South China Sea Forum

[CAPRICORN-88]

Older than you. I recommend you stop trolling, trust me.

It is so easier to be a troll in here but coming down to EARTH, in event of an ALL OUT WAR between USA and China, China will as a matter of strategy should take the opportunity and immediately ANNEXED Vietnam as its former Province of ANNAM.

Trust me, it is far too easy for China to do that.

 

[BuddhaPalm]

It is so easier to be a troll in here but coming down to EARTH, in event of an ALL OUT WAR between USA and China, China will as a matter of strategy should take the opportunity and immediately ANNEXED Vietnam as its former Province of ANNAM.

Trust me, it is far to easy for China to do that.

The only reason why we don't spank Vietnam harder already is because of VCP Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong. The moment they try to do colored revolution against VCP, we will defend our ally just like Russia defended Assad.

 

[gambit]

If you watch the documentary I posted, it yield the same result.
US has bases surrounded both Russia and China with everyone thought it was okay to do so.

That says much about how those everyone do not like Russia and China.

If the same were to deploy to their doorstep, it will then judge as ACT of WAR. Bias? No? Anyone?

If ? We will see if ever Russia and/or China are powerful enough to do something like that.

Remember the Cuban Missile Crisis where the Soviets decided that maintaining Cuba as a base was too expensive and effectively abandoned Cuba. In contrast, Japan and South Korea remains and thrives.

 

[Gijoe]

Now wait until China releases its "own" Red Sea underwater drone in few weeks...

It already sell online for $20 usd, and it is cost US that toy for $ 100000 usd. Lol, US drone only worth $20 usd online. Lol

 

[gambit]

It already sell online for $20 usd, and it is cost US that toy for $ 100000 usd. Lol, US drone only worth $20 usd online. Lol

Cost China much more than $150,000 in time, fuel, and salary to stole something worth only $20. LOL.

 

[BoQ77]

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

 

[cochine]

It is so easier to be a troll in here but coming down to EARTH, in event of an ALL OUT WAR between USA and China, China will as a matter of strategy should take the opportunity and immediately ANNEXED Vietnam as its former Province of ANNAM.

Trust me, it is far to easy for China to do that.

Its called a wetdream from ancient time.

 

[frequency]

This is very good news.

 

[SBUS-CXK]

To be completely square with you, I changed my avatar just so I could enjoy seeing you folks lose your cool over your rather peculiar presumptions of me.

I wasn't let down.

Even if the SU-30MKI replace LCA can not change your cheap.
Perhaps India 18 million modern slaves and 60 million child labor make you so confident?

I'd like to point out a few observations from your very own "Red-Sword" exercises:
- the Chinese AWACS (which uses a very large L-band array) was unable to detect the J-20
- the ground-based radar was unable to spot the J-20
- none of the air-based assets was able to detect the J-20
- these simulated "enemy" assets were knocked out of the simulation before they even knew a J-20 was in the vicinity

How could you possibly expect a vessel like Liaoning to detect an aircraft (B-2) that is far stealthier than the J-20 due to its uncompromised VLO design?

A country does not depend on one plane.
He needs a lot of support.
For example: Q-5, J-6, J-7, J-8, J-10, J-10B, J-10C, J-11, J-11B, J-15, J-20, J-31, JH-7, H-6k, Y-8, Y-20, KJ-200, KJ-500, C919, AG600. (JF-17).
This is not your the kind of modern slave state you can produce only the world's lightest fighters (trash).

 

[samsara]

China Seized An Unmanned U.S. Navy Sub - That Was Possibly Legal

Moon of Alabama - 2016-12-16

China Just Seized an Unmanned US Navy Sub

China just seized an unmanned underwater vehicle operated by the US Navy, according to reports from Reuters. The seizure occurred in the South China Sea yesterday, and the US has since demanded that the vehicle be returned.

Reuters is reporting that the vehicle was seized just northwest of the Subic Bay, shortly before the USNS Bowditch was about to pick up the unmanned vehicle.

Aside from the details of this case which do not yet know (there is a tit-for-tat ongoing between the U.S. and Chinese Navy in the South-China-Sea) the legal issue involved here could get quite complicate.

Many militaries and commercial shipping companies are working on unmanned ships. But there is no case law and no international law yet that is applicable for unmanned shipping. The Laws of the Sea and the Law of Salvage all consider, to my best knowledge, only manned shipping.

This spring I discussed this problem over lunch with some people working in commercial cargo shipping here in Hamburg. The first plans for unmanned commercial cargo liners had just come up (see pic below). They had no ready answers to the open legal questions.

The Chinese can simply say: "We saw a ship or submarine that seemed to be somewhat erratic in its movements. It did not respond to direct bridge to bridge bull horn calls. No crew was seen on board. We reasonably considered it a danger to international shipping. We salvaged it. If it is yours we will give it back (after a thorough inspection) if you pay us the usual applicable salvage award."

What can the U.S. in a legally straight way respond? How will it respond?

How would a British Navy Captain react if some unannounced unmanned ship came up through the English Channel? He would probably ask: "Is that ship possibly out of control or damaged? How would I know? Is it a danger to the dense general shipping here? Should I salvage it? Should I sink it?"

