US military units to stay for South China Sea patrols

[boomerangutang]

So LC, are any of the Phil political candidates willing to allow China to take possession of the islands? It's like being pregnant, you can't be halfway pregnant. There may be a slight chance of joint ownership, but that's extremely doubtful. I'm trying to think of territory in the world that's owned by more than one country. Antarctica comes to mind, but even there, there are sectors under the management of different countries. The US and Canada share Glacier National Park which straddles their borders, but they still have their respective sectors. Can you imagine two Asian countries sharing a national park, let alone some islands? I can if their leaders were 22nd century thinkers, but none are close to that now. Preah Vihar almost caused a war between Thailand and Cambodia. It's a tiny bit of land, smaller than my property in Chiang Rai. I could have found a solution which would please both sides, but they didn't want to get advice from a farang like me. They'd rather put land mines and barbed wire all over the place.

from LC: China is not interested to rule over any lands ...they just want to get more trade and make more $$$ ...I don't see them telling the Africans what to do as they traded with them and it won't happen in ASEAN.

Dude, in Africa, the Chinese aren't trying to assert their ownership over any territory, as far as I know. It's different in the SCS. They're saying they own the islands just off Philippines coast. Not cool If China wants to do biz with Fils or whomever, no problem, same as they're doing in Africa and elsewhere: go and have discussions and make deals. Don't just show up and claim ownership of another country's islands. No matter how you (and silver tongued Chinese manipulators) try to explain it away, it's the same basic shit, and it's clear as day. Maybe China can fool the top chief in Gambia (along with a bunch of money and gifts), but they can't fool the rest of the world.

Edited May 5, 2016 by boomerangutang

[AYJAYDEE]

So LC, are any of the Phil political candidates willing to allow China to take possession of the islands? It's like being pregnant, you can't be halfway pregnant. There may be a slight chance of joint ownership, but that's extremely doubtful. I'm trying to think of territory in the world that's owned by more than one country. Antarctica comes to mind, but even there, there are sectors under the management of different countries. The US and Canada share Glacier National Park which straddles their borders, but they still have their respective sectors. Can you imagine two Asian countries sharing a national park, let alone some islands? I can if their leaders were 22nd century thinkers, but none are close to that now. Preah Vihar almost caused a war between Thailand and Cambodia. It's a tiny bit of land, smaller than my property in Chiang Rai. I could have found a solution which would please both sides, but they didn't want to get advice from a farang like me. They'd rather put land mines and barbed wire all over the place.

from LC: China is not interested to rule over any lands ...they just want to get more trade and make more $$$ ...I don't see them telling the Africans what to do as they traded with them and it won't happen in ASEAN.

Dude, if Africa, the Chinese aren't trying to assert their ownership over any territory, as far as I know. It's different in the SCS. They're saying they own the islands just off Philippines coast. Not cool If China wants to do biz with Fils or whomever, no problem, so as they're doing in Africa and elsewhere: go and have discussions and make deals. Don't just show up and claim ownership of another country's islands. No matter how you (the silver tongued Chinese manipulators) try to explain it away, it's the same basic shit, and it's clear as day. Maybe China can fool the top chief in Gambia (along with a bunch of money and gifts), but they can't fool the rest of the world.

canada and the us do not share glacier park, it belongs to america.

[55Jay]

This is about China and what China did.

N. Korea's antics in the 2000's not notwithstanding, America's present role is reactionary, and now supportive to what appears to be a growing coalition and consensus by neighboring/regional nations against China because of what China did.

The posts favoring China or, at best, a desire to see America "butt out", avoids taking responsibility for what has happened, and why. I'm sure China would prefer not having this American interference, which tends to draw instant and prolonged media attention and annoying analysis. Big Brother is watching and, ironically, it seems to wrankle the noses of the Chinese when the shoe's on the other foot?

Hello 55Jay.

Everybody knows that Beijing does actually spy on it's own people. The stuff from Edward Snowden tells us that basically, people in America (and indeed, people in Britain as well) might also be spied on by the government ?

Anyway, can you imagine being Mr Modi, India's leader ? Washington is trying to be your friend, and oh, Washington is actually spying on you ?

Sir, I'm not against the people of America. I do actually have loads of American friends, and yes, some of them vote Republican. I'm only trying to point out that Washington (America's government) does actually do all kinds of naughty things.

Hi. No problem. Some of your posts (and others') do have an emotive USA=Bad, China=Good drum beat to them, but I don't take it personally. I read all points of view and usually land somewhere in the middle.

I don't really think Mr. Modi is naive, and was not genuinely outraged as much in private as he let on in public. He's a big boy invited to sit at the big boy's table, and exploited this fortuitous "revelation" to gain a bit of leverage - as did others.

Back on topic, with a few exceptions of course, the other residents in the Chinese neighborhood, at least for now, seem to prefer a robust American military presence to that of China - in this case, a supportive/defensive counter-weight to China's apparent aspirations. They have their reasons and that seems to be what this thread is about, rather than a historical dressing down of the USA to support a wishful desire that they just go away.

Hello there.

I'm not actually a believer in USA=Bad and China=Good. I reckon that both are almost the same.

Ever since World War Two finished, America and Russia have have been carrying out their rival 'campaigns for world domination'. I don't actually reckon that Washington is evil when carving out the New American Empire. Every powerful nation has done the same thing, Britain had a giant empire before the American one. Rome had an empire a long time ago.

The present day American Empire is different to all previous empires. America does not normally do things like invade other countries and stick the American flag on those countries. Instead, America dominates and influences other countries, sometimes sets up puppet governments, and in-directly controls others. It's all done to benefit the USA.

What about China ? China is far more powerful than it was three decades ago. Today, China has a giant trade surplus, and is flooding some other countries with it's tourists.

China itself is now trying to carve out the new Chinese Empire, or 'sphere of dominance'. Beijing is competing with Washington for domination in the Pacific. Washington has been the dominant power in the Pacific since World War Two ended, China is trying to start competing for this domination.

Do I reckon Beijing is better than Washington ? Not really, no. They're both almost the same. It's just that some Americans here (Publicus) constantly bang the anti-China drum. What's the difference between Washington and Beijing ?

Washington has been democratically elected and has given freedom of speech to people. Washington has to make it look like that it's foreign policy is based on spreading freedom and democracy. In Beijing's case, Beijing is not a democracy and has not given freedom of speech to it's people. Beijing does not have to make it look like that it is trying to spread freedom and democracy to others.

This South China Sea thing. It's about Beijing flexing it's muscle into an area that Washington has been flexing it's muscle since World War Two ended.

For the countries in South-East Asia, how about extract the benefits from both the two competitors ?

China is flexing its muscles in response to the US flexing theirs?

IMV, it's the other way 'round.

China has been flexing its muscles, testing the idea of a new, emerging paradigm of a less potent US, and in the absence of the US "X" factor, as it was, testing the resolve of its neighbors to resist their overtures.

The US response is just that. Reactionary. They were caught flat footed and scrambled in order to flex their muscles in a delayed response to what China's been up to for years, and has recently upped the stakes with their island building adventure; amid a growing chorus of protests and spats by China's neighbors. Yes, I know, it's the USA 911 Force to the rescue again. Much to the chagrin of Obama, I'm sure.

The US deserves some blame here for neglecting the Pacific for as long as they did, creating the conditions for an opportunistic group to exploit. I suspect China's neighbors aren't surprised by what's happened and are pleased relieved the US is back in town, at least for now.

Economically, sure, the parties involved will keep holding hands while squabbling.

[Publicus]

The possible winner of Monday's Philippines elections is saying he is wiling to talk to China directly

The so call " Asian Trump" is leading the polls heading into election is saying he is willing to talk and also negotiate trade and even consider asking China to assist in rail development

Anyone that drove into makati like me last weekend would thank the heavens for a pragmatic man ...

Won't please the USA who have committed all sorts patrolling the area only to be told they are not needed anymore

But this guy looks like he probably won't bend over to the powers China or anyone else and would put Philippines first although it's encouraging to see he loves trade as much as China

China is not interested to rule over any lands ...they just want to get more trade and make more $$$ ...I don't see them telling the Africans what to do as they traded with them and it won't happen in ASEAN.

Rodrigo Duterte who is likely to win the May 9th Philippine presidential election is indeed often referred to as a Trump of the Phils (not of Asia), in that he tends toward being the wild radical.

Those who've been attentive to the election campaign there know Davao City Mayor Duterte has been all over the place on the SCS aggressions by the CCP Dictators in Beijing.

The one thing Mayor Duterte has said with consistency is that he would not consider changing the Phils policy on CCP aggressions in SCS, not for at least two years. Duterte wants to see if negotiations between Asean and CCP can develop before he'd consider possible bilateral negotiations. So it could sound like Mayor Duterte has a bit of the Chinese in him too, as do almost all Filipinos.

Duterte has also been saying throughout the campaign....

Mr Duterte has said he will tout the Philippines’ alliance with Western powers such as the US to get China to accept Manila’s position. He also said he would ride a jet ski to a disputed island occupied by China and personally stake the Philippines’ claims.

http://www.todayonline.com/world/asia/duterte-will-talk-chinese-if-south-china-sea-issue-stalls

Good thing then the Phils doesn't have a red button its behavior-similar Trumpish president-to-be can push while jet skiing and Phils flag whipping in the wind.

The bottom line on the possibility of a Phils president Duterte is that he takes the same position as Asean has always held, i.e., joint and cooperative use of the resources of the SCS. If CCP would agree to negotiate that fairly and bilaterally with the Phils beginning in two years time, that would be good indeed. It would in fact be excellent. It could lead to broader negotiations over the SCS.

Duterte has been mayor of Davao City for 22 years. The greatest income increases there however have occurred in Mayor Duterte's previously undisclosed bank account which is now under open investigation after an opposition lawyer dug it out. Developments are ongoing, as they say (Pesos 221 million for starters).

Duterte has meanwhile promised $21 million to each region of the Phils if he's elected (to power small and medium sized business ha!). It would be a good bet besides to say Duterte will get the CCP Boyz to build a new railway system in Duterte's home province of Mindanao no matter the outcome of the ongoing SCS antagonisms.

Edited May 5, 2016 by Publicus

[boomerangutang]

So LC, are any of the Phil political candidates willing to allow China to take possession of the islands? It's like being pregnant, you can't be halfway pregnant. There may be a slight chance of joint ownership, but that's extremely doubtful. I'm trying to think of territory in the world that's owned by more than one country. Antarctica comes to mind, but even there, there are sectors under the management of different countries. The US and Canada share Glacier National Park which straddles their borders, but they still have their respective sectors. Can you imagine two Asian countries sharing a national park, let alone some islands? I can if their leaders were 22nd century thinkers, but none are close to that now. Preah Vihar almost caused a war between Thailand and Cambodia. It's a tiny bit of land, smaller than my property in Chiang Rai. I could have found a solution which would please both sides, but they didn't want to get advice from a farang like me. They'd rather put land mines and barbed wire all over the place.

from LC: China is not interested to rule over any lands ...they just want to get more trade and make more $$$ ...I don't see them telling the Africans what to do as they traded with them and it won't happen in ASEAN.

Dude, if Africa, the Chinese aren't trying to assert their ownership over any territory, as far as I know. It's different in the SCS. They're saying they own the islands just off Philippines coast. Not cool If China wants to do biz with Fils or whomever, no problem, so as they're doing in Africa and elsewhere: go and have discussions and make deals. Don't just show up and claim ownership of another country's islands. No matter how you (the silver tongued Chinese manipulators) try to explain it away, it's the same basic shit, and it's clear as day. Maybe China can fool the top chief in Gambia (along with a bunch of money and gifts), but they can't fool the rest of the world.

canada and the us do not share glacier park, it belongs to america.

from Wikipedia: Glacier National Park borders Waterton Lakes National Park in Canada—the two parks are known as the Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park and were designated as the world's first International Peace Park in 1932.

I assume then, if that's the only thing in my post that you question, ....then you agree with everything else?

Edited May 5, 2016 by boomerangutang

[boomerangutang]

The possible winner of Monday's Philippines elections is saying he is wiling to talk to China directly

The so call " Asian Trump" is leading the polls heading into election is saying he is willing to talk and also negotiate trade and even consider asking China to assist in rail development

Anyone that drove into makati like me last weekend would thank the heavens for a pragmatic man ...

