ROK Drop

Avatar of GI KoreaBy on June 14th, 2012 at 3:18 am

Should the Scarborough Shoal Be Handed Over To the Mongolians?

» by in: China

The East Asia Gazette has a real good article published in regards to the current Scarborough Shoal controversy between the Philippines and China in comparison to the Dokdo issue between Japan and South Korea:

The recent dispute over “illegal fishing” off the Scarborough Shoal between China and the Philippines calls to mind the Dokdo/ Takeshima dispute between Korea and Japan in the East Sea.

Just as the Japanese flaunt historical documents proving the Dokdo islets are Japanese, so too do the Chinese vociferously underline the existence of records proving that the Scarborough Shoal, or “Huangyan Island,” belongs to China. The Chinese claim that the earliest maps charting the territory were drawn up during the Yuan Dynasty, circa 1280 C.E. However, anyone with a humble knowledge of Chinese history is aware of the fact that the Yuan Dynasty corresponds to an epoch when China was ruled by the Mongols–the first non-Han (and thus by definition, non-Chinese) dynasty to rule over the Middle Kingdom.  [East Asia Gazette]

Read the rest at the link, but the author does a very good job of showing how ridiculous China’s claim to the Scarborough Shoal along with the rest of the South China Sea is.  Maybe the Philippines should offer the Scarborough Shoal to the Mongols just to show how ridiculous the Chinese claims are?  ;-)

If the Chinese really want to get into ancient territorial claims I guess they could also offer to hand over a large part of Manchuria back to the Koreans?

Tags: , , , , ,
- 1,307 views
24
  • Tom
    4:55 am on June 14th, 2012 1

    Sorry, but Scarborough Shoal is China’s territory. North America is also China’s too. North America was first charted by China and the first people to discover it were the Chinese, not Christopher Columbus.

    Koreans know the value of China.

    http://koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2012/06/116_112962.html

  • 2ID Doc
    5:50 am on June 14th, 2012 2

    1. Tom, I read the article. When exactly did China discover North America? 2016, 2028, or 2010? That’s the only 3 dates I can find. My history books say the Norse found North America around 1000 CE more or less & Columbus in 1492.

  • Lemmy
    6:14 am on June 14th, 2012 3

    What the hell is this CE crap? This is how bigots, homophobes, racist, and anti-semites refer to A.D.

    1280 C.E. there is no such date, next issue!

  • Tom
    6:30 am on June 14th, 2012 4

    North America was discovered in 1417 by the Ming Dynasty’s imperial navy, admiral Zheng He, who also sailed around Africa in 1405, way before any White man arrived. China has the ancient map that proves it. The Norseman don’t have anything other then conjecture and theory.

  • Joker
    6:39 am on June 14th, 2012 5

    What, Tom, the Chinese discovered America?

    Why, then, are Native Americans not Chinese nor do they speak Chinese?

    Oh wait, that China claim is bogus much as its claim in Scarborough shoal. The Austronesian sea fairers have been traversing th South China sea even before when the Han Chinese went seafaring. So nah-ah, the Chinese could have not discovered it first

  • 코리
    6:49 am on June 14th, 2012 6

    Is that really you Tom? I’ve never seen you so clearly prove Kushibo’s accusations that you are secretly a Chinese agitprop. Better play the cards a bit closer to the chest otherwise the mothership may cut you off.

  • Tom
    7:18 am on June 14th, 2012 7

    Joker, if Americans like to say “Christopher Columbus discovered America”, why can’t we say “Chinese admiral Zheng He discovered America”? What’s the difference? :lol:

  • 2ID Doc
    7:55 am on June 14th, 2012 8

    The Norseman don’t have anything other then conjecture and theory.

    Leif wintered in 1001, probably near Cape Bauld on the northern tip of Newfoundland.
    The earliest etymology of “Vinland” is found in Adam of Bremen’s 11th century Latin Descriptio insularum Aquilonis (“Description of the Northern Islands”)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinland
    It’s also in Chinese as well.

  • Joker
    8:36 am on June 14th, 2012 9

    But the Zheng He map was taken from a 17th century map and counterfeited. It’s as fake as the Chinese claims in South China Sea/East Sea.

  • Tom
    8:50 am on June 14th, 2012 10

    2ID Doc, remind me to edit that page and correct the mistake. :lol:

    Joker, very funny but who’s the one really faking? :lol:

  • come on!
    5:29 pm on June 14th, 2012 11

    and Jesus was Korean right lol

  • kushibo
    5:38 pm on June 14th, 2012 12

    What the hell is this CE crap? This is how bigots, homophobes, racist, and anti-semites refer to A.D.

    1280 C.E. there is no such date, next issue!

    I never use “C.E.” (Common Era) but I find it funny in your reference to “anti-Semites” that you might think “pro-Semites” (as in Jews or pro-Jews) would be the ones who hold fast to “A.D.,” which stands for “Anno Domini” (the Year of Our Lord) even though they reject who Our Lord is.

