Chinese Warships Enter Japanese Waters

Originally posted by ELectricalApprentice
why does a Chinese boat have english writing on it? that seems kind of weird to me...

Because of the same reason a Chinese aircraft has english writing, and for the same reason why Chinese pilots must speak english while communicating with ATC's.

English is the most universal language on Earth. English writings makes it possible for everyone to identify, or at least, replicate any kind of communication or writing.

I think Japan would take them out if they had too. Name one Navy battle that the chinese even participate in let alone win?

Japan has a grand history of navy superiority and great naval battle that they have won. My bet goes to Japan!

There MUST and will be NO war in the pacific oceans.

USA had kept it safe for decades, for the many nations there to prosper and progress and including China too, with cost and lives of our forefathers sacrificed after WW2.

It is high time UN steps in to mediate and declare the WILL of our world FORCEFULLY, for peace to be upheld, as promised by all those nations, and it must NOT be lip service.

ICJ exists and awaits for all parties to talk and compromise without going to war.

It is also timely for the FOREMOST and premier agency of mankind - UN Human Rights team, to do a detail study and research upon the impact and effects of war in the pacific oceans, should it occur, with regards to economics, lives, medical/food aid, refugee areas, safe zones and transportation, etc, and present it to those asian nations and MOST critically, its PEOPLE, on the REALITY of war if it is allowed to happen.

UN Human Rights agency had been more a reactive force than to take proactive stances. Those days are over. It's time to be proactive. Condemning after reactions is merely hypocrisy.

reply to post by penninja


Allow the Japanese to re-arm?

Originally posted by GarrusVasNormandy

Originally posted by ELectricalApprentice
why does a Chinese boat have english writing on it? that seems kind of weird to me...

Because of the same reason a Chinese aircraft has english writing, and for the same reason why Chinese pilots must speak english while communicating with ATC's.

English is the most universal language on Earth. English writings makes it possible for everyone to identify, or at least, replicate any kind of communication or writing.

The English writing struck me too... so I did an image search on Google for Chinese navy ships. I didn't see any with English letters or words. They all had numbers only, though the numbers were not in Chinese.

Then I did a search for "China Marine Surveillance," since this is what the writing said. They do have exactly this writing in English on the side.

Wikipedia says:

The China Marine Surveillance (CMS; Chinese: 中国海监) was created on 19 October 1998 as a paramilitary maritime law enforcement agency under the auspices of the PRC's State Oceanic Administration. It is responsible for law enforcement within the PRC's territorial waters, exclusive economic zones (EEZ), and shores. It is also charged with protecting the maritime environment, natural resources, navigation aids and other facilities, and can carry out maritime surveys. In emergencies, it also engages in search and rescue missions.

So not navy, but not quite civilian either. Paramilitary police?

Originally posted by penninja
China considers this their back yard, there is long standing populace anger against the Japanese for actions during WW2.

The Island is actually a remnant of the "atrocities" Japan did against China ... In reality, Japan should be "obligated" to hand it over ...

We all know that some major war is going to break out soon. Just looking at what is happening all over with the lying in the financial sectors of the world will tell us that. When many countries collapse financially than war is eminent. Seems like Major war straightens out things in the world, at least historically anyway..

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by penninja

 

The U.S. has a Nimitz Class Nuclear Carrier Group station in Japan...plus the Pacific is the U.S. Navy's Bath Tub.

We can in a very short time bring in several carrier groups but one U.S. Carrier Group is powerful enough to Destroy the entire Chinese Navy. Not to mention the large numbers of U.S. Attack Subs in the region. If hostilities were to break out...the U.S. is bound by Treaty to defend Japan...we can do this easily.

The Chinese Navy would never know what hit them if they actually opened fire on a Japanese Island. The Russians would not attempt anything of this nature either. It is posturing. Several Years back when China was shooting Missiles over Taiwan...the U.S. sent in several carrier Groups during Clinton's Presidency. The Chinese stopped all Military activity asap.

Remember that a SINGLE U.S. NUCLEAR NIMITZ CLASS CARRIER GROUP WITH SUPPORT SHIPS AND SUBS....carry Nuclear Weapons...China does not want a Floating City loaded with NUKES within very close striking distance to it's Mainland. A Single Carrier Group has Multiple Hundreds of Nuclear Weapons aboard it as well as Aegis Cruisers and Subs all loaded with Nuclear Missiles and SLBM's

The Aegis Cruisers all carry the New SM-3 ABM's and the New Chinese Carrier Killer Missiles are an easy target for these Highly Touted by the Chinese Missiles. A U.S. Carrier Group has such a High Ability of Protection as well as being able to stay out of range of the Chinese Air Force that when they show up...China has no defense.
Split Infinity

Yadda Yadda Yadda, heard this all before, ok let's get real for a moment. Nobody can say for sure who'd win. Is a winner even possible from such an action? Both countries have ready to launch nuclear weapons, and if war occurred, both countries likely will use them on each other. Who in their right might would like to survive that mess?

Americans my view often overestimate their military and tend to ignore the weaknesses that show up. History highlights the "fact" America has been most dominant military power on this earth since 1945

Yet wars after 1945 involving the United States of America, they've struggled to win. The record isn't great lets be honest. Americas superiority in navy, air , and ground forces didn't give them victory against Vietnam, or Korea. Iraq forces deserted 2003 and Afghanistan had no army no navy or airforce.

There is no judging how capable the US would be against a force like the Chinese military. Your dealing with unknowns here. The fact nuclear weapons are in use by both nations, war, is a scenario one should hope to avoid

Million upon millions of ordinary folks would die on each side and both countries likely be left uninhabitable for least half a century.

reply to post by penninja


Actually, I know a couple of people who go to China on a regular basis to teach English. It is almost mandatory there to learn at least a working knowledge of the English language. In fact, my church sponsors an outreach program for foreign students called "Friends of Internationals" and we have several Chinese students each semester and all of them can communicate enough in English to get by at our universities.

Originally posted by P12SOLD

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by penninja

 

The U.S. has a Nimitz Class Nuclear Carrier Group station in Japan...plus the Pacific is the U.S. Navy's Bath Tub.

We can in a very short time bring in several carrier groups but one U.S. Carrier Group is powerful enough to Destroy the entire Chinese Navy. Not to mention the large numbers of U.S. Attack Subs in the region. If hostilities were to break out...the U.S. is bound by Treaty to defend Japan...we can do this easily.

The Chinese Navy would never know what hit them if they actually opened fire on a Japanese Island. The Russians would not attempt anything of this nature either. It is posturing. Several Years back when China was shooting Missiles over Taiwan...the U.S. sent in several carrier Groups during Clinton's Presidency. The Chinese stopped all Military activity asap.

Remember that a SINGLE U.S. NUCLEAR NIMITZ CLASS CARRIER GROUP WITH SUPPORT SHIPS AND SUBS....carry Nuclear Weapons...China does not want a Floating City loaded with NUKES within very close striking distance to it's Mainland. A Single Carrier Group has Multiple Hundreds of Nuclear Weapons aboard it as well as Aegis Cruisers and Subs all loaded with Nuclear Missiles and SLBM's

The Aegis Cruisers all carry the New SM-3 ABM's and the New Chinese Carrier Killer Missiles are an easy target for these Highly Touted by the Chinese Missiles. A U.S. Carrier Group has such a High Ability of Protection as well as being able to stay out of range of the Chinese Air Force that when they show up...China has no defense.
Split Infinity

Yadda Yadda Yadda, heard this all before, ok let's get real for a moment. Nobody can say for sure who'd win. Is a winner even possible from such an action? Both countries have ready to launch nuclear weapons, and if war occurred, both countries likely will use them on each other. Who in their right might would like to survive that mess?

Americans my view often overestimate their military and tend to ignore the weaknesses that show up. History highlights the "fact" America has been most dominant military power on this earth since 1945

Yet wars after 1945 involving the United States of America, they've struggled to win. The record isn't great lets be honest. Americas superiority in navy, air , and ground forces didn't give them victory against Vietnam, or Korea. Iraq forces deserted 2003 and Afghanistan had no army no navy or airforce.

There is no judging how capable the US would be against a force like the Chinese military. Your dealing with unknowns here. The fact nuclear weapons are in use by both nations, war, is a scenario one should hope to avoid

Million upon millions of ordinary folks would die on each side and both countries likely be left uninhabitable for least half a century.

edit on 14-9-2012 by P12SOLD because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-9-2012 by P12SOLD because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-9-2012 by P12SOLD because: (no reason given)

One reason we haven't seemed to do well in recent "wars" is that our military was seriously held back by our politicians. This was one of the biggest gripes by the military; that they were not allowed to unleash the full power of our forces in what was being called a "police action".

My biggest fear is that way too many nations are getting nuclear capability. And some of them are being run by certifiable maniacs like Achmoud Im-A-Nut-Job of Iran. No superior weapon has ever been invented that hasn't eventually been used in an all out war.

