Philippine Defense Forces - Compiled Threads [Archive] - Page 39

Bahay_Kubo

June 11th, 2011, 06:19 PM

US urges peaceful end to West Philippine Sea tensions
Agence France-Presse (http://globalnation.inquirer.net/3851/us-urges-peaceful-end-to-west-philippine-sea-tensions)
8:54 pm | Saturday, June 11th, 2011

WASHINGTON—(UPDATE) The United States is “troubled” by tensions triggered by a maritime border dispute in the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea), US officials said Friday, calling for a “peaceful” resolution to the crisis.

“We’ve been troubled by some of these reports about the South China Sea and believe they only serve to raise tensions and don’t help with the peace and security of the region,” said State Department spokesman Mark Toner.

“We support a collaborative diplomatic process… and call on all claimants to conform all of their claims, both land and maritime, to international law.”

He said the United States and the international community at large share an interest in maintaining maritime security in the region, citing freedom of navigation, economic development and respect for international law.

Beijing says it is committed to peace in the West Philippine Sea, but its more assertive maritime posture has caused concern among regional nations.

Tensions between China and Vietnam are at their highest level in years after Hanoi accused Chinese marine surveillance vessels of cutting the exploration cables of an oil survey ship in May inside its exclusive economic zone in the maritime waters.

On Thursday, Vietnam alleged a similar incident in the zone, saying a Chinese fishing boat rammed the cables of another oil survey ship in its waters.

Beijing countered by warning Vietnam to halt all activities that it says violate its sovereignty in disputed West Philippine Sea waters.

The two countries have long-standing disputes over the potentially oil-rich Paracel and Spratly archipelagos and surrounding sea.

Tensions have also risen this year between China and the Philippines, another claimant to the Spratly islands, where Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan also say they have a stake.

In the past two weeks, the Philippines has publicly accused Chinese forces of being behind seven confrontations with Filipinos in the Spratlys in less than four months.

Chinese ambassador to Manila Liu Jianchao dismissed the reported incidents as mere “rumors” or exaggeration, even as he asserted China’s claim to the reputedly oil-rich Spratlys island chain.
Vietnam’s navy on Friday announced it will hold a live-fire drill in the South China Sea next week.

“We don’t support anything that adds to raising the current level of tension; we don’t think it’s helpful,” Toner said.

“What there needs to be is a collaborative diplomatic process, a peaceful process, to resolve various territorial disputes and otherwise,” he added. “Shows of force, other gestures like that, just I think raise tensions.”

US Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned last weekend that clashes may erupt in the West Philippine Sea unless nations with conflicting territorial claims adopt a mechanism to settle disputes peacefully.

manlajay

June 11th, 2011, 06:31 PM

Phl, US to hold war games (http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=695313&publicationSubCategoryId=63)

By Jaime Laude (The Philippine Star) Updated June 12, 2011 12:00 AM Comments (0) View comments

Manila, Philippines - The Philippines and the United States are set to embark on a joint naval exercise late this month, but officials said the tensions in the West Philippine Sea have nothing to do with the programmed war drill.

The military confirmed the holding of the joint naval exercises as China warned the US should not get involved in the territorial dispute in the South China Sea since “the US is not a party to the dispute.”

“The joint naval exercise will start on June 28 at the Naval Forces West (Navforwest),” Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) spokesman Commodore Jose Miguel Rodriguez said.

“It has been programmed since last year,” Rodriguez added. There has been no announcement yet of the specific location of the military exercises but Navforwest operates mainly in the Sulu Sea and nearby waters.

The planned naval exercise, called “Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training” or CARAT, is in accordance with the Mutual Defense Treaty between the Philippines and the US, officials said.

This year’s CARAT exercise is aimed at testing the capability of the two navies to undertake “freedom of navigation operations.”

Philippine military officials announced the coming naval maneuvers amid heightened tensions in the West Philippine Sea and the South China Sea stoked by alleged intrusions by Chinese vessels into Philippine waters and into disputed territories, particularly the Spratly Islands Group.

Vietnam earlier announced plans for a nine-hour live fire naval exercise tentatively set for tomorrow off central Quang Nam province, apparently in response to increased Chinese activities near the Spratlys.

The US Navy’s guided-missile destroyer USS Chung-Hoon is underway to participate in the CARAT.

Considered as one of the most powerful warships in the US Navy, the Arleigh Burke class destroyer left its home port at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii late last week and may now be in international waters near the Sulu Sea.

AFP chief Gen. Eduardo Oban Jr. said the arrival of Chung-Hoon has nothing to do with the territorial spat with China.

Navy spokesman Lt. Col. Omar Tonsay said the US Navy vessel has yet to make contact and that it might have to complete a separate mission before sailing to the Philippines.

“There’s no need for them (Chung-Hoon officers) to coordinate with us their activities while they are still in international waters. They will inform us anyway once they reach port. Maybe they have other activities before CARAT,” Tonsay said.

He said the details of the coming joint naval war drill are still being worked out. “We are having a planning conference next week,” he said.

Counting on US

Malacañang, meanwhile, expressed confidence that the country can count on US support in defending its sovereignty but emphasized the preeminence of diplomacy in settling territorial disputes.

“We are committed to the resolution of the issue in the most diplomatic and the most peaceful way possible. I haven’t seen the terms of the Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) quite recently but I know that as an ally the United States will help should it reach that point because of the Mutual Defense Treaty,” deputy presidential spokesperson Abigail Valte said over radio dzRB.

She said the AFP leadership would likely take up the territorial issue in the upcoming Philippines-US Mutual Defense Board meeting in Hawaii in August, but she is not aware if President Aquino has specific instructions to Oban.

“As a security issue, that will depend entirely on Gen. Oban. But since it is a security issue, it is normal to talk about the issue in that kind of meeting, but I imagine one way or the other, it will be discussed,” Valte said.

China cautions US

China, meanwhile, cautioned the US to keep its hands off the issue.

“What should be done to settle the territorial dispute should be done on the basis of a bilateral term so the US is not a party to the dispute,” Chinese Ambassador Liu Jianchao said during a forum on Thursday at the Chinese embassy.

“I understand its (US) concern which is really unnecessary, after all this maritime water has always been safe and peaceful,” Liu said.

“We’ve been all trying to make this area a peaceful, stable one and so far the navigation in this area has always been safe and peaceful. So there’s no excuse for an intervention in this area,” Liu said.

“The territorial dispute is a dispute between the claimant parties, not really with a country that’s outside this region that has no relevance to the territorial dispute in this region,” he added.

The ambassador also said any visit by Philippine lawmakers to the disputed territories would be tantamount to encroachment.

Also on Friday, the US said it is troubled by tensions in the South China Sea and urged countries with stakes in the region to work for a peaceful resolution to the crisis.

“We’ve been troubled by some of these reports about the South China Sea and believe they only serve to raise tensions and don’t help with the peace and security of the region,” said State Department spokesman Mark Toner.

“We support a collaborative diplomatic process... and call on all claimants to conform all of their claims, both land and maritime, to international law,” he said.

Rep. Neri Colmenares of the militant party-list group Bayan Muna, for his part, urged President Aquino yesterday not to involve the US in the Spratlys dispute.

He said the US has no business meddling in the Spratlys issue “because it is not part of ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) or even Asia.”

“The forum for the resolution of the issue is ASEAN plus China,” he said.

He added that the Aquino administration should not accept excess defense equipment supposedly being dangled by the US in exchange for its being allowed to meddle in the Spratlys conflict.

Earlier, he urged the administration to elevate the Spratlys issue to ASEAN or the United Nations.

Let DFA do the talking

Sen. Francis Escudero said Aquino’s aides should refrain from issuing statements on the issue and let officials trained in diplomacy do the job.

Escudero, an ally of Aquino, was reacting to Valte’s declaration of confidence in US readiness - in accordance with the MDT - to help the country in the event of open hostilities with China.

Escudero said the DFA should do the talking “instead of the Palace through its spokesperson in order to avoid any faux pas on our part.”

“I urge Palace officials to carefully review the MDT and read through its fine print and get confirmations from the US government through its ambassador if indeed this situation is covered or what the limitations there may be to the application of the MDT from the point of view of the US government,” Escudero said.

Escudero said US Ambassador Harry Thomas Jr., while calling for the full implementation of the 2002 Declaration of Conduct between China and ASEAN, also appealed for calm and stressed that Washington takes no side on the issue.

“I really am hopeful that this issue can be settled without bloodshed and if at all this should escalate, we really have an ally in the US not only as stipulated in the MDT but as a gesture of long-standing friendship,” Escudero said.

“The last thing we like to see happening is to be encouraged and to be emboldened to fight with an assurance of an ally but find ourselves alone in the field. Only because we did not do our own compliance, like checking what we really have in fine print with the US,” he added.

More important than RH

Rep. Roilo Golez, meanwhile, said the government should focus more on asserting the country’s rights over the Spratlys than working for the approval of the Reproductive Health (RH) bill.

Golez issued the call during an anti-RH bill rally in Malolos, Bulacan.

“We’re so preoccupied with the RH bill while we should be tackling issues like the Spratlys and other concerns,” he said.

“We should strengthen our claim by asking help from the community of nations,” he said. “We have to really make noises so that other countries will know what China is doing.”

He also praised Vietnam for taking a tougher stand against China.

“We should not allow ourselves to be bullied. Look at Vietnam. It’s just the size of the Philippines but it is ready to fight,” he said.

Senate President Pro Tempore Jinggoy Estrada, speaking in Doha, Qatar, also urged the administration to stand its ground against China but work for a diplomatic solution to the problem.

“We have to deal also with the other countries like Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, China which have claims over the Spratly Islands. What is due us is due us. The Philippines should never give up,” Estrada said.

But Estrada admitted that the Philippine government’s dispute with China can only be settled “diplomatically.”

“We have to solve it diplomatically. We cannot fight them even if we try to strengthen ourselves, they will still emerge strong,” Estrada said.

Estrada said the Philippine government should sit down with China, Vietnam, Indonesia and Malaysia.

“What we need is dialogue. We have no other alternative,” Estrada said.

Political analyst Chito Sta. Romana, for his part, said a territorial claim based on history is weak.

China has been asserting claims over some islands using as basis ancient maritime documents and maps dating back to the 7th century.

He said under the United Natiosn Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the Philippines has the strongest claim over the Spratlys which were discovered and taken over by the late Tomas Cloma in 1947. Cloma turned over the islands to the Philippine government in the 1970s.

“Under the law of the sea any claim based on historical account is not strong,” he said.

What’s in a name?

Presidential spokesman Edwin Lacierda, for his part, said they would now call South China Sea the West Philippine Sea even as he admitted that it would not change the situation much.

“It’s always going to be a question on the boundaries,” he said.

“We are signatories to the UNCLOS as well as the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea. The nomenclature will not change their claim that’s why we try to resolve this peacefully. So that’s why we believe on a peaceful resolution and a continuous multilateral dialogue among all the claimants in the disputed areas,” Lacierda earlier said.

But the military said it has been using the term West Philippine Sea to refer to South China Sea in the last five years.

“When people keep referring to the South China Sea, there is a subliminal message that this sea belongs to a country whose name appears in the name,” Rodriguez said.

“Vietnam calls it East Sea and China calls it South China Sea. We in the Philippines should call it West Philippine Sea,” the military spokesman said.

Akbayan party-list Rep. Walden Bello has proposed the renaming of the South China Sea to further bolster the country’s claim over Spratlys.

The Department of Foreign Affairs has been using “West Philippine Sea” in its letters and notes verbale protesting China’s incursions. - With Aurea Calica, Jess Diaz, Marvin Sy, Pia Lee-Brago, Perseus Echeminada, Jose Rodel Clapano, Dino Balabo

Bahay_Kubo

June 11th, 2011, 06:32 PM

Phl, US to hold war games
By Jaime Laude
The Philippine Star (http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=695313&publicationSubCategoryId=63)
Updated June 12, 2011 12:00 AM

Manila, Philippines - The Philippines and the United States are set to embark on a joint naval exercise late this month, but officials said the tensions in the West Philippine Sea have nothing to do with the programmed war drill.

The military confirmed the holding of the joint naval exercises as China warned the US should not get involved in the territorial dispute in the South China Sea since “the US is not a party to the dispute.”

“The joint naval exercise will start on June 28 at the Naval Forces West (Navforwest),” Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) spokesman Commodore Jose Miguel Rodriguez said.

“It has been programmed since last year,” Rodriguez added. There has been no announcement yet of the specific location of the military exercises but Navforwest operates mainly in the Sulu Sea and nearby waters.

The planned naval exercise, called “Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training” or CARAT, is in accordance with the Mutual Defense Treaty between the Philippines and the US, officials said.

This year’s CARAT exercise is aimed at testing the capability of the two navies to undertake “freedom of navigation operations.”

Philippine military officials announced the coming naval maneuvers amid heightened tensions in the West Philippine Sea and the South China Sea stoked by alleged intrusions by Chinese vessels into Philippine waters and into disputed territories, particularly the Spratly Islands Group.

Vietnam earlier announced plans for a nine-hour live fire naval exercise tentatively set for tomorrow off central Quang Nam province, apparently in response to increased Chinese activities near the Spratlys.

The US Navy’s guided-missile destroyer USS Chung-Hoon is underway to participate in the CARAT.

Considered as one of the most powerful warships in the US Navy, the Arleigh Burke class destroyer left its home port at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii late last week and may now be in international waters near the Sulu Sea.

AFP chief Gen. Eduardo Oban Jr. said the arrival of Chung-Hoon has nothing to do with the territorial spat with China.

Navy spokesman Lt. Col. Omar Tonsay said the US Navy vessel has yet to make contact and that it might have to complete a separate mission before sailing to the Philippines.

“There’s no need for them (Chung-Hoon officers) to coordinate with us their activities while they are still in international waters. They will inform us anyway once they reach port. Maybe they have other activities before CARAT,” Tonsay said.

He said the details of the coming joint naval war drill are still being worked out. “We are having a planning conference next week,” he said.

Counting on US

Malacañang, meanwhile, expressed confidence that the country can count on US support in defending its sovereignty but emphasized the preeminence of diplomacy in settling territorial disputes.

“We are committed to the resolution of the issue in the most diplomatic and the most peaceful way possible. I haven’t seen the terms of the Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) quite recently but I know that as an ally the United States will help should it reach that point because of the Mutual Defense Treaty,” deputy presidential spokesperson Abigail Valte said over radio dzRB.

She said the AFP leadership would likely take up the territorial issue in the upcoming Philippines-US Mutual Defense Board meeting in Hawaii in August, but she is not aware if President Aquino has specific instructions to Oban.

“As a security issue, that will depend entirely on Gen. Oban. But since it is a security issue, it is normal to talk about the issue in that kind of meeting, but I imagine one way or the other, it will be discussed,” Valte said.

China cautions US

China, meanwhile, cautioned the US to keep its hands off the issue.

“What should be done to settle the territorial dispute should be done on the basis of a bilateral term so the US is not a party to the dispute,” Chinese Ambassador Liu Jianchao said during a forum on Thursday at the Chinese embassy.

“I understand its (US) concern which is really unnecessary, after all this maritime water has always been safe and peaceful,” Liu said.

“We’ve been all trying to make this area a peaceful, stable one and so far the navigation in this area has always been safe and peaceful. So there’s no excuse for an intervention in this area,” Liu said.

“The territorial dispute is a dispute between the claimant parties, not really with a country that’s outside this region that has no relevance to the territorial dispute in this region,” he added.

The ambassador also said any visit by Philippine lawmakers to the disputed territories would be tantamount to encroachment.

Also on Friday, the US said it is troubled by tensions in the South China Sea and urged countries with stakes in the region to work for a peaceful resolution to the crisis.

“We’ve been troubled by some of these reports about the South China Sea and believe they only serve to raise tensions and don’t help with the peace and security of the region,” said State Department spokesman Mark Toner.

“We support a collaborative diplomatic process... and call on all claimants to conform all of their claims, both land and maritime, to international law,” he said.

Rep. Neri Colmenares of the militant party-list group Bayan Muna, for his part, urged President Aquino yesterday not to involve the US in the Spratlys dispute.

He said the US has no business meddling in the Spratlys issue “because it is not part of ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) or even Asia.”

“The forum for the resolution of the issue is ASEAN plus China,” he said.

He added that the Aquino administration should not accept excess defense equipment supposedly being dangled by the US in exchange for its being allowed to meddle in the Spratlys conflict.

Earlier, he urged the administration to elevate the Spratlys issue to ASEAN or the United Nations.

Let DFA do the talking

Sen. Francis Escudero said Aquino’s aides should refrain from issuing statements on the issue and let officials trained in diplomacy do the job.

Escudero, an ally of Aquino, was reacting to Valte’s declaration of confidence in US readiness - in accordance with the MDT - to help the country in the event of open hostilities with China.

Escudero said the DFA should do the talking “instead of the Palace through its spokesperson in order to avoid any faux pas on our part.”

“I urge Palace officials to carefully review the MDT and read through its fine print and get confirmations from the US government through its ambassador if indeed this situation is covered or what the limitations there may be to the application of the MDT from the point of view of the US government,” Escudero said.

Escudero said US Ambassador Harry Thomas Jr., while calling for the full implementation of the 2002 Declaration of Conduct between China and ASEAN, also appealed for calm and stressed that Washington takes no side on the issue.

“I really am hopeful that this issue can be settled without bloodshed and if at all this should escalate, we really have an ally in the US not only as stipulated in the MDT but as a gesture of long-standing friendship,” Escudero said.

“The last thing we like to see happening is to be encouraged and to be emboldened to fight with an assurance of an ally but find ourselves alone in the field. Only because we did not do our own compliance, like checking what we really have in fine print with the US,” he added.

More important than RH

Rep. Roilo Golez, meanwhile, said the government should focus more on asserting the country’s rights over the Spratlys than working for the approval of the Reproductive Health (RH) bill.

Golez issued the call during an anti-RH bill rally in Malolos, Bulacan.

“We’re so preoccupied with the RH bill while we should be tackling issues like the Spratlys and other concerns,” he said.

“We should strengthen our claim by asking help from the community of nations,” he said. “We have to really make noises so that other countries will know what China is doing.”

He also praised Vietnam for taking a tougher stand against China.

“We should not allow ourselves to be bullied. Look at Vietnam. It’s just the size of the Philippines but it is ready to fight,” he said.

Senate President Pro Tempore Jinggoy Estrada, speaking in Doha, Qatar, also urged the administration to stand its ground against China but work for a diplomatic solution to the problem.

“We have to deal also with the other countries like Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, China which have claims over the Spratly Islands. What is due us is due us. The Philippines should never give up,” Estrada said.

But Estrada admitted that the Philippine government’s dispute with China can only be settled “diplomatically.”

“We have to solve it diplomatically. We cannot fight them even if we try to strengthen ourselves, they will still emerge strong,” Estrada said.

Estrada said the Philippine government should sit down with China, Vietnam, Indonesia and Malaysia.

“What we need is dialogue. We have no other alternative,” Estrada said.

Political analyst Chito Sta. Romana, for his part, said a territorial claim based on history is weak.

China has been asserting claims over some islands using as basis ancient maritime documents and maps dating back to the 7th century.

He said under the United Natiosn Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the Philippines has the strongest claim over the Spratlys which were discovered and taken over by the late Tomas Cloma in 1947. Cloma turned over the islands to the Philippine government in the 1970s.

“Under the law of the sea any claim based on historical account is not strong,” he said.

What’s in a name?

Presidential spokesman Edwin Lacierda, for his part, said they would now call South China Sea the West Philippine Sea even as he admitted that it would not change the situation much.

“It’s always going to be a question on the boundaries,” he said.

“We are signatories to the UNCLOS as well as the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea. The nomenclature will not change their claim that’s why we try to resolve this peacefully. So that’s why we believe on a peaceful resolution and a continuous multilateral dialogue among all the claimants in the disputed areas,” Lacierda earlier said.

But the military said it has been using the term West Philippine Sea to refer to South China Sea in the last five years.

“When people keep referring to the South China Sea, there is a subliminal message that this sea belongs to a country whose name appears in the name,” Rodriguez said.

“Vietnam calls it East Sea and China calls it South China Sea. We in the Philippines should call it West Philippine Sea,” the military spokesman said.

Akbayan party-list Rep. Walden Bello has proposed the renaming of the South China Sea to further bolster the country’s claim over Spratlys.

The Department of Foreign Affairs has been using “West Philippine Sea” in its letters and notes verbale protesting China’s incursions.

Wind Shear

June 11th, 2011, 06:46 PM

@xxxriainxxxx and among other else:

Speaking of history, yes. They do have "past."

To start with, here's a Wikipedia entry about Sino-Vietnamese War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War).

As far as I know, Philippines and Vietnam fought China before. :-)

And oh, China also messed with nature by building structures on coral reefs.

Time to close this thread.

915bungohunter

June 11th, 2011, 06:53 PM

Wag sana mangyari sa mga nagpapatrolya sa spratleys at mga nakatira doon kung may invasion.
WFucSXHoWPA

Talagang nagpakita ng barbaric acts ang chinese navy at marines sa video na ito

mao rong

June 11th, 2011, 06:54 PM

^^nakaya nga nila sa Tibet sa Spratlys pa kaya...

Simple Dude

June 11th, 2011, 06:59 PM

^^nakaya nga nila sa Tibet sa Spratlys pa kaya...

^^ agree,... :okay: that's why i hope na tuloy2 na yung Modernization ng AFP,... sana ma approve na rin yung plan's to buy some Submarines and additional 2 Hamilton class ships...

mao rong

June 11th, 2011, 07:02 PM

^^pero may pondo ba?

Panzer_18

June 11th, 2011, 07:03 PM

sisiw lng para nila ang spratlys ...

Simple Dude

June 11th, 2011, 07:18 PM

^^pero may pondo ba?

^^ syempre meron yan... pero maliit lang yung shares ng AFP kaya i hope i-increase nila...

Simple Dude

June 11th, 2011, 07:19 PM

sisiw lng para nila ang spratlys ...

^^ yup, specially yung Philippine Navy... i think they will just treat us like a Target practice...

mao rong

June 11th, 2011, 07:22 PM

^^:lol:...we can always ask for help

mao rong

June 11th, 2011, 07:49 PM

US not coming to PH aid vs China (http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/14118/us-not-coming-to-ph-aid-vs-china)

The United States yesterday said it will not side with any party in the Spratlys conflict, which is to say that the Philippines’ most powerful ally will not be coming to its aid should its spat with China escalate into a shooting war.

The US Embassy made this clear yesterday in reaction to a Malacañang statement earlier yesterday expressing confidence that Washington would honor its commitment under the two countries’ Mutual Defense Treaty to come to the aid of a beleaguered ally.

“The US does not take sides in regional territorial disputes,” the US press attaché Rebecca Thompson said in an e-mailed statement when contacted for comment to deputy presidential spokesperson Abigail Valte’s invoking of the 60-year-old MDT.

Thompson said the US was “troubled by incidents in the South China Sea in recent days that have raised tensions in the region” and that Washington opposes “the use or threat of force” by any of the countries with rival claims to the Spratly islands.

The brief statement said the US “shares a number of national interests with the international community in the South China Sea” but did not mention the Philippines or the two countries’ over-a-hundred-year-old ties and mutual defense pact.

In an interview on state-run dzRB radio earlier yesterday, Valte figured the Philippines could count on its superpower ally should the situation with China deteriorate because of the MDT.

“I haven’t seen the terms of the MDT quite recently but I know that as an ally, the United States will help if ever it reaches that point because of the Mutual Defense Treaty,” she said.

“Hopefully, it doesn’t get to that point because, again, we are committed to the resolution of the issue in the most diplomatic and the most peaceful way possible,” she added.

Armed Forces Chief General Eduardo Oban was also earlier quoted as saying that the military remained “hopeful that the Americans will not stand aside should the conflict erupt and that they can invoke the MDT with the US.”

The MDT was signed on Aug. 13, 1951, in Washington, D.C. with both parties declaring “publicly and formally their sense of unity and their common determination to defend themselves against external armed attack.”

Under the eight articles of the treaty, both parties agree to aid and support each other in settling any international disputes by peaceful means, among others.

Sentor Francis Escudero said the Department of Foreign Affairs should be designated as the lead agency to talk about the Spratlys issue in public.

Avoid any mistakes

He said Malacañang should not do so through its spokespersons “in order to avoid any faux pas on our part.”

Escudero said the government should also review the MDT to ascertain if US forces would indeed come to the rescue if the Philippines is attacked because of the Spratlys dispute.

He said Palace officials should carefully review the MDT, read through its fine print and get confirmations from the US government “if indeed this situation is covered.”

But he remained optimistic that US military support would be given in case of an armed conflict as “a gesture of longstanding friendship.”

Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. said the House would leave it to the Department of Foreign Affairs assert the country’s sovereignty claim over the West Philippine Sea.

“The DFA is articulating our position and we’re supporting it,” he said.

Armed Forces spokesperson Commodore Miguel Rodriguez said the AFP leaves it to the DFA to make an official comment on the developments in the Spratlys issue.

Not joining Vietnam

“We submit our reports to the DFA and the DFA crafts the country’s position on KIG [Kalayaan Island Group] affairs,” he said, referring to the portion of the Spratlys claimed by the Philippines.

He also said the military was not joining Vietnam, another Spratlys claimant, in the deepening rift with China over the issue.

“We are not looking at partnering with one country against another country,” he said.

At a Federation of Filipino-Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry Independence Day dinner last night, President Aquino came face to face with Chinese Ambassador Liu Jiangchao who only a few days ago had warned claimant states to stop exploring for oil in the Spratlys.

“Like all neighbors, I know we may have our disagreements sometimes,” Mr. Aquino said in his speech, acknowledging Liu’s presence.

“(But) no one can deny the benefits our relationship has brought to both our countries throughout the years,” he added.

Liu adverted to “incidents” that have arisen between the two countries since Mr. Aquino came to power.

“But facts have manifested we are stronger than these tests,” he said.

Liu said the Aug. 23 botched hostage crisis involving Hong Kong tourists had been settled with a “loving and understanding heart.”

“The last thing the Chinese government and people want to see is that the [Spratlys] dispute stands in the way of the progress of our wonderful relations and the friendship and brotherhood of our two peoples,” Liu said, who hinted at a visit to China from Mr. Aquino later this year.

In the past two weeks, the Philippines has accused China of making at least six incursions into Philippine territory in the past four months, a charge that Beijing has dismissed as rumors.

Recently, the Aquino government has made a point of referring to the South China Sea as the West Philippine Sea to bolster its claim to certain parts of the Spratlys.

swahi

June 11th, 2011, 08:17 PM

^^:lol:...we can always ask for help

Doesn't the abu sayaf have special preference for the chinese? Maybe our military can ask them for help?:nuts:

Kintoy

June 11th, 2011, 08:20 PM

1989 Tiananmen Square Protests

9-nXT8lSnPQ

mao rong

June 11th, 2011, 08:26 PM

^^grabe na halt nya yung parade...

Doesn't the abu sayaf have special preference for the chinese? Maybe our military can ask them for help?:nuts:

^^we can try...:lol:

lochinvar

June 11th, 2011, 09:25 PM

mao rong

June 11th, 2011, 10:08 PM

^^or the US is just playing safe i guess...plus the fact that it's a disputed territory

spearhead

June 11th, 2011, 11:06 PM

US Destroyer sent to South China Sea amid tension in Spratlys (http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/307822)

The United States has sent one of the most formidable warships, the USS Chung-Hoon, a guided-missile destroyer to the South China Sea and Sulu sea amid tensions between China, Vietnam and the Philippines over the disputed Spratly Islands.

"Yahoo Online News said that USS Chung-Hoon, a guided-missile destroyer, has been sent on an independent deployment to the South China as well as to the Sulu Sea early this week to assert right of free passage in the region," Philstar.com reports.

“The ship will be sailing through waters that the US considers international waters to assert right of free passage and to demonstrate the international community does not accept national claims to the contrary,” the report said.

Earlier China and Vietnam have accused each other for their presence in the disputed territories. In an apparent move to flex its muscle in the tension-filled sea lanes, Vietnam had announced it will do ammunition or firing drill not far from the disputed islands.

Following Vietnam's announcement for next week's firing drill, China has castigated the Philippines for its protest based on what it called "rumors" on the alleged incursions by Chinese vessels.

The Philippines said it has documented close to six incursions by Chinese vessels and aircraft since February off the Reed Bank which the Philippines said was well within Philippine territory.

The Spratly Islands are being claimed in whole or in part by several countries in Southeast Asia including China, Vietnam, Malaysia, Taiwan Brunei and the Philippines.

The islands reportedly sit on top of huge oil and gas deposits which have not been explored for commercial purposes.

China is claiming that the entire Spratly Islands are part of its territories

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/307822#ixzz1P0IjSXjk

spearhead

June 12th, 2011, 12:13 AM

US urges peaceful end to West Philippine Sea tensions (http://globalnation.inquirer.net/3851/us-urges-peaceful-end-to-west-philippine-sea-tensions)

WASHINGTON—(UPDATE) The United States is “troubled” by tensions triggered by a maritime border dispute in the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea), US officials said Friday, calling for a “peaceful” resolution to the crisis.

“We’ve been troubled by some of these reports about the South China Sea and believe they only serve to raise tensions and don’t help with the peace and security of the region,” said State Department spokesman Mark Toner.

“We support a collaborative diplomatic process… and call on all claimants to conform all of their claims, both land and maritime, to international law.”

He said the United States and the international community at large share an interest in maintaining maritime security in the region, citing freedom of navigation, economic development and respect for international law. Beijing says it is committed to peace in the West Philippine Sea, but its more assertive maritime posture has caused concern among regional nations.

