61–70 of 147 posts
Fascinating article. I also really enjoyed the presentation - the mix of writing, video and images worked well together. This is the first time I've seen the "BBC Magazine", and the experience is great.
It says it was built with Shorthand - http://shorthand.com/ . Anyone know of an open-source equivalent?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The United States never made a territorial claim to any part of Iraq.
When you come with a large army, invade the country, remove the local government, and replace it with puppets working for your country's interests, "territorial claim" is just a twist of words.
I get it, you don't like the United States, but you're desperately trying to draw equivalencies that do not exist. It's been a really long time since the US annexed anything. That doesn't make the loss of life that occurs in its small wars any less serious but you cannot talk about international events if you lump everything bad that happens in the world into the same ill-defined category and then use whatever labels you have at hand to refer to that category. Annexation isn't invasion. They might be associated - Russia annexed Crimea after an invasion, after all - but they're not the same thing.
If simply using terms properly doesn't move you, then there's this: you can tell a lot about a county's ambitions based on what its territorial disputes are and what it's trying to acquire. In this annexation = invasion world that you're inhabiting, you'd conclude that the United States wants to colonize the Middle East. I assure you that this is not the case. We just want to buy their oil, aside from that we don't give a damn about them. Not saying whether that's smart or ethical or not, but that's the reality.
When did this type of website design become acceptable? I'm starting to see it more and more. It reminds me of when "Multimedia CD-ROMs" first appeared circa mid-1990s, where flashy interfaces were ranked much higher than useability. Please stop it. Give me a webpage with text, and images that I can enlarge when clicked. Thank you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When you come with a large army, invade the country, remove the local government, and replace it with puppets working for your country's interests, "territorial claim" is just a twist of words.
Sorry, but that's stupid on a number of levels. First, territorial claims can be made with or without war, the later of which is (thankfully!) what we're actually talking about with China and the islands. Second, anyone who thinks that the government in Iraq has been a puppet of the United States just isn't paying attention. I get it, you don't like the United States, but you're desperately trying to draw equivalenci…
Every time I see discussion about the nine dash line, I can't help but wonder how it can seem sane to anybody that China should have the water rights to an area ~600 km south of what is blatantly Vietnam's coastal waters (and the southern tip of their land) and just barely north of Malaysia's physical territory. I know the correct answer is: China doesn't care, and isn't concerned with reason when it comes to the nin…
Since 17th century, a few islands had been controlled by various western countries and more had been marked or renamed.But the pirates, armed merchants and provincial navy of imperial China were still the dominant power in the area for a long time.
Chinese people totally lost control of it after the Sino-French war which changed the geopolitical status drastically: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-French_War
The nine-dash line stems from the eleven-dash line when ROC was the ally of the US after WWII and was accepted as the transferee of those islands from Japanese army who had acquired them from France/Great Britain.
But the ROC were too eager to fight back to the mainland instead of sending naval troops to guard those islands.It just chose one island Taiping as a strong point.
The unattended reefs and islands have been occupied by various countries in all kinds of sneaky/funny ways merely in past 30 years after the US-Vietnam war.
The validity argument makes no sense in this 'occupy and claim to own' game. Every country is a thief and the biggest is Vietnam whose navy had been more powerful than China's with the support from the former USSR during the PRC-USSR conflict.
Maybe the ROC in Taiwan should be the rightful owner according to the arrangement after WWII. But it is too weak to say anything now.
The whole history of the area is a vivid example of military power dictates terms.
I've watched with fascination as the Japanese Senkaku islands slowly and gradually came to be labeled 'disputed' in the western media, after China's recent claims. It seems like China has figured out a way to hack the media (the free media outside of China, I mean -- the government there obviously has root on Chinese TV and newspapers). Japanese ownership of this territory is basically as settled under international…
... Japan’s diplomats say their country “discovered” the islands in 1884. ... They are recorded in “Voyage with a Tail Wind”, published in 1403, a portolano recounting a journey from Fujian province to Ryukyu, the old name for the Okinawa chain of islands. By the following century, in “A Record of an Imperial Envoy’s Visit to the Ryukyu Kingdom”, Chinese names were given to all the islets in the Diaoyu group. Japanes…
Like any large country that tastes power and prosperity for a couple decades, China got rich with money from exports and drunk with power, and like any other country including the U.S. it will not end well. Too bad i makes life miserable for their neighbors too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is not China, you should see everyone else's claims. Vietnam's claimed and occupied islands are just as ridiculous as China's. In fact ASEAN could not stand together against China in this case is exactly because every country around South China Sea has conflicting claims. BBC is trying to avoid this as much as possible. Facts are hard, Let's just blame bad China.
I was very surprised when I found this out. It makes sense though - just like in any negotiation, you don't start with what you're willing to settle for, you start with what you want. In general, there are always two sides to the coin. Where from an American perspective you see Chinese aggression outwards, if you flip the arrows on the map around, you might notice that from a Chinese perspective, the US is aggressive…
Every time I see discussion about the nine dash line, I can't help but wonder how it can seem sane to anybody that China should have the water rights to an area ~600 km south of what is blatantly Vietnam's coastal waters (and the southern tip of their land) and just barely north of Malaysia's physical territory. I know the correct answer is: China doesn't care, and isn't concerned with reason when it comes to the nin…
To quote a Chinese official from a few years ago 'Vietnam is a small country and China is a big country and that is just a fact.'
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not necessarily true. Not even probably true. The nuclear-armed USA has invaded a number of smaller and weaker countries over the past decades. China has also attacked several neighbors, though in a less balls-out manner. Armageddon did not ensue. The scariest scenario in Asia right now is: China attacks Japan (e.g. invades the Senkakus, or even accidentally kills some Japanese soldier in one of China's frequent reck…
I'm going to say the scariest scenario in Asia involves either North Korea or Pakistan.
Fascinating article. I also really enjoyed the presentation - the mix of writing, video and images worked well together. This is the first time I've seen the "BBC Magazine", and the experience is great.