South China Sea Forum

[Beidou2020]

@Krueger

You must be working for the US intelligence agencies. Snowden revealed they have people like you going to forums and doing exactly the things you are doing.

 

[NiceGuy]

We take criticism and get the oil.

Great deal for us.

Okay, u violate the law to get the oil, and we get the support from the world. Its a good chance for VN to have a closer relationship with US-EU and get more advance tech from them to get richer and stronger

 

[Beidou2020]

Okay, u violate the law to get the oil, and we get the support from the world. Its a good chance for VN to have a closer relationship with US-EU and get more advance tech from them to get richer and stronger

Who is stopping you?

Go right ahead.

btw, we are drilling in our EEZ.

 

[NiceGuy]

Who is stopping you?

Go right ahead.

btw, we are drilling in our EEZ.

What we want now is the support from the World, and the better relationship with US-EU to get richer. We wanna get rich first. Understood ??

The oil rig issue can be solved later

 

[applesauce]

Points are addressed above, you hold ZERO advantage over our airforc and navy over the Spratly; that's the reason why you did not even dare to attack us when we were in the 90's

ooh this is rich hahaha, so china dared to attack in the 70's and the 80's but suddenly china didnt "dare" to attack in the 90s, what did vietnam get weapons from atlantis in the 90s? fact is china has acted again and again to defend its interest when they are threaten. it did so in the 50s fighting a conventional war against the UN led by the US, it did so in 62 in response to the indian forward policy, it did so in the 70s to demonstrate vietnam-soviet alliance was worthless, it did so in 80s with the naval skirmishes, it just so happens that more recently no one has so openly challenged china's core interests therefore no open war was necessary, the 90s saw the fall of the soviets so a major threat disappeared, and more minor threats such as vietnam did not warrent war.

The distant between Hainan to the Spatly is about 1500 km while the combat range of the Flankers and its variants is 2000 km; 3000+ km is just ferry range. Yes, you will need serious refuel to go to Spratly. Hence, you can only put a limited # of jets all in once at the same time which will limit your numerical superiority over us. And get real please, you have more jets but many more enemies to deal with and more territory to guard. If there is military conflict, it will be between the Guangzhou Military District's airforce at most. My estimate is that at best you can put 10 jets all in once at the same time.


Does it look to you like we're losing sleep over your airforce having any kind of advantage over us in the Spratly? Had we converted 6 submarines into 60 Flankers, we would have had 96 Flankers at the moment but we chose not to because your airforce was never viewed as the biggest threat to us.



Who told you that the Kh-59MK is 120 km?. The Russian sold us the Yakhont at 300 km so you would better believe that the Kh-50mk is 285 km. The Migs21 can carry two a2a missiles to attack you while you are doing refueling or on your one way mission back to base, my friend



Do you know how the curvature of the earth blocks radar detection range? If our Su22 fly at 200 meters above sea level, your radar can only pick us up at 80 km. At that range, we're already in the range of the KH-31 missiles to launch at your ship Horizon calculator - radar and visual You want to talk about how your navy can sink our navy in a ship to ship engagement? Sorry to disappoint you but the curvature of the earth won't allow your radar to pick us up earlier and vice versa. In a ship to ship engagement, our missile boats can fire 16 kh-35 missiles at you and God helps you if you can engage those missiles from all directions

.

let us assume, that all of the above is true (and i dont agree with much of it, but regardless) would you agree that building major bases right in the island group would solve all of the above problems for china?

Ok, our subs can use to launch anti-ship missiles then.

yea and i already said subs are more dangerous than anything else vietnam has. unfortunately for you however, china has operated kilos for far longer than vietnam and has far more subs of all type to play this game.

Since you mention that you're going to put your SAMs on the Spartly reefs, I can tell you that a 150km rocket can take them out with ease because all the reefs/islands in this area are very close to each other, sometimes just a few nautical miles apart. We can park our S-300 on the Spratly to provide extra air cover for our airforce while you hopelessly trying to park your SAM on a congested reefs; good luck with that

lol right so you are somehow gonna magically park rockets and sams on islands(your transport ships are magically invincible to chinese subs, cruise missile, air force, and navy i guess lol), while china with its far larger and better air force/navy cant do the same? lol china actually has 1000 km+ range cruise missiles in additions to srbm, like it or not, the entire island group is within range of a ton of chinese weapons and even more so when an airbase is built

 

[NiceGuy]

Rumor said China army is in alert level 3 and mobilizing near VN-China's border........VN tanks also mobilizing

QUỐC TẾ
Về thông tin Trung Quốc báo động chiến đấu cấp 3 ở biên giới

HỒNG THỦY1 thảo luận15/05/14 10:21
(GDVN)- Nếu thông tin này đúng sự thật thì đây tiếp tục là một động thái khiêu khích của nhà cầm quyền Trung Quốc, chúng ta cần hết sức cảnh giác.
Về thông tin Trung Quốc báo động chiến đấu cấp 3 ở biên giới - Quốc tế - Giáo dục Việt Nam

 

[Beidou2020]

What we want now is the support from the World, and the better relationship with US-EU to get richer. We wanna get rich first. Understood ??

The oil rig issue can be solved later

Vietnam will never be as rich as China.

 

[Fukuoka]

Says JEW USA never answering for their war crimes in all continents, using especially forbidden weapons

 

[cnleio]

In 2008, American might say the same words to Georgia.

Georgia have to do to prepare for the legal war against Russia.

 

[ViXuyen]

ooh this is rich hahaha, so china dared to attack in the 70's and the 80's but suddenly china didnt "dare" to attack in the 90s, what did vietnam get weapons from atlantis in the 90s? fact is china has acted again and again to defend its interest when they are threaten. it did so in the 50s fighting a conventional war against the UN led by the US, it did so in 62 in response to the indian forward policy, it did so in the 70s to demonstrate vietnam-soviet alliance was worthless, it did so in 80s with the naval skirmishes, it just so happens that more recently no one has so openly challenged china's core interests therefore no open war was necessary, the 90s saw the fall of the soviets so a major threat disappeared, and more minor threats such as vietnam did not warrent war.

The reason why China has not attacked Vietnam in the Spratly because China knows that Vietnam holds the military advantage

let us assume, that all of the above is true (and i dont agree with much of it, but regardless) would you agree that building major bases right in the island group would solve all of the above problems for china?

Nope, a base in the Spratly that you build out of a reef can easily be taken out by our EXTRA rocket or ballistic missiles; that is assuming that you can even build a base that can support take off and landing and a base that can house even a few jets.

yea and i already said subs are more dangerous than anything else vietnam has. unfortunately for you however, china has operated kilos for far longer than vietnam and has far more subs of all type to play this game.

Unfortunately for you Vietnam also has submarines to counter the sub force of your South Sea Fleet. Most of your subs in the south sea fleet are cold war relic.

lol right so you are somehow gonna magically park rockets and sams on islands(your transport ships are magically invincible to chinese subs, cruise missile, air force, and navy i guess lol), while china with its far larger and better air force/navy cant do the same? lol china actually has 1000 km+ range cruise missiles in additions to srbm, like it or not, the entire island group is within range of a ton of chinese weapons and even more so when an airbase is built

We have real islands in the Spratly here, buddy. Our transport vessels have been carrying supplies and troops to the Spratly islands eveyday and up till NOW you don't even know what we have transported to the Spratly. You can try to pound our real islands with whatever you wish but we just pound your "sea base" with our own ballistic missiles and EXTRA rockets and your entire operation in the Spratly will cease immediately. You rely on a sea base to operate while we don't; that is even assuming that you can build a sea base in the Spratly

I'm not losing sleep over any military conflict over the Spratly or even the Paracel with you guys

My rebuttals above

 

[ViXuyen]

1. no, actually the india-tibet border is one of the lightest defended borders in china(numbers wise), why is this you ask? because given the terrain, there no use to station a ton of troops unless war has already broken out, any major move by india could be spotted way before they are ready given the difficulties of getting everything up there. furthermore heavy tanks is all but useless there, so any combate is likely to involve a very small number of forces and almost no heavy equipment.

2/3 china does keep a large number of missiles and the north sea fleet basically all for japan, china also does keep a lot of missile and the east sea fleet at taiwan area. but heres the thing, china has a heck of alot of missiles.

4. this is where the best chinese divisions are stationed, the force there is trained and equipped to fight a standard american division one on one.

5. the force in point 4 is basically the same one for point 5. given its the same area.

6. surely you have heard of the south sea fleet?

you are assumming the situation is equally bad for china on all front. fact is china-russia relations are on the up and up, threat of war is extremely remote. large scale combat with india is also extremely unlikely. and PRC-ROC tries are currently amicable with a very remote chance of serious tensions at the moment. therefore it leaves two problem areas, namely the north east with possible NK situation and japan, and the south with the various island disputes. this is hardly unmanageable.

Unfortunately for you, China has massive land mass to defend and 7 potential enemies that China has to allocate its forces to such as Russia/Taiwan/SK/Japan/India/U.S..and Vietnam. Unlike the U.S who does not have to worry about any threats surrounding its border, Chinese forces are spread thin to defend on many fronts/enemies hence you have many military districts

Btw, if you add the Phillipines and the Indonesian to your list of potential enemies, China would have 9 enemies to spread her forces to

 

[BoQ77]

If all opposers cooperate, all up, all down ... then China will suffer much of difficulties

 

[NiceGuy]

15/05/2014

VietNamNet Bridge – The Vietnamese Government can sue China in the International Court of the Law of the Sea, while the Vietnam Oil and Gas Group (PetroVietnam) may sue the China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) in the civil court of Vietnam. So says Attorney Hoang Ngoc Giao, Director of the Institute for Legal Policy and Development.

Yes, US , pls help us to sue China to international court. Its time for a better relationship between US-VN

 

[GR!FF!N]

but in this case too,China will probably avoid to become a party in the cases,just like case Philippines lodged.

