Obama camp downgrades the Republic of China

Common, this is not Taiwan, as Ma said it clearly. The maximum you can say is that it is Taiwan Democracy, but that falls short of being a country. Instead, you got the Republic of China crap being fed into you until you finally understand that this is what the people in here voted for (for sure it wasn’t because the economy was in such a bad way that it could only get better…)

Well one could view the fact the Taiwanese can vote because the ROC constitution allows them to vote. Unlike the previous Japanese government on the island.

Personally I think the focus Hartzell’s analysis is off bases. This is not a problem about WWII and what Japan did or didn’t agree to do with Taiwan when they surrendered to the Allies. This has always been about the day after WWII when the Chinese Civil war resumed and the resolution of the territorial claims between ROC and PRC after military action ceased between these two States.

Especially in light of the past 4 years that I’ve been posting. The evolution of a multipolar planet is becoming a reality where the PRC sphere of influence in the region cannot be denied. Satelite States in the region are realigning to China by the day. The days where the US can unilaterally determine the fate of the Satelite States in the Pacific Rim are almost over.

One could deny this reality and end up like CSB, become the butt of every diplomatic joke between Singapore and Washington. Or one can face reality and evolve their solution to the Strait Issue to ensure the best for ROC and its people.

How do you define “the day after WWII when the Chinese Civil war resumed . . . .” ??

Is that April 29, 1952 ??? or August 6, 1952 ???

Or are you somehow naive enough to believe that “the war is over” when the surrender ceremonies are completed??? Under international law, that is not an accurate definition.

Yawn…I think people are just reading too much into what he said, I mean he actually said the US has 57 states once by accident!
Unfortunately Obama has a very very good chance to win the upcoming elections. Hopefully Biden will be handling the foreign affairs.

By 1952 most overt military campaigns had ended in the Chinese Civil war.

I was referring to the period of 1946 - 1950.

A full political solution to the Strait Issue cannot be reached until the fundimental issue of 1926 are resolved. Basically is there a peaceful solution for left and right leaning political leaders in addressing issue afflicting common Chinese citizens? Granted this issue is further compounded by the fact that ROC and PRC are 2 seperate entities now with further fragmentation and evolution of political processes and ideals…

Without address that fundimental point every other discussion is just pushing air in my opinion.

[quote=“lincolnunit”]Yawn…I think people are just reading too much into what he said, I mean he actually said the US has 57 states once by accident!
Unfortunately Obama has a very very good chance to win the upcoming elections. Hopefully Biden will be handling the foreign affairs.[/quote]
Actually Obama brother in law is a Chinese Canadian. Maybe he is more familiar with the issue than either Obama or Biden…one could hope…nah…probably another twinkie CBC…:laughing:

[quote=“ac_dropout”][quote=“lincolnunit”]Yawn…I think people are just reading too much into what he said, I mean he actually said the US has 57 states once by accident!
Unfortunately Obama has a very very good chance to win the upcoming elections. Hopefully Biden will be handling the foreign affairs.[/quote]
Actually Obama brother in law is a Chinese Canadian. Maybe he is more familiar with the issue than either Obama or Biden…one could hope…nah…probably another twinkie CBC…:laughing:[/quote]

LoL, I agree, but Obama’s got some relations with the blue camp, i know this because my former boss is a big time kmt supporter here in DC and her son-in-law actually is a friend/colleague of Obama’s and she contributed quite a bit into his campaign

I thought that the ROC already had been “de-recognized” and “downgraded” in the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act.

I believe MYJ went to court 3 times already over suspected corruption charges.
CSB and family, have yet to finish any of their court cases.

So it is not like MYJ gets a pass, it is more like judgement has already been passed 3 times already.

CSB and family on the other hand has yet to get one judgement…

Well, I am not blind. And, I never get paid to lie. Of course, Ma should be watched with suspicion. So far, he has be adhering his conducts to pretty well within limits set by the constitution of ROC. No concrete signs of him sell out Taiwan, other than those fabricated stories from green propagandists.

Don’t you wish him to be a good president? Or, do you prefer another evil president sucking the treasury dry?

