Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Philippines Defense Forces Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
The Kalayaan, Panatag & other disputed islands; Future conflict zones?
Topic Started: Feb 2 2005, 08:00 PM (156,100 Views)
Fmr TOPP Awardee 82'PNP
Member Avatar
PDFF Moderator
PDFF Mod Group
seWer Rat
Jul 25 2010, 06:41 AM
From what international legal basis did you get this, link please?

I wonder how Mr. freedom Fighter arrived to this analogy when China itself has'nt even declared it to be their territory as a matter of fact, Philippine contingent is there to maintain our assertion of rights to the island.
Posted Image



"GUILTY CONSCIENCE NEEDS NO ACCUSER"
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
fatbat_mca
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  * ]
sounds like another troll to me this freedom fighter, watch out mods. :armywink:
oh my sofie!
Posted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Fmr TOPP Awardee 82'PNP
Member Avatar
PDFF Moderator
PDFF Mod Group
fatbat_mca
Jul 25 2010, 07:08 AM
sounds like another troll to me this freedom fighter, watch out mods.  :armywink:

You are right. I can see a clue on the mode of his reply to posts. We are on his tail anyway. I know who he might be. However, we still give him the benefit of the doubt. We will pull the plug as soon as what comes to light during our observation. By his comment on China's rights over the Spratleys is utterly unpatriotic except if he was a Chinese himself and I am more than happy to go with him if he will be able to support it with documented proof, otherwise, it was just a childish comment to annoy us and our compatriots in this forum that would ultimately justify him to be just an attention seeker.
Posted Image



"GUILTY CONSCIENCE NEEDS NO ACCUSER"
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
desertranger
Member
[ *  *  * ]
Just got through reading this... China has submitted a map to the UN claiming all of the Spratleys. This was submited 7 MAy 2009. Here's the link and the map.

http://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submi...e_mys_vnm_e.pdf
"
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Marschall
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  * ]
desertranger
Jul 25 2010, 08:01 PM
Just got through reading this... China has submitted a map to the UN claiming all of the Spratleys. This was submited 7 MAy 2009. Here's the link and the map.

http://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submi...e_mys_vnm_e.pdf

This bloody map almost touches Palawan!!!

:headbang:

I suppose our Govt. officials will wake up once the RP is turned to a second Tibet under Chinese rule...

"THE BEST PARENT AND GUARDIAN OF LIBERTY AMONGST MEN IS TRUTH" ~ Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei

“When learned men begin to use their reason, then I generally discover that they haven’t got any.” - G. K. Chesterton

MSantor is not a man of sound reason. Savages have always preferred the club for they know that they are powerless against the pen. But who is the greater fool - the savage or the one that gives him power? May Truth rebuke you.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
truegrit


Very STUPID MAP and this means that there are no longer International Waters which all passes thru since its all CONTROLLED by PROC.... This move by PROC is clearly an International Harassment towards its Southeast Asian Neighbors by asserting its Political & Military Influence. As member of UN, we should strictly enforced UN Accepted Law on Territorial Claim ....UNCLOS 200 mile EEZ.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Fmr TOPP Awardee 82'PNP
Member Avatar
PDFF Moderator
PDFF Mod Group
There's nothing to be concerned of. It's only a map created by the Chinese that is a part of their saber rattling move to boost their campaign of claiming the island with no cognizance from any international judicial body or the UN. It's the same old story -bullying.
Posted Image



"GUILTY CONSCIENCE NEEDS NO ACCUSER"
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
freedom fighter
Trainee
[ *  * ]
Fmr TOPP Awardee 82'PNP
Jul 25 2010, 07:25 AM
You are right. I can see a clue on the mode of his reply to posts. We are on his tail anyway. I know who he might be. However, we still give him the benefit of the doubt. We will pull the plug as soon as what comes to light during our observation. By his comment on China's rights over the Spratleys is utterly unpatriotic except if he was a Chinese himself and I am more than happy to go with him if he will be able to support it with documented proof, otherwise, it was just a childish comment to annoy us and our compatriots in this forum that would ultimately justify him to be just an attention seeker.

I refer to occupation as a mode of acquiring territorial res nullius in international law. The Chinese, an ancient civilization going back to the Yangtze settlements, already had many of its people on the islands amny, many, many, many years ago.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Fmr TOPP Awardee 82'PNP
Member Avatar
PDFF Moderator
PDFF Mod Group
If we have to compare it with our Sabbah claim where the island now is under the territorial jurisdiction of Malaysia, it is quite clear that many years back the island was ruled by the a princess who was a close relative of the ruler of the sultanate of Sulu. This clearly manifested that it was a part of our territory on the basis that Sabbah was ruled by a Filipino muslim sultanate, but this was not recognized and supported by the international forum and the UN despite that history. The claim was scuttled because Malaysia held it's grip. China's presence in the Spratleys could have been ages ago before the Philippine contingency started it's presence in the islands until now. Where were the Chinese then ? If the Chinese claim were to be honored, a huge chunk of Philippine territory will be involved.
Posted Image



"GUILTY CONSCIENCE NEEDS NO ACCUSER"
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
freedom fighter
Trainee
[ *  * ]
Fmr TOPP Awardee 82'PNP
Jul 26 2010, 09:44 AM
If we have to compare it with our Sabbah claim where the island now is under the territorial jurisdiction of Malaysia, it is quite clear that many years back the island was ruled by the a princess who was a close relative of the ruler of the sultanate of Sulu. This clearly manifested that it was a part of our territory on the basis that Sabbah was ruled by a Filipino muslim sultanate, but this was not recognized and supported by the international forum and the UN despite that history. The claim was scuttled because Malaysia held it's grip. China's presence in the Spratleys could have been ages ago before the Philippine contingency started it's presence in the islands until now. Where were the Chinese then ? If the Chinese claim were to be honored, a huge chunk of Philippine territory will be involved.

I understand your patriotism but it may be the fatal thick layer of bias that will cover your eyes from the proper understanding of international events in the light of public international law.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · West Philippine Sea · Next Topic »
Locked Topic