South China Sea Forum

[Cossack25A1]

Well same rin puro panggagag0 lng na man alam ng maoist posters d2

I am pretty sure this definition I have is not accurate but this is how I see Chinese members in this forum (or at least in certain thread discussions) - there are four with two extras:

1. "Troll" - no need for definition

2. "(Ultra)Nationalist" - members who believe that they are always right, dismiss others' point-of-view and even see them as hostile even though the comment they are replying on doesn't have any hostile sentiment. Some may post very detailed commentaries that has some sense except that it is pro-China.

3. "50 cent" - possibly people paid to make pro-China comments, stir up the discussion (less-likely), derailing a thread (probable) or at least divert the discussions into something that doesn't contradict the discussion but veer it towards pro-China side or neutral side (most likely). There is a chance that some are false-flaggers or they appear to be "professional" in the sense that they can go details like an ultra.

4. "Warmonger" - certain members will likely post comments that goes along the line "we must nuke *insert country name here* to teach them a lesson" or other comments similar to the mentioned line.

5. "Falseflag" - some may use other country flag. Kinda hard to identify as some are actually different nationality... which brings us to another definition.

6. "Sinophile" - members of other nationalities that has strong pro-China stance.

 

[Viet]

US doesn't care about Vietnam: Top 5 reasons

1. Vietnam is a communist country. The US has NEVER signed a defense treaty with a communist nation.

2. In 1974, South Vietnam was a US ally. The United States did nothing as China took over the Paracel Islands in 1974.

3. The United States has proclaimed forty years of neutrality in the South China Sea. In the latest incidents, the United States publicly proclaimed neutrality in June and December of 2014.

4. The United States is downsizing the Army to 450,000 troops. The United States will match the post-World War II low in Army strength. The United States does not plan to fight a war.

It is impossible to fight against China's 2.2-million PLA Army with only 450,000 troops.

Army Veterans Recall Layoffs from Previous Eras | Military.com
"Army Veterans Recall Layoffs from Previous Eras
Sep 10, 2014 | by Brendan McGarry
...
After rising to 570,000 soldiers in 2008 during the war in Iraq, the Army has less than 520,000 soldiers today and is on pace to shrink to 490,000 soldiers by next year. It's bracing for even further reductions driven by automatic budget cuts known as sequestration.

The Pentagon's proposed budget for 2015 calls for the service's end-strength to decrease to 440,000-450,000 soldiers by 2017. If sequestration remains in effect, the number may fall to as low as 420,000 soldiers -- tens of thousands less than the figure the Army's top officer, Gen. Raymond Odierno, said is needed to respond adequately to conflicts around the world."

5. The Pentagon insists on protecting its ties with China.

US Army Protects China Ties Despite Tensions | DefenseNews
"US Army Protects China Ties Despite Tensions
By Joe Gould | 10:17 p.m. EST March 4, 2015
...
Amid reports the Pentagon has paused efforts to expand defense ties with China until the two nations can agree on rules for airborne encounters between their warplanes, Gen. Vincent Brooks, chief of US Army Pacific (USARPAC), said he received no instructions to reduce his engagements with the People's Liberation Army.
...
The US Army will continue to receive Chinese official visits at US Army Pacific headquarters, plan events with the Chinese and maintain ties under the 'sufficient latitude' that policy guidelines provide, Brooks said. The command, for example, is in talks to hold exchanges between mid-career officials from the two nations.

'We don't want to have transactional engagements with one another, where we only come together when we need something," Brooks said. "We need to have more substantial relationships that can be built over time.'"

well, I recall our victories over the mighty armies of mongolians and manchus, while these barbarians conquered china, took your princesses and enslaved chinese men

Now, I am just going to watch and eat popcorn on this thread.

share some popcorn with me

 

[BoQ77]

US wants India's direct intervention in the South China Sea row

NEW DELHI: Less than two months after the release of the US-India Joint Strategic Vision statement for the Asia-Pacific region during President Barack Obama's visit, one of America's top military commanders has made it clear that China has no right in opposing Indian naval operations in the disputed South China Sea.

