China starts "combat ready" patrols in disputed seas

[chauism]

How can we interpret it as NOT China's official policy if this Chinese general is still holding his post and has not received any sanction??? If he is a Filipino general and has said that, he will be immediately relieve of duty and his career is over. Our civilian gov't is above our military. Our military follows what our civilian gov't says.



Georgia conflict - Georgia shot FIRST, so no defense back up. Russia only responded siding with the secessionists, mostly

But then, is this the case of the Philippines and China??? Absolutely not. We're NOT battling secessionists from the Scarborough or Spratly's but defending our territorial integrity from a creeping and covert Chinese invasion.

Now, if Chinese fires the first shot, MDT can be called.

I think the Chinese are pointing to the Georgian conflict to scare us and make us back out. NO MDT will happen if we fire the first shot. You see, the Chinese are itching so, one of their arrogant crew may fire on us and poof, the US-MDT.

We also see this:
New Chinese tactic to get the ownership of SCS:
Increase use of disguised fishing fleets and other supposedly civilian activities to provoke an incident.

It's a bit tough for PLAN to expel a few under-equipped "squatters", isn't it?
Oh, I know: the Chinese admirals were expecting the "squatters" to shoot at your fishermen.
China has a 100+Billion Dollars annual military budget but still expects the little guy to shoot first. Why don't you shoot first and see China crumbles.

China wants war to be the instrument of settlement of the ownership of SCS.

Georgia wouldn't fire the first shot if it thought itself without US backing. US's official stance on SCS dispute is to stay neutral, so yes it all comes down to who fire the first shot and how disruptive the conflict will be for its shipping line. I am quoting some personal words from Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell to my uncle during his visit to China "Althought US is neutral in this matter, however since China is such big country and philippine is small, so if China start acting aggressively it will be seem as China is bullying Phlippine, then US morally has to say something on behalf of Philippine." Also, China is not the one who brought naval warship into this disputed area.

 

[WuMaoCleverbot]

Also, China is not the one who brought naval warship into this disputed area.

Those 12 Chinese fishing vessels are poaching in Philippine territory. They are not fishing, what they are doing are poaching activities, they are harvesting corals and endangered giant clams, and catching live sharks and sea turtles. We are not bullying China, China is bullying us. Just look at the graph. Can a nation with ONE frigate bully a GIANT nation with 62 submarines, 13 destroyers and 65 frigates??? COMMON SENSE PLEASE.

And what’s wrong with sending a CUTTER to arrest poachers? NOTHING. Do you complain when policemen arrest thieves inside your house? Besides, the BRP Gregorio del Pilar hardly counts as a WARSHIP. It used to be an American COAST GUARD vessel! Since it happens to be the most advanced we have, it was drafted as a Navy flagship.

 

[ahfatzia]

Obviously you copied those sentence from wikipedia, then why don't you copied the complete paragraphy here???

He has a habit of edit and change the content of the sources and not providing links. He even edited my posts for a few occasions to strengthen his arguments as I scolded for his intellectual dishonesty. He doesn't write those long posts of his, just inserts a few words that makes believe is his. A clumsy attempt of plagiarism you might say.

I would bother with his posts without a link if I were you.

 

[chauism]

Those 12 Chinese fishing vessels are poaching in Philippine territory. They are not fishing, what they are doing are poaching activities, they are harvesting corals and endangered giant clams, and catching live sharks and sea turtles. We are not bullying China, China is bullying us. Just look at the graph. Can a nation with ONE frigate bully a GIANT nation with 62 submarines, 13 destroyers and 65 frigates??? COMMON SENSE PLEASE.

And what’s wrong with sending a CUTTER to arrest poachers? NOTHING. Do you complain when policemen arrest thieves inside your house? Besides, the BRP Gregorio del Pilar hardly counts as a WARSHIP. It used to be an American COAST GUARD vessel! Since it happens to be the most advanced we have, it was drafted as a Navy flagship.

