The U.S. just sent a carrier strike group to confront China

[Dungeness]

I have checked, but you may want to check the UNCLOS definition of Freedom of navigation

FON in UNCLOS means "navigation shall not suffer interference from other states";
FON OP in US military terms means "challenging the excessive territorial claims";

And here is what you said: "there are only one term and meaning for Freedom of Navigation"

Do you still insist they are the same thing now? Man up, soldier, admit your mistake.

By the way, US has not ratified UNCLOS, so borrowing the term FON from UNCLOS to glorify or address up its military operation is kind of sneaky and not convincing.

Are there any third party country US can "Go to war with" North Korea? Maybe the US should fight a war with North Korea in China .

Dude, you do know "go to war with means you want an invasion by either North Korean "invade" the south, or the American "invading" North. Otherwise there are no way to "go to war with" someone without invading a country.

We are not talking about fighting a war in the video game..

Of course, go to war with NK means invading NK. So what is your point?

What did China do in the past 60 years?

Dispute in Arunachal Pradesh
Dispute in Taiwan
Dispute in South China Seas
Dispute in East China Seas

Interesting, that is all you can come up with. May I also add Korean War and Vietnam War?

Arunnachal/South Tibet is between China and India, and neither has invited US to be a judge, and I think the two countries are capable of solving the problems themselves. Taiwan is entirely Chinese matter, so leave it with them. SCS is something after "Pivot To Asia" policy. Dispute with Japan in ECS is a long standing issue since 1970s. So what exactly qualifies as the offence of "what China was doing drawing the US back into Asia"?

You blame China on every single dispute China has with its neighbors. we can understand it is out of the "national interest" of the US, but, please don't pretend you are doing this out of selfless "justice for all" like an innocent angel.

That's funny, if US does not want to go to war with China over the SCS, then whatever they do is "meaningless"?

Did China plan on going to war with anyone then? If not, then would it be also "Meaningless" for China to have a military force? OR if China are not plan on going to war with anyone else, then would it be meaningless too to "militarize" those island?.

"Meaningless" means the US is not going to change the ground reality in SCS.

What US may do or may not do is not in your concern. Would it be anyway shape or form you can control. If you want to talk about war, okay, let's talk about war. If you don't, then you should shut up about which ever side not ready for war.

Likewise, it is not your concern either. You are not in position calling the shot. Should I remind you this is an internet forum, anybody can talk about his opinion, you either agree or disagree. It is rude to ask people to "shut up" just because you don't like his point of view. You are losing your cool. Please act like a responsible and respectful forum member, a "Professional" one.

Now I know why so many members have put you in their ignored lists. You just can't handle a meaningful debate if you are losing the arguments.

 

[jhungary]

FON in UNCLOS means "navigation shall not suffer interference from other states";
FON OP in US military terms means "challenging the excessive territorial claims";

And here is what you said: "there are only one term and meaning for Freedom of Navigation"

Do you still insist they are the same thing now? Man up, soldier, admit your mistake.

By the way, US has not ratified UNCLOS, so borrowing the term FON from UNCLOS to glorify or address up its military operation is kind of sneaky and not convincing.

Dude, how did your English actually make sense when you claim you are living in the United States and earn above average salary??

Can you tell me the reason why the US Conduct FONOP to "Challenge the excessive territorial claims"?

That's because someone is "Freedom of Navigation is Interfered by some other states"

The whole Idea of FONOP is to preserve the right of freedom of navigation in high seas. Hence you will not see US Navy conduct FONOP in undisputed High Seas.

Of course, go to war with NK means invading NK. So what is your point?

My point? What is your points? You are the one that bought in the whole "US does not engage NK" issue on the table. Not me.

Interesting, that is all you can come up with. May I also add Korean War and Vietnam War?

Arunnachal/South Tibet is between China and India, and neither has invited US to be a judge, and I think the two countries are capable of solving the problems themselves. Taiwan is entirely Chinese matter, so leave it with them. SCS is something after "Pivot To Asia" policy. Dispute with Japan in ECS is a long standing issue since 1970s. So what exactly qualifies as the offence of "what China was doing drawing the US back into Asia"?

You blame China on every single dispute China has with its neighbors. we can understand it is out of the "national interest" of the US, but, please don't pretend you are doing this out of selfless "justice for all" like an innocent angel.

Did I pretend I am a selfless "Justice for all" kind of person?

I said, US pivot back to Asia because of China, you may not like it, you may not agree with it. But do you honestly think US will come back after leaving Philippine and downsize the base in Korea (from 45000 to 23000), if China behave normally?? And remember, it is not US who said they will come back, they were asked.

True hurts, I never pretend to be a selfless justice for all kind of guys, however, your Chinese government pretend to be the victim here, when all they do is try to bully other out of the way.

"Meaningless" means the US is not going to change the ground reality in SCS.

Then I can also say China keep militarizing those island will not change the ground reality of SCS.

The US will keep sailing around your so called "territories" and you will keep issuing warning. Nothing WILL EVER CHANGE.

Likewise, it is not your concern either. You are not in position calling the shot. Should I remind you this is an internet forum, anybody can talk about his opinion, you either agree or disagree. It is rude to ask people to "shut up" just because you don't like his point of view. You are losing your cool. Please act like a responsible and respectful forum member, a "Professional" one.

Now I know why so many members have put you in their ignored lists. You just can't handle a meaningful debate if you are losing the arguments.

Lol, then what are you saying? You are saying I cannot have emotion on a debate? Isn't it a bit out of your concern? If you think I am rude, I am not respecting you, then please do remember, NOBODY POINTING A GUN AT YOUR HEAD TO REPLY TO MY POST. If you don't like something, you don't need to reply. Talk about hypocrisy.

Remember how this convo started? You post some news about the US Navy SEALs and you got call out on for not reading your own quote. That's how this convo started. Now, do talk about rubbish post.

There are only 7 people put me in their ignore list, which is almost all Chinese member, If I make a post in member section and ask would the forum member whom value their opinion more? Me or the entire Chinese Brigade? If you all move on, you will not be missed by anybody. That is the ground truth.

 

[Tiqiu]

There are only 7 people put me in their ignore list, which is almost all Chinese member, If I make a post in member section and ask would the forum member whom value their opinion more? Me or the entire Chinese Brigade?

I didn't quite understand this paragraph, were you trying to say that If you were to initiate a poll in the PDF to see whose opinion would all members here value more between yours and those of the entire Chinese numbers (except you), than the result would be yours?

If your answer is yes, then shouldn't you first change your flag so that such poll can be conducted in the first place because you said "Me or the entire Chinese Brigade"?

 

[gambit]

Here is your problem that you get really angry before you figure out what China's claim is. China has never claimed the entire SCS as its territorial waters, it just inherited the claim from ROC that considered all islands and reefs within the dash line as their assets. The "dash line" merely means "undefined".

No one in Asia buy that spin.

I said a few days back in a different thread that your China is taking after Imperial Japan.

Kanji Ishiwara

Haven't you ever heard of Perry? Don't you know anything about your country's history? … Tokugawa Japan believed in isolation; it didn't want to have anything to do with other countries, and had its doors locked tightly. Then along came Perry from your country in his black ships to open those doors; he aimed his big guns at Japan and warned that "If you don't deal with us, look out for these; open your doors and negotiate with other countries too." And then when Japan did open its doors and tried dealing with other countries, it learned that all those countries were a fearfully aggressive lot. And so for its own defense it took your own country as its teacher and set about learning how to be aggressive. You might say we became your disciples. Why don't you subpoena Perry from the other world and try him as a war criminal?