Admiral Harry Harris Jr, whose area of responsibility extends to the Pacific and Indian Oceans, said, "The South China seas are international waters and India should be able to operate freely wherever India wants to operate. If that means the South China Sea, then get in there and do that."

In July 2011, when the Indian Navy amphibious warfare ship INS Shardul set course from the Nha Trang military port in south Vietnam towards Haiphong port in north Vietnam to make a friendly visit, she was buzzed on an open radio channel and told by the Chinese Navy, "You are entering Chinese waters. Move out of here." In 2014, China opposed the India-Vietnam agreement which would enable the state-owned Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) to explore oil wells in waters which China claims to administer.

Voicing his concerns on China's regional disputes in the South China Sea, Admiral Harris said, "I view with concern China's land reclamation process. I think it's provocative, and it causes tensions to be raised in the South China Sea and all of the countries in the South China seas. So, I am concerned about it. For all of us who are concerned about freedom of navigation, it behoves us to pay attention to what China is doing in the South China Sea and its dramatic land reclamation. They are, in fact, changing facts on the ground."

Though the US Admiral did note the increased Chinese submarine presence in the Indian Ocean, his primary concern was on safeguarding maritime security and ensuring the freedom of navigation in the South China Sea, very much in line with the joint statement released by the US and Indian delegations during President Obama's visit to New Delhi in January.

China, for its part, claims much or all of the South China Sea as its territorial waters. The region contains several islands, reefs and sandbars and is thought to be a region enormously rich in hydrocarbons, particularly around the highly disputed Spratly Islands.

Though this has remained largely unstated in public, the United States sees India as a key part of its pivot towards the Asia-Pacific region. Not only is the Indian Navy one of the most powerful forces in the region, it is a useful training partner which engages the US Navy in exceptionally high-level wargames in the annual Malabar series of exercises which are held during the fall. According to Admiral Harris, "I was involved with Malabar 1995 and now you look at Malabar 2014, and it is leaps and bounds beyond what it was. I would like to have an increase with India in special operations exercises."

Last year, India opened up the Malabar exercises to include Japan, a strong ally of both New Delhi and Washington. Australia, another regional partner of the US and India, also has concerns with Chinese naval expansionism.

While India and the United States stand committed to engaging China economically, a new strategic order clearly seems in the process of being established across both the Pacific and Indian Oceans with the US being the big brother.

"As part of the US rebound, the Pacific fleet is going to get bigger. 60 per cent of the US Navy will be in the Pacific fleet by 2020. For me, my area of responsibility for the US Navy is the Pacific and Indian Oceans and so, I say that my area of responsibility goes from Hollywood to Bollywood and Polar Bears to Penguins. So that's kind of all of it. That's 52 per cent of the world. That's my area of responsibility," Admiral Harris said. The US sees India as an important part of this new order.

 

[BoQ77]

I like the US strategy. Let's use India as cannon fodder!

India already tried to sail a warship through the South China Sea.

China "escorted" it out. A single Indian warship surrounded by a multitude of larger Chinese destroyers, submarines, and overhead J-11B fighter aircraft is a sitting duck.

If India does not follow the instructions of the escort commander, China will impound the Indian ship.

Very interesting news. Give us the source for more details, ok ? @DRAY

 

[Martian2]

Very interesting news. Give us the source for more details, ok ? @DRAY

In South China Sea, a surprise Chinese escort for Indian ships - The Hindu

 

[BoQ77]

In South China Sea, a surprise Chinese escort for Indian ships - The Hindu

The article is not exactly what you said in previous post. Does it mean you modified or interpolated the article in purpose ?
All we get is a Chinese ship shadow 4 Indian ships during 12 hours in the international water.

Lately, that Chinese ship was ordered to move away.

Your post

China "escorted" it out. A single Indian warship surrounded by a multitude of larger Chinese destroyers, submarines, and overhead J-11B fighter aircraft is a sitting duck.

If India does not follow the instructions of the escort commander, China will impound the Indian ship

Your link to this source:

For the next 12 hours, the Chinese warship would provide an unscheduled escort to the four Indian vessels. The PLAN frigate was aware that the four ships were also going to visit Shanghai later in the month during their month-long tour; yet that they insisted on providing an escort through what India and other countries view as international waters underscored for officials how Beijing increasingly views one of the world's most important waterways.

“The tone of the message was welcoming, but was also as though we were entering Chinese waters,” said an official who did not want to be named. The Chinese ship left the Shivalik's side after 12 hours, revealing that it had been instructed to move away by the PLAN.

 

[Martian2]

The article is not exactly what you said in previous post. Does it mean you modified or interpolated the article in purpose ?
All we get is a Chinese ship shadow 4 Indian ships during 12 hours in the international water.

That was just a warning and it was three years ago. China's control of the South China Sea is tightening.

Have you already forgotten that PLA Navy stopped the USS Cowpens?

Last year, a PLA Navy flotilla has been patrolling the South China Sea (see citation below).

Tensions Set To Rise In The South China Sea | The Diplomat

 

[BoQ77]

That was just a warning and it was three years ago. China's control of the South China Sea is tightening.

Have you already forgotten that PLA Navy stopped the USS Cowpens?

Why you provide us by fake news ? Read again and revise it, ok? Thanks

 

[Martian2]

Why you provide us by fake news ? Read again and revise it, ok? Thanks

I said that's what the Indians will face when they come back again. The citation speaks for itself.

"If India does not follow the instructions of the escort commander, China will impound the Indian ship."

"Will" means future tense. A future event.

 

[Martian2]

In your post, all verbs in past tense. Am I wrong?

Read it again. I didn't say "had."
----------

US encourages India to become South China Sea cannon fodder

1. Indian warships had already been "escorted" by a PLA Navy frigate, which happened three years ago.

2. Two years ago, China started conducting PLA Navy warship patrols.

3. Last year, China "escorted" out the USS Cowpens.

4. The PLA Navy Air Force is conducting routine patrols of the South China Sea (see citation below).

PLA Navy conducts patrol and high-sea training

 

[BoQ77]

I like the US strategy. Let's use India as cannon fodder!

India already tried to sail a warship through the South China Sea.

China "escorted" it out. A single Indian warship surrounded by a multitude of larger Chinese destroyers, submarines, and overhead J-11B fighter aircraft is a sitting duck.

If India does not follow the instructions of the escort commander, China will impound the Indian ship.

So in this news, how many Chinese ship or aircraft engage ?
How many Indian ships related ?
Who move away ? Chinese ship or Indian ships ?

 

[jhungary]

That was just a warning and it was three years ago. China's control of the South China Sea is tightening.

Have you already forgotten that PLA Navy stopped the USS Cowpens?

Last year, a PLA Navy flotilla has been patrolling the South China Sea (see citation below).

Tensions Set To Rise In The South China Sea | The Diplomat

lol Chinese ask the Cowpens to leave the area and have no response, then the PLAN cross the cowpens 500 yards in front with a LPD. That is not stopping the Cowpens, that's being stupid....What if Cowpens does not stop in time? The bow of cowpens would slice thru the LPD and many men in both ship would have been killed.

That was nothing to be proud of.

 

[Martian2]

US doesn't care about Vietnam: Top 7 reasons

1. Vietnam is a communist country. The US has NEVER signed a defense treaty with a communist nation.

2. In 1974, South Vietnam was a US ally. The United States did nothing as China took over the Paracel Islands in 1974.

3. The United States has proclaimed forty years of neutrality in the South China Sea. In the latest incidents, the United States publicly proclaimed neutrality in June and December of 2014.

4. The United States is downsizing the Army to 450,000 troops. The United States will match the post-World War II low in Army strength. The United States does not plan to fight a war.

It is impossible to fight against China's 2.2-million PLA Army with only 450,000 troops.

Army Veterans Recall Layoffs from Previous Eras | Military.com
"Army Veterans Recall Layoffs from Previous Eras
Sep 10, 2014 | by Brendan McGarry
...
After rising to 570,000 soldiers in 2008 during the war in Iraq, the Army has less than 520,000 soldiers today and is on pace to shrink to 490,000 soldiers by next year. It's bracing for even further reductions driven by automatic budget cuts known as sequestration.

The Pentagon's proposed budget for 2015 calls for the service's end-strength to decrease to 440,000-450,000 soldiers by 2017. If sequestration remains in effect, the number may fall to as low as 420,000 soldiers -- tens of thousands less than the figure the Army's top officer, Gen. Raymond Odierno, said is needed to respond adequately to conflicts around the world."

5. The Pentagon insists on protecting its ties with China.

US Army Protects China Ties Despite Tensions | DefenseNews
"US Army Protects China Ties Despite Tensions
By Joe Gould | 10:17 p.m. EST March 4, 2015
...
Amid reports the Pentagon has paused efforts to expand defense ties with China until the two nations can agree on rules for airborne encounters between their warplanes, Gen. Vincent Brooks, chief of US Army Pacific (USARPAC), said he received no instructions to reduce his engagements with the People's Liberation Army.
...
The US Army will continue to receive Chinese official visits at US Army Pacific headquarters, plan events with the Chinese and maintain ties under the 'sufficient latitude' that policy guidelines provide, Brooks said. The command, for example, is in talks to hold exchanges between mid-career officials from the two nations.

'We don't want to have transactional engagements with one another, where we only come together when we need something," Brooks said. "We need to have more substantial relationships that can be built over time.'"

6. US gave Vietnam a paltry $28 million in military aid for 2014. $18 million for five patrol boats and $10 million for demining operations. In contrast, Israel received $3.4 BILLION.

Israel Hayom | Israel aid remains untouched in 2014 US budget proposal
"Apr 11, 2013 - Israel would receive $3.4 billion in total military aid under the 2014 U.S. budget proposal sent to Congress by President Barack Obama on ..."

7. China is a very important market to the United States. US carmakers sold 4.6 million cars in China (GM: 3.5 million; Ford: 1.1 million). In contrast, US carmakers sold only 19,000 cars in Vietnam last year.

Ford, GM post double-digit sales gains in China | Automotive News
"Ford, GM post double-digit sales gains in China
January 8, 2015 - 7:03 am ET

SHANGHAI (Reuters) -- Ford Motor Co. and General Motors posted double-digit sales gains in China last year, the automakers reported this week.

Ford and its Chinese joint ventures sold 1.11 million vehicles, up 19 percent from the previous year, Ford said today.
...
Meanwhile, GM and its Chinese partners sold a record 3,539,970 vehicles in China in 2014, up 12 percent from the previous year, the U.S. automaker said on Tuesday."

Vietnam's automotive sales leap 43% in 2014: trade association
"Thaco was the market leader with the number of cars sold hitting 42,339 vehicles in 2014, followed by Toyota (40,820), Ford (13,988), Honda (6,492), and Vietnam GM (5,134)."

 

[BoQ77]

3. Last year, China "escorted" out the USS Cowpens.

How you consider "escorted" ? describe how China escorted the USS Cowpens ?

 

[Martian2]

How you consider "escorted" ? describe how China escorted the USS Cowpens ?

I don't do endless semantic arguments. I've said all I will say on the subject.

I only care about substance. I have something to say. Once I've made my point, the message's merit is to be decided by the reader.

I want to convey two points.

1. US encourages India to become cannon fodder in the South China Sea.
2. US doesn't care about Vietnam.

The reader decides whether my analysis is correct or not.