South China/West Philippine Sea

[tk421]

I don't think you can strike a "50/50" deal with China. As far as they're concerned, all of the territories are theirs. We don't even have anything to bargain with, why would they give 50% of "their" stake to us?

[mokong10101]

I don't think you can strike a "50/50" deal with China. As far as they're concerned, all of the territories are theirs. We don't even have anything to bargain with, why would they give 50% of "their" stake to us?

 

Then if that's the case it's even more pointless to "modernize" the military. It's plain common sense 500 to 1 ratio ang discrepancy ng military naten. Money will just be wasted and let's not even start talking how much of those funds ang mapupunta sa corruption.

 

Ang fundamental issue dito ay ang security ng Pinas. The only solution is to arm every Filipino family.

 

Of course ayaw ng mga mason na bestfriend ni Pnoy nyan. Ayaw din ng military, pulis at gobyerno na armado ang mga Pilipino.

[filibustero]

Before anybody can strike a deal, the question of ownership would have to be resolved first. And I highly doubt that China would relinquish any claim of ownership over an area rumored to be mineral-rich. If it were the Philippines to give way first and relinquish its claim of ownership, how can the government be sure that the Philippines will indeed get the 50% share? It would be naive to think that China will not bully its way into getting the entire pie for itself. Ultimately, this piece of territory is crucial for China's dominance. The weakness of the United States is its dependence on oil-producing countries to fuel its industries. China will have to face the same problem, and its solution is to claim a territory that is rumored to have vast deposits of oil and natural gas.

 

Modernization of our military is necessary to repel any encroachment by Chinese vessels into our territorial waters. It's not necessary to match 1:1 the military might of China. We just need enough to patrol our seas properly. Both countries know that the moment a military vessel opens fire against another, the other members of the UN Security Council will sweep down on the West Philippine Sea to prevent any escalation of hostilities. This is the opening that the United States needs to take a firm stand against China. Unknown to many is that the reason why the US is not so firm on the dispute is that its fragile economy cannot take a backlash from China - one of its major creditors.

 

And the reason why it's not desirable to allow ordinary Filipinos to own guns is that it will just cause peace and order problems for the entire country. The military and the police will have to face a threat from within the country instead of just focusing on external threats.

[maxiev]

I don't think you can strike a "50/50" deal with China. As far as they're concerned, all of the territories are theirs. We don't even have anything to bargain with, why would they give 50% of "their" stake to us?

"He who has the guns makes the rules." China has the guns. We don't. We only have our diplomatic skills to make our case.

[maxiev]

Before anybody can strike a deal, the question of ownership would have to be resolved first. And I highly doubt that China would relinquish any claim of ownership over an area rumored to be mineral-rich. If it were the Philippines to give way first and relinquish its claim of ownership, how can the government be sure that the Philippines will indeed get the 50% share? It would be naive to think that China will not bully its way into getting the entire pie for itself. Ultimately, this piece of territory is crucial for China's dominance. The weakness of the United States is its dependence on oil-producing countries to fuel its industries. China will have to face the same problem, and its solution is to claim a territory that is rumored to have vast deposits of oil and natural gas.

 

Modernization of our military is necessary to repel any encroachment by Chinese vessels into our territorial waters. It's not necessary to match 1:1 the military might of China. We just need enough to patrol our seas properly. Both countries know that the moment a military vessel opens fire against another, the other members of the UN Security Council will sweep down on the West Philippine Sea to prevent any escalation of hostilities. This is the opening that the United States needs to take a firm stand against China. Unknown to many is that the reason why the US is not so firm on the dispute is that its fragile economy cannot take a backlash from China - one of its major creditors.

 

And the reason why it's not desirable to allow ordinary Filipinos to own guns is that it will just cause peace and order problems for the entire country. The military and the police will have to face a threat from within the country instead of just focusing on external threats.

So the US is just waiting for an excuse to take a firm stand on China. But since China is its greatest creditor, doesn't the US already hold the aces against Chinese government? Couldn't it warn China, "you guys better behave if you want to see your money again." China has a lot to lose if the US unilaterally uses this as a bargaining tool.

 

Then again, if the US ever resorts to doing this, market economies all over the world will go on a tailspin. The entire world economy could be disrupted.

Edited October 28, 2013 by maxiev

[sonnyt111]

So the US is just waiting for an excuse to take a firm stand on China. But since China is its greatest creditor, doesn't the US already hold the aces against Chinese government? Couldn't it warn China, "you guys better behave if you want to see your money again." China has a lot to lose if the US unilaterally uses this as a bargaining tool.

 

Then again, if the US ever resorts to doing this, market economies all over the world will go on a tailspin. The entire world economy could be disrupted.

If the US ever did this, no nation on earth will ever lend them money again.

[sonnyt111]

"He who has the guns makes the rules." China has the guns. We don't. We only have our diplomatic skills to make our case.

Which is exactly what is happening. Well so far China hasn't used in military advantage by forcibly taking over the disputed territory (if if they could do so any time). It has instead resorted to very strong rhetoric.

 

I pray that it stays this way for the years to come. They can talk all they want. As long as they don't use military force, then the status quo is maintained.

[Larry]

So the US is just waiting for an excuse to take a firm stand on China. But since China is its greatest creditor, doesn't the US already hold the aces against Chinese government? Couldn't it warn China, "you guys better behave if you want to see your money again." China has a lot to lose if the US unilaterally uses this as a bargaining tool.

 

Then again, if the US ever resorts to doing this, market economies all over the world will go on a tailspin. The entire world economy could be disrupted.

 

I don't think the US holds any "aces" of any sort against china. China has been buying up US government debt (which seems like a dumb move now considering the current situation, but that's another story). China buying up US debt is what currently holds down US interest rates (by as much as 1 percentage point), should they stop buying up dollar backed US securities, interest rates would spiral IMO. The US has a lot more to lose should they threaten China with that, especially given the debates about the debt ceiling, and the recent budget debacle they just had.

 

and on modernization, this issue isn't the only one that fuels the Modernization debate. There's a lot be gained from modernizing the military, and it affects everything, law enforcement, insurgency, foreign deterrence, just the thought of being able to properly patrol all our islands and keep the people in them safe is a huge argument for modernization. For an island nation not to have a proper navy is laughable at best.

[heatseeker0714]

For an island nation not to have a proper navy is laughable at best.

 

QFT... Laughable at best, Criminal at its worst...

[heatseeker0714]

http://manilastandardtoday.com/2013/10/24/biazon-asks-why-air-assets-cant-reach-quake-areas/

 

Biazon asks why ‘air assets’ can’t reach quake areas

By Florante S. Solmerin | Posted on October 24, 2013 at 12:02am | 1,679 views

 

He reminded the Department of National Defense and the Armed Forces of the Philippines to “revisit their priorities” in buying assets, while taking into account similar assets for disaster and relief operations.

 

He added that instead of buying more fighter jets, the AFP should also make it a priority to buy more helicopters.

 

 

Si Pong hindi maka-move on sa ISO role ng AFP... There will always be internal threats and natural or man made calamities whether you accept it or not, hindi mawawala yan... Grunt mentality at its finest, "Everything should revolve around the ground pounders"... The real lowdown in this situation, because of his past stint as CSAFP, the common tao out there will give his words a lot of thought...

 

Hayst... Na-stuck na si Pong sa 1980s not realizing that it's already 2013...

[lomex32]

With 3 of them in the senate (Gringo and Antonio), I wonder what have they really done that benefited much of our Men in Uniform ?

 

Hayst... Na-stuck na si Pong sa 1980s not realizing that it's already 2013...

Edited October 29, 2013 by lomex32

[tk421]

Then if that's the case it's even more pointless to "modernize" the military. It's plain common sense 500 to 1 ratio ang discrepancy ng military naten. Money will just be wasted and let's not even start talking how much of those funds ang mapupunta sa corruption.

 

Ang fundamental issue dito ay ang security ng Pinas. The only solution is to arm every Filipino family.

 

Of course ayaw ng mga mason na bestfriend ni Pnoy nyan. Ayaw din ng military, pulis at gobyerno na armado ang mga Pilipino.

 

Actually, we still have to modernize despite being overpowered.

 

If you're against modernizing the military, then we might as well just disband our army and just let anyone take over the archipelago. What use is an army without functioning weapons, then? Remember: China, too, had a weak army at some point in the past.

 

Modernizing allows us time and deters the other side from starting anything nasty until cooler heads prevail. Sure, in an all out war, we'd most likely lose. But the same can be said even if we arm every family in the Philippines.

 

Also, arming every Filipino family, we'll only be doing the invaders a favor: soon enough we'll be killing each other from the inside. Have you heard of that outgoing barangay captain that shot dead his siblings because he lost the election? That's just one family. Imagine arming the rest.

[hit05]

If the US ever did this, no nation on earth will ever lend them money again.

 

 

Sure, that is naive. You know why? The reason China had to buy the US Bonds is to safeguard against the domino effect of US economic recession spreading fast to China.

 

Thus, giving the US a loan via boonds sale at a time when Americans were losing confidence in the economy was never about charity or astute investments with an ROI. Rather it was about insurance money to prevent a sudden overpowering fear of change called ECONOMIC DEPRESSION.

 

In the outbreak of war, such holdings would be used as pledge for reparation funds. Just like in the Iraq war or even the Libyan Conflict, a declaration of war will nullify any claims and prevent enemy access to their bankable resources if these are on the other side of the conflict. Such holding can be released for humanitarian reasons or if a more friendly party comes to power.

[heatseeker0714]

With 3 of them in the senate (Gringo and Antonio), I wonder what have they really done that benefited much of our Men in Uniform ?

 

Pre 3 years ng wala sa Senate si Pong, he ended his stint there on June 30, 2010... Naka 2 terms na sya non.... Then ngayon 2013 elections mahina sa ratings kaya nag re-electionist congressman na lang dun sa Muntinlupa...

 

Ano ba nagawa nyang significant for the AFP as a Senator??? Ano nga ba? Tahimik lang naman sa Senado yan, pomopustura lang pag meron Marines na nagbabalak mag coup against Ate Glue....

 

Pero if any of you guys know of anything significant that Pong did as a Senator for the modernization of the AFP, please feel free to share....

[mokong10101]

Actually, we still have to modernize despite being overpowered.

 

If you're against modernizing the military, then we might as well just disband our army and just let anyone take over the archipelago. What use is an army without functioning weapons, then? Remember: China, too, had a weak army at some point in the past.

 

Modernizing allows us time and deters the other side from starting anything nasty until cooler heads prevail. Sure, in an all out war, we'd most likely lose. But the same can be said even if we arm every family in the Philippines.

 

Also, arming every Filipino family, we'll only be doing the invaders a favor: soon enough we'll be killing each other from the inside. Have you heard of that outgoing barangay captain that shot dead his siblings because he lost the election? That's just one family. Imagine arming the rest.

 

1. Until you understand that a ratio disadvantage of 500 to 1, I'm afraid no amount of explanation will make you discern how strategically pointless and an exercise in idiocy trying to modernize the military. Which in itself as an institution is an unbelievably corrupt organization.

 

The Chinese also have a few of those so-called NUCLEAR SUBMARINES which can fire missiles from 500 miles with great precision. We can buy 10 new craft and it will be sunk in less than 10 minutes.

 

2. You obviously are not a student of history. Or maybe you're still very young to remember that before the Martial Law era, a significant portion of the middle/upper class own guns and yet crime is relatively low.

 

Again you're missing the point.

 

And I repeat. The point here is not those islands but the overall safety of the country from foreign threats.

 

Countries which allows its citizens to have guns have the lowest crime rates (Switzerland, US). While those who impose strict gun controls suffer from high crime rates. Eherm! Philippines. hehe

 

It's quite basic and simple really. And I understand you have been deluded into thinking otherwise. MORE GUNS MEANS LESS CRIME.

 

But to finish the point.

 

Switzerland is a very small country in the middle of Europe and yet it has survived 2 world wars without being invaded by anyone. Kahit si Hitler at si Stalin hindi naglakas loob na pasukin ang bansang ito kahit nandito pa ang mga malalaking bangko at pera... dahil....

 

Tama ang hula mo pre. Ang galing.

 

Bawat pamilyang Swiss owns an average of 5-6 RIFLES. Essentially every man, woman and child is armed. Think 50 million Filipinos armed. The Chinese will never dream of sh_tting on us.

 

In contrast saten when the Japanese invaded Filipinos died by the thousands and thousands because we are unarmed.

 

Simple arithmetic and a knowledge in history goes a long way to wisdom. hehe.

Edited October 29, 2013 by mokong10101