HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: joe@astro.as.utexas.edu (Joe Wang)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: Can we not all get along?
Date: 30 Aug 92 17:14:27 GMT
Organization: McDonald Observatory, University of Texas @ Austin

In article <1992Aug27.222708.23570@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> thuang@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Tze-yau Huang) writes:
>For Taiwanese Holo, genetic analysis points out that they are more likely to
>be a sinicized Yue people

So what?  What is genetics relevant to any of this?  (And if genetics
is relevant to any of this, are you willing to live with the
consequences of such?)

>There is no reason to choose China particularly as homeland while there 
>were intermarriages and migrations.

China is where most of the people who share the same culture and
identity live.  As for intermarriages and migrations, why are they
relevant?

>Also, there is no such thing as big China.  

What makes you say that?  I've seen the term "greater China" and
"China region" used more and more often in essays on economics and
foreign policy when writers want to refer to the bloc of
(PRC, ROC, Macao, Hong Kong) in a politically neutral way.  



Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.korean
From: woongki@syacus.acus.oz.au (Woong-Ki Chong)
Subject: Re: Generalizing again?? (was Re: All you d*ckhead friend-betraying Koreans!!!)
Organization: ACUS Australian Centre for Unisys Software, Sydney
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 03:09:39 GMT

kim_sh@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Sung Hyun Kim) writes:

>In article <1992Aug24.230918.24991@awdprime.austin.ibm.com> tylee@austin.ibm.com (Ter-Yuan Lee) writes:

>>For this, Korean can not just bury their heads in the sand lying that their
>>culture is totally irrelevant to the Chinese culture. For the same reason
>>above, they even claim that Korean culture breeds the Chinese culture, 
>>Confucius is Korean, ....., etc. And in their map, ROC does not exist.

>And I don't claim Korean culture breeds the Chinese culture..for the reason,
>see above..I don't think Korean culture has influenced Chinese in major way.
>And then...who said Confucious is Korean... (s)he must be out of her/his 
>mind. Everybody knows.

I don't think anybody actually claims that Confucious was a Korean, but
it is true, according to a number of Chinese records, that he belonged to
the Dong-Yi (Eastern Yi) who were separate from the Han Chinese.
And for whatever the reason, Koreans have always been referred to as Dong-Yi
by the Chinese.

BTW, I find it ironic that Dong-Yi has the meaning of "eastern barbarians".
From: chu@church.cs.unc.edu (Heng Chu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: The Foreign Minister of PRC said ...
Date: 27 Aug 92 02:33:46 GMT
Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

In article <HJj-pz#@engin.umich.edu> chen@caen.engin.umich.edu (Jian Chen) writes:
>I wish ROC government can be wise and do not make any aggresive
>move. 

*** Like what? Seeking diplomatic relationships is by no means aggressive. 

Heng
Xref: sparky soc.culture.taiwan:12320 soc.culture.korean:3836
From: txc6266@ultb.isc.rit.edu (T.X. Cheng )
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.korean
Subject: Re: All you d*ckhead friend-betraying Koreans!!!
Date: 24 Aug 92 00:51:52 GMT
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Originator: txc6266@ultb

In article <1992Aug23.164824.4527@news.acns.nwu.edu> phantom@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (James Choi) writes:
>I think I am getting into habit of checking these things.  NO NAME AGAIN!
>
>In article <9223618.1419@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> dht@cs.mu.OZ.AU (Joyous Dave baby) writes:
>[...]
>>all you f***ing d*ckhead, selfish, dishonest, friend-betraying
>>Koreans...
>
>I am sure some fits the description above.  Then again, it is true for any
>nationality or race.  So, nothing new so far...
>
>>I'll never ever buy ANY Korean product from now on.... whether
>>it's car or noodles or cheap pirate/rip-off Taiwan-designed
>>computers... and I'll encourage all my friends to do so.
>
>Unfortunately, this sentiment does not last long.  If it did, U.S. would
>not have such trade deficit problems.  Koreans in Korea, with their
>anti-Japanese feeling at its peak as ever, LOVES Japanese products and BUYS
>them.  Americans are sold on better quality cars made by their ex-war-enemy
>who used to shoot them.
>
>You can certainly try boicotting the products of those who betrayed you.
>But the reality is we cannot stop people from buying the products made by
>those who used to shoot, torture and rape you.
>
>>"Now we insist that the customers use condoms, and most do.
>>We hit them on their most sensitive point, saying we are protecting
>>their families."              -- Margarita, Mexico City prostitute
>>:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) that really hurts! :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
>
>Make sure to avoid Korean made condoms as well.
>
>Good luck.
>
>James Choi

You seem having not been Taiwan ever.  You won't know and understand
how strong the anti-Korean thoughs of the people but not the government
in Taiwan.

