- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
- Messages
- 37,070
- Reaction score
- 17,952
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
He already said it, a right to fight. He, as all the fringe right, is always spoiling for a fight.which even the CFR has said should stop!Loves the US provocations to China,
The provocations to China?
Are you joking?
You're conflating two separate issues here. I have consistently said there is a venue for settling these disputes, and none of it involves building anything anywhere in advance of a settlement.
Actually, what you've bolded is what you claim I think - not at all what I have said or think. And no, I'm not checking every claim - I'm looking at the particular one that poses the greatest problem.
The provocations to China?
Are you joking?
Scarborough Shoal standoff - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Somehow, this ^ makes China the aggrieved party in all of these incidents. Yeah, beats me too.
Ok, you've already condemn China for building on the islands as provocative and aggressive. I guess this here was a veiled attempt at acknowledging that Vietnam is also being threatening and aggressive!!!!
Vietnam is hardly a threat to China - a fundamental reality you fail to acknowledge. That doesn't excuse Vietnam, the Philippines, Japan or any other claimant for their actions - it's a simple recognition of reality. Those countries individually pose no threat to China. China has violated international law and settlements it originally agreed to - i.e., broken their word as a nation and acted in an aggressive manner to militarily assert rights it doesn't have under the 1982 conventions as well as other agreements.
Lol. You think that's the extent of Chinese claims, or complaints.
Vietnam is hardly a threat to China - a fundamental reality you fail to acknowledge. That doesn't excuse Vietnam, the Philippines, Japan or any other claimant for their actions - it's a simple recognition of reality. Those countries individually pose no threat to China. China has violated international law and settlements it originally agreed to - i.e., broken their word as a nation and acted in an aggressive manner to militarily assert rights it doesn't have under the 1982 conventions as well as other agreements.
No. It's indicative of China's lack of respect for agreements which they sign and their intent to aggressively and militarily claim what they couldn't by convention. It doesn't speak well in support of your argument that China is the abused nation here. It appears to be the opposite, in fact. Lol, indeed.
Vietnam and China are long-standing enemies. The point is not that Vietnam threatens China but that it threatens what China perceives as its vital interests in the South China Sea, while inversely China clearly threatens what Vietnam sees as its vital interests there.
It's very hypocritical of you to accuse China of threatening, aggressive behavior for building military infrastructure on the islands, while being dismissive of Vietnam doing the same. And nobody seems willing to address the fact that Taiwan too has laid claim to ALL of the Spratly islands, which means, not only is Taiwan stepping on China's claims, but they're stepping on the claims of Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam as well!!!
An argument from ignorance considering that you don't even know the extent of China's claims upon the archipelago, nor the extent of the others claims for that matter.
All true. Much the same can be said for many of the other claimants in the area - they've all had disputes with China, and China with them over the course of many years. Various countries over the years have established or attempted to establish a military presence of such reefs and islands in the region during conflicts.
And maybe you can tell me what the result of a military conflict between Vietnam and China would likely be. I don't dismiss the actions of any of the nations in the region, but I pay more attention to the elephant in that room. This is pure deflection on your part. China has clearly demonstrated contempt for the very agreements it's a party to as recently as 2012.
What international body has determined that China's claims, however wonderful they might be, are valid? Besides you and China, which don't meet that requirement.
All very true and several of the claimants have created certain "facts on the ground". What sets China apart is the facts that it alone claims the whole of the South China Sea (I use this name for convenience sake - the name itself is a point of contention) AND has the capacity to actually put military muscle behind this claim. The military power of the Philippines is negligeable and While Vietnam, Malaysia, Taiwan and other regional states do have serious military force, none of them can balance China in a real conflict, which is why they are all desperate to keep the US engaged in the region.
What "international body" has ever determined that the US annexation (read: stolen by conquest) of the Hawaiian islands are valid? That finger pointed has three pointing back at itself!!
Ok, you've already condemn China for building on the islands as provocative and aggressive. I guess this here was a veiled attempt at acknowledging that Vietnam is also being threatening and aggressive!!!!
On the bolded, so you acknowledge the US's contradiction. And China doesn't believe they have violated it.
Ok, you've already condemn China for building on the islands as provocative and aggressive. I guess this here was a veiled attempt at acknowledging that Vietnam is also being threatening and aggressive!!!!
Adm. Sun Jianguo, deputy chief of staff of the People’s Liberation Army, speaking at a regional security forum in Singapore, said that China had not definitely said it would create a so-called air defense identification zone, but that any decision would be based on an aerial threat assessment and the maritime security situation. He also said other nations should not overemphasize the issue.
The creation of an air defense zone would be viewed by the United States and Southeast Asian nations as a huge provocation. In recent years, foreign officials have speculated whether one of Beijing’s next moves in the South China Sea would be to set up such a zone, which would further solidify China’s military presence in the waters.
No. It's indicative of China's lack of respect for agreements which they sign and their intent to aggressively and militarily claim what they couldn't by convention. It doesn't speak well in support of your argument that China is the abused nation here. It appears to be the opposite, in fact. Lol, indeed.
China may well have the most meritorious claim to the Spratlys. There's little doubt the other players wish to keep us engaged. Our interest, however, is limited to acceptance of international law and maintaining free passage through the area. This is something we have historically done since our founding and we will continue to do it. It's not, as has been characterized here by some, China bashing. All of the overlapping claimed EEZ zones in the area are a problem, but China is the one nation making such a claim that can legitimately threaten that free passage.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?