| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Real Reality
Joined: 10 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
 Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 4:59 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Googlefight gives the edge to Takeshima. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guri Guy
Joined: 07 Sep 2003
Location: Bamboo Island
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 7:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Korea is trying to win in an imaginary world because they sure won't win in the real one. If it ever goes to World Court, Korea is finished. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gang ah jee
Joined: 14 Jan 2003
Location: city of paper
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 7:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| Googlefight gives the edge to Takeshima. |
Googlefight bah. A real match would let them tag in their alternative romanisation tag team partners 'tokdo' and 'takesima'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 3:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Guri Guy wrote: |
| Korea is trying to win in an imaginary world because they sure won't win in the real one. If it ever goes to World Court, Korea is finished. |
Maybe because I'm living in Korea and only get the Korean side, but the Korean claim seems more solid. For example when Japanese maps locate Dokdo in Korean waters...
What is your side? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Smee
Joined: 24 Dec 2004
Location: Jeollanam-do
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 5:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
From http://www.occidentalism.org/?p=319
| Quote: |
Old Korean maps and documents referred to two islands in the Sea of Japan (East Sea). The islands were Ulleungdo (Muleungdo) and Usando. Koreans claim that Usando was Dokdo (Liancourt Rocks), so when they see Usando mentioned in a Korean document or on a Korean map, they often just call it Dokdo instead of using the name on the map or in the document. However, that is not only confusing, it is a big mistake because Korea�s historical maps and documents suggest that Usando was actually Jukdo, which is a small island less than four kilometers off the east coast of Ulleungdo. This means that when the video talks about Japanese documents saying this or that about �Dokdo,� the documents are most likely referring to Ulleungdo�s neighboring island, Jukdo, not to present-day Dokdo.
Old Korean maps show Usando next to Ulleungdo, not ninety-three kilometers to the southeast, which is where present-day Dokdo is. Old Korean documents say that Usando was fertile and had trees and other plant life, but present-day Dokdo is just barren rocks with no trees and little or no plant life. Even though Koreans have recently been bringing soil to the rocks to try to grow some small plants there, the plants there are still insignificant, and there are certainly no trees. Old Korean documents also talk about people living on Usando, which means that it could not have been Dokdo since Dokdo does not have the water or soil to support people.
|
| Quote: |
Below is a 1710 map of Usando and Ulleungdo with lines drawn to the two islands from the mainland.
|
| Quote: |
On the bottom line drawn to the two islands, it says, �Two days travel time by boat.� That means that the two islands were next to each other. If either of the islands had been Dokdo, it would have required an extra travel day. By the way, in 1710, notice that Korean maps were still showing Usando west of Ulleungdo.
|
~~~~~
From http://www.occidentalism.org/?p=328
| Quote: |
Koreans claim that Usan (Usando) was the old name for present-day �Dokdo� (Liancourt Rocks), but the Japanese claim that it was Jukdo, which is a small island less than four kilometers off the east coast of Ulleungdo. Since �Dokdo� is ninety-two kilometers southeast of Ulleungdo, it seems obvious that Usan (Usando) was not �Dokdo.� In fact, it looks like the Japanese claim that it was Ulleungdo�s neighboring island of Jukdo (Chukdo) is correct.
Since Usan (Usando) was obviously not present-day �Dokdo� (Liancourt), that means Korea has no historical maps or documents to show that she even knew about Liancourt Rocks before the Japanese incorporated them in 1905. Korean claims on Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo) are based on lies and half-truths, which means Korea is illegally occupying Japanese territory.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guri Guy
Joined: 07 Sep 2003
Location: Bamboo Island
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 6:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Good analysis Smee. Korea even if they knew of the existance of the islets (in doubt now it seems) never exerted control over them. Korea's period as a Hermit Kingdom had a policy where a ship captain left the sight of land was to be put to death. Since Dokdo cannot be seen from the mainland, Korea couldn't have exerted control over Dokdo.
Japan's claim in 1905 appears to be the first legitimate claim on the islets and they exerted control over them at that time. Korea's current occupation of the islets is a little too late and totally illegal.
Korea needs to do the mature thing and take it to World Court but they know they will lose so they refuse. The issue will continue to fester as a result. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stumptown
Joined: 11 Apr 2005
Location: Paju: Wife beating capital of Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Guri Guy wrote: |
| Korea is trying to win in an imaginary world because they sure won't win in the real one. If it ever goes to World Court, Korea is finished. |
Amen to that, brother. I've been telling Korean friends since this whole thing began that there is only one way to prove it and that is to take it to the world court. They seem to think that because "this is Korea" they won't get a fair trial (reason unexplained). Anyway, if they really want to settle it, they can...but they won't. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DrewAgain
Joined: 07 Dec 2004
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Guri Guy wrote: |
| Korea is trying to win in an imaginary world because they sure won't win in the real one. If it ever goes to World Court, Korea is finished. |
If Japan claimed Hawaii as theirs, would the US go to World Court to prove Hawaii is theirs? Just the mere act of going to court is to acknowledge Japan has even the smallest claim to Hawaii.
Now in Korea's case, why would they acknowledge Japan's claim at all? When Dokdo has been Korean for centuries, and Japan's best claim is that Dokdo has been Japanese since 1905 (surprise, surprise, step one in the eventual takeover of all Korea), I wouldn't give Japan the satisfaction of going to court either.
In court, legitimacy can be thrown out the window and politics can make anything happen. Canada lost access to the northern Pacific coast in the Alaska Boundary Dispute, because the British decided to side with the Americans in court, because they were a bigger force than Canada. Put Dokdo up for the World Court to decide (read: let third parties who know nothing of the situation decide), and don't you think they'll side with the country with more political and economic influence? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
doggyji
Joined: 21 Feb 2006
Location: Toronto - Hamilton - Vineland - St. Catherines
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Guri Guy wrote: |
| Korea is trying to win in an imaginary world because they sure won't win in the real one. If it ever goes to World Court, Korea is finished. |
You sound very certain. Where do you get the most info about this matter? It seems this document has been put at the centre of the dispute lately. It's not very pleasing to the Japanese claim.
"太政官 指令文" (태정관 지령문) which is an official document written in 1877 by the very Meiji admin. The article says it clearly states dokdo is not a Japanese island. And it says Japan tries best not to mention anything about it as it's a big weak point. This must be an important document in relation to the action by Japan in 1905. Maybe people like Mithridates can read one page on here.
http://news.naver.com/hotissue/ranking_read.php?section_id=000&ranking_type=popular_day&office_id=001&article_id=0001471863&date=20061120&seq=3
| DrewAgain wrote: |
If Japan claimed Hawaii as theirs, would the US go to World Court to prove Hawaii is theirs? Just the mere act of going to court is to acknowledge Japan has even the smallest claim to Hawaii.
Now in Korea's case, why would they acknowledge Japan's claim at all? When Dokdo has been Korean for centuries, and Japan's best claim is that Dokdo has been Japanese since 1905 (surprise, surprise, step one in the eventual takeover of all Korea), I wouldn't give Japan the satisfaction of going to court either.
In court, legitimacy can be thrown out the window and politics can make anything happen. Canada lost access to the northern Pacific coast in the Alaska Boundary Dispute, because the British decided to side with the Americans in court, because they were a bigger force than Canada. Put Dokdo up for the World Court to decide (read: let third parties who know nothing of the situation decide), and don't you think they'll side with the country with more political and economic influence? |
Well said.
Cold Comfort: the Japan Lobby Blocks Resolution on WWII Sex Slaves
Last edited by doggyji on Sun Nov 19, 2006 9:06 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Hierophant
Joined: 13 Sep 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 8:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Does Dokdo/Takeshima have any actual strategic or economic value to either nation? It looks like a loose collection of rocks jutting out of the ocean. Are there any precious minerals there? Is it a good site for a naval/missile base?
Am I missing something? Is this all about pathetic, spiteful rivalry? Should I really hate humanity-in-general as much as I think I should due to things like this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vox
Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Location: Jeollabukdo
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Hierophant
Joined: 13 Sep 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vox wrote: |
I believe Dokdo/Takeshima is supposed to be sitting on top of huge natural gas reserves. I've heard this more than once.
|
OK. That would make this whole debacle a little more sensible: greed seems more logical than spite. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wrench
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 10:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dokdo has nothing but fish.
And WHO CARES its a rock. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wrench wrote: |
Dokdo has nothing but fish.
And WHO CARES its a rock. |
Last I heard, there might be oil in the waters (well, not in the water  ). Whoever owns the island that can't be named would own that too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
