Comments by "Yerris" (@yerri5567) on "Why Taiwan matters to the United States" video.

Eyes Eagle How come you dont mention US bots too? You should not have any bias when it comes to bots
6
jontheb123 Your words are just as deceptive. Who said sovereignty equates to absolute control? Most of the Amazon is untouched by Brazil and other South American countries. Does that mean they dont have sovereignty over them? Qing China was the first country to have sovereignty over the whole of Taiwan. Not Ming.
3
 @bctvanw Sovereignty is not about "conquering" or having "absolute control". Otherwise countries like Brazil cant claim the Amazon as theirs...
3
@craigslistseller9354 What does psyche got to do with anything? Isnt Taiwan doing just fine now? Those that experienced Japanese oppression are mostly dead already. So your story is a 1 sided story. I was fortunate enough, unfortunately, to listen in to an actual Taiwanese that actually experienced Japanese oppression. He hated them to the core of his heart. Those that dont hate them are simply born after the Japanese left, thats post 1945.
2
@overworlder There was NO Dutch official present then. When the Dutch came, they came as the Dutch East India Company. A COMPANY FYI. And they never claimed sovereignty over Taiwan. Qing was the first state that did. How does Taiwan have an absolute right of Independence when it they were legally never allowed to? If you support people having an "absolute right of independence" without having any regards to the legality of things, then me and my family, and my community would like to be our own independent country too. Is that allowed? You know how many people have tried and failed simply due to it being illegal? Your point is flawed.
2
@overworlder "you don’t know the meanings of words. Taiwan is de facto independent. It’s government is not ‘dependent’ on the ROC, whatever that means" FYI, "Taiwan" is the name of the island. The island IS in fact dependent on the Republic of China, because theyre ruled and governed by the Republic of China, a Chinese state mind you, not a "Taiwan state". In other words, ROC is the one thats independent. "Taiwan" (island) is not. And another FYI, Taiwan =/= ROC. That is for the politically ignorant. Taiwan is a PART OF ROC. "The old KMT claims are just a historical curiosity. They can change their constitution if they want although it is a difficult process." Not at all. That is still KMTs CORE VALUE - that THEY are the legitimate rulers of China. Its possible to change their constitution, its not difficult. The thing is wont be able to, simply because theres NOT enough support within the government to! They need 75%+ of the seats to vote for it. Thats impossible since KMT hold about half the votes (give or take). And theyre not going to vote against their own core values. "The real reason they don’t is because of the antics and constant threats of violence from the desperate Chungnanhai clique" The Chinese Civil war has not technically ended yet. There was no peace treaty nor armistice signed. Do you understand what "civil war" means? It means war within the SAME country. Tell me, now that PRC has succeeded ROC, all ROC territories "de facto" belong to them. There, I used your favourite word. How well does the word "de facto" hold now? "But Xi’s tricks can’t hold off the inevitable as China’s economy flatlines" Your tricks dont fool me. Chinas economy is "flat-lining" around 6-7% GDP growth a year. Which is MUCH higher than the rest of the developed world. Who are you trying to fool? "See the USSR or Nazi Germany for the stupidity and failure of dictatorships" Use the failed minority to judge the rest? Thats not a very intelligent thing to do. You know Kings are also dictators right? How many Kingdoms thrived in the history of mankind? Too many. So what does that say about dictators? If the country/kingdom is run by a good dictator, they will thrive; if the country/kingdom is run by a bad dictator, they will not. Its simple as that. Dictatorship isnt inherently "good" nor "bad", its the person behind it that is. Same goes for democracies. Vote in an incompetent leader, their country will fall into shambles. "Weve seen it all before". "Democracies last for centuries, dictatorships come and go. We’ve seen it all before" Youve never heard of failed democracies? Youve never heard of kingdoms that last of centuries? Monarchs are effectively dictators too you know? Moreover, China is authoritarian, not run by a dictator. Even Xi needs permission/support from his government to do what he wants. Do dictators need permissions to do things? Clearly you dont know what youre talking about.
