Trump's "Tonkin Gulf" - an accident trying to happen?

Just lately - well, last few months - there has been a series of nautical near-misses and outright mishaps involving US ships in the poky little corner of the west Pacific where Japan, China, Russia, and both Koreas all have shores and maritime territory.

* 18 June. Missile-equipped destroyer USS Fitzgerald collides with Philippine freighter in the Sea of Japan, killing seven US personnel.

The Fitzgerald had been active in Japanese waters to monitor the Korean peninsula following a series of ballistic missile launches by North Korea.

* 11 August. US ship violates Chinese waters, ignoring 10 successive requests to leave.

China’s foreign ministry said: “The US destroyer’s actions have violated Chinese and international laws, as well as severely harmed China’s sovereignty and security.

“China is very displeased with this and will bring up the issue with the US side.”

* 21 August. Missile-equipped destroyer USS John S McCain damaged during collision with Liberian oil tanker in Singaporean waters. Ten crew reported missing at time of writing.

Given the tension between the US and North Korea, am I alone in beginning to suspect that the US Navy is - for whatever reason - hoping to pick a fight in Kim's vicinity?

a reply to: audubon

www.theguardian.com...

Did you read the article?
This was in international waters near the disputed Spratly Island chain. Just because China claims ownership doesn't mean they do. Hell, they claim ownership of Taiwan too.

originally posted by: Wreckclues
a reply to: audubon

www.theguardian.com...

Did you read the article?
This was in international waters near the disputed Spratly Island chain. Just because China claims ownership doesn't mean they do. Hell, they claim ownership of Taiwan too.

I did, but that point didn't seem relevant. Whether or not China actually owns the waters is immaterial if it claims that it does and the invading party knows about China's claim (which it did). It's still a deliberate provocation.

a reply to: audubon


I agree. All this maritime disorder has me scratching my head too. The fact that the latest incident involves the USS John S McCain is high weirdness, given McCain's recent public bouts.

a reply to: windword

The thing that gets me, in the two destroyer incidents (Fitzgerald and McCain), is that both ships got hit in the side by far heavier ships that were far less agile and far harder to decelerate.

Fitzgerald (8,315 tons displacement) was hit smack in the mid portside by a 29,000 ton cargo ship.

McCain (8,900 tons) was hit at the port aft by a tanker displacing 50,000 tons.

These weren't breakneck speed hits, they would have been almost slow-motion, and both destroyers could easily have got out of the way. Perhaps I'm too suspicious, but it seems to me as though both destroyers must have virtually parked themselves in the immediate path of visible oncoming traffic and waited to be hit.

a reply to: audubon

McCain lost steering according to reports. There wasn't a damn thing they could do.

a reply to: audubon

Not sure I agree with you about the China thing. Just because they claim it as their territory doesn't make it true. Hell we have planted a flag on the moon but I don't think that means the U.S. owns the moon.

On the other hand I totally agree it seems odd we are having so many collisions. It's like they think they are in bumper boats. We are talking about some of the most advanced naval ships in the world crashing into huge cargo vessels. Strange.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: audubon

McCain lost steering according to reports. There wasn't a damn thing they could do.

Per CNN: A US Navy official told CNN the McCain had experienced a loss of steering before the collision, but that steering had been regained.

Some very rum business there, with destroyers losing the ability to manoeuvre and then regaining it following a collision, without any explanation. We shall see what else emerges (although it won't be for a while, I'd guess).

ETA: I'm no seaman, not even a deckchair one, but does 'loss of steering' mean you are automatically becalmed and unable to move? This seems unlikely. So my question is really, could the McCain have just tickled the engine and jerked forward a bit, and avoided the collision (which, as stated, was coming from the port side)?

I dont know how you loose steering then suddenly get it back , to much of a coincidence.
At this rate when something happens they will have to many of our ships at port getting repairs that we won't be able to fight back .
Or our ships in for repairs will be armed and conveniently located to strike.
Either way soething seems off .

a reply to: JHumm

You don't lose it and suddenly get it back. You lose steering and the crew works to repair it. They're perfectly capable of troubleshooting and repairing many problems at sea.

a reply to: audubon

They have backup steering systems, including a manual system. The problem is that the backups are slow to turn the ship. It all depends on what broke though.

originally posted by: audubon
It's still a deliberate provocation.

Not it's not.

It's ensuring the bully (in this case China) is not allowed to forget that the sea they are claiming (yes, the whole sea) is not Chinese. If people cannot challenge China's ludicrously belligerent territorial claims, then they' will think they can continue doing it. But hey ho, that's another topic, even if using it in this thread to prove a point was misplaced.

Accidents happen at sea. Ships run aground, break down and even crash into each other.

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: audubon
It's still a deliberate provocation.

Not it's not.

It's ensuring the bully (in this case China) is not allowed to forget that the sea they are claiming (yes, the whole sea) is not Chinese.

You seem to be presuming that a provocation has to be somehow 'immoral'. That presumption is not shared by me. A provocation can be carried out in total good faith.