South China/West Philippine Sea

[fatchubs]

What makes you think the US will not join in the fray? Perhaps, you can ask Obama if he's gonna send the USS George Washington in the event of a War of the Spratlys. After all, he is the commander-in-chief. He has a lot of Nimitz class super carriers to choose from.

 

What makes me think so ... well one would be this http://www.tribuneonline.org/headlines/20120114hed3.html

 

"The United States has appeared to change its position on the Spratlys controversy between the Philippines and China, saying Washington “is not taking sides” on the territorial tussle between the Philippines and China which have been battling for control over the oil-rich region in the South China Sea for the last 20 years."

And you? CAre to answer my question without throwing the same question back

[fatchubs]

Again, you're too excited because of one article which apparently you don't understand. The United States will take no sides in this issue but I was talking of the United States joining us in the event of war. You post without even thinking, which I've been telling you before. You forgot to mention the Mutual Defense Treaty (are you even aware of it?) which the US would honor in the event of a military showdown with China. Think before you post. Haha! You're making yourself look like a clown again by asking foolish questions.

 

 

 

 

I am aware of the treaty ... but I have some concerns. Is it automatic that the US fights our fight if China strikes given the existence of the said treaty?

[fatchubs]

Talaga? Aware ka ba talaga or nung sinabi ko lang? Another foolish question. Read up and you'll know. Just go back to the Corona thread. You don't belong here.

 

how can it be a foolish question? why don't you enlighten me since i really don't know much on this. correct me if i am wrong but from what I know it is not automatic that the US can go to war and fight our fight despite the existence of the treaty.

[dungeonbaby]

1.) ahh ganon ba? wala palang sense pinost ko.I'll just let the more SENIOR AND CREDIBLE posters in this thread judge forthemselves with regard to the quality of my posts, sa tagal and active ko ditosa Politics, Economy and Current Events Thread, magkakakilala na kami ditongmga GENUINE and PRODUCTIVE posters.

 

2.) the Philippine government not aggressiveenough in developing oil fields in the WPS??? "Napag iiwanan tayo"? Of all the Claimants ba sadisputed Areas ng WPS, sino na lang ba walang up and running oil and or naturalgas platform???? Research child. Research.

 

3.) if you were a US Company, who would yourather have NOT breathing down your Corporate Neck, The Federal Governmentunder who's Laws you are subject to scrutiny and regulation or the PRC???

 

4.) the mere fact that you didn't understand myanswer shows the lack of depth of your understanding with regard the WPS Issue.I'm a fair man, i acknowledge other posters who give credible answers based onFACTS on whatever they post but on people who just feel slighted because of myresponse and gives a knee jerk reaction, well, that's another story. It showssaid person's mental immaturity. ang dami ko ng nakasagutan dito sa MTC butwhenever they refute my posts based on facts, i learn to trust and respectthem. Di ko naman gawaing mamikon at mapikon sa isang forum.

 

1. way to overreact. i said i didn't get what you said. so who was i pointing a finger at? me, primarily. if anything, i was pointing to my own confusion at what you were trying to say. your post didn'tmake sense to me, which is different from discrediting your posts altogether.did i say you were a nonsensical poster? did i make a personal attack on you in arguing my points? no, but you just had to attack me. and not just here but on someone else's profile, to wit:

 

brod ano history ni DungeonBaby??? umeepal sakin don sa Politics thread eh.... yellow zombie ba?

 

anyone who thinks i'm a yellow zombie obviously doesn't read the threads carefully. and since when does posting a contrary opinion qualify as being "epal?"

2. are you speaking of the Malampaya Oil Platform? isn't that on undisputed territory? i was speaking about disputed territory. for example, the rigs (seaoil, if i'm not mistaken) near palawan are right at the line that's disputed by China, yet they're so near palawan it wouldn't make sense for China to seriously bother with those. a passing glance at a map of oil rigs in the area will show just how far behind we are in this matter. do i think the Philippine government is aggressive? no. I feel our government has all but given away islands to the Chinese. that's a feeling i have and you are free to disagree passionately. but are you saying, then, that you believe we are doing absolutely everything to aggressively harness this energy that is at ourfingertips? Taiwan was aggressive with Pratas. China was aggressive with the Paracels. and now, despite the obvious distance from their shores, they have those islands.

 

i read D. Dzurek's paper on the Spratley dispute and looked at US Department of State maps. but fine, i'll take your dare and do more research, i'll even defer to you "experts." in the meantime, maybe some of us here ought to backread and get over their purported status as "GENUINE"and "PRODUCTIVE" posters whatever the hell that's supposed to mean in the "reality" of MTC.

 

3. i'm not a US company so i can't say with certainty whom they would prefer NOT to breathe down their necks. what i can say is this, it doesn't matter whom they choose to deal with - the Philippines or China - the Feds could scrutinize the deal but they couldn't do much to "regulate" it if a.) the company's on the straightand narrow, i.e., not stealing, b.) the US and China are not at war, and c.) there is no trade embargo with China. my point was, i still tend to think the overriding impetus to explore or produce energy on the part of the multinational oil companies doesn't look to be politics or the MDT, it's business. and even if the US didn't deal with the Chinese (which would be odd, since Crestone already dealt with the Chinese in 1992) there are other oil companies who would and do deal with China.

 

4. yes, clearly i lack understanding because i don't see what you are making a fuss about, we're not on opposite sides.

[fatchubs]

What part of "read up and you'll know" didn't you understand? What you know is irrelevant coz obviously you don't know what you're talking about.

 

hahaha ... daming satsat ng nagmamarunong di naman makasagot ng matino sa mga tanong ko

 

 

Thank you for being tight lip on the REAL ISSUE.

[khantan]

Afaik, yon tutulungan tayo ng Estados Unidos kapag umabot ng mainland ang labanan. Hindi tayo papansinin kapag ang laban ay nasa Spratlys o Scarborgh.

[wendy testicleger]

Ihanda na natin ang pangunahing sandata natin: ang insect infested Philippine bananas!

[camiar]

Our Mutual Defense Treaty with the USA obliges both the Philippine and American governments to aid each other if it comes under armed attack by external party.

 

One of the treaty's article staes: An armed attack on either of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack on the metropolitan territory of either of the Parties, or on the island territories under its jurisdiction in the Pacific or on its armed forces, public vessels or aircraft in the Pacific.

 

If a US enemy militarily attacks Guam, for example, the Philippines is obliged to come to its aid. An attack on our Kalayaan Island (under our jurisdiction), or any of our armed forces, ships, or aircraft in this area, will bring on the same response from the US.

 

But we should no rely on the MDT for our own protection. Diplomacy is still the best strategy.

 

If we are too cocky to start a fight and end up getting clobbered by a stronger opponent, we would be the ones at fault.

 

What we should be doing is to increase our capability to resist an armed attack. We don't even need to match our opponent's war-fighting capabilities in the area. We just need to build enough strength to make it very very costly for them to attack us - both militarily and diplomatically.

 

Our Mutual Defense Treaty with the USA obliges both the Philippine and American governments to aid each other if it comes under armed attack by external party.

 

One of the treaty's article states: An armed attack on either of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack on the metropolitan territory of either of the Parties, or on the island territories under its jurisdiction in the Pacific or on its armed forces, public vessels or aircraft in the Pacific.

 

If a US enemy militarily attacks Guam, for example, the Philippines is obliged to come to its aid. An attack on our Kalayaan Island (under our jurisdiction), or any of our armed forces, ships, or aircraft in this area, will bring on the same response from the US.

 

But we should no rely on the MDT for our own protection. Diplomacy is still the best strategy.

 

If we are too cocky to start a fight and end up getting clobbered by a stronger opponent, we would be the ones at fault.

 

What we should be doing is to increase our capability to resist an armed attack. We don't even need to match our opponent's war-fighting capabilities in the area. We just need to build enough strength to make it very very costly for them to attack us - both militarily and diplomatically.

[heatseeker0714]

Despite US ambiguity regarding the Panatag Shoal Issue during its early stages, the following developments has taken place lately...

 

A US Nuclear Fast Attack Sub suddenly surfaces in Subic in the middle of the Panatag Shoal tension with China...

 

Then US SecState Hillary Clinton, US SecDef Leon Panetta, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Martin Dempsey, leading US Senate and House leaders have called for the Signing and Ratification by the US of the UNCLOS Treaty...

 

And now this...

 

China alarmed by Clinton’s comments on West Philippine Sea

 

http://globalnation.inquirer.net/38223/china-alarmed-by-clinton%E2%80%99s-comments-on-west-philippine-sea

 

Getting scared Chicom??? Oh God, i've been praying since day one of this stand-off that one of your stu.pid ship captains get jittery and fire the first shot at a Philippine Government Vessel...

[heatseeker0714]

More good news for you ChiCom landgrabbers...

 

Movers, shakers’ to welcome Aquino to US

http://globalnation.inquirer.net/38209/%E2%80%98movers-shakers%E2%80%99-to-welcome-aquino-to-us

[heatseeker0714]

giving government announcements full of b.s@%t to your citizens is your right, but expecting the same to work on FILIPINO Citizens is just plain stu.pidity...

 

DFA slams Chinese report on agreement on Unclos

 

http://globalnation.inquirer.net/38203/dfa-slams-chinese-report-on-agreement-on-unclos

 

getting desperate ChiCom??? running out of "News Coverage" for you to mask your screw-ups in front of your citizens regarding the Bo Xilai and Chen Guangcheng Scandals???

 

if a Blind Man under house arrest guarded by around a hundred paramilitary law enforcers slips from your fingers and manages to seek refuge in the US Embassy hundreds of miles away from his village with the help of a few civilian "Dissident" friends of his, ano na lang mukhang maihaharap nyo sa mga mamamayan nyo???

 

ahehehehehe....

[dos8dos]

Panetta: Majority of US warships moving to Asia

[silentkilla]

Panetta: Majority of US warships moving to Asia

 

so the us has changed its stance on being neutral with regards to china's territorial grabbing of the west philippine sea?

[dos8dos]

^dude in diplomacy, one party does not have to SPELL things out

[dos8dos]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o318z54rHTU Edited June 2, 2012 by dos8dos