US says Chinese warship seized Navy underwater drone

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, jpinx said:

It's not possible to impose western ideas of right and wrong in asia.  International law is a western concept.   If China is "squatting" and the US is so incensed - why has nothing been done?

If so, then why is China using the World Trade Organization for several issues?  International law is hardly a Western concept.

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, jpinx said:

China has built these islands and nobody did anything.  China chases away any non-chinese boats and aircraft and no-one does anything.  China puts military equipment on the islands and *Still* no-one does anything.  What the US and others need to realise is that the only thing that is going to stop this pantomime is the US Pacific fleet cruising up there and blockading the islands -- but no-one has the guts for that, so China continues to build and re-inforce.  The longer they are allowed to continue, the harder this is going to be to resolve, and the greater the risk of a messy end.  Stealing the drone was just another poke in the eye from China - -designed to demonstrate that China has control.

And if the US had been more aggressive, this thread would be filled with posts of "warmongers!".  Danged if you do, danged if you don't.

[jpinx]

3 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

And if the US had been more aggressive, this thread would be filled with posts of "warmongers!".  Danged if you do, danged if you don't.

That's the price of setting yourself up as "World Police"

[jpinx]

5 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

If so, then why is China using the World Trade Organization for several issues?  International law is hardly a Western concept.

Because the WTO doesn't have the guts to tell China to toe the line of the international court or "no deals".  

[craigt3365]

Just now, jpinx said:

That's the price of setting yourself up as "World Police"

Some like it, some don't.  Keyboard warriors don't like it.  Those in need love it.

[jpinx]

Just now, craigt3365 said:

Some like it, some don't.  Keyboard warriors don't like it.  Those in need love it.

Of course, but nothing satisfies everyone always.  The UN is meant to be the "International Police", what happened to that idea?

[craigt3365]

32 minutes ago, jpinx said:

Of course, but nothing satisfies everyone always.  The UN is meant to be the "International Police", what happened to that idea?

FAIL! LOL

[jpinx]

1 minute ago, craigt3365 said:

FAIL! LOL

Indeed it has !!!  But where's the will to re-boot it and make it effective?  The concepts of "Justice" , "Police" , etc are so different across the globe that it makes such an international effort almost impossible.  Anyone who has any small understanding of China knows that the way to hurt them is hit their trade, but US can't even do that now 'coz it'd hurt the US even more.  No matter what people think of him, I hope Trump will really get US back to being pretty much self-sufficient and not so reliant of cheap crappy imports that international issues like this can not be resolved.

[craigt3365]

Just now, jpinx said:

Indeed it has !!!  But where's the will to re-boot it and make it effective?  The concepts of "Justice" , "Police" , etc are so different across the globe that it makes such an international effort almost impossible.  Anyone who has any small understanding of China knows that the way to hurt them is hit their trade, but US can't even do that now 'coz it'd hurt the US even more.  No matter what people think of him, I hope Trump will really get US back to being pretty much self-sufficient and not so reliant of cheap crappy imports that international issues like this can not be resolved.

I should be a bit more specific.  The UN has some very successful programs.  But keeping conflicts from flaring up in various countries doesn't seem to be their forte.   The Security Council is a massive fail.

 

You have some interesting points.  It will be interesting to see what Trump does.

[Basil B]

7 hours ago, jpinx said:

But China does not recognise the ruling. 

 

Maybe if the US were to capture a Chinese navy boat and hold them as pirates. 

[tonbridgebrit]

7 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

If so, then why is China using the World Trade Organization for several issues?  International law is hardly a Western concept.

 

Right, we've gone from the absurd Hague ruling to the WTO.

Look, if China is so wrong, let's all support Trump, let's have this 35% tax slapped onto all that Chinese stuff that America is importing.

Yes, go on, do it. It's time for action. All talk is just a macho display of strength and aggression.

 

 

[onthesoi]

555 ..I would love to see the faces of Trump supporters when the price of consumer electronics increases by 35% overnight.

[tifino]

5 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

555 ..I would love to see the faces of Trump supporters when the price of consumer electronics increases by 35% overnight.

 

No, that 35% increase will be from the Arab cartels artificially rising Fuel prices - I hear will be in 8 to 9 weeks time...

[tonbridgebrit]

1 hour ago, tonbridgebrit said:

 

Right, we've gone from the absurd Hague ruling to the WTO.

Look, if China is so wrong, let's all support Trump, let's have this 35% tax slapped onto all that Chinese stuff that America is importing.

Yes, go on, do it. It's time for action. All talk is just a macho display of strength and aggression.

 

 

 

59 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

555 ..I would love to see the faces of Trump supporters when the price of consumer electronics increases by 35% overnight.

If China is a danger and threat to world peace.  If China really has taken or stolen some islands from whatever people. If China has actually built some islands, islands that are a problem to whatever people. If China has actually stolen the South China Sea. If China has actually stolen a drone, and Washington was entitled to have that drone there, and Washington does actually reckon that the drone is a big deal.
If China is taking part in unfair trading practices. If China is dumping a load of cheap goods onto America. If China is unfairly putting taxes onto American goods entering China.

If all the above is true. In that case, surely, America MUST stick some serious taxes onto the Chinese imports ?

Talk is BS. It's action that counts.   35% taxes, that is action.

 

 

[onthesoi]

53 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

If China is a danger and threat to world peace.  If China really has taken or stolen some islands from whatever people. If China has actually built some islands, islands that are a problem to whatever people. If China has actually stolen the South China Sea. If China has actually stolen a drone, and Washington was entitled to have that drone there, and Washington does actually reckon that the drone is a big deal.
If China is taking part in unfair trading practices. If China is dumping a load of cheap goods onto America. If China is unfairly putting taxes onto American goods entering China.

If all the above is true. In that case, surely, America MUST stick some serious taxes onto the Chinese imports ?

Talk is BS. It's action that counts.   35% taxes, that is action.

 

What does the South China Sea have to do with US import tax?

 

What gives America jurisdiction in the South China Sea?

Note: A clue to ownership of these seas might be in the name of the seas themselves.

 

 

[tonbridgebrit]

6 hours ago, onthesoi said:

 

What does the South China Sea have to do with US import tax?

 

What gives America jurisdiction in the South China Sea?

Note: A clue to ownership of these seas might be in the name of the seas themselves.

 

 

"What gives America jurisdiction in the South China Sea?". 
And the answer, is, is nothing.  Washington has never actually said "look, that island over here, it belongs to Vietnam, and that island over there, it belongs to the Philipinnes".  Washington has not got involved in who owns whatever islands, because it would be highly dangerous to do so. This is because, loads of islands dotted across planet earth belong to various countries (including America and Britain), and claiming that whatever lump of rock in the sea belongs to Vietnam because, because it's closer to Vietnam than China, well, it's dangerous to say that. There's islands that are very far away from Europe, but European countries have them.



"What does the South China Sea have to do with US import tax?".
Well, the Hague is a BS institution, and them getting involved and announcing their ruling, well, they've confirmed they are a BS institution. For those who think that China is wrong, real action needs to be taken. Forget the Hague, 35% taxes on the imported Chinese goods, that's the action to be taken. The reason why a load of people have got something against 35% taxes on the imported Chinese goods, is, is because it's Trump who is going to do it, it's not Hillary.

 

[craigt3365]

10 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

 

Right, we've gone from the absurd Hague ruling to the WTO.

Look, if China is so wrong, let's all support Trump, let's have this 35% tax slapped onto all that Chinese stuff that America is importing.

Yes, go on, do it. It's time for action. All talk is just a macho display of strength and aggression.

The Hague ruling is far from absurd.  And both deal with international law.  You didn't seem to respond to that part.

 

Hard to argue that China is not wrong with regards to this one.  Property that is not theirs was taken in international waters.  Right?

 

You're defending an illegal action.  Not sure why.

[craigt3365]

8 hours ago, onthesoi said:

 

What does the South China Sea have to do with US import tax?

 

What gives America jurisdiction in the South China Sea?

Note: A clue to ownership of these seas might be in the name of the seas themselves.

 

 

The recent ruling laid out ownership of the SCS.  China's 9-dash line was ruled invalid.  Easy to research this.  We live in a global society and need to abide by international laws. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine-Dash_Line

Quote

On 12 July 2016, an arbitral tribunal in the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague ruled that China has no legal basis to claim "historic rights" within its nine-dash line in a case brought by the Philippines. The tribunal judged that there was no evidence that China had historically exercised exclusive control over the waters or resources within the Nine-Dash Line. The ruling was rejected by the Chinese government.^[16]

 

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, tonbridgebrit said:

"What gives America jurisdiction in the South China Sea?". 
And the answer, is, is nothing.  Washington has never actually said "look, that island over here, it belongs to Vietnam, and that island over there, it belongs to the Philipinnes".  Washington has not got involved in who owns whatever islands, because it would be highly dangerous to do so. This is because, loads of islands dotted across planet earth belong to various countries (including America and Britain), and claiming that whatever lump of rock in the sea belongs to Vietnam because, because it's closer to Vietnam than China, well, it's dangerous to say that. There's islands that are very far away from Europe, but European countries have them.



"What does the South China Sea have to do with US import tax?".
Well, the Hague is a BS institution, and them getting involved and announcing their ruling, well, they've confirmed they are a BS institution. For those who think that China is wrong, real action needs to be taken. Forget the Hague, 35% taxes on the imported Chinese goods, that's the action to be taken. The reason why a load of people have got something against 35% taxes on the imported Chinese goods, is, is because it's Trump who is going to do it, it's not Hillary.

 

America has no jurisdiction in the SCS.  China has jurisdiction only in certain areas.  Not the entire SCS.  There are a few other nations with claims in that area. LOL  The ownership has been clearly laid out.  Though one country is now ignoring that.  A dangerous thing to do.

 

No action would be required if China obeyed international laws, right? LOL  Easy!

[Rhys]

Pssst... it was made in China... 55555

[jpinx]

China is not interested in the Hague - a toothless talking shop.  They don't pay much attention to the UN and many other international (western) bodies unless it suits their purpose.  The fact is that China is bullying it's way into territorial claims that will soon be impossible to refute -- much like the Crimea now "belonging" to Russia after the invasion that US watched without actually doing anything in accordance with their obligations.  It's a shame for the Philippines and Vietnam, but that's the way their part of the world operates.  Why anyone would believe anything the US signs as a "We'll support you" document nowadays is beyond belief --  they never actually do anything unless there's oil in it for them. 

 

 

[craigt3365]

51 minutes ago, jpinx said:

China is not interested in the Hague - a toothless talking shop.  They don't pay much attention to the UN and many other international (western) bodies unless it suits their purpose.  The fact is that China is bullying it's way into territorial claims that will soon be impossible to refute -- much like the Crimea now "belonging" to Russia after the invasion that US watched without actually doing anything in accordance with their obligations.  It's a shame for the Philippines and Vietnam, but that's the way their part of the world operates.  Why anyone would believe anything the US signs as a "We'll support you" document nowadays is beyond belief --  they never actually do anything unless there's oil in it for them.

You are aware the US produces more oil than they consume?  Or almost equal?  It's not about oil for the US.  It's about the global economy.  When Europe stalls, so does the US.  The US is a global economy.  We live in an interconnected world now. 

 

The minute the US does something to help out, many scream "warmongers!".  Danged if you do, danged if you don't.

[jpinx]

9 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

You are aware the US produces more oil than they consume?  Or almost equal?  It's not about oil for the US.  It's about the global economy.  When Europe stalls, so does the US.  The US is a global economy.  We live in an interconnected world now. 

 

The minute the US does something to help out, many scream "warmongers!".  Danged if you do, danged if you don't.

So -- why did US not act when russia invaded crimea?

 

I sympathise with the Hobson's choice, but we've been round that topic already

[craigt3365]

3 minutes ago, jpinx said:

So -- why did US not act when russia invaded crimea?

 

I sympathise with the Hobson's choice, but we've been round that topic already

Not sure Hobson's choice is the right analogy.  I don't think the US wants to get into a war with Russia.  Definitely not over Crimea.  Not worth the risks.  How about the EU acting to help out?

[jpinx]

Hobson's choice referred to the choice between doing something or not.  Wrong in both cases. 

 

So the US is not committed to assisting fellow NATO members when invaded by Russia (or others) ?  So what's the point of NATO?  The EU did act by enforcing sanctions which have recently been renewed, but they don't have the military muscle to take a on a "manual" war of boots on the ground.  If the US doesn't want to help out NATO, perhaps they should leave? 

 

I'm not being nasty here -- but one has to see the actions to know the "man".

[craigt3365]

1 minute ago, jpinx said:

Hobson's choice referred to the choice between doing something or not.  Wrong in both cases. 

 

So the US is not committed to assisting fellow NATO members when invaded by Russia (or others) ?  So what's the point of NATO?  The EU did act by enforcing sanctions which have recently been renewed, but they don't have the military muscle to take a on a "manual" war of boots on the ground.  If the US doesn't want to help out NATO, perhaps they should leave? 

 

I'm not being nasty here -- but one has to see the actions to know the "man".

We're way off topic here.  Let's get back to China and a drone.  LOL

[Usernames]

14 hours ago, onthesoi said:

 

What does the South China Sea have to do with US import tax?

 

What gives America jurisdiction in the South China Sea?

Note: A clue to ownership of these seas might be in the name of the seas themselves.

 

 

 

By that reasoning, Germany owns the Bismarck Strait and Antarctica. 

[jpinx]

9 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

We're way off topic here.  Let's get back to China and a drone.  LOL

Yes - but you have to admit that there's much wider issues involved.  Given that Ukraine is in NATO but is nowhere near the Atlantic, maybe the Philippines should join too.

 

As for the drone-sub, it's back now, complete with secretly installed recording devices !!   

[Usernames]

5 minutes ago, jpinx said:

Yes - but you have to admit that there's much wider issues involved.  Given that Ukraine is in NATO but is nowhere near the Atlantic, maybe the Philippines should join too.

 

As for the drone-sub, it's back now, complete with secretly installed recording devices !!   

 

The Ukraine is not in Nato, although John McCain, the Neocons, and the Clintons have argued it should be. 

[craigt3365]

3 minutes ago, Usernames said:

 

The Ukraine is not in Nato, although John McCain, the Neocons, and the Clintons have argued it should be. 

Ummm...I believe the people in Ukraine also wanted this.  And for good reasons.  Look what's happened.