PLAN patrols USA waters intimdating Washington

[Hellraiser007]

But after distroying India like Nazi did to French

We are not french we are India, May be Pakistan suits France, since some of the parts of it are not under its control(FATA) like France in WW2.

 

[gambit]

China is a signatory to UNCLOS so naturally she agree with the terms of UNCLOS which allow all ship for innocent passage including military vessel.

China disagree/disallow non-innocent passage(defined by UNCLOS) which is also disallowed in UNCLOS.

That is why I said the passage is dishonest, it make it sound like China disagree with innocent passage of military vessels.

But China DOES disagreed.

===
The US and most other countries interpret international law to allow a right of free passage for military vessels through the EEZ, but China disagrees and has long chided the US practice of frequent surveillance missions along the Chinese coast.
===

Which part of '...but China disagrees...' do you not understand? China's discontent -- with the generally accepted interpretation -- is based upon US passive intelligence gathering missions, of which I already explained it is practically impossible to determine if a military vessel is conducting or not. For all we know, just by the vessel's captain looking at the coast would constitute intelligence gathering.

 

[Hellraiser007]

India is the new fascist Italy. Always trying to live up to the hype because of their next-door neighbour, yet losing every war they get themselves into.

Simple statement will not have any value, you need to back it up.

Did your leaders tell this and a few hundred other predictions/ opinions about China when their President was over in dili??

Why should some one tell me anything, I am not Chinese who rely on CCP to brain wash them, or a Pakistani who rely in Islamic radicals.

 

[idune]

Good question is when india would start patrol Chinese EEZ?

 

[GR!FF!N]

Good question is when india would start patrol Chinese EEZ?

not needed..we don't believe in "Our 1359th forefather f@@rted on this land and took a bath it in this water,so this land and this ocean is ours" policy..and again,"Patrolling" EEZ is same like patrolling international water,as EEZ is part of international water..and we have a huge EEZ of our own to patrol,not to mention a huge Ocean is lying under our very nose..

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

Stop fighting over what was the PLAN Ship doing and whether it is allowed or not.

Who gives a damn about a Naval Ship in the EEZ?

The US isnt scared of some PLAN ship on its Western or Eastern coast. There are plenty of anti-ship assets on both sides of the US coast lines to destroy this ship.

If the US wanted they could send their SEALs for underwater demos, USAF/Navy can sink it easily.

The US isn't scared nor is it 'intimidated'.

 

[anon45]

Look at all the Indians yelping in pain and fear and jumping to their Anglo master's defense

USA is too afraid of China to stop us from bullying our neighbors like Japan, India, Vietnam and Philippines. We attack them without any consequence whatsoever.

USA can't even stop us from patrolling their waters!

and yet we arent trying to stop you, meanwhile China was trying to stop the US, they couldn't.


China failed, now they are sulking into playing our game.

 

[Oldman1]

Look at all the Indians yelping in pain and fear and jumping to their Anglo master's defense

USA is too afraid of China to stop us from bullying our neighbors like Japan, India, Vietnam and Philippines. We attack them without any consequence whatsoever.

USA can't even stop us from patrolling their waters!

You guys couldn't even stop us from patrolling your waters.

 

[Nan Yang]

But China DOES disagreed.

===
The US and most other countries interpret international law to allow a right of free passage for military vessels through the EEZ, but China disagrees and has long chided the US practice of frequent surveillance missions along the Chinese coast.
===

Which part of '...but China disagrees...' do you not understand? China's discontent -- with the generally accepted interpretation -- is based upon US passive intelligence gathering missions, of which I already explained it is practically impossible to determine if a military vessel is conducting or not. For all we know, just by the vessel's captain looking at the coast would constitute intelligence gathering.

Any example when China refuse innocent military passage through EEZ ?

 

[HongWu]

Stop fighting over what was the PLAN Ship doing and whether it is allowed or not.

Who gives a damn about a Naval Ship in the EEZ?

The US isnt scared of some PLAN ship on its Western or Eastern coast. There are plenty of anti-ship assets on both sides of the US coast lines to destroy this ship.

If the US wanted they could send their SEALs for underwater demos, USAF/Navy can sink it easily.

The US isn't scared nor is it 'intimidated'.

very "convincing"

 

[JSCh]

But China DOES disagreed.

===
The US and most other countries interpret international law to allow a right of free passage for military vessels through the EEZ, but China disagrees and has long chided the US practice of frequent surveillance missions along the Chinese coast.
===

Which part of '...but China disagrees...' do you not understand? China's discontent -- with the generally accepted interpretation -- is based upon US passive intelligence gathering missions, of which I already explained it is practically impossible to determine if a military vessel is conducting or not. For all we know, just by the vessel's captain looking at the coast would constitute intelligence gathering.

China agree with innocent passage as can be proven by frequent actual innocent passage of other countries' military vessel(including US) through China EEZ and China military vessel frequent innocent passage through another country EEZ.

China disagree with non-innocent passage as the paragraph say "chided the US practice of frequent surveillance missions along the Chinese coast"

A surveillance missions like regular EP-3E SIGINT aircraft flying directly towards China territory is obviously "to the prejudice of the defense or security of the coastal State."

The paragraph saying "US and most other countries" lumping US and most other countries is actually hijacking the opinion of most other countries.

Most other countries INCLUDING China would agree with "right of free passage" IF the free passage is innocent(defined by UNCLOS).

Is there any evidence that most other countries agree with US interpretation of "right of free passage"/innocent passage?

Would most countries agree that "free passage" include passage similar to the EP-3E SIGINT aircraft surveillance mission?

A casual reader reading the paragraph would not have understand that "free passage" in that context include passage similar to the EP-3E SIGINT aircraft surveillance mission.

That is why, THE PARAGRAPH IS DISHONEST.

 

[Nan Yang]

China agree with innocent passage as can be proven by frequent actual innocent passage of other countries' military vessel(including US) through China EEZ and China military vessel frequent innocent passage through another country EEZ.

China disagree with non-innocent passage as the paragraph say "chided the US practice of frequent surveillance missions along the Chinese coast"

A surveillance missions like regular EP-3E SIGINT aircraft flying directly towards China territory is obviously "to the prejudice of the defense or security of the coastal State."

Non innocent passage examples are not the EP-3 but the US Navy ships like USS Impeccable. The mission of Impeccable is to directly support the Navy by using SURTASS passive and active low frequency sonar arrays to detect and track undersea threats. This according to China is preparing the ground for future battle and is thus not innocent. It violates the law and the intend of UNLOS.

UNLOS do not govern the air space. What US do by flying 12 miles limit is legal but is a very unfriendly act and does not promote trust between US and China.

 

[HongWu]

You guys couldn't even stop us from patrolling your waters.

Yes we can! We follow you and disrupt your operations with jamming

 

[gambit]

Any example when China refuse innocent military passage through EEZ ?

None. But that is because China in the past could not. Now that China is rising, not so peacefully, and is becoming more militarily aggressive, other Asian countries harbors doubts, especially when China is claiming vast stretches of the immediate sea as sovereign territory. If China can deny a military vessel, from a militarily inferior country, passage, then there is no guarantee that China will not do the same, on whims, to civilian vessels.

 

[gambit]

China agree with innocent passage as can be proven by frequent actual innocent passage of other countries' military vessel(including US) through China EEZ and China military vessel frequent innocent passage through another country EEZ.

China disagree with non-innocent passage as the paragraph say "chided the US practice of frequent surveillance missions along the Chinese coast"

A surveillance missions like regular EP-3E SIGINT aircraft flying directly towards China territory is obviously "to the prejudice of the defense or security of the coastal State."

Directly? Do not distort the EP-3E's flight path.

And I already explained my opinion on what Article 19 2(c) really mean.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...ers-intimdating-washington-2.html#post4363521

Looks like you did not understand post 16 so read it again.

Yes we can! We follow you and disrupt your operations with jamming

With what? Fruit jam? We will take it.