Thai Airways soars with ‘plane’-tastic gourmet menus for all classes

[webfact]

Trump White House vows to stop China taking South China Sea islands

By David Brunnstrom and Matt Spetalnick

REUTERS

 

China's Liaoning aircraft carrier with accompanying fleet conducts a drill in an area of South China Sea in this undated photo taken December, 2016. REUTERS/Stringer

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The new U.S. administration of President Donald Trump vowed on Monday that the United States would prevent China from taking over territory in international waters in the South China Sea, something Chinese state media has warned would require Washington to "wage war."

 

The comments at a briefing from White House spokesman Sean Spicer signalled a sharp departure from years of cautious U.S. handling of China's assertive pursuit of territory claims in Asia, just days after Trump took office on Friday.

 

"The U.S. is going to make sure that we protect our interests there," Spicer said when asked if Trump agreed with comments by his Secretary of State nominee, Rex Tillerson, on Jan. 11 that China should not be allowed access to islands it has built in the contested South China Sea.

 

"It’s a question of if those islands are in fact in international waters and not part of China proper, then yeah, we’re going to make sure that we defend international territories from being taken over by one country," he said.

 

Tillerson's remarks at his Senate confirmation hearing prompted Chinese state media to say the United States would need to "wage war" to bar China's access to the islands where it has built military-length air strips and installed weapons systems.

 

Tillerson, who was expected to be confirmed as secretary of State on Monday, was asked at the hearing whether he supported a more aggressive posture towards China and said: "We’re going to have to send China a clear signal that, first, the island-building stops and, second, your access to those islands also is not going to be allowed.”

 

The former Exxon Mobil Corp chairman and chief executive did not elaborate on what might be done to deny China access to the islands.

 

But analysts said his comments, like those of Spicer, suggested the possibility of U.S. military action, or even a naval blockade, that would risk armed confrontation with China, an increasingly formidable nuclear-armed military power. It is also the world's second-largest economy and the target of accusations by Trump that it is stealing American jobs.

 

Spicer declined to elaborate when asked how the United States could enforce such a move against China, except to say: “I think, as we develop further, we’ll have more information on it.”

 

RISK OF DANGEROUS ESCALATION

 

Military experts said that while the U.S. Navy has extensive capabilities in Asia to stage blockading operations with ships, submarines and planes, any such move against China's growing naval fleets would risk dangerous escalation.

 

Aides have said that Trump plans a major naval build-up in East Asia to counter China's rise.

 

China's embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the White House remarks.

 

China's Foreign Ministry said earlier this month it could not guess what Tillerson meant by his remarks, which came after Trump questioned Washington's longstanding and highly sensitive "one-China" policy over Taiwan.

 

Washington-based South China Sea expert Mira Rapp-Hooper at the Center for a New American Security called the threats to bar China's access in the South China Sea "incredible" and said it had no basis in international law.

 

"A blockade - which is what would be required to actually bar access - is an act of war," she added.

 

"The Trump administration has begun to draw red lines in Asia that they will almost certainly not be able to uphold, but they may nonetheless be very destabilising to the relationship with China, invite crises, and convince the rest of the world that the United States is an unreliable partner."

 

Bonnie Glaser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank called Spicer's remarks "worrisome" and said the new administration was "sending confusing and conflicting messages."

 

Dean Cheng, a China expert at the conservative Heritage Foundation, said Spicer's remarks showed the South China Sea was an important issue for the Trump administration.

 

He said it was significant that neither Spicer nor Tillerson had been specific as to what actions would be taken and this left open the possibility that economic measures - instead of military steps - could be used against China and firms that carry out island building.

 

(Reporting by David Brunnstrom and Matt Spetalnick; Editing by Andrew Hay)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-01-24

[craigt3365]

100% agree with this part:

 

Quote

"The Trump administration has begun to draw red lines in Asia that they will almost certainly not be able to uphold, but they may nonetheless be very destabilising to the relationship with China, invite crises, and convince the rest of the world that the United States is an unreliable partner."

 

[optad]

The Chinese will let a lot fly but.... covet their 'territory'; be prepared. This one is not a flippant issue like "the wall".

 

Hope there is a better solution than what the Chinese have put unilaterally on the table, needs more but whatever that is , at this point, it will take some art. 

[ddavidovsky]

Trump needs to get the Russians behind him on this one.

