Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Asian History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Asian History Asian History Forum - China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand, and the Asia-Pacific Region


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old April 21st, 2017, 08:16 AM   #41
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2013
From: China
Posts: 4,916

xi jinping is supposed to speak chinese whatever to what degree he masters the english langugage.

the remote translator is not a rocket science.

----------------------------------
the influence ability upon dprk is a false problem.
you can think china has the largest and ultimate influence over dprk. because we are the only country which can provide them necessary foreign currencies to enter a international market(though very limited). without china, they buy almost nothing from outside world. that would be worse if we stop aid.
however, as i said it is a false problem. the south korea is no small economy body, if it trades with dprk, with the advantage of local transport and ethnic connection, china would be so-so. US is the same. question is why not they?
on the other hand, china has little influence over dprk on security issues. because it needs no smart man to see the point, china does not control the red button of a US launched war. china and dprk are no real allies, though the friend relationship treaty says that we shall *help* each other in defensive wars. the methods of helping is not defined, and up to choice. hence, on the security issues, US has the largest and ultimate influence, because they have the red button.

Last edited by heylouis; April 21st, 2017 at 08:41 AM.
heylouis is offline  
Remove Ads
Old April 21st, 2017, 08:26 AM   #42

AlpinLuke's Avatar
Knight-errant
 
Joined: Oct 2011
From: Lago Maggiore, Italy
Posts: 19,806
Blog Entries: 19

As for I know only the Mongols, when they ruled China, were able to make "Korea" a vassal state, but actually that was "Goryeo" and the dynasty Yuan was governed by Mongols [XIV century]. And this situation lasted only some decades.

So, my impression is that it's not historically sustainable that Korea has been part of China.
AlpinLuke is offline  
Old April 21st, 2017, 08:29 AM   #43

Blue's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Feb 2016
From: ROK
Posts: 358

And we need to understand the Koreans' point of view. China has a tendency to base its right to certain territories through historical claims. Also, consider the timing. Trump triggered China, Russia, and North Korea while leaving the Koreans and the Japanese to defend themselves at sea without the US fleet. Remember that North Korea has sunk two South Korean naval ships since 2002. This is a danger zone not to be fooled around with.

Last edited by Blue; April 21st, 2017 at 08:36 AM.
Blue is offline  
Old April 21st, 2017, 08:33 AM   #44
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2013
From: China
Posts: 4,916

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue View Post
And we need to understand the Koreans' point of view. China has a tendency to base its right to certain territories through historical claims.
come on, the borders between china and dprk are well established.
that means the borders between china and any possible united korea are also established.

the undertermined factors, are the eez definitions. those are modern ones, which have no relationship and cannot have relationship with ancient history.
heylouis is offline  
Old April 21st, 2017, 08:38 AM   #45

Blue's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Feb 2016
From: ROK
Posts: 358

Quote:
Originally Posted by heylouis View Post
come on, the borders between china and dprk are well established.
that means the borders between china and any possible united korea are also established.

the undertermined factors, are the eez definitions. those are modern ones, which have no relationship and cannot have relationship with ancient history.
Still, the Koreans can't help wondering if after the South China Sea and after the island that's currently Japan's, Korea could be next.
Blue is offline  
Old April 21st, 2017, 08:38 AM   #46
Citizen
 
Joined: Apr 2017
From: Singapore/Canada
Posts: 25

"Korea" as a nation state, that's from Silla unification to Joseon dynasty has never being part of any Chinese dynasties (Han or Manchu).
The northern part of the Korean peninsula was briefly under Han and Tang rule, but those parts were not under the control of a "Korean" state either, therefore China never directly ruled a Korean state.

If Xi really said what Trump claimed, it's like saying the Viets, one of the tribes of Baiyue used to rule southern China, and that's even before Huaxia culture has reached that area, therefore China used to be a part of Vietnam.
Merlion85 is offline  
Old April 21st, 2017, 08:43 AM   #47
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2013
From: China
Posts: 4,916

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue View Post
Still, the Koreans can't help wondering if after the South China Sea and after the island that's currently Japan's, Korea could be next.
all the claimed areas had been claimed since the past, with 1949 being the cutoff line. there is no new claim

you can check the list. the list is constant in a way that there is only deleting operation since 1949 with no adding operation since 1949.

if there is chance, i would like more to claim the copyright of the national flag of south korea, rather than the territory.

Last edited by heylouis; April 21st, 2017 at 08:56 AM.
heylouis is offline  
Old April 21st, 2017, 08:47 AM   #48

Blue's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Feb 2016
From: ROK
Posts: 358

A large part of the Korean peninsula was Goguryeo, not only Manchuria. The Goguryeo descendants under Silla became part of the new unified kingdom. The same happened with Baekje. In fact, the South Korean city that I currently live in was at one time a Baekje, then a Goguryeo, then a Silla city. The descendants of Goguryeo and Baekje didn't disappear. The region around Seoul was strategically important because of it's location and the vast fields for farming. (The plantations disappeared in this region due to urbanization). The three kingdoms each tried to take this area.

Last edited by Blue; April 21st, 2017 at 08:53 AM.
Blue is offline  
Old April 21st, 2017, 08:48 AM   #49
Scholar
 
Joined: Jun 2014
From: Earth
Posts: 962

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue View Post


Well, Baekje and the southern part of Goguryeo were located inside the Korean peninsula. Their descendants are certainly in Korea now.
I don't understand why people get so jumpy when someone explains Goguryeo and Baekje as part of Korean history.
No one gets jumpy at that. Even the NE project acknowledges Goguryeo and its role in Korean history.

The only people getting jumpy are Koreans when someone explains Goguryeo's connection to China. Then we get strawman claims that Chinese are saying "Goguryeo is Chinese" etc
bananasinpajamas is offline  
Old April 21st, 2017, 08:49 AM   #50
Scholar
 
Joined: Jun 2014
From: Earth
Posts: 962

Quote:
Originally Posted by Senyokbalgul View Post
You should probably specify usernames so that other users could try to correct their historical facts.

Mongol Korean brotherhood
bananasinpajamas is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Asian History

Tags
china, historically, korea



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"YES" does not mean "MAYBE", and "Regret"≠"RAPE" Abhishek Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 110 January 7th, 2016 05:17 PM
Historical Terminology of "Telangana", "Telugu", and "Andhra" civfanatic Asian History 20 September 28th, 2014 07:41 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.