No one said Philippine is bullying China, however you have to admit that Gregorio del Pilar incident is indeed a diplomatic blunt on philippines' part.

 

[WuMaoCleverbot]

He even edited my posts for a few occasions to strengthen his arguments

What do you mean "edited??" I never edited any of your post to mislead anybody. In fact, I can't remember that I've edited your post. Why don't you post here the said post/s that I edited???

No one said Philippine is bullying China, however you have to admit that Gregorio del Pilar incident is indeed a diplomatic blunt on philippines' part.

One of my compatriot who was there in China during the Scarborough stand off said that Chinese news portrays China as the one who are being bullied by the Philippines. But the world knows, China is the aggressor and China is the bully.

What we see:

This is how Beijing’s fishing boat aggression works: Purportedly Chinese civilian boats will venture into the other country’s EEZ. When patrol boats of that country try to apprehend them, maritime patrol vessels from China’s Fisheries Bureau (under the Ministry of Agriculture) will suddenly appear to secure the Chinese boats, often resulting in a stalemate. China would then reiterate its so-called “inalienable right” to the disputed waters, and insist on a bilateral negotiation to resolve the stand-off.

As the stand-off drags, China would then flare up domestic nationalist sentiments by demonizing the rival claimants, like Japan and the Philippines, through its controlled media. This is then followed by economic pressures like the restriction of rare earth exports to Japan in 2010, the cancellation of tourist travels to the Philippines, and the dumping of Philippine banana exports in China. Finally, China would rattle its saber by making bold pronouncements of its willingness and capability to defend its territory militarily, just as it dismisses suggestions to resolve the disputes through mechanisms under international law. Meanwhile, Chinese fishing boats continue their activities, ignoring all protestations.

Obviously, China is employing this new strategy for two reasons. Firstly, Beijing wants to show that the disputed waters are indeed traditional fishing grounds for Chinese fishermen, in order to buttress its “historical claims” to the said maritime territories. Secondly, by using vessels from the Fisheries Bureau instead of, say, the Coast Guard, the Chinese side is trying to dodge accusations of aggressiveness by characterizing its activities in the area as being civilian in nature.

 

[chauism]

What do you mean "edited??" I never edited any of your post to mislead anybody. In fact, I can't remember that I've edited your post. Why don't you post here the said post/s that I edited???



What we see:

This is how Beijing’s fishing boat aggression works: Purportedly Chinese civilian boats will venture into the other country’s EEZ. When patrol boats of that country try to apprehend them, maritime patrol vessels from China’s Fisheries Bureau (under the Ministry of Agriculture) will suddenly appear to secure the Chinese boats, often resulting in a stalemate. China would then reiterate its so-called “inalienable right” to the disputed waters, and insist on a bilateral negotiation to resolve the stand-off.

As the stand-off drags, China would then flare up domestic nationalist sentiments by demonizing the rival claimants, like Japan and the Philippines, through its controlled media. This is then followed by economic pressures like the restriction of rare earth exports to Japan in 2010, the cancellation of tourist travels to the Philippines, and the dumping of Philippine banana exports in China. Finally, China would rattle its saber by making bold pronouncements of its willingness and capability to defend its territory militarily, just as it dismisses suggestions to resolve the disputes through mechanisms under international law. Meanwhile, Chinese fishing boats continue their activities, ignoring all protestations.

Obviously, China is employing this new strategy for two reasons. Firstly, Beijing wants to show that the disputed waters are indeed traditional fishing grounds for Chinese fishermen, in order to buttress its “historical claims” to the said maritime territories. Secondly, by using vessels from the Fisheries Bureau instead of, say, the Coast Guard, the Chinese side is trying to dodge accusations of aggressiveness by characterizing its activities in the area as being civilian in nature.

China is not the first country to use economic sanction and military threat to get what it want nor it will be the last, actually China learned this from the best teachers. This is how the real world works, wake up and smell the coffee. There is a saying in realpolitik "No diplomacy for a weak nation". It is definitely not political correct, however sadly it is the reality.

 

[ahfatzia]

What do you mean "edited??" I never edited any of your post to mislead anybody. In fact, I can't remember that I've edited your post. Why don't you post here the said post/s that I edited???

Read my post #358 on this thread and compare how you quoted that post on your #359. They are not the same aren't they? You added quite a few words to my post didn't you? My post #364 told you off didn't I?

My post, whether they are good or bad or you agree with them or not, are my personal properties and no one has the right to alter them. You can quote them and refute them but if alter them that's intellectual dishonesty. No need to reply.

 

[gpit]

Read my post #358 on this thread and compare how you quoted that post on your #359. They are not the same aren't they? You added quite a few words to my post didn't you? My post #364 told you off didn't I?

My post, whether they are good or bad or you agree with them or not, are my personal properties and no one has the right to alter them. You can quote them and refute them but if alter them that's intellectual dishonesty. No need to reply.

Yeah, some internet Filipinos live in low form of life...

It's pitiful. And she shouldn't have done that...

 

[WuMaoCleverbot]

Read my post #358 ( This is your original post, during that time I still don't know how to change the color of the text like now )on this thread and compare how you quoted that post on your #359 (This is your post with my added comments ). They are not the same aren't they? You added quite a few words to my post didn't you? My post #364 told you off didn't I ( Read my Post 366 )?

My post, whether they are good or bad or you agree with them or not, are my personal properties and no one has the right to alter them ( Read Post 259, I don't think grandmaster commited intellectual dishonesty, he done the same thing to me and I'm not offended ). You can quote them and refute them but if alter them that's intellectual dishonesty No need to reply ( What you mean is you don't want me to defend my side??? ).

Post 359: ahfatzia's post with my comments inside the parenthesis text not colored red

^^^

You could say the same to the Philippines' claims as I seen a few Spanish maps here in the forum the Huangyan Island wasn't on them(you can't find Huangyan Island because it's called Bajo de Masinloc in Philippine-Spanish map). At least the Chinese claim went back far in history(but China can't identify the specific historical document, don't have also the 1270 map, and Chinese historical claim is not recognized in international law )where as the new Filipino republic didn't put the islands on her map(Philippine-Spanish map and the 1903 US Philippine territorial map shows scarborough is part of the Philippine Islands)until the 90s when oil was a possibility in the area.

Post 362 ahfatzia's post with my comments inside parentheis text colored red

^^^

Your two maps are unclear as where the Scarborough Shoal is( it only shows you don't know where is Scarborough shoal is ) and on the second map, the international line drawn by an unknown cartographer living 10,000 miles away, centuries ago, is ridiculous(what ridiculous is China can't even produce her 1270 map). Your article ( it's the official position of the Philippine gov't over Scarborough shoal and its surrounding waters ), probably written by a blogger or some so called Filipino expert(it's the official position of the Philippine gov't), has no link( Philippine Position on Bajo de Masinloc and the Waters Within its Vicinity ) and if I, or you, want I can search the Global Time archive and find many more opinion pieces to counter your argument (China's claim is GROUNDLESS and totally rebutted by the Philippines).

One fact that's international recognized is Philippines did not include the islands in her maps before the 90s and the flag you mentioned was planted on 1997 ( An 8.3 meter high flag pole flying a Philippine flag was raised in 1965. A small lighthouse was also built and operated the same year. } Didn't China claimed she erected something on Huangyan that was removed?

Here's something you should look at (The first link has one of your map). I'm not here to argue with you because I'm an outsider ( I remembered you already admitted that your a pro-China ) and my interest is not as intense as yours or the Chinese, however I did look into Global Time and other sites months back and read some of their legal arguments and they seemed much stronger than your unlinked piece ( Chinese historical claims are not recognized by international law ).