Tim Cheng
From: joe@astro.as.utexas.edu (Joe Wang)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: Friendship.
Date: 25 Aug 92 10:12:23 GMT
Organization: McDonald Observatory, University of Texas @ Austin

In article <1992Aug24.002455.11308@ultb.isc.rit.edu> txc6266@ultb.isc.rit.edu (T.X. Cheng ) writes:
>Friend is used to be betrayed.

A man who trusts cannot be betrayed, only mistaken.


Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: shao@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (SHAO CHUNG-SHANG)
Subject: Re: All you d*ckhead friend-betraying Koreans!!!
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 02:05:13 GMT

In article <25AUG199214284099@rigel.tamu.edu> y0z8374@rigel.tamu.edu (ZHANG, YUEMIN) writes:
>In article <1992Aug25.183157.27115@zip.eecs.umich.edu>, cyc@z.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang) writes...
>>>Recognizing PRC is one thing, but at the expense of a long-time
>>>friendship is another.
>>>
>> 
>>Korean didn't have choice, it's KMT who makes many ROC's
>>long-time friends to betray us. Since almost every country has agreed 
>>and accepted that PRC represnets China, why would KMT still stubbornly 
>>insist they are China. If Taiwan can claim its independence, I believe 
>>Korean will be more than happy to recognize both PRC and Taiwan.
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>>But, if Taiwan dare to compete with PRC in the representation of China,
>>the loser is obvious.
>> 
>>Yi-Chieh
>
>Are you a kerean? If not, please not pretend to be.

hot face touching cold ass?  mr. chang!

cs shao.
From: laiichung@vtcc1.cc.vt.edu (L. D. ROPER)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: Question about TI
Date: 3 Sep 92 22:38:00 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <22146@galaxy.ucr.edu>, lulu@ucrengr.ucr.edu (david lu) writes...
>In article <1992Sep2.012328.7757@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> pchang@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Pei-Yuan Chang) writes:
>>
>> Hi, I am not asking for arguments
>> OK, let me get this straight: I wrote a long paper this qaurter about TW
>>arousing discussions on TI in the class.  I'm just curious about the following
>>statement in the whole TI idea: why "mainlanders" should be kicked out of the
>>island after TI?

 = Well , I am a TI supportor and I know quite a lot people support TI , but
   based on what I know : none of them claimed that TI will kick out of 
   mainlanders . If you really heard of such kind of saying , please tell me 
   where did you hear that . I keep hearing people talking about that TI will
   get rid of mainlanders but none of my TI friends said that and I don't see
   any TI organization announced that . But I just keep receiving those message
   from KMT's publications , especially during election days .
   TI won't kick out mainlanders because they thought they are also Taiwanese .
   People in Taiwan are in the same boat , share the same fate . TI is the way
   for the better future of Taiwan . That's what I know why those people ( me
   also ) support TI .

                                                                 I Chung Lai

Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: ghe@nyx.cs.du.edu (George He)
Subject: Re: The foreign minister of prc said:Re to George He
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 15:16:31 GMT

In article <1992Sep2.003825.6931@ulowell.ulowell.edu> cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi) writes:
>In article <BtxAnI.7xK@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> ACHEN@ucs.indiana.edu writes:
>>The tiny island of Taiwan cannot survive economically without a
>>market who will buy its products.  All export oriented economies
>>are doomed to failure without a bigger country such as the USA
>>which can buy their products.  It is foolish to try to advocate
>>an independent Taiwan.  An independent Taiwan could survive economically
>>only if America has enough money to buy its products.  If 
>>America collapses then so goes the independent Taiwan. 
>>
>>So it is better to make friends with your brothers in the
>>mainland, rather than calling them nasty names.  The next 
>>century belongs to Asia and the Pacific Rim countries.  America
>>is already past its prime.  In the future it is China, not
>>America who will be Taiwan's biggest trade partner.  Remember,
>>the Chinese are not our enemy.  The white man is the true
>>enemy of all Chinese.  

