Page 33 of 52 FirstFirst ... 23252627282930313233343536373839404143 ... LastLast
Results 801 to 825 of 1293
  1. #801
    I'm in Jail

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Online
    14-12-2023 @ 11:54 AM
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    13,986
    Without permission, eh ? And how many miles are they from the Philippine mainland ?

  2. #802
    Thailand Expat OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:03 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    25,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Latindancer View Post
    Without permission, eh ? And how many miles are they from the Vietnam mainland ?
    FIFY.

    Battle of the Paracel Islands


    "
    The Paracel Islands, called Xisha Islands (西沙群岛; Xīshā Qúndǎo) in Chinese and Hoang Sa Islands (Quần Đảo Hoàng Sa) in Vietnamese, lie in the South China Sea approximately equidistant from the coastlines of the PRC and Vietnam (200 nautical miles). With no native population, the archipelago’s ownership has been in dispute since the early 20th century.

    China first asserted sovereignty in the modern sense to the South China Sea’s islands when it formally objected to France’s efforts to incorporate them into French Indochina during the Sino-French War (1884–1885). Initially, France recognized Qing China's sovereignty over the Paracel and Spratly archipelagos, in exchange for Chinese recognition of Vietnam as a French territory. Chinese maps since then have consistently shown China’s claims, first as a solid and then as a dashed line. In 1932, one year after the Japanese Empire invaded northeast China, France formally claimed both the Paracel and Spratly Islands; China and Japan both protested. In 1933, France bolstered their claim and seized the Paracels and Spratlys, announced their annexation, formally included them in French Indochina. They built several weather stations on them, but they did not disturb the numerous Chinese fishermen found there. In 1938 Japan took the islands from France, garrisoned them, and built a submarine base at Itu Aba (now Taiping / 太平) Island. In 1941, the Japanese Empire made the Paracel and Spratly Islands part of Taiwan, then under its rule.

    In 1945, in accordance with the Cairo and Potsdam Declarations and with American help, the armed forces of the Republic of China government at Nanjing accepted the surrender of the Japanese garrisons in Taiwan, including the Paracel and Spratly Islands. Nanjing then declared both archipelagoes to be part of Guangdong Province.

    In 1946 it established garrisons on both Woody (now Yongxing / 永兴) Island in the Paracels and Taiping Island in the Spratlys. France promptly protested. The French tried but failed to dislodge Chinese nationalist troops from Yongxing Island (the only habitable island in the Paracels), but were able to establish a small camp on Pattle (now Shanhu / 珊瑚) Island in the southwestern part of the archipelago.

    In 1950, after the Chinese nationalists were driven from Hainan by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), they withdrew their garrisons in both the Paracels and Spratlys to Taiwan. In 1954 France ceased to be a factor when it accepted the independence of both South and North Vietnam and withdrew from Indochina.

    In 1956 North Vietnam formally accepted that the Paracel and Spratly islands were historically Chinese" ...

    The South Vietnamese fleet also received warnings that U.S. Navyradarhad detected additional Chinese guided missile frigates and aircraft on their way from Hainan.

    South Vietnam requested assistance from the U.S. Seventh Fleet, but the request was denied.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Paracel_Islands


    Chlna > French > China (Qing China) > China > French > Japan > China (ROC) > China (PRC) .

    Vietnam sovereignty seems to missing!
    Last edited by OhOh; 01-05-2020 at 02:52 PM.
    A tray full of GOLD is not worth a moment in time.

  3. #803
    I'm in Jail

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Online
    14-12-2023 @ 11:54 AM
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    13,986
    Initially, France recognized Qing China's sovereignty over the Paracel and Spratly archipelagos, in exchange for Chinese recognition of Vietnam as a French territory.


    So a deal was done. And nothing to do with whether China really had a valid claim....

  4. #804
    Thailand Expat helge's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    11,648
    Quote Originally Posted by Latindancer View Post
    So a deal was done.
    As always
    Quote Originally Posted by Latindancer View Post
    a valid claim....
    Christmas Island ?

    Falklands?