According to Treaty of Paris(1898) between the United States and Spain, Treaty of Washington(1900) between Spain and the United States, Treaty between Great Britain and the United States(1930), Constitution of the Philippines (1935), Republic Act No. 3046 "Act to Define the Baselines of the Territorial Sea of the Philippines"(1961), and all the maps published by Philippines official until 1990s, 118th degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich is the territorial limit line of Philippines ( And what you just posted actually helped prove that China owns Scarborough Shoal? NO!!! ) . Scarborough Shoal is obvious outside this limits, and Philippines has never made claim or put dispute on Scarborough Shoal( we also never claimed the Philippines ), which is internationally recognized as territory of China ( Another Chinese LIE, no one recognizes China's claim over Scarborough shoal ). But in the following years, Philippines made an unilateral decision to include Scarborough Shoal as its territory, ignoring China's opposition ( Several official Philippine maps published by Spain and United States in 18th and 20th centuries show Scarborough Shoal as Philippine territory.China's the one who unilaterally claimed the SCS ).

Most Philippines maps published by Spain and United States in 18th and 19th century does not show Scarborough Shoal or show it as foreign territory, for example, in the same color as Malaysia and China.

Several Spanish Maps predate in 1734 and 1900 showing the Scarborough Shoal not the Philippine Territory http://www.zamboanga.net/murillomap3.jpg (there is no Scarborough Shoal in this map - there's no Scarborough Shoal in the Map because it's called Panacot...try to enlarge the map and you'll see Panacot ) and http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/a...no/panatag.jpg (the color of Scarborough Shoal is white, the same as Malaysia and China, thus the foreign territory.)

(The piece is from Wikipedia)

Post 259: My post with grandmaster's comments text colored red

In March 1988, Chinese troops killed 70 Vietnamese troops and occupied Johnson South Reef (six kilometers away from Vietnam’s Collins Reef) in the Spratly Islands.

are you afraid to tell every one which aggressive side fired gun first? Vietnam?

In April 2001 a Chinese jet fighter collided with an American EP-3 reconnaissance aircraft 60 miles off Hainan Island.

Are you afraid to tell people why that aircraft flew within china water and did spying? because people will question your inclination?
On June 11, 2009, a Chinese submarine deliberately cut the cable of a sonar array being towed by the USS John McCain in international waters about 140 miles northwest of Subic Bay, Philippines.

why USS did some thing thousand miles away from its territory and in china EEZ? telling this will unveil your hypocritical and unreasonable character?

In 2009 alone, Chinese had seized 433 Vietnamese fishermen in the West Philippine Sea.
you are wrong by saying "west phipipine sea", agressive nature of filipino!
In Feb 25, 2011, Chinese warship fired at Filipino fishing boat(MV Maricris 12)
In March 2011, Philippine-commissioned seismic vessel was harassed in Reed Bank in western Palawan by the Chinese
why did those boats were in china water? how dare and aggressive?

In August 2011, Chinese naval vessels confronted an Indian Navy ship that was transiting between two Vietnamese ports.
why dont you tell people that indian navy ship got through china water? does that unveil you are liar?
In February 2012, armed Chinese vessels prevented Vietnamese fishing boats from seeking refuge in Paracel Island during a storm and reportedly tried to rob its crewmembers.
why were those fishing boats in china's water? did vietnam or filipino govement tell them to go there during the storm and claimed its territory? who is aggressive?
In the summer of 2010, a Chinese “fishery management vessel” described as a “repurposed heavy gunboat” threatened to fire at Indonesian patrol vessels confronting illegal Chinese fishermen in its EEZ near Natuna Island.
even if this is true, then it is china-indonesia business. not the business for aggressive country like philippine which is like to dictate on others
In April 2012, two Chinese surveillance vessels prevented the Philippine Navy frigate BRP Gregorio del Pilar from arresting illegal Chinese fishermen and poachers in Panatag Shoal (also known as Scarborough Shoal).
no chinese knows Scarborough but Huangyan Dao in stead! these chinese people fished in china water, it is its legal responsibilty to protect its citizens and water from pinoy invaders. the philippine illeagally arrested chinese people in china water, the philippine navy was illegal and aggressive.
In June 2012, Indian Navy vessels sailing in the West Philippine Sea received an unscheduled escort by a People's Liberation Army Navy frigate for 12 hours (John J. Tkacik, Jr., Testimony for the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs, March 28, 2012 and Territorial disputes in the South China Sea)
it is the host reponsibilty to escort an invited guess to ensure china's guess is safe. who never know, the filipino would fire at china's guess and blame china did! that can't be interpret in the evil way like the filipino did but it is for indian navy safety and respect!





