Re: [討論] 想台獨原因

看板PublicIssue作者n3oanderson (wake up ...)時間11年前 (2014/06/10 10:03)推噓3(3推 0噓 2→)

留言5則, 4人參與討論串33/43 (看更多)

the principal occuyping Power的翻譯用軍事佔領似乎比較恰當. 美國是台灣主要軍事佔領國(the principal occuyping Power). 所以台灣不屬聯合國託管(這也是中國無權置啄之因) http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-caDC-08-05078 On September 8, 1951, Japan signed the San Francisco Peace Treaty (“SFPT”) and officially renounced “all right, title and claim to Formosa and the Pescadores.” Treaty of Peace with Japan, art. 2(b), Sept. 8, 1951, 3 U.S.T. 3169, 136 U.N.T.S. 45. The SFPT does not declare which government exercises sovereignty over Taiwan. It does generally identify the United States as “the principal occupying Power,” but does not indicate over what. Id. at art. 23(a). nationalarchives.gov.uk/pdfs/large/cab-129-73.pdf 國際觀點: 台灣de facto, de jure不屬於中國(包括中華人民共和國及中華民國). 中華民國頂多正在管理台灣. Formosa and the Pescadores are, therefore, in the view of Her Majesty's Government, territory the de jure sovereignty over which is uncertain or undetermined. In the meantime, Her Majesty's Government do in practice recognise the Chinese Nationalists as the authority administering Formosa; but they do not recognise them as the de facto government of Formosa, whether as part of China or on any other basis, since they do not regard Formosa, as such, as constituting a separate State. ※ 引述《nnkj (男鹿大人)》之銘言： : http://taiwangok.blogspot.tw/2008/09/23-partofchina.html : 台灣屬於中國的理由 ◎ 傅雲欽（律師 / 建國廣場負責人） 2008.09.23 ... : 和統派看法一樣──台灣事實上（de facto）獨立，法律上（de jure）統一，屬於中國 : 。但我不是統派，因為在理想上，統派主張走向事實上統一，我則主張法律上獨立。我是 : 新觀念的獨派，姑且稱為「脫中獨立派」。 : 為什麼台灣屬於中國呢？這要先從法律的條文或原則的基本結構談起。 ... -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 111.243.107.33 ※ 文章網址: http://www.ptt.cc/bbs/PublicIssue/M.1402365818.A.68E.html ※ 編輯: n3oanderson (111.243.107.33), 06/10/2014 10:04:00

推

frogha1

06/10 10:15, , 1^F

06/10 10:15, 1^F

推

Gnome

06/10 10:16, , 2^F

06/10 10:16, 2^F

※ 編輯: n3oanderson (111.243.107.33), 06/10/2014 10:28:52

推

higamanami

06/10 10:38, , 3^F