US not coming to PH aid vs China

[gambit]

I dont know but do we have any participant from Philipines to have a meaningful discussion about this topic? Otherwise this topic will be an unnecessary troll...

Look at the issue this way...

There is a great deal of difference between a 'territory' or a 'protectorate' versus 'sovereign land'. A 'territory' is a piece of land where one has mostly administrative authority and power that can be quickly ceded -- not necessarily through conquest by someone else -- by that administrative authority, to another authority figure, and that concession does not affect home soil sovereignty of the country, not even in the least.

These islands are being contested for reasons other than sovereignty. Neither Viet Nam nor the Philippines being existentially threatened by the loss of these islands. All, including China, know that administrative powers over these islands have never been clearly established. On the other hand, contesting claims have been clearly established. Whether one claim or another is more valid is -- and should be -- a matter for an international legal arbitration process whose decision, while may not be legally binding, should be respected and conceded to.

This is why the US is correct in not getting involved other than to urge a peaceful diplomatic solution to the issue. But if China want to take on the Phi's main home islands, whose home soil sovereignty is NOT in dispute, then the US will step in and give China the military spanking she deserve.

 

[Zabaniyah]

USA seems Not interest coz:
1.They allows Vn to Enrich uranium, that can make Nuke boom.

2.Those Island simply too small to defend, Vn can blow away with boom and missle.^^

So, China just simply can not control the whole island, and Vn now strong enought to defend our sovereignty.^^

Tell your people, don't push your Gov into the deep hole, it's just impossible to control all of islands.^^

Are you implying that Vietnam is capable of developing and acquiring nukes?

But if Vietnam has nukes, that would be news for me!

You do understand just how hard it is to develop and acquire nuclear weapons these days, right?!

For countries like India and Pakistan, their nuclear programs were certainly not a walk in the park as far diplomacy went!

Iran's nuclear program is a pretty epic one too

 

[gpit]

Chinese are too smart to make the same mistakes as the Americans.

War Plan For Total Victory (Felix Doctrine - named after originator)

As the South China Sea tension between Vietnam and China heats up, I predict the following response by China.

Step #1: After eliminating Vietnam's primitive air defenses, "Rolling Thunder" for three months. Destroy every Vietnamese military base, barracks, arms depot, airfield, maintenance facility, fuel depot, etc.

Also, destroy every bridge, airport, sea port, railway system, communication network, large warehouse facilities, electric power plant, water pumping station, civilian airfield, granary stores, manufacturing centers, and other valuable targets to paralyze Vietnamese Army.

The Vietnamese Army now lacks mobility, war supplies, food supplies, water, ability to communicate, ability to coordinate, etc. They are extremely vulnerable and demoralized.

Step #2: Advance into Vietnam with ground troops. Upon encountering any large concentrations of Vietnamese troops, eliminate with heavy howitzer barrages. Follow with tank and infantry attacks that are supported by attack jets and attack helicopters.

Step #3: Every PLA soldier is free to shoot if they believe they're in danger. Chinese Rule of Engagement: protect yourself. This is war.

Step #4: Argue about the Geneva conventions after total victory. Veto and ignore liberal complaints at the U.N. They're going to do that anyway. Simply point to the thousands of civilian collateral damage in Afghanistan and the tens of thousands (or more) of civilian collateral damage in Iraq due to NATO bombings. Their hands aren't clean and they're in no position to criticize.

Only a fool would advocate American-style Rules of Engagement. Under American rules, China will fare no better in Vietnam than the U.S. Army in Afghanistan and Iraq. That is a recipe for disaster and humiliation. Only deluded bleeding hearts think that building schools in an enemy country is a path to victory.

The strategy for victory is to rip the enemy country into shreds and let them pick up the pieces over the next 50 years. I guarantee that Vietnam will not be eager to pick a fight with China over the South China Sea ever again.

I beg to oppose #2 and #3. US army's quagmire in middle East is a lesson. Ground invasion needs an exit plan. UN discussion or Geneva convention can't substitute the exist plan. Unlike with India, Sino-Vietnam land boarder has been well demarcated, so China shouldn't occupied even an inch of that, unless a puppet government is will to make new demarcation.

In stead, I'd like to add: Vietnamese Navy should be completely wiped out upto single armed fishing boat. That shouldn't be difficult given their shaggy warships. Maybe one missile per ship. When they get the kilo from Russia, South China Sea is a perfect graveyard for them to RIP.

If they like war, let they live in perpetual poverty and brave.

 

[dore]

LOL!

But some Vietnamese thought they got adopted by a new Papa!

Haha..haha..

force your thinking on other people but it shows yourself

 

[gambit]

The new thread is warranted because the Filipinos were counting on the Americans to fight as mercenaries on their behalf. Now that the Filipinos and the Vietnamese know that the U.S. won't lift a finger to help them, watch the little barking dogs slink away with their tails between their legs.

Heck...Miami-Dade PD can take on Cuba and we can make that island our next 'Puerto Rico'. Would Chinese blood be on Cuba's soil? Or will China slink tail-between-legs away?

I have been here for almost two years and I have made 1,396 posts with 1,863 "thanks" from other members.

Please......The way you Chinese boys tripped over each other about that made that feature worthless. Made the Chinese members here nothing more than a mutual admiration society. By the way, if the contents of a post is supposedly so 'useful', why have you not 'thanked' me for exposing the lie that the F-22's rudder system is supposedly 'less advanced' than the J-20's all-moving vertical stabs? Is it because the person who made that lie is Chinese and called himself an 'Engineer'?

I made a YouTube video on the J-20 that has been watched by over 71,000 viewers.

I hate -- and have never used -- the phrase 'Trust me on this'. But I will have to make an exception here...

Trust me on this one...A lot of those view counts are from those of us who have relevant experience watched it strictly for entertainment and we passed it around in the aviation community. Your argument on this would be more credible if you can show at least one technically credible Internet site that will cite your crappy video as a source for their analysis.

 

[Huan]

Heck...Miami-Dade PD can take on Cuba and we can make that island our next 'Puerto Rico'. Would Chinese blood be on Cuba's soil? Or will China slink tail-between-legs away?


Please......The way you Chinese boys tripped over each other about that made that feature worthless. Made the Chinese members here nothing more than a mutual admiration society. By the way, if the contents of a post is supposedly so 'useful', why have you not 'thanked' me for exposing the lie that the F-22's rudder system is supposedly 'less advanced' than the J-20's all-moving vertical stabs? Is it because the person who made that lie is Chinese and called himself an 'Engineer'?


I hate -- and have never used -- the phrase 'Trust me on this'. But I will have to make an exception here...

Trust me on this one...A lot of those view counts are from those of us who have relevant experience watched it strictly for entertainment and we passed it around in the aviation community. Your argument on this would be more credible if you can show at least one technically credible Internet site that will cite your crappy video as a source for their analysis.

Unlike you, I think Martian2's J-20 video is pretty good.

 

[gambit]

Unlike you, I think Martian2's J-20 video is pretty good.

Of course you would...It was made by a Chinese. You do not have the intellectual courage to consider counterpoints to that crap. Like I said...Yours is nothing more than a mutual admiration society.

 

[mirage 5000]

read the history USA will never come when PUPPETS need him .lolz

 

[ptldM3]

Unlike you, I think Martian2's J-20 video is pretty good.

How so? Is it because it has a lot of pictures and a featured song from Top Gun? I suppose for J-20 fanboys it can be entertaining.

 

[Huan]

Of course you would...It was made by a Chinese. You do not have the intellectual courage to consider counterpoints to that crap. Like I said...Yours is nothing more than a mutual admiration society.

Well, that so called society is sure increasing in size. I look forward to what China has become in 2015 at the end of the 12th Five Year Plan. ^^

 

[Martian2]

How so? Is it because it has a lot of pictures and a featured song from Top Gun? I suppose for J-20 fanboys it can be entertaining.

My J-20 video is popular, because over 71,000 viewers have seen it and given it an 86.7% "like" rating. Also, it is reasonable to assume that my video comes highly recommended to the friends of those 71,000 viewers. I believe that my J-20 video is among the top 7 most popular on YouTube regarding China's J-20 Mighty Dragon stealth fighter.

Most of my viewers are from the United States, Canada, Australia, Great Britain, and New Zealand. I can post the demographic map if someone is interested.

 

[Martian2]

Heck...Miami-Dade PD can take on Cuba and we can make that island our next 'Puerto Rico'. Would Chinese blood be on Cuba's soil? Or will China slink tail-between-legs away?


Please......The way you Chinese boys tripped over each other about that made that feature worthless. Made the Chinese members here nothing more than a mutual admiration society. By the way, if the contents of a post is supposedly so 'useful', why have you not 'thanked' me for exposing the lie that the F-22's rudder system is supposedly 'less advanced' than the J-20's all-moving vertical stabs? Is it because the person who made that lie is Chinese and called himself an 'Engineer'?


I hate -- and have never used -- the phrase 'Trust me on this'. But I will have to make an exception here...

Trust me on this one...A lot of those view counts are from those of us who have relevant experience watched it strictly for entertainment and we passed it around in the aviation community. Your argument on this would be more credible if you can show at least one technically credible Internet site that will cite your crappy video as a source for their analysis.

Australia Air Power. Second video in the "Multimedia" section.
(Link: http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-J-XX-Prototype.html)

Since you seem to be a vociferous critic, let me ask you whether you have made a video on any military issue that has been watched by tens of thousands of people? If not, kindly stop yapping.

By the way, for those of you that haven't seen it, I have a second video with 2,882 views on China's J-15 Flying Shark naval fighter. Please watch it. It's my first high-definition video.

 

[gambit]

Australia Air Power. Second video in the multimedia section.
(Link: Chengdu J-XX [J-20] Stealth Fighter Prototype / A Preliminary Assessment)

You mean with this disclaimer...???

[APA does not endorse or necessarily agree with the content of third party multimedia items embedded in this page]

As if that is not bad enough for your argument, APA is hardly considered to be credibly technical among aviation engineers. At best, the community regards the APA crowd to be knowledgeable supporters/fanboys.

Since you seem to be a vociferous critic, let me ask you whether you have made a video on any military issue that has been watched by tens of thousands of people? If not, kindly stop yapping.

Am quite certain the F-22's chief designer never made such a video either. But am also quite certain that if he is allowed, he will have no problems shooting down your J-20's so called 'analysis'. But then again...I have done that here.

 

[Martian2]

Vietnam diplomatic document signed by Vietnam Premier Pham Van Dong

Translation of Vietnamese government's diplomatic document (shown above) into English:

The Democratic Republic of Vietnam's Government agree to terms of China's public statement on 9-4-1958 about China's sea territory claim. The Democratic Republic of Vietnam Government respect it, and will direct all Agencies to absolutely respect the 12 nautical miles sea territory of China in all matters with the People's Republic of China in the East Sea.

Sincerely,

Hanoi 14-9-1958.

-----

Translation of Vietnamese government's diplomatic document (shown above) into Mandarin/中文:

越南民主共和国承中华人民共和国在1958年9月4日关于中国领海主张的各项条款。越南民主共和国尊重，并且将要求所有越南部门尊重中华人民共和国在东海（我南海）12海里的领海的领海。

敬礼

河内，1958年9月14日

----------

"Declaration of the Government of the People's Republic of China on China's Territorial Sea (September 4，1958)" in Chinese as follows:

文中所提到的中华人民共和国在1958年9月4日关于中国领海主张的各项条款如下：

中华人民共和国政府宣布

　　（一）中华人民共和国的领海宽度为12海里。这项规定适用于中华人民共和国的一切领土，包括中国大陆及 其沿海岛屿，和同大陆及其沿海岛屿隔有公海的台湾及其周围各岛、澎湖列岛、东沙群岛、西沙群岛、中沙群岛、 南沙群岛以及其他属于中国的岛屿。

　　（二）中国大陆及其沿海岛屿的领海以连接大陆岸上和沿海岸外缘岛屿上各基点之间的各直线为基线，从基线 向外延伸12海里的水域是中国的领海。在基线以内的水域，包括渤海湾、琼州海峡在内、都是中国的内海、在基 线以内的岛屿，包括东引岛、高登岛、马祖列岛、白犬列岛、乌岳岛、大小金门岛、大担岛、二担岛、东碇岛在内 ，都是中国的内海。

　　（三）一切外国飞机和军用船舶，未经中华人民共和国政府的许可，不得进入中国的领海和领海 上空。

　　任何外国船舶在中国领海航行，必须遵守中华人民共和国政府的有关法令。

　　（四）以上（一）（二）两项规定的原则同样适用于台湾及其周围各岛、澎湖列岛、东沙群岛、西沙群岛、南 沙群岛以及其他属于中国的岛屿。

　　台湾和澎湖地区现在仍然被美国武力侵占，这是侵犯中华人民共和国领土完整的和主权的非法行为。台湾和澎 湖等地尚待收复，中华人民共和国政府有权采取一切适当的方法在适当的时候，收复这些地区，这是中国的内政， 不容外国干涉。

-----

Translation:

Declaration of the Government of the People's Republic of China on China's Territorial Sea （September 4，1958）

　　The Government of the People's Republic of China declares：

　　1. The breadth of the territorial sea of the People's Republic of China shall be twelve nautical miles. This provision applies to all territories of the People's Republic of China including the Chinese mainland and its coastal islands，as well as Taiwan and its surrounding islands，the Penghu Islands，the Dongsha Islands，the Xisha Islands，the Zhongsha Islands，the Nansha Islands and all other islands belonging to China which are separated from the mainland and its coastal islands by the high seas.

　　2. China's territorial sea along the mainland and its coastal islands takes as its baseline the line composed of the straight lines connecting bas-points on the mainland coast and on the outermost coastal islands； the water area extending twelve nautical miles outward from this baseline is China's territorial sea. The water areas inside the baseline，including Bohai Bayand the Chiung chow Straits，are Chinese inland waters. The islands inside the base line，including Tungyin Island，Kaoteng Island，the Matsu Islands，the Paichuan Islands，Wuchiu Island，the Grater And Lesser Quemoy Islands，Tatan Island，Erhtan Island and Tungting Island，are islands of the Chinese inland waters.

　　3. No foreign aircraft and no foreign vessels for military use may enter China's territorial sea and the air space above it without the permission of the Government of the People's Republic of China.

　　While navigation Chinese territorial sea，every foreign vessel must observe the relevant laws of the People's Republic of China and regulations of its government.

　　4. The principles provided in paragraphs （2） and （3） apply also to Taiwan and its surrounding islands，the Penghu Islands，the Dongsha Islands，the Xisha Islands，the Zhongsha Islands，the Nansha islands， and all other islands belonging to China.

　　The Taiwan and Penghu areas are still occupied by the United States armed force. This is anunlawful encroachment on the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the People's Republic of China. Taiwan，Penghu and such other areas are yet to be recovered，and the Government of the People's Republic of China has the right to recover these area by all suitable means at a suitable time. This is China's internal affair，in which no foreign interference is tolerated.

[Note: Thank you to FrankLau for the post and translation.]