China 'building runway in disputed South China Sea island'

From the link above.

"It's a sovereign immune vessel, clearly marked in English not to be removed from the water — that it was US property."

Do they put that on every bomb or missile they use, what about their aircraft carriers. Do they also write it in Chinese? :rofl:

^Another posting on the "seizure".

M of A - China Seized An Unmanned U.S. Navy Sub - That Was Possibly Legal

A taster of one persons "opinion" and 28 other "opinions"

"The Chinese can simply say: "We saw a ship or submarine that seemed to be somewhat erratic in its movements. It did not respond to direct bridge to bridge bull horn calls. No crew was seen on board. We reasonably considered it a danger to international shipping. We salvaged it. If it is yours we will give it back (after a thorough inspection) if you pay us the usual applicable salvage award."What can the U.S. in a legally straight way respond? How will it respond?
How would a British Navy Captain react if some unannounced unmanned ship came up through the English Channel? He would probably ask: "Is that ship possibly out of control or damaged? How would I know? Is it a danger to the dense general shipping here? Should I salvage it? Should I sink it?"
What would the legal answers be?"


The British captain would ask for a cup of tea and inform head office for advice.
The Ameristanis would blow it out of the water.
ISIS would blame the Assad regime.
The LORD would have a laugh and grab some popcorn and await the "mothership" to arrive and then disable the "mothership" as well. Lavrov would suggest calling the Ameristanis and The LORD would reply, "Which of the 17 Ameristani "intelligence agencies" have jurisdiction in the South China Sea?". Lavrov replies, "Probably all of them, but it being a Saturday better send a message via a tweet to the Golden boy".

Obviously not stealthy enough, or the Chines navy have advanced under water radar.:)

Such an unexceptional event, Ameristan leads the world. :rofl:

This is a great opportunity to take massive western collective umbrage and drop a few hundred tonnes of ordnance on these sneaky chinky chonks and their sneaky little islands.

I say it is time to bust a move on these coonts.

HOOYA!!

:fire:

^It's time you led this platoon over the top sergeant, try and make to the ten yard wire before you're cut down by the Huns machine guns. There's a good chap.

China confirms US request for seized drone - Global Times

China's first response.

China like Russia are taking advantage of what they see as weakness and a lack of resolve from the current Presidency. As much as many Tdorians dislike the way the USA has exercised its power and influence(and in many cases rightly so), To think that the world would be better off with China as the world power and influence I think is delusional. Even the Israelis know they can ignore Obama with total impunity and many more of unsavoury regimes have realised they can also ignore the USA with little or no consequences.
The chinese govt has shown how ruthless it can be when it has the power to do so. Tiananmin square should serve as a reminder to what can happen with such a totalitarian govt only slightly removed from the ideology of fatso in north korea. They are gradually ensuring their energy supplies around the world especially Africa.
Corporate greed has help set up a Goldman sachs style economy as in China that has become too big to fail without considerable economic pain. The one advantage that Trump currently has is his unpredictability whether that will prove to be an asset or a total disaster remains to be seen.
To suggest that The Asian region would be less prone to problems or conflict if the USA would just leave, I believe is nonsensical. The power vacuum left would be filled by China which is what they seek.
Australia is already far too beholden to China for its economic security as are many other countries.
The European Union will never step up to the plate. They are too busy removing urinals from the European parliament to get in touch with their feminine side to actually do something.
I believe if we are to counter a more inward looking isolationist America other countries must step up to the plate. I am interested how other Tdorians read it.

Trump's secretary of state pick says China should be barred from South China Sea islands



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's nominee for secretary of state set a course for a potentially serious confrontation with Beijing on Wednesday, saying China should be denied access to islands it has built in the contested South China Sea.
In comments expected to enrage Beijing, Rex Tillerson told his confirmation hearing before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee that China's building of islands and putting military assets on those islands was "akin to Russia’s taking Crimea” from Ukraine.
Asked whether he supported a more aggressive posture toward China, he said: "We’re going to have to send China a clear signal that, first, the island-building stops and, second, your access to those islands also is not going to be allowed.”
The former Exxon Mobil Corp chairman and chief executive did not elaborate on what might be done to deny China access to the islands it has built up from South China Sea reefs, equipped with military-length airstrips and fortified with weapons.
Trump's transition team did not immediately respond to a request for specifics on how China might be blocked from the artificial islands.

China claims most of the energy-rich waters through which about $5 trillion in ship-borne trade passes every year. Neighbors Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam also have claims.
Tillerson also said Washington needed to reaffirm its commitment to Taiwan, which Beijing regards as a renegade province, but stopped short of Trump's questioning of Washington's long-standing policy on the issue.
The United States switched diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to China in 1979, acknowledging that China takes the position that there is "one China" and Taiwan is part of it. But the United States is also Taiwan's biggest ally and arms supplier.
"I don’t know of any plans to alter the 'one China' position," Tillerson said.

Tillerson said he considered China’s South China Sea activity "extremely worrisome" and that it would be a threat to the "entire global economy" if Beijing were able to dictate access to the waterway.
He blamed the current situation on what he termed an inadequate U.S. response. "The failure of a response has allowed them just to keep pushing the envelope on this," Tillerson said.
"The way we’ve got to deal with this is we’ve got to show back up in the region with our traditional allies in Southeast Asia," he said.

Democratic President Barack Obama’s administration conducted periodic air and naval patrols to assert the right of free navigation in the South China Sea. These have angered Beijing, but seeking to blockade China's man-made islands would be a major step further and a step that Washington has never raised as an option.
Under his strategic "pivot" to Asia, Obama has increased the U.S. military presence in the region, and Trump has vowed a major naval buildup.
Tillerson's words also went beyond Trump's own tough rhetoric on China.

RELUCTANT TO CHALLENGE

Obama has sought to forge a united front in Southeast Asia against China’s pursuit of its territorial claims, but some allies and partners who are rival claimants have been reluctant to challenge Beijing.
Tillerson called China's South China Sea island-building and declaration of an air defense zone in the East China Sea it contests with Japan "illegal actions."
"They’re taking territory or control, or declaring control of territories that are not rightfully China’s," he said.
The response was muted from the Philippines, a traditional U.S. ally that last year won an international arbitration case that included a challenge to China's island-building within its 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone.
"These are not policies yet and let us wait if they will implement what was said in the hearing," Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana told reporters on Thursday.
"Let's wait until Trump is in office."

His comments reflect the sharp change in Manila's approach to China under new President Rodrigo Duterte, who wants good diplomatic and business ties with Beijing and says challenging it is provocative and pointless. He makes no secret of his lack of trust in the Obama administration and has chided it for what he considers inaction in the South China Sea.

Tillerson also said the United States could not continue to accept "empty promises" China had made about putting pressure on North Korea over that country's nuclear and missile programs.
He said his approach to dealing with North Korea - which recently declared it is close to carrying out its first test of an intercontinental ballistic missile - would be "a long-term plan" based on sanctions and their proper implementation.
Asked if Washington should consider imposing "secondary sanctions" on Chinese entities found to be violating existing sanctions on North Korea, Tillerson said: "If China is not going to comply with those U.N. sanctions, then it's appropriate ... for the United States to consider actions to compel them to comply."
He accused China of failing to live up to global agreements on trade and intellectual property, echoing past remarks by Trump, who has threatened to impose high, retaliatory tariffs on China. But Tillerson also stressed the "deeply intertwined" nature of the world's two biggest economies.
"We should not let disagreements over other issues exclude areas for productive partnership," he said.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-sec...09.html?ref=gs

https://teakdoor.com/images/smilies1/You_Rock_Emoticon.gif

HOOYA!!

:fire:

^ Yep. Bellicose saber rattling to appease the Budweiser drinkers.

https://teakdoor.com/Gallery/albums/u...11/Trump_2.jpg

America doesn't own The Pacific and associated areas.

That is, unless one belongs to the continuous empire extension mindset.

'No access': Rex Tillerson sets collision course with Beijing in South China Sea

Rex Tillerson, Donald Trump’s nominee for secretary of state, has set the stage for a potential clash with China, saying it should be barred from artificial islands it has built in the South China Sea.

Tillerson said China’s control and construction of artificial islands in waters claimed by neighbouring countries was “akin to Russia’s taking of Crimea”.

China claims sovereignty over almost the entire South China Sea, building seven artificial islands on reefs and rocks and outfitting them with military-length airstrips and anti-aircraft guns.

“We’re going to have to send China a clear signal that, first, the island-building stops and, second, your access to those islands also is not going to be allowed,” Tillerson said during his confirmation hearing to become America’s top diplomat. “They are taking territory or control or declaring control of territories that are not rightfully China’s.”
Analysis 'A storm is gathering on the horizon': Chinese scholars fret about Trump
Experts agree the chances of a bitter and messy rupture between China and the US have increased following Trump’s tweets lashing out at Beijing
Read more

The statements are sure to enrage China, which has taken an extremely rigid stance on challenges to its sovereignty claims. Last year, an international tribunal ruled much of China’s territorial claims were invalid, but had little effect and the Chinese government ignored the verdict.

“[Chinese president] Xi Jinping will not be seen as weak and soft in the face of pressure from the United States, so I really do worry about an early crisis with China,” said Bonnie Glaser senior adviser for Asia at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “China is not going to allow the United States to deny it access to what it sees as its own territory.”
Rex Tillerson at the confirmation hearing for secretary of state.
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Rex Tillerson at the confirmation hearing for secretary of state. Photograph: Patsy Lynch/REX/Shutterstock

Trump frequently slammed China during his campaign, mostly on economic issues, and recently used Twitter to chastise China over its support for North Korea. But Tillerson’s comments are a new provocation that Beijing may not be able to ignore.

“China has been restrained in the face of all the tweets and rhetoric because they hope they can put the US-China relationship on an even keel,” Glaser said. “The Chinese have not given up on that, but at some point Xi Jinping may have to because being seen as weak would damage his ability to consolidate power.”

This year is crucial for Xi as his first term winds down. A critical Communist party meeting at the end of the year will involve a cabinet shuffle and will likely determine who succeeds Xi, with leaders locked in a power struggle to appoint their allies.

While Tillerson did not elaborate on how the US would bar China from islands in the South China Sea, experts agreed it would have to involve some form of military deployment.

“Blocking China’s access, presumably with US warships, would precipitate a crisis, a military clash,” said Ashley Townshend, a fellow at the University of Sydney’s United States studies centre.

“It is also illegal under the same rules the US is conducting all of its current policy in the South China Sea.”

Under Barack Obama, the US maintained a neutral stance on sovereignty claims, not recognising any ownership and often sailing warships through the South China Sea in what it called freedom of navigation exercises.

“Tillerson, like Trump, is shaping up to taking a much more hawkish stance with China on the South China Sea and indeed more broadly,” Townshend added.

But a more assertive stance on what China sees as its territorial integrity is likely to cause more tension, with Xi saying in a speech last year: “No foreign country should expect us to swallow the bitter fruit of damage to our sovereignty, security and development interests.”

Tillerson also slammed China for failing to reign in North Korea’s nuclear program, describing China as having “complete control over what sustains the government of North Korea.”

“We cannot continue to accept empty promises, like the ones China has made made to pressure North Korea to reform only to shy away from enforcement,” Tillerson said. “Looking the other way when trust is broken only encourages more bad behavior. It must end.”

The boisterous language on both the South China Sea and North Korea is unlikely to force China to act, and may even hamper efforts of Trump’s administration to encourage cooperation in other areas.

“I can’t think of a solution to the North Korean nuclear issue that doesn’t involve China and the US working together,” Townshend said. “But publicly calling out China is not the best strategy if you are trying to induce them to cooperate.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...outh-china-sea

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Looper

Tillerson said China’s control and construction of artificial islands in waters claimed by neighbouring countries was “akin to Russia’s taking of Crimea”.

---

Oh, Putin will love this. :)

^It is looking interesting. Mad Dog Mattis has said Russia are posing the biggest threat to NATO since WWII at his hearing. I think they should let Russia off and bomb these chinky islands instead. Divide and conquer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Looper

While Tillerson did not elaborate on how the US would bar China from islands in the South China Sea, experts agreed it would have to involve some form of military deployment.

---

Thank god for experts. I thought they were going to prevent access using strong words and sanctions - ha ha

Pretty funny all the Putin worshipers here thought that Drumpf was going to a peacenik. :rofl:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Looper

Thank god for experts

---

They are in front of their examiners and will say what is required to pass. passing an exam shows one can perform on que. it is not indicator of achieving success in a real job.

Will they walk the walk once safely installed. One should wait and see rather than obliterating cities to win "fake" success. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bsnub

Drumpf was going to a peacenik.

---

I believe the consensus was that, of the two candidates, Mr. Trump was the lesser evil of the two.

Again will he, if he successfully becomes POTUSE, walk the walk?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhOh

Again will he, if he successfully becomes POTUSE, walk the walk?

---

I think he has already proven that he can talk the talk but he can't walk the walk.

South China Sea: China warns US over islands 'confrontation'

Blocking China from islands it has built in contested waters would lead to "devastating confrontation", Chinese state media have warned.

The angry response came after secretary of state nominee Rex Tillerson said the US should deny Beijing access to new islands in the South China Sea.

Two state-run papers carry editorials strongly criticising his comments.

The hawkish Global Times tabloid warned that any such action would lead to "a large-scale war".

Beijing has been building artificial islands on reefs in waters also claimed by other nations. Images published late last year show military defences on some islands, a think-tank says.

Flying close to Beijing's new islands
Why is the South China Sea contentious?
Images 'show weapons built on islands'

Speaking at his confirmation hearing on Wednesday, Mr Tillerson likened China's island-building to Russia's annexation of Crimea from Ukraine.

"We're going to have to send China a clear signal that first, the island-building stops and second, your access to those islands also is not going to be allowed."

China's official response, from foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang, was muted. China had the right to conduct "normal activities" in its own territory, he said.

Asked specifically about the remark on blocking access, he said he would not respond to hypothetical questions.
'Unrealistic fantasies'

But editorials in the China Daily and the Global Times were more direct in their comments.

The China Daily suggested Mr Tillerson's remarks showed ignorance of Sino-US relations and diplomacy in general.

"Such remarks are not worth taking seriously because they are a mish-mash of naivety, shortsightedness, worn-out prejudices and unrealistic political fantasies," it said.

"Should he act on them in the real world, it would be disastrous.

"As many have observed, it would set a course for devastating confrontation between China and the US. After all, how can the US deny China access to its own territories without inviting the latter's legitimate, defensive responses?"

The Global Times, a nationalist daily, suggested that Mr Tillerson's "astonishing" comments came because "he merely wanted to curry favour from senators and increase his chances of being confirmed by intentionally showing a tough stance toward China".

China would ensure his "rabble rousing" would not succeed, it went on.

"Unless Washington plans to wage a large-scale war in the South China Sea, any other approaches to prevent Chinese access to the islands will be foolish."

The Obama administration has spoken out strongly against the island-building, pledged to ensure freedom of navigation in the South China Sea and sending navy ships to sail in contested areas.

But it has not threatened to block access to the islands, a step likely to enrage Beijing.

Mr Tillerson did not explain how the US might block access to the islands, and both Chinese papers suggested a wait-and-see policy.

"It remains to be seen to what extent his views against China will translate into US foreign policies," the China Daily said.

South China Sea: China warns US over islands 'confrontation' - BBC News

Ding Ding round one!

China hits back at US over South China Sea claims

China has asserted its "indisputable sovereignty" over parts of the South China Sea after the Trump administration vowed to prevent China from taking territory in the region.

https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2017/01/1132.jpg

The Chinese foreign ministry said Beijing would "remain firm to defend its rights in the region".

White House spokesman Sean Spicer said on Monday the US would "make sure we protect our interests there".

Barack Obama's administration refused to take sides in the dispute.

