Comments by "Yerris" (@yerri5567) on "Italy pulls out of China's Belt and Road Initiative | DW News" video.

@bayafrica5909 If you bothered reading the Hague ruling, it says China (and by extension all countries) have no "legal basis" in making territorial claimed based on historical rights. Except China made those claims BEFORE international law existed. Just like how US/CA made their sovereign claims over NA BEFORE international law existed. Thats why its theirs. There is no "legal basis" in claiming territory prior to international laws existence. And China actually has not violated any maritime laws. In fact, UNCLOS supports countries to safeguard their territorial integrity.
5
@TruthTeller8888 Whats "great" or not is subjective. Above world average is "great" for most.
3
@TruthTeller8888 Yeh not all businesses succeed. A lot of businesses got bust even after borrowing a loan. Your point? That countries projects/loans must also have a 100% success rate?
3
@TruthTeller8888 Tell me, how does a "debt trap" work when the debt is only a tiny fraction of their total debt? For example, if you can pay $100m in debt, why is the $10m that China gives is called a "debt trap" but not the other $90m?
2
@TruthTeller8888 And countrys economy is in debt. So not sure what you mean by Chinas economy is in debt. All countries are...
2
@bayafrica5909 "Your explanation of China's ownership to the entire ocean of SCS was just too absurd" Learn to read properly. When did I speak about China owning the "entire" "ocean" of SCS? I specifically said islands, not sea. And SCS is not an "ocean", its a sea... "Beijing has never established jurisdiction or exclusive control on international waters before & after the world wars despite it's claim of historical rights" Not once did I speak about "waters". I spoke of islands only. "You insist that China hadn't violated the Hague Ruling which states: "Any pre-existing historic Chinese rights were extinguished to the extent those were INCOMPATIBLE with the LOSC."' Correct. The laws of UNCLOS is indeed INCOMPATIBLE with Chinas sovereign claims over the islands. Why? Because what China claims is SOVEREIGNTY over the islands in the SCS, whereas UNCLOS speaks about maritime boundaries, theyre 2 different things. UNCLOS has no authority to determine what country has sovereignty over what. So the UNCLOS are indeed incompatible with sovereign claims, as the laws DONT speak about sovereignty. Moreover, although China did make pre-existing claims from historical rights, their claims can also be claims based on conquest. Why does it have to be one or the other, but not both? Theres no law prior to international laws existence that prohibited countries from claiming territory based on conquest. What do you have to say about that? "I'm afraid you're interpreting international law base on your own personal counsel" Just because you dont understand my words doesnt mean theyre based on my personal counsel. Just like how you though I said China owned the "entire ocean", when I only spoke of the islands. Have you ever thought that its YOU thats interpreting words wrongly?
2
@bayafrica5909 "So, how can China own the entire ocean of South East Asia when according to history Beijing didn't even have jurisdictions & has no control of the whole mainland because of internal conflicts & war among the Dynasties?" Firstly, Im not Chinese, so I cant speak for the Chinese. I only speak of the laws in what you originally commented about. I do have interested in China, so I will comment further on what you mentioned. Qing Dynasty (Beijing) has documented jurisdiction over islands in the SCS. So thats that. And Qing Dynasty was was founded long before USA was even a country, and no dynasty came after that. So not sure what "war among dynasties" you speak of here. So do clarify. "How can China exercise jurisdiction over its land or seas the time it was subjugated by colonial powers like Britain & Japan?" Since when did a countrys sovereignty over XYZ gets dismissed just because you were attacked at ABC?? Moreover, they were only partially subjugated. The vast majority of China was untouched by Britain/Japan. "Did you even know that China was at the behest of Western Super powers before & after the world wars? You Pangyao are so ignorant" You mean when 8 major world colonisers teamed up to attack China? Yes, I do know. Why the need to resort to personal attacks? The one assuming that I am ignorant when Im not, is the one thats ignorant himself. And all that what you have said had absolutely nothing to do with my previous comment on China abiding by international laws/Hague ruling.
1