Kanji may have called Perry by name, but everyone back then knew who he was referring to, even thru translation, when he said 'you'. Kanji was smart enough to know that his Japan, as an island nation, was closer to the UK than to the US, even though he was indicting the entire Western bloc in his self defense as he stood accused of war crimes. If Japan was to increase her security status in Asia and qualified to stand as equals with the whites in the world, Japan MUST engage in foreign conquest. The UK and the Europeans more than the US were the examples to follow. The UK with her global reach navy, and the Europeans with their many land armies that sporadically fought each other throughout the centuries. The US had no holdings on mainland China while the UK and the Europeans had their profitable divisions on the same.

So Imperial Japan became an imperialist nation and the first victim was Korea, then China. The day Imperial Japan defeated the Russians on land and on sea, Japan was the equal of the whites on the world. A powerful military that can challenge foes and land and sea, and large holdings of foreign territories with accompanying submissive peoples to serve her.

Treaty of Shimonoseki - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article 1: China recognizes definitively the full and complete independence and autonomy of Korea,...

Should we look forward to the day when today's China lay claim to Korea ?

First Sino-Japanese War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As Prussian advisor Major Klemens Meckel put it to the Japanese, Korea was "a dagger pointed at the heart of Japan".

Korea is equally the dagger pointed at China. And since your China is taking after Imperial JPN in so many ways, the Koreans, specifically the South Koreans, are NOT going to be surprised when one day China lay claim that Korea belongs to China, or at least as a tributary state when Korea once was to China.

It will not be US who will fire the first shot that will start a war in Asia. It will be your China.

 

[Dungeness]

No one in Asia buy that spin.

I said a few days back in a different thread that your China is taking after Imperial Japan.

Kanji Ishiwara

Kanji may have called Perry by name, but everyone back then knew who he was referring to, even thru translation, when he said 'you'. Kanji was smart enough to know that his Japan, as an island nation, was closer to the UK than to the US, even though he was indicting the entire Western bloc in his self defense as he stood accused of war crimes. If Japan was to increase her security status in Asia and qualified to stand as equals with the whites in the world, Japan MUST engage in foreign conquest. The UK and the Europeans more than the US were the examples to follow. The UK with her global reach navy, and the Europeans with their many land armies that sporadically fought each other throughout the centuries. The US had no holdings on mainland China while the UK and the Europeans had their profitable divisions on the same.

So Imperial Japan became an imperialist nation and the first victim was Korea, then China. The day Imperial Japan defeated the Russians on land and on sea, Japan was the equal of the whites on the world. A powerful military that can challenge foes and land and sea, and large holdings of foreign territories with accompanying submissive peoples to serve her.

Treaty of Shimonoseki - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Should we look forward to the day when today's China lay claim to Korea ?

First Sino-Japanese War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Korea is equally the dagger pointed at China. And since your China is taking after Imperial JPN in so many ways, the Koreans, specifically the South Koreans, are NOT going to be surprised when one day China lay claim that Korea belongs to China, or at least as a tributary state when Korea once was to China.

It will not be US who will fire the first shot that will start a war in Asia. It will be your China.

You don't know what you are talking about, and I don't know what you are talking about either. It is not going anywhere, so let's just leave the way it is.

 

[xunzi]

That's right, we will see China exercising this same right more often as her navy continues to grow. To the disappointment of some people's wishes, despite the big eye-catching headline, Stennis CSG did not enter within 12 nautical miles of contested islands.


Stennis Carrier Strike Group Exits South China Sea Days after Arriving | Military.com

The John C. Stennis Strike Group synchronizes the capabilities of multiple ships and squadrons to provide coordinated forward presence around the globe. Our forces, up to 10 ships and 70 aircraft, are mission flexible and ready to engage. (US Navy photo)

Mar 08, 2016 | by Hope Hodge Seck
Days after its much-heralded arrival in the region, the John C. Stennis Carrier Strike Group has passed out of the South China Sea, officials announced on Monday.

The strike group, which includes the USS Stennis, Arleigh-Burke class guided missile destroyers USS Chung-Hoon, USS Stockdale, and USS William P. Lawrence, and Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser USS Mobile Bay, arrived in the South China Sea on March 1.

Its appearance in the region came amid rising tensions over China's decision to deploy HQ-9 surface-to-air missiles to the disputed Woody Island in the Paracel Island chain, a move that numerous U.S. officials have described as militarization of the region against international policy.

Navy officials, however, have maintained that the ships were in the area only for standard operations and that their presence was neither intended as a show of force nor as a formal confrontation of Chinese naval forces.

The Stennis strike group completed routine operations in the South China Sea for five days and then transited into the Philippine Sea through the Luzon Strait, Navy officials said in a news release. During the strike group's transit through the region, it conducted daily flight operations with Carrier Air Wing 9 and completed a replenishment-at-sea, stocking up on supplies and fuel from the fast combat support ship Rainier.

According to the release, ships from the Chinese People's Liberation Army (Navy) remained in the vicinity of the strike group as it transited thought the sea, but bridge-to-bridge communications between the two navies remained professional.

A spokesman for U.S. Pacific Fleet, Lt. Cmdr. Matt Knight, told Military.com he did not believe any ships within the strike group came within 12 nautical miles of contested islands, which would have signaled a formal freedom of navigation operation within territorial seas.

The Navy conducted two "innocent passage" operations within the last six months. Last October, the guided-missile destroyer Lassen passed near the contested Subi reef and other regions within the Spratly islands. And in January, the guided-missile destroyer Curtis Wilbur passed within 12 nautical miles of Triton Island in the Paracels.

The commander of U.S. Pacific Command, Adm. Harry Harris, told lawmakers last month that he supported continued freedom of navigation operations in order to assert U.S. rights and discredit territorial overreach in the region.

Knight said the transit of the Stennis and other ships in the strike group through the South China Sea was not linked to rising tensions in the region.

"This is a routine patrol of a U.S. carrier strike group," he said. "Our ships and aircraft operate routinely throughout the Western Pacific, including the South China Sea, and have for decades. This patrol was conducted in accordance with international law, and the United States will fly, sail, and operate anywhere international law allows."

Knight added that Pacific Fleet ships sailed a total of 700 days in the South China Sea over the course of 2015.

"We do have a fairly continuous presence there," he said. "We've been doing this for decades."

Other ships, including the Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser Antietam and amphibious dock landing ship Ashland, also conducted routine operations within the South China Sea within the last week, according to official Navy releases.

We will leave the possibility to conduct freedom of navigation in the future, so it is important our American friends and their friends understand that key point.

 

[jhungary]

I didn't quite understand this paragraph, were you trying to say that If you were to initiate a poll in the PDF to see whose opinion would all members here value more between yours and those of the entire Chinese numbers (except you), than the result would be yours?

If your answer is yes, then shouldn't you first change your flag so that such poll can be conducted in the first place because you said "Me or the entire Chinese Brigade"?

dude, not all Chinese here act like Chinese brigade. There are still a few sane Chinese out here.

I don't know about you, I am probably the few (if not only) member here being followed by almost every other nation here in PDF. I do not just have a support network based on one country, Indian, Pakistani, American, Vietnamese, Philippino, Indonesian all appreciate my post and my contribution.

You get a selection of Chinese fan base, I got that, I don't work like that. I don't ask for follower, I do not post here just to please ANYBODY. I say what I think and what I know, if you like it, then yeah good on ya, if you don't like it, well, then I can't do anything about it. This is why I was followed by people form different nation.

You like to tow your line for your own people, I don't mind, you can do whatever the heck you want, I respect that, I think that's wrong, but I respect that. But if your buddy here claim I am a rubbish poster because I was "Ignored" by "many" member here (Emphasis on the MANY part)? LOL, either he is joking or he is lying to himself. LOL. Respect is not about what you say, but how you earn. I don't care if you have the same skin I have or spoke the same language,

 

[rott]

You don't know what you are talking about, and I don't know what you are talking about either. It is not going anywhere, so let's just leave the way it is.

LOL...

 

[gambit]

...and I don't know what you are talking about either.

Oooohhh...Yes, you do...Buddy...

You are smart enough to know from even basic Political Science that countries are not that much different from human beings -- considering how people make up countries. So from that perspective, countries and their foreign affairs have been reflecting basic human behaviors on every level.

You would emulate from afar if you must. But if there is an equally successful example closer to home, why look beyond your horizon ?

Of all the countries in Asia, not one have managed to eclipse Japan in terms of rapid rise from being behind others, prominence in international politics since that time of awakening, creation and amassing of wealth, and started a war that produced territorial conquests and subjugation of natives. China have no need to look around the Earth's sphere for inspiration, just across a few miles of sea water will do. China will surpass Japan in the list of things above, until the final item -- a major war.

Despite this is the 21st century, your leadership is the same as that of 19th century Imperial Japan. China will not be satisfied with being merely 'prominent' but from taking after Imperial Japan, China expects herself to be dominant and the end justifies the means, even if those means involves violence. China have no use for the Europeans whose countries decided to live in peace despite sharing borders and a bloody history because of those borders. For China, enlightenment is for the weak. China's leadership sees the Asiatic blood that Imperial Japan spilled as something to be admired, not rued.

But Imperial Japan is not the only geographically immediate neighbor worthy of emulation.

Russia/Soviet historian William Fuller said of over 300 yrs of Russia's political thoughts...

They generally employed the cold-blooded language of strategy and analysis. They weighed the international impact of what they proposed to do; they pondered the strengths and weaknesses of their prospective enemies; and they justified their policies in terms of the benefits they anticipated for Russian power and security. One is struck by the omnipresence of this style of reasoning.

Substitute 'Russian' for 'Chinese' and we see what is happening in the SCS today.

 

[Dungeness]

Oooohhh...Yes, you do...Buddy...

You are smart enough to know from even basic Political Science that countries are not that much different from human beings -- considering how people make up countries. So from that perspective, countries and their foreign affairs have been reflecting basic human behaviors on every level.

You would emulate from afar if you must. But if there is an equally successful example closer to home, why look beyond your horizon ?

Of all the countries in Asia, not one have managed to eclipse Japan in terms of rapid rise from being behind others, prominence in international politics since that time of awakening, creation and amassing of wealth, and started a war that produced territorial conquests and subjugation of natives. China have no need to look around the Earth's sphere for inspiration, just across a few miles of sea water will do. China will surpass Japan in the list of things above, until the final item -- a major war.

Despite this is the 21st century, your leadership is the same as that of 19th century Imperial Japan. China will not be satisfied with being merely 'prominent' but from taking after Imperial Japan, China expects herself to be dominant and the end justifies the means, even if those means involves violence. China have no use for the Europeans whose countries decided to live in peace despite sharing borders and a bloody history because of those borders. For China, enlightenment is for the weak. China's leadership sees the Asiatic blood that Imperial Japan spilled as something to be admired, not rued.

But Imperial Japan is not the only geographically immediate neighbor worthy of emulation.

Russia/Soviet historian William Fuller said of over 300 yrs of Russia's political thoughts...

They generally employed the cold-blooded language of strategy and analysis. They weighed the international impact of what they proposed to do; they pondered the strengths and weaknesses of their prospective enemies; and they justified their policies in terms of the benefits they anticipated for Russian power and security. One is struck by the omnipresence of this style of reasoning.

Substitute 'Russian' for 'Chinese' and we see what is happening in the SCS today.

"Despite this is the 21st century, your leadership is the same as that of 19th century Imperial Japan."

With all due respect, I don't think we need to go any further if this is what you have in mind. Modern day China was never an expansionist country, so your hypothesis was baseless. Therefore, I don't expect any meaningful, intellectually stimulating discussion under this presumption.