 

[Pangu]

1, Analysis, China, Vietnam
New Tensions In The South China Sea: Whose Sovereignty Over Paracels? – Analysis

May 15, 2014 RSIS Leave a comment

By RSIS

China’s positioning of a state-owned oil rig in waters near the disputed Paracel Islands has led to increased tensions between China and Vietnam. While this has been seen as another demonstration of Chinese assertiveness, a closer look may tell a different story.

By Sam Bateman

TENSIONS BETWEEN China and Vietnam over sovereignty issues in the South China Sea flared up again on 2 May 2014 when China positioned an oil rig in waters off the disputed Paracel Islands. Vietnam protested this action and sent vessels to disrupt the rig’s operations. China responded by sending more ships to protect the rig. Inevitably with the numbers of opposing vessels in the area, a violent clash occurred on 7 May injuring some Vietnamese personnel and damage to some vessels.

Vietnam has launched a strong diplomatic and public relations campaign to support its position. It appears to be winning the public relations battle with much global commentary supporting its claim that the rig is illegal and painting the situation as yet another example of China’s assertiveness. However, a closer look at the situation suggests that China may be within its rights with the rig. Undoubtedly, however, it could have handled the situation more diplomatically rather than acting unilaterally in a way that inevitably would lead to increased tension.

Locating the rig
The rig is about 120 nautical miles east of the Vietnamese coast, and 180 nautical miles south of China’s Hainan Island. These are the two nearest mainland points from which an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and continental shelf may unquestionably be measured. Equally importantly, however, the rig is about 14 nautical miles from a small island in the Paracels claimed by China and 80 nautical miles from Woody Island, a large feature with an area of about 500 hectares occupied by China.

Woody Island is indisputably an island under the regime of islands in the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and thus entitled to an EEZ and continental shelf. Despite global commentary that suggests otherwise, a negotiated maritime boundary in this area would likely place the rig within China’s EEZ even if reduced weight was given to China’s claimed insular features.

Vietnam claims that because the rig is closer to its mainland coast than to China’s and well inside 200 nautical miles of its coast, it lies within its EEZ and on its continental shelf. Superficially this argument may appear attractive but geographical proximity alone is not an unequivocal basis for claiming sovereignty or sovereign rights. There are many examples around the world of countries having sovereignty over features well inside the EEZ of another, or of EEZ boundaries being established significantly closer to one country than to another.

The sovereignty question
The question as to who has sovereignty over the Paracels is at the heart of the current situation. If Vietnam had sovereignty over the islands, there would be no dispute. However, despite much global commentary suggesting that Vietnam has a case to support its sovereignty claim, closer analysis of the history of the dispute suggests otherwise.

Vietnam’s current claim is seriously weakened by North Vietnam’s recognition of Chinese sovereignty over the Paracels in 1958 and its lack of protest between 1958 and 1975. A number of governments, including the United States, have explicitly or implicitly recognised Chinese sovereignty over some or all of the islands. China has occupied Woody Island since the end of World War Two. North Vietnamese occupation of that large feature may have significantly affected American operations against North Vietnam during the Vietnam War.

The US has urged the claimant countries to exercise care and restraint. Against the historical background of American acceptance of China’s sovereignty over Woody Island, it would be hypocritical now for Washington to make any stronger statement that might be seen as supportive of Vietnam’s position.

Where to now?
Previous incidents around the Paracels mainly related to fisheries management issues and China’s arrest of Vietnamese fishing vessels attempting to fish in or near the islands. Undoubtedly Vietnam can make a strong case that its fishermen have traditionally fished in these waters – in much the same way as China claims traditional rights for its fishermen elsewhere in the South China Sea.

Vietnam may well have been better off to agree to China’s sovereignty over the Paracels in return for China conceding traditional fishing rights in the area to Vietnamese fishermen and agreeing to pursue the joint development of marine resources in the waters between the islands and the coast of Vietnam. Unfortunately, however, the two countries have probably passed the point of no return in being able to reach such a negotiated settlement. Vietnam is playing for high odds by endeavouring to muster global and regional support for its position when in fact, it may end up with nothing.

Hard line positions by all the parties to the sovereignty disputes in the South China Sea are short-sighted and will inevitably lead to increased tensions and regional instability. There will be ‘losers’ in this approach when potentially all could be ‘winners’ if the parties accepted the need for functional cooperation in managing the sea and its resources. The geographical reality is that straight line maritime boundaries will be impossible to achieve in some parts of the sea, and as a consequence, the sole ownership of resources will also not be possible.

The irony of the current situation is that functional cooperation is not just something that would be nice to have but is an actual obligation under Part IX of UNCLOS covering semi-enclosed waters such as the South China Sea. That obligation has been forgotten while countries continue to assert their unilateral sovereignty claims and risk a ‘win-lose’ outcome.

Sam Bateman is a Senior Fellow in the Maritime Security Programme at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University. He is a former Australian naval commodore with research interests in regimes for good order at sea.

New Tensions In The South China Sea: Whose Sovereignty Over Paracels? - Analysis | Eurasia Review