U.S to test waters with China

InSpiritInTruth · Oct 26, 2015

Well I guess it is not enough for U.S. foreign policy and it's strong arm tactics by it's military policy of sowing all this discord in the middle east, and even now with Russia. Now the U.S. has decided to sow a little more discord by seeing if it can get a rise out of China by sending warships and aircraft to the South China sea.

US patrols in South China Sea: A tense new front in US-China rivalry - The Economic Times

A quote from the article...."The Obama administration has said it would test China's territorial claims to the area after months of pressure from Congress and the US military. It has not given a timeframe.

"I think we have been very clear - that we intend to do this," State Department spokesman Mark Toner told reporters last Monday.

Chinese Foreign Ministry officials said this month that Beijing would "never allow any country to violate China's territorial waters and airspace in the Spratly islands in the name of protecting navigation and overflight". [end quote]

Who made the U.S. the policeman over the disputes of the world? And what kind of reaction do you suppose the U.S. military will get by provoking war and sowing discord among the nations of the world?

This kind of thinking reminded me of a few verses in Proverbs 6:12-15[SUP] "[/SUP]A naughty person, a wicked man, walketh with a froward mouth.
[SUP]13 [/SUP]He winketh with his eyes, he speaketh with his feet, he teacheth with his fingers;
[SUP]14 [/SUP]Frowardness is in his heart, he deviseth mischief continually; he soweth discord.
[SUP]15 [/SUP]Therefore shall his calamity come suddenly; suddenly shall he be broken without remedy."

maxwel · Oct 26, 2015

Most of the South China Sea isn't anywhere near China, or China's International Waters, AND it contains vitally important international shipping lanes.

China primarily wants the South China Sea because oil reserves have been found below it, which all of the nearby nations have a legal, and reasonable, claim upon. (China however, does not.) China has falsely asserted a claim to the region by claiming a couple of tiny islands (close to the Philippines) which are not much more than sandbars, and then building some tiny buildings there which a few sailors are forced to live in... and thereby claiming that China owns the region by virtue of "occupation".

Essentially, China has grabbed a couple of sandbars in another country's territorial water, and then claimed they own the region.

If we don't do something to discourage China in the South China Sea, we have 100 million allies in the Philippines that are all going to end up speaking Chinese and answering to Xi Jinping.

InSpiritInTruth · Oct 26, 2015

maxwel said:

I also don't agree with China's strong arm tactics either on this issue but the U.S. is not one who is without sin in this regard as well. Just look at what the U.S. government did to the native American Indians and Mexicans because they had lands the U.S. coveted after for nothing more than greedy gain.

The trouble I see here in this situation with China is the way the U.S. is going about the issue by using a show of force to discourage the Chinese. One of these days this arrogant show of force by the U.S. military is going to met with force, and perhaps and all out war with China. And over what, a sand bar in the ocean? LOL

I'm sure a lot of American mothers and fathers would have a hard time sending their sons and daughters to die in a war over a few sand bars in the south China sea.

maxwel · Oct 26, 2015

The problem with the "sandbar" is 3 fold:

1. Under the South China Sea are some of the LARGEST OIL RESERVES IN THE WORLD.
These oil reserves should rightly belong to the neighboring countries of the region, like the Philippines, Malayasia, and Vietnam. But China wants these oil fields, and plans to just STEAL them.

2. The South China Sea contains INTERNATIONALLY VITAL SHIPPING LANES.
These shipping lanes are vital both for world commerce, and for military purposes.

3. Protecting the South China Sea also equates to protecting 100 MILLION Filipinos.
A. The Philippines is a long-time friend and ally, and was once even a U.S. colony.
B. The Philippines is a militarily strategic area in Southeast Asia, of vital importance in the region.
C. The Philippines is also the ONLY CHRISTIAN NATION IN EAST ASIA OR SOUTHEAST ASIA.
(Most countries in Southeast Asia are Muslim enclaves.)

There are many, many reasons to deter China from the South China Sea.

If you don't happen to like it, then that's fine.
But there are plenty of good reasons.

By the way... we have a lot of Filipinos on this site.
They are from a poor country, with many problems, and many needs.
Please tell all of our Filipinos brothers that YOU would like the Chinese to steal their oil fields, shut down their commercial shipping lanes, and then, due to proximity, also threaten their country militarily.

If you think our Filipino brothers should lose their oil fields, and shipping lanes, and never have a chance to develop economically, AND live in fear, day and night, of the Chinese military... then fine. YOU tell them that.

Every place in the world is not as safe and cozy as America.
Maybe you need to get out and travel a bit.

InSpiritInTruth · Oct 26, 2015

maxwel said:

Again I didn't say I agreed with what China is doing in the South China sea, but the US also has it's own monetary interests in this region as well.

I believe your #1 and #2 is also in the US' main interests, but not so much #3. The US is also out to obtain some of those oil resources by supporting those lessor countries with military support to control them and profit from them, but mean while also profiting off of those lessors countries through weapons sales as is already taking place around the globe. War is big business for the US, and stoking the fire of conflict around the globe increases sales and profits.

Not to mention the US also profits off of the 5 trillion dollars that travels through those waters every year. So I would say money is the main motivator for both China and US interests in the region, but not so much it's sympathy for the poor Filipinos. Which by the way is not a Christian nation, no more than the US is a so called "Christian nation."

crossnote · Oct 26, 2015

maxwel said:

The problem with the "sandbar" is 3 fold:

1. Under the South China Sea are some of the LARGEST OIL RESERVES IN THE WORLD.
These oil reserves should rightly belong to the neighboring countries of the region, like the Philippines, Malayasia, and Vietnam. But China wants these oil fields, and plans to just STEAL them.

2. The South China Sea contains INTERNATIONALLY VITAL SHIPPING LANES.
These shipping lanes are vital both for world commerce, and for military purposes.

3. Protecting the South China Sea also equates to protecting 100 MILLION Filipinos.
A. The Philippines is a long-time friend and ally, and was once even a U.S. colony.
B. The Philippines is a militarily strategic area in Southeast Asia, of vital importance in the region.
C. The Philippines is also the ONLY CHRISTIAN NATION IN EAST ASIA OR SOUTHEAST ASIA.
(Most countries in Southeast Asia are Muslim enclaves.)

There are many, many reasons to deter China from the South China Sea.

If you don't happen to like it, then that's fine.
But there are plenty of good reasons.

By the way... we have a lot of Filipinos on this site.
They are from a poor country, with many problems, and many needs.
Please tell all of our Filipinos brothers that YOU would like the Chinese to steal their oil fields, shut down their commercial shipping lanes, and then, due to proximity, also threaten their country militarily.

If you think our Filipino brothers should lose their oil fields, and shipping lanes, and never have a chance to develop economically, AND live in fear, day and night, of the Chinese military... then fine. YOU tell them that.

Every place in the world is not as safe and cozy as America.
Maybe you need to get out and travel a bit.

#4 Czechoslovakia

maxwel · Oct 26, 2015

InSpiritInTruth said:

The fact that the U.S. has it's own interests in the region does not automatically make it's actions evil.

That is absurd logic.

1. If a U.S. military move is helpful to the Philippines... it doesn't become LESS HELPFUL to the Philippines if it also benefits the U.S.

2. If a U.S. military move is helpful to the Philippines... it doesn't become LESS HELPFUL to the Philippines if the U.S. has ulterior motives.

The Republic Of The Philippines desperately needs our intervention... whether or not we're doing it out of pure motives is pretty irrelevant to the Filipinos, who are facing down the huge power of China.

You really haven't traveled much have you?
Never been too far from your remote control and your air conditioning?
Never been anywhere poor?
Never been anywhere dangerous?
Never seen little children living in a tin shack and burning coal in a bucket to stay warm, or trying to stay alive in a war zone, or dying of malnutrition?

These are real people, with real names, with real pains, and real sorrows... and they need help.
I don't care WHY my government helps them.
They still need help.

Sinnerman · Oct 26, 2015

InSpiritInTruth said:

Well I guess it is not enough for U.S. foreign policy and it's strong arm tactics by it's military policy of sowing all this discord in the middle east, and even now with Russia....
This kind of thinking reminded me of a few verses in Proverbs 6:12-15[SUP] "[/SUP]A naughty person, a wicked man, walketh with a froward mouth.

Desdichado · Oct 27, 2015

I've been saying it since 2004, America does not have a foreign policy.

If only America exercised the imperial responsibility it is showing in the South China Sea more often. The world would be a safer place.

InSpiritInTruth · Oct 27, 2015

Sinnerman said:

Your right, the US. government has been lying to it's citizens since before Vietnam. As long as you don't believe the lies and propaganda it's not hard to see how US foreign policy has caused more divisions and strife than peace.

Start reading, here's an old article from 91 showing the folly of US intervention since after WW2...

"Ancient History": U.S. Conduct in the Middle East Since World War Il and the Folly Of Intervention

Here's one on how the CIA helped create the Taliban....

"CIA worked with Pakistan to create Taliban"

Here's one that shows the failed policy in Iraq by US which divided the Sunni and Shia factions causing the formation of ISIS, before Bush invaded there was no terrorists presence there.

Iraq exposes failed U.S. policy: Our view

Even former Prime minister Tony Blair now agrees the US invasion of Iraq and their policy of causing division (sowing discord) between Sunni and Shia started the whole mess we see today.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/26/w...s-iraq-war-helped-give-rise-to-isis.html?_r=0

So it's not hard to see how US strong arm tactics and causing divisions just seem to bring more death and destruction, not peace as they suggest.

InSpiritInTruth · Oct 27, 2015

China now threatens to build up arms in the region because of US actions....

Angry China says shadowed US warship near man-made islands in disputed sea

Quote from article..."Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang later told a daily briefing that if the United States continued to "create tensions in the region," China might conclude it had to "increase and strengthen the building up of our relevant abilities".
Lu did not elaborate, except to say he hoped it did not come to that, but his comments suggested China could further boost its military presence in the South China Sea."

So they know there is a risk of escalation, another quote from article....

"RISK OF ESCALATION....The decision to go ahead with the patrol follows months of deliberation and it risk upsetting already strained ties with China.
"By using a guided-missile destroyer, rather than smaller vessels ... they are sending a strong message," said Ian Storey, a South China Sea expert at Singapore's Institute of South East Asian Studies."

Inflaming an already hot issue is not a good way of keeping the peace in the area in my opinion.

InSpiritInTruth · Oct 27, 2015

maxwel said:

I don't believe starting a war with China is going to help feed them and cloth them. How bout the US military take some of that 700 billion dollar annual military spending and make clothes and bake biscuits for them? I think that money would be better spent making biscuits to feed the poor than making more bombs to blow them up.

Desdichado · Oct 27, 2015

InSpiritInTruth said:

The US already does a good deal of that as well. It's no substitute for perceived strength, however. Both accomplish different ends.

PeterJens · Oct 27, 2015

China is looking for a fight, and with all people using force, unless you stand up to them, they take what they can get.

Only a fool would not recognise China is a dictatorship with capitalist trappings. How much instability do you need to cause an extreme reaction?

Christians are persecuted, there is no freedom of speech and constantly China is pushing electronic warfare and spying over the internet. If a corrupt system prospers, pushes its way around, does not make it innocent or friendly.

The only way to respond to violence is containment and protection. Too many wars have started because the response was too weak and it was taken as a response of we do not care.

When dealing with other countries, like for like responses helps to bring reasonable to the tables and not give everything to the aggressors.

maxwel · Oct 27, 2015

InSpiritInTruth said:

1. If you had ever traveled further into the world than your own living room, you would understand that the Filipinos don't want us to send them handouts. They just want to have a little self reliance, and self respect, like anyone else. They want freedom from China to access their own oil fields, and shipping lanes, and run their own economy.

2. The AMOUNT of money the U.S spends, or does not spend, on the military, still has nothing to do with this topic of getting involved in the South China Sea. Throwing those numbers out, and complaining about military spending is a lovely thought, but it's irrelevant to this topic, and is nothing but a distraction technique.

3. The fact that China is blustering, has nothing to do with "starting a war". Dictatorial nations bluster and bloviate endlessly. A lot of "talk" never equates to "war". Most generally, historically and currently, most dictators "talk" about war just to bolster nationalism in their own populace, and stay in power.

If you simply don't like the U.S. being in the South China Sea, that's fine; that's valid as an opinion.
It is perfectly fine for you to have that opinion.

But if you want to turn this into a DEBATE:
A. You've already made logical contradictions in your own arguments numerous times.
B. You've made numerous editorial assertions with no facts.
C. You've made numerous rhetorical "deflections" that have nothing to do with the topic.
C. You have yet to say a single thing that holds water under scrutiny.

Maybe it's time to move on to a new topic.

InSpiritInTruth · Oct 27, 2015

maxwel said:

Hey your the one who said this move by the US is about protecting the sovereignty and oil fields of the poor Filipinos, which is contrary to what the US officials have said concerning this latest move testing China. (which by the way is what the OP is about)

China Warns U.S. Navy After Ship Sails by Chinese-Built Island - US News

Here is a quote from the article....

"The U.S. says it doesn't take a position on sovereignty over the South China Sea, but insists on freedom of navigation and overflight. About 30 percent of global trade passes through the South China Sea, which is also home to rich fishing grounds and a potential wealth of undersea mineral deposits." [end quote]

There ya go, according to the US the move is not about sovereignty, or oil rights, or the poor Filipinos, it's about freedom of navigation and overflight.

So maybe it's time for you to move on to a new topic since you don't know what it is your talking about.

Sirk · Oct 27, 2015

InSpiritInTruth said:

Hey your the one who said this move by the US is about protecting the sovereignty and oil fields of the poor Filipinos, which is contrary to what the US officials have said concerning this latest move testing China. (which by the way is what the OP is about)

China Warns U.S. Navy After Ship Sails by Chinese-Built Island - US News

Here is a quote from the article....

"The U.S. says it doesn't take a position on sovereignty over the South China Sea, but insists on freedom of navigation and overflight. About 30 percent of global trade passes through the South China Sea, which is also home to rich fishing grounds and a potential wealth of undersea mineral deposits." [end quote]

There ya go, according to the US the move is not about sovereignty, or oil rights, or the poor Filipinos, it's about freedom of navigation and overflight.

So maybe it's time for you to move on to a new topic since you don't know what it is your talking about.

and what are freedom of overflight, navigation and sovereignty precursors too? Do the minerals and oil and fish get themselves to market? Lol

tourist · Oct 27, 2015

InSpiritInTruth said:

Hey your the one who said this move by the US is about protecting the sovereignty and oil fields of the poor Filipinos, which is contrary to what the US officials have said concerning this latest move testing China. (which by the way is what the OP is about)

China Warns U.S. Navy After Ship Sails by Chinese-Built Island - US News

Here is a quote from the article....

"The U.S. says it doesn't take a position on sovereignty over the South China Sea, but insists on freedom of navigation and overflight. About 30 percent of global trade passes through the South China Sea, which is also home to rich fishing grounds and a potential wealth of undersea mineral deposits." [end quote]

There ya go, according to the US the move is not about sovereignty, or oil rights, or the poor Filipinos, it's about freedom of navigation and overflight.

So maybe it's time for you to move on to a new topic since you don't know what it is your talking about.

What the US says publically is often at odds with what is really being contemplated and weighed. Besides sovereignty, navigation and overflight issues it is primarily about oil.

InSpiritInTruth · Oct 27, 2015

Sirk said:

Whose the ones making "editorial assertions with no facts".

Sirk · Oct 27, 2015

InSpiritInTruth said:

I guess I didn't realize it was a stretch to assume that oil and fish get to market on ships. My bad.

U.S to test waters with China

Banned

Senior Member

Banned

Senior Member

Banned

Senior Member

Senior Member

Banned

Senior Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Senior Member

Banned

Senior Member

Banned

Sirk

Guest

Senior Member

Banned

Sirk

Guest