Tensions between China and Vietnam are at their highest level in years after Hanoi accused Chinese marine surveillance vessels of cutting the exploration cables of an oil survey ship in May inside its exclusive economic zone in the maritime waters. On Thursday, Vietnam alleged a similar incident in the zone, saying a Chinese fishing boat rammed the cables of another oil survey ship in its waters.

Beijing countered by warning Vietnam to halt all activities that it says violate its sovereignty in disputed West Philippine Sea waters.

The two countries have long-standing disputes over the potentially oil-rich Paracel and Spratly archipelagos and surrounding sea.

Tensions have also risen this year between China and the Philippines, another claimant to the Spratly islands, where Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan also say they have a stake.
In the past two weeks, the Philippines has publicly accused Chinese forces of being behind seven confrontations with Filipinos in the Spratlys in less than four months.
Chinese ambassador to Manila Liu Jianchao dismissed the reported incidents as mere “rumors” or exaggeration, even as he asserted China’s claim to the reputedly oil-rich Spratlys island chain.

Vietnam’s navy on Friday announced it will hold a live-fire drill in the South China Sea next week.

“We don’t support anything that adds to raising the current level of tension; we don’t think it’s helpful,” Toner said.

“What there needs to be is a collaborative diplomatic process, a peaceful process, to resolve various territorial disputes and otherwise,” he added. “Shows of force, other gestures like that, just I think raise tensions.”

US Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned last weekend that clashes may erupt in the West Philippine Sea unless nations with conflicting territorial claims adopt a mechanism to settle disputes peacefully.

waraywaray architect

June 12th, 2011, 01:27 AM

"The United States yesterday said it will not side with any party in the Spratlys conflict, which is to say that the Philippines’ most powerful ally will not be coming to its aid should its spat with China escalate into a shooting war."

Just like I mentioned earlier, the U.S. doesn't recognize Kalayaan Islands as part of the U.S. recognized Philippine territory. Now if the Chinese invaded Lubang Islands or Batanes, that's a different story.

This statement doesn't imply if the Philippines is attacked. It is simply saying "it doesn't takes sides"; that is to say, whether the Philippines OR China has the legitimate claim or not, the US will not mingle with the issue.

Parchie

June 12th, 2011, 02:00 AM

^^nakaya nga nila sa Tibet sa Spratlys pa kaya...

If the drug cartels in the Americas can assemble low-cost subs, why can't the AFP not re-align some money building their own local submarines? I know the AFP has an engineering brigade, they can tap their engineers. Kahit yung 10-man hulls na pwedeng pang launch ng torpedo! Kung ang isang ship ay may 300 crew, magandang kill-ratio ang 1 is to 30! Just a thought though is push becomes a shove!

waraywaray architect

June 12th, 2011, 02:20 AM

gaLj

June 12th, 2011, 02:20 AM

This statement doesn't imply if the Philippines is attacked. It is simply saying "it doesn't takes sides"; that is to say, whether the Philippines OR China has the legitimate claim or not, the US will not mingle with the issue.

I couldn't agree more.

The MDT doesn't extend up to the disputed area. The reed bank is covered by MDT, since it's already a party of our territory when we signed that treaty. We already exercise sovereignty in that area since the Spanish Era.

Manila-X

June 12th, 2011, 02:46 AM

The Philippines is better off having a good and modern armed forces but can only be used as defensive just like Japan. Though can send its personnel for peace keeping missions.

LuckyLady

June 12th, 2011, 02:53 AM

This spratly's incident for me is a blessings in disguise...It would push our gov't. to speed up the transformation and modernization of our military. The world could also see the real color and ambitions of chicom particularly in this area. Chicom is really good in lies, fakes and pretensions, it's time we see their real color and we could also test and force them to display their capabilities. This incident awakens us also that it's time we re examine the PINOY PATRIOTISM, which i think most of us have already forgotten. And we should not worry if the US will come to our aid or not when worst come to worst. On the surface of course it should deny, but the reality might be different. IMO sometimes things are better left unspoken.

waraywaray architect

June 12th, 2011, 03:12 AM

leofriends

June 12th, 2011, 03:48 AM

congrats tread 11... :D happy independence day!!

LuckyLady

June 12th, 2011, 04:03 AM

In the art of war, you DON'T let your enemies know what you want to do. It's a mind game. Let the Chinks figure it out themselves. China can attack the Philippines anyway they want, but the real battle is on the ground. Philippine troops are battle tested and are good in guerilla warfare.

exactly! that is why there is an urgency to upgrade our armaments. i hope our officials would realize that we'll all benefit when we have a strong country so they better should minimize their corruptions.

By the way HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY TO OUR COUNTRY AND TO ALL OUR FELLOW FILIPINOS! Mabuhay ang Pilipinas at Mabuhay tayong lahat!

coldfire083

June 12th, 2011, 04:42 AM

http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=695313&publicationSubCategoryId=63

Phl, US to hold war games
By Jaime Laude (The Philippine Star) Updated June 12, 2011 12:00 AM Comments (60)

Manila, Philippines - The Philippines and the United States are set to embark on a joint naval exercise late this month, but officials said the tensions in the West Philippine Sea have nothing to do with the programmed war drill.

The military confirmed the holding of the joint naval exercises as China warned the US should not get involved in the territorial dispute in the South China Sea since “the US is not a party to the dispute.”

“The joint naval exercise will start on June 28 at the Naval Forces West (Navforwest),” Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) spokesman Commodore Jose Miguel Rodriguez said.

“It has been programmed since last year,” Rodriguez added. There has been no announcement yet of the specific location of the military exercises but Navforwest operates mainly in the Sulu Sea and nearby waters.

The planned naval exercise, called “Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training” or CARAT, is in accordance with the Mutual Defense Treaty between the Philippines and the US, officials said.

This year’s CARAT exercise is aimed at testing the capability of the two navies to undertake “freedom of navigation operations.”

Philippine military officials announced the coming naval maneuvers amid heightened tensions in the West Philippine Sea and the South China Sea stoked by alleged intrusions by Chinese vessels into Philippine waters and into disputed territories, particularly the Spratly Islands Group.

Vietnam earlier announced plans for a nine-hour live fire naval exercise tentatively set for tomorrow off central Quang Nam province, apparently in response to increased Chinese activities near the Spratlys.

The US Navy’s guided-missile destroyer USS Chung-Hoon is underway to participate in the CARAT.

Considered as one of the most powerful warships in the US Navy, the Arleigh Burke class destroyer left its home port at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii late last week and may now be in international waters near the Sulu Sea.

AFP chief Gen. Eduardo Oban Jr. said the arrival of Chung-Hoon has nothing to do with the territorial spat with China.

Navy spokesman Lt. Col. Omar Tonsay said the US Navy vessel has yet to make contact and that it might have to complete a separate mission before sailing to the Philippines.

“There’s no need for them (Chung-Hoon officers) to coordinate with us their activities while they are still in international waters. They will inform us anyway once they reach port. Maybe they have other activities before CARAT,” Tonsay said.

He said the details of the coming joint naval war drill are still being worked out. “We are having a planning conference next week,” he said.

Counting on US

Malacañang, meanwhile, expressed confidence that the country can count on US support in defending its sovereignty but emphasized the preeminence of diplomacy in settling territorial disputes.

“We are committed to the resolution of the issue in the most diplomatic and the most peaceful way possible. I haven’t seen the terms of the Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) quite recently but I know that as an ally the United States will help should it reach that point because of the Mutual Defense Treaty,” deputy presidential spokesperson Abigail Valte said over radio dzRB.

She said the AFP leadership would likely take up the territorial issue in the upcoming Philippines-US Mutual Defense Board meeting in Hawaii in August, but she is not aware if President Aquino has specific instructions to Oban.

“As a security issue, that will depend entirely on Gen. Oban. But since it is a security issue, it is normal to talk about the issue in that kind of meeting, but I imagine one way or the other, it will be discussed,” Valte said.

China cautions US

China, meanwhile, cautioned the US to keep its hands off the issue.

“What should be done to settle the territorial dispute should be done on the basis of a bilateral term so the US is not a party to the dispute,” Chinese Ambassador Liu Jianchao said during a forum on Thursday at the Chinese embassy.

“I understand its (US) concern which is really unnecessary, after all this maritime water has always been safe and peaceful,” Liu said.

“We’ve been all trying to make this area a peaceful, stable one and so far the navigation in this area has always been safe and peaceful. So there’s no excuse for an intervention in this area,” Liu said.

“The territorial dispute is a dispute between the claimant parties, not really with a country that’s outside this region that has no relevance to the territorial dispute in this region,” he added.

The ambassador also said any visit by Philippine lawmakers to the disputed territories would be tantamount to encroachment.

Also on Friday, the US said it is troubled by tensions in the South China Sea and urged countries with stakes in the region to work for a peaceful resolution to the crisis.

“We’ve been troubled by some of these reports about the South China Sea and believe they only serve to raise tensions and don’t help with the peace and security of the region,” said State Department spokesman Mark Toner.

“We support a collaborative diplomatic process... and call on all claimants to conform all of their claims, both land and maritime, to international law,” he said.

Rep. Neri Colmenares of the militant party-list group Bayan Muna, for his part, urged President Aquino yesterday not to involve the US in the Spratlys dispute.

He said the US has no business meddling in the Spratlys issue “because it is not part of ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) or even Asia.”

“The forum for the resolution of the issue is ASEAN plus China,” he said.

He added that the Aquino administration should not accept excess defense equipment supposedly being dangled by the US in exchange for its being allowed to meddle in the Spratlys conflict.

Earlier, he urged the administration to elevate the Spratlys issue to ASEAN or the United Nations.

Let DFA do the talking

Sen. Francis Escudero said Aquino’s aides should refrain from issuing statements on the issue and let officials trained in diplomacy do the job.

Escudero, an ally of Aquino, was reacting to Valte’s declaration of confidence in US readiness - in accordance with the MDT - to help the country in the event of open hostilities with China.

Escudero said the DFA should do the talking “instead of the Palace through its spokesperson in order to avoid any faux pas on our part.”

“I urge Palace officials to carefully review the MDT and read through its fine print and get confirmations from the US government through its ambassador if indeed this situation is covered or what the limitations there may be to the application of the MDT from the point of view of the US government,” Escudero said.

Escudero said US Ambassador Harry Thomas Jr., while calling for the full implementation of the 2002 Declaration of Conduct between China and ASEAN, also appealed for calm and stressed that Washington takes no side on the issue.

“I really am hopeful that this issue can be settled without bloodshed and if at all this should escalate, we really have an ally in the US not only as stipulated in the MDT but as a gesture of long-standing friendship,” Escudero said.

“The last thing we like to see happening is to be encouraged and to be emboldened to fight with an assurance of an ally but find ourselves alone in the field. Only because we did not do our own compliance, like checking what we really have in fine print with the US,” he added.

More important than RH

Rep. Roilo Golez, meanwhile, said the government should focus more on asserting the country’s rights over the Spratlys than working for the approval of the Reproductive Health (RH) bill.

Golez issued the call during an anti-RH bill rally in Malolos, Bulacan.

“We’re so preoccupied with the RH bill while we should be tackling issues like the Spratlys and other concerns,” he said.

“We should strengthen our claim by asking help from the community of nations,” he said. “We have to really make noises so that other countries will know what China is doing.”

He also praised Vietnam for taking a tougher stand against China.

“We should not allow ourselves to be bullied. Look at Vietnam. It’s just the size of the Philippines but it is ready to fight,” he said.

Senate President Pro Tempore Jinggoy Estrada, speaking in Doha, Qatar, also urged the administration to stand its ground against China but work for a diplomatic solution to the problem.

“We have to deal also with the other countries like Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, China which have claims over the Spratly Islands. What is due us is due us. The Philippines should never give up,” Estrada said.

But Estrada admitted that the Philippine government’s dispute with China can only be settled “diplomatically.”

“We have to solve it diplomatically. We cannot fight them even if we try to strengthen ourselves, they will still emerge strong,” Estrada said.

Estrada said the Philippine government should sit down with China, Vietnam, Indonesia and Malaysia.

“What we need is dialogue. We have no other alternative,” Estrada said.

Political analyst Chito Sta. Romana, for his part, said a territorial claim based on history is weak.

China has been asserting claims over some islands using as basis ancient maritime documents and maps dating back to the 7th century.

He said under the United Natiosn Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the Philippines has the strongest claim over the Spratlys which were discovered and taken over by the late Tomas Cloma in 1947. Cloma turned over the islands to the Philippine government in the 1970s.

“Under the law of the sea any claim based on historical account is not strong,” he said.

What’s in a name?

Presidential spokesman Edwin Lacierda, for his part, said they would now call South China Sea the West Philippine Sea even as he admitted that it would not change the situation much.

“It’s always going to be a question on the boundaries,” he said.

“We are signatories to the UNCLOS as well as the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea. The nomenclature will not change their claim that’s why we try to resolve this peacefully. So that’s why we believe on a peaceful resolution and a continuous multilateral dialogue among all the claimants in the disputed areas,” Lacierda earlier said.

But the military said it has been using the term West Philippine Sea to refer to South China Sea in the last five years.

“When people keep referring to the South China Sea, there is a subliminal message that this sea belongs to a country whose name appears in the name,” Rodriguez said.

“Vietnam calls it East Sea and China calls it South China Sea. We in the Philippines should call it West Philippine Sea,” the military spokesman said.

Akbayan party-list Rep. Walden Bello has proposed the renaming of the South China Sea to further bolster the country’s claim over Spratlys.

The Department of Foreign Affairs has been using “West Philippine Sea” in its letters and notes verbale protesting China’s incursions. - With Aurea Calica, Jess Diaz, Marvin Sy, Pia Lee-Brago, Perseus Echeminada, Jose Rodel Clapano, Dino Balabo

Simple Dude

June 12th, 2011, 04:51 AM

The Philippines is better off having a good and modern armed forces but can only be used as defensive just like Japan. Though can send its personnel for peace keeping missions.

^^ that's what i dream of for now,... :okay:

Simple Dude

June 12th, 2011, 04:54 AM

In the art of war, you DON'T let your enemies know what you want to do. It's a mind game. Let the Chinks figure it out themselves. China can attack the Philippines anyway they want, but the real battle is on the ground. Philippine troops are battle tested and are good in guerilla warfare.

^^ exactly :okay: but Pnoy already challenged China for a possible arm race :lol: which we should not be telling them so they will be surprised... i bet you got that art of war from Sun Tzu, Right?? :)

Simple Dude

June 12th, 2011, 05:00 AM

Simple Dude

June 12th, 2011, 05:05 AM

This statement doesn't imply if the Philippines is attacked. It is simply saying "it doesn't takes sides"; that is to say, whether the Philippines OR China has the legitimate claim or not, the US will not mingle with the issue.

^^ or maybe they are also trying to help us in that way, coz if they will not help us... the Government might do more extra effort to strengthen our defense capabilities... but in the actual combat i think they are still going to rescue us from the Red pigs... :dunno:

makatiprime

June 12th, 2011, 05:14 AM

if china attacks the philippine soil, this will be the end of chinese dominance in asia...the war would still in spratlys area...and no war will happen, as long as us navy are in the vicinity of the west philippine sea, no nation can intrude or invade another sovereign nation...UN members treaty...(except the united states of america as the father and empire of the world...every rule there's an exception)

mao rong

June 12th, 2011, 05:54 AM

Alinghi

June 12th, 2011, 06:05 AM

what? your telling me to "shut up"?? isn't this ssc an open forum where everyone has the rights to open up their opinion?? (like freedom of Speech??) if you don't like reading other people's comments specially those who wants to know more... then make your own forum... ok, 1.now... do you think we are united with those moro's when they are still fighting for their FREEDOM?? 2. di naman namatay yung ARMM eh, gusto lang naman ni Erap na kontrol yung Mindanao at maging mapayapa... can't you get it? tingin mo ba magiging peaceful tayo kung mayroong MILF?? since when did that peace talks ever work?? 3 & 4,... ok, i admit i really dont have any idea what happened to that Abu Bakar now thing is... this rebellion became active again and yeah, they are even trying to expand the ARMM coz as what iv'e heard... they are attempting to claim the whole Mindanao... Wow, thank's for the piece of advice... i like it, shut the hell up? bot haim, BULI KALA TIM IROY...

please read:
http://hdn.org.ph/speech-of-former-p...moro-conflict/

adi toy, lamuna...

you call the shots! why don't you create your own "carabao english wrong grammar wrong spelling wrong syntax wrong subject-verb agreement ignorant poser's forum"??? whatever floats your boat.. lol mag waray ka nalang para walang comic relief dito whenever you post using your moronic English :lol:

1. lack of education entails punitive action and discrimination towards cultural minorities.. just like you what you've been saying about the Moro's here.. enough said.

2. then why did you say that "Arroyo restored the ARMM"??? if the peace talks Tripoli agreements didn't bear fruit in 1995 and the MNLF expanded, you would most likely be dead by now due to terrorism or war, kuha mo? then you say that peace talks are useless? aw oo nga naman you don't know a thing kaya it's understandable :ohno:

3. then why the hell would you say that Abubakar is back in the hands of the rebels WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW A SINGLE THING ABOUT IT??? that's the problem with you! you claim facts to be true and then later you admit that you really don't know anything?! @$*%! what does that say about your reputation here in the forum? = POSER :ohno:

4. pa what i've heard what i've heard ka pa! don't you know that the expansion of the ARMM is already included in the Organic Act which created it? duh!!!

http://hdn.org.ph/speech-of-former-p...moro-conflict/
asus! you actually believe sugarcoated half-baked statements laden with whole lies like that? anyway with your level of intuition and education, i can understand :nuts:

P.S. i suggest you use waray in the forums because a 10 year-old 6th grader can write better English than you :lol:

Kintoy

June 12th, 2011, 06:55 AM

Celebrate Philippine Independence Day by NOT buying anything made in China today

Manila-X

June 12th, 2011, 07:07 AM

Manila-X

June 12th, 2011, 07:10 AM

^^ that's what i dream of for now,... :okay:

Same here for The Philippines. A good armed forces but stick on the defensive.

mao rong

June 12th, 2011, 07:11 AM

^^takot lang nila..

Kintoy

June 12th, 2011, 07:14 AM

http://i1199.photobucket.com/albums/aa462/kintoy2/P3210498b.jpg

leofriends

June 12th, 2011, 08:06 AM

I doubt if China would even attack/invade a foreign country including The Philippines because if they do, it will worsen their image and reputation around the globe.

as you said it is starting now...:lol:

-SNPKLSDMBLDR-

June 12th, 2011, 08:20 AM

Chinese Navy fleet to hold drill in west Pacific

2011-06-10 (China Military News cited from Global Times) -- A navy fleet of the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) will conduct a training drill in international waters in the west Pacific in mid to late June, according to a press release issued Thursday by the Ministry of National Defense.
The press release came after some Japanese media published reports expressing fears over recent moves by Chinese naval vessels in international waters close to Japanese territory.
The press release said that the drill is in line with relevant international laws and does not target any specific country, in response to reports that Chinese navy ships previously passed through waters between the Japanese islands of Okinawa and Miyako.
"This will be a regular drill according to the annual plan (of the PLA)," said the press release.
Experts believed that on Thursday's press release was aimed at clearing up misunderstandings among some Japanese media that had reported the regular military drill as a security threat.
Sankei Shimbun, a Japanese newspaper, reported Wednesday that eight Chinese navy vessels had passed through international waters between Okinawa and Miyako Wednesday while another three vessels had traveled the same route on Thursday morning.
According to an earlier Global Times report, a total of 10 military vessels did pass through this route in a military drill on April 10, while two other vessels also passed through for training purposes in July last year.
"China's training drill is just a regular practice for the troops. Meanwhile, those Chinese vessels are actually very far away from Japan and in international waters, where they are unable to harm any Japanese," Liu Jiangping, a military expert, told the Global Times.
Liu told the Global Times that the Japanese reports were not based on fact, and were harming Sino-Japanese relations as Prime Minister Naoto Kan comes under mounting pressure to quit from his post.
"The Japanese media should take a more objective stand over China's regular military drills, in order to enhance mutual understanding between the two countries," Liu told the Global Times.
The chief of the General Staff of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) Chen Bingde has confirmed that China's first aircraft carrier is under construction. An official from the PLA also added that the carrier will not enter other nations' territories after it is completed, the Hong Kong Commercial Daily reported on Tuesday.

source (http://www.china-defense-mashup.com/chinese-navy-fleet-to-hold-drill-in-west-pacific.html)

LuckyLady

June 12th, 2011, 08:25 AM

Same here for The Philippines. A good armed forces but stick on the defensive.

why what do think is the AFP's plan to do when they will be modernized? Do you think they'll gonna use this for aggression in other countries? Your post seems to suggest something else.

Bricken Ridge

June 12th, 2011, 08:39 AM

Simple Dude

June 12th, 2011, 08:52 AM

you call the shots! why don't you create your own "carabao english wrong grammar wrong spelling wrong syntax wrong subject-verb agreement ignorant poser's forum"??? whatever floats your boat.. lol mag waray ka nalang para walang comic relief dito whenever you post using your moronic English :lol:

1. lack of education entails punitive action and discrimination towards cultural minorities.. just like you what you've been saying about the Moro's here.. enough said.

2. then why did you say that "Arroyo restored the ARMM"??? if the peace talks Tripoli agreements didn't bear fruit in 1995 and the MNLF expanded, you would most likely be dead by now due to terrorism or war, kuha mo? then you say that peace talks are useless? aw oo nga naman you don't know a thing kaya it's understandable :ohno:

3. then why the hell would you say that Abubakar is back in the hands of the rebels WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW A SINGLE THING ABOUT IT??? that's the problem with you! you claim facts to be true and then later you admit that you really don't know anything?! @$*%! what does that say about your reputation here in the forum? = POSER :ohno:

4. pa what i've heard what i've heard ka pa! don't you know that the expansion of the ARMM is already included in the Organic Act which created it? duh!!!

http://hdn.org.ph/speech-of-former-p...moro-conflict/
asus! you actually believe sugarcoated half-baked statements laden with whole lies like that? anyway with your level of intuition and education, i can understand :nuts:

P.S. i suggest you use waray in the forums because a 10 year-old 6th grader can write better English than you :lol:

^^ Gosh, your so annoying... Carabao English? :lol: i made it simple for you,...:lol: wait a minute... im just an 18 year old dude, and you seem to be even more younger than I... will you understand me if i speak Waray here?? haha very funny, even my friends here in Cebu are having epistaxis everytime i speak my language... :bash: not unless you have your translator or a mind power thingy, Moron... :D 1. did i discriminate them? all i want is peace... 2. i know, that's why we have to stop it... at parang ni restore na rin niya yung MNLF kasi pinabayaan niya ito, unlike Erap na talagang nakipaglaban... just read the last part of the site i gave u and that's exactly my explanation 3. am i even in Mindanao to know what's happening there?? 4. well, ok... its part of the organic act, i dont care about it... i just want to destroy those MILF's to promote peace... we have to much enemies, How can we even unite the country? peace talks? now tell me, since when did it bear a fruit...
Wow, sugarcoated half-baked statements... Galing mo ah :lol:

mao rong

June 12th, 2011, 09:05 AM

Simple Dude

June 12th, 2011, 09:19 AM

^^ayaw talaga patalo ng China

^^ ganun talaga ang buhay... :lol:

Mercato

June 12th, 2011, 09:25 AM

If the drug cartels in the Americas can assemble low-cost subs, why can't the AFP not re-align some money building their own local submarines? I know the AFP has an engineering brigade, they can tap their engineers. Kahit yung 10-man hulls na pwedeng pang launch ng torpedo! Kung ang isang ship ay may 300 crew, magandang kill-ratio ang 1 is to 30! Just a thought though is push becomes a shove!
This is what boggles me. Filipinos even have engineers who worked for Boeing as aircraft design engineers. And also, why can't the Philippines start developing its own missile technology? The government can start by pooling resources first, like inviting great thinkers in the industry, and come up with projects or what have you, and ask the USA to assist or advice. They have to start somewhere or the country will be left to the dogs.For the simple reason that the top brass of the AFP are busy enriching themselves and milking government resources for the benefit of their own families. They are busy selling hardware to the Abu Sayyaf to prolong the war and keep themselves profitable. They are busy protecting and conniving with the illegal poachers who destroyed our underwater resources off Cotabato (ARMM territory mind you) for a huge profit. The hell do these generals care about the Spratlys; we all know they only pay lip service to it for the benefit of media. They would rather buy expensive houses in Ayala Alabang or in the West Coast. All in the name of the family.

They are busy thinking up new ways and schemes to get 50million peso retirement bonuses, I'm afraid one suicide by one general is not nearly enough to cleanse the entire AFP of its corruption. They are the enemy within, our greatest enemy is not from the outside but the enemy within. :ohno:
The Philippines is better off having a good and modern armed forces but can only be used as defensive just like Japan. Though can send its personnel for peace keeping missions.The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. First order of the day is to lynch all these corrupt generals and quarantine them with their freakin bloodsucking families to the Spratlys to become target practice for the Chinese. Until we overcome the enemy within, we will always be scatterbrained and goin nowhere on how to improve the AFP.

mao rong

June 12th, 2011, 09:26 AM

^^ ganun talaga ang buhay... :lol:

^^trying to counter the USA ang dating

coldfire083

June 12th, 2011, 09:35 AM

Ganda ng dream ko. presidente daw si Eddie Gil kaya mayaman ang Pilipinas kaya modernize na ang AFP natin dahil sa AFP Chief na si Makatiprime tapos Sankatutak Stealth and submarines natin plus 10 pa ang aircraft carrier ng Pilipinas na donate ng mga jews satin.

mao rong

June 12th, 2011, 09:37 AM

^^:rofl:

jpdm

June 12th, 2011, 09:42 AM

For the simple reason that the top brass of the AFP are busy enriching themselves and milking government resources for the benefit of their own families. They are busy selling hardware to the Abu Sayyaf to prolong the war and keep themselves profitable. They are busy protecting and conniving with the illegal poachers who destroyed our underwater resources off Cotabato (ARMM territory mind you) for a huge profit. The hell do these generals care about the Spratlys; we all know they only pay lip service to it for the benefit of media. They would rather buy expensive houses in Ayala Alabang or in the West Coast. All in the name of the family.

They are busy thinking up new ways and schemes to get 50million peso retirement bonuses, I'm afraid one suicide by one general is not nearly enough to cleanse the entire AFP of its corruption. They are the enemy within, our greatest enemy is not from the outside but the enemy within. :ohno:
The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. First order of the day is to lynch all these corrupt generals and quarantine them with their freakin bloodsucking families to the Spratlys to become target practice for the Chinese. Until we overcome the enemy within, we will always be scatterbrained and goin nowhere on how to improve the AFP.

Very very sad but very very true, mercato.

Deus Ex

June 12th, 2011, 10:21 AM

Taiwan is the only country that can come to our aid. Vietnam will be engaged in land combat.

leofriends

June 12th, 2011, 11:19 AM

US not coming to PH aid vs China
By Julie M. Aurelio, Norman Bordadora
Philippine Daily Inquirer
1:29 am | Sunday, June 12th, 2011

The United States yesterday said it will not side with any party in the Spratlys conflict, which is to say that the Philippines’ most powerful ally will not be coming to its aid should its spat with China escalate into a shooting war.

The US Embassy made this clear yesterday in reaction to a Malacañang statement earlier yesterday expressing confidence that Washington would honor its commitment under the two countries’ Mutual Defense Treaty to come to the aid of a beleaguered ally.

“The US does not take sides in regional territorial disputes,” the US press attaché Rebecca Thompson said in an e-mailed statement when contacted for comment to deputy presidential spokesperson Abigail Valte’s invoking of the 60-year-old MDT.

pano kaya ung nasa loob ng 200NM EEZ di pa rin kaya sakop yun ng MDT??? dapat reviewhin tong mabuti ng palasyo...:ohno:

Alinghi

June 12th, 2011, 12:14 PM

^^ Gosh, your so annoying... Carabao English? :lol: i made it simple for you,...:lol: wait a minute... im just an 18 year old dude, and you seem to be even more younger than I... will you understand me if i speak Waray here?? haha very funny, even my friends here in Cebu are having epistaxis everytime i speak my language... :bash: not unless you have your translator or a mind power thingy, Moron... :D 1. did i discriminate them? all i want is peace... 2. i know, that's why we have to stop it... at parang ni restore na rin niya yung MNLF kasi pinabayaan niya ito, unlike Erap na talagang nakipaglaban... just read the last part of the site i gave u and that's exactly my explanation 3. am i even in Mindanao to know what's happening there?? 4. well, ok... its part of the organic act, i dont care about it... i just want to destroy those MILF's to promote peace... we have to much enemies, How can we even unite the country? peace talks? now tell me, since when did it bear a fruit...
Wow, sugarcoated half-baked statements... Galing mo ah :lol:

kaya pala, no wonder, a teenager pretending to be knowledgeable when clearly he's not.. kung gusto mong sumikat sa pagka poser mo, then SSC is not the venue for you kasi people here need to be able to back up their claims with facts and truthful information, na hindi mo kayang gawin as shown from your posts.

my suggestions for you:

1. finish college first, then study the socio-economic problems of the country thoroughly and seriously, so that you can have a CREDIBLE opinion and not just "guess" the serious conditions of the country, which leaves no room for humor like what you're doing.

2. sumipsip ka na sa English professor mo as early as now kasi i am seeing your English grades in your TRO clearly in RED or F :lol: :lol: :lol:

kuha mo?

