Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 55

Thread: China relics buyer refuses to pay

  1. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Last Seen
    04-05-16 @ 06:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: China relics buyer refuses to pay

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    There is no excuse for why thieves stole property from another nation. This is all that is happening... thieves trying to justify their behaviour. If it were petty theft, people would be saying there is no excuse for why you shoplifted... but a grand cultural larseny is okay. The same sense of entitlement that France and England had when they invaded China and made the Qing sign the Treaty of Nanjing is the same sense of imperialist entitlement that they have to cultural relics stolen during that time. These countries never learn.
    Oh get over yourself.

    We're talking about property that was taken in war centuries ago. Quit with your "they shouldn't have stolen it" rhetoric.


  2. #22
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,019

    Re: China relics buyer refuses to pay

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Well...that's not what he said. That's not what he said at all.
    Except :

    Quote Originally Posted by ludahai
    While it may have a "moral" claim to the relics, there is no legal claim to them.
    If somebody steals my car and police find it a year after do I no longer have a claim to such a car even if it was sold to somebody else? Seriously saying that China no longer has a legal claim to an object which was not only stolen from China but also that it's present owner knew was stolen from China is ridiculous.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  3. #23
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: China relics buyer refuses to pay

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Except :



    If somebody steals my car and police find it a year after do I no longer have a claim to such a car even if it was sold to somebody else? Seriously saying that China no longer has a legal claim to an object which was not only stolen from China but also that it's present owner knew was stolen from China is ridiculous.
    If you find your car 150 years later in France, then I'd say you no longer have any claim to it.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  4. #24
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,019

    Re: China relics buyer refuses to pay

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    If you find your car 150 years later in France, then I'd say you no longer have any claim to it.
    Under what law, rule or logic do stolen items stop belonging to the person they were stolen from over time? Get serious.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  5. #25
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: China relics buyer refuses to pay

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Under what law, rule or logic do stolen items stop belonging to the person they were stolen from over time? Get serious.
    There really are no laws that are internationally recognized (and followed) to stop people from looting during a war. And even if there are now, there certainly weren't any such laws 150 years ago.

    As for what logic they stop belonging to the person...because at a certain point, it becomes damn near impossible to track down the original owner. Is the French government today (much less the private investor who actually owns it) the same French government that stole the property? Is the Chinese government today the same Chinese government from whom it was stolen?

    If we're going to start going back 150 years to address grievances, then the US government needs to give most of its land back to Native American tribes. In fact, they have MORE of a claim to it than the parties in this case...because it actually WAS the same United States government that stole their land.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  6. #26
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,019

    Re: China relics buyer refuses to pay

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    There really are no laws that are internationally recognized (and followed) to stop people from looting during a war. And even if there are now, there certainly weren't any such laws 150 years ago.
    And yet governments have recently made efforts to return looted treasure to their rightful owners. I don't see why this would be any different considering we know who A) the owners is and that B) the items in question were indeed stolen.

    As for what logic they stop belonging to the person...because at a certain point, it becomes damn near impossible to track down the original owner.
    Ummm the original owners in this case would be then be people of China. What are you confused about?

    Is the French government today (much less the private investor who actually owns it) the same French government that stole the property?
    Yes. Or is France no longer an existent country?

    Is the Chinese government today the same Chinese government from whom it was stolen?
    Irrelevant. The American government 10 years ago wasn't the same as the American government today. Does that mean they no longer carry responsibility for the government that came before them?

    If we're going to start going back 150 years to address grievances, then the US government needs to give most of its land back to Native American tribes.
    Extremist logic. These are specific items which were stolen from a specific group of people. How much land belonged to each Native American tribe? Where were the boundaries of their land? The U.S. government has had many instances of giving land back to Native Americans. Just look at the way they stop digging whenever a new Native cemetery is found. Matter of fact the U.S. government has gone even as far back as 40 years to address grievances with groups it considers it did wrong to. Just look at the reparations the Japanese got. But like I said. Your argument fails. The discussion at hand involves 2 specific items which we :

    A) Know were stolen.

    B) Know who they belonged to.

    In fact, they have MORE of a claim to it than the parties in this case...because it actually WAS the same United States government that stole their land.
    See above.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  7. #27
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: China relics buyer refuses to pay

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    And yet governments have recently made efforts to return looted treasure to their rightful owners. I don't see why this would be any different considering we know who A) the owners is and that B) the items in question were indeed stolen.
    Right, GOVERNMENTS who come into possession of property looted during war often return the property to the country it came from. Mostly as a goodwill gesture. They rarely make individual citizens return that property, except for specific events ascribed into their nations' laws, such as the Holocaust, and/or if the individual himself is partially responsible for the theft.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey
    Ummm the original owners in this case would be then be people of China. What are you confused about?
    Why do the people of China own it? It was the emperor's personal possession and I doubt he shared it with his subjects. (And before you bring up the White House as an analogy, the people VOTE for representatives who appropriate tax dollars to furnish the White House.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey
    Yes. Or is France no longer an existent country?

    Irrelevant. The American government 10 years ago wasn't the same as the American government today. Does that mean they no longer carry responsibility for the government that came before them?
    The US government is the same as it has been since 1789. France has had at least seven different governments since 1860.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey
    Extremist logic. These are specific items which were stolen from a specific group of people. How much land belonged to each Native American tribe? Where were the boundaries of their land?
    In the cases where the answers to those questions can be clearly identified, would you support returning the land in full and granting total sovereignty to the Native American tribes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey
    The U.S. government has had many instances of giving land back to Native Americans.
    Not nearly as many instances as they do of taking land from Native Americans.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey
    Just look at the way they stop digging whenever a new Native cemetery is found.
    That's more out of respect than out of any sense that the land was wrongfully taken. And even if it was, that hardly cuts it. The US government looted an entire continent.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey
    Matter of fact the U.S. government has gone even as far back as 40 years to address grievances with groups it considers it did wrong to. Just look at the reparations the Japanese got.
    Going back 40 years to address specific grievances with living people who were actually affected is one thing. Going back 160 years to force a private investor, who had no part in the looting, to give property back to a government (the People's Republic of China) which never owned it in the first place is different.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 03-07-09 at 12:07 AM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  8. #28
    Defender of the Faith
    ludahai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate City
    Last Seen
    07-03-13 @ 02:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,320

    Re: China relics buyer refuses to pay

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    If somebody steals my car and police find it a year after do I no longer have a claim to such a car even if it was sold to somebody else? Seriously saying that China no longer has a legal claim to an object which was not only stolen from China but also that it's present owner knew was stolen from China is ridiculous.
    That theft is governed by municipal law. This is governed by international law. In 1860, there was no body of law that governed this sort of situation. In other words, it was perfectly legal at the time.
    Semper Paratus
    Boston = City of Champions: Bruins 2011; Celtics 2008; Red Sox 2004, 2007; Patriots 2002, 2004, 2005
    Jon Huntsman for President

  9. #29
    Defender of the Faith
    ludahai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate City
    Last Seen
    07-03-13 @ 02:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,320

    Re: China relics buyer refuses to pay

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Under what law, rule or logic do stolen items stop belonging to the person they were stolen from over time? Get serious.
    FOrtunes of war.
    Semper Paratus
    Boston = City of Champions: Bruins 2011; Celtics 2008; Red Sox 2004, 2007; Patriots 2002, 2004, 2005
    Jon Huntsman for President

  10. #30
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,019

    Re: China relics buyer refuses to pay

    Quote Originally Posted by ludahai View Post
    That theft is governed by municipal law. This is governed by international law. In 1860, there was no body of law that governed this sort of situation. In other words, it was perfectly legal at the time.
    Stealing, looting, plundering whatever you want to call it has NEVER been legal. Try. Again.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •