It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

China owned port to host Chinese Submarines in L.A. Harbor

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex



BTW Zaphod58, you really think that if the CCP wants to try to invade the U.S. they are going to go ask for permission? i think not.


This is just silly scaremongering for the extremely gullible.
It doesn't even make any sense...



I am pretty certain that's what some people said before Japan attacked Pearl Harbor.

The most appalling thought is that even thou Chinese officials have made declarations of war against the U.S., that war with the U.S. is inevitable and that the CCP must make sure China wins and delivers the first blow, there are still people who "think is just silly scaremongering and it doesn't make sense...." In war not everything makes sense.

[edit on 20-3-2006 by Muaddib]




posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 04:42 PM
link   
Dropping a nuke on the US, or attacking US interests in Asia is VASTLY different from invading the US. To put it simply, so that even YOU can understand it, China CAN NOT invade the US. Who's gonna help them, Russia? Russia has been wary of China for years, because China would like to get their hands on some of the resources in Siberia. Russia is the only other country that could even CONSIDER invading the US.

You can't invade a country with no air support, no resupply, almost no long range transport, and either armor OR infantry but not both.
And unless China can drop nukes on the ENTIRE US or deliver a massive crippling blow, which they can't do, then even if they attack us first they're not going to win a war yet. Yes they're upgrading their military, so is everyone else. What, you expect a country to keep the same equipment for 50 years and no upgrade anything?

The comments about attacking the US have come from a few generals and military commanders. China has always been big on saber rattling when it comes to Taiwan.



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 04:51 PM
link   


The most appalling thought is that even thou Chinese officials have made declarations of war against the U.S., that war with the U.S. is inevitable and that the CCP must make sure China wins and delivers the first blow, there are still people who "think is just silly scaremongering and it doesn't make sense...."


Oh please. The Chinese say "if they attack us we'll kick their butts". The US says "If they attack us we'll kick their butts." Silly primate posturing that's been going on since the first ape whacked another one over the head with an antelope bone.

The Chinese have no realistic (non nuclear anyway) offensive options against the US, unlike the WW2 Japanese, who had one of the most powerful navies on the planet. Unlike WW2, we aren't strangling the Chinese economy, we are making them fat & rich. Moreover the Chinese aren't exactly launching a campaign of conquest, if you haven't noticed. The last time they got into a war was 1979.

And, specifically, this whole scenario is simply ridiculous. Why stage a missle attack from subs that are openly sitting in US ports (absurd in the first place, as if the US, the largest military power on the planet, was somehow helpless on it's own territory) when you can do the same thing from way out in the middle of the Pacific?


[edit on 3/20/06 by xmotex]



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by koji_K
Chinese (or any foreign military vessels) need specific permission when they enter ANY port in the US, and in the case of nations where we have not-quite-friendly relationships with, such visits are usually big affairs. Ownership of a port doesn't change that.

This letter is based on a misconception.


Only allies period should be visiting ports with military vessels. Anybody else should be banned unless it is an emergency and for humanitarian reasons. This was the policy towards the USSR for example.



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
And muaddib, have you ever actually LOOKED at the forces China could bring to bear?
An invasion by them would last 2 days. They would have NO air support, NO ressuply, they would have to choose between armor and infantry, etc.
It is not possible for China to sucessfully invade the US. The distances involved make it a joke logistically.


I think that if they were going to attack, and got up close with their nuclear missile submarine it would be to launch an EMP attack. Shorter time to effect at a closer range may be able to give them a real chance at delivering a crippling blow.

And if this is all a joke the elected representative needs to take it down from his website, and put up an explanation.



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Malichai

And if this is all a joke the elected representative needs to take it down from his website, and put up an explanation.


Porbably he recieved some money for doing so, a competitor of cosco or maybe taiwan



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 08:03 PM
link   
where are the Democrats crying about this story though? I guess bill called them on the phone and said to them: good china, bad middle east. Don't worry be happy!!!



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 03:28 AM
link   
The following is an article form 2001 written by one of the Russian officers who have defected to the west.


Sino-Russian Treaty Challenges U.S.
Col. Stanislav Lunev
Thursday, July 19, 2001
The West's worst Cold War nightmare became a reality Monday when Russia's President Vladimir Putin and his Red China counterpart, Jiang Zemin, signed the first post-Soviet treaty of "friendship and cooperation" in 30 years.
This document formalized 10 years of growing strategic cooperation between Moscow and Beijing based on the intention of both governments to challenge American international position and influence.

In a joint statement, Putin and Jiang expressed hope for a "just and rational new international order" to reflect their concept of a "multipolar" world. The treaty comes amid the two nations' mounting concern over a U.S.-dominated "unipolar" world and ongoing attempts by Moscow and Beijing to draw more nations into the Russian-Chinese axis.

The "friendship and cooperation treaty" formalized Russian-Chinese collaboration on foreign and defense policy matters. From now on, Moscow and Beijing will have a common approach in opposition to the main U.S. interests, notably:


Moscow supported forcible Chinese reclamation of Taiwan, and Beijing supported Russian opposition to the enlargement of NATO.

Both nations united against U.S. plans to build a National Missile Defense system (NMD).

Both oppose American policy in the Middle East, in the Balkans, in Latin America, in Europe, and everywhere else in the world.


Excerpted from.
www.newsmax.com...

Yet, there are some people who still don't believe this, for some reason.



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 03:31 AM
link   
If anyone would like to dismiss the idea that this pact has anything to do with their military, then perhaps these people are for some reason not aware of the following.


Sino-Russian Military Exercise into 3rd Stage

More than 7,000 Chinese and 1,800 Russian troops -- complete with military vessels, fighter jets and amphibious tanks -- will start a three-day live ammunition combat practice tomorrow, according to a senior officer with the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA).

The two armies will play out three scenarios: an offshore blockade involving missile-guided destroyers and jet fighters, an amphibious landing conducted by air forces, marine corps and paratroops, and a forced evacuation, with the participation of Russia's strategic bombers Tu-95MS and Tu-22M3 and advanced Chinese fighter planes.

On August 14-16, China and Russia held their first joint practice on these three scenarios on Shandong Peninsula and its surrounding waters.


Excerpted from.
www.china.org.cn...

Any takers to try to dismiss this?



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 03:35 AM
link   
Anyone aware of the latest military exercise these two countries did together?

Here is a link with several other links which more or less say what these two countries did together in 2005.

english.chinamil.com.cn...

Let's see what one of the main links that can be found in the link i provided above says.


First China-Russia military exercises conclude


  WEIFANG, Shandong, Aug. 25 (Xinhuanet) -- The first China-Russia joint military exercises ended here Thursday after successful maneuvers of 10,000 troops from the Russian and Chinese navy, air force, army and paratroops.

  "Through the exercises, the two armed forces enhanced their friendship and mutual trust, and improved their capabilities to meet new challenges and threats and to fight international terrorism, extremism and separatism," said Chinese Defense Minister Cao Gangchuan at the closing ceremony.


Excerpted from.
english.chinamil.com.cn...

Separatism...the only country that China claims is trying to separate from mainland China is Taiwan. China says they will go to war with the U.S. if we interfere with their plans for Taiwan.

Still think there is no possible way both these countries will unite to attack the U.S.?....

[edit on 21-3-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 04:24 AM
link   
Has everyone also forgotten some of the latest announcements by Putin and Russian officials? Such as the following.

This is what Putin says to Islamic nations...


Putin Calls Russia Defender of Islamic World
Created: 12.12.2005 18:05 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 11:43 MSK

MosNews

Russia is the most reliable partner of the Islamic world and most faithful defender of its interests, Russian President Vladimir Putin said in Chechnya’s capital Grozny. Putin unexpectedly visited the war-ravaged republic to speak in the local parliament that opened for its first sitting on Monday.

“Russia has always been the most faithful, reliable and consistent defender of the interests of the Islamic world. Russia has always been the best and most reliable partner and ally. By destroying Russia, these people (terrorists) destroy one of the main pillars of the Islamic world in the struggle for rights (of Islamic states) in the international arena, the struggle for their legitimate rights,” Putin was quoted by Itar —Tass as saying, drawing applause from Chechen parliamentarians.


Excerpted from.
www.mosnews.com...


Then this is what he says to the western world....


West in mortal danger from Islam, says Putin
By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in Brussels and Julius Strauss in Moscow
(Filed: 12/11/2002)

Islamic radicals are pursuing the systematic annihilation of non-Muslims, President Vladimir Putin claimed yesterday.

The Russian leader said at a European Union summit in Brussels that western civilisation faced a mortal threat from Muslim terrorists, and claimed that they had plans to create a "worldwide caliphate".


Excerpted from.
news.telegraph.co.uk.../news/2002/11/12/wput12.xml


And what Islamic groups is Putin trying to support? is it moderate Muslims, or extremists?....

