True Reasons Behind the Confrontations amid US and China

[Flyman]

China plays logic and verbal tricks all the time

:ar15China plays logic and verbal tricks all the time

On confrontations on South China Sea, on six-party talks and on suppressions and massacres in Tibet as well as on US-Sino bilateral cooperation against economic crisis, China has been playing a lot of logic and verbal tricks.

 

[OPSSG]

:ar15China plays logic and verbal tricks all the time

On confrontations on South China Sea, on six-party talks and on suppressions and massacres in Tibet as well as on US-Sino bilateral cooperation against economic crisis, China has been playing a lot of logic and verbal tricks.

Where are your links to reputable sources? Where is the factual support for your arguments?

Are you even Chinese?

 

[DarthAmerica]

What are true reasons behind the Confrontaions on South China Sea amid US and China militaries? It seems easy to understood by ones with Chinese cultural background but very dificult to those western military experts. Up to now, It has only been seen that US Congressman, Republican Representative Mark Kirk remarked that It's an early test of the new US president and the story would reverberate around the world and would be carefully watched in North Korea, Iran and Syria.

Appreciate Mark Kirk's efforts to point out some substantials behinded and hope that US administration and militaries would be alerted by Mark Kirk's remarks. However, from a Chinese's ponit of view, Mark Kirk's remark is far not enough to the truth! What is the truth?

On April 1, 2001, a similarly incident happened on South China Sea and a collision resulted between US Navy EP-3 and China PLA Air Forcr J-8s which caused the death of the J-8's pilot, Lt. Cdr. Wang Wei, while the EP-3 was forced to make an emergency landing on Hainan. It was intersting to dig out
that the incident had just made Chinese authorities safely passed a keen internal political crisis and the former president Jiang Zemin beaten his political competitors with the help of the incident. However, a question has been still remaining as who maneuvered and designed that incident as well as commanded China's pilots to make dangerous flight activities from Beijing to Hainan. Although we are not able to get further intense secrets inside right now, but as the Chairman of Military Committee of China, Jiang Zemin really politically benefited from the incident.

Both incidents happened in 2001 and 2009 have the same characteristic that China's militaries maneuvered and conducted dangerous activities against US aircrafts and vessels that were absolutely not allowed in PLA's normal exercise and training regulations. Such as these dangourous activities could only take place under one condition that the commands came from the highest level of Chinese Militaries and only one person was affordable for the loses and risks whatever in military men's lifes and in Chinese politics. In 2001, the person was the former President Jiangzemin and the person in 2009 is the China's President and Chairman of Chinese Military Committee Hu Jintao.

Fortunately, the USNS Impeccable successfully and safely dodged China Navy's harassment and didn't left any chance for Chinese authorities to stimulate Chinese young people again and to make another patriotism passion tide sweeping the whole country. It's apparently true that President Hu Jintao is not as lucky as the former President Jiang Zemin in this confrontation on South China Sea amid US and China and that President Hu Jintao has also tutored new US Administration how to deal with Chinese government in free of charge .

We can only speculate, but some things are pretty obvious. The PRC uses a lot of that area for test and development of various platforms including submarines. The DoD and PLAN hold their submarines in very high regard at the systems level and it's an area of much concern. The Impeccable was very likely monitoring the area for such activity and certainly collecting ELINT. Perhaps the PLAN had something going on the Impeccable would be particularly interested in. Perhaps the actions were initiated at higher levels in order to test the new U.S. administration. Either way, the Impeccable's presence was not coincidental and the severity of the Chinese response suggest more than meets the eye.


-DA

 

[tonyget]

Get your facts straight. ...............

What's that got to do with being hypocritical ?

How do you know for sure that what the ship did was illegal under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LoS)? .............................

(1) The Americans admit that they were operating in Chinese EEZ.

(2) I don't deny that China also send spy ships to her neighbor's water, and I think they protest it is doing a right thing ------- not in reverse like what Americans did(they break into your place and protest you for expel them, typical gangster's logic)

 

[OPSSG]

(1) The Americans admit that they were operating in Chinese EEZ.

(2) I don't deny that China also send spy ships to her neighbor's water, and I think they protest it is doing a right thing ------- not in reverse like what Americans did(they break into your place and protest you for expel them, typical gangster's logic)

Earlier, you confidently stated and I quote: "The ship was illegal." What was illegal about it? If you are going to cite LoS as applicable 'law', please demonstrate some basic understanding of the laws of the sea and applicability of UN legal conventions. Countries have limited set of exclusive rights outside of their own territorial waters and air space. Do you have any legal training in maritime laws and how these so called 'rights' should be applied and enforced?

Was it illegal to sail there (which is not territorial waters)? Who bears the burden of proof, if it is indeed 'performing' an 'illegal' activity? I'm just saying it is not clear cut, who is right or wrong.

Almost everybodys' spy ships pass through the territorial waters of the neighbouring states when the travel pass the Straits of Malacca (Malaysia and Indonesia) and the Straits of Singapore (Singapore and Indonesia). Does the personnel of any navy or coast guard vessel in this region strip to their underwear and throw planks into the path of Chinese or NZ navy ships because they might be gathering electronic intelligence?

Anyway, I am pretty sure that the USN will just send a destroyer escort and the USNS Impeccable will once again continue in the same mission in the same area of operations. The USNS Impeccable is operated by a civilian crew under Navy supervision. It is not a warship or, strictly speaking, a spy ship. Its work is part of a largely unseen cat and mouse game in which the US tracks foreign submarines on the open seas.

My position is much the same as a BBC report which says:

'Neither the US nor China can claim to be wholly right. "It's not a slam dunk on either side," says Dr Valencia.'​

OTOH, you are applying gangster logic to your arguments.

 

[OPSSG]

What's that got to do with being hypocritical ?

I have heard your valid opinion. However, I note that you do not supply facts or links in support of your arguments or opinions. It is my opinion, you have a factual error in your earlier post and I have provided further information in relation to your omission(s).

You may also want to read this link in relation to a similar incident relating to international law where China's Han-class nuclear-powered submarine entered Japanese territorial waters during the early morning hours of November 10, 2004, and passed submerged at about 100 meters as it “wandered” in Japanese territorial waters for about two hours before exiting into international waters. A submarine remaining in another country's territorial waters while submerged and operating unannounced after being warned via active sonar 'ping' is considered an hostile act.

In this case, China is definitely hypocritical in her conduct, taking into consideration the Nov 2004 Han Submarine Incident. Please also see news of discussions to resolve the USNS Impeccable incident

 

[xudeen]

:ar15China plays logic and verbal tricks all the time

On confrontations on South China Sea, on six-party talks and on suppressions and massacres in Tibet as well as on US-Sino bilateral cooperation against economic crisis, China has been playing a lot of logic and verbal tricks.

OK, what part did China play logic & tricks on the South China Sea confrontation? Is it that that they didn't say, "We are wrong & you are right"?

And what six party talks on Tibet are you talking? Did China ever open any form of international discussion on Tibet? Or are you mistaking North Korea with Tibet?

Also, what kind of tricks are China playing in the Sino-US fight aginst this economic crisis? Perhaps you mean this: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ba857be6-f88f-11dd-aae8-000077b07658.html :

 

[tonyget]

Does the personnel of any navy or coast guard vessel in this region strip to their underwear and throw planks into the path of Chinese or NZ navy ships because they might be gathering electronic intelligence?

Evidence please.

Just because you are loud doesn't make you right. So far I only hear Americans yelling ,but no photo/video or any other evidence to support their claimes.

 

[OPSSG]

Does the personnel of any navy or coast guard vessel in this region strip to their underwear and throw planks into the path of Chinese or NZ navy ships because they might be gathering electronic intelligence?

Evidence please.

Just because you are loud doesn't make you right. So far I only hear Americans yelling ,but no photo/video or any other evidence to support their claims.

I am sorry to have to have taken the time to enter into this discussion with you (in contrast to my enjoyable discussions / disagreements with Feanor in the F-35 JSF thread). :lul

Given your poor command of English, you have misunderstood my rhetorical question (please check the dictionary for the meaning of the word 'rhetorical'). Hence, no evidence is necessary in relation to my rhetorical question.

