Comments by "Yerris" (@yerri5567) on "What’s behind the South China Sea dispute?" video.

Fun fact: China was literally the first claimant in the region to make sovereign claims over the island/reefs in the 1940s (some sources say 1930s). Whereas Vietnam and PH first mad their first sovereign claims over 3 decades later in the 1970s after oil was found.
21
@yellow13foxtwo China never expanded their map, all the territories they claim now were all inherited from Republic of China. In fact, PRC now claims less territory than what ROC claimed.
15
@yokeshkaliaperumal2012 You mean the areas that were never part of Indian history till the British came along? When the British invaded those areas recognised to be part of Qing China, they illegally forced the Tibetan local rulers there to ceded territory to them. Those Tibetan local rulers had ZERO authority to cede land as sovereignty over the territory was Qing Chinas. What that means is that territory was ILLEGAL ceded to the British. Illegal is illegal, stop trying to defend something illegal.
8
@orojackson56 "China is a signatory of UNCLOS that guarantees claims of territories within the 200 nautical miles as part of the jurisdiction of that country" The fact that you said this shows you dont understand how international laws work. China claims SOVEREIGNTY over the islands/reefs in the SCS. Meaning those islands/reefs are part of their country. EEZ does NOT mean you can now walk over another countrys sovereign territory.
6
@rainieresguerra-uw7on "No. Scarborough shoal and other areas in the SCS which are being claimed by the Philippines were already part of a map of the Philippines" When the US handed over sovereignty over PH to the PH government, it explicitly stated exactly what PH had and dont have sovereignty over. So we can safely say from this that PH does NOT have any sovereignty over any outlying islands in the SCS. If was only after oil was found in the 1970s, that PH suddenly made claims to the islands. If it was "already theirs" then why bother needing to make that announcement?
5
@Hkchinese888 Not really. Only some people of certain countries are laughing. Most people dont care.
3
@fenrirtheashenwolf7627 "Bruh, the right side almost touch the Philippines. How can China claim those waters literally in another country?" It you make the dotted lines even thicker, itll cover the cover the whole PH too. And when the US handed over sovereignty of PH to the PH government, it specifically stated that the sovereignty DOES NOT include the islands in the SCS.
3
@arjandeboer651 What did the Hague ruling say? Did you read it? It did NOT state those islands/reefs belong to the PH.
2
@nespar1541 Its a fact. If you insist that I am wrong, back it up with facts and figures. The fact of the matter is, PH does NOT have sovereignty over anything in the SCS as per stated in the treaty that handed over sovereignty to the PH.
1
@ColoniaMurder20 Oldest map of PH? You mean the map that included Borneo? Since when was Borneo part of the PH? Maps are maps. They are to include all geographic features, even if it doesnt belongs to you. Try again.
1
@Hkchinese888 No? Most people dont care because most people dont care about maps...
1
@rainieresguerra-uw7on Based on YOUR logic, no one ALSO recognises PHs claims. So what now? War?
1
@ColoniaMurder20 "you clearly have no idea about claim in Sabah.. take note tagalog people in Visayans people came from Bornoe and same as Tausug people where their claim Sabah as part their ancestral land" Thats not the country of PHs claim. If you want to go with ethnic homeland claims, then can Americans claim Europe since most of them came from Europe? Country is country, migration is migration. Theyre 2 very different things. Its wrong to conflate them together. Try again. "Royal families who control Kingdom of Borneo and Kingdom of Manila were related by blood" Ethnicity does not mean anything in modern geopolitics. Pakistanis and Indians are also related by blood. But theyre still 2 separate countries. As are many other countries in this world. Your point? "War? why your government cried so hard when PH and U.S. build up military bases near in Taiwan and Palawan Island?" My country is not involved in this. Try again. Moreover, even if China does cry really really hard. You still cant win a war with them. Try again, again.
1
@ColoniaMurder20 "I suggest to you learn about rent in Sabah territories from Sultanate of Sulu to British companies" Thats got nothing to do with PH. PH was ruled by Spanish at that time. Theyre 2 very different countries. Like I said, country is country, and people (migration) is people (migration). Theyre 2 very different things youre conflating together. And thats wrong. "and take note Taiwan was part of Philippines territories during Spanish rule. before Dutch stole control entire Formosa Island as known as Taiwan 400 years ago from Spanish" Wrong. Taiwan was part of Spain during Spanish rule. And it was just the northern tip of Taiwan, not the whole island. Youre seriously confused. Thats like saying India is part of Bangladesh during British rule. Such a wrong thing to say. Say no more. Youre too confused. And the Dutch did not control the "entire" island. They only controlled the southern arrow tip of Taiwan. Just look at their map. You keep spreading misinformation.
1
@ColoniaMurder20 "so you admit many parts in China weren't control entire Tibetan, Xinjiang, and many parts of China?" Wrong again. People cant "admit" to something that has no relation to them. If I say youre Chinese, did I just "admit" youre Chinese? Tibetan, Xinjiang, etc had been part of China (Qing) for longer than USA has been a country. So why wouldnt they be part of China? When Qing transferred sovereignty of China to Republic of China, it also included the territories of Tibet and Xinjiang. So sovereignty was legally theirs to begin with. "take note indigenous people in Taiwan were related to Filipinos" Im not sure if youre deliberately doing this, but your words truly are filled with ambiguity, thus misinformation. Its Filipinos that are related to the indigenous people of Taiwan. Not the other way around. All Austronesians originated from Taiwan. "Spanish mentioned about black people in Taiwan.. let me guess those black people were annihilated by Han during their occupation" How black is black? Some people call brown people black. If youre talking about Taiwan aborigines, then they still exists. But whats this got to do with the above points? "you said Spanish and Dutch only control southern tip?" Read properly. I said Spanish controlled the northern tip of Taiwan, and the Dutch controlled the southern arrow tip of Taiwan. And your map just proved I was right. So not sure what youre laughing at. Just remember, YOU where the one that said the Dutch controlled the "ENTIRE" island. Your map has proved you wrong and proved me right.
1
@ColoniaMurder20 "Han chinese only control small part in western China territories. if we follow your logic not entire western China" Thats not my "logic". You clearly dont know how countries work. Its not about "control", its about "sovereignty". Its impossible for every single country on this planet to have "control" over every inch of their territory. From the deserts of America/Australia/Africa, forests of the Amazons, icy lands of Canada/Russia, to even mountains of various countries, governments have not walked every inch of those territories, does that mean its not theirs? "Kindly explain to me where are negrito people in Taiwan now?" In Taiwan. They live where they want to live. Away from the cities. Just like most indigenous Australians and native Americans. "did Han chinese annihilated one of indigenous people in Taiwan as known as "Negrito" people during their occupation during colonial era?" You should ask the Taiwanese that. But again, what does that have to do with my comments? Youre shifting goalpost here.
1
@yokeshkaliaperumal2012 "Those 'local tibetian leaders' should have been under qing's authority, is it not? Why wasn't Qing doing anything when British India took over their lands?" They gave authority for Tibetans to govern themselves, but Qing ultimately had sovereignty over the territory. And Qing just recovered from being under siege from 8 major foreign powers at that time, and was not ready to start another war maybe? Or maybe the local Tibetans didnt or couldnt report to Beijing for them until it was too late? Who knows. Regardless, British Indias seizure of Tibet was illegal. And theres no treaty that indicates any secession of Tibetan territory from Qing China to British India.
1
@fenrirtheashenwolf7627 I couldnt find the exact same source Ive previously read from again, but what I did find was that when the Spanish transferred sovereignty to the US (Treaty of Paris 1898), they drew lines on what they gave to the US. The lines DID NOT include the outlying islands/reefs to the west of PH. If the US didnt receive sovereignty to those outlying islands/reef, then they obviously cant transfer that to the PH since the US didnt even have sovereignty over them.
1
@halfevilhalfgood2206 Whats a joke? That PRC didnt inherit their currently claimed territory from ROC?
1