs there anymore. They don't make things there. Taiwan moves up the value chain. R&D. Admin. Services. Logistics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yushin
Joined: 14 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| it's oh so simple....historically...taiwan was created by whom? I rest my case |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| yushin wrote: |
| it's oh so simple....historically...taiwan was created by whom? I rest my case |
Does that mean that Canada should join England? Should Peru become a province of Spain? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atomic42
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Location: Gimhae
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| nautilus wrote: |
Nobody cares I see?
Typical traitorous westerners. Sell out your allies but suck up to your enemies. |
Couldn't care less actually.
And Taiwan was never my ally. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
butlerian
Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 6:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| yushin wrote: |
| it's oh so simple....historically...taiwan was created by whom? I rest my case |
So what? The world is in a dynamic state of change. People change, customs change, culture changes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chris_J2
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Location: From Brisbane, Au.
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 6:17 am Post subject: Taiwan |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Even the U.S. is now opposing Taiwans admission to the United nations! |
It was the US that initiated dropping of Taiwan from the UN back in the 70's, in favour of admitting China instead. Blame Nixon.
"In addition, the desire of the Nixon administration to improve relations with the de facto government of mainland China to counterbalance the Soviet Union reduced American willingness to support the ROC.
As a result of these trends, on October 25, 1971, Resolution 2758 was passed by the General Assembly, withdrawing recognition of the ROC as the legitimate government of China, and recognising the PRC as the sole legitimate government of China. PRC received support from two-thirds of all United Nations' members including approval by the Security Council members excluding the ROC." (Republic of China = Taiwan)
Source: Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_and_the_United_Nations
Nothing new there. Also found this:
"In the case of the United States, the One-China policy was first stated in the Shanghai Communiqu� of 1972: "the United States acknowledges that Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China. The United States does not challenge that position." Thus, the United States's One-China Policy is subtly different from the One China Principle that China imposes on the rest of the world in that Washington has not expressed an explicitly immutable statement regarding whether it believes Taiwan is independent or not. Instead, Washington simply states that they understand China's claims that the country claims Taiwan as its own. In fact, many scholars agree that US One-China Policy was not intended to please the Chinese government, but as a way for Washington to conduct international relations in the region, which Beijing fails to state.
When President Jimmy Carter in 1979 broke off relations with Taiwan in order to establish relations with the PRC, Congress responded by passing the Taiwan Relations Act, which while maintaining relations, stopped short of full recognition of the ROC. In 1982 President Ronald Reagan also saw that the Six Assurances were adopted, the sixth being that the United States would not formally recognize Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan. Still, United States policy has remained ambiguous. During the House International Relations Committee on April 21 of 2004, the Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, James A. Kelly, was asked by Rep. Grace Napolitano (D-CA) whether America�s commitment to Taiwan�s democracy conflicted with the so-called One-China Policy. He admitted the difficulty on defining the U.S.'s position: "I didn�t really define it, and I�m not sure I very easily could define it." He added, "I can tell you what it is not. It is not the One-China principle that Beijing suggests." [1]
For any country who wants to establish diplomatic relationship with mainland China, it must first discontinue any formal relationship with Taiwan by the request of the Chinese mainland government. In order to compete for other countries' recognition, each other gives money to those remaining few small countries. The Chinese government likes to accuse the Taiwan government of Money diplomacy. Several small African and Caribbean countries have established and discontinued diplomatic relationship with both sides several times in exchange for huge financial support from each side."
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-China_policy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nautilus
Joined: 26 Nov 2005
Location: Je jump, Tu jump, oui jump!
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| yushin wrote: |
| it's oh so simple....historically...taiwan was created by whom? I rest my case |
Actually Taiwan was first settled , and is still occupied by the Tao- a ploynesian people.That was before Japan or China got there. let them keep it. They are the original inhabitants. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nautilus wrote: |
| yushin wrote: |
| it's oh so simple....historically...taiwan was created by whom? I rest my case |
Actually Taiwan was first settled , and is still occupied by the Tao- a ploynesian people.That was before Japan or China got there. let them keep it. They are the original inhabitants. |
I think the only thing that matters is if the vast majority of people want to be their own nation, they should be their own nation without fear of being bombed. Canadians would not like Quebec to leave. Americans would not want Texas to leave. But I would hope in the 21st century, the expressed will of the people within the political boundary like a state or province should be respected and separation should be reasonably negotiated. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| nautilus wrote: |
| yushin wrote: |
| it's oh so simple....historically...taiwan was created by whom? I rest my case |
Actually Taiwan was first settled , and is still occupied by the Tao- a ploynesian people.That was before Japan or China got there. let them keep it. They are the original inhabitants. |
I think the only thing that matters is if the vast majority of people want to be their own nation, they should be their own nation without fear of being bombed. Canadians would not like Quebec to leave. Americans would not want Texas to leave. But I would hope in the 21st century, the expressed will of the people within the political boundary like a state or province should be respected and separation should be reasonably negotiated. |
Texas is not allowed to leave. The precedent of open and total war against seceeding States was established in the 19th Century. I would hope it stands even today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pkang0202
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| From China's point of view, Taiwan IS part of China. Taiwan should be free, however, you have a big David versus Goliath scenario. I seriously doubt any country in the world cares for Taiwan enough to go to war with China over it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