Well, I am not blind. And, I never get paid to lie. Of course, Ma should be watched with suspicion. So far, he has be adhering his conducts to pretty well within limits set by the constitution of ROC. No concrete signs of him sell out Taiwan, other than those fabricated stories from green propagandists.

Don’t you wish him to be a good president? Or, do you prefer another evil president sucking the treasury dry?[/quote]

I would love nothing more than for Ma to be a great president, but his performance to date has not been inspiring and this is not green propoganda unless you believe 80% of Taiwanese are green.

Also, and I am not defending Chen, but he didn’t suck the treasury dry (that’s an absurd exaggeration for someone who claims to be interested in the truth). You’re just repeating pan-blue media fabrications now.

The constitution of the ROC says he should adhere to laws. How many laws did he broke in the last days?

  • Desecration of the National Flag by Police Forces under orders of the Ma Administration
  • Display of the PRC flag in the Free China Area, with connivance of the Police Forces under orders of the Ma Administration
  • Received a high ranking officer of the Communist Party

I’m not even starting with the abuse of the “Parade and Assembly Law” by the KMT this week, cause then we need another thread…

[quote=“mr_boogie”]The constitution of the ROC says he should adhere to laws. How many laws did he broke in the last days?

  • Desecration of the National Flag by Police Forces under orders of the Ma Administration
  • Display of the PRC flag in the Free China Area, with connivance of the Police Forces under orders of the Ma Administration
  • Received a high ranking officer of the Communist Party

I’m not even starting with the abuse of the “Parade and Assembly Law” by the KMT this week, cause then we need another thread…[/quote]

Can we impeach him?
Who is the VP?
And what is his/her ideas like?

[quote=“mr_boogie”]The constitution of the ROC says he should adhere to laws. How many laws did he broke in the last days?

  • Desecration of the National Flag by Police Forces under orders of the Ma Administration
  • Display of the PRC flag in the Free China Area, with connivance of the Police Forces under orders of the Ma Administration
  • Received a high ranking officer of the Communist Party [/quote]

When CSB was still roaming the streets of Taiwan he was openly advocating his supporters to do a citizen’s arrest of Chen Yunlin for being a communist.

You know things have changed a bit when the KMT is tight with the CCP, while the DPP has seemingly taken up the place of the old KMT that opposes the CCP.

[quote=“ABC”][quote=“mr_boogie”]The constitution of the ROC says he should adhere to laws. How many laws did he broke in the last days?

  • Desecration of the National Flag by Police Forces under orders of the Ma Administration
  • Display of the PRC flag in the Free China Area, with connivance of the Police Forces under orders of the Ma Administration
  • Received a high ranking officer of the Communist Party [/quote]

When CSB was still roaming the streets of Taiwan he was openly advocating his supporters to do a citizen’s arrest of Chen Yunlin for being a communist.

You know things have changed a bit when the KMT is tight with the CCP, while the DPP has seemingly taken up the place of the old KMT that opposes the CPP.[/quote]

except for the fact that the DPP never oppressed the Taiwanese people and never denied the people of its rights.

If police cannot upheld the law, only the citizens can (although, in a way, that will make citizens as vigilantes…)
The KMT should have changed the law way before Chen Yun Lin set foot on Taiwan, so that something like that couldn’t be used by the DPP. Maybe the KMT lawmakers are too busy these days, with so many anti-corruption laws to be passed…

In the 1959 DC Circuit case of Sheng v. Rogers, the judges found that Taiwan was not a part of the national territory of the Republic of China (ROC). Considering this fact, it should not come as a surprise that for many years the “Taiwan” entry in the U.S. Dept. of State publication Treaties in Force has clearly noted that “The United States does not recognize the Republic of China as a state or a government.”

Full details are available in the 487-page text of this official U.S. government publication.

For convenience, a 5-page EXCERPT of the 2010 edition is also available on the internet. It includes the Cover Page, Foreward, the Taiwan entry, and the Treaty of Peace with Japan (April 28, 1952) entry.

[quote=“Hartzell”]In the 1959 DC Circuit case of Sheng v. Rogers, the judges found that Taiwan was not a part of the national territory of the Republic of China (ROC). Considering this fact, it should not come as a surprise that for many years the “Taiwan” entry in the U.S. Dept. of State publication Treaties in Force has clearly noted that “The United States does not recognize the Republic of China as a state or a government.”

