Chinese maritime aggression. Other East Asian nations now remember why they like America

[Thorn777]

that just made my day

[Admiral Piett]

Marshall of France, my previous posts in this thread, especially the ones which had all of the sources actually relevant to the issue, show that the facts of the current predicament are not something to be trifled with and should be weighed as a threat to the status quo of the south Pacific. Rather this off-topic tirade and rant about American foreign policy is doing you no favors in the absence of the facts of Chinese foreign policy and the concerns about the newly appointed CCP leadership posturing itself in a way more aggressive than most of its predecessors. This is reflected even at home where they have been waging a 'reform' campaign of taking power from rivals within the party and taking more direct control on the provincial level to 'end the corruption'.

Perhaps you should be talking about China, not the US, in this thread.

[lemondude]

Cool, then you can't complain about how the US acts around the world as long as its in their interests, correct?


Do you realize the world runs on international law? Do you understand this isn't the 1800s and nations can't do whatever they want?

And i think you may have confused the way i used the word "right." I did not mean it in the notion of right and wrong, but what justification China had for its actions.

I didn't complain about how US acts, just that nobody can complain about what China does. Everybody acts in their interests you, me and uncle Sam.

China does have justification. You simply don't agree with it. Which brings it back to your sense of right or wrong and your judgement.

This international law was made when China was much much weaker and had no influence to speak off, so China was not part of its making process. If America rebelled cause of tax with no representation, then why should China obey a law that they had nothing to do with, while at the same time contributing to the world.

[Vanoi]

China does have justification. You simply don't agree with it. Which brings it back to your sense of right or wrong and your judgement.

No, its just the justification you use is dirt poor. Its more of an excuse if anything.

This international law was made when China was much much weaker and had no influence to speak off, so China was not part of its making process.

And yet they have signed and agreed to them and thus are binded by them.

]If America rebelled cause of tax with no representation[/B], then why should China obey a law that they had nothing to do with, while at the same time contributing to the world.

You can't boil down the American Revolution to that single reason. Nor can you use this war as an example, as there was no international law in 1776.

China has to obey the laws because they ratified them. They chose to sign them and abide by them. If China wants to be treated right by other countries, it would help if it treated others the same way. The way the West treated China hundreds of years ago does not justify China's actions now.

[Captain Jin]

This international law was made when China was much much weaker and had no influence to speak off, so China was not part of its making process. If America rebelled cause of tax with no representation, then why should China obey a law that they had nothing to do with, while at the same time contributing to the world.

No it wasn't. It absolutely was not. Do your research instead of wasting other people's time with arguments based purely off of what you believe. China has been a member of the UN Security Council since 1971 so they have had plenty of freaking influence regarding UN conventions. There were multiple UN conventions regarding the Law of the Sea. The first was in 1958 and the most recent was started in 1982 and went into effect in 1994. GUESS WHO SIGNED AND RATIFIED AND IS NOW IN VIOLATION OF IT????? CHIIIIIIIIIIINA

[lemondude]

No it wasn't. It absolutely was not. Do your research instead of wasting other people's time with arguments based purely off of what you believe. China has been a member of the UN Security Council since 1971 so they have had plenty of freaking influence regarding UN conventions. There were multiple UN conventions regarding the Law of the Sea. The first was in 1958 and the most recent was started in 1982 and went into effect in 1994. GUESS WHO SIGNED AND RATIFIED AND IS NOW IN VIOLATION OF IT????? CHIIIIIIIIIIINA

China truly became influential in the late 2000s. They may have agreed to it but at that time China needed America that China would have agreed to pretty much anything.

UN is based in America and the important members are American Allies, just because China was a member doesn't mean it can project its influence until now or even now. Don't pretend that China wasn't the last of the security council member until now and that America doesn't dictate the UN's pace.

At the time if China didn't agree to these conventions then China needed to present its own set of conventions, at that time you think anything China suggested in this regard could pass? If China didn't present their own then China needs to sign off on what's already on the table and bid its time.

@vanoi
Poor excuse? That's an opinion, not a purely unbiased view. Nobody can have that.

As to the revolution, I just said that China wants a voice now that it contributes much more economically. Why should China agree to a law that was pretty much forced on to China.

I never said China should mistreat its neighbors because of what anybody did.

[Derpy Hooves]

China truly became influential in the late 2000s. They may have agreed to it but at that time China needed America that China would have agreed to pretty much anything.

UN is based in America and the important members are American Allies, just because China was a member doesn't mean it can project its influence until now or even now. Don't pretend that China wasn't the last of the security council member until now and that America doesn't dictate the UN's pace.

At the time if China didn't agree to these conventions then China needed to present its own set of conventions, at that time you think anything China suggested in this regard could pass? If China didn't present their own then China needs to sign off on what's already on the table and bid its time.

@vanoi
Poor excuse? That's an opinion, not a purely unbiased view. Nobody can have that.

As to the revolution, I just said that China wants a voice now that it contributes much more economically. Why should China agree to a law that was pretty much forced on to China.

I never said China should mistreat its neighbors because of what anybody did.

China was and is a member of the UN Security Council, if that does not make it influential, I don't know what does.

China did not have to agree to the law. So it was not forced, not like the US would sanction China or declare war on China if it didn't agree.

[lemondude]

China was and is a member of the UN Security Council, if that does not make it influential, I don't know what does.

China did not have to agree to the law. So it was not forced, not like the US would sanction China or declare war on China if it didn't agree.

Member of the security council, so what? China in the 70s could barely feed its people, in the 80s could barely put meat on the table in the 90s couldn't even get such brands as Gucci, LV, and such.

China in those times was pretty much an African nation. So you give China a sword, but China at that time was so skinny that it couldn't even lift a fork to feed itself.

China was the Asian guy in a 100 meters race, literally.

Didn't you understand the point that China needed America to modernize the country and China had to go along with US. You think wars and sanctions are the only way to hurt economy? US could use excuses to slow tourism, make excuses or use influence to slow investment, all kinds of things can be done in the name of justice and the American people that could hurt China.

[Derpy Hooves]

Member of the security council, so what? China in the 70s could barely feed its people, in the 80s could barely put meat on the table in the 90s couldn't even get such brands as Gucci, LV, and such.

China in those times was pretty much an African nation. So you give China a sword, but China at that time was so skinny that it couldn't even lift a fork to feed itself.

China was the Asian guy in a 100 meters race, literally.

Didn't you understand the point that China needed America to modernize the country and China had to go along with US. You think wars and sanctions are the only way to hurt economy? US could use excuses to slow tourism, make excuses or use influence to slow investment, all kinds of things can be done in the name of justice and the American people that could hurt China.

Seems to me your pulling out of your ass . Mind backing ANY of that up?

[Border Patrol]

Mass intellectual property theft and a lack of respect for foreign investors does that more than any American influence ever could. And China gets few Western tourists because it's poor and less beautiful than Thailand.
Westerners don't trust China because China gives them plenty of reason not to.

[athanaric]

Mass intellectual property theft and a lack of respect for foreign investors does that more than any American influence ever could.

That's a good point.

And China gets few Western tourists because it's poor and less beautiful than Thailand.

And that's a stupid point. Beauty of a country or landscape is entirely subjective, and furthermore China actually has an advantage in that it has an enormous variety of landscapes and climates. Probably more than any other country on Earth. It also doesn't get "few Western tourists", it actually has quite a few.
The reason that Westerners are less eager to visit the PRC than some other places is because they don't like dictatorships where you can't talk freely with the natives, and they don't appreciate some of the nastier sides of contemporary China. And because China is not exactly a cheap destination. Although some of us don't mind, of course, seeing how places like Turkey, Egypt, and Cuba - all worse than China in several ways - still get a lot of Western visitors.

[Border Patrol]

Shhh. He was totally going to bite that one, too...

[YuriVII]

Let's be frank, all the security council members violate international treaties they signed and supported (except the one you live in and the one you like the most). Why? Because they can.

[lemondude]

Seems to me your pulling out of your ass . Mind backing ANY of that up?

backing what up? That China was entirely dependent on US for economy in the early 70s, 80s, 90s? That China was poor? That China had no influence?

Did you know the US friendly Nationalist government after WW2 weren't even invited to some of the important meetings between the powers. How much influence you think the not US friendly Communist China who somehow manage to make the country even weaker during its early stages had?

At that time China had no navy to speak of, even if China did fight on the law, nothing would come of it, China would have no way of enforcing anything in that large a body of water.


@Border Patrol

Lack of respect? China gave the foreigners a lot of favors and gave them almost colonial master status to invite them here, why do you think they all want to be in China? Cause they are all Masochists?

Now that China no longer needs to be like that and starts to help more and more its own businesses and it's disrespectful?

BTW, you do know what people go to Thailand for right? It's capital is aptly named.

[sleepyx732]

I don't understand..

We can talk all day about keeping China in check, but who's keeping the US in check? Widely believed to be the only superpower in the world?

Worst case scenario. How many people here believe the following, "A collapse or sudden retreat of US power would most likely result in an extended period of global anarchy?

[Heinz Guderian]

BTW, you do know what people go to Thailand for right? It's capital is aptly named.

The capital is called Bangkok and so i'm guessing cock

I don't understand..

We can talk all day about keeping China in check, but who's keeping the US in check? Widely believed to be the only superpower in the world?

Worst case scenario. How many people here believe the following, "A collapse or sudden retreat of US power would most likely result in an extended period of global anarchy?

i would say with the massive reduction in arms sales and military spending all across the world as well as in the US a period of significant economic and cultural progress and we'd have a base on Mars within a generation.

[Derpy Hooves]

I don't understand..

We can talk all day about keeping China in check, but who's keeping the US in check? Widely believed to be the only superpower in the world?

Worst case scenario. How many people here believe the following, "A collapse or sudden retreat of US power would most likely result in an extended period of global anarchy?

The US is the only superpower. Only the American people can keep the US in check. Finally, there has always been anarchy.

[sleepyx732]

i would say with the massive reduction in arms sales and military spending all across the world as well as in the US a period of significant economic and cultural progress and we'd have a base on Mars within a generation.

True, but I don't see this happening in the near future.

The US is the only superpower. Only the American people can keep the US in check. Finally, there has always been anarchy.

I agree with this. However, Americans haven't done much in attempting to control it's own government. In fact, it's been the other way around. This last decade the government has done and attempted to do much to control and contain it's populace. When Americans finally decidd they have had enough, I'm afraid it'll be to late.

[Nikitn]

So you don't think that China's claim cutting a broad swathe through every other country's normal territorial claim is unreasonable at all?

There are huge swaths of oceans which are currently outside anyones EEZ, and all sides want a piece of that cake. The Chinese were the first to claim the islands during the 1930s, which entitles them to a stronger claim. Besides, everyone is setting up claims going into everyone elses EEZ. It's a normal negotiating tactic.

[sephodwyrm]

So you don't think that China's claim cutting a broad swathe through every other country's normal territorial claim is unreasonable at all?

I find our historical tradition of NOT FIGHTING OUR CLAIMS and shutting ourselves from the world to be laughable. So this reversal is a happy one.