• 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!

Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South China

Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Jack Hays said:
Militarily the artillery is of no value. It could be erased in the first half-hour of any engagement with US forces. Its only conceivable role is to threaten merchant shipping.
Click to expand...

It's fantastic that you actually believe that, and I rather suspect that you don't.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Montecresto said:
It's fantastic that you actually believe that, and I rather suspect that you don't.
Click to expand...

It's straightforward military analysis. That artillery is useless in any other role. This isn't a hard call.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Jack Hays said:
It's straightforward military analysis. That artillery is useless in any other role. This isn't a hard call.
Click to expand...

Oh, if you'd look back, you'd see that I called out the military value of the artillery before you did. That said, jumping to the conclusion that it's intended use is against unarmed merchant vessels is a huge jump, really, you're going to suggest that China would engage merchant ships in such fashion. You sound like Bolten, McCain, and Netanyahu.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Jack Hays said:
It's straightforward military analysis. That artillery is useless in any other role. This isn't a hard call.
Click to expand...

Well, just because such pieces have been used in that exact manner for centuries doesn't mean....ah.... never mind.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Montecresto said:
Oh, if you'd look back, you'd see that I called out the military value of the artillery before you did. That said, jumping to the conclusion that it's intended use is against unarmed merchant vessels is a huge jump, really, you're going to suggest that China would engage merchant ships in such fashion. You sound like Bolten, McCain, and Netanyahu.
Click to expand...

The artillery has no value against an armed opponent. Therefore its only use can be against unarmed opponents. The artillery poses a credible threat in that context. As for Bolton, McCain and Netanyahu, I'm honored to be mentioned in their company.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Jack Hays said:
The artillery has no value against an armed opponent. Therefore its only use can be against unarmed opponents. The artillery poses a credible threat in that context. As for Bolton, McCain and Netanyahu, I'm honored to be mentioned in their company.
Click to expand...

Yeah. The intention is to force shipping out beyond artillery range. There is simply no other reason for it to be there.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

humbolt said:
Yeah. The intention is to force shipping out beyond artillery range. There is simply no other reason for it to be there.
Click to expand...

I'd have to look into the geographic particulars, but there are points along that shipping lane where that artillery's range would effectively close it.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Jack Hays said:
The artillery has no value against an armed opponent. Therefore its only use can be against unarmed opponents. The artillery poses a credible threat in that context. As for Bolton, McCain and Netanyahu, I'm honored to be mentioned in their company.
Click to expand...

The next step will be the radars, naval cruise missiles and anti-aircraft assets, which will effectively enforce their EEZ claim. This is standard procedure as well. One could call it territory-grabbing in the traditional sense, with the only exception being that they're furnishing the land.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

humbolt said:
The next step will be the radars, naval cruise missiles and anti-aircraft assets, which will effectively enforce their EEZ claim. This is standard procedure as well. One could call it territory-grabbing in the traditional sense, with the only exception being that they're furnishing the land.
Click to expand...

Not referring to their EEZ claims, which is a whole other issue, the Chinese have the soundest title to the Spratly's.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Jack Hays said:
The artillery has no value against an armed opponent. Therefore its only use can be against unarmed opponents. The artillery poses a credible threat in that context. As for Bolton, McCain and Netanyahu, I'm honored to be mentioned in their company.
Click to expand...

I know you are dude, glad to boost your standing. ;) that's not entirely true. The pieces of artillery could provide a certain level of defense for the contractors working there. They certainly aren't offensive in nature.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

humbolt said:
The next step will be the radars, naval cruise missiles and anti-aircraft assets, which will effectively enforce their EEZ claim. This is standard procedure as well. One could call it territory-grabbing in the traditional sense, with the only exception being that they're furnishing the land.
Click to expand...

Btw, where's the criticism of vietnams reclamation projects in the Spratly's and their placement of artillery pieces, hmm?
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Montecresto said:
Not referring to their EEZ claims, which is a whole other issue, the Chinese have the soundest title to the Spratly's.
Click to expand...

And what international body has declared that to be true?
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Montecresto said:
Btw, where's the criticism of vietnams reclamation projects in the Spratly's and their placement of artillery pieces, hmm?
Click to expand...

They shouldn't be doing it either, but Vietnam isn't China.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Jack Hays said:
Militarily the artillery is of no value. It could be erased in the first half-hour of any engagement with US forces. Its only conceivable role is to threaten merchant shipping.
Click to expand...

Hilarious stuff Jack. I mean really what sort of range do you think their artillery has and why would they use it to sink merchantmen when they have a navy ? :lol:
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

humbolt said:
They shouldn't be doing it either, but Vietnam isn't China.
Click to expand...

Well, if they shouldn't be doing it either, perhaps they need to discontinue it if they expect China to. :roll:
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

China looses all credibility the moment they engage a merchant vessel with artillery. Where do people come up with this stuff.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Montecresto said:
I know you are dude, glad to boost your standing. ;) that's not entirely true. The pieces of artillery could provide a certain level of defense for the contractors working there. They certainly aren't offensive in nature.
Click to expand...

They provide no protection. They are merely targets. They are only useful against unarmed opponents.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

flogger said:
Hilarious stuff Jack. I mean really what sort of range do you think their artillery has and why would they use it to sink merchantmen when they have a navy ? :lol:
Click to expand...

Range would depend on type of artillery, but several miles is likely. Enough to shut down a narrow shipping lane. Why not the Chinese Navy? Because the island can't be sunk.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Jack Hays said:
They provide no protection. They are merely targets. They are only useful against unarmed opponents.
Click to expand...

How familiar are you with the pieces deployed? Are you aware that there is an island within range of this one that the Vietnamese are engaging in reclamation of, that has also been outfitted with artillery?
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Montecresto said:
How familiar are you with the pieces deployed? Are you aware that there is an island within range of this one that the Vietnamese are engaging in reclamation of, that has also been outfitted with artillery?
Click to expand...

Vietnamese are not a threat to shipping.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Montecresto said:
Like I said, I'd be doing the same thing China's doing, with one caveat, I'd tell America to defend its annexation of the Hawaiian islands to a board that I have veto power in. ;)
Click to expand...

The case as it stands, China has very legal right to all of their claim. Is that what you are stating?
What board are you referring to?
The Philippines have taken their case to the Court of Arbitration in the Hague. If the courts rule in full or in part in favor of the Philippines claims, do you think China will recognize it?
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

JANFU said:
The case as it stands, China has very legal right to all of their claim. Is that what you are stating?
What board are you referring to?
The Philippines have taken their case to the Court of Arbitration in the Hague. If the courts rule in full or in part in favor of the Philippines claims, do you think China will recognize it?
Click to expand...

Yes.

The UN.

I see no legitimacy in the case even coming before The Hague due to China's solid historical claims and international recognition of their ownership that I presented you yesterday. If we're going to start requiring countries to burden the claims of others upon their borders going back in history, there's no end to what may transpire, and may not bode well for our own countries.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Jack Hays said:
Ah. I see that you added the link. Article from around 1999? Problem is not China's participation in the atoll derby, but rather China's threats against freedom of navigation. That is unlike any of the other derby participants.
Click to expand...
zI'm just coming into this thread...
my question: have there actually been any interferences of note?
Or is it more in the potential realm so far?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom