AS REPORTERS gather in Seoul to await the latest hostile missive (or missile) fromthe North, Western governments have continued to press China to do more to rein intheir putative ally. Like a pit bull chained in the front yard, North Korea doeskeep the neighbours on edge. Of course there is always the danger of what mighthappen if you neglect to feed the dog.当记者聚集在汉城等待来自北方的最新的敌对书信（或），西方政府继续施压中国，让中国好好管管他的公认的盟友。朝鲜像一头拴在前院的斗犬，持续把中国弄的尴尬境地。当然，如果你忘了喂狗，那么经常要发生危险。China’s involvement on the Korean peninsula in the period since the Korean warhas been cited amply in recent press accounts. But Beijing’s interests there havehistorical roots which reach back far earlier than 1950. For more than twothousand years, successive Chinese dynasties have seen Korea as a tributary to beprotected, a prize to be coveted, or as a dangerous land bridge which might convey“outer barbarians” into China. Unsurprising then that China should have a longhistory of mucking about in Korean politics, a history which has often brought itinto conflict with that other great Eastern power, Japan. This has seldom workedout well for the Korean people. Nor has it led to much joy for China.自后中国对的参与在近来的新闻报道中已充分体现。但是，北京对那里的利益诉求，有其历史根源，远远要早于1950年 。超过两千多年以来，中国历代王朝都把朝鲜看成一个附庸国来保护，或者看成一个令人垂涎的战利品，或者看成一个危险的可能传送“外部野蛮人”进入中国的桥梁。不足为奇，那么，中国在朝鲜政治中应该有一个悠久的历史，一个常常把中国弄到与另一个东部强权国家，日本，起冲突的历史。这很少带好处给朝鲜人。也没给中国带来太多的喜悦。In 108BC the Han emperor Wudi conquered the northern part of the Korean peninsula.The Han empire proceeded to administer the area around modern Pyongyang for nearly400 years.公元前108年半岛北部的部分。汉帝国持续管理现代周围地区近400年。Memories of such early conquests inspired later Chinese rulers. The Sui dynasty, after reunifying China in the sixth century AD, soon turned their sights on their neighbours. At the time, the Goguryeo kingdom ruled central and northern Korea and held territory extending into parts of Manchuria and Siberia. They considered themselves to be on a par with the Sui emperors. The Sui disagreed. Yet their campaign to chastise the recalcitrant Goguryeo proved disastrous. Despite havingmobilised more than 1m soldiers, the Sui armies failed to make substantial gains on the battlefield. The expense of money and manpower crippled their dynasty. Within a few decades the Sui had given way to an even mightier Chinese empire: the Tang.这种早期征服的记忆启发了后来的中国统治者。隋朝在公元六世纪统一中国后，很快就把目光投向他们的邻居。当时，高句丽王国统治着朝鲜中部和北部并且持续扩张到满洲和西伯利亚地区。他们认为自己可与隋皇帝相提并论。隋朝不同意。不过，隋朝惩罚顽抗的高句丽的战役被证明是灾难性的。尽管已经动员了超过100万士兵，隋朝军队未能在战场上获得实质性的收益。资金和人力的开支削弱他们的王朝。几十年后，隋让位给更厉害的中国帝国，唐。Like their Sui predecessors, the new rulers were obsessed with bringing Goguryeoto heel. Then, as now, Korea was divided among warring states. The Tang alliedwith one of Goguryeo’s Korean enemies in a protracted struggle for supremacy onthe peninsula. In 668, the Tang armies with their Korean allies finally capturedthe Goguryeo capital of Pyongyang. Unfortunately for the Tang, they misjudgedtheir own allies in Korea, who turned on the Chinese interlopers soon after andforced them back over the Yalu river, across the border from modern Korea.与隋朝前辈一样，新的统治者沉迷于臣服高句丽。当时和现在一样，朝鲜被划分战国状态。唐朝与半岛上高句丽霸主地位的长期对抗者之一结盟（译注：即唐朝和半岛三国之一的新罗结盟后灭了百济和高句丽，后来唐朝和新罗为争夺胜利果实又爆发了战争）。 668年 ，唐朝军队与朝鲜盟友终于夺取高句丽首都平壤。对唐朝来说不幸的事情是，他们误判了自己的朝鲜盟友，后者对中国闯入者产生警觉，并且迫使他们回过鸭绿江，越过现代的（中朝）边界。This early history is not without controversy. Modern Chinese historians continueto rankle Korean nationalists by suggesting that the Goguryeo state was a productof ethnic groups from what is today North China. They argue that its dynasticperiod belongs to Chinese history. Korean scholars reject this, with somehistorians even arguing that the claims constitute a retroactive land grab, withcontemporary implications should North Korea collapse.这种早期的历史也不是没有争议。现代中国史学家通过声明“高句丽国家来源于今天中国北方一个族群”来继续激怒朝鲜（韩国）的民族主义者，他们认为朝鲜的历史属于中国的历史朝鲜（韩国）学者们拒绝这一观点，一些历史学家甚至认为这个声明构成了土地追溯争夺战，而且（这个声明）暗示了北朝鲜应该（被中国）毁灭。Chinese scholars have their own gripes. In the past they have complained thatKorean historical dramas depict Chinese as cruel and wanton invaders.中国学者也有自己的抱怨。过去，他们已经抱怨过，朝鲜（韩国）历史剧把中国描绘成残酷的和肆意的入侵者。In the 13th century, the Mongol Yuan dynasty used Korea as a jumping-off point forwhat was supposed to be an invasion of the Japanese islands. A stout Japanesedefence and a fortuitous wind storm prevented the Mongols from landing andprovided fodder for the myth of the “Divine Wind”—kamikaze—that protected Japanfrom invaders.在13世纪，元朝把朝鲜当做侵略日本岛的一个起点来使用。日本的牢固防御以及一个偶然的风暴阻止了蒙古人的登陆，并且提供了传说中的“神风”的素材-神风敢死队-从侵略者手中保护了日本。A few centuries later, into the rule of the Ming dynasty, Japan enjoyed theopportunity to turn the tables. Toyotomi Hideyoshi launched a series of invasionsof the Asian mainland, again using Korea as his point of attack. While Koreanssuffered the worst of Hideyoshi’s aggression, his stated goal was nothing shortof the complete conquest of China. At the time Korea was a tributary state of theMing, sending missions bearing gifts in exchange for nominal protection, and soJapan’s challenge could not go unanswered. While the combined armies of the Mingand the Koreans managed to beat back the Japanese invasion, the war devastated thepeninsula.几个世纪以后，到明朝的统治时期，日本享用了这个转败为胜的机会。丰臣秀吉发动了一系列侵略亚洲大陆的战争，再次使用了朝鲜做为他的攻击点。朝鲜遭受了最严重的丰臣秀吉的侵略（丰臣秀吉的最终目标是彻底征服中国）。当时朝鲜国是明朝的朝贡国，朝鲜派遣使团带着礼物朝贡以换取名义上的保护，因此对于日本的挑战，明朝不能不做出回应。明朝和朝鲜的联合军队打退日军的侵略，不过战争毁坏了朝鲜半岛。Nor did Korea fare much better against the Ming’s hated rival, the Qing empire ofManchuria. Straddling the zone between the Ming Empire and Korea, the Manchusbegan by pressing the Koreans to renounce their loyalty to the Ming court. In1636, eight years before they conquered China itself, the Manchus had forced theKorean government to submit to Manchu authority. When the Manchus moved south andchanged the name plates at the Forbidden City, one of the first visitors was aKorean delegation which came bearing tribute to the new lords of China.做为明朝的死敌，满洲清帝国对朝鲜好不了多少。跨立于明帝国和朝鲜之间的区域，满族开始向朝鲜施压让他们放弃对明朝的忠诚。 1636年，满洲征服了中国的八年之前，满族已经迫使朝鲜政府屈服于满族的威严。当满族南移，并更改了紫禁城的名牌后，最早的来访者之一是朝鲜代表团，来向中国的新主人进贡。In the 19th century, Korea’s continuing status as a tributary would lead Chinaonce again into war with Japan over the fate of the peninsula. Not long after theMeiji restoration of 1868, the Japanese started aggressively testing China’swillingness to defend her tributary satellites. In a mixture of imperial expansionand employment programme (for legions of suddenly unemployed samurai), theJapanese army sought to wrest the Ryukyu islands and Korea from China, asconcessions. Alarmed, the Chinese sent an official to Seoul to act as a “residentcounsellor” for the Korean king. His charge, somewhat ironically, was to preserveKorean independence in the face of Japanese ambitions.在19世纪，朝鲜继续做为中国的附庸国，这导致中国再一次陷入对日的战争（来决定朝鲜半岛的命运）。 1868年的明治维新后不久，日本开始积极试探中国是否愿意捍卫她的卫星国。在帝国的扩张和就业计划（突然失业的武士军团）的混合刺激下，作为一种让步，日军试图从中国手中夺取琉球群岛和朝鲜。大惊失色之下，中国正式向汉城派遣了一个官员作为朝鲜国王“居民辅导员” 。有点讽刺的是，在面对日本的野心下，“居民辅导员”的职责是保护朝鲜人的独立。Finally, in 1894 a rebellion at the court in Seoul provided Japan with a criticalopportunity. Japanese troops seized the palace and installed a regent loyal totheir own interests. The war that resulted was an outright disaster for China. Thehumiliating peace treaty that China signed with Japan gave “full and completeindependence and autonomy” to Korea. In reality, Korea had swapped one suzerainfor another. Japan would complete the process in 1912 by annexing Korea. This gaveimperial Japan a foothold on the mainland for its eventual conquest of Manchuriaand China, in what was to become the second world war.最终，1894年汉城宫廷叛乱给了日本一个重要的机会。日军夺取了宫殿，并培植了一个效忠于日本利益的摄政王。对中国来说，战争的结果是一个彻头彻尾的灾难。中国与日本签订了赋予朝鲜“全面和完整的独立性和自主性”屈辱的和平条约。实际上，朝鲜换了一个又一个的领主。1912年日本完成了吞并朝鲜的全部。这给了日本帝国最终征服满洲和中国大陆提供了立足点，而那成为了第二次世界大战。The misgivings felt by Koreans watching outside forces—particularly China andJapan—intervening to solve problems on the peninsula is understandable, againstthe historical backdrop. As is China’s reluctance to commit itself to managingPyongyang. Today’s deadlock is both a legacy of the cold war and the latestchapter in a long story of power shifts across East Asia.针对历史背景来看，朝鲜（韩国）国人对外部力量--特别是中国和日--来干预解决朝鲜半岛问题的担忧是可以理解的。由于是中国不愿致力于管理平壤。今天的僵局，既是冷战时期遗留下来的，也是整个东亚地区权力转移的一个漫长的故事的最新篇章。typingmonkeyApr 15th, 19:11 67顶The article is subtly but significantly inaccurate in comparing Chinese andJapanese interests in Korea and elsewhere as like in kind. Throughout most of thehistorical era, China did not generally annex or absorb adjacent territories. Shewould leave local sovereigns on their thrones, exchange princesses, trade, accepttribute, and offer protection from foreign powers beyond her orbit. Occasionalmilitary incursions were conducted as punitive raids or to reestablish suzerainty.But by and large, Han people and Han governments had no intention and no desire tooccupy foreign lands.This is substantially different from Japan's post-industrial ambitions, which wereoutright conquest, occupation, and frankly, the acquisition of lebensraum. Japantook Korea, Manchuria, and large parts of China with the overt intention of takingland from others to give to land-starved Japanese. Indeed, millions of Japanesemoved to conquered territories and made their lives there.So when the topic has anything to do with China, readers are well advised tolisten to facts, not the resident sinophobes at the Economist. Yes, China tooktribute from the Korean throne, sent a "resident counsellor" to advise it, andsent armies to keep outside powers at bay. But Japan actually toppled that throneand more importantly sent millions of Japanese colonists to turn Korea (andManchuria and Formosa) Japanese.This is the key distinction. Suzerainty is not sovereignty, and tribute is notcolonization.在比较中国和日本对朝鲜和其它类似的情况表现出的兴趣时，这篇文章是微妙的，但明显不准确。纵观大多数历史时代，中国一般确实不是吞并或吸收毗邻地区。她会让当地的君王坐上宝座、交换公主、贸易、接受致敬，并提供给（小国）保护抵御在她周围的外部力量。偶尔军事入侵被认为是进行惩罚性袭击或（武力）恢复宗主国地位。但总的来说，汉族和汉族政府无意和没有欲望占据外国的土地。这和日本的后工业的野心有本质上的不同，后者是彻底的征服、占领、坦白的说是在收购生存空间。日本公然攫取他国土地的意图是显然的，日本把朝鲜、满洲、中国大部分地区夺来给予缺乏土地的日本人。事实上，数以百万计的日本人搬到被征服的领土上，并在那里过他们的生活。所以，当话题跟中国有关系时，读者应该被建议去听听事实，而不是宅在“经济学人”sinophobes 。是的，中国从朝鲜王室获得贡品，派遣“居民辅导员”去提供建议，并派军队在海湾抵御外部势力。但是，日本实际上是在推翻王位，并且更重要的是发送数以百万计的日本殖民者把朝鲜（满洲和福摩萨）变成日本人的。“译注：福摩萨即台湾 是殖民时代西欧开拓者口中的词汇 含殖民色彩，大陆一般不用。”这就是关键的区别。宗主权不是主权，纳贡不是殖民。ewakornApr 17th, 07:11 41顶Most non-East Asians frequently use European-centric concept to interpret EastAsian history.The most common example is China invaded Vietnam and Korea , 2000,....years ago.But the reality is that were Vietnam and Korea separate entities ,2500,...years ago?One of the first kingdoms established in Vietnam's Red Valley was called Nanyue(Vietnamese: Nam Viet which the current name Vietnam is derived from). It was setup by a Qin Dynasty general called Zhao Tuo in 207 B.C.The same happened to Korea. One of the earliest kingdoms set up on the Peninsulawas by Wi Man -- someone from the original Yan kingdom of China's warring statesperiod in 194 B.C.But somehow both Vietnamese and Korean history interpreted Nanyue and Wiman Joseonas their own albeit in reality the rulers were Chinese.So when the Chinese dynasty fought with these kingdoms set up by Chinese, shouldthese battles be regarded as China's "civil wars" or an "invasion" by China?本文内容于
18:00:17 被小编a28编辑
您可能对这些帖子感兴趣
但实际情况是，在1500 ， 2000 ， 2500 ，...年前越南和朝鲜是独立的存在吗？在越南红谷成立的第一个王国之一被称为南越（越南语：当前名称来自越南的南越） 。由秦朝将军赵佗在公元前207年成立。同样的事情也发生在朝鲜。半岛上最早的王国之一是由卫满建立的 - 在公元前194年由原来中国战国时期燕国的人建立。但不知何故，无论是越南还是朝鲜都把南越和卫满朝鲜解释成他们自己的，尽管实际上来说，两国的（最初）统治者是中国人因此，当中国的王朝和这些由中国人创建的王国战斗时，这些战斗应该被视为中国的“内战”或被中国的“入侵”吗？ewakornApr 17th, 06:43 32顶Our writer has applied the modern concept to interpret ancient history.Korea had never been an unified country (unless you believe in the legendaryTangun) on the Peninsula until the Silla Kingdom allied with the Tang army toconquer the Goguryeo and Baekje kingdoms (the two other kingdoms on the peninsula)around A.D. 660-668.In the Korean "History of Three Kingdoms" -- Samguk Sagi (don't mix up with the"Romance of Three Kingdoms"), the book clearly narrated that the monarchy,aristocrats, and civilians of each kingdom regarded their counterparts in theother two kingdoms as alien as they regarded those of Sui/Tang dynasty in China.A unified kingdom on the peninsula didn't emerge until Silla's Taejong Muyeol era-- when king Kim ChunChu pleaded in the Tang court to lend him 130,000 Chinesetroops to destroy the other two kingdoms.Kim Chunchu earned praise in Korean history -- no matter from the view of North orSouth -- albeit he used "foreign" forces to kill his own "countrymen" in the othertwo kingdoms.我们的作家用了的现代概念来解释古代历史。在朝鲜半岛上的朝鲜从来就不是一个统一的国家（除非你相信传说中的檀君），直到公元660-668年左右新罗王国联合唐朝军队征服高句丽和百济王国（半岛上的另两个王国）。在朝鲜（韩国？）版的“三国演义”里 - 三国史记（不要与“三国演义”混淆了 ），清楚地叙述，半岛三国的每一个国家的君主、贵族和平民，都把其它两个国家的人看成外国人，就像他们看待中国的隋朝/唐朝人似的。半岛上并没有一个统一的王国，直到新罗太宗Muyeol时才出现 ： - 当时国王金ChunChu恳求唐朝宫廷借给他13万中国军队用于摧毁另外两个王国。不管是北方还是南方的看法，金Chunchu在朝鲜（韩国）历史上赢得了赞誉，尽管他用“洋”势力杀了自己“同胞”的另两个王国。（译注：朝鲜（韩国？）版三国演义，一部珍贵史料，由古代朝鲜学者用汉字编写）Ghentisin reply to typingmonkeyApr 16th, 09:40 25顶A lot of people have died due to Chinese protection of suzerainty, in Korea,Vietnam, and other places. It's hard to say that seeking suzerainty is somehowmorally superior to seeking sovereignty when in both cases, people end up gettingkilled and villages are burned and looted. If I invade Korea and put a Japanesegeneral on the throne, or a Korean king who promises to do whatever China wants,is there anything substantively different?If anything, Japan, while seeking sovereignty over Taiwan and Manchuria, built upvast industrial infrastructure. Did China do as much in its quest for suzeraintyover Korea and Vietnam? I honestly don't know, but to me it seems like it was more"pay us tribute and we won't kill you" rather than "pay us tribute and we'll helpdevelop your country."由于中国维护其宗主国地位，导致了在朝鲜、越南和其它地方很多人死亡。比起寻求主权地位时导致人被打死、村庄被烧毁和洗劫，很难说寻求宗主权时导致人被打死、村庄被烧毁和洗劫在道德上要高尚一些。如果我侵入朝鲜并让一个日本将军坐上王位，或是让一个任由中国人摆布的朝鲜族人当国王，有什么实质上的区别吗？如果有的话，是日本--在寻求台湾和满洲的主权时，建立了庞大的工业基础设施。中国在对朝鲜和越南诉求宗主权时做了像日本这样事情了吗？我确实不知道，但对我来说，似乎更多的像是“支付给我们的敬意和我们不会杀了你”，而不是“支付给我们的致敬，我们将帮助发展你的国家。 ”Kim77in reply to happyfish18Apr 17th, 12:29 21顶If you are literate in Chinese, you'd have known that the character 'Han'indicating Korea and the character 'Han' indicating the Han Chinese are twodifferent characters. Not to mention the fact that only South Koreans refer totheir country as 'Hanguk'.But what can I expect, you are the Economist's resident troll.如果你认识汉字，你知道字符'han'表示韩国而字符'han'表示的汉人，这是两个不同的字符。更不用提的事实是只有南韩人称自己的国家' Hanguk ' 。但是，我能期待什么，你这常驻“经济学人”的怪物。silent nightApr 17th, 05:57 21顶In the ancient East Asia,people lacked the sence of the modern concepts of nationetc..Theoretically people in ancient East Asia could go and live in everywhere andeverytime which they wanted,needn't any passports or visas when they travel aroundthe East Asia.The border lines weren't also accurate.Even ancient China itselfoften had been composed of some kingdoms at the same time and also fought eachother some time.If we give an analysis about ancient Chinese or East Asia'shistory by modern ideas,we can get some ridiculous conclusions.for example,a warhappened in two group of ancient Chinese will become an "invasion" which soundslike Shanghai invaded Beijing in history.Ancient Chinese or the people in EastAsia could not know their descendants will be called Chinese,Korean or Vietnameseetc. one day in the 21st century,a large proportion of people in different EastAsian countries may come from the same families in ancient China.In my viewpoint,the East Asian histry should been looked on as a whole.在古代东亚，人们缺乏现代国家概念的意识。理论上讲，生活在古代东亚的人，只要他们想都可以在任何时间去任何地方生活，当他们周游东亚时不需要任何护照或签证。边界线也清楚.即便在那个时候中国古代本身往往已经由一些王国组成，同时也在某些时间打击对方。如果我们用现代理念来分析古代中国或东亚，我们会得到一些荒谬的结论。例如，古代中国的两个部分爆发战争变成了“入侵”，听起来就像在历史上上海侵略了北京。古代中国人或东亚人可能不知道他们的后裔将被称为中国人，韩国人或越南人。二十一世纪的某一天，大比例的来自不同东亚国家的人可能在古代中国是来自于同一家庭。我的观点认为，东亚历史，应该被当做一个整体来对待。GigleApr 16th, 17:48 21顶Korea, not much different from Poland.朝鲜（韩国），和波兰没有太大的不同。Kim77Apr 17th, 12:52 19顶In my opinion, the Chinese commenters on this article are far from being correctwhen they say 'China didn't invade Korea, because back then neither of thosestates existed'. That's only half true.We all know well that China did exist as a recognizable, distinctive politicalforce embodying a certain culture at least 2200 years ago, when the Chin dynastyunited the warring states - or even before that, if you count from the Zhoudynasty. The most recent embodiment of the Chinese state - People's Republic ofChina - may not be the legal heir to long-gone Chinese empires, but thereobviously is a strong sense of continuity.Likewise, Korea did exist from ancient times. The three kingdoms of Korea(Goguryeo, Baekje and Silla) shared a common cultural identity and mutuallycomprehensible languages that mitigated their lethal political rivalries. Withoutthis sense of shared belonging, the unification of the Korean peninsula by Sillawould not have been sustainable. Why else would the dynasties that followed Silla,all of which were centred in central and southern Korea and had tenuous connectionto the north until at least the 10th century, still claim descent from Goguryeo?Asia is different from Europe in the sense that political boundaries did notchange all that much since the birth of Christ. This gives us a stronger sense ofidentification with our past histories than is found in other parts of the world,and it should be accepted that a war a millenium ago will still have its influenceon the minds of men today.在我看来，当这篇文章里的中国的评论者说：“中国没有入侵朝鲜，因为往回推这些国家并不存在”，这远非正确。只是对了一半。我们都清楚的知道，中国确实是一个公认的、独特的政治力量，并展现出了一定的文化底蕴，从秦朝统一战国算起（或者更要往前推，如果算上周朝）至少已有2200年。最近的中国国家 - 中华人民共和国 - 可能不是悠久中国帝国的法定继承人，但显然有一种强烈的连续性。同样，朝鲜确实从远古时代存在至今。朝鲜三国（高句丽，百济，新罗）有着共同的文化认同和相互理解的语言，这缓解了他们的致命的政治对立。如果没有这个意义上的共享归属感，新罗统一的朝鲜半岛将不会持久。否则为什么，所有这一切都集中在朝鲜中部和南部并且脆弱的联系着北方，至少直到10世纪，新罗朝代之后仍然声称高句丽的后裔？在这个认识上来说亚洲和欧洲不同，-即自从耶稣诞生以后政治上的分界线并没有多大变化。这给我们带来了更强的认同感比其他世界各地被发现的我们过去的历史，并且“一百年前的一场战争仍会对今天男人们的精神上有影响”这种说法应该被接受。Anjin-Sanin reply to typingmonkeyApr 16th, 00:45 19顶Actually, the Han Dynasty conquest was an actual annexation of at least part oftoday's Korea, resulting in the "Four Han Counties" (楽浪郡?真番郡?臨屯郡?玄菟郡)that covered all of today's North Korea plus part of the South that lies north ofTaejong.So, the article is factually correct and accurate regarding the original Hanconquest in 108-107 B.C., and lasted until the Third Century A.D.其实，汉王朝的征服实际上是吞并，至少吞并了今天朝鲜的一部分，产生了“四个汉郡”（楽浪郡?真番郡?臨屯郡?玄菟郡），当时的面积覆盖了今天整个北朝鲜和在平壤北部归属于韩国的一部分土地。因此，在谈到关于公元前108-107年持续到公元3世纪的汉朝的征服时，这个文章确实是正确的和精确的。Vanbrughin reply to wudang wushuApr 17th, 14:25 17顶That's a bit of an overreaction. I don't think that description of "Pitbull" isnearly as insulting in English as in your native tongue.Secondly, it is a description of the prickly and threatening North Korea state,not the people.有点反应过度了。我不认为“斗犬”这样的描述在英语里的侮辱意味和你的母语里相近。其次，他描述的是多刺和威胁别人的北朝鲜国家，而不是它的人民。--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------silent nightin reply to ewakornApr 17th, 09:10 17顶Zhao Tuo (Chinese: 赵佗; Mandarin Pinyin: Zhào Tuō; Jyutping: Jiu? Tō?,Vietnamese: Tri?u ?à), was the founder of the kingdom of Nanyue. He was a Chinesemilitary commander who gained independence upon the collapse of the Qin Dynasty.Nanyue included northern Vietnam and parts of southern China. His capital was inPanyu, modern Guangzhou, China. His ruling circle included both ethnic Chinese andnative Baiyue, and he encouraged intermarriage and assimilation.[1] In Vietnamese,he is referred to as Tri?u ?à, and the dynasty he founded is called the Tri?uDynasty (Chinese: 赵朝). In traditional Vietnamese history, he was considered theemperor of Vietnam. However, modern Vietnamese historians regarded him as aforeign invader who invaded Vietnam in 207 BC.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhao_TuoZhao Tuo and his 500,000 soilders and more settlers from China have become"invaders" and "foreigners" now.How many so-called "modern Vietnamese" and "modernVietnamese historians" are Chinese descendants,especially in North Vietnam? 2,232years ago,500,000 soilders and more settlers from China is a very largepopulation,let alone the setters in other time of history.At that time,the realnative Vietnamese may be some savages or some very primitive tribes living injungle,especially in Southern Vietnam.赵佗（中国人：赵佗，普通话拼音： Zhào Tuō; Jyutping：Jiu? Tō？ ，越南语： Tri?u ?à？ ） ，是南越王国的创始人。他是一个中国的军事指挥官，在秦王朝崩溃后获得（南越）独立。南越包括越南北部和中国南部的部分地区。他的首都是在番禹，现代中国广东。他的执政圈包括中国部落人和百越本地人，并且他鼓励通婚和同化。 [1]在越南，他被称为“Tri?u ?à？并且他创立的王朝被称为Tri?u王朝（中国：赵朝） 。在传统的越南历史中，他被认为是越南皇帝。然而，现代越南历史学家都把他当成外来入侵者，在公元前207年侵略了越南。http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhao_Tuo现在，赵佗和他的500000名士兵以及更多来自中国的定居者已经成为“入侵者”和“外国人”.有多少所谓的“现代越南人”和“现代越南历史学家”是中国人的后裔？尤其是在北部越南。2232年前， 来自中国的500,000名的士兵和更多的开拓者是很大的人口数量，更别提其它历史时间的开拓者。那个时候，真正的越南本地人可能是一些野蛮人或一些生活在丛林中的非常原始的部落，尤其是在越南南部。Mike Tyson Ironmanin reply to Devils Advocate_1Apr 18th, 07:13 13顶The Japanese already got two from the US in 1945. I do not think they are afraidof Kim's paltry bomb.It is not only the Japanese that are complaining about Chinese aggression. TheVietnamese fishing boats were sank by the Chinese recently in Vietnamese waters.You must be Chinese to talk like that.1945年日本人挨了两个来自美国的炸弹。