Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

China says US warship's Spratly islands passage 'illegal'
BBC ^ | 1 hour ago, 2015-10-27 | BBC

Posted on 10/27/2015 5:31:19 AM PDT by WhiskeyX

Chinese officials have condemned a US ship's passage near disputed islands in the South China Sea as "illegal".

The guided-missile destroyer USS Lassen breached the 12-nautical mile zone China claims around Subi and Mischief reefs in the Spratly archipelago.

The freedom of navigation operation is a serious challenge to China's claims over the artificial islands.

Its foreign ministry said the ship had been warned and characterised the act as a "threat to China's sovereignty".

Lu Kang, the spokesman, added that Beijing would "resolutely respond to any country's deliberately provocative actions" and that the ship had been "tracked and warned" while on the mission to deliberately enter the disputed waters.

Meanwhile, US Defence Department spokesman Cdr Bill Urban said that "the United States is conducting routine operations in the South China Sea in accordance with international law".

The move was welcomed by several countries in the East Asia region, including the Philippines and Japan.

(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: china; chinaaggression; disputedislands; floridanavyport; southchinaseas; spratleyislands
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last
Be sure to study the map showing the extent of China's exaggerated territorial claims and how they violate international law.
1 posted on 10/27/2015 5:31:19 AM PDT by WhiskeyX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyX

US says China’s limitation of children born to a woman is illegal


2 posted on 10/27/2015 5:32:47 AM PDT by knarf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyX

Did someone bluff or pull someone’s bluff or was this handled ahead of time for both to save face?

Almost kills me to give obummer credit for a right move.


3 posted on 10/27/2015 5:34:01 AM PDT by dp0622
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyX

I don’t think the map routine will work on this deal. They’ve dragged tons and tons of sand, and established an actual island....and are building onto it. In five years, this island might be the size of New York City (at least the downtown section). We’ve never had anyone attempt something like this, and I think if they “build it”....it’s their property. This is not the US fight as I see it, we have no interest....no territory near it.


4 posted on 10/27/2015 5:36:02 AM PDT by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyX

they know how to fight a war with America......

take it to the court room where it will linger for years and years and meanwhile things can go on as usual.

in america lawyers control everything and engaging them is the way forward


5 posted on 10/27/2015 5:37:02 AM PDT by bert ((K.E.; N.P.; GOPc.;+12, 73, ....carson is the kinder gentler trump)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knarf

Regardless of what the U.S. does and does not have to say does nothing to change the 200 nautical mile zone agreed to by international treaty. Just look at and study the map. It clearly shows how China is attempting to grab virtually the entire South China Sea along with islands that have long been the territories of Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, the Philippines, and the Republic of China. The Chinese actions are nothing short of a gigantic invasion and conquest of these nation’s territories and effort to obstruct the international maritime routes.


6 posted on 10/27/2015 5:37:41 AM PDT by WhiskeyX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyX

Ordinarily uneventful. But soebarkah’s interests in this regard are ulterior, and definitely not in America’s interest. This somehow has more to do with his enemy islamism.


7 posted on 10/27/2015 5:39:45 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyX
Same trojan horse-like invasion the muzzies are enacting ...

The NIKE plan ...

JUST DO IT

8 posted on 10/27/2015 5:40:40 AM PDT by knarf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice

“I don’t think the map routine will work on this deal.”

I recognize you want to play the pro-communist activist sowing FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt), but in this case you are being foiled by the international treaty which denies recognition of sovereignty over such improvements to reefs, islets, and so forth which are in the High Seas and the territories of these other nations.


9 posted on 10/27/2015 5:41:11 AM PDT by WhiskeyX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyX

Gulf of Tonkin II ?


10 posted on 10/27/2015 5:41:51 AM PDT by Patton@Bastogne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onedoug

“But soebarkah’s interests in this regard are ulterior....”

Don’t forget Obama’s former home, Indonesia, has a sizable claim to some of these territories China is attempting to usurp. See the map.


11 posted on 10/27/2015 5:43:44 AM PDT by WhiskeyX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyX; All

12 posted on 10/27/2015 5:50:48 AM PDT by Louis Foxwell (This is a wake up call. Join the Sultan Knish ping list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyX

Well, it was mighty neighborly of China to build that nice military complex for them then.


13 posted on 10/27/2015 5:51:40 AM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate "Republicans Freed the Slaves Month")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyX

The Chinese probably look at Guam and and a bunch of other Pacific Islands we claim or have claimed in the past (including the Phillipines) and begin to make comparisons.


14 posted on 10/27/2015 5:51:59 AM PDT by CMB_polarization
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Patton@Bastogne

“Gulf of Tonkin II ?”

No, not at all. China is the aggressor in this situation. China knew full well when they started this political-military campaign that success would require the United States to surrender or accede to the loss of these territories despite the protests of the nations those territories belong to. China is very busy at the building of a blue-water navy with aircraft carrier groups capable of challenging the U.S. Navy. Unfortunately, their aircraft carriers and aircraft carrier air groups will not be combat ready for some years to come.

In the meantime, Chinese leadership saw an opportunity to take advantage of Obama’s profound reluctance to engage China in a confrontation over any Chinese aggressions. China’s gambit is therefore an attempt to see how much they can get away with seizing by armed force before the U.S. is willing to undertake the political, diplomatic, economic, and military risks associated with doing so. China is counting on the U.S. forcing the true owners of these territories to back down so long as the United States is not willing to defend them in a confrontation with China.

Since China’s navy is not yet prepared for a major engagement with the U.S. Navy, China will threaten loudly and then compromise as little as possible while fanatically holding onto these ill gotten territories.


15 posted on 10/27/2015 5:54:13 AM PDT by WhiskeyX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice

In the next few years the ocean may have something to say about it. The current and tides have not allowed an island there before.


16 posted on 10/27/2015 5:57:46 AM PDT by rfreedom4u (Rick Chollett for President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice
Sen. Lizzy Warren (D-MA- Hakawi Tribe) has called the Chicoms to “inform” them that THEY DID NOT BUILD THAT! And Buckwheat had a follow up call from the golf course requesting that China leave the links in Hawaii intact during any attack upon us.

........these people are gonna get a lot of folks killed.

17 posted on 10/27/2015 6:03:52 AM PDT by JEDI4S (I don't mean to cause trouble...it just happens naturally through the Force!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: CMB_polarization

“The Chinese probably look at Guam and and a bunch of other Pacific Islands we claim or have claimed in the past (including the Phillipines) and begin to make comparisons.”

There is no such comparison to make. The United States acquired the Pacific territories in accordance with the international law in force at the time. Many of these territories have been offered the opportunity to become independent of the United States, but they have chosen instead to enjoy the economic and security benefits they enjoy as a U.S. territory. Others, such as the Philippines, were seized from the Spanish Empire, promised future independence when the Philippines could organize and defend themselves against domestic insurrections (Muslim rebels) and foreign invasions (German Empire, Japanese Empire), and were given their independence as they later chose.

China, on the other hand, is violating the prohibitions for seizures of these sovereign territories of other nations found in the Kellogg-Briand Treaty, the United Nations Charter, and a wide assortment of other subsequent international treaties. As the Chinese describe such actions, the nation of China is behaving as a bandit in their seizures of these places.


18 posted on 10/27/2015 6:15:51 AM PDT by WhiskeyX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: bert
Slap a 30 percent tariff on every piece of Chinese junk sent to the US.
They'll be talking out of the other side of their mouth...
19 posted on 10/27/2015 6:17:02 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Baseball players, gangsters and musicians are remembered. But journalists are forgotten.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyX

Beijing Condemns US Naval Patrols in South China Sea

“China’s foreign minister Wang Yi has warned the United States not to create trouble after it was reported the US Navy had started freedom of navigation operations in the South China Sea. A senior US defence official briefed journalists that the destroyer USS Lassen had sailed through the 12-nautical mile zones of two islands in the disputed Spratly chain early on Tuesday morning.”

It’s pretty much exactly as I predicted. I believe the two were Subi and Mischief reefs. It was the USS Lassen, a Flight IIA Burke class DDG.

IMHO, it is certainly not over. But there is a good chance that the status quo will hold for a while. Although China has tremendously modernized and increased its fleet...it is not ready to challenge the US directly over such an issue. Give them another 15 years at the rate they are going...and they very may very well try to do so.

In the mean time, they will be building fortress SCS in anticipation of that happening and we cannot stop that. We can only counter it and that would take a HUGE investment in the Philippines, Malaysia, and Vietnam to do the same in terms of reclamation and then building up their new islands. We would have to have Australia, Japan, and India join with us in making that possible.

Of course under this administration, I just do not see us doing that.

So, for the next few years, it will probably be more and more of these semi-confrontations as China continues to build.

If the US went whole hog and invested in its military, we could forestall it for a good while. With the upcoming rail guns, the lasers, new carriers, the Zumwalts, etc. we will still hold the upper hand.

But short of China changing and the people of China (which I believe is the most possible thing) demanding their government become more representative...that’s the way I feel it is going to go.

For a REAL good idea of what the Chinese have done in the SCS...see my Flickr Album of the same, here:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/jeff_head/albums/72157653161943872


20 posted on 10/27/2015 6:18:39 AM PDT by Jeff Head (Semper Fidelis - Molon Labe - Sic Semper Tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson