'Sink two aircraft carriers': Chinese Admiral's chilling recipe to dominate the South China Sea
Fighting words.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/new...iU8AKSPPUY5uvE
'Sink two aircraft carriers': Chinese Admiral's chilling recipe to dominate the South China Sea
Fighting words.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/new...iU8AKSPPUY5uvE
^ From a person many steps away from the big red button. If only some other countries had similar security.
China's world first: Electromagnetic railgun goes to sea
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/new...ectid=12184829
And if you've never seen what an electromagnetic railgun can do....awesome, literally.
What the US does with a jack boots, threats, extortion, coercion, murder and invasion, China does with money. It's why so many countries are turning away from the US. They're going to part of someones empire, so why not the one that gives them the case rather than murders and kills all the people and then uses their country as a launching pad to attack the next country on the murkins hit list?
Always amused to catch up with these threads where harryNoRead and his mates puke up the US State department narrative as if it's beyond suspicion
^
With the election of President Duterte and his declaration that the “U.S. has lost” in the SCS in Beijing during a state visit to China in July 2016, Duterte secured $24 billion in Chinese economic pledges to help the Philippines develop infrastructure and its economy. They also mutually agreed to put aside the territorial disputes between them to focus on cooperation and stabilizing their relationship.
By most accounts, the relationship has moved in a positive trajectory as some of the economic pledges made to Manila have begun to trickle in. To date, an estimated $800 million out of the $24 billion has been accounted for. As with most large-scale economic pledges related to infrastructure and development, it takes years for the economic assistance to take root and to be able to assess its effectiveness. Still, there are questions concerning Chinese commitment to fully delivering promised funds, especially if Manila strengthens its relationship with America and or Japan, or if Manila returns to a more contested approach to its territorial claims.
https://nationalinterest.org/feature...hina-sea-40012
What makes you believe the Rear Admiral has, "permission to speak" and/or that his views are the views of the Chinese politicians and military commanders. Is he on the decision making panel, does he have a military position with the capacity to decide on military actions?
"Rear Admiral Lou Yuan is deputy head of the Chinese Academy of Military Sciences. Admiral Lou, who holds an academic military rank — not a service role —"
Your source:
Do you even read the article under discussion, that you post about? Did you not see the original piece was from the Taiwan's Central News Agency (CNA). Who are "highly likely" to have an axe to grind, don't you agree?
"Taiwan's Central News Agency (CNA) reports Admiral Lou gave a wide-ranging speech on the state of Sino-US relations. The high-profile, hawkish military commentator reportedly declared"
The NZ Herald publishes, a reported CNA report, that itself uses the cover of, "reportedly declared" Who wrote the articles pertinent points, not the NZH, not the CNA, some unknown "reporter".
^From your links "About us" page:
"It is about American interests"
https://nationalinterest.org/about-the-national-interest
Lots of unnamed "questions" and possible scenarios, If....., with......., or if.......... returns...... Which nobody can foresee. Only prudent planning and scheduling is available.
The Chinese financial commitment will be utilised once the governments have decided, what, where and when, not to any here today, dismissed tomorrow, propaganda article. As many are aware overextending by both parties is not always useful. Decades, not manipulated hourly share prices, are the relevant time scales
One presumes you agree with sober heads deciding the spending of CNY 165,000,000,000 is the correct way forward.
Last edited by OhOh; 02-01-2019 at 09:32 PM.
A tray full of GOLD is not worth a moment in time.
Christopher Pyne says China has raised regional 'anxiety' over its activities in the South China Sea
Defence Minister Christopher Pyne has called on Beijing to act responsibly in the South China Sea and avoid mimicking Russia's "might is right" approach to diplomacy.
Key points:
The Minister urged Beijing to respect international law to resolve territorial tensions
He added that Canberra and other capitals were not intent on "containing" China
The Government will invest $90 billion in the Royal Australian Navy in the coming years
Delivering a keynote speech to military leaders in Singapore, Mr Pyne stressed that no country wanted to stifle China's growth and prosperity.
But he urged Beijing to rethink its approach to the politically-charged waters of the South China Sea, arguing the world power was eroding regional confidence and increasing anxiety, including with activities like building artificial islands in disputed waters.
"Resolving disputes in the South China Sea in accordance with international law would build confidence in China's willingness to support and champion a strategic culture that respects the rights of all states," Mr Pyne said.
"As the exhortation goes, to those that much is given, much is expected; similarly for nation states, for those with great power comes great responsibility, and so I call on China to act with great responsibility in the South China Sea."
The Minister pledged Australian support for multilateral activities in the South China Sea, if required, to remind Beijing they are international waters.
See how China is converting reefs to military facilities by building artificial islands in the South China Sea.
China is pitted against smaller neighbours in those waters that it claims almost in entirety.
While Australia is "not interested in containing China," it wants Indo-Pacific countries to not have to make "choices between economic gain and sovereignty," Mr Pyne said.
Mr Pyne described ongoing tensions between the United States and China as "the defining great power rivalry of our times".
However, he shrugged off suggestions of a potential cold war between the duelling world heavyweights.
"It's a simplistic and unsophisticated characterisation of what is a much more complex and dynamic geo-strategic paradigm," Mr Pyne said.
https://www.abc. net.au/news/2019-01-28/christopher-pyne-says-china-is-raises-anxiety-in-region-over-scs/10756224
Does he not know of any other SE Asian countries militarising "their alleged" South China Seas islands, reefs and shoals?
From an Oz politician, look at your own actions Oz, priceless.
Australia:
Exports to ameristan $8.43B
Imports from ameristan $23.61B
Trade balance - $15B
Exports to China $68.10B
Imports from China$49.97B
Trade balance + $19B
https://tradingeconomics.com/australia/exports-by-country
https://tradingeconomics.com/austral...rts-by-country
Australians are lucky China makes up the annual deficit.
"External Debt in Australia decreased to 2,031,327 AUD Million in the third quarter of 2018 from 2045588 AUD Million in the second quarter of 2018. External Debt in Australia averaged 802,484 AUD Million from 1988 until 2018, reaching an all time high of 2045588 AUD Million in the second quarter of 2018 and a record low of 147312 AUD Million in the third quarter of 1988."
https://tradingeconomics.com/australia/external-debt
A 200% increase in debt. All good news to the lenders. Austerity and reduction in wages will be called for soon. Possibly the ameristani banks are willing to "invest" in Oz, for a nice annual interest income or because of the Kangaroos.
I'm sure a current Oz politician has the balls to say NO to ameristan but it's bankers say don't be so silly.
Sovereignty eh. As Venezuela is, experiencing now, that financial tap can be turned off and regime change instigated overnight, by a single tweet. Or in Oz's case a letter from the Oz Governor General,
appointed by the UK head of State, to the sitting PM.
Last edited by OhOh; 28-01-2019 at 07:42 PM.
In in your rush to lick America's asshole clean, I see you've lost track of the conversation again Harry, ...
A warship is not just "any ship".
If the US wanted to demonstrate that "any ship" could pass through the area and challenge the idea: "might is right" is not a sensible approach to diplomacy .....then sending a warship is not the way to go.
If you need that explained to you then you probably have brain damage.
^I can see your point regarding warships as opposed to "the freedom of the seas illusion".
One of those quaint international laws which some utilise against other countries, but ignore for their own situation, even failing to pass them into domestic law themselves. As long as we all obey their illegal sanctions and don't stop in ports situated in any of the many countries they currently have under their illegal sanctions
However as we know, China has developed a new "warship".
They appear, to many sailors, as just another oil tanker meandering along the commercial routes. Unfortunately they have successfully sunk or disabled more western warships in the past few years than all the others since the UN action in Korea (allegedly). These oil tankers have the ability to shutdown some of the most highly armed and defended western warships, disable computer systems and consequently missiles, torpedo and gun systems, some have said they can also disable a submarines periscope!!!!!.
They stop exceptionally well trained, fed and watered crews from performing their duties etc. Using simple, superior, designed and manufactured, from night soil, old tin cans and string, electronic weapons along with the amplified sounds of common insects.
Once an enemies warship and crew are disabled the tanker then use one of the oldest methods of sinking ships, ramming the opponent. Hence the many limping back to port/towed backed to port/sunken warship/overheating engines........ stories, we read about every month.
