DragonEmpire
BANNED
- Joined
- May 27, 2014
- Messages
- 217
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
Looks like a nice spot for Platform 981 
South China Sea Forum
- Thread starter SinoChallenger
- Start date
EastSea
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2011
- Messages
- 3,787
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
Looks like a nice spot for Platform 981
100 kg NTN is enough.
tbquestion
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- May 18, 2014
- Messages
- 42
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
International experts are now saying that China is most likely to find gas deposit in the SCS, given that her rig is close by the area where Exon discovered gas deposit in 2011 & 2012.
At that point war b/t China and Vietnam is unavoidable b/c Vietnam will never let China pump the gas out in peace. Right now China is baiting Vietnam into a war b/c she knows that in a few years Vietnam will be too hot to handle. At the moment Vietnam is trying to avoid military confrontation to save her naval assets for the future.
Eventually, Vietnam knows she will have to engage China military because she knows that a bully is never satisfied until he has taken everything from you.
One of the mystery in all this is India position on the SCS matter. Does she wants China to significantly destroy one of her friends in the region?
We all know Russia doestnt care as it knows a bruised Vietnam will buy more weapon from it.
The US, as we knows from the Scaraborough incident with the Philipine wont be doing anything and besides this is a conflict between two communist brothers.
At that point war b/t China and Vietnam is unavoidable b/c Vietnam will never let China pump the gas out in peace. Right now China is baiting Vietnam into a war b/c she knows that in a few years Vietnam will be too hot to handle. At the moment Vietnam is trying to avoid military confrontation to save her naval assets for the future.
Eventually, Vietnam knows she will have to engage China military because she knows that a bully is never satisfied until he has taken everything from you.
One of the mystery in all this is India position on the SCS matter. Does she wants China to significantly destroy one of her friends in the region?
We all know Russia doestnt care as it knows a bruised Vietnam will buy more weapon from it.
The US, as we knows from the Scaraborough incident with the Philipine wont be doing anything and besides this is a conflict between two communist brothers.
ViXuyen
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
- Messages
- 1,276
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
The harsh reality is that there is no oil in the Paracel Islands. If there is, the Chinese would have drilled it along time ago since they have controlled the Islands for over 40 years now. The Spratly on the other hand is a different deal as there is a possibility of oil as it can be shown that Vietnam's major oil fields are very close to the Spratly islands. That is the reason why China wants to negotiate with Vietnam regarding the Spratly issue. Vietnam has made it clear that no negotiation is possible regarding the Spratly unless China returns about 12 Paracel islands that China robbed Vietnam at gunpoint in 1974.
tbquestion
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- May 18, 2014
- Messages
- 42
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
I am talking about gas deposits as Exxon Mobil discovered them near where the rig is now. What happen to the joint Vietnam-Exxon Mobil effort to develop that gas field. According to some sources, Beijing talked Exxon into walking away from the deal.
EastSea
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2011
- Messages
- 3,787
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
Obama warns against tensions in East Sea
US President Barack Obama on May 28 expressed concern about increased tensions in the East Sea and said the US supports ASEAN in formulating a code of conduct (COC) with China to settle maritime disputes in the sea.
Addressing US military cadets at West Point, Obama warned global crisis could threaten US allies if they are not resolved completely, and they could force US military to intervene.
“Regional aggression that goes unchecked – in southern Ukraine, the South China Sea [East Sea], or anywhere else in the world – will ultimately impact our allies, and could draw in our military. We can’t ignore what happens beyond our boundaries," Obama said.
“In the Asia Pacific, we’re supporting Southeast Asian nations as they negotiate a code of conduct with China on maritime disputes in the South China Sea, and we’re working to resolve these disputes through international law.”
Tension has mounted in the East Sea after China positioned its drilling rig Haiyang Shiyou-981 deep inside Vietnam’s exclusive economic zone and continental shelf on May 1.
Chinese vessels, including military ships, that were deployed to escort the rig, have constantly rammed civil Vietnamese boats, injuring sailors and damaging their property.
VOV/VNN
US President Barack Obama on May 28 expressed concern about increased tensions in the East Sea and said the US supports ASEAN in formulating a code of conduct (COC) with China to settle maritime disputes in the sea.
Addressing US military cadets at West Point, Obama warned global crisis could threaten US allies if they are not resolved completely, and they could force US military to intervene.
“Regional aggression that goes unchecked – in southern Ukraine, the South China Sea [East Sea], or anywhere else in the world – will ultimately impact our allies, and could draw in our military. We can’t ignore what happens beyond our boundaries," Obama said.
“In the Asia Pacific, we’re supporting Southeast Asian nations as they negotiate a code of conduct with China on maritime disputes in the South China Sea, and we’re working to resolve these disputes through international law.”
Tension has mounted in the East Sea after China positioned its drilling rig Haiyang Shiyou-981 deep inside Vietnam’s exclusive economic zone and continental shelf on May 1.
Chinese vessels, including military ships, that were deployed to escort the rig, have constantly rammed civil Vietnamese boats, injuring sailors and damaging their property.
VOV/VNN
Viet
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2012
- Messages
- 29,950
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
President Barack Obama warned that the US was ready to respond to China's "aggression" toward its neighbours at sea, but said Washington should lead by example by ratifying a key treaty.
WEST POINT, United States: President Barack Obama warned on Wednesday that the United States was ready to respond to China's "aggression" toward its neighbours at sea, but said Washington should lead by example by ratifying a key treaty.
In a wide-ranging speech on foreign policy to US military cadets at West Point, Obama said that the United States should shun isolationism and that its military must be prepared for crises.
"Regional aggression that goes unchecked - whether it's southern Ukraine, or the South China Sea, or anywhere else in the world - will ultimately impact our allies, and could draw in our military," Obama said.
But Obama emphasised caution on any decision to use force and said: "American influence is always stronger when we lead by example."
"We can't try to resolve the problems in the South China Sea when we have refused to make sure that the Law of the Sea Convention is ratified by the United States - despite the fact that our top military leaders say that the treaty advances our national security," Obama said, not naming China directly as he diverted from his prepared text.
"That's not leadership; that's retreat. That's not strength; that's weakness," Obama said.
Senators of the rival Republican Party have refused to ratify the treaty, saying that the United Nations (UN) convention would override US sovereignty.
Tensions have been rising for months between China and its neighbours at sea, with Vietnam on Tuesday accusing Beijing of ramming and sinking one of its fishing boats in the South China Sea.
Japan and the Philippines also have tense disputes at sea with China. Japanese commentators have voiced concern that the US failure to prevent Russia from annexing Ukraine's Crimea peninsula in March sent the wrong signal to China.
In another reference to policy toward Asia, Obama again cited the democratic reforms in Myanmar as a success story.
The administration upon entering office in 2009 opened a dialogue with the then military-ruled nation earlier known as Burma, whose relations have improved with the United States have improved dramatically.
"Progress there could be reversed. But if Burma succeeds, we will have gained a new partner without having fired a shot," Obama said.
Myanmar has freed political prisoners, eased censorship and welcomed foreign investors, but human rights groups have voiced alarm over violence against the Rohingya minority.
- AFP/rw/fl
Obama warns against "aggression" in South China Sea - Channel NewsAsia
WEST POINT, United States: President Barack Obama warned on Wednesday that the United States was ready to respond to China's "aggression" toward its neighbours at sea, but said Washington should lead by example by ratifying a key treaty.
In a wide-ranging speech on foreign policy to US military cadets at West Point, Obama said that the United States should shun isolationism and that its military must be prepared for crises.
"Regional aggression that goes unchecked - whether it's southern Ukraine, or the South China Sea, or anywhere else in the world - will ultimately impact our allies, and could draw in our military," Obama said.
But Obama emphasised caution on any decision to use force and said: "American influence is always stronger when we lead by example."
"We can't try to resolve the problems in the South China Sea when we have refused to make sure that the Law of the Sea Convention is ratified by the United States - despite the fact that our top military leaders say that the treaty advances our national security," Obama said, not naming China directly as he diverted from his prepared text.
"That's not leadership; that's retreat. That's not strength; that's weakness," Obama said.
Senators of the rival Republican Party have refused to ratify the treaty, saying that the United Nations (UN) convention would override US sovereignty.
Tensions have been rising for months between China and its neighbours at sea, with Vietnam on Tuesday accusing Beijing of ramming and sinking one of its fishing boats in the South China Sea.
Japan and the Philippines also have tense disputes at sea with China. Japanese commentators have voiced concern that the US failure to prevent Russia from annexing Ukraine's Crimea peninsula in March sent the wrong signal to China.
In another reference to policy toward Asia, Obama again cited the democratic reforms in Myanmar as a success story.
The administration upon entering office in 2009 opened a dialogue with the then military-ruled nation earlier known as Burma, whose relations have improved with the United States have improved dramatically.
"Progress there could be reversed. But if Burma succeeds, we will have gained a new partner without having fired a shot," Obama said.
Myanmar has freed political prisoners, eased censorship and welcomed foreign investors, but human rights groups have voiced alarm over violence against the Rohingya minority.
- AFP/rw/fl
Obama warns against "aggression" in South China Sea - Channel NewsAsia
Jf Thunder
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2013
- Messages
- 9,194
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
all they can do is warn, LOL
Viet
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2012
- Messages
- 29,950
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
America should prepare a plan of imposing economics sanction on China. Once TPP is in place, China is no longer needed. Let them trade with N Korea or Pakistan 
Why not turn China back to an agrarian state as we had seen a generation ago?
Why not turn China back to an agrarian state as we had seen a generation ago?
Raphael
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2012
- Messages
- 3,287
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
Well at least he pointed out the hypocrisy of screeching about international law when his country hasn't even signed UNCLOS yet. That's a big improvement.
In time, he may improve so much that he will stop enabling and instigating banana harvesters from claiming territory that doesn't belong to them.
In time, he may improve so much that he will stop enabling and instigating banana harvesters from claiming territory that doesn't belong to them.
Pangu
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2014
- Messages
- 1,501
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
Enjoy getting screwed by the TPP, we'll do trade with the smart ones.
Series: Dan Gillmor column
Previous | Next | Index
Thanks to WikiLeaks, we see just how bad TPP trade deal is for regular people
The more you know about the odious Trans-Pacific Partnership, the less you'll like it. It's made for corporate intellectual property and profits
A protester demonstrates against the proposed Stop Online Piracy Act (Sopa) in New York. It might be time to do the same against the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Photograph: Mario Tama/Getty Images
Among the many betrayals of the Obama administration is its overall treatment of what many people refer to as "intellectual property" – the idea that ideas themselves and digital goods and services are exactly like physical property, and that therefore the law should treat them the same way. This corporatist stance defies both reality and the American Constitution, which expressly called for creators to have rights for limited periods, the goal of which was to promote inventive progress and the arts.
In the years 2007 and 2008, candidate Obama indicated that he'd take a more nuanced view than the absolutist one from Hollywood and other interests that work relentlessly for total control over this increasingly vital part of our economy and lives. But no clearer demonstration of the real White House view is offered than a just-leaked draft of an international treaty that would, as many had feared, create draconian new rights for corporate "owners" and mean vastly fewer rights for the rest of us.
I'm talking about the appalling Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, a partial draft of which WikiLeaks has just released. This treaty has been negotiated in secret meetings dominated by governments and corporations. You and I have been systematically excluded, and once you learn what they're doing, you can see why.
The outsiders who understand TPP best aren't surprised. That is, the draft "confirms fears that the negotiating parties are prepared to expand the reach of intellectual property rights, and shrink consumer rights and safeguards," writes James Love a longtime watcher of this process.
Needless to say, copyright is a key part of this draft. And the negotiators would further stiffen copyright holders' control while upping the ante on civil and criminal penalties for infringers. The Electronic Frontier Foundation says TPP has "extensive negative ramifications for users' freedom of speech, right to privacy and due process, and hinder peoples' abilities to innovate". It's Hollywood's wish list.
Canadian intellectual property expert Michael Geist examined the latest draft of the intellectual property chapter. He writes that the document, which includes various nations' proposals, shows the US government, in particular, taking a vastly different stance than the other nations. Geist notes:
[Other nations have argued for] balance, promotion of the public domain, protection of public health, and measures to ensure that IP rights themselves do not become barriers to trade. The opposition to these objective by the US and Japan (Australia has not taken a position) speaks volumes about their goals for the TPP.
The medical industry has a stake in the outcome, too, with credible critics saying it would raise drug prices and, according to Love's analysis, give surgeons patent protection for their procedures.
Congress has shown little appetite for restraining the overweening power of the corporate interests promoting this expansion. With few exceptions, lawmakers have repeatedly given copyright, patent and trademark interests more control over the years. So we shouldn't be too optimistic about the mini-flurry of Capitol Hill opposition to the treaty that emerged this week. It's based much more on Congress protecting its prerogatives – worries about the treaty's so-called "fast track" authorities, giving the president power to act without congressional approval – than on substantive objections to the document's contents.
That said, some members of Congress have become more aware of the deeper issues. The public revolt against the repugnant "Stop Online Piracy Act" two years ago was a taste of what happens when people become more widely aware of what they can lose when governments and corporate interests collude.
If they become aware – that's the key. One of TPP's most abhorrent elements has been the secrecy under which it's been negotiated. The Obama administration's fondness for secret laws, policies and methods has a lot to do with a basic reality: the public would say no to much of which is done in our names and with our money if we knew what was going on. As Senator Elizabeth Warren pointed out, in a letter to the White House:
Series: Dan Gillmor column
Previous | Next | Index
Thanks to WikiLeaks, we see just how bad TPP trade deal is for regular people
The more you know about the odious Trans-Pacific Partnership, the less you'll like it. It's made for corporate intellectual property and profits
A protester demonstrates against the proposed Stop Online Piracy Act (Sopa) in New York. It might be time to do the same against the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Photograph: Mario Tama/Getty Images
Among the many betrayals of the Obama administration is its overall treatment of what many people refer to as "intellectual property" – the idea that ideas themselves and digital goods and services are exactly like physical property, and that therefore the law should treat them the same way. This corporatist stance defies both reality and the American Constitution, which expressly called for creators to have rights for limited periods, the goal of which was to promote inventive progress and the arts.
In the years 2007 and 2008, candidate Obama indicated that he'd take a more nuanced view than the absolutist one from Hollywood and other interests that work relentlessly for total control over this increasingly vital part of our economy and lives. But no clearer demonstration of the real White House view is offered than a just-leaked draft of an international treaty that would, as many had feared, create draconian new rights for corporate "owners" and mean vastly fewer rights for the rest of us.
I'm talking about the appalling Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, a partial draft of which WikiLeaks has just released. This treaty has been negotiated in secret meetings dominated by governments and corporations. You and I have been systematically excluded, and once you learn what they're doing, you can see why.
The outsiders who understand TPP best aren't surprised. That is, the draft "confirms fears that the negotiating parties are prepared to expand the reach of intellectual property rights, and shrink consumer rights and safeguards," writes James Love a longtime watcher of this process.
Needless to say, copyright is a key part of this draft. And the negotiators would further stiffen copyright holders' control while upping the ante on civil and criminal penalties for infringers. The Electronic Frontier Foundation says TPP has "extensive negative ramifications for users' freedom of speech, right to privacy and due process, and hinder peoples' abilities to innovate". It's Hollywood's wish list.
Canadian intellectual property expert Michael Geist examined the latest draft of the intellectual property chapter. He writes that the document, which includes various nations' proposals, shows the US government, in particular, taking a vastly different stance than the other nations. Geist notes:
[Other nations have argued for] balance, promotion of the public domain, protection of public health, and measures to ensure that IP rights themselves do not become barriers to trade. The opposition to these objective by the US and Japan (Australia has not taken a position) speaks volumes about their goals for the TPP.
The medical industry has a stake in the outcome, too, with credible critics saying it would raise drug prices and, according to Love's analysis, give surgeons patent protection for their procedures.
Congress has shown little appetite for restraining the overweening power of the corporate interests promoting this expansion. With few exceptions, lawmakers have repeatedly given copyright, patent and trademark interests more control over the years. So we shouldn't be too optimistic about the mini-flurry of Capitol Hill opposition to the treaty that emerged this week. It's based much more on Congress protecting its prerogatives – worries about the treaty's so-called "fast track" authorities, giving the president power to act without congressional approval – than on substantive objections to the document's contents.
That said, some members of Congress have become more aware of the deeper issues. The public revolt against the repugnant "Stop Online Piracy Act" two years ago was a taste of what happens when people become more widely aware of what they can lose when governments and corporate interests collude.
If they become aware – that's the key. One of TPP's most abhorrent elements has been the secrecy under which it's been negotiated. The Obama administration's fondness for secret laws, policies and methods has a lot to do with a basic reality: the public would say no to much of which is done in our names and with our money if we knew what was going on. As Senator Elizabeth Warren pointed out, in a letter to the White House:
I have heard the argument that transparency would undermine the administration's policy to complete the trade agreement because public opposition would be significant. If transparency would lead to widespread public opposition to a trade agreement, then that trade agreement should not be the policy of the United States. I believe in transparency and democracy and I think the US Trade Representative should too.
Thanks to WikiLeaks, we have at least partial transparency today. The more you know about the odious TPP, the less you'll like it – and that's why the administration and its corporate allies don't want you to know.
Thanks to WikiLeaks, we see just how bad TPP trade deal is for regular people | Dan Gillmor | Comment is free | theguardian.com
Thanks to WikiLeaks, we have at least partial transparency today. The more you know about the odious TPP, the less you'll like it – and that's why the administration and its corporate allies don't want you to know.
Thanks to WikiLeaks, we see just how bad TPP trade deal is for regular people | Dan Gillmor | Comment is free | theguardian.com
Battle of Bach Dang River
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2011
- Messages
- 3,086
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
America should prepare a plan of imposing economics sanction on China. Once TPP is in place, China is no longer needed. Let them trade with N Korea or Pakistan
Why not turn China back to an agrarian state as we had seen a generation ago?
No, Kim Jong Un has purged pro-china group. Now only Pakistan.
Viet
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2012
- Messages
- 29,950
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Barack Obama is too soft. It is his weakness that encourages Chinese aggression.
the regions from Japan to Philippines to Vietnam are slowing turning into battlefields.
I believe the solution lies in Japan. it must shoulder more responsibilities.
the regions from Japan to Philippines to Vietnam are slowing turning into battlefields.
I believe the solution lies in Japan. it must shoulder more responsibilities.
Edison Chen
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2013
- Messages
- 2,933
- Reaction score
- 11
- Country
- Location
Obama gave Vietnam another delusion. If the US could intervene by force, why do they waste time by talking, by WARN? 
