Comments by "Logik" (@philonetic321) on "China and the Philippines Clash in the South China Sea | WSJ News" video.

  1. Only China disputes it. The rest of the world agrees that China is wrong.
    57
  2.  @until-w4m  Can the richest country in the world help them? Yes. USA is not like China. USA is actually self-sufficient. China can't last 4 months without imported food.
    22
  3.  @wionporky9937  United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
    18
  4.  @Melsims1984  You bots are too funny.
    14
  5.  @LongMuyang-do5rs  It's not Chinese waters.
    12
  6.  @until-w4m  Remind me, how much food does China import? Good talk. Insults are for children.
    8
  7.  @until-w4m  Mhmm. All you have is insults and propaganda. Truly childish.
    8
  8.  @黄小杰-l3k  Despite what you think of yourself, your feelings are not relevant. Cry all you like.
    6
  9. China imports more agricultural products than any other country. China's reliance on food imports is growing faster than any other country. Shut down 2 corridors and people starve within months.
    6
  10.  @artcorner1298  This is Philippines exclusive economic zone. It's not in dispute. The Hague held an international tribunal and declared the 9 dash line to have no legal basis. China has no business being there and they are breaking international law.
    6
  11.  @Kwh.a  That's how a child thinks. Are you a child?
    5
  12.  @Steven.K8  UNCLOS, international law. It's Philippine's exclusive economic zone, not Chinese waters. You're just regurgitating Chinese propaganda. Your opinions are not relevant.
    5
  13.  @until-w4m  You have no argument. You are embarrassing yourself.
    5
  14.  @ddding9518  You're right, it's just 168 countries and the entire EU which have ratified the treaty. Including China.
    4
  15.  @Steven.K8  It's not hard to understand. China has NO legal claim in the region. They are in Philippine waters, not an island. They are ramming Philippine boats, in Philippine's EEZ. The 9 dash was China's only claim. Now China has no legal claim, at all. China has no business being in Philippine waters, period.
    4
  16.  @Steven.K8  That's not an argument. This is inside of the Philippine's exclusive economic zone and over 600nm away from China. This is not Chinese waters.
    3
  17. ​ @Steven.K8  The Hague held an international tribunal and declared the 9 dash line to have no legal basis. Try again.
    3
  18.  @Steven.K8  It doesn't determine Philippines claim because it wasn't on trial. China's claim was and it has ZERO legal basis. China has no business being there, period. Again, it's not Chinese waters, they have no claim.
    3
  19.  @Steven.K8  China's claim has been processed through international tribunal and denied as having no legal basis. China has no legal claim. It is not Chinese waters. I can repeat it as many times as you require.
    3
  20.  @Steven.K8  China and The Philippines have both ratified UNCLOS. This is nowhere NEAR Chinese coastal waters or any recognized Chinese land. Artificial islands also do not count. Take your propaganda back to China.
    2
  21.  @Steven.K8  China's claim has been processed through international tribunal and denied as having no legal basis. China has no legal claim. I can repeat it as many times as you require.
    2
  22. Reported for spam and misinformation.
    2
  23.  @bolifevlog  Oh, so you're spamming. No, it's not the USA's fault that some idiots thought they could ride on the wing like a cartoon character. That's stupid.
    2
  24. China and Philippines have both ratified UNCLOS. The Hague International Tribunal has already concluded that China's claim has no legal basis.
    1
  25.  @LongMuyang-do5rs  Even if you had evidence of that, which you don't, it still wouldn't matter lol. China has NO authority in those waters.
    1
  26.  @LongMuyang-do5rs  Even if you had evidence of that, which you don't, it still wouldn't matter. China has ZERO authority in those waters.
    1
  27.  @LongMuyang-do5rs  Even if you had evidence of that, which you don't, it still wouldn't matter lol. China has zero authority there.
    1
  28.  @LongMuyang-do5rs  China has no authority there.
    1
  29.  @黄小杰-l3k  UNCLOS. It's Philippines EEZ. China is breaking international law. Cry about it all you like. Facts don't care about your feelings.
    1
  30.  @黄小杰-l3k  Cry about it all you like. It's international law and China is breaking it.
    1
  31.  @Steven.K8  Name of treaty? See, China didn't exist as a recognized country until 1949. Try again. China and the Philippines have both ratified UNCLOS. This is inside of the Philippine's EEZ. China is breaking international law.
    1
  32.  @Steven.K8  China has no business being there. Nobody recognizes China's alleged ownership, nobody recognizes the 9 dash line. That is fantasy. China is breaking international law.
    1
  33.  @Steven.K8  This is nowhere near Chinese coastal waters or any recognized Chinese land. China has no business there. Both countries have ratified UNCLOS. China is breaking international law.
    1
  34. This is nowhere near Chinese coastal waters or any recognized Chinese land. China has no business there. Both countries have ratified UNCLOS. China is breaking international law.
    1
  35.  @Steven.K8  This is nowhere near Chinese waters or any recognized Chinese land. Artificial islands don't count. Both countries have ratified UNCLOS. China is breaking international law.
    1
  36. ​ @Steven.K8  It was their coastline before China tried to dispute it. China also makes artificial islands. China is 600nm+ away, nobody recognizes their claims. China is delusional. China also ratified UNCLOS. This is the Philippines EEZ, that's not up for debate. China is breaking international law.
    1
  37.  @Steven.K8  China has no claim to the region and has no business being there. China didn't exist as a recognized country until 1949. 9 dash line is nonsense propaganda. Artificial islands don't matter. Try again.
    1
  38.  @Steven.K8  No, sorry, that's just China and the 9 dash line propaganda. Artificial islands also don't count. China ratified UNCLOS and is breaking international law.
    1
  39. ​ @Steven.K8 9 dash line was propaganda created in 2009. The rest of the world isn't stupid. Only China disputes it but it was already part of Philippines' EEZ. The 9 dash line is not recognized by any international community. There has already been an international tribunal which concluded that the 9 dash line has no legal basis. It's fantasy. China is breaking international law.
    1
  40.  @Steven.K8  The Hague already had an international tribunal and declared that the 9 dash line has no legal basis, Get over it. China is breaking international law.
    1
  41.  @Steven.K8  9 dash line has NO legal basis. China has no business there. End of story.
    1
  42.  @Steven.K8  China has no claim, 9 dash line has ZERO legal basis. China has no business being there or ramming boats, they are still breaking international law. Try again.
    1
  43.  @Steven.K8  China has no claim or business being there, especially ramming boats. They are still breaking international law. Try again.
    1
  44.  @Steven.K8  China didn't accept the result? Gee, what a shocker. 9 dash line has NO legal basis, anywhere, for anything. China has no other claim. That was China's claim. Now, China has ZERO legal claim. It was propaganda to begin with. China has NO business being in the region, period.
    1
  45.  @Steven.K8  You already made it clear in the other thread that you have no regard for international treaties and law. You have no argument. Stop wasting my time with propaganda.
    1
  46.  @Steven.K8  China's claim was a part of the 9 dash line. Their claim has been determined to have zero legal basis. It's not hard to understand. China has no claim.
    1
  47.  @Steven.K8  Read my previous comment. China has no legal claim. Doesn't matter if China doesn't agree, the tribunal is over.
    1
  48. China and Philippines have both ratified UNCLOS. The Hague International Tribunal has already concluded that China's claim has no legal basis.
    1
  49.  @pennsboro  Indian Ocean.
    1
  50. China and Philippines have both ratified UNCLOS. The Hague International Tribunal has already concluded that China's claim has no legal basis.
    1
  51. China and Philippines have both ratified UNCLOS. The Hague International Tribunal has already concluded that China's claim has no legal basis.
    1
  52.  @until-w4m  Looks like I hit a nerve. Sorry, you're mistaken. China is nowhere near self-sufficient. But keep dreaming.
    1
  53.  @until-w4m  China is a net importer of food, get over it. If BRI corridors are shut down, China starves.
    1
  54.  @until-w4m  China is a net importer of foods. Keep dreaming.
    1
  55.  @until-w4m  China is a net importer of foods. Shut down 2 BRI corridors and China starves in 6 months. Keep dreaming.
    1
  56.  @until-w4m  They are a net importer of foods. Shut down 2 BRI corridors and they starve in 6 months. Keep dreaming.
    1
  57. They are a net importer of foods. Shut down 2 BRI corridors and they starve in 6 months. Keep dreaming.
    1
  58.  @until-w4m  They are a net importer of foods. Shut down 2 BRI corridors and they starve in 6 months. Keep dreaming.
    1
  59.  @until-w4m  They are a net importer of foods. Shut down 2 BRI corridors and people starve in 6 months. Keep dreaming.
    1
  60.  @until-w4m  They are a net importer of foods. Shut down 2 BRI corridors and people starve in 6 months. All you have is propaganda.
    1
  61.  @until-w4m  They are a net importer of foods. Shut down 2 BRI corridors and people starve in 6 months. All you have is propaganda.
    1
  62.  @until-w4m  China is a net importer of foods. Shut down 2 BRI corridors and people starve in 6 months.
    1
  63. Shut down 2 BRI corridors and people starve in 6 months. All you have is propaganda.
    1
  64.  @until-w4m  China is a net importer of foods. For being so large, there is relatively little farmland. Shut down 2 BRI corridors and people starve in 6 months. All you have is propaganda.
    1
  65.  @until-w4m  China is a net importer of foods. For being so large, there is relatively little farmland. Shut down 2 BRI corridors and people starve in 6 months. All you have is propaganda.
    1
  66.  @until-w4m  Shut down 2 B.R.I. corridors and China starts to starve in months. All you have is propaganda.
    1
  67.  @until-w4m  Shut down 2 B.R.I. corridors and China starts to starve in months. All you have is propaganda.
    1
  68. China is an extreme net importer of foods. Growth of food imports near 5%/year. Look in the mirror and take your own advice. Insults are for children.
    1
  69.  @until-w4m  China imports more than 100 million tons of food in 2018 and it's only gotten higher since then. China imports more agricultural products than any other country, including soybeans, corn, wheat, rice, and dairy products. Shut down 2 corridors and people starve within months.
    1
  70.  @混元手霹雳  Who do you think you're kidding? Their GDP has more than tripled over the last 20 years.
    1
  71.  @doringgray6952 1. China imports about 10% of their food. 140 million people depending on imports. China imports more food than any other country. 2. I'm American. We have a defense treaty with them. The benefit is keeping the open seas free of Chinese piracy and taxation.
    1
  72.  @混元手霹雳  Are you kidding me? Look at their GDP over the last 20 years. It's more than tripled.
    1
  73.  @yutangss4582  The USA is self sufficient in energy and food. China is not. China would collapse inside of 6 months if 2 BRI corridors were shut down.
    1
  74. China and Philippines have both ratified UNCLOS. The Hague International Tribunal has already concluded that China's claim has no legal basis.
    1
  75. China and Philippines have both ratified UNCLOS. The Hague International Tribunal has already concluded that China's claim has no legal basis.
    1
  76. China started to believe their own lies.
    1
  77. China and Philippines have both ratified UNCLOS. The fake 9 dash line was created in 2009. The Hague International Tribunal has already concluded that China's claim has no legal basis.
    1
  78. China and Philippines have both ratified UNCLOS. The Hague International Tribunal has already concluded that China's claim has no legal basis.
    1
  79. China and Philippines have both ratified UNCLOS. The Hague International Tribunal has already concluded that China's claim has no legal basis.
    1
  80. China and Philippines have both ratified UNCLOS. The Hague International Tribunal has already concluded that China's claim has no legal basis.
    1
  81. China and Philippines have both ratified UNCLOS. The Hague International Tribunal has already concluded that China's claim has no legal basis.
    1