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

[Jom]

It is not advertly breaking the law. It is providing evidence to show that the law should be changed a bit. The US has no right to meddle in the affairs. It would just be the same if you tried to meddle in the affairs of any other country. Inane? And what about the fact that the US is spying on coastal regions in the South sea China to gain intelligence? Isn't that inane? China receives a lot of negative attention thanks to the US and western media. They have a right to say what they want. Thats what you Americans preach isn't it? That people should have free will. Well China's saying what they want to sat. You should hear them out before jumping to conclusions.

China wants to change international law and the USA has no right to have a say over that international law? Whilst it may be difficult to believe at times, the USA is party to most international law, too, including those over maritime claims.

And no one is denying China's right to say what it wants, but you're complaining that China is being criticised for what it's saying in western media. Freedom of speech cuts both ways: you can say whatever you like, but don't expect everyone to like it, especially if it means that other countries who happen to be US allies lose out.

[HissingNewt]

In this age and century they can't. They're too weak to claim anything. The US can claim as it is a superpower, but the South China sea was used by the Chinese before. Evidence is prior to the post I've made above.

This is terrible logic and pretty much leaves the US as having the right to claim the entire Pacific Ocean and most of the Atlantic.

Edit: Stop worrying about the actual definition of superpower, Newt. It's impolite.

It's too much fun to stop.

My god! Uneducated! You people cannot reply to the rightly long answer I've written. The next thing you'll say is the evidence does not fit this and whatever.

As a great power and emerging superpower, China's foreign policy and strategic thinking is highly influential.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_relations_of_China

Did you not read how much the PLA deploys? How much their navy does? Have you see how strategically they've divided their provinces up? You forget this: China's the world's largest army, its a superpower that controls the world economy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...Army_Air_Force

Seriously.

Here, take a look at the US military aircraft:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...itary_aircraft

Also helpful to notice that the US isn't using old Soviet equipment for the most part (the Chinese strategic bomber was retired by the Russians in '93). In addition to that, there's not a chance that China would be able to match the F-22's that are in service and it's unlikely they'd be able to handle F-35's whenever those are ready to go. The fact that America can put all 11 carrier strike groups into that area in the event of a war, combined with bases in Japan, the Phillipines, South Korea, and it's safe to assume Vietnam will be on our side in a war where China is the aggressor, and you can quickly see Chinese bases getting bombed and disabled early on. China would not win a war using human wave tactics that didn't work 100 years ago in WW1. Sheer manpower doesn't matter when the other side would have a decisive advantage in air and sea power, along with those drone operators sitting across the world in the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_battle_group

Edit: Also, forgot to mention that because the Nimitz class carriers just aren't good enough, the new Ford class is being built:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_...rcraft_carrier

Important to note that those can have even more aircraft and the first one is projected to come into service in 2015.

[lemondude]

Are you serious? The US doesn't control the UN. Any veto from Russia or China prevents the US from carrying out any kind of UN Security Council Resolutions.


No, it is a poor excuse. There is no reasonable justification to bully your neighbors.


You have a UN Security Council seat. You have a voice. You were not forced to sign any conventions. You country very much signed them of their own accord and now they must abide by them.


No, you did, and others have been implying it throughout this thread.

It's the UN not the student council. Also if you claim that China has so much influence back then, then by this logic China should have much more power now. So how come China couldn't change the law or be let alone or at least bring it up as a topic of discussion in a favorable position.

See you said bullying, that's an opinion. Some would call this self defense, in fact 1.3 billion people would and more would in China's allies. Yea China has Allies, not as tight as the US, but not everyone likes the US and not everyone is scared of China's rise.

If China indeed were happy to sign then why back off now? But not gonna argue this point because it really doesn't matter, what matters now is China is not liking the law one bit now if China ever did.

If I did imply that China could mistreat its neighbors then it was not my intention, after all this is a forum not a paper.


I really think this problem will solve itself really. When China's navy is powerful enough to be unchallenged in this area then what does it matter who the sea belongs to on paper.

[s.rwitt]

Some would call this self defense

And they would be wrong.

[HissingNewt]

It's the UN not the student council. Also if you claim that China has so much influence back then, then by this logic China should have much more power now. So how come China couldn't change the law or be let alone or at least bring it up as a topic of discussion in a favorable position.

See you said bullying, that's an opinion. Some would call this self defense, in fact 1.3 billion people would and more would in China's allies. Yea China has Allies, not as tight as the US, but not everyone likes the US and not everyone is scared of China's rise.

If China indeed were happy to sign then why back off now? But not gonna argue this point because it really doesn't matter, what matters now is China is not liking the law one bit now if China ever did.

If I did imply that China could mistreat its neighbors then it was not my intention, after all this is a forum not a paper.


I really think this problem will solve itself really. When China's navy is powerful enough to be unchallenged in this area then what does it matter who the sea belongs to on paper.

This is self defense as much as the German invasions of Poland, France and Russia were.

The issue is that China is influential, but cannot change international law by itself. Guess what, neither can the US, and we're the reigning superpower.

[Vanoi]

It's the UN not the student council.

The Security Council is a part of the UN. Derp.

Also if you claim that China has so much influence back then, then by this logic China should have much more power now.

Lol wut? Just because you have influence doesn't mean you should have more.

So how come China couldn't change the law or be let alone or at least bring it up as a topic of discussion in a favorable position.

Because the laws are set? If China wants to change the laws, they better convince the rest of the world then to change them.

See you said bullying, that's an opinion.

No, its fact. Read the OP please.

Some would call this self defense,

Claiming large swaths of sea territory to the point of claiming some nations entire territorial claims (If you see the map of Chinese territorial claims, they plan outright claim land and the entire sea territories of Brunei and Malaysia)

Thats not self-defense in the slightest.

If China indeed were happy to sign then why back off now? But not gonna argue this point because it really doesn't matter, what matters now is China is not liking the law one bit now if China ever did.

They signed the law, and ratified it. Thus they have to follow it.

I really think this problem will solve itself really. When China's navy is powerful enough to be unchallenged in this area then what does it matter who the sea belongs to on paper.

Funny thing, to do that they would have to outclass the US Navy. What are the chances of China outclassing the US navy? Slim to none.

But i see you have changed your argument to "Might makes right"

[The Wandering Storyteller]

No, they very much would. China is an important trading partner, but the US has taken the sides against China before regardless.



Militarily, yes. Their Navy can't even come to match the US Navy which would be required to win a war over South China sea.


Sure, if you just blatantly ignore the OP.


No, they don't. You don't have any understanding of economics do you? And i want a source for the last part.


No, it does not. Holding foreign countries debt does not suddenly mean you control the world's economy.


The UK didn't control the world's economy before 1945. Start backing up these ridiculous claims with sources.


No, The UK is very much still a world power. Just not a superpower.



Except three wars. Jesus, you don't have any understanding of the world do you, or how long this dispute has been going on? The South china Sea dispute is not recent.


Why do you continue to ignore the OP? China is bullying its neighbors in an attempt to claim islands they have zero claim to in the first place. The OP presents this.

You are justifying the bullying, and at the same time, criticizing when the US does it. That is hypocrisy.


Your entire argument is based on two wrongs make a right. That is a fallacy. Do you understand what a fallacy is?


Just because you use the oceans, doe snot mean you have claim to them.



No, this is the Us's business. They have an ally in the area to support, and its in the US's interests that China not bully it neighbors.


Except the Philippines, a US ally in the region, and countries like Vietnam, who are becoming allies of the US.


China has to follow the law like everyone else. China is not an exception, and you only continue to support the fact that China is nothing more than a bully in this issue.


No, it is. Its in the US's interests to protect allies like the Philippines who is a key ally in the region.




Saying this over and over does not make it true.


Yea, must have been why the US was able to push that Security Council Resolution against Syria. Oh wait, China and Russia blocked it. But how is this possible if the US controls the UN?


Source?

Right, since I'll go through your post, you're defying logic. Again supported by brainwashed facts will not make it necessarily correct.

No, they very much would. China is an important trading partner, but the US has taken the sides against China before regardless.