GodIsNotGreat

June 12th, 2011, 12:51 PM

le Reine

June 12th, 2011, 12:53 PM

^^Amen. That's what I'm going to say as well.

mao rong

June 12th, 2011, 12:57 PM

Doesn't officials in the Philippine government realize this already? A cursory reading of contemporary US history would reveal that the USA would act only to serve its own interests. Vietnam, Cambodia, Somalia, Iraq; the list goes on and on.

^^tama....:)

leofriends

June 12th, 2011, 01:33 PM

parang alam ko na kung baket... naloko na..:lol:

Op-Ed: U.S. is Insolvent and Bankrupt According to China:bash:
Jun 10, 2011 by ■ Kelly Bowlin - 6 comments

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/307824#ixzz1P3p5v6uA

Guan Jianzhong, chairman of China’s largest credit rating agency: Dagong Global Credit, slams U.S. credit rating as false, propped-up and unsustainable. Was he trying to be subtle?

The Financial Times reported that Guan said: “The western rating agencies are politicized and highly ideological and they do not adhere to objective standards. The financial crisis was caused because rating agencies didn’t properly disclose risk and this brought the entire US financial system to the verge of collapse, causing huge damage to the US and its strategic interests.”

A recent editorial published by Xinhua, China’s official state newswire, praised Dagong’s report as a significant step toward breaking the monopoly of western rating agencies of which it said China has long been a “victim”.

“Compared with the US’ conquest of the world by means of force, Moody’s has controlled the world through its dominance in credit ratings,” the editorial said...
U
gly talk. Kind of what it feels like when a creditor, who’s been hassling you for month, pulls in front of your house and a mean looking goon dressed in black exits, cracks his knuckles and heads for the front door. If it’s me, I’m out the back and over the fence, but the United States can’t run, and they certainly can’t hide.
Is it true? Is the U.S. no better than a financial junkie, tapped out of supply, printing its own fix in money shops working overtime? It’s no big secret. We’re at our debt ceiling right now. It’s all over the news. We either have to raise our own debt ceiling or default on our obligations. Sound healthy to you?

The Ugly Truth About Ugly Paper That’s Invisible

In 2008, when the financial markets melted down faster than the reactors at Daiichi, investment vehicles with sexy names were sporting debt-to-capital ratios of 40-1. In layman’s terms, for every $100,000 of hard assets floating around (you know, like a typical mortgage) there was $4,000,000 in funny paper being traded by smart guys at Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers and countries like Iceland and Greece and gulp…even pension funds managed by some really big municipalities. The volume of these paper-thin, ponzi-like, investments was, and still is, in the trillions. They didn’t just disappear, (well maybe the equity in the hard assets like that $100,000 mortgage did, in fact it’s worth about $50,000 today and continuing to slide), there was too much floating around. No, the bad paper is like an incurable contagion hovering over our financial bedsides ready to infect us like it did to countries like Greece and Portugal and Iceland. Hey, if the U.S. has maxed out its metaphorical credit cards on trips to places like Iraq and Afghanistan, where does that leave countries that can’t prop up their economies with such onerous consumption?

Uh, The Check’s in the Mail

The U.S. Government is going to have to face the fact it’s in way over its head and the sharks are starting to circle. Yea, China, is one of those sharks. In purely political terms, China hasn’t done anything wrong, in fact, it has stood on the sidelines while we continue to muck around in Iraq and Afghanistan and spend money we don’t have. They must be scratching their heads when they watch our cable feeds, at all the big car commercials that are right back on prime-time, where they were two years ago, pre-$4.00 gasoline. Guan Jianzhong would probably have us bend over on his lap for a couple of bare-butt swats, or perhaps have us stand in front of a chalk board and write, “corporate greed is bad” 1,000 times and then stand in the corner and repeat, “we promise to never spend more than we have in our checkbook and if we do, we’ll live with the consequences and not just print more money”.

Guan Jianzhong is right!

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/307824#ixzz1P3nsu5US

tpos mukang madididssolve pa ung NATO..:ohno:

Op-Ed: No future for NATO, says Gates to Europeans
Jun 10, 2011 by ■ Paul Wallis - 6 comments

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/307829#ixzz1P3pBO1Ra

US Defence Secretary Robert Gates has said what most Europeans didn’t want to hear: NATO isn’t contributing its fair share, and leaving the US stuck with the costs. That’s about 75% of the costs, actually, but this is a US-centric perspective.
Gates points out that NATO has run low on munitions in its campaign in Libya, after only a few weeks, and that the NATO contribution to Afghanistan is a mixed batch of efforts on various scales, some of which are very low, literally just a few people.
Gates’ economic argument is that only 5 of NATO’s 28 member states spend the agreed 2% of GDP on defence. That this is a sore point with the US is understandable, given the current economic situation in America. The money side of the equation is an obvious issue, and future US budgets are likely to be looking at cutting costs.
The negativism, however, is misplaced and unhelpful in terms of creating a working dialog. It’s also hard to see how what seems to be a pretty transparent flagging of a much reduced US commitment and level of interest is likely to help, either.
Background
NATO was originally founded in the post-war era under US auspices and US command, with US funding, while Europe was still staggering to its economic feet. The threat was the Soviet Union, and it was in the US interest to have a strong, united European military force in place to meet that threat.
The primary concept for NATO in its original configuration was based on US military concepts and massive US participation. US forces, as a matter of policy, operate under US command. That means that foreign command and control have become secondary considerations.
It also means that the exact requirement for combat strength at the coalface has become a pretty vague thing. That doesn’t exactly help create working organizational priorities or define the need for combat capacity.
The US controlled and coordinated a range of useful standardizations of munitions systems and equipment, based pretty much on its own. Of various NATO nations only a few of them have local armaments industries producing their own unique weapons systems, notably France, Germany and the UK, with Spain and Italy producing some systems on a smaller scale.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/307829#ixzz1P3ofP6V4

coldfire083

June 12th, 2011, 02:11 PM

Nagrally kanina ang Bayan MUna against US. Wag daw sila makialam sa China and Pilipinas.

leofriends

June 12th, 2011, 03:09 PM

Nagrally kanina ang Bayan MUna against US. Wag daw sila makialam sa China and Pilipinas.

ganyan nmn ung mga umag na yan.. ayaw pa kasi nila aminin na kapitalista sila.. anak ng tokwa, sasakupin na nga tayo ng china wala pang ginagawa yan mga yan... pag US ang pupunta.. anak talaga ng tupa oh..:ohno:

pulsephaze22

June 12th, 2011, 03:14 PM

^^ Bunch of useless hypocrites. Nakatatak na kasi sa isip nila na US ang laging kalaban mga inutil.:bash:

GodIsNotGreat

June 12th, 2011, 03:44 PM

^^Amen. That's what I'm going to say as well.

It would appear that Malacanang, in the face of China's aggressive posturings, is floating the idea that the US has commitments towards our country in case hostilities flare up between the two countries. The US Embassy spokesperson just shot that idea down.

This is very embarrassing for Malacanang.

mao rong

June 12th, 2011, 04:10 PM

ipaligpit ang mga yan...:D

spearhead

June 12th, 2011, 04:33 PM

http://i1199.photobucket.com/albums/aa462/kintoy2/P3210498b.jpg

HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY to all my folks here and to the rest of filipino nation! Mabuhay!

It would appear that Malacanang, in the face of China's aggressive posturings, is floating the idea that the US has commitments towards our country in case hostilities flare up between the two countries. The US Embassy spokesperson just shot that idea down.

This is very embarrassing for Malacanang.

The US can still help us indirectly through FMS military asset acquisitions.

spearhead

June 12th, 2011, 05:19 PM

250eI3pTjMM

Simple Dude

June 12th, 2011, 05:22 PM

kaya pala, no wonder, a teenager pretending to be knowledgeable when clearly he's not.. kung gusto mong sumikat sa pagka poser mo, then SSC is not the venue for you kasi people here need to be able to back up their claims with facts and truthful information, na hindi mo kayang gawin as shown from your posts.

my suggestions for you:

1. finish college first, then study the socio-economic problems of the country thoroughly and seriously, so that you can have a CREDIBLE opinion and not just "guess" the serious conditions of the country, which leaves no room for humor like what you're doing.

2. sumipsip ka na sa English professor mo as early as now kasi i am seeing your English grades in your TRO clearly in RED or F :lol: :lol: :lol:

kuha mo?

^^ english ba kamo?? :lol: your making me laugh,... non sense din makipag debate sa'yo eh kasi kahit gaano ka simple yung pag explain di mo parin makuha,... kahit mag Chinese pa tayo dito,... why are you calling me a poser? the f***? now, im asking you... since when did that peace talk's ever succeed? the times of Magsaysay against the HUK's? well, we are now in a diff. situation... are we peaceful right now with the presence of ASG, MILF and the NPA's? paikot2 lang usapan natin d2... my point is, we should wipe these people out so that the country will be peaceful,... ikaw nalang kaya mag presidente tutal mas magaling ka pa naman eh :lol: i always hang out with my Korean and Thai friends, naiingit ako sa Bansa nila kasi mapayapa at tuloy2 yung Asenso... don't you know that there are some soldier's who sell ammo's to the rebel's? which is one reason why tumatagal ang bakbakan... if we declare an all out war with them then they might be forced to surrender just like what Erap did... and in that way, isa nalang yung attention natin... yung China... we are making war for good... peace talk's will take us forever coz at the end, they will still violate the peace agreement... even Sri Lanka wiped out those Tamil Tigers to establish peace and power... simpleng topic lang di parin ma-get's i dont know how to explain it just for u to understand kahit pina simple ko na nga eh wala parin..., even grade 2 pupils can understand what i mean... hindi sa sobrang galing, yung simpleng usapan nagiging komplikado.. :ohno: we better stop this...

Simple Dude

June 12th, 2011, 05:56 PM

^^
http://jedayang.wordpress.com/2011/04/18/challenges-ahead-in-the-philippine-governments-conflict-management-of-moro-and-communist-insurgents/

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/regions/view/20081008-165336/2000-all-out-war-vs-MILF-symbolic

Arvor

June 12th, 2011, 06:18 PM

http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/RIMPAC-2010.jpg

The United States yesterday said it will not side with any party in the Spratlys conflict, which is to say that the Philippines’ most powerful ally will not be coming to its aid should its spat with China escalate into a shooting war.

The comments are not that ambiguous, at the same time the US is saying that it oposses any military action in the area and that it has it's own vital interests there, this means that even if the US does not act on our behalf it could still act on it's own for it's own vital interests which is stability in those shipping lanes .

Secondly the US is still bound by the treaty which applies to Phillippine territory recognized by said treaty, so even if the status of the treaties coverage regarding the Spratley's is ambiguous the rest of our national territory is not, which means that if China makes the mistake of attacking our mainlands or recognized islands it would mean a clear case for the implementation of the treaty .

With regards Tibet vs the Spratleys Tibet is right next door to China sharing a land border, the Spratleys is separated by an ocean and China might be strong by regional standards or vs asean but it is still hopelessly outmatched by the US and it's allies, at this point in time China's military will in the end be obliterated in a conventional war ... so despite the bravado and rhetoric at the end of the day the Chinese are still painfully aware of their limitations .

This does not mean that our country should rest on it's laurels it should continue modernisation, increasing the defence budget and improving overall efficiency .

wBAfpjf5z2U
Rimpac 2010

mao rong

June 12th, 2011, 06:37 PM

http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/RIMPAC-2010.jpg

^^o laban kayo?:D:D:D...that's why China is now on a PR offensive...

gmaer

June 13th, 2011, 02:16 AM

Philippines should prepare to fight for Spratlys on its own, say lawmakers (http://globalnation.inquirer.net/4011/philippines-should-prepare-to-fight-for-spratlys-on-its-own-say-lawmakers)
By Gil C. Cabacungan Jr.
Philippine Daily Inquirer
8:52 pm | Sunday, June 12th, 2011

MANILA, Philippines—Lawmakers are not disappointed with the US stance on China’s intrusion on the Spratly islands and West Palawan Sea but they believe that the Philippines should take the lead in making it a global issue.

Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. said it would be proper not to involve the US at this point because the situation could still be solved diplomatically.

Belmonte said reaching a common stand with other claimants against China would be the best option.

Parañaque Representative Roilo Golez said he fully expected the US to take a hands-off stance on China’s intrusion at this point.

“The US reaction is expected and pro forma in any potential conflict not involving a crucial ally like Israel, Taiwan and South Korea. But I believe that in an open conflict, which is unlikely, the US would resort to gunboat diplomacy or, to be more precise, aircraft carrier diplomacy to make sure freedom of navigation is preserved,” said Golez.

Muntinlupa City Rep. Rodolfo Biazon said that the US would remain neutral until the country’s troops or ships were fired upon.

But some lawmakers like Easter Samar Ben Evardone said that as the country’s ally, the US should take a stand.

“We should question the US why it chooses which part of our country is covered by the RP-US mutual defense treaty. The Spratlys are part of PH territory therefore the US should come to our defense in case of hostilities in the area,” said Evardone.

Golez said the Philippines should be prepared to be alone in tackling the West Philippine Sea question as a diplomatic challenge but it should also move to strike alliances with other countries that have been the victim of China’s aggression.

“We should use all international fora possible to project China as a misbehaving international bully. We should internationalize the issue in both official and unofficial channels. We can hurt China in an area where they are most vulnerable and where a credible attack can be launched and sustained: their international image,” said Golez..

Aurora Rep. Juan Edgardo Angara said: “Many countries are similarly situated as us in having territory disputes with an increasingly aggressive China. I think it is time we seek the help of the United Nations for possible mediation.”

s40

June 13th, 2011, 03:46 AM

if we think the Americans would come to our aid in an actual shooting war in the spratleys - i doubt that will happen.....

I know Georgia had similar strong mutual defense alliances with the US, when the Russians came, the US did 0......... Georgia lost a big chunk of their territory. We should equip ourselves with a strong military otherwise.... No Country should assume they'll have friends and allies to help them... The US is a fair weather friend.

To add, you think the US would shoot it out with China........ China holds billions of US bonds... in a shooting war with the US, they could put the US into recession by screwing up the US's borrowing capability.... The US would rather not have unemployment than for the Philippines to lose some territory and our poor defensless Filipino ass to die in a war.... What a joke... our poor analysis of the situation... I guess Pnoy knows this and he can't do nothing....

We should really make our economy strong and start buying war material

gmaer

June 13th, 2011, 03:50 AM

Phl-US defense pact to help ease tensions with China (http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=695662&publicationSubCategoryId=63)
(The Philippine Star) Updated June 13, 2011 12:00 AM

MANILA, Philippines - Malacañang hopes that the Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) with the United States will help reduce tension with China over the Spratlys.

Speaking to reporters after the Independence Day reception toast of President Aquino, Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa Jr. said the pact may be invoked by the Philippines in any military problem.

“The relevant portion of that treaty is that the US has been our ally and they will come, and we expect na talagang kasama natin sila (they are with us) in any problem that will require their help,” he said.

“It’s a diplomatic problem, it’s a political and diplomatic issue, so we will solve it along those lines,” he said. “We don’t want to encourage anything that will exacerbate the issues there.”

He called for caution in handling the conflict, emphasizing that the issues involve international law and are being addressed diplomatically.

Ochoa said the National Security Council, which he chairs, has not yet convened to discuss the Spratlys issue, although all NSC members have been “in constant communication” with each other on the matter.

President Aquino hopes that dialogue and mutual respect could resolve the differences between the Philippines and China.

“Let us continue along this path, to create partnerships characterized by continued dialogue and a culture of mutual respect for our historic and current partners,” he said.

Presidential spokesman Edwin Lacierda has asked other claimants to refrain from issuing statements that may heighten tension.

“The Republic of the Philippines has stated its position on the various territorial issues in the West Philippine Sea,” he said.

“We are committed to dialogue with other claimants. We call on all parties to refrain from inflammatory statements that would make it more difficult to reach a mutually agreeable solution.”

He was specifically referring to the Reed Bank, a territory near Palawan declared by the Philippines as part of its territory.

“Our goal here is really a peaceful resolution, so it’s better for the parties to talk away from the cameras to have a better discussion,” he said.

Lacierda said Malacañang leaves it to the Department of National Defense to make the announcements regarding the measures being taken to protect the Philippine waters._

Philippine-China relations remain good, he added.

Lacierda said China and the Philippines believe that everything should be resolved peacefully through dialogue, Lacierda said.

“We believe in a multi-lateral approach on all the disputed areas including all the claimants in the South China Sea,” he said.

“We strongly believe that in our discussion with China, they are open and very hopeful for a peaceful resolution and this could be done diplomatically.”

Meanwhile, Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. does not favor asking US help in the dispute over the Spratlys.

The war games with the US are not a show of force against China, he added.

In an interview after the 113th Independence Day rites in Malolos yesterday, Belmonte said the Philippines must sit down with other claimants.

“Right now, ang unang dapat gawin ay makasama ang iba pang claimants, di lang tayo, magkaisa tayo ng stand vis a vis China.” he said. (The first thing that needs to be done is to get together with other claimants and reach a common stand vis a vis China).

“I’m not in favor na tawagin ang Estados Unidos, kung may tatawagin tayo, magpulong pulong muna tayo, tawagin muna ang lahat ng claimants.” (Am not in favor of calling in the US. If we have to call someone let’s gather all the claimants first). —Delon Porcalla, Dino Balabo

gmaer

June 13th, 2011, 04:05 AM

I would like to share a FANTASY (edited) picture of PF-15 BRP Gregorio Del Pilar if only the Philippine Navy has the right budget...

http://img857.imageshack.us/img857/6908/pf15weapons.jpg

Picture taken from Art Garcia of Timawa.net

-SNPKLSDMBLDR-

June 13th, 2011, 04:20 AM

gmaer

June 13th, 2011, 04:56 AM

Taiwan plans missile boats in disputed Spratlys

TAIPEI (AFP) – Taiwan is planning to deploy missile boats in the South China Sea and tanks on disputed islands as regional tensions mount over territorial differences, a military spokesman said Sunday.
Taiwan's defence ministry said it feared coastguards now stationed in the Spratlys, claimed by several nations, and the Pratas islands, claimed by China, may not be sufficiently heavily-equipped to handle potential conflicts.
"Currently the coastguards in the Nansha (Spratlys) and Tungsha (Pratas) are only armed with light weapons," Taiwan's defence ministry spokesman David Lo told AFP.
"The missile boats and tanks is an option we've offered to the coastguards," he said, without specifying numbers and adding that the coastguard had yet to make a final decision.
Local media said the missile boats' presence would serve as a deterrent.
Each of Taiwan's 47-tonne Seagull class boats is armed with two Hsiungfeng I missiles, a ship-to-ship weapon with a range of 40 kilometres (24 miles).
The remarks come as China becomes increasingly assertive in the potentially resource-rich South China Sea, following several years of relative quiet.
Taiwan on Saturday reiterated its claims to the Spratlys, along with three other island groups in the South China Sea, amid a flare-up in regional tensions over rival claims.
Taiwan, Vietnam, Brunei, China, Malaysia, and the Philippines claim all or part of the Spratlys, which could lie on top of large oil reserves.
The Taiwanese coastguard currently has a 130-strong garrison on Taiping, the biggest island in the Spratlys archipelago, which has a runway to smooth logistical support.
The Philippine military in April said it planned to use a new US-made vessel to boost patrols in the disputed waters, after a complaint about Chinese patrol boats harassing a Philippine oil exploration vessel in the area.

source (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110612/wl_asia_afp/taiwandiplomacyspratlys;_ylt=Apu6_bdWDZGnkJ_avcVDHKYBxg8F;_ylu=X3oDMTJ2YTA2NDEyBGFzc2V0A2FmcC8yMDExMDYxMi90YWl3YW5kaXBsb21hY3lzcHJhdGx5cwRwb3MDMTYEc2VjA3luX3BhZ2luYXRlX3N1bW1hcnlfbGlzdARzbGsDdGFpd2FucGxhbnNt)

http://www.mnd.gov.tw/UserFiles/Image/Military%20Baggage/mid3-b.jpg
The Taiwanese Hsiung Feng I anti-ship missile

The Hsiung Feng I (HF-1) (雄風一型, "Brave Wind I") is an anti-ship missile system developed by the Chungshan Institute of Science and Technology in Taiwan ROC between 1975 and 1978 and is essentially a derivative of the Israeli Gabriel missile Mk II. It is currently deployed on the ROC Navy's littoral combantants, most notably the Hai Ou class missile boats, as well as some land based facilities. Due to it being superseded by the Hsiung Feng II on larger patrol craft and in coastal batteries, the HF-I is being phased out of service (alone with Hai Ou class FACs).

http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/attachments/naval-warfare/20917d1274502250-roc-navy-aleqm5jodjkribbvjplasplgueo396vpza.jpg
The Taiwanese Sea Gull-class missile boat looks stealthy!

bakit naman nasali Taiwan dito?

Spratly Islands belong to Taiwan: MOFA official (http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/china-taiwan-relations/2011/05/11/301911/Spratly-Islands.htm)
Updated Wednesday, May 11, 2011 11:40 pm TWN, CNA

TAIPEI--The Ministry of Foreign Affairs reiterated yesterday Taiwan's sovereignty over various archipelagoes in the South China Sea and called for the peaceful settlement of regional disputes over the islands in question.

The ministry said that from the perspective of history, geography and international law, the Spratly Islands and Paracel Islands as well as their surrounding waters are undisputable territories of the Republic of China, as Taiwan is formally known.

The ministry's assertion of sovereignty over the Spratlys and Paracels followed recent Vietnamese claims to the islands. Before that, the Philippines protested against China's claims of sovereignty over the Spratly archipelago and its neighboring waters.

Taiwan believes nations neighboring the islands in the South China Sea should act in line with the principle and spirit of international law and avoid unilateral measures so as not to affect regional stability, the ministry said.

Sun, Dec 23, 2007 - Page 8
Manila's weak claim to the Batanes (http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2007/12/23/2003393815)
By Chen Hurng-yu 陳鴻瑜

The Batanes Islands, controlled by the Philippines, are a territorial problem left over from the colonial period. When Spain and the US signed the Treaty of Paris in 1898, the islands were not adequately addressed and this led to irresolution.

Taiwan challenges the Philippines' possession of the Batanes Islands for the same reasons that it challenges Manila's claim to the Spratly Islands.

Territorial issues should be discussed on a case-by-case basis. It is necessary to look at the issue of the Batanes Islands based upon international conventions rather than conjecture.

Philippine commentators say that Taiwan is not a sovereign state and therefore cannot claim territory controlled by Manila.

This point of view is hardly worth discussing. Diplomatic relations between Taiwan and the Philippines lasted until 1975. Although the two states have not maintained official diplomatic relations, this is not evidence of whether Taiwan is a nation or not. Anyone even vaguely familiar with international law should understand this. Non-recognition of another state does not affect its status; the Philippines has no authority to decide whether Taiwan is a country.

Philippine citizens require visas issued by the Taiwanese government to work or travel in Taiwan, which is in itself proof of Taiwan's sovereignty.

Philippine academic Carlos Agustin believes that a seaway treaty signed by Taiwan and the Philippines constitutes recognition of the Philippine territory.

This argument has many flaws: The treaty, signed in July 1991 -- not 1993, as Agustin believes -- concerns Taiwanese fishing boats traveling through two Philippine seaways, not border issues between the two states. Furthermore, the Philippine government does not consider the treaty to be an agreement between states, but defines it as a conference record and abolished part of it in 1998.

Another Philippine academic, Pervagus, suggests that Section 4 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS) justifies the Philippines' possession of the Batanes Islands. But section 4 of UNCLOS concerns archipelagic states only and the Philippines does not qualify.

He also says Japan and Taiwan never occupied or controlled the Batanes Islands, whereas the US did. This argument is based on military occupation and not on international treaties. If we must choose between occupation and treaties to base our borders on, treaties should win.

International law and its implementation supports the regulations of international treaties and opposes military occupation.

Apolonio Anota presents a similar argument. Because the Philippine government holds congressional elections on the Batanes Islands, Manila clearly controls the territory, he says. The people on the islands choose to be citizens of the Republic of the Philippines by complying with its laws, participating in its national elections and identifying themselves as Philippine, he says.

Anota is completely ignoring the fact that the US violated the 1898 treaty.

Another Philippine commentator has argued that the Ivatans of the islands were claimed by Spain in 1782, which is dubious. Although Spain claimed the main island of the Batanes, Basco, in 1782, it did not set up administrative centers on the islands because of their remoteness and the strong northerly winter winds that made life on the islands difficult.

LuckyLady

June 13th, 2011, 05:33 AM

gmaer

June 13th, 2011, 05:37 AM

http://bomboradyo.com/images/stories/USS_chung_hoon.jpg

'USS Chung-Hoon, walang kinalaman sa Spratlys' (http://bomboradyo.com/index.php/news/top-stories/56843-uss-chung-hoon-walang-kinalaman-sa-spratlys)
Last Updated on Saturday, 11 June 2011 16:30 Saturday, 11 June 2011 15:32

Nilinaw ngayon ni Armed Forces of the Philippines chief Gen. Eduardo Oban na walang kinalaman sa tensyon sa West Philippine Sea ang pagdating sa Pilipinas ng USS Chung-Hoon.

Ang nasabing US warship ay nakatakdang darating sa Palawan sa susunod na linggo para sa isang military exercises.

Sinabi ngayong umaga ni Gen. Oban, bahagi lamang ito ng Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training (CARAT), isang taunang activity ng US at Pilipinas para palakasin ang Naval capability.

Ayon kay Oban, isa lamang itong normal military exercises tulad ng Balikatan kaya walang kinalaman sa pangha-harass ng Chinese vessels sa mga barko at mangingisda ng Pilipinas.

Nanawagan pa ang heneral na iwasan umano ang mga ispekulasyon na hindi naman nakatutulong sa problema.

Ang USS Chung-Hoon (DDG-93) ay bahagi ng US Pacific Fleet na ang homeport ay sa Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.

Hindi na rin bago para sa naturang barkong pandigma ang pagbisita sa Pilipinas dahil noong 2010 ay umasiste ito sa Philippine Navy sa Sulu Sea sa inilunsad na operasyon laban sa tinaguriang mga Islamic militants.

Matapos na bumalik sa kanyang homeport, ang barko ay ni-redeploy sa Western Pacific mula Enero 1, 2011. Ito ay may 380 officers at enlisted men.

Bahagi ng mga armas na karga ng USS Chung-Hoon ay Tomahawk missiles.

Samantala, sa isyu ng Spratlys sinabi pa ng AFP chief, patuloy lamang umano ang mandato ng AFP katuwang ang Philippine Coast Guard para bantayan ang ating teritoryo.

Dapat umanong panatilihin ang military presence sa mga territorial waters para ipatupad ang maritime laws at proteksyunan ang soberenya ng bansa.

Kung maaalala noong May 14 lamang ay umani ng atensyon ang pagdating din sa Pilipinas ng aircraft carrier ng Estados Unidos na USS Carl Vinson

Sa nuclear powered ship isinakay ang bangkay ni Osama bin Laden bago inilibing sa Arabian Sea.

Manila-X

June 13th, 2011, 05:40 AM

Lets say The Philippines is better building up its armed forces rather than beauty queens.

LuckyLady

June 13th, 2011, 05:46 AM

let's not expect too much from the US...sino ba tayo para kelangan nyang maki pag away sa china para lang sa atin. Let's help ourselves instead. Of course the US would send some troops there but it's more on pacifying the situation i guess. Our gov''t officials should shut up their mouth in saying the US should help us...Lalo lang tayo napagtawan pag ni re refute to ng US. Tutulungan na nga tayo tapos binibigyan pa natin sila ng sakit sa ulo, mga siraulo talaga!

Mercato

June 13th, 2011, 05:48 AM

Sun, Dec 23, 2007 - Page 8
Manila's weak claim to the Batanes (http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2007/12/23/2003393815)
By Chen Hurng-yu 陳鴻瑜Another Philippine academic, Pervagus, suggests that Section 4 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS) justifies the Philippines' possession of the Batanes Islands. But section 4 of UNCLOS concerns archipelagic states only and the Philippines does not qualify.

What hogwash. Now the Philippines does not qualify as an ARCHIPELAGO? Had they changed the definitions as well? These dishonourable people, who learned nothing from Confucius' honorable ways, can lie like hell and still look at you straight in the eye.

So the bullies are coming... they're all coming coz they can sense our weakness. :ohno:

Manila-X

June 13th, 2011, 05:53 AM

As with the Spratlys, the issue is more tense between China and Vietnam rather than with China and The Philippines.

Mercato

June 13th, 2011, 05:56 AM

^^ Yes, because Vietnam fights back and she knows how to fight back. She has no choice because she shares a land border with the red dragon.

The Philippines, on the other hand, is only protected by the sea. No thanks to our useless corrupt generals and decrepit AFP.

s40

June 13th, 2011, 06:04 AM

^^ agree.... we'll probably lose a couple of more islands and square kilometers before our moronic politicians give the AFP the money to buy those submarines and jet fighters to keep the bastards out...

Freakin AFP should clean up their stupid mess too.... If their own mistah's and kabaro would just stop robbing the place we'd probably have at least some painful arsenal in the field kahit pa isa isa lang... 1 big frigate in palawan would be enough projection of power....... What a Philippines.... everyday we are becoming a joke of a country... slowly marching towards that Flawed Democracy state run by morons, drug lords and jueteng lords like erap.

xxxriainxxx

June 13th, 2011, 06:09 AM

Another Philippine academic, Pervagus, suggests that Section 4 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS) justifies the Philippines' possession of the Batanes Islands. But section 4 of UNCLOS concerns archipelagic states only and the Philippines does not qualify.

What hogwash. Now the Philippines does not qualify as an ARCHIPELAGO? Had they changed the definitions as well? These dishonourable people, who learned nothing from Confucius' honorable ways, can lie like hell and still look at you straight in the eye.

So the bullies are coming... they're all coming coz they can sense our weakness. :ohno:

Another stupid assertion. That Taiwanese writer cant even define what an archipelago is.

Manila-X

June 13th, 2011, 06:11 AM

I'm sure that in the end, the whole Spratlys situation will be solved through diplomatic means instead of turning to a full scale war.

xxxriainxxx

June 13th, 2011, 06:15 AM

I'm sure that in the end, the whole Spratlys situation will be solved through diplomatic means instead of turning to a full scale war.

Meanwhile, China's actions in the Kalayaan Islands and the West Philippine Sea is moving the region into another Cold War. Russia is going to occupy Cam Rahn and US, cautiously will watch out from the Philippine side.

gmaer

June 13th, 2011, 06:15 AM

As with the Spratlys, the issue is more tense between China and Vietnam rather than with China and The Philippines.

China accuses Vietnam in South China Sea row (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13723443)
10 June 2011 Last updated at 08:44 GMT

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/48951000/jpg/_48951918_009889013-1.jpg

China has accused Vietnam of "gravely violating" its sovereignty in an escalating row over disputed waters in the South China Sea.

Beijing said Vietnam had endangered Chinese sailors' lives and warned it to stop "all invasive activities".

It follows an accusation by Vietnam that a Chinese fishing boat rammed cables from an oil exploration vessel inside its exclusive economic zone.

China is engaged in maritime border disputes with several countries.

The South China Sea includes important shipping routes and may contain rich oil and gas deposits.

The Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan also have rival claims in the area; China's claim is by far the largest.

The US has also expressed concern about China's rising naval ambitions.

Escalating dispute

China's foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei said Chinese fishing boats were chased away by armed Vietnamese ships on Thursday.

He said that during the incident the fishing net of one of the Chinese boats became tangled with the cables of a Vietnamese oil exploring vessel which continued to drag the Chinese vessel for more than an hour before the net had to be cut.

China insists the Vietnamese vessel was operating illegally in the area.

"By conducting unlawful oil and gas surveys in seas around the Wanan Bank of the Spratly archipelago and by driving out a Chinese fishing vessel, Vietnam has gravely violated China's sovereignty and maritime rights," said Mr Hong.

"China demands that Vietnam cease all violations," he said, adding that Vietnam should "not take actions that would complicate and expand the dispute".

Beijing's strong-worded statement followed Vietnam's accusation that a Chinese fishing boat had "intentionally rammed" the exploration cables of a Vietnamese boat - the second such incident in two weeks.

That vessel, chartered by state energy giant PetroVietnam, was conducting a seismic survey inside its 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone on Thursday, said foreign ministry spokeswoman Nguyen Phuong Nga.

She described the "premeditated and carefully calculated" attack as part of China's attempts to control disputed waters.

"This is unacceptable to Vietnam," she said, adding that her colleagues had met Chinese embassy officials "to express our opposition to such acts".

On Thursday, hackers from both countries planted patriotic messages on hundreds of websites, including government sites.

It follows anti-China protests by hundreds of Vietnamese over the weekend.

Seeking resolution

China's ambassador to the Philippines, Liu Jianchao, has insisted China's intentions were peaceful and said that China was not looking for oil in the disputed waters and, therefore, no other country should.

"We're calling on other parties to stop searching for the possibility of exploiting resources in these areas where China has its claims," he told reporters.

"We will never use force unless we are attacked," he said.

The Philippine government has accused two Chinese patrol boats of harassing a Philippine oil exploration ship on 2 March this year.

The Philippines has said it has seen new structures being built on islands which it claims.

"That's part of our exercise of jurisdiction. It's not harassment," Mr Liu said.

He also rejected the involvement of the United States in regional attempts to resolve the long-running territorial dispute.

China prefers to tackle each conflicting claim with each country separately.

Vietnam, Indonesia and the Philippines have led regional efforts to seek a multilateral resolution of the conflict.

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/48951000/gif/_48951920_south_china-sea_1_466.gif

rawr

June 13th, 2011, 06:21 AM

Sun, Dec 23, 2007 - Page 8
Manila's weak claim to the Batanes (http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2007/12/23/2003393815)
By Chen Hurng-yu 陳鴻瑜

...we have a weak claim at Batanes?! ::nuts: Oh right, we're not even claiming it

since it has been ours since many years ago! :bash:

InformaticIAN

June 13th, 2011, 06:23 AM

[B]

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/48951000/gif/_48951920_south_china-sea_1_466.gif

kitang kita nman dito ang ibidinsya....

gmaer

June 13th, 2011, 06:24 AM

^^ In 1979, China and Vietnam fought a brief but bloody border war in response to Vietnam's 1978 invasion and occupation of Cambodia.

This was called the Sino-Vietnamese War (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/prc-vietnam.htm).

http://www.mentalfloss.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/sino-war.jpg

firebar10

June 13th, 2011, 06:27 AM

gmaer

June 13th, 2011, 06:37 AM

it seems all of our neighbors wants to claim pieces of our territory for so many flawed reasoning it seems that they are aware that our most potent weapon is making noise on the diplomatic front, I just wish our politicians will put their act together to push through a credible military that can deter these foolish claims

It all started in the 1980s when the Philippine Navy decommissioned many of its warships and the Philippine Air Force retired many of its fighter jets expecting that in the 1990s there will be new acquisitions but the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis hampered this plan.

Poor AFP, I almost joined them in 1999 with high hopes... :ohno:

Mercato

June 13th, 2011, 06:38 AM

Meanwhile, China's actions in the Kalayaan Islands and the West Philippine Sea is moving the region into another Cold War. Russia is going to occupy Cam Rahn and US, cautiously will watch out from the Philippine side.Funny thing is, the Philippines and Vietnam don't even seem to be talking to each other when we're supposed to be on the same side, the ASEAN side (kahit may konting overlaps ang ating territorial claims with each other but first things first - deal with the chinese.)

It would be wise for us to put up a united front against the Red Dragon. Vietnam can bring along Uncle Russia and we take with us Uncle Sam. Honestly, I really don't have any problems at all about giving Uncle Sam new bases in the Philippines. If Vietnam can give bases to Russia without losing her self worth, why can't we with Tio Sam?

gentlemuscleman

June 13th, 2011, 06:39 AM

darating ang panahon na pag pinabayaan natin ang ating arm forces maraming mawawalang territory na isla ang ating bansa,habang patuloy sa pagpapayaman ang mga demonyong heneral mbilyong pera mula sa mga natural resources natin ang mawawala.ginagago na tayo ng ating mga kapitbahay.alam nila na mayaman ang dagat na sakop natin kaya ganon na lang ang inggit nila sa atin.panahon na para anihin na natin ang nakatagong langis natin bago tayo nila maunahan.:cheers::cheers::cheers::cheers:

Mercato

June 13th, 2011, 07:09 AM

Remember one Phil government website which was hacked into by a Mainlander? Are we prepared with countermeasures against these new types of warfare?

9 June 2011 Last updated at 14:38 GMT

Vietnam and China hackers escalate Spratly Islands row (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13707921)

Computer hackers from Vietnam and China have attacked websites including portals run by each other's governments, amid a sea-border row.

The hackers replaced content on the sites with abuse and national symbols.

Vietnam's Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung said his country's claims to territory in the South China Sea were incontestable.

Chinese officials later warned other Asian nations to halt exploration for minerals in the area.

Both sides claim ownership of islands in the South China Sea.

The Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan also have rival claims in the area.

'Strong determination'

On the weekend, hundreds of Vietnamese protested against Chinese naval operations in disputed waters.

Relations between Vietnam and China have long been awkward, but public protests are extremely rare.

The demonstrations in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City followed a confrontation between a Vietnamese ship and Chinese patrol boats last month.

Hanoi accused a Chinese patrol of cutting the cables of a Vietnamese ship conducting seismic research about 120km (80 miles) off Vietnam's coast.

At the time of the incident, China said that Vietnamese vessels had been operating "illegally", adding that the country should "refrain from creating trouble".

On Thursday, Prime Minister Dung made his first comments on the row, saying Vietnam's sovereignty was incontestable in areas of the Paracel and Spratly island groups.

"We continue to affirm strongly and to manifest the strongest determination of all the party, of all the people and of all the army in protecting Vietnamese sovereignty in maritime zones and islands of the country," Mr Dung said in comments reported by the Thanh Nien newspaper.

Later, Vietnamese officials accused a Chinese fishing boat of once again intentionally ramming cables from an oil exploration vessel inside its exclusive economic zone.

And separately, China's ambassador to the Philippines, Liu Jianchao, warned other countries to stop prospecting for oil in the area.

The disputed islands are largely uninhabited, but the area includes important shipping routes and may contain oil and gas deposits.

Mercato

June 13th, 2011, 07:16 AM

Pentagon Declares War On Cyber Enemies (http://www.infowars.com/pentagon-declares-war-on-cyber-enemies/)

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/P1-BA947_CYBERW_G_20110530164521.jpg

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
May 31, 2011

The Pentagon has announced that computer intrusions from abroad are to be considered acts of war against the United States and will be answered with conventional military force.

“If you shut down our power grid, maybe we will put a missile down one of your smokestacks,” a military official told The Wall Street Journal. In part, the Pentagon intends its plan as a warning to potential adversaries of the consequences of attacking the U.S., according to the Journal.

The Pentagon document is 30 pages in its classified version and 12 pages in the unclassified one. It concludes that the Laws of Armed Conflict are applicable in cyberspace as in traditional warfare.

The Pentagon established a new command last year, headed by Gen. Keith B. Alexander, director of the NSA, to consolidate military network security and attack efforts. Alexander told the Washington Post last November that the new outfit wants maneuvering room to mount what he called “the full spectrum” of operations in cyberspace.

The NSA announced its ambitious cyber security plan last year. Dubbed “Perfect Citizen,” it is designed to detect cyber assaults on private companies and government agencies running such critical infrastructure as the electricity grid and nuclear-power plants, according to the New York Times.

According to the Post, offensive actions may include shutting down part of an opponent’s computer network to head off a cyber-attack or changing a line of code in an adversary’s computer to render malicious software harmless. They are operations that destroy, disrupt or degrade targeted computers or networks, the newspaper reported.

The United States and Israel apparently employed this doctrine when they inserted the Stuxnet worm on a computer network associated with Iranian nuclear facilities. Iran had not attacked the United States or Israel, thus demonstrating that U.S. cyber warfare efforts against official enemies are not limited to offensive capability.

Since at least 2003, the Pentagon has considered cyberspace a battlefield. A Pentagon document entitled the Information Operation Roadmap was released to the public after a FOIA request by the National Security Archive at George Washington University in 2006.

On October 30, 2003, then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld signed a secret order for the classified 74-page directive. “DoD’s ‘Defense in Depth’ strategy should operate on the premise that the Department will ‘fight the net’ as it would a weapons system,” the report states.

The United States and Israel apparently employed this doctrine when they inserted the Stuxnet worm on a computer network associated with Iranian nuclear facilities. Iran had not attacked the United States or Israel, thus demonstrating that U.S. cyber warfare efforts against official enemies are not limited to offensive capability.

Since at least 2003, the Pentagon has considered cyberspace a battlefield. A Pentagon document entitled the Information Operation Roadmap was released to the public after a FOIA request by the National Security Archive at George Washington University in 2006.

On October 30, 2003, then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld signed a secret order for the classified 74-page directive. “DoD’s ‘Defense in Depth’ strategy should operate on the premise that the Department will ‘fight the net’ as it would a weapons system,” the report states.

Rumsfeld’s directive notes the importance of psychological operations. “In the battle of perception management, where the enemy is clearly using the media to help manage perceptions of the general public, our job is not perception management but to counter the enemy’s perception management,’ said the chief Pentagon spokesman, Lawrence Di Rita in December 2004.

The reported attacks on the Pentagon’s computer network have served to further boost the impression that crafty enemies are at war in cyberspace with the United States. It provided an impetus to attack official enemies. “Recent attacks on the Pentagon’s own systems – as well as the sabotaging of Iran’s nuclear program via the Stuxnet computer worm – have given new urgency to U.S. efforts to develop a more formalized approach to cyber attacks,” writes the Journal.

The Pentagon has publicized a number of alleged attacks, including “the most significant breach of U.S. military computers ever,” a 2008 episode in which a foreign intelligence agent used a flash drive to infect computers, including those used by the Central Command in overseeing combat zones in Iraq and Afghanistan, the New York Times reported last August.

In May of 2010, Richard Clarke, a former adviser to both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, warned that the United States should prepare for a cyber attack that he claims could cause destruction on the scale of 9/11 in less than 15 minutes.

Prior to the announcement by the Pentagon today, major defense contractor Lockheed Martin reported over the weekend that its computer network was infiltrated by shadowy adversaries.

“Officials had no information on the origin on the attack, but one of the US diplomatic cables released by the WikiLeaks website suggested that China had jumped ahead of the US when it came to cyber-espionage,” The Telegraph reported on Saturday, two days before the Pentagon announcement.

The government and the corporate media have hyped the marginal threat of computer attacks over the last few years.

In late February of 2010, CNN rolled out a slick propaganda presentation called “Cyber Shockwave” that posited a cyber attack on the United States. The aired scenario was created by former CIA Director, General Michael Hayden, and the co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, former Rep. Lee Hamilton (D-IN) and former Gov. Thomas Kean (R-NJ). Other government insiders and establishment types participated, including former Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff and former CIA director John McLaughlin. The scenario sketched out a dire scenario of knocked out power grids and the prospect of the United States being pitched into the Dark Ages.

“How should the government deal with the threat?” we asked at the time. “Federalize the National Guard to deal with unruly mobs freaking out over the loss of electricity. Nationalize utility companies so the NSA and the government get electricity. The participants also recommended new powers be granted to the president. Not surprisingly, they declared the president has the authority to take unprecedented action against the states and the private sector under the Constitution.”

In April of last year, CIA director Leon Panetta said that the next “Pearl Harbor” is likely to be an attack on the United States’ power, financial, military and other internet systems, the Sacramento Press reported. Panetta said the United States faces thousands of cyber attacks daily on its internet networks. The attacks are originating in Russia, China, Iran and from even hackers.

The government and the corporate media are overplaying the threat of a cyber attack for political reasons. It is a key component of an effort to install a sprawling surveillance grid.

“It is alarming that so many people have accepted the White House’s assertions about cyber-security as a key national security problem without demanding further evidence. Have we learned nothing from the WMD debacle? The administration’s claims could lead to policies with serious, long-term, troubling consequences for network openness and personal privacy,” writes Evgeny Morozov for the Boston Review. “Much of the data are gathered by ultra-secretive government agencies — which need to justify their own existence — and cyber-security companies — which derive commercial benefits from popular anxiety. Journalists do not help. Gloomy scenarios and speculations about cyber-Armageddon draw attention, even if they are relatively short on facts.”

The supposed cyber threat now hyped by the Pentagon is not limited to foreign adversaries. Last October, Obama instructed the Pentagon to attack “cyberthreats” within the United States. “The Obama administration has adopted new procedures for using the Defense Department’s vast array of cyberwarfare capabilities in case of an attack on vital computer networks inside the United States, delicately navigating historic rules that restrict military action on American soil,” the New York Times reported.

In short, Obama gave the Pentagon orders to attack a supposed cyber threat within the United States.

LuckyLady

June 13th, 2011, 07:16 AM

Funny thing is, the Philippines and Vietnam don't even seem to be talking to each other when we're supposed to be on the same side, the ASEAN side (kahit may konting overlaps ang ating territorial claims with each other but first things first - deal with the chinese.)

It would be wise for us to put up a united front against the Red Dragon. Vietnam can bring along Uncle Russia and we take with us Uncle Sam. Honestly, I really don't have any problems at all about giving Uncle Sam new bases in the Philippines. If Vietnam can give bases to Russia without losing her self worth, why can't we with Tio Sam?g

that's one thing we should learn from vietnam. they have confidence to deal with china. eh tayo? Anway, I fully support this idea of yours in bold. While we are just starting to strengthen our military we need the US in our ground. So let's return that US bases here in the Philippines particularly in areas we don't have a capability to protect. Can nasasanay na kasi mga ungas na chicoms na to kasi mga pinoy ok ok lang di nagagalit at walang unity. Eh sila konting sinungaling lang ng gobyerno nila, lumalabas kaagad yung patriotism nila.

gmaer

June 13th, 2011, 07:17 AM

LuckyLady

June 13th, 2011, 07:25 AM

LuckyLady

June 13th, 2011, 07:28 AM

LuckyLady

June 13th, 2011, 07:29 AM

gmaer

June 13th, 2011, 07:29 AM

g

that's one thing we should learn from vietnam. they have confidence to deal with china. eh tayo? Anway, I fully support this idea of yours in bold. While we are just starting to strengthen our military we need the US in our ground. So let's return that US bases here in the Philippines particularly in areas we don't have a capability to protect. Can nasasanay na kasi mga ungas na chicoms na to kasi mga pinoy ok ok lang di nagagalit at walang unity. Eh sila konting sinungaling lang ng gobyerno nila, lumalabas kaagad yung patriotism nila.

If ever the return of a US base is approved, the US base should be in a strategic location that can best serve the interest of both the host country and the US Military. It should also be away from our capital in an event a nuclear strike occurs:

1. Palawan
2. Batanes Islands
3. Tawi-Tawi or Sulu

We should not return Clark and Subic because these former bases are now business zones that can impact our economy if taken away.

http://www.miprox.de/USA_speziell/US-Military-Bases-Worldwide.jpg

But this should not be an excuse for the AFP not to be self-reliant and not modernize itself. There should be a contract and an expiration date to this US base for like 20 years only?

LuckyLady

June 13th, 2011, 07:34 AM

If ever the return of a US base is approved, the US base should be in a strategic location that can best serve the interest of both the host country and the US Military. It should also be away from our capital in an event a nuclear strike occurs:

1. Palawan
2. Batanes Islands
3. Tawi-Tawi or Sulu

We should not return Clark and Subic because these former bases are now business zones that can impact our economy if taken away.

http://www.miprox.de/USA_speziell/US-Military-Bases-Worldwide.jpg

But this should not be an excuse for the AFP not to be self-reliant and not modernize itself. There should be a contract and an expiration date to this US base for like 20 years only?

agree! but maybe we can shorten the years only it's renewable on some conditions. We should have a timeline for our modernization.

gmaer

June 13th, 2011, 07:35 AM

parang kumakati na talaga kamay ng chicom mapasubo sa gyera

The Spratly Islands dispute can become the next Falkland Islands War (http://www.naval-history.net/NAVAL1982FALKLANDS.htm) if China continues with its South China Sea domination!

China plans for world domination--Taiwan first
© 2000 Discerning the Times Digest and NewsBytes

China took a giant step towards war against Taiwan and the US with the release of a white paper on October 16. Entitled, "China's National Defence in 2000", the white paper raised threats of military force against Taiwan, and indirectly to the US to the highest level since Taiwanese president Chen Shiu-bian was elected. On October 18, South China Morning Post quoted the the report as saying "The PLA has the absolute determination, confidence, ability and means to safeguard state sovereignty and territorial integrity and will never tolerate, condone or remain indifferent to the realisation of any scheme to divide the motherland."

The report said the Taiwan situation was "complicated and grim" and offered little hope of a peaceful resolution. "Separatist forces in Taiwan are scheming to split the island from China, in one form or another," it said. "This has seriously undermined the preconditions and foundation for peaceful reunification across the strait." The report issued the strongest language yet in the on-again, off-again rhetoric of war from Beijing. "If a grave turn of events occurs leading to the separation of Taiwan from China in any name, or if Taiwan is invaded and occupied by foreign countries, or if the Taiwan authorities refuse indefinitely the peaceful settlement of cross-strait reunification through negotiations, then the Chinese Government will have no choice but to adopt all drastic measures possible, including the use of force, to safeguard China's sovereignty and territorial integrity." (bold added for emphasis)

The paper stated that the chance for a peaceful resolution between Taiwan and China is "seriously imperiled'' because of "hegemonism and power politics'' -- China's code words for U.S. meddling. "China will have to enhance its capability to defend its sovereignty and security by military means,'' claimed the paper. China expects the US to intervene when they make their move to take Taiwan. Yan Xuetong, an expert in international security at Beijing's prestigious Tsinghua University, claims "Do they prepare against the United States? My answer is very clear: yes."

China's near-term goal more hostile than previously reported

Since early October, Discerning the Times (DTT) has been reporting the stunning announcement made by China about their "first island defense line" that would run from Taiwan through the Spratly Islands to Singapore at the tip of the Malaysian Peninsula. The first island-chains describe the sphere of influence that China expects to achieve in the Pacific Ocean. In essence China was claiming for itself most of the South China Sea and Southeast Asia.

On October 19, NewsMax reported that the white paper presented even greater eye popping ambitions. According to NewsMax, Communist China plans to upgrade its navy to permit it to control "what its military calls 'first island-chain' by 2010 and to the 'second island-chain' by 2040." The NewsMax report greatly expands the already ostentatious goals of the announcement made in early October. "The first island-chain includes Japan, Okinawa, Taiwan, the Philippines and Brunei. The second island-chain extends to Australia’s doorsteps," said NewMax. This has enormous implications. For over a year now, China has repeatedly and vocally demanded that the US and international community has no right to intervene in the internal affairs within its sphere of influence.

By setting their sights on calling all of Southeast Asia and the South Pacific part of their sphere of influence, China is claiming all that happens in these nations and island states their "internal affair," not subject to outside interference. It also validates, if correct, the conclusions by Steven W. Mosher in his book "Hegemon: The Chinese plan to dominate Asia and the rest of the world."

Mosher has found that China has "a three-tiered plan for achieving hegemony (that means a single, all dominant power -- a single axis of power dominating the world). The first is local hegemony. They will move to take back Taiwan -- they are consolidating control over the South China Sea right now, an area about as big as the Mediterranean Sea.... The second stage of hegemony will be regional hegemony where they take back or bring under their control territories that China historically dominated but lost in recent decades."

"The third stage," claims Mosher, "from about 2011 to 2014, the Communist Chinese will have a military force superior to the United States. And I don't even think it is arguable that once they achieve that, they are going to use it." Mosher is correct. China has one of the poorest civil rights records in the world. Its leadership believes the purpose of its citizens is to merely serve the state (i.e. the leaders) and tolerate no activity that may undermine the control of the state over the people. While international trade is important to China, it comes in a distant second to to their primary goal of internal security and becoming a power broker in the world. While the West thinks it is enticing China to join the world in trade, China is using the trade card to position itself for world domination.

China expects a war with the US

China fully expects to have a war with the United States. The minister of defense of the People's Republic of China, Minister Chi Haotian, said not long ago that, "War with the United States was inevitable." Mosher notes that "He didn't say 'possible,' he didn't say 'probable,' he said, 'inevitable.'" The Chinese military has been told by president Jiang Zemin to actually prepare for this war. President Jiang Zemin, the head of the country, the head of the Chinese Communist Party, said to his central military commission, the leading generals in the People's Liberation Army, air force and navy, that they should "... prepare for war with the United States by the year 2008."

Mosher warns that the Chinese already believe "China can win such a conflict with the United States in Asia," such as a Chinese attack on Taiwan. More importantly, however, "they believe that at the end of the day, which means 20 to 30 years down the road," laments Mosher, "that there will only be one country left standing -- a Hegemon -- and they intend for China to be the Hegemon." China's recent war games using 110,000 troops to simulate amphibious landings went way beyond merely intimidating Taiwan. They are group army-sized exercises in full simulation mode. If Mosher's time-table is correct, Taiwan will, of necessity be the first target.

Because China wants Taiwan's economic powerhouse intact they will not depend on conventional brute force to take Taiwan. As explained in the August issue of Discerning the Times Digest, they are more likely to use the 300 short- and mid-range missiles now positioned along the Taiwan Strait instead of a massive air strike or a head-on amphibious assault. Some of these missiles are armed with electromagnetic pulse and neutron atomic bombs that have the ability to take out military bases and naval ships will little collateral damage to Taiwan's economy. The amphibious assault will occur after the military bases are neutralized, and a Chinese provisional government will be established patterned after that of Hong Kong.

The PLA white paper--transparency or smokescreen?

In spite of the obvious threat to the US contained in the white paper, some call the paper a demonstration of openness by China designed to ease concerns of the West about China's intentions. "This is a phenomenal document. It goes far further than anything they've ever done before," enthused David Shambaugh, director of the China Policy Program at George Washington University.

Military sources caution, on the other hand, that the white paper is nothing more than a smokescreen. They point to the huge military expenditures that far exceed the $14.6 billion that the Chinese government officially claim. "China's intensive military buildup in recent years is certainly not targeted only at Taiwan. China's real target is the U.S.," said Taiwanese National Defense University lecturer Colonel Jen Yi-ming. If that is the goal, then the war games utilizing 10,000 soldiers during the second week of October and the 100,000 troops used in amphibious landing training in September demonstrated China's resolve. The military demonstration was the biggest display of Chinese weapons and military skills since 1964.

The white paper paper confirmed that the People's Liberation Army (PLA) - still the world's largest force - has been trimmed to under 2.5 million troops, following a reduction of 500,000 soldiers over the past three years. However, even as president Jiang Zemin called for higher-tech and more realistic training, the exercises proved new capabilities to attack stealth warplanes and cruise missiles, according to CBS on October 17. The Chinese military is becoming leaner, but a lot meaner. NewsMax reports that these military analysts "say it is the height of naiveté to believe that the release of the white paper is nothing more than a smoke screen meant to convey an openness that is in reality an illusion."

China carving out a place in the new world order

Many analysts claim that China's white paper and military war games are merely a bluff to intimidate Taiwan in finding a peaceful resolution for Taiwan to reunify with China. That, however, is about as likely as the Palestinians and Israelis agreeing on a solution for Jerusalem and the Temple mount. It isn't going to happen. Yet, China must have Taiwan to provide the economic power to claim a seat at the table of the emerging new world order. As discussed in August's DTT Digest, China has a plan for even taking Taiwan without destroying it as an economic powerhouse.

Ironically, while the typical American is totally unaware that world government is just around the corner, China fully understands what is happening and is acting to position itself as one of the regional powerhouses and global hegemon. As reported in the September and December issues of DTT Digest last year, the UN and the international community is rapidly developing a plan to divide the world into economic and military regions to administer the emerging global governance. This has not gone unnoticed by China. The recent actions of China and its plans as laid out in the white paper clearly show that they will control one of the ten regions proposed by the UN Security Council in 1997.

Once again, we are reminded of the warning given by Daniel 7:7, 24-25. ‘‘After that, in my vision at night I looked, and there before me was a fourth beast—terrifying and frightening and very powerful. It had large iron teeth; it crushed and devoured its victims and trampled underfoot whatever was left. It was different from all the former beasts, and it had ten horns.... The ten horns are ten kings who will come from this kingdom. After them another king will arise, different from the earlier ones; he will subdue three kings. He will speak against the Most High and oppress his saints and try to change the set times and the laws. The saints will be handed over to him for a time, times and half a time."

China's manipulation of the White House and Congress

To America's shame, China is the most successful nation in the world at manipulating the American system, especially the current administration and Congress. To get most favored nation status China has enlisted Fortune 500 companies to fight their battles for them. "Some of these companies are now pulling the plug on certain grants they've been giving to think tanks when those think tanks become critical of the China trade or publish reports critical of human rights abuses in China," warns Mosher. The whole system of think tanks observing China and getting accurate information is being badly skewed and biased and "it's going to make it increasingly hard for us to defend ourselves in years to come," claims Mosher, because we are making policy on wishful thinking rather than hard facts.

Mosher cautions that while many analysts view the Jewish lobby as having the greatest influence machine in Washington, it is the inscrutable Chinese who hold that honor hands down. The big difference between China and Israel, however, is that China is bent on either dominating us or destroying us. Israel just wants our help. V mc

http://www.discerningtoday.org/members/Digest/2000Digest/October/se-asia_s-pacific_defense_map.jpg

Source: http://www.discerningtoday.org/members/Digest/2000Digest/October/china_plans_for_world_domination.htm

shranethomas

June 13th, 2011, 07:47 AM

Hay naku magtanim nalang tayo ng Marijuana kesa protektahan ang Spratlys.

gmaer

June 13th, 2011, 08:10 AM

Hay naku magtanim nalang tayo ng Marijuana kesa protektahan ang Spratlys.

For what?

http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2010/026/1/d/War_on_medical_marijuana_by_Latuff2.jpg

gmaer

June 13th, 2011, 08:25 AM

Military to tap NSCB to assess Bayanihan impact (http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?publicationSubCategoryId=63&articleId=695680)
By Alexis Romero (The Philippine Star) Updated June 13, 2011 12:00 AM

MANILA, Philippines - The military will tap the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) to help assess the impact of its Bayanihan security plan.

Bayanihan, which took effect last Jan. 1 and will be in force until 2016, seeks to curb armed rebellion through development of security programs with the participation of civilian sectors.

It replaced Oplan Bantay Laya, which lapsed when the Arroyo administration stepped down last June 30.

Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) public affairs chief Col. Arnulfo Burgos Jr. said they would work with the NSCB’s Technical Working Group on Defense and Security Statistics to determine the effectiveness of the Bayanihan.

The board is a state agency that gathers social and economic statistics for the formulation of policy.

Its technical working group reviews data on defense affairs and presents recommendations to state agencies.

AFP chief Gen. Eduardo Oban Jr. said their partnership with the NSCB shows the aim of Bayanihan to involve all sectors in promoting peace and development.

“The recently published Bayanihan assessment plan last April will guide us in evaluating the progress and effectiveness of its performance,” Oban said.

The assessment will obtain data through reports from subordinate military units, and surveys.

“Our security forces tasked to maintain lasting peace affect a wide variety of areas such as tax revenues, poverty index, peace index data, these among others,” Oban said.

He said the evaluation also seeks to determine how the public has responded to Bayanihan, which gives emphasis on the role of civilians in addressing rebellion.

“We want to see how our stakeholders share a common understanding and desire to resolve the conflict and the confidence of the people in our combined effort to attain peace,” Oban said.

Burgos said military officers and key officials of the NSCB have started conducting meetings to discuss ways to implement the assessment.

He said the military leadership has created a technical working group to craft the evaluation plan.

The group, headed by Col. Jefferson Omandam, executive officer of the AFP deputy chief of staff for Civil Military Operations, is composed of representatives from the Civil Relations Service, Judge Advocate General, Office of the Civil Engineer, and the Deputy Chief of Staff for Reservist Affairs.

Bayanihan also emphasizes respect for human rights and compliance with the international humanitarian law.

Under the plan, the government will hold peace talks with the communist rebels and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front and isolate terrorists and lawless groups.

http://a5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/199462_206084996085513_129375537089793_772160_6281332_n.jpg

Wind Shear

June 13th, 2011, 10:11 AM

Well, it war with China will happen in near future (God forbid), I guess it's time to collect and store information about unconventional warfare, RIGHT NOW.

Yre

June 13th, 2011, 10:24 AM

Well, it war with China will happen in near future (God forbid), I guess it's time to collect and store information about unconventional warfare, RIGHT NOW.

Vietnam has a bit of advantage against China, they already have lots tunnel going inside the mainland and can wreak some havoc eh tayo papaano kaya tayo makakalaban kung puro barko na may mga missile na nakakatutok sa mga isla natin, papaano natin palubugin iyang mga barko?
Yun dapat pag isipan na ngayon paano tayo pwedeng makipagsabayan sa ganyang labanan. Ngayon palang dapat mag train na nang ala SEAL commando na pwedeng sumisid kahit ilang kilometro at maging human bomb. Kaso wala pa akong narinig na pinoy na gustong maging gaya ng mga kamikazi ng japan.

leofriends

June 13th, 2011, 10:44 AM

Vietnam has a bit of advantage against China, they already have lots tunnel going inside the mainland and can wreak some havoc eh tayo papaano kaya tayo makakalaban kung puro barko na may mga missile na nakakatutok sa mga isla natin, papaano natin palubugin iyang mga barko?
Yun dapat pag isipan na ngayon paano tayo pwedeng makipagsabayan sa ganyang labanan. Ngayon palang dapat mag train na nang ala SEAL commando na pwedeng sumisid kahit ilang kilometro at maging human bomb. Kaso wala pa akong narinig na pinoy na gustong maging gaya ng mga kamikazi ng japan.

yeah, parang advance party lng yan.. kung sa lupa may land mine... sana merun din taytung water mine..:nuts: mukang utakan at diskarte lng ang laban natin dito hindi sa mga equipments..:ohno:

leofriends

June 13th, 2011, 10:45 AM

For what?

http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2010/026/1/d/War_on_medical_marijuana_by_Latuff2.jpg

:lol::lol::lol::lol: mukang di nga maganda yan naisip mo...

leofriends

June 13th, 2011, 10:50 AM

BOOM!!!:ohno:

US intercepted N. Korea ship over arms fears
AFP NewsAFP News – 2 hours 38 minutes ago

The US Navy intercepted a North Korean ship suspected of carrying missiles or other weapons to Myanmar and made it turn back, a senior US official said Monday.

The comments by Gary Samore, special assistant to President Barack Obama on weapons of mass destruction, confirmed reports of the incident, which happened last month, in The New York Times and South Korean media.

The New York Times said the ship was intercepted south of the Chinese city of Shanghai by a US destroyer on May 26.

In an interview with Yonhap news agency, Samore identified the cargo ship as the M/V Light and said it may have been bound for Myanmar with military-related contraband, such as small arms or missile-related items.

"We talked directly to the North Koreans. We talked directly to all the Southeast Asian countries including Myanmar, urging them to inspect the ship if it called into their port," he was quoted as saying.

"The US Navy also contacted the North Korean ship as it was sailing, to ask them where they were going and what cargo they were carrying."

North Korea is subject to international and United Nations sanctions designed to curb its missile and nuclear programmes.

UN Resolution 1874, adopted in June 2009, one month after the North's second nuclear test, toughened a weapons embargo and authorised member states to intercept such shipments.

Another North Korean ship, the Kang Nam I, was forced to reverse course in 2009 after being suspected of trying to deliver military-related supplies to Myanmar.

The New York Times said the Light was registered in Belize, whose authorities gave the United States permission to inspect the ship.

It said the US destroyer McCampbell caught up with the Light somewhere south of Shanghai and asked to board the vessel under the authority given by Belize.

The paper, quoting unidentified US officials, said the North Korean refused four times. But a few days later, it stopped dead in the water and turned back to its home port, tracked by US surveillance planes and satellites.

"Such pressure from the international community drove North Korea to withdraw the ship," Samore was quoted by Yonhap as saying.

"This is a good example that shows that international cooperation and coordination can block the North's weapon exports."

The United States has frequently expressed concern at military ties between Myanmar and North Korea.

Last month Deputy US Assistant Secretary for East Asia and Pacific Affairs Joseph Yun expressed concern directly to Myanmar's new army-backed government.

US diplomatic memos released last year by the website WikiLeaks said Washington has suspected for years that Myanmar ran a secret nuclear programme supported by Pyongyang.

A top Myanmar official told visiting US Senator John McCain this month that his country is not wealthy enough to acquire nuclear weapons.

leofriends

June 13th, 2011, 11:06 AM

shranethomas

June 13th, 2011, 01:46 PM

At tama rin yang cartoons na pinost dito yan ang simbolo ng control para manatili ang status quo at kontrolado parin ang mga taong gustong gumawa ng alternatibong pamamaraan na makakasagip sa karamihan. Pero dito bala kasagot ng kapayapaan.

Kintoy

June 13th, 2011, 02:36 PM

Lung Cancer Thread ba to?

makatiprime

June 13th, 2011, 03:27 PM

Lung Cancer Thread ba to?

tigilan mo na yan, para kang strikta na nanay, pabayaan mo sila magshare ng ideas, malay mo sa iniisip nila kong ano ang mas nakakapagbigay ng magandang impormasyon

kenken94

June 13th, 2011, 03:46 PM

As with the Spratlys, the issue is more tense between China and Vietnam rather than with China and The Philippines.

That is because, if they get out of control and attack the Philippines, they're just one nuke away from one of the U.S's thousand warheads in it's arsenal. Let's face it, China wouldn't want to go back to scratch if nuclear war comes.

Vietnam can tap Russia but I guess they don't have a binding contract like and MDT just like U.S - PHL.

Kintoy

June 13th, 2011, 03:49 PM

tigilan mo na yan, para kang strikta na nanay, pabayaan mo sila magshare ng ideas, malay mo sa iniisip nila kong ano ang mas nakakapagbigay ng magandang impormasyon

itigil mo na ang kabobohan mo, LRT 4 :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Kintoy

June 13th, 2011, 03:50 PM

OMG. binding contract. :lol::lol::lol::lol:

Sou-jiro

June 13th, 2011, 04:19 PM

Sou-jiro

June 13th, 2011, 04:30 PM

Other well publicize Chinese conflict with its neighbors

China’s Territorial Disputes with India
By Shelly Zhao

Jun. 10 – China and India have a number of territorial disputes along their roughly 4,000 kilometer-long border. Some of the disputed areas border the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) or the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR) and are geographically significant, with Tibetan refugees and the Tibetan government-in-exile (Central Tibetan Administration) in the neighboring Himachal Pradesh state. This article discusses how the main territorial disputes have challenged Sino-Indian relations, particularly in the context of both China and India’s rise, and examines a case study of the Asian Development Bank’s loans and Arunachal Pradesh. This is a follow-up piece to our article on China Briefing last week titled “China’s Territorial Disputes in the South China Sea and East China Sea.”

Sino-Indian relations and territorial issues
With India’s independence in 1947 and the People’s Republic of China established in 1949, both countries needed to reassess their roles, especially in the Cold War system, and saw a redefining of relations. After establishing diplomatic relations in 1950, a central component of border relations was Tibet. China and India signed the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence/Panscheel Agreement in 1954, which lasted for eight years. Minor clashes occurred from the mid-1950s, and in 1959, Tibetan refugees settled in Himachal Pradesh to the north of India (south of Jammu and Kashmir), and China found this an encroachment of territory.

Conflicts culminated in the 1962 border war that changed the political landscape – China taking control of much of the disputed territories to the west, and India gaining control of the Arunachal Pradesh region to the east. Sino-Indian relations deteriorated further in the 1960s and 1970s with China supporting Pakistan in the 1965 Indo-Pakistani War; India signing a Treaty of Peace, Friendship, and Cooperation with the Soviet Union in 1971; and skirmishes occurring between China and India in 1967 (Chola Incident) in Sikkim and 1987 in Arunachal Pradesh.

Bilateral relations have improved since the 1980s, with eight rounds of border negotiations occurring between 1981 and 1987 (though without concrete agreements achieved) and dialogue through the Indian-Chinese Joint Working Group on the Border Issue between 1988 and 1993, and a border agreement signed in 1993. In recent years, however, the disputes continue to affect bilateral relations and seem far from resolution. Below, the following tables summarize the major disputed territories, divided into the western and eastern areas.

Why Inner Mongolia Matters

Late last month, a friend in Hohhot, Inner Mongolia, told me that military police were guarding the university there, and that students weren’t allowed to freely come and go. I was taken aback. I didn’t think that the killing of a farmer could escalate so quickly.

Inner Mongolia certainly hasn’t been a peaceful place recently, due mainly to unrest prompted by the conflict there between economic and environmental interests, specifically the coal mining activities of the Han Chinese and the farmlands that the Mongolians depend on for a living.

Last month, a Mongolian herder was killed, apparently for refusing to let coal trucks pass through the grasslands out of concern for the noise and pollution being caused. Following the herder’s death, protests involving hundreds of people erupted in the north-eastern region of Inner Mongolia. Among those protesting were students, who staged a sit-down protest against the government and demanded severe punishment for the ‘murderer.’ (The trucker was convicted and sentenced to death last week).

At a press conference held by local authorities, officials promised to promptly and strictly deal with the matter, but this wasn’t enough to quell growing anger. A text message urging a mass protest on May 30 began to circulate widely, and anxious local authorities dispatched a large number of military police to Hohhot and Xilin Gol; university students were even briefly stopped from attending school.

Inner Mongolia Communist Party Secretary Hu Chunhua, who is widely seen as a key member of the party’s sixth generation leadership, personally met the students, calling for calm and restraint. He also said that the government would properly handle the challenge of encouraging economic development while ensuring the environment is protected.

But a criminal case that should have been simple to resolve has become complicated due to a number of factors – ethnicity, economics and social tensions.

Of China’s five autonomous regions, economic growth has been strongest in Inner Mongolia, with few protests and relative ethnic and social harmony. Yet in some ways, this harmony has been superficial, and the incident involving the death of the herder highlights one of the big problems facing the region, namely how high GDP growth has come at the expense of many farmers’ livelihoods, adversely affecting the environment in the process.

Against this backdrop, senior communist party officials held a meeting to discuss measures to strengthen and rejuvenate public administration. The media interpreted the meetings as the Chinese Communist Party finally acknowledging some of the defects of China’s economic growth model, and the serious social problems it can create.

Many Chinese scholars are concerned that those hoping to see China destabilized will see this incident as a new opening. China should therefore remain vigilant over the possibility that the unrest in Inner Mongolia will be exploited by those seeking independence in Tibet, Xinjiang, Taiwan and elsewhere. If these current tensions really are exploited, it could spark major social unrest around China.

Japan-China island tensions rise

The ins and outs of the spat over a Chinese fishing boat captain

Tensions are growing daily over Japan's arrest of a Chinese fishing boat captain following his ship's collision with Japan Coast Guard vessels in the East China Sea.

News photo
Peaking pressure: The Uotsuri islet, part of a set of disputed islands in the East China Sea, is shown in this photo from a Maritime Self-Defense Force patrol plane on Sept. 15. KYODO PHOTO

Both countries have openly criticized each other over the incident, and the escalating diplomatic spat has led to public protests, the suspension of ministerial and higher-level exchanges, and the cancellation of a concert by pop group SMAP in Shanghai.

At the heart of the problem are a set of disputed islands in the East China Sea. Japan has administration of the islands, which it calls the Senkaku Islands, but both Beijing and Taiwan claim sovereignty as well, calling them the Diaoyu and Tiaoyutai, respectively. Following are basic questions and answers about the dispute:

Why was the Chinese captain arrested?

A JCG patrol vessel came across a Chinese fishing boat in Japanese-claimed territorial waters on the morning of Sept. 7.

After being warned to leave the area, the boat and JCG patrol ship Yonakuni collided. No details have yet been released as to who or what caused the collision. The Yonakuni then ordered the trawler to stop for inspection, which the Chinese captain refused, according to a JCG representative.

Later that morning, another JCG patrol ship, the Mizuki, was chasing the fishing boat to conduct an onboard inspection near Kuba Island when another collision occurred.

The Chinese captain, Zhan Qixiong, 41, was arrested the next day on suspicion of obstructing the public duties of coast guard personnel.

Japanese authorities are also looking into whether the captain engaged in unlawful fishing.

What is China's position on the collision?

In 1992, China enacted a territorial waters law that included the islands as part of its territory. Therefore, the application of any Japanese law in the area is unacceptable for Beijing.

From the beginning, the Chinese government has demanded that Japan release the captain, calling the arrest "illegal and invalid."

"We demand that the Japanese side immediately let the Chinese captain return unconditionally," Chinese Foreign Ministry representative Ma Zhaoxu said on the ministry's official website earlier this week. "If the Japanese side clings obstinately to its own course and doubles its mistakes, China will take strong countermeasures, for which Japan shall bear all the consequences."

What about the fishing boat captain?

The captain is being detained at the Ishigaki branch of the Naha District Public Prosecutor's Office. On Sunday, the Ishigaki Summary Court in Okinawa Prefecture gave prosecutors permission to extend Zhan's detention for another 10 days, until Sept. 29.

Beijing reacted immediately, suspending ministerial and higher-level exchanges with Japan.

Where are the islands?

The uninhabited islands are in the East China Sea. They occupy an area of only 7 sq. km, spread over what Japan calls Uotsuri, Kuba, Minami Kojima and other small islands about 170 km from both Taiwan and Ishigaki Island in Okinawa Prefecture.

The islands are under the administrative control of the Japanese government, which calls them the Senkaku Islands. China and Taiwan have both been claiming sovereignty since the 1970s. They call them the Diaoyu in China and the Tiaoyutai in Taiwan. They are often the source of diplomatic tension.

What is Japan's view of the dispute?

In 1885, during the Sino-Japanese War, Japan stated that it had conducted surveys that confirmed the islands were uninhabited and "showed no trace of having been under the control of China's Qing empire," the Foreign Ministry says on its website. In 1895, the Japanese government officially incorporated the territory as a part of Japan, and the islands became a part of Japan's southern archipelago, known as the Nansei Shoto. For the next four decades, small numbers of Japanese lived on the islands, building wharves and factories for processing dried bonito. The islets were later deserted in 1940.

After the war, the Nansei Shoto, including Okinawa and the Senkaku Islands, were captured by the United States and controlled under the San Francisco Peace Treaty. Okinawa was later returned to Japan in 1971. However, this agreement only ceded control of the disputed Senkaku Islands and did not directly determine sovereignty, argue China and Taiwan.

"There is no territorial dispute in the East China Sea," newly appointed Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara said. "The Senkaku Islands are an integral part of Japan's sovereign territory."

When and why did China and Taiwan begin to claim sovereignty over the islands?

Over the last 75 years, the two governments have held undefined positions on the Senkakus. The islands were handed over in an "unequal treaty" to Japan after China lost the First Sino-Japanese War in 1895.

In 1968 the United Nations Economic Commission for the Asia and the Far East reported potential oil reserves in the waters off the Senkakus. Both China and Taiwan officially declared sovereignty over the islands in 1971.

Haven't similar incidents occurred in Japan's territorial waters?

Yes. Japan Coast Guard Commandant Hisayasu Suzuki recently told a Diet committee that the JCG has conducted 21 inspections on foreign ships entering Japan's official territorial waters this year alone.

A similar situation occurred in 2004, when seven Chinese protesters were arrested for landing on one of the islands. The Japanese government, led by then Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, deported the protesters to China.

China might expect the fishing boat captain to get similar treatment, given the nature of the dispute. But this time, this incident is being dealt with by prosecutors, not politicians.

How is Japan's security partner, the United States, responding to this incident?

In August, U.S. State Department spokesperson Philip Crowley told a news conference that the Japan-U.S. security alliance covers the Senkaku Islands. The treaty obliges the U.S. to defend Japan against an armed attack by another country.

But Crowley also has said that the U.S. has not taken any sides on the issue of sovereignty or the diplomatic row surrounding the collision, urging Japan and China to resolve the issue in a peaceful manner.

"The Senkaku Islands have been under the administrative control of the government of Japan since they were returned as part of the reversion of Okinawa in 1972. Article 5 of the 1960 U.S.-Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security states that the treaty applies to the territories under the administration of Japan," he said in August.

At a separate news conference on Sept. 13, Crowley also said: "On this narrow issue, we hope that would be resolved peacefully through dialogue between China and Japan.

"But the U.S.-Japanese alliance is a cornerstone of security and stability across Asia, and that security and stability benefits Japan."

mao rong

June 13th, 2011, 05:36 PM

war!...:D:nocrook:..i agree with @Sou-jiro.ASEAN should put-up a united front in addressing the territorial dispute against China.the more muscle the better...:)

Bahay_Kubo

June 13th, 2011, 06:04 PM

US ships off to Palawan for PHL-US naval exercises (http://www.gmanews.tv/story/223284/nation/us-ships-off-to-palawan-for-phl-us-naval-exercises)
06/13/2011 | 04:48 PM

Two United States Navy destroyers and a salvage ship are sailing to the Philippines this month for naval training exercises with Filipino counterparts off Palawan province, a Philippine Navy official said Monday.

The naval exercises come at a time of renewed tensions between the Philippines and China over the alleged intrusion of Chinese vessels into Philippine territorial waters near Palawan, but Navy spokesman Lt. Col. Omar Tonsay said the situation is a mere coincidence.

“Hindi related," said Tonsay in an interview Monday. “Matagal na siyang ginaganap between [the] third and second quarters. So, talagang every year."

Dubbed as the Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training or CARAT, the exercises will be held from June 28 to July 8 within the Sulu Sea, just east of Palawan.

The US ships involved are the USS Chung-Hoon and USS Howard — a class of destroyers — and the rescue and salvage ship USNS Safeguard. As he is not privy to the information, Tonsay could not immediately say how many US servicemen will join CARAT.

From the Philippines, the official said four Navy ships will take part in the exercises. He also did not have the information on which ships and how many Filipino servicemen will take part in the naval exercises.

US and Philippine naval forces have been pursuing CARAT for over 10 years now. The US has the same arrangement with Bangladesh, Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand.

Exchange of best practices

“The objective is interoperability, our ability to operate with the US and vice versa and exchange of doctrinal and tactical best practices. We adopt their best practices if we can, and vice versa," Tonsay said.

Tonsay announcement came on the heels of a similar report from Vietnam which has staged live fire exercises within its territorial waters in the South China Sea. Like the Philippines, Vietnam has recently accused China of violating its sovereignty.

Apart from military operations, Tonsay that CARAT shall encompass community relations, diving and salvage exercises, and other “at-sea" training exercises, as well as subject matter expert exchange.

“In at-sea or fleeting training exercises, all will be covered. All tactics involved at sea will be covered…" he added.

Dispute to result in war?

Meanwhile, in an interview on GMA News’ “Unang Balita" newscast, a public policy expert said the Philippines must improve discussions on the Spratlys dispute to prevent it from escalating into war.

“Kailangang palakasin ang usapan para hindi na matuloy sa giyera," said Dr. Prospero De Vera II, director of the University of the Philippines (UP) Center for Policy and Executive Development, in an interview with anchor Arnold Clavio on “Unang Balita."

“Ang mahalaga ay gamitin ng Pilipinas ang kanyang relasyon, unang una sa ASEAN, para gawing ASEAN-China discussion ito. Hindi dapat bilateral na Philippines at saka Tsina lang ang nag-uusap, kasi maliban sa may dalawa pang claimants sa ASEAN, kailangan ‘yung regional bloc talaga dahil regional issue ito, eh," De Vera explained.

In another interview on GMA News TV’s “News To Go" on Monday, an expert on Philippine-China relations said war is an unlikely consequence of the dispute between China and the Philippines.

“Kung titingnan mo ‘yung interes ng mga gobyerno — ng China, Vietnam, at Pilipinas – wala sa interes nila na lumaki pa ang isyu at magkaroon ng giyera," said Dr. Aileen Baviera, former dean of the UP Asian Center, in an interview with “News To Go" anchors Howie Severino and Kara David.

“Siyempre, hindi mo naman maiaalis ‘yung posibilidad na magkaroon ng aksidente dahil may mga sundalo d’yan sa lugar na yan, kanya-kanyang mga battle warships, halimbawa… Kaya nga ‘yung mga bansa na ‘yon, dapat mag-usap-usap para maiwasan ang mga ganoong pangyayari," Baviera added.

Palace: Don’t blame the Filipino-Chinese

In Malacañang also on Monday, presidential spokesperson Edwin Lacierda said he believes the territorial dispute will not breed anti-Chinese sentiment among Filipinos as he urged the public not to pin the blame on the Filipino-Chinese.

“No form of Sinophobia in our country… Most of us have Chinese blood one way or another," he said, admitting that he has Chinese blood, as well as the President.

“I think ang kailangan natin maalala ay huwag tayong mandamay ng mga hindi dapat idamay… I can say this for myself… we’re looking at this issue [from] the Filipino perspective," he added.

mao rong

June 13th, 2011, 06:05 PM

mukhang labanan lang to ng PR

Simple Dude

June 13th, 2011, 06:13 PM

war!...:D:nocrook:..i agree with @Sou-jiro.ASEAN should put-up a united front in addressing the territorial dispute against China.the more muscle the better...:)

^^ Go, Go Go ASEAN!!! :lol:

mao rong

June 13th, 2011, 06:18 PM

^^:lol:..pwde?

Simple Dude

June 13th, 2011, 06:21 PM

^^:lol:..pwde?

^^ pwedend pwede... suicide mission for us all :D hahaha

mao rong

June 13th, 2011, 06:23 PM

^^:lol:...di naman...more sa diplomatic front muna...

Yre

June 13th, 2011, 06:24 PM

OMG. binding contract. :lol::lol::lol::lol:

:lol: Baka mamaya niyan ibenta pa nga tayo ulit gaya ng ginawa ng Spain during their war with the US.

On the other news: Magdasal nalang tayo matuloy 'to para ma karma naman ang china baka magdalawang-isip pa silang makipag giyera sa mga maliliit na bansa.

(Reuters) - China faces a "meaningful probability" of a hard economic landing and the euro zone is storing up problems for the future by not tackling the debt crisis head on, said Nouriel Roubini, the economist who predicted the global financial crisis.

He said U.S. Treasury prices, which have risen sharply as investors sought a safe haven from the euro area debt crisis and worries about a slowdown in the global economy, were fairly valued although he was cautious about U.S. equities.

New York-based Roubini is closely followed by Wall Street because he predicted the U.S. housing meltdown that precipitated the global downturn.

China avoided a hard landing during the global credit crunch but faces a downturn after 2013 as it will struggle to keep increasing fixed investments, Roubini said.

More... (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/13/us-roubini-idUSTRE75C1OF20110613?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reuters%2FtopNews+%28News+%2F+US+%2F+Top+News%29)

xxxriainxxx

June 13th, 2011, 06:59 PM

^^ Au contraire - troubles in China will even fuel them to pursue thievery at the West Philippine Sea to divert attention.

shranethomas

June 13th, 2011, 07:40 PM

As for me ayoko sa gera. I go for a peaceful resolution.

Arvor

June 13th, 2011, 08:04 PM

I know Georgia had similar strong mutual defense alliances with the US, when the Russians came, the US did 0......... Georgia lost a big chunk of their territory. We should equip ourselves with a strong military otherwise.... No Country should assume they'll have friends and allies to help them... The US is a fair weather friend.

To add, you think the US would shoot it out with China........ China holds billions of US bonds... in a shooting war with the US, they could put the US into recession by screwing up the US's borrowing capability.... The US would rather not have unemployment than for the Philippines to lose some territory and our poor defensless Filipino ass to die in a war.... What a joke... our poor analysis of the situation... I guess Pnoy knows this and he can't do nothing....

US arrangements and ties with Georgia is nowhere near as strong or close as those between the US and the RP which also has substantial history, secondly Georgia is blocked off from the bulk of US power by the Bosphorus channel which connects the Mediterranean to the Black sea access to which by foreign naval powers have been regulated by treaties for decades .

There are also other political complications aswell with regards US European NATO allies who agreed with Russia's stance following Georgia's foolish adventurism, countries like Turkey, Germany etc, so these two cases aren't comparable at all .

2nd yes as Kissinger said about that war "great powers do not commit suicide for allies" ( least of all small and unimportant allies)", Georgia started the war by attacking Russians and only an idiot would throw out centuries of wisdom that says "never invade Russia" so it's Georgia's fault for starting the war a war which they could not win, the US had no reason to die for Geogria's mistaken beliefs .

The quality of the Chinese militaries abilities is often quite low even compared to the Russian military which is itself at a lower level than NATO and allied forces like S.Korea, the Chinese military is also untested in modern warfare and their last major war which was against Vietnam mentioned by someone in a previous post was quite humiliating for them, where a smaller Vietnam held the Chinese armies at the border with little to show for itself .

The situation is therefor quite different it is not in the US's and it's regional allies such as Singapore, Japan or S.Korea's interests to have such a conflict flare up in those waters which are vital for these countries and the US .

The US and likely with allies would act to end or prevent any such conflict on it's own behalf and need not do it for ours, which gives them a freer hand politically aswell, this is basically diplomatic speak and one needs to read between the lines ... .

----

With regards the US and Chinese economic relationship the US can default on it's debts and those $ bills become just pieces of worthless paper which could then be used for say toilet paper, they are only worth something as long as people or the US and it's allies in OPEC etc accepts them to trade for stuff, if the US then suffers greater unemployment the result would not be as dire as it would be for China, which would mean hundreds of millions of angry and workless people who would likely do a "made in china" label regime change overnight, the only thing keeping the ruling elites in power is their ability to deliver jobs .

China's ruling elites has more to lose than just worthless $ reserves they literally could lose their heads, this is a lesson which they know well since it was widespread displeasure that allowed Mao to eventually overthrow the nationalists to Taiwan ... .

The Chinese economy and military can be shut down by the west with a few flicks of a button, there is a massive disconnect between rhetoric, image and reality, yes China is developing yes China has a relatively large economy and even military but for now it's all still just a paper tiger ... .

Here is a little bit more on the economic issue which is also a strategic one that has an impact on the military equation .

Only a fraction something like 5 to 15 cents out of every $ of the profits made from trinkets made in China actually goes to the Chinese the rest flows back to the west, the Chinese on the other hand are giving the Americans and others real goods and perhaps some services in exchange for something untangible or imaginary paper or digital money, both of which can be flushed down the toilet ... and whoever were handed them would have lost everything while the trinkets or the real goods the tangible stuff now belongs to others .

So the relationship between China and the west is more complicated and less advantagious for China than what people might percieve it to be, furthermore China is not exporting much to the rest of the world, rather alot of what it exports are products innovated in the west and merely produced in China because they work for peanuts, the west especially Europe and Japan can and do easily maintain their industrial base vs China using their innovation, skills and highly efficient and automated production systems often using industrial robots or simply through superior quality or value products .

Western companies only remain in China while it's profitable and easy for them to do so, the day China starts wars and become a more expensive place to do business they will simply shut down those factories and move them to the next continent which will be able to provide masses of cheap labour .., namely Africa which is projected to have the largest population boom in the coming decades .

Anyway don't get me wrong in some ways im quite a sinophile myself i think that China does have a great and long history and culture, but this isn't the 14th century and were not vassal states to the middle kingdom, China needs to stick to a more harmonious developmental path and method of acquiring ressources which granted it does need .

This was a bit long winded but i think that sometimes there is a misperception out there on what China is at this point in time .

waraywaray architect

June 14th, 2011, 12:11 AM

Arvor, I could not have said it any better. With all these Chinese hoopla, especially in the media, all the more the chinks get aggressive and arrogant. I mean look, they CAN'T even attack Taiwan which is just a tiny renegade "country", nor even defeat India and Vietnam in the past wars they have had, and not even the Japs! And people in the media are saying, "they're challenging the USA". C'mon, they're getting too much publicity. In terms of economy, I firmly believe, and this is just my opinion, that China's economic "progress" is just a smokescreen. You cannot compare it to the 1st world countries where when their economies rise, so does the lives of its citizens - that to me is real progress. The only ones making money in China is the communist party. their people are paid crap that's why the goods spread all over the world is made in China. They have the modern day slavery, communist style.

gmaer

June 14th, 2011, 02:11 AM

Just sharing...

http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k139/dober_2006/Luneta_Parade.jpg

Philippine Army M41 Walker Bulldog MBTs parade during the new Philippine Independence Day (June 12, 1961) in Quirino Grandstand, Manila, Philippines.

Vietnam has a bit of advantage against China, they already have lots tunnel going inside the mainland and can wreak some havoc eh tayo papaano kaya tayo makakalaban kung puro barko na may mga missile na nakakatutok sa mga isla natin, papaano natin palubugin iyang mga barko? Yun dapat pag isipan na ngayon paano tayo pwedeng makipagsabayan sa ganyang labanan. Ngayon palang dapat mag train na nang ala SEAL commando na pwedeng sumisid kahit ilang kilometro at maging human bomb. Kaso wala pa akong narinig na pinoy na gustong maging gaya ng mga kamikazi ng japan.

The AFP counterpart of the US Navy Seals is the the SWAG or NAVSOG which was also trained by the US Navy Seals during Balikatan exercises.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3561/3580399733_36b793e51f_o.jpg

One of the primary requirements of being a Philippine Navy Seal is to swim from the Philippine Navy GHQ in Manila to the NAVSOG Training Camp in Cavite. You fail that test (or drown) and you're out of the team!

Gusto ko lang i share itong facts about hemp aka Marijuana. And the reason why we want to keep Spratlys ay dahil sa issue din ng natural resources. A little bit of thought.

FACT

· Deaths per year resulting from alcohol: 100,000
· Deaths per year resulting from tobacco: 430,000
· Deaths per year resulting from aspirin: 180- 1000
· Deaths per year resulting from legal drugs: 106,000
· Deaths that have ever occurred in direct result of Cannabis: 0 (that’s right zero)

FACT

· Farming 6% of the continental U.S. acreage with biomass crops (Hemp) would provide all of America’s Energy needs.
· Biomass can be converted into methane, methanol, or gasoline (which could eliminate our ties with the Middle East) at a cost comparable to petroleum and hemp is much better for the environment.
· Hemp fuel burns clean. Petroleum causes acid rain due to sulfur pollution.
· The use of Hemp Fuel does not contribute to global warming

FACT

· Hemp seed can be pressed into nutritious oil, which contains the highest amount of fatty acids in the plant kingdom. Essential oils are responsible for our immune system responses, and can clear the arteries of cholesterol and plaque.
· The byproduct of pressing the oil from hemp seed is a high quality protein seed cake. It can be used to bake into cakes, breads and casseroles. Hemp seed protein is one of mankind’s finest, most complete, and available-to-the body vegetable proteins.
· A Vegan or vegetarian can get all of the days required protein from a handful of hemp seed.

FACT

· Hemp is the oldest cultivated fiber plant in the world.
· Low-THC fiber hemp varieties developed by the French and others have been available for over 20 years. It is impossible to get high from fiber hemp. Over 600,000 acres of hemp is grown worldwide with no misuse problem.
· One acre of hemp can produce as much usable fiber as 4 acres of trees or two acres of cotton.
· Trees cut down take 50-500 years to grow, while hemp can be cultivated in as little as 100 days and can yield 4 times more paper over a 20 year period.
· Until 1883, from 75-90% of all paper in the world was made with cannabis hemp fiber including that for books, Bibles, maps, paper money, stocks and bonds, newspapers, etc.
· Hemp paper is longer lasting than wood pulp, stronger, acid-free, and chlorine free (Chlorine is estimated to cause up to 10% of all Cancers).
· Hemp paper can be recycled 7 times, wood pulp 4 times.
· Hemp particleboard may be up to 2 times stronger than wood particleboard and holds nails better.
· Hemp is a softer, warmer, and more water absorbent, than cotton and doesn’t stretch out.
· Half of the U.S. pesticides are used to treat cotton, while hemp has a natural pesticide.

FACT

· Almost any product that can be made from wood, cotton, or petroleum (including plastics) can be made from hemp. There are 25,000 known uses for hemp.
· For thousands of years virtually all good paints and varnishes were made with hemp seed oil and/or linseed oil.
· One acre of hemp produces as much cellulose fiber pulp as 4.1 acres of trees, making hemp a perfect material to replace trees for pressed board, particle board, and concrete construction molds.
· Heating and compressing plant fibers can create a practical, inexpensive, fire-resistant constructions material with excellent thermal and sound-insulating qualities.
· In 1941 Henry Ford built a plastic car made of fiber from hemp and wheat straw. Hemp is biodegradable, as synthetic plastic is not.

You're OFF-TOPIC man! :ohno:

As for me ayoko sa gera. I go for a peaceful resolution.

But under the influence of marijuana, will you not become war freak when tensions occur?

s40

June 14th, 2011, 03:07 AM

US arrangements and ties with Georgia is nowhere near as strong or close as those between the US and the RP which also has substantial history, secondly Georgia is blocked off from the bulk of US power by the Bosphorus channel which connects the Mediterranean to the Black sea access to which by foreign naval powers have been regulated by treaties for decades .

There are also other political complications aswell with regards US European NATO allies who agreed with Russia's stance following Georgia's foolish adventurism, countries like Turkey, Germany etc, so these two cases aren't comparable at all .

2nd yes as Kissinger said about that war "great powers do not commit suicide for allies" ( least of all small and unimportant allies)", Georgia started the war by attacking Russians and only an idiot would throw out centuries of wisdom that says "never invade Russia" so it's Georgia's fault for starting the war a war which they could not win, the US had no reason to die for Geogria's mistaken beliefs .

The quality of the Chinese militaries abilities is often quite low even compared to the Russian military which is itself at a lower level than NATO and allied forces like S.Korea, the Chinese military is also untested in modern warfare and their last major war which was against Vietnam mentioned by someone in a previous post was quite humiliating for them, where a smaller Vietnam held the Chinese armies at the border with little to show for itself .

The situation is therefor quite different it is not in the US's and it's regional allies such as Singapore, Japan or S.Korea's interests to have such a conflict flare up in those waters which are vital for these countries and the US .

The US and likely with allies would act to end or prevent any such conflict on it's own behalf and need not do it for ours, which gives them a freer hand politically aswell, this is basically diplomatic speak and one needs to read between the lines ... .

----

With regards the US and Chinese economic relationship the US can default on it's debts and those $ bills become just pieces of worthless paper which could then be used for say toilet paper, they are only worth something as long as people or the US and it's allies in OPEC etc accepts them to trade for stuff, if the US then suffers greater unemployment the result would not be as dire as it would be for China, which would mean hundreds of millions of angry and workless people who would likely do a "made in china" label regime change overnight, the only thing keeping the ruling elites in power is their ability to deliver jobs .

China's ruling elites has more to lose than just worthless $ reserves they literally could lose their heads, this is a lesson which they know well since it was widespread displeasure that allowed Mao to eventually overthrow the nationalists to Taiwan ... .

The Chinese economy and military can be shut down by the west with a few flicks of a button, there is a massive disconnect between rhetoric, image and reality, yes China is developing yes China has a relatively large economy and even military but for now it's all still just a paper tiger ... .

The semantics and detail are different but you really think the US would wage a small war in the spratleys for our shitty country? Pnoy is gullible, i never imagine a lot of our countrymen are....... The Americans don't even respect you when you get a US visa treating us like pieces of shit and shouting at our poor stupid souls wanting to go to America.... Unless China becomes a terrorist or starts putting nuclear missles on spratlys able to reach the USA, they will not spill any blood.... the MDT and VFA are all crap agreements for the benefit of the US.... I'm no commie lover but I aint no USA lover too... This is all the same, the dynamics are different but distilled to the very end.......if China bullies us, nothing happens.... we call the US, they say F you Filipinos buy your own military.... You put too much trust in the US.... Will the US destroy their image as a 'borrower' for a small philippine country with the gdp for 1 US state? I don't think so... What if the US says China screw you I default on all my bonds you hold........ CHina say's oh yeah screw you back, I nationalize every USA company asset in China..... all too simplistic is it not?... bottomline there is no way in hell the US will protect the Philippines against China... China might be commies but the fear of commies is dead in America, they won't send their young boys to die like Vietnam anymore.... maybe give it another 30 years after they forget about all their dead kids... maybe

Ady001

June 14th, 2011, 03:24 AM

DND to hold bidding for P82-M bullet assembly machine
By Alexis Romero (The Philippine Star) Updated June 14, 2011 12:00 AM Comments (2) View comments

MANILA, Philippines - The Department of National Defense (DND) will conduct a bidding this month for the purchase of a bullet assembly machine worth P82 million.

In a bulletin signed by Defense Assistant Secretary Lamberto Sillona and posted on its website, the DND said it would acquire a multi-station bullet assembly machine for 5.56 mm M193/M1855 rifle.

The Government Arsenal, an agency attached to the DND, will use the machine.

The department is now inviting bidders for the project, which has an approved budget of P82 million. The deadline for submission of bids is on June 23 at 10 a.m.

The opening of bids will be held on the same day at the DND office in Camp Aguinaldo, Quezon City.

Officials said bidders should have completed a contract similar to the project within the last three years from the submission of bids.

The bidding is open to local and foreign firms subject to the regulations of the Procurement Law.

Suppliers may buy bid documents for P25,000 at the DND Bids and Awards Committee Office.

They may also download the forms from the Philippine Government Electronic Procurement System website but should pay for these before the bids are submitted.

The DND said the firm that offers the lowest price would advance to the post-qualification stage, which would determine if the bidder complied with government requirements.

Based on its procurement plan, the DND aims to undertake P120.91-million worth of projects this year.

These include the procurement of supplies and materials, communication expenses, advertising, printing and binding, rental of equipment, professional services, repair and maintenance, utilities and taxes.

http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?publicationSubCategoryId=63&articleId=696037

I hope they could use these bullets to better use, like gunning down invasive peoples...

gmaer

June 14th, 2011, 03:27 AM

3 US warships join war games (http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/14681/3-us-warships-join-war-games)
By Dona Pazzibugan
Philippine Daily Inquirer
3:36 am | Tuesday, June 14th, 2011

Three American warships and four Philippine Navy vessels will take part in naval training exercises between the Philippines and the United States to be held June 28-July 8 in the Sulu Sea.

The Philippine Navy said holding this year’s Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training (Carat) exercise in the waters east of Palawan province had been arranged before the renewed conflict with China over the disputed Spratly Islands in the West Philippine Sea.

“It had been planned beforehand,” said Lt. Col. Omar Tonsay, the Navy spokesperson.

“It’s been going on for more than 10 years now … Last year it was held in the Zambales area, this year in the Palawan area, next year it will be in the Zamboanga area,” Tonsay added, explaining that the venue is rotated among the six naval forces around the country.

Tonsay said it was not the first time the annual exercise would be held in the Sulu Sea.

The last Carat exercise took place in October last year at the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority area in Zambales province where the former American naval base used to be.

Five Philippine Navy ships with about 1,000 sailors and Marines then trained with more than 3,000 of their American counterparts brought in by six US Navy vessels and three aircraft that participated in the annual exercise.

Tonsay said this year’s Carat exercise involved sea training, salvage, diving, community relations work and experts exchange.

It will not include live-fire drills, he said.

The participating US warships are the destroyers USS Chung-Hoon and USS Howard, and a rescue and salvage ship USNS Safeguard.

Tonsay said the USS Chung-Hoon was in international waters west of the Philippines but had not yet entered Philippine territory.

Carat is conducted in accordance with the PH-US Mutual Defense Treaty. It aims to ensure interoperability between the Philippine Navy and US Navy and a venue for the exchange of doctrinal and tactical best practices.

http://www.public.navy.mil/surfor/ddg83/Photos/USS_Howard.jpg
USS Howard (DDG-83) is an Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyer in the United States Navy. It is the same warship class as the USS Chung-Hoon and was named in honor of USMC Gunnery Sgt. Jimmie E. Howard (1929–1993), recipient of the Medal of Honor for his leadership of a platoon against repeated attacks by a battalion-sized Viet Cong force.

There's a lot of irony with the current warships that will be joining the 2011 US-PHL CARAT in the West Philippine Sea. USS Chung Hoon is a Hawaiian-based destroyer and was named after a Chinese-Hawaiian Admiral in WW2 while USS Howard was named after a Vietnam War Hero! USS Safeguard (ARS-50) below is a US Navy Safeguard-class salvage ship.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4103/5045862281_7fa6b71ae6.jpg
USNS Safeguard (T-ARS-50)

gmaer

June 14th, 2011, 05:12 AM

Can Manila count on US in Spratlys row? (http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/14679/can-manila-count-on-us-in-spratlys-row)
By TJ Burgonio
Philippine Daily Inquirer
3:36 am | Tuesday, June 14th, 2011

Some senators on Monday continued to express doubts that the United States would come to the aid of the Philippines if the verbal row with China over the disputed Spratly Islands escalated.

Sen. Francis Pangilinan said: “Whether or not America sides with us is immaterial at this point. Besides, imploring US providence in the past didn’t bring us into the proverbial promise land.”

Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, for his part, said President Aquino could invoke the PH-US Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) if the country were attacked by another country.

“Any attack against the forces of either the US or the Philippines in the treaty area will mean an attack against the parties of the (MDT),” Enrile told reporters.

But asked whether the Philippines could count on the US to fulfill its obligations in the treaty, he said: “Oh well that is another issue. Can we count on them? I do not know. We better ask them, can we count on you? I don’t know.”

Malacañang has maintained that the Philippines could invoke the MDT as a mechanism against any attack by a foreign country.

How dumb can we get?

Under the MDT, signed in Washington on Aug. 13, 1951, both countries declared their “sense of duty and common determination to defend themselves against external armed attack.”

After warning Manila against taking unilateral actions on Spratlys, Chinese Ambassador Liu Jianchao called on claimant-countries to stop exploring the idea of exploiting resources in the area claimed by China.

Sen. Joker Arroyo wondered why Malacañang was interpreting the US stand on the MDT in relation to the Spratlys dispute.

“Regardless of what they say, America will stick to its position. Meaning they will not interfere in territorial disputes,” Arroyo said in an interview.

He also wondered why Malacañang was arguing with US Embassy spokesperson on the issue. “We belittle ourselves arguing with them. How dumb can we get?”

Enrile said the Philippines could invoke the MDT if the Pacific Area from Asia to the US mainland were attacked since this was covered by the treaty.

No automatic retaliation

Enrile agreed with Arroyo, however, that the treaty did not provide automatic retaliation by the United States against the attacking or invading country.

An attack on any portion of the Spratlys is a different matter. In this case, the Philippines could invoke the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea for violation of the country’s exclusive economic zone, Enrile said.

Enrile said Malacañang should study the MDT before invoking it.

“You can review it if the other party wants to review it. You cannot just say, ‘Oh let’s review it.’ You’re dealing with a sovereign country and then second, you can terminate it by giving them a notice of one year. If you want to terminate it but I won’t advocate a termination of the MDT given our present condition,” he said.

Since there is no shooting war yet, Pangilinan said the Philippines could take care of itself.

“Our chances of winning in a shooting war may be bleak but we will definitely not allow anyone to defeat us in a word war,” he said in a text message.

The US Navy 7th Fleet is the closest to our region but it is currently pre-occupied with 3 major operations:

1. Earthquake in Japan
2. War in Afghanistan
3. Tensions in the Korean Border
4. And now, the South China Sea Dispute!

The People's Republic of China's South Sea Fleet (SSF) which patrols the South China Sea and the Spratly Islands is composed of 11 guided missile destroyers, 18 guided missile frigates, 8 diesel-electric powered fast attack submarines, 11 LSTs, 6 troop transport ships, 4 medium landing ships, 1 hospital ship and 1 LPD. Most of the fleet's surface ships are located at Zhanjiang naval base, while all of the fleet's submarines are at Yulin navy base on Hainan Island. The SSF has many other bases included Guangzhou, Haikou, Shantou, Mawei, and Beihai, while naval air force bases are at Lingshui, Haikou, Sanya, Zhanjiang, and Guiping. The fleet's area of operations is divided into six zones.

http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z181/MSantor/Chinese%20military%20or%20PLA/Kunlun-Shan.jpg
The SSF Command Ship - Kunlun Shan LPD (Type 071 amphibious transport dock)

In the 1970s the fleet underwent a major buildup, due to conflict in the Paracel Islands and other reefs in the South China Sea. In 1974, the SSF took the Paracel Islands from South Vietnam, which resulted in the sinking of one South Vietnamese frigate while damaging another. The latest incident was in 1988, when a Chinese naval task force engaged Vietnamese naval forces, sinking one Vietnamese warship and damaging another.

xxxriainxxx

June 14th, 2011, 05:56 AM

^^ Please use West Philippine Sea on your post komrad.

gmaer

June 14th, 2011, 06:24 AM

^^ Please use West Philippine Sea on your post komrad.

Which part? :)

xxxriainxxx

June 14th, 2011, 06:28 AM

Which part? :)

I normally edit any reference to the other illegitimate name for West Philippine Sea, Kalayaan Islands and Panatag Shoal. :)

pi_malejana

June 14th, 2011, 06:29 AM

le Reine

June 14th, 2011, 06:32 AM

^^That's not important. The US Gov't have said that they will not side with any party re: Spratly's.

Yre

June 14th, 2011, 06:33 AM

^^ Au contraire - troubles in China will even fuel them to pursue thievery at the West Philippine Sea to divert attention.

You do know China has several ethnic, regional and border problems going on and if what you said will happen, then the more the separatist like Tibet and Mongolia will be enboldened to take advantage of the situation and i doubt China likes to battle on several fronts inside and outside.

Just sharing...
....
The AFP counterpart of the US Navy Seals is the the SWAG or NAVSOG which was also trained by the US Navy Seals during Balikatan exercises.
......
One of the primary requirements of being a Philippine Navy Seal is to swim from the Philippine Navy GHQ in Manila to the NAVSOG Training Camp in Cavite. You fail that test (or drown) and you're out of the team!

But are they willing to become Kamikaze? OTOH, it could be part of their job...

Just sharing...
But under the influence of marijuana, will you not become war freak when tensions occur?

No, marijuana is a relaxant. It will make you lethargic and without care even if your life is on the line.

gmaer

June 14th, 2011, 06:34 AM

I normally edit any reference to the other illegitimate name for West Philippine Sea, Kalayaan Islands and Panatag Shoal. :)

If you are referring to this post...

In the 1970s the fleet underwent a major buildup, due to conflict in the Paracel Islands and other reefs in the South China Sea. In 1974, the SSF took the Paracel Islands from South Vietnam, which resulted in the sinking of one South Vietnamese frigate while damaging another. The latest incident was in 1988, when a Chinese naval task force engaged Vietnamese naval forces, sinking one Vietnamese warship and damaging another.

Here's my answer:

http://www.bomboradyo.com/images/stories/westphlsea.jpg

Source: http://www.bomboradyo.com/index.php/news/top-stories/56964-west-philippine-sea-ang-tamang-bansag

gmaer

June 14th, 2011, 06:40 AM

hmmm, what do you guys think?? malamang may magrally na naman sa US embassy...:bash::ohno:

US expresses support to PHL on Spratlys dispute
AMITA O. LEGASPI, GMA News (http://www.gmanews.tv/story/223331/nation/us-expresses-support-to-phl-on-spratlys-dispute)
06/14/2011 | 10:34 AM

The United States on Tuesday expressed full support to the Philippines on the issues concerning the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea) and the Spratly Islands.

"We, the US, are with the Philippines," US Ambassador Harry Thomas said in his speech during the grand launch of the National Renewable Energy Program in Makati.

"The Philippines and the US are stretegic allies. We willl continue to consult and work with each other on all issues, including [the] South China Sea and Spratly Islands," he added.

He further said that the two countries' "partnership grew stronger over the years." — RSJ, GMA News

Ano ba talaga Tito Sam?

But are they willing to become Kamikaze? OTOH, it could be part of their job...

I don't think so coz a Kamikaze and a commando like the SEALs are 2 different things.

http://www.navy.mil.ph/gallery/rwx/1289277390-47676_158539750825212_100000075654147_537155_5827925_n.jpg

A Kamikaze will not crouch in a small group and wait or seek for the enemy. They will do suicide attacks.

xxxriainxxx

June 14th, 2011, 06:57 AM

You do know China has several ethnic, regional and border problems going on and if what you said will happen, then the more the separatist like Tibet and Mongolia will be enboldened to take advantage of the situation and i doubt China likes to battle on several fronts inside and outside.

Of course, and the PLA will not hesitate to crush them. An outside 'enemy' can stoke nationalist sentiments in China. Worked in America. As for widespread protests in China, I think Beijing can manage them quite well.

If you are referring to this post...

Here's my answer:

http://www.bomboradyo.com/images/stories/westphlsea.jpg

Source: http://www.bomboradyo.com/index.php/news/top-stories/56964-west-philippine-sea-ang-tamang-bansag

Yep.

Yre

June 14th, 2011, 07:05 AM

Of course, and the PLA will not hesitate to crush them. An outside 'enemy' can stoke nationalist sentiments in China. Worked in America. As for widespread protests in China, I think Beijing can manage them quite well.
Yep.

IF they were the one being attacked but not the other way around.
What do you mean worked in America???? Can you give an example.

Manila-X

June 14th, 2011, 07:26 AM

Arvor

June 14th, 2011, 07:41 AM

The semantics and detail are different but you really think the US would wage a small war in the spratleys for our shitty country?

Unless China becomes a terrorist or starts putting nuclear missles on spratlys able to reach the USA, they will not spill any blood....

What if the US says China screw you I default on all my bonds you hold........ CHina say's oh yeah screw you back, I nationalize every USA company asset in China..... all too simplistic is it not?... bottomline there is no way in hell the US will protect the Philippines against China...

@S40

I wrote many times that they would not need to intervene on behalf of the Phillippines, they would intervene because it is in the US interests to have the vital sea lanes and the maritime traffic that flows through it secured, this is where ships travel between Singapore and East Asia any conflict would endanger the free flow of traffic and this is something the US and it's other allies in East Asia like Japan and S.Korea or others like Singapore can not accept to happen, they would be forced to act less their economies suffer great damage Japan and S.Korea in particular can not allow the impediment of oil and other ressources from coming through without which their economies would shut down .

As for the economic issue again China can seize those factories or offices alot of them are Chinese owned or partly owned anyway but what would they do with empty factories and offices ?, corporations can rapidly move production at will if it was in their interests to do so and with regards US multinationals alot of them are not even registered in the US anymore so there's enough legal loopholes for them .

China is ageing rapidly and its labour costs are rising, as ive written in an earlier post Africa is about to experience an increased population boom and increasing development in the coming decades so these factories in China could likely be shut down anyway in the next decades in favour of producing in Africa ... .

The "bottom line" is that China stand to lose more than the US in such a move and any large scale disruption to maritime traffic would automatically drag the US, Japan, S.Korea, Singapore and even Taiwan into the conflict it need not be about the Phillippines at all .

In fact in case of Chinese agression in the Spratleys the RP should simply impose or try to impose the closure of sealanes using the pretext of danger to merchant traffic, such a move would automatically draw these other countries navies into the region which will restrict Chinas ability to act .

gmaer

June 14th, 2011, 07:45 AM

The only thing I can say is the best thing The Philippine armed forces can do right now is improve its military especially its weapons, fleet and equipment.

One it has modernized, other than CAT, ROTC, there should be conscription for Filipino men starting the age of 18 and serve 2 years in The Army or 3 years in The Navy or Airforce. Similar to what Singapore or South Korea are doing.

The National Defense Act of 1935 (Commonwealth Act No. 1) was passed by the Philippine National Assembly on December 21, 1935.

The Act provided for the drafting of Filipino men, between the ages of 21 and 50, into the 30 reserve divisions. This force was to be raised through 2 training camps, of 20,000 men each, lasting 22 weeks. The camps would be staffed by members of the regular army.

The first group of 20,000 troops was drafted on January 1, 1937, and there were 4,800 officers and 104,000 enlisted men in the reserves by 1939.

xxxriainxxx

June 14th, 2011, 07:51 AM

Beware of the Chinese Army.

http://a3.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/252455_10150213698728810_679638809_7029853_994908_n.jpg

:lol:

xxxriainxxx

June 14th, 2011, 07:52 AM

IF they were the one being attacked but not the other way around.
What do you mean worked in America???? Can you give an example.

Bush used the Iraq war to divert attention from troubles at home and help propel his reelection.

As for China, that's a little naive - Beijing knows how to stoke 'Chinese Pride'. Mainlanders were brainwashed that they own everything in the world. Why do you think there are frequent hacking attacks on different websites?

coldfire083

June 14th, 2011, 07:54 AM

Ang sarap pagsasampalin mukha ng mga yan.

gmaer

June 14th, 2011, 07:57 AM

Arvor

June 14th, 2011, 08:05 AM

The Indonesian Air Force announced on Sunday that it would add five more C-130 Hercules transports to its fleet over the next two years.

Admiral Imam Sufaat, the Air Force chief of staff, said the new additions would be among the nine such aircraft to be procured over the next few years.

“Once we get the nine C-130s, the Air Force will have 30 units of this plane,” he said.

The fleet will consist of two C-130s used as refueling planes, two outfitted to carry VIPs and 26 to transport troops.

Air Force spokesman First Adm. Bambang Samoedro said the service could be getting the planes from several countries by 2014.

“The countries that have offered us the planes are the United States, Norway and Australia,” he said.

“We are currently in the process of looking at the whether to get them through a grant or a soft loan, because this is strongly related to the country’s budget.”

The United States offered a fleet of six C-130Es for delivery in 2012 at a special discount. The planes were initially offered to other Asian and African governments but the orders never came to fruition.

The Norwegian government also offered to sell four used C-130Hs to Indonesia at a cost of $66 million. Under the terms of the deal, the Norwegian government would recondition the planes at its own cost before selling them to Indonesia.

A third bid came from Australia, which offered a fleet of six C-130Js for immediate delivery.

Imam said that in addition to purchasing the transports, the Air Force was also waiting for the United States to approve the sale of 24 used F-16C/D fighter jets to the Indonesian Armed Forces.

The F-16s had been offered as a grant, but the deal must be approved by US lawmakers.

“We hope we can get the approval from the Congress soon so that so we can sign the contract within this year,” Imam said.

He added that if the agreement could be finalized before the end of the year, Indonesia would get the first eight fighters in 2012 to help boost the nation’s squadrons .

Additional reporting by Antara

http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/news/air-force-to-boost-arsenal-with-transport-craft/446556

I wonder if these were offered to the PAF ? .

Yre

June 14th, 2011, 08:06 AM

xxxriainxxx

June 14th, 2011, 08:08 AM

Chinese Army playing Boom ti ya ya Boom...

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3243/2993911730_85509bd94c.jpg

:lol:

gmaer

June 14th, 2011, 08:12 AM

The Chinese Army practicing anti-gravity maneuvers which can prove effective in combat?

http://www.profilebrand.com/funny-pictures/category/demotivational/3_chinas-red-army.gif

xxxriainxxx

June 14th, 2011, 08:12 AM

I agree with you.

:lol: You gotta be kidding me using that analogy...:bash:

And hacking attacks on websites which is so very childish is now due to Beijing's goading their brainwashed people? Parang napaka bobo naman ng pagtingin mo sa namamahala ng gobyerno ng mga intsik...

Sa ganyang thinking, diyan tayo matatalo...:ohno:

You think hacking websites are random? You have to go through the thick Great Firewall to do that. You think they can go do that without blessings from Beijing? Sorry, but that's totally naive.

That analogy works. If you don't think so, then it is up to you. Hindi naman kita pinipilit. I talk to the right people enough to know what I am talking about.

xxxriainxxx

June 14th, 2011, 08:15 AM

And then there's Made in China Hogwarts- seats two.

http://www.justsaypictures.com/images/chinese-army.jpg

s40

June 14th, 2011, 08:19 AM

@S40

I wrote many times that they would not need to intervene on behalf of the Phillippines, they would intervene because it is in the US interests to have the vital sea lanes and the maritime traffic that flows through it secured, this is where ships travel between Singapore and East Asia any conflict would endanger the free flow of traffic and this is something the US and it's other allies in East Asia like Japan and S.Korea or others like Singapore can not accept to happen, they would be forced to act less their economies suffer great damage Japan and S.Korea in particular can not allow the impediment of oil and other ressources from coming through without which their economies would shut down .

As for the economic issue again China can seize those factories or offices alot of them are Chinese owned or partly owned anyway but what would they do with empty factories and offices ?, corporations can rapidly move production at will if it was in their interests to do so and with regards US multinationals alot of them are not even registered in the US anymore so there's enough legal loopholes for them .

China is ageing rapidly and its labour costs are rising, as ive written in an earlier post Africa is about to experience an increased population boom and increasing development in the coming decades so these factories in China could likely be shut down anyway in the next decades in favour of producing in Africa ... .

The "bottom line" is that China stand to lose more than the US in such a move and any large scale disruption to maritime traffic would automatically drag the US, Japan, S.Korea, Singapore and even Taiwan into the conflict it need not be about the Phillippines at all .

In fact in case of Chinese agression in the Spratleys the RP should simply impose or try to impose the closure of sealanes using the pretext of danger to merchant traffic, such a move would automatically draw these other countries navies into the region which will restrict Chinas ability to act .

In my opinion, having worked for a multinational corporation in many countries for many years, "empty factories and offices" is not that simple. If I was Ford and I build a $5 billion car factory and China siezes that? You think that will go down with shareholders very well? Empty factories put up in China don't cost millions of pesos, they cost billions of dollars because they are global factories. Any seizure there would cripple global supply lines not to mention damaging balance sheet and capital issues with USA companies.... I think non-business people over simplify how much capital and money has been put into CHina by companies in the hope of the China opportunity... If China screws the US companies, we're not talking pennies here and we're not talking Americans would go back to sleep...... Such a move would destroy so much economic value you're concept of the USA defaulting on its bonds crazy. The point is the US in no way whatsoever screw over China because they are linked economically. You put too much hope in Africa.... my company does not even look at Africa...... That continent will not be productive, not in the next 20 years... If you have been there, it is not a factory base... it is a raw material base that is it.