     Have I ever mentioned any *USA* in any article I posted?
If not, please don't get too smart to *assume* what I am thinking.
The "uncle Sam" theory never comes into my mind.

     It's of course good to make friends (anywhere, including mainland).
However, once you realize your mainland friends can easily sell you for just
a few bucks, you'd better learn a lesson and prepare yourself for
mainlanders' lousiness.

     In addition, friends are to be made on equal basis. 
Unfortunately, Chinese communists are the last group of people on the earth 
to realize this point. I depreciate those who bend their knees down to those 
DP mainlanders (DP mainlanders are those mainlanders 
who serve commies like dogs while speak like big China  Chauvinism pigs).

     And I regard your last statement about white man as
comments from a racist. Who taught you that? KMT or CCP?

>After WWII, philipine had the richest living standard in Asia. But Philipine 
>became independent from U.S., further away from Communism nation comparing
>Korea, Taiwan, SouthVietName, got much less market support from U.S., living
>standard declined drastically to the bottom of Asia. Taiwan will be in the 
>same fate if not suportted by a big market.

The analogy on this matter is a pretty poor one.
This remind me an old saying.
How to make a poor man rich?
Give him fish or give him a fishing rod?

I believe American gave Philipines fish only.
On the contrary, Taiwan herself has already learned how to catch fish.






Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: Taiwan Embassies
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 92 02:57:06 GMT

In article <9223712.15142@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> dht@cs.mu.OZ.AU (Joyous Dave baby) writes:
>Two European countries have diplomatic ties with ROC (that I know of anyway).
>
>First is of course, Vatican City, for reasons obvious.
>
>Second is Latvia (sp?).  Latvia, when she became independant, wanted to
>recognize ROC because of trade and economic reasons.  However, in order
>to be recognize by UN, it is necessary to *please* PRChina since PRC
>holds the permanent seat.  Thus, Latvia formed diplomatic tie with PRC,
>and *after* it got accepted into UN, it formed diplomatic tie with ROC.
>
>Latvia is the first and only(?) country to recognize both China's at
>the same time.

I am not sure if it's Latvia or Lithuania...  It's one of those Baltic states.
:-)

Technically, you can say that Niger also recognized both Chinas at the same
time, albeit only for a few hours.  Niger established the relationship with
Taiwan *without* terminating the relationship with China, which broke off the
relationship with Niger in a few hours.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: shao@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (SHAO CHUNG-SHANG)
Subject: Re: Korean Bashing (Re: All you d*ckhead friend-betraying Koreans!!!)
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 20:54:35 GMT

In article <1992Aug30.070733.8147@leland.Stanford.EDU> claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu) writes:
>
>It surely isn't perfect.  If I have the ability to modify the system, I would
>use the District Plan which Maine (and none of the other states) use.  Under
>Maine's plans, 2 of the state's electoral votes (representing the 2 Senate
>seats that the state has in the Congress) would be determined at-large by
>popular vote for the whole state, and each of the other two electoral votes
>would be given to the candidate who got more popular votes in each of Maine's
>two Congressional districts.

the question is not the american system perfect or not.  the question, i want
to ask why it is called as democrate system, evan it may be against the
principles of democracy.  why?  what is the origin of this imperfect system?
is there reason other than the democracy principles behind this system?

your suggestion is not nothing to do with reality of the american political
system right now.  i believe we are discussing the reality of the political
system, not some good suggestions or perfect suggestions.

>But as for it being against the wishes of the majority of the population, you
>didn't address my point that since the electoral college begun to be voted in
>as slates, only once did the popular and the electoral votes disagree (in the
>Harrison vs. Cleveland election).

'once' means it will happen at any time again, if america does not revise their
laws and rules.

>Ford was not voted in; he was initially appointed by Richard Nixon as Vice-
>President when Spiro Agnew resigned.  When Nixon himself resigned, Ford
>became President.  Ford had *some* popular mandate; he was confirmed by the
>Senate, which was elected by the people.  However, that is not much mandate
>at all.
>
>Lee is in a similar situation; he was voted in by Guo2 Min2 Da4 Huay4, so you
>can draw an analogy there with the Senate, and I would argue that Lee has even
>less popular mandate, since the people over whom he has effective power had
>elected only a *very* tiny fraction of the representatives who elected Lee.

ok, i understand now.  president lee was elected by the guo2 min2 da4 hauy4
by those old representatives.  yes, it is 'imperfect', but it won't happen
again.  evan the laws and rules are not changed in taiwan.  next president
will be elected by the representatives who will be elected by people.  do you
accept this as a democracy system?  i believe this is the key question that
leads us to compare the systems between roc and usa.

cs shao.
From: chchang@acsu.buffalo.edu (Chun-Shi Chang)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: F-16 for Taiwan?
Date: 1 Sep 92 19:58:45 GMT
Organization: State University of New York at Buffalo/Comp Sci

Well, here we go again. According to an article in clari.tw.aerospace,
Bush may announce support for F-16 sale to Taiwan on Wednesday (9-2-92) 
when he visit the General Dynamics plant.

``I'm assuming he wouldn't be going to General Dynamics unless he's
got good news to tell,'' said Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas. :-)

The sale would cost Taiwan $4 billion for 150 fighters. It would save 
about 3,000 jobs at GD and mark the end of a decade-long ban on major 
weapons shipments to Taiwan.

-Chunshi
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: rot@multisys.com (Republic of Taiwan)
Subject: Re: The Foreign Minister of PRC said ...
Organization: Multimedia Information Systems Corporation. (TEL: 408-437-3031)
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 15:43:44 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.220236.9256@engage.pko.dec.com> li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tong-Kang Li) writes:
>
>When you want to count on the U.S. for this matter you should think what is 
>the best interest to her. Is losing Taiwan Independence or military 
>confrontation with China? I think U.S. would rather losing Taiwan Independence 
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^
You THINK.

>than military confrontation (unless China decides to use forces to unify Taiwan
>that may be a different story).
>
>Also the fact is U.S. government has expressed many times for opposition of 
>Taiwan Independence. And China is not Iraqi, Lybia, or Panama. Military 
>confrontation with China can be very costly to the U.S. 
>
>Now you can see whether U.S. will persuade Taiwan giving up TI or fight for it.

YOU can see. Please donot' count me in.

>U.S. was the last major NATO member to recognize Croatia, Bosnia, and three 
>Baltics. As for Republics in the Commonwealth, U.S. would like to see 
>Gorbachov (sp?) continue to lead these Republics under the name of 
>Soviet-Union but Soviet Union collapsed herself then U.S. recognized these 
>Republics after the break-up.
>
>Since tension in the East Asia region has been greatly reduced these several 
>years, U.S. has no reason to recognize Taiwan Independence at the risk of 
>her own interest.

Yea... In your opinion.

>
>I understand your frustration and resentment but truth is truth.

Yes, we understand your self-believing and self-cheating.
This is America, everyone can believe what he or she want to
believe as long as he or she does not infringe other people's rights.

>
>Tom


Xref: sparky soc.culture.taiwan:12433 soc.culture.korean:3964
From: junglee@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Jung S. Lee)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.korean
Subject: Re: Korean Airline flights unwelcome in Taiwanese Airspace, etc. [FWD]
Date: 26 Aug 92 14:41:01 GMT
Followup-To: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.korean
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <BtKqt5.MF9@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, for499@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (Biing T Guan) writes:
> shin@krusty.ee.udel.edu (Jeong-Gyun Shin) writes:
> 
> >No flames but seems like international politics is indeed game of interests:
> >banning Korean airlines wouldn't do much harm to Taiwan but banning U.S. 
> >airlines would do so.  So ... I guess that's why U.S. airlines continue to
> >fly to and out of Taiwan even though U.S. was the very dear ice breaker.
> >Come to think of it, viva la independent Taiwan!
> 
> Sorry to break a news to you, S. Korea is not U. S. Yes, we depend on
				^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> U. S. as much as we hate to admit it.  But I do think we can live
  					 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  So what you are saying is that since you, Taiwan, heavily depends on U.S 
  economically, U.S. airlines is welcomed although you don't like it.
  Then what is wrong with Korea establishing diplomatic relationship
  with Mainland China because of its potential market? 
  See Mainland China is not Taiwan, you know? We are better off
  without Taiwan economically and politically. 
  
  
> without S. Korea.  So come to think of it, viva la independent North Korea to
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> you too!

  Don't worry. I think S. Korea already recognized N. Korea as an
  independent country. Two flags in front of U.N. building, you know.
  We are not as stubborn as you guys. We are trying to work things out
  with N. Korea for reunification. I guess you guys need to learn a
  lesson from your old friend.
> 
> Biing T. Guan
> A Taiwan-born Chinese

  Heck, who cares where you are born? We could come across on 42nd St.
  and become friends.  
  Everything is changing as time goes. 

Jung S. Lee
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: The Foreign Minister of PRC said ...
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 16:32:48 GMT

In article <14808@borg.cs.unc.edu> chu@church.cs.unc.edu (Heng Chu) writes:

>    Absurd claims exist in international society. Examples include 
>    PRC's claim that Taiwan is part of their territory. That certainly 
>    didn't prevent other countries to rush to have diplomatic relationship 
>    with it.

True.  Another example would be that Quebec has yet to renounce its claim on
all of Labrador, part of which is commonly recognized as belonging to New
Foundland.  It apparently did not affect the relationship between the other
provinces and Quebec (which is stormy in some cases, however).
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: ACHEN@ucs.indiana.edu
Subject: The foreign minister of prc said:Re to George He
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 23:30:45 GMT

The tiny island of Taiwan cannot survive economically without a
market who will buy its products.  All export oriented economies
are doomed to failure without a bigger country such as the USA
which can buy their products.  It is foolish to try to advocate
an independent Taiwan.  An independent Taiwan could survive economically
only if America has enough money to buy its products.  If 
America collapses then so goes the independent Taiwan. 

So it is better to make friends with your brothers in the
mainland, rather than calling them nasty names.  The next 
century belongs to Asia and the Pacific Rim countries.  America
is already past its prime.  In the future it is China, not
America who will be Taiwan's biggest trade partner.  Remember,
the Chinese are not our enemy.  The white man is the true
enemy of all Chinese.  
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tong-Kang Li)
Subject: Re: The Foreign Minister of PRC said ...
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 01:00:13 GMT


In article <1992Aug30.210718.6155@zip.eecs.umich.edu>, cyc@z.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang) writes...
>>
>>In my opinion, no matter KMT claim or disclaim, most of countries will not
>>recognize Taiwan as "Republic of anything" at present or near future unless
>>you pay enough $$.
>>
> 
>I don't think so. The reason that a country must choose either PRC or ROC
>is that both PRC and ROC claim that they are China. Since there is only one
>China, there will be only one winner. If Taiwan can be something else, 
>PRC can be China while Taiwan can be Taiwan. Two winners can exist at 
>the same time. 

Although Taiwan still claims "One China policy" but the fact is, Taiwan has 
quietly moved towards "Two China policy", relations with Niger is an example. 
As I said before, Taiwan has difficulty to be recognized as "Republic of 
Anything" (that includes ROC or ROT). If Taiwan can be something else as
you suggested, "Chinese Taipei" has proved working. Any suggestions for
better names?

>>I wonder what would happen if Taiwan declares "Taiwan is not part of China"
>>and adopts name of "Republic of Taiwan". My guessing is Mainland China will
>>blockade the island enough to cause social and economic chaos, e.g., collapse 
>>of stock market and money fled out of country, etc. To restore the regional 
>>peace, US, Japan, South Korea, etc will put great pressure on Taiwan to 
>>force her to withdraw the declaration. After months, Taiwan may have to back 
>>to previous state and take a very very long time to recover the economy and 
>>dignity.
>>
>>Any comments.
>>
> 
>This thought is like to ask a victim don't resist and just let a killer
>kill him. Human being is granted to live not to be killed. Man.
>Only an aggressive country will be asked to back off not a country being
>under attacked. If U.N. didn't ask Kuwait to give up and surrender to Iraq, 
>why should U.N. ask Taiwan to give up its right to live and right to 
>determine their future.

My guessing did not suggest "ask a victim don't resist and just let a killer 
kill him" but just possible consquences. Certainly, if majority people on
Taiwan are willing to take that risk, go ahead. But it is certainly not the 
case based on the results of last December's election at least for now.

Kuwait is a member of U.N. but not Taiwan so it is unlikely U.N. will tell 
Taiwan what to do.

Tom