  5. #805
    Thailand Expat misskit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Chiang Mai
    Posts
    48,094
    Manila Rejects China’s Designation of 2 New Sea Districts

    The Philippines on Thursday “strongly” protested China’s creation of two districts in the disputed South China Sea, saying Beijing’s move violated the Southeast Asian nation’s territorial sovereignty.


    Manila had been protesting Beijing’s self-declared Sansha City “and the extent of its administrative jurisdiction” since 2012, the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) said in a statement. It marked the latest in a series of recent protests by the foreign office over Chinese actions in the sea.


    “The Philippine government strongly protests the establishment of the so-called districts of ‘Nansha’ and ‘Xisha,’” it said.


    On Thursday the Philippines also rejected the designation of Kagitingan Reef within the administrative center for the so-called “Nansha district.” The Kagitingan Reef is within the Kalayaan Island Group and, Philippine officials said, is an integral part of Philippine territory.


    Manila “does not recognize Sansha, nor its constituent units, nor any subsequent acts emanating from them,” the department said.


    “The Philippines also objects to and does not recognize the Chinese names given to some features in the Kalayaan Island Group,” the statement read.


    “The establishment and supposed extent of jurisdiction of ‘Sansha City’ of which the new two districts are part, violate Philippine territorial sovereignty over the Kalayaan Island Group and Bajo de Masinloc, and infringes on Philippine sovereign rights over the waters and continental shelf in the West Philippine Sea,” the DFA said.


    Beijing claims almost all of the South China Sea, a vital waterway through which about U.S. $5 trillion in ship-borne trade passes annually, while Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Vietnam and Taiwan also claim parts of those waters.


    Thursday’s statement from the Philippine foreign office came eight days after Manila filed a diplomatic protest against Beijing after Filipino officials said Chinese sailors had pointed a radar gun at a Philippine Navy ship. Manila at the same time filed a separate diplomatic note regarding the Chinese move to name the districts.


    On Thursday, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang responded to a reporter’s question related to the alleged laser-gun incident.


    “According to what we know, the Philippine side’s accusation about laser gun-pointing is not true,” he told a daily press conference.


    “The Chinese warship was patrolling in relevant waters of China’s Nansha Islands,” he said, using the Chinese name for the contested Spratly Islands. “Its operation was professional and standard, which accords with international law and relevant security rules. China has lodged representations with the Philippine side, asking certain individuals on the Philippine side to respect facts and refrain from issuing groundless remarks.”


    Earlier this month, the State Council, China’s top administrative body, approved the creation of two new municipal districts – Nansha District, which is based at Fiery Cross Reef, an artificial island built by China that it said will oversee all of the Spratly Islands and their surrounding waters; and Xisha District, based on Woody Island, which will oversee the Paracel Islands.


    In 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague sided with the Philippines in its arbitration case against China. The international community, including the United States, hailed that win as historic, but Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte never enforced the ruling and instead sought closer ties with Beijing.


    The DFA statement on Thursday also called on China to “adhere to international law” and impose self-restraint in conducting activities in the South China Sea, which is believed to lie atop vast mineral and oil deposits.


    It underscored that the international arbitral tribunal’s ruling had “comprehensively addressed China’s excessive claims and illegal actions in the South China Sea.”


    Manila has been protesting the passage of Chinese warships as well as fishing boats near its sea territory. Last year, Duterte held talks with Chinese leader Xi Jinping after a Chinese trawler rammed into a Filipino fishing boat, leaving 22 Filipino fishermen adrift at sea.


    But Duterte’s government subsequently accepted China’s apology for the incident, with the president saying he had no choice but to do so because he had to consider Beijing’s military might.


    The Philippines’ stronger position against China came shortly after Duterte spoke with U.S. President Donald Trump recently. While complete details of the dialogue were not released to the press, the U.S. Embassy in Manila said the two leaders had agreed to maintain the “strong and enduring” ties between the allies.


    This week, a resolution filed at the Philippine Senate urged Duterte’s government to “exert legal and diplomatic pressure” against China over its activities in the South China Sea. The resolution called for reparations by China to damage it has caused on Philippine territory in the sea region.


