PLAN SCS Bases/Islands/Vessels (Not a Strategy Page)

Blackstone

Blackstone

Brigadier
joshuatree said:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
Obama's making a strategic mistake with the "my is bigger than yours" display, and I suspect more bad than good would result in the form of increased tensions with little to show for the trouble. The FON operation will give China the rationale to partially militarize in the name of self-defense, and also setup SCS ADIZ in the future.
 
siegecrossbow

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Blackstone said:
Obama's making a strategic mistake with the "my is bigger than yours" display, and I suspect more bad than good would result in the form of increased tensions with little to show for the trouble. The FON operation will give China the rationale to partially militarize in the name of self-defense, and also setup SCS ADIZ in the future.
Click to expand...

I think this is a classical example of "needling" the opponent. I get what Obama is trying to do here: he wants to show America's allies in the region (Japan, Philippines, Taiwan, etc.) that American power projection has them covered. However, I don't think that the benefits (goodwill from the Philippines and maybe Taiwan) outweighs the significant risk of China further militarising the region. I think it really comes down to what America's bottom line is. Is the U.S., or any country for that matter, willing to actually go to war over the South China Sea? If America's ultimate goal is to decrease tension within the region (which best serves American geopolitical interests), then this is not the proper course of action.

Obama is leaving office next year. Whoever succeeds him gets to deal with the fallout. Given the fact that the likely candidate is either Clinton or Trump, the odds of reconciliation isn't high.
 
Last edited:
P

PanAsian

Major
siegecrossbow said:
I think this is a classical example of "needling" the opponent. I get what Obama is trying to do here: he wants to show America's allies in the region (Japan, Philippines, Taiwan, etc.) that American power projection has them covered. However, I don't think that the benefits (goodwill from the Philippines and maybe Taiwan) outweighs the significant risk of China further militarising the region. I think it really comes down to what America's bottom line is. Is the U.S., or any country for that matter, willing to actually go to war over the South China Sea? If America's ultimate goal is to decrease tension within the region (which best serves American geopolitical interests), then this is not the proper course of action.

Obama is leaving office next year. Whoever succeeds him gets to deal with the fallout. Given the fact that the likely candidate is either Clinton or Trump, the odds of reconciliation isn't high.
Click to expand...

This move plays to all of the US' strengths: direct military action, enabling and corralling in as many others against China as possible, persistently and loudly spinning the PR no matter what but especially if China overreacts. Solid move on the Obama administration's part, of course assuming containment being the goal.
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Beijing Condems US Naval Patrols in South China Sea

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


article said:
China's foreign minister Wang Yi has warned the United States not to create trouble after it was reported the US Navy had started freedom of navigation operations in the South China Sea.

A senior US defence official briefed journalists that the destroyer USS Lassen had sailed through the 12-nautical mile zones of two islands in the disputed Spratly chain early on Tuesday morning.
Click to expand...
Pretty much exactly as I predicted.

I believe the two were Subi and Mischief reefs.

It was the USS Lassen, a Flight IIA Burke class DDG.
 
aquauant

aquauant

Junior Member
"Type 052D DDG Kunming monitored, followed and warned the US vessel. .."
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!




"If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything." This applies to both parties.
 
A

a1a2a3a4a5a6a

New Member
Registered Member
siegecrossbow said:
I think it really comes down to what America's bottom line is. Is the U.S., or any country for that matter, willing to actually go to war over the South China Sea? If America's ultimate goal is to decrease tension within the region (which best serves American geopolitical interests), then this is not the proper course of action.
Click to expand...

The goal of the US, has never been monotonously decreasing tension, but maintaining a manageable level of tension, just enough as an excuse to stay and project influence around the globe, which in turn would serve American geopolitical interests.
 
plawolf

plawolf

Lieutenant General
a1a2a3a4a5a6a said:
The goal of the US, has never been monotonously decreasing tension, but maintaining a manageable level of tension, just enough as an excuse to stay and project influence around the globe, which in turn would serve American geopolitical interests.
Click to expand...

Don't forget about the arms dealers, who do you think all of China's "scared" neighbours are supposed to turn to for arms?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top