[Credo]

I have often thought that Trump's cozy relationship with Russia is in part because he wishes to take on China and that isn't something that can be done if Russia is a wild card on the issue.    

 

The islands, however, are Philippine territory and Duterte is about the most unpredictable leader on the planet, next to Trump.   

 

There's a big difference between drawing a line in the sand and drawing one in the water.   

 

 

[Banana7]

1 hour ago, ddavidovsky said:

Trump needs to get the Russians behind him on this one.

 USA and Russia can work together to quash China and their imperial intentions to takeover the world. There are rumours that China is looking to push into Siberia. Here is the article"

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/07/03/where-do-borders-need-to-be-redrawn/why-china-will-reclaim-siberia

 

China proper is a lot smaller than their current borders, looking back in history.

[craigt3365]

1 minute ago, Banana7 said:

 USA and Russia can work together to quash China and their imperial intentions to takeover the world. There are rumours that China is looking to push into Siberia. Here is the article"

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/07/03/where-do-borders-need-to-be-redrawn/why-china-will-reclaim-siberia

 

China proper is a lot smaller than their current borders, looking back in history.

Russia is currently the more aggressive one of the two.  And probably with more military might...definitely more military experience.

 

China is grabbing islands in the SCS, but Russia is taking over territory from other sovereign nations and killing innocent civilians there.

 

China has a minor claim to the SCS.  Russia has no claim to the land grabs it's done recently.

 

Very interesting article, but I don't see how China can pull this off.  Look at the problems Russia has from the international community regarding Ukraine. 

[Credo]

The basic question is, which one is a greater danger to the US?   I would say China.   Russia is belligerent, China is devious and insidious.   

[Thakkar]

1 hour ago, ddavidovsky said:

Trump needs to get the Russians behind him on this one.

In a tri-polar world, the one super power that has their puppet instigate conflict but *doesn't* join the fight, wins by default—all without firing a shot or spending a dime.

[craigt3365]

21 minutes ago, Credo said:

The basic question is, which one is a greater danger to the US?   I would say China.   Russia is belligerent, China is devious and insidious.   

I'd vote for Russia being the greater danger.  Run by only one man, Putin.  China has a huge government apparatus and I don't believe Jinping can do whatever he wants without at least some support from others around him.  I may be wrong about that though! LOL

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_People's_Republic_of_China

Quote

The President of the People's Republic of China is the head of state of the People's Republic of China (PRC). Under the constitution, the presidency is a largely ceremonial office with limited powers.^[1] However, since 1993, as a matter of convention, the presidency has been held simultaneously by the General Secretary of the Communist Party of China. The office is officially regarded as an institution of the state rather than an administrative post; theoretically, the President serves at the pleasure of the National People's Congress, the legislature, and is not legally vested to take executive action on its own prerogative.^[2] The current President is Xi Jinping, who took office in March 2013.

 

[Credo]

2 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

I'd vote for Russia being the greater danger.  Run by only one man, Putin.  China has a huge government apparatus and I don't believe Jinping can do whatever he wants without at least some support from others around him.  I may be wrong about that though! LOL

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_People's_Republic_of_China

 

I base my assumption on who I think is the greater threat to the US and I don't see Russia being able to get and hold the large land grabs that they have had in the past.   Eastern Europeans (and Europeans in general) have had a taste of freedom and whatever he gains, he will have a full time job holding it.   

 

China knows and understands the Asian mentality.   They have their people firmly under the control of the gov't and whatever information anyone gets is gov't sanctioned.   The neighbors are countries that are used to military rule and the population has by and large acquiesced to keeping quiet.   China will see no uprisings.   Russia will.

 

Of course, if I were Estonia, Ukrainian or any of the former Soviet Republics, I would feel very differently, but the shenanigans in that part of the world will not have a profound impact on the US unless the US decides it wants to get involved.

 

That said, you may be right.  Neither of them are to be taken lightly and neither is trustworthy.   Personally, I wouldn't want to get between a Russian and his vodka or a Chinese and his money.   

[louse1953]

Too late,they are already there.Your move Trickstar.

[boomerangutang]

       An odd factor is the Fil prez, Duterte.  He sounds like he's a patriot and probably wants his country to keep their shoals and islands.  Yet, his actions are odd.  He's been chummying up with China recently.   If the US chooses to make a strong stand for Fil sovereignty, Duterte has to be solidly alongside.  The Fil people are in favor of a strong stance (as am I, an American), but Duterte is a wild card.

