Pentagon Press Conference Turns Into Heated Debate Between Top Generals From US And China

Okay, I just call this embarrassing. I found the youtube for the statement as well (the full thing) and it's worth listening to. Particularly from about the 27 minute mark on for a few minutes. That well covers the remarks being made and quoted in the article by the Chinese General.



It's important to note this was said in a joint news conference at the U.S. Pentagon. To my ears, that context alone forms a statement when what he said is heard and considered.

Fang warned that China would respond to any attempts by Vietnam, Japan or other neighbors to assert their own claims over the disputed islands and reefs.

"We do not create trouble but we are not afraid of trouble," Fang said at a Pentagon news conference after meetings with Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

There is one thing to be said for the Chinese, and it's not necessarily a comfortable observation given their history of being the opposite. They are saying what they mean, more than ever.

Fang also made China's case in a separate dispute over disputed reefs and shoals with the Philippines, and accused Japan of reverting to World War II militarism in asserting its claims to disputed uninhabited islands called the Senkaku by Japan and the Diaoyu by China.

Fang said the Japanese claims were also encouraged by the U.S. rebalance of forces. "This is something that we can never agree (upon)," Fang said.

Source

We certainly do live in interesting times, and I'm starting to wonder how much of the good relations between the U.S. and China are based in the perception of the US side. Not necessarily felt anything like the same from theirs?

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

What rebalance of forces?

Lmao.. evidently fang forgot.. everytime china has tangled with vietnam vietnam has sent china packing back home .. chinese commanders on the china / vietnam border are reluctant to tangle with the vietnamese as they know what the outcome would be..

Moral - dont mess with vietnam ..

I found a couple decent headlines to read up on that. It's one of a great many things flying under the radar of clutter in one crisis after another through the media.

Navy: Pacific pivot is the guiding principle

Pacific Pathways: Army prepares new tack for deploying forces in Pacific

Chuck Hagel: The Asia pivot is still on

Yup... It's a real thing. Just not talked about very much. That in itself is interesting.

I found another more current article too. This one came out today, like the thread OP.

Pentagon sending two long-range Global Hawk drones for operations from Japan

It never stops, in one direction or another it seems.

Meh.. let japan rearm ..japan quite capable if had the equipment of handling china ..but nnnooo due to the american occupation japan cant put china back in its place ..

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

We certainly do live in interesting times, and I'm starting to wonder how much of the good relations between the U.S. and China are based in the perception of the US side. Not necessarily felt anything like the same from theirs?

ABSOLUTELY INDEED.

All foreigners are . . . seen first and foremost as . . . NON-CHINESE = BARBARIANS--automatically deficient.

And, they see this as their long overdue CHINESE CENTURY, IF NOT THE CHINESE MILLENIUM.

You can bet they will do everything they can to make it so . . . and they can do a lot . . . regardless of Western perceptions of their capacities, or not.

And, they are certainly artists at putting a smile on virtually anything for any reason they deem worth it.

They are artists at ingratiating and setting up obligation after obligation . . . as well as hundreds of traps within traps . . . somewhat like a Chinese puzzle box.

They are also artists at making Westerners look like the fools they consider them to be.

And then to look down on the Westerners for ALLOWING them to do so.

i got this sneaky sneaky feeling that all this USA russian sword rattling are 2 bullies working together to take the world away from china. if not left in check china could literally OCCUPY THE WORLD lol. they could put more boots on the ground EVERYWHERE then anyone else. that alone is a reason to keep them in check. not to mention THAT THEY WANT TO AND HAVE ACTIVELY BEEN TRYING TO OCCUPY THE WORLD! and that they hate us lol.

the korean war only ended when we threatened china with bombings on chinese soil. That leaves alot of bad feelings IMO, its like the bully just threatened to give you a wedgy but you got a chance to go rearm and come back to deal with the bully.... i see them takin a stab at it someday.

IMO china is the real "enemy" to worry about with the wild card of the islamic nations. russia is a caucasian christian nation that if it comes down to it would more then likely be happy to go shoulder to shoulder with us to rule the world. we work well together, well sorta, hitler got to find out just how formidable the US and the Russia are when they team up.