Another fabricated Chinese history. Where's your proof???




A number of Asean countries already confidentially expressed support to our gov't against Chinese aggression in Scarborough shoal. If China really wants to find out, she could just declare war against us and see how many countries support us and how alone China will fight this war.




We are talking about sovereignty. As for sovereignty, its not discovery and naming. It's history, use/occupation and control/jurisdiction. China claims to have discovered it and has a history over it, used it for a multitude of uses but he never had control and jurisdiction over it. China never controlled the area. China never managed the area, never had the Chinese government in the area. So ergo, CHINA DO NOT HAVE SOVEREIGNTY OVER THE AREA. The Chinese government merely claims jurisdiction in these areas but they do not have effective jurisdiction as required for sovereignty. China has to prove indisputable sovereignty before he can rightfully claim the islands. Without this, this action is as pointless as just drawing a map with China's name on it.




The Chinese claim to have 'been there first' is like arguing that Europeans got to Australia before its aboriginal inhabitants. Can you identify specific historical evidence supporting that China discovered Spratly Islands in 200BC??? I BET YOU CAN'T.



Can you identify specific historical evidence supporting that Chinese monks build a monastery in Spratly Island in 220AD??? I BET YOU CAN'T.




Have you seen the MAP??? I BET YOU DID'T. Can you post the map here??? I BET YOU CAN'T. BUT WE CAN SHOW YOU OUR MAP.

Philippine Maps:

http://i45.tinypic.com/oqjb6u.jpg

http://i46.tinypic.com/4kbp1y.jpg

http://i45.tinypic.com/33feyvl.jpg


Official maps of the Yuan Dynasty and Ching
Dynasty, including but not limited to Da Qing Zhi Sheng Quan Tu
(published in 1862) and Huang Chao Yi Tong Yu Di Zen Du (published in
1894), show that the southernmost extent of China ends at Hainan islands

[Huang chao zhi sheng yu di quan tu] /


“La Relación del suceso de la venida del tirano chino del gobernador Guido de Lavezares 1575 Épica española en Asia en el siglo XVI" - states it well - as well as a recognition by a Ming Dynasty emisary of the Philippines then known as Las Islas Filipinas; as 'Beyond China's realm' and they also exchanged maps and bounderies, which showed China had no claims south of islands of the Formosa





Can you identify specific historical evidence supporting that Spratly Islands became part of the Northern Song in 990AD??? I BET YOU CAN'T.




Can you identify specific historical evidence supporting that Kublai Khan controlled most of the islands during China’s Yuan Dynasty??? I BET YOU CAN'T.



China was asked to provide the 1279 map………………and the CCP hasn’t been able to do so! China was also asked to provide the exact coordinates that prove the 9 or 11 dash line ownership according to ancient Chinese claims………..and the CCP also wasn’t able to produce any documentation to support their claims!

The fact that the CCP can’t show anyone these Yuan Dyanasty maps is most revealing!

If your government treats you like idiots who would believe anything they say, don't put the rest of the world at the same level that you are on.

The rest of the world relies on EVIDENCE. Not just whatever BS spouting out of the mouths of you Chinese.