On the issue of photos, IIRC the USN released some nice candid photos and other evidence to international news agencies. I am sorry you are not happy with the current discussion and think that the American sources I cite are yelling. BTW, I am also not yelling. I am only providing information in response to your omission(s).

You have an opinion. Good for you. I also have a opinion. In my opinion, you are not an informed forum participant in this area of discussion. Hence, I shall stop responding to your posts on this topic.

 

[tonyget]

I am sorry to have to have taken the time to enter into this discussion with you (in contrast to my enjoyable discussions / disagreements with Feanor in the F-35 JSF thread). :lul

Given your poor command of English, you have misunderstood my rhetorical question (please check the dictionary for the meaning of the word 'rhetorical'). Hence, no evidence is necessary.

I am sorry you are not happy with the current discussion and think that I am yelling. BTW, I am not yelling. I am only providing information in response to your omission(s).

You have an opinion. Good for you. I also have a opinion. In my opinion, you are not an informed forum participant in this area of discussion and I shall stop responding to your posts on this topic.

Don't change my words, who says you are yelling? I said "Americans yelling", so you're an American now ?

Admin: Text deleted. You need to chill. This kind of response demonstrates that you are misunderstanding the content of OPSSG's response and have jumped to your own conclusions. A lack of control and a shortness of manners will see you in trouble very quickly. Naturally we would not like to see that when it's something that can be managed by pausing before posting.

Control your temper. This does not require a response on here. Please read the forum rules before responding.

 

[OPSSG]

Don't change my words, who says you are yelling? I said "Americans yelling", so you're an American now ?

Run away if you like.

I am not American (and my credentials have been accepted by the Mod team). You replied as I was amending my post and adding a link, as I was having connection problems with DT (occasionally, I crash before my post is uploaded).

I am walking away from a meaningless circular discussion (with you on the USNS Impeccable incident) that is currently not based on facts. In fact, I am trying not to further hurt your feelings by continuing to provide facts.

Peace be with you.

 

[ReAl PrOeLiTeZ]

:ar15China plays logic and verbal tricks all the time

On confrontations on South China Sea, on six-party talks and on suppressions and massacres in Tibet as well as on US-Sino bilateral cooperation against economic crisis, China has been playing a lot of logic and verbal tricks.

man your walking a fine line between your banned. every country politics uses verbal tricks, think China is the only one? US vs China confrontations, is mostly the fear of "Sinophobia" during the Cold War. People notice things that involve China more quickly and judgementally then other nations. People notice chinese students at university saying they are stealing their education, while if you look at the influx of students who's origin is from Russia you will be alarmed by the number. Its just biased media, false assumptions, brain washed society we live in. Images and words are more powerfull then any weapon out their you know.

 

[Flyman]

War's close to us, and it's a midwife for Chinese Century

War's close to us, and it's a midwife for Chinese Century


PLA admiral, former Defence Minister Chi Haotian

 

[Flyman]

Admiral Chi: War is close to Us

Admiral Chi: War is close to Us

Not permiting to develop and obstructing China's modernization processes have been being all the time and never changed Japan's state Policy which should be given us as deepest painful historic lessons. Although there're opportunities of cooperation between states, competitions, conflicts and, an extreme one of conflict forms, wars are much more substantially existing in state relations. Cooperations are temperoary and conditional. Competitions and confilcts are absolute which are main shafts of historic development. So- called peace and development being subjects of current era, therefore, is absolutely wrong (maximum to be an expedient measure). The statemnt has neither any elaborately theoretical fundations nor historical facts and experiences to support with....(continue late)

 

[Flyman]

Admiral Chi: War is close to Us

Admiral Chi: War is close to Us

Not only geographical and historical enemies of China and Japan, but also spliting up between China and former Soviet Union (USSR) in 60s was enough to prove that seeking its own state interest was exclusive behavior standard for any countries. There's no any room for morality in state relations. The same ideology of China and USSR and common enemies to be faced with by them as well as no-threatening low technological level to USSR in 60s could not stop spliting up which took place finally between China and USSR and then it came up further more serverely military conflicts. Among various complicated reasons, an ultimate one was that USSR didn't want to see an increasingly developing and increasingly stronger China stood with USSR shoulder to shoulder, even though it only trended to but not far to be realized to. If China and USSR with the same ideology, common enemies and one stronge-one weak situation could be splicted up, it can be obviously seen that phantom, frangibility and fatalness in China's politics, strategy and diplomacy under the so-called curse, peace and development being subjects of current era. We say that the poisonous theory of peace and development being subjects of current era is completely wrong, one part's willing and functioning numbness because of reasons as following:

 

[Flyman]

Admiral Chi: War is close to Us

Admiral Chi: War is close to Us

1. Attacting China's modernization processes is western powers' consecutive policy

According to Chinese modern historical experiences and lessons and PRC's 50-year historical experiences and lessons, it is concluded that attacting (including with completely war methods) China's modernization processes is western powers' consecutive policy. So was last 160 years, and so will next 160 years.

 

[Flyman]

Admiral Chi: War is close to Us

Admiral Chi: War is close to Us

2. Development means dangers and threats;Without right to war, no right to develop

Development means dangers and threats which is a general rule of would history.

During Warring States Period, a state's development means a threaten to another one which is a general rule in world history. It's also the core and fundmental of western countries' diplomacy.

 

[exported_kiwi]

I live in China and have done so for the last 5 years so I think I have a fairly decent insight into the way things work here. Basically, what's happeneing is that the Gov't here is using distraction tactics once again to divert the peoples attention away from the ongoing problems prevalent in the PRC. Unemployment is skyrocketing, Gov't corruption, while being tackled is still endemic, natural disasters are prevalent, many youths graduate from University/college and can't find jobs, health care is unaffordable for so many, poverty remains a huge issue, children must support their parents, house prices out of reach for most, societal pressure to marry young and have that all important one child and the list goes on. There must be unbridled nationalism here to have any sort of coherence amongst the vast and diverse population. This is just one case of distraction, like Taiwan, anti-Japanese TV, constant reminders of how corrupt the West is, lack of morality in the Western nations, mass killings in the US etc. You have to be here to understand the mindset and even for me, it's a bit much sometimes and I have to bite my lip and just walk away!
P.S; China thinks they "own" everything in the South China Sea.....go figure!

 

[Type59]

I bring thread back on topic. Americans are launching missile strikes into Pakistan to protect their interests. China has its interests to protect their ships from survilence. Lets remember any war is gonna be fought on or close to Chinese territory, if the US and China go to war.

Lets be blunt, if you do not agree with action, it does not mean the action is wrong.

More likely China is testing the new adminstration. Like North Korea, Iran, even US allies want to see the direction the new govt is gonna take.

 

[ReAl PrOeLiTeZ]

I live in China and have done so for the last 5 years so I think I have a fairly decent insight into the way things work here. Basically, what's happeneing is that the Gov't here is using distraction tactics once again to divert the peoples attention away from the ongoing problems prevalent in the PRC. Unemployment is skyrocketing, Gov't corruption, while being tackled is still endemic, natural disasters are prevalent, many youths graduate from University/college and can't find jobs, health care is unaffordable for so many, poverty remains a huge issue, children must support their parents, house prices out of reach for most, societal pressure to marry young and have that all important one child and the list goes on. There must be unbridled nationalism here to have any sort of coherence amongst the vast and diverse population. This is just one case of distraction, like Taiwan, anti-Japanese TV, constant reminders of how corrupt the West is, lack of morality in the Western nations, mass killings in the US etc. You have to be here to understand the mindset and even for me, it's a bit much sometimes and I have to bite my lip and just walk away!
P.S; China thinks they "own" everything in the South China Sea.....go figure!

people keep sayin Chinese government is corrupt how? Western media doesnt even mention Tawain government corruption, mean look at it the President of Tawain yes president is corupt and is going to jail. I mean the President corrupt is huge, his the guy running your whole area (not gonna say country cause i might spark some argument here). Yet no coverage on western media.