No China couldnt. They could be NUKED into oblivion before that happened.

originally posted by: mindseye1609
i got this sneaky sneaky feeling that all this USA russian sword rattling are 2 bullies working together to take the world away from china. if not left in check china could literally OCCUPY THE WORLD lol. they could put more boots on the ground EVERYWHERE then anyone else. that alone is a reason to keep them in check. not to mention THAT THEY WANT TO AND HAVE ACTIVELY BEEN TRYING TO OCCUPY THE WORLD! and that they hate us lol.

the korean war only ended when we threatened china with bombings on chinese soil. That leaves alot of bad feelings IMO, its like the bully just threatened to give you a wedgy but you got a chance to go rearm and come back to deal with the bully.... i see them takin a stab at it someday.

IMO china is the real "enemy" to worry about with the wild card of the islamic nations. russia is a caucasian christian nation that if it comes down to it would more then likely be happy to go shoulder to shoulder with us to rule the world. we work well together, well sorta, hitler got to find out just how formidable the US and the Russia are when they team up.

a reply to: Expat888

Times and beliefs are very different.
Japan wouldnt stand a chance against China in these times. The young Japan are no where near as patriotic or fanatical as those of the 30's/40's. I think most Japanese would rather flee or join China than fight another war.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Thanks for the work Wrabbit. The Asia "pivot" is more a spread ourselves thinner if you ask me.

But it sounds better when caging it like a dance step.

originally posted by: princeofpeace
No China couldnt. They could be NUKED into oblivion before that happened.

originally posted by: mindseye1609
i got this sneaky sneaky feeling that all this USA russian sword rattling are 2 bullies working together to take the world away from china. if not left in check china could literally OCCUPY THE WORLD lol. they could put more boots on the ground EVERYWHERE then anyone else. that alone is a reason to keep them in check. not to mention THAT THEY WANT TO AND HAVE ACTIVELY BEEN TRYING TO OCCUPY THE WORLD! and that they hate us lol.

the korean war only ended when we threatened china with bombings on chinese soil. That leaves alot of bad feelings IMO, its like the bully just threatened to give you a wedgy but you got a chance to go rearm and come back to deal with the bully.... i see them takin a stab at it someday.

IMO china is the real "enemy" to worry about with the wild card of the islamic nations. russia is a caucasian christian nation that if it comes down to it would more then likely be happy to go shoulder to shoulder with us to rule the world. we work well together, well sorta, hitler got to find out just how formidable the US and the Russia are when they team up.

this is the "keeping in check" i was talking about.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Thanks for the work Wrabbit. The Asia "pivot" is more a spread ourselves thinner if you ask me.

But it sounds better when caging it like a dance step.

when 2 f22's and 2 b1b spirits can consecutively take out 50+ air to air targets in a single strike i say spread em thin!

i get what your saying but deep deep down you know they gotta be planning for it. no ones gonna let anything go "Undefended" at this point with quick response times almost anything is defendable in a matter of minutes.

dont forget the big dogs we keep caged up all over the world. not all those have nukes on the tip. some are purposely small to only damage small areas incase we need to use them in a more populated area or if we need to use them in defense on our own territory and they won't kick of WW3 if we gotta send an ICBM to blow up something conventionally.

with the ICBM fleet we basically have varying sized explosives ANYWHERE within a few feet in minutes. that makes me sleep good at night knowing that even if someone gets super sneaky its just a matter of a couple phone calls to blow some SH!# up for real. some of those ICBM's can hit 20+ targets. you know they have protocol for the 20 to hit in a blanket fashion for area denial or whatever. there some pretty amazing pieces of tech, and these are old school. we got some "Newer" ones but anything brand-new is still top secret as far as i know.

any new missiles recently? new warheads? re entry vehicles or whatever there called?

basically the US is ready and willing for war, china is ready and willing to take orders from above... thats different. we've been out in the sandbox of the world practicing for the last 20 years on how to use all our nice new twenty first century toys, and we have gotten good at it.

a buddy of mine just last night said this, "HELL even if they just come over here and go hand to hand with us purely based on numbers everyones gotta take out 4 people. 4 to 1 isnt odds i like!"

i laughed and answered "those are the odds that soldiers and marines dream about. if the US actually got a chance to stand up proudly and go hard for a REASON it wouldnt matter if they had 20 to 1, there world will never of been as #$#%ED up as when we got done romping around it without care. just ask hiroshima and nagasaki"

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Hmm... this is scary.
Probably because I don't know much about China though. Good thing some members here seem to be located in Asia. I hope we can pick their minds on the topic.