Won't please the USA who have committed all sorts patrolling the area only to be told they are not needed anymore

But this guy looks like he probably won't bend over to the powers China or anyone else and would put Philippines first although it's encouraging to see he loves trade as much as China

China is not interested to rule over any lands ...they just want to get more trade and make more $$$ ...I don't see them telling the Africans what to do as they traded with them and it won't happen in ASEAN.

Rodrigo Duterte who is likely to win the May 9th Philippine presidential election is indeed often referred to as a Trump of the Phils (not of Asia), in that he tends toward being the wild radical.

Those who've been attentive to the election campaign there know Mayor Duterte has been all over the place on the SCS aggressions by the CCP Dictators in Beijing.

The one thing Mayor Duterte has said with consistency is that he would not consider changing the Phils policy on CCP aggressions in SCS, not for at least two years. Duterte wants to see if negotiations between Asean and CCP can develop before he'd consider possible bilateral negotiations. So it could sound like Mayor Duterte has a bit of the Chinese in him too, as do almost all Filipinos.

Duterte has also been saying throughout the campaign....

Mr Duterte has said he will tout the Philippines’ alliance with Western powers such as the US to get China to accept Manila’s position. He also said he would ride a jet ski to a disputed island occupied by China and personally stake the Philippines’ claims.

http://www.todayonline.com/world/asia/duterte-will-talk-chinese-if-south-china-sea-issue-stalls

Good thing then the Phils doesn't have a red button its behavior-similar Trumpish president-to-be can push while jet skiing and Phils flag whipping in the wind.

The bottom line on the possibility of a Phils president Duterte is that he takes the same position as Asean has always held, i.e., joint and cooperative use of the resources of the SCS. If CCP would agree to negotiate that fairly and bilaterally with the Phils beginning in two years time, that would be good indeed. It would in fact be excellent. It could lead to broader negotiations over the SCS.

Duterte has been mayor of Davao City for 22 years. The greatest income increases there however have occurred in Mayor Duterte's previously undisclosed bank account which is now under open investigation after an opposition lawyer dug it out. Developments are ongoing.

Duterte has meanwhile promised $21 million to each region of the Phils if he's elected (to power small and medium sized business ha!). It would be a good bet besides to say Duterte will get the CCP Boyz to build a new railway system in Duterte's home province of Mindanao no matter the outcome of the ongoing SCS antagonisms.

I hadn't heard of Duterte before a few moments ago. From first impressions, he sounds like a corrupt very rich ding dong. I hope Fils have better candidates to choose from, or at least someone who won't let go of, or sell the islands.

[Publicus]

The possible winner of Monday's Philippines elections is saying he is wiling to talk to China directly

The so call " Asian Trump" is leading the polls heading into election is saying he is willing to talk and also negotiate trade and even consider asking China to assist in rail development

Anyone that drove into makati like me last weekend would thank the heavens for a pragmatic man ...

Won't please the USA who have committed all sorts patrolling the area only to be told they are not needed anymore

But this guy looks like he probably won't bend over to the powers China or anyone else and would put Philippines first although it's encouraging to see he loves trade as much as China

China is not interested to rule over any lands ...they just want to get more trade and make more $$$ ...I don't see them telling the Africans what to do as they traded with them and it won't happen in ASEAN.

Rodrigo Duterte who is likely to win the May 9th Philippine presidential election is indeed often referred to as a Trump of the Phils (not of Asia), in that he tends toward being the wild radical.

Those who've been attentive to the election campaign there know Mayor Duterte has been all over the place on the SCS aggressions by the CCP Dictators in Beijing.

The one thing Mayor Duterte has said with consistency is that he would not consider changing the Phils policy on CCP aggressions in SCS, not for at least two years. Duterte wants to see if negotiations between Asean and CCP can develop before he'd consider possible bilateral negotiations. So it could sound like Mayor Duterte has a bit of the Chinese in him too, as do almost all Filipinos.

Duterte has also been saying throughout the campaign....

Mr Duterte has said he will tout the Philippines’ alliance with Western powers such as the US to get China to accept Manila’s position. He also said he would ride a jet ski to a disputed island occupied by China and personally stake the Philippines’ claims.

http://www.todayonline.com/world/asia/duterte-will-talk-chinese-if-south-china-sea-issue-stalls

Good thing then the Phils doesn't have a red button its behavior-similar Trumpish president-to-be can push while jet skiing and Phils flag whipping in the wind.

The bottom line on the possibility of a Phils president Duterte is that he takes the same position as Asean has always held, i.e., joint and cooperative use of the resources of the SCS. If CCP would agree to negotiate that fairly and bilaterally with the Phils beginning in two years time, that would be good indeed. It would in fact be excellent. It could lead to broader negotiations over the SCS.

Duterte has been mayor of Davao City for 22 years. The greatest income increases there however have occurred in Mayor Duterte's previously undisclosed bank account which is now under open investigation after an opposition lawyer dug it out. Developments are ongoing.

Duterte has meanwhile promised $21 million to each region of the Phils if he's elected (to power small and medium sized business ha!). It would be a good bet besides to say Duterte will get the CCP Boyz to build a new railway system in Duterte's home province of Mindanao no matter the outcome of the ongoing SCS antagonisms.

I hadn't heard of Duterte before a few moments ago. From first impressions, he sounds like a corrupt very rich ding dong. I hope Fils have better candidates to choose from, or at least someone who won't let go of, or sell the islands.

Duterte has led in the polls all the way so the expectation of the May 9th election is that he'd win, even if with only one-third of the popular vote, which is the most he's ever had in the polling.

As with Trump, Duterte focuses on domestic money economic development but he's literally wrapped himself in the flag during the campaign and during his 22 years as mayor of Davao. While his foreign policy people don't like opposing Beijing in anything, Duterte knows CCP is extremely unpopular with the Phils general public due to the SCS stuff over the past several years.

So Duterte isn't going to change much of the present policy without allowing some breathing room, which is why he's saying no changes for at least two years. Duterte also knows he needs to see how the Arbitral Tribunal's ruling coming in a couple of weeks will play out, especially given that everyone expects the Phils to win the case while CCP will have to shoot off flares and lower its lifeboats because of it.

