China state paper warns of war over South China Sea unless U.S. backs down

ph.news.yahoo.com...

BEIJING (Reuters) - A Chinese state-owned newspaper said on Monday that "war is inevitable" between China and the United States over the South China Sea unless Washington stops demanding Beijing halt the building of artificial islands in the disputed waterway. The Global Times, an influential nationalist tabloid owned by the ruling Communist Party's official newspaper the People's Daily, said in an editorial that China was determined to finish its construction work, calling it the country's "most important bottom line". The editorial comes amid rising tensions over China's land reclamation in the Spratly archipelago of the South China Sea. China last week said it was "strongly dissatisfied" after a U.S. spy plane flew over areas near the reefs, with both sides accusing each other of stoking instability. China should "carefully prepare" for the possibility of a conflict with the United States, the newspaper said. "If the United States' bottomline is that China has to halt its activities, then a U.S.-China war is inevitable in the South China Sea," the newspaper said.

This is heating up.

I can not see a compromise been reached on this one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mod Note: Posting work written by others.– Please Review This Link.

a reply to: joho99

Here's the article from "The Global Times". It's the Chinese article referred to in the Yahoo/Reuters link.

Experts warn of military conflicts in S.China Sea

It goes into more detail on the incident that sparked the articles.

a reply to: joho99

Unless we cower. US will try to stay out of it for as long as possible on the face card, but America always has an ace in the hole, this could be big though.

a reply to: joho99

Wow this is not directed at you dude.


Talk about blatant media spin doctoring by the source. They quoted Reuters as a source. So I went there for the article. The following is the small segment of the article that they based their source on. Not to mention their link to the source kept taking me back to their page. Lol

The nationalist Global Times, a tabloid owned by the ruling Communist Party's official newspaper, the People's Daily, said war was "inevitable" between China and the United States unless Washington stopped demanding Beijing halt the building of artificial islands in the disputed waterway.

It said China was determined to finish its construction work, calling it the country's "most important bottom line".

Such commentaries are not official policy statements, but are sometimes read as a reflection of government.

So their source was about a few paragraphs out of a Reuters article and it was a editorial?

Source

a reply to: Greathouse

After reading that quote...


Has the US actually demanded they stop or simply not recognize their right to build in international waters and in a location claimed by a few other countries that are actually closer and continues to do fly by/overs?

If you head over to Global Times, you can read the original article without it being "interpreted" by Reuters.
Don't click if you have trouble sleeping.

Global Times - Experts warn of exhange of fire

In the article they quote Washington Free Beacon & it's recent account of a US drone aircraft having it's electronics jammed whilst in flight over the disputed Spratley (or Nansha) Islands, with the deliberate intent of bringing it down. That, to me, means the Chinese authorities freely admit that's what happened.

originally posted by: SLAYER69
a reply to: Greathouse

After reading that quote...


Has the US actually demanded they stop or simply not recognize their right to build in international waters and in a location claimed by a few other countries that are actually closer and continues to do fly by/overs ?

Welcome to my world. I made that very suggestion on this thread and got flamed for I don't know how many pages.

flame city

originally posted by: TheShippingForecast
If you head over to Global Times, you can read the original article without it being "interpreted" by Reuters.
Don't click if you have trouble sleeping.

Global Times - Experts warn of exhange of fire

In the article they quote Washington Free Beacon & it's recent account of a US drone aircraft having it's electronics jammed whilst in flight over the disputed Spratley (or Nansha) Islands, with the deliberate intent of bringing it down. That, to me, means the Chinese authorities freely admit that's what happened.

The question a lateral thinker would see is. Why didn't they source quote the original source in the first place? After all is evident from the OP it was very easy to obtain?

Because that is a tabloid Chinese source probably editorialized by their equivalent of neocons. By quoting Reuters they tried to gain some legitimacy.

Time after time I see conspiracy theorist say they use critical thinking.

When by definition conspiracies require lateral thought. It's no damn wonder some of you don't understand me. Lol

a reply to: Greathouse

Wonders if this is basic sabre rattling for internal consumption for the Chinese, Don't want to appear weak eh?


Meanwhile, Are Beijing and Washington in tense backdoor hotline exchanges to deal with the situation?

originally posted by: TheShippingForecast
If you head over to Global Times, you can read the original article without it being "interpreted" by Reuters.
Don't click if you have trouble sleeping.

Global Times - Experts warn of exhange of fire

In the article they quote Washington Free Beacon & it's recent account of a US drone aircraft having it's electronics jammed whilst in flight over the disputed Spratley (or Nansha) Islands, with the deliberate intent of bringing it down. That, to me, means the Chinese authorities freely admit that's what happened.

The article simply expresses China's willingness to shoot down American spy planes and unwillingness to stop building in what it considers to be its own territorial waters. The US will not get involved in direct confrontation, but they may support a proxy war on behalf of the Philippines or even Viet Nam.

originally posted by: SLAYER69
a reply to: Greathouse

Wonders if this is basic sabre rattling for internal consumption for the Chinese, Don't want to appear weak eh?


Meanwhile, Are Beijing and Washington in tense backdoor hotline exchanges to deal with the situation?

I'm relatively sure this has been going on for a while. I alluded to that fact in my thread. My biggest question was why did they decide to take CNN reporters up with them and get it on tape then put it in the media?

I pondered that the US was trying to force a response from China. The complaint they filed was the response. But as you stated this is probably saber rattling from the nationalist.

originally posted by: Greathouse

originally posted by: SLAYER69
a reply to: Greathouse

Wonders if this is basic sabre rattling for internal consumption for the Chinese, Don't want to appear weak eh?


Meanwhile, Are Beijing and Washington in tense backdoor hotline exchanges to deal with the situation?

I'm relatively sure this has been going on for a while. I alluded to that fact in my thread. My biggest question was why did they decide to take CNN reporters up with them and get it on tape then put it in the media?

I pondered that the US was trying to force a response from China. The complaint they filed was the response. But as you stated this is probably saber rattling from the nationalist.

Let's just be honest here.

China is going to "Tibet" the south china sea.

With those bases, and make no mistake, they are bases, they will be able to threaten the entire south china sea.

Then after they have the sea locked up, comes the next move, Vietnam perhaps.

a reply to: johnwick

Yep their ambitions are clear, but I don't think it'll be an issue for couple years at least.


But I think it's completely strategic. They want the islands for the resources and they also want airbases where they can reach Straight's of Malacca.

Sure there's territorial disputes, but when you look at a map of China's claims you'll realize what is going on.

20th

a reply to: Greathouse

Would China know whodunnit if a few cluster bombs fell on the illegal Chinese work parties?

Do they have SAMs on these illegal islands they are buildings?

I think Phillipines should arrest everyone on the island for ecological vandalism in their territory, so how big China is then.

a reply to: Forensick

Would China know whodunnit if a few cluster bombs fell on the illegal Chinese work parties?

Yes

Do they have SAMs on these illegal islands they are building?

I think so if not they will have.

I think Phillipines should arrest everyone on the island for ecological vandalism in their territory, so how big China is then.

I know the Philippines and Vietnam are doing the same thing, and I think Brunei and Malaysia are also. That's what all the heat is about everyone's clamming islands/reefs at the moment. There's bullying and saber rattling going on. But I do not think we have passed the diplomacy stage yet.

Keep in mind I'm not taking China's side I know who the aggressor is. I'm just laying the facts out there.

China wins now because the great patriots
at Wal-Mart love to save 2 cents on a gross
of jeans over National Security.
Malaysia Cambodia and S Vietnam to name a few
are hot on the trail of this level of mass production
If this persists Chinese textiles and electronics will
no longer dominate like they have
and they might start seeing red.

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: johnwick

Yep their ambitions are clear, but I don't think it'll be an issue for couple years at least.


But I think it's completely strategic. They want the islands for the resources and they also want airbases where they can reach Straight's of Malacca.

Sure there's territorial disputes, but when you look at a map of China's claims you'll realize what is going on.

Within ten years I expect some big power play.

Perhaps even Taiwan, or Vietnam.

But most likely Taiwan.

They really want that one back, in a big way.

a reply to: johnwick

I agree definitely within 10 years. (if diplomacy fails)

The US and Philippines started talking about reopening the military bases at Subic Bay and Clarkfield in 2012. It was brought up again in 2014. Then as far as I know everything went silent.

So personally I believe we're already there, preparing for larger forces.