Shall we look at the evidence?


Russia to take Syria's side if conflict with U.S. arises - Russian MPs
20:41 | 20/ 12/ 2005


MOSCOW, December 20 (RIA Novosti) - Russia will take Syria's side if charges against Syrian officials with involvement in the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri cause a conflict between the United States and Syria, two Russian parliamentary members said Tuesday.

"If Russia is to choose between its two strategic allies, it will undoubtedly take Syria's side," said Shamil Sultanov, a coordinator of an inter-faction association, Russia and the Islamic World: A Strategic Dialogue.


Excerpted from.
en.rian.ru...


HAMAS to Arrive in Russia Late February
Sunday, February 12 2006 @ 04:13 PM Eastern Standard Time

Russian President Vladimir Putin signaled for preparations to be carried out for HAMAS’, the Islamic Resistance Movement, visit in February to Russian officials in Moscow. The visitation is an official event arousing the curiosity of the international community.

HAMAS senior officials can pay a visit to the Moscow officials by the end of February, said Aleksandr Kalugin, the Russian Foreign Minister’s Special Envoy for the Middle East Settlement. The statement by President Putin is actually an official invitation, Mr. Kalugin told the Interfax: "There are preparations underway to specify when and how the visit will be carried out.” It will probably be the HAMAS leader Khaled Mashal who will be hosted in Moscow as the HAMAS president, said Mr. Kalugin.


Excerpted from.
www.turks.us...

Since the problem with Iran's nulcear intentions arose, and since China and Russia said they were with the international community to take this matter to the United Nations, I said that China and Russia would back off their first statements, which they have both done.

Russia, while on the one hand was saying to the world since the war started that the United States had no reason for attacking Saddam's regime...


Russia's Putin calls on US to end Iraq war
March 20, 2003
AFP

Russian President Vladimir Putin called Thursday on the United States to stop its war against Iraq and rejected US claims that President Saddam Hussein's regime posed a danger to other countries.

However Russia also stressed that Iraq will not splinter Moscow's partnership with Washington in the global anti-terror coalition.
..............
"This military action is unjustified," Putin stressed. "There has been no answer to the main question: Are there weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and if so, which ones?"
.............
"We must continue our dialogue with the US administration in order to convince it that this war will have difficult consequences for everyone, including the United States," Russia's top diplomat said.

"If this war breaks us apart, then it will weaken us in the face of new global threats."


Excerpted from.

www.cdi.org...

Why would Russians officials say that the war could break the U.S. and Russia appart? were the Russians behind the WMD in Iraq as many defectors from both Russia and Iraq had said?....

Was that the reason for the statements from Putin and Russian officials?

Let's see what other statements were made at that time by Putin.


"Iraq has presented no danger, neither for neighbouring countries nor for any region in the world," Putin declared, in a flat contradiction of Washington's view.


Excerpted from.
www.globalpolicy.org...

On the other hand this is what president Putin and Russian intelligence agencies were saying to the U.S....


.....................
Surprise remarks

Speaking on a visit to Kazakhstan, Mr Putin said Russia had warned the US on several occasions that Iraq was planning "terrorist attacks" on its soil.

"After the events of 11 September 2001, and before the start of the military operation in Iraq, Russian special services several times received such information and passed it on to their American colleagues," he told reporters.


Excerpted from.
news.bbc.co.uk...


Other interesting links with events which back my statements.

www.cdi.org...

It seems that once again Russia is playing both sides, but as we can see, Russia will side with China, and extremist Islamic nations against the U.S. and the rest of the western world, or is that not what Putin and other Russian officials are saying?....

[edit on 21-3-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 07:38 AM
link   
That's all very nice, but where the hell does it say anything about Chinese missile subs to be stationed in US ports?

As for the rest of it - yeah the Russians and Chinese don't particularly want to be ruled from Washington. Do we want to be ruled from Beijing and Moscow either? I don't think so. They would be idiots if they didn't acknowledge the US as a potential threat - the US has the most powerful military on the planet and isn't shy about throwing that weight around. That doesn't mean they're going to attack us, but it does mean they're likely to work together should the US try to push them around.

As for Taiwan, Chinese policy seems to be to have a credible threat against Taiwan should they seek formal independence. Otherwise they'd be happier to absorb Taiwan without any shooting - a shooting war isn't going to do any favors for the economic infrastructure that makes Taiwan worth having in the first place.

Secondly, the US is unlikely to support any moves towards independence by the Taiwanese. US policy has been opposed to Taiwanese independence since the 1970's, if you haven't noticed. US strategy seems to be to arm the Taiwanese well enough that the Chinese think twice about launching an invasion, while at the same time supporting eventual (peaceful) reunification.



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
That's all very nice, but where the hell does it say anything about Chinese missile subs to be stationed in US ports?


GOOD QUESTION!

Can we keep this on topic, please? Thanks!



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid
GOOD QUESTION!

Can we keep this on topic, please? Thanks!


Isn't it interconnected cmdrkeenkid? Discussing the possible reasons for the CCP to own American ports.

Every chinese company is owned and controlled by the CCP, the Chinese military.

As for the article in question, yes I would like to find other sources that corroborate this too. But, you knew a but was coming didn't you?, this is being brought up by a U.S. Representative, so I would say this story is true, which then brings back the question, why would the Chinese want to dock nuclear submarines, Xias, in U.S. ports?.....

I find it rather strange that the Chinese company would make such a petition. unless they thought maybe by bribing someone they would be able to do this?

I also find it rather strange that it seems some people around here would like to suggest that a Chinese company making such a petition is not a big deal....


[edit on 21-3-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Fair enough... I just don't want the thread going down the path of "China can't invade the US because of..." and "China can inade the US because of..."

That stuff doesn't apply.



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 05:28 PM
link   
BTW, for the person who submitted this in here, this should be submitted in ATSNN. If this is not ATSNN material....I don't know what is.



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 05:49 PM
link   


I also find it rather strange that it seems some people around here would like to suggest that a Chinese company making such a petition is not a big deal....


I just find it extremely unlikely such a request would be made in the first place.

"Hey, do you mind if we base our nuclear missile subs in your ports?"

Uh, yeah.... sure.

I'm sorry but I dont think there is a big enough bribe to push that one through... this is either a purely fictional scare story, or a misrepresentation of something else entirely. Probably a bit of paranoia about Chinese merchant shipping - of which there is quite a bit coming to the US. Every time I find myself at a crossing waiting for a freight train to pass, I see about a million COSCO containers on it.



[edit on 3/21/06 by xmotex]



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
I just find it extremely unlikely such a request would be made in the first place.

"Hey, do you mind if we base our nuclear missile subs in your ports?"

Uh, yeah.... sure.

I'm sorry but I dont think there is a big enough bribe to push that one through... this is either a purely fictional scare story, or a misrepresentation of something else entirely. Probably a bit of paranoia about Chinese merchant shipping - of which there is quite a bit coming to the US. Every time I find myself at a crossing waiting for a freight train to pass, I see about a million COSCO containers on it.
[edit on 3/21/06 by xmotex]


Riiight...like chinese officials have not bribed some U.S. officials before.....

There are some people that would do anything for money, perhaps the Chinese thought they could make an offer that Moseley would not say no to.

Anyways we are speculating as to how he became aware of this. But this has been raised by a U.S. Representative, and I find it quite disturbing that you would dismiss this story so soon. You don't have all the facts, and I have already said I dont have all the facts, but this story should not be dismissed like you are claiming it should be dismissed.....

[edit on 21-3-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 06:34 PM
link   
The "story" for far consists of a citizen's very unclear letter to a US Senator that the Senator happened to reprint on his website. It is not any kind of a statement by the Senator himself as far as I can tell. Here is another letter written to the Senator, and I doubt it reflects the second term Republican's own feelings. The letter in question in this thread is vague to the point of incomprehensibility, and references a class of submarine that doesn't exist.

And I'm not "dismissing" it so much as pointing out that a) the US will never allow Chinese SSBN's to be based in it's ports, period (how are you going to bribe the entire United States Navy and Coast Guard, for one thing?) b) there isn't enough information in the source article to even figure out exactly what they're claiming is going on.

Without any further clarification or corroboration, it's hard to figure out exactly what this whole thing is about. The original letter doesn't say anything about them being missile boats, for one thing.

[edit on 3/21/06 by xmotex]



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
BTW, for the person who submitted this in here, this should be submitted in ATSNN. If this is not ATSNN material....I don't know what is.


I would like to see some verification first. It sounded a little odd, and I seached for typhoon class subs before posting this seeing only that this is the name for the missiles on their single Boomer. If it was not posted at the website of an elected US representative I would say it has almost no credibility. Searches for the petition, and any details lead me to nothing other than the one article. Its not news without verification.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join