Full details are available in the 487-page text of this official U.S. government publication.

For convenience, a 5-page EXCERPT of the 2010 edition is also available on the internet. It includes the Cover Page, Foreward, the Taiwan entry, and the Treaty of Peace with Japan (April 28, 1952) entry.[/quote]

I’ve read your analysis of the Taiwan/ROC/PRC situation, it is well researched and right on par with legal logic. Taiwan/Formosa was never ceded to anybody following WWII and hence the ROC is a government in exile and technically this island of Taiwan still belongs to the USA as they were/are the occupying allied force.

I like it, it makes sense, but the PRC doesn’t buy it, and they could care less a bout international land treaties and western laws of war!. While we were nation building in the South Pacific, the newly empowered PRC was left out of the loop; they were the enemy and as such, never considered as receivers for Taiwan.They know this, and they recent it.

China has no plan to ‘legally’ receive Taiwan from anyone, they are just going to build a huge military and take it back as it is theirs and that’s that. They have a point, but they also have taken a page from someone else’s book…oh yeah, the United States! If that day comes I’d be a lot more worried about who their next Pacific acquisition will be. They’re not too fond of Japan you know!

A question that came to mind is: Why, if the USA saw trouble brewing with the Chinese (their civil war), did they not just leave Taiwan as part of Japan? Is the current status of Taiwan what we (the USA) wanted all along? I’m curious what the plan was, what the plan should have been and what the plan will be now?

What could Taiwan have done differently to have created a better outcome? Was CKS’s obsession with retaking the mainland actually Taiwan’s greatest downfall with regards to sovereignty? Or was sovereignty never really an option and Taiwan has been destined to be a floating state all along?

[quote=“Maceck”][quote=“Hartzell”]In the 1959 DC Circuit case of Sheng v. Rogers, the judges found that Taiwan was not a part of the national territory of the Republic of China (ROC). Considering this fact, it should not come as a surprise that for many years the “Taiwan” entry in the U.S. Dept. of State publication Treaties in Force has clearly noted that “The United States does not recognize the Republic of China as a state or a government.”

Full details are available in the 487-page text of this official U.S. government publication.

For convenience, a 5-page EXCERPT of the 2010 edition is also available on the internet. It includes the Cover Page, Foreward, the Taiwan entry, and the Treaty of Peace with Japan (April 28, 1952) entry.[/quote]

I’ve read your analysis of the Taiwan/ROC/PRC situation, it is well researched and right on par with legal logic. Taiwan/Formosa was never ceded to anybody following WWII and hence the ROC is a government in exile and technically this island of Taiwan still belongs to the USA as they were/are the occupying allied force.

I like it, it makes sense, but the PRC doesn’t buy it, and they could care less a bout international land treaties and western laws of war!. While we were nation building in the South Pacific, the newly empowered PRC was left out of the loop; they were the enemy and as such, never considered as receivers for Taiwan.They know this, and they recent it.

China has no plan to ‘legally’ receive Taiwan from anyone, they are just going to build a huge military and take it back as it is theirs and that’s that. They have a point, but they also have taken a page from someone else’s book…oh yeah, the United States! If that day comes I’d be a lot more worried about who their next Pacific acquisition will be. They’re not too fond of Japan you know!

A question that came to mind is: Why, if the USA saw trouble brewing with the Chinese (their civil war), did they not just leave Taiwan as part of Japan? Is the current status of Taiwan what we (the USA) wanted all along? I’m curious what the plan was, what the plan should have been and what the plan will be now?

What could Taiwan have done differently to have created a better outcome? Was CKS’s obsession with retaking the mainland actually Taiwan’s greatest downfall with regards to sovereignty? Or was sovereignty never really an option and Taiwan has been destined to be a floating state all along?[/quote]
There was a option like in the 1950s ish before the economic boom for China and the fact that time we still have more soft power & millitary power than China. We could of declare independence. Time is over now unless we fight a independence war (that would be game over for us) or some how we convince China to let us be independent (which will never happen with CCP in power).
Yeah so their dream of reconquering China for the KMT did cost us our soverignity and our soft power (could been better than now).
IMO.