info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
How do you find fault in China doing what everyone is doing? How about "the pace and scale" with which she is doing it? So, let's "confront" China while "China is weak".
65 views
Skip to first unread message
lo yeeOn
May 30, 2015, 4:45:56 PM5/30/15
to
About Pivoting to China:
How do you find fault in China doing what everyone is doing? How
about "the pace and scale" with which she is doing it? Ah, that's it!
That's the line.
And the hawks such as Kyle Mizokami, are goading the US along:
. . . simply letting China do whatever it wants is not an option.
The risks are much smaller now, while China is weak, and infinitely
better than the alternative of confronting a stronger, more powerful
China down the road.
So, let's "confront" China while "China is weak". The US shall remain
the world's policeman, go anywhere it wants - thousands of miles away
- and flex its muscles anywhere it wants. But China claiming most of
the South China Sea to be her own, even though it is only a few
hundred miles away, is unacceptable. So, Mizokami wants the US to
follow the Confucian order: Stay right where you are!
If you were second-class in the 19th and 20th centuries, then remain
second-class!
The imperialists and colonial masters of yesterday haven't learned,
have they?
They continue to go around the world to tell others what to do - and
what not to do - as if it were still yesterday! But they have
forgotten that, as the East is still red at dawn, there has risen a
people who also want a place under the sun for themselves.
Today, the sun shall rise for everybody in Far East Asia and tomorrow,
the sun will shine brightly over Africa also.
lo yeeOn
The US has called for an "immediate and lasting halt" to land
reclamation in disputed areas of the South China Sea.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32941829
US Defence Secretary Ashton Carter told the Shangri-La Dialogue in
Singapore that China's actions in the area were "out of step" with
international rules.
China claims almost the whole of the South China Sea, resulting in
overlapping claims with its neighbours.
. . .
China takes the view that it is doing nothing wrong - and certainly
nothing that other countries are not also doing.
However, it is clearly the pace and scale of what China is doing that
worries many.
. . .
At the conference on Saturday, which was attended by defence ministers
from across the Asia-Pacific region, Mr Carter said he wanted the
"peaceful resolution of all disputes".
"To that end, there should be an immediate and lasting halt to land
reclamation by all claimants," he said.
He acknowledged that other claimants such as Vietnam, the Philippines,
Malaysia and Taiwan had reclaimed pockets of land or built outposts in
the area, but said "one country has gone much farther and much faster
than any other".
"China has reclaimed over 2,000 acres, more than all other claimants
combined and more than in the entire history of the region. And China
did so in only the last 18 months," he said.
"It is unclear how much farther China will go. That is why this
stretch of water has become the source of tension in the region and
front-page news around the world."
The US defence secretary also said the US would maintain a substantial
presence in the region, adding: "The United States will fly, sail, and
operate wherever international law allows."
. . .
------------
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/30/us-asia-security-idUSKBN0OF01J20150530
U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter said on Saturday that China's
island-building in the South China Sea was undermining security in the
Asia-Pacific, drawing a scathing response from the foreign ministry in
Beijing.
Carter, speaking to top defense officials from the Asia-Pacific at the
annual Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, acknowledged that several
countries had created outposts in the region's disputed islands, but
he said the scope of China's activity created uncertainty about its
future plans.
. . .
"The United States disregards history, legal principles and the
facts," spokeswoman Hua Chunying said. "China's sovereignty and
relevant rights were established a long time ago in the South China
Sea.
China's island-building is "legal, reasonable, conforms to the
situation and neither impacts nor targets any country."
Despite the rhetoric, Carter said there was no military solution to
the South China Sea disputes. "Right now is the time for renewed
diplomacy, focused on a finding a lasting solution that protects the
rights and interests of all," he said.
--------------
http://theweek.com/articles/557430/what-china-dangerously-underestimates-about-americas-interest-south-china-sea
What China dangerously underestimates about America's interest in the
South China Sea By Kyle Mizokami
. . .
Senior Colonel Yang Yujun, claimed that the U.S. was "smearing the
Chinese Navy," presumably for no other reason than it is jealous of
China's rise.
Senior Colonel Yang is right but for the wrong reasons. The United
States is preparing to confront China. The purpose isn't to smear the
Chinese Navy, but rather to uphold a key strategic principle.
As a direct interest, the South China Sea isn't of huge importance to
America. The principle of freedom of navigation, on the other hand is
very much an interest of America's. As a maritime power surrounded by
two oceans and reliant on ocean-going trade, the United States must on
principle resist all such claims - even those by countries as small as
the Maldives.
The United States is the only country capable of countering China's claim to the South China Sea. Despite the extraordinary growth and progress of the Chinese military over the past two decades, the U.S. military is still more powerful by a wide margin.
China is currently operating from a position of weakness. That's
precisely why it must be countered now, before it grows more
powerful. It's important to confront China over this issue now and
"teach it a lesson"
. . .
This will make for some tense moments above, on, and below the South
China Sea, and could even conceivably start a war.
But simply letting China do whatever it wants is not an option. The
risks are much smaller now, while China is weak, and infinitely better
than the alternative of confronting a stronger, more powerful China
down the road. The sooner China learns to play by the rules, the
better.
How do you find fault in China doing what everyone is doing? How
about "the pace and scale" with which she is doing it? Ah, that's it!
That's the line.
And the hawks such as Kyle Mizokami, are goading the US along:
. . . simply letting China do whatever it wants is not an option.
The risks are much smaller now, while China is weak, and infinitely
better than the alternative of confronting a stronger, more powerful
China down the road.
So, let's "confront" China while "China is weak". The US shall remain
the world's policeman, go anywhere it wants - thousands of miles away
- and flex its muscles anywhere it wants. But China claiming most of
the South China Sea to be her own, even though it is only a few
hundred miles away, is unacceptable. So, Mizokami wants the US to
follow the Confucian order: Stay right where you are!
If you were second-class in the 19th and 20th centuries, then remain
second-class!
The imperialists and colonial masters of yesterday haven't learned,
have they?
They continue to go around the world to tell others what to do - and
what not to do - as if it were still yesterday! But they have
forgotten that, as the East is still red at dawn, there has risen a
people who also want a place under the sun for themselves.
Today, the sun shall rise for everybody in Far East Asia and tomorrow,
the sun will shine brightly over Africa also.
lo yeeOn
The US has called for an "immediate and lasting halt" to land
reclamation in disputed areas of the South China Sea.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32941829
US Defence Secretary Ashton Carter told the Shangri-La Dialogue in
Singapore that China's actions in the area were "out of step" with
international rules.
China claims almost the whole of the South China Sea, resulting in
overlapping claims with its neighbours.
. . .
China takes the view that it is doing nothing wrong - and certainly
nothing that other countries are not also doing.
However, it is clearly the pace and scale of what China is doing that
worries many.
. . .
