And rightly given back to the Republic of China in 1945 (hence why the Chinese government retreated there in 1949...)

Those claims related to changing regimes are of course disingenuous and only aimed at creating a false narrative. It is fake history for political purposes.

I’m confused, is it your assertion that the ROC is the legitimate government of China, hence there’s no CCP claim on Taiwan?

I am not asserting anything. I am stating that Taiwan is indeed Chinese territory, historically and today.

Now, there has been (arguably still is) a civil war and the overall territory of China is split with both sides claiming the whole but only one side is strong enough to think they still have a shot a it.

Now, to go back to the article, it serves the US' interests to support one side against the other hence why they do it, in the same way that it serves their interests to 'grab' Ukraine against Russia. It's the same old global Great Game.

Ah ok, I just got confused. Thank you for the clarification.

This is poor understanding about internationally recognized rights on owning territories, that has nothing to do with history and who owned them centuries ago.

Today Qing are as relevant, as Russian historical claims on California.

Yeah, point 2 is rather silly.

There's no way the Russian influence in California can be compared with the Han Chinese influence on Taiwan.

I’d be curious to know what GP’a position on Israel is given their stance on historical claims.

Undeniable rights for native people to claim their native lands. In a global scale not really seeing what is so special about Israel compared to native people of US, who are displaced from their lands for ceturies, but still maintain claims on their lands. It is only a question of mere 1500 years to get their lands back. Maybe they can succeed quicker than Jews - only time will tell.

So land claims by the Chinese from 125 years ago are irrelevant, but land claims by Europeans from 1,500 years ago are?

Serious lack of consistency.

Qing were Manchu - not Han. Though, the comparision should be about CCP influence, otherwise all Americans should be scared of all naturalized Chinese, as if all Han are the same...

My understanding was that the actual immigrants to the island were mostly Han.

But then, my understanding is wrong about a lot of things.

I mean, you are not wrong about big picture, though you are missing very small, but important detail, that they migrated there, because they were not communists and they are still not communists.

Yeah, given that they started migrating there (by the millions) decades before The Communist Manifesto was written -- it's probably pretty safe to say that most of them were not communist.

A very important detail indeed.

Then why even make point 2 at all?