US says Chinese warship seized Navy underwater drone

[Usernames]

Just now, craigt3365 said:

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

 

Ask how many Americans and other members of Nato want it. 

[jpinx]

4 minutes ago, Usernames said:

 

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

I stand corrected, but they certainly have been half-in, half-out for a number of years now.  

 

Regardless - I still think the Phils and Vietnam could join NATO.  

[jpinx]

Just now, Usernames said:

 

Ask how many Americans and other members of Nato want it. 

Looks like the European contingent of NATO want Ukraine in, but US not.....

[Usernames]

Just now, jpinx said:

I stand corrected, but they certainly have been half-in, half-out for a number of years now.  

 

Regardless - I still think the Phils and Vietnam could join NATO.  

 

That used to be called Seato.

[craigt3365]

1 minute ago, Usernames said:

 

Ask how many Americans and other members of Nato want it. 

Most American's know very little about Ukraine.  We're off topic here.

[jpinx]

2 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Most American's know very little about Ukraine.  We're off topic here.

Indeed -- but it does demonstrate that the issue has wide-reaching connotations.  ASEAN includes the US, Phils, China etc, but seems to be a very quiet little club.  I suppose there are veto rights in there which would stop anything actually "happening".  At least Nato can make decisions (sometimes).  ok ok ok back on topic before I get a holiday

 

The drone sub was commercial - you can buy one for about $150k, so the chinese were just poking the US in the eye about exactly whose playground the South China Sea actually is.   Whether the US wants to make something of it depends on so many things, and the timing (in-between presidents) is a prime example of the opportunism of the Chinese.  Would the US really risk the national debt as well as a potential naval confrontation?   Lots of people appear to wish the US would cruise in there with a battle group. 

[craigt3365]

In an economic battle with China, they'd come out the loser.  Their economy is not doing good and the population is starting to revolt.  Well, as much as they can.  The leaders there are very afraid of another revolution.  The US would weather the storm, but it'd hurt.  Both sides know this, so hopefully, calmer heads will figure out a way to deal with this.  Sad to say one country needs to carry a big stick so the bullies pay attention.

[tonbridgebrit]

5 hours 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. 

 

 

Okay, you want to call the Hague a toothless talking shop. I prefer to call it a BS institution.

You're saying that China is bullying it's way into territorial claims, and that they ignore international (Western) bodies. How about this. China did not formally declare ownership of whatever islands during the 1800s, when Britain and France turned up in the Far East. Had China of formally declared ownership of the islands to Britain and France at the time, well, Britain and France would have recognised it.

Obviously, when Britain and France first turned up in the Far East, they didn't actually question any of China's borders (borders with Russia, Vietnam, Mongolia, etc). It would have been absurd. A bit like turning up in Africa, and telling one tribe that they're not entitled to some of the land that they've got.


So, declare ownership AFTER Britain and France have turned up, that's called "theft". Declare ownership BEFORE Britain and France turn up, well, that land is rightfuly yours.


You also say that it is a shame for the Philipinnes. Well, Duterte is taking the Philipinnes closer to China. What we're seeing in the Philipinnes is an action replay of what's happened in Thailand. As in, Thailand has spent years drifting towards China.

I end my post by repeating, Washington is not saying that those islands don't belong to China. Washington is staying away from the issue of who actually owns those islands. This is happening because certain countries (Britain, France, America, etc) have islands or bits of land that are very far away from them. It's ridiculous to say that China does NOT own whatever lump of rock in the South China Sea, and at the same time, to own an island in the middle of the Indian Ocean, a place very far away from Europe.

I call the Hague a BS institution, because it's done this ruling regarding islands in the South China Sea. But it won't use the same principle regarding numerous lumps of rock dotted across planet earth. Who is right ?   Is Washington and China right, or is the Hague right ?  I personally think the Hague should be disbanded, and then re-created.

 

 

[jpinx]

12 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

In an economic battle with China, they'd come out the loser.  Their economy is not doing good and the population is starting to revolt.  Well, as much as they can.  The leaders there are very afraid of another revolution.  The US would weather the storm, but it'd hurt.  Both sides know this, so hopefully, calmer heads will figure out a way to deal with this.  Sad to say one country needs to carry a big stick so the bullies pay attention.

In the SE Asia playground the big stick is Chinese.   With China owning such a huge proportion of the US national debt, it makes the outcome of a financial war much less clear-cut.  Certainly the Chinese economy wobbles quite a lot, but then - it always has.  This is nothing new.  What is new is how much of the US debt has been bought up by the Chinese over the last ten years or so.  They don't do something like that without very good reason, and probably a plan in the background ! 

[jpinx]

3 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Okay, you want to call the Hague a toothless talking shop. I prefer to call it a BS institution.

You're saying that China is bullying it's way into territorial claims, and that they ignore international (Western) bodies. How about this. China did not formally declare ownership of whatever islands during the 1800s, when Britain and France turned up in the Far East. Had China of formally declared ownership of the islands to Britain and France at the time, well, Britain and France would have recognised it.

Obviously, when Britain and France first turned up in the Far East, they didn't actually question any of China's borders (borders with Russia, Vietnam, Mongolia, etc). It would have been absurd. A bit like turning up in Africa, and telling one tribe that they're not entitled to some of the land that they've got.


So, declare ownership AFTER Britain and France have turned up, that's called "theft". Declare ownership BEFORE Britain and France turn up, well, that land is rightfuly yours.


You also say that it is a shame for the Philipinnes. Well, Duterte is taking the Philipinnes closer to China. What we're seeing in the Philipinnes is an action replay of what's happened in Thailand. As in, Thailand has spent years drifting towards China.

I end my post by repeating, Washington is not saying that those islands don't belong to China. Washington is staying away from the issue of who actually owns those islands. This is happening because certain countries (Britain, France, America, etc) have islands or bits of land that are very far away from them. It's ridiculous to say that China does NOT own whatever lump of rock in the South China Sea, and at the same time, to own an island in the middle of the Indian Ocean, a place very far away from Europe.

I call the Hague a BS institution, because it's done this ruling regarding islands in the South China Sea. But it won't use the same principle regarding numerous lumps of rock dotted across planet earth. Who is right ?   Is Washington and China right, or is the Hague right ?  I personally think the Hague should be disbanded, and then re-created.

 

 

Let's stick to the period since 1945, otherwise you will find that most of USA western seaboard is Chinese too !

Where the Pilippines is going these days is an open question. 

The Falklands are a good example of a self-determining community who are half a world away from UK, but consistently vote to remain part of the UK.  I'm sure there are other examples, but these islands in question now did not even exist until the Chinese built them.  How can that be ignored?

 

[tonbridgebrit]

26 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

In an economic battle with China, they'd come out the loser.  Their economy is not doing good and the population is starting to revolt.  Well, as much as they can.  The leaders there are very afraid of another revolution.  The US would weather the storm, but it'd hurt.  Both sides know this, so hopefully, calmer heads will figure out a way to deal with this.  Sad to say one country needs to carry a big stick so the bullies pay attention.

And indeed,  Washington should go for it. War is about "I can hurt you more than you can hurt me, that's why I'm fighting this war".

Do it, let's support Trump with this 35% tax on the Chinese imports. No more silly macho displays of military strength by sending warships to sail close to the Chinese man-made islands. Macho displays achieve nothing. They're good for the media, good for certain Thai Visa posters, people can go on and on about how China is being angered by the ships sailing pretty close to the Chinese dots. But they achieve nothing.

It's time for action. Do a partial blockage of the Chinese goods entering into America. Go and destroy China's manufacturing sector. Got to hit them, and hit them hard.

[tonbridgebrit]

7 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

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!

 

7 minutes ago, jpinx said:

Let's stick to the period since 1945, otherwise you will find that most of USA western seaboard is Chinese too !

Where the Pilippines is going these days is an open question. 

The Falklands are a good example of a self-determining community who are half a world away from UK, but consistently vote to remain part of the UK.  I'm sure there are other examples, but these islands in question now did not even exist until the Chinese built them.  How can that be ignored?

 

Okay, on the day that Washington announces that it is in agreement with the Hague ruling, Washington announces that the islands in the South China Sea DO NOT belong to China,  on that day, I will personally declare that China must pack it's bags, and get out of those islands.

I'm waiting for that day. It will never happen. Why ? Please read my previous post.  

 

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Okay, you want to call the Hague a toothless talking shop. I prefer to call it a BS institution.

You're saying that China is bullying it's way into territorial claims, and that they ignore international (Western) bodies. How about this. China did not formally declare ownership of whatever islands during the 1800s, when Britain and France turned up in the Far East. Had China of formally declared ownership of the islands to Britain and France at the time, well, Britain and France would have recognised it.

Obviously, when Britain and France first turned up in the Far East, they didn't actually question any of China's borders (borders with Russia, Vietnam, Mongolia, etc). It would have been absurd. A bit like turning up in Africa, and telling one tribe that they're not entitled to some of the land that they've got.


So, declare ownership AFTER Britain and France have turned up, that's called "theft". Declare ownership BEFORE Britain and France turn up, well, that land is rightfuly yours.


You also say that it is a shame for the Philipinnes. Well, Duterte is taking the Philipinnes closer to China. What we're seeing in the Philipinnes is an action replay of what's happened in Thailand. As in, Thailand has spent years drifting towards China.

I end my post by repeating, Washington is not saying that those islands don't belong to China. Washington is staying away from the issue of who actually owns those islands. This is happening because certain countries (Britain, France, America, etc) have islands or bits of land that are very far away from them. It's ridiculous to say that China does NOT own whatever lump of rock in the South China Sea, and at the same time, to own an island in the middle of the Indian Ocean, a place very far away from Europe.

I call the Hague a BS institution, because it's done this ruling regarding islands in the South China Sea. But it won't use the same principle regarding numerous lumps of rock dotted across planet earth. Who is right ?   Is Washington and China right, or is the Hague right ?  I personally think the Hague should be disbanded, and then re-created.

 

 

International waters are very well defined.  The recent ruling confirmed that.  China just prefers to ignore it.  As do many other nations.  Frankly, I wouldn't care if they didn't make such an ecological disaster.  Horrible what they did.

 

Washington is saying to respect freedom of navigation. Which the Chinese are ignoring.  Militarizing these islands isn't good.  Not sure how anybody could support that.  Especially as it's not theirs.  Never has been.  Read up on this.  It's very well defined.  And respected by many nations.

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, jpinx said:

In the SE Asia playground the big stick is Chinese.   With China owning such a huge proportion of the US national debt, it makes the outcome of a financial war much less clear-cut.  Certainly the Chinese economy wobbles quite a lot, but then - it always has.  This is nothing new.  What is new is how much of the US debt has been bought up by the Chinese over the last ten years or so.  They don't do something like that without very good reason, and probably a plan in the background ! 

China is actually selling off US debt at a dramatic pace.

 

http://money.cnn.com/2016/12/16/investing/china-japan-us-debt-treasuries/index.html

 

Quote

 

China is no longer the biggest foreign holder of U.S. debt

Beijing has been dumping U.S. government debt to prop up its currency. China uses the dollars it gets from selling U.S. Treasuries to buy the yuan, which has sunk to an 8-year low as the world's second largest economy slows.

 

China's huge holdings of U.S. debt fell to $1.12 trillion at the end of October, their lowest level in more than six years, according to U.S. Treasury Department data. Japan held $1.13 trillion.

 

 

 

[jpinx]

1 minute ago, craigt3365 said:

China is actually selling off US debt at a dramatic pace.

 

http://money.cnn.com/2016/12/16/investing/china-japan-us-debt-treasuries/index.html

 

 

 

Cool -- so who owns the US's ass?  Japan and China between them it seems, and both have multiple conflicts with each other and Russia, etc about islands --   both natural and man-made.  This is always going to be "interesting".  Anyone got a Philly Lawyers phone number. ?  :)

[tonbridgebrit]

2 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

International waters are very well defined.  The recent ruling confirmed that.  China just prefers to ignore it.  As do many other nations.  Frankly, I wouldn't care if they didn't make such an ecological disaster.  Horrible what they did.

 

Washington is saying to respect freedom of navigation. Which the Chinese are ignoring.  Militarizing these islands isn't good.  Not sure how anybody could support that.  Especially as it's not theirs.  Never has been.  Read up on this.  It's very well defined.  And respected by many nations.

Craigt3365, you're simply refusing to tackle the issue of how "Washington has never got involved on the issue of who actually owns the islands in the South China Sea".

You remember when Publicus was here. He mentoned the issue on several occassions. As in , America does not get involved in the issue of who owns whatever islands.

So, the islands or bits of sea that are nearer the Philipinnes, they belong to the Philipinnes ? Do you agree that the Philipinnes is becoming an action replay of Thailand ?  As in, drifting towards China with Duterte in charge ?



Freedom of navigation ?  Has a single ship, from Japan or South Korea (or any other country) been restricted or stopped by China in the South China Sea ? If a single ship is stopped or restricted, I will cheer on Washington as it fires a missile to sink whatever Chinese military ship. And if China fires missiles back, I will cheer on Washington as it uses 2% of it's firepower to destroy the bulk of the Chinese navy and airforce.  That's never going to happen though, why on earth would China stop whatever ships and get it's own ships sunk ? China does know, that it's navy is certainly no match for America's navy.

I ask again, please focus on WHY it is that "Washington has never got involved on the issue of who actually owns the islands in the South China Sea".

 

 

 

[tonbridgebrit]

2 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

China is actually selling off US debt at a dramatic pace.

 

http://money.cnn.com/2016/12/16/investing/china-japan-us-debt-treasuries/index.html

 

 

 

"China is no longer the biggest foreign holder of U.S. debt

Beijing has been dumping U.S. government debt to prop up its currency. China uses the dollars it gets from selling U.S. Treasuries to buy the yuan, which has sunk to an 8-year low as the world's second largest economy slows."

Come on Washington, CNN is telling us that China has been financially weakened. Do it. Vote with Trump to impose 35% tax on the Chinese imports. Destroy China's manufacturing sector. Make China beg for mercy. Sailing military ships near those islands won't make the Chinese pack their bags and leave. But destroying their manufacturing sector, and causing their society to break down and collapse, that will send them packing.

 

[craigt3365]

I've not replied because I'm against any use of force.  And prefer a diplomatic approach.  One that works for both sides.  That takes time and cool heads.  China isn't making this easy, but we don't need to throw gas on the fire.  Hopefully, it'll get sorted out.  The one with the biggest stake in this, the PI, seems to have backed down.  Hard for the US to go after this when the local players aren't interested.  It wasn't brought up at ASEAN.

[maewang99]

Use of force? and Treasury holdings? 

China...... and India... are nuclear powers.  the China thing is about factory jobs many of which won't exist much longer.. anywhere... even in Vietnam. the other is why Al Gore kept his mouth shut at Trump Tower on Dec 6, 2016 because there was no point to opening it anymore.

but *****both***** stories are about knuckleheads that should be working on the science stuff that can solve our problems... not on factory jobs that won't exist much longer.