If your assumption were right, China would have annexed NK and NV in the process defending them. After all, even Vietnam wanted to annex whole Sub Mekong, right?

Remember one thing at least, PRC, in its 67 years of existence, has never claimed an inch of territory that was not on the may of ROC. It had solved the border issues with 14 out 16 land neighbors, most of time with great sacrifice on its own land claims. You can easily verify my statement by simply comparing the official maps of ROC and PRC.

Thanks for your long writing, but I think it is just nonsense.

 

[Zhang Fan]

"Despite this is the 21st century, your leadership is the same as that of 19th century Imperial Japan."

With all due respect, I don't think we need to go any further if this is what you have in mind. Modern day China was never an expansionist country, so your hypothesis was baseless. Therefore, I don't expect any meaningful, intellectually stimulating discussion under this presumption.

If your assumption were right, China would have annexed NK and NV in the process defending them. After all, even Vietnam wanted to annex whole Sub Mekong, right?

Remember one thing at least, PRC, in its 67 years of existence, has never claimed an inch of territory that was not on the may of ROC. It had solved the border issues with 14 out 16 land neighbors, most of time with great sacrifice on its own land claims. You can easily verify my statement by simply comparing the official maps of ROC and PRC.

Thanks for your long writing, but I think it is just nonsense.

china didn't annex NK is because the pressure from the cccp,china sacrificed even gave a huge chunk of land to myanmar was for eliminateing a remnant of ROC troops settling there

 

[gambit]

Modern day China was never an expansionist country,...

Because China could not. During the Cold War, China was geopolitically restrained, but that did not stop China from being a troublemaker in other Asian countries as testified by Lee Kwan Yew in his memoir. Lee credited the US, via the Vietnam War, for containment of communism. He conceded that without the Vietnam War, Asia would have been under communist thralldom with China being the instigator of many revolutions throughout the region.

If your assumption were right, China would have annexed NK and NV in the process defending them.

Taking over NKR is still an option for China under the need of a geopolitical buffer state. As for North Viet Nam, the Viet Minh may have needed China but no way would the Vietnamese allow their independence lost to China.

Thanks for your long writing, but I think it is just nonsense.

What China is doing in the SCS is not nonsense. It is perfectly in line of what any regional hegemon aspirant want and MUST do if it want to be that hegemon. Considering billions of dollars of sea trade going thru the SCS, putting a potential physical stranglehold on Asia make sense as a threat for lesser powers.

YOU might think my argument is nonsense. Your China's leadership -- if they are reading me -- is smiling.

 

[Place Of Space]

Because China could not. During the Cold War, China was geopolitically restrained, but that did not stop China from being a troublemaker in other Asian countries as testified by Lee Kwan Yew in his memoir. Lee credited the US, via the Vietnam War, for containment of communism. He conceded that without the Vietnam War, Asia would have been under communist thralldom with China being the instigator of many revolutions throughout the region.


Taking over NKR is still an option for China under the need of a geopolitical buffer state. As for North Viet Nam, the Viet Minh may have needed China but no way would the Vietnamese allow their independence lost to China.


What China is doing in the SCS is not nonsense. It is perfectly in line of what any regional hegemon aspirant want and MUST do if it want to be that hegemon. Considering billions of dollars of sea trade going thru the SCS, putting a potential physical stranglehold on Asia make sense as a threat for lesser powers.

YOU might think my argument is nonsense. Your China's leadership -- if they are reading me -- is smiling.

"He conceded that without the Vietnam War, Asia would have been under communist thralldom with China being the instigator of many revolutions throughout the region."
Most part of Asia were still european colony in the communism booming period. Or at least the remaining european colonist still struggled to stay here, keep the occupation status. The crux of those revolutions in Asia were achieving independence.

 

[greenwood]

the US can only bark

@Nihonjin1051 @Shotgunner51 @F-22Raptor @Hamartia Antidote @TaiShang @Cossack25A1

Talented works.