What use is the Philliphines? China is more important to the US. You're saying China is insignificant in front of the Philliphines. Haha.

Militarily, yes. Their Navy can't even come to match the US Navy which would be required to win a war over South China sea.

So you're saying China isn't a strong army? Right, let me get the PLA strength and army for you from wikipedia.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The People's Liberation Army Ground Force (PLAGF) (simplified Chinese: 中国人民解放军陆军; traditional Chinese: 中國人民解放軍陸軍; pinyin: Zhōngguó Rénmín Jiěfàngjūn Lùjūn) is the land-based service branch of the People's Liberation Army. Its regular forces consist of 1.7 million personnel, with an additional 800,000 personnel in reserve, making it the largest active standing army in the world, and second largest in terms of army personnel.[1] The PLAGF furthermore deploys 10,000 main battle tanks, 5,500 armoured personnel carriers, 2,200 infantry fighting vehicles and 25,000 artillery pieces as well as anti-aircraft units. Currently 40% of the ground force divisions and brigades are either armoured or mechanized to deal with potential threats. The PLA Ground Forces has and continues to undergo rapid major upgrades and re-structuring to deal with future land warfare, with front line troops, special forces, and marines given priority in receiving newer modern weapon systems

You're saying 1.7 million soliders is weak? Even having a reserve of 800,000? I must say what a brain you do have!

o, they don't. You don't have any understanding of economics do you? And i want a source for the last part.

The one that controls the world economy becomes a superpower. All the countries have a US debt in which they have US dollars. Lol.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...an-rights.html

No, it does not. Holding foreign countries debt does not suddenly mean you control the world's economy.


Oh yes it does, the US has made sure that everyone will trade in US dollars for oil. If they trade in any other currency, then the dollar will go down like hell.

The UK didn't control the world's economy before 1945. Start backing up these ridiculous claims with sources.

You know what I speak is conspiracy isn't it? We show you the evidence and you'll ignore it. No point discussing this one with you. Before that countries traded in how much gold you had. Now it was the US who did US dollar manipulation. Now its the Chinese.

No, The UK is very much still a world power. Just not a superpower.

You're kidding me. The UK is a weak power. It doesn't hold any sort of signification except the reputation of its army and navy. World power, yeah right. England can be crushed very easily by the United States if they were to do so. The only thing protecting England is her navy.

Except three wars. Jesus, you don't have any understanding of the world do you, or how long this dispute has been going on? The South china Sea dispute is not recent.


You're saying what I'm saying! You have no clue of how long this issue has been going on for. Don't try and twist my words and don't try to talk as if you know much. Copycat!

Why do you continue to ignore the OP? China is bullying its neighbors in an attempt to claim islands they have zero claim to in the first place. The OP presents this. You are justifying the bullying, and at the same time, criticizing when the US does it. That is hypocrisy.

I don't agree with anything you've said here. My evidence shows that isn't a bully. You are just rejecting it. No, sorry.

Your entire argument is based on two wrongs make a right. That is a fallacy. Do you understand what a fallacy is?

Two wrongs? Fallacy? You've just bought random stuff here. Sorry, try and debate the stronger points.

Just because you use the oceans, doe snot mean you have claim to them.


Then what right did the US have to interfere in Japan in 1853?

No, this is the Us's business. They have an ally in the area to support, and its in the US's interests that China not bully it neighbors.


Bull****. They ain't protecting anyone here. What support has been lended to their allies then?

Except the Philippines, a US ally in the region, and countries like Vietnam, who are becoming allies of the US.

Have you ever been to Asia by any chance? The Vietnamese don't hold much of a very high favor with the US thanks to the Vietnam war. They're only siding because they fear a growing superpower.

China has to follow the law like everyone else. China is not an exception, and you only continue to support the fact that China is nothing more than a bully in this issue.


Whoo hoo! They ain't breaking the law, and neither will I accept your last sentence.

No, it is. Its in the US's interests to protect allies like the Philippines who is a key ally in the region.



Did the Chinese ever go and attack the Phillppines? Did they ever go and take the whole country by force? The US certainly did.

Yea, must have been why the US was able to push that Security Council Resolution against Syria. Oh wait, China and Russia blocked it. But how is this possible if the US controls the UN?

Western propaganda blinds you. No need of getting involved in Syria. The US mostly controls the council. China and Russia have been recently accepted in, but that doesn't hold to the suspcion that the US suspects China and Russia.

No, they very much would. China is an important trading partner, but the US has taken the sides against China before regardless.



Militarily, yes. Their Navy can't even come to match the US Navy which would be required to win a war over South China sea.


Sure, if you just blatantly ignore the OP.


No, they don't. You don't have any understanding of economics do you? And i want a source for the last part.


No, it does not. Holding foreign countries debt does not suddenly mean you control the world's economy.


The UK didn't control the world's economy before 1945. Start backing up these ridiculous claims with sources.


No, The UK is very much still a world power. Just not a superpower.



Except three wars. Jesus, you don't have any understanding of the world do you, or how long this dispute has been going on? The South china Sea dispute is not recent.


Why do you continue to ignore the OP? China is bullying its neighbors in an attempt to claim islands they have zero claim to in the first place. The OP presents this.

You are justifying the bullying, and at the same time, criticizing when the US does it. That is hypocrisy.


Your entire argument is based on two wrongs make a right. That is a fallacy. Do you understand what a fallacy is?


Just because you use the oceans, doe snot mean you have claim to them.



No, this is the Us's business. They have an ally in the area to support, and its in the US's interests that China not bully it neighbors.


Except the Philippines, a US ally in the region, and countries like Vietnam, who are becoming allies of the US.


China has to follow the law like everyone else. China is not an exception, and you only continue to support the fact that China is nothing more than a bully in this issue.


No, it is. Its in the US's interests to protect allies like the Philippines who is a key ally in the region.




Saying this over and over does not make it true.


Yea, must have been why the US was able to push that Security Council Resolution against Syria. Oh wait, China and Russia blocked it. But how is this possible if the US controls the UN?


Source?

This is terrible logic and pretty much leaves the US as having the right to claim the entire Pacific Ocean and most of the Atlantic.



It's too much fun to stop.



Here, take a look at the US military aircraft:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...itary_aircraft

Also helpful to notice that the US isn't using old Soviet equipment for the most part (the Chinese strategic bomber was retired by the Russians in '93). In addition to that, there's not a chance that China would be able to match the F-22's that are in service and it's unlikely they'd be able to handle F-35's whenever those are ready to go. The fact that America can put all 11 carrier strike groups into that area in the event of a war, combined with bases in Japan, the Phillipines, South Korea, and it's safe to assume Vietnam will be on our side in a war where China is the aggressor, and you can quickly see Chinese bases getting bombed and disabled early on. China would not win a war using human wave tactics that didn't work 100 years ago in WW1. Sheer manpower doesn't matter when the other side would have a decisive advantage in air and sea power, along with those drone operators sitting across the world in the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_battle_group

Edit: Also, forgot to mention that because the Nimitz class carriers just aren't good enough, the new Ford class is being built:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_...rcraft_carrier

Important to note that those can have even more aircraft and the first one is projected to come into service in 2015.

Agreed that the US can't just claim everything, and also agreed by the fact that the Chinese Air force is outdated, but I wouldn't underestimate the strength of the Chinese air force. When used properly they'll be effective. I don't underestimate them, they'll find a way to improve their forces.

[HissingNewt]

Agreed that the US can't just claim everything, and also agreed by the fact that the Chinese Air force is outdated, but I wouldn't underestimate the strength of the Chinese air force. When used properly they'll be effective. I don't underestimate them, they'll find a way to improve their forces.

A Winchester 1887 (edit: should've said 1873 since that's the rifle) is also effective when used the right way. That doesn't mean it's not outdated and far surpassed by better weapons. I agree that China will find ways to improve, but they'll need to actually develop their own weapons to do that rather than just buying Russian stuff. Maybe they'll get there one day by stealing enough stuff from America.