Two years from now the SCS situation will be very different and Duterte knows it. Two years from now SCS positions will have hardened and they will have definitely become more volatile. Duterte learned to kick the can on the dirt roads where he grew up so it's a game he's played for a long time and that he knows well. It's called keeping your options open.

[Publicus]

No, not those liberals. I was referring o the much more dangerous neo-liberals in the mold of scoop jackson, perle, wolfowitz, feith etc, you know the ones, your heroes

SCS hawk SecDef Ashton Carter hasn't any connection to the people you mentioned, not by a long shot. Neither does this poster with the exception I'd mentioned to Sen Jackson vis-a-vis the Russian Soviet Union of the cold war.

Your post expresses a confusion over the historical meaning of "liberal" in American politics and government. Then it gets further mucked up by throwing in the term "neo-liberal."

Worse, it identifies warmongers such as Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle as liberals. The fragmented post is off the wall while the mention of Paul Wolfowitz or Richard Perle as liberals is just flat out laffable. It's self-contorted insider stuff that remains unintelligible outside of its closed circle of jargon and ideology.

The bottom line is that CCP Dictators in Beijing have been determined for decades to turn the SCS into a Chinese lake and to "restore" the perpetual illusion of the Middle Kingdom by making Asean tributary states of the CCP dynasty of emperors in business suits.

So no matter how anyone over there slices the SCS salami it still curls out as baloney.

[ExpatOilWorker]

Is China conditioning the larger population for a future conflict or just recruiting cannon fodder for the PLA with this video?

http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a20717/chinese-militarys-newest-recruitment-video

[boomerangutang]

I watched the video, thanks. It's akin to something Saddam Hussein might have commissioned if he'd lasted longer at the top of his heap.

It got me to thinking: If Chinese hackers hadn't stolen (and reverse-engineered) western armnaments (mostly from the US), they'd still have smooth bore muzzle-loaded cannons as their state-of the art weaponry. They're quite good at copying things, but not so good at getting their copies to function at top levels. I see it with Chinese made tools all the time. Even the simplest tools: they're made in China as copies of American items, but they just aren't half as good as the originals. Same for electric tools: There's a large shop here in Chiang Rai, where one section is original tools, and another section are all Chinese-made. The Chinese tools look the same, but they're half the price of the originals. And they're half as good. Quality of metals is lower, and tolerances are poorer. Plus they're louder, less accurate, and break down soon after being put to use. Even the power cables are much thinner than the originals. The cables are the same diameter, but the thickness of the copper is tiny (and the sheathing is fat). Thankfully, the Thai shop owner will fix things cheaply.

I heard they made replicas of Skunk Works' (Lockheed's) latest stealth fighter. They got the design right, but their jet didn't do what it was supposed to do, so the Chinese sold it to other countries, instead of using it in their own air force.

[AYJAYDEE]

I watched the video, thanks. It's akin to something Saddam Hussein might have commissioned if he'd lasted longer at the top of his heap.

It got me to thinking: If Chinese hackers hadn't stolen (and reverse-engineered) western armnaments (mostly from the US), they'd still have smooth bore muzzle-loaded cannons as their state-of the art weaponry. They're quite good at copying things, but not so good at getting their copies to function at top levels. I see it with Chinese made tools all the time. Even the simplest tools: they're made in China as copies of American items, but they just aren't half as good as the originals. Same for electric tools: There's a large shop here in Chiang Rai, where one section is original tools, and another section are all Chinese-made. The Chinese tools look the same, but they're half the price of the originals. And they're half as good. Quality of metals is lower, and tolerances are poorer. Plus they're louder, less accurate, and break down soon after being put to use. Even the power cables are much thinner than the originals. The cables are the same diameter, but the thickness of the copper is tiny (and the sheathing is fat). Thankfully, the Thai shop owner will fix things cheaply.

I heard they made replicas of Skunk Works' (Lockheed's) latest stealth fighter. They got the design right, but their jet didn't do what it was supposed to do, so the Chinese sold it to other countries, instead of using it in their own air force.

we once heard he same stuff about japan and taiwan! and u know how that turned out

[AYJAYDEE]

No, not those liberals. I was referring o the much more dangerous neo-liberals in the mold of scoop jackson, perle, wolfowitz, feith etc, you know the ones, your heroes

SCS hawk SecDef Ashton Carter hasn't any connection to the people you mentioned, not by a long shot. Neither does this poster with the exception I'd mentioned to Sen Jackson vis-a-vis the Russian Soviet Union of the cold war.

Your post expresses a confusion over the historical meaning of "liberal" in American politics and government. Then it gets further mucked up by throwing in the term "neo-liberal."

Worse, it identifies warmongers such as Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle as liberals. The fragmented post is off the wall while the mention of Paul Wolfowitz or Richard Perle as liberals is just flat out laffable. It's self-contorted insider stuff that remains unintelligible outside of its closed circle of jargon and ideology.

The bottom line is that CCP Dictators in Beijing have been determined for decades to turn the SCS into a Chinese lake and to "restore" the perpetual illusion of the Middle Kingdom by making Asean tributary states of the CCP dynasty of emperors in business suits.

So no matter how anyone over there slices the SCS salami it still curls out as baloney.

that the term doesnt fit with your simplistic black/white view of the world doesnt surprise me. and the fact that those beasts all worked for and idolized jackson speaks volumes about what kind of nasty man he was

Edited May 5, 2016 by AYJAYDEE

[keemapoot]

I watched the video, thanks. It's akin to something Saddam Hussein might have commissioned if he'd lasted longer at the top of his heap.

It got me to thinking: If Chinese hackers hadn't stolen (and reverse-engineered) western armnaments (mostly from the US), they'd still have smooth bore muzzle-loaded cannons as their state-of the art weaponry. They're quite good at copying things, but not so good at getting their copies to function at top levels. I see it with Chinese made tools all the time. Even the simplest tools: they're made in China as copies of American items, but they just aren't half as good as the originals. Same for electric tools: There's a large shop here in Chiang Rai, where one section is original tools, and another section are all Chinese-made. The Chinese tools look the same, but they're half the price of the originals. And they're half as good. Quality of metals is lower, and tolerances are poorer. Plus they're louder, less accurate, and break down soon after being put to use. Even the power cables are much thinner than the originals. The cables are the same diameter, but the thickness of the copper is tiny (and the sheathing is fat). Thankfully, the Thai shop owner will fix things cheaply.

I heard they made replicas of Skunk Works' (Lockheed's) latest stealth fighter. They got the design right, but their jet didn't do what it was supposed to do, so the Chinese sold it to other countries, instead of using it in their own air force.

Boomer, your quote "They're quite good at copying things, but not so good at getting their copies to function at top levels." is partially correct. At the risk of being sued for defamation, I will simply say, that a company like Chinese government-owned Huawei ($60 billion revenue/$6 bil profit/200k employees worldwide), which is now the largest telecom equipment company in the world, winning deals worldwide, makes equipment that is as good as Cisco, and there's a reason for that. I happen to know the intimate details, and they allegedly took excellent Cisco designs and source code, made them cheaper, and later, made them better even. It was allegedly the largest wholesale theft of intellectual property in history, but you won't find this published. I will state here the rumours are: that Cisco dropped its lawsuit after the highest level government minister met with the Cisco CEO and threatened to ban Cisco forever in China. Cisco dropped the suit, and continued to prosper in China alongside the meteoric rise of Huawei. I personally witnessed a partner company of ours, in a surprise lab visit, trying to reverse engineer, but they lacked the source code.

However, make no mistake, Chinese can copy and improve anything. What you cite above are Chinese making product "to a price point." In other words, people expect equivalent performance and cheaper prices and China always accommodates. However, they can also make top notch highest tech, as witnessed by Xiaomi.

There is however, a valid assertion that Chinese are not good at "innovation and creativity of new products and services." They have been so busy for these past 30 years allegedly copying products to catch up, that they haven't yet been tested on this. However, new business innovators, such as Alibaba, have invented unique new business models for China, and have become world beaters too. In other words, China is just starting to spread its wings, but yes, certainly we can say they have shown to be less innovative and entrepreneurially creative than the US by a huge margin to this point in their modern tech development.

[LawrenceChee]

I like the posts from Keemapoot because they are balanced and also these viewpoints are from ground experience instead of just flaming China.

As for Cisco lets just put it out as an open industrial secret what happen to those in the know ...

Many have seen my posts while I have stoutly defended China and offered a different view to the forum, I have no qualms critiquing the environmental laws and unsustainable cheap manufacturing models or where the goverance has been weak.

There is room for China's quiet ascension to the world platform and they want that recognition . They believed firmly they have earned it and any pragmatic country will recognise that

In Asia , countries have been doing 2 things really well ...talking about the need to have Japan / USA in the region to balance China's rise ( aka getting free aid , infrastructure and staying politically correct) and also at the same time extracting trade deals from China to promote growth in the country.

China is happy to play this game knowing that a prosperous ASEAN and Asia is needed for the sustainability of the Chinese economy. While they won't admit it in public , you can see no matter how deep the disagreements are with Japan , they continue to trade Abe or not.

If you want quality made in China products ...PAY you can find it.

Facebook is opening following what WeChat is doing to boost revenue and have done well lately ...you can use WeChat to flag a cab , pay bills , transfer money etcetc and Facebook has been trying to include those features ...so gasp ...does that finally qualify as innovation in the eyes of some posters ?

[keemapoot]

If you want quality made in China products ...PAY you can find it.

Facebook is opening following what WeChat is doing to boost revenue and have done well lately ...you can use WeChat to flag a cab , pay bills , transfer money etcetc and Facebook has been trying to include those features ...so gasp ...does that finally qualify as innovation in the eyes of some posters ?

Yup, and 830 million Chinese using QQ, in spite of government surveillance shows the practical nature of the Chinese. They just get on with life and business and are making their own solutions given their unique political situation.

We can either berate, moralize and agonize over how these practices and beliefs don't comport with our own value systems, or we can just get on to accepting that is who and what they are, and they are here to stay as a valued partner.

Edited May 6, 2016 by keemapoot

[Publicus]

No, not those liberals. I was referring o the much more dangerous neo-liberals in the mold of scoop jackson, perle, wolfowitz, feith etc, you know the ones, your heroes

SCS hawk SecDef Ashton Carter hasn't any connection to the people you mentioned, not by a long shot. Neither does this poster with the exception I'd mentioned to Sen Jackson vis-a-vis the Russian Soviet Union of the cold war.

Your post expresses a confusion over the historical meaning of "liberal" in American politics and government. Then it gets further mucked up by throwing in the term "neo-liberal."

Worse, it identifies warmongers such as Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle as liberals. The fragmented post is off the wall while the mention of Paul Wolfowitz or Richard Perle as liberals is just flat out laffable. It's self-contorted insider stuff that remains unintelligible outside of its closed circle of jargon and ideology.

The bottom line is that CCP Dictators in Beijing have been determined for decades to turn the SCS into a Chinese lake and to "restore" the perpetual illusion of the Middle Kingdom by making Asean tributary states of the CCP dynasty of emperors in business suits.

So no matter how anyone over there slices the SCS salami it still curls out as baloney.

that the term doesnt fit with your simplistic black/white view of the world doesnt surprise me. and the fact that those beasts all worked for and idolized jackson speaks volumes about what kind of nasty man he was

Again, Wolfowitz and Perle were not liberals and they are not people I supported at any time in their careers. Perle for instance stated to me face to face in 1975 that the South Vietnamese were our "comrades in arms." I told him he was crazy -- almost everyone there agreed. (A NW Washington garden dinner party.)

Neither can you document your statements against the late Sen. Jackson and it anyway would be taking us more off topic. Your own a priori views held in absentia are well observed here anyway.

US is active in the SCS subsequent to what originally was called the "Pivot to the Pacific" in 2011 which was first presented by then SecState Hillary Clinton in the hawkish Foreign Policy magazine, later to the 2012 Asean annual meeting.

Now called the USA Rebalance to Asia, the 'pivot' was initiated and developed by Sec. Clinton and the then AsstSecState for the Pacific Asia, Kurt Campbell.

The then SecState Hillary Clinton.....

America’s Pacific Century

The future of politics will be decided in Asia, not Afghanistan or Iraq, and the United States will be right at the center of the action.

As we move forward to set the stage for engagement in the Asia-Pacific over the next 60 years, we are mindful of the bipartisan legacy that has shaped our engagement for the past 60. And we are focused on the steps we have to take at home -- increasing our savings, reforming our financial systems, relying less on borrowing, overcoming partisan division -- to secure and sustain our leadership abroad.

This kind of pivot is not easy, but we have paved the way for it over the past two-and-a-half years, and we are committed to seeing it through as among the most important diplomatic efforts of our time.

http://www.cfr.org/asia-and-pacific/secretary-clintons-op-ed-americas-pacific-century/p30265

This is a major reason we've got to where we are presently in the SCS. CCP Dictators in Beijing detest and despise Hillary Clinton more than the most soreheaded right wing loser in the USA does. CPP know SecDef Ashton Carter himself means business and of that there can be no doubt.

Edited May 6, 2016 by Publicus

[Publicus]

Money has come forward to talk a lot at this thread. Big money, no half-yuan peanuts stuff.

Big business types who are up to the ceiling in CCP enabled bucks love it which is comprehensible. The massively corrupt CCP.

What they still need to learn is to yield on the geostratigic stuff to the people who have made a respectable career of and from their world view. That is, professional people in Washington and on the ground elsewhere in our globalised world. Or at the least to recognise the existence of the geostrategic aspects of any developing situation or circumstance, as in the CCP China and the PRC that it owns completely.

Because there's more to life than only the color of one's money.

[AYJAYDEE]

No, not those liberals. I was referring o the much more dangerous neo-liberals in the mold of scoop jackson, perle, wolfowitz, feith etc, you know the ones, your heroes

SCS hawk SecDef Ashton Carter hasn't any connection to the people you mentioned, not by a long shot. Neither does this poster with the exception I'd mentioned to Sen Jackson vis-a-vis the Russian Soviet Union of the cold war.

Your post expresses a confusion over the historical meaning of "liberal" in American politics and government. Then it gets further mucked up by throwing in the term "neo-liberal."

Worse, it identifies warmongers such as Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle as liberals. The fragmented post is off the wall while the mention of Paul Wolfowitz or Richard Perle as liberals is just flat out laffable. It's self-contorted insider stuff that remains unintelligible outside of its closed circle of jargon and ideology.

The bottom line is that CCP Dictators in Beijing have been determined for decades to turn the SCS into a Chinese lake and to "restore" the perpetual illusion of the Middle Kingdom by making Asean tributary states of the CCP dynasty of emperors in business suits.

So no matter how anyone over there slices the SCS salami it still curls out as baloney.

that the term doesnt fit with your simplistic black/white view of the world doesnt surprise me. and the fact that those beasts all worked for and idolized jackson speaks volumes about what kind of nasty man he was

Again, Wolfowitz and Perle were not liberals and they are not people I supported at any time in their careers. Perle for instance stated to me face to face in 1975 that the South Vietnamese were our "comrades in arms." I told him he was crazy -- almost everyone there agreed. (A NW Washington garden dinner party.)

Neither can you document your statements against the late Sen. Jackson and it anyway would be taking us more off topic. Your own a priori views held in absentia are well observed here anyway.

US is active in the SCS subsequent to what originally was called the "Pivot to the Pacific" in 2011 which was first presented by then SecState Hillary Clinton in the hawkish Foreign Policy magazine, later to the 2012 Asean annual meeting.

Now called the USA Rebalance to Asia, the 'pivot' was initiated and developed by Sec. Clinton and the then AsstSecState for the Pacific Asia, Kurt Campbell.

The then SecState Hillary Clinton.....

America’s Pacific Century

The future of politics will be decided in Asia, not Afghanistan or Iraq, and the United States will be right at the center of the action.

As we move forward to set the stage for engagement in the Asia-Pacific over the next 60 years, we are mindful of the bipartisan legacy that has shaped our engagement for the past 60. And we are focused on the steps we have to take at home -- increasing our savings, reforming our financial systems, relying less on borrowing, overcoming partisan division -- to secure and sustain our leadership abroad.

This kind of pivot is not easy, but we have paved the way for it over the past two-and-a-half years, and we are committed to seeing it through as among the most important diplomatic efforts of our time.

http://www.cfr.org/asia-and-pacific/secretary-clintons-op-ed-americas-pacific-century/p30265

This is a major reason we've got to where we are presently in the SCS. CCP Dictators in Beijing detest and despise Hillary Clinton more than the most soreheaded right wing loser in the USA. CPP know SecDef Ashton Carter himself means business and of that there can be no doubt.

lol! name dropping dont impress me son. and you can put any name to it that you like but the fact remains america is meddling in the area once again and has no moral authority left to sell it to anyone. the world knows u wouldnt stand for china making trouble in the gulf of mexico and has no sympathy for your antics in asia. a nation of phonies who cant get anyone to listen to the do as i say not as i do bullshit anymore

[keemapoot]

Money has come forward to talk a lot at this thread. Big money, no half-yuan peanuts stuff.

Big business types who are up to the ceiling in CCP enabled bucks love it which is comprehensible. The massively corrupt CCP.

What they still need to learn is to yield on the geostratigic stuff to the people who have made a respectable career of and from their world view. That is, professional people in Washington and on the ground elsewhere in our globalised world. Or at the least to recognise the existence of the geostrategic aspects of any developing situation or circumstance, as in the CCP China and the PRC that it owns completely.

Because there's more to life than only the color of one's money.

Your half-baked accusations of those of us who value China as a partner and liken it to 'sleeping with the enemy,' for financial gain is highly entertaining. I do understand that respectable careers in your view do not include building businesses, maximizing technology or making things of value; but rather only teaching, campaigning, researching and other such noble endeavours.

I'm afraid my eyes just glaze over when I read stuff like "geostrategic" and other big words as subtle distinctions are wasted on people like me. Please try to use simpler words for us simple. folks.

[boomerangutang]

I met an old timer in the US, years ago, who used to work for a US company. They made industrial cooling machines, as big as trucks. They got an order from a Korean company - who just wanted one unit. If they liked it, they would order hundreds more to re-sell in Asia. They only bought the one. A few years later, the US company heard reports that their device was being sold all over Asia. The guy I met was charged with going to Asia to see what was happening. He and his team found identical units for sale all over, that's not unusual. Here''s the funny part: the original unit had a flaw: when it was tested at the US factory, its shaft broke, so it was welded, and then worked fine. It was found that all the copies made for sale in Asia HAD THEIR SHAFTS BROKEN - AND THEN WELDED, like the original.

Here's another spin on the same topic: Copiers are held in high esteem in Asia, particularly if their copies are able to fool experts. Here's an example of that: A Chinese man made copies of an old classic sculpture. He would only sell one at a time at his market stall. The other vendors knew he was making copies while telling customers they were buying the original, but the vendor was respected because he made good fakes. In a western country, that wouldn't be allowed. If the vendor was found out, he would be busted for false advertising (or worse).

One more mention of the power tools thing from my own experiences: Chinese tools copy every part, but they often skimp on metal quality. In other words, if a metal alloy part looks identical and works nearly as well as the original, then the inferior and cheaper allow part will be used. The tool will work well for the first week and then might break, whereas the original will likely work well for years. Tolerances are things like gaps between moving parts. An original tool might have a gap of .0001 cm whereas a Chinese copy have a .001 gap. The difference may seem insignificant, but it could mean the difference between a good tool and an great tool.

Now, here's how all this talk could relate to a possible military clash between the US and China. The US has the original weapons and the original tools making those weapons (and ammo). At best, Chinese have reversed engineered weapons, possibly in combination with stolen schematics (there are large rooms in China filled with PLA personnel whose sole job is to search the internet all day for western innovations relating to weapons, capabilities, etc.).

Someone on another thread (Chinese economics) mentioned how every weapon system the US has: China has an identical system. I don't think so. Americans are the innovators. They've got an A-10 Warthog plane with a 7-barrel gun on its nose which can spit out 70 large (uranium tipped?) bullets per second. Chinese can try copying that gun, but it's doubtful they'll get it working to such a high degree as the originals. The US also has a rail gun which I'm sure the Chinese are trying to copy. But again, if Chinese can't make an electric drill which works more than 7 hours (with Chinese-made drill bits that bend in seconds), how can we expect them to make high quality weapons?

[keemapoot]

^Boomer, good points and queries. AFAIK, and in speaking with an international dealer of Chinese arms, they make weapons grade to top specs with top grade steel, etc., and of course, many of the old designs were borrowed from Soviet designs and factories in partnerships. Those top grade specs are tested and passed to the same standards, and are widely sold and distributed worldwide.

But, your queries are interesting in terms of conventional warfare on a large scale, would there be massive points of failure? I'm sure a military hardware expert will be along shortly to address this issue.

[Publicus]

SCS hawk SecDef Ashton Carter hasn't any connection to the people you mentioned, not by a long shot. Neither does this poster with the exception I'd mentioned to Sen Jackson vis-a-vis the Russian Soviet Union of the cold war.

Your post expresses a confusion over the historical meaning of "liberal" in American politics and government. Then it gets further mucked up by throwing in the term "neo-liberal."

Worse, it identifies warmongers such as Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle as liberals. The fragmented post is off the wall while the mention of Paul Wolfowitz or Richard Perle as liberals is just flat out laffable. It's self-contorted insider stuff that remains unintelligible outside of its closed circle of jargon and ideology.

The bottom line is that CCP Dictators in Beijing have been determined for decades to turn the SCS into a Chinese lake and to "restore" the perpetual illusion of the Middle Kingdom by making Asean tributary states of the CCP dynasty of emperors in business suits.

So no matter how anyone over there slices the SCS salami it still curls out as baloney.

that the term doesnt fit with your simplistic black/white view of the world doesnt surprise me. and the fact that those beasts all worked for and idolized jackson speaks volumes about what kind of nasty man he was

Again, Wolfowitz and Perle were not liberals and they are not people I supported at any time in their careers. Perle for instance stated to me face to face in 1975 that the South Vietnamese were our "comrades in arms." I told him he was crazy -- almost everyone there agreed. (A NW Washington garden dinner party.)

Neither can you document your statements against the late Sen. Jackson and it anyway would be taking us more off topic. Your own a priori views held in absentia are well observed here anyway.

US is active in the SCS subsequent to what originally was called the "Pivot to the Pacific" in 2011 which was first presented by then SecState Hillary Clinton in the hawkish Foreign Policy magazine, later to the 2012 Asean annual meeting.

Now called the USA Rebalance to Asia, the 'pivot' was initiated and developed by Sec. Clinton and the then AsstSecState for the Pacific Asia, Kurt Campbell.

The then SecState Hillary Clinton.....

America’s Pacific Century

The future of politics will be decided in Asia, not Afghanistan or Iraq, and the United States will be right at the center of the action.

As we move forward to set the stage for engagement in the Asia-Pacific over the next 60 years, we are mindful of the bipartisan legacy that has shaped our engagement for the past 60. And we are focused on the steps we have to take at home -- increasing our savings, reforming our financial systems, relying less on borrowing, overcoming partisan division -- to secure and sustain our leadership abroad.

This kind of pivot is not easy, but we have paved the way for it over the past two-and-a-half years, and we are committed to seeing it through as among the most important diplomatic efforts of our time.

http://www.cfr.org/asia-and-pacific/secretary-clintons-op-ed-americas-pacific-century/p30265

This is a major reason we've got to where we are presently in the SCS. CCP Dictators in Beijing detest and despise Hillary Clinton more than the most soreheaded right wing loser in the USA. CPP know SecDef Ashton Carter himself means business and of that there can be no doubt.

lol! name dropping dont impress me son. and you can put any name to it that you like but the fact remains america is meddling in the area once again and has no moral authority left to sell it to anyone. the world knows u wouldnt stand for china making trouble in the gulf of mexico and has no sympathy for your antics in asia. a nation of phonies who cant get anyone to listen to the do as i say not as i do bullshit anymore

Quite a confused post there going from the SCS to the Gulf of Mexico.

Better to stick with the one liners but then what would some kid know eh.

[boomerangutang]

^Boomer, good points and queries. AFAIK, and in speaking with an international dealer of Chinese arms, they make weapons grade to top specs with top grade steel, etc., and of course, many of the old designs were borrowed from Soviet designs and factories in partnerships. Those top grade specs are tested and passed to the same standards, and are widely sold and distributed worldwide.

But, your queries are interesting in terms of conventional warfare on a large scale, would there be massive points of failure? I'm sure a military hardware expert will be along shortly to address this issue.

When I go to the market and ask a vendor (who's selling hot cakes) "aroi mai?" (delicious?). What are they going to say? Of course they'll say "aroi dee!" or "aroi jing!" ...both meaning sure, very delicious!

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been removed. The topic is about the SCS.

[AYJAYDEE]

Quite a confused post there going from the SCS to the Gulf of Mexico.

Better to stick with the one liners but then what would some kid know eh.

says the guy that keeps referring to russia! lol

[Publicus]

Money has come forward to talk a lot at this thread. Big money, no half-yuan peanuts stuff.

Big business types who are up to the ceiling in CCP enabled bucks love it which is comprehensible. The massively corrupt CCP.

What they still need to learn is to yield on the geostratigic stuff to the people who have made a respectable career of and from their world view. That is, professional people in Washington and on the ground elsewhere in our globalised world. Or at the least to recognise the existence of the geostrategic aspects of any developing situation or circumstance, as in the CCP China and the PRC that it owns completely.

Because there's more to life than only the color of one's money.

Your half-baked accusations of those of us who value China as a partner and liken it to 'sleeping with the enemy,' for financial gain is highly entertaining. I do understand that respectable careers in your view do not include building businesses, maximizing technology or making things of value; but rather only teaching, campaigning, researching and other such noble endeavours.

I'm afraid my eyes just glaze over when I read stuff like "geostrategic" and other big words as subtle distinctions are wasted on people like me. Please try to use simpler words for us simple. folks.

Nuthin' wrong with making an honest buck which I'm confident is what a number of people around here do to a credible extent. The respectable people who swim in the same water as the others do...all of us. As far as it goes, anyway.

Nothing wrong either with respecting the life's qualifications, expertise, experience of others. That is, success at making an honest living is deserving of respect whatever the field of endeavor.

Someone posted recently that Don Corleone pointed out to the heads of the five families that they could make a 'gentleman's' agreement -- that they didn't have to sign papers cause they weren't lawyers. They were businessmen. So the police, judges, lawyers etc were in their pockets.

I don't say much about my small business in a couple of countries because, well, they're my business.

Edited May 6, 2016 by Publicus

[tonbridgebrit]

http://www.smh.com.au/world/south-china-sea-claims-white-house-gagged-us-navy-chief-over-china-criticism-20160408-go1yzv.html







Okay, a quote from the above report from The Sydney Morning Herald, this report came out in early April. [uS Pacific commander Harry Harris has been most prominent amid repeated warnings by US military leaders that China's ambitions in the disputed waters are destabilising the region.] Harry Harris is an Admiral.

Admiral Harris claims that China is building a great wall of sand with dredges and bulldozers.

Another quote [ But an article in the military publication Navy Times this week reported the White House had sought to muzzle commanders ahead of a recent meeting between President Barack Obama and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping.

Advertisement

The article said National Security Adviser Susan Rice imposed the gag order on March 18 to allow "maximum political maneuvering space" for the two leaders ahead of their meeting last week, citing two unnamed "defence officials".]

Yes, I think it's good that National Security Adviser Susan Rice has done this. Any meeting between President Obama and Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping must be given "maximum political maneuvering space".

[keemapoot]

Nothing wrong either with respecting the life's qualifications, expertise, experience of others. That is, success at making an honest living is deserving of respect whatever the field of endeavor.

Indeed. Most of the posters on this thread, including yourself, have added value. Your additions are often well-researched and add a dimension some of us may not have considered.

If any poster wants respect for his qualifications, expertise and experience, he would normally have to earn that by his postings, and some minimal peek under the skirt. On a public forum, outing oneself is not to be encouraged, but on a specialist subject matter and sweeping matters involving China, it may be wise to let members know if you have some special experience or qualifications that would cause members to take more seriously posts which might seem heavily biased and subjective.

After that brief interlude, let's return to the subject at hand.

[LawrenceChee]

Boomer - you make mention of Chinese methodology of copying for success

I can assure you they have learnt a few things from Nam War and intend to copy that to full advantage

All the technology and sky sea / Star Wars etc etc whatever terms used by Comrade P is useless in the SCS context

The Chinese intention is clear in the SCS and they know a few things to neutralise the USA military might :

1) no one will bomb civilian structures ...no nuclear bomb can or will ever be used again

2) USA has never won a land war in recent years and Nam shows you after the bombing bravado , the USA land troops cannot invade or attack any Chinese city without international outcry or sustain the heavy losses and retreat in shame. While the Americans have air superiority , the ground superiority belongs to the Chinese

3) In an urban densely population country like China , the USA air superiority can't achieve much ; refer to point 1 , you can drop anything in China without hitting civilians , such is the success of the urbanisation

4) Political will in USA is weak and any injuries / military death fought over atolls and other ASEAN countries interests is not important to norma Americans

As such the Chinese continue their works at the islands and continue to offer trade deals to the countries for the islands

In the meantime the USA waste fuel and time doing these patrols knowing they are not achieving any intent except another temporary show for the region

Edited May 6, 2016 by LawrenceChee

[AYJAYDEE]

Nothing wrong either with respecting the life's qualifications, expertise, experience of others. That is, success at making an honest living is deserving of respect whatever the field of endeavor.

Indeed. Most of the posters on this thread, including yourself, have added value. Your additions are often well-researched and add a dimension some of us may not have considered.

If any poster wants respect for his qualifications, expertise and experience, he would normally have to earn that by his postings, and some minimal peek under the skirt. On a public forum, outing oneself is not to be encouraged, but on a specialist subject matter and sweeping matters involving China, it may be wise to let members know if you have some special experience or qualifications that would cause members to take more seriously posts which might seem heavily biased and subjective.

After that brief interlude, let's return to the subject at hand.

the dulles brothers, westmoreland, taylor, kissinger, macnamara etc etc all had what they considered special expertise and every one of them got the vietnam thing dead wrong!

Edited May 6, 2016 by AYJAYDEE