我不认为他们会怕金XX的微不足道的炸弹。并不仅仅是日本人抱怨中国的侵略。最近在越南水域内越南人的渔船被中国弄沉了。像你那样说话你一定是中国人。Kim77in reply to ewakornApr 17th, 12:45 13顶If it was accepted that Wiman Joseon and Nanyue are exclusively part of China'shistory because their rulers hailed from China, China will lose all claim to thehistories of its own foreign dynasties, including Liao, Jin, Yuan and mostcritically, Qing. Which will have actual political territorial consequences intoday's China.如果说“因为他们的统治者来源于中国，所以Wiman朝鲜和南岳属于中国历史的一部分（的说法）”被接受的话那么中国将失去所有它所声称的历代外族王朝的历史，包括辽，金，元，最关键的是，清。在今天的中国，哪一个会有实际的政治和领土推论。nerdyQin reply to typingmonkeyApr 17th, 03:49 13顶If Han people and Han governments have always been benevolent, then why Tibetanstoday are burning themselves?如果汉族人和汉族政府一直是仁慈（王道）的，那么为什么今天的XZ人会自焚？HoushuApr 18th, 17:16 12顶The historical facts are that various tribes and mini-states in north-east Chinaand Korea were in constant jostling and rivalry for over thousand years, untillate 1800 when two foreign invaders appeared on the scene: Russia and Japan.So to describe Korea is akin to an asiatic Poland caught between two powers iscompletely wrong.I'll spare you guys on Banyan's cynical ploy and ulterior motive...历史的事实是，在中国东北部以及朝鲜的诸多部落和小国家在不断的冲撞和对抗中超过了千年，直到1800年代晚期两个外国侵略者出现在了舞台上：俄罗斯和日本。所以说形容朝鲜是夹在两个强权中间的亚洲版波兰是完全错误的。饶了你这愤世嫉俗的伎俩和别有用心的家伙...Devils Advocate_1in reply to Mike Tyson IronmanApr 18th, 06:35 12顶[Mike Tyson Ironman11 mins agoI thought Korea was annexed to Japan in 1910. More than 10 years after US annexedHawaii.In this article, the threat from Russia is completely ignored. How can one tell astory of Korea annexation and Sino-Japanese war without mentioning Russia's roleand only focus on Japanese "ambitions."This article is completely one-sided. It is not history.]The neo-militarists in Nipponland is crying "threat from China" non-stop thesedays. It is time for Japland to annexed Korea yet again and Mr Kim will be able tofind a practical use for his nuclear bombs.Devil's[麦克泰森Ironman11分钟前我认为韩国于1910年被日本吞并。比美国吞并夏威夷要早上十年。在这篇文章中，来自俄国方面的威胁被完全忽视了。在讲述吞并朝鲜和中日战争的故事时怎么能不提及俄国的角色并且只是专注于日本人的“野心”。这篇文章是完全片面的。这不是历史。 ]在Nipponland的新军国主义这些天一直不停的喊着“来自中国的威胁”。是时候日本再一次吞并朝鲜了，那么金先生将能为核弹找到个实用点儿的用途。;-D, ;-D, ;-D魔鬼Mike Tyson IronmanApr 18th, 06:20 12顶I thought Korea was annexed to Japan in 1910. More than 10 years after US annexedHawaii.In this article, the threat from Russia is completely ignored. How can one tell astory of Korea annexation and Sino-Japanese war without mentioning Russia's roleand only focus on Japanese "ambitions."This article is completely one-sided. It is not history.我认为朝鲜于1910年被日本吞并。比美国吞并夏威夷要早上十年。在这篇文章中，来自俄国方面的威胁被完全忽视了。在讲述吞并朝鲜和中日战争的故事时怎么能不提及俄国的角色并且只是专注于日本人的“野心”。这篇文章是完全片面的。这不是历史。mrhorsein reply to wudang wushuApr 17th, 12:14 12顶This is a figure of style, meaning that North Korea aggressively guards China.北朝鲜的作风就是暴力保卫中国。}