Will the US defend Philippines if China attacks?

[Martian2]

Idiot.
USA don't has territorial claims in Middle East, but invasion of Saddam Hussein in to Kuwait was good chance for US to take control on Irak. You cant do policy with your low IQ, bro.

The U.S. threatened Saddam Hussein. Clinton is specifically stating that the U.S. will not involve itself in the disputes between South China Sea claimants. These are two completely different situations.

The United States officially threatened Saddam and demanded that he leave Baghdad within 24 hours.

Here, Secretary of State Clinton said the U.S. has no territorial claims in the South China Sea and will not "take sides." Official U.S. policy is neutrality.

Do you understand the different stances by the United States government regarding Iraq and the South China Sea?

Are all Vietnamese as dumb as you Vietnamese guys on this forum?

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Idiot.
USA don't has territorial claims in Middle East, but invasion of Saddam Hussein in to Kuwait was good chance for US to take control on Irak. You cant do policy with your low IQ, bro.

Too bad China isn't Iraq, not even close, whereas Vietnam is pretty much weaker than Iraq of the 1980s, at least Saddam was rich with oil at the time and he has bought far more Russian toys than you poor Viet.

There is nothing new: the United States always says that she does not take sides in disputes in the SCS, but, always "but", she has a national interest in ensuring maritime safety in the SCS.
She did not lie.

She wants to meddle into China's business, but she doesn't want to harm US's national interests by defending your poor country.

 

[fallstuff]

Vietnam is a very insignificant nation for USA to spend blood and money. US will talk up the Vietnamese with rhetoric as much as it can, but will never fight a war.

The whole proposition is ridiculous to begin with.

 

[dunhill]

Are you a conspiracy theorist? Are you claiming Clinton is lying? That's complete crap.

The United States doesn't have to engage in lies. If the U.S. wants to fight you, it will threaten you in very clear terms (e.g. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, etc.).

You are completely nuts. Secretary of State Clinton is stating official U.S. government policy.

Did you miss her reasoning? She said the U.S. has no territorial claims in the South China Sea and is not a participant.

Are you claiming that she's lying and the U.S. has territorial claims in the South China Sea? I hate you idiotic Vietnamese. You keep discussing crap. I want to discuss facts.

1. Everybody should be able to agree that the U.S. has no territorial claims in the South China Sea (as enunciated by Clinton).

2. Since the U.S. has no territorial claims, the U.S. has no reason to engage in a major war against the world's second largest military spender.

3. If you want to fight over islands in the South China Sea, that's your business. The U.S. doesn't care.

This makes perfect sense. Why are you suggesting she's lying? America is a superpower and does not need to resort to lying. I think you Vietnamese are idiots and brain dead.

Dead brain should be you, and you just proved that to me by the China Army's photos you posted, dream it. (even photo shop). Like U.S like China as a big country has something in common that will used FAKES - FABRICATES subjects when its wants to make war or any wars.

Unlike US, China plays more dirty tricks than any country, and always cries when something really happens to its. Like China like Chinese member here, its always insulted other nation when Chinese members can not deal, then its will reports to MOD even though Chinese member always disrespect to the other at very first time.

Are all Vietnamese as dumb as you Vietnamese guys on this forum?

It does not matter even though we are smarter than you Chinese, but due to your Chinese ignorant and never admit that Chinese WRONG then everything will under Chinese eyes are FOOLISH, DUMB so on and on.

Tell me the truth, besides your Pakistanis, False flaggers as standing as your friends, what is the other nation loves Chinese in this PDF? Check around then you'll will know the answer.

 

[xyxmt]

I have no idea what you're talking about. Show me a reputable citation.

Also, Clinton stated the Obama administration's policy in plain English. Are you saying you can't understand plain English?

From BBC News quoting Clinton: The US has no territorial claims in the region and will not ''take sides'' in disputes, she stressed.

Which part of this sentence don't you understand?

In other words Mrs Clinton was saying "we will side with the stronger side as usual"

 

[dunhill]

In other words Mrs Clinton was saying "we will side with the stronger side as usual"

Let's go back at the square 1:

Who will guaranteed that U.S will drop (walk away) from Philippines? Base on the long history of U.S and Philippines friendship, there is more chance for Philippines.

U.S may not base troops in Philippines, but U.S could train, supplies weapons for Philippines. On Philippines side, its does not need U.S troop to involves but the need from Philippines that weapons.

Base from the MTD from both countries, U.S might let Philippines on loan, or 100% aids for weapons supplies which are U.S still keep its promises to Philippines people and also get rid of obsolete weapons on the goes. That win-win situations for both countries.

 

[ephone]

U.S. risks itself to have a major confrontation with another giant: China, just for the sake of a small country called phi???

Just Manila allows the US reopening Navy-Air force base at Subic Bay, the terms of the Treaty will be executed completly.
If I'm not mistaken, the treaty there is a provision that the US and the Philippines will defend each other if their warship was attacked in the Pacific. The SCS is located within the Pacific?

 

[fallstuff]

Let's go back at the square 1:

Who will guaranteed that U.S will drop (walk away) from Philippines? Base on the long history of U.S and Philippines friendship, there is more chance for Philippines.

U.S may not base troops in Philippines, but U.S could train, supplies weapons for Philippines. On Philippines side, its does not need U.S troop to involves but the need from Philippines that weapons.

Base from the MTD from both countries, U.S might let Philippines on loan, or 100% aids for weapons supplies which are U.S still keep its promises to Philippines people and also get rid of obsolete weapons on the goes. That win-win situations for both countries.

Even in the darkest of hours. US relied on permissions.

 

[shree835]

That days are gone...if China did so...China will be attacked by whole world, except Pakistan and North Korea.

 

[dunhill]

That days are gone...if China did so...China will be attacked by whole world, except Pakistan and North Korea.

North Korea will not allied with China in any conditions. More than likely, N.Korea will take the lost lands during Korea War. Nevertheless, China only got Pakistan and I don't think Pakistan will help China for the foolish claims. Pakistan, N.Korea only friends with China on its faces but from its back will gives China both middle fingers, the other word that "You on your own"

 

[Battle of Bach Dang River]

Vietnam is a very insignificant nation for USA to spend blood and money. US will talk up the Vietnamese with rhetoric as much as it can, but will never fight a war.

The whole proposition is ridiculous to begin with.

Do you understand this topic? Why you said about "Vietnam" while the topic is "Will the U.S. defend the Philippines if China attacks?"

We never expected anyone to directly fight in a war to protect the territory of Vietnam. VN is not an US ally.

U.S. risks itself to have a major confrontation with another giant: China, just for the sake of a small country called phi???

If the US is allowed to reopen the large base Navy-Air Force at Subic Bay, all things will be changed.

 

[Battle of Bach Dang River]

Maritime safety means safe passage for U.S. ships. Do you understand the phrase "maritime safety"?

What the hell does "maritime safety" for U.S. ships have to do with Vietnamese disputes with China over South China Sea islands? She specifically ruled that out of the purview of American interests.

You are a Chinaman living in the U.S, you dont know that every year about 1.2 trillion USD of American goods through the East Sea (SCS)? And in 2010, Secretary Clinton said that the US has national interest in freedom of navigation in the SCS. And to have freedom of navigation, the US must ensure safety of navigation in the SCS.

Also the US has said many times that she combats against anyone to use of force in the SCS, she supported the resolution of disputes by peaceful negotiations.

If the Chinese [and Chinaman] want to attack Philppines, why not do it instead of constantly be muttering: "Maybe Uncle Sam will do not help the Philippines", "Maybe Uncle Sam will do not help the Philippines", "Maybe Uncle Sam will do not help the Philippines"....

 

[ComeAtMeBro]

^ THIS

Just attack us directly and you will see
Prove to us that you(China) are the king of the world or you still are the biggest p***y in our eyes

 

[gambit]

The U.S. threatened Saddam Hussein. Clinton is specifically stating that the U.S. will not involve itself in the disputes between South China Sea claimants. These are two completely different situations.

The United States officially threatened Saddam and demanded that he leave Baghdad within 24 hours.

Here, Secretary of State Clinton said the U.S. has no territorial claims in the South China Sea and will not "take sides." Official U.S. policy is neutrality.

Do you understand the different stances by the United States government regarding Iraq and the South China Sea?

Are all Vietnamese as dumb as you Vietnamese guys on this forum?

If you think that the moment China starts shooting the US will do nothing then you are as dumb as the insult you tossed.

 

[Abhishek_]

If you think that the moment China starts shooting the US will do nothing then you are as dumb as the insult you tossed.

you are underestimating his incompetence