South China Sea Forum

[Chinese-Dragon]

I thought he said VN was gonna use those missiles to sink our islands

If they have enough firepower to "sink" these islands, then we have enough firepower to sink Vietnam.

*If

 

[Nan Yang]

If you begin to believe to your own propaganda, then it is time to visit a doctor. The US will continue with provocations until the chinese lose the nerves and fire on US warships. Things will become interesting after that.

You can expect the retaliation not only from America but from the NATO. And Japan and South Korea. All US allies. All obligned to defend America if the country comes under attack.

No. I believe China will just play "wait and see". China already said that they will not be the first to first to open fire.
You do not want any conflict in your backyard. If there is, we all loss and US wins. US is far away and protected by two ocean.

Don't be like an Arab.

 

[Solomon2]

US/CHINA CNO Discussion Readout
Story Number: NNS151029-10 Release Date: 10/29/2015 12:40:00 PM

Official U.S. Navy file photo of Chief of Naval Operations Adm. John Richardson.

From Chief of Naval Operations Public Affairs
WASHINGTON (NNS) -- Chief of Naval Operations Adm. John Richardson participated in a video teleconference (VTC), Oct. 29, with his Chinese counterpart, People's Liberation Army (Navy) (PLA(N)) Commander Adm. Wu Shengli to discuss ongoing engagements between the two navies and recent operations in the South China Sea.

This was the second time Richardson has engaged with Wu over the VTC, the last being in Aug 2015.

During the latest call, Richardson and Wu discussed U.S. freedom of navigation operations; the relationship between the two navies, including pending port visits and senior leader engagement; and the importance of maintaining an ongoing dialogue.

U.S. freedom of navigation operations are global in scope, and executed across a wide range of maritime claims. The operations serve to protect the rights, freedoms, and lawful uses of the sea and airspace guaranteed to all nations under international law. Freedom of navigation operations are not a challenge to the sovereignty of land features. The United States takes no position on competing sovereignty claims to land features in the South China Sea.

Both admirals agreed to speak again via VTC later this year.

For more news from the Chief of Naval Operations, visit Navy Leadership -- Chief of Naval Operations

 

[oproh]

Whatever, they will still come and go next to your "islands" as they please. And of course China will do 0 to challenge that.

So did america's patrol resulted in China's islands disappearing, if no then it simply means that america's challenge to China failed miserably.

 

[Nan Yang]

Grabbing my popcorn, let the game begin enough of talking from both sides.

You will be disappointed.

 

[ahtan_china]

If you begin to believe to your own propaganda, then it is time to visit a doctor. The US will continue with provocations until the chinese lose the nerves and fire on US warships. Things will become interesting after that.

You can expect the retaliation not only from America but from the NATO. And Japan and South Korea. All US allies. All obligned to defend America if the country comes under attack.

The U-2 spy plane was shoot down by China in 50+ years ago. What would be happen?
The USA gave benefit(TPP) to you Viet. Don't just talk. Do something for your master.

 

[Viet]

are you stupid or naive or both?

nato and korea will fight war with china for US? what a delution is that? you thought they were as dumb as you vites, who experienced the most pathetic life on earth in the last 100 years untill now. ask the people around you in germany, did the have the guts or willpower to fight today's china, you ignorant.

you bet if we just lend a little bit help more to russia, those european countries will rush us to beg for stop. remember the PM of your hosting country currently is in china and she promises to support everything of our wish to just keep us happy.

it is you who is dumb!

article 5 of the NATO treaty clearly requires member states to come to the aid of any member state subject to an armed attack. a chinese attack on America is an attack on all NATO members.

and you are naive, too, if you place chinese fate on the poker table, betting other states will sit idle doing nothing.

the US can demand assistance from Germany. do you think the germans will say NO?

 

[jhungary]

Not really.

No ASEAN country are joining US. Maybe Philippines

Australia actually is joining China
Australia to join Chinese navy exercises in South China Sea| Reuters

Japan is unlikely.
Why Japan Won’t Get Too Involved in the South China Sea | The Diplomat

US is pretty much on its own. Which makes it meaningless.

said that many time here, Australia do not take any side, not Chinese, not the US.

We have RAAF regularly patrol the SCS with the US navy, and we are getting more cooperation from the US navy as well. The Australian-Chinese Exercise and the port visit have been arranged/scheduled prior to Talisman Sabre 2015 exercise, just because Aussie joining a long agreed Exercise with China does not mean we took the Chinese side.

 

[Penguin]

Wait, so you mean to say one can build on the high sea, or EEZ but not one's own territory and territorial water? You are joking right?

Read the relevant treaty articles as pertaining to artificial structures. And don't put words in my mouth: I never said anything about building artificial structures on territorial waters.

Point here is that if you have a reef and put a artifucial structure on it (i.e. it is not a naturally formed island) it isn't recognized as your territory to begin with. See how the US is approching this (as indicated earlier).

Put differenly: a coastal state can build artificial structures in EEZ and on high seas (i.e. outside its territorial waters) but that don't make them territory. One could argue only a 500m safety zone around an artificially created object would be allowed.

 

[Zsari]

Read the relevant treaty articles as pertaining to artificial structures. And don't put words in my mouth: I never said anything about building artificial structures on territorial waters.

Point here is that if you have a reef and put a artifucial structure on it (i.e. it is not a naturally formed island) it isn't recognized as your territory to begin with. See how the US is approching this (as indicated earlier).

Put differenly: a coastal state can build artificial structures in EEZ and on high seas (i.e. outside its territorial waters) but that don't make them territory. One could argue only a 500m safety zone around an artificially created object would be allowed.

Ah, you got the idea wrong. China is not saying "I build it, now its mine", but rather "its mine so I build on it", which is what other states in the SCS are doing as well.

Again, tell it to your embassy what your definition of "Peaceful Purpose"

Don't need me to tell them, as they have been saying that all along.

 

[jhungary]

Don't need me to tell them, as they have been saying that all along.

dude, are you actually living in the US?

This is a phase, means tell that to someone who cares.

That means, I don't care.

 

[Zsari]

dude, are you actually living in the US?

This is a phase, means tell that to someone who cares.

That means, I don't care.

Been here 29 years, first time I've heard that though.

 

[jhungary]

Been here 29 years, first time I've heard that though.

then either your English is Shite or You haven't been living in the US for 29 years

Tell Someone Who Cares Quotes

 

[anon45]

said that many time here, Australia do not take any side, not Chinese, not the US.

We have RAAF regularly patrol the SCS with the US navy, and we are getting more cooperation from the US navy as well. The Australian-Chinese Exercise and the port visit have been arranged/scheduled prior to Talisman Sabre 2015 exercise, just because Aussie joining a long agreed Exercise with China does not mean we took the Chinese side.

I'd still say Australia is by far more aligned with the US politically and militarily.

I don't think its really a threat. US knows that this is their usual routine path. Chinese islands never existed according to the US.

I agree it's not a threat, just a fact.

 

[pher]

it is you who is dumb!

article 5 of the NATO treaty clearly requires member states to come to the aid of any member state subject to an armed attack. a chinese attack on America is an attack on all NATO members.

and you are naive, too, if you place chinese fate on the poker table, betting other states will sit idle doing nothing.

the US can demand assistance from Germany. do you think the germans will say NO?

go to study again, you dumb viet.
Nato country has obligation to US only if US soil got attacked, not in the case when US sails thousdands miles away to fight war with others. Did nato participate in US' boming and spraying orange agent in vienam? no, because they don't have such kind of obligation unless they volunteerly jump in for fun.