Japanese Defence Minister: Helicopter & DDG "locked on" by Chinese Frigates' Radar

Re: Japanese Defence Minister: Helicopter & DDG "locked on" by Chinese Frigates' Ra

Equation said:

So you do agreed that Japan does not have the right to control the DYT? So what is Japan's purpose of controlling and island that don't belong to them? You still haven't answer that one important question and I don't expect you to. Why dose Japan needs to de facto control on the the DYT?

Click to expand...

I have already said more than once that Japan's control of DYT is a historical injustice that needs to be corrected. You would know if you actually bothered to read my posts.

Japan's purpose in controlling DYT is not obvious to you? Seriously? If even this basic concept is not clear to you, you definitely should not even be in this debate in the first place. I am actually flabbergasted by your latest post. It reveals a degree of cluelessness that shocks me TBH. What are you doing in this thread? You clearly don't belong here.

Let me help you get a clue then: Japan wants to control DYT to claim access to the EEZ surrounding it; this is the primary reason above all others. Japan also wants to control DYT because it serves as part of the chain of islands preventing China's easy access to the rest of the Pacific, the others being Japan, the Ryukyu Islands, Taiwan, and the Phillipines. Japan also wants to control DYT because it is a sort of litmus test for Japanese nationalist hardliners to rate their leaders.

Equation said:

I see what you are doing steering away from the conversation by adding accusation of a different matter to paint the accuser as being "intellectually dishonest". Playing the false victim won't get you anywhere. Did you just graduate from the Nike X/Gambit School of Bravado Arguments or what, because you sure do write like them?

Click to expand...

First you called me a China-hater, and said that I defamed China. When I asked you to prove it, you could not. When I pressed you further, you became INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST and started calling me a Chinese-hater instead, as if that could somehow substitute for being a China-hater. These are not the same thing, but since you were unable to prove that I am a China-hater or that I "defamed" China, you dishonestly moved the goalposts and started calling me a Chinese-hater. I think even someone like you can understand how pathetic and immoral this tactic is. You cannot even prove that I am a "Chinese-hater". Just because you are losing this argument (and losing it badly), doesn't mean I am some kind of Chinese-hater. Just because I disgree with all the internet armchair general fanboys who want to right now go and take DYT for the glory of the motherland (or for whatever other stupid reason), doesn't mean I am some kind of Chinese-hater. If you want to continue falsely accusing me of this, that, or the other nonsense, you shouldn't be surprised if it gets turned around and stuffed right back down your throat.

Equation said:

You mean now I don't have the right to reply anyway I want? It's just a simple reply in which you got offended by me for some how "budging" into your conversation. If you're talking to someone specifically and want to keep it away from someone else from jumping in, than do that privately. Since this an open forum for all to read, everybody and any body has the right to join in the conversation. Read the rules again, because you seem to have forgotten it. Making weak accusation makes you look silly and insecure.

Click to expand...

You have a right to post that you like blue instead of green if you want. On the other hand, it does absolutely NOTHING to change the fact that you look completely ridiculous getting your underwear in a bunch responding to a post I made to someone else because you thought I was talking to you. You have been trying SO hard to hide this fact this whole time, but as I said, it's not working.

Re: Japanese Defence Minister: Helicopter & DDG "locked on" by Chinese Frigates' Ra

According to the latest breaking news from wall-climber, a fat pilot had boarded the J-1000, an experimental starfighter rumored to possess unparalleled capabilities in strafing Internet heated arguments. It's mentioned he's diverting course to this thread, with ETA anytime.

Re: Japanese Defence Minister: Helicopter & DDG "locked on" by Chinese Frigates' Ra

Seems to me though that it is Japan that is clearly enjoying the political advantage here. They already control the islands, and if they choose to send troops to the island there is nothing China can do that will not result in its reputation being tarnished. Take a look at Tibet and Xinjiang; those regions were controlled by the Qing for many years, and when China retook them, China was the "enemy". It doesn't matter whether Japan makes the initial move or not; the fact that the Chinese are willing to claim Japanese controlled territory will translate to Anschluss in the minds of Western or other East Asian leaders. If Japan chooses to occupy the islands with a garrison, it is essentially moving troops within its "borders". That is not to say that the islands shouldn't belong to China, though.

China must refrain from any military action, including straddling their airspace or using radars. A soft hand needs to be played until the enemy strikes your iron hand. I don't think either side can afford any sort of conflict.

Re: Japanese Defence Minister: Helicopter & DDG "locked on" by Chinese Frigates' Ra

MwRYum said:

What everyone interesting in is when will both side man each other up and finally go to war.

Click to expand...

The question then becomes which side will shoot itself in the foot first. No matter how dominating or flourishing the Chinese military industry and research might be, they cannot expect to fight a war and come out looking like a victim.

Re: Japanese Defence Minister: Helicopter & DDG "locked on" by Chinese Frigates' Ra

SinoSoldier said:

It doesn't matter whether Japan makes the initial move or not; the fact that the Chinese are willing to claim Japanese controlled territory will translate to Anschluss in the minds of Western or other East Asian leaders. If Japan chooses to occupy the islands with a garrison, it is essentially moving troops within its "borders". That is not to say that the islands shouldn't belong to China, though.

Click to expand...

Japan moving troops onto DYT unilaterally without a Chinese first move will easily give China enough political cover to escalate the situation to armed conflict if it so desires. It will not matter that Japan will claim it is simply moving troops around inside its borders, it knows that China will interpret this otherwise, and so will the rest of the world, no matter what lip service they pay to Japan (or not). I'm fairly certain Japan would not even consider such a move in the absence of a Chinese incursion; I'm also fairly certain the US would not permit this in the first place. That is why it is important that no Chinese boots land on DYT, unless of course Japan escalates by landing boots first. If that happens, then all bets are off, stupidity has prevailed, and war will be likely.

SinoSoldier said:

The question then becomes which side will shoot itself in the foot first. No matter how dominating or flourishing the Chinese military industry and research might be, they cannot expect to fight a war and come out looking like a victim.

Click to expand...

Successfully portraying yourself as the victim depends alot on how well you play the game. If China did as some of the people on this forum would like, China has exactly ZERO chance of being seen as the victim and 100% chance of being seen as the aggressor.

Re: Japanese Defence Minister: Helicopter & DDG "locked on" by Chinese Frigates' Ra

Mysterre said:

Japan moving troops onto DYT unilaterally without a Chinese first move will easily give China enough political cover to escalate the situation to armed conflict if it so desires. It will not matter that Japan will claim it is simply moving troops around inside its borders, it knows that China will interpret this otherwise, and so will the rest of the world, no matter what lip service they pay to Japan (or not). I'm fairly certain Japan would not even consider such a move in the absence of a Chinese incursion; I'm also fairly certain the US would not permit this in the first place. That is why it is important that no Chinese boots land on DYT, unless of course Japan escalates by landing boots first. If that happens, then all bets are off, stupidity has prevailed, and war will be likely.


Successfully portraying yourself as the victim depends alot on how well you play the game. If China did as some of the people on this forum would like, China has exactly ZERO chance of being seen as the victim and 100% chance of being seen as the aggressor.

Click to expand...

Exactly.

When it comes to Mali, the French using the pretext of democracy and anti terrorism excuse gets commonly accepted and applauded. Had the PLA done the exactly what the French have done, the West would be labelling China as the new invader of Africa while kindly omitting the history of how themselves enslaved an entire race in the first place.

Hence, it's better to maintain the status quo for now, sit back and watch Japan transforming itself to a country where 50% of its population will be retirees in half a century. Then we can take it by force with much less international scrutiny and most importantly the least amount of casualties.

Re: Japanese Defence Minister: Helicopter & DDG "locked on" by Chinese Frigates' Ra

cn_habs said:

Exactly.

When it comes to Mali, the French using the pretext of democracy and anti terrorism excuse gets commonly accepted and applauded. Had the PLA done the exactly what the French have done, the West would be labelling China as the new invasion of Africa while kindly omitting the history of how themselves enslaved an entire race in the first place.

Hence, it's better to maintain the status quo for now, sit back and watch Japan transforming herself to a country where 50% of its population will be retirees in half a century. Then we can take it by force with minimal international pressure and the least amount of casualties.

Click to expand...

Well at some point the day will come when China is so strong militarily and economically compared to Japan and the US that it can peacefully negotiate a return of DYT to China without any bloodshed at all. In fact I'll bet that is exactly China's plan. Unless there is further escalation, of course. IMO this is how China was able to successfully negotiate the return of HK from the UK. Fresh from her victory against Argentina, Thatcher was playing hardball with DXP, who supposedly said something like "China is not Argentina. HK is not the Falklands", in essence a giant "eff you, return HK now". Even in the early 80's China's relative strength vis a vis the UK had improved to where the UK knew it could not hold HK should China decide to take it back by force.

The other point regarding "pretexts" is how little importance people seem to attach to them, when they are actually quite important in geopolitics, important enough that countries will go so far as to fabricate pretexts to go to war if they don't see themselves as having a legitimate one. There is even a specific term for "pretext" (casus belli, reason for war). WWI had the July Ultimatum, WWII had the Gleiwitz Incident, Vietnam War had the Gulf of Tonkin incident, Desert Storm had the invasion of Kuwait, Iraq War had 9/11 and WMD's (allegedly), just to name a few of the wars in the last two centuries. You can see that the casus belli for several of these wars are either incorrect or wholly manufactured. In regards to the DYT dispute, as long as China does not stupidly give Japan an obvious casus belli as a birthday present, Japan would have to try and fabricate one in order to justify any significant escalations (such as landing its own troops or building a base on DYT) which would have a much lower chance of convincing the world audience of the legitimacy of its actions than a perfectly good reason (like Chinese boots on DYT), especially if China is smart about how to manage the potential fallout.

Re: Japanese Defence Minister: Helicopter & DDG "locked on" by Chinese Frigates' Ra

China & Japan should seriously sit down and talk without antagonisng each other. Look at joint interests where possible, & finally remember your own nationals & that of the people of Asia are looking for peace & prosperity for the region. Once the shooting begins (by any party - accidental or intentional) it would difficult to stop it. Veterans of wars & hostilities know this.

Mysterre said:

There is definitely a case to be made for 50/50 joint development of the contested area north of DYT, where Japan claims the median line and China claims the continental shelf. Both "median line" and "continental shelf" are legitimate claims as UN conventions allow either without specifying which takes greater priority; countries are left to themselves to resolve disputes. The oil inside this disputed area should IMO be jointly developed by Japan and China.

DYT is another matter altogether. IMO this is an issue of historical injustice and one of the last pieces of Japanese colonial aggression that needs to be resolved with China before the 2 countries can finally put the past behind them (some others being the permanent removal of the 14 convicted class A war criminals inside the Yasukuni Shrine and official Japanese acknowledgement of the true extent of the Nanjing Massacre and of the activities of Unit 731). There should be no compromise here or 50/50 joint development of the surrounding sea.

Click to expand...

Re: Japanese Defence Minister: Helicopter & DDG "locked on" by Chinese Frigates' Ra

Mysterre said:

Japan moving troops onto DYT unilaterally without a Chinese first move will easily give China enough political cover to escalate the situation to armed conflict if it so desires. It will not matter that Japan will claim it is simply moving troops around inside its borders, it knows that China will interpret this otherwise, and so will the rest of the world, no matter what lip service they pay to Japan (or not). I'm fairly certain Japan would not even consider such a move in the absence of a Chinese incursion; I'm also fairly certain the US would not permit this in the first place. That is why it is important that no Chinese boots land on DYT, unless of course Japan escalates by landing boots first. If that happens, then all bets are off, stupidity has prevailed, and war will be likely.

Click to expand...

Therefore it won't happen just like that, they won't suddenly send troops there without some excuse and a gradual escalation of events. Yet the Japanese still have many options to push for conflict (if they're determined to go down that path). For example, they can continue to have Japaneses "civilians" go to the island and do all kinds of activities there with the JCG "failing" to intercept them. And then they can make a big fuss about how JCG personal needs to land on the island to "search" and "apprehend" and "remove" them from the island. If this is happening frequent enough and China fail to respond with enough deterrence, then the JCG will have the excuse to set up things on the island to "prevent" future occurrences of similar incidents. For starters, they can set up unmanned remote monitoring stations on the island, which will require regular maintenance. Alternatively, they may start to allow some limited civilian visits to the island with a non-military and non-political excuse such as "scientific survey", and then they will gradually become more lenient in allowing Japanese to set foot on the island. At some point in this chain of events China has to intervene with some action near the island (unless they want to give up their claim), which will start with water cannons and ships bumping into each other. Sooner or later there will be injuries or causalities even if no guns were involved, and the JSMDF may start come in with excuses like "we called in a nearby JSMDF helicopter just to airlift someone to get emergency treatment". If a Japanese civilian/police is severely injured or killed during these conflicts, guess what they'll make out of it?

Then why is Japan not already doing this? Because the US wanted some political conflict between China and Japan, but they don't want to see a war break out, so they will exert their influence to stop Japan from being too risk-seeking. The Japanese leadership is also not prepared for a war, they cannot afford one as it will be economic suicide, and they have no confidence that they will come out victorious, even if just a pyrrhic victory. They want to be aggressive in the claim because they know the tides are turning and their time is running out, yet they're afraid to push it too much to cause a trade war, not to mention a real war. Their right wing may be zealous, but after all, Japan is not North Korea, they have a lot to lose.

This is why I said in an earlier post that aggressive Japanese aggravation in the DYT conflict (to the level of what's being described in this post) is not very probable. The Chinese leadership definitely need to be prepared for such a scenario, no matter how unlikely it seems, but their current strategy should not be designed as if they expect this to happen. They should not assume this WILL happen and then use it as an excuse to be aggressively pushing for the endgame soon, instead of waiting for a more favorable opportunity. I'm not praising the Chinese leadership as superior to all other regimes (as someone cynically suggested under this thread), but they do have a track record of being quite competent strategists. I can't speak the same for Japanese leaderships since the start of WWII. Therefore I have confidence that the Chinese leadership will not be as hot-headed as some people on the Internet.

Anyway, back to my reply for the quote. What I wanted to say is, if Japan really want to escalate the conflict, they have plenty of ways to do so without looking bad on the "international" press which is dominated by western-centric ideology and biases. By utilizing this bias (i.e. Japan=democracy=Western ally=good guy, China=communists=hacker/thief/competitor=bad guy), they can make the first move without being seen (by most in the West anyway) as making the first move. They can do this as long as they don't stupidly send troops there out of the blue. The main reason they're not doing this right now is not because they can't instigate a war while still being the "good guy", it is simply because they cannot afford to have such war. In conflicts like these, media can always be controlled, people's views will be manipulated, and public opinion of third parties don't matter that much anyway. I've seen too many invasions being coated as War of justice even if evidence suggested otherwise. Sure, some people became skeptical and anti-war, but it didn't stop others from believing they're spreading democracy and fighting evil on earth. It certainly did not stop all those invasions started by supposedly democratic and pro human right western countries, and those are bloody invasions with no chance in hell to be advertised as "defending your sovereign territory" (unlike DYT to Japan). For a potential armed conflict in DYT, branding yourself as the good guy is not that difficult if you're today's Japan, yet it will be difficult to China because it is challenging a dominant world order. I guess this is where you and I differ (or maybe not). The power to bring severe consequences through force, economy, or otherwise is what China can rely on to keep the situation from escalating, they can't rely on their adversary's poor excuse causing international uproar as a deterrence. They should certainly take advantage of it in a propaganda war but it's a minor factor to the actual outcome of DYT dispute.

Re: Japanese Defence Minister: Helicopter & DDG "locked on" by Chinese Frigates' Ra

SinoSoldier said:

The question then becomes which side will shoot itself in the foot first. No matter how dominating or flourishing the Chinese military industry and research might be, they cannot expect to fight a war and come out looking like a victim.

Click to expand...

But you do know with neither side can afford the repercussion of backing down, escalation is the only path; and you should be familiar with the term "accidental discharge of weapons" too. Like it or not, this "Mexican standoff" status quo can't last forever, some hotheads on either side will eventually make another move to make each side man up and before you know it, Japan and China goes to war.

It's not a matter of "if" but a matter of "when".