China South-China-Sea

[xizhimen]

Very wealthy thanks for bowing down and become US's slave since 1979

If China were an US slave why US is so against China and props Vietam to counter China?

Nearly 90% in U.S. see China as 'competitor' or 'enemy,' survey finds

The Pew Research survey also found that many in the U.S. back Washington taking a tougher approach to bilateral ties with Beijing.

www.japantimes.co.jp

 

[Ravenman]

China is becoming the new US.

Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philipines, Cambodja, Thailand, Bangladesh, India, Australia, Taiwan, Singapore, Laos, New Sealand, East Timor, Japan, Papua New Guinea and South Korea should unite economicly, diplomaticly and militairily against the Yellow Danger.

China has only 3 slaves in Asia: Myanmar, North Korea and Brunei.

 

[xizhimen]

China is becoming the new US.

Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philipines, Cambodja, Thailand, Bangladesh, India, Australia, Taiwan, Singapore, Laos, New Sealand, East Timor, Japan, Papua New Guinea and South Korea should unite economicly, diplomaticly and militairily against the Yellow Danger.

China has only 3 slaves in Asia: Myanmar, North Korea and Brunei.

Many from your list are China's good friends, connected and united with China with Road and Belt initiative, almost all have China as their biggest trading partner.

 

[Jagdflieger]

CN is the agressor, but your army is coward and usless without help from daddy US-JP like in 1979. The only tactic CN generals know is just human wave attack, thats why CN can;t take bigger parts in SCS where 70% of CN's merchant ships must pass throught


CN POW quickly surrender in 1979 even when they didn't fire a single shoot

View attachment 45170

View attachment 45169

Factually Vietnam was the aggressor - both in regards to attacking an ally of China (Cambodia) and racial harassment right down to killing of Vietnamese citizens being of Chinese ethnic. Also it was China that moved into Vietnamese territory - not the other way around.
Losses are estimated to be the same on both sides. Vietnam and China never declared a victory.

However it proofed to be a huge victory for China - since they had manged to curb the Soviet influence in S.E.A. and had made it clear to them that China will not be again threatened by them.

 

[Ravenman]

Many from your list are China's good friends, connected and united with China with Road and Belt initiative, almost all have China as their biggest trading partner.

They have also huge debts to China because of the Belt & Road Initiative.

China promised a win-win situation but its becoming clearly a only-China-win situation, like Sri Lanka and Brunei.

Matter of time when these Asian countries see the reality of Chinese debt-policies and take up arms.

There is no room for another imperialist power - the US damaged the world enough.

 

[xizhimen]

They have also huge debts to China because of the Belt & Road Initiative.

China promised a win-win situation but its becoming clearly a only-China-win situation, like Sri Lanka and Brunei.

Matter of time when these Asian countries see the reality of Chinese debt-policies and take up arms.

There is no room for another imperialist power - the US damaged the world enough.

"debt trap" was a new invention created by the west, only after China became an alternative for developing countries to get money from.

The west lost their monoply on loans and they started to trash talk China ever since.

China Debt Trap Claims in Africa Stem From US Rivalry: Study

Claims that China practises "debt-trap diplomacy" in Africa distort the reality of business and debt deals on the continent, a new study says

www.asiafinancial.com

China surpasses all other global lenders

Chinese state loans and trade credit to 150 nations crossed $1.5 trillion – surpassing state debts by the World Bank, the IMF, or all the total of OECD creditor governments

tbsnews.net

 

[Jagdflieger]

Guy's please cool it down !!

@Viva_vietnamm - I have deleted some of your posts which IMO do not contribute towards a "founded discussion" but just unnesessarily inciting a topic.
@Ravenmann - I consider a term such as "yellow danger" to be a racial derogatory term - please refrain from such usage - also the term "slaves" - thanks

 

[Viva_vietnamm]

Guy's please cool it down !!

@Viva_vietnamm - I have deleted some of your posts which IMO do not contribute towards a "founded discussion" but just unnesessarily inciting a topic.
@Ravenmann - I consdier a term such as "yellow danger" to be a racial degratory term - please refrain from such usage - thanks

Agree, I and @sizhimen has known each other about 5 years since we were in PDF and most of our post are for trolling since @Sizhimen can't stop posting nonsene like "China is not the agressor in SCS (east VN sea)" while Qing map already confirm that the end of CN's border is Hainan island. No 9 dash line that time while VN's map already included those Paracell and Spratly islands since 1838.

QIng map, no 9 dash line

VN's map with those Paracell and Spratly islands.