What would the legal answers be?

It took centuries until all nations agreed to some common Law of the Sea. I wonder how long it will take to make that applicable for unmanned shipping. With probably millions of dollars worth of cargo on such ships the problems could soon escalate.

Is it "pirating" or "salvaging" when someone enters up and takes control of such a ship? I don't know and reading the law hasn't helped.

The Chinese were possibly well within their rights when they took control of the unmanned U.S. Navy sub. But do not expect the U.S. Navy to support that legal position. Until of course the day it captures some unmanned Chinese ship.

 

[SBUS-CXK]

Now wait until China releases its "own" Red Sea underwater drone in few weeks...

China is the world's third largest arms exporter. Have their own industrial capabilities and R & D capabilities.
This is the Chinese CH-4 uav in Iraq to combat terrorist organizations video.

So now I want to know. What can be made in your country?
So, a lame laugh at a long-distance runner up. Really interesting.

 

[samsara]

China To Hand Over Seized US Drone "Under These Conditions"

ZeroHedge, 2016-12-18

On Saturday morning, the Pentagon was eager to announce that China would return a U.S. Navy underwater drone after its military scooped up the submersible in the South China Sea late this week and sparked a row that drew in President-elect Donald Trump. As previously reported, Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook said that “through direct engagement with Chinese authorities, we have secured an understanding that the Chinese will return the UUV to the United States."

In retrospect, the Pentagon may have declared victory too soon. According to the South China Morning Post, China's handover of the drone will come "with conditions", adding that "Beijing is expected to demand the United States scale down its surveillance in the South China Sea when it hands back a seized US underwater drone." Beijing would also "seek an expansion in the code for unplanned military encounters in the disputed waters to cover drones like the one seized by a Chinese warship off the Philippine coast near Subic Bay on Thursday."

Zhang Zhexin, a professor from the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies, said he expected it would take about 10 days for the drone to be returned. The demand for US concessions stems from the fact that “China is worried that there will be more action from the US during its power transition period,” Zhexin said. “Beijing will possibly talk to the US about expanding the code for unplanned encounters at sea to include unmanned underwater vehicles.”

Currently the code includes a set of standard operational procedures designed to minimize the risks of unintended maritime encounters, but it does not have a procedure to deal with underwater drones.

China is concerned that despite the US insistence that the drone was used for purely peaceful purposes. its deployment had ulterior motives. Zhang Huang, a professor from the PLA National Defence University, said the unmanned underwater vehicle could be used to gather data on Chinese naval actions, and the navigation details of Chinese submarines, People’s Daily reported.

Zhang Baohui, a China security specialist at Hong Kong’s Lingnan University, said the drone could be used to collect data on factors such as currents and salinity, as well as special sonar signals from Chinese nuclear submarines. “Both uses have military applications. The first could be used to track possible routes by Chinese submarines,” he said.

“The second could be used to detect and trace Chinese nuclear submarines.”

“The drone is part of the US’ anti-submarine warfare.”

 

[gambit]

The Chinese were possibly well within their rights when they took control of the unmanned U.S. Navy sub. But do not expect the U.S. Navy to support that legal position. Until of course the day it captures some unmanned Chinese ship.

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/rt-beiji...china-sea-report.467091/page-23#ixzz4THb7uwHZ

No, the Chinese were not within their rights.

First...The event happened far away from any Chinese territorial water. In fact, it happened in Filipino waters proper -- inside Subic Bay.

Second...The Bowditch noted that the Chinese ship have been stalking the Bowditch before taking the UUV. This means the Chinese knew exactly what the Bowditch does.

Third...Now the Chinese claimed...

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-drone-idUSKBN14526J

...discovered a piece of "unidentified equipment" and checked it to prevent any navigational safety issues before discovering it was a U.S. drone.

If it was completely innocuous, then the Chinese should have returned the UUV to the Bowditch when asked at that time, instead, the Bowditch crew reported that the Chinese did not replied when queried.

When someone tells you that what you -- innocuously -- found belongs to them, at least do the polite thing and see if they are telling the truth. What happened was not in a crowded area. It was the open sea, so all the more reason that if the US said it belongs to US, odds are very good that the thing BELONGS TO US.

 

[samsara]

The Chinese are right in that leaving an unmanned drone floating is a hazard to shipping - they had every right to pick up hazards.

Unmanned (no captain, no crew) vehicle on the open sea belongs to the first one that finds it. Especially if it seeds sonars and opto-acoustical monitoring devices in the disputed areas. Same happened with the W. Bush and the downed spy plane. Nothing to really worry about right now, except rhetorics.

 

[gambit]

The Chinese are right in that leaving an unmanned drone floating is a hazard to shipping - they had every right to pick up hazards.

Fine...Then why not released it to the owner when he asked for it ? After all, once he asked for it, the thing becomes his responsibility to remove it, correct ?

Spin it any way you want but only Internet Chinese will believe your argument. The people least gullible are the experienced mariners, which ironically includes the Chinese crew who stole the UUV. In other words, they knew exactly what they were doing -- theft.