US B52 aircraft challenge China air zone

page: 4
14
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Trubeeleever
I hear some comments from people bewildered because America is being called the aggressor.

I wonder if China flew nuclear bombers within range of American shores if you would then see that as an aggressive move?


Who said anything about nukes. Just because it was b52 lol.

Go save a kangaroo lol.

The Bot




posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 04:00 PM
link   
Not much different when navy does freedom of seas exercises when countries make claim of seaway hundreds of miles offshore.

Nearly all countries exercise airspace the same way, I remember closing days of Clintons administration when P-3 was in international airspace and was forced down on Hainan and torn apart, I also remember its return to Dobbins in GA much later. - that's aggression which basically went unanswered.

China arbitrarily claiming airspace is also aggressive, showing the claim as being illegitimate is fine by me.

Were the US to do anything of the sort without a years dickering at the UN would raise hue and cry.

The no-fly zones were under auspices of UN decisions - no comparison when arbitrarily making claim to vast stretches of airspace on its own volition.

Kind of like if the US claimed an air defense zone around Guam for 2000 miles, the Chinese are being that ridiculous.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 05:14 PM
link   
reply to post by dlbott
 



Go save a kangaroo lol.


That's a good one. Original and funny.

But seriously nukes or not the intent is the same. If the roles were reversed and china sent in some high altitude bombers to flirt with the US mainland border, do you reckon those birds would make it back alive.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 05:14 PM
link   
reply to post by dlbott
 



Go save a kangaroo lol.


That's a good one. Original and funny.

But seriously nukes or not the intent is the same. If the roles were reversed and china sent in some high altitude bombers to flirt with the US mainland border, do you reckon those birds would make it back alive.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 05:42 PM
link   


The US did make a statement condemning the action. China did nothing for days.
reply to post by Riffrafter
 


So, by your own admission....the US made it's statement and what did China do? Nothing. For days.

So what did the US think was a good idea?....send in a couple of bombers as an implied threat just to whack the hornets nest, so to speak. How very measured and thought out. I know I'm a bit over the hill, but when I was a child I was taught that only bullies threaten others to get what they want. Adults talked about their problems and found a mutually agreeable outcome...everybody wouldn't always get what they wanted...but a resolution was reached. It was encouraged to be the bigger person and not let your baser instincts rule you.




But I do know that letting that decree stand for any length of time would have been very dangerous for us & other countries around the world on many levels.


Perhaps you could enlighten us all as to how this could have been so very dangerous on so many levels? I would love to hear how some tiny specs of land thousands of miles from the US could have such Earth shaking ramifications?



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


The Chinese are trying to secure desperately needed resources. The whole Libya thing was all about denying the Chinese access to Libyan oil fields which they had a VERY sizable investment in. Doesn't make it right...nor was that my point...in case I am being obtuse let me get right to the heart of the matter.

The US has, in the last 12 years, invaded (illegally I might add) 3 sovreign nations, occupied them militarily and have been responsible for the deaths of over a million innocent people. These wars were based on lies...and now they are funding the very same terrorists in Syria because it's convienient. The US has propped up some of the most brutal dictators in the last century. The School of the Americas was a training ground for 9 of the most brutal dictators in Central and South America and so many kill squads that wiped out millions. The CIA overthrew a countries government for a frikin BANANA COMPANY!!!

Whew.....considering all that...how can the US sit there and point fingers at anyone? Surely you must see the hypocrisy in that?...the stomach churning hypocrisy of it all. I don't see China sending armies all over the worlds to steal the resources of other nations. These are uninhabited islands and were there not oil in the area...nobody would care.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Trubeeleever
 


Russia does it all the time and oh look, they all make it back.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by redoubt
 


China already occupied some islands that is within the economic zone of the Philippines and thousands of miles away from China. The Philippines can't do anything about it since China has the military might to do it and the Philippines can only watch helplessly what China is doing.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 07:55 PM
link   
I'm thoroughly enjoying this... China creates an imaginary zone and within 2 days the US is crossing over it , doing as they please...lol

Your move China!



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 08:05 PM
link   
All the news reports are stating it was a "training mission". We all know how wars begin. With an exercise…

This one is from CNN thirty minutes ago…


The flights came two days after China unilaterally announced the creation of a so-called "Air Defense Identification Zone" over several islands it and Japan have both claimed.
---
The aircraft were in China's newly declared air zone for about an hour, according to the U.S. official.
---
The planes' pilots did not identify themselves upon entering the disputed airspace, as China would have wanted, according to the official.

Thumb in your no fly zone China.

Next escalation…


China's military, meanwhile, announced on its website early Wednesday that its navy's sole aircraft carrier was heading toward the South China Sea.
---
As with U.S. aircraft carriers, it doesn't travel alone: Two guided missile destroyers and two guided missile frigates are accompanying the massive ship as part of its group.
---
…the carrier group's mission is to conduct scientific experiments and military training.


Ahh, more training. This began with a bunch of people waving flags on the islands in dispute, now its B52s and aircraft carriers (and more for all we know).

Yah, team! Maybe we can open another front in the War on Terror. All the away across the Pacific is a Looong supply line.

CNN



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 09:04 PM
link   
reply to post by intrptr
 


That's right, because damn our allies and treaty obligations. And damn those free passage treaties, and those pesky international borders. China can do whatever they want, and steal land from anyone they want to, because hey, we all know China is the good guy here.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 09:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 



Is… that the… South China Sea?

We both know what the contest is. Not some craggy rocks, its mineral resources. Thats more about money than treaties…

the corporations don't care about treaties.
edit on 26-11-2013 by intrptr because: additional



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by intrptr
 


I didn't realize that meant that China owned everything in it. I guess that means they own Japan, Korea, Taiwain, the Spratly Islands...... I mean it's named for them so they must own it all right?



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 

Ok well, its not An American Sea, anyway.

Its closer to China than Japan, too. As far as who has the bigger stick there…

Lets look at it like… what the hell, let them have a few zillion in rocks. It would be a gesture that would go a lot further than rattling sabers.

Like the Mob does. "My gift to you".

Please hold on to our trillion dollar debt a little longer?

And if they don't show gratitude, then that would make them look the bad guy, not us.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by intrptr
 


And the US has every right to fly through international airspace, as does China, Russia, and everyone else. China has no right, anymore than the US does to declare airspace over uninhabited islands as a no fly zone, unless they're for military use. Where are the Chinese military bases?

The US also has a treaty with Japan, so I guess you're another "Screw our allies" person huh. Oh wait, I forgot, screw our allies and get rid of the military, so the world will suddenly be a peaceful place.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Zaphod58
reply to post by Senduko
 


None taken, this is just a civil discussion.


As Wrabbit pointed out, the Japanese constitution limits them to defensive forces only, and severely limits those. In return, the US provides the bulk of protection for Japan. That's why we forward base a carrier group there, as well as having several air bases, and ground units in the area.

Japan, in a qualitative sense, has one of the best militaries in the area. However, they would, at best, be able to hold off a serious attack by China long enough for a US response to arrive in the area.


Rather then an protection defense base for Japan i see it as an military occupation. So according to you prefer long military occupations of other countries?

Whats next? lets invade China and occupy China so that we can take over Russia at ease?
edit on 26-11-2013 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 10:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter
 


You can see it how you want to. The Japanese and the Japanese government see it as a treaty between the two countries that provides them protection. Your opinion, my opinion, and anyone else's opinion is irrelevant. It's how they see it that matters.

The Japanese had the choice for us to leave or to stay, they voted for us to stay, so they wouldn't have to build up a strong military and be seen as a threat to anyone again. They made the choice for the US to stay, and created their own constitution preventing themselves from having a large military. So you have a problem with it, take it up with the Japanese, because they obviously don't.
edit on 11/26/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Zaphod58
reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter
 


You can see it how you want to. The Japanese and the Japanese government see it as a treaty between the two countries that provides them protection. Your opinion, my opinion, and anyone else's opinion is irrelevant. It's how they see it that matters.


How is Military Occupation a protection treaty? you know the American Republicans had a problem with the Russians dominating eastern Europe,and the Balkans with similar moves the American government is currently doing in Asia.

We have being in Japan for 50 years.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter
 


At their request. Control of Japan was turned back over to the Japanese in 1951, when they signed the Japan-America Security Alliance. That expired and they signed a mutual cooperation treaty. US forces are in Japan entirely at the request of the Japanese government, and almost 75% of Japanese people like having them there, and like the treaty.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 10:36 PM
link   
reply to post by deadcalm
 


I've heard that a LOT...a LOT, lot. What the hell is a "legal" invasion? If there are illegal invasions, what does one do to perform a legal invasion? Do you get a special permit, or what? How does that work?






top topics



 
14
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join