The Spratly Islands and other Chinese infiltrations

Floods, droughts, tsunami's and other natural disasters affecting coolthaihouse.members.

Moderators: Sometimewoodworker, MGV12, BKKBILL, pattayapope

Re: The Spratly Islands

Postby Roger Ramjet » Fri Jun 19, 2015 8:49 am

If anyone should wonder what the USS George Washington is doing in Brisbane http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-19/u ... ne/6558176 it's just there for annual joint US Australian exercises in and around Shoalwater Bay (an Australian Army training area in Queensland).
That is one huge aircraft carrier. I wonder where the rest of the fleet are? All those little hanger's on like destroyers, frigates, etc etc normally about 7 to 10 in all and of course the ever lurking subs. I'm pleased I'm not a Military Policeman based in Brisbane, the civilian police will be shitting themselves, especially as the Australian MPs carry no sidearms and will be partnering the civilian police. It's great fun when the US Navy is in town, you get to put into good use of all those "police holds" you were taught in training. The Brisbane Watchhouse (police holding cells) will be gearing up for a lot of customers, but if the MPs do it right, they'll just take them back to the ship, unless of course it's a serious offence. It's always good fun when you question a Yank sailor and ask him what "boat" he's/she's from? That normally gets a violet response or an attempt at a drunken lecture about them being on a carrier or ship.
I can recall having a beer with a warrant officer. When I asked him what his job was he told me he drove a bulldozer. A bloody bulldozer on a ship, so I asked what for. If a plane crashed on the deck or couldn't be moved within a certain amount of time it was bulldozer over the side. Nice way to get rid of a few million dollars in seconds.
Whoever took that photo did the aircraft carrier justice.
User avatar
Roger Ramjet
 
Posts: 5285
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:55 pm

Re: The Spratly Islands

Postby Roger Ramjet » Thu Jul 02, 2015 11:23 am

User avatar
Roger Ramjet
 
Posts: 5285
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:55 pm

Re: The Spratly Islands

Postby MGV12 » Thu Jul 02, 2015 2:18 pm

Roger Ramjet wrote:And so the build-up continues: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-02/c ... ed/6589460


Philippine-China South China Sea Dispute Over Spratly Islands: Human 'Buffer' Prevents Chinese Military Aggression

china-spratlyislands.jpg


In terms of military resources and power, it’s clear that China has the upper hand in the disputed South China Sea waters over other regional opposition. For a small Filipino community located on one of several islands that China also claims, they have found civilian occupation is more effective than the Filipino military when it comes to maintaining sovereignty.

http://www.ibtimes.com/philippine-china ... ts-1990262
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

“Some days I am an optimistic pessimist ... other days I am a pessimistic optimist”
User avatar
MGV12
 
Posts: 5350
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:23 pm
Location: Chiang Mai

Re: The Spratly Islands

Postby Roger Ramjet » Tue Aug 04, 2015 7:02 pm

Oh dear, China walked into a hornet's nest and ASEAN has two more days to run.
http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/asia/64 ... -china-sea
User avatar
Roger Ramjet
 
Posts: 5285
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:55 pm

Re: The Spratly Islands

Postby MGV12 » Tue Oct 27, 2015 5:42 pm

US Navy destroyer passes disputed China islands
3 hours ago

A US Navy ship has sailed close to artificial islands built by China in the disputed waters of the South China Sea, US defence officials have said.
Guided-missile destroyer USS Lassen breached the 12-nautical mile zone China claims around Subi and Mischief reefs in the Spratly archipelago.

The freedom of navigation operation represents a serious challenge to China's territorial claims.
The foreign ministry in Beijing condemned it as "illegal".

In a statement, ministry spokesman Lu Kang described the operation as a "threat to China's sovereignty", adding that Beijing would "resolutely respond to any country's deliberately provocative actions".
US Defence Department spokesman Commander Bill Urban said earlier that "the United States is conducting routine operations in the South China Sea in accordance with international law".

.................

International maritime law allows countries to claim ownership of the 12-nautical mile area surrounding natural islands but does not allow nations to claim ownership of submerged features that have been raised by human intervention.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34641131

“Some days I am an optimistic pessimist ... other days I am a pessimistic optimist”
User avatar
MGV12
 
Posts: 5350
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:23 pm
Location: Chiang Mai

Re: The Spratly Islands

Postby Roger Ramjet » Tue Oct 27, 2015 8:05 pm

China were warned. They knew they had no rights to claim the 12 mile exclusion zones, but did so none the less. All their soft talk about no weapons on the islands is just that.... they believe if they keep talking the talk long enough the US and allies will be lulled into a false sense of security. Australia told them they weren't buying http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2015/s4331925.htm
It's also the reason that Japan has increased its defence force to a now active army. It's also the reason that SEA countries have granted the US permission to use their bases in the last few weeks. China need to stop and think, not as a communist power which dictates to the people what they do, but as a country with economic ties throughout the region.
What are they going to do rely on the Thai military for support?
User avatar
Roger Ramjet
 
Posts: 5285
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:55 pm

Re: The Spratly Islands

Postby Roger Ramjet » Wed Oct 28, 2015 7:45 am

It should have happened years ago, China should have been stopped from building the islands in the first place and the US and other countries should have exercised their right to passage through the area that controls 1/3 of the world's shipping. The mere fact that China have sunk any vessel that has come even near the islands in the last few months (Vietnamese and Philippino) has shown China not only wishes to control the global shipping in the region, it wants to isolate Taiwan, and it wants to claim sole rights to all the resources in the area.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-28/c ... ol/6890786
And then the Philippines had the termerity to lodge a complaint to the UN after ASEAN failed in its sharing negotiations, which China refused to listen to: http://www.monitor.upeace.org/innerpg.c ... rticle=623 and now it will have to go to the full International Court of Justice without mediation, which has failed so far, which again China will refuse to abide by, or listen to, claiming they have been using the "islands" for centuries (so have all the other countries), which to be honest is the flimiest of evidence that China can provide and will not be listened to by the ICJ because China is not linked by the continental shelf, whereas other countries are.
China is being the bully on the block and by moving arms and ammunition onto the islands it has built up, has breached an agreementit signed, saying it wouldn't. The fact that the US has finally sent the USS Lassen, a guilded missile destroyer within the so called Chinese exclusion zone clearly demonstrates that China is only willing to take on nations that have little or no defence (like Vietnamese or Philippino fishing vessels), shows that it is not in a position -yet - to mix it with the big boys. Now the US, Japan and other better armed countries need to do fly-bys, exercise their right to use International waters and finally get China to the negotiating table and honour its obligations under the treaty of the seas it is a signatory to.
I bet the Captain of the USS Lassen had his whole crew at General Quarters during their "incursion" and that there were a few other Aegis class ships within the vicinity and at least an AWACs or two flying in the area, as well as total satellite coverage of every action the Chinese took. I'd love to be a fly on the wall listening to all the radio traffic between the Chinese on the island and the mainland and also what was said by the Americans, prior to and during the "incursion".
User avatar
Roger Ramjet
 
Posts: 5285
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:55 pm

Re: The Spratly Islands

Postby Roger Ramjet » Thu Oct 29, 2015 10:15 pm

China 'not frightened of war with US’ – Chinese media after Spratly Islands destroyer incident
https://www.rt.com/news/319948-us-china ... y-spratly/
This comes from the Communist mouthpiece newspaper and the claim that they didn't retaliate because they had no missile ships in the region to lock on to the USS Lassen and destroy it, is absolute garbage as they have missile batteries on each of their artificial islands as well as artillery batteries and they also have submarines constantly patrolling and enforcing their no go areas if it's defenceless fishing boats. It's chest beating, but dangerous chest beating.
If I were a US or foreign company in China I would be looking for another country to move my industry to immediately, I'd also be moving all the technology to a safer area so that the Chinese couldn't copy it (that's a hint for Apple). It would also prompt me to start tightening imports from China.
The US must be very sure of themselves to move the USS Lassen within range of the artificial islands knowing the Chinese have armaments there. I know the Chinese are playing a game, but it is a very dangerous game.
The UN and ASEAN hold signed agreements that this would "never" happen, which proves that China cannot keep its word.
Very, very dangerous game China is playing at the moment.
User avatar
Roger Ramjet
 
Posts: 5285
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:55 pm

Re: The Spratly Islands

Postby MGV12 » Fri Oct 30, 2015 3:58 pm

Roger Ramjet wrote:China 'not frightened of war with US’ – Chinese media after Spratly Islands destroyer incident
https://www.rt.com/news/319948-us-china ... y-spratly/
This comes from the Communist mouthpiece newspaper and the claim that they didn't retaliate because they had no missile ships in the region to lock on to the USS Lassen and destroy it, is absolute garbage as they have missile batteries on each of their artificial islands as well as artillery batteries and they also have submarines constantly patrolling and enforcing their no go areas if it's defenceless fishing boats. It's chest beating, but dangerous chest beating.
If I were a US or foreign company in China I would be looking for another country to move my industry to immediately, I'd also be moving all the technology to a safer area so that the Chinese couldn't copy it (that's a hint for Apple). It would also prompt me to start tightening imports from China.
The US must be very sure of themselves to move the USS Lassen within range of the artificial islands knowing the Chinese have armaments there. I know the Chinese are playing a game, but it is a very dangerous game.
The UN and ASEAN hold signed agreements that this would "never" happen, which proves that China cannot keep its word.
Very, very dangerous game China is playing at the moment.


I wouldn't let them build nuclear power plants in my country either ... unfortunately the UK have just signed up! Worsened by the fact that they have agreed to a price per watt way above current levels and the Chinese have an [underwritten] out clause if it's still not profitable. Unbelievable :roll:

And as if we don't have enough Chinese to worry about ... they have called an end to their one-child-only policy!

“Some days I am an optimistic pessimist ... other days I am a pessimistic optimist”
User avatar
MGV12
 
Posts: 5350
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:23 pm
Location: Chiang Mai

Re: The Spratly Islands

Postby Roger Ramjet » Fri Oct 30, 2015 5:08 pm

MGV12 wrote:I wouldn't let them build nuclear power plants in my country either ... unfortunately the UK have just signed up! Worsened by the fact that they have agreed to a price per watt way above current levels and the Chinese have an [underwritten] out clause if it's still not profitable. Unbelievable

And as if we don't have enough Chinese to worry about ... they have called an end to their one-child-only policy!

China seemes to have bilateral "trade" agreements, whereby, they allow a foreign country to build say the "Birdcage" in their country, providing they are allowed to build something in the other person's country, in this case a badly designed nuclear energy reactor. It's just China's way of being a friendly country. Rather like letting a Thai builder loose with an unlimited budget to build a 3 million baht home and then you end up with a 1 million baht home that cost 7 million. China is not afraid to use that little bit of a threat either when negotiating.
And of course never forget that nothing comes out of China that China doesn't want the rest of the world to see... the great firewall prevents that.
There have been a number of books written about modern day China including Wild Swans, Three daughters of China by Jung Chang and she and her husband Jon Halliday have written a number of other books on China that have guaranteed them the death sentence if they ever go back.
And even though the Chinese claim they had no ships in the region to target the USS Lassen which didn't just do a sail by, it stayed in the "exclusion zone" for over one hour, the Chinese failed to mention it actually had two missile battleships in the area, neither of which was good enough to take on the USS Lassen, so they just said they didn't have anything available. The whole point was if China had launched any of its aircraft, the Spratly Islands are so far away from the mainland, the planes would have run out of fuel before they got there..... and I'm sure the Americans had other assets in the area (the Philippines) they could call on if China had been stupid enough to feel slighted enough. It's a big loss of face for China, but.... once they have those military runways in place, they'll start enforcing the no fly zones, freedom of the seas and they will block trade through the South China Sea, unless it benefits them. It's just another way of being the biggest bully in the area and getting their hands on all those goodies that lie beneath the South China Sea without letting other claimants in.
All of this was known back in the 60's, so why has it taken so long for the US to challenge them?
The world is being lulled into a false sense of security with China acting as the slighted party and the US portrayed as the big bully, but I don't believe that's the case, I think China wants Taiwan at any cost and no matter how long it takes and throw in the goodies in the South China Sea to pay for it all and China is a happy little camper.
User avatar
Roger Ramjet
 
Posts: 5285
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:55 pm

Re: The Spratly Islands

Postby MGV12 » Fri Oct 30, 2015 7:07 pm

Is this another 'Cold War' or is it heading to be a 'Luke Warm' war .... China can't afford to back down as they seek to dominate S.E Asia and the US can't afford to allow them to do that as they will appear to be negligent in supporting their allies.

U.S., Chinese navies agree to maintain dialogue to avoid clashes

BEIJING/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. and Chinese navies held high-level talks on Thursday after a U.S. warship challenged China's territorial assertions in the South China Sea, and a U.S. official said they agreed to maintain dialogue and follow protocols to avoid clashes.

After the talks between U.S. chief of naval operations Admiral John Richardson and his Chinese counterpart, Admiral Wu Shengli, scheduled port visits by U.S. and Chinese ships and planned visits to China by senior U.S. Navy officers remained on track, the official said.

"None of that is in jeopardy. Nothing has been canceled," said the official.

Both officers also agreed on the need to stick to protocols established under the Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea.

"They agreed that it's very important that both sides continue to use the protocols under the CUES agreement when they're operating close to keep the chances for misunderstanding and any kind of provocation from occurring," said the official.

The talks, by video conference, were held to calm tensions after Beijing rebuked Washington for sending a guided-missile destroyer within 12 nautical miles of one of China's man-made islands in the South China Sea's Spratly archipelago on Tuesday.

A U.S. Navy spokesman stressed Washington's position that U.S. freedom of navigation operations were meant to "protect the rights, freedoms, and lawful uses of the sea and airspace guaranteed to all nations under international law."

There was no immediate comment from China on the talks. A spokesman for China's Ministry of Defense said earlier that Wu would present Beijing's "solemn position on the U.S. vessel's entry without permission" into waters in the South China Sea.

"We would urge the U.S. side not to continue down the wrong path," Defence Ministry spokesman Yang Yujun said. "But if they do, we will take all necessary measures in accordance with the need."

China suffered a setback on Thursday in its broad territorial claims in the South China Sea when an arbitration court in The Hague said it had jurisdiction to hear some territorial claims the Philippines filed against China.

View galleryStill image from a United States Navy video purportedly …
Chinese dredging vessels are purportedly seen in the waters around Fiery Cross Reef in the disputed …
The court said additional hearings would be held to decide the merits of the Philippines' arguments. China has not participated in the proceedings and does not recognize the court's authority in the case.

A senior U.S. defense official welcomed the court's decision, saying it demonstrated "the relevance of international law to the territorial conflicts in the South China Sea."

State Department spokesman John Kirby said that in accordance with the terms of the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the decision of the tribunal would be legally binding on both the Philippines and China.

MOST SIGNIFICANT U.S. CHALLENGE

The U.S. patrol on Tuesday was the most significant U.S. challenge yet to territorial limits China claims around its artificial islands in one of the world's busiest sea lanes.

But plans by U.S. Pacific Command commander Admiral Harry Harris and Admiral Scott Swift, commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, to visit China remain on track, as do reciprocal port visits by U.S. and Chinese ships in November and December, the U.S. official said.

The U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM) said Harris, who has been highly critical of China's island building, would arrive in Beijing on Monday, while a U.S. official said Swift would go later in the year.

Harris will spend three days in China to meet military leaders and visit military installations.

"Sustained military-to-military dialogue between the U.S. and China is designed to maximize cooperation on areas of mutual interest while candidly addressing and managing disagreements," PACOM said.

Next week, Chinese President Xi Jinping will visit Vietnam, another vocal claimant in the South China Sea, and Singapore, while Chinese Defence Minister Chang Wanquan will attend a meeting of Southeast Asian defense ministers in Malaysia that U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter is also due to attend.

Analysts said that even though both sides were still talking, it was difficult to see either backing down.

"Neither the U.S. nor China desires a military conflict, but the key problem is that the core interests of both sides collide in the South China Sea," said Ni Lexiong, a naval expert at the Shanghai University of Political Science and Law.

Chinese state media said on Thursday a "guided-missile destroyer flotilla" under the navy's South China Sea Fleet carried out a "realistic confrontation training exercise" involving anti-aircraft firing and firing at shore at night.

A state-owned news website carried photos from the drills, saying they took place recently in the South China Sea. One picture showed three warships sailing in a row.

Despite criticism of China's action in the South China Sea, foreign navies from the United States to Europe have continued to try to build ties with their Chinese counterparts.

A French frigate docked at China's main South China Sea base of Zhanjiang in the southern province of Guangdong on Wednesday on a four-day visit. It will participate in a maritime exercise about accidental encounters at sea.

Two Australian warships will also hold exercises with the Chinese navy in the South China Sea next week, Australian Defence Minister Marise Payne said on Thursday.

Australia, a key U.S. ally in the region, expressed its strong support for freedom of navigation this week, while stopping short of welcoming the USS Lassen's patrol.

http://news.yahoo.com/u-chinese-navy-ch ... 14186.html

“Some days I am an optimistic pessimist ... other days I am a pessimistic optimist”
User avatar
MGV12
 
Posts: 5350
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:23 pm
Location: Chiang Mai

Re: The Spratly Islands

Postby Roger Ramjet » Fri Oct 30, 2015 8:53 pm

MGV12 wrote:Analysts said that even though both sides were still talking, it was difficult to see either backing down.

MGV12 wrote:Is this another 'Cold War' or is it heading to be a 'Luke Warm' war .... China can't afford to back down as they seek to dominate S.E Asia and the US can't afford to allow them to do that as they will appear to be negligent in supporting their allies.