This is my point... China for example invades kalayaan group of island (the one with our airbase).... Philippines throws a hissy fit and engages in small scale war... We loose.... we call big brother USA.... You think the US will engage China to return Kalayaan group to good ole Philippines Ally??? I bet my life they will say Philippines go shut up, we want the sea lanes open as you say so... It will not return anything to status quo.... They'll probably whisper to the Chinese.... good move, stupid Filipinos did not want to put up their own fight and expect us to give them back Kalayaan.

Yre

June 14th, 2011, 08:23 AM

You think hacking websites are random? You have to go through the thick Great Firewall to do that. You think they can go do that without blessings from Beijing? Sorry, but that's totally naive.

That analogy works. If you don't think so, then it is up to you. Hindi naman kita pinipilit. I talk to the right people enough to know what I am talking about.

Yeah, you seem to forgot 9/11...that's why i think you weren't really thinking enough...
I'm not going to discuss further with you re: hackings as it seems you don't even know what it is you want to talk about.

gmaer

June 14th, 2011, 08:25 AM

I wonder if these were offered to the PAF ? .

AFP to get 3 C-130 aircraft (http://www.interaksyon.com/article/2239/afp-to-get-3-c-130-aircraft)
19-Apr-11, 5:13 PM | Chichi Conde, InterAksyon.com

MANILA, Philippines - The Armed Forces of the Philippines will have three more C-130 Hercules cargo aircraft by the third quarter of the year, military chief of staff Gen. Eduardo Oban said on Tuesday.

Oban made the announcement during a briefing on preparations for Holy Week at Malacanang Palace presided by President Benigno Aquino III.

The Philippine Air Force currently has only one C-130.

Brig. Gen. Roy Deveraturda, head of the AFP Modernization Program Office, said two of the C-130s are undergoing progressive depot maintenance and repair. A third plane, worth about P1.8 billion, will be up for rebidding within the year.

A brand-new C-130 costs around P3.5 billion.

The AFP canceled a bidding last year after only one firm, Derco Aerospace Inc., tendered an offer for a 26-year old C-130 from Tunisia.

Aquino earlier announced that the military will buy P11 billion worth of combat utility helicopters, patrol vessels, and high-powered guns, among others, within the year.

He said P8 billion will be sourced from revenues from the Malampaya offshore natural gas fields and P3 billion from the AFP modernization fund.

So the purchase of the Tunisian C-130 that overshot a runway was cancelled!?

LuckyLady

June 14th, 2011, 08:31 AM

hmmm, what do you guys think?? malamang may magrally na nama..:bash::ohno:

US expresses support to PHL on Spratlys dispute
AMITA O. LEGASPI, GMA News (http://www.gmanews.tv/story/223331/nation/us-expresses-support-to-phl-on-spratlys-dispute)
06/14/2011 | 10:34 AM

The United States on Tuesday expressed full support to the Philippines on the issues concerning the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea) and the Spratly Islands.

"We, the US, are with the Philippines," US Ambassador Harry Thomas said in his speech during the grand launch of the National Renewable Energy Program in Makati.

"The Philippines and the US are stretegic allies. We willl continue to consult and work with each other on all issues, including [the] South China Sea and Spratly Islands," he added.

He further said that the two countries' "partnership grew stronger over the years." — RSJ, GMA News

i have this wildest idea to construct a prison cell in this contested island and put this stupid NPA's who will rally againts the support of the US for the Philippines...Dapat sila ilagay don para unang igyera nang tsikom.

gmaer

June 14th, 2011, 08:37 AM

And then there's Made in China Hogwarts- seats two.

http://www.justsaypictures.com/images/chinese-army.jpg

The Chinese Army will be using witchcraft technology? We better equip our soldiers with agimat or anting-anting for protection! And start recruiting "mangkukulams" in our Womens' Auxiliary Corps (WACs).

http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb187/sonias_2007/dezembro1/20081222082236ENLUS0158325012299341.jpg
Filipino women soldiers parade during the AFP 73rd Anniversary in Camp Aguinaldo, Quezon City, Philippines on 22 December 2008.

^^ I hope one of them has "witch" blood in their lineage. :lol:

LuckyLady

June 14th, 2011, 08:57 AM

Yre

June 14th, 2011, 09:02 AM

they better change that Act to reflect the current situation of our country our men is turning into a rare specie:lol:

Unfortunately i agree with you...daming matatapang ngayon...sa counterstrike, dota, farcry, etc...

Nuong may compulsary ROTC at CAT nga, dami na nga reklamo, ewan ko nalang kun may giyera na talaga..

gmaer

June 14th, 2011, 09:04 AM

they better change that Act to reflect the current situation of our country our men is turning into a rare specie:lol:

No worries! That Act was made before WW2 to create an independent Philippine Army and is no longer in effect. Now we have the CAT/CMT and the ROTC as residues of that long abolished Act which are not much of a conscription but just for "reservers" training which is not taken seriously by most of today's youth including me! haha

diz

June 14th, 2011, 09:07 AM

Chinese Army playing Boom ti ya ya Boom...

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3243/2993911730_85509bd94c.jpg

:lol:

stop talking smack before you get your ass wholped bro. you might regret this in the event of a Chinese invasion. you know well enough that if your shoeless army can evict the jet-equiped armed forces of the KMT off to Formosa, you know you're beast.

xxxriainxxx

June 14th, 2011, 10:24 AM

Yeah, you seem to forgot 9/11...that's why i think you weren't really thinking enough...
I'm not going to discuss further with you re: hackings as it seems you don't even know what it is you want to talk about.

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

Please don't say I forgot 9/11, we lost a family friend in the Twin Towers.

xxxriainxxx

June 14th, 2011, 10:29 AM

stop talking smack before you get your ass wholped bro. you might regret this in the event of a Chinese invasion. you know well enough that if your shoeless army can evict the jet-equiped armed forces of the KMT off to Formosa, you know you're beast.

Are you threatening me? Well, newsflash. I wont mind dying or killing for my country. If the Chinese can curtail their own citizen's freedom of speech, I am not Chinese and never will be. My forefathers fought against the Spanish (19 martyrs of Aklan), another one was beheaded by the Japanese during WW2 and now is the name of the police station building in Kalibo, my uncle fought against Marcos, and I have a cousin who was an NPA commander. This fruit does not fall far from the tree.

Just saying, you have no right to curtail my freedom of speech.

Manila-X

June 14th, 2011, 10:31 AM

stop talking smack before you get your ass wholped bro. you might regret this in the event of a Chinese invasion. you know well enough that if your shoeless army can evict the jet-equiped armed forces of the KMT off to Formosa, you know you're beast.

Its what we call freedom of speech. Unfortunately, this is what China lacks.

As for invasion, this is the worst case scenario and definitely it won't happen to that and should not even be thinking about it.

Manila-X

June 14th, 2011, 10:34 AM

xxxriainxxx

June 14th, 2011, 11:10 AM

coldfire083

June 14th, 2011, 11:20 AM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13759253

Vietnam's Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung has issued a decree about a potential military call-up, amid rising tension with China.

Mercato

June 14th, 2011, 11:39 AM

The Japanese soldiers during WWII said they are willing die for the sake of their emperor.

General Patton said,

Now, I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.That's why I said, 'I wont mind dying or killing for my country.'

Patton is one of the generals I really looked up to.:yes: :D :D

"We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender,..." ~ Sir Winston Churchill.

Well, even tho our Pangulo isn't exactly a Winston Churchill, sige na lang, at least some inspirational lines na lang kahit papaano. Bottom line and main point is, just stop this doormat syndrome already... :lol: :lol:

Mercato

June 14th, 2011, 11:44 AM

Well, it war with China will happen in near future (God forbid), I guess it's time to collect and store information about unconventional warfare, RIGHT NOW. This was how the old VietCong inflicted heavy losses against the United States, how the old Afghan mujahideen defeated the old Soviet Union. Our own Hukbahalaps were quite lethal against the Japanese Imperial Army back then. This is a good idea, a very good idea indeed. :yes:

Sou-jiro

June 14th, 2011, 11:57 AM

despite the US saying they will not side with Either China or Philippines on spratly's disputes, at the same time I dont think US will ignore China's growing power or even dominance in theyre region and they will act! Influence is very important for thr US. and China is considered rival!....

I know some people have anti US sentiments and I dont always agree with the US ...but in the end If i have to select a world super power??

I would always pick the US over the emerging China" I would rather trust the US than China..people can keep defending China...I dont give a F**K!.....They horrible records speciallys human rights speaks for itself...now Im not saying The Philippines or its ASEAN neighbors are clean..no one is...

sorry for the pun

Yre

June 14th, 2011, 12:20 PM

That's why I said, 'I wont mind dying or killing for my country.'

Patton is one of the generals I really looked up to.

He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country I guess that's what he meant..you can leave the 'dying' part to the other side..

This was how the old VietCong inflicted heavy losses against the United States, how the old Afghan mujahideen defeated the old Soviet Union. Our own Hukbahalaps were quite lethal against the Japanese Imperial Army back then. This is a good idea, a very good idea indeed. :yes:

My main issue is how are we going to do unconventional warfare out in the sea? Hire mercenary dolphins??

xxxriainxxx

June 14th, 2011, 12:50 PM

I guess that's what he meant..you can leave the 'dying' part to the other side..

My main issue is how are we going to do unconventional warfare out in the sea? Hire mercenary dolphins??

Why not?

http://media.metronews.topscms.com/images/8c/2a/d3c446d841ebbbcdc487b54960ab.jpeg

Frickin Laser!

Arvor

June 14th, 2011, 02:09 PM

In my opinion, having worked for a multinational corporation in many countries for many years, "empty factories and offices" is not that simple. If I was Ford and I build a $5 billion car factory and China siezes that? You think that will go down with shareholders very well?

Indeed it won't go down well with shareholders but they won't blame Ford management for it, they would instead blame the Chinese for the unjustified seizure of their plant which has nothing to do with the US government, it is a private business that presumably pays it's taxes and whatnot in China ... .

Such moves would actually create bad pr for investments in China given that it already has a rather bad image when it comes to property laws .

Empty factories put up in China don't cost millions of pesos, they cost billions of dollars because they are global factories. Any seizure there would cripple global supply lines not to mention damaging balance sheet and capital issues with USA companies....I think non-business people over simplify how much capital and money has been put into CHina by companies in the hope of the China opportunity... If China screws the US companies, we're not talking pennies here and we're not talking Americans would go back to sleep...... Such a move would destroy so much economic value you're concept of the USA defaulting on its bonds crazy.

Lol whoever said the global economic system wasn't crazy to begin with ? .

The point is the US in no way whatsoever screw over China because they are linked economically. You put too much hope in Africa.... my company does not even look at Africa...... That continent will not be productive, not in the next 20 years... If you have been there, it is not a factory base... it is a raw material base that is it.

I never said that Africa currently is such i always referred to it as a future trend, fact is China's population is ageing rapidly and it's labour costs are rising it is therefor inevitable that the situation will someday changen, Africa has the right demographic trends and by then should have developed enough infrastructure to make it more worthwhile than China .

This is my point... China for example invades kalayaan group of island (the one with our airbase).... Philippines throws a hissy fit and engages in small scale war... We loose.... we call big brother USA.... You think the US will engage China to return Kalayaan group to good ole Philippines Ally??? I bet my life they will say Philippines go shut up, we want the sea lanes open as you say so... It will not return anything to status quo.... They'll probably whisper to the Chinese.... good move, stupid Filipinos did not want to put up their own fight and expect us to give them back Kalayaan.

Why do you keep on insisting on the scenario of the Phillippines being the cause of US intervention ?, the US does not need the Phillippines as an excuse to intervene anywhere in the world where it believes it's longstanding vital interests and military supremacy is being seriously challenged, the south china sea is one such vital place and they will act regardless of who starts the conflict they simply can not tolerate anyone impeding the free access of maritime traffic in those sea lanes and neither would Japan, S.Korea or Europe/Nato powers ... .

China will always suffer more in any conflict military or economic .

skywalker2008

June 14th, 2011, 02:57 PM

i have this wildest idea to construct a prison cell in this contested island and put this stupid NPA's who will rally againts the support of the US for the Philippines...Dapat sila ilagay don para unang igyera nang tsikom.

I have a better idea. We can transfer all the country's squatters in that area. Let China demolish them and provide for their relocation site. :nuts:

Yre

June 14th, 2011, 03:18 PM

I have a better idea. We can transfer all the country's squatters in that area. Let China demolish them and provide for their relocation site. :nuts:

Good idea. Hitting 2 birds with 1 stone. :bash::lol:

mao rong

June 14th, 2011, 05:12 PM

Why not?

http://media.metronews.topscms.com/images/8c/2a/d3c446d841ebbbcdc487b54960ab.jpeg

Frickin Laser!

^^:rofl:...nice one

Mercato

June 14th, 2011, 05:29 PM

Can't wait to see if any of those involved countries will attempt to hack at each other's missile weapons targeting and fire control system... that would be a disastrous moment if that ever happens!

Source: https://pakistanpal.wordpress.com/tag/indian-missile-system-record-hack/The Japanese soldiers during WWII said they are willing die for the sake of their emperor.

General Patton said,

Now, I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country. I guess that's what he meant..you can leave the 'dying' part to the other side..

My main issue is how are we going to do unconventional warfare out in the sea? Hire mercenary dolphins?? Why are you still guessing when he already explicitly said what he wanted to say? And that is that.

I thought I already posted an article about cyber warfare some pages back? Cyber warfare, because it is new, falls under the category nonconventional.

Gmaer had already provided one hint. If the Vietnamese can produce hackers aimed at Chinese warships, can’t the Philippines do the same?

1. Didn’t the Philippines produce one young lad who scared the living daylights of the entire world at the turn of the century 2000 with his Love Bug virus? I am sure there are a thousand more like him out there. How did Will Smith in Independence Day bring down a vastly superior Alien invading force? Was it not through cyber warfare, and one virus?

2. Is it not so that the terrain of Palawan is heavily forested and easy to camouflage maritime guerilla bases? Is it not so that logistically speaking, Palawan can provide far better logistical support precisely because it is sooooooooooooooo near the Spratlys?

3. Is it not so that poorly equipped Somali pirates are giving the modern navies of the world a big headache? Is it not so that our very own Abu Sayyaf had been known to embark on similar acts of piracy? If a renegade rebel force can engage in piracy, then why not the AFP? But “piracy” with a purpose, a maritime guerilla purpose aimed at a foreign invader.

4. One forumer @askal here I remember posted a youtube vid about Nazi stealth technology which was 60 years old already. The materials used by the Nazis might seem crude to today’s youngster pundits but by jove, they were ingenious. They used wood! And they designed the flying wing aircraft to be “invisible” to radar. I am not suggesting building the B2 bomber. But stealth technology can also be applied to ships and smaller seacraft. How about fast moving stealth technology speedboats, kayaks, canoes or any smaller craft that can approach enemy vessels at night and plant a plastic explosive device like what Al Qaeda used on the USS Cole in Yemen? Then disappear in the thick jungles of Palawan? All using wood which is abundant in the Philippines?

5. If there are existing Philippine garrisons in the Spratlys, how about them mining the area so that approaching Chinese vessels will hit the sea mines and explode?

6. Is it not possible to build cheaper drones and base them in Puerto Princesa or again in jungle bases? How about launching killer drones, Philippine made, against enemy ships? Drones which are undetectable using wood or material that radar cannot detect?

7. If we run out of bombs, how about loading the drones with African killer bees so that even if the drone doesn’t do much damage, the African killer bees will wreak havoc on the entire crew of any Chinese vessel?

Gentlemen, the Somali pirates, the Abu Sayyaf and their Al Qaeda Yemeni elders had shown us that unconventional warfare is still possible at sea. All it takes is a little more imagination and especially faith. Our big advantage is we have the Philippine Carrier Palawan so near the Spratlys for logistical support and a thousand hiding places.

P.S. I forgot to mention a li'l somethin about Vietnam. She actually has an added headache because she has to fight a war both on land and at sea. The war being stoked by China is happening at sea because Chinese ships are cutting underwater Vietnamese cables. That's one thing admirable about the Vietnamese, they are a no nonsense, practical people. And they do not bow down to anyone, not like some Filipinos who're already afraid to lose investment money. Is there a price to freedom? How much is self respect worth? FYI, economic domination is also another type of unconventional warfare.

Nabartek

June 14th, 2011, 05:39 PM

Nangagalaiti na si Goliath sa mga David (Vietnam, Phils)..Hahaha

Since some people mentioned here the local Chinese, it would be interesting to hear their views on the issue. From what I gather, they are one of the biggest haters of the mainlanders. I think non-Chinese Pinoys should bear that in mind. The only pro-China Tsinoy I can think of is Sycip. :lol: But your regular Tsinoy has a big dislike for mainlanders in general

On the serious side, I think an alliance between ASEAN, the US and South Korea + Japan is a must to deter Chinese hegemony as these are the countries that will be directly affected once the Chinese successfully and unilaterally command the West Philippine Sea (or East Vietnam sea..)

Nabartek

June 14th, 2011, 05:51 PM

Difference is Vietnam fights back....whilst we just fight back with words...sad to say I don't think diplomacy is NOT enough. Our government needs to stop being a push over, that's why they are not taken seriously.

All of Asean should put aside they're squabble about spratly's for now and put a United front. The worlds super powers might see China as an emerging country to watch out for but if they all notice China is not very popular in its region and specially amongst its ASEAN neighbors THEN they will not ignore this issue!!

Japan also has some conflict againt's China in Islands its claiming...and Lets face it...Japan and Even S. Korea aren't really fond of the Chinese...

I'm not enticing war here...but if ASEAN and countries like S. Korea and Japan side with ASEAN's approach then surely China cannot ignore and may Change it's approach and who know's possibly with less aggression. For people who may keep insisting China is to be feared is not the point. If countries bordering China are unhappy about them China will not ignore this...

One or two countries they may ignore...but a whole region? I don't think so...so I'm saying Philippines or Vietnam should not go at it alone...Have more dialogue with its neighbors...

I know there may be some "CHINA defenders here"...you should know who you people are!....I don't CARE!....

I may be getting carried away here but as a Filipino I'll gladly Die and Kill for my country!

I agree. The Chinese are quite aggressive in lies and deception.Not to mention they have the upperhand since they have a permanent seat in the UN.

The issue about China is not strictly limited to sovereignty. It includes economic future and stability not only for the Philippines but for several countries. That is why the Chinese gov't are so atat about the Spratlys. They want to take the "short cut" to being a world power unlike the US. One has to remember that prior to the Cold War and bombing of Pearl harbor, the US had an isolationist policy. With China, they just deliberately intend to dominate and control through trade and politics and in the future, they will not hesitate to use military force

Mercato

June 14th, 2011, 06:00 PM

stop talking smack before you get your ass wholped bro. you might regret this in the event of a Chinese invasion. you know well enough that if your shoeless army can evict the jet-equiped armed forces of the KMT off to Formosa, you know you're beast.hmmm, they might be the proverbial Lion on Land just like Hitler was, but also like Hitler they are still cowards in the water vis-a-vis the United States or Russia. I think I had posted a March article from a Russian govt site that Russia has every intention of remaining a Pacific power (and it was aimed at that Chinese buildup mind you). ;)

But notwithstanding a hypothetical invasion, weren't we taught in school these famous lines???? ;) "Give me Liberty, or give me Death!" is a quotation attributed to Patrick Henry from a speech he made to the Virginia Convention. Indeed, weren't we supposed to learn from our founding fathers? ;)

Nabartek

June 14th, 2011, 06:08 PM

I think it is high time we change the last line of our national anthem

Ang mamatay ng dahil sa yo --> very pessimistic and passive

How about this:

Ang PUMATAY ng dahil sa'yo :lol:

Nabartek

June 14th, 2011, 06:12 PM

It would appear that Malacanang, in the face of China's aggressive posturings, is floating the idea that the US has commitments towards our country in case hostilities flare up between the two countries. The US Embassy spokesperson just shot that idea down.

This is very embarrassing for Malacanang.

One has to remember that the one speaking is the US ambassador not the US president. So what the ambassador says does not necessarily reflect what the US will stand for. :D

xxxriainxxx

June 14th, 2011, 06:12 PM

I think it is high time we change the last line of our national anthem

Ang mamatay ng dahil sa yo --> very pessimistic and passive

How about this:

Ang PUMATAY ng dahil sa'yo :lol:

I heard that already in one of those left leaning group marches back in my uni days.

xxxriainxxx

June 14th, 2011, 06:13 PM

One has to remember that the one speaking is the US ambassador not the US president. So what the ambassador says does not necessarily reflect what the US will stand for. :D

The ambassador basically reflects what the country he/she represents think. That's why he/she is the ambassador- kumbaga representante ng bansa.

Nabartek

June 14th, 2011, 06:16 PM

This is what boggles me. Filipinos even have engineers who worked for Boeing as aircraft design engineers. And also, why can't the Philippines start developing its own missile technology? The government can start by pooling resources first, like inviting great thinkers in the industry, and come up with projects or what have you, and ask the USA to assist or advice. They have to start somewhere or the country will be left to the dogs.

It is because the government would rather send them abroad than hire them and give them a job. OFW money keeps our economy afloat...very short-sighted government solution...

To think of it, Engineering is quite a popular major.

Nabartek

June 14th, 2011, 06:18 PM

The ambassador basically reflects what the country he/she represents think. That's why he/she is the ambassador- kumbaga representante ng bansa.

Representative. But it does not mean it is what the US government will do

Washington: We will not side with any country but we want peaceful resolution
US Ambassador: we will side by the Phils

In that scenario, what Washington says will weigh more.

xxxriainxxx

June 14th, 2011, 06:33 PM

Representative. But it does not mean it is what the US government will do

Washington: We will not side with any country but we want peaceful resolution
US Ambassador: we will side by the Phils

In that scenario, what Washington says will weigh more.

The ambassador will only release a statement when it had been cleared with his/her leader. Remember, the ultimate architect of a country's foreign policy is its leader.

Yre

June 14th, 2011, 06:45 PM

Why are you still guessing when he already explicitly said what he wanted to say? And that is that.

I don't get you, it was towards rainxxx(sp?) i said it and i thought i was quite explicit already by adding the sentence "leave the dying part to the other side". But then let's leave it at that, no sense arguing more about it..

I thought I already posted an article about cyber warfare some pages back? Cyber warfare, because it is new, falls under the category nonconventional.

Gmaer had already provided one hint. If the Vietnamese can produce hackers aimed at Chinese warships, can’t the Philippines do the same?

Yes i agree it can be considered unconventional but hack a warship? Never thought warship is being controlled remotely now...galing siguro sa toys-r-us yan...

1. Didn’t the Philippines produce one young lad who scared the living daylights of the entire world at the turn of the century 2000 with his Love Bug virus? I am sure there are a thousand more like him out there. How did Will Smith in Independence Day bring down a vastly superior Alien invading force? Was it not through cyber warfare, and one virus?

I don't know why you cited that movie you almost shot down your argument with the pinoy who unleashed the script. It is also highly debatable he is a true hacker who created that script since a hacker doesn't get caught immediately by using an assigned school computer to release a malicious script. I say it was plain idiocy on his part so don't make him an example also.

2. Is it not so that the terrain of Palawan is heavily forested and easy to camouflage maritime guerilla bases? Is it not so that logistically speaking, Palawan can provide far better logistical support precisely because it is sooooooooooooooo near the Spratlys?

You are assuming a full scale war where invading forces (the chinese) will land on Philippines shores. They only want to annex those rocks and islets and not the whole Philippines! The chinese are not that stupid, you seem to be implying China is going to start WW3 by fully challenging another superpower who has an MDT with us.

3. Is it not so that poorly equipped Somali pirates are giving the modern navies of the world a big headache? Is it not so that our very own Abu Sayyaf had been known to embark on similar acts of piracy? If a renegade rebel force can engage in piracy, then why not the AFP? But “piracy” with a purpose, a maritime guerilla purpose aimed at a foreign invader.

What? You are now comparing a commercial ship being harassed by pirates the same as badgering a fully armed warship? Where in hell these Somali pirates tried to hijack a destroyer? The reason the modern navies is having a headache is because they are not the target as these pirates steers away whenever they see them warships! Do you think during a war an approaching unidentified seacraft doesn't get immediately obliterated by a warship?

Please try to make more sense...

4. One forumer @askal here I remember posted a youtube vid about Nazi stealth technology which was 60 years old already. The materials used by the Nazis might seem crude to today’s youngster pundits but by jove, they were ingenious. They used wood! And they designed the flying wing aircraft to be “invisible” to radar. I am not suggesting building the B2 bomber. But stealth technology can also be applied to ships and smaller seacraft. How about fast moving stealth technology speedboats, kayaks, canoes or any smaller craft that can approach enemy vessels at night and plant a plastic explosive device like what Al Qaeda used on the USS Cole in Yemen? Then disappear in the thick jungles of Palawan? All using wood which is abundant in the Philippines?

This as i said is only applicable if there is a full scale war happening and not only on a particular area being contested.

5. If there are existing Philippine garrisons in the Spratlys, how about them mining the area so that approaching Chinese vessels will hit the sea mines and explode?

And make that particular area dangerous to all navigators and when i mean all, friends or foe alike? Or you are assuming a full scale war is really going to happen?

6. Is it not possible to build cheaper drones and base them in Puerto Princesa or again in jungle bases? How about launching killer drones, Philippine made, against enemy ships? Drones which are undetectable using wood or material that radar cannot detect?

7. If we run out of bombs, how about loading the drones with African killer bees so that even if the drone doesn’t do much damage, the African killer bees will wreak havoc on the entire crew of any Chinese vessel?

Gentlemen, the Somali pirates, the Abu Sayyaf and their Al Qaeda Yemeni elders had shown us that unconventional warfare is still possible at sea. All it takes is a little more imagination and especially faith. Our big advantage is we have the Philippine Carrier Palawan so near the Spratlys for logistical support and a thousand hiding places.

damn...i hate repeating myself...you are assuming too much.
But yes i agree with you all of it are plausible IF and only IF a full scale war between 2 nations ensue but then once that happens, don't assume we are going to be alone in that fight! Didn't you read some of the other posts here by other forumers?

P.S. I forgot to mention a li'l somethin about Vietnam. She actually has an added headache because she has to fight a war both on land and at sea. The war being stoked by China is happening at sea because Chinese ships are cutting underwater Vietnamese cables. That's one thing admirable about the Vietnamese, they are a no nonsense, practical people. And they do not bow down to anyone, not like some Filipinos who're already afraid to lose investment money. Is there a price to freedom? How much is self respect worth? FYI, economic domination is also another type of unconventional warfare.

Who said the filipinos are bowing to anyone? Which filipinos are afraid losing investment money when as per CB data, we never received during the last couple of years a single yuan by way of direct investment from the chinese so why be afraid on something that does not exist?

The last time i checked, it was during GMA's administration who has tried to sell us off to the chinese, maybe you should check it out too who is trying to sell our freedom.

Nabartek

June 14th, 2011, 06:50 PM

The ambassador will only release a statement when it had been cleared with his/her leader. Remember, the ultimate architect of a country's foreign policy is its leader.

Not always. Washington's statement does not coincide with the US Ambassadors statement.

Washington policy: side with no one
US Ambassador: We will side with the PHL.

I guess the US ambassador is just trying to please Phil politicians since there is a conflict on OFFICIAL US policy on Spratlys and what the US Ambassador has been saying. It is not like that the US Ambassador needs 2/3 votes from the House and the go signal from the president to release a statement.

On the other hand, the Phil media could be exaggerating on the US Ambassador's statement

Yre

June 14th, 2011, 06:50 PM

The ambassador will only release a statement when it had been cleared with his/her leader. Remember, the ultimate architect of a country's foreign policy is its leader.

Exacto!

xxxriainxxx

June 14th, 2011, 06:56 PM

Not always. Washington's statement does not coincide with the US Ambassadors statement.

Washington policy: side with no one
US Ambassador: We will side with the PHL.

I guess the US ambassador is just trying to please Phil politicians. It is not like that the US Ambassador needs 2/3 votes from the House and the go signal from the president to release a statement.

The US Ambassador reports to the Head of the State Department (Hillary Clinton) and the President. No. It doesn't needs approval from the Congress but it does need approval from the President especially on matters of critical importance.

If an Ambassador contradicts the President, he or she will be immediately be censured or worse, recalled from his/her posting.

If you carefully read between the lines, Washington's message coincides with the Ambassadors' message. It does not contradict.

Nabartek

June 14th, 2011, 07:06 PM

The US Ambassador reports to the Head of the State Department (Hillary Clinton) and the President. No. It doesn't needs approval from the Congress but it does need approval from the President especially on matters of critical importance.

If an Ambassador contradicts the President, he or she will be immediately be censured or worse, recalled from his/her posting.

If you carefully read between the lines, Washington's message coincides with the Ambassadors' message. It does not contradict.