China can't prove Spratlys claim

MANILA, Philippines - Chinese authorities have failed to identify specific historical evidence backing Beijing's claims that it owns disputed islands in the West Philippine Sea, a confidential US embassy cable published by anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks said.

Cable 08BEIJING3499, sent to Washington by the US embassy in Beijing in September 9, 2008, said a Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) official and a local scholar could not identify specific historical records to justify China's "Nine Dashes" claim that covers the whole Spratlys and areas within other countries' exclusive economic zones (EEZs).

MFA Department of Treaty and Law Oceans and Law of the Sea Division Deputy Director Yin Wenqiang told a US embassy political officer on August 30, 2008 that "China has indisputable sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea and the adjacent waters."

However, the US official said "Yin admitted he is not aware of the historical basis for the 'Nine Dashes'" and only mentioned unspecified "Chinese historical documents" that indicate the basis for China's claims on territory west of the Philippines, according to the cable.

The US official also talked to Beijing University Asia scholar Yang Baoyun about China's claims.

Yang said China's claims "date back to ancient times, prior to the development of the modern nation-state."

"Neither MFA's Yin nor Beijing University's Yang could specify a historical document that indicated the basis for the demarcation of the 'Nine Dashes'," the cable added.

Yang referred to a 2000 MFA "white paper" on the Spratlys. "However, the white paper devotes little attention to the history of the "Nine Dashes," providing, for example, only vague references to areas frequented by Chinese fisherman from Hainan," the memo said.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...y-patrols-disputed-seas-18.html#ixzz22vHtCL4D

Post 366:

I don't think it creates misunderstanding, in fact, I believe it makes it clearer.

@ahfatzia
Hope you understand my side. No need to reply, if you feel like to, just pls do, I do not control you and you are not a robot. Be well.

 

[mDumb]

Flip dude, what are you doing in this forum wasting your time? Discussing topics that you're not familiar with.

You Flips should focus your energy in how to create jobs there, instead of being a cry baby for everything. "Uncle Sam, we've got only WWII weapons we can't fight the bully China." C'mon, dude why should the Amercan tax payers pay for your weapons just because you can't afford them. And stop using China card as a means to get free weapons from the US. US of A is BROKE!!!!!!!

You gained independence from Spain and USA, it seems gaining independence from these two countries don't mean anything, since you people keep going back to your master for a handout. I wonder if Jose Rizal would be happy with Philippines today.

Imagine, if you Flips don't work overseas in Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Middle East, and America, Philippines would be completely broke.

The sad part is, you Flips don't recognize or realize how much the Chinese contribute to your well being (food, clothes, and shelter).

Since, you like history, let me ask you this.

The USA granted independence to Philippines on July 4, 1946. Why you Flips decided to celebrate the Independence Day on June 12?

 

[WuMaoCleverbot]

Flip dude, what are you doing in this forum wasting your time?

We are not wasting time, we are fighting Chinese propaganda propagators here who spews lies. We fight their lies with truth.

Discussing topics that you're not familiar with.

And you are more familiar with the topics??? Are you a Zimbabwean are you not??? Or are you one of the Chinese false flaggers here with multiple accounts???

You Flips should focus your energy in how to create jobs there, instead of being a cry baby for everything. "Uncle Sam, we've got only WWII weapons we can't fight the bully China." C'mon, dude why should the Amercan tax payers pay for your weapons just because you can't afford them.

This only proves you know only very little. Why don't you try to read more of the posts here in various threads and you will see that your questions had been answered already numerous times.

Since, you like history, let me ask you this.

The USA granted independence to Philippines on July 4, 1946. Why you Flips decided to celebrate the Independence Day on June 12?

Just read this:

Independence Day (Philippines) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[hoangsa]

It is useless to discuss with aggressors from China. They are not reasonable. Instead of argument, you 'd better talk with the world and ready to fight with them. Save your energy, no need to talk with them. They do not understand human voice.