It did, however, send B-52 bombers and a naval destroyer last year, and the then US Secretary of State John Kerry spoke out over what he called "an increase of militarisation from one kind or another" in the region.

Several nations claim territory in the resource-rich South China Sea, which is also an important shipping route.

Read more:

Why is the South China Sea contentious?
See images from Woody/Yongxing Island
China's Island Factory
Flying close to Beijing's new South China Sea islands

The new US president has taken a tough stance against China, and Mr Spicer told reporters "the US is going to make sure we protect our interests" in the South China Sea.

"If those islands are, in fact, in international waters and not part of China proper, yeah, we'll make sure we defend international interests from being taken over by another country," he said, without giving further details.

The Chinese government responded by saying that the US was "not a party to the South China Sea issue".

Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said China was "committed to peaceful negotiations with all countries concerned" in the dispute, and said it "respects the principles of freedom of navigation and over-flight in international waters".

But, she went on: "Our position is clear. Our actions have been lawful."
'Devastating confrontation'

Mr Spicer's comments echo those of Donald Trump's new Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.

During his nomination hearing, Mr Tillerson said the US should block access to islands being built by China in the South China Sea, likening it to Russia's annexation of Crimea from Ukraine.

"We're going to have to send China a clear signal that first, the island-building stops and second, your access to those islands also is not going to be allowed," he told the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

The Chinese state media responded by warning that such actions would lead to a "devastating confrontation".

https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2017/01/1133.jpg

Rival countries have wrangled over territory in the South China Sea for centuries, but tension has steadily increased in recent years.

Its islets and waters are claimed in part or in whole by Taiwan, China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei.

Beijing has been building artificial islands on reefs and carrying out naval patrols in waters also claimed by these other nations.

Although the Obama administration insisted it was neutral, it spoke out strongly against the island-building and sought to build ties with, and among, the South East Asian nations whose claims overlap those of China.

In July an international tribunal ruled against Chinese claims, backing a case brought by the Philippines, but Beijing said it would not respect the verdict.

The frictions have sparked concern that the area is becoming a flashpoint with global consequences.

China hits back at US over South China Sea claims - BBC News

This problem should have been nipped in the bud before the sneaky coonts started fortrifying these 'islands'. They should have been blockaded 2 years ago.

Building artificial islands with the intention of taking unilateral control of international waters is the biggest piece of nonsense since Crimea.

Obama's line of standing off and pretending not to notice was piss weak.

The problem for the Donald is that he has alienated a lot of other countries with his protectionist US-centric rhetoric. It is no good the US going in to blockade these islands by themselves. The message needs to come from the international community as a whole that China will not be allowed to take illegal control of international waters. The UN needs to make a resolution that military action will be taken if China does not stop the nonsense and abandon the existing islands.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Looper

During his nomination hearing, Mr Tillerson said the US should block access to islands being built by China in the South China Sea, likening it to Russia's annexation of Crimea from Ukraine. "We're going to have to send China a clear signal that first, the island-building stops and second, your access to those islands also is not going to be allowed," he told the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The Chinese state media responded by warning that such actions would lead to a "devastating confrontation".

---

He got the job by telling the politicians what they wanted to hear. Mission accomplished.

What ameristan will do in truth is, "To early to say".

All true, Looper. Green owed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Looper

The UN needs to make a resolution that military action will be taken if China does not stop the nonsense and abandon the existing islands.

---

Who pray will back up the UN resolution? An Asian coalition or are we talking the big boys like Japan, South Korea and Australia?

:)

It is not in anyone's interests except China for China to take illegal control of international waters so I think virtually the entire rest of the world is thinking the same thing.

The problem is that China is trying to buy off its neighbours with 'investments' and infrastructure assistance. If China's immediate neighbours are too short-sighted to see the folly of being bought off so cheaply over this long-term strategic issue then the coalition might need to be gathered from further afield.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Looper

Building artificial islands with the intention of taking unilateral control of international waters is the biggest piece of nonsense since Crimea.

---

Didn't they sort of get away with that?

I don't think it is too late to stop them. It would have been much simpler to do it 2 years ago though.

what's that word....

something about looking backwards is always clearer or something.

It's all going to go silly, mate. I'm glad I won't be here to see it.

Information is moving faster than humanoids can assimilate. Their ability to plot and plan is failing simply because the information transfer is beyond them.

I see a general loss, across the board, of any true understanding of what is going on.

The speed with which things are now moving leaves room for only the outrageous, 15 minute, flash in the pan exploitation by the empowered.

And so good night .... :)

China warns Donald Trump via US media to stay out of South China Sea dispute

https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2017/01/1196.jpg

China has sent its strongest message yet to US President Donald Trump that it will not back down on its claims in the South China Sea.
Key points:

China says South China Sea is an issue for those in the region
Beijing reiterates it will not bend on "one China" policy
Analysts say trade is an area that should mutually benefit China and US

In a rare move, a senior Chinese official used an English-language interview to warn the new administration not to challenge Beijing over the territorial disputes.

"There might be a difference [of opinion] over the sovereignty of these islands but it's not for the United States," Lu Kang, China's most senior Foreign Ministry spokesman, told NBC News.

"That might be between China and some other countries in this region."

For weeks Chinese officials and state-controlled media have warned the US to avoid any involvement in the territorial disputes in the strategic waterway, which involve another five claimants.

That has not appeared to work, with Mr Trump's press secretary Sean Spicer this week warning the US would seek "to defend international territories from being taken over by one country".

Mr Lu's English-language interview on a US network now appears to be aimed directly at Mr Trump — who has previously expressed his fondness for watching television news programs.

"[The South China Sea] is not the United States territory or the international territory as he mentioned," Mr Lu said.

Beijing also used the interview to reiterate China's unwillingness to bend on the "one China" principal, saying Beijing is "100 per cent" committed, and expects the same of Washington.

The one China principal is a condition China imposes upon other countries to accept if they want diplomatic relations with Beijing.

It forces governments to recognise the independently-ruled island Taiwan as part of one China, and to have no official relations with Taipei.

In November, then-President-elect Mr Trump rattled Beijing by accepting a phone call from Taiwan's President Tsai Ing-wen, and he has since further infuriated China by saying he will not commit to the decades-old one China position unless there is progress on trade issues.

China's US media outreach is an attempt to nip both the South China Sea issue and Taiwan in the bud, by making clear Beijing will not back down on territory it claims is "indisputable".
China also says US must tone down 'trade war' talk

But one other major issue of contention remains — trade.

China has been warning the US to tone down its "trade war" talk, stressing the threat of imposing new tariffs on Chinese goods would trigger counter measures.

While agricultural exports form the bulk of US exports to China, each year billions of dollars of Boeing planes and passenger vehicles are sold to China.

Analysts in Beijing appear to see trade as an area where China can help Mr Trump achieve his goal of boosting US jobs.

Already the e-commerce billionaire Jack Ma has met Mr Trump, and ambitiously pledged to create a million new jobs in the US through expanding his e-commerce network throughout the US.

Analysts and officials alike in China hope these sorts of initiatives will help create US jobs, help Chinese businesses and "make America great again" without hurting China's interests.

China warns Donald Trump via US media to stay out of South China Sea dispute - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Looper

I don't think it is too late to stop them. It would have been much simpler to do it 2 years ago though.

---

The U.S. should definitely stay out of it. No one else in that area gives a hoot.
Let those other Ninja Turtle Chinks take care of it. They are so fucking corrupt that it will only backfire towards the U.S.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Looper

The problem is that China is trying to buy off its neighbours

---

China is promoting a way of life which allows for citizens of any country that wishes to join it's coalition, a share of the prosperity.

If one can "buy off" with this philosophy its an improvement on being slaughtered by throat slitters or bombed from 10,000m which is ameristans and its vassals preferred method.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Looper

Lu Kang, China's most senior Foreign Ministry spokesman

---

https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2017/01/1196.jpg

Does Australia only posses one China-man photo?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HermantheGerman

The U.S. should definitely stay out of it. No one else in that area gives a hoot.

---

There are many other countries in the region with claims with conflict with Chinas but the water is also an important international shipping lane and ceding control to the sneaky chinks will cost everyone in the long run. There are many other countries around the world with an interest in not letting China take control of that shipping lane.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhOh

China is promoting a way of life which allows for citizens of any country that wishes to join it's coalition, a share of the prosperity.

---

You sound like a programmed little chinkie-bot speech writer. Your tissue of euphemisms is beyond hilarious! Chinas international bribery is about China taking control of an international shipping lane which is thousands of miles from its mainland to promote China's economic strength at the expense of others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Looper

is about China taking control of an international shipping lane

---

Do you agree with France and UK "taking control" of the English Channel? I presume others "control" the Malacca Straights, which in your opinion is acceptable.

Has China been sinking commercial ships transiting its SCS, I'm sure Miss Kitt would have informed us? Has China been erecting lighthouses radar stations, like the ones which dot/ring the English Channel - for safety and navigation purposes?

Or is it just your hate of all things Chinese? When did you start hating them, as a child sitting on grandpa's knee or was it when you matured and went from your comics to TD?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhOh

China is promoting a way of life which allows for citizens of any country that wishes to join it's coalition, a share of the prosperity.

Do you agree with France and UK "taking control" of the English Channel? I presume others "control" the Malacca Straights, which in your opinion is acceptable.

---

I think the Admin should move this to the "Jokes and funny stories".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Looper

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HermantheGerman

The U.S. should definitely stay out of it. No one else in that area gives a hoot.

---

There are many other countries in the region with claims with conflict with Chinas but the water is also an important international shipping lane and ceding control to the sneaky chinks will cost everyone in the long run. There are many other countries around the world with an interest in not letting China take control of that shipping lane.

---

But no one is really making an issue out of it like the U.S. Just sell some weapons to the region and let those involve have a go for it. :rolleyes:
Economic sanctions against China should also be considered. But no one seems to care, so sanctions won't happen.

Some of you might want to watch this documentary...it might change some of your views?

https://123movies.is/film/the-coming.../watching.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by charleyboy

Some of you might want to watch this documentary...it might change some of your views?

https://123movies.is/film/the-coming.../watching.html

---

What the ole Pisshead John Pilger is saying: "That China is surrounded by some 400 U.S. military bases".
Well, isn't time then for China to thank the U.S. for that ? Or how else could have China develop in such a prosperous nation ? :rolleyes:

The movie is a piece of shit. Cheap cut and paste film strips from the History Chanel. John Pilger should spend his money on a hair cut...he looks like Bum who has just been kicked out of Hong Kong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhOh

Do you agree with France and UK "taking control" of the English Channel?

---

Utterly spurious comparison highlighting yet again your wafflebrained logic and bizarre deference to the self-serving chinks (what is that about or is it derived from the usual blind hatred of any US interests whatever they may be?).

The English channel is a narrow strait between 2 countries. The south China sea territorial claim is thousands of miles from China. But you already know all this. What an utter dick-brained troll.

Furthermore, the Spratleys are way, way down South from China, bordering Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines.

If they'd only claimed the Paracels, they might have some kind of claim, but they were greedy to a ludicrous extent.

It's not just the shipping lanes but more about the oil in the area.

Heck, they claim water all the way down to Brunei....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Looper

The English channel is a narrow strait between 2 countries.

---

The distances between the partially submerged reefs and more numerous small scattered, islands are what.

I suggest you ask a captain on a super tanker which area is the more dangerous. The well regulated English Channel with it's lights and radar controlled management, or the unlit, uncontrolled risk infected SCS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Looper

The south China sea territorial claim is thousands of miles from China

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Latindancer

Furthermore, the Spratleys are way, way down South from China

---

How far would you agree that a country has to be from one of it's islands or territories prior to it losing its claim 50km, 1000km, ......

There are many countries alleging sovereignty on far away distant lands. Won as the spoils of some battle centuries ago or even just proclaiming, "as there are no Christians here we claim all in the name of our own Christian God".

Or are you being just a tad racist?