Taiwan Irked at Google's Version of Earth 571
frank_adrian314159 writes "As reported in The Register, Taiwan wants Google Earth to stop calling it a province of China. Although Google has yet to comment on this issue, it will be interesting to see the brightest minds that money can buy trying to solve what decades of diplomats have unsuccessfully wrestled with - how to balance the nationalistic pride of the inhabitants of Taiwan against the nationalistic pride of the inhabitants of mainland China." From the article: "Foreign ministry spokesman, Michel Lu, explained: 'It is incorrect to call Taiwan a province of China because we are not. We have contacted Google to express our position and asked them to correct the description.' Google has maintained a stony silence on the matter, presumably while it tries to work out a solution which will please both the Taiwanese and the hosts of the (lucrative, burgeoning, inviting) Chinese internet search business opportunity market."
Simple solution (Score:5, Funny)
Problem solved.
--
You didn't know. [tinyurl.com]
Re:Simple solution (Score:5, Insightful)
"Chinese Taipei" -- obvious bullshit, Taipei is the capital of the country, not the country itself.
"Republic of China" -- obvious bullshit, they were the Republic of China before the communist rebellion, but they can't claim to be the whole of China anymore.
"Taiwan" -- the geographic name. Perfectly neutral.
So... we nearly say "Germany" instead of "Federal Republic of Germany", its real name. We use "Poland" instead of "Republic of Poland". We say "China" instead of "People's Republic of China". So, why won't we just call Taiwan... "Taiwan"?
Re:Simple solution (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Simple solution (Score:3, Insightful)
Yup, Google has violated their policy here, but they can join the long list of moral weasels on this issue. Fact: Taiwan is a soverign nation entitled to all the privledges and respect that status brings. Fact: For craven reasons mostly related to fear of upsetting trade relations with China almost no nation fully recognizes that fact. Fact: While being part craven in not extending full recognition to Taiwan and not
Re:Simple solution (Score:3, Funny)
You cant be in china, they dont allow those words.
Re:Simple solution (Score:5, Insightful)
You had me until that one. Simply because your "empire" once held that territory does not entitle you to do so indefinitely, particularly considering that both then and now, said occupation is completely against the wishes of the people who actually live there.
Using your logic, we can build about 5 cases for who should legally own Palestine, and we see where that logic gets us.
Your history is also largely incorrect. Tibet was independent between 600 and the start of the Mongol empire, and again from the time the Mongols lost control until the Qing dynasty tried to take over in hostile fashion. They gained some control over Tibet though not central rule, until the British started protecting Tibet. By 1900 the British sold Tibet out to China - again, against the wishes of Tibet - and China took over.
So to sum up, China has not "owned" Tibet any time in the last 1500 years except for the last 50, and has had absolutely no control that was granted by the people of Tibet. That makes China an occupying, illegitimate, oppressive power in Tibet.
Not so simple (Score:3, Interesting)
How do we determine when secession is permissible and when it is not? The Basque region in Spain, late 1700s US, Ireland, Hawaii since its statehood, the US South during the Civil War, the Caucasus, Tibet, Taiwan, Israel/Palestine for the last 2000 years, the Sunni triangle, Br
Re:Simple solution (Score:4, Interesting)
If even one person refuses it, then the state no longer has legitimacy of control over that individual, HOWEVER, that individual has no right to reside in territory controlled by the state, as they have set themselves apart from society.
Conversely, if a majority of the people in a region refuse the contract, then the rule of that area by the state is not legitimate. The state can force obedience with arms, but a contract accepted only due to coersion is not binding. They may rule the region, but will not be legitimate there until the people freely agree to it.
If this is not the case, then the entire point of having a state has been lost and its purpose perverted.
Re:Simple solution (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Simple solution (Score:5, Insightful)
Try telling that to my mother, uncle, and aunt who fled from Tibet through the Himalayas because a neighbouring country decided to assert their "rightful authority". My grandfather died in China-Occupied Tibet and my grandmother died shortly after getting out.
Rape, slaughter, famine, and cultural-cleansing are some of the many atrocities Tibetans were subjected to because China decided to assert their "rightful authority". Tibet was an independant country. Sadly, it no longer is. I don't claim Tibet is a country, but strongly incist that it was.
I suggest YOU look up some facts before posting pro-China "crap". Let's start with http://www.tibet.org/why/ [tibet.org] and http://www.tibet.com/WhitePaper/ [tibet.com]
How can you be so misinformed? You should be ashamed of what China did from a humanitarian point of view, regardless of whatever political bias and motivations you may have.
