US aircraft carrier and supporting warships Begin Patrols in South China Sea

a reply to: the2ofusr1

Because it impacts global trade, and there are MANY countries, and most of them want US help.

The issue with the Philippines is a long explanation. The previous administration wanted US help. Obama basically told the Philippines to go screw when Duterte got elected, so Duterte said no, you go screw, I will make friends with Russia and China.

Now that Trump is in office relations with the Philippines is much better. Now take a closer look at your source ...

"The Hague ruling will not be on the agenda in the sense that it’s already part of international law," Foreign Affairs Undersecretary Enrique Manalo told reporters ahead of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) meeting chaired by the Philippines in April.

So your source says it won't be on the agenda because China already lost, and the matter is established law. Nowhere does it say China is allowed to keep it and nothing is being done and the PI doesn't want the land.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Because it impacts global trade, and there are MANY countries, and most of them want US help. The issue with the Philippines is a long explanation.

If you break down trade that passes through the area its pretty much a China thing with them having around 85% of the traffic . The other 15% can easily bypass the area ,so its not crucial but would be a inconvenience . The long explanation you suggest is not a occams approach but if the long explanation is the only explanation then relying on one news source or one persons opinion might not be the best approach . This link journal-neo.org... has many different writers on the area and the situation ... At the end of the day though it still comes down to why the US has moved there ,and seemed to be determined about it .

China has not stopped anyone from using it as a trade route ...not yet .And it wouldn't make sense for them to do so because it might drag the US into a conflict with them ...

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte reiterated last month he wanted to avoid confrontation with China and saw no need to press Beijing to abide by the July ruling that went in favor of the Philippines.

www.reuters.com...

I wonder why the US would be moving in to the area ? The seems to be a bit of a disconnect going on here .If I steal my neighbors garbage bin and they don't have a problem with me keeping it then what business would it be to our other neighbor ? ...If it was a big enough sin to the owner then they would proceed with actions against me if I didn't give it back .No one of the parties directly involved is doing that ...Its a neighbor on the other side of town that is intruding into my neighborhood without me or my neighbors request . So what is really going on here ?

Well, to take your analogy:

If your neighbour (china) steals your (in this case, the Philippines') garbage bin and you're fully aware that, should you attempt to take it back or demand it back, your neighbour, who's built like a brick outhouse and has a propensity for violence, has both the means and perhaps the will to come round to your house and beat you senseless, or maybe worse, then you're more than likely going to say "nah, keep it, it's no big deal".

Now, lets say you have a friend who lives across town. He's a hard bastard; beefy, strong and isn't afraid of a scrap. He hates bullies and he hears about your situation. He knows you're only saying "keep it" because you're scared and your neighbour is bigger and harder than you.
Chances are, he might take it upon himself to go round there and have a word.
He might start out by asking nicely, then maybe saying he'll phone the cops, then, when your neighbour says he doesn't care and tells him he doesn't give a toss about what the cops think, maybe he tells him "look, you give it back or there's gonna be some trouble", maybe he gives him "the look" and even does a bit of flexing and posturing to show he's serious.

Now, you might not really want your friend doing that because you're afraid of possible repercussions from the neighbour once he's gone, but you can't tell me you wouldn't also be secretly pretty chuffed that he'd stood up to them.




Anyway, not saying this is all true, just a thought that occurred to me when i read your post....

Vietnam PM wants stronger U.S. role in South China Sea
www.reuters.com...

a reply to: the2ofusr1

Like I said, read your source again, it says the land belonging to the Philippines won't be discussed because it's already settled international law. Nowhere does your source say it belongs to China, it says the opposite.

originally posted by: the2ofusr1

China has not stopped anyone from using it as a trade route ...not yet .And it wouldn't make sense for them to do so because it might drag the US into a conflict with them ...

It doesn't today, but the land is not theirs, them stealing it means they are willing to do what they want when they feel they can.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

It doesn't today, but the land is not theirs, them stealing it means they are willing to do what they want when they feel they can.

Such is the case where I live in Canada .It seems to go on all around the world but in the South China Sea case there doesnt seem to be any displaced peoples ... just sayin This piece takes a closer look at the subject

The US Has Run Out of Friends in Asia, So Brings Along Europe Client regimes the United States and its European allies have cultivated throughout the region have either turned on them or have been effectively removed from power, or even the prospect of ever holding power again. The Philippines, quite literally a territory of the United States until the end of World War 2, and a nation that vacillated between independence from and interdependence with Washington for decades since, has recently become more vocal about perceived inequities in Manila-Washington relations. This is primarily because of the much more significant – and growing – ties Manila has with Beijing.

US-backed opposition forces in Malaysia have repeatedly tried and failed to oust the ruling government in street protests led by Anwar Ibrahim’s political alliance under the brand name “Bersih.” In neighboring Thailand, Thaksin Shinawatra and his political opposition party were ousted from power in 2014 and have since been incrementally picked apart through legislative and judicial proceedings. Even as Shinawatra clung to power, Thailand’s establishment began shifting away from Cold War ties with the US and toward closer ties with not only Beijing, but also Moscow as well as its regional neighbors. journal-neo.org...

a reply to: the2ofusr1

So as long as no one is displaced, the US can steal all land they want from Canada?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

So as long as no one is displaced, the US can steal all land they want from Canada?

Sure have at it ...It would just be someone stealing something from someone who already stole it ...what is your point ?

a reply to: the2ofusr1

So you have no problem with another country stealing whatever they want from whomever they want.

I find that too incredulous to be true.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I live in what is known as Atlantic Canada . The First Nation tribes have never ceded 1 acre of land to the Crown .We may legally own it but what can we do ? Oh and it is a much bigger area then those Islands with many many people .We speak but are not heard .What can we do ...Call another foreign country's army . Would that be the best way to go or would letting the Crown Corporation Canada deal with the first nations people ... It is a long complicated subject . I think even more so then some small group of islands some other country built where there were none ,half way around the world .

a reply to: the2ofusr1

So the land of the First Nation tribes doesn't belong to them. Good, that's how it should be, right?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Did you miss the part that there has never been 1 acre of land ceded to the crown ? In other words the original owners of the land still own it legally under international law .

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Taggart

Obama was the leader of the left, who told America to get used to jobs leaving.
The right is trying to save jobs .. you called them wrong ..

The adhoms must be because you have no argument.

The ad homs?

Did you see the comment I replied to?

Your reading comprehension is atrocious so let me elaborate.



if you can read THE RIGHT started the ad homs.

No Obama mentions, no job mentions.

Nice try though.

Grab em by the Chyna.

a reply to: Taggart

What does that have to do with your adhom to me? Nothing? Thought so.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Taggart

What does that have to do with your adhom to me? Nothing? Thought so.

What ad Hom? Calling you childish for the fact you brought up Jobs, Obama and lots of other unconnected items in reply to my post.
It was childish.

It's like you making a pro Trump post and me saying "I can't believe you are against Rape"

They aren't connected.

a reply to: Taggart

No, you tried to be witty. I asked what is wrong about jobs, as that seems to be the #1 priority of the people you called wrong.

Rather than answer you lashed out with adhoms.

I guess it's hard when Trump has done something Obama said could not be done unless he had a magic wand.

originally posted by: gortex

Did you seriously listen to that 6 minutes of Tripe?

No ... the US is not gonna stir up crap with China ... ... right now.

They've gotta finish up in the Middle East first.

a reply to: Snarl

I thought the video was OK , referenced and sourced mainly from the mouth of Rex Tillerson himself.
In normal circumstances I would agree the US isn't gonna stir up crap with China but these are normal circumstances , we will have to wait and see if China's response is measured or defencive.