Obama warns China

[meanderer]

Read all my posts from the beginning. The Ah Q are the Chinese members in this thread who still insist that China is not losing to the US in the SCS/ECS dispute. And I haven't even mentioned how things have significantly changed in northeast Asia when Japan has now managed to modify its pacifist constitution.

But yes, I do believe that China itself has revealed some Ah Q behaviour. Bully the weak like Philippines, but doesn't act this way against stronger resistance like Viet Nam in the Oil rig dispute. You guys withdrew the rig earlier than declared, drove VN closer to the US, then now trying to speak some warm words to Viet Nam in order to bring VN back. Do you know how weak and embarrassing this look? China Should have just stood firm like it initially did in the oil rig incident and tell VN #### you, go away we don't care who you cozy up to.

Similar thing happened in the ECS. China did some really tough political posturing, declared ADIZ and even did some aggressive manoeuvring with its naval vessels/plane. This allows Japan to have an excuse to modify its pacifist constitution, and now China seems to have back tracked its aggressive posturing and stayed quiet with the ECS dispute.

Similar thing when facing Taiwan-US. Don't act so tough against this strong partnership, but act really tough against softer opponents like the Philippines, or Norway with that Nobel prize dispute.

It looks like an Ah Q character to me. Bully the weak, but back down when facing tough opponents. Then some Chinese members come up with some strawman arguments on how China was always winning all along.

With your military power its the same. Backed down when facing tough resistance from VietNam in 1979, didn't dare to grab more islands back in 1988 when they were all wide open, cancelled a road construction work along the Vietnamese boarder because the fear of the Viet military using it for an attack, didn't do much when Myanmar bombed your own territory. But has no problem bullying your own weak civilians in the Tiananmen square. There's no point having a strong economy and military when you still possess an Ah Q mentality and constantly make political blunders.

in international relationships, countries act based on what they perceive as the best interest to them, not 'face'. this is the realism view, which is dominant in current international society.

US has been a mixture of realism and idealism, which often causes problems for them.

under the realism viewpoint, it's totally reasonable and rational to act tough towards the weak, but prudent with the powerful. and it's common.

 

[William Hung]

Kettle calling a pot black. Have you refuted my points? Philippine lost control for Scarborough is a victory for Philippine and disaster for China? Who is AH Q?

I've made plenty of counter-arguments in post #101 which you totally ignored.

When did I ever said the Philippines was a victor in the Scarborough shoal skirmish?? You're making arguments out of thin air again. I've even given China due credit for successfully bullied the Philippines in the Scarborough shoals. You keep making strawman arguments one after another without addressing my real counter-arguments.

The US was the victor since after that incident, the neighbourhood has changed their views about China and is welcoming the US back (read my link in post #101). The Philippines,
who was on friendly terms with China before 2009 and had plan to do joint oil exploration with China has now turned 180 degree and filing an ongoing legal case against China. So regarding the US-China power struggle in Asia, which was my main focusing point in this thread, the US is winning and the Scarborough shoal incident can be seen as a disaster for China.

US so far has not demonstrated any concrete action to help Vietnam gained even a single inch of water or land but demonstrated impotent of inaction?

When did Viet Nam ever asked the US to help Viet Nam to gain any water or land??? Viet Nam never lost any territory since 2009. As for US concrete actions, Viet Nam asked the US to diplomatically condemn the Oil rig placement and the US did, by passing a Senate resolution that objected to China's actions and officially asked China to withdrew.

And within one week of the US condemning China's action, China withdrew the oil rig, much earlier than it planned to. Those two events could be related or it could be a pure coincident. But it nevertheless gave the impression to VietNam and other onlookers that China folded to US pressure. So I don't know how you could spin it around and said China was the victor and exposed the US as "impotent."

China did however succeeded in gaining new waters from the Philippines. But this is a blunder considering that the Philippines was previously on very friendly terms with China and had no plan to invite the US back into its territory. After China successfully deceived and bullied the Philippines in the Scarborough shoals, the Philippines has now become the most anti-China country in ASEAN and is now pursuing legal against in a tribunal. More importantly, it has now welcomed the US back. Even worse, China has made most Asian countries wary of her (read my article in post #101). So China gained a little but lost bigger things. So off course the US would initially sit back and let China do her bullying against the Philippines.

And the US didn't break their MDT with the Philippines because the US is only obliged to respond to attack on Filipino territory, not to disputed territory. Now all the US need to do is to wait for the tribunal to declare whether the Scarborough shoals are Filipino waters or not. Then you can judge whether the US is impotent or not.

So I don't see how you and your compatriots can keep spinning it around as some kind of Chinese victory and how China has exposed the US as impotent and not being able to fulfill it's MDT obligation. China is losing to the US in the power struggle in Asia. If you think my view is wrong, then ask yourself this: If the US has been exposed as impotent, then why is Viet Nam and the Philippines (and other Asian countries) still welcoming the US into Asia? If the US was exposed as impotent, shouldn't VN, PH, JP ignore the US and start compromising with China? But we can clearly see the opposite is happening. So your claims are only Ah Q spiritual victory that doesn't reflect reality.

While Vietnam has to crap down anti China protest and continue China policy of AIIB in hand to serve China expansion. Who is the Ah Q?

When violent riots occur, every countries would need to stop them immediately. But the anti-China riots proved that the oil rig achieved in making the Vietnamese people extremely anti-China.

As for the AIIB, I've already addressed it in post #101. Read it. Vietnam and the Philippines being AIIB members will have no implications for the SCS dispute.

China island construction at Spratly island continue at electric pace with no resistance other than blank warning. Who is the Ah Q?

VietNam and the Philippines has also done construction work. You are not achieving anything with the construction work. The work are done on reefs that are already in China's possession. You are not gaining any new waters. It only serve your opponents in allowing them to use it against you in the PR war.

You can repeat 10000 times but it will not changed any facts.

You are the one entertaining Ah Q spiritual victories in your mind that doesn't correlate with facts. You refused to address my counter-arguments and keep repeating your Ah Q spiritual victories.

But since you've once complained why I only attribute Ah Q mentality to some Chinese and not to Vietnamese, I will have to do so to be fair. I don't agree with you that Viet members has declared victory in this thread (one member was actually lobbying the US for help), but I will say that some other Vietnamese has shown their Ah Q mentality in other ways:

We all know that Russia's interest currently converge with China's interest rather than with Viet Nam. Russia's relationship with China is no doubt more important than their relationship with Vietnam. And we can see this with those huge oil and gas agreement, etc. Even militarily, Russia played a very important role in help getting China's military industry started. Sold many important military assets to China, etc. But a few Vietnamese members still insist that Russia is a true reliable ally of Vietnam (what reliable ally would arm your enemy?) and will help VietNam is the SCS (even though Russia stayed totally silent). They could only rationalize this through their Ah Q mentality. When Russia sold them a few Kilos and corvettes, it was an Ah Q victory for them because they ignore the fact that Russia have previously already sold even more Kilos and more potent frigates to China. They brag about a few Su-30 with their Ah Q mentality but ignore the fact that Russia has supplied hundreds of Su-30/27 and kits for China, which helped China's military aviation industry. And they are still dreaming that Russia is a true ally of Vietnam with their Ah Q spirit. Their Ah Q thoughts does not correlate with facts. So yes, you are free (and totally justified) to make fun of the Ah Q spirit of theses Vietnamese members who still dream about the Russia-VN alliance in fighting China.

 

[Amember]

China: Make islands not wars.

 

[William Hung]

in international relationships, countries act based on what they perceive as the best interest to them, not 'face'. this is the realism view, which is dominant in current international society.

US has been a mixture of realism and idealism, which often causes problems for them.

I wasn't talking about face. I was talking about a PR war that influences leaders and politicians (see my article link from post #101). And this is alot more important than just winning face. In the SCS/ECS disputes, I was arguing that China is losing to the US in the PR war (at least in the eyes of most neighbouring countries).

under the realism viewpoint, it's totally reasonable and rational to act tough towards the weak, but prudent with the powerful. and it's common.

China took actions that looked aggressive enough to make countries wary of her yet not enough to win anything significant. I see the pattern of China acting very tough and aggressive at first, but then backed down when resistance seems fierce or when they see the blunder. That was my main point. If you look back, China has only gained some small waters from the Philippines but nothing else significant. China's lost, as I was trying to explain, was much bigger.

 

[xudoai]

We all know that Russia's interest currently converge with China's interest rather than with Viet Nam. Russia's relationship with China is no doubt more important than their relationship with Vietnam. And we can see this with those huge oil and gas agreement, etc. Even militarily, Russia played a very important role in help getting China's military industry started. Sold many important military assets to China, etc. But a few Vietnamese members still insist that Russia is a true reliable ally of Vietnam (what reliable ally would arm your enemy?) and will help VietNam is the SCS (even though Russia stayed totally silent). They could only rationalize this through their Ah Q mentality. When Russia sold them a few Kilos and corvettes, it was an Ah Q victory for them because they ignore the fact that Russia have previously already sold even more Kilos and more potent frigates to China. They brag about a few Su-30 with their Ah Q mentality but ignore the fact that Russia has supplied hundreds of Su-30/27 and kits for China, which helped China's military aviation industry. And they are still dreaming that Russia is a true ally of Vietnam with their Ah Q spirit. Their Ah Q thoughts does not correlate with facts. So yes, you are free (and totally justified) to make fun of the Ah Q spirit of theses Vietnamese members who still dream about the Russia-VN alliance in fighting China.

we will sliding slowly to US, bro. The cold war is dead.

 

[William Hung]

we will sliding slowly to US, bro. The cold war is dead.

Yes, I could already see the US and Viet Nam slowly moving in that direction with this two news:

A Breakthrough in US-Vietnam Relations | The Diplomat

^^^ the vanguard of the VCP negotiating with the US and CIA.

Vietnamese move commemoration after flag barred from Marine base - San Jose Mercury News

WESTMINSTER -- Vietnamese Americans scrapped plans to mark the 40th anniversary of the fall of a Saigon at a Southern California Marine base after learning they could not fly the South Vietnamese flag.

^^^ The US military openly banned the former South VN flag.

We can see the senior VCP knows what the new reality is. They know the old cold war alliance no longer exist.

 

[xudoai]

Yes, I could already see the US and Viet Nam slowly moving in that direction with this two news:


^^^ the vanguard of the VCP negotiating with the US and CIA.




^^^ The US military openly banned the former South VN flag.

We can see the senior VCP knows what the new reality is. They know the old cold war alliance no longer exist.

VCP GS visited Peking last week, based on invitation of CPC GS, It is necessary to have a time for Vietnam, just waiting what china will do in SCS.

Based on experiences of past, we know well that the aggreement both party in the past is useless. It was made in 1955 by Ho Chi Minh and 1975 by Le Duan with Mao and Deng, both was the meaningless, empty paper. China invaded in to Paracel 1956 after 1955 and invaded in to Spratly 1988 after aggreeement 1975, there is evidents for that China CPC swalowed his committments is very quickly.

 

[cirr]

Subi Island Phase I

Yongshu Island Phase I

 

[William Hung]

VCP GS visited Peking last week, based on invitation of CPC GS, It is necessary to have a time for Vietnam, just waiting what china will do in SCS.

Based on experiences of past, we know well that the aggreement both party in the past is useless. It was made in 1955 by Ho Chi Minh and 1975 by Le Duan with Mao and Deng, both was the meaningless, empty paper. China invaded in to Paracel 1956 after 1955 and invaded in to Spratly 1988 after aggreeement 1975, there is evidents for that China CPC swalowed his committments is very quickly.

Yes, and also before the Oil rig incident, the CCP also said they want to settle disputes peacefully without aggression, etc. There is like a predictable cycle.

Even one Chinese member has said the current VCP-CCP meeting is meaningless with nothing more than empty words.

I'm just trying to inform some Chinese members what's going on behind the scene because some of them still think that there is still a pro-China VCP faction and that China can still split VN in half with a pro-Chinese northern Vietnam. I know you guys were secretly laughing at this false belief so I wanted to be a nice guy and tell those Chinese members some truth.

The VCP vanguard had talked with the US/CIA and both came out very happy. The US military openly banning the former South VietNam flag from their bases is a telling sign. I hope our Chinese friends can now forget the theory that a divided VN is possible with a pro-Chinese North.

 

[Raphael]

The US was the victor since after that incident, the neighbourhood has changed their views about China and is welcoming the US back (read my link in post #101).

You put too much stock into what the "neighborhood" thinks, when your idea of the "neighborhood" consists merely of the Philippines and Vietnam.

The two most significant recent geopolitical developments have been the solidification on the China-Russia alignment, and the solidification of the US-PH and US-VN alignment. Can you tell me which is of greater significance? We chose Russia over VN-PH, because the former is a great power, a major military power, with the largest energy reserves in the world. The kind of country you want batting for your team. In contrast, VN-PH have negligible militaries, negligible economies (smaller than most of our provinces), and their "human capital" consists of banana harvesters, nail technicians, and maids for export, which regardless of political relations, will always be desperate to work in coastal Chinese cities. The US finds these countries more palatable allies because their military troops need cheap "adult entertainment and services", and have always been bizarrely taken by squat, brown "women" with highly simian features.

You seem to be under the delusion that PH and VN are trophy wives that caused China to lose big when it failed to court them in its "post-2009 PR battle". The truth is, they are not trophy wives but ragged, wrinkly, deformed peasant women. Their opinions and alignments are worth nothing, and come with an unreasonably high price tag to boot (requiring that China relinquish its territorial sovereignty). Instead, we scored a real Russian trophy wife post-2009, and couldn't be happier

 

[William Hung]

You put too much stock into what the "neighborhood" thinks, when your idea of the "neighborhood" consists merely of the Philippines and Vietnam.

The two most significant recent geopolitical developments have been the solidification on the China-Russia alignment, and the solidification of the US-PH and US-VN alignment. Can you tell me which is of greater significance? We chose Russia over VN-PH, because the former is a great power, a major military power, with the largest energy reserves in the world. The kind of country you want batting for your team. In contrast, VN-PH have negligible militaries, negligible economies (smaller than most of our provinces), and their "human capital" consists of banana harvesters, nail technicians, and maids for export, which regardless of political relations, will always be desperate to work in coastal Chinese cities. The US finds these countries more palatable allies because their military troops need cheap "adult entertainment and services", and have always been bizarrely taken by squat, brown "women" with highly simian features.

You are beginning to use low level personal insults. Lets cool down my friend, we are just having a discussion. If it is too sensitive, we can always abandon this discussion.

My idea of a neighbourhood is not only confined to VN and PH. I've previously used this article:

Asia pivots towards the US as China bears down | smh.com.au

"I asked Bates Gill, director of the US Studies Centre at Sydney University, if he could list the nations in the region that had not deepened relations with the US at the expense of China since Obama announced his rebalancing. He came up with just Laos, Cambodia and North Korea (ED: although I would personally add Thailand to this list).

"America is clearly the welcome external player throughout most of the region, where its military and economic power remains unrivalled, says Gill, an expert on Chinese security policy. "These have been a strong four years."

It turns out that the strategic logic of a more muscular China has overwhelmed the impact of any individual leader. Take for example Julia Gillard, who once called for a more"independent" foreign policy, but ended up making Australia the fulcrum of the US pivot."

So it is not just only VN and PH, but also nearly the whole Asian neighbourhood.

I agree that Russia is a significant and valuable ally of China. I've even mentioned it in my previous post. But why did you make it out to be an exclusive disjunction with respect to other potential allies? Why did you make it out to be either ally with Russia or ally with VN/PH? Why not ally with all of them, Russia+VN+PH+rest of Asia?

You seem to be under the delusion that PH and VN are trophy wives that caused China to lose big when it failed to court them in its "post-2009 PR battle". The truth is, they are not trophy wives but ragged, wrinkly, deformed peasant women. Their opinions and alignments are worth nothing, and come with an unreasonably high price tag to boot (requiring that China relinquish its territorial sovereignty). Instead, we scored a real Russian trophy wife post-2009, and couldn't be happier

You play down the significance of VN and the PR thing, but why did China bothered inviting the VCP over and spoke some reconciliatory words? Why did your state media keep writing these kind of cheesy articles?

Commentary: No room for wedge in China-Vietnam relations - Xinhua | English.news.cn

It even mentioned a new cheesy phrase that I have never heard before: "China and Vietnam are traditional chums." *cringes*

Why did China complained about South Korea's plan to station the US THAAD system?

It seems like the Chinese government do care (and rightly so) about what's going on in the neighbourhood.

 

[xunzi]

What we did in our territory is our business. Can we be clear on this?

 

[Viet]

You are beginning to use low level personal insults. Lets cool down my friend, we are just having a discussion. If it is too sensitive, we can always abandon this discussion.

My idea of a neighbourhood is not only confined to VN and PH. I've previously used this article:

Asia pivots towards the US as China bears down | smh.com.au



So it is not just only VN and PH, but also nearly the whole Asian neighbourhood.

I agree that Russia is a significant and valuable ally of China. I've even mentioned it in my previous post. But why did you make it out to be an exclusive disjunction with respect to other potential allies? Why did you make it out to be either ally with Russia or ally with VN/PH? Why not ally with all of them, Russia+VN+PH+rest of Asia?





You play down the significance of VN and the PR thing, but why did China bothered inviting the VCP over and spoke some reconciliatory words? Why did your state media keep writing these kind of cheesy articles?

Commentary: No room for wedge in China-Vietnam relations - Xinhua | English.news.cn

It even mentioned a new cheesy phrase that I have never heard before: "China and Vietnam are traditional chums." *cringes*

Why did China complained about South Korea's plan to station the US THAAD system?

It seems like the Chinese government do care (and rightly so) about what's going on in the neighbourhood.

Don't waste your time on this low iq idiot raphael.

 

[Viet]

What we did in our territory is our business. Can we be clear on this?

First you quit the UN, and leave the Unclos, then we will talk.

 

[SelfServeFive]

We should not elbow smaller countries like Vietnam and Philippines. Instead, we should directly attack their capital cities Hanoi and Manila with PLA and force their governments to obey Beijing.