Why Isn't Taiwain part of the PRC?

Baldtastic

Ad Honorem
Aug 2009
5,504
Londinium
quotations are precisely made, without any edition.

you may use forum search tools to find them. the tools serve a purpose.

do you acknowledge you cannot show any direct source from taiwan.

do you acknowledge you cannot explain what is blue, green, white, orange of taiwan?

do you acknowledge you cannot show any proper debates happened inside taiwan as i have provided?
More distractions but not evidence to support your claim.

None of this is relevant to my point, if you no longer want to contest it then just say.

All you need to provide is the line(s) of text showing that self-determination is not within the UN law/agreement or even that national integrity trumps that of self-determination.

Do you have this or shall we move on?
 
  • Like
Reactions: dukeofjive

heylouis

Ad Honorem
Apr 2013
6,627
China
More distractions but not evidence to support your claim.

None of this is relevant to my point, if you no longer want to contest it then just say.

All you need to provide is the line(s) of text showing that self-determination is not within the UN law/agreement or even that national integrity trumps that of self-determination.

Do you have this or shall we move on?
the whole self-determination things isn't on whether china signed it (which was signed by china anyway), but on whether it is related with an assumed given right of independence, even blind and deaf could understand this essence.
1. UN resolutions disacknowledge taiwan as a Trust or non-self-governing territory. UN resolution in zero sources said that a region outside the list of Trust or non-self-governing territories is granted to gain independence. UN resolution clearly stated "self-determination" "shall not be construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States ".
OHCHR | Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action
take a hell look at the logo there, how large the "Unite Nations" are, stop your pathetic lie that the link is not UN. if you don't know what OHCHR is, drop your talks on UN.
you till now constantly claim un.org sources as "not UN sources", which behavior is pity.
Baldtastic said:
(Baldtastic claimed heylouis said:. ) self-determination is overridden by a nations sovereign integrity, as you previously claimed.
fact
(heylouis actually said)i provided enough sources that self-determination cannot override the integrity of a nation
do you now acknowledge you made up that i said "self-determination is overridden by a nations sovereign integrity"
do you acknowledge you cannot show any direct source from taiwan.

do you acknowledge you cannot explain what is blue, green, white, orange of taiwan?

do you acknowledge you cannot show any proper debates happened inside taiwan as i have provided?
 

Baldtastic

Ad Honorem
Aug 2009
5,504
Londinium
First of all, you should edit your post as you included your own text within the quote. I hope you don't want people to think you're trying to mislead other members...


In accordance with the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, this shall not be construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States conducting themselves in compliance with the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples and thus possessed of a Government representing the whole people belonging to the territory without distinction of any kind.
Emphasis is mine. Please read this again as it doesn't show what you think it shows.

If a nation is conducting themselves in compliance with equal rights and self determination of peoples - the founding UN Charter - then the UN provides no authorization to dismember or impair that states territorial integrity.

Or in other words, if you contravene the UN charter, and dont permit the self determination of peoples, then you are, under the clause you provide, able to "dismember or impair that states territorial integrity" as those people will no longer be " possessed of a Government representing the whole people belonging to the territory " i.e. they no longer want to be part of that country.

There is also nothing, nothing, in the above that supersedes or trump the UN founding charter, which is what I asked for. So, to sum-up, the PRC, still recognizes the human right of self determination as per Clause 2 of the UN Charter.

If you're still unsure, then please refer to Clause 1 of the link you provide:

1. The World Conference on Human Rights reaffirms the solemn commitment of all States to fulfil their obligations to promote universal respect for, and observance and protection of, all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, other instruments relating to human rights, and international law.
Reaffirming their commitment to the purposes and principles contained in the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
All states, such as the PRC, must fulfill their obligations of the Charter of the UN = recognize self determination of peoples.

