South China Sea Forum

[TaiShang]

Return the seaglide to US is the right thing to do.
Try to learn how to say "Sorry" as well.

No. No sorry. Did you say sorry when you burnt down German and Japanese factories, killing people?

An apology for seizing a spying illegal foreign asset would truly be "unpresidented."

China needs to charge a salvage fee.

 

[gambit]

China needs to charge a salvage fee.

Keep it and consider the fee paid. After all, you could not build something like it and that is why you stole it.

 

[samsara]

"These "drones" are persistent ASW platforms. They don't operate like traditional drones with propulsion, rather they take on water as ballast and adjust their attitude (i.e. down-angle) by shifting internal weights. As the craft sinks, it "glides" laterally. At a predetermined depth, a little water is pumped out, internal weights are shifted aft, and the craft glides to the surface some number of miles away. At that point, the craft establishes a satellite up-link and reports its GPS position. Since the craft is essentially on autopilot when it is submerged, there is always some uncertainty as to where its going to pop up. For that reason, a remote controller has to provide course corrections for the craft to reach its next way point. This is accomplished via satellite down-link. With new orders (heading and dive depth), the craft comes to the ordered course and sinks, repeating the dive & glide/surface & glide routine. One of the beauties of passive propulsion is that the craft is utterly silent. This makes it an excellent platform for passive sonar capable of detecting both surface ships and submarines. Conversely, their silence and small size makes them difficult to detect using conventional ASW sensors (acoustic and magnetic). I can understand why the Chinese are so interested." - Moon of Alabama

So the relevant question here is: "What is actually the US Navy doing 3,000 miles away from home in China's backyard?"

Thus the snoop central exceptional nation with drones both above and below the ground are fair game for capture... just catch me if you can...

 

[gambit]

"These "drones" are persistent ASW platforms.

So what ?

Were we anywhere near China ? What you argued opened the door for seizure of any vessel in international water just from mere suspicion. Did you even think before you post ?

 

[samsara]

So what ?

Were we anywhere near China ? What you argued opened the door for seizure of any vessel in international water just from mere suspicion. Did you even think before you post ?

The Laws of the Sea and the Law of Salvage all consider only MANNED vessels.

Drone is excluded!

 

[gambit]

The Laws of the Sea and the Law of Salvage all consider only MANNED vessels.

Drone is excluded!

Present your argument. Simply saying it does not cut it, kid.

 

[samsara]

Present your argument. Simply saying it does not cut it, kid.

I won't repeat it again, just read the Moon of Alabama posted above.

Btw don't be rude, and kid me not.

 

[frequency]

haha China just want a war. Let's give it to them! Why wait! I'm so impatient!!

 

[sweetgrape]

Insinuate all you like. That doesn't make you right. ANd it shows you don't have SUBSTANTIVE arguments: this is why you attack the person rather than the message.

You see it as personal attack？hehe, what's substantive arguments? so tell me which clause of UNCLOS china violating, armed military warship apply to freedom of navigation? hehe, you are idiot or I am idiot? ok, this personal attack.

I'm not an American. You could have know this, had you payed attention in previous discussions of Chinese behavior in the SCS and the relation to UNCLOS. My country, like China, has signed and ratified UNCLOS.

Again, you seek to attack the person rather than the message.

You are not American? ok, so you don't know USA is not signatory of UNCLOS?! do you think USA have qualificaton of judging us by UNCLOS law? hehe, freedom of navigation, guy, freedom not apply in all cases, don't be misguided or misguiding others.

As a normal foreigner, if you want to come to China for tour, it is very simple, and are welcome, but if you play as tourist in disguise, but to collect information related to nation security, we will confiscate your device and expel you, hard to understand?

haha China just want a war. Let's give it to them! Why wait! I'm so impatient!!

Hehe, why feel so hilarious about the comment, a Vietnamese who had lain that bought a Huawei phone with much more money than market price that just enterred into market, and said it soon failed to work.

Give war to China? so cool, come back to your vietnam, there are huge chance, talking is very simple, don't be a coward, although I know you are.

 

[BuddhaPalm]

haha China just want a war. Let's give it to them! Why wait! I'm so impatient!!

Exactly! We committed a brazen act of war by seizing most advanced UUSV of USN under their nose. All they can do is submit a demarche through their ambassador and we told them to shove it

Now get ready for more spanking

 

[gambit]

I won't repeat it again, just read the Moon of Alabama posted above.

Btw don't be rude, and kid me not.

You are a kid, from what I can tell.

The salvage laws covers ABANDONED items. This UUV was not abandoned.

Further, to this day, China continued the lie that the event occurred inside Chinese controlled waters.

do you think USA have qualificaton of judging us by UNCLOS law?

Yes, because China signed UNCLOS. Whether the US signed or not is irrelevant. China signed UNCLOS, therefore, China will be held against it.

Exactly! We committed a brazen act of war by seizing most advanced UUSV of USN under their nose. All they can do is submit a demarche through their ambassador and we told them to shove it

Now get ready for more spanking

China bullied a civilian ship to get something that was built by common civilian parts. A CIVILIAN ship.

 

[sweetgrape]

Yes, because China signed UNCLOS. Whether the US signed or not is irrelevant. China signed UNCLOS, therefore, China will be held against it.

Hehe, first show which clause of the law we isolating, then prove so called freedom of navigation apply to military ship.

As to we are signatory of UNCLOS, but you are not, so you think you can enter into any territorial sea of China?! what a roguish and unreasonable comment, but I like that, so you want to be rogue, now we are rogue too, don't you find it is funny?

In the thread, you jump up and down, in fact, it is very funny, I feel very good that you are active here, that indicating something, the case irritate you, bad or good, I don't care, hope you have another good day here

 

[gambit]

Hehe, first show which clause of the law we isolating, then prove so called freedom of navigation apply to military ship.

No one recognizes the SCS as belonging to China, from that perspective, the laws regarding the freedom of navigation applies.

 

[samsara]

Now let's see what the US gov/military can do regarding the confiscation of its spying drone.

After all, China is a force on its peer level to reckon for the USA, whether it likes or not, but reality is there and won't be altered by words.

Word exchanges won't change the status of the possession!

Possession is 9/10th of the law! The US gov or its military is terribly wrong to think China is a weak nation that it can bully or intimidate.

No one recognizes the SCS as belonging to China, from that perspective, the laws regarding the freedom of navigation applies.

In fact only the NATO Clan plus the few claimants plus few vassal states have been disputing the China's claims on the South China Sea.

 

[gambit]

Now let's see what the US gov/military can do regarding the confiscation of its spying drone.

After all, China is a force on its peer level to reckon for the USA, whether it likes or not, but reality is there and won't be altered by words.

Word exchanges won't change the status of the possession!

Possession is 9/10th of the law! The US gov or its military is terribly wrong to think China is a weak nation that it can bully or intimidate.

Essentially, you cannot find anything in the laws of salvage to justify China's theft.