China Ready To Use Military Force If US Violates Its Territorial Waters

Seems it happend and China did nothing......

Told ya.

China are not stupid enough to start WW3.

originally posted by: victor7
Reply to asen_y2k

BRICS are not a alliance. Moreover Russia, Brazil, and economically finished, democratic India learns more towards the west rather than communist China and Russia.

Only alliance that may form is between Russia and China both dictatorships with huge internal problems which may use a war to distract its people from a revolution.

Where do you get your facts from?

India leans towards west? but west does not give much squat for India.

India has defense pact with Russia however in the event of war if India walks out of the pact then no worries, your military looks good only on paper, time and again when need arises you guys are found "much" illprepared.

You guys are mostly good for peacekeeping operations. In the real battle your nuts and nuggets are spilled very quickly.

Russia and India do not have any defense pact that involves mutual defense or military action. Even the old Indo-Soviet Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation that end with the Soviet Union did not have that. India has defense cooperation agreements with Russia, the US, Japan and others but they simply covers things like weapons sales, cooperation in certain technologies, and other economic items.

India's pivot to the US/Japan and the West in military affairs occurred for several reasons. China being the main concern. Russian failure to deliver weapons systems in working order or on time became to much for the Indians to overlook. Russia's overall weakness makes it of little use to India, What India sees is China walking all over Russia and Russia being forced to accept it. China steals Russian influence in the former Soviets States, it makes big economics deals with Ukraine including joint development of fighter aircraft engines, it grabs Russian arms markets, it takes advantages trade deals with Russia and then when Russia needs Chinese support, it never materializes. So India sees no chance of Russia supporting them in a conflict with China. And the failure of BRICS who it spent the last summit fighting with China the entire time while Russia did nothing and the South Africa and Brazil barely showed up. Vietnam is in the same boat as India, Russia is not counter to China so it has to turn West. Although while India has seen a group of large scale trade and defense deals, Vietnam is still in the early stages.

"for the first time ever, the American strategists have developed an illusion ... that they may defeat a nuclear power in a non-nuclear war." He added that "it's nonsense, and it will never happen."

Rogozin, who spoke after the Security Council's meeting chaired by President Vladimir Putin, was commenting on prospective U.S. weapons under the so-called Prompt Global Strike program, which would be capable of striking targets anywhere in the world in as little as an hour with deadly precision.
RUSSIA: US MAY HAVE DELUSION OF WINNING WAR WITH RUSSIA

i wonder why no other nations are sending warships in Chinese waters except the US?

originally posted by: odzeandennz
i wonder why no other nations are sending warships in Chinese waters except the US?

Other nations have.

The US Navy does not need any others ships though to conduct freedom of navigation exercises in international waters. Secondly its not Chinese waters as the areas in question are not sovereign territory and as such have no territorial waters.

originally posted by: odzeandennz
i wonder why no other nations are sending warships in Chinese waters except the US?

No one is sending any warships into "Chinese waters"....

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: odzeandennz
i wonder why no other nations are sending warships in Chinese waters except the US?

Other nations have.

The US Navy does not need any others ships though to conduct freedom of navigation exercises in international waters. Secondly its not Chinese waters as the areas in question are not sovereign territory and as such have no territorial waters.

I gues China see this differently, and there is nothing the US can do about it. China have built the Island and it will stay there as a Chinese island until the US have balls to do soemthing about it.

A phuny protest With one USS Lassen aint going to change anything. THat ship wouldnt last 15 minutes if it started to act agressive towards the Chinese.

a reply to: spy66

The Us is doing something about it and it's the Chinese who don't have the balls to start anything...

The Chinese are claiming that the water is their territory, their neighbours and international law dispute this. The US sails it's ships through those waters to invalidate the claim and China can do nothing about it. If it was genuine Chinese waters, they'd have the right to defend themselves, but they know they are on shaky ground with their claim and rely on it not being challenged for it to work. The Convention of the Sea does not allow you to build artificial islands to expand your territory, which is precisely what China is doing.

Here is an interesting talk about the south China sea and the current world situation with China and the USA. I wonder what if anything will happen next time the USA sails within 12 miles of the island?

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

Nothing... China is delusional to think their territory claim holds any weight.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

Nothing... China is delusional to think their territory claim holds any weight.

Right.... so we are being told by the US.

The US is becoming a Word that doesnt matter.

a reply to: spy66

Not just the US. If you could look beyond your blind hatred of the US you would see it.

I think the US could "win" a war against China without the average American being affected....at all.


Mainland China would quickly become a landlocked nation.

More stuff here...We flew Bombers through.
thehill.com...

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Tjoran

originally posted by: Patriotsrevenge

originally posted by: CharlesT
I think Russia and China are ready to call Washington's bluff.


a reply to: lostbook

Against the U.S. Navy? That would be a whole lot of stupid lol. When Mike Tyson walks down your street you dont walk out and try to piss him off do you? That would be about the same stupidity. China would be wiped out in 24 hours, that is a Russian military opinion by the way.

That;s just a Mc Donald's size ego talking.

No, it's a fact. The US Navy could go head to head with basically every other navy in the world, at the same time. Tell me what Navy you think the Chinese possess that can have any chance of success? The US is not the Philippines using WW2 era ships.

The U.S. has 19 aircraft carriers, compared to the rest of the world's 12 aircraft carriers combined. The U.S. carriers are also larger and more technically advanced than any others.

China's sole carrier, for instance, is a retrofitted Ukrainian carrier from the Soviet Union that was originally supposed to be an off-shore casino.

www.businessinsider.com...

The problem is that China started taking control in the area during the mid-'90s, and even though the U.S. knew it did nothing for the next two decades.

It's probably because China is a major trading partner not only of the U.S. but of various countries in the region complaining about this issue.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Isurrender73

originally posted by: JDmOKI
a reply to: Isurrender73

So maybe China should start paying off smaller nations and building airstrips and leave international water alone?

This is option that China should be open too, if they can cine to financial and military agreements.

Honestly I don't know what the solution is. But the absolute last, and impossible to consider solution at this point is war.

War cannot be an option anymore.

The US has bases. China does not want bases. They want to own the land. The equivalent to the US would be if we went to the Philippines and took some of their islands and claimed it was US territory.

There is no comparison.

Interestingly enough, that actually happened.

originally posted by: Isurrender73

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Isurrender73

Spoken like someone who has no clue about the realities of the situation. You really have no idea what you are talking about, and somehow, when China says "give us what we want or we will attack" the US is the bad guy in your mind.

So twisted.

I am not saying US is the bad guy in this situation. I am saying we don't need to be proving our bravado with Aircraft Carriers.

What is wrong with keeping Aircraft Carriers out of the area until we have exhausted all non military options?

Are you listening to what I am saying?

Or are you worried that somehow your manhood is damaged if we don't push the issue with Aircraft Carriers as a first response? I think it's time to start exploring civilized, level headed options.

But so far the US is only threatening Aircraft Carriers and China is only threatening war. Who is going to have a level head first? Or do we just start dropping bombs and skip diplomacy?

The irony is that this started almost two decades ago, and during that whole period China became a major trading partner of the U.S.

originally posted by: Isurrender73
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

We haven't even tried. We can survive a departure from made in China. We will have every made in China product made in other 3rd world nations, or in the US. The TPP or other trade policies would insure all production is replaced in less then 2 years.

We owe China money, they owe us nothing. We can refuse to pay. The US can cause more damage to China's economy then the Chinese can damage the US economy. This is part of the reason for China's recent market corrections. It is really quite simple.

And I hate the TPP, but some trade agreements would be necessary to break away from made in China.

Given the fact that the U.S. economy relies primarily on heavy borrowing and spending to stay afloat, with something like 70 pct of the economy based on consumer spending, and around 70 pct working in the service industry and not intending to go to manufacturing or agriculture unless they receive high pay, that's highly unlikely.

originally posted by: Vector99
Expect a LOT of chest pumping from China and Russia both during Obama's last year. But don't expect anything but that. When it comes to a war with the US, they know not only is the US the largest, most advanced military in the world, but also the most strategically placed country in the world as well. 75% water / 25% land border, with the 25% land border our friends up north. Some of the most fertile food producing land in the world, plenty of natural resources, and a population that isn't excessive.

The US IS a self-reliant country if it wants to be, it can function with ZERO imports, granted it may take a very short amount of time to reinstate manufacturing here, but ALL of our manufacturing needs (plant's, employees, resources, ec...) could spring up within 1-2 years, and that's an exaggerated time frame.

Oh did I mention Alaska?

Self-reliant? Completely the opposite. It is heavily in debt, with most not only working in the service industry but significant numbers facing health problems, etc. It needs something like 20-25 pct of oil and other resources worldwide to support middle class lifestyles.

And even with extensive amounts spend (and ironically passed on to the public), its own military admits it cannot even handle Russia:

www.thedailybeast.com...

originally posted by: chewi
a reply to: Vector99
The world would not need to find extra land and resources if it wasn't for the way in which the world powers distribute the wealth.
USA are the richest nation in the world. They cant even look after their own citizens but think they can sort out the worlds problems.
Charity begins at home. NO we want to further our world agenda and fox our citizens. They will be happy when they realise we have the most billionaires and millionaires.

To make matters worse, much of that wealth actually consists of credit.