These new warships do not only attack legitimate expensive and fragile warships costing 100,000,000s Roubles/Yuan but, you can't beat this, they actually deliver goods and commodities back to their home ports and earn a profit 24/7 year after year, for their privately owned shipping lines and shareholders.
As you can imagine this is not going down to well with western ship owners and the bankers who have invested heavily and demand their regular pound of flesh.
Another example of the benevolent Chinese helping a poorer neighbour to develop Unlike the nasty world bank that require economic feasability studies.
I could just imagine the conversation of ohoh klondyke and a couple of others walking down the concrete steps to the "showers" at Auschwitz. Those damn Yanks and Brits only offered us a hand basin. These nice Germans are giving us showers.
Sri Lanka the latest victim of China?s debt-trap diplomacy - Asia Times
Another one if you can believe those annoying facts from the fake newspaper NYT, of course nowhere near as believable as RT or Shin Wa.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/25/w...anka-port.html
Last edited by Hugh Cow; 30-01-2019 at 07:42 AM.
Oh dear, another behind the curve poster.
Care to share the position of Sri Lanka's debt situation i.e who it owes what to and how much.
Due diligence or posting fake "news"
This may help your "knowledge" of their debt position.
https://indianpunchline.com/sri-lankas-bop-crisis-is-an-eye-opener/
I await any evidence, you may provide, disputing the linked above article's numbers.
Last edited by OhOh; 30-01-2019 at 12:52 PM.
As usual, HoHo tries to gloss over the important details.
China charges an interest rate of 6.3% for its loans to Lanka, while the interest rates on soft loans from the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) are only 0.25–3%.
Read more at:
//economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/65659719.cms?from=mdr&utm_source=contentofinterest &utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
As your "factual" India Times report claims that, "China is already the largest lender to the island nation", in paragraph 3. I stopped reading. I presume you have copies of the Loan Agreements to share with us?
However as I asked,
for any factual evidence to support your allegations please post them here so we might analyse and reach a conclusion.
Here is a link to the ADB bank:
https://data.adb.org/dataset/statement-adbs-sovereign-loans-1968-2017
Maybe you could supply the other lenders figures.
Last edited by OhOh; 30-01-2019 at 04:26 PM.
In your rush to lick China's asshole clean, I see you've lost track of the conversation again foobar, ...
"Building military runways are NOT island resorts".
If the Chinese wanted to demonstrate that "any ship" could pass through the area and challenge the idea: "might is right" is not a sensible approach to diplomacy .....of building military runways.
If you need that explained to you then YOU DO have brain damage.
Last edited by HermantheGerman; 30-01-2019 at 01:55 PM.
Jeezus H Christ you really are a Russian/ chinese Troll arent you?
Here's the site if you want to "subscribe" to Indian Punchline.
https://russia-insider.com/en/indian_punchline
Note the start of the web address and here's a little more on Russian Insider, A pro Moscow pro kremlin rag based in ...yes you guessed it.... Russia.
A bit more on Russian Insider. that certainly describes OhNo
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_Insider
The Asia Times and New York Times credibility of course pales into insignificance next to Russian Insider. So sorry my mistake.
None of it of course mitigates the fact that the chinkies indulged in predatory lending to a country they knew couldn't pay it back, and then swiped a port off them for 99 years, which was probably their intention in the first place.
That's how Chinastan works.
You are able to post which ever "sources" you wish,as we all are. If you beleive the numbers and accusations included in your posts without checking,
it's up to you".
I do look around the many "sources"and choose t accept the facts from proven, reliable sources. Your sources, Asia Times and NYT make allegations/fake news with no factual sources quoted.
You must take that up with the Sri Lankan officials who accepted the deal.
"On 7 Sep 2014, the Japanese premier launched stage 2 of the second phase of the BIA development project on his arrival at the airport, which is being funded by the Japanese Government."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandar...d_construction
I don't think you're adding any benefit to 'arrys post, with such poorly checked sources.
However you must take that up with the Sri Lankan officials who accepted, the Japanese funded projectl.
Just in case anyone missed the faux pas by
the airport was a Japanese funded projectl.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)