 

         In contrast, the VN, Indonesians and Malaysians are unflinching in standing up for their respective sovereign territory.  Same for Taiwan in its claim for one of the S.China islands.  I think Duterte is somewhat mentally ill.  What other mayor of a town (17 yrs in Mindanao) would go around at night on a motorcycle and shoot people dead with a gun?

 

As for Russia;  They're going to stand by and watch - probably grinning.  It's also an opportunity for Russia and others, to see how advanced and effective their adversaries' munitions/satellites are.   It will also be grand for weapons manufacturers - to showcase their wares.

 

 

Edited January 24, 2017 by boomerangutang

[mjef]

So the WW III is not gonna be started by Russia or Iran after all!

[smedly]

56 minutes ago, Credo said:

The basic question is, which one is a greater danger to the US?   I would say China.   Russia is belligerent, China is devious and insidious.   

To me China is like Germany was from 1910- 1942, they are going to bully their way into a war and who is going to stop them, the USA keeping Russia on side is a good tactic, then you have Japan, S.Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, the unknowns would be - Thailand - Philipines - and the rest 

[timewilltell]

1 hour ago, Credo said:

The basic question is, which one is a greater danger to the US?   I would say China.   Russia is belligerent, China is devious and insidious.   

Yeah well, so far as China goes, that sort of defines a lot of Asian countries. Their culture has used deception, cheating and corruption and they are really not comfortable with any straightforwardness as it takes away their Trump cards.

Edited January 24, 2017 by timewilltell

[boomerangutang]

         One difference between, for example, Indonesia and the Philippines is:   When Chinese fishing ships (which are always guarded by Chinese navy) go near Indonesian territory, the Indonesians immediately challenge them strongly.   In contrast, the Fil navy (admittedly weak) doesn't lift a finger to challenge Chinese anything - not even island building off the Fil coast.

[hhinhh]

1 hour ago, Banana7 said:

 USA and Russia can work together to quash China and their imperial intentions to takeover the world. There are rumours that China is looking to push into Siberia. Here is the article"

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/07/03/where-do-borders-need-to-be-redrawn/why-china-will-reclaim-siberia

 

China proper is a lot smaller than their current borders, looking back in history.

I am sorry to say that people in the US have such a minor knowledge of what is going on in the rest od the world. Only there such articles can be published and I am surprised that a reputable paper like The New York Times is willing to issue it.

1. Russia does not have any part of its country as a giveaway. 2. China would need to take it by military actions. That would be a very dangerous adventure risking an atomic war and be almost impossible keeping in mind the huge area of Siberia. 3. China's domestic strategy is a good economic growth to keep the population satisfied and get continues for the communist party. Such an adventure would cause a strong economic depression and could be the end of the power of the communist party.

Keeping these points in mind such intentions will never happen. China will rather annoy weaker countries in SEA and buy the raw materials on the market, the price there is lower than sparking a war with Russia.

[Enoon]

36 minutes ago, timewilltell said:

Yeah well, so far as China goes, that sort of defines a lot of Asian countries. Their culture has used deception, cheating and corruption and they are really not comfortable with any straightforwardness as it takes away their Trump cards.

 

"For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill."

 

Sun Tzu, "The Art of War".

 

[craigt3365]

2 minutes ago, hhinhh said:

I am sorry to say that people in the US have such a minor knowledge of what is going on in the rest od the world. Only there such articles can be published and I am surprised that a reputable paper like The New York Times is willing to issue it.

 

1. Russia does not have any part of its country as a giveaway. 2. China would need to take it by military actions. That would be a very dangerous adventure risking an atomic war and be almost impossible keeping in mind the huge area of Siberia. 3. China's domestic strategy is a good economic growth to keep the population satisfied and get continues for the communist party. Such an adventure would cause a strong economic depression and could be the end of the power of the communist party.

 

Keeping these points in mind such intentions will never happen. China will rather annoy weaker countries in SEA and buy the raw materials on the market, the price there is lower than sparking a war with Russia.

 

Those in power in the US have an excellent knowledge of what's going on in the rest of the world.  They do have ambassadors and representatives in pretty much every country globally.  This gives them an excellent perspective as these people are interacting with local officials pretty much every day. 

 

With regards to newspaper articles, well, I guess the knowledge depends on the writer???

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, Credo said:

 

 

That said, you may be right.  Neither of them are to be taken lightly and neither is trustworthy.   Personally, I wouldn't want to get between a Russian and his vodka or a Chinese and his money.   

And I'd rather not share a forum with a bigot and his bigotry. But sometimes there's nothing you can do about it.

[JHolmesJr]

54 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

       An odd factor is the Fil prez, Duterte.  He sounds like he's a patriot and probably wants his country to keep their shoals and islands.  Yet, his actions are odd.  He's been chummying up with China recently.  

 

Just a bit of posturing to see if he can get a better deal out of the USA.

[Khon Kaen Dave]

I think that North Korea will be watching this with great interest.

[ilostmypassword]

Just now, JHolmesJr said:

 

Just a bit of posturing to see if he can get a better deal out of the USA.

It's clear you haven't bothered to look up Duterte's life. He has a long history of anti-Americanism.

[geriatrickid]

3 hours ago, ddavidovsky said:

Trump needs to get the Russians behind him on this one.

Oh yes, because he wants to get stabbed in the back.

 

Remember Poland? The Russians cut a treaty with their best friends the nazis and invaded Poland.

Remember the Russian promises on the  Baltic states? No liberation  wfor them?

Remember the  Iron Curtain and the enslavement of eastern Europe? Putin the KGB  colnel wants to bring back the  diabolical stalinist regime.

 

 

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, geriatrickid said:

Oh yes, because he wants to get stabbed in the back.

 

Remember Poland? The Russians cut a treaty with their best friends the nazis and invaded Poland.

Remember the Russian promises on the  Baltic states? No liberation  wfor them?

Remember the  Iron Curtain and the enslavement of eastern Europe? Putin the KGB  colnel wants to bring back the  diabolical stalinist regime.

 

 

How can you say that about a nation whose citizens have given Trump so much money? We owe them. Or, at least, he does.

[TheFishman1]

Good deal

[maewang99]

war it is.  fine with me. 

 

now let me tell you where to send my Social Security checks.....

[billd766]

26 minutes ago, maewang99 said:

war it is.  fine with me. 

 

now let me tell you where to send my Social Security checks.....

 

War is NEVER fine.

 

I have never ceased to be amazed at the willingness of so many political leaders who are so happy to commit their countries to a senseless pointless, war which will involve a large number of military young men and women ordered to go out and kill their opposite numbers from another country.

 

If innocent men, women and children become killed or injured, that is sad, but it doesn't really matter as they were on the wrong side anyway.

 

What I would personally like to see is the leaders and their parliaments be forced into an arena with their wives and families and forced to fight the "enemy" to death with the rest of the world  watching on live TV.

 

That would quickly put an end to wars if they have to go out and do it themselves.

Edited January 24, 2017 by billd766

[boomerangutang]

      With a human population bursting towards 7 billion....  Food for thought: if every person on the planet represented 2 years, together we would = the age of the universe.

 

       If you put a few rats in a finite space and gave then water and bread, guess what would happen in a few months:  Yup, they'd be eating each other.  Another angle:  look at the history of Rapanui (Easter Island) before the white man showed up.  Whereas earlier, the island had been like paradise, overpopulation rendered the land and surrounding seas barren.  No one greeted the white men when they arrived on their sailing ship. The few surviving natives were huddled in a little mud cave. 

 

      The S.China sea debacle is just one result of human voraciousness.  Other facets are disease, mass migrations, terrorist bombings, wars, chemicals/pollution, dearth of effective antibiotics.  Note: an elder woman in Nevada just died of an infection.  The doctors tried all the 18 strongest antibiotics, and none worked.  She died of septic poisoning.   It's not an isolated incidence, but interesting because she was rich and could afford the very best medical treatment.

 

         Today, the largest populated country in the world is coveting a few terra-formed shoals off the Fil coast, plus Tibet, and Taiwan, and parts of India.  Tomorrow it will venture further afield.  And that's just China.  India will soon be the most populous country.  Both countries are killing their daughters, just before and just after they're born.   Migrants from N. Africa, the M.East and Burma are willing to take a 50/50 risk of their lives to try and find halfway decent places to make more babies. Troubled times ahead.