Totally true, MGV12 this "cold war" should remain just that.... China do not have the law on their side, neither do they have the fire power. US CINPAC has both the law and the ships to counter any Chinese mistake made because of loss of face. China will gain revenge by sinking a Philippino vessel and then say "see the US can't protect you and we don't listen to International Law". Then the US will retaliate with a massive show of force along with the navies that are allies and China will hide again. They cannot afford an out and out confrontation because then they wouldn't have a big enough Navy left to take Taiwan.....and I doubt they will succeed anyway unless they can shut down the South China Sea. For China 100 years is nothing to achieve their aim of taking back Taiwan.
And meanwhile they will "aid" other Asian countries, help them with infrastructure and get all friendly.....except of course with their arch enemy Viet Nam who is not afraid of China in the least. And all the people who say the US is wrong, then they should look at Tibet.
User avatar
Roger Ramjet
 
Posts: 5285
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:55 pm

Re: The Spratly Islands

Postby BKKBILL » Fri Oct 30, 2015 9:43 pm

Roger Ramjet wrote:And all the people who say the US is wrong, then they should look at Tibet.

I think you are right on this RR. China is willing to wait, thing is the US is not noted for waiting years for anything.

The people who are saying the US is wrong are fortunately in the minority and don't have big war toys.
It's not who you know, it's whom you know.
User avatar
BKKBILL
 
Posts: 2946
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 10:05 pm
Location: Mae Taeng, Chiang Mai

Re: The Spratly Islands

Postby Roger Ramjet » Sat Oct 31, 2015 12:58 am

BKKBILL wrote: think you are right on this RR. China is willing to wait, thing is the US is not noted for waiting years for anything.

I read a comprehensive military paper about this back in the late 60's when the US was still committed to the Vietnamese war and they knew way back then exactly what the Chinese were going to do. As far as I recall the whole scenario hasn't changed one bit and it's the reason the US has built carriers and an impressive US fleet in the Pacific. As they cut back on old soldiers, they increased their spending on technology and the education of their officers. For a Major to be promoted to LtCol he had to have a university degree or after 20 years he was retired no matter how decorated or how much combat he had seen. In some respects they were right, but in others they were wrong. A Defense (US spelling) paper was written on lessons learnt after Viet Nam then fell by the wayside when they did the same bloody stupid committment in Iraq, Iran and of all places Afghanistan... and of course the CIA had fingers in all those pies. JFK was the only President to get it right when he said the CIA should be scattered to the four winds.
The US have this bad habit of "on the job training", the problem there is they teach jungle warfare when it is limited warfare or open warfare and never seem to catch up. US Army Rangers have been doing the same course for years and it is no longer applicable, the only thing people get out of it is a Ranger Patch, which designates the path they will travel as officers, especially if they fail the course. And now the US finds themselves short of combat soldiers all over again. In Vietnam you could guarantee at least one tour, perhaps two, rarely three, but in Afghanistan they are doing four or even five tours and they are not regular army, they are just resserves.
I think the US have been very reserved for the last 40+ years, they have talked and talked and tried to keep China as a "friend", but China has other plans and always had them. I can see China using North Korea to it's full advantage in the coming years, even if it is just a decoy.... and of course they claim Russia is the instigator, when it's not. America should force this to go through the full UN Security Council so that there is a resolution on the books condemning China, but it won't happen because Russia will veto it.
This is a very serious state of affairs, China signed an agreement with ASEAN that it would listen to arbitration over who actually "owns" the Spratly Islands and they would stop work immediately and be bound by the agreement....they then totally ignored it because who but Viet Nam would be "silly" enough to invade them over some islands in the middle of the South China Sea.
A couple of my mates are treating the whole thing very seriously which is why France and Australia are "visiting" China with their war ships just to show what they are capable of as far as electronic warfare is all about and to show they are more than capable of taking on and defeating the same class ship in the Chinese Navy. China has this quaint notion that they have more ships, so they are more powerfull, but that is not the case as the French found out during WW2.
User avatar
Roger Ramjet
 
Posts: 5285
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:55 pm

Re: The Spratly Islands

Postby Roger Ramjet » Wed Nov 04, 2015 3:03 pm

How to resolve the issue and give a public speach of unity ASEAN style. Is this a forrunner of things to come? http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/asia/75 ... -china-sea
User avatar
Roger Ramjet
 
Posts: 5285
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:55 pm

PreviousNext

Return to disasters

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest