How many of you have seen this:

http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/us-yes-china-we-did-send-a-small-armada-to-the-south-china-sea/ar-BBqmdTM?li=AAgfYrC&ocid=mailsignout

Big question is: Who will Australia support if and when this dispute escalates into war, China or the US?

What we have here is two equally belligerent nations in China and the US. China is clearly militarizing these disputed islands. The US like a bully boy is doing its best to escalate tensions in the region. A region somewhat remote from the United States, but when has that stopped them.
Australia like a subservient lap dog will side with the US. Nothing new in that. if it comes to all out war as Mr Opinion suggests it could, China may nuk Brisbane, and the US may then nuk Hanoi, or vise versa, no matter peace can then be restored will little damage done.

Hi Paul,

Why would the US nuke Hanoi ? One major point that you overlook is that the small countries in the region are happy for the UDS to be there to protect their interests - Vietnam and the Philippines are negotiating the use of bases by the Yanks.

It's international waterways that we're talking about: nobody's national territory, so the Yanks have as much right to send their ships there as anybody else - with the warm support of the Vietnamese and Philippines, and perhaps Taiwan, Malaysia and Indonesia as well.

So who's the bully ?

Joe

Did anyone catch Niall Ferguson's three part TV documentary on China in which he warned that a major protracted economic downturn in China's economy (like what is happening now) could create nationalistic tensions amongst the Chinese pushing the Communist Party into war against its traditional belligerents? I think Ferguson is correct in his assessment. But I am biased in that I'm a great fan of Ferguson's world history perspective.

I think the first country to fall victim in such a war would be Taiwan. After all the Chinese still maintain that Taiwan is not an independent nation and belongs to the Chinese nation-state. Maybe that's why China's ally North Korea has nuclear capability, in order to strike South Korea and Japan and thus block a northerly advance by the US into China. And if Taiwan is the intended victim that might make sense of why China is building a defensive wall of man made military islands in the seas south of Taiwan.

Sorry about that Joe, President Donald has apologized about that slight indiscretion, seems a rough second lieutenant in the US Airforce took it upon himself to nuk Hanoi by mistake the intended target was Pyongyang. President Donald hopes that the nuking of Hanoi will not have any long term effects on the friendly relations the US and Vietnam have enjoyed since the early 1950's. Besides President Donald has committed $50 trillion to the rebuilding of Hanoi, based on the layout of Chicago, a win win situation. Another $50 trillion for the rebuilding of Pyongyang will be forth coming next week. PM Wong thinks she can squeeze a couple of bucks out of China to rebuild Brisbane, being one of the family and all that, Australia hopes to include a Disney type theme park in the rebuild, especially for Chinese tourists, another win win situation.

Hi Mr Opinion,

I agree that China may be heading for some very severe internal problems - as you say, an economic downturn (I suspect a major downturn), but also major demographic problems in five or ten years, certainly before 2030, as the first generation of single-child parents ALL reach retirement age.

I'd predict that, even though China has tried to reverse its one-child policy, that it may take a long time, if ever, for the next generations to get used to the idea of having more than one child themselves. So the number of working Chinese may start to decline after 2020-2025, and more and more young people will be expected to financially support (either personally or through their taxes) more and more old people.

And a much higher proportion of those younger people are now highly educated - where do you reckon they would like to work ? The migratory drain on work-force numbers will only exacerbate China's economic and social problems.

So your suggestion that " .... if Taiwan is the intended victim that might make sense of why China is building a defensive wall of man made military islands in the seas south of Taiwan .... " may be partly right: I would suggest further that China is intent on seizing the entire South China Sea as national waterways, and to that end, they may leave Taiwan alone, since it supports that policy - after all, the Kuomintang devised that policy back in 1947.

In its conquest of that region, China will pick on the weakest of the countries there, perhaps Vietnam. It's ironic that the Vietnamese economy is now not just growing faster than China's, but that there are very active industrial and trade links between southern China and Vietnam. Indeed, an economic axis is developing from southern China through Vietnam and Laos to Thailand. The last thing the region needs is Chinese aggression, and ultimately, that's the case for China itself.

Joe

Hi Paul,

Quite amusing really. children love that sort of thing. Yuk yuk. But back to reality:

Are you suggesting that Trump, as President, would be a Chinese ally ? i.e. in attacking Vietnam ? And that, for all his pseudo-right-wing bluster, he is actually a Chinese agent ? So he wouldn't order any B-52s to bomb some of the shoals that the Chinese are building on ? That would be quite easy from any new Vietnamese or Filipino bases - after all, the Scarborough Shoals that the Chinese are claiming, are only about 120 miles from Manila and 1000 miles from China, Filipino fisherman have been living on those shoals for thousands of years before a Chinese ship passed by in 1420 or so and 'thereby' claimed them ?

Frankly, Paul, I think that China is more likely to nuke Hanoi than the US. Do you want to revise your story to match reality ?

Or, from the news just in, to make room in your story for North Korea to nuke South Korea ?

Joe

Dear Loudmouth,

That is another possible scenario, but one bound in economic determinism. I think I'm correct with my Taiwan hypothesis based on the premise that the war would be driven my nationalistic sentiment, with greater China wanting to incorporate Taiwan into a global Chinese empire.

The question is: Who will Australia support? The US or China? I don't think Australia will have the option of sitting it out because that will leave it vulnerable, with the US ignoring it and China lining it up for annexation.

Hi Mr Opinion,

I think that Australia will support the international law of the seas, like the US. I wish the ABC and SBS would stop referring incorrectly to these shoals, Scarborough, the Paracels and the Spratleys, as 'islands': they are shoals and reefs, underwater at high tide, and thereby - according to international law - not claimable by any country as their national territory.

There are reefs and shoals all over the world: just because one powerful country decides to build a shoal up to support an air-base, doesn't give it the slightest legality.

Joe

China is clearly the bully, and the enemy of all countries including its Asian neighbours. China deems itself far superior to all other civilisations, as did Japan prior to its defeat in WW2. Japan has modified its feelings of superiority by being thrashed and realising that its Emperor is not divine. China needs the same lesson; and, anyone feeling it necessary to ask which 'side' Australia will be on should be fitted for a straitjacket.

Dear ttbn, I take it you think Australia will support the US.

Dear Loudmouth, I take it you think Australia will stay out of a war between the US and China.

@ Loudmouth, Monday, 7 March 2016 12:15:16 PM

Well said.

China is already threatening private mariners and bullying them to go well around its claimed new territory, or else.

There is no justification whatsoever for China's position.

In this context a letter from my son-in-law to The West Australian says it all:

“..most of our politicians express great concern over China’s establishment of a military base in the South China Sea.  Why is it, one is compelled to wonder, that we are unable to acknowledge that whilst a nation such as the United States is permitted to have “Strategic Interests” everywhere in the world, China’s modest expansion is unequivocally condemned?

“The US has more than 700 bases in 38 foreign countries.  China has one.  The US has 95% of all the world’s overseas bases.  The US empire has a quarter of a million military personnel serving at these bases.  China has a few hundred.  With its overseas bases covering close to a quarter of a million hectares, the US military is one of the world’s largest landowners.  China has a few miserable hectares.  The US military budget in 2015 was US$600 billion (that’s a whopping 54% of US Federal government discretionary spending; compare that to the measly 3% it spends on Social Security and unemployment).  Of the $1.7 trillion spent worldwide on military expenditures, the US accounts for 37% of that spending – outspending the next nine largest military budgets around the world combined.

“The US has a permanent war economy and has been at war somewhere in the world pretty much constantly.  So, who should we fear?”

Dear EmperorJulian,

I take it you think Australia should support the China.

Hi Jules,

So what ? Aggression is aggression, no matter how much territory a country already controls. Unless, of course, you think that every country should have a go at being an imperialist aggressor ?

It is illegal to claim shoals and reefs. End of.

Joe

Yep, aggression is aggression, and when it occurs we should support its victims or stay out of it. Who has China attacked? Whose homeland has it invaded? Who are its victims?

We should have supported the victims of American aggression against Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. And Iraq. And Libya. And Syria (yes, overwhelming military support for armed mainly foreign regime changers is aggression).

We should stand firm on our rejection of American demands that we join it in a military challenge to China in the atolls. And if we are going to get excited about Chinese incursions into uninhabited reefs beyond China we should be getting a hell of a lot more excited about aggressive direct and proxy American military incursions into populated countries throughout the Middle East and much of Africa. To say nothing of bullying military threats to countries not yet invaded.

We still owe the world an apology over our connivance with the American proxy invasion and occupation of East Timor using Indonesian war criminals. Nobody who paid any attention could mistake ongoing Portuguese support for East Timor. Where did Australia ever stand? Gareth Evans may be able to tell us.

The time to stand up against China is when it commits actual aggression against any real country. And on the victims' behalf, not America's.

Recently I attended a series of seminars as part of the "Securing our Future in Cyberspace Conference" hosted by the Australian National University (ANU). This gave me inspiration for new material to teach ICT Ethics at ANU: "Cyberwar: Hypothetical Scenario for Teaching ICT Ethics: http://blog.highereducationwhisperer.com/2016/02/cyberwar-over-south-china-sea.html

ps: It happens that in 1997 I found myself as a civilian on-board the USS Blue Ridge, flagship of the US 7th Fleet: http://tomw.net.au/nt/tt97.html

Hi Jules,

Bit of a non sequitur: the Yanks yada yada, all quite true - and China improperly building up shoals a thousand miles from its own territory, firing on and sinking Vietnamese boats, clearly intent on taking over the whole South China Sea - two different issues.

My recollection about the struggle of the people of East Timor is of the US, in 1999, fully backing General Cosgrove and the Australian peace-keeping troops there. But my memory is long enough to remember how the Labor Party sold out the East Timorese to the Indonesians. Remember Balibo ?

Joe

“yada yada yada” is a copout noise that doesn't adequately account for the position we are in as regards the threats to peace and hence to Australia from China and the USA. However one compares them (which we need do in order to make conclusions about our stance w.r.t. the US-China confrontation in the Pacific) there's a lot more to the aggressive global reach of America compared with China's than “yada yada yada”.

Loudmouth's recollection of 1999 is when it was all over bar the shouting. New Indo President Habibe had miscalculated by agreeing to a Timorese referendum on its future and to his astonishment the Timorese voted almost unanimously against any further role for the Indos.

The Yanks' role in the 24-year atrocity is summarised in the Wikipedia entry at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_invasion_of_East_Timor#Indonesian_motivations (scroll down to US involvement and then Australian involvement.) The issues can't be properly addressed by claiming that Labor betrayed East Timor (and Australia and the real Australian heroes who teamed up with the East Timorese against the Japs to whom Soekarno had sold out). Both Tweedles from Whitlam Labor via Fraser Liberal and Hawke and Keating Labor to Howard/Downer Liberal sold this country down the river. My guess is that this was because all five leaderships were honorary Yanks who put America first and the principles over which the war was fought were casually flicked under the bus.

I think that the Australian government will be very reluctant not to support China if the South China Sea dispute scales into war. Reason is that neither the NLP nor Labor will not want to upset Australia's millions of Chinese and risk a backlash from Chinese voters at the federal election. So I think Australia has only one of two choices: either support China militarily against the US or remain neutral during the conflict.

I just saw a news clip posted about 4 hours ago which says that the US has approached the Australian government about placing B-1 supersonic long range bombers in Australia to counter China's annexation of the South China Sea. For those who don't know, the B-1 carries nuclear bombs and has a range of 12,000 km.

This will be a test for the Australian government. Should it stay with a traditional ally or should it appease Australia's Chinese community in order to shore up the votes needed to win a federal election?

It doesn't matter much really.

Support china, & if it wins we would be no better than an owned vassal, China would rule with a similar iron fist to their rule in Tibet. I doubt our treatment would be much better as an ally or a defeated enemy.

Support the yanks & we will continue to be a kind of US protectorate as we are now, receiving few favours other than that, but basically free.

Might as well be dead than a Chinese coolie.

Dear Hasbeen,

It does matter very much. I am one of those who want to live in a free society in which I can have control over what I think and do. I am pro-US and like the Americans I believe in democracy, liberty and free speech. I definitely do not want to see China impose a totalitarian puppet state on us.

Australian politicians' and business leaders' love affair with the Chinese Communist Party has now come back to bite them on the bum. Which is exactly what I have been expecting to happen. China will be very upset if Australia allies itself with the US in countering its annexation of the South China Sea.

Both political parties are now in a dilemma because the Chinese in Australia are in a position to cast the deciding vote in a federal election and I don't think the Chinese voters will be very happy if Australia opposes China, being the land of their kin and ancestors. So if the government - either NLP or Labor - sides with the US it will run the risk of losing government. And if it sides with China or stays neutral it will lose the protection of the US.

Mr. Opinion,

You are either being deliberately obtuse to bait other posters, or you are an idiot.

Of course Australia, even under the fool Turnbull, will support the U.S.A in accordance with the ANZUS treaty.

Any anti-Australian Chinese would be interned during hostilities.

Most Chinese living in Australia didn't leave China because they liked the place. Your ravings about upsetting Chinese-Australias is pure bigotry towards Chinese people who might very well hate the Chinese government as much as any democracy loving person would.

Mr Opinion,

Have you decided on which of the many languages spoken by the Chinese is going to be your bi-lingual other half?

Dear ttbn,

If Australia sides with the US in the conflict what do you think will happen to the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement?

Do you think China could fear that the Australian government might move to nationalise China's business interests in Australia if there is a war?

Do you think Turnbull and the Liberals will risk losing government by turning the large minority of Chinese voters against them at the federal election?

Where are you going to house the several million Chinese in Australia who would be resentful that Australia has turned against the land of their kin and ancestors?

What ever they'd do they won't be speaking Chinese as there ain't no such language.

I'm in New Delhi at the moment and brushing up on my Hindi and French as were visiting Indian friends who are originally from the former French colony of Pondicherry
Hindi is handy and many Indians are fluent in it but I'm fortunate that my wife knows many of the dialect variations.

Dear Is Mise,

I get the impression you think that China's annexation of the greater part of the South China Sea is something of a joke. You either have a low IQ or a very poor knowledge of the world or even worse, both!

China has clearly violated international laws and treaties that it has signed, and is trying bully it neighbors and take their territorial claims by force. Unless Paul and EJ (traditionally Yank haters) are suggesting that this level of aggression is allowed to continue unchecked, some level of action needs to be taken, and presently China is counting on its neighbors being unable to challenge it militarily.

Of course this is having the effect of boosting America's pivot into Asia, with the countries around the south china sea boosting military co operation with the US and offering the use of their ports and bases.

The US and China's neighbors also have the option of sanctions, which given the weakened state of China's economy could tip it into recession, or stagnation.

The Prison Republic of China, PRC, has planted its flag on an uninhabited reef that's not territory of (or even claimed by) any nation except of course the Prison Republic of China itself. Far from being terra nullius it isn't even terra. If this is aggression, against whom is it aggression? The Chinese tried to brush aside the right to free air passage over airspace that isn't anyone's national territory and the Americans have very properly defended this right under international law and flown their aircraft accordingly. The Americans have every right to group their warships anywhere on the Pacific Ocean that they choose and so do the Chinese or even (regrettably) the Indos. For any nation to sail its warships too close to another nation's warships without permission [1] would be aggression, and God has not given the Americans the right to do this even though the Americans may claim ownership of the ocean as they claim ownership of God.

The Pacific Ocean isn't an American lake, PNAC or no PNAC, global Monroe Doctrine or no global Monroe Doctrine.

Of course one may speculate about Chinese intentions to reduce other nations (i.e. us) to the status of Tibet, but speculations about intentions are no excuse for aggression (any aggression) as the Krauts' aggression based on these kinds of assertions got them crushed. Twice.

The ANZUS Treaty which has been a recipe for us meekly making ourselves Deppity Dawg for America is worth reading in full, especially Article V [2]

[1] as is currently being demanded by the freak wing of the LNP.

[2] Google “ANZUS Treaty text”

Hi Jules,

About China's building on reefs and shoals, you ask:

"If this is aggression, against whom is it aggression? "

The obvious answer is: Everybody, according to international law. Particularly when it is obvious that China will use this leap-frogging strategy to occupy and build up more shoals and reefs, and eventually make a claim on the entire South China Sea as its own national waterway.

Or is that just a bit paranoid ? No, I don't think so. That's how the area is displayed on Chinese maps, a legacy from the anti-Communist Kuomintang, who had claimed authority for it from the Manchu invaders of China - a bit like India, having once been in the British Empire, claiming bits and pieces now all over the world which also had once been part of the British Empire, and other bits that Britain had claimed, such as reefs and shoals.

We'll see.

No, the Pacific is not an American lake. And neither is the South China Sea Chinese. Or the Black Sea Russian, if complete irrelevance is the order of the day, in this stupid 'tu quoque' argument.

Interesting that you use the Nazis' excuse of needing 'lebensraum' in relation to Chinese claims on South China Sea reefs. Can you see just a slight contradiction there, Jules ?

Joe

Your post is so confused that I am not sure which side you are arguing on.

The various territorial limits are 12 Nm for territorial waters 24Nm for the contiguous zone (control zone), and 200Nm for economic zone ownership of mineral rights.

China has claimed right up to 12Nm of all those bordering the China sea and has effectively annexed all the mineral and fishing rights of these seas, actually shooting at Filipino fishing boats, and trying to control navigation in one of the busiest water ways in the world.

This is far far more than freedom of navigation, and unless China stops there is a real risk of a shooting war starting.

We are in a very bad position. One day, maybe soon, The US and China will come into conflict. When that happens the first thing we will be TOLD by the seppoes is to stop selling coal and iron ore to china. We will have to choose between our alliance with the americans and destruction of our economy.

Then there is the question of whether the americans would/could really protect us if it came down to china saying we want those resources and we are going to take them.

Our best hope in those circumstances, and I believe us Aussies could do it, is to arm the whole population and tell the chinese they will have to kill every single one of us if they want our country. And we will take as many of them with us as we can. Even the chinese would probably baulk at that.

Not too sure about that Mikk, it could backfire.

More than half our population could not hit a barn wall, from the inside, with the door shut, with a shot gun. I would not like most of them standing behind me armed, even if on my side.

Then we have the likes of EmperorJulian, Paul & a few others who going by their posts could even be on the other side, if we were on the US side. I most definitely would not like them behind me.

Hopefully sanity will prevail. The Chinese needs the US, & to a lesser extent the EU consumers. Without them the whole Chinese pack of cards economy comes tumbling down.

Perhaps things are worse than we know with their economy now, & they are playing this game to build a nationalistic fervour to replace a faltering growth. Even the loss of a few tens of millions would not worry them, if it maintained their power structure.

I am a little surprised, I thought the Chinese leadership had enough on it's plate at home. The worry is if this is their answer to a faltering wealth creation there.

Does anybody think that the situation in the South China Sea might end up as another Cuban missile crisis with the US demanding the withdrawal of China's missiles from their newly created man-made island military bases?

 "it is obvious that China will use this leap-frogging strategy to occupy and build up more shoals and reefs, and eventually make a claim on the entire South China Sea as its own national waterway."

“It is obvious that ...” means “please accept my assertion that...”

“That's how the area is displayed on Chinese maps”

Really? Maps in the public domain acknowledged by the PRC to be PRC maps? Do they really accept Kuomintang claims? Is the evidence for that accessible on the Internet or in accessible books and journals?

“No, the Pacific is not an American lake”... “complete irrelevance”.

No, highly relevant to implied claims that America has a right to treat encroachment into the Pacific Ocean as if it were encroachment into America and expect its Australian cheer squad to treat it the same way.

(cont)

(continued)

“Interesting that you use the Nazis' excuse of needing 'lebensraum' in relation to Chinese claims on South China Sea reefs. Can you see just a slight contradiction there, Jules ?”

If as suggested above I had likened the Chinese claims to the Nazi claims on the East the contradiction would indeed be more than slight, even though the Deppity Dawgs write as though those parallels exist.

However the parallel (read it again) was between (1) the Deppity Dawg chorus group's assertions of supposed Chinese “intentions” and (2) the Krauts' drivel about supposed British, French and Czarist Russian “intentions” and then Polish, British, Czech, French, Polish and Soviet “intentions” as a pretext to launch war on the world, twice.

Indeed it's the Deppity Dawgs who are drawing a parallel based on the Nazis - writing as though China is following their Lebensraum logic.

Requires close attention to get it.

"Which Side Are You On"?

Nobody with better than two neurones up and running would want Australia to side with the geostrategic ambitions of either bunch of imperialists. The side to be on is that of civilisation, which depends on behaviour following international rules which apply to all nations. The alternative is chaos, strutting brass-hat rule and a fortune for the arms manufacturers

Hi Jules,

Well, yes but I did also write, "We'll see."

Yes, on maps which display what they call their seven-dotted line (I think. Seven ? Nine ? Eleven ?)

Yes, on 1947 Kuomintang maps, which the CPC was quite happy to inherit in 1949. Imperialism springs eternal.

Irrelevant ? Frankly, if the Yanks ate all their first-born raw, it would still be irrelevant.

As I understand it, the Yanks (and the Australians) are prepared to uphold international law, which sets out that it is illegal to claim any reefs or shoals which are substantially under-water at high tide. As well, local fishermen who have been working n those waters for centuries, perhaps millennia, have the right, recognised internationally, to work in those areas, even to camp on those reefs in their traditional stilt-houses over the water.

'Lebensraum' ? Well yes: " ... writing as though China is following their Lebensraum logic." Is any other co0untry in the region making the same illegal claims ?

And yes, " .... The side to be on is that of civilisation, which depends on behaviour following international rules which apply to all nations" and which sometimes require that we stand up to bullies.

You got that right :)

Joe.

A new report from the National Genealogical Society,proves that billionaire presidential candidate Donald Trump is a not-so-distant relative of Adolph Hitler.
Trump is related to Hitler on his paternal grandmother's side. She lived in Bavaria and married Adolph Hitler's grand uncle from Austria-Hungary, Johann Schicklgruber.

Upon marrying Trump's grandmother Katherina, Johann Schicklgruber made a name for himself in local politics. However, he was soon banished from his hometown by local authorities for inciting violence against Hungarians.

After this incident, Johann Schicklgruber moved with his wife to the German town of Kallstadt and changed his surname to Trump in an effort to escape his shameful past. The other Schicklgrubers would later change their surname to Hitler, also in an effort to escape their shameful past.

Johann and Katherina had a son they named Frederick, who would later move to the United States. His son Fred made a fortune in real estate and later fathered Donald.

“I'm proud of my family tree,” said Donald Trump, learning of the connection today. “Hitler was a great leader who made Germany great again. I've read all of his books several times.”

“Look, just like in America, Germany was having trouble with a particular religious group,” continued Trump. “Adolph Hitler didn't give in to the PC culture or the liberals. He spoke his mind and got things done. Hitler's fabulous, just terrific. I can't think of somebody more great to be related to.”

Since news of this broke, Trump's supporters have posted thousands of comments all over the Internet, defending and praising Trump for being related to Hitler.

Were not an independent country in this realistic scenario.
We are just a pawn on the global chessboard.

China owns all our farms and needs them for food and also of of its other vested interests in our country including our mineral wealth.

Do you think they are just going to let that go in a war situation?, and what if the US is DELIBERATELY trying to start a war to blame its forthcoming economic collapse on?

What then?

Then we have a date with destiny... and the clock is ticking.

Even if I'm wrong, I'm still right, and I'll tell you why.
Lets say by some miracle WW3 happens and we come out of it unscathed and un-nuked..

Seems irrational already..

But where do you think everyone else on the planet is coming when the nukes start flying in the northern hemisphere and its no longer inhabitable?

Australia will be the homeless shelter for the planet.

Paul,

So what, I'm a distant relative of William the Conqueror and Henry the II of England and consequently Prince Harry et al but that doesn't mean that I'm more than plain old me, even though I have a minor Scots title.

Hi Paul,

And just suppose someone did some research and found that you are a distant relation of Marie Antoinette ? Or the pirate Henry Morgan ? So f...... what ?

I certainly don't want to defend Trump in any way but for God's sake, try to avoid the stupidest, dirtiest, lowest, cheapest, ways to attack someone. Attack him on his record and on the vile things that he has said, not some idiotic sidetrack like this.

Otherwise one would think, is that all you've got ? You're an idiot, plain and simple.

Joe.

Trump's alleged blood relationship to Hitler is a mere factoid, but his expressions of pride in Hitler's deeds, if correctly quoted, make him (like Hitler) a dangerous scumbag.

I wrote " .... The side to be on is that of civilisation, which depends on behaviour following international rules which apply to all nations" and Loudmouth added

“and which sometimes require that we stand up to bullies.”

True. Wonderful Australians stood up to bullies during two world wars.

After that it ceased, and led at first by Menzies we went over to standing up FOR bullies. Portugal alone stood up to Indo bullies during the illegal Indo occupation of East Timor. The Viet Cong, not Australia, stood up to bullies who launched the rape of Vietnam. Canada and Sweden, not Australia, gave sanctuary to Americans who refused to participate. France, not Australia, was reviled by America for standing up to the bullies' lie campaign and Blitzkrieg against Iraq (a gift that keeps on giving). Who is standing up to the bullies who are bombing and shelling the bejesus out of the people of North Africa and the Middle East in pursuit of regime change? Not us.

There's a sliver of light in Loudmouth's “and which sometimes require that we stand up to bullies.” What a pity if it applied only to those who challenge America's geopolitial interests. As he reminds us that he wrote: "We'll see".

I'll ask this question again because I think it is important:

Does anybody think that the situation in the South China Sea might end up as another Cuban missile crisis with the US demanding the withdrawal of China's missiles from their newly created man-made island military bases?

Thanks EmperorJulian, my point exactly, when it was pointed out to Trump that he himself, Donald Schicklgruber, and Adolf Schicklgruber were related. Donny then went on to heap praise on Hitler, read all his books several times, etc, I believe Hitler only wrote one book 'Mein Kampf', and his second book a squeal was never published, and other books attributed to Hitler were written for Hitler, well Donny got that wrong.

Also, I was reading where admitted Trump supporters were give "quotes" attributed to Trump. When asked if they agreed with the statements, the majority said, YES! It was then pointed out to the Trump supporters that the statements were not made by Trump, but rather they were public statements that Hitler had made. When asked again if they agreed with them the Trump supporters said, No! They went on to say they didn't agree with Hitler, but if Mr Trump made such statements then they would agree.

Is Mise, I am closely related to Jesus on my mothers side, we are first cousins. That actually makes me a God, but I don't use the title often, only on formal occasions like when having 'High Tea' with my dear friend the Maharajah of Bongostan. But feel free if you wish to address me formally on the Forum.... such as..."Dear God Paul1405, you are absolutely correct as always etc etc and of course etc."

Hi Jules,

So what is the US championing in that region ? International law. Isn't that the case, apart from all the paranoia about ulterior motives ? The rights of small nations in the area to have some input, and not to be bullied by the Chinese Navy and Air Force. Isn't that so ?

I don't care, in this situation, if the Yanks did this or that x years ago, this is what they are seeking to do now. And I'm all for it, provided they don't go beyond what's permitted in international law. Can China show that it is respecting international law in this particular case ? No ?

Anything else ?

Joe.

Jules,

This article pretty much wraps up the whole debate:

http://thediplomat.com/2016/03/south-china-sea-and-freedom-of-navigation/

It's worth going over a few times, to find flaws (after all, the writer is a Yank), and if none can be found, then that's it. Good luck !

Joe.

Mr Opinion
Do you really think the Chinese would listen?
Why should they?
No one has said they have nukes on those new islands of theirs. Only surface to air missiles. Unlike in the Cuban crisis.
Hardly surprising as the seppoes keep wanting to fly their spy planes around them.
Also the islands are not a few hundred miles from the US mainland.
One last thing the americans are too cowardly to go up against a real enemy.
They prefer to fight peasants on bicycles or impoverished "sand people".
Still the stupidity of america never ceases to flabbergast me so you never know.
I hope not for all our sakes.

Hi Mikk,

So the Yanks are evil personified ? They are secretly turning Mexicans into dog food ? Beheading Canadians ? Kidnapping tens of thousands of Cuban maidens for sex camps for their brutal soldiers ?

And that has to do with international law of the seas - what ?

I would have thought that, since reefs and shoals cannot be claimed as national territory, certainly not if they are thousands of km from a nation's own territory, then to put missiles on them would be a breach of international law by that nation ? You think it wouldn't be ? Can you explain that position to us innocents :)

Joe.

At http://thediplomat.com/2016/03/south-china-sea-and-freedom-of-navigation/ USCommander Odom has paraphrased Mr Jin's denial that the Chinese have breached UNCLOS in the South China Sea, and has foreshadowed a follow-on commentary.

What he has not addressed but maybe will is whether or not a nation is entitled to group its warships anywhere and how close to the grouped warships another nation is entitled to send its own.

Meanwhile back at the ranch it would be hypocrisy on steroids for Australia, in shock horror at Chinese breaches of law, to stand by the USA in provoking a war with them over it. Not that its governments haven't a history of standing by the USA in its grossest flouting of international law and the security rights of other people not only x years ago but currently, every single day. Such hypocrisy from the Deppity Dawg cheer squads has long needed to be confronted. There is a glimmer of hope that Loudmouth's reference to the need to stand up to bullies is dinkum, a chink in the armour of 70 years of nationwide hypocrisy initiated by Menzies. As he says: We'll see.

Dear Loudmouth,

Are there any more like you at home?

I just found this on the web which covers the points I have been raising:

http://sputniknews.com/politics/20160311/1036108851/us-china-war.html

Joe
"So the Yanks are evil personified ?"

More like stupidity personified

Dear all,

I just found this on the web which covers the points I have been raising:

http://sputniknews.com/politics/20160311/1036108851/us-china-war.html

The Yanks are not evil personified - that's a mere straw man constructed by an apologist.

After the war America started to exhibit evils that had characterised the Axis. This shows up in behaviour (e.g. Tonkin Gulf lies and rape of Vietnam and WMD lies and Iraq Blitzkrieg, and proclamations (e.g. PNAC) all amply described in ongoing reporting in the public domain. It's an uneven process and has not (yet) managed to engulf the great goodness and strength embedded in the American people.

Deppity Dawgs in Australia gravitate to what is vile, and Axis-like, in the Pentagon, the beltway and the Tea Party elements that get to call the shots in US policies.

Paul,

i thought that you were an atheist and now you're professing belief in God; Christ!!

Hi Jules,

Thanks for proving my point.

Hi Mr Opinion,

No, I'm a one-off.

Hi Mikk,

Probably, but not quite relevant to the subject of illegally occupying reefs and shoals and building military bases on them, thousands of km from one's own shores, and within cooee of someone else's country, in waters that local fishermen have been working in for centuries.

Are the Yanks doing that anywhere ? Then I rest my case.

Boys, I sympathise - it must be hard yakka being a useful idiot these days. But take courage, you're doing well.

Joe.

I just found this article on the web:

http://www.voanews.com/content/india-rejects-joint-naval-patrols-with-us-in-south-china-sea/3231567.html

It looks like India is either going to support China or stay neutral. I'm wondering if India has a secret pack with China.

It's very obvious that Russia has a secret pact with China, especially now that China is sending a small force of army and aircraft to assist Russia in its Syrian operations.

Does anyone get the feeling that World War 3 might be just around the corner?

PS: And everyone wonders why I'm anti-Chinese. Stupid me, I just can't see the big picture.

Dunno what point of Loudmouth's I've proved. So far I have him down as declaring support for international law applying equally to all nations and for standing up to bullies.

Can I extend that to a belief that Australian foreign policy should adhere to the above?

And further that no nation can be accepted as "exceptional" and thereby exempt from principles of behaviour that it expects of others?

If so we're on the same page.

We'll see.

Hi Jules,

YES ! Yes, yes, yes. Precisely. Exactly. Thank you, thank you.

Best wishes,

Joe.

Dear EmperorJulian & Loudmouth,

Thank you for your pseudo intellectual comments.

Now go put your heads back in the sand and let the real thinkers work out what is happening in the world.

I think what Mr Opinion is driving at (have to guess a bit as analytical reasoning isn't his strong point) is that declaring support for international law applying equally to all nations and for standing up to bullies is “pseudo-intellectual” and irrelevant to “real thinkers” who “work out what is happening in the world.”

Maybe he accepts that there really is a nation (guess which) that “real thinkers” accept as "exceptional" and thereby exempt from principles of behaviour that it expects of others?

Or perhaps his advice is to stop all that reasoning stuff and simply become a knuckle-dragger and grunt.

Dear EmperorJulian,

The only compliment I can pay you is that I think you are as knowledgeable as an engineer. And the same goes for the great majority of people on the The Forum.

I'm not as knowledgeable as an engineer but I try to be. We all should.

Dear EmperorJulian,

Maybe you could be so kind as to tell all of us about what subjects engineers are knowledgeable about?

What are engineers knowledgeable about? For openers, the genius behind every structure on the face of the earth, every machine, every transport system, every city. They are even more knowledgeable than most of us about what could have, and what couldn't have, brought down the Twin Towers.

Dear EmperorJulian,

You give engineers too much credit. Transport systems, cities, and virtually every project that engineers are connected with are the product of a collaboration of workers from hundreds of fields. An engineer is only a small part in the overall economic process.

Want I am asking from you is that you tell us what subjects (e.g.. geology, cosmology, sociology, philosophy, etc.) that engineers are knowledgeable in. Can you give us a list?

Different engineers are knowledgeable in different subjects. There are some subjects (such as geology) that many engineers are knowledgeable in, and some that few engineers know much about, but there's nothing that no engineers are knowledgeable in. And there's a reason for that: engineers are people. People have interests. Engineers have the intelligence to pursue those interests, and usually also have the resources to do so.

And engineers are a huge part in the overall economic process, because engineers are the ones who know what can be done and how to do it.

Dear Aidan,

What a load of crap!

You want people to believe that engineers are knowledgeable in a wide range of subjects because you are an engineer yourself and you want to be admired by others for being an engineer. For you it's all about social status: It's about how you see yourself vis-a-vis others and how you think others see you vis-a-vis themselves.

When I refer to someone being knowledgeable on a subject I mean people who have specialised training in that subject. And for me that usually means having the training and expertise that comes from years of study.

I have studied engineering and the only subjects I would say engineers are knowledgeable in are mathematics, physics, and chemistry. And even that is only to a limited level, definitely not the level a scientist or mathematician would be expected to know. The rest of engineering is just a lot of sub-branches of these subjects which deal with trades-like practical applications for design and construction practices.

If you (or anyone else) think I'm wrong then give us a list of the subjects you think engineers are knowledgeable in. I've given three subjects to start with so let's see what you can add to the list.

While we're waiting for Aidan to enlighten us on the greatness of engineers have a look at this news just put on the web:

http://www.smh.com.au/world/court-verdict-looms-in-philippines-v-china-dispute-in-south-china-sea-20160302-gn8i4n.html

According to Suseonline and others of that ilk - who criticise me for being racist and paranoid when it comes to China - the Filipinos in this news report would also be racists and paranoid when it comes to China.

Well at least I'm not alone. I bet anything you like that China won't abide by the court decision unless it is favourable to its position. But Suseonline and the others will still continue supporting China at any cost. They must be in line for one of those free fake $40K Rolexes that were snatched up by the LNP stalwarts.

Dunno about others but I certainly don't support China at any cost. I don't support their occupation of Tibet or East Turkestan or their overt threats to Taiwan (which unlike China has a government legitimised by elections) or their police state at home or any specific breaches of international law on any ocean. Or for that matter the LNP's standing invitation to them to take over much of Australia without their having to fire a shot.

The only country to the aid of which we have automatically rushed for the last 70 years has been America which daily commits more violations of international law than all other countries combined have committed over the entire 70 year period. America is currently at war with Syria because it can't accept the right of the Syrian people to decide on who governs them, and with the Yemenis because of their resistance to America's close ally, the anti-democratic and theocratic Moslem dictatorship Saudi Arabia.

It has always been Lib governments that have sent our soldiers to war for America, without even a passing thought for international law

And now the Deppity Dawgs are slavering to egg the American empire into starting yet another war, an adventure which is most unlikely to have the support of America's own people outside its Neocon pressure group.

Opposing this doesn't mean supporting China. If anything it means supporting assertion of Australian independence for once. Something that gives the Deppity Dawg chorus line the vapours.

Dear EmperorJulian,

You are too idealistic. In the real world of today the Australian govt whether LNP or Labor will not be able to choose to be neutral and let the US and China hammer it out. Staying neutral will be viewed by the US as being equivalent to supporting China. The US will withdraw its protection of Australia and China will look upon Australia as just another victim to be absorbed into its aggressively expanding totalitarian empire.

Problem for the govt is that supporting the US will incur the ire of the Chinese community in Australia and they will cast their votes against a govt that supports the US against their ancestral homeland. In this case, I think the Turnbull govt will not make an open commitment to support the US against China until after the election in order to prevent the backlash from Australia's Chinese voters.

PS. I suppose like me you're holding your breath with excitement waiting for Aidan to give us his list of subjects that engineers are knowledgeable about.

Mr Opinion seems to have a thing about engineers. For the academic disciplines in which they have to be knowledgeable to qualify, he could explore the websites of the training institutions. Beyond that I suppose their knowlegeability will depend on their individual life experiences and will range from that of knuckle-