China builds new military facilities on South China Sea islands - think tank

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, tonbridgebrit said:

You've put up that post about the Philippines. That post is from last year. Okay, here's a more recent post, from the same newspaper.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/13/duterte-cancels-visit-to-disputed-south-china-sea-island-after-warning-from-beijing

Basically, Duterte is 'well in' with Beijing.  There isn't going to be a fight between China and the Philipinnes.

So you are saying China hasn't take territory that doesn't belong to them?  They've not destroyed pristine reefs?  They've not built military bases on them?  That's what my article was referencing.  It's not just up to the PI, many other nations have a stake in this.

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, tonbridgebrit said:

A war between China and Indonesia will be about the present disputed bits of the South China Sea. Now, if China invades Indonesia, which they have no intention of doing, then yes, the States and Oz should trigger off World War Three by attacking China. 

Are you Chinese?  Taking territory that doesn't belong to them is an invasion! LOL  They've already done this.  With many different countries.

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

So you are saying China hasn't take territory that doesn't belong to them?  They've not destroyed pristine reefs?  They've not built military bases on them?  That's what my article was referencing.  It's not just up to the PI, many other nations have a stake in this.

 

The crux of what he pushes is a divide-and-conquer attitude. Present things as being a disparate series of specific country issues. This allows ignoring the PRC's general conduct, while using different sub-issues to deflect and obfuscate any such references. The "proof" is always that this or that is what a specific involved country does, without any context. 

 

[craigt3365]

2 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

The crux of what he pushes is a divide-and-conquer attitude. Present things as being a disparate series of specific country issues. This allows ignoring the PRC's general conduct, while using different sub-issues to deflect and obfuscate any such references. The "proof" is always that this or that is what a specific involved country does, without any context. 

 

It would be interesting to hear his comments if you replaced USA with China.  LOL

[Dumbastheycome]

11 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Seriously?  Taking territory that isn't theirs, destroying pristine atolls and building military bases on them.  Wow...I'd call that aggression.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/02/china-blocking-access-disputed-south-china-sea-atoll-philippines

 

https://www.ft.com/content/32abaea8-0924-11e7-97d1-5e720a26771b?mhq5j=e1

 

Its only a matter of time before something serious happens.

Matter of  time?  Quite  likely. But  because real  diplomacy  has  been forsaken  for the  sake  of prolonging the economic stumbling and  demise  in the  west and  the  east making  good  observation  of that have  reacted  defensively.

On the  pretext  of interpreting  that as an aggressive threat rather  than rational  defense it is  more  likely  that the  west  will incite  until such  time as a  serious  something  will  happen.

The  outcome  will not  satisfy  the  intent. More likely  it  will  hasten the opposite.

[craigt3365]

8 minutes ago, Dumbastheycome said:

Matter of  time?  Quite  likely. But  because real  diplomacy  has  been forsaken  for the  sake  of prolonging the economic stumbling and  demise  in the  west and  the  east making  good  observation  of that have  reacted  defensively.

On the  pretext  of interpreting  that as an aggressive threat rather  than rational  defense it is  more  likely  that the  west  will incite  until such  time as a  serious  something  will  happen.

The  outcome  will not  satisfy  the  intent. More likely  it  will  hasten the opposite.

Demise in the West?  Really?  Things are going pretty well.  Hardly a demise.  China has some serious issues ahead of them.  I think they'll overcome them, but they are serious.

 

Net: China took territory from other countries.  No way to argue that any other way.  Hopefully, you can see that.

[Dumbastheycome]

55 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Demise in the West?  Really?  Things are going pretty well.  Hardly a demise.  China has some serious issues ahead of them.  I think they'll overcome them, but they are serious.

 

Net: China took territory from other countries.  No way to argue that any other way.  Hopefully, you can see that.

Specify  which   country  lost  territory  to  China?

The   global  economy  is  being   maintained  by multiple   bandaids. The  west  has more  of  them now  and  more  to  come  before  too long. At that  time  the  east  will  have to  apply a  few of its  own but  will  probably  heal   fastest.

I  see  well  because  I  constantly  remove  illusion  from  my  glasses.

I  would  add  that as a  dependent  on income  from the  status   quo  of  the   global economy I  do  not  relish  the  inevitable   mayhem  that   will  definitely   ensue. 

Then  again   I  Do  have  relatives  in both the  USA  and   China. If  only  I   could  rummage   up  a  Russian  cousin!   lmao !

[craigt3365]

15 minutes ago, Dumbastheycome said:

Specify  which   country  lost  territory  to  China?

The   global  economy  is  being   maintained  by multiple   bandaids. The  west  has more  of  them now  and  more  to  come  before  too long. At that  time  the  east  will  have to  apply a  few of its  own but  will  probably  heal   fastest.

I  see  well  because  I  constantly  remove  illusion  from  my  glasses.

I  would  add  that as a  dependent  on income  from the  status   quo  of  the   global economy I  do  not  relish  the  inevitable   mayhem  that   will  definitely   ensue. 

Then  again   I  Do  have  relatives  in both the  USA  and   China. If  only  I   could  rummage   up  a  Russian  cousin!   lmao !

Easy to research that. There's a bunch of countries that have conflicts with China. 

 

The rest isn't on topic. Just a rant.

[craigt3365]

7 hours ago, Dumbastheycome said:

Avoidance. Deflection.  No  debate. No  humour.  Yank 

Derogatory posts are against forum rules. If you can't post properly, please don't.  And no personal attacks.

 

No avoidance.  Just saying if you want to find out about China's territorial incursions, you can find that out on your own.  But I'll help you out, so here are their incursions into other countries.

 

https://chinadailymail.com/2013/12/01/china-claims-territories-of-23-countries-but-only-has-borders-with-14/

 

Quote

 

China claims territories of 23 countries, even though it only has borders with 14

The total area of China’s claims on other countries exceeds the size of modern China itself, but Beijing refuses to budge on its claims.

 

Many are based on unsubstantiated (outside China) and unprecedented “historical precedents” dating back centuries.

 

And while China only has land borders with 14 countries, it is claiming territory from at least 23 individual nations.

 

 

 

[tonbridgebrit]

On 17/07/2017 at 11:30 AM, craigt3365 said:

How about this? Give Vietnam the power, weapons and support to fight China toe to toe?  Kinda one side otherwise, don't you agree?

 

China is being a bully.  Ignoring court rulings, etc.  Sad you can't see this.

Give Vietnam weapons to fight China ?  No, that would be a ridiculous thing to do.

Washington's track record in backing whatever groups in whatever fight is not that great. How often do you see, the guys that Washington supported end up creating new (or worse) problems later on ? Also, do realise, America sells  weapons to Far East places like Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. The weapons are not subsidized by US tax-payers. Vietnam doesn't have the cash needed to buy the stuff that is, supposedly, the latest stuff in war.  Also, lots of people in Washington simply don't want to export arms to Vietnam, they still remember that the Vietcong were against the USA.       

And very important, is, is that Trump is prez.  Okay, what if Hillary was POTUS ?  In that case, if Hillary today, sends an aircraft carrier to the Paracel Islands, well, the media would call that "strong and firm diplomacy". But it's Donald Trump in power, the media don't like Trump. That's why, the media will call it "reckless and dangerous action". My own view, is, is that whether it's Hillary or Trump in power, it's still a dangerous and reckless move. Notice how lots of people were against Trump sending that carrier towards North Korea, yes, the impact of the media is huge.

And if the media doesn't support Trump in whatever action, then, the general public won't support him. And the media not supporting a US carrier sailing to the Paracel Islands, well, they certainly won't support arming and backing Vietnam in whatever conflict.


You want to talk about China being a bully, and ignoring court rulings. Duterte is 'in' with Beijing, it's silly to try and make the case for the Philipinnes being bullied by China. You mentioned the word 'sad'. I don't wish to use that word, I'ill simply say that  people who cheer on supporting military action by anybody against China are being un-real and dangerous. Can you really imagine Washington selling/giving weapons to Duterte, to fight against China ?  Or US ships alongside Philipino ships, fghting against China ? It isn't going to happen.  And it also isn't going to happen with Vietnam.

[tonbridgebrit]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-37700409

The above is a link about Duterte's visit to Beijing. Let's not live in a pretend world where the Philipinnes is against China.

And here's a quote from the article.   "Mr Duterte arrived on Tuesday for a four-day trip expected to boost trade and mend ties between the nations. Both sides were ready to move on from a bitter row over islands in the South China Sea, a top Chinese official said. The visit also shows Mr Duterte's efforts to engage China as he moves away from the US, a long-time ally."

Edited July 19, 2017 by tonbridgebrit

[Morch]

51 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Give Vietnam weapons to fight China ?  No, that would be a ridiculous thing to do.

Washington's track record in backing whatever groups in whatever fight is not that great. How often do you see, the guys that Washington supported end up creating new (or worse) problems later on ? Also, do realise, America sells  weapons to Far East places like Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. The weapons are not subsidized by US tax-payers. Vietnam doesn't have the cash needed to buy the stuff that is, supposedly, the latest stuff in war.  Also, lots of people in Washington simply don't want to export arms to Vietnam, they still remember that the Vietcong were against the USA.       

And very important, is, is that Trump is prez.  Okay, what if Hillary was POTUS ?  In that case, if Hillary today, sends an aircraft carrier to the Paracel Islands, well, the media would call that "strong and firm diplomacy". But it's Donald Trump in power, the media don't like Trump. That's why, the media will call it "reckless and dangerous action". My own view, is, is that whether it's Hillary or Trump in power, it's still a dangerous and reckless move. Notice how lots of people were against Trump sending that carrier towards North Korea, yes, the impact of the media is huge.

And if the media doesn't support Trump in whatever action, then, the general public won't support him. And the media not supporting a US carrier sailing to the Paracel Islands, well, they certainly won't support arming and backing Vietnam in whatever conflict.


You want to talk about China being a bully, and ignoring court rulings. Duterte is 'in' with Beijing, it's silly to try and make the case for the Philipinnes being bullied by China. You mentioned the word 'sad'. I don't wish to use that word, I'ill simply say that  people who cheer on supporting military action by anybody against China are being un-real and dangerous. Can you really imagine Washington selling/giving weapons to Duterte, to fight against China ?  Or US ships alongside Philipino ships, fghting against China ? It isn't going to happen.  And it also isn't going to happen with Vietnam.

 

So your view is that if the US does something, it's dangerous and reckless, whereas if the PRC does anything, that's quite alright.

[Morch]

38 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-37700409

The above is a link about Duterte's visit to Beijing. Let's not live in a pretend world where the Philipinnes is against China.

And here's a quote from the article.   "Mr Duterte arrived on Tuesday for a four-day trip expected to boost trade and mend ties between the nations. Both sides were ready to move on from a bitter row over islands in the South China Sea, a top Chinese official said. The visit also shows Mr Duterte's efforts to engage China as he moves away from the US, a long-time ally."

 

Intimidation, coercion, realpolitik. Doubt anyone but yourself insists on taking things at face value (when it suits).

[craigt3365]

51 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-37700409

The above is a link about Duterte's visit to Beijing. Let's not live in a pretend world where the Philipinnes is against China.

And here's a quote from the article.   "Mr Duterte arrived on Tuesday for a four-day trip expected to boost trade and mend ties between the nations. Both sides were ready to move on from a bitter row over islands in the South China Sea, a top Chinese official said. The visit also shows Mr Duterte's efforts to engage China as he moves away from the US, a long-time ally."

Yes, that fine upstanding president of the Philippines.  You're using him as a reference?  The one who's killed thousands of innocent people.  Seriously? Too funny.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies removed.  

[craigt3365]

Well, the peace loving and law abiding Chinese are at it again.  Hope they don't cause another crash like they did a few years ago.

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/24/politics/chinese-jet-intercept-us-navy-plane/index.html

 

Quote

 

Chinese fighter jet performed 'unsafe' intercept of US Navy plane

A Chinese fighter jet performed an "unsafe" intercept of a US plane Sunday while it was flying in international airspace over the East China Sea, according to a Pentagon spokesman, the latest in a series of similar encounters in the region.

The Chinese J-10 fighter jet was armed and came as close as 300 feet in front of the US EP-3 reconnaissance plane, causing the Navy aircraft to take "evasive action," a US defense official told CNN.

The "EP-3, flying in international airspace in the East China Sea, was intercepted by two Chinese J-10s," US Navy Capt. Jeff Davis told reporters Monday at the Pentagon.

 

Seems they don't understand, or don't care about, international laws. LOL

 

[Scott]

A post commenting on moderation has been removed.  

 

10) Do not discuss moderation publicly in the open forum; this includes individual actions, and specific or general policies and issues. You may send a PM to a moderator to discuss individual actions or email support (at) thaivisa.com to discuss moderation policy.  You will not block contact with moderators or administrators. Doing so will result in suspension.