• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US B-52 bombers challenge disputed China air zone.

Higgins86

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 13, 2011
Messages
18,099
Reaction score
10,108
Location
England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
BBC News - US B-52 bombers challenge disputed China air zone


Two B-52 bonbers have challenged Chinas new air defence rules by flying over the disputed islands in the south china sea. This comes after Japan have refused to acknowledge China's new "air defence identification zone", US claim that normal procedures but China have warned that aircraft obey its rules or face "emergency defensive measures".
I feel that both sides have valid points here but from a neutral standpoint I don't understand why the US would risk antagonising China or risk a possible mis-communication which could result in shots being fired.
 
BBC News - US B-52 bombers challenge disputed China air zone


Two B-52 bonbers have challenged Chinas new air defence rules by flying over the disputed islands in the south china sea. This comes after Japan have refused to acknowledge China's new "air defence identification zone", US claim that normal procedures but China have warned that aircraft obey its rules or face "emergency defensive measures".
I feel that both sides have valid points here but from a neutral standpoint I don't understand why the US would risk antagonising China or risk a possible mis-communication which could result in shots being fired.

Gotta draw the line somewhere. Otherwise they just keep pushing the limit.
 
BBC News - US B-52 bombers challenge disputed China air zone


Two B-52 bonbers have challenged Chinas new air defence rules by flying over the disputed islands in the south china sea. This comes after Japan have refused to acknowledge China's new "air defence identification zone", US claim that normal procedures but China have warned that aircraft obey its rules or face "emergency defensive measures".
I feel that both sides have valid points here but from a neutral standpoint I don't understand why the US would risk antagonising China or risk a possible mis-communication which could result in shots being fired.

If you don't understand why the US would do this, then you don't understand how China and "creep" work. US is protecting it's own and Japan's interests in the area and seems unwilling to simply cede to a Chinese expansion of territorial influence.
 
Gotta draw the line somewhere. Otherwise they just keep pushing the limit.

I agree but these islands are an on going issue and have been a issue for a few years now, personally would like to see the US sitting both parties down and trying to talk this out. Just seem's very agressive to fly two b-52's the day after they announce their new air defence.
 
I agree but these islands are an on going issue and have been a issue for a few years now, personally would like to see the US sitting both parties down and trying to talk this out. Just seem's very agressive to fly two b-52's the day after they announce their new air defence.

I don't think we're ever going to see the Chinese and Japanese sit down and talk about anything, even with the master of illusion, Obama in the room. We've already made our position on the ownership of those islands very clear.
 
BBC News - US B-52 bombers challenge disputed China air zone


Two B-52 bonbers have challenged Chinas new air defence rules by flying over the disputed islands in the south china sea. This comes after Japan have refused to acknowledge China's new "air defence identification zone", US claim that normal procedures but China have warned that aircraft obey its rules or face "emergency defensive measures".
I feel that both sides have valid points here but from a neutral standpoint I don't understand why the US would risk antagonising China or risk a possible mis-communication which could result in shots being fired.

Wow, does that seem stupid. The ONLY motivation I can see for doing so is to try to push China deeper into an arms race - which of course is something the military defense industry always wants.
 
I agree but these islands are an on going issue and have been a issue for a few years now, personally would like to see the US sitting both parties down and trying to talk this out. Just seem's very agressive to fly two b-52's the day after they announce their new air defence.

I don't see any reason why we should give a **** about those islands.

Personally, I think declaring Japan our ally and China our enemy immediately after WWII - even declaring China doesn't exist for decades - was among the worst foreign policy decisions in USA history.
 
I don't see any reason why we should give a **** about those islands.

Personally, I think declaring Japan our ally and China our enemy immediately after WWII - even declaring China doesn't exist for decades - was among the worst foreign policy decisions in USA history.

No one does, the issue is Chinese expansion and aggressiveness.
 
If you don't understand why the US would do this, then you don't understand how China and "creep" work. US is protecting it's own and Japan's interests in the area and seems unwilling to simply cede to a Chinese expansion of territorial influence.

No one does, the issue is Chinese expansion and aggressiveness.

Both, well said.

This is the reason. If we don't stand now, then when and where? When they decide that Guam should be Chinese? Or Hawaii?
 
I don't see any reason why we should give a **** about those islands.

Personally, I think declaring Japan our ally and China our enemy immediately after WWII - even declaring China doesn't exist for decades - was among the worst foreign policy decisions in USA history.

China was never a very good ally of the US. They were allies of convenience like the Soviets were in WWII.

The Republic of China did not like the Americans, and the feeling was mutual, the US was looking to support a US friendly regime in China, but the Chinese Republic didn't want American involvement in their internal politics.

Unfortunately this left the Republic vulnerable to the Chinese Communist party after the war, and within a few years the country was locked in a civil war with the communists while having few friends willing to help out.

The knee jerk reaction seems to always be to blame the US for everything, but the Chinese government before, during and after WWII was incredibly stupid in about every facet of governance.
 
Both, well said.

This is the reason. If we don't stand now, then when and where? When they decide that Guam should be Chinese? Or Hawaii?

It's not for me, as a Canadian, to say when or if the US should use force, but I can comment on the why or the what ifs. I would say as well that usually in life when bullies are faced with resistance, they generally back down - bullies like to test the limits of their prey - in this case, the US is indicating where those limits may lie. It may be different next time, as China gets militarily stronger, but it's good to set limits while you can.
 
It's not for me, as a Canadian, to say when or if the US should use force, but I can comment on the why or the what ifs. I would say as well that usually in life when bullies are faced with resistance, they generally back down - bullies like to test the limits of their prey - in this case, the US is indicating where those limits may lie. It may be different next time, as China gets militarily stronger, but it's good to set limits while you can.

As a Canadian, you have every right to be concerned with the action of China that may impact the entire world. And, you have every right to voice your opinion regarding the actions of any other country, including the US. Whether I agree with you or not is my right. On this particular topic, and many others I have read you opine on, we agree.
 
BBC News - US B-52 bombers challenge disputed China air zone


Two B-52 bonbers have challenged Chinas new air defence rules by flying over the disputed islands in the south china sea. This comes after Japan have refused to acknowledge China's new "air defence identification zone", US claim that normal procedures but China have warned that aircraft obey its rules or face "emergency defensive measures".
I feel that both sides have valid points here but from a neutral standpoint I don't understand why the US would risk antagonising China or risk a possible mis-communication which could result in shots being fired.

Because Japan is our ally and we fly in that area out of Okinawa. China was staking out a position in an attempt to claim power over Japanese airspace and the ability to limit our and our partner nations' operations. I'm not much a fan of the administration, but this was precisely the right move - demonstrate the Chinese claim to be toothless by raising the stakes beyond their willingness to match.
 
Both, well said.

This is the reason. If we don't stand now, then when and where? When they decide that Guam should be Chinese? Or Hawaii?

I don't think its as simple as that, unlike Guam and Hawaii these are uninhabited islands. Japan claimed them in 1895 during their aggressive expanision period, during this period as many of you know Japan murdered and raped their way through Asia. The debate over these islands runs deeper than China just trying to "flex" and it is also worth pointing out that China are not the only Asian power who disagrees with Japan over who own's these islands.
 
As a Canadian, you have every right to be concerned with the action of China that may impact the entire world. And, you have every right to voice your opinion regarding the actions of any other country, including the US. Whether I agree with you or not is my right. On this particular topic, and many others I have read you opine on, we agree.

Thank you for the kind words - much appreciated - and I enjoy your posts, that I've seen during my time here. Part of the fun of being here is to be able to disagree or to share opinions that may get people thinking. I enjoy when people don't agree, if they have good reasons - but I also enjoy when people agree - good to be validated on occasion. And I have to just close by saying that America doesn't get near the validation they deserve from the rest of the world so I like to show some when I can.
 
BBC News - US B-52 bombers challenge disputed China air zone


Two B-52 bonbers have challenged Chinas new air defence rules by flying over the disputed islands in the south china sea. This comes after Japan have refused to acknowledge China's new "air defence identification zone", US claim that normal procedures but China have warned that aircraft obey its rules or face "emergency defensive measures".
I feel that both sides have valid points here but from a neutral standpoint I don't understand why the US would risk antagonising China or risk a possible mis-communication which could result in shots being fired.

Why does it not even occur to you to wonder why China is risking antagonizing us?
 
Why does it not even occur to you to wonder why China is risking antagonizing us?

Because this feud has gone on for centuries and is much bigger than a simple powerplay from China and it is on their doorstep not yours.
 
Because this feud has gone on for centuries and is much bigger than a simple powerplay from China and it is on their doorstep not yours.

It's on Japan's "doorstep," too, and they agree with us. As the story said, flying through there is business as usual and has been since the end of WWII. It's China who's suddenly making the aggressive moves here and claiming things they haven't before.
 
It's on Japan's "doorstep," too, and they agree with us. As the story said, flying through there is business as usual and has been since the end of WWII. It's China who's suddenly making the aggressive moves here and claiming things they haven't before.


Oh no they have claimed these Islands on a number of occasions. You could argue that Japn have been equally aggressive with the purchuse of three of the disputed islands from their private owner.
 
BBC News - US B-52 bombers challenge disputed China air zone


Two B-52 bonbers have challenged Chinas new air defence rules by flying over the disputed islands in the south china sea. This comes after Japan have refused to acknowledge China's new "air defence identification zone", US claim that normal procedures but China have warned that aircraft obey its rules or face "emergency defensive measures".
I feel that both sides have valid points here but from a neutral standpoint I don't understand why the US would risk antagonising China or risk a possible mis-communication which could result in shots being fired.
So one day when China is feeling froggy and tells us they own the Pacific up to within 3 miles of Cali.
 
Oh no they have claimed these Islands on a number of occasions.

They've never threatened any action before.


You could argue that Japn have been equally aggressive with the purchuse of three of the disputed islands from their private owner.

Who'd they threaten by doing so?
 
Because this feud has gone on for centuries and is much bigger than a simple powerplay from China and it is on their doorstep not yours.

Centuries? We haven't even had "airspace" for centuries.
 
Like the cowboys that we are, this is how America deals with crisis .. with a gun. No differently than we thought to deal with Syria, we lead with the gun.

This part of an on-going proxy battle with China for resources .. a war that China is winning. This is more of Obama's 'pivot towards Asia.'

.. much more to come.
 
They've never threatened any action before.




Who'd they threaten by doing so?

They threatened China, Taiwan and even Korea complained about it openly. Don't under estimate the mistrust much of Asia has for Japan.
 
Back
Top Bottom