The guided-missile destroyer the USS Mustin has entered the South China Sea and is sailing near the Paracel Islands. The islands are claimed by China, though the US does not recognize that claim. China objected that they didn’t authorize the US to sail there.
National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien called China’s claims in the South China Sea ‘ridiculous,’ saying they’ve been rejected by all the major countries. Most countries in the region have conflicting claims in the South China Sea, and to the extent they overlap with Chinese claims, the US backs everyone else’s claims.
In rejecting their claims, the US has repeatedly carried out “freedom of navigation” exercises near Chinese claims just to prove that they can’t enforce those claims. China is objecting to those incursions, and earlier this week fired anti-ship missiles into contested waters to prove they could challenge those ships if they have to.
The Pentagon warns the missile fire is a threat to peace. Chinese officials responded that the US was interfering in Chinese internal affairs and is simply upholding its rights.
“amerikans have been liars and braggarts for 3 centuries”. Daniel Boorstin
“Obama’s job is to lie to a nation of liars”. Kiese Laymon
Every day China is getting stronger and the USA is getting weaker.
Does Trump or anyone else think that China will back down?
The big difference is that China’s planning, even economic, is 15 years whilst US strategic long term planning is “What are we going to do after lunch?’
The future belongs to China and Russia and intelligent people would be making plans to accommodate this not stamping their little feet and throwing tantrums.
One day ‘Mommy’ will have to spank.
China plans for the whole; the US spends for individual interests.
China does have corruption and is vastly more racist than is the US. So, it’s odd to see those with certain values cheer it.
However, an ascendant China doesnt affect me; so, a war would be the only way to “lose” on the matter.
I do not believe that China is any more corrupt than US or UK, merely a different flavour.
Do you think that there is something wrong with preferring one race (culture) over another?
The term has lost all meaning.
China is Nationalistic, more so even than the US.
Do you think that there is something wrong with being nationalistic?
They are way ahead and increasing the lead in every field. I may not wish to live within the social values of China, but as a society it is vastly more comfortable than either US or UK.
China is fighting corruption, and when caught one would be lucky to escape with his life.
Precisely, there is nepotism as elsewhere but the petty corruption when found is punished. In UK and US they merely give them another government contract.
Ive heard one can even buy his way out of a murder charge in China. So, it is just different. Also, there’s less product safety.
But nothing like antifa in Oregon would be permitted in China, and China doesnt believe in Zionism (no dehumanization of Arabs).
You mean like Ted Kennedy.
I dislike China’s expansion into Tibet and in the northeast, unique history in northeast. I’d prefer to preserve those ethnicities as well. I dont mind Chinese nationalism, but anything can get out of balance.
China might be less aggressive if the US werent so dominating.
Not exactly unique.
“Fear of hostile Mongol domination of Tibet compelled the emperor to send troops against the Oirat [Mongols]. After an initial reverse, his armies drove them out in 1720 and were welcomed at Lhasa as deliverers, all the more because they brought with them the new Dalai Lama, Bskal-bzang-rgya-mtsho. For the next 200 years there was no fighting between Tibetans and Chinese. However, after evicting the Oirat, the emperor decided to safeguard Manchu interests by appointing representatives—generally known as ambans—at Lhasa, with a small garrison in support. The Tibetans, interpreting this as another patron-priest relationship, accepted the situation, which generally left them to manage their own affairs. It was only in recurring crises that Manchu participation became, briefly, energetic. Imperial troops quelled a civil war in Tibet in 1728, restored order after the political leader was assassinated in 1750, and drove out the Gurkhas, who had invaded from Nepal in 1792. As Manchu energy declined, the Tibetans became increasingly independent, though still recognizing the formal suzerainty of the emperor, behind which it sometimes suited them to shelter. ”
China feels that Tibet [like Taiwan] has historically been an [somewhat] independent province of China and sees no reason to change that view.
That sounds naive, would be wonderful if true, if that were how China viewed Tibet today.
They seem to be pushing to war with China and I suspect this based on the collapsing America economy that is mainly driven by the military industrial complex that former U.S. president D.W. Eisenhower warned about.
What’s the difference in a new man made island with air base or a aircraft carrier ? I only expect China’s stationary aircraft carrier are much cheaper to build .
Isn’t illegally seizing Syrian oil fields or oil tankers by the US military just as ridiculous?
No more ridiculous than the rest of US foreign policy. How is starving foreigners into submission tolerated?
Just glad the US has someone in the administration that thinks he can identify what is “rediculous”…
If Biden wins, I wonder if the Neocons will be even more aggressive. Neos and Antifa both hate Arabs, maybe also China.
Errr.m, “antifa hates arabs”..you might wanna source that, I think. Not sure my eyes will survive the reading of it.
While arguing details — we lose the sight of the real issue.
US is NOT the authority on deciding maritime borders. It does not matter what US believes. In fact as a NON signatory to UN Convention on the Laws of the Seas (UNCLOS) US has no legal standing to raise issue on anyone’s behalf, and CANNOT be a party in a dispute.
Second — the actual boundaries of Extended Economic Zones (EEZ) are subject to bilateral negotiations between parties, to be taken to UNCLOS arbitration, if requested by both parties.
US has procured a ruling by Hague Arbitration court without permission of both parties. This court’s opinion is irrelevant, yet US calls it — “award”!
The issues related to EEZ are negotiable. Give and take on boundaries is balanced by fishing rights, energy or mineral exploitation. There are no firm rules, parties can agree as they please in actual demarcation. Rules become more complex when a party claims sea shelf, or continental shelf — when geological proof is needed.
China’s maritime borders are not ridiculous — they are historic claims that WILL
be determined through negotiation with neighbors. UNCLOS rules require this step.
US has NO standing in ANY bilateral dispute, and cannot legally demand enforcing any “freedom of negotiation”.
Because the laws have defined the rules of navigation. Rules are clear on Territorial waters. Rules on EEZ are also defined. Commercial traffic is not affected in any way — but military vessels must notify and be granted right of innocent package. By complaining about boundaries — US is avoiding asking for permission.
For as long as vessels stay in international waters — there is no problem.
But straying into EEZ — regardless of unresolved issues among neighbors — is an unnecessary provocation.
Freedom of navigation in INTERNATIONAL WATERS — is the freedom not endangered by anyone. Entering EEZ zones in order to favor one claimant over other — is imposing American arbitrary rules on matters we are legally prohibited from having any standing.
Speaking of ridiculous!
Almost as “ridiculous” as stealing oil and selling it at half its market value
It’s democratic as long as the West is in control
That’s why they are wasteful and call others “shitty countries”
Not everyone wants empire. Hopefully Little Americaners can come to power in the GOP even if the Dem have gone full Neocon.
“Hopefully Little Americaners can come to power in the GOP even if the Dem have gone full Neocon.”
Every last crumb of historical evidence says that there’s no hope whatsoever of “Little Americans” “coming to power” in the approved US political party’s bait and switch “pretend we’re actually two separate parties” scam.
The purpose of the state and its approved political party is to benefit the political class at the expense of the productive class, full stop.
Ok, Luch, ill bite, google search brings nothing, wth is “Little Americaners”, bracing myself.
GK Chesterton wanted a little England, meaning no empire, even open to breaking up Scotland, England, Ulster, S. Ireland, etc.
I’m culturally appropriating that from the English.
Chesterton dreamed of people living in peace, not enviously desiring to conquer and rule over neighbors. He wanted each community proud and happy, a chorus of superlatives.