China Plans To Seize South China Sea Island From Philippines, Says "Battle Will Be Restricted"

reply to post by OccamsRazor04


they pull anything we take out their three gorges damn and kill upwards of 350million people as 10 cubic miles of water flow down the most populated river valley on the planet,and rid them of their largest source of fresh water(china has lots of fresh water issues due to polution from modernization and lack of environmental regulations) flooding their farmland with silt and stripping the land of trees crops and people

en.wikipedia.org...

The Yangtze River (English pronunciation: /ˈjæŋtsi/ or /ˈjɑːŋtsi/), known in China as the Chang Jiang, is the longest river in Asia and the third-longest in the world. It flows for 6,418 kilometers (3,988 mi) from the glaciers on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau in Qinghai eastward across southwest, central and eastern China before emptying into the East China Sea at Shanghai. It is also one of the biggest rivers by discharge volume in the world. The Yangtze drains one-fifth of the land area of the People's Republic of China (PRC) and its river basin is home to one-third of the PRC's population.[6]

so when that area floods when/if the dam is taken out 1/3 of our enemies wash out to the sea,horrible yes and possibly arrogant thinking but in a war it would make a VERY tempting target

science.howstuffworks.com... few other links on the liabilities posed by their massive dam

science.howstuffworks.com... just for comparisons sake this is what happens if hoover goes but of note 1/3 of the us population does not live along the colorado river valley

www.threegorgesprobe.org...

conservative estimate of what would happen if the dam failed/was blown up

The consequence of failure at the Three Gorges Dam would rank as history’s worst man-made disaster. More than 75 million people live downstream on an intensively cultivated floodplain that provides much of China’s food. It is therefore reasonable to expect that a key design criterion for the project is ensuring that the risk of failure is kept extremely low.

news.bbc.co.uk... older link talking about how its one of tiawans targets incase they get invaded......and how china has sent troops their to prevent terror attacks.

note im pretty sure doing this would be a war crime(think they changed the laws after the dam-busters raid in ww2) and a big one at that but if nukes are already flying i see most rules going out the window or in Taiwan's case an act of revenge in the event of them being conquered.not like the Russians didnt have plans to do the same to hoover in the event of nuclear war.

reply to post by RalagaNarHallas

they pull anything we take out their three gorges damn and kill upwards of 350million people as 10 cubic miles of water flow down the most populated river valley on the planet,and rid them of their largest source of fresh water(china has lots of fresh water issues due to polution from modernization and lack of environmental regulations) flooding their farmland with silt and stripping the land of trees crops and people

I agree...

The British showed how bad you can hurt an army during WWII by bombing a key German dam.



So taking out the dam would all but devistate that country and any ability to sustain an expensive war would not be there.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


Yes, well, we were also lucky enough to have an extraordinary military man in George Washington, and he had some extremely capable leaders working under him.

Without that, I don't think we would have pulled it off.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


yeah i think it would only be done either once the nukes had launched allready or as the last act of a nation being conquered (tiawan)

as it would be a war crime under the geneva convention i dobut it would go over too well but it would most likely end the war.

of the nazi war criminals indited and sentenced to death some were put to death for flooding the lowlands of holland to slow allied advance so the precedent is there for war crimes charges but there are exceptions as we did the same to korea during the korean war in an attempt to starve out the north koreans by flooding the rice patties. bombing the damn to destroy it would most likely be a war crime,bombing it to show we COULD destroy it or to take out its hydroelectric production would be another thing entirely but i would assume strikes on the dam would be treated as a "red line" by the Chinese

www.philstar.com... few more links for the OP

MANILA, Philippines - A Chinese news network has reported that China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) is planning to seize the contested Pag-Asa Island in the Spratlys Group of Islands this year in what can be an explosive military confrontation. Business and strategy news platform Qianzhan (Prospects) reported that Beijing condemned the Philippines' move to deploy Air Force and naval contingents to Pag-Asa Islands early this month and called the occupation illegal and "arrogant." "According to experts, the Chinese navy has drawn a detailed combat plan to seize the island and the battle will be restricted within the South China Sea. The battle is aimed at recovery of the island stolen by the Philippines from China," the news site cited in its January 10 and January 9 reports.

newsinfo.inquirer.net... details the obligations of the treaty of mutual defense signed in 1951 between the usa and the Philippines


freepatriot.org...

TDawgRex
reply to post by Argyll

 

Did you ever stop to think for a moment that if China starts a restricted war (yea...that worked so well in the ME didn't it?), then we basically don't have to pay off our debt to them since they have attacked one of our allies?

If 0bama didn't react, that would make him Carter the second. I think that he is to narcisitic to want that. And if he didn't react, he would be also handing over the reigns to the GOP for the next 8-12 years and I know he doesn't want that.

There's more to it than this. We own more of their debt as a percentage of GDP than they own of ours. A war would wipe out the debt on both sides, which would be quite bad for both economies, from there it would spread globally.

We have to respond and look convincing but both sides know that shooting at each other isn't viable.

reply to post by RalagaNarHallas

they pull anything we take out their three gorges damn and kill upwards of 350million people as 10 cubic miles of water flow down the most populated river valley on the planet,and rid them of their largest source of fresh water(china has lots of fresh water issues due to polution from modernization and lack of environmental regulations) flooding their farmland with silt and stripping the land of trees crops and people

Even if we declare war on China (highly doubtful) if we were to attack a target of this magnitude China would launch their nukes. They'd have every right to do so IMO. Blowing up that dam goes beyond war crimes, I don't think we even have a word that adequately describes it. A crime against humanity is the closest thing I can come up with. Even in war you don't deliberately target 350 million people, a large percentage who are most likely civilians.

reply to post by RalagaNarHallas

I'll give ya a star for thinking strategically. But in the long run, I don't see it playing out so well.

But the option is there, isn’t it?

Bassago
reply to post by RalagaNarHallas

 

they pull anything we take out their three gorges damn and kill upwards of 350million people as 10 cubic miles of water flow down the most populated river valley on the planet,and rid them of their largest source of fresh water(china has lots of fresh water issues due to polution from modernization and lack of environmental regulations) flooding their farmland with silt and stripping the land of trees crops and people

Even if we declare war on China (highly doubtful) if we were to attack a target of this magnitude China would launch their nukes. They'd have every right to do so IMO. Blowing up that dam goes beyond war crimes, I don't think we even have a word that adequately describes it. A crime against humanity is the closest thing I can come up with. Even in war you don't deliberately target 350 million people, a large percentage who are most likely civilians.

Happens all the time in war i can gurantee 4 gorges would be a legitimate target.Along with electrical plants and water treatment plants industries phone lines.In a war you want to do anything to disrupt the enemy's ability to fight. Look at whats happened in wars mustard gas in iran iraq war neurotoxins fire bombings and yes even nukes. Best way to avoid civilian deaths not to start a war.

reply to post by Bassago


So China is going to start a limited war with the Philippines and everyone else is just supposed to sit back and watch...am I reading this right ?

This is an elite move by the controllers, I think we are about to find out why Obama has fired 200 top military people.

This won't be like the middle east, this will be a war with a country that has nothing to lose and has been getting ready for this for the past 50 years.

reply to post by Bassago


Look what America did to Japan in WW2 to end the war, do you think we have changed that much sense then ?

The only difference now may be we would use an unmanned plane.

Battleline
reply to post by Bassago

 

So China is going to start a limited war with the Philippines and everyone else is just supposed to sit back and watch...am I reading this right ?

This is an elite move by the controllers, I think we are about to find out why Obama has fired 200 top military people.

This won't be like the middle east, this will be a war with a country that has nothing to lose and has been getting ready for this for the past 50 years.

edit on 13-1-2014 by Battleline because: (no reason given)

No even china knows it couldn't be limited and would escalate quickly see the us is not the phillipines only ally. Theres UK, Finland, Belgium, German, France,Italy,Turkey,and Australia. They are bound to defend the philippines China knows this as well i think the purpose of the limited engagement thing is in case they attack a ship they can go oops sorry didnt mean to do that we told them not to be aggressors etc.

reply to post by dragonridr

Happens all the time in war i can gurantee 4 gorges would be a legitimate target.Along with electrical plants and water treatment plants industries phone lines.In a war you want to do anything to disrupt the enemy's ability to fight.

No I don't believe it would be a legitimate target.

Protocol I is a 1977 amendment protocol to the Geneva Conventions relating to the protection of victims of international armed conflicts.

Articles 56 and 53 outlaw attacks on dams, dikes, nuclear generating stations, and places of worship. The first three are "works and installations containing dangerous forces" and may be attacked but only in ways that do not threaten to release the dangerous forces (i.e., it is permissible to attempt to capture them but not to try to destroy them). link

reply to post by Bassago


If it came right down to it and it was a matter of survival, would you really not do whatever you had to in order to win?

And further, do you not think that they would hesitate to do the same?

What's funny is that it would be fairly easy put the Chinese navy in check on these sort of things if a handful of countries in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific created an alliance. (Looking at the regional economics, if combined they'd could be considered a "mini superpower". Not to mention able to choke anything coming or going from Africa or the Mideast.) But from what I understand, they have too many petty squabbles between themselves that prevent them from organizing and dealing in a strategic way with what may be the bigger threat.

Agit8dChopYou know the Germans outdid other European nations on spending and military tech.
The only reason the Russians won? was numbers. The Nazi's were astounded by the Russians ability to never run out of men.

The Russians had a way to get their troops to Germany. China has no way to get troops to the US. So the comparison is 100% invalid.

reply to post by Krazysh0t


They already have to some extent that we are aware of. We have discovered FAKE cloned chips within our military inventory and supply chain.

The kicker is the chips we have discovered are the easiest one to find. They are typically Clones with the intent to cut corner in the name of profit. Therefore, some (not all) cheap clones will be discovered when Random lot test are performed during the QA and stress tests.

The problem is: What is the likely hood that China has an NSA type agency where they tell manufactures to purposely put back doors on the chips. These are extremely difficult to catch because they do not cut corners as profit is not their intent and they will pass the QA and stress test with flying colors.

From November 2007 through May 2010, U.S. Customs officials said they seized 5.6 million bogus chips. Yet many more are finding their way into the U.S. and even the military, which federal officials consider especially worrisome because it could affect national security.

Commerce officials partly blamed the Iraq and Afghanistan wars for diminishing the supplies of chips the military normally uses for equipment repairs and forcing it to rely on questionable dealers for replacement parts. Moreover, both studies cited serious flaws in the Pentagon's procedures for spotting sham components.

Read more at: phys.org...

The year-long investigation found large numbers of counterfeit parts – mainly from China – have been making their way into critical defense systems. A 112-report produced by the committee highlights cases in the U.S. Air Force's largest cargo plane and in assemblies intended to go in special operations helicopters and U.S. Navy surveillance planes.

www.eetimes.com...

I started a thread on this a bit back. www.abovetopsecret.com...

Which leads me to ask why are we willing to take such risks with our defense systems? Is China really an enemy or a threat or are officials in office and the military that naive?

vind21

OccamsRazor04

Argyll
reply to post by TDawgRex

 

Did you ever stop to think for a moment that if China starts a restricted war (yea...that worked so well in the ME didn't it?), then we basically don't have to pay off our debt to them since they have attacked one of our allies?

I see what you are saying, but I think China are playing the long game, they are a very powerful nation, if, and it's a big if at the moment, they make any moves in the Philippines then they will most certainly have taken the US debt into consideration.....and to be brutally honest, if the only contingency plan the US have taken to deter the Chinese from any military action is "if you attack one of our allies then we ain't paying our bills"......then things aren't looking too good!

No we have the ability to wipe China from the face of the Earth if we wanted, and prevent any invasion by Chinese forces with ease. China has zero force projection and would be unable to retaliate with any conventional weapons.

^^^^ This.

There is a cevat, however, china doesn't need to project force to mainland USA. We have to come to them to defend the philipines, probably certain doom for our forces. If our pacific fleet were to be more or less wiped out, there wouldn't be the several months of rebuilding time we had during WWII, and then there is Russia, who does have some force projection ability left.

It's a messy situation if China were to openly attack and invade and simply wipe out the civilian population.... it will be WWIII

Outside the Chinese mainland (where said Island is) China would be unable to effectively fight against our Naval forces. All we would have to do is blockade China and wait for them to collapse. China then would have to attack our forces to break the blockade, which they do not have the capacity to do.

ketsuko
reply to post by Bassago

 

If it came right down to it and it was a matter of survival, would you really not do whatever you had to in order to win?

And further, do you not think that they would hesitate to do the same?

edit on 13-1-2014 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)

If it came to the destruction of America by China or visa versa then yes I believe it could happen. Over a disputed island in the Pacific not so much. There is war and then there's genocide. If the latter begins we are all lost.

reply to post by Bassago


I agree .. unless China used nuclear weapons we would never do that. Completely unecessary, China has no hopes in a conventional war with the US.