    Also this week, the U.S. Navy’s USS Bunker Hill, a guided missile cruiser, completed an “innocent passage” maneuver in the disputed waters. It was the U.S. government’s second freedom of navigation operation in the area in just two days.

    Manila Rejects China’s Designation of 2 New Sea Districts

  6. #806
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,552
    This is why the chinkies only like UN bodies that they can blackmail.

    BY EJECTING its neighbours’ forces, building up its navy and constructing artificial islands, China has for years sought to assert vast and ambiguous territorial claims in the South China Sea. These alarm its neighbours and have led to military confrontations. They also challenge America’s influence in Asia. Now the Permanent Court of Arbitration, an international tribunal in The Hague, has declared China’s “historic claims” in the South China Sea invalid.

    https://www.economist.com/china/2016/07/16/courting-trouble

  7. #807
    Thailand Expat helge's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    11,648
    Not much to read there.

    Can I borrow your password ?

  8. #808
    Thailand Expat OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:03 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    25,222
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    ambiguous
    That new weasel word will be placed below "highly probable", OK?

    "ambiguous


    ADJECTIVE

    open to more than one interpretation; not having one obvious meaning."

    Quote Originally Posted by helge View Post
    Not much to read there.

    Can I borrow your password ?
    It's dated 16/7/2016 FFS.

    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    It's old news being rehashed by the whackjob .

    China 'building runway in disputed South China Sea island'-bottom-barrel-jpg
    Last edited by OhOh; 01-05-2020 at 06:57 PM.

  9. #809
    Thailand Expat helge's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    11,648
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post
    It's dated 16/7/2016 FFS.
    Yes, saw that in the link, before I opened

    4 years old court ruling is still a ruling

  10. #810
    Thailand Expat OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:03 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    25,222
    Quote Originally Posted by helge View Post
    4 years old court ruling is still a ruling
    Not from an illegal court.

    At the time, as I then pointed out, the court did not have legal jurisdiction to issue anything.

    If you wish to review the courts own "rules", you will find, both parties in the dispute have to agree that the court has jurisdiction.

    Article 1/4.

    PCA Arbitration Rules | PCA-CPA

    China did not.

  11. #811
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,552
    The chinkies won't accept any organisations jurisdiction if it goes against them.

    But if even the most mickey mouse, contrived kangaroo court hints in their favour, they squeal like a bunch of schoolgirls.

  12. #812
    Thailand Expat helge's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    11,648
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post
    If you wish to review the courts own "rules",
    I couldn't even read the article, and took Harry's word for it
    My mistake ?
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    The chinkies won't accept any organisations jurisdiction if it goes against them.
    Super Powers a la carte

  13. #813
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    26-09-2021 @ 10:28 PM
    Posts
    10,105
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    The chinkies won't accept any organisations jurisdiction if it goes against them.
    Not so "exceptional" case nowadays...

  14. #814
    Thailand Expat OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:03 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    25,222
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    The chinkies won't accept any organisations jurisdiction if it goes against them.
    The courts own rules are there for you read.

    China as a law abiding country informed the court of their position. What the court decided upon, after it's receipt, you must ask the court.

  15. #815
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,552
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post
    The courts own rules are there for you read.

    China as a law abiding country informed the court of their position. What the court decided upon, after it's receipt, you must ask the court.
    Yes.... so The chinkies won't accept any organisations jurisdiction if it goes against them.

  16. #816
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    26-09-2021 @ 10:28 PM
    Posts
    10,105
    ^Wondering whether there are other states that do not give a damn about ICC? (Or is ICJ? it doesn't matter, all the same...)

  17. #817
    Thailand Expat helge's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    11,648
    Quote Originally Posted by Klondyke View Post
    Wondering whether there are other states that do not give a damn about ICC?
    You thinking of the exceptionel ones?

    But they are exceptionel, for god sake

  18. #818
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    26-09-2021 @ 10:28 PM
    Posts
    10,105
    Quote Originally Posted by helge View Post
    But they are exceptionel, for god sake
    Do you think, more than the chinkies?

  19. #819
    Thailand Expat helge's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    11,648
    Quote Originally Posted by Klondyke View Post
    Do you think, more than the chinkies?
    Doesn't matter what you and I think.

    What does "they" think of themselves

    China might not be there yet, but their president seems to be quite the unpleasant fellow, so they are getting nearer

  20. #820
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    26-09-2021 @ 10:28 PM
    Posts
    10,105
    If the countries should be measured whether their president is "unpleasant" or "pleasant"? (the world would be much better off...)

  21. #821
    A Cockless Wonder
    Looper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 10:15 PM
    Posts
    15,185
    Rockwell B-1 bombers fly over South China Sea in latest foray into contested space

    The U.S. military continued its weeklong show of force in the South China Sea with a sortie over the contested waters on Thursday by two Air Force bombers.

    China 'building runway in disputed South China Sea island'-wktcb2-jpg


    The B-1B Lancers from the 28th Bomb Wing at Ellsworth Air Force Base, S.D., flew a 32-hour round trip to conduct operations over the sea as part of a joint bomber task force by the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command and U.S. Strategic Command, the Air Force said in news release Thursday.

    The mission further demonstrated the service’s new “dynamic force employment model,” which is intended to make its global bomber presence less predictable, the Air Force said.

    China has claimed sovereignty over much of the South China Sea, an assertion disputed by other nations with competing claims, such as Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei.

    During the past week, Navy warships operated near the Spratly and Paracel islands, two of the archipelagos China has claimed most vehemently.

    The guided-missile cruiser USS Bunker Hill sailed near the Spratlys on Wednesday as part of its so-called freedom-of-navigation operations. They are intended to challenge assertions by China and other claimant nations that military passing near the islands must first receive authorization.

    The U.S. contends that international law allows for direct passage through the contested archipelagos.

    On Tuesday, the guided-missile destroyer USS Barry sailed near the Paracel Islands.

    The Air Force sortie on Thursday follows a similar B-1 bomber round trip April 22 from Ellsworth to Japan, where a B-1B Lancer joined 15 Japanese fighters for training near Misawa Air Base.

    Air Force bombers fly over South China Sea in latest foray into contested space - Pacific - Stripes

    China 'building runway in disputed South China Sea island'-b1_mk82-jpg



  22. #822
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    26-09-2021 @ 10:28 PM
    Posts
    10,105
    Quote Originally Posted by Looper View Post
    The U.S. contends that international law allows for direct passage through the contested archipelagos.
    How generous from them taking such effort - and spending money so much now needed - to keep the islands "uncontested". Perhaps some country - from far away - would like to declare it for their territory and build there a military base.... (something like on Diego Garcia, Guam, you name it...)

  23. #823
    Thailand Expat OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:03 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    25,222
    Quote Originally Posted by helge View Post
    quite the unpleasant fellow,
    Seems a mild insult, unless you attended Winchester College:

    Attachment 50462

    How many insulting phrases do you have?

    If say ten to choose from where does "quite the unpleasant fellow" fit GT 50%, LT 50%

  24. #824
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,552
    I guess the old chinkies haven't managed to nick the B-1 plans yet then.

  25. #825
    Thailand Expat misskit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Chiang Mai
    Posts
    48,094
    US Sends another Ship near South China Sea Survey Site

    Updated at 8:22 a.m. ET on 2020-05-09


    The commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet called on China to end its “bullying” behavior in the South China Sea as the U.S. sent a warship near the spot where a Malaysian-contracted oil exploration ship is operating and close to a recently deployed Chinese survey vessel.


    The U.S. Navy’s 7th Fleet said in a press release that on Thursday it had sent the USS Montgomery and transport ship USNS Cesar Chavez near the West Capella, the oil exploration ship which is operating within Malaysian waters.


    The Chinese survey ship Hai Yang Di Zhi 8, escorted by China Coast Guard (CCG) ships and maritime militia, has been conducting a survey nearby since April 15. That is widely viewed as an attempt to intimidate Malaysia out of exploiting resources in waters that China also claims.


    The USS Montgomery is the second American littoral combat ship to sail in that area of the South China Sea within two weeks, after the USS Gabrielle Giffords patrolled there on April 26.


    “The Chinese Communist Party must end its pattern of bullying Southeast Asians out of offshore oil, gas, and fisheries. Millions of people in the region depend on those resources for their livelihood,” Adm. John Aquilino, commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, said in a press release.


    Tensions


    Tensions have been rising in the resource-rich South China Sea, which China largely claims for itself, notwithstanding conflicting territorial claims involving five other governments. Assertive behavior at sea and recent Chinese declarations of administrative authority over the contested area have drawn protests from both neighboring countries and the U.S. government.


    China frequently sends research vessels, coastguard ships, and paramilitary forces to assert its claims. The CCG is much bigger and better armed than most navies in the region, including that of Malaysia. But experts said that by sending ostensibly civilian law enforcement ships, China increases pressure on its rivals without allowing territorial disputes to spiral into war.


    James R. Holmes, a professor of maritime strategy at the U.S. Naval War College, said the recent deployments of U.S. littoral combat ships hint at a new role for these advanced but smaller vessels, which may be better suited to countering gray-zone tactics employed by China.


    The U.S. Navy rotates its four littoral combat ships in and out of Singapore’s Changi Naval Base.

    “A littoral combat ship, especially one bulked up with naval strike missiles, may provide a good tool for this mission because it outguns anything in the China Coast Guard or maritime militia, yet it’s outclassed by heavy ships from the PLA Navy. It’s intermediate in capability,” Holmes said.


    If the U.S. Navy were to send more muscular warships, it would risk looking more provocative than China and potentially escalating the situation, he said.


    Malaysia signaled its discomfort when the U.S. sent two bigger warships, the USS America and USS Bunker Hill, on an exercise in the same area on April 18. The littoral combat ships are smaller and less heavily armed.


    “For my money this is a form of diplomatic jujitsu we ought to test out in the South China Sea,” Holmes said.


    The littoral combat ships ran into numerous difficulties during their development and commissioning into the U.S. Navy. There were originally meant to be 55 of the ships built, but the Navy decided not to acquire any more after the first four, and in February, the Navy’s budget director recommended decommissioning them.


    The United States has accused China of exploiting the COVID-19 pandemic to expand its unlawful claims in the South China Sea.


    China has said that the Hai Yang Di Zhi 8 survey ship is conducting normal activities and have accused U.S. officials of smearing Beijing.


    But adding to the current tensions, China last week announced a unilateral fishing ban in a large area of the South China Sea until Aug. 16, prompting protests from fisheries’ associations in Vietnam and the Philippines.


    On Friday, Vietnam’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs also officially rebuked China over the ban.


    “Vietnam demands that China not further complicate the situation in the South China Sea,” Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Le Thi Thu Hang said in a statement.


    Her comment follows a conversation Wednesday between U.S. Secretary of State Michael Pompeo and Vietnam’s Deputy Prime Minister Pham Binh Minh. They agreed on the “importance of ensuring freedom of the seas, and the unfettered pursuit of economic opportunity throughout the Indo-Pacific region,” the State Department said in a statement.


    Also this week, in an apparent reference to the recent Chinese and U.S. naval activities in the South China Sea, Indonesia’s top diplomat called on “all relevant parties to exercise self-restraint and to refrain from undertaking actions that may erode mutual trust and potentially escalate tension in the region.”


    Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi urged restraint while negotiations for a code of conduct (CoC) in the contested sea region were being delayed because of the coronavirus pandemic.


    “Indonesia continues to follow closely recent developments in the South China Sea,” she said Wednesday during a news conference in Jakarta about COVID-19, according to a transcript.


    “Indonesia expresses its concerns on recent activities in the South China Sea which may potentially escalate tensions at a time where global collective efforts are vital in fighting COVID-19.”


    Indonesia, the foreign minister added, “underlines the importance of maintaining peace and stability in the South China Sea, including to ensure freedom of navigation and over-flight and to urge all Parties to respect international law.”


    Ahmad Pathoni in Jakarta contributed to this report.

    https://www.benarnews.org/english/ne...020162056.html

Page 33 of 52 FirstFirst ... 23252627282930313233343536373839404143 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •