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

page: 2
25
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 07:35 PM
link   

continue to have any reputation on the world scene.


America has some left. Lol




posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by TDawgRex
 

Then again...being ATS and all for a good conspiracy theory?

China would be among (maybe) 2-3 in the world that would actually be capable of striking the Mainland U.S. in crippling ways but which may not even kill, if you think carefully.

Now I can see situations created, in our current condition as a nation, where priorities would suddenly be about troops back here for security and basic infrastructure support for a few months ..and then? Well, again, to entertain conspiracy for how the Chinese play Chess, Obama wouldn't much care what was happening in the West Pacific for a while. There can come a level of immediate 'uhh..this needs fixed' that would overwhelm even revenge thinking...for at least a while, anyway.

I suppose if there is truth to the story here, China would have thought some of this through well a. of this move on the board.

May we live in interesting times, eh?


Well, there are those who are saying that the H1N1, H5N1, H5N9 strains are growing to a pandemic rate. That would fill the conspiracy bill. And if I'm not mistaken, all those strains originated in Asia...if not actually China. I would bet that if we see people dropping like flies, war is not that far off.

Crap! Here I go sounding like the Book of Revelations.



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 




and it will if they attack the Philippines, they will have to commit to the war machine and conquering resources to stay prosperous. Shortly expect wars into Japan (might as well get those islands back while they are reclaiming things).


Considering the escalating rhetoric between China and Japan this is not farfetched. Taking Japans talk of increasing militarization it makes this seem all the more plausible. The Japanese leaders would have more intelligence on these issues than the public.



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 07:44 PM
link   

We (America) should sit this one out...


Well now, isn't this interesting. I would have thought America would have already perceived the disadvantage of getting involved in a military dispute with China, the loss of American lives would be immense. Having said that though, the following (referring to China) is a quote from the New York Times in December...

“The United States strongly opposes the use of intimidation, coercion or aggression to advance territorial claims,” Mr. Kerry said. “The United States remains firmly committed to the security of the Philippines and the region.”
...so I guess America will have to follow through with its bellicose rhetoric Should China attack the island...and a very different proposition it will be to that of the Muslim war machine. American military will be fighting against a foe with similar technology and weaponry, and against a very formidable infantry.

America would have to gain air superiority, which I believe it will, but would China allow itself to lose an entire battle group without resorting to non-conventional weaponry? Now that is the question...

Of course, many of you will think China may well be a push over, but if China does attack the Philippine island, they would have already considered America's military response and will be prepared for it. I think the Chinese may have a few deadly surprises up their sleeves? I don't think they would even contemplate this action without making sure they had the means and ability to defend it, even against America. I for one would never over-estimate the Chinese, but even more important, I would never want to under-estimate them either.
edit on 12/1/14 by elysiumfire because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 07:46 PM
link   

EA006

continue to have any reputation on the world scene.


America has some left. Lol


Nice joke, but despite our meddling in third world countries, our nation still has MUCH international clout. We could easily get the UK involved in any dispute we wanted. Same goes for Canada. In East Asia, we are best buds with Japan, South Korea, and the Philippines. You can recognize a two of those as countries that China has threatened recently and one that North Korea has threatened all the time. A few European nations are wary of us, but that doesn't mean we couldn't get their backing if a situation like the one I described in the OP were to kick off. Oh yeah and Israel loves us (whatever that means, I have a feeling their definition of support when we need it would be FAR different than what they demand from us on a regular basis).

These are at the top of my .. I'm sure our military might could bully a few other nations into siding with us, like we did back in 2003.

ETA: Oh yea I forgot two more key players in that region of the world. New Zealand and Australia, both of which are again best buds with the US. Not to mention, I'm pretty sure they are HIGHLY interested in the actions of China, since once China is down with the Philippines and Japan, they could easily turn their .s towards those two countries.
edit on 12-1-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 07:49 PM
link   
Krazysh0t:

We could easily get the UK involved in any dispute we wanted.


Oh yeah! Didn't work too well with Syria did it? Do you think we are your lackeys or something? The British people will decide what dispute they'll allow themselves to get involved in. You go up against China you are on your own, pal!
edit on 12/1/14 by elysiumfire because: (no reason given)

edit on 12/1/14 by elysiumfire because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by elysiumfire
 


People always forget that China is pretty resource poor. Where will they get the oil to supply such operations? They can be cut off pretty quickly and the Russians don't really have any love for them either. China is pretty much completely surrounded with no resources to mobilize its army. They just use tough rhetoric so this is probably an attempt to force some type of concessions with negotiations while appearing to be intimidating. More or less a nod to Japan that their expansionist ideas are not going unnoticed but I do not see any conflict coming from this to be honest.



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Snarl
This is one (of many) scenarios that's been a long time in the making. The PI got a little too independent ... and now they've got superpowers bickering over their turf.

Looking at the politics, I'd guess the US will 'balk', allow China to 'take' for hidden concessions, and then disallow the sweet savor of 'the win.'


Id say the best move is let china attack the island they wont try to keep it right now theres nothing there.Then the US can immediately appropriate all chinese interests in the US for attacking an ally.There goes half the national debt.Though China knows this and isnt going to risk it for an island.There just beating drums hoping to intimidate the philippines,malaysia,south korea,vietnam,taiwan and brunei . There i think i got everybody did you notice how many people have problems with china? Practically every neighbor it has has some land dispute with china because there is also india,north korea,bhuttan oh and almost forgot pakistan and well mongolia. Apparently China doesnt play well with others the nrrd a timo out.



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 07:55 PM
link   

elysiumfire
Krazysh0t:

We could easily get the UK involved in any dispute we wanted.


Oh yeah! Didn't work too well with Syria did it? Do you think we are your lackeys or something? The British people will decide what dispute they'll allow themselves to get involved in. You go up against China you are on your own, pal!
edit on 12/1/14 by elysiumfire because: (no reason given)

edit on 12/1/14 by elysiumfire because: (no reason given)


We didn't go into Syria either, so that is a moot point. Not to mention Syria is just some random third world country. The Philippines happens to be an international ally of not just the US but also the UK. Do not for a second think that your country would be able to stay out of this conflict if it kicks off.



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 07:57 PM
link   

elysiumfire
Krazysh0t:

We could easily get the UK involved in any dispute we wanted.


Oh yeah! Didn't work too well with Syria did it? Do you think we are your lackeys or something? The British people will decide what dispute they'll allow themselves to get involved in. You go up against China you are on your own, pal!
edit on 12/1/14 by elysiumfire because: (no reason given)

edit on 12/1/14 by elysiumfire because: (no reason given)


Completely different circumstances. Who do you think would be the big dog in the room if the US got hammered? Economically that would be China. I'm sure the will have no problems seeing the EU as "junior" partners of the upcoming Eurasian domination of the world. I'm not so sure they'll go easy on you though.



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 08:01 PM
link   

EA006
reply to post by Bassago
 


The U.S won't do ***t. As per.


The Philippines was very close to becoming the 51st State. If China attacked and this current administration stood by then Americans should revolt as that is as egregious an offense you can do to an ally, and afterwards we would have no Allies at all.



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 08:02 PM
link   

EA006
reply to post by Bassago
 


The U.S won't do ***t. As per.


You are dead wrong.

I'm following this since 2011, The plan was laid out at least on 2011, most probably before that.
China is also playing this game. This chess board worth more than Middle East doubled.
Current strategic and economic winner is - USA.

By 2015, my 2011 prophecy will come true.

edit on 12-1-2014 by NullVoid because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 08:06 PM
link   

EA006
reply to post by Argyll
 


They can, but they won't. China takes one island, then another, then another. The U.S does nothing.
China has a strong military easily transported to the area. Boots on the ground. The U.S does nothing.
China flips off America.....you see where this is going.


China is an ant right now anywhere outside the Chinese mainland. They have zero force projection power and would be completely unable to land any boot anywhere without US allowance. In 15-20 years this might have changed, but right now China is more than happy to not spend money on force projection and allow the US to spend it's money ensuring the trade security China enjoys.



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 08:13 PM
link   

elysiumfire
Krazysh0t:

We could easily get the UK involved in any dispute we wanted.


Oh yeah! Didn't work too well with Syria did it? Do you think we are your lackeys or something? The British people will decide what dispute they'll allow themselves to get involved in. You go up against China you are on your own, pal!
edit on 12/1/14 by elysiumfire because: (no reason given)

edit on 12/1/14 by elysiumfire because: (no reason given)


Wishful thinkin'...pal. What the people want and what the Gov't does are two different things.

But I don't really see the UK adding a whole lot to this mess with the exception of Intel and some Spec-Ops. I suspect that the AUS/NZ military will do more heavy lifting then the UK.

It just boils down to logistics and who is in the neighborhood.
edit on 12-1-2014 by TDawgRex because: Spelling



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 08:16 PM
link   

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.



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 08:17 PM
link   
reply to post by NullVoid
 


We'll see how that pans out.

America: "Hey China stop messin' with our shizzle! or we'll do stuff..."
China: "O.k o.k we stop now, we behave"
America: "Well o.k then, now run along you little scamp"

That's not what's happening. If China needs resources they'll take them.



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by TDawgRex
 

Then again...being ATS and all for a good conspiracy theory?

China would be among (maybe) 2-3 in the world that would actually be capable of striking the Mainland U.S. in crippling ways but which may not even kill, if you think carefully.

Now I can see situations created, in our current condition as a nation, where priorities would suddenly be about troops back here for security and basic infrastructure support for a few months ..and then? Well, again, to entertain conspiracy for how the Chinese play Chess, Obama wouldn't much care what was happening in the West Pacific for a while. There can come a level of immediate 'uhh..this needs fixed' that would overwhelm even revenge thinking...for at least a while, anyway.

I suppose if there is truth to the story here, China would have thought some of this through well a. of this move on the board.

May we live in interesting times, eh?


I would say it is the opposite. The US Navy can blockade Chinese ports preventing all trade from entering or leaving completely crippling China. Meanwhile we can import from India and other places to lessen the impact on the US (although there would be an impact).

As far as military strikes go, China has no way to effect Mainland USA other than nuclear attacks, which would be responded to in kind. We have much greater defensive capabilities meaning China would be annihilated while the US wouldn't (though the US would certainly be hurt badly). This means a nuclear attack is all but impossible to happen.



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 08:20 PM
link   

EA006
reply to post by NullVoid
 


We'll see how that pans out.

America: "Hey China stop messin' with our shizzle! or we'll do stuff..."
China: "O.k o.k we stop now, we behave"
America: "Well o.k then, now run along you little scamp"

That's not what's happening. If China needs resources they'll take them.


It's pretty hard to take resources when you have someone bombing the crap out of you every time you think you have the damage from the last bombing run repaired.

Just ask Nazi Germany, circa 1939-1945. Oh, they had a sporting go at it for a couple of years, but in the long run...well, we all know how that turned out.



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 08:22 PM
link   
reply to post by TDawgRex
 


Yeah they folded shop and .ed across the ocean to the country that bombed them......



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


I don't think many of them trust us right now. Maybe if the administration changes hands and they feel they can trust the new admin, but even then, we've gone back on a lot of agreements this past five years and done things that haven't set well or made sense to our previous allies in the world.

Besides, China has made diplomatic and trade moves with those in the region (like Australia). The whole region is one big mess of negotiations over proposed FTAs right now. China and Japan are in the thick of things.



Now, however, both the Chinese and Australian governments have renewed their support for an FTA, and seem determined to push an agreement through in the next 12 months. “It’s time to sign the agreement,” said Australian Minister for Industry Ian Macfarlane during an early November visit to China. Macfarlane added that he hopes a comprehensive deal will be ready in time for Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s visit to China in 2014. Abbott has also expressed his support for the FTA, although he has hinted that the deal might not be a comprehensive one. “I’ve always taken the view that you should take what you can get today and pitch for the rest tomorrow,” Abbott told reporters during the October APEC Summit in Bali. Meanwhile, when Chinese President Xi Jinping met with Australia’s Governor-General in early November, he listed completion of the China-Australia FTA as his first priority for China-Australia relations.

...

For one thing, Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott, who assumed office on September 18, is determined to increase ties between China and Australia. Former Prime Minister Julia Gillard, who held office from June 2010 – June 2013, placed more emphasis on Australia’s relationship with the U.S. Under her leadership, Australia agreed to host U.S. marines in the city of Darwin, a move that surprised and worried Chinese leaders. By contrast, Abbott has taken pains to repair Australia’s relationship with China. A renewed push for the FTA is one part of those efforts.

In addition, the Asia-Pacific region seems to have caught a general case of FTA fever, with numerous bilateral and multilateral free trade zones under negotiation. On a large scale, there is something of a race to complete two separate expansive multilateral agreements: the Trans-Pacific Partnership (which would include Australia, Brunei, Chile, Canada, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the U.S., and Vietnam), and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (which covers ASEAN, Australia, China, India, Japan, New Zealand, and South Korea).


So you see, Australia voted for regime change, and the new regime is more friendly to China and the idea of trade over the South Pacific.

So much for getting the Aussies to come when we call ...

This is what happens when you elect someone who alienates anyone and everyone who might have been, should have been, your natural ally in the world in his haste to appease your enemies.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join