South China/West Philippine Sea

[maxiev]

- Well, we kicked the US out because of our arrogance and short-sightedness; people who led the should be named as such just to shame them...Anyway, knowing that they are building up can help us prepare and we can tell them we know. "Surprise" is helpful in an attack, since it is a force multiplier. The intel can be given to the press just for them to sensationalize and we do not even have to announce it to the world. The world does not listen too much if someone always shout "wolf".

As I recall, JPE was one of those who spearheaded the ouster of the US from the Philippines. Which isn't actually the truth. The truth is the Americans decided to abandon their bases because of the devastation brought about by Mt. Pinatubo. The Americans probably figured the cost to clean up the bases was too high and not worth the effort especially with a hostile Philippine government telling them to leave.

[Bugatti Veyron]

I must agree with VUBULI, it will be sunk, although it will take more than 5 or the 5 that get through the defense, but no sane admiral will put a carrier in the confined waters of the West Philippine Sea. "Quantity has a quality of it's own", those are tactics. However, that will mean that the US ...and Allies (NATO, Australia, Japan, and South Korea will have to respond) and all bets are off...far fetch scenario. china will confine itself to the Philippines; looking at the stats, the chinese do not need their navy just the coast guard. They will want a repeat of what they did with Vietnam back in the 80's. And that is me being an armchair admiral.

The Chinese navy, for all its power, is no match against the superior US navy. I highly doubt if China will want to do anything that will provoke American retaliation. Nobody will ever forget what transpired after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941. Or what happened to al Qaeda's leader and the Taliban. America is a country steeped on war. It's history is one of war. From the Declaration of Independence in 1776, America has been at war beginning with the American Revolution against the British, the American Civil War, the Indian Wars, the Spanish-American War, World War 1, World War 2, the Korean War, Vietnam War, the Gulf Wars parts 1 and 2. Each war brought new innovations in the fields of tactics and weapons development.

 

There is no doubt that America posseses the most powerful military in the world as of the present. A US analyst mentioned this but said that this may all change in 10 years or so.

 

In the meantime, I think China will lie low and will prevent a direct confrontation with the US. Attacking a US warship constitutes a direct confrontation.

[sonnyt111]

NATO? What are you talking about? The NATO countries are on the other side of the world. With the exception of the US, which is one of our staunchest alllies, the NATO countries wouldn't really care that much with the events happening in the Southeast Asian region.

 

Read up on the Aegis Missile Defense System to know what I'm saying.

If you take NATO out of the equation, do you think Australia, Japan and South Korea will band together with the US if a shooting war (God forbid) erupts between the US and China?

[sonnyt111]

Are Japan, Australia and South Korea NATO members? You're talking about countries half a world away.

 

The US has mutual defense treaties/agreements with these countries and should there be a shooting war with China, the three countries you mentioned are obliged to assist the US. Of course, China has to strike first in order for their treaties to take effect.

 

That's why I mentioned removing NATO from the equation. NATO, as a political and security alliance, includes European nations, the United States, and Canada. NATO is dedicated to peace and security in that part of the world. Hence it would obviously not be involved in peace and security in our part of the world.

 

The mutual defense treaties between United States, Japan, South Korea and Australia probably act as sufficient deterrent towards Chinese hostility.

 

That aside, check out this piece of North Korean propaganda uploaded onto YouTube.

 

http://news.yahoo.co...-140005920.html

Edited February 5, 2013 by sonnyt111

[tk421]

Wow China is getting serious. In its row with Japan, they actually made a radar weapons lock on Japanese naval vessels.

[airport-noo]

-NATO is a military alliance, an attack on one will be considered as an attack on everyone, hence why the Alliance was in Afghanistan. Attacking an American ship is an attack on the US. Somebody just need to read the charter. That was made clear to me in Brussels.

We're not part of NATO but in 2003 we were designated a MNNA (Major Non-NATO Ally). The benefits of MNNA doesn't include going to war for our sake; it's mostly training & logistics cooperation (wikipedia). Personally, I think if war breaks out the US participation will depend on where it's fought. If the fight is in the sea to decide who puts a flag on disputed territory, the US will not go to war for that. Maybe they'll help us with arms/supplies but not live bodies. If China starts invading us then that's a different story. South Korea wasn't MNNA until the 80's but freedom-loving countries like Philippines (even Puerto Rico) sent troops without any formal military alliance when the S.Koreans called for help.

[dungeonbaby]

this is what i've been saying we should be doing: taiwan students, teachers to camp in spratlys

[dungeonbaby]

Good idea. The question now is, how long can these students camp on Taiwan's portion of the Spratlys? Or do they have relievers on a rotation basis so that Taiwan's portion of the Spratlys would always have Taiwanese on it?

 

a good idea but you know as well as i do that this was a point of contention just last year. what does occupation amount to?

 

anyway, the time frame is being kept under wraps for security reasons, but the taiwanese will be sending postcards from the spratlys. apparently they already have LSTs there, and frigates. can't confirm this last bit of info though.

[tk421]

Occupation is one thing. Asserting control is another. I don't think we can do the latter.

[maxiev]

We're not part of NATO but in 2003 we were designated a MNNA (Major Non-NATO Ally). The benefits of MNNA doesn't include going to war for our sake; it's mostly training & logistics cooperation (wikipedia). Personally, I think if war breaks out the US participation will depend on where it's fought. If the fight is in the sea to decide who puts a flag on disputed territory, the US will not go to war for that. Maybe they'll help us with arms/supplies but not live bodies. If China starts invading us then that's a different story. South Korea wasn't MNNA until the 80's but freedom-loving countries like Philippines (even Puerto Rico) sent troops without any formal military alliance when the S.Koreans called for help.

I concur with this analysis.

[sonnyt111]

What about his video? It's no longer available.

 

Yeah I know. The video got pulled. It was a poorly made video in my opinion. Just some cheap North Korean propaganda.

[sonnyt111]

Good idea. The question now is, how long can these students camp on Taiwan's portion of the Spratlys? Or do they have relievers on a rotation basis so that Taiwan's portion of the Spratlys would always have Taiwanese on it?

 

I would imagine students camped there today will be relieved in a couple of days on a rotation basis. Sure fire way to occupy the contested islands on a continuing basis. Evicting these Taiwanese by force by the Mainlanders is tantamount to full scale war which could have severe repercussions for China if the US decides to counter Chinese aggression with military intervention.

[airport-noo]

this is what i've been saying we should be doing: taiwan students, teachers to camp in spratlys

Malakas loob nila dahil hindi sila babarilin ng China. The prospect of reunification makes this move favorable to China. Unlike the VIetnamese who were massacred when they pulled this stunt.

Edited February 7, 2013 by airport-noo

[heatseeker0714]

this is what i've been saying we should be doing: taiwan students, teachers to camp in spratlys

 

You do that, we lose the moral high ground. Us lodging our complaint in that International Tribunal has boosted our standing in the eyes of other countries. As one ASEAN Diplomat stated, "The Philippines Foreign Service has been for decades, not held in very high regard, but with this move, it shows that they clearly did their homework."

 

Sec. Albert Del Rosario et al put China in a bind... If they ignore said complaint, they'll be seen as not participating in the proper and legal forum. If they send delegates to said tribunal, they'll concede their position of "Irrefutable Sovereignty" and recognize our complaint.

[heatseeker0714]

Occupation is one thing. Asserting control is another. I don't think we can do the latter.

 

Hence our 3 pronged approach, namely, Political, Diplomatic and Legal.

 

Political - Our Government talking with theirs about said issue.

Diplomatic - Our Government shouting at the top of its lungs to get everybody's (International Community) attention on the situation.

Legal - Our Government going to the International Tribunal.

[dungeonbaby]

You do that, we lose the moral high ground. Us lodging our complaint in that International Tribunal has boosted our standing in the eyes of other countries. As one ASEAN Diplomat stated, "The Philippines Foreign Service has been for decades, not held in very high regard, but with this move, it shows that they clearly did their homework."

 

Sec. Albert Del Rosario et al put China in a bind... If they ignore said complaint, they'll be seen as not participating in the proper and legal forum. If they send delegates to said tribunal, they'll concede their position of "Irrefutable Sovereignty" and recognize our complaint.

 

taiwan's dnd has been doing it for 3 years, according to reports. how's taiwan's moral highground?

 

and how is panatag shoal, is its entrance still barred by the Chinese?

[tk421]

Hence our 3 pronged approach, namely, Political, Diplomatic and Legal.

 

Political - Our Government talking with theirs about said issue.

Diplomatic - Our Government shouting at the top of its lungs to get everybody's (International Community) attention on the situation.

Legal - Our Government going to the International Tribunal.

 

I'm afraid those are not enough. We can win all three, but if the Chinese Navy can do any damn thing they want in the vicinity, then we still can't claim effective control over the territory.

[tk421]

taiwan's dnd has been doing it for 3 years, according to reports. how's taiwan's moral highground?

 

and how is panatag shoal, is its entrance still barred by the Chinese?

 

Taiwan doesn't need 'moral high ground'. If they're occupying it and no one else is infringing in their set borders, then it's effectively their's.

[dungeonbaby]

Taiwan doesn't need 'moral high ground'. If they're occupying it and no one else is infringing in their set borders, then it's effectively their's.

 

which would make my point, wouldn't it

[camiar]

Occupation is one thing. Asserting control is another. I don't think we can do the latter.

We have been asserting control on Pag-asa Island in the Spratlys for decades already.

 

We have Philippine Marines there. It has a 1.2 km long airstrip there that can allow huge C-130 military transport planes to land and take-off.

 

Recently, the Department of Education officially opened an Elementary School there to cater to the growing number of children among the Filipino community living there. There is a fully functioning Barangay in the island. Elections are conducted there in conjunction with our regular elections here in Manila.

 

We have not just occupied the Pag-asa Island, we are asserting control over it.

 

All Taiwan can do is to let their students to camp in some unoccupied sandbar in the area.

 

We, on the other hand, have already been occupying and governing the biggest island in the Spratleys.

 

Yes, China can take that island from us by overwhelming force. But at what price? I doubt if they will do it.

Edited February 7, 2013 by camiar

[tk421]

They dont have to take it. All they have to do is make a blockade around it and prevent supplies from coming through...

[hit05]

The real issue here is our officials are deeply divided. There is no clear cut policy. Even the Chinese Envoy during the start of Noynoy's term publicly proclaimed that promises have been broken and the president's word does not have integrity.

 

Maybe what Filipinos should be doing today is simply to collate the headline news and stop allowing media/information controls to erase the facts to SHORTEN our memory.

 

What PROMISES were given by Noynoy to China? He did sit down with Chinese officials and decided on the Spratly issue. The bilateral decision by China and the Philippines summon the call for ASEAN nations to mobilize a contigent military force as resistance to the act of taking over the disputed islands. It also made the US State Secretary steadfast in her duty to both APEC and Asean groups to protect the region from Chinese expansionist activities by revising the VFA and perhaps altering the protocol or judgment call for military action.

 

There is also recent crack in Senate unity which stems from Sen Enrile revelations about Sen Trillanes' secret missions to China as negotiator for Noynoy. The Senate as a separate and independent body has been compromised by Sen Trillanes' act of accepting missions fit for a Cabinet Secretary instead. Such secret and unofficial moves not only confuses all the parties concerned but demoralizes the DFA in its effort to resist FALSE and misleading claims by China.

 

Today the DFA is boldly using multilateral UN settlement to calm all parties but it does not disclose the damage done by earlier negotiations or the unnecessary trips of Senator Trillanes who got no authority to decide on behalf of the State. One of the chief officials that Noynoy appointed to study the matter openly admitted on TV that he lived in China for sometime and knew about the territorial claims gap. According to this lawyer, China base its map on the CLAIM of the Nationalists that went into the island of Formosa and establish the Republic of Taiwan. But COMMON SENSE would tell us that China went through as FAILED cultural revolution which is based on lies and preposterous propaganda. This Cultural Revolution is an abject failure and its officers were in fact executed as traitors aka Gang of Four after the death of Chairman Mao. Moreover even the Taiwanese today refuses to accept deals of unification with the mainland and does not consider themselves a part of China so why even entertain the territorial claim which is a HOAX.

[camiar]

They dont have to take it. All they have to do is make a blockade around it and prevent supplies from coming through...

Blockade Pag-asa Island? what excuse would they use to justify it? That would only make them look bad to the international community.

 

To prevent supplies from coming through? To do that they also have to enforce a no-fly zone since we are capable of re-supplying by air. But to enforce the no-fly zone, they would have to declare war. War against whom? the Philippines? What a laugh! They will just make themselves look like fools.

 

You give too much credit on China's perceived strength. The fact is, China can't do much with their claims as we are with ours. You should understand that they cannot touch our claimed islands not because we are strong enough to defend them, but because our neighbors and allies are watching. But having said that, I still believe that we should build up our own military strength to protect our claims. Defending our territory and sovereignty is our responsibility, not the USA, nor any of our neighbors and allies.

Edited February 8, 2013 by camiar

[oscartamaguchiblackface]

Blockade Pag-asa Island? what excuse would they use to justify it? That would only make them look bad to the international community.

 

To prevent supplies from coming through? To do that they also have to enforce a no-fly zone since we are capable of re-supplying by air. But to enforce the no-fly zone, they would have to declare war. War against whom? the Philippines? What a laugh! They will just make themselves look like fools.

 

You give too much credit on China's perceived strength. The fact is, China can't do much with their claims as we are with ours. You should understand that they cannot touch our claimed islands not because we are strong enough to defend them, but because our neighbors and allies are watching. But having said that, I still believe that we should build up our own military strength to protect our claims. Defending our territory and sovereignty is our responsibility, not the USA, nor any of our neighbors and allies.

 

Was wondering if I understood you correctly. That in order to enforce an embargo, there is a need to declare war. Was I right in my interpretation? If so, how is it that JFK managed to declare a naval quarantine off Cuba during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962 without declaring war? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a quarantine similar to an embargo? Is there really a need to declare war against a country before an embargo can take effect?

 

I agree with your statement that China can't do much with their claims as we are with ours. I've always maintained that China stands to lose much should hostilities break out. I believe that, as much as possible, China doesn't want to provoke the US from entering into the equation by siding with an ASEAN member which happens to be at odds with China. Not to mention having to confront other ASEAN member countries which may come to the aid of their ally.

[camiar]

Was wondering if I understood you correctly. That in order to enforce an embargo, there is a need to declare war. Was I right in my interpretation? If so, how is it that JFK managed to declare a naval quarantine off Cuba during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962 without declaring war? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a quarantine similar to an embargo? Is there really a need to declare war against a country before an embargo can take effect?

 

You have to read a few posts back to put it in the right context. We were talking about China taking Pag-asa Island by overwhelming force, which tk421 says China don't have to but just to blockade the island (presumably to force it to surrender).

 

Under what pretense would China blockade Pag-asa Island? Can you give a scenario of a full naval blockade with a no-fly-zone that is not a state of war?