2
@overworlder I know what a democracy is. No need to define it for me. Your comment doesnt counter ANY of the points that I raised. Taiwan is the a middle of an unfinished civil war between PRC and ROC - thats technically in a prolonged ceasefire. You expect no violence in a civil war? Theyre lucky that PRC has been so patient and not firing a shot imo. Also, if you want to speak about democracy whereby the majority of the country gets heard, then you must also include the 1+ billion people of China. As Taiwan is part of China afterall regardless of what you think. Remember, Republic of CHINA claims to be the country called CHINA. And its stated very clearly in their constitution. So its not just the inhabitants of provincial Taiwan that gets a say. The whole 1+ billion people of China gets a say.
2
@romanianturk2101 How can an island physically be part of the mainland?
1
@CKLim1998 Look what happened to them? You mean look what happened to them after they failed to enact their constitutional duty of Article 23 of their very own Basic Constitution?
1
@samthesuspect Nope, they only had control over ports. They never claimed sovereignty over the island.
1
@overworlder When the Dutch came, there were already Chinese there. Just not administered by any government
1
@samthesuspect No? My first comment I said Qing China was the first country to have sovereignty over the whole of Taiwan?
1
@overworlder "Chinese" was what the West referred to the "Middle Kingdom" since time immemorial. Doesnt matter which Dynasty, whether itd be Qing or Ming.
1
@overworlder You didnt say the word "state". Whos changing whos words now?
1
@overworlder And "the Dutch" is not. "The Dutch" refers to the people. You said: "The Dutch were on Taiwan before the Ming or Qing" So it could very easily be interpreted as the Dutch people were on Taiwan before the Ming/Qing people.
1
@overworlder What do you mean by "exactly"? My last comment referred to the "people", contrary to your point when you were referring to the "states". If we want to talk about people, then the Chinese were there before the Dutch as mentioned in my first comment to you. There are records of Chinese already there before the Dutch have arrived.
1
@overworlder No. Nothing in my argument was false. In fact, it is your argument that is uninformed. Taiwan has NEVER been "independent". Even now, its currently dependent on the government of Republic of China, a Chinese state that claims to be the country called China. The "only reason" why it cant "enact its democratic mandate" for independence as you call it is because its simply unconstitutional under their own laws. To secede from their very own country they claim to be, China (ROC), without 75% of the houses votes, is treason. Its got nothing to do with CCP, but their very own laws.
1
 @overworlder Crazy talk? Everything I said are facts. Youre just in denial so it seems "crazy" to you.
1
@overworlder And now, somehow defending KMT and ROCs constitution is now "CCP propaganda". And that Im being "manipulated". You dont even know what youre talking about anymore. Youre so full of yourself.
1
@overworlder Its not "ancient history" if its CURRENTLY still in their very constitution that they refuse to change as they do not enough support within their government to make that change. Again, PRC is authoritarian, not run by dictatorship. Even Xi needs permission from his government before doing things. If you keep denying this then that can only mean one thing, youre in denial and cant speak facts. Tell me, why is the will of only one province the only thing that matters in their whole country? Its like saying ONLY the will of Catalonia matters in the whole country of Spain, or ONLY the will of Quebec matters in the whole country of Canada. They MUST have consent from the WHOLE country if they want to secede from their country. Otherwise its ILLEGAL. And that brings back to one of my main points. If everyone didnt care about the legality of things then let me tell you, there would be over a million different countries in this world, as I (and my family and community) for one would like our block of land to be my/our own independent country too!
1
@overworlder My 2 lines about your "dictatorship" is long? Especially when it wasnt even about "pro-dictatorship" at all? What are you on? Your eyes alright there? Catalonia isnt "de facto" part of Spain, it IS part of Spain, as per recognised by the world. Taiwan also isnt "de facto" part of China, it IS part of China. Again, as per recognised by the world. And like I said, Taiwan isnt "independent", its "dependent" of Republic of CHINA, a CHINESE state, that claims to be CHINA. ROC is independent, NOT "Taiwan". The only reason they arent dejure is because Taiwan is not recognised by the world to be "independent", because they were NEVER "independent". It had been governed by China for longer than USA has been a country, with only a small blip of 50 years governed by Japan.
1
@overworlder "the CCP ignores international law all the time" Which one? Specifically which international law did PRC ignore? I really do hope you state the actual law for this one, not some words from third party thats been misconstrued. "The CCP doesn’t have control over Taiwan" Theres always a time in history where X doesnt have control over Z when theyre part of the same country. Just like how Spain didnt always have control over Catalonia. And India not having control over Sentinel Islands. Nor South American countries have control over some Amazonian tribes. So what? That doesnt change the FACT that theyre part of the SAME country. "If the CCP starts a war, it could easily end with an independent Taiwan" The Chinese Civil War between PRC and ROC never ended. No peace treaty nor armistice was ever signed. Its technically a prolonged ceasefire. So its not "starts a war", its "resume" the war. "Taiwan is de facto independent" Wrong. Republic of CHINA is independent, not "Taiwan". If Taiwan DEPENDENT on the Chinese state of Republic of China, then theyre NOT called "independent".
1
@overworlder You truly are sad for liking your own comment...like seriously, who does that? Its like licking your own balls... "All your pro-CCP..." No "pro-CCP" nonsense. Im pro facts. I wonder why you didnt say Im also "pro-ROC" too? Loser. "from stealing IP to trashing international law to breaking promises" Im still not seeing where the actual international law China supposedly ignored is. Is it that hard to back what you have to say? And IP theft is everywhere, including in the US. Why have double standards and only mention China? Even your "Taiwan" has IP theft. Surely youre going to bring that up too right? "like Xi’s personal face-to-face promise to Obama that the SCS would not be militarised" Oh and American politicians 100% stick to what they say yeh? Again, why the double standards? How come I dont see you trashing them and demonise the US in the same way you are with China? "The free world will oppose any effort by the sinister Xi dictatorship to seize or siege Taiwan" The fact that you keep using the term "dictator" means you truly are in denial of the facts. Ive already educated you that even Xi needs permission from his government to do what he wants, and that by definition means he ISNT a dictator as dictators dont need permission to do things. Also, no country on this planet can dictate what any other country can or cannot do within their sovereign borders. Thats called meddling with another countrys internal affairs. The so-called "free world" is doing exactly what they dont want others to do. So hypocritical... "The moment Chungnanhai..." Youve mention this a number of times already. Its as if you expect others to understand what that means. We are speaking English here.
1
@overworlder "another wall of tedious ranting. You’re just going around in circles" I am DIRECTLY addressing the points you have raised. Thats not called "ranting". And its NOT me that going around in circles. Its YOU. Everything I have said is RESPONSE to YOU going around in circles falsely saying the exact same lies. You never learn. "I’ll like my comments if I want. Enjoy your day" And thats how we know youre sad...
1
@overworlder This is not a private conversation between me and you. This is thread is public you know right? "We" refers to everyone reading this if that wasnt obvious enough already. Its not me that doesnt know the facts. Its YOU that doesnt, thats why you keep repeating the same incorrect nonsense. As for your international law comment, I specifically asked you to pull out the very international law China supposedly ignored. Till now, you still have yet to provide that very exact law. Why bother bringing up laws you dont even know? You cant even rebuttal thats why youre either repeating the same incorrect nonsense, or trying to run as far as you can.
1
@overworlder Every single time you respond, someone other than me on this thread gets a notification on this. And my comments have been sprinkled with more than 1 likes. So obviously at least 2 people is reading this. And Im the one thats asking you for the exact law, and now you ask me back to tell you what the laws are? What a joke. Its exactly that "googling" isnt easy this days as all the info has been misconstrued by people/organisations with their agendas. Its almost always bias to some extent. Just like you are right now. Im clearly defending ROCs constitution, which has NOTHING to do with CCP, yet you STILL go rambling on about CCP this CCP that. Whos the dishonest and ignorant one now?
1
@overworlder And providing the exact law is too hard because you dont know it. Got it. You want to bring international law into this, then we indeed need to look into the law about this. Thats how it is. Same for government stance and diplomatic framework. Its all completely set in stone. Its not about "me", its about how the worlds governments work. I suggest you learn how the world works before speaking about such topics if you dont want to make a fool out of yourself. Yes, youre rambling. You keep bringing up irrelevant points and points that were already addressed. Im directly responding you with relevancy. Responding with relevancy is by definition NOT rambling. You say the ROC will shatter. What about the PRC? Some say theyre going to collapse soon as well. Let me tell you this, if PRC does collapse, I bet you ANYTHING that ROC will take over the mainland to reclaim their lost territory and CLAIM TO BE THE COUNTRY CALLED CHINA, because thats the name of the country theyve always claimed to be!
1
username You mean doom Taiwan.
1
@HoneyCruiser The outcome was overpopulation of Whites, so Whites dominated the votes to become part of the US. Poor natives couldnt do a thing...
1
@avatarxs He could mean the revolution from Ming and Qing too. Probably?
1
@dimensional3926 Not everyone that has a different opinion that you is a bot. Making such a claim is just brainless...
1
@avatarxs Qing already conquered Ming then. The remnant Ming loyalist "revolted" Qings rule, therefore by definition it can be considered a revolution. A couple thousands? What are you talking about? Koxingas troops alone was already 25000. And there were already many Chinese living in Taiwan at that time. There was the Guo Huaiyi Rebellion when the Dutch killed 4000 Chinese then. And that was said to be 1 in 10 Chinese living just in the Dutch controlled region then, let alone the whole of Taiwan.
1
@willywonka4340 Sovereignty is not about "conquering" or having "absolute control". Otherwise countries like Brazil cant claim the Amazon as theirs...
1
@willywonka4340 "then based on your logic of sovereignty, the Republic of China can claim, as it has done so in the past, the entire Mainland is China as part of their territory. The thing is, they have no Administration over the mainland, at least not anymore. Even I find this ambitious claim laughable" Its not "MY" logic, thats how the world defines sovereignty. And yes, ROC claims mainland China as part of its territory. Till this day, they still have not revoked their claims over the mainland. Theyre just being low key about it biding their time thats all. "From what I read, they're okay with it as long as the government provides them with what they need" Maybe some, but not all. And Im talking about untouched/unexplored land too, not just the tribes. "But during the times of Qing Dynasty annexation of Taiwan, the indigenous Aborigines were very very hostel and refuse to give up their claims of their lands in the mountainous regions, to the point that they will fight to the death...See the difference?" Excuse me? Youre telling me that the Amazonian tribes didnt fight to their deaths before their compromise? What about the Sentinel islands that India has sovereignty over? Till this day theyre still untouched and still hostile to all forces other than their own tribe. Does that mean that India doesnt have sovereignty over the islands?
1
@bctvanw "I know the Netherlands ranks at the top of “who can claim” Taiwan by your logic. " "By my logic" again? You sure you 2 arent the same people? I already said, its not "MY" logic, its the WORLDS logic. Netherlands NEVER claimed sovereignty over the island. They only had control over ports. So tell me, how "by my logic" can Netherlands claim sovereignty over Taiwan, when they never claimed sovereignty over Taiwan in the past again? "Btw ROC claimed Mongolia, but it never ruled it since it was founded in 1949" What was founded in 1949? ROC was founded in 1912. When Qing China collapsed in 1912, Qing transferred its sovereignty to ROC which included Mongolia. It was written very clearly in black and white. And it was Mongolia that illegally revolted with the support of Russia then. ROC didnt even have a say as they were in the losing side of a civil war then. "PRC claims Taiwan, but it has never ruled over Taiwan since it was founded in 1949" After effectively winning the civil war, PRC, with the recognition of the world, succeeded the ROC, and claimed sovereignty over ALL of ROCs territory, including mainland China and provincial Taiwan. Every country you can think of in this world also supported this and agreed PRC is the legitimate ruler of all China including Taiwan. And that includes your country too.
1
@bctvanw "The same?" Did I say they were the same? And since when was sovereignty about ethnicity? They got nothing to do with each other. So not sure why you even bringing that up. "The Netherlands only ruled some ports of Taiwan? Yes... and so did Koxinga and Qing for most of its years in Taiwan. They all stayed near the coastal areas of Taiwan" Again, Netherlands NEVER claimed sovereignty over the island, Koxinga said Ming did, but not enough evidence, but Qing definitely claimed sovereignty over the WHOLE island - even if they didnt have absolute control over the whole island. Remember, sovereignty isnt about absolute control. Otherwise South Americans countries like Brazil cant claim sovereignty over the Amazon, and India cant claim sovereignty over the Sentinel islands etc. But they do. "ROC claimed Mongolia and Tibet from the beginning indeed, but ROC has never actually ruled them. PRC first ruled Tibet in 1951" Again, sovereignty is not about "absolute control" or the "rule" you speak of. Its about the legal transfer of ownership of the land. ROC had legal sovereignty over Mongolia and Tibet even if they didnt "rule" them. Heck even Qing didnt even rule them, they let them rule themselves for the most part. But make no mistake, Qing had sovereignty over the land. As for Tibet pre-1951, Tibet illegally formed their own government, recognised by no one. So sovereignty was still Chinas. Which China is the question. By 1949 PRC effectively won the civil war. So all ROCs territory was effectively PRCs. Nothing wrong with taking back control over their own territory. "You may not know that when ROC was founded in 1912....ROC did not even try to claim Taiwan" I do know that. Japan invaded Qing China, Qing lost and ceded Taiwan to them. ROC had no right to claim Taiwan as theirs then, as Qing never transferred sovereignty of Taiwan to ROC, because Qing DIDNT have sovereignty over Taiwan then. "In 1930s, ROC even had a Chinese consulate in Taihoku, Formosa(Taipei, Taiwan)" Because Taiwan was part of Japan then. Japan had sovereignty over Taiwan. "Both KMT and CCP leaders support Taiwan independence from 1920s to 1940s. They could claim Taiwan to be part of China, but they did not" ??? What are you on about? What evidence do you have for that claim?
1
@bctvanw Context is important here. During 1936, China was split into pieces, it was still not unified then, and was facing an invasion from Japan. Thus it was not the "immediate task" for anything besides fighting off invaders and reunification of China (Taiwan was not part of China then). Also, by the time PRC took over China in 1949, Taiwan was ALREADY part of China - Taiwan was returned to China after WW2 in 1945. THATS the difference in context that youre intentionally or unintentionally leaving out. So how could CCP or KMT "claim Taiwan to be part of China, but they did not" when Taiwan was clearly part of Japan then?
1
@bctvanw The annexation of Manchuria was illegal. There was no treaty signed nor was it recognised by any country including China. Taiwan was officially signed off to Japan via a treaty, and was recognised by world powers. Ill say your words right back at you: "You don't see the logic here?" In Japans Instrument of Surrender in 1945, they specifically said they will follow the Potsdam Declaration - and by extension Cairo Declaration. And in it, it specifically says Taiwan is to be returned to China. The 1951 treaty was just a matter of formality. China has already ruled Taiwan for 6 years then!
1
Aussie Taipan Who wouldnt want nuclear weapons? Its just that your buddy USA wont allow you to have it. And TW wont allow you to place them on their land. So what you going to do now Mr PM?
1
@jagastan892 Sooo what you suggesting? Chinas going to invade Australia for their iron ore? Even though China is already #1 importer of their iron ore?
1
@dekumutant This whole video is indirectly about containing China. Thats the only reason why the US wants Taiwan, and why the US is further extending its tentacles to AUS/Pacific. Its to strategically contain China.
1
@Zei33 No Australian is worried about an invasion from China...If China wanted to invade Australia they could have invaded Australia anytime they wanted. Even at their weakest point in time history they couldve invaded AU just by their sheer numbers alone... Chinas interests in Australia is already at a level that satisfies their economic interests. And their level is more or less at an equilibrium. Having more of your aforementioned resources wont change much. Especially when their trajectory is moving towards more green energy dependent after 2030. So the cost of an invasion is not worth such a minor benefit. All this worrying is unfounded.
1
@Zei33 Im an Australian myself. And surrounded by Australians...Its not on the mind on ANY Australians I know of. So I dont know where you came to that conclusion from. China is not a threat to Australia, as long as Australia doesnt meddle with China. But the Australian government just HAS to follow the US with their anti-China rhetoric and provoke China at every angle. We are not like the US. We are in no position of power to do that. The Australian government will inevitable cause Australia to suffer if they continue to follow the path theyre going. But regardless, its not going to be an invasion. Itll be other consequences.
1
@Zei33 The military has their own agenda. Whats happening behind the scenes no one truly knows. But I speculate its got something to do with US pressuring AU in some form or another. Nothing to do with China having plans to invade AU. Probably more misinformation and fear mongering from the US side. The US also has their agenda too (to contain China), and they plan on using AU in achieving that (we are not the only ones being used). China has no history of invading countries out of no where after all. As long as AU doesnt get involved in their internal affairs, AU will be safe. Chinas rise will be beneficial to us. Not a threat. If China didnt rise and purchase our resources we would be in a much worse position than if they didnt. Also, youre specifically talking about those in the military. Please dont conflate the militarys concerns with the average Australians concerns. None of us think Chinas going to invade us.
1
@Zei33 My comments there. Probably got censored due to some keywords triggered from Yts algorithm. Negative opinion on China doesnt equate to the thinking China will invade us. We need to discern the difference. The negative opinion is mostly due to government propaganda within the country. Only reporting negative things on China, while hiding the real reason behind their actions. Just like Chinas "attack" on protesters in the UK embassy recently. The media skewed it to make Chinas look bad and that theyre the ones at fault. But once you delve deep into it, it was actually the protesters that assaulted the Chinese embassy workers first, second, and third. Ive looked into this with video evidence, so I know. Most dont care and just take the medias word for it. I for one dont believe anything without verification. And neither should anyone. Thats how one falls victim propaganda and brainwashing. And yes, many forces want to contain Chinas rise. Thats nothing new. They want the publics support in containing China so they spread anti-China propaganda painting China negatively at every opportunity they can. The US and Uk rain also did many terrible things throughout the years. Where were those reports? Have a think about why the media also isnt painting the US and Uk rain in a negatively light. Why the double standards? Food for thought. There would be no military threat to AU if AU doesnt meddle with literally everything China does. Even if they want to do that, they need to be able to hold off China like how the US can. AU has no such power. The AU government are fools by being USs guinea pig. Theres a saying that the US will contain China at all costs, and that "cost" is Australia. The word you used here was "threat". Such a vague word that could mean anything. Even China increasing their military spending "threat", something that literally every single country on this planet does. But when China does it its a "threat". Where are the fear mongering "threats" of other countries increasing their military spending? Heres a fact, China is spending less on their military than AUS, US, UK and India in terms of GDP ratio. But the media doesnt tell you that. They say Chinas military spending is 300% what they were 10 years ago. Well no shit. Their GDP also grew 300% in the past 10 years. It sounds more "threatening". See the pattern? So the word you used here was "threat". The word I used was "invasion". Theres a difference. Go find another survey asking if people think China would invade us. Youll get an astounding figure close to zero. So dont say the stats dont match what I am saying. Youre literally misrepresenting my words here. I specifically used the word invasion, and you used the word "threat" - a term so vague it could mean anything. This is how misinformation and propaganda is spread. There is literally zero evidence that China will invade AU. Zero.
1
@Zei33 Well obviously YT doesnt like certain keywords Iv presented. Its not about "Chinese shills" or not, even anti-China comments have been censored. Its certain keywords triggering its algorithm. The term "threat" is not specific enough as that does not mean "invasion". Especially when Im specifically talking about an invasion. Its a completely different meaning. Lessons learned in WW2? Germany showed signs of expanding its borders, whereas China has not. So the fear is unfounded. Everything China is claiming now is what it has already claimed ever since its founding. Theres nothing new to that. Moreover, China isnt a dictatorship, its authoritarian. Even Xi needs permission from his government before he can implement what he wants. "Having a dictator in charge of a country is a major risk to everyone, especially when the country is so powerful" Again, that opinion of yours is unfounded. Thats all in your head. Evidence speak louder than words and theres no evidence that China is going to or has any plans to invade AU. The biggest risk now is the US trying to pull us to their side to contain China. Theyre the biggest risk to Australia. The US is the one with a track record with meddling with other countries affairs. We dont need to be a part of that. We are a sovereign country, not someones lap dog. Leave China alone and China will leave us alone. Its simple as that. All this trade war and military "threat" is in retaliation to Australias anti-China actions.
1
@Zei33 Well it goes to say that YTs censoring algorithm is extremely flawed. Even your last 2 comments were censored. Its not shown publicly but I can see it in notifications. Youve said nothing worthy of censoring, and neither have I. So much for "free speech" Youtube... And yes, if AU joins the US in war with China, if it happens, then yes, AU would be in danger. Thats why in a situation like this, being neutral is best, not joining with the US. We can "support" the US, but joining them is another story. Just like all these countries are supporting Rain UK , but none have "joined" them. If they do "join" in, then their country will also be in danger. Its simple as that.
1