- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 94,823
- Reaction score
- 28,342
- Location
- Williamsburg, Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
The US is not bound to support Manila in the event of Filipino aggression.
Greetings, humbolt. :2wave:
According to what I recall from my college days spent studying history (which is by no means cast in concrete ), :mrgreen: China has claimed ownership of the Sprattlys since the 1800s. At the end of WW2, Japan "returned" the Sprattlys to China, with French backing and allied approval. China's move now is unusual, but it's been rumored for quite a while that this might be coming. Is this a "triple Dog dare you" message to the US, and is this really all up to us? It seems more a matter for the UN, IMO. Interesting....
I agreed to its legality, I was contesting its prudence and necessity. Satellites can easily determine what's taking place on the islands. The US should avoid unnecessary provocations.
The United States should avoid inadvertently encouraging the claimants to engage in confrontational behavior. For example, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's reference in November 2011 to the South China Sea as the West Philippine Sea could have unintended consequences such as emboldening Manila to antagonize China rather than it seeking to peacefully settle their differences.
Armed Clash in the South China Sea - Council on Foreign Relations
I disagree. But it is clear, that once again, as it never seems to fail, we have folks, some of which aren't even American, fully prepared for Americans to shed their blood, this time to dispute insignificant islands hundreds of miles off of the Chinese mainland that are thousands of miles from US shores. :roll:
China has held title to the Spratlys since before the UN ever existed. Why should they seek legitimacy from the UN?
They signed a convention on this that clearly addresses claims. That is clear.
If you believe some here, it's all perfectly legitimate. If we had imperial designs, all of it would've been ours following WWII. But the Chinese are simply establishing a "sphere of influence", as if anyone doubted that they aren't the economic and military power in the region. We are to believe though, that they are under threat of attack from the Philippines and Vietnam. It's hard to stop laughing about that.
Again with the monumental silliness.
:lamo
Wow, so much substance Jack, you may dismiss the CFR's point on this all you wish. Nevertheless, the US must avoid sending improper signals to Manila as Hillary did, and, the US should avoid unnecessary provocations.
What about Chinese aggression?
For my final attempt with you JANFU. Though there's more than this, China holds a treaty from 1887 known as the boundary convention, signed between China and France at the conclusion of the Sino-French war, in which China already fought for the un inhabited Spratly islands and won! In which treaty the Chinese are documented as the rightful owners! Furthermore, in 1939, the Japanese wrested possession of the islands from the Chinese, but after the Japanese surrender, during restoration, the Spratlys were returned to the Chinese in 1947.
I think (hope) a war with China is extremely unlikely. It would no doubt be devastating to both nations.
Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South China Sea - Asia - World - The Independent
China has upped its military posturing, issuing a strategy paper saying Beijing would “surely counterattack if attacked” by an enemy amid concerns from the US and neighbouring countries over its developments in the South China Sea. The release of the document came shortly after Beijing lodged a complaint against the US for flying a surveillance jet over disputed territory in the South China Sea, where China is building artificial islands. Chinese state media reported that the white paper, issued by the state council, the country’s cabinet, underscored that Beijing was committed to world peace and believed that a world war was unlikely. But it added that “small-scale wars, conflicts and crises are recurrent in some regions”. The state-owned news agency Xinhua highlighted one particular phrase, which appeared in the “Strategic Guideline of Active Defence” section: “We will not attack unless attacked, but we will surely counterattack if attacked.”
Much to the concern of its neighbours and the US, China, the dominant powerhouse in the region, has been building artificial islands and buildings in the disputed South China Sea, where the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan all have overlapping claims. In one area, the Spratly islands, the US says China has created 2,000 acres of land, with satellite images showing what appears to be an airstrip. The paper said that China’s armed forces would work to “resolutely safeguard China’s sovereignty [and] security and development interests” and work towards “realising the Chinese dream of achieving the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation”. Announcing its release, the People’s Liberation Army spokesman Yang Yujun appeared to be referring to the US when he said that “outside powers” were attempting to “tarnish the Chinese military’s reputation and create an atmosphere of exaggerated tension.” He added: “We cannot eliminate the possibility that this is to create excuses for the actions that certain countries may be planning to take.”
Greetings, Montecresto. :2wave:
That body of water has been called the South China Sea for as long as I can remember, so who knows her motives for calling it something else? :shrug: I doubt Manila will question China over it, though, but they and the other countries involved might raise their concerns to the Council on Foreign Relations on what's happening over there - if they haven't already done so!
Imperial China, imperialist France, and Imperial Japan. An even more elevated level of silliness.:lamo
Where have I called for War by the US? Point it out.
You are losing the augment when it devolves to this.
I stopped counting at the 50 Plus mark of friends killed in Bosnia and AStan. And that does not include all the suicides after. And more to come.
I spent 3 1/2 years in a **** hole called Bosnia.
I suggest reconsidering your insulting remark.
You are the silly one, who's added nothing of substance to this discussion.
Relentless silliness. China is the aggressor, and must be dealt with firmly.
With respect to the tensions in the South China Sea, Bloomberg.com reported that the U.S. Defense Secretary reaffirmed that the U.S. would continue to operate in the region:
“There should be no mistake about this: The United States will fly, sail and operate wherever international law allows, as we do all around the world,” said Carter, who has ordered the military to develop options for more assertive U.S. demonstrations of its right to transit the region.
Carter Warns China U.S. Will Go Wherever Global Law Permits - Bloomberg Politics
Personally, I would have preferred if he substituted "American interests" for international law, but agree with his overall sentiments. Appeals to international law have technical merit, but commitments rooted in national interests are viewed as stronger, as nations act to safeguard their interests while they don't necessarily respond to breaches in international law. Free passage through the international waters of the South China Sea is a critical American interest (and vital interest of numerous American allies).
Oh I don't know. My #73 makes more sense than anything you've posted.
You haven't a clue of the Spratlys history, and you're in here mouthing emptiness.
And China hasn't threatened to interrupt that.
We need to keep China down before they get too powerful.
:roll:
I patently disagree.
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?