IMHO, the only reason nuclear bombs haven't been used in a major war since the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is that the United States was the only nation that had them at the time of their use on Japan and the world had time to see just how terrible a war using them would be.

Then, during the "cold war", the only effective way of delivering them would allow the other side enough time to retaliate. This led to what was known as the MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) scenario.

Now the MAD scenario no longer applies. It is easy for any nation that has nuclear weapons to pull off a sneak attack by launching even the shortest range and cheapest missiles, like the SCUD series, with a nuclear war head from just off the coast of any other nation it wants to wipe out. I doubt that even the USA has an anti missile defense system that would be able to react in time to stop such a close in attack. And we might not even be able to determine the perpetrators of such an attack in time to retaliate effectively.

And if they are going for an EMP (Electro Magnetic Pulse) attack there is no missile defense system that could catch up to an enemy missile already in flight before it reached its peak altitude which is when an EMP device would be detonated. Our only hope in such a situation is an extremely fast response laser system deployed at enough locations along our three coastlines to provide adequate coverage. I don't really think we have advanced that far yet with laser systems. And Iran has already tested a system for use in an EMP attack just off their own coast with the only thing missing being the nuclear warhead. They detonated the test missiles at the ideal altitude for an EMP attack and then claimed the launch was "failure".

And even if we could retaliate just what good would it do if several of our coastal cities were wiped out by nukes. Just imagine losing New York (the financial district eg Wall Street and the stock exchange), Baltimore Harbor (major receiving port for container ships), Houston Texas (oil ship receiving and refineries), and any number of critical cities on the west coast. Want to see just how such a scenario would play out; read the novel "Dead Heat" by Joel Rosenberg. And if you think 9/11/2001 changed us for the worse just imagine the aftermath if multiple US cities and multiple millions of people were to be wiped out in such an attack.

We are living in rapidly changing times and the changes are not for the better. I honestly believe I will still be around to see a full scale nuclear war and I am already 73 years old. Do YOU feel that warm glow approaching; it is not the sun rising, believe me.

Well as they say "When the cat's away the mice will play". With all of this media focus on the US Embassy attacks in the Middle East, Israel and Iran ready for war, and Kate's "bumpy bits" it's taking attention away from what's going on in the rest of the world.

Hmmmm....wonder if that's on purpose?

reply to post by penninja


Did we take sides in the Falkland Island dispute between Britain and Argentina in 1982? If not, why would we interfere in what appears to be the same situation, but between different countries?

Falklands War

Japan is a de facto nuclear power-China doesnt want to open that can of worms.

reply to post by detachedindividual

This is a blip, like the UK sending ships to the Falklands. It's a show of force. There is really nothing for Obama to say.

Uhrm... ur... that ended with a War... and uhr... In this case Argentina is Japan who the USA is required to defend.

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by penninja

 

Did we take sides in the Falkland Island dispute between Britain and Argentina in 1982? If not, why would we interfere in what appears to be the same situation, but between different countries?

Falklands War

Because we have a treaty with japan that requires us to.

Helllloooooooooo

Originally posted by princeofpeace
Japan is a de facto nuclear power-China doesnt want to open that can of worms.

I've heard estimates that Japan could have a very large number of Nukes ready in as little as a month no idea if this is true or not but then again there have been a lot of rumors in regards to what fukushima was really being used for so who knows

I think the Chinese listen to Obama and Panetta talk about the Asian-Pacific theater as the primary strategic focus for the United States and think to themselves that the time is now or never to see about getting some of these border disputes settled. The question is how far each will go in asserting control. It's not just Japan, either. China is doing this in several spots at about this same time.

As China fortifies its military and administrative hold on disputed islands in the Spratly Islands and other South China Sea territories, the Philippines is effectively reverting to its pre-1992 state of strategic affairs, an era when the US helped to determine the island nation's security and provided strong steering to its foreign policy.

Source

That is from a story about the Philippines looking to actively bring the U.S. back into the area with an active role in regional security. Even Vietnam has asked for U.S. help...as nuts as I thought it was when I saw it.....in island territorial disputes with China.

Japan and China just have that deep hatred from World War II primarily....which the other nations don't necessarily have as strongly. Nanking would be one of the better documented massacres to look at and consider the Chinese tend to have long memories...

Existing thread started here
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by penninja

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by penninja

 

Did we take sides in the Falkland Island dispute between Britain and Argentina in 1982? If not, why would we interfere in what appears to be the same situation, but between different countries?

Falklands War

Because we have a treaty with japan that requires us to.

Helllloooooooooo

But does that treaty involve defending them when they take land from another country? HULLOOOOO