What's the real reason for sending a missile destroyer to the disputed Spratly Islands, haven't they (US) got spy satellites that can read a newspaper?
http://www.sott.net/article/304955-Clue ... law-allows
China does have “plenty of historical and jurisprudence evidence to show that China has sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea and the adjacent waters.” Maybe sovereignty is a post-imperial notion ascribed to nation-states, not ancient empires.
“The United States has Guam in Asia which is very far away from the US and the French have islands in the South Pacific, so it is nothing new,” Jia told AFP recently.
The Spratly Island spat.
-
- Stabby McStaberson
- Reactions: 0
- Posts: 699
- Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2014 10:50 pm
The Chinese aren't just claiming the useless islands, they are claiming practically the entire South China Sea...meaning no commercial ship through or air traffic over the entire area without Chinese permission. This shouldn't be just a US issue. This should be a UN issue on behalf of all the other countries in the region. In trying to oust the US influence from the area, the Chinese, with their heavy-handed tactics, have somehow managed to bring them all closer to the US instead. Huge mistake. Soon even the Vietnamese will request US military bases on their soil.RainMan wrote:What's the real reason for sending a missile destroyer to the disputed Spratly Islands, haven't they (US) got spy satellites that can read a newspaper?
http://www.sott.net/article/304955-Clue ... law-allows
China does have “plenty of historical and jurisprudence evidence to show that China has sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea and the adjacent waters.” Maybe sovereignty is a post-imperial notion ascribed to nation-states, not ancient empires.
“The United States has Guam in Asia which is very far away from the US and the French have islands in the South Pacific, so it is nothing new,” Jia told AFP recently.
If the US continues unilaterally to provoke a Chinese military response, that would also be a huge mistake. Even once-mighty US aircraft carriers are no match for powerful guided missiles these days. I fear this situation may get out of control very quickly if cooler heads don't prevail. The US may lose an entire naval fleet before they know what hit them. And what type of response would that necessitate?
..and if you disagree with me, you are one billion times WORSE than HITLER!!!
- RainMan
- K440 Defender of the Faith
- Reactions: 4
- Posts: 5362
- Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 7:54 pm
- Location: Vagabond
Over $5 trillion in trade passes through every year, a lot at stake.
"Freedom of overflights and navigation doesn’t mean allowing foreign warships and military jets to violate other countries’ sovereignty and security, the Foreign Ministry said in a statement Monday, after U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry accused China of restricting such movements in the region last week.
China sees freedom of navigation in the region as key because it is an important conduit for trade and natural resources, the ministry said."
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/0 ... jASGtIrJ1s
"Freedom of overflights and navigation doesn’t mean allowing foreign warships and military jets to violate other countries’ sovereignty and security, the Foreign Ministry said in a statement Monday, after U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry accused China of restricting such movements in the region last week.
China sees freedom of navigation in the region as key because it is an important conduit for trade and natural resources, the ministry said."
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/0 ... jASGtIrJ1s
Never mind.
http://exiledonline.com/the-war-nerd-th ... -will-die/Pol Pothead wrote:
If the US continues unilaterally to provoke a Chinese military response, that would also be a huge mistake. Even once-mighty US aircraft carriers are no match for powerful guided missiles these days.
https://pando.com/2014/05/21/the-war-ne ... nerf-wars/Pol Pothead wrote: I fear this situation may get out of control very quickly if cooler heads don't prevail. The US may lose an entire naval fleet before they know what hit them. And what type of response would that necessitate?
Massive stalker
-
- 20,000 Posts; I need professional help !
- Reactions: 2
- Posts: 22651
- Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 2:31 pm
- Location: Space, maaaan
It doesn't have to mean the US is looking to make war with China. Someone, and realistically that can only be the US, has to show by action as well as empty words and angry letters that the international community does not accept China's annexation of these islands nor recognise their man-made ones. I
I came, I argued, I'm out
-
- Stabby McStaberson
- Reactions: 0
- Posts: 699
- Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2014 10:50 pm
That is why I would much prefer to see UN-marked naval vessels defying the Chinese demands as opposed to only US Navy vessels taking symbolic action. I'm guessing the Russians would go along with the Chinese to veto such a UN-sponsored mission, though, possibly in return for assistance in evading trade embargos imposed over the Ukraine situation.andyinasia wrote:It doesn't have to mean the US is looking to make war with China. Someone, and realistically that can only be the US, has to show by action as well as empty words and angry letters that the international community does not accept China's annexation of these islands nor recognise their man-made ones.
Failing UN action, the neighboring countries should form a NATO-type pact in collective defiance of the Chinese. They should be re-thinking their economic reliance on trade with China, as painful as that may be in the short term. Of course, they won't do it.
..and if you disagree with me, you are one billion times WORSE than HITLER!!!
As a permanent member of the UNSC China has the ability to Veto any resolution alone, it does not need the support of other members.Pol Pothead wrote: I'm guessing the Russians would go along with the Chinese to veto such a UN-sponsored mission, though, possibly in return for assistance in evading trade embargos imposed over the Ukraine situation.
-
- Bark plop plop bark woof woof
- Reactions: 1
- Posts: 1708
- Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 8:55 pm
-
- Damn, I just saw my Internet Bill !
- Reactions: 4
- Posts: 4384
- Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2014 5:46 am
I don't understand. For once the US holds the moral highground. They have every right to be there and they should, by principle. Someone had to stand up to Sino aggression.penisjokeforaname wrote:The 'mericans sure are hell bent on pissing off everyone they can.
-
- Stabby McStaberson
- Reactions: 0
- Posts: 699
- Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2014 10:50 pm
What's not to understand? Bash the US for taking a stand, and bash the US if they do nothing. Khmer440 SOP. Easy peasy.Gin&Tonic wrote:I don't understand. For once the US holds the moral highground. They have every right to be there and they should, by principle. Someone had to stand up to Sino aggression.penisjokeforaname wrote:The 'mericans sure are hell bent on pissing off everyone they can.
..and if you disagree with me, you are one billion times WORSE than HITLER!!!
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
-
‘Riot Island’: The brutal arc of Singapore’s prison experiment
by Londo » Mon Jul 17, 2023 1:50 pm » in 'Not' Cambodia - 0 Replies
- 1727 Views
-
Last post by Londo
Mon Jul 17, 2023 1:50 pm
-
-
-
British backpacker facing life imprisonment for selling drugs on Death Island/Koh Tao.
by Chroy Changvarite » Wed Mar 06, 2024 4:10 pm » in Thailand, Vietnam, Myanmar and Lao forums - 14 Replies
- 755 Views
-
Last post by angsta
Mon Mar 11, 2024 12:23 am
-