Do you have any other links that will support my argument? This one was very helpful, OHCHR | Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dukeofjive

heylouis

Ad Honorem
Apr 2013
6,627
China
All states, such as the PRC, must fulfill their obligations of the Charter of the UN = recognize self determination of peoples.
not even slightly relevant

it is about whether a region can be independent. zero references had been on "independence", plenty references have spoke the "territorial integrity"

established law case
yesterday's vote in Catalonia was not legal.
European Commission - PRESS RELEASES - Press release - Statement on the events in Catalonia
 

Baldtastic

Ad Honorem
Aug 2009
5,504
Londinium
not even slightly relevant

it is about whether a region can be independent. zero references had been on "independence", plenty references have spoke the "territorial integrity"

established law case
yesterday's vote in Catalonia was not legal.
European Commission - PRESS RELEASES - Press release - Statement on the events in Catalonia
I use you're own source, even the specific text cited and then you say it's not relevant - even though is specifically mentioned self-determination in what you cite :zany::lol:

Remember how we've been here before? You're back to referring to anything else other than the PRC/the thread lol

Quality entertainment, poor understanding of what the PRC has agreed to lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: dukeofjive

heylouis

Ad Honorem
Apr 2013
6,627
China
I use you're own source, even the specific text cited and then you say it's not relevant - even though is specifically mentioned self-determination in what you cite :zany::lol:

Remember how we've been here before? You're back to referring to anything else other than the PRC/the thread lol

Quality entertainment, poor understanding of what the PRC has agreed to lol
it is not the source not relevant, it is the conclusion not relevant.

if you have seriously been trained with high education, you would understand citations are cited when they are relevant for the conclusion.

you argues for the independence of taiwan, aren't you? the references did not speak for the point, hence it is irrelevant.

i argue that "self determination" "shall not be construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States ". as it was the direct and explicit speech of the source, it is relevant.

apparently your logics is rubbish.
you provide nothing useful on taiwan information.
you cited nothing from inside taiwan.
you constantly lied
you constantly refuse to provide sources on how "self determination" is linked with "independence"

you are a worthless discusser. poison of this thread.
 

deaf tuner

Ad Honoris
Oct 2013
14,633
Europix
@Baldtastic @deaf tuner

do you acknowledge you cannot show any direct source from taiwan.

do you acknowledge you cannot explain what is blue, green, white, orange of taiwan?

do you acknowledge you cannot show any proper debates happened inside taiwan as i have provided?
I wasn't talking about any of it.

I was merely asking You to provide something on "Taiwanese are PRC citizens". (Your words, not mine ...)
 
  • Like
Reactions: dukeofjive

Baldtastic

Ad Honorem
Aug 2009
5,504
Londinium
it is not the source not relevant, it is the conclusion not relevant.

if you have seriously been trained with high education, you would understand citations are cited when they are relevant for the conclusion.

you argues for the independence of taiwan, aren't you? the references did not speak for the point, hence it is irrelevant.

i argue that "self determination" "shall not be construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States ". as it was the direct and explicit speech of the source, it is relevant.

apparently your logics is rubbish.
you provide nothing useful on taiwan information.
you cited nothing from inside taiwan.
you constantly lied
you constantly refuse to provide sources on how "self determination" is linked with "independence"

you are a worthless discusser. poison of this thread.
More insults and red herrings from heylouis, you’re surprising no-one lol

I’ve not argued for the independence of Taiwan. I’ve argued that self-determination is a human right, as per the UN Charter, and that The PRC agrees with me, hence their signature.

It was *your* citation, provided by yourself to attempt to prove your conclusions/assertions. I just explained that you don’t understand the text you cite and it actually supported the UN Charter, my argument.

No need to resort to insults, just try to prove your POV with a citation, as I have with the UN. Perhaps it’s time to stop arguing against what your country has agreed to. Doesn’t look good to all these foreigners reading your posts, looks like you don’t agree with the UN Charter or the PRC for signing it.
 

heylouis

Ad Honorem
Apr 2013
6,627
China
I wasn't talking about any of it.

I was merely asking You to provide something on "Taiwanese are PRC citizens". (Your words, not mine ...)
i provided, the world acknowledge taiwan is part of the PRC nation. something being part of a nation won't have other citizenship

as for your own rubbish twisting on printed papers of taiwan, rebellions regions are rebellion regions because they have something illegal.
that is also why ISIS printed papers, which called passports does not prove a ISIS citizenship

your logic does not stand

you don't talk on taiwan things in a thread about taiwan, because you are incapable, incompetent, helpless on taiwan issues
pathetic and pale.