Comments by "Lee Sk John" (@LeeSkJohn-sv8wi) on "TaiwanPlus Docs" channel.

China and Taiwan owns SCS before unclos even existed. They do not need unclos arbitration to own their scs.
3
@Punkhazard1292 unclos is not UN. Go improve your knowledge before commenting here.
2
@BustLoca are you pretending not to understand my English. I specifically stated in article 2 of Taipei treaty or sinojapan peace treaty. I did not mention it's in post dam and Cairo declaration. Read again my explanation about obligated by postdam and Cairo declaration. Japan do not need to mention the owner. The treaty itself and subsequent event already shows it's China's through uti possidetis. Unless your interpretation of china signing the Taipei treaty or sinojapan peace treaty is to return SCS back to Philippines???🤣 You are a joke here. Go read article 2 of Taipei treaty or sinojapan peace treaty before you comment. Here is article 2 of Taipei treaty:.. It is recognised that under Article 2 of the Treaty of Peace which Japan signed at the city of San Francisco on 8 September 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the San Francisco Treaty), Japan has renounced all right, title, and claim to Taiwan (Formosa) and Penghu (the Pescadores) as well as the Spratley Islands and the ... https://china.usc.edu › treaty-peace... Treaty of Peace between the Republic of China and Japan (Treaty of Taipei ...
2
Taiwan constitution still claim they own the 11dash SCS.
2
@Punkhazard1292 I know what's unclos. so why must china leave UN? USA troll. Nothing amusing in your comment to laugh like a fool.
1
@clarkwayne3440 Did I claim china and Taiwan owns the whole world???
1
@Punkhazard1292 if that's so, then why must china leave UN??? USA troll.🤣
1
@BustLoca Are you sure??? It's unclos that had no jurisdiction to territorial dispute. It's UN ICJ that had such jurisdiction. China is an important member of UN with veto right. Your comment is irrelevant.
1
@BustLoca I did not write ICJ have jurisdiction over a countrys territory. I wrote UN ICJ can judge territorial sovereignty. Not unclos.
1
@clarkwayne3440 11dash SCS is not the whole scs. ASEAN countries is there does not meant they own China's and Taiwan spratlies and Paracels groups of islands within China's 11dash scs. China allows others to fish does not meant 11dash SCS belongs to them. China doesn't own Taiwan does not meant Taiwan is one china.😝😁🤣
1
@BustLoca China and Taiwan owns SCS before unclos even existed. They do not need unclos law of islands or reef nor arbitration to own their scs. Your comment is irrelevant.
1
@BustLoca Again, I am not writing about international organisation having jurisdiction on a country territorial sovereignty. I am stating UN ICJ can decide on territorial Sovereignty in a dispute. Not unclos . Unclos arbitration on south china sea in 2016 is invalidated by china and Taiwan for this reason. Even the award of eez to Philippines is not Philippines territory. Philippines won nothing in unclos arbitration. If philipines is serious, go proper international court UN ICJ to get a case.
1
@BustLoca dash line is maritime claim of the sea within China's Taiwan, hainan spratlies and Paracels groups of islands as belonging to china.
1
@BustLoca china did not claim scs because of the name. After ww2 Japan return SCS back to china in the Taipei treaty or sinojapan peace treaty obligated by postdam and Cairo declaration. Go read up article 2 of Taipei treaty or sinojapan peace treaty. Next time do some research before commenting instead of asking stupid questions
1
@BustLoca yes. Japan did not own them. They stolen it from china during ww2. That's why they are obligated in the postdam and Cairo declaration to return occupied territories back to the owner. China was not invited in the San Francisco peace treaty due to civil war. That's the reason china inked a separate treaty for the return of their occupied territories in the Taipei treaty or sinojapan peace treaty. It's specifically stated in article 2 of the treaty Taiwan, Paracels and spratlies groups of islands to be renounced to china. USA gave china a naval vessel to reclaim their spratlies and were present in the flag raising ceremony in Taiping islands.. Again you show your ignorance. Next time do proper research before commenting here.
1
@BustLoca Are you sure? The territory dispute between Malaysia and Singapore regarding Batu islands were presided in UN ICJ ... War can also be a way of settling dispute. China will go to UN ICJ if Philippines can get a case. But I doubt as treaties and events in history clearly shows scs belongs to china and not Philippines. Instead Philippines put up a fake court to fake sovereignty. EEZ in international law is not Philippines territory. And unclos have no jurisdiction to deny china historical right. Again you show your ignorance.
1
@BustLoca I specifically gave you the treaty and explained to you how the treaty were inked. Yet you are in denial. Go read up the declaration and treaty before BS here.
1
@BustLoca after the treaty were inked with USA as witness , USA gave china a naval ship to reclaim their scs and we're even present in the flag ceremony. Don't just assume USA gave because china was weak.
1
@BustLoca your comment on gambling is irrelevant
1
@BustLoca what I do is none of your business. What's important is to improve your knowledge so that you understand the truth about south china sea.
1
@BustLoca read carefully what I have attach in the article 2 of Taipei treaty or sinojapan peace treaty. It's clearly stated Taiwan, spratlies and Paracels. That's all within China's 11dash SCS.
1
@BustLoca wrong. There were no records of Mao asking the whole SCS to be hand over to china. You spew lies. The truth I have written is Japan return SCS back to china in the Taipei treaty or sinojapan peace treaty obligated by postdam and Cairo declaration. The 11dash SCS claim only covers 80%of SCS after ROC employed USA cartoghers to chart them. These event of history were recorded in internationally recognised treaties claim and declaration. Not CCP lies.
1
@BustLoca there were no CCP documentary about replacing Chiang with Mao??? Care to give evidence?
1
@BustLoca read article 2 of the treaty That I had reference twice in my comment. You still deny in front of evidence to lie the treaty had nothing to do with south china sea.
1
@BustLoca china already fish in their south China sea before unclos eez even existed. Your comment is irrelevant.
1