I read about Chinas ZCSB in context of 4 raids in apartments of Chinese spies in Munic back in 2009... I was suprised about how sofisticated their cyber-intelligence service allegedly is (considering that parts of China are still living in the 16th century).

a reply to: mindseye1609

any new missiles recently? new warheads? re entry vehicles or whatever there called?

Not sure it matters. Time to orbit, and reentry are all dependent on chemical rockets (for lift) and gravity (for terminal plunge). This is matter of minutes like you said. About 26 if intercontinental, I think.

Much less if sub launched or land based nearby.

I alway muse about this picture on the enemy radar that shows multiple launch signatures and tracks rising over the horizon.

Anyone in any region over that horizon on the receiving end is going to be alarmed that these are headed for them. In the beginning stages of climb out it is not readily apparent the intended destination of Intercontinental Ballisitc Missiles.

But just in case, the decision to defend and counter launch is the "quandary" of every government that is ICBM armed and wondering about these things. That is the uncertainty that has always been called out in this scenario. Launch on warning, counter strikes, Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) is as prevalent today as it has always been.

Other nations like Russia and China have also updated their arsenals with new (as good) technology as the US. To think they haven't or to think we can "squash them like bugs" (as I hear some here put it) is to underestimate modern capability and the flight times involved in such scenarios.

If one side shoots the other will too with plenty of time for reflection. This can only escalate in a cacophony of lets be sure and wipe em out on both sides'.

Madness

a reply to: ColCurious

China is popping up in the oddest ways these days.....

Chinese police to patrol Paris streets as France eyes tourism boost

You just can't make some of this stuff up these days. That was recently carried on Reuters, of all places.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: mindseye1609

any new missiles recently? new warheads? re entry vehicles or whatever there called?

Not sure it matters. Time to orbit, and reentry are all dependent on chemical rockets (for lift) and gravity (for terminal plunge). This is matter of minutes like you said. About 26 if intercontinental, I think.

Much less if sub launched or land based nearby.

I alway muse about this picture on the enemy radar that shows multiple launch signatures and tracks rising over the horizon.

Anyone in any region over that horizon on the receiving end is going to be alarmed that these are headed for them. In the beginning stages of climb out it is not readily apparent the intended destination of Intercontinental Ballisitc Missiles.

But just in case, the decision to defend and counter launch is the "quandary" of every government that is ICBM armed and wondering about these things. That is the uncertainty that has always been called out in this scenario. Launch on warning, counter strikes, Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) is as prevalent today as it has always been.

Other nations like Russia and China have also updated their arsenals with new (as good) technology as the US. To think they haven't or to think we can "squash them like bugs" (as I hear some here put it) is to underestimate modern capability and the flight times involved in such scenarios.

If one side shoots the other will too with plenty of time for reflection. This can only escalate in a cacophony of lets be sure and wipe em out on both sides'.

Madness

ya MAD is definitely a pretty bummer scenario that seems pretty well adopted by all the ICBM carriers. i imagine using ICBM's or any other Large missiles conventionally would start with a couple phone calls letting some of the other people know ahead of time that they weren't nuke armed. still kinda a bad idea really now that i think hard about MAD. way to many flags get raised when the big ones go up.


what about cruise missiles and whatnot then. we gotta have a pretty good saturation of the medium sized missiles and they gotta be pretty quick to respond?

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Interesting. The oddest ways indeed.

"It's more for the symbol than the policing."

What? Looks like the french don't see a problem with this... weird. Or is it?

That General Fang Fenghui called China an "awakening Tiger".
Bears, now Tigers... why can't they ever be Bunnies?!? Fluffy friendly Bunnies.

a reply to: mindseye1609

what about cruise missiles and whatnot then. we gotta have a pretty good saturation of the medium sized missiles and they gotta be pretty quick to respond?

I am not as familiar with the launch signatures generated by Cruise Missiles, say submarine launched? They are initially quite obvious considering their beginning phase is just like a rocket. Rate of fire is much slower from both shipboard and Submarine.

Especially submarine…
There is no such thing as rapid fire of cruise missiles from any platform. Utilized exclusively there wouldn't be enough numbers to beat down an enemies defenses to insure victory. Especially since the Big Boys (ICBMs) are typically located deep within a countries land mass, requiring long duration flight times to reach them.

Let alone mobile launchers. Improbable to get them all, same with Boomers (sub platforms). This is one good reason overall why this hasn't happened yet.

As world populations grow and resources dwindle other nations draw lines in the sand now (like in Wrabbits video of the Pentagon press conference in the OP). That certainty of other nations response and capability is less understood now. After all any countries nuke abilities and plans are the deepest kept secrets.

I'm linking one ex generals view of war in the Pacific and its problems.

Ex generals war scenario

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: mindseye1609

what about cruise missiles and whatnot then. we gotta have a pretty good saturation of the medium sized missiles and they gotta be pretty quick to respond?

I am not as familiar with the launch signatures generated by Cruise Missiles, say submarine launched? They are initially quite obvious considering their beginning phase is just like a rocket. Rate of fire is much slower from both shipboard and Submarine.

Especially submarine…

There is no such thing as rapid fire of cruise missiles from any platform. Utilized exclusively there wouldn't be enough numbers to beat down an enemies defenses to insure victory. Especially since the Big Boys (ICBMs) are typically located deep within a countries land mass, requiring long duration flight times to reach them.

Let alone mobile launchers. Improbable to get them all, same with Boomers (sub platforms). This is one good reason overall why this hasn't happened yet.

As world populations grow and resources dwindle other nations draw lines in the sand now (like in Wrabbits video of the Pentagon press conference in the OP). That certainty of other nations response and capability is less understood now. After all any countries nuke abilities and plans are the deepest kept secrets.

I'm linking one ex generals view of war in the Pacific and its problems.

Ex generals war scenario

i was speaking more of using cruise missiles to deal with any kid of scenario that would involve us being "spread to thin" just a couple to kinda soften em up til the rest of the team gets there if we didnt have planes to respond.




just began reading into your link in depth, its very very long and detailed so its gonna take me a minute to digest but so far its reading a little on the "US is uber weak" Side. now granted we aren't invincible but we got more then a few trump cards of our own on deck.

these micro parasite satellites they are talking about.... thats fun... lol

i gotta think that the US would drop an asteroid on shanghai before china became a world economy leader or attempted any kind of full scale war. an asteroid or just a rod from god or whatever. a non traceable non nuclear mass people killer. give china something to busy themselves with.

alot of the assumptions the general is making is based on russia jumping to the aid of china. i was doing me some looking at a map the other day and I'm sure all you military and strategy types have noticed what we are doing in the middle east... we now officially have iran surrounded. like literally in every sense of the word. now if russia were to jump on board with us, china's not far from being surrounded either... just a thought. russia's history has very recent ties with western culture. it was only HUNDREDS of years ago that the empire was a off shoot of one of our own... i think this might be by design, the ultimate long term rope a dope to deal with the snake and the tiger (islam and china)

this is a game of risk thats been playing out for a long time and its looking more and more like we are about to be eye to eye with some peers scrapping it out for chunks of that game board. i just HOPE that russia and the US really are secret allies cause that really turns the tables in a big way.

originally posted by: stirling
POST REMOVED BY STAFF

and those banks LOVE IT when these countries take out HUGE LOANS to pay for WAR. the banksters would like nothing more then to see super powers go at it. thats some serious revenue. you know how many jobs get created during war time? thats all money paying back loans and whatnot. like i said, the banksters would love a war.