Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Chinese actions in the South China Seas

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post
    Good god it is still the 1700's! If no one is there, seize it...

    Finders keepers, losers weepers...

    Possession in 9/10s of the law...

    Are you 10 years old?
    If the law still exists and is accepted by UNCLOs and other bodies, then why not use it.?

    If volcanic or an earthquake through up a small landmass off the coast of say Hawaii, I betcha the Americans would do the same to prevent anyone else from making it a base.

    FYI Britain and British academics back Japanese claims to the Diaoyo island under the guidelines of Terra Nullis. So it is still used in the 21st century.

    For someone who claims to base his posts on facts, you sure are letting yourself down bigtime.

    The Americans asked the British to sanitize Diego Garcia by removing any traces of human population. Isnt that what e of the German Army did during WW2
    Last edited by Funtastic; 11 Oct 18,, 04:04.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post
      Bwahaha

      Obviously you were never a sailor. A ship never overtakes another ship and crosses it's bow suddenly unless it wants to cause something.

      However, a car driver doing this shit is not unknown. I suppose you drive this way.
      The picture does not show the Chinese boat trying to cross the U.S. ship.It could have been the completed final scene of the Chinese boat approching from the port side having given way to the starboard boat andnot crossing the bow of the approching boat. In this situation a turn to port would haveb been the olny option for the PLAN captain as a turn to starboard would have resulted in her hitting the US. Ship. Smart and quick thinking on the part of the Chinese Captain.
      Anyway the front boat's stern was clear of the following boat which was speeding up.You see moves like that in match racing where it is perfectly legal if the front boats stern is clear of the following boat.In pre race manouvring, when one boat causes another boat to back off, it is known as a "slamdunk"

      n this instance the presence of the U.S boat was challenging the Chinese by saying Im here, what you gonna do about it?. Well they got their answer when they got outsailed in a game of chicken and started to bellyache about it. Scorcard in a game of chicken China1 Usa Zip. :)
      Last edited by Funtastic; 10 Oct 18,, 20:42.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
        The point remains that the USN, RN, RAN, RCN, JSDFN, ROCN do not recognize Chinese soverignty over these waters no matter what kind of bellyaching Beijing is squawking. They are not shutting down their weapon systems and in effect telling the Chinese to fuck off.

        The US and others are calling these artifical islands and therefore cannot be used to lay claim to these waters. It's he sys/she says. Since neither the US nor China is going to allow the UNSC to decide the matter. The legality portion is mute. Both sides claim they're right and the bigger guns win and that ain't the Chinese.

        You can do as much wet dreams as you want. Chinese ownership claims are being ignored. Period.
        The Legailty is not mute.not mute. The rights of Terra Nullis are well established under law and China has the same rights to use them.

        All this does is demonostrate the duplicitous nature of the countries involved in FONOPS.
        Japan and Australia are involved because they are vassel states of the U.S. Britains not far behind either. Have you noticed that theres a couple of hundred other countries who are not running FONOPS.

        Of course the ROC would oppose the PRC claim because they have their own 11 dash claim or have you convienietly forgotten that

        In 1947 the US asked Chiang to submit his 9/11 dot claim.There was no diagreement from any of the major powers of the time. So whats changed.......oh thats right the CCP are now tht government of China......oh thats right, commies are bad.
        Last edited by Funtastic; 10 Oct 18,, 21:07.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Funtastic View Post
          The Legailty is not mute.not mute. The rights of Terra Nullis are well established under law and China has the same rights to use them.
          Of course it's moot. France and England fought wars all over the world, including North America, simply because they did not recognize Terra Nullis. When you have a hostile power ready to challenge your claims, you better have the firepower to back up your claims. You do not.
          Chimo

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Funtastic View Post
            The picture does not show the Chinese boat trying to cross the U.S. ship.It could have been the completed final scene of the Chinese boat approching from the port side having given way to the starboard boat andnot crossing the bow of the approching boat. In this situation a turn to port would haveb been the olny option for the PLAN captain as a turn to starboard would have resulted in her hitting the US. Ship. Smart and quick thinking on the part of the Chinese Captain.
            Anyway the front boat's stern was clear of the following boat which was speeding up.You see moves like that in match racing where it is perfectly legal if the front boats stern is clear of the following boat.In pre race manouvring, when one boat causes another boat to back off, it is known as a "slamdunk"

            n this instance the presence of the U.S boat was challenging the Chinese by saying Im here, what you gonna do about it?. Well they got their answer when they got outsailed in a game of chicken and started to bellyache about it. Scorcard in a game of chicken China1 Usa Zip. :)
            One picture at the end of things showing the PLAN ship, cutting across the bow of another ship. The U.S ship was the stand on craft. Any ship approaching from the stern or port side the U.S. ship must maintain course and speed as it is the stand on craft. That put the U.S. ship on the starboard side of the PLAN ship which makes the PLAN ship the give way ship if the U.S. ship was overtaking the PLAN ship which wasn't the case. As for your ignorance they are not boats as must would know.

            Ooo, notice your American term "slam dunk." Do you also know the word "toast" as in a small isolate made man island disappearing?

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Funtastic View Post

              The Americans asked the British to sanitize Diego Garcia by removing any traces of human population. Isnt that what the Nazis did?
              Based on your reading out of some web site since you probably weren't alive at the time.

              Moving a population is not the same as removing traces. How many traces have you removed, permanently, over the last 50 years?

              As for your Nazi analogy I wold be very, very careful throwing that term around here.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
                Of course it's moot. France and England fought wars all over the world, including North America, simply because they did not recognize Terra Nullis. When you have a hostile power ready to challenge your claims, you better have the firepower to back up your claims. You do not.
                No, The north american wars was about conquest and colinization.The presence of a indigenous population who fought for either side would have voided any claim of terra nullis. A High court decision in Australia twenty plus yrs ago has led many to belive Cook was wrong to declare claim Australia for Britain citing terra nullis because there existed a indigenous population to whom the land belonged. Terra nullis implies devoid of population and their is no ownership and other things.

                Anyway the concept of was first formly used to settle the disputes in the polar region in the early 20th century.

                So please give me better reason as to why China cannot utilize the concept of Terra Nullis to claim ownership of those island other than "U.S. dont like it and its got better guns planes ships yada yada yada."
                Last edited by Funtastic; 11 Oct 18,, 01:19.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Funtastic View Post
                  If volcanic or an earthquake through up a small landmass off the coast of say Hawaii, I betcha the Americans would do the same to prevent anyone else from making it a base.
                  If within 200 mile EZ zone, of our 50th State, then most likely yes.

                  How many are within 200 miles of your national coastline?

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    [QUOTE=tbm3fan;1046113]
                    Based on your reading out of some web site since you probably weren't alive at the time.
                    Wrong. I was even around when the Americans moved the Population from biki attoll and then nuked the s--t out of it befor allowing the population out of it. Are you suggesting the alternative story is anti american B.s.

                    Moving a population is not the same as removing traces. How many traces have you removed, permanently, over the last 50 years?

                    It was forced removal

                    As for your Nazi analogy I wold be very, very careful throwing that term around here.
                    Sorry Ill see if I can remove it
                    Last edited by Funtastic; 11 Oct 18,, 04:52.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Funtastic View Post
                      No, The north american wars was about conquest and colinization.The presence of a indigenous population who fought for either side would have voided any claim of terra nullis. A High court decision in Australia twenty plus yrs ago has led many to belive Cook was wrong to declare claim Australia for Britain citing terra nullis because there existed a indigenous population to whom the land belonged. Terra nullis implies devoid of population and their is no ownership and other things.
                      Your tap dancing is very impressive. First citing Australia as TN but saying North America isn't. None of this precludes the fact that the European powers fought wars for new lands no matter who planted the flag first. TN alone does not give your sorveringty in perpetuity.

                      Originally posted by Funtastic View Post
                      Anyway the concept of was first formly used to settle the disputes in the polar region in the early 20th century.
                      Backed by military force.

                      Originally posted by Funtastic View Post
                      So please give me better reason as to why China cannot utilize the concept of Terra Nullis to claim ownership of those island other than "U.S. dont like it and its got better guns planes ships yada yada yada."
                      I will give you a big one. Because the Chinese claims the entire area as historically theirs and not because of Terra Nullis. Terra Nullis is frankly moot. It voids China's claims based on history.
                      Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 11 Oct 18,, 01:42.
                      Chimo

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post
                        How many are within 200 miles of your national coastline?
                        Spratly & scarborough are too far


                        Click image for larger version

Name:	spratly.JPG
Views:	2
Size:	121.6 KB
ID:	1477465


                        Scarborough shoal (Seriously? why is there even an argument about this one !!)
                        Click image for larger version

Name:	scarborough shoal.JPG
Views:	2
Size:	117.4 KB
ID:	1477467

                        Paracel is about 220 miles away
                        Click image for larger version

Name:	paracel.JPG
Views:	2
Size:	100.7 KB
ID:	1477466

                        I don't know as yet where those artificial islands are..
                        Last edited by Double Edge; 11 Oct 18,, 02:27.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
                          Your tap dancing is very impressive. First citing Australia as TN but saying North America isn't. None of this precludes the fact that the European powers fought wars for new lands no matter who planted the flag first. TN alone does not give your sorveringty in perpetuity.
                          Thats what I said. TN was not and cannot be a factor in the North American wars of conquest.

                          Backed by military force.

                          I will give you a big one. Because the Chinese claims the entire area as historically theirs and not because of Terra Nullis. Terra Nullis is frankly moot. It voids China's claims based on history.
                          How does it void it. TN and Historical claims are two different things.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post
                            If within 200 mile EZ zone, of our 50th State, then most likely yes.

                            How many are within 200 miles of your national coastline?
                            And if it was outside? Would she claim it under TN?

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post
                              One picture at the end of things showing the PLAN ship, cutting across the bow of another ship. The U.S ship was the stand on craft. Any ship approaching from the stern or port side the U.S. ship must maintain course and speed as it is the stand on craft. That put the U.S. ship on the starboard side of the PLAN ship which makes the PLAN ship the give way ship if the U.S. ship was overtaking the PLAN ship which wasn't the case. As for your ignorance they are not boats as must would know.

                              Ooo, notice your American term "slam dunk." Do you also know the word "toast" as in a small isolate made man island disappearing?
                              Ok smarty. If the difference between boats and ships was size, tonnage and its use, why did the germans and others refer to their submarines as u boats and not U Ships?

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Funtastic View Post
                                How does it void it. TN and Historical claims are two different things.
                                You must be daft. Historic claims means that China owns these waters in the past. New lands means no one has owned these waters before. You either owned it before or you discover land that no one else owned before, including the Chinese.
                                Chimo

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X