  • kushibo
    6:55 pm on June 14th, 2012 13

    and Jesus was Korean right lol

    He is at Yonsei. ;-)

  • nagi
    3:16 am on June 21st, 2012 14

    obviously scarborough shoal belongs to the philippines lol.. My opinion is this ancient maps thingy is not a realible proof. Because Philippines also have their historical basis on scarborough shoal. And THAT time, there was no LAW states the nautical distance between any islands. There’s a HUGE difference between AD, BCE, whatever and present lol. So, the only way to solve this problem is to give the shoal to the philippines. China might be a huge country, but who knows? If david defeated Goliath, what more Philippines over China?

  • Seoul Guy
    10:16 am on June 21st, 2012 15

    DELETED BY ADMIN: Please don’t use racially derogatory terms. Thanks.

  • Glans
    12:30 pm on June 21st, 2012 16

    The first time I ever heard “Common Era” – it was so new that CE wouldn’t have been understood – a rabbi was giving the closing prayer as a television station was going off the air for the night. I understood what he meant and why he said it. Many scholars now use CE and BCE in prefence to AD and BC. It’s more inclusive and absolutely accurate. The Gregorian calendar begins 1 January, 1 CE. We really don’t know when Jesus was born. Dionysius Exiguus guessed it was 525 years before his own time.

  • 2ID Doc
    12:43 pm on June 21st, 2012 17

    #16 Thanks for your take on the date debate Glans. I am a history buff and since historians use the Gregorian calender & use CE & BCE I use it out of habit myself. I intend to offend no one in using those notations.

  • Tom
    2:56 pm on June 21st, 2012 18

    Seoul Guy = White guy pretending to be Korean, calling Chinese people racist names.

    :roll:

  • kushibo
    4:41 pm on June 21st, 2012 19

    Seoul Guy wrote:

    Tom = Chinko

    Cut it out, Seoul Guy.

  • kushibo
    4:55 pm on June 21st, 2012 20

    Regarding “CE” and BCE, I can’t think of a good reason to drop AD or BC from our common lexicon. It boils down to snubbing Christianity (and Catholicism in particular) for the sake of snubbing Christianity.

    I mean, the C.E. and B.C.E. are not only fuzzy and inaccurate, the “common era” they supposedly reference is the very same era marked by the rise of Christian dominance that are intrinsic in “BC” and “AD.”

    In short, as long as one uses the Gregorian calendar, it is a Christendom-centered system, whether one likes it or not. CE and BCE have an icky “Kwanzaa is the same as Christmas” feel to them.

    Oddly, it also takes a swipe at Christianity at the same time it foists Eurocentrism on non-European cultures. I mean, whose “common era” is it? It’s not East Asia’s. It’s not India’s. It’s certainly not the Americas’.

    At least the Gregorian calendar made no bones that it was intended as Christ-centered and simply called it that: “before Christ” and “the year of our Lord.” The year “1 CE” was not the beginning of any common era, but the beginning of the retroactive Gregorian calendar.

    For a true “common era,” maybe “Year One” should be 1492 AD, when the Eurocentrically labeled “Old World” and “New World” collided irrevocably with each other. Even 1918 AD or 1945 AD would be a better beginning of a “common era.” If one needs a beginning of a supposed common era from two millennia ago, maybe look to when the Romans occupied the entire circumference of the Mediterranean Sea.

    But as long as we have 1 AD as the start of the calendar — a date specifically chosen because those who set up the calendar believed that was when Christ was born — the whole “common era” stuff is nonsense.

  • Leon LaPorte
    5:28 pm on June 21st, 2012 21

    20. It’s only non-sense if you need it to validate your weak faith. It’s too late to change the calendar system altogether but like it or not the majority of people on this earth are not Christians.

    Isn’t it enough that the entire calender the world uses is based on your religion?

  • 2 ID Doc
    5:49 pm on June 21st, 2012 22

    20-Kushibo Irony=learning BCE & CE from the Catholic Biblical scholars at a local university where I took a couple of Bible History courses. I’m a “Cradle Catholic” the professors said they used those terms to be less threatening to the Jewish & Muslim historians they worked with in the Middle East. I agree that it is very Western-centric, but I have sent this thread way off-topic, so I will quit posting on this post.

  • Leon LaPorte
    6:05 pm on June 21st, 2012 23

    22. “”…the professors said they used those terms to be less threatening to the Jewish & Muslim historians they worked with…”

    How very… Christian of them. :grin:

  • kushibo
    7:38 pm on June 21st, 2012 24

    20. It’s only non-sense if you need it to validate your weak faith.

    Judging by your comment, it’s not me needing validation.

    “Common era” is a silly misnomer, borne apparently from some in the majority (as you made sure to state) of non-Christians to stick it to Christians.

    Isn’t it enough that the entire calender the world uses is based on my religion? Well, I want credit where credit is due. If the whole world were to adopt a neo-Mayan calendar, for example, then by golly the Mayans would deserve credit for that.

    What’s next? Forcing Catholic universities to take down their crucifixes (yeah, a non-Catholic student at Sogang told me they should do that). :roll:

 

RSS feed for comments on this post | TrackBack URI

By submitting a comment here you grant this site a perpetual license to reproduce your words and name/web site in attribution.

Bad Behavior has blocked 35332 access attempts in the last 7 days.