Re:Simple solution (Score:5, Informative)
Wow, you are so wrong and misguided it isn't even funny.
The war against India was not imperialistic at all; it was a border dispute that India was getting too agressive about; we attacked them, taught them a lesson, and backed out. If we were so imperialistic, why don't we hold any Indian territory today? In fact those same territories that were under dispute then are still under dispute now.
Wow, guess who else is so wrong and misguided? Have you picked up a history book or bothered to look at multiple sources of history to see what actually happened in the 1962 Sino-Indian War? It was completely because of imperialistic desires; among other things, it provided a "bridge" into Tibet, which China claims as its own. There were protests in India and China over this occupation. Ethinically and geographically it belongs to either Tibet (a free one) or India -- definitely not China. Are you even aware of what China said was its valid reason for conquering the territory? It was to "liberate three million Tibetans from imperialist aggression, to complete the unification of the whole of China, and to safeguard the frontier regions of the country." What utter nonsense!
And guess who started the war? Like you said, the Chinese. First, the Chinese took over whatever it felt necessary (Tibet) and started heading towards the Indian border. Second, India put up a military to safegaurd what was clearly its boundary -- a good bit behind what China already claimed at that point. Then, the Chinese decided that border patrol was an act of agression and felt validated conquering MORE territory. And, no they haven't left, yet? Hence the "dispute". So why did India not press itself militaristically? Because India did not have a military set up that China already did in the region; it is hard terrain that India has to play cath up with. So, it remains a "border dispute" that China guards agressively.
The current Chinese foriegn policy towards India dictates, basically, containment. Yeah... no imperialism there! I wouldn't be surprised if you more of your post has it "so" wrong; heads up moderators -- the parent is spouting bullshit.
Some sources:
Asia Times: India in China [atimes.com]
The battle for the border [rediff.com]
The Sino-Indian War [orbat.com]
1962 Sino-Indian War: An Overview [hindustantimes.com]
Re:Simple solution (Score:3, Informative)
The only history you seem to have down correctly is the part that's unflattering to the US (not surprising). This is completely ok by the way because we know what our country has done wrong. You're not opening any eyes here with that stuff. It's common knowledge in the US. Your take on what your own country has done is pretty distorted though. Your po
Re:Simple solution (Score:3, Insightful)
The Korean War was fought because forces from the DPRK crossed the 38th Parallel.
"The UN was there to overturn the communist government, and were essentially encroaching on our borders;
Considering that DPRK forces initially almost pushed UN forces off of the penninsula entirely before being pushed back north (points north, like Seoul, were ravaged), I'd lay the blame on the DPRK for putting the stakes
Re:Simple solution (Score:3, Interesting)
Independence is defined by the ability to defend your land from both military and cultural invasions. Everything else is moot.
Re:Simple solution (Score:3, Informative)
No. China was the chief supplier of the Afghan rebels. The Soviet after action reports make that clear. The Aghans might have had US Stingers, but they were wearing Chinese sneakers and using Chinese radios.
The Muslims in China ha
Re:Good guys follow the law. (Score:3, Informative)
In fact, the Catholic Church does. Also, 26 other countries do.
See our old friend Wikipedia [wikipedia.org].
Re:Simple solution (Score:4, Insightful)
"Taiwan" -- the geographic name. Perfectly neutral.
When you have the political boundary layer on, it should show the political names, not the geographic names.
If there is a dispute of some sort (tiawan, tibet, etc) then the program should be clear that they use a specific set of political names (ie, "As recognized by the UN") and stay out of political rumbling. Tiawan is simply trying to bring this issue up in the "court of world opinion" again, and Google is a convenient talking point.
-Adam
What's in a name? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Simple solution (Score:3, Insightful)
Groups who want China and Taiwan to suck it up and make politics reflect reality unfortunately don't have control of the Taiwanese government.
Re:Simple solution (Score:4, Informative)
On the one hand, you have the Nationalists (the Kuomingtang, KMT), who led by Chiang Kei-shek brought a lot of Mainland Chinese Nationalists over to Taiwan back in the 50's after the Chinese Communists drove them out. The KMT settled in Taiwan and plotted their return to China to assert their democratic government there (both they and the Communists asserted that theirs was the legitimate government for the whole of China). This return, of course, has not quite happened although the KMT has claimed that Taiwan is part of China, in as much as they are the legitimate government of China as a whole. For a long time, the largely Mainlander KMT has remained (despite their minority status among the "native" Taiwanese, who are also ethnically Chinese, but have lived on Taiwan for several hundred years) have maintained a one-party system and martial law up until the mid-80's.
In that time there has been a liberalization of political life, leading to the rise of a large opposition party (the Democratic People's Party, DPP), consisting largely of "native" Taiwanese, as well as a change in the KMT's own membership as more "native" Taiwanese rise to positions of power within that party. The DPP could be described supporting Taiwanese interests over the KMT's party-line of reunifying with China under a Nationalist flag. This is intertwined with resentment over the KMT's repressive and corrupt policies over the years and a genuine need to address domestic issues within Taiwan.
Thus the reality of of whether or not the Taiwanese or their government favor reunification or independence can be well summarized by this paragraph from Wikipedia:
It is also important to note that a DPP president is currently in office, although the legislature is still fairly divided. So what's meant by "the government" is rather unclear at the moment.
("Native" is written in quotes to distinguish those Taiwanese who are ethnically Chinese, but have resided in Taiwan for the last few hundred years from the actual aborigineal tribes in Taiwan, who, like many native people, have suffered under a variety of hands.)
Re:Simple solution (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Simple solution (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Simple solution (Score:5, Insightful)
Furthermore, and you do not seem to realize this, the Chinese government is not a government of law, it is a government of personality. It is a dictatorship, run by individuals who answer to no voters, or anyone else, for that matter. Since I will assume you do not know Hu Jintao, or Jiang Zemin, you are not qualified to say that China will not launch nukes.
Your understanding and assessment of the situation is incorrect.
On the other hand, it is Tuesday, and if this is a troll, I vote for it as the best I've seen all year.
Re:Simple solution (Score:4, Interesting)
Basically he claimed that it would be a political impossibility for the Chinese government to accept an independent Taiwan. There's a very big nationalistic sentiment in China (perhaps even bigger than the totally ridiculous amount you have in the US? Who knows), and he asserted that any attempt by the government to recognize Taiwan would be met with riots and possibly a revolution.
I didn't fully understand the Chinese stance on the issue, but it seemed to revolve around Taiwan having been "part of China" for hundreds of years.
I don't know if this tells anything or not, but in an effort to understand the situation better I asked him if it's important that the people who live in Taiwan come under Chinese rule or if it's just the land that they are after. He told me that they probably don't care about the people, it would be OK if they relocate somewhere, only the land simply must eventually come under Chinese rule. Any other line of thinking would lead nowhere.
Re:Simple solution (Score:3, Insightful)
No, but they are part of China and, therefore, have as much claim to the name as the people on the mainland.
By the way, perhaps you've heard of the Republic of Korea (eg, "South Korea") and the People's Republic of Korea (eg, "North Korea")?
Re:Simple solution (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Simple solution (Score:3, Funny)
(btw, thank you George W Bush, *true* Conservative!)
Re:Simple solution (Score:4, Insightful)
Personally, I'm in favor of just putting the borders on the map and leaving it blank. Or they could just let the user decide and then set a cookie....
Butter (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Butter (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Butter (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Butter (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm betting though that the 'do no evil' thing is but a marketing gimick and nothing more.
Ill solve this quickly (Score:3, Insightful)
Google already knows the answer to this and that is why "Taiwan" is listed as such.
End of story. (For Taiwan at least)
Dr.O
But... (Score:2)
PROC and ROC (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:PROC and ROC (Score:2)
Google is in a bad position: They have a nuetral product, easily accessable, which shows political divisions. Taiwan shows up on the product, so it needs to be inside or outside a boundry. A diplomat's words can leav
Re:PROC and ROC (Score:4, Funny)
Naaa na na na a na na na na na na na na na.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Naaa na na na a na na na na na na na na na.... (Score:3, Funny)
It is sad (Score:3, Insightful)
Thanks, Nixon (for nothing).
Re:It is sad (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:It is sad (Score:3, Interesting)
China was never, and is still not, a *real* strategic threat to the United States. It has vast potential, but it's still decades from being able to utilize any of it. It was even further away
Not "Province: , "Republic" (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not a province, it's a Republic of China. That's why the labels on manufactured goods say "Made in Taiwan ROC".
Re:Not "Province: , "Republic" (Score:5, Informative)
Ditto Tibet (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Ditto Tibet (Score:4, Insightful)
Taiwan is both a democratic country and it maintains de facto rule--it has its own military that prevents China from walking over, and it maintains order within the island as well. As to its constitutional legitimacy... that is a separate question (if you're talking about from a historical perspective... but of course from a self-determination perspective they are legitimately independent).
Re:Ditto Tibet (Score:2)
Solution (Score:2, Interesting)
Or call it just plain ol' Taiwan.
Or hey, even better, give it a name based on originating IP.
EBay it! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:EBay it! (Score:2)
Mod parent up! If mainland China really is a "bigger market", they should put up or shut up. It's kind of a bad precedent though... I mean... does Redmond really want to be Microsoftville? Does Atlanta want to be Coketown? Maybe they could just restrict it to teritories that are under dispute by organized armies.
Claim is it someone else's issue (Score:4, Insightful)
Google Kowtows to China (Score:3, Insightful)
So much for the "do no evil" schtick, huh?
Hey, once upon a time Gates was the clever, driven College drop-out sticking it to the Man, too, right? Eventually, they all embrace their inner Gekko.
Mebbe one of their two billionaire founders will sleep with his sister by mistake and the whole modern Greek Tragedy can be complete.
*sigh*
what's for lunch... haven't eaten lunch... starving...
Re:Google Kowtows to China (Score:2)
This just shows once again that ANY corporation is a sociopath.
It's all about the money- never give your loyalty to a corporation- they have no conscience- they have no guilt.
Oh Google... (Score:5, Funny)
if (IP == Taiwan){
Label as independent
}
else {
Label as province of China
}
Re:Oh Google... (Score:2, Funny)
for c in countries:
if ip not 'redstate':
label('USA Free Market')
else:
don't show country
While Google's at it... (Score:2, Insightful)
Coming soon from Google (Score:2)
Are you tired of endless, bureaucratic discussions with international diplomats? Well worry no more! Google will sort out all your petty squabbles for you, with no interference and just a few text based ads appended to your country's constitution.
Google International Diplomacy integrates fully with existing Google packages. Connect that red "President Phone" to Google Talk! Search for the name of a country's Prime Minister with Google Google!
text only, not embedded into the image (Score:2)
The text next to the map says "Taiwan, Province of China" ... the maps themselves don't actually imply it is part of China (as far as I could notice). This means it is a very easy change for Google to implement, no edit of the maps or code needed. They just need to decide what to do politically.
A note, Taiwan is not asking for "Taiwan, Province of China" to become "Taiwan, an independant nation" ... perhaps all provinces of all nations shoul
Who else thinks... (Score:2)
I say google will... (Score:3, Interesting)
Why are they bugging Google about this? (Score:4, Insightful)
Google's Master Plan... (Score:2, Funny)
Google does business in China (Score:2)
Google does business in China. China exerts extraordinary control over any company "priviledged" to operate inside china.
Therefore, Google Earth will reflect China's beliefs.
-Adam
Google is probably adhering to ISO 3166 (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.iso.org/iso/en/prods-services/iso3166m
03: Why is Taiwan named Taiwan Province of China in ISO 3166-1?
A: The names in ISO 3166-1 - and thus on our Webpage - are taken from United Nations sources. These sources are authoritative inputs to the international country code standard. They are:
* The United Nations Bulletin Country Names and the
* Country and Region Codes for Statistical Use of the United Nations Statistics Division
Since Taiwan is not a UN member it does not figure in the UN bulletin on country names. The printed edition of the publication Country and region codes for statistical use gives the name we use in ISO 3166-1. By adhering to UN sources the ISO 3166/MA stays politically neutral.
Re:Google is probably adhering to ISO 3166 (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Google is probably adhering to ISO 3166 (Score:3, Interesting)
But clearly it is not politically neutral to have Taiwan excluded from the UN. I'm not saying that it's right or wrong, but it's certainly not neutral.
I think it's a cop out to say that you're just following the U.N. standards. I think the right thing to do for this any many other situations is to have the maps reflect the political reality- that there is disagreement. Of course China will act like a petulant child if google were to do t
Someone at google just copied and pasted (Score:4, Funny)
1. A geek will pass out your post, crisis averted. Expect a job offer. But you have to work in China or something... check a previous post about where google newhires have to work. +)
2. a geek will say "In my research I have discovered that yadda yadda and problem solved, crisis averted".
and then 10 other geeks will roll their eyes because they read the same shit here too.
Whose schvantz is tastier? (Score:2, Insightful)
Kinda hard to "do no evil" when different people have different definitions.
Google needs to grow a pair and stand up on this issue rather than silently ignoring it and hoping it will go away.
another test of their corporate philosophy... (Score:3, Insightful)
6. You can make money without doing evil.
Do they follow Yahoo's lead, [bbc.co.uk] and cater to the very oppressive Chinese gov? Or do they support a democracy that has been around just as long as China really, having been created in more or less the same instance. China, after all, has no less claim to being the authority over Taiwan than Taiwan has to being the authority over China.
How about it Google...gona "do no evil" here?
Re:another test of their corporate philosophy... (Score:3, Insightful)
The ROC controlled Taiwan and China starting in 1912. After the Second Sino-Japanese War, China had a civil war. In 1949 the PRC beat out the ROC in mainland China, and the ROC retreated to Taiwan, where it had ruled since 1912.
Which is to say, the government that controls Taiwan has been in continuous control of Taiwan since 1912. The current government of China has only existed since 1949. In 1950, Truman recognized Taiwan's independence from China - China, at the t
EASY solution (Score:5, Funny)
Article in Time (Score:5, Informative)
Managing Google's Idea Factory
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_4
CIA Factbook: Taiwan Link (Score:3, Informative)
Second country from the bottom, aftwer Zimbabwe and before European Union. http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos / tw.html [cia.gov]
So yes, they are in the CIA world factbook.
history (Score:3, Informative)
You folks may remember when the Taiwanese legislature was planning to declare independence, and mainland threats made them back down? Well, if there weren't any ties to the mainland, why would they need to declare independence at all?
The reason is that, when Mao Tse-Tung's army took over the Chinese mainland and China's original rulers relocated to Taiwan, the old government maintained a claim to being the government of the mainland. In their eyes they were a province of China as a whole, despite the rest of the country being controlled by interlopers.
Now, over time, they realized the Communist regime, while it's gotten a bit more flexible, wasn't going away. Their own government changed in the meantime, too. And while they've gotten to the point where they no longer consider themselves to be the same country as the mainland, by having laid claim to being the only legitimate part of the original government they're still tied together.
Proper naming is important? (Score:2)
?
How to really piss off Beijing. (Score:2, Funny)
Perfect solution... (Score:3, Funny)
Republic of Taiwan?? (Score:3, Informative)
Tickbox (Score:3, Funny)
Google should make it a tick box, so the user can choose whether the map should show independent or not.
Here is a partial list of others:
But Amtrak got it right despite ISO 3166! (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2
Why can't Google?
The people of Taiwan deserve credit. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Customisable naming? (Score:3, Interesting)
Far as that goes, why couldn't they change the label based on the IP space of the place calling up the page? Known Taiwanese subnet? There ya go, it's called one thing. Known Chinese subnet? Here you go, it's called what you want to call it. Give 'em an option to change from that default behavoir. Think of it as live, real-time, address-based translation of the name.
Hell - they're Google. Let 'em invent a
Re:Customisable naming? (Score:2)
I mean, the insanity has to stop somewhere.
Gotta pick your fights... (Score:3, Insightful)
Sadly, Taiwan is doomed unless the US wants to provoke a third world war... which I hope to God they don't.
Google is "calling it in the air" as they say.
Re:google aren't the only one (Score:5, Insightful)
If the school bully says you have to say "uncle", that doesn't mean he's suddenly your real uncle...
Re:google aren't the only one (Score:4, Informative)
Minor distinction I feel is important to make.
Re:google aren't the only one (Score:5, Informative)
It's a pity that the moderators can't recognize flamebait when they see it.
It really depends on how you define "independence."
If by "independent" you mean the existence of a sovereign government, an army, and a legal structure, then by all means Taiwan is independent. If by "independent" you mean recognized by everyone else, then they're not.
As an example, if you try to go to Taiwan, ROC with a PROC visa, you'll be laughed at. The leaders in Taiwan are democratically elected, they have their own army, currency, health care system, business regulations, the whole works. As far as I'm concerned, that's pretty darn independent.
If you're looking at the view of whether they *should* be independent, that's where a lot of the debate comes in. In PROC the view is that historically Taiwan was part of the PROC, so it should be reunited with the motherland. This particular belief is pretty strong on the mainland due to nationalistic pride and control of the newspapers. In Taiwan, people just want the right to elect their own leaders democratically; regardless of where they stand on the reunification issue, they don't want to turn into another Hong Kong, and that is the public relations problem that PROC is faced with. They want to maintain an authoritarian government over a population that is used to publicly berating its own leaders.
Re:google aren't the only one (Score:3, Insightful)
And ya know, that isn't rigorously true. Taiwan was filled with indigenous polynesians until the 1600s, was a Dutch colony for a while after that, was fairly uncontrolled between 1700 and 1800, was a Japanese colony from about 1800-1900, and was independent between 1900 and the start of WWII. Japan occupied it again during the war, and the Allies agreed China would occupy it *temporarily* after the war. Afterwards, of course, the Chinese c
Re:google aren't the only one (Score:2)
Why isn't the US part of the World Criminal Court?
Why isn't Norway and Iceland members of the European Union?
Why hasn't Atlantis melted all of Antartica's ice that its buried under?
And most importantly...
Why hasn't an American cable channel picked up (new) Doctor Who yet?
Re:google aren't the only one (Score:5, Informative)
The government that is running Taiwan today is called the Republic of China. This is the government established by the Nationalist Party, which overthrew the imperial Qing Dynasty about a century ago. This is also the government that fought alongside the Allies in WWII against Japan, and is a permanent member of the UN Security Council.
After WWII, the government lost mainland China to the communists in civil war, and retreated to Taiwan. The communists then formed the People's Republic of China, and took over the Security Council seat and UN membership a couple of decades later.
Today, Taiwan maintains an independent executive, legislative, and judicial system, with police and military power. It also maintains diplomatic relationships with about two dozen small countries. It is not in the UN primarily because of the unfortunate zero-sum diplomatic contest that has been ongoing for decades now. Put simply, the PRC would not allow Taiwan into the UN, and most governments do not recognize Taiwan because the PRC would sever relations if they did.
I've head quite a few boxes on them that say Taiwan, ROC on them so I guess not even everyone there shares the same opinion.
Taiwan is ruled by the Republic of China, not the People's Republic of China. The problem at hand is that by saying "Taiwan, China", people (like you, no offense) will mistake it for the People's Republic of China. Over the years, a good number of native (meaning, arrived in Taiwan before 1949) Taiwanese have grown to resent the repressive Nationalist rule, and there is now some negative reaction to the name "China". The Nationalists have since lost power in elections, and the new ruling party has tried what it can to ditch the "China" altogether and achieve an independent "Taiwan", but this remains the most divisive political issue on the island.
as for me, what the hell do I know about it !
Re:google aren't the only one (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Simple.. (Score:2, Funny)
They're trying to reconcile making the mad cash from catering to the soon-to-be-richest country in the world and compromising their company motto.
Imma write them a nasty letter. A girl I know is from Taiwan (mmm... hot Taiwanese girl...) and imma send them all the Taiwanese facts about their independence. I suggest you all find hot Taiwanese girls and do the same.
Google! Don't be evil!
Re:Simple.. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd say there's an empirical way of testing this. Do the Taiwanese pay taxes to the mainland government, are mainland government laws enforced in Taiwan? No, in both cases. Has Taiwan managed to maintain this state of affairs for a reasonable period of time? Yes. Then Taiwan has earnt its right not to be called a province.
Doesn't stop Google annoying the mainland government by calling it such, but you shouldn't let economics get in the way of the truth.
Re:Why not call it (Score:2)
Re:They've already solved the problem (Score:2)
A simple matter of a rogue CIA group equipping the Taiwainese with some nukes would also solve the diplomatic standoff as well, and allow the U.S. to decouple itself from the thorny situation and without the guilt associated with giving China a free-hand with Taiwain in exchange for the freedom to nuke Kim Jong Il's regime.
Re:Predicted (Score:2)
You can always count on a capitalist... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Why the US picks on China (Score:3, Insightful)
For God's sake man, cut the moral equivalency crap and realize that there is bad and good and these are absolutes. They are not values that are relative to something else and they certainly cannot be excused by saying in essence "heck, everybody does it."
11 million people killed for their ideology....that's evil, pure and simple. That's the evil of a man, drunk with his own power, that feel
Re:Why the US picks on China (Score:3, Insightful)
You tried to make China sound like a nice place to vacation. Stand and defend your comments like you've got a brain instead of falling back on the shopworn "Oh, yeah. Well the US has done some bad things too you know." Such an argument is pathetic and weak and t
Re:WTF? (Score:3, Funny)
smash.