• 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

Anomalism

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2013
Messages
3,237
Reaction score
2,159
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
I think (hope) a war with China is extremely unlikely. It would no doubt be devastating to both nations.

Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South China Sea - Asia - World - The Independent

China has upped its military posturing, issuing a strategy paper saying Beijing would “surely counterattack if attacked” by an enemy amid concerns from the US and neighbouring countries over its developments in the South China Sea. The release of the document came shortly after Beijing lodged a complaint against the US for flying a surveillance jet over disputed territory in the South China Sea, where China is building artificial islands. Chinese state media reported that the white paper, issued by the state council, the country’s cabinet, underscored that Beijing was committed to world peace and believed that a world war was unlikely. But it added that “small-scale wars, conflicts and crises are recurrent in some regions”. The state-owned news agency Xinhua highlighted one particular phrase, which appeared in the “Strategic Guideline of Active Defence” section: “We will not attack unless attacked, but we will surely counterattack if attacked.”

Much to the concern of its neighbours and the US, China, the dominant powerhouse in the region, has been building artificial islands and buildings in the disputed South China Sea, where the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan all have overlapping claims. In one area, the Spratly islands, the US says China has created 2,000 acres of land, with satellite images showing what appears to be an airstrip. The paper said that China’s armed forces would work to “resolutely safeguard China’s sovereignty [and] security and development interests” and work towards “realising the Chinese dream of achieving the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation”. Announcing its release, the People’s Liberation Army spokesman Yang Yujun appeared to be referring to the US when he said that “outside powers” were attempting to “tarnish the Chinese military’s reputation and create an atmosphere of exaggerated tension.” He added: “We cannot eliminate the possibility that this is to create excuses for the actions that certain countries may be planning to take.”
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

I undersand Taiwan Who cares about threats of it?
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

China s extremely dependent on the US to keep it's citizens employed and happy. I doubt they would initiate an armed confrontation with the US but then again, now would be the time to do it.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Lets hope that the US doesn't push China's interests in their own backyard.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

We've already seen, in Cuba in 1962, what one nuclear power did in a confrontation with another nuclear power that had roughly ten times as many weapons. The U.S. advantage over China in that department is more like twenty to one. Going up against six thousand hydrogen bombs is likely to cause second thoughts. And what's worse for the nation going up against them, many of those weapons are in missile submarines whose locations are unknown. That means they might be launched from only a hundred miles or so off the coast, reducing the time to react almost to nothing. As far as I've heard, China does not yet have subs like that. But the U.S. has quite a few of them, each one carrying as many as two dozen missiles loaded with maybe one hundred or more nuclear weapons.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

We need to keep China down before they get too powerful.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

China s extremely dependent on the US to keep it's citizens employed and happy. I doubt they would initiate an armed confrontation with the US but then again, now would be the time to do it.

The underlined is exactly what went through my head when I read the article.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

We've already seen, in Cuba in 1962, what one nuclear power did in a confrontation with another nuclear power that had roughly ten times as many weapons. The U.S. advantage over China in that department is more like twenty to one. Going up against six thousand hydrogen bombs is likely to cause second thoughts. And what's worse for the nation going up against them, many of those weapons are in missile submarines whose locations are unknown. That means they might be launched from only a hundred miles or so off the coast, reducing the time to react almost to nothing. As far as I've heard, China does not yet have subs like that. But the U.S. has quite a few of them, each one carrying as many as two dozen missiles loaded with maybe one hundred or more nuclear weapons.

I'd be worried once the first nuke went off, it'd pretty much be the end of things.

IIRC, China kicked our butts during practice "War Games" not too long ago.

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

If China feels threatened, it could be because they have threatened others. Challenging others in international airspace or waters usually results in some push back. Maybe they should consider that, and STFU. If they want to resolve the issues surrounding the various islands peacefully, there are accepted ways to do just that, and they don't involve unilaterally constructing military bases on the very islands in dispute.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

I'd be worried once the first nuke went off, it'd pretty much be the end of things.

IIRC, China kicked our butts during practice "War Games" not too long ago.

Kinda scary.

Of course the purpose of having a very strong force like the U.S. has is to make sure no other nation ever even thinks about sending one of the things our way. As someone who lived through the Cuban Crisis in October, 1962, nothing like that bothers me much. What's remarkable, in hindsight, is how determined most people were to stand behind President Kennedy in whatever he might need to do--and the Soviet leadership knew that. But that was in those hokey old days when it was hard to find Americans who weren't proud of the United States. If we faced something like that now, probably about a third of the country would be pulling for the enemy. Now, though, we would have President Pinprick at the helm--and we all know Kennedy had nothing on him when it comes to guts.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Of course the purpose of having a very strong force like the U.S. has is to make sure no other nation ever even thinks about sending one of the things our way. As someone who lived through the Cuban Crisis in October, 1962, nothing like that bothers me much. What's remarkable, in hindsight, is how determined most people were to stand behind President Kennedy in whatever he might need to do--and the Soviet leadership knew that. But that was in those hokey old days when it was hard to find Americans who weren't proud of the United States. If we faced something like that now, probably about a third of the country would be pulling for the enemy. Now, though, we would have President Pinprick at the helm--and we all know Kennedy had nothing on him when it comes to guts.

Those hokey days when information was far harder to come by. The third you refer to just aren't buying everything anymore.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

If China feels threatened, it could be because they have threatened others. Challenging others in international airspace or waters usually results in some push back. Maybe they should consider that, and STFU. If they want to resolve the issues surrounding the various islands peacefully, there are accepted ways to do just that, and they don't involve unilaterally constructing military bases on the very islands in dispute.

Obviously you're unaware that there are six nations with overlapping claims to those islands and that five of them have built military type infrastructure on various islands in the group, despite their disputed status!!! But don't let me stand in the way of your bias against China.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Obviously you're unaware that there are six nations with overlapping claims to those islands and that five of them have built military type infrastructure on various islands in the group, despite their disputed status!!! But don't let me stand in the way of your bias against China.

I'd like to see a link about the other five nations' military infrastructure. You realize I hope that if the infrastructure is on islands incorporated into states' territories then it's a different matter altogether.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Of course the purpose of having a very strong force like the U.S. has is to make sure no other nation ever even thinks about sending one of the things our way. As someone who lived through the Cuban Crisis in October, 1962, nothing like that bothers me much. What's remarkable, in hindsight, is how determined most people were to stand behind President Kennedy in whatever he might need to do--and the Soviet leadership knew that. But that was in those hokey old days when it was hard to find Americans who weren't proud of the United States. If we faced something like that now, probably about a third of the country would be pulling for the enemy. Now, though, we would have President Pinprick at the helm--and we all know Kennedy had nothing on him when it comes to guts.


There is that, too.

Given the current international climate, I wonder how many other nations might hypothetically "side" with China? :shock:

Russia in the mix would not be good...

("President Pinprick" is a new one for me.) :lol:

I'll have to remember that one.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Obviously you're unaware that there are six nations with overlapping claims to those islands and that five of them have built military type infrastructure on various islands in the group, despite their disputed status!!! But don't let me stand in the way of your bias against China.

I'm completely aware of the various claims. Note that none of the other nations with claims are building a military installation, and none of them are threatening free use of international territory. Only China. If you would apply the same metric in that area you consistently apply to the US, you might come to a reasonable position. I have no bias against China. You do have a bias against the US however, and you show it here every day Monte.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

I'd like to see a link about the other five nations' military infrastructure. You realize I hope that if the infrastructure is on islands incorporated into states' territories then it's a different matter altogether.

Stop being coy Jack, you know what "disputed" means. Taiwan and China claim all the islands in the Spratly archipelago while others claim various numbers and Brunei just one.

The intractable and contentious nature of jurisdictional disputes over the Spratlys has prompted claimant states to take efforts to enforce their claims by stationing a permanent military presence in the archipelago. By 1999, nearly 1650 troops of five claimant governments had occupiedatleastforty-sixoffifty-onelandformationsintheSpratlyarchipelago.42 Intheprocess, the two principal antagonists, China and Vietnam, have each increased naval patrols and established new military outposts on previously unoccupied islets in the region (See Table 1).43

http://www.stimson.org/images/uploads/research-pdfs/cbmapspratly.pdf

China has a title found in the boundary convention in 1880 signed between France and China at the conclusion of the Sino-French war which recognised China as the rightful owner of the Spratlys. Upon Japan's surrender at the conclusion of WW11, ownership of the Spratlys was returned to China. Japan having seized them from China in 1939.
 
Last edited:
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Stop being coy Jack, you know what "disputed" means. Taiwan and China claim all the islands in the Spratly archipelago while others claim various numbers and Brunei just one.

The intractable and contentious nature of jurisdictional disputes over the Spratlys has prompted claimant states to take efforts to enforce their claims by stationing a permanent military presence in the archipelago. By 1999, nearly 1650 troops of five claimant governments had occupiedatleastforty-sixoffifty-onelandformationsintheSpratlyarchipelago.42 Intheprocess, the two principal antagonists, China and Vietnam, have each increased naval patrols and established new military outposts on previously unoccupied islets in the region (See Table 1).43

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

I'm completely aware of the various claims. Note that none of the other nations with claims are building a military installation, and none of them are threatening free use of international territory. Only China. If you would apply the same metric in that area you consistently apply to the US, you might come to a reasonable position. I have no bias against China. You do have a bias against the US however, and you show it here every day Monte.

Excuse me but the US isn't a party to this dispute! There are six nations with overlapping claims to these islands, none of them are the US. Brush up on the Spratly history before posting.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Post 16 dude!!!

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

Excuse me but the US isn't a party to this dispute! There are six nations with overlapping claims to these islands, none of them are the US. Brush up on the Spratly history before posting.

US interest is in freedom of navigation in recognized international waters.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Excuse me but the US isn't a party to this dispute! There are six nations with overlapping claims to these islands, none of them are the US. Brush up on the Spratly history before posting.

The marketing campaigns of the Military Industrial Complex need wars to feed them. Cold Wars. Terror Wars. Race Wars. Police Wars. Use the media as stenographers to generate a fearful narrative and demand new better, bigger, more powerful weapons and weapons programs.

"War is good business, and business is good."
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

US interest is in freedom of navigation in recognized international waters.

Would you stop it with your bull**** rhetoric. China isn't threatening merchant ship travel in the shipping lanes in the straight.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

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.

Oh, 1999. In this instance, the older the better. China has the strongest proof of title of any of the claimants. And the Us doesn't have a dog in this race, beyond it's typical intrusion and interference in regional issues that they have no business in.
 
Re: Beijing warns US: 'We will fight back' as battle of words escalates over South Ch

Those hokey days when information was far harder to come by. The third you refer to just aren't buying everything anymore.

The third I refer to are whiny, loutish malcontents--pajama boys with grasping hands, and no guts.
 
Back
Top Bottom