[The Wandering Storyteller]

China wants to change international law and the USA has no right to have a say over that international law? Whilst it may be difficult to believe at times, the USA is party to most international law, too, including those over maritime claims.

And no one is denying China's right to say what it wants, but you're complaining that China is being criticised for what it's saying in western media. Freedom of speech cuts both ways: you can say whatever you like, but don't expect everyone to like it, especially if it means that other countries who happen to be US allies lose out.

They're providing the historical evidence aren't they? Should the US intervene in what China does? Should they intervene in their army process decisions? Whilst it may be difficult to believe something, the USA only goes along with the laws its make. Not the international community. You are simply denying China's right to let her speak, let her claim what she wants. Freedom of speech is the thing you Amercians preach a lot and yet you've supported dictators in the past. Huh, fancy that. The Western Media is showing that China is a blood thirsty nation that wants to take the South Sea China ocean. And you are just another citizen that is convinced China is trying to do exactly that.

A Winchester 1887 is also effective when used the right way. That doesn't mean it's not outdated and far surpassed by better weapons. I agree that China will find ways to improve, but they'll need to actually develop their own weapons to do that rather than just buying Russian stuff. Maybe they'll get there one day by stealing enough stuff from America.

Of course that America is a world power, no doubt about that. Its armies and navy have some of the best technologies, but the Chinese will continue to improve. Russia is cannablizing itself but you seem to have ignored this point: One Russian solider is worth ten american soldiers. And they did used to be a superpower once a upon a time. They can't steal from America. It would be impossible to do so.

[s.rwitt]

One Russian solider is worth ten american soldiers

Stop ignoring this unprovable, ridiculous point that he's just invented, Newt.

[HissingNewt]

Of course that America is a world power, no doubt about that. Its armies and navy have some of the best technologies, but the Chinese will continue to improve. Russia is cannablizing itself but you seem to have ignored this point: One Russian solider is worth ten american soldiers. And they did used to be a superpower once a upon a time. They can't steal from America. It would be impossible to do so.

I think you got that exchange rate for US and Russian soldiers backwards considering the force multipliers like aircraft and drones.

[Jom]

They're providing the historical evidence aren't they? Should the US intervene in what China does? Should they intervene in their army process decisions? Whilst it may be difficult to believe something, the USA only goes along with the laws its make. Not the international community. You are simply denying China's right to let her speak, let her claim what she wants. Freedom of speech is the thing you Amercians preach a lot and yet you've supported dictators in the past. Huh, fancy that. The Western Media is showing that China is a blood thirsty nation that wants to take the South Sea China ocean. And you are just another citizen that is convinced China is trying to do exactly that.

What is it you don't get about what I just said? China IS being allowed to speak. HOWEVER, China is being criticised for what it has SAID. That is FREEDOM IS SPEECH on BOTH SIDES.

Secondly, I'm not American. Huh, fancy that: you made an assumption and were wrong. That's never happened before, eh?

[The Wandering Storyteller]

I think you got that exchange rate for US and Russian soldiers backwards considering the force multipliers like aircraft and drones.

Have you read on Russian Military history? You do know they repulsed the Germans in WW2? See, you Amercians can't take it can you? I've said before, the Russian army now is a watershed compared to its past. Russian soldiers when used the right way will be 100% effective. General Bagration and De Tolly proved this to greater effect. Just because Russia is in a gloomy state right now is thanks to the CIA's involvement of throwing the old Soviet Union off power.

What is it you don't get about what I just said? China IS being allowed to speak. HOWEVER, China is being criticised for what it has SAID. That is FREEDOM IS SPEECH on BOTH SIDES.

Secondly, I'm not American. Huh, fancy that: you made an assumption and were wrong. That's never happened before, eh?

Unless you try to desperately prove I'm wrong at something, whats the point of having this debate if you're going to go to trivial matters? Not a good response, you can come up something better than that.

[s.rwitt]

Have you read on Russian Military history? You do know they repulsed the Germans in WW2? See, you Amercians can't take it can you? I've said before, the Russian army now is a watershed compared to its past. Russian soldiers when used the right way will be 100% effective. General Bagration and De Tolly proved this to greater effect. Just because Russia is in a gloomy state right now is thanks to the CIA's involvement of throwing the old Soviet Union off power.

Was that the one where they relied on overwhelming numbers to win battles?

[The Wandering Storyteller]

Well I'm going, I expect to see much better replies with more stronger points to be debated with tommorow or whatever. Please no statements, no opinions, no one line or two line sentences trying to disprove stuff. Give me facts, stastics, paragraphs as I've bothered to do here and you haven't. Heinz, how you doing? This is nothing. I was expecting a much stronger argument from the American side but it seems I'm not getting any. And for all of you who think I'm dumb, think I'm dumb because that's what I want you to exactly think of me. You yourselves will get frustrated off me in this thread, ahah.

[s.rwitt]

Well I'm going, I expect to see much better replies with more stronger points to be debated with.

Three people have routinely proven almost everything you've stated wrong...what more are you looking for?

[Jom]

Unless you try to desperately prove I'm wrong at something, whats the point of having this debate if you're going to go to trivial matters? Not a good response, you can come up something better than that.

Most of your arguments here been a list of assertions that have concluded with an insistence that you're right and we're all just too blind to see it because of propaganda in western media outlets. You've then gone on to claim that China is somehow being gagged in this matter which is extremely bizarre as this thread is all about China's claims and by now we're all pretty conversant in them. So most of what you've said is based upon these odd claims that China is being stifled in this matter, and if I unpick that, the rest of what you've said comes crashing down.

[s.rwitt]

Don't forget his argument that islands don't count as territory and the ocean/island things that are being disputed are being done for self defense. Besides, the Chinese went to those waters before. Therefore, America owns the moon. For self defense. Or else you're brainwashed.

[Derpy Hooves]

Well I'm going, I expect to see much better replies with more stronger points to be debated with tommorow or whatever. Please no statements, no opinions, no one line or two line sentences trying to disprove stuff. Give me facts, stastics, paragraphs as I've bothered to do here and you haven't. Heinz, how you doing? This is nothing. I was expecting a much stronger argument from the American side but it seems I'm not getting any. And for all of you who think I'm dumb, think I'm dumb because that's what I want you to exactly think of me. You yourselves will get frustrated off me in this thread, ahah.

So you have a problem with people being able to disprove your arguments in one sentence?


FYI, you don't need numbers to win.
Example, Battle of Agincourt
English: ~6,000
French: ~30,000
English victory.
Modern times
Battle of Singapore
British: ~80,000
Japanese: ~30,000
Japanese victory.

[Vanoi]

What use is the Philliphines? China is more important to the US. You're saying China is insignificant in front of the Philliphines. Haha.

You have no understanding of geo-politics do you? If the US wants influence in South East Asia, who would be better to support?

China who wants their own influence in the area and is very much against US influence in the area

Or the Philippines who have no ambitions for this region, is a US ally, and supports US interests.

So you're saying China isn't a strong army? Right, let me get the PLA strength and army for you from wikipedia.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The People's Liberation Army Ground Force (PLAGF) (simplified Chinese: 中国人民解放军陆军; traditional Chinese: 中國人民解放軍陸軍; pinyin: Zhōngguó Rénmín Jiěfàngjūn Lùjūn) is the land-based service branch of the People's Liberation Army. Its regular forces consist of 1.7 million personnel, with an additional 800,000 personnel in reserve, making it the largest active standing army in the world, and second largest in terms of army personnel.[1] The PLAGF furthermore deploys 10,000 main battle tanks, 5,500 armoured personnel carriers, 2,200 infantry fighting vehicles and 25,000 artillery pieces as well as anti-aircraft units. Currently 40% of the ground force divisions and brigades are either armoured or mechanized to deal with potential threats. The PLA Ground Forces has and continues to undergo rapid major upgrades and re-structuring to deal with future land warfare, with front line troops, special forces, and marines given priority in receiving newer modern weapon systems

You're saying 1.7 million soliders is weak? Even having a reserve of 800,000? I must say what a brain you do have!

Lol. What do you think this is? Total War? Call of Duty? Numbers mean . Can you explain to me why China then was unable to push US forces out of Korea? They had more troops than the US did there. Using your logic China should have won.

And guess what the US Army has that Chain doesn't? Experience. When was the last time China fought again? The US Army is battle-tested. China's army is not.

Also, you seem again to have a hard time understanding English. i wasn't even talking about China' army in the first place, but their Navy. Derp.

You are as I've said ignorant. The one that controls the world economy becomes a superpower. All the countries have a US debt in which they have US dollars. Lol.

Like i said before, you know jack about economics. Holding foreign debt does not mean you control the world's economy.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...an-rights.html

Sorry to say, but the Daily mail is not an accepts source around here. Its known to completely lie in its stories. Come up with a better source.

Oh yes it does, the US has made sure that everyone will trade in US dollars for oil. If they trade in any other currency, then the dollar will go down like hell.

No, it doesn't Learn some economics please. Oil isn't the only commodity in the world.

No one controls the worlds economy. The economies of the world are connected to each other. One economy having trouble creates ripple effects in the world's economy.

You know what I speak is conspiracy isn't it? We show you the evidence and you'll ignore it.

You have no showed evidence the UK controls the world's economy. Stop lying and learn how to debate.

No point discussing this one with you. Before that countries traded in how much gold you had. Now it was the US who did US dollar manipulation. Now its the Chinese.

Source.

You're kidding me. The UK is a weak power. It doesn't hold any sort of signification except the reputation of its army and navy. World power, yeah right.

What do you think makes you a world power. Derp.

England can be crushed very easily by the United States if they were to do so. The only thing protecting England is her navy.

No . But that doesn't mean the UK isn't a world power. Remember, they do hold a UN Security Council seat.

You're saying what I'm saying! You have no clue of how long this issue has been going on for. Don't try and twist my words and don't try to talk as if you know much. Copycat!

Copycat? You just don't' understand English or geo-politics. The dispute between Pakistan and India has been going on for decades and hasn't been solved. this dispute in South China sea has been going on for some years now. Its not going to solve itself anytime soon.

I don't agree with anything you've said here. My evidence shows that isn't a bully. You are just rejecting it. No, sorry.

You haven't showed any evidence China isn't a bully. Stop ignoring the OP please.

[Two wrongs? Fallacy? You've just bought random stuff here. Sorry, try and debate the stronger points.

Nice deflection. You don't even understand the fallacy you are making do you? This is seriously embarrassing for you. I'd stop.

Then what right did the US have to interfere in Japan in 1853?

Of wanting to open trade. The US wanted new markets to trade in.

Bull****. They ain't protecting anyone here. What support has been lended to their allies then?

http://www.sunstar.com.ph/manila/loc...lys-row-161079

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/09/wo...doff.html?_r=0

The US supports the Philippines in this dispute.

Have you ever been to Asia by any chance? The Vietnamese don't hold much of a very high favor with the US thanks to the Vietnam war.

You do realize the Vietnamese have pretty much gotten over the Vietnam War?

They're only siding because they fear a growing superpower.

Much more than that. They hate China more than the US.

Whoo hoo! They ain't breaking the law, and neither will I accept your last sentence.

Its called the Law of the Sea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...Law_of_the_Sea

Claiming the territorial waters of other countries is a violation of the Law of the Sea. Never mind China is violating the sovereignty of these countries.

Did the Chinese ever go and attack the Phillppines? Did they ever go and take the whole country by force? The US certainly did.

You mean the US took the country by force from the Spanish. Before the US controlled the Philippines, it was owned by Spain. Then once the US took it, they controlled the country until 1946 when they gave them their independence.

Western propaganda blinds you. No need of getting involved in Syria.

Except to protect the civilians dieing there and stop Syrian chemical weapons from falling in the wrongs hands.

The US mostly controls the council. China and Russia have been recently accepted in, but that doesn't hold to the suspcion that the US suspects China and Russia.

You realize Russia has held a seat in the UN Security Council since it was created? And China got theirs in the 1970s? Its not recent. The US doesn't control the council. Stop talking out of your ass.