The issue here is their official policy, status quo. Although there are US politicians urging to do something about the tension, it is not the official US policy. Plus the State Department is not Washington. The State Department only implements the law and policies Washington create. Example: Clinton wants UNCLOS ratified; Washington does NOT (at least the Senate and the House, it won't reach the President if not ratified by the Senate and Congress, anyway).

xxxriainxxx

June 14th, 2011, 07:07 PM

The sea lanes on the West Philippine Sea is an economic inasmuch that it is a geopolitical issue. Freedom of navigation must be ensured. Russia, US, Japan and other countries cannot let the Chinese control it. That would be disastrous - if that happens, the balance of power will definitely tilt heavily to Beijing. The world will be an entire Han empire. That's scary.

xxxriainxxx

June 14th, 2011, 07:11 PM

The issue here is their official policy, status quo. Although there are US politicians urging to do something about the tension, it is not the official US policy. Plus the State Department is not Washington. The State Department only implements the law and policies Washington create. Example: Clinton wants UNCLOS ratified; Washington does NOT (at least the Senate and the House, it won't reach the President if not ratified by the Senate and Congress, anyway).

The US official foreign policy comes from POTUS through the State Department. It's as official as it gets. As for ratification of treaties, you are mistaking an Ambassador's statement into treaties that were not even ratified.That's a totally different story. What I am saying is that the White House stand is expressed by its ambassador.

Anyway, gotta sleep na. Goodnight.

Mercato

June 14th, 2011, 07:14 PM

I don't get you, it was towards rainxxx(sp?) i said it and i thought i was quite explicit already by adding the sentence "leave the dying part to the other side". But then let's leave it at that, no sense arguing more about it.. Patton already said it 60 years ago, you clearly said you were still guessing. The post is there for all the world to see.
Yes i agree it can be considered unconventional but hack a warship? Never thought warship is being controlled remotely now...galing siguro sa toys-r-us yan...Clearly you have not read the link of gmaer. Learn to read before you yak your mouth off. The idea did not come from me.
I don't know why you cited that movie you almost shot down your argument with the pinoy who unleashed the script. It is also highly debatable he is a true hacker who created that script since a hacker doesn't get caught immediately by using an assigned school computer to release a malicious script. I say it was plain idiocy on his part so don't make him an example also. Who said I was talking about the movie? I was talkin about a world wide incident in the year 1999-2000. I am not privy to any of your local movies, mind you. And the “idiot” I heard was given a high paying job somewhere in the United States.
You are assuming a full scale war where invading forces (the chinese) will land on Philippines shores. They only want to annex those rocks and islets and not the whole Philippines! The chinese are not that stupid, you seem to be implying China is going to start WW3 by fully challenging another superpower who has an MDT with us. Where did I say that in my reply to you?
What? You are now comparing a commercial ship being harassed by pirates the same as badgering a fully armed warship? Where in hell these Somali pirates tried to hijack a destroyer? The reason the modern navies is having a headache is because they are not the target as these pirates steers away whenever they see them warships! Do you think during a war an approaching unidentified seacraft doesn't get immediately obliterated by a warship? Are you a clod or just plain dense? With the present state of the AFP how can you face a frontal Chinese attack? I thought you demanded unconventional warfare, and I had cited to you some examples. If all you care about is being a whining loser, then go hit the road, kid. I see you have nothing to offer but being a defeatist sulker.
Please try to make more sense... I’m afraid I have no time to waste on a plebeian.

This as i said is only applicable if there is a full scale war happening and not only on a particular area being contested.
And make that particular area dangerous to all navigators and when i mean all, friends or foe alike? Or you are assuming a full scale war is really going to happen?
damn...i hate repeating myself...you are assuming too much.
But yes i agree with you all of it are plausible IF and only IF a full scale war between 2 nations ensue but then once that happens, don't assume we are going to be alone in that fight! Didn't you read some of the other posts here by other forumers? I thought you wanted examples of unconventional warfare apart from suicide dolphins. Now that I’ve mentioned some, there you go whining again.

Who said the filipinos are bowing to anyone? Which filipinos are afraid losing investment money when as per CB data, we never received during the last couple of years a single yuan by way of direct investment from the chinese so why be afraid on something that does not exist?

The last time i checked, it was during GMA's administration who has tried to sell us off to the chinese, maybe you should check it out too who is trying to sell our freedom. I POSTED that article about GMA and the ZTE. Don’t lecture me, kiddo, if you’re trying to portray yourself as a know it all pundit. Go ask Professor Diokno, yonder at the Economy/ Executive Thread. He claims you got loads of investment from the Chinese.

Clearly you disagree with everything about unconventional warfare and you have nothing else to offer except criticisms and whining. Since we cannot also win a conventional warfare, we might as well all pack up our bags and go home. :lol: :lol: :rofl:

P.S. But that is exactly what an agent of the People's Republic would want, wouldn't he? Pandemonium... ;) yeah, the enemy within. ajajaja :lol: :lol:

Nabartek

June 14th, 2011, 07:18 PM

The US official foreign policy comes from POTUS through the State Department. It's as official as it gets. As for ratification of treaties, you are mistaking an Ambassador's statement into treaties that were not even ratified.That's a totally different story. What I am saying is that the White House stand is expressed by its ambassador.

Anyway, gotta sleep na. Goodnight.

Not exactly. Remember, Washington is not just the White House

White house: FOR immigration reform
Washington: stalling the Dream Act

US foreign policy are determined by the laws that Congress and the Senate passes and EO's or the war powers by the President.

Yre

June 14th, 2011, 07:28 PM

Yre

June 14th, 2011, 07:51 PM

Patton already said it 60 years ago, you clearly said you were still guessing. The post is there for all the world to see.

Damn, don't you understand i was referring to xxrianxx when i said to leave the dying part on the enemies and not on himself? Which part was i talking about Patton? Do you even know what you are talking about?

Clearly you have not read the link of gmaer. Learn to read before you yak your mouth off. The idea did not come from me.

Wow, now blaming other people after mouthing him off...funny...yeah your post is there for the world to see...:bash:

Who said I was talking about the movie? I was talkin about a world wide incident in the year 1999-2000. I am not privy to any of your local movies, mind you. And the “idiot” I heard was given a high paying job somewhere in the United States.

Again what? Now you deny you have indeed cited a movie where (jeff?) hacked an alien spaceship with a virus he had written in an alien language??? Are you having some temporary amnesia here:lol:
And the so-called hacker, can you please provide a reliable news, link or whatever that what you are saying is true he has a high paying job now due to his unleashing a malicious script. For all we know, he might be there in the US but in jail since the Phils. doesn't have the cybercrime law yet at that time but which the US already have.

Where did I say that in my reply to you?
Are you a clod or just plain dense? With the present state of the AFP how can you face a frontal Chinese attack? I thought you demanded unconventional warfare, and I had cited to you some examples. If all you care about is being a whining loser, then go hit the road, kid. I see you have nothing to offer but being a defeatist sulker.
I’m afraid I have no time to waste on a plebeian.

Wow, you have the nerve to call me a kid when it's you who is acting it? :lol:
When did I demanded an unconventional warfare or YOU are just so plainly dense you don't understand a single word i said? I was even constantly shooting that idea and here you are offering it and now it is me who is demanding it?????:bash:

I thought you wanted examples of unconventional warfare apart from suicide dolphins. Now that I’ve mentioned some, there you go whining again.

oh sh!t, you clearly did not understand what i'm saying....

I POSTED that article about GMA and the ZTE. Don’t lecture me, kiddo, if you’re trying to portray yourself as a know it all pundit. Go ask Professor Diokno, yonder at the Economy/ Executive Thread. He claims you got loads of investment from the Chinese.

Huh? Are you high, drunk or just sleepy now?

Clearly you disagree with everything about unconventional warfare and you have nothing else to offer except criticisms and whining. Since we cannot also win a conventional warfare, we might as well all pack up our bags and go home. :lol: :lol: :rofl:

P.S. But that is exactly what an agent of the People's Republic would want, wouldn't he? Pandemonium... ;) yeah, the enemy within. ajajaja :lol: :lol:

What again!! first you said above i'm demanding unconventional warfare and now i'm disagreeing on it, are you having some kind of "lucid interval" :lol: here or you are just drunk? :lol:

I think it's way past your bedtime now you can't seem to make up your mind you are contradicting even yourself..:lol:

P.S. I just noticed now you are accusing me an agent of PRC, damn...:ohno:
You know what's wrong with you, some of you thinks a shooting war is damn too easy just like in the movies or computer games. Ang tatapang nyo ewan ko lang kung marunong nga ba kayong humawak ng baril.

Naririndi ako sa mga pinagsasabi ninyo dito, atat na atat makipag barilan agad kaso hindi naman kayo ang makikipagbarilan, kumbaga mga keyboard warriors ba. Ewan ko lang kun makakaranas kayo ng giyera tignan ko lang kun di kayo tatawag ng mommy!!!

Subukan ninyo muna mag volunteer sa Army at sumabak hanapin ang mga abu sayaff para malasap ninyo kun gaano kasarap makipagbarilan na totoong baril at bala ang lumilipad. Baka ma high pa kayo sa pulbura. Pagkatapos niyan, diyan kayo magsalita kung madali lang ba makipag giyera.

Wala akong sinabi na sumurender tayo, ang pinapahiwatig ko lang isipin ninyong maiigi mga pinagsasabi ninyo dito kung tama ba o nakakatulong sa sitwasyon. Dami ko nang nababasa mga racist comment patungkol sa mga tsino na hindi naman akma at para bang tayo pa naghahamon ngayon dahil sa akala natin eh nandiyan kaagad si uncle sam.

Mercato

June 14th, 2011, 08:06 PM

Behold, the only viable and critical solution for agent Fu Manchu is to let go of the Spratlys and accede to Beijing's demands. All questions and solutions he seemingly asks for he will twist around and convolute everything because that is the job of a saboteur. :lol:

I guess that's what he meant..you can leave the 'dying' part to the other side..

My main issue is how are we going to do unconventional warfare out in the sea? Hire mercenary dolphins?? If you have no intention of seeking answers, then do not ask the questions. :)

Damn, don't you understand i was referring to xxrianxx when i said to leave the dying part on the enemies and not on himself? Which part was i talking about Patton? Do you even know what you are talking about?

Wow, now blaming other people after mouthing him off...funny...yeah your post is there for the world to see...:bash:

Again what? Now you deny you have indeed cited a movie where (jeff?) hacked an alien spaceship with a virus he had written in an alien language??? Are you having some temporary amnesia here:lol:
And the so-called hacker, can you please provide a reliable news, link or whatever that what you are saying is true he has a high paying job now due to his unleashing a malicious script. For all we know, he might be there in the US but in jail since the Phils. doesn't have the cybercrime law yet but which the US have.

Wow, you have the nerve to call me a kid when it's you who is acting it? :lol:
When did I demanded an unconventional warfare or YOU are just so plainly dense you don't understand a single word i said? I was even constantly shooting that idea and here you are offering it and now it is me who is demanding it?????:bash:

oh sh!t, you clearly did not understand what i'm saying....

Huh? Are you high, drunk or just sleepy now?

What again!! first you said above i'm demanding unconventional warfare and now i'm disagreeing on it, are you having some kind of "lucid interval" :lol: here or you are just drunk? :lol:

I think it's way past your bedtime now you can't seem to make up your mind you are contradicting even yourself..:lol:

I'm afraid you're the one contradicting yourself and you have no intention at all about reading gma'ers links because that is not your prime directive. :)
Can't wait to see if any of those involved countries will attempt to hack at each other's missile weapons targeting and fire control system... that would be a disastrous moment if that ever happens!

Source: https://pakistanpal.wordpress.com/tag/indian-missile-system-record-hack/

Nabartek

June 14th, 2011, 08:19 PM

I don't understand why some of you guys don't get it. If china indeed tries to assert forcefully and occupy those islands, we will be alone in defending that or taking it back. Don't ever expect the US will do that for us like some kind of big brother defending his younger brother's lollipop taken by a bully. Nope, i don't think it will happen.

So please you people who keeps talking about hacking, wooden drones, unconventional warfare in the sea...please stop, it’s only good on computer games where you can reset the game if you get beaten or invoke god mode.

What i think will playout though is if indeed a mini war ensues on those islets and gets dragged out up to our shores and China invade us, then that's the time the US will enter the fray. I doubt china would like that as it will be giving the US the perfect excuse to declare war on them, no need to drum up their people with made up WMD's or terroristic act since that's what the MDT is for, the Philippines doesn't even need to invoke it, it will be automatic.

I guess the US will be very happy too declaring a war on China as it may mean writting off all their debts on China. What a perfect excuse...but we are the pawns here, just bear it in mind.

What i'm afraid though is we might get sold again just like the spanish-american war where we got sold for 20million$ to the US.

Please people, think! Critically….

The US declaring war on China is too risky. Besides, the last time the US DECLARED a war was in WWII. One, China is in the permanent UN council. Two, China has numerous nuclear bombs. Three, they are rapidly increasing budget on military. If the US will be happy to declare war on China, would it not have done so with North Korea?

This is not a black and white situation and it is not even like the Spanish-American war.

Last thing, the China issue is not solely a Philippine-China issue. Many countries, in the bigger picture, an involved. Vietnam and Japan have the same problem with Chinese aggression. Didn't China scold Vietnam, too lately? An alliance is possible.

Your last statement, it seems that you assume that people who have a different opinion from you is not critically thinking.

Arvor

June 14th, 2011, 08:24 PM

China 'will not use force' in South China Sea disputes
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13759253

China has said it will not resort to the use of force to resolve maritime border disputes in the South China Sea.

Several Asian nations claim territory in the South China Sea, which includes important shipping routes and may contain oil and gas deposits.

On Monday, Vietnam staged live-fire drills after weeks of rising tensions between the two nations.

Vietnam has also issued a decree specifying who would be exempt from military call-up in a time of war.

"We will not resort to the use of force or the threat of force," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei said.

He condemned any action that would exacerbate the dispute, and urged those involved to "do more that is beneficial to regional peace and stability".

As well as Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan also have rival claims in the area.

As chair of the regional grouping Asean last year, Hanoi actively promoted a multilateral approach to the problem. However, Beijing says it prefers to negotiate with individual states separately.

Responsibility

In an apparent message to China that Vietnam is willing to stand its ground, the Vietnamese government issued a decree earlier specifying which people would be exempt from military service during a time of war.

The decree lists eight examples where Vietnamese citizens would not be obliged to join a military call-up. They include people holding senior positions in state organisations and those providing essential services such as lighthouse operators.

The BBC's South East Asia correspondent Rachel Harvey says the significance lies not in the exemptions themselves but in the timing of the decree.

The news comes a day after the Vietnamese navy conducted exercises it described as routine, but which at least one Chinese newspaper interpreted as a deliberate show of force.

Vietnam is engaged in a renewed row with China over sovereignty of two groups of islands in the South China Sea; the Spratly and Paracel islands.

Tensions have escalated following two separate confrontations involving Vietnamese and Chinese boats in recent weeks.

In a thinly veiled reference to Hanoi, Mr Hong implied Vietnam was to blame for the recent row.

"Some country took unilateral actions to impair China's sovereignty and maritime rights and interests, and released groundless and irresponsible remarks with the attempt to expand and complicate the issue of the South China Seas," Mr Hong said.

"This is where the problem lies."

The US has also expressed concern about China's rising naval ambitions in the region.

On Sunday, the Japan-based carrier USS George Washington left port for deployment in the region, which is almost certain to include the South China Sea.

Yre

June 14th, 2011, 08:26 PM

Kintoy

June 14th, 2011, 08:30 PM

GMA's betrayal, explained:

Gov't fixing damage of Arroyo-China deal

China’s six recent incursions in the Recto (Reed) Bank, off western Palawan, were not isolated incidents. They coincided with, and so were likely Chinese reactions to, Philippine sovereign acts in those territorial waters. In January Phl began overdue development of oil and gas finds in that undisputed part of the South China Sea. In March Phl intensified coast guarding against alien vessels and poachers. In April Phl protested in the UN China’s “nine-dash line” claim over most of the South China Sea, especially as it encroaches on the Recto Bank.

These things Phl actually should have done years ago. Foreign and Filipino petroleum firms had long completed explorations of the Recto Bank and were ready for extractions. Periodic absence of Phl patrols from the area was taken to mean as abandonment. As for China’s assertion over the 3.5-million square-kilometer South Sea, international law and concord with ASEAN were breached. China’s unilateral declaration of May 7, 2009, covered the Paracels, which Vietnam also claims, and the Spratlys, which Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and PH occupy in part. More than that, it included the Recto Bank, which is but 80 miles from Palawan but 500 miles distant from China. Vietnam and Malaysia objected the very next day. Indonesia, though not a South China Sea claimant, filed protest last year. Phl, closest of all to the Spratlys where it holds nine islets and acknowledged owner of Recto Bank, tarried. Only now is Phl moving.

Phl is trying to catch up, Strategic Planning and Communications Sec. Ricky Carandang confirmed. And there’s a reason for it. Phl in fact is repairing the damage inflicted by the past administration’s reckless ties with China. Specifically, he mentioned the joint marine seismic undertaking (JMSU).

The JMSU is said to be the most shameless act of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. (Opinionists stated during its exposé that it overshadowed her 2004 presidential election rigging and her abetting of jueteng vice lords.) In late 2004 Arroyo authorized the Philippine National Oil Co. CEO, only two days on the job, to sign with the Chinese counterpart a survey of the South China Sea. Ostensibly it was in keeping with the 2002 ASEAN-China accord of cooperation in disputed waters. There was a catch. Four-fifths of the 142,886 square kilometers to be explored were not in the disputed Spratlys, but within Phl’s 200-mile exclusive economic zone under the UN Law of the Sea. One-sixth was within internationally recognized Phl boundaries, in the Recto Reef near Palawan’s Malampaya natural gas field. By labeling the coverage as “disputed,” Arroyo in effect invited China to lay claim to it. Which China did, through its “nine-dash line” declaration of 2009.

The JMSU illicitly was kept under wraps by virtue of a non-disclosure proviso. Not even the protests of Vietnam, which belatedly was taken in March 2005 as third party, made the Arroyo regime talk. Only at the height of congressional questioning of the Chinese-funded NBN-ZTE deal was it exposed, in March 2008. It turned out that the JMSU constituted not only treason in giving away Philippine territory and natural resources, but also plunder. China gladly lent Phl $2 billion a year up to 2010 when Arroyo stepped down. From 2004 to 2010 Arroyo and subalterns signed 65 projects with China, all financed by padded loans. (Whistle-blowers like Jun Lozada said each Chinese deal had at least 20-percent kickback.) Among these were for the Northrail, Southrail, NBN, and mysterious projects like the lease of a million hectares of farmland, and the award to telecom firm ZTE of gold mining rights in Mount Diwalwal and North Davao.

Lawyers and diplomats denounced the JMSU as unconstitutional. It broke the Charter provision against exploration and exploitation of natural resources by aliens. It was in the form of an international treaty, yet was never submitted to the Senate for ratification. Arroyo released $5 million a year as Phl contribution to the three-year seismic study, with no appropriation from the House of Reps. If plunder was tough to prove in the $400-million kickbacks from the $2-billion annual loans, there still was graft. For, the JMSU was grossly and manifestly disadvantageous to the Phl government. Phl never got a copy of the JMSU final report, having failed under another onerous proviso to renew by July 2008. The JMSU also damaged PH ties with ASEAN, for it broke ranks with the members instead of abiding by the pact to deal as one with China. Arroyo escaped questioning because protected by bribed allies in Congress.

At any rate, part of today’s damage repairing is the buildup of coastal security, Carandang said. Instead of buying from the US the usual military materiel for ground warfare, the Armed Forces are talking of radars and such. Phl also has protested China’s six military incursions in the Recto Bank, in a pitch to be heard worldwide. Ruffled ties with ASEAN are being ironed out, to resume the linked-arms approach to China’s expansionism. At the same time, China is being assured that Phl, while asserting its ownership of the Recto Bank, is employing diplomacy and economics to ease tensions over the Spratlys. And the government is conducting an information drive to explain to Filipinos that the Recto Bank is indisputably theirs. Part of this precisely is the use of the local title Recto instead of the British exploration’s Reed Bank. And the return of the term Western Philippine Seas to refer to that part of the South China Sea within Philippine territory.

http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=696248&publicationSubCategoryId=64

Nabartek

June 14th, 2011, 08:32 PM

China 'will not use force' in South China Sea disputes
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13759253

What China says is not what China does. In the mid 90's they said the structures they were erecting were for fishing which turned out to be military post. In additon, didn't they kill Vietnamese sailors in the 80's? They used brute force to take over the Vietnamese occupied Paracel islands

Would you still believe them? Not me.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13761711

Mercato

June 14th, 2011, 08:39 PM

^^^^ one need look no further than the recent events. :)
According to Chinese definitions (and their agents here of course ;)), these actions below do NOT constitute use of force. :lol: :lol:

Philippines says China violated its seas
(AFP) – Jun 4, 2011

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iDj9U3_1_3hIohS601QUVVKEXJOg?docId=CNG.4110b3e99956903bdf5fbd9d268ff9c0.291

MANILA — The Philippines accused China on Saturday of undermining peace and stability in Asia by allegedly sending naval vessels to intimidate rival claimants in disputed sections of the South China Sea.

Manila had protested over incidents in February to May, when the Chinese navy allegedly opened fire on Filipino fishermen, intimidated a Philippine oil exploration ship and put posts and a buoy in Philippine-claimed areas.

"The Philippines noted that these actions of Chinese vessels hamper the normal and legitimate fishing activities of the Filipino fishermen in the area and undermines the peace and stability of the region," Manila said.

Read more...

Yre

June 14th, 2011, 08:47 PM

The US declaring war on China is too risky. Besides, the last time the US DECLARED a war was in WWII. One, China is in the permanent UN council. Two, China has numerous nuclear bombs. Three, they are rapidly increasing budget on military. If the US will be happy to declare war on China, would it not have done so with North Korea?

This is not a black and white situation and it is not even like the Spanish-American war.

Last thing, the China issue is not solely a Philippine-China issue. Many countries, in the bigger picture, an involved. Vietnam and Japan have the same problem with Chinese aggression. Didn't China scold Vietnam, too lately? An alliance is possible.

Your last statement, it seems that you assume that people who have a different opinion from you is not critically thinking.

Did you miss the part where i said if china invades us, then that's the time the MDT takes effect?

Regarding Nokor, why would US declares war on China with NoKor's antics? There is no threat against the US from NoKor and SoKor is not being invaded by their northern brothers also so what legitimate reason would the US have? NoKor is even a big problem for China itself.

Yes i agree this is not exactly a black and white issue, what i'm trying to just shot down are just some of the forumers are too eager to get into a shooting war as if this is very easy to do and anyone who differs an opinion is either an agent of PRC (me?), not so nationalistic, would like to surrender immediately or just doesn't care. Gusto mo ba, sunod lang ng sunod lahat ng forumers dito with their ideas na makipaghamunan sa China?

The reason why i said some here is not critically thinking is that they are letting their emotions ride them over. Sinabi ko bang kailangan mag agree kayo sa lahat ng sinabi ko? I was also just expressing my opinion just as you people here that's why i'm asking questions which sometime i admit i do by way of sarcasm.

gmaer

June 15th, 2011, 02:24 AM

What China says is not what China does. In the mid 90's they said the structures they were erecting were for fishing which turned out to be military post. In additon, didn't they kill Vietnamese sailors in the 80's? They used brute force to take over the Vietnamese occupied Paracel islands

Would you still believe them? Not me.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13761711

Quotations from Chairman Mao Zedong (The Little Red Book - 1964)
枪杆子里面出政权

Every Communist must grasp the truth: Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.

Chapter 5

My main issue is how are we going to do unconventional warfare out in the sea? Hire mercenary dolphins??

Attract the enemy to come to shore and attack them from there!

5. If there are existing Philippine garrisons in the Spratlys, how about them mining the area so that approaching Chinese vessels will hit the sea mines and explode?

The Chinese Navy South Sea Fleet doesn't have minesweepers! :banana:

6. Is it not possible to build cheaper drones and base them in Puerto Princesa or again in jungle bases? How about launching killer drones, Philippine made, against enemy ships? Drones which are undetectable using wood or material that radar cannot detect?

You can use RC helicopter/airplane toys for improvised killer drones. :cheers:

7. If we run out of bombs, how about loading the drones with African killer bees so that even if the drone doesn’t do much damage, the African killer bees will wreak havoc on the entire crew of any Chinese vessel?

Very creative biological warfare! Pinoy-style :lol:

Yes i agree it can be considered unconventional but hack a warship? Never thought warship is being controlled remotely now...galing siguro sa toys-r-us yan...

The weapons system on modern warships like the guided missiles are computerized and are remotely controlled through a war room located under deck. The 76mm Oto Melara gun for example is not operated inside its gun turret but in a remote location inside the ship. A CIWS on the other hand is a standalone computer-driven gun platform, the only role of humans is to turn it on/off, reload its ammunition (when it runs out of ammo), and maintain it (updating the software, cleaning the hardware, etc.).

And make that particular area dangerous to all navigators and when i mean all, friends or foe alike? Or you are assuming a full scale war is really going to happen?

Make our allies aware of the mining plan and let our enemies guess them like what the Japanese Imperial Navy did in the beginning of WW2 before they attacked Pearl Harbor, the US Military Intelligence keeps on guessing where the hell the Japanese aircraft carriers were going to after spotting them leaving their home ports? It was already too late for them to find out the truth because Japanase warplanes have already struck their Hawaiian bases.

s40

June 15th, 2011, 02:51 AM

gusto niyo ng secret weapon..........

eto pakita niyo sa CHina I'm sure matakot na yan sa Pinas........ meron tayong 50 million na mahirap, kapag nakita yan ng China sabihin nila....... "sheeeeeeiiiiiiiiiiiitttttttttttt so many poor people, no invasion we'll lose more money feeding them and cause humanitarian crisis"...........
http://globalhealthdisparities.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/best-dump1.jpg

gmaer

June 15th, 2011, 03:05 AM

'Philippine Air Force has had no fighter jets since 2005' - Oban (http://interaksyon.com/article/5541/philippine-air-force-has-had-no-fighter-jets-since-2005---oban)
12-Jun-11, 9:55 PM | Ben Cal, Philippine News Agency

MANILA - Amid rising tensions with China over the disputed Spratly Islands, the head of the Philippine military raises the following stark reminder: Since 2005 the Philippines has had no jet fighters to protect the country’s airspace.

Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) chief of staff Gen. Eduardo Oban Jr., in an interview with the Philippines News Agency, confirmed the predicament of the Philippine Air Force (PAF) - that it has had no supersonic jet fighter interceptors since its F-5 jets were phased out six years ago as obsolete.

“Our pilots have no more fighter jets to scramble, unlike before,” Oban, himself a jet pilot, said.

Oban said that the PAF at present has no capability to intercept hostile planes that may intrude into Philippine skies. He added that the PAF also needs to modernize its radar system.

The PAF used to be the No. 1 air force in Southeast Asia after World War II, the AFP chief said, until in the late 1960s it started lagging behind its neighbors in the procurement of new fighter jets.

In the early 1950s, the PAF acquired two squadrons of Sabre jets, the top of the line jet fighters at that time. This was complemented by a squadron of propeller-driven Mustang planes.

In 1965, the Philippines was one of the first countries in the world to acquire from the United States 30 F-5 Freedom fighter jets. In 1979 the country purchased an additonal 25 Crusader jet aircraft also from the U.S.

But over the years, the PAF has found itself depleted of fighter planes.

The last F5 was flown in 2005 before it was decommissioned.

“At present we don’t have any fighter jets,” Oban told the PNA.

Earlier this month, InterAksyon.com also ran an exclusive interview with Philippine Navy Rear Admiral Alex Pama, where it was pointed out how the country's navy, too, was basically making do with meager resources, even in the face of brewing crises - and constant tension - in the South China Sea. (Owing to new tensions with China, the Philippines now refers to the body of water as the "West Philippine Sea".)

Oban noted that the 1995 AFP Modernization Plan was passed by Congress and approved by then President Fidel V. Ramos for the AFP to acquire new planes and armaments. But the 1997 Asian financial crisis dampened the modernization program as the U.S. currency soared to as much as P50 to a dollar. Oban said that when the modernization program was first being drafted, the exchange rate was only one U.S. dollar to P20.

“In fact, we anticipated that by the time we ordered new planes, the exchange rate would be one U.S. dollar to P30, but we were wrong,” Oban added.

Still, Oban said the AFP will continue its modernization program to upgrade the AFP’s capability so it can carry its mandate to protect the sovereignty of the country.

To be delivered in November this year are combat helicopters the PAF has ordered from Poland. Also to be delivered are additional jet trainer planes.

The Philippine Navy has just acquired one Jacinto Class vessel that would boost its capability to patrol the country’s territorial waters.

Oban said that the guidance of Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin is to acquire multi-role fighter planes and helicopters.

He said the AFP prefers to buy brand-new jet fighters rather than second-hand.

The delivery of the aircraft will take at least three years.

When asked what type of jet fighters the Air Force would want, Oban said that is still being studied by the PAF.

There are a variety of jet fighters available in the world market such as the F-14, F-15, F-16, and F-18, all US-made; Kfir jet made by Israel; Tornado jet developed by Britain, Germany and Italy; and the Russian Sokhoi jet fighter, among others.

Sixteen years after the 1995 AFP Modernization Law was passed, the AFP is still struggling to upgrade its equipment, particularly the acquisition of new jet fighters and naval ships.

Oban said that another factor that delayed the modernization plan was the resurgence of insurgency in the late 1990s and early 2000s which the AFP had to shift gear, giving priority to domestic problem and leaving behind the needs for external security.

I wonder where did Oban get the idea that F-14 Tomcats are still available unless Iran is selling theirs due to lack of spare parts? And the Philippine Navy did not acquire one Jacinto class vessel but rather upgraded one Jacinto class corvette and acquired a former USCG Hamilton class cutter (now known as BRP Gregorio Del Pilar) to boost its capability to patrol the country’s territorial waters.

I bet for the KFIR C10, it's in the list! :banana: