antiterror13
Brigadier
absolutely not ... you still dont get it! ... it is OT ... I am done .. no more comment from me
China's SCS Strategy Thread
- Thread starter lilzz
- Start date
absolutely not ... you still dont get it! ... it is OT ... I am done .. no more comment from me
common now, don't try to change the topic by your little diversion scheme.absolutely not ... you still dont get it! ... it is OT ... I am done .. no more comment from me
My main thing about there are enough publications outthere calling to seize China assets .
Man, people like you and the other guys try like crazy to divert the topic.
Reclaiming at Scarborough would be a significant action politically because any Chinese reclamation/building would be spun as unilateral aggression and militarization by hostile media. China knows this so if they do reclaim/build at Scarborough at some point it would probably coincide with so as to be a response to reclamation/building or military moves by another country.
How is this reclamation different from any other reclamation from the world's perspective where they did not wait for some action from another country? It is only more significant than the others from the US and Philippines perspective but neither of these countries are going to make any unilateral moves on Scarborough Shoal and will certainly let China be the aggressor in this situation.
Personally, I don't see enough benefits for China in reclaiming Scarborough Shoal.
They already have 3 airbases in the SCS and have already made the point very clearly to everyone else that they have to deal directly with China.
On a more general note, I don't see the USA appropriating Chinese assets, even if China built on Scarborough Shoal as it would economic warfare. The result would be the end of the global trade and investment order, recession in both China and the USA, plus a huge increase in Chinese military spending,
I reckon China would easily double military spending to 4% of GDP, which would be an extra $200 billion next year just for R&D, weapons procurement and training.
And one of the first priorities would probably be 3000 land attack cruise missiles just like the US has.
They already have 3 airbases in the SCS and have already made the point very clearly to everyone else that they have to deal directly with China.
On a more general note, I don't see the USA appropriating Chinese assets, even if China built on Scarborough Shoal as it would economic warfare. The result would be the end of the global trade and investment order, recession in both China and the USA, plus a huge increase in Chinese military spending,
I reckon China would easily double military spending to 4% of GDP, which would be an extra $200 billion next year just for R&D, weapons procurement and training.
And one of the first priorities would probably be 3000 land attack cruise missiles just like the US has.
Up till this line, I thought you brought up the "US freezing China asset" only to demonstrate how lunatic some "thinkers" in US can be. I thought you also treated it as a joke to entertain everyone.
But it seems that you are serious about its possibility as realistic and therefor proposing the Chinese selling US assets.
No, US and China are way too big and important to each other to even think of doing such things. This won't happen between countries on this scale. While China selling assets are perfectly within her right, but it is not to China's own interest, while the idea of US "freezing China's asset" is outlandish at least. That would only happen when US declares war on China. On behalf of Philippine? I don't even bother talk about it.
I don't hold any personal view to you, so please forgive me if I sounds otherwise, but I think you may have taken those lunatic "thinkers" too seriously, given them too much credits they deserve, equating a country as large as China to Philippine and therefor you are played by the said "lunatic" into their traps that are meant to distract China's attention away from her strategic agenda. The distraction is exactly what these "lunatics" were doing all these years. I hope you don't inadvertently work for them. I have repeatedly questioned the intention of some people who pretend to help China by pushing China to confrontation with others, such as the Anti-China Hongkonger Liang Guoxiong "defending Diayu island". These people are very tricky. So just take their words as a fart.
The top priority for China & the other countries including those in Asia is focused on the Economy & Trade, and how to avoid possible Global Recession. This was an important topic besides others discussed at the G-20 hosted by China in Hangzhou recently. The other issues raised during bi-lateral talks of participating countries included the South China Sea brought up the by President Obama. Both the US and Chinese Presidents stated their views strongly. It would be much better for bi-lateral talks to be convened soon between claimants of the territorial waters, and avoidance of antagonistic actions by parties concerned. Time for "Jaw-Jaw & Not War-War", and hopefully conclude as far as possible "Win-Win" solutions for security, peace and progress for the region. "Give & Take" & importantly derived benefits must be included in the strategies of the respective negotiators.
The point of reclamation is to lay a legal claim, a legal ground to assert sovereignty with military force if necessary.
It is NOT to build the reclaimed island to a fortress. Islands as small as ones in SCS is defenseless to large amphibious attack from any sides. But they can be firmly held by a country that has the capability to launch such attack any time it want (almost). This means a large Navy and close by. If some big outside player can station big number of marines and aircrafts near SCS and has the logistic to sustain the high stress for a long time, that player can take and hold, so too can China. Question is who can sustain this stress. Answer is obvious.
A good example is how wolf pack take a buffalo, it is due to their sustained relentless attack to exhaust the buffalo. They can rest any time they want, but always keep the buffalo alerted. Don't make mistake by thinking SEA countries as wolf packs, there are only two players here with one player's home thousands kilometers away.
My conclusion is, no need for China to rush reclamation or tit for tat response to other claimant, no need to think of a concrete defense on the islands. The real defense is the big Navy, Air force and even at the land boarder.
It is NOT to build the reclaimed island to a fortress. Islands as small as ones in SCS is defenseless to large amphibious attack from any sides. But they can be firmly held by a country that has the capability to launch such attack any time it want (almost). This means a large Navy and close by. If some big outside player can station big number of marines and aircrafts near SCS and has the logistic to sustain the high stress for a long time, that player can take and hold, so too can China. Question is who can sustain this stress. Answer is obvious.
A good example is how wolf pack take a buffalo, it is due to their sustained relentless attack to exhaust the buffalo. They can rest any time they want, but always keep the buffalo alerted. Don't make mistake by thinking SEA countries as wolf packs, there are only two players here with one player's home thousands kilometers away.
My conclusion is, no need for China to rush reclamation or tit for tat response to other claimant, no need to think of a concrete defense on the islands. The real defense is the big Navy, Air force and even at the land boarder.
One thing you can't take it away. Those guys view points are in the mainstream publication. That's a Fact.
that may be true, but there are many more views in the mainstream by sane people. All depend on what we take as representing the majority. I tend to have faith in people when not in a panic which is now.