Total Posts:15|Showing Posts:1-15
Jump to topic:

Preah Vihear belongs to whom?

Kc1999
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2014 8:45:36 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I say Thailand for many reasons, but I wanna see what DDo thinks about it; I feel that the ICJ has no say, and when our sovereignty is threatened, we will respond.

How about ya DDo?
#NoToMobocracy #BladeStroink
setabed
Posts: 28
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2014 5:16:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/9/2014 8:45:36 AM, Kc1999 wrote:
I say Thailand for many reasons, but I wanna see what DDo thinks about it; I feel that the ICJ has no say, and when our sovereignty is threatened, we will respond.

How about ya DDo?

The ICJ says Cambodia and actually that judgment's been in place for over 50 years. The ruling is fair. Thai sovereignty isn't threatened.

Although I do think Thai nationals should have free access to visit the temple, but I think they do have.
Kc1999
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2014 7:20:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/9/2014 5:16:03 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 8:45:36 AM, Kc1999 wrote:
I say Thailand for many reasons, but I wanna see what DDo thinks about it; I feel that the ICJ has no say, and when our sovereignty is threatened, we will respond.

How about ya DDo?

The ICJ says Cambodia and actually that judgment's been in place for over 50 years. The ruling is fair. Thai sovereignty isn't threatened.

Although I do think Thai nationals should have free access to visit the temple, but I think they do have.

So you're saying we are to believe a French map without any markings?
#NoToMobocracy #BladeStroink
setabed
Posts: 28
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2014 7:25:19 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/9/2014 7:20:03 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 5:16:03 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 8:45:36 AM, Kc1999 wrote:
I say Thailand for many reasons, but I wanna see what DDo thinks about it; I feel that the ICJ has no say, and when our sovereignty is threatened, we will respond.

How about ya DDo?

The ICJ says Cambodia and actually that judgment's been in place for over 50 years. The ruling is fair. Thai sovereignty isn't threatened.

Although I do think Thai nationals should have free access to visit the temple, but I think they do have.

So you're saying we are to believe a French map without any markings?

I'm saying you're to believe the ICJ, the status quo, and whatever documents exist. What arguments do you have on your side? You say you have many reasons - what are they?
Kc1999
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2014 7:40:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/9/2014 7:25:19 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:20:03 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 5:16:03 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 8:45:36 AM, Kc1999 wrote:
I say Thailand for many reasons, but I wanna see what DDo thinks about it; I feel that the ICJ has no say, and when our sovereignty is threatened, we will respond.

How about ya DDo?

The ICJ says Cambodia and actually that judgment's been in place for over 50 years. The ruling is fair. Thai sovereignty isn't threatened.

Although I do think Thai nationals should have free access to visit the temple, but I think they do have.

So you're saying we are to believe a French map without any markings?

I'm saying you're to believe the ICJ, the status quo, and whatever documents exist. What arguments do you have on your side? You say you have many reasons - what are they?

1. Preah Vihear belonged to Thailand before the French came

Even though it was marked on the French map as being "French", though I don't know how that got into place, Preah Vihear always belonged to Thailand; after the Thai-Vietnamese Wars, Thailand was granted half of Cambodia into it's territory. Of that, Thailand allowed Cambodians to practice Self-Governance, and demanded only tributes. However, before that, Thailand always owned Preah Vihear, and it was only after 1904, when the French attempted to colonise our lands, was when the ownership of the temple was really questioned.

2. The French Map itself
There are two maps; one drawn and agreed by the joint Thai-French team as a political map, and another drawn as a geographical map. The political map was drawn in 1905, while the Geographical Map was drawn in 1907. The Thai Government accepted both maps, but were keen to keep the 1905 map, which stated the Preah Vihear was always on the Thai side. The Cambodian side used this against Thailand during the 1962 trial; we have, for a long time, accepted the 1907 map, but that was wrong. There was never any other disputes about the areas drawn out by the 1905 map, so all of this fuss is over a mistake the French did.

These are just few, I could blabber more.
#NoToMobocracy #BladeStroink
setabed
Posts: 28
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2014 7:50:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/9/2014 7:40:48 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:25:19 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:20:03 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 5:16:03 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 8:45:36 AM, Kc1999 wrote:
I say Thailand for many reasons, but I wanna see what DDo thinks about it; I feel that the ICJ has no say, and when our sovereignty is threatened, we will respond.

How about ya DDo?

The ICJ says Cambodia and actually that judgment's been in place for over 50 years. The ruling is fair. Thai sovereignty isn't threatened.

Although I do think Thai nationals should have free access to visit the temple, but I think they do have.

So you're saying we are to believe a French map without any markings?

I'm saying you're to believe the ICJ, the status quo, and whatever documents exist. What arguments do you have on your side? You say you have many reasons - what are they?

1. Preah Vihear belonged to Thailand before the French came

Even though it was marked on the French map as being "French", though I don't know how that got into place, Preah Vihear always belonged to Thailand; after the Thai-Vietnamese Wars, Thailand was granted half of Cambodia into it's territory. Of that, Thailand allowed Cambodians to practice Self-Governance, and demanded only tributes. However, before that, Thailand always owned Preah Vihear, and it was only after 1904, when the French attempted to colonise our lands, was when the ownership of the temple was really questioned.

2. The French Map itself
There are two maps; one drawn and agreed by the joint Thai-French team as a political map, and another drawn as a geographical map. The political map was drawn in 1905, while the Geographical Map was drawn in 1907. The Thai Government accepted both maps, but were keen to keep the 1905 map, which stated the Preah Vihear was always on the Thai side. The Cambodian side used this against Thailand during the 1962 trial; we have, for a long time, accepted the 1907 map, but that was wrong. There was never any other disputes about the areas drawn out by the 1905 map, so all of this fuss is over a mistake the French did.

These are just few, I could blabber more.

It's a Khmer temple, though, right? So I'm thinking your objections are about the land and the border rather than the temple itself? Where do you think the border should go?
Kc1999
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2014 7:54:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/9/2014 7:50:29 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:40:48 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:25:19 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:20:03 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 5:16:03 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 8:45:36 AM, Kc1999 wrote:
I say Thailand for many reasons, but I wanna see what DDo thinks about it; I feel that the ICJ has no say, and when our sovereignty is threatened, we will respond.

How about ya DDo?

The ICJ says Cambodia and actually that judgment's been in place for over 50 years. The ruling is fair. Thai sovereignty isn't threatened.

Although I do think Thai nationals should have free access to visit the temple, but I think they do have.

So you're saying we are to believe a French map without any markings?

I'm saying you're to believe the ICJ, the status quo, and whatever documents exist. What arguments do you have on your side? You say you have many reasons - what are they?

1. Preah Vihear belonged to Thailand before the French came

Even though it was marked on the French map as being "French", though I don't know how that got into place, Preah Vihear always belonged to Thailand; after the Thai-Vietnamese Wars, Thailand was granted half of Cambodia into it's territory. Of that, Thailand allowed Cambodians to practice Self-Governance, and demanded only tributes. However, before that, Thailand always owned Preah Vihear, and it was only after 1904, when the French attempted to colonise our lands, was when the ownership of the temple was really questioned.

2. The French Map itself
There are two maps; one drawn and agreed by the joint Thai-French team as a political map, and another drawn as a geographical map. The political map was drawn in 1905, while the Geographical Map was drawn in 1907. The Thai Government accepted both maps, but were keen to keep the 1905 map, which stated the Preah Vihear was always on the Thai side. The Cambodian side used this against Thailand during the 1962 trial; we have, for a long time, accepted the 1907 map, but that was wrong. There was never any other disputes about the areas drawn out by the 1905 map, so all of this fuss is over a mistake the French did.

These are just few, I could blabber more.

It's a Khmer temple, though, right? So I'm thinking your objections are about the land and the border rather than the temple itself? Where do you think the border should go?

The Khmer Empire fell years ago. That argument is invalid.
#NoToMobocracy #BladeStroink
Kc1999
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2014 7:55:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/9/2014 7:54:07 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:50:29 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:40:48 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:25:19 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:20:03 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 5:16:03 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 8:45:36 AM, Kc1999 wrote:
I say Thailand for many reasons, but I wanna see what DDo thinks about it; I feel that the ICJ has no say, and when our sovereignty is threatened, we will respond.

How about ya DDo?

The ICJ says Cambodia and actually that judgment's been in place for over 50 years. The ruling is fair. Thai sovereignty isn't threatened.

Although I do think Thai nationals should have free access to visit the temple, but I think they do have.

So you're saying we are to believe a French map without any markings?

I'm saying you're to believe the ICJ, the status quo, and whatever documents exist. What arguments do you have on your side? You say you have many reasons - what are they?

1. Preah Vihear belonged to Thailand before the French came

Even though it was marked on the French map as being "French", though I don't know how that got into place, Preah Vihear always belonged to Thailand; after the Thai-Vietnamese Wars, Thailand was granted half of Cambodia into it's territory. Of that, Thailand allowed Cambodians to practice Self-Governance, and demanded only tributes. However, before that, Thailand always owned Preah Vihear, and it was only after 1904, when the French attempted to colonise our lands, was when the ownership of the temple was really questioned.

2. The French Map itself
There are two maps; one drawn and agreed by the joint Thai-French team as a political map, and another drawn as a geographical map. The political map was drawn in 1905, while the Geographical Map was drawn in 1907. The Thai Government accepted both maps, but were keen to keep the 1905 map, which stated the Preah Vihear was always on the Thai side. The Cambodian side used this against Thailand during the 1962 trial; we have, for a long time, accepted the 1907 map, but that was wrong. There was never any other disputes about the areas drawn out by the 1905 map, so all of this fuss is over a mistake the French did.

These are just few, I could blabber more.

It's a Khmer temple, though, right? So I'm thinking your objections are about the land and the border rather than the temple itself? Where do you think the border should go?

The Khmer Empire fell years ago. That argument is invalid.

Yep, my arguments are about the land, and what is situated on top of it, but I ignore the history of the thing that is situated on top of it.
#NoToMobocracy #BladeStroink
setabed
Posts: 28
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2014 7:59:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/9/2014 7:55:18 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:54:07 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:50:29 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:40:48 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:25:19 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:20:03 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 5:16:03 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 8:45:36 AM, Kc1999 wrote:
I say Thailand for many reasons, but I wanna see what DDo thinks about it; I feel that the ICJ has no say, and when our sovereignty is threatened, we will respond.

How about ya DDo?

The ICJ says Cambodia and actually that judgment's been in place for over 50 years. The ruling is fair. Thai sovereignty isn't threatened.

Although I do think Thai nationals should have free access to visit the temple, but I think they do have.

So you're saying we are to believe a French map without any markings?

I'm saying you're to believe the ICJ, the status quo, and whatever documents exist. What arguments do you have on your side? You say you have many reasons - what are they?

1. Preah Vihear belonged to Thailand before the French came

Even though it was marked on the French map as being "French", though I don't know how that got into place, Preah Vihear always belonged to Thailand; after the Thai-Vietnamese Wars, Thailand was granted half of Cambodia into it's territory. Of that, Thailand allowed Cambodians to practice Self-Governance, and demanded only tributes. However, before that, Thailand always owned Preah Vihear, and it was only after 1904, when the French attempted to colonise our lands, was when the ownership of the temple was really questioned.

2. The French Map itself
There are two maps; one drawn and agreed by the joint Thai-French team as a political map, and another drawn as a geographical map. The political map was drawn in 1905, while the Geographical Map was drawn in 1907. The Thai Government accepted both maps, but were keen to keep the 1905 map, which stated the Preah Vihear was always on the Thai side. The Cambodian side used this against Thailand during the 1962 trial; we have, for a long time, accepted the 1907 map, but that was wrong. There was never any other disputes about the areas drawn out by the 1905 map, so all of this fuss is over a mistake the French did.

These are just few, I could blabber more.

It's a Khmer temple, though, right? So I'm thinking your objections are about the land and the border rather than the temple itself? Where do you think the border should go?

The Khmer Empire fell years ago. That argument is invalid.

Yep, my arguments are about the land, and what is situated on top of it, but I ignore the history of the thing that is situated on top of it.

You're kind of selective in thinking about which parts of history count. Personally, I think that the land has been under Cambodian control for over 50 years and it should stay that way. What benefits would a dispute have for anyone?
Kc1999
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2014 8:02:01 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/9/2014 7:59:00 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:55:18 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:54:07 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:50:29 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:40:48 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:25:19 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:20:03 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 5:16:03 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 8:45:36 AM, Kc1999 wrote:
I say Thailand for many reasons, but I wanna see what DDo thinks about it; I feel that the ICJ has no say, and when our sovereignty is threatened, we will respond.

How about ya DDo?

The ICJ says Cambodia and actually that judgment's been in place for over 50 years. The ruling is fair. Thai sovereignty isn't threatened.

Although I do think Thai nationals should have free access to visit the temple, but I think they do have.

So you're saying we are to believe a French map without any markings?

I'm saying you're to believe the ICJ, the status quo, and whatever documents exist. What arguments do you have on your side? You say you have many reasons - what are they?

1. Preah Vihear belonged to Thailand before the French came

Even though it was marked on the French map as being "French", though I don't know how that got into place, Preah Vihear always belonged to Thailand; after the Thai-Vietnamese Wars, Thailand was granted half of Cambodia into it's territory. Of that, Thailand allowed Cambodians to practice Self-Governance, and demanded only tributes. However, before that, Thailand always owned Preah Vihear, and it was only after 1904, when the French attempted to colonise our lands, was when the ownership of the temple was really questioned.

2. The French Map itself
There are two maps; one drawn and agreed by the joint Thai-French team as a political map, and another drawn as a geographical map. The political map was drawn in 1905, while the Geographical Map was drawn in 1907. The Thai Government accepted both maps, but were keen to keep the 1905 map, which stated the Preah Vihear was always on the Thai side. The Cambodian side used this against Thailand during the 1962 trial; we have, for a long time, accepted the 1907 map, but that was wrong. There was never any other disputes about the areas drawn out by the 1905 map, so all of this fuss is over a mistake the French did.

These are just few, I could blabber more.

It's a Khmer temple, though, right? So I'm thinking your objections are about the land and the border rather than the temple itself? Where do you think the border should go?

The Khmer Empire fell years ago. That argument is invalid.

Yep, my arguments are about the land, and what is situated on top of it, but I ignore the history of the thing that is situated on top of it.

You're kind of selective in thinking about which parts of history count. Personally, I think that the land has been under Cambodian control for over 50 years and it should stay that way. What benefits would a dispute have for anyone?

Well, for parts of the Cambodian Civil War, Thai forces did occupy it.

I mean like, if Mexico owned Texas, the US would have a lengthy dispute wouldn't it.
#NoToMobocracy #BladeStroink
setabed
Posts: 28
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2014 8:07:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/9/2014 8:02:01 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:59:00 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:55:18 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:54:07 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:50:29 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:40:48 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:25:19 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:20:03 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 5:16:03 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 8:45:36 AM, Kc1999 wrote:
I say Thailand for many reasons, but I wanna see what DDo thinks about it; I feel that the ICJ has no say, and when our sovereignty is threatened, we will respond.

How about ya DDo?

The ICJ says Cambodia and actually that judgment's been in place for over 50 years. The ruling is fair. Thai sovereignty isn't threatened.

Although I do think Thai nationals should have free access to visit the temple, but I think they do have.

So you're saying we are to believe a French map without any markings?

I'm saying you're to believe the ICJ, the status quo, and whatever documents exist. What arguments do you have on your side? You say you have many reasons - what are they?

1. Preah Vihear belonged to Thailand before the French came

Even though it was marked on the French map as being "French", though I don't know how that got into place, Preah Vihear always belonged to Thailand; after the Thai-Vietnamese Wars, Thailand was granted half of Cambodia into it's territory. Of that, Thailand allowed Cambodians to practice Self-Governance, and demanded only tributes. However, before that, Thailand always owned Preah Vihear, and it was only after 1904, when the French attempted to colonise our lands, was when the ownership of the temple was really questioned.

2. The French Map itself
There are two maps; one drawn and agreed by the joint Thai-French team as a political map, and another drawn as a geographical map. The political map was drawn in 1905, while the Geographical Map was drawn in 1907. The Thai Government accepted both maps, but were keen to keep the 1905 map, which stated the Preah Vihear was always on the Thai side. The Cambodian side used this against Thailand during the 1962 trial; we have, for a long time, accepted the 1907 map, but that was wrong. There was never any other disputes about the areas drawn out by the 1905 map, so all of this fuss is over a mistake the French did.

These are just few, I could blabber more.

It's a Khmer temple, though, right? So I'm thinking your objections are about the land and the border rather than the temple itself? Where do you think the border should go?

The Khmer Empire fell years ago. That argument is invalid.

Yep, my arguments are about the land, and what is situated on top of it, but I ignore the history of the thing that is situated on top of it.

You're kind of selective in thinking about which parts of history count. Personally, I think that the land has been under Cambodian control for over 50 years and it should stay that way. What benefits would a dispute have for anyone?

Well, for parts of the Cambodian Civil War, Thai forces did occupy it.

I mean like, if Mexico owned Texas, the US would have a lengthy dispute wouldn't it.

So this is about pride? It's not that you actually want the temple and the land, but you feel that your pride has been injured by it being defined as Cambodian by the ICJ?
Kc1999
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2014 8:09:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/9/2014 8:07:02 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 8:02:01 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:59:00 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:55:18 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:54:07 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:50:29 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:40:48 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:25:19 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:20:03 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 5:16:03 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 8:45:36 AM, Kc1999 wrote:
I say Thailand for many reasons, but I wanna see what DDo thinks about it; I feel that the ICJ has no say, and when our sovereignty is threatened, we will respond.

How about ya DDo?

The ICJ says Cambodia and actually that judgment's been in place for over 50 years. The ruling is fair. Thai sovereignty isn't threatened.

Although I do think Thai nationals should have free access to visit the temple, but I think they do have.

So you're saying we are to believe a French map without any markings?

I'm saying you're to believe the ICJ, the status quo, and whatever documents exist. What arguments do you have on your side? You say you have many reasons - what are they?

1. Preah Vihear belonged to Thailand before the French came

Even though it was marked on the French map as being "French", though I don't know how that got into place, Preah Vihear always belonged to Thailand; after the Thai-Vietnamese Wars, Thailand was granted half of Cambodia into it's territory. Of that, Thailand allowed Cambodians to practice Self-Governance, and demanded only tributes. However, before that, Thailand always owned Preah Vihear, and it was only after 1904, when the French attempted to colonise our lands, was when the ownership of the temple was really questioned.

2. The French Map itself
There are two maps; one drawn and agreed by the joint Thai-French team as a political map, and another drawn as a geographical map. The political map was drawn in 1905, while the Geographical Map was drawn in 1907. The Thai Government accepted both maps, but were keen to keep the 1905 map, which stated the Preah Vihear was always on the Thai side. The Cambodian side used this against Thailand during the 1962 trial; we have, for a long time, accepted the 1907 map, but that was wrong. There was never any other disputes about the areas drawn out by the 1905 map, so all of this fuss is over a mistake the French did.

These are just few, I could blabber more.

It's a Khmer temple, though, right? So I'm thinking your objections are about the land and the border rather than the temple itself? Where do you think the border should go?

The Khmer Empire fell years ago. That argument is invalid.

Yep, my arguments are about the land, and what is situated on top of it, but I ignore the history of the thing that is situated on top of it.

You're kind of selective in thinking about which parts of history count. Personally, I think that the land has been under Cambodian control for over 50 years and it should stay that way. What benefits would a dispute have for anyone?

Well, for parts of the Cambodian Civil War, Thai forces did occupy it.

I mean like, if Mexico owned Texas, the US would have a lengthy dispute wouldn't it.

So this is about pride? It's not that you actually want the temple and the land, but you feel that your pride has been injured by it being defined as Cambodian by the ICJ?

Sovereignty, not pride.
#NoToMobocracy #BladeStroink
setabed
Posts: 28
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2014 8:19:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/9/2014 8:09:30 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 8:07:02 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 8:02:01 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:59:00 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:55:18 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:54:07 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:50:29 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:40:48 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:25:19 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:20:03 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 5:16:03 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 8:45:36 AM, Kc1999 wrote:
I say Thailand for many reasons, but I wanna see what DDo thinks about it; I feel that the ICJ has no say, and when our sovereignty is threatened, we will respond.

How about ya DDo?

The ICJ says Cambodia and actually that judgment's been in place for over 50 years. The ruling is fair. Thai sovereignty isn't threatened.

Although I do think Thai nationals should have free access to visit the temple, but I think they do have.

So you're saying we are to believe a French map without any markings?

I'm saying you're to believe the ICJ, the status quo, and whatever documents exist. What arguments do you have on your side? You say you have many reasons - what are they?

1. Preah Vihear belonged to Thailand before the French came

Even though it was marked on the French map as being "French", though I don't know how that got into place, Preah Vihear always belonged to Thailand; after the Thai-Vietnamese Wars, Thailand was granted half of Cambodia into it's territory. Of that, Thailand allowed Cambodians to practice Self-Governance, and demanded only tributes. However, before that, Thailand always owned Preah Vihear, and it was only after 1904, when the French attempted to colonise our lands, was when the ownership of the temple was really questioned.

2. The French Map itself
There are two maps; one drawn and agreed by the joint Thai-French team as a political map, and another drawn as a geographical map. The political map was drawn in 1905, while the Geographical Map was drawn in 1907. The Thai Government accepted both maps, but were keen to keep the 1905 map, which stated the Preah Vihear was always on the Thai side. The Cambodian side used this against Thailand during the 1962 trial; we have, for a long time, accepted the 1907 map, but that was wrong. There was never any other disputes about the areas drawn out by the 1905 map, so all of this fuss is over a mistake the French did.

These are just few, I could blabber more.

It's a Khmer temple, though, right? So I'm thinking your objections are about the land and the border rather than the temple itself? Where do you think the border should go?

The Khmer Empire fell years ago. That argument is invalid.

Yep, my arguments are about the land, and what is situated on top of it, but I ignore the history of the thing that is situated on top of it.

You're kind of selective in thinking about which parts of history count. Personally, I think that the land has been under Cambodian control for over 50 years and it should stay that way. What benefits would a dispute have for anyone?

Well, for parts of the Cambodian Civil War, Thai forces did occupy it.

I mean like, if Mexico owned Texas, the US would have a lengthy dispute wouldn't it.

So this is about pride? It's not that you actually want the temple and the land, but you feel that your pride has been injured by it being defined as Cambodian by the ICJ?

Sovereignty, not pride.

This map has the cultural breakdown of Thailand. I don't agree at all with borders being drawn along cultural/language lines, necessarily, but if they were the border between Cambodia and Thailand would be well North of the temple.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

It's a Khmer temple. The people in the area speak Khmer and it's been under Cambodian control for at least 50 years (although I'm not sure about what happened during the civil war) and before that it was under French control and not part of Thailand for another 50 years at least.

The ICJ has ruled twice that it's Cambodian land, a ruling which cannot be appealed. I mean seriously, what grounds to you have for claiming it for Thailand? And why do you even want to? I don't understand what you mean by "sovereignty". If anything, it's Cambodian sovereignty that's under threat. After all hasn't the Thai military been marching all over it, which is why this issue flamed up in the first place?
Kc1999
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2014 8:25:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/9/2014 8:19:06 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 8:09:30 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 8:07:02 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 8:02:01 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:59:00 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:55:18 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:54:07 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:50:29 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:40:48 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:25:19 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 7:20:03 PM, Kc1999 wrote:
At 2/9/2014 5:16:03 PM, setabed wrote:
At 2/9/2014 8:45:36 AM, Kc1999 wrote:
I say Thailand for many reasons, but I wanna see what DDo thinks about it; I feel that the ICJ has no say, and when our sovereignty is threatened, we will respond.

How about ya DDo?

The ICJ says Cambodia and actually that judgment's been in place for over 50 years. The ruling is fair. Thai sovereignty isn't threatened.

Although I do think Thai nationals should have free access to visit the temple, but I think they do have.

So you're saying we are to believe a French map without any markings?

I'm saying you're to believe the ICJ, the status quo, and whatever documents exist. What arguments do you have on your side? You say you have many reasons - what are they?

1. Preah Vihear belonged to Thailand before the French came

Even though it was marked on the French map as being "French", though I don't know how that got into place, Preah Vihear always belonged to Thailand; after the Thai-Vietnamese Wars, Thailand was granted half of Cambodia into it's territory. Of that, Thailand allowed Cambodians to practice Self-Governance, and demanded only tributes. However, before that, Thailand always owned Preah Vihear, and it was only after 1904, when the French attempted to colonise our lands, was when the ownership of the temple was really questioned.

2. The French Map itself
There are two maps; one drawn and agreed by the joint Thai-French team as a political map, and another drawn as a geographical map. The political map was drawn in 1905, while the Geographical Map was drawn in 1907. The Thai Government accepted both maps, but were keen to keep the 1905 map, which stated the Preah Vihear was always on the Thai side. The Cambodian side used this against Thailand during the 1962 trial; we have, for a long time, accepted the 1907 map, but that was wrong. There was never any other disputes about the areas drawn out by the 1905 map, so all of this fuss is over a mistake the French did.

These are just few, I could blabber more.

It's a Khmer temple, though, right? So I'm thinking your objections are about the land and the border rather than the temple itself? Where do you think the border should go?

The Khmer Empire fell years ago. That argument is invalid.

Yep, my arguments are about the land, and what is situated on top of it, but I ignore the history of the thing that is situated on top of it.

You're kind of selective in thinking about which parts of history count. Personally, I think that the land has been under Cambodian control for over 50 years and it should stay that way. What benefits would a dispute have for anyone?

Well, for parts of the Cambodian Civil War, Thai forces did occupy it.

I mean like, if Mexico owned Texas, the US would have a lengthy dispute wouldn't it.

So this is about pride? It's not that you actually want the temple and the land, but you feel that your pride has been injured by it being defined as Cambodian by the ICJ?

Sovereignty, not pride.

This map has the cultural breakdown of Thailand. I don't agree at all with borders being drawn along cultural/language lines, necessarily, but if they were the border between Cambodia and Thailand would be well North of the temple.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

It's a Khmer temple. The people in the area speak Khmer and it's been under Cambodian control for at least 50 years (although I'm not sure about what happened during the civil war) and before that it was under French control and not part of Thailand for another 50 years at least.

The ICJ has ruled twice that it's Cambodian land, a ruling which cannot be appealed. I mean seriously, what grounds to you have for claiming it for Thailand? And why do you even want to? I don't understand what you mean by "sovereignty". If anything, it's Cambodian sovereignty that's under threat. After all hasn't the Thai military been marching all over it, which is why this issue flamed up in the first place?

No I'm saying before French control it was under Thai control.

Well, I also have something for the ICJ to say; the Thai people are unsatisfied with your rulings, but are forced to accept it.

Cambodian sovereignty under threat? How about the millions of Cambodians marching into Thai lands?

I guess my point is France, and French Maps of the Last Century, have nothing to do with the current situation, and there should be an equilibrium to the lands Thailand used to own before the French came. My point is that I feel that it is unfair that some people wearing whigs in Hague gets the final say, when the dispute is between two nations. I do not have a say in what my country does but that is my opinion. The Khmer Empire fell, and you just have to accept that. Cambodia is not the Khmer Empire. Accept that too. Let's agree to disagree for now.
#NoToMobocracy #BladeStroink
setabed
Posts: 28
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2014 9:34:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Yes we can agree to disagree. Of course.

I understand what you mean about the ICJ especially given the history of colonization. I would resent their interference too.

On the other side, though, I've seen it over and over, politicians inventing disputes with external groups or exaggerating them for no other reason than immediate political gain. It happens everywhere. I think that's what's happening with.this.