At the conference on Saturday, which was attended by defence ministers
from across the Asia-Pacific region, Mr Carter said he wanted the
"peaceful resolution of all disputes".
"To that end, there should be an immediate and lasting halt to land
reclamation by all claimants," he said.
He acknowledged that other claimants such as Vietnam, the Philippines,
Malaysia and Taiwan had reclaimed pockets of land or built outposts in
the area, but said "one country has gone much farther and much faster
than any other".
"China has reclaimed over 2,000 acres, more than all other claimants
combined and more than in the entire history of the region. And China
did so in only the last 18 months," he said.
"It is unclear how much farther China will go. That is why this
stretch of water has become the source of tension in the region and
front-page news around the world."
The US defence secretary also said the US would maintain a substantial
presence in the region, adding: "The United States will fly, sail, and
operate wherever international law allows."
. . .
------------
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/30/us-asia-security-idUSKBN0OF01J20150530
U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter said on Saturday that China's
island-building in the South China Sea was undermining security in the
Asia-Pacific, drawing a scathing response from the foreign ministry in
Beijing.
Carter, speaking to top defense officials from the Asia-Pacific at the
annual Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, acknowledged that several
countries had created outposts in the region's disputed islands, but
he said the scope of China's activity created uncertainty about its
future plans.
. . .
"The United States disregards history, legal principles and the
facts," spokeswoman Hua Chunying said. "China's sovereignty and
relevant rights were established a long time ago in the South China
Sea.
China's island-building is "legal, reasonable, conforms to the
situation and neither impacts nor targets any country."
Despite the rhetoric, Carter said there was no military solution to
the South China Sea disputes. "Right now is the time for renewed
diplomacy, focused on a finding a lasting solution that protects the
rights and interests of all," he said.
--------------
http://theweek.com/articles/557430/what-china-dangerously-underestimates-about-americas-interest-south-china-sea
What China dangerously underestimates about America's interest in the
South China Sea By Kyle Mizokami
. . .
Senior Colonel Yang Yujun, claimed that the U.S. was "smearing the
Chinese Navy," presumably for no other reason than it is jealous of
China's rise.
Senior Colonel Yang is right but for the wrong reasons. The United
States is preparing to confront China. The purpose isn't to smear the
Chinese Navy, but rather to uphold a key strategic principle.
As a direct interest, the South China Sea isn't of huge importance to
America. The principle of freedom of navigation, on the other hand is
very much an interest of America's. As a maritime power surrounded by
two oceans and reliant on ocean-going trade, the United States must on
principle resist all such claims - even those by countries as small as
the Maldives.
The United States is the only country capable of countering China's claim to the South China Sea. Despite the extraordinary growth and progress of the Chinese military over the past two decades, the U.S. military is still more powerful by a wide margin.
China is currently operating from a position of weakness. That's
precisely why it must be countered now, before it grows more
powerful. It's important to confront China over this issue now and
"teach it a lesson"
. . .
This will make for some tense moments above, on, and below the South
China Sea, and could even conceivably start a war.
But simply letting China do whatever it wants is not an option. The
risks are much smaller now, while China is weak, and infinitely better
than the alternative of confronting a stronger, more powerful China
down the road. The sooner China learns to play by the rules, the
better.
bmo...@nyx.net
May 31, 2015, 8:04:33 PM5/31/15
to
TT
May 31, 2015, 8:11:37 PM5/31/15
to
1.6.2015, 3:04, bmo...@nyx.net kirjoitti:
> What China is doing is not "what everyone else is doing". It's not surprising that you can't acknowledge that, despite your endless barrage of verbiage.
I doubt it's his verbiage. The interesting part here is that apparently
> What China is doing is not "what everyone else is doing". It's not surprising that you can't acknowledge that, despite your endless barrage of verbiage.
Russia is not the only country with troll factories - obviously this lee
yeeon character is paid to post this crap... and likely gets even paid
for each of our replies?
People often accuse jokingly someone being a paid troll but this time
around it's no joke. I mean what the hell?
jdeluise
May 31, 2015, 8:22:17 PM5/31/15
to
bmo...@nyx.net writes:
>
> What China is doing is not "what everyone else is doing". It's not
> surprising that you can't acknowledge that, despite your endless
> barrage of verbiage.
lo yeeon relies on the endless verbiage, probably drawn from a database
>
> What China is doing is not "what everyone else is doing". It's not
> surprising that you can't acknowledge that, despite your endless
> barrage of verbiage.
for him. Without that he's exposed as someone with a adolescent frame
of mind, literally so naive it's painful.
John Liang
May 31, 2015, 11:16:52 PM5/31/15
to
Shakes
May 31, 2015, 11:45:44 PM5/31/15
to
bmo...@nyx.net
Jun 1, 2015, 12:11:34 AM6/1/15
to
On Sunday, May 31, 2015 at 8:16:52 PM UTC-7, John Liang wrote:
lo yeeOn
Jun 1, 2015, 12:50:38 AM6/1/15
to
In article <07ce2eb9-e505-4b91...@googlegroups.com>,
Force sin <forc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Is that SO !!!
>
>Is the USA strong ?
>
>Politicians and Western media ...simply compare the number of aircraft
>carriers the US has.... with ONLY one miserable tiny one discarded the
>the Soviet Union..now with the PLA navy.
>
>Ha ha ha ha... Is this the way ...China would fight the USA.... with a
>tiny miserable obsolete junk from Soviet era ?
>
>I think...US top brass know very well...the fleet of US carriers will be
>at the bottom of South China Seas...if the USA ever use them to wage war
>with China. They are painfully aware...that the aircraft carriers will
>be sitting ducks against the sunburn and DF-21 missiles.. and the China
>silent submarines.
>
>
>Ref:
>
>All the advance techno-toys in the US war machines failed to detect a
>China sub which surface next to the US submarine.
>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-492804/The-uninvited-guest-Chinese-sub-pops-middle-U-S-Navy-exercise-leaving-military-chiefs-red-faced.html
>
>Aircraft carrier has ABSOLUTELY no defence against the DF-21
>https://theextinctionprotocol.wordpress.com/2013/04/20/u-s-aircraft-killer1-china-deploys-anti-ship-ballistic-missile-along-southern-coast-facing-taiwan/
The key point about China from the US point of view is the recognition
that there is no military solution - for just about anything that
China does today, mindful of the fact that China is always very
careful about whatever it does in the international arena.
Indeed, the BBC News made clear that China's claim that it is doing
nothing that other countries are not also doing has factual support -
as even defense secretary Ashton Carter has said as much:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32941829
China takes the view that it is doing nothing wrong - and certainly
nothing that other countries are not also doing.
So, even as he barked about the "pace and scale" with which China does
what everybody else has been doing, Carter acknowledged that China has
plenty of company.
He acknowledged that other claimants such as Vietnam, the
Philippines, Malaysia and Taiwan had reclaimed pockets of land or
built outposts in the area, ...
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32941829
If history is any indication, China isn't a country that takes the
business of waging war lightly. Remember, despite the ferocity with
which it defeated Chiang Kai-shek's army, the PLA chose to bide its
time to unite the Mainland with Taiwan, mindful of bloodshed and costs
to the Chinese people. But, remember also that it did not hesitate to
fight the US-led UN military to a draw on the Korean peninsula, when
it felt that the West was testing its resolve and strength. Now, if
the rest of the world did something to China when China was arguably
much, much weaker and could get nowhere in "teaching the PLA a lesson"
back in the stone age of 1950-53, what can they do to teach China
today? Remember that at the time, the US had nukes but China did not.
Nor did it have any communication satellites to aid its intelligence
gathering.
So, China is not a country the former and present colonialists and
imperalists can hope to corral in.
China is averse to the sacrifice a war would bring; but at the same
time, China is not afraid to let you know that she is not to be herded
around like in the days of old.
How in reality will this strategy play out?
I can't tell you what their plan is because I don't know.
But I figure that the PLA will not be afraid to engage in a dog fight
with an intruding foreign plane if the latter is deemed engaged in
intimidation. And if there is such a fight and a plane is lost and
the PLA also loses two pilots, they will be eulogized as patriots just
like we honor those of ours. How many such combats can the US afford
before it will also lose its planes and pilots? China can absorb
losses where the US fears to tread - just like what happened during
the Korean war. Not even Ashton Carter is stupid enough to believe
that China could be intimidated today when his predecessors could not
50-60 years ago. Remember China still has the same PLA, only much
better equipped and vastly modernized. So it will be Mutual Assured
Destruction or MAD if any country wants to use nuke on China so as to
control her.
China will not be controlled by any other nation!
China says what she means and means what she says. She is into
peaceful development and she also has a responsibility to make sure
that she will not be back to the state when everybody in China was
feeling ashamed of being taken advantage of by foreigners, even from
that tiny island nation of Japan.
And that's why even Ashton Carter recognizes that all he can do is
bark - while acknowledging that there is no military solution if we
choose to confront China militarily.
lo yeeOn
Force sin <forc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Sunday, 31 May 2015 04:45:57 UTC+8, lo yeeOn wrote:
>>
>
>> China is currently operating from a position of weakness.
>>
>>........, while China is weak.
>>
>
>> China is currently operating from a position of weakness.
>>
>
>Is that SO !!!
>
>Is the USA strong ?
>
>Politicians and Western media ...simply compare the number of aircraft
>carriers the US has.... with ONLY one miserable tiny one discarded the
>the Soviet Union..now with the PLA navy.
>
>Ha ha ha ha... Is this the way ...China would fight the USA.... with a
>tiny miserable obsolete junk from Soviet era ?
>
>I think...US top brass know very well...the fleet of US carriers will be
>at the bottom of South China Seas...if the USA ever use them to wage war
>with China. They are painfully aware...that the aircraft carriers will
>be sitting ducks against the sunburn and DF-21 missiles.. and the China
>silent submarines.
>
>
>Ref:
>
>All the advance techno-toys in the US war machines failed to detect a
>China sub which surface next to the US submarine.
>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-492804/The-uninvited-guest-Chinese-sub-pops-middle-U-S-Navy-exercise-leaving-military-chiefs-red-faced.html
>
>Aircraft carrier has ABSOLUTELY no defence against the DF-21
>https://theextinctionprotocol.wordpress.com/2013/04/20/u-s-aircraft-killer1-china-deploys-anti-ship-ballistic-missile-along-southern-coast-facing-taiwan/
The key point about China from the US point of view is the recognition
that there is no military solution - for just about anything that
China does today, mindful of the fact that China is always very
careful about whatever it does in the international arena.
Indeed, the BBC News made clear that China's claim that it is doing
nothing that other countries are not also doing has factual support -
as even defense secretary Ashton Carter has said as much:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32941829
China takes the view that it is doing nothing wrong - and certainly
nothing that other countries are not also doing.
what everybody else has been doing, Carter acknowledged that China has
plenty of company.
He acknowledged that other claimants such as Vietnam, the
Philippines, Malaysia and Taiwan had reclaimed pockets of land or
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32941829
If history is any indication, China isn't a country that takes the
business of waging war lightly. Remember, despite the ferocity with
which it defeated Chiang Kai-shek's army, the PLA chose to bide its
time to unite the Mainland with Taiwan, mindful of bloodshed and costs
to the Chinese people. But, remember also that it did not hesitate to
fight the US-led UN military to a draw on the Korean peninsula, when
it felt that the West was testing its resolve and strength. Now, if
the rest of the world did something to China when China was arguably
much, much weaker and could get nowhere in "teaching the PLA a lesson"
back in the stone age of 1950-53, what can they do to teach China
today? Remember that at the time, the US had nukes but China did not.
Nor did it have any communication satellites to aid its intelligence
gathering.
So, China is not a country the former and present colonialists and
imperalists can hope to corral in.
China is averse to the sacrifice a war would bring; but at the same
time, China is not afraid to let you know that she is not to be herded
around like in the days of old.
How in reality will this strategy play out?
I can't tell you what their plan is because I don't know.
But I figure that the PLA will not be afraid to engage in a dog fight
with an intruding foreign plane if the latter is deemed engaged in
intimidation. And if there is such a fight and a plane is lost and
the PLA also loses two pilots, they will be eulogized as patriots just
like we honor those of ours. How many such combats can the US afford
before it will also lose its planes and pilots? China can absorb
losses where the US fears to tread - just like what happened during
the Korean war. Not even Ashton Carter is stupid enough to believe
that China could be intimidated today when his predecessors could not
50-60 years ago. Remember China still has the same PLA, only much
better equipped and vastly modernized. So it will be Mutual Assured
Destruction or MAD if any country wants to use nuke on China so as to
control her.
China will not be controlled by any other nation!
China says what she means and means what she says. She is into
peaceful development and she also has a responsibility to make sure
that she will not be back to the state when everybody in China was
feeling ashamed of being taken advantage of by foreigners, even from
that tiny island nation of Japan.
And that's why even Ashton Carter recognizes that all he can do is
bark - while acknowledging that there is no military solution if we
choose to confront China militarily.
lo yeeOn
lo yeeOn
Jun 1, 2015, 2:24:01 AM6/1/15
to
In article <24e0210a-1cba-41cc...@googlegroups.com>,
<wakal...@yahoo.com.sg> wrote:
>----
>
>This kind of hubris is dangerous for the US and the world. I don't
>think the PLA sees itself as operating from a position of weakness in
>the South China Sea. Those tiny islands are convenient for coastguard
>type patrols only. But for a real shooting war, China will operate from
>its unsinkable land bases on the mainland and Hainan island. The writer
>Kyle Mizokami (and Ashton Carter as well) could not see this, and so
>they are grossly miscalculating by thinking that China's navy will be
>the one doing the fighting for China. The reality is that the PLA air
>force and missile forces will, in times of war in the South China Sea,
>attack from mainland bases.
>
>And let's not forget, no matter in how many battles the American
>"empire" may defeat China, the South China Sea will remain next to
>China, which can continue to attack from the mainland. forever.
>
>Wakalukong
>
>-----
USSR when the former invaded the latter. But when it was a fight for
survival - as opposed to expanding your living space or Lebensraum -
then the side which is being attacked but which is too big for the
aggressor to quickly swallow, then it becomes a war of attrition.
At the end of the day, such a contest never favors the
outsider/aggressor, just look at the defeats of Napoleon's army and
Hitler's Wehrmacht at the hand of the militarily inferior Russian army
from two different eras. So, history provides us with an important
lesson.
Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter conceded that there is no military
solution. He also conceded that China is doing what everybody else
has done. As a moral issue, his "pace and scale" argument doesn't
strengthen his stand. To the contrary, it weakens his case and makes
him sound disingenuous, hypocritical!
[Sec. Carter] acknowledged that other claimants such as Vietnam, the
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32941829
So, enough already, and the People's Daily made a conciliatory but
firm response to Carter's latest rhetoric thus:
China issues six-point response to US remark on South China Sea
issue Updated: 2015-05-31 21:45 (Xinhua)
http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2015-05/31/content_20870320.htm
BEIJING - China has rejected accusations by Ashton Carter that
China's actions in the South China Sea are "out of step" with
international rules. The Chinese Foreign Ministry issued a six-point
response on Saturday.
Spokeswoman Hua Chunying said China's sovereignty and rights in the
area have a historical foundation, and do not require land
reclamation as justification.
Second, construction on the Nansha islands - also called the Spratly
islands by some countries- are within Chinese sovereignty and does
not target any country. The spokeswoman explained that China is
sticking to its path of peaceful development and its defensive
security policy.
Third, Chinese construction is based on international needs and
fulfils the responsibility and obligation China shoulders as a big
nation. Hua Chunying said the construction will better serve
regional countries for their sailing, disaster relief and fishing in
the area.
Fourth, she noted that construction on islands and reefs have not
caused and will not pose problems to air and sea navigation. but
warned that countries should not abuse freedom of navigation.
Fifth, Hua explained that the code of conduct in the South China Sea
should be negotiated between China and ASEAN nations. She called on
countries outside the region such as the US to respect their efforts
and not complicate the process.
Lastly, the spokeswoman said the South China Sea issue is not an
issue between China and the US, as it does not concern the US. Hua
urged the US to keep its promise not to take sides on territorial
disputes, and stop making remarks that are harmful both to regional
peace and stability AND to US-China relations.
So, acting like a big country, China reasons with the US. It's now up
to the US to be reasonable, as it should have been - instead of its
hollow Asia Pivot.
lo yeeOn
<wakal...@yahoo.com.sg> wrote:
>
>This kind of hubris is dangerous for the US and the world. I don't
>think the PLA sees itself as operating from a position of weakness in
>the South China Sea. Those tiny islands are convenient for coastguard
>type patrols only. But for a real shooting war, China will operate from
>its unsinkable land bases on the mainland and Hainan island. The writer
>Kyle Mizokami (and Ashton Carter as well) could not see this, and so
>they are grossly miscalculating by thinking that China's navy will be
>the one doing the fighting for China. The reality is that the PLA air
>force and missile forces will, in times of war in the South China Sea,
>attack from mainland bases.
>
>And let's not forget, no matter in how many battles the American
>"empire" may defeat China, the South China Sea will remain next to
>China, which can continue to attack from the mainland. forever.
>
>Wakalukong
>
>-----
>>
>> . . .
>>
>> This will make for some tense moments above, on, and below the South
>> China Sea, and could even conceivably start a war.
>>
>> But simply letting China do whatever it wants is not an option. The
>> risks are much smaller now, while China is weak, and infinitely better
>> than the alternative of confronting a stronger, more powerful China
>> down the road. The sooner China learns to play by the rules, the
>> better.
>
Well said. Remember Nazi Germany had lop-sided advantage over the
>> . . .
>>
>> This will make for some tense moments above, on, and below the South
>> China Sea, and could even conceivably start a war.
>>
>> But simply letting China do whatever it wants is not an option. The
>> risks are much smaller now, while China is weak, and infinitely better
>> than the alternative of confronting a stronger, more powerful China
>> down the road. The sooner China learns to play by the rules, the
>> better.
>
USSR when the former invaded the latter. But when it was a fight for
survival - as opposed to expanding your living space or Lebensraum -
then the side which is being attacked but which is too big for the
aggressor to quickly swallow, then it becomes a war of attrition.
At the end of the day, such a contest never favors the
outsider/aggressor, just look at the defeats of Napoleon's army and
Hitler's Wehrmacht at the hand of the militarily inferior Russian army
from two different eras. So, history provides us with an important
lesson.
Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter conceded that there is no military
solution. He also conceded that China is doing what everybody else
has done. As a moral issue, his "pace and scale" argument doesn't
strengthen his stand. To the contrary, it weakens his case and makes
him sound disingenuous, hypocritical!
[Sec. Carter] acknowledged that other claimants such as Vietnam, the
Philippines, Malaysia and Taiwan had reclaimed pockets of land or
built outposts in the area, ...
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32941829
So, enough already, and the People's Daily made a conciliatory but
firm response to Carter's latest rhetoric thus:
China issues six-point response to US remark on South China Sea
issue Updated: 2015-05-31 21:45 (Xinhua)
http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2015-05/31/content_20870320.htm
BEIJING - China has rejected accusations by Ashton Carter that
China's actions in the South China Sea are "out of step" with
international rules. The Chinese Foreign Ministry issued a six-point
response on Saturday.
Spokeswoman Hua Chunying said China's sovereignty and rights in the
area have a historical foundation, and do not require land
reclamation as justification.
Second, construction on the Nansha islands - also called the Spratly
islands by some countries- are within Chinese sovereignty and does
not target any country. The spokeswoman explained that China is
sticking to its path of peaceful development and its defensive
security policy.
Third, Chinese construction is based on international needs and
fulfils the responsibility and obligation China shoulders as a big
nation. Hua Chunying said the construction will better serve
regional countries for their sailing, disaster relief and fishing in
the area.
Fourth, she noted that construction on islands and reefs have not
caused and will not pose problems to air and sea navigation. but
warned that countries should not abuse freedom of navigation.
Fifth, Hua explained that the code of conduct in the South China Sea
should be negotiated between China and ASEAN nations. She called on
countries outside the region such as the US to respect their efforts
and not complicate the process.
Lastly, the spokeswoman said the South China Sea issue is not an
issue between China and the US, as it does not concern the US. Hua
urged the US to keep its promise not to take sides on territorial
disputes, and stop making remarks that are harmful both to regional
peace and stability AND to US-China relations.
So, acting like a big country, China reasons with the US. It's now up
to the US to be reasonable, as it should have been - instead of its
hollow Asia Pivot.
lo yeeOn
lo yeeOn
Jun 1, 2015, 3:21:16 AM6/1/15
to
In article <caee4a45-3393-445b...@googlegroups.com>,
Errh, Secretary Carter conceded that China was only doing what everyone
else had already been doing. In the BBC News report cited by my OP:
[Sec. Carter] acknowledged that other claimants such as Vietnam, the
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32941829
In addition to conceding that China is doing what everybody else has
done, Carter also conceded that there is no military solution.
As a moral issue, his "pace and scale" argument doesn't strengthen his
stand. To the contrary, it weakens his case and makes him sound
disingenuous, hypocritical!
I also seriously doubt that China is among the "everyone" - as in
"everyone agrees belongs to them" in your preposterous claim:
>When most countries reclaim land, it's in waters that everyone
>agrees belongs to them. This is obviously not the case with what
>China has been doing in the South China Sea.
Had China conceded in those cases, then Sec. Carter would have made a
more direct, pointed accusation against China, instead of his "pace
and scale" line. To say that everyone is doing it, just that you are
doing it at a faster pace and grander scale is tantamount to beating
around the bush. What do you expect of today's China if she does not
awe the world by the scale and pace by which she does any building
project?
And has China ever conceded that Taiwan is another country?
No. For China, Taiwan is always a part of her, like her flesh and
blood. And there is just one such China and it is not on the Taiwan
island.
There is nothing "obvious" about your claim once we accept that
Sec. Carter did say that
"other claimants [in the South China Sea affair] such as Vietnam,
thing.
China has consistently and repeatedly claimed that she is for peaceful
development. And there is nothing to show that she isn't.
But, she has also made clear that she would never accept containment.
And that's because the Chinese people have not forgotten the
humiliation they received from the colonialists and imperialists in
the last two centuries. And modern China arose from the premise that
she will never let foreigners to humiliate her again.
If you think the Chinese people are too sensitive, so be it.
The Chinese people learn from their painful past. There is no way to
ask them to go back.
If it is territorial dispute between neighbors, it will always end in
a peaceful settlement - just ask Russia and India, the two largest
neighbors China has for neighbors.
But Asia Pivot is something else - and China will resist it.
John Liang is right - he has the same facts as Sec. Carter does.
lo yeeOn
else had already been doing. In the BBC News report cited by my OP:
[Sec. Carter] acknowledged that other claimants such as Vietnam, the
Philippines, Malaysia and Taiwan had reclaimed pockets of land or
built outposts in the area, ...
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32941829
In addition to conceding that China is doing what everybody else has
done, Carter also conceded that there is no military solution.
As a moral issue, his "pace and scale" argument doesn't strengthen his
stand. To the contrary, it weakens his case and makes him sound
disingenuous, hypocritical!
"everyone agrees belongs to them" in your preposterous claim:
>When most countries reclaim land, it's in waters that everyone
>agrees belongs to them. This is obviously not the case with what
>China has been doing in the South China Sea.
more direct, pointed accusation against China, instead of his "pace
and scale" line. To say that everyone is doing it, just that you are
doing it at a faster pace and grander scale is tantamount to beating
around the bush. What do you expect of today's China if she does not
awe the world by the scale and pace by which she does any building
project?
And has China ever conceded that Taiwan is another country?
No. For China, Taiwan is always a part of her, like her flesh and
blood. And there is just one such China and it is not on the Taiwan
island.
There is nothing "obvious" about your claim once we accept that
Sec. Carter did say that
"other claimants [in the South China Sea affair] such as Vietnam,
the Philippines, Malaysia and Taiwan had reclaimed pockets of land
or built outposts in the area",
with his complaint being only in the "pace and scale" of doing such a
or built outposts in the area",
thing.
China has consistently and repeatedly claimed that she is for peaceful
development. And there is nothing to show that she isn't.
But, she has also made clear that she would never accept containment.
And that's because the Chinese people have not forgotten the
humiliation they received from the colonialists and imperialists in
the last two centuries. And modern China arose from the premise that
she will never let foreigners to humiliate her again.
If you think the Chinese people are too sensitive, so be it.
The Chinese people learn from their painful past. There is no way to
ask them to go back.
If it is territorial dispute between neighbors, it will always end in
a peaceful settlement - just ask Russia and India, the two largest
neighbors China has for neighbors.
But Asia Pivot is something else - and China will resist it.
John Liang is right - he has the same facts as Sec. Carter does.
lo yeeOn
lo yeeOn
Jun 1, 2015, 3:51:25 AM6/1/15
to
In article <87k2vo9...@wintersun.localdomain>,
The word "verbiage" is bmoore's trademark when it comes to shoot and
snipe at me. If it is too many words but right, it is better than
bmoore's falsehood - but that's his job in the SCC newsgroup. It's
interesting how he usually hangs around there and shoots and snipes at
those who try to reason about current events concerning the US and
China, yet for my original post posted in SCC, RST, and other groups,
he chose to run over here to this group to post an unsupported claim.
leaving out a group who would be naturally interested, as demonstrated
by Force sin's and Wakalukong's follow up to mine.
Of course, bmoore's claim is not supported, as I've pointed out in my
OP as well as my follow-ups to other responses in this thread.
What did bmoore say? He said:
>> What China is doing is not "what everyone else is doing". It's not
>> surprising that you can't acknowledge that, despite your endless
>> barrage of verbiage.
And what did Sec. Carter say?
In the BBC News report cited by my OP:
[Sec. Carter] acknowledged that other claimants such as Vietnam, the
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32941829
So, Sec. Carter's statement directly contradicts bmoore's pretentious
verbiage. But for you, jdeluise, there are several other posters who
have already taken a position similar to mine: Wakalukong, Force Sin,
Shakes, and John Liang. Since I strive for the truth with my postings
and my intension to bring the truth to more people is sincere, there
is always a chance that there will be people who would agree with what
I say, despite the effort of the messenger shooters like bmoore.
lo yeeOn
In response to Kyle Mizokami's hawkish rhetoric, netter Wakalugong
wrote:
>This kind of hubris is dangerous for the US and the world.
Subject: Re: How do you find fault in China doing what everyone is doing? How about "the pace and scale" with which she is doing it? So, let's "confront" China while "China is weak".
solution. He also conceded that China is doing what everybody else
has done. As a moral issue, his "pace and scale" argument doesn't
snipe at me. If it is too many words but right, it is better than
bmoore's falsehood - but that's his job in the SCC newsgroup. It's
interesting how he usually hangs around there and shoots and snipes at
those who try to reason about current events concerning the US and
China, yet for my original post posted in SCC, RST, and other groups,
he chose to run over here to this group to post an unsupported claim.
leaving out a group who would be naturally interested, as demonstrated
by Force sin's and Wakalukong's follow up to mine.
Of course, bmoore's claim is not supported, as I've pointed out in my
OP as well as my follow-ups to other responses in this thread.
What did bmoore say? He said:
>> What China is doing is not "what everyone else is doing". It's not
>> surprising that you can't acknowledge that, despite your endless
>> barrage of verbiage.
In the BBC News report cited by my OP:
Philippines, Malaysia and Taiwan had reclaimed pockets of land or
built outposts in the area, ...
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32941829
So, Sec. Carter's statement directly contradicts bmoore's pretentious
verbiage. But for you, jdeluise, there are several other posters who
have already taken a position similar to mine: Wakalukong, Force Sin,
Shakes, and John Liang. Since I strive for the truth with my postings
and my intension to bring the truth to more people is sincere, there
is always a chance that there will be people who would agree with what
I say, despite the effort of the messenger shooters like bmoore.
lo yeeOn
In response to Kyle Mizokami's hawkish rhetoric, netter Wakalugong
wrote:
>This kind of hubris is dangerous for the US and the world.
>----
>
>This kind of hubris is dangerous for the US and the world. I don't
>think the PLA sees itself as operating from a position of weakness in
>the South China Sea. Those tiny islands are convenient for coastguard
>type patrols only. But for a real shooting war, China will operate from
>its unsinkable land bases on the mainland and Hainan island. The writer
>Kyle Mizokami (and Ashton Carter as well) could not see this, and so
>they are grossly miscalculating by thinking that China's navy will be
>the one doing the fighting for China. The reality is that the PLA air
>force and missile forces will, in times of war in the South China Sea,
>attack from mainland bases.
>
>And let's not forget, no matter in how many battles the American
>"empire" may defeat China, the South China Sea will remain next to
>China, which can continue to attack from the mainland. forever.
>
>Wakalukong
>
>-----
>>
>
>This kind of hubris is dangerous for the US and the world. I don't
>think the PLA sees itself as operating from a position of weakness in
>the South China Sea. Those tiny islands are convenient for coastguard
>type patrols only. But for a real shooting war, China will operate from
>its unsinkable land bases on the mainland and Hainan island. The writer
>Kyle Mizokami (and Ashton Carter as well) could not see this, and so
>they are grossly miscalculating by thinking that China's navy will be
>the one doing the fighting for China. The reality is that the PLA air
>force and missile forces will, in times of war in the South China Sea,
>attack from mainland bases.
>
>And let's not forget, no matter in how many battles the American
>"empire" may defeat China, the South China Sea will remain next to
>China, which can continue to attack from the mainland. forever.
>
>Wakalukong
>
>-----
>>
>> . . .
>>
>> This will make for some tense moments above, on, and below the South
>> China Sea, and could even conceivably start a war.
>>
>> But simply letting China do whatever it wants is not an option. The
>> risks are much smaller now, while China is weak, and infinitely better
>> than the alternative of confronting a stronger, more powerful China
>> down the road. The sooner China learns to play by the rules, the
>> better.
>
>>
>> This will make for some tense moments above, on, and below the South
>> China Sea, and could even conceivably start a war.
>>
>> But simply letting China do whatever it wants is not an option. The
>> risks are much smaller now, while China is weak, and infinitely better
>> than the alternative of confronting a stronger, more powerful China
>> down the road. The sooner China learns to play by the rules, the
>> better.
>
Well said. Remember Nazi Germany had lop-sided advantage over the
USSR when the former invaded the latter. But when it was a fight for
survival - as opposed to expanding your living space or Lebensraum -
then the side which is being attacked but which is too big for the
aggressor to quickly swallow, then it becomes a war of attrition.
At the end of the day, such a contest never favors the
outsider/aggressor, just look at the defeats of Napoleon's army and
Hitler's Wehrmacht at the hand of the militarily inferior Russian army
from two different eras. So, history provides us with an important
lesson.
Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter conceded that there is no military
USSR when the former invaded the latter. But when it was a fight for
survival - as opposed to expanding your living space or Lebensraum -
then the side which is being attacked but which is too big for the
aggressor to quickly swallow, then it becomes a war of attrition.
At the end of the day, such a contest never favors the
outsider/aggressor, just look at the defeats of Napoleon's army and
Hitler's Wehrmacht at the hand of the militarily inferior Russian army
from two different eras. So, history provides us with an important
lesson.
solution. He also conceded that China is doing what everybody else
has done. As a moral issue, his "pace and scale" argument doesn't
strengthen his stand. To the contrary, it weakens his case and makes
him sound disingenuous, hypocritical!
[Sec. Carter] acknowledged that other claimants such as Vietnam, the
him sound disingenuous, hypocritical!
Philippines, Malaysia and Taiwan had reclaimed pockets of land or
built outposts in the area, ...
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32941829
So, enough already, and the People's Daily made a conciliatory but
firm response to Carter's latest rhetoric thus:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32941829
So, enough already, and the People's Daily made a conciliatory but
firm response to Carter's latest rhetoric thus:
lo yeeOn
Jun 1, 2015, 4:18:04 AM6/1/15
to
bmoore's trademark sound bite against me. He used to use other means
to attack me, such as inciting physical violence against me because I
asked why should hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis die because
we wanted to punish Saddam! And before that, team work was used to
try to stifle me. But lately, say at least 6 months, he's been saying
"verbiage, verbiage", thinking that he would intimidate me this way.
But if I were truly paid to post, then of course saying "verbiage"
ain't gonna finish the job for him. You know, since I posted much on
Ukraine, on Tibet, on HK, and on China, I would have gotten rich from
all those who would pay me - if it were true that I got paid for my
post. And wouldn't it be hilarious if I get paid for your reply too?
But of course, even if you hate Putin, I don't get paid for taking the
side of Valentina Lisitsa or those of the pro-Russians. I personally
don't like Putin that much, myself. But that's another story and I
rarely say nice things about him either.
As usual, bmoore gave a falsehood, thinking that he could fool you
guys. But as cited in my OP, Sec. Carter has said what directly
contradicts his claim - but that did not surprise me at all.
Secretary Carter conceded that China was only doing what everyone else
[Sec. Carter] acknowledged that other claimants such as Vietnam, the
Philippines, Malaysia and Taiwan had reclaimed pockets of land or
In addition to conceding that China is doing what everybody else has
done, Carter also conceded that there is no military solution.
Modern China is only interested in the pursuit of peaceful
development. The Chinese history for the past 65 years speaks loud
and clear in support of that claim.
lo yeeOn
Subject: Sec. Carter acknowledged "everybody is doing it!" Re: How do you find fault in China doing what everyone is doing? How about "the pace and scale" with which she is doing it? So, let's "confront" China while "China is weak".
In article <caee4a45-3393-445b...@googlegroups.com>,
<bmo...@nyx.net> wrote:
>On Sunday, May 31, 2015 at 8:16:52 PM UTC-7, John Liang wrote:
>> On Monday, June 1, 2015 at 10:04:33 AM UTC+10, bmo...@nyx.net wrote:
>> > What China is doing is not "what everyone else is doing". It's not
>surprising that you can't acknowledge that, despite your endless barrage
>of verbiage.
>>
>surprising that you can't acknowledge that, despite your endless barrage
>of verbiage.
>>
>Actually What China is doing is what everyone else was doing. We are
>talking about building island and reclaiming land from the sea.
>Malaysia, Vietnam and Philipines all did well in advance of China about
>12-13 years earlier. Vietnam in particular have been drilling for oil
>in this region for a very long time. China was the only nation that
>started doing it this year. Talking about freedom of navigation that
>weren't be a problem for most of the nation that use this sea route for
>trade and commerce, but what US wants is freedom of navigation for its
>navy ship, spy jet, fighter jet in this region
>
>When most countries reclaim land, it's in waters that everyone agrees
>belongs to them. This is obviously not the case with what China has been
>doing in the South China Sea.
Errh, Secretary Carter conceded that China was only doing what everyone
else had already been doing. In the BBC News report cited by my OP:
>talking about building island and reclaiming land from the sea.
>Malaysia, Vietnam and Philipines all did well in advance of China about
>12-13 years earlier. Vietnam in particular have been drilling for oil
>in this region for a very long time. China was the only nation that
>started doing it this year. Talking about freedom of navigation that
>weren't be a problem for most of the nation that use this sea route for
>trade and commerce, but what US wants is freedom of navigation for its
>navy ship, spy jet, fighter jet in this region
>
>When most countries reclaim land, it's in waters that everyone agrees
>belongs to them. This is obviously not the case with what China has been
>doing in the South China Sea.
Errh, Secretary Carter conceded that China was only doing what everyone
[Sec. Carter] acknowledged that other claimants such as Vietnam, the
Philippines, Malaysia and Taiwan had reclaimed pockets of land or
In addition to conceding that China is doing what everybody else has
done, Carter also conceded that there is no military solution.
As a moral issue, his "pace and scale" argument doesn't strengthen his
stand. To the contrary, it weakens his case and makes him sound
disingenuous, hypocritical!
I also seriously doubt that China is among the "everyone" - as in
"everyone agrees belongs to them" in your preposterous claim:
>When most countries reclaim land, it's in waters that everyone
>agrees belongs to them. This is obviously not the case with what
>China has been doing in the South China Sea.
Had China conceded in those cases, then Sec. Carter would have made a
more direct, pointed accusation against China, instead of his "pace
and scale" line. To say that everyone is doing it, just that you are
doing it at a faster pace and grander scale is tantamount to beating
around the bush. What do you expect of today's China if she does not
awe the world by the scale and pace by which she does any building
project?
And has China ever conceded that Taiwan is another country?
No. For China, Taiwan is always a part of her, like her flesh and
blood. And there is just one such China and it is not on the Taiwan
island.
There is nothing "obvious" about your claim once we accept that
Sec. Carter did say that
"other claimants [in the South China Sea affair] such as Vietnam,
"everyone agrees belongs to them" in your preposterous claim:
>When most countries reclaim land, it's in waters that everyone
>agrees belongs to them. This is obviously not the case with what
>China has been doing in the South China Sea.
Had China conceded in those cases, then Sec. Carter would have made a
more direct, pointed accusation against China, instead of his "pace
and scale" line. To say that everyone is doing it, just that you are
doing it at a faster pace and grander scale is tantamount to beating
around the bush. What do you expect of today's China if she does not
awe the world by the scale and pace by which she does any building
project?
And has China ever conceded that Taiwan is another country?
No. For China, Taiwan is always a part of her, like her flesh and
blood. And there is just one such China and it is not on the Taiwan
island.
There is nothing "obvious" about your claim once we accept that
Sec. Carter did say that
the Philippines, Malaysia and Taiwan had reclaimed pockets of land
or built outposts in the area",
with his complaint being only in the "pace and scale" of doing such a
thing.
China has consistently and repeatedly claimed that she is for peaceful
development. And there is nothing to show that she isn't.
But, she has also made clear that she would never accept containment.
And that's because the Chinese people have not forgotten the
humiliation they received from the colonialists and imperialists in
the last two centuries. And modern China arose from the premise that
she will never let foreigners to humiliate her again.
If you think the Chinese people are too sensitive, so be it.
The Chinese people learn from their painful past. There is no way to
ask them to go back.
If it is territorial dispute between neighbors, it will always end in
a peaceful settlement - just ask Russia and India, the two largest
neighbors China has for neighbors.
But Asia Pivot is something else - and China will resist it.
John Liang is right - he has the same facts as Sec. Carter does.
lo yeeOn
with his complaint being only in the "pace and scale" of doing such a
thing.
China has consistently and repeatedly claimed that she is for peaceful
development. And there is nothing to show that she isn't.
But, she has also made clear that she would never accept containment.
And that's because the Chinese people have not forgotten the
humiliation they received from the colonialists and imperialists in
the last two centuries. And modern China arose from the premise that
she will never let foreigners to humiliate her again.
If you think the Chinese people are too sensitive, so be it.
The Chinese people learn from their painful past. There is no way to
ask them to go back.
If it is territorial dispute between neighbors, it will always end in
a peaceful settlement - just ask Russia and India, the two largest
neighbors China has for neighbors.
But Asia Pivot is something else - and China will resist it.
John Liang is right - he has the same facts as Sec. Carter does.
lo yeeOn
John Liang
Jun 1, 2015, 5:00:26 AM6/1/15
to
TT
Jun 1, 2015, 5:35:28 AM6/1/15
to
1.6.2015, 3:22, jdeluise kirjoitti:
> lo yeeon relies on the endless verbiage, probably drawn from a database
> for him.
Exactly. Pretty obvious.
> lo yeeon relies on the endless verbiage, probably drawn from a database
> for him.
You don't write pages of crap and when challenged about it replying with
one liner or most of the time not replying at all.
I've had him filtered for quite some time. On other hand it opens a
window to Chinese propaganda machinery. The problem is that what you see
from that window is rather dull.
But anyway it's interesting thought that there are troll factories in
Russia AND China... Everyone knows about the former.
I wonder if North Korea has them. Maybe not.
Pelle Svanslös
Jun 1, 2015, 6:10:15 AM6/1/15
to
bmo...@nyx.net
Jun 1, 2015, 12:31:24 PM6/1/15
to
bmo...@nyx.net
Jun 1, 2015, 12:33:30 PM6/1/15
to
bmo...@nyx.net
Jun 1, 2015, 12:35:15 PM6/1/15
to
On Monday, June 1, 2015 at 1:18:04 AM UTC-7, lo yeeOn wrote:
> In article <YqNax.9582$Jg1....@uutiset.elisa.fi>, TT <as...@dprk.kp> wrote:
> >1.6.2015, 3:04, bmo...@nyx.net kirjoitti:
> >> What China is doing is not "what everyone else is doing". It's not
> >surprising that you can't acknowledge that, despite your endless barrage
> >of verbiage.
> >
> >I doubt it's his verbiage. The interesting part here is that apparently
> >Russia is not the only country with troll factories - obviously this lee
> >yeeon character is paid to post this crap... and likely gets even paid
> >for each of our replies?
> >
> >People often accuse jokingly someone being a paid troll but this time
> >around it's no joke. I mean what the hell?
>
> Well, TT, thanks for saying that you doubt "it's his verbiage". It's
> bmoore's trademark sound bite against me. He used to use other means
> to attack me, such as inciting physical violence against me because I
> asked why should hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis die because
> we wanted to punish Saddam! And before that, team work was used to
> try to stifle me. But lately, say at least 6 months, he's been saying
> "verbiage, verbiage", thinking that he would intimidate me this way.
You're paranoid. BTW, TT called you a paid troll, and you manage to turn it into a compliment? Funny!
> In article <YqNax.9582$Jg1....@uutiset.elisa.fi>, TT <as...@dprk.kp> wrote:
> >1.6.2015, 3:04, bmo...@nyx.net kirjoitti:
> >> What China is doing is not "what everyone else is doing". It's not
> >surprising that you can't acknowledge that, despite your endless barrage
> >of verbiage.
> >
> >I doubt it's his verbiage. The interesting part here is that apparently
> >Russia is not the only country with troll factories - obviously this lee
> >yeeon character is paid to post this crap... and likely gets even paid
> >for each of our replies?
> >
> >People often accuse jokingly someone being a paid troll but this time
> >around it's no joke. I mean what the hell?
>
> Well, TT, thanks for saying that you doubt "it's his verbiage". It's
> bmoore's trademark sound bite against me. He used to use other means
> to attack me, such as inciting physical violence against me because I
> asked why should hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis die because
> we wanted to punish Saddam! And before that, team work was used to
> try to stifle me. But lately, say at least 6 months, he's been saying
> "verbiage, verbiage", thinking that he would intimidate me this way.
bmo...@nyx.net
Jun 1, 2015, 12:36:52 PM6/1/15
to
bmo...@nyx.net
Jun 1, 2015, 12:38:37 PM6/1/15
to
Fednatic
Jun 1, 2015, 2:37:14 PM6/1/15
to
John Liang
Jun 1, 2015, 4:20:38 PM6/1/15
to
bmo...@nyx.net
Jun 1, 2015, 4:58:23 PM6/1/15
to
> If closeness determine who own an island then Senkaku Islands belong to Taiwan and China not Japan. Guam is also cloer to Japan and China than US mainland so if China and Japan raise question on Guam and because of their closeness in distance it means Guam belong to one of those two countires.
John Liang
Jun 1, 2015, 5:13:51 PM6/1/15
to
>
> > If closeness determine who own an island then Senkaku Islands belong to Taiwan and China not Japan. Guam is also cloer to Japan and China than US mainland so if China and Japan raise question on Guam and because of their closeness in distance it means Guam belong to one of those two countires.
>
> What's happened in the past is the past. Wars have been fought, and things are as they are. But today we have a situation where China has claimed basically the entire South China Sea. Are you really saying that they have the right to build islands anywhere they want in the SCS? I don't think anyone wants another war, but China is risking it, and shamelessly blaming it on the US.
Who told you China is claiming the entire South China Sea ? US government ? They have as much right to build the island as Vietnam, Malaysia and Phillipines. Vietnam is building more island than any other countries in the region and you single out Chinna risking a war not Vietnam. It is known to most people US will support any attempt to weaken its potential challengers to its goal of global supremacy, it will use anything to protect and gain supremacy.
> > If closeness determine who own an island then Senkaku Islands belong to Taiwan and China not Japan. Guam is also cloer to Japan and China than US mainland so if China and Japan raise question on Guam and because of their closeness in distance it means Guam belong to one of those two countires.
>
> What's happened in the past is the past. Wars have been fought, and things are as they are. But today we have a situation where China has claimed basically the entire South China Sea. Are you really saying that they have the right to build islands anywhere they want in the SCS? I don't think anyone wants another war, but China is risking it, and shamelessly blaming it on the US.
bmo...@nyx.net
Jun 1, 2015, 5:26:11 PM6/1/15
to
> > > If closeness determine who own an island then Senkaku Islands belong to Taiwan and China not Japan. Guam is also cloer to Japan and China than US mainland so if China and Japan raise question on Guam and because of their closeness in distance it means Guam belong to one of those two countires.
> >
> > What's happened in the past is the past. Wars have been fought, and things are as they are. But today we have a situation where China has claimed basically the entire South China Sea. Are you really saying that they have the right to build islands anywhere they want in the SCS? I don't think anyone wants another war, but China is risking it, and shamelessly blaming it on the US.
>
> Who told you China is claiming the entire South China Sea ? US government ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine-dotted_line
>They have as much right to build the island as Vietnam, Malaysia and Phillipines. Vietnam is building more island than any other countries in the region and you single out Chinna risking a war not Vietnam.
>It is known to most people US will support any attempt to weaken its potential challengers to its goal of global supremacy, it will use anything to protect and gain supremacy.
John Liang
Jun 1, 2015, 7:40:52 PM6/1/15
to
bmo...@nyx.net
Jun 1, 2015, 7:49:41 PM6/1/15
to
And what about Vietnam? They've made quite a bit of noise about China so you can't leave them out. And you mean to tell me that no other countries in the region are concerned?
> I don't know when did US become part of ASEAN or as an Asian countries, so is Australia. Nine dotted line has been there for long time, long before Phillipines claim the island in just 3 or 4 years ago.
> You want to know why US is getting the bad rap, simple it destroyed countries and make up reasons for their invasions, it supported some of most horrific regions like Saudi Arabia and Egypt for the sake of resources while with those countries its own principal of democracy is totally chucked out, against some countries it did not like it us democracy as a stick, totally hypocrite. US supported Iraq in its war against Iran in 1970s and supplied it with chemical weapons then when Iraq used chemical weapon against Iran. US is always in a war for profiteering regardless how glorified its reason going into the war. This was also true for both WW1 and WW2, you just won't find another nation that continue to trade with enemy (germans) even to the last minutes of the war, of course it is well documented US supplied Japan nearly 80% of its raw material right up to the attack of Pearl Harbor.
0 new messages