What's new

South China Sea Forum

I want to sound like a "Nerd",but Freedom of Navigation in International Water can only interfered in both countries are in War.so why such "Swarming" action on part of "Chinese Ships"??

Its true that Chinese Ships are performing similar duties against USN,VN and PHN.But what they forgot is,If China has similar Capabilities within First Island Chain,other powers can ensure China will stay inside "First Island Chain".
 
. .
This is stupidity on US navy part....Why the heck they are going so close to Chinese territory....Do they want a war or what?
Let me get this straight...

The Chinese is claiming an expanse of sea that was never theirs to start, then they start building artificial islands in trying to gain control of the region, but it is US who is provocative ?
 
.
We need updated pictures of the reclaimed islands been none for a month
 
.
Let me get this straight...

The Chinese is claiming an expanse of sea that was never theirs to start, then they start building artificial islands in trying to gain control of the region, but it is US who is provocative ?
But that should be solved through the dialogue...not by sending vessels...you can only intimidate smaller nations but not countries like China or Russia...relax Uncle Sam.....sometimes it is good to deal in a peaceful way....I think this concept is really foreign to you right?
 
Last edited:
.
But that should be solved through the dialogue...not by sending vessels...you can only intimidate smaller nations but not countries like China or Russia...relax Uncle Sam.....sometimes it is good deal in a peaceful way....i think this concept is really foreign to you right?
So basically, after someone punched you in the face, you would rather talk to the guy instead of fighting back ?

You are saying that anyone who provoked, not just US but a host of countries, and if there are any response, it is the responders who are at fault ?
 
.
This is stupidity on US navy part....Why the heck they are going so close to Chinese territory....Do they want a war or what?

That's like India building a string of islands to Oman and then saying you need permission to pass.

You'd say you don't recognize these islands as legit and sail right by.

The U.S. doesn't recognize these manmade islands as legit
It's as simple as that.
 
.
That's like India building a string of islands to Oman and then saying you need permission to pass.
Right...And if Pakistan respond by sending ships to challenge India, we can criticize Pakistan for not using 'dialogue' to resolve the issue. :lol:

Come to think of it, the US was in the wrong for going to war against Imperial Japan after the attack on Pearl Harbor. We should have tried 'dialogue' to get Imperial Japan to stop expansion in mainland China and stop all the atrocities against the Chinese.

When Hitler invaded Poland because the German people needed land to expand, according to Hitler's belief, Europe should have use 'dialogue' to try to solve Germany's problem.
 
.
Right...And if Pakistan respond by sending ships to challenge India, we can criticize Pakistan for not using 'dialogue' to resolve the issue. :lol:

Come to think of it, the US was in the wrong for going to war against Imperial Japan after the attack on Pearl Harbor. We should have tried 'dialogue' to get Imperial Japan to stop expansion in mainland China and stop all the atrocities against the Chinese.

When Hitler invaded Poland because the German people needed land to expand, according to Hitler's belief, Europe should have use 'dialogue' to try to solve Germany's problem.
I am saying solve it through dialogue....not by a military conflict that can lead to a war
 
.
I am saying solve it through dialogue....not by a military conflict that can lead to a war
Why at US ?

A blockade is an act of war and that is without a single bullet fired. China claiming an expanse of sea as her own then trying to exert navigation control is very close to creating an economic blockade, not just to immediate Asian countries, but to any country in any part of the world that conducts commerce with Asia.

But is US who must use 'dialogue' ?

The word 'dialogue' is often used by cowards.
 
.
Right...And if Pakistan respond by sending ships to challenge India, we can criticize Pakistan for not using 'dialogue' to resolve the issue. :lol:

What's even nuttier is Pakistan could then build a chain of islands outside the manmade Indian ones and claim India now needs permission to pass.

It turns into a worldwide pegging in the ocean contest.

The U.S. says this is all ridiculous and doesn't recognize any of it.

It we did a precedent of legitimate "pegging" would be set and the above scenario would be wide open to do.
 
Last edited:
.
Why at US ?

A blockade is an act of war and that is without a single bullet fired. China claiming an expanse of sea as her own then trying to exert navigation control is very close to creating an economic blockade, not just to immediate Asian countries, but to any country in any part of the world that conducts commerce with Asia.

But is US who must use 'dialogue' ?

The word 'dialogue' is often used by cowards.
Lets say US is right on this issue....how should we solve it?
What's even nuttier is Pakistan could then build a chain of islands outside the manmade Indian ones and claim India now needs permission to pass.

It turns into a worldwide pegging in the ocean contest.

The U.S. says this is all ridiculous and doesn't recognize any of it.
Yeah that would be a strange world with every nation building an artificial island. Pakistan does not have expansionist designs but it needs to look after its economic and strategic interests.
 
.
Lets say US is right on this issue....how should we solve it?

Yeah that would be a strange world with every nation building an artificial island. Pakistan does not have expansionist designs but it needs to look after its economic and strategic interests.

Now you can see why the U.S. Is doing this. To stop the potential mess that could erupt if everybody started dropping artificial islands all over the place and claiming permission to pass rights.

The U.S. said we don't recognize this artificial island crap and we are going to sail right by it without permission.
 
.
The U.S. Navy plans to conduct patrols within 12 nautical miles of artificial islands in the South China Sea about twice a quarter to remind China and other countries about U.S. rights under international law, a U.S. defense official said on Monday.

"We're going to come down to about twice a quarter or a little more than that," said the official, who was not authorized to speak publicly about Navy operational plans.

"That's the right amount to make it regular but not a constant poke in the eye. It meets the intent to regularly exercise our rights under international law and remind the Chinese and others about our view," the official said.

U.S. Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes on Monday said there would be more demonstrations of the U.S. military's commitment to the right to freely navigate in the region.

"That's our interest there ... It's to demonstrate that we will uphold the principle of freedom of navigation," Rhodes told an event hosted by the Defense One media outlet.

Rhodes' comments came a week after a U.S. guided-missile destroyer sailed close to one of Beijing's man-made islands in the South China Sea last week.

China's naval commander last week told his U.S. counterpart that a minor incident could spark war in the South China Sea if the United States did not stop its "provocative acts" in the disputed waterway.

The USS Lassen's patrol was the most significant U.S. challenge yet to the 12-nautical-mile territorial limit China claims around artificial islands it has built in the Spratly Islands archipelago.

China claims most of the South China Sea, through which more than $5 trillion of world trade transits every year. Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, the Philippines and Taiwan all have rival claims.

Rhodes said the goal in the dispute was to come to a diplomatic framework to resolve these issues.

U.S. Vice Admiral John Aquilino, deputy chief of naval operations for operations, plans and strategies, declined to comment about when the next patrols would take place.

"We do operations like that all the time around the world. That will continue for us," he told Reuters after his remarks at the same conference. "We'll just keep going."

Defense Secretary Ash Carter may visit a U.S. Navy ship during his upcoming visit to Asia, but is not expected to be on board during any Navy freedom of navigation operations, the U.S. defense official said.

U.S. Navy plans two or more patrols in South China Sea per quarter| Reuters

America is totally far away from spratlys located at the other side of the globe. Yet the Americans send their naval fleet to SCS. Doesn't this show that America is the aggressor? Conclusion is, Americans wanted spratlys personally and to do so is through proxy. America trusted Taiwanese more than pinoys as they are less corrupt, that means America would wanted taiwan to get entire spratlys and kicked the rest out. Without China, they'll kick Vietnam out first followed by others. That only means they can choose either to let China or America to own spratlys. Vietnam should team up with China if they wanted spratlys, not India. Indian naval fleet would flee when America telling them to leave. US fleet is known to be arrogant, they would chase fighters and ships away even if they intruded into a country's territorial sea by locking into that country's fighter or vessel with trigger ready.
 
.
Why at US ?

A blockade is an act of war and that is without a single bullet fired. China claiming an expanse of sea as her own then trying to exert navigation control is very close to creating an economic blockade, not just to immediate Asian countries, but to any country in any part of the world that conducts commerce with Asia.

But is US who must use 'dialogue' ?

The word 'dialogue' is often used by cowards.
Looks like the time has come to sink the "Man Made Islanad"......
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom