"This is the Chinese navy... You go!" China warns US spy plane flying over South China Sea

[Genesis]

The idea and need of 'freedom of navigation' predate the UNCLOS convention, buddy. Maybe not in formalized text, but certainly was in tacit agreement post WW II, the parties involved included China. If what China built on those reefs cannot be recognized as islands, that 12-mile exclusionary zone do not exist on any island, and any shooting at anyone by China will be considered an act of war -- BY CHINA.

So yes, you may draw when ready.

NOT FORMALIZED in text, that is a big step from not formalized to formalized. International norms don't HAVE to be followed, yet nobody goes to the 12 miles territorial waters of the US, nor does the US goes to anyone elses.

Your claim that we would lose what is formalized in the agreement is false, when it is proven, it won't be lost.

12 miles continental China, I have always maintained that the islands for now is a gray area, and thus the 12 miles is informal. You can check if that has been my stance or not.

Can you even keep a conversation, oh and I never use laugh at someone else, because 9 of out 10, you are really just making a fool of ourself.

 

[Zero_wing]

NOT FORMALIZED in text, that is a big step from not formalized to formalized. International norms don't HAVE to be followed, yet nobody goes to the 12 miles territorial waters of the US, nor does the US goes to anyone elses.

Your claim that we would lose what is formalized in the agreement is false, when it is proven, it won't be lost.

12 miles continental China, I have always maintained that the islands for now is a gray area, and thus the 12 miles is informal. You can check if that has been my stance or not.

Can you even keep a conversation, oh and I never use laugh at someone else, because 9 of out 10, you are really just making a fool of ourself.

Yes and yet its so the opposite

 

[kawaraj]

The idea and need of 'freedom of navigation' predate the UNCLOS convention, buddy. Maybe not in formalized text, but certainly was in tacit agreement post WW II, the parties involved included China. If what China built on those reefs cannot be recognized as islands, that 12-mile exclusionary zone do not exist on any island, and any shooting at anyone by China will be considered an act of war -- BY CHINA.

So yes, you may draw when ready.

I don't think the USA has endorsed this UNCLOS convention.

As your pretext saying, if US conducts any aggression towards Chinese navy or Chinese construction site, or any such as, these actions shall be considered as ACT of WAR, an invasion of China by the U.S.. The Chinese navy paid by their taxpayer are obliged to honor their duty to protect their land for their Chinese people.

Any nation will do the same.

 

[gambit]

NOT FORMALIZED in text, that is a big step from not formalized to formalized. International norms don't HAVE to be followed, yet nobody goes to the 12 miles territorial waters of the US, nor does the US goes to anyone elses.

Your claim that we would lose what is formalized in the agreement is false, when it is proven, it won't be lost.

12 miles continental China, I have always maintained that the islands for now is a gray area, and thus the 12 miles is informal. You can check if that has been my stance or not.

Can you even keep a conversation, oh and I never use laugh at someone else, because 9 of out 10, you are really just making a fool of ourself.

Then there is nothing for China to protest, right ? Just shoot whoever is within range. Then deal with the consequences.

 

[j20blackdragon]

Why does China need to fire the first shot? The onus is on the US to stop the island construction. If you do nothing, we gain 7 islands located on strategic sea lanes controlling 40 percent of the world's commerce. Combine that with the Paracel Islands and Hainan and we have a complete stranglehold on the South China Sea.

 

[Genesis]

Then there is nothing for China to protest, right ? Just shoot whoever is within range. Then deal with the consequences.

We're done here.

 

[gambit]

We're done here.

You were 'done' a long time ago.

Why does China need to fire the first shot? The onus is on the US to stop the island construction. If you do nothing, we gain 7 islands located on strategic sea lanes controlling 40 percent of the world's commerce. Combine that with the Paracel Islands and Hainan and we have a complete stranglehold on the South China Sea.

Nooo...The onus is upon China to actually do something to compel ship traffic to obey China's wishes, and that compulsion is contingent upon the US to do nothing. Can China persuade the US to do nothing ? If not, then start shooting.

 

[Genesis]

You were 'done' a long time ago.


Nooo...The onus is upon China to actually do something to compel ship traffic to obey China's wishes, and that compulsion is contingent upon the US to do nothing. Can China persuade the US to do nothing ? If not, then start shooting.

prove to me that I said to shoot, since you like to throw that term so much. I never said it and you know it, all I said was if ships get within 12 miles of the continental China and we'll shoot, but you must misinterpret that in a way that made it sound like we'll shoot if the 12 miles is crossed with our islands, when clearly, not only this thread, but others that proves that is the last thing I meant.

As to your assertion that ship traffic need to obey China, China never said no ships can go within Chinese EEZ, we have no rules on that, even with our continental EEZ.

Nobody claims China will stop international trade in our EEZ, case and point is we currently have EEZ and we don't do so now or ever.

You like to claim things that are just not there, but I guess if you start arguing rationally about anything or even just against the things that we did say, you have a lot less posts.

 

[EastSea]

Uncle Sam is coming.

prove to me that I said to shoot, since you like to throw that term so much. I never said it and you know it, all I said was if ships get within 12 miles of the continental China and we'll shoot, but you must misinterpret that in a way that made it sound like we'll shoot if the 12 miles is crossed with our islands, when clearly, not only this thread, but others that proves that is the last thing I meant.

As to your assertion that ship traffic need to obey China, China never said no ships can go within Chinese EEZ, we have no rules on that, even with our continental EEZ.

Nobody claims China will stop international trade in our EEZ, case and point is we currently have EEZ and we don't do so now or ever.

You like to claim things that are just not there, but I guess if you start arguing rationally about anything or even just against the things that we did say, you have a lot less posts.

reefs and rocks didn't have own 12 nm.

 

[anonymus]

Why does China need to fire the first shot? The onus is on the US to stop the island construction. If you do nothing, we gain 7 islands located on strategic sea lanes controlling 40 percent of the world's commerce. Combine that with the Paracel Islands and Hainan and we have a complete stranglehold on the South China Sea.

And what good that would do to China?

 

[anonymus]

You were 'done' a long time ago.


Nooo...The onus is upon China to actually do something to compel ship traffic to obey China's wishes, and that compulsion is contingent upon the US to do nothing. Can China persuade the US to do nothing ? If not, then start shooting.

Not only US, but any decent Navy. If China molest shipping in South China Sea, others would molest Chinese Shipping elsewhere.

Any Navy with even a handful of Frigate class ships could return favour to Chinese elsewhere.

 

[anonymus]

What couldn't China do with our navy and coast guard that the convention can? Since the US, according to the people here, don't respect our 12 miles claim and EEZ claim anyways, what would we have to lose by not being in the convention.

Would the US start to go within the continental China's 12 miles "territorial" waters, if we had not been in the convention?

Who else dares to go inside our territorial water, or want to? Due to our navy and coast guard.

So to recap, the US doesn't respect where we want the convention to work, while the others are too weak to infringe even if we weren't in the convention.

How does this change anything.

As I have stated in the post above, Though China could enforce any Quixotic rule in SCS, but what will it do when countries whose shipping China would molest in SCS decide to repay favour elsewhere. Your Navy is not strong enough ,and would never become strong enough, to force its will outside your immediate neighbourhood.

Without benefits of treaty, China opens itself to harassment. It would not be able to take offending party to court.What would you do if France/Spain/Italy decide to ban Chinese shipping in Mediterranean, or India decide to ban Chinese Shipping in Indian Ocean; if China is not a party to UNCLOS?

 

[j20blackdragon]

No one would care if China imposed a naval blockade on Vietnam or the Philippines. We already did a trial run when we trolled Vietnam with the oil rig last year. Did anyone come to Vietnam's aid?

 

[Viet]

No one would care if China imposed a naval blockade on Vietnam or the Philippines. We already did a trial run when we trolled Vietnam with the oil rig last year. Did anyone come to Vietnam's aid?
View attachment 225127

what´s stopping you?

 

[70U63]

US and Japan - want to keep the tension for the self interest
China - busy with their casinos
PH - wait for a year for new president, then we can talk
Other countries in the region - got too much internal shxt to deal with
SG - white wash the money from corrupted crooks in the region before transferring to western nations.