 

[Jagdflieger]

Are you Chinese or German ??

As my flag shows, I am a German national.

Qing map showed no 9 dash line when all Mongol's land was included.


View attachment 45171

Actually for someone being so eager (nothing wrong) to post on this topic - you should know that the 9-dash aka 11-dash line was instituted in the late 1920's by the KMT (ROC) government. So naturally it won't show up in a Ming or Qing map.

However there are hundreds of documents/maps from the Ming dynasty onward (also from before) that clearly show numerous islands in the South-China-Sea to be discovered, settled, and claimed by the respective Chinese Dynasties.
Of all the today's claimant states - only China, Brunei and Japan existed as sovereign nations during the Ming or Qing dynasty. e.g. Vietnam was still made of separate kingdoms and Dai-Viet were in Vassal status to Ming China. There was no unified Vietnam or a nation termed Vietnam before Ming or Qing China to lay any claims towards the South China Sea that would or have been recognized by any Chinese government or respective Dynasty.

It was Mao who voluntarily reduced the KMT 11-dash line to a 9-dash line - via acquitting the Golf of Tonking to his communist ally Vietnam.

Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines were split into dozens of independent kingdoms and fiefs - they never constituted a unified nation before gaining independence from their colonial masters - who simply drew up borders to their own liking. And as such ignoring previous Chinese claims. Simply we have the power and the ships - so China, we don't care about your protests. (sounds familiar?).

Due to overwhelming odds in favor of a Qing fleet - the Dutch decided to retreat from the Parcel islands upon being informed by the Chinese side that these Islands belong to China.
So the Dutch found it wise to retreat to their port of Tainan and never came back. It is the only such encounter that I am aware of.

As such there is abundant historical evidence that large parts of the South-China-Sea and it's island's had been claimed by China - before the first European land grabbers showed up.

However the PRC agreed to the UNCLUS statutory (being a signatory) - which does not behold a 9-dash line.

Therefore my personal opinion is that the claimant parties would be better off to find a diplomatic solution.

 

[Gary]

This thread has derailed so much, I'm goin give it some refresh especially in regards to post #23.

China is a preferable trade partner, not friends. There's no "friends" in geopolitics, it's just interest. While the benefit of doing business with China is tremendous, no country ever would be stupid enough to erase the Beijing threat in its calculus. With maybe the exception of Cambodia, Myanmar or North Korea.

I say the rest of East and Southeast Asia had done a very well balanced coreography of balance between trade links with Beijing and the overall security concern of the Indo-Pacific. But my concern is there wont be long enough time and eventually ASEAN will have to choose which side it must go.

The US has tried to counter Beijing economic influence in ASEAN by launching its own initiative, but overall China still takes the lead. The US administration has also demonstrate again and again the utter lack of understanding on courting ASEAN and especially Indonesia's particular importance . If the US amend this mistake, the US should not have to worry about China overtaking its influence in the Asia Pacific at all.

If China had not yet get the message, a little hint on (still) how important the US for most of the Asia-Pacific countries is RIMPAC, name me one Chinese sponsored event that could attract participation like that of RIMPAC.

This year RIMPAC will be one of the clearest signs on where Asia Pacific saw where its security hangs into, with record participants from across the Pacific converging into Hawaii.

But yes, diplomatic solutions is always preferred.

World's largest joint naval exercise a message to China - Asia Times

MANILA – Just weeks after US President Joe Biden’s maiden visit to Asia, China is testing the resolve of newly elected leaders among US allies in

asiatimes.com

 

[Jagdflieger]

...With maybe the exception of Cambodia, Myanmar or North Korea....

Because they are friends? ... sorry just couldn't resist

.... and eventually ASEAN will have to choose which side it must go.....

Fully agree

.... If the US amend this mistake, the US should not have to worry about China overtaking its influence in the Asia Pacific at all.

The obvious issue is that the USA only want's to control - respectively the governments and as such their trade dependence. I do not see the USA actively helping S.E.A. countries aside from $ droppings of water onto a hot stone. And inspiring them to buy US weapons with the little money these countries have anyway. Or the US government and companies inspiring them towards IMO ridiculous prestige projects - like Lombok's 2nd International airport.

The huge rise in many S.E.A. GDP statistics of the last 10 years is simply due to China opening up trade relations and Chinese companies investing into those countries and infrastructure projects - independent of additionally granting Chinese state loans.
The more the living style rises the more happy and peaceful a population becomes and as such forming the basis for a stable country. Is the USA involved in barter trade? more or less not because it doesn't fit into capitalism.
China? like hell - we don't just want your bananas and squeeze a country and it's competitors to the last cent. China places a fair price for e.g. agrarian products and delivers e.g. a 1000 buses to a certain African country. And this is what has given China a huge leverage towards the USA or the EU's commercial practices.

I am actually not surprised about China's very good reputation in Africa, and how many Africans can speak Chinese and the term friends is a commonly found and used term. As for S.E.A. almost every country has it's own growing developing car.vehicle market - and fact is that in e.g. Indonesia the local vehicle manufacturers are using their own political lobby to block such barter-trade proposals. Good for them maybe - but doesn't solve the padi farmers issue on e.g. Lombok how to get to the next town.
Historically there are clear reasons as to why many S.E.A. locals don't like or fancy Chinese. Unfortunately however they are not really honest with themselves as to why the Chinese communities in e.g. Indonesia or e.g. Philippines became rich and they the locals did not. Instead of recognizing the actual causes they prefer to see Chinese aka China as an evil opportunist and transfer this image onto today's China.

The USA off course is aware about these sentiments and exploits and incites them - think about it. !!

Somehow S.E.A. countries are "blind" or reluctant towards recognizing as to what they could actually achieve together with China.

If China had not yet get the message, a little hint on (still) how important the US for most of the Asia-Pacific countries is RIMPAC, name me one Chinese sponsored event that could attract participation like that of RIMPAC.

I am not a naval guy - don't really know much regarding this topic. Respectively the "actual military benefit gained" from participating in that maneuver.
But i could envisage a Chinese version of RIMPAC in the next 10 years to come and being joint by other S.E.A. and pacific countries.
Maybe starting off with Myanmar, Cambodia, Russia, North-Korea Sri-Lanka, Solomon, Tonga etc.

 

[Gary]

Because they are friends? ... sorry just couldn't resist

How do I say it ummm.... because they're accommodating.

Fully agree

The obvious issue is that the USA only want's to control - respectively the governments and as such their trade dependence. I do not see the USA actively helping S.E.A. countries aside from $ droppings of water onto a hot stone. And inspiring them to buy US weapons with the little money these countries have anyway.

Countries are free to chose whichever arms supplier they want. Indonesia once try alternatives from Russia (Sukhoi) and it doesn't satisfy the end user as it's plagued with low availability and readiness rate. Not to mention it's electronics are behind those from the west.

The huge rise in many S.E.A. GDP statistics of the last 10 years is simply due to China opening up trade relations and Chinese companies investing into those countries and infrastructure projects - independent of additionally granting Chinese state loans.

I agree on some, while others not so much

The more the living style rises the more happy and peaceful a population becomes and as such forming the basis for a stable country. Is the USA involved in barter trade? more or less not because it doesn't fit into capitalism.
China? like hell - we don't just want your bananas and squeeze a country and it's competitors to the last cent. China places a fair price for e.g. agrarian products and delivers e.g. a 1000 buses to a certain African country. And this is what has given China a huge leverage towards the USA or the EU's commercial practices.

Yup

I am actually not surprised about China's very good reputation in Africa, and how many Africans can speak Chinese and the term friends is a commonly found and used term. As for S.E.A. almost every country has it's own growing developing car.vehicle market - and fact is that in e.g. Indonesia the local vehicle manufacturers are using their own political lobby to block such barter-trade proposals. Good for them maybe - but doesn't solve the padi farmers issue on e.g. Lombok how to get to the next town.
Historically there are clear reasons as to why many S.E.A. locals don't like or fancy Chinese. Unfortunately however they are not really honest with themselves as to why the Chinese communities in e.g. Indonesia or e.g. Philippines became rich and they the locals did not. Instead of recognizing the actual causes they prefer to see Chinese aka China as an evil opportunist and transfer this image onto today's China.

Not me. Hehe

I am not a naval guy - don't really know much regarding this topic. Respectively the "actual military benefit gained" from participating in that maneuver.

How about this. Unlike the West, China has not contribute anything of significance on modern warfare for the last 300+ years.
So how could countries benefit from joint maneuver with China?

But i could envisage a Chinese version of RIMPAC in the next 10 years to come and being joint by other S.E.A. and pacific countries.
Maybe starting off with Myanmar, Cambodia, Russia, North-Korea Sri-Lanka, Solomon, Tonga etc.

Maybe, but most likely naval parades and simple PASSEX and I don't see " Chinese RIMPAC " would be popular. As I've said before China has not contributed anything on the science, arts and craft of modern warfare. What are we going to learn from them while they themselves modelled their navy after the USN ?

 

[xizhimen]

How about this. Unlike the West, China has not contribute anything of significance on modern warfare for the last 300+ years.
So how could countries benefit from joint maneuver with China?

Europe didn't contribute much to the human civilization 1000 years ago, but nations rise and fall, each one may have their day, what didn't happen in the past doesn't mean they won't happen in the future, 300 years from now, the world could be a total different picture from what it looks today.

 

[Jagdflieger]

How about this. Unlike the West, China has not contribute anything of significance on modern warfare for the last 300+ years.
So how could countries benefit from joint maneuver with China?

Maybe, but most likely naval parades and simple PASSEX and I don't see " Chinese RIMPAC " would be popular. As I've said before China has not contributed anything on the science, arts and craft of modern warfare. What are we going to learn from them while they themselves modelled their navy after the USN ?

True presently in majority China has not developed significant military hardware, but since about 4-5 years this also is changing significantly.
e.g. submarines, surface vessels - stealth - drones -etc.
The more customers you have the more attractive a Chinese RIMPAC gets. (let's not forget that most western weapon systems are copies of each other)

To my limited naval knowledge - RIMPAC isn't so much about tactical combat enhancement but interaction of crews and systems/regulations from nearly identical vessels and their assets.

E.g. an Indonesian destroyer practicing being refueled by e.g. a Singaporean support vessel. Australian pilot's landing on a US aircraft carrier, Japanese helicopter pilots getting to know the space limitations or landing routine on a Malaysian vessel. A US build E2C Hawkeye from the USN or Singapore transmitting information to an Indonesian F-16 ...ups sorry I think they don't have a link-16 capability, okay a Malaysian F-18..ups also no link-16 ...well at least some countries found out thanks to RIMPAC that they can't receive data from a friendly E2C. and so on...

Now maybe China will supply (gift or sell) a Liaoning carrier to Pakistan or hey maybe to Indonesia plus some KJ-500 AWACS or an Antonov AWACS version, plus some J-15 with arrestee-hooks, and both countries will be very eager to join a joint naval exercise led by China.
Maybe due to China's fleet being so huge and supposedly effective - Beijing doesn't see a need for a RIMPAC (allies) or they might be simply too arrogant - who knows?
The USA has been playing this game now since almost 80 years, China is just starting. The future will tell

 

[Gary]

True presently in majority China has not developed significant military hardware, but since about 4-5 years this also is changing significantly.
e.g. submarines, surface vessels - stealth - drones -etc.
The more customers you have the more attractive a Chinese RIMPAC gets. (let's not forget that most western weapon systems are copies of each other)

I'm not talking about hardware. China has not contributed anything on the arts and sciences on how those hardware are used. The gunpowder might have come from China, but the knowledge of effective uses of firearms didn't come from China, see the difference?

China can build all fancy weapons they like, but eventually hardware is just tools. The human factor determines the course of the war.

To my limited naval knowledge - RIMPAC isn't so much about tactical combat enhancement but interaction of crews and systems/regulations from nearly identical vessels and their assets.

RIMPAC is the navy equivalent of the Air force's flag exercise, for most navies around the world (non NATO ) this is the closet they get to observe how a real Western navy operate.

Surely complex as it involves SINKEX, MINEX, amphibious assaults and all type of complex naval warfare exercise

China simply doesn't have the expertise and experience of the US to "show" us how modern navies operate.

Indonesia would have more transfer of knowledge in naval exercise with Australia than that of China.

E.g. an Indonesian destroyer practicing being refueled by e.g. a Singaporean support vessel. Australian pilot's landing on a US aircraft carrier, Japanese helicopter pilots getting to know the space limitations or landing routine on a Malaysian vessel. A US build E2C Hawkeye from the USN or Singapore transmitting information to an Indonesian F-16 ...ups sorry I think they don't have a link-16 capability, okay a Malaysian F-18..ups also no link-16 ...well at least some countries found out thanks to RIMPAC that they can't receive data from a friendly E2C. and so on...

This is what RIMPAC in its '86 format looks like.....

And just over a month ago, a much lengthier case of a ″missing″ carrier occurred during an exercise named RIMPAC 86. The USS Ranger, although the target of an intense search that included satellite reconnaissance, escaped detection for two weeks while sailing across the Pacific.


The performance was considered all the more remarkable by an Australian admiral who monitored the exercise because the carrier’s planes were flying sorties throughout the period, staging mock attacks against surface ships, submarines and land targets.

How to Make an Aircraft Carrier Vanish

WASHINGTON (AP) _ U.S. Navy aircraft carriers, despite their incredible size, are becoming adept at a form of magic. Utilizing weather, speed, advanced logistical planning and high-tech tomfoolery, several carriers in recent months have managed to vanish from antagonist's eyes into the...

apnews.com

The USS Ranger steam catapult non nuclear carrier WILL beat whatever type 0XX carrier China throws at it.

Now maybe China will supply (gift or sell) a Liaoning carrier to Pakistan or hey maybe to Indonesia plus some KJ-500 AWACS or an Antonov AWACS version, plus some J-15 with arrestee-hooks, and both countries will be very eager to join a joint naval exercise led by China.

I'll leave that in another thread

Maybe due to China's fleet being so huge and supposedly effective - Beijing doesn't see a need for a RIMPAC (allies) or they might be simply too arrogant - who knows?
The USA has been playing this game now since almost 80 years, China is just starting. The future will tell

Being big is what the Qing China's Beiyang fleet goes to war with Japan with. Look what happened next.

Battle of the Yalu River (1894) - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Battle of Weihaiwei - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

China has only started reforms since the 2000s and intensified those starting in the early 2010s. While it's impressive looking at the PLAN (hardware) transformation, they're still a toddler when compared to the USN and its allies collective knowledge and experience in military domain and even more so in the naval and air force domain.

And every military knows that, hence not many much wanted to do joint maneuver with China. Except maybe Pakistan where it's actually the Pakistani who taught the Chinese on how modern Western style air force operate lol.

Even I personally think India has more experience operating aircraft carrier.

 

[xizhimen]

Being big is what the Qing China's Beiyang fleet goes to war with Japan with. Look what happened next.

Battle of the Yalu River (1894) - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Battle of Weihaiwei - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

I guess you conveniently missed out the main fact here, Qing didn't have any industrial base and all it's ships were bought from the west, Qing can not even make a screw, fast forward to the present time, China is the world biggest industrial and manufacturing nation, produces 60% of the world total steel, as the world biggest shipbuilder, Chinese navy ships now are all being built by herself, Chinese shipbuilding capability can easily allow China to outbuild anyone in a very short time frame, it's reported that now, on average, China finishes one big naval battle ship every single month.

 

[Gary]

I guess you conveniently missed out the main fact here, Qing didn't have any industrial base and all it's ships were bought from the west, Qing can not even make a screw, fast forward to the present time, China is the world biggest industrial and manufacturing nation, produces 60% of the world total steel, as the world biggest shipbuilder, Chinese navy ships now are all being built by herself, Chinese shipbuilding capability can easily allow China to outbuild anyone in a very short time frame, it's reported that now, on average, China finishes one big naval battle ship every single month.

And it seems you (deliberately) missed out the whole point of my post, imported or domestically built, those ships are not going to operate themselves. They'll need sets of crews.

It doesn't matter if China could build all components of the ship by itself. Fact is just like the Beiyang fleet crews of Qing are nowhere near the IJN in competence, the PLAN crews of CCP is nowhere near its potential adversary the USN.

 

[xizhimen]

And it seems you (deliberately) missed out the whole point of my post, imported or domestically built, those ships are not going to operate themselves. They'll need sets of crews.

It doesn't matter if China could build all components of the ship by itself. Fact is just like the Beiyang fleet crews of Qing are nowhere near the IJN in competence, the PLAN crews of CCP is nowhere near its potential adversary the USN.

China trains some of the world best science students, engineers, athletes, skilled workforce, what makes you believe that China can not train good combat personnels? at least in the World Military Game medal rankings, China tops the list by a large margin. A highly disciplined and hard working population is easy to train for any purposes.

 

[xizhimen]

Fact is just like the Beiyang fleet crews of Qing are nowhere near the IJN in competence,

This is true, but it bears no similarity to today's China, it was over a hundred years ago when China was sick man in Asia.

 

[Gary]

China trains some of the world best science students, engineers, athletes, skilled workforce, what makes you believe that China can not train good combat personnels? at least in the World Military Game medal rankings, China tops the list by a large margin. A highly disciplined and hard working population is easy to train for any purposes.

Because this :

Institutional memory - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Your PLA simply doesn't have enough of it.

This is true, but it bears no similarity to today's China, it was over a hundred years ago when China was sick man in Asia.

Sick or not, PLA STILL lacks these.

Institutional memory - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org