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.
Satellite images taken on 14 February appear to show two batteries of eight missile launchers and a radar system on Woody or Yongxing Island in the Paracels.
The presence of missiles would significantly increase tensions in the acrimonious South China Sea dispute.
China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi said reports were a Western media invention.
But Mr Wang defended "the limited and necessary self-defence facilities" on islands inhabited by Chinese personnel as "consistent with the right for self-preservation and self-protection.... under the international law".
Asked about the reports, US Secretary of State John Kerry attacked China's increased "militarisation" of the contested region, saying it was a "serious concern".
GREENE: And this island is disputed, we mentioned. That means China claims that it belongs to them, but other countries also claim same thing.
LANGFITT: Absolutely. And, of course, this is the problem across the South China Sea. China's controlled it for a long time. I want to remind people this is not one of those artificial islands that they basically built from sand. China's had it for many years. They've got a population of about 1,400 Chinese there. But Vietnam and Taiwan, they also consider it to be their territory as well.
GREENE: OK, so those are countries that are friendly with the United States. This is China now, as we understand it, putting surface-to-air missiles that could take down aircraft. This sounds pretty significant.
LANGFITT: I think it is. I've been talking to a lot of analysts today, and this is the first time most of them can remember China actually putting missiles on disputed islands. It might have happened a long time ago, but certainly recently, as we've seen in the last few years, there's been a lot of tension in the region. And this is the first time that people can really remember this happening. And people generally, I think, saw it as China upping the stakes in the area and kind of making the next tactical move. The U.S. Admiral Harry Harris - he's head of U.S. Pacific Command - he was in Tokyo today. He did a briefing, and he said that this represents a militarization of the South China Sea. And I think it's important for people back in the States to remember that these are really crucial sea lanes. A lot happens out here. You've got more than $5 trillion in trade. Twenty percent of that is U.S. trade. All the oil goes to Japan through the South China Sea. And we also have these countries here - China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan - all kind of arguing over these islands.
originally posted by: Sargeras
a reply to: SLAYER69
This is what happens when you give one of the most brutal regimes in modern times trillions of dollars from the west.
China should have been treated like North Korea long ago.
All we are seeing is them treating the world like they do their own people.
This is what happens when the west places weaklings in power.
We sent a rabbit to deal with a pack of wolves.
originally posted by: Tarzan the apeman.
a reply to: SLAYER69
www.nytimes.com...
Lets build some islands and take over some waters. I say if they can do it anyone can do it. We can take and charge countries for using our waters for shipping.
Way to destroy some reefs dumb arses.
originally posted by: the owlbear
originally posted by: Sargeras
a reply to: SLAYER69
This is what happens when you give one of the most brutal regimes in modern times trillions of dollars from the west.
China should have been treated like North Korea long ago.
All we are seeing is them treating the world like they do their own people.
This is what happens when the west places weaklings in power.
We sent a rabbit to deal with a pack of wolves.
China is no different than the US.
Except in one regard...look around your place. Everything you own. Look where it was made. Obviously you're not Amish since you're online. But I guarantee you up to 75% of what you own was in China at one point in time.
You can thank that weak president Nixon and weak Hank Kissinger for all of this.
Both were staunch anti communists if I remember. Born in '75, so I just know what the books tell me.
originally posted by: SLAYER69
a reply to: the owlbear
Nixon going to China was an attempt to split the Communist world in two, between the Soviet Union and Red China, it worked but had helped create our present situation where we find ourselves now. The former Clinton Administration and others Kowtowing carried the ball further.
originally posted by: Tarzan the apeman.
a reply to: SLAYER69
www.nytimes.com...
Lets build some islands and take over some waters. I say if they can do it anyone can do it. We can take and charge countries for using our waters for shipping.
Way to destroy some reefs dumb arses.
originally posted by: Sargeras
originally posted by: the owlbear
originally posted by: Sargeras
a reply to: SLAYER69
This is what happens when you give one of the most brutal regimes in modern times trillions of dollars from the west.
China should have been treated like North Korea long ago.
All we are seeing is them treating the world like they do their own people.
This is what happens when the west places weaklings in power.
We sent a rabbit to deal with a pack of wolves.
China is no different than the US.
Except in one regard...look around your place. Everything you own. Look where it was made. Obviously you're not Amish since you're online. But I guarantee you up to 75% of what you own was in China at one point in time.
You can thank that weak president Nixon and weak Hank Kissinger for all of this.
Both were staunch anti communists if I remember. Born in '75, so I just know what the books tell me.
I was born in 78' so I'm in the same boat, though I blame it more in free trade agreements, and weak leadership under Clinton.
We are so screwed, China owned the rare earth market.
To quote call of duty black ops 2" what kind of idiot builds an entire military infrastructure based on a market completely controlled by China!!? "
Shakes head walks away....
originally posted by: 727Sky
originally posted by: Tarzan the apeman.
a reply to: SLAYER69
www.nytimes.com...
Lets build some islands and take over some waters. I say if they can do it anyone can do it. We can take and charge countries for using our waters for shipping.
Way to destroy some reefs dumb arses.
By the time all the environmental impact statements and protest are finished China could own all of S.E. Asia, Taiwan, the Philippines, Singapore, and no telling what else !
There is a reason America is sucking up to Vietnam and other countries in the region. China says, and the others say, which may be played out with lives lost if reason cannot be once again established.
How about a nuclear power plant for powering the islands
youtu.be...
originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: SLAYER69
Well who would have guessed..
China stated only civilian infrastructures would be built on the islands.
I believe the phrase obama is looking for is -
"Oh good grief".
originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: the owlbear
You mean the Marshall plan? The inception of the United nations? The creation of NATO to counter the soviet threat who occupied east Europe for 50 + years.
The bases were by mutual consent. Don't believe me research France and what occurred when they left NATO. Although im not really sure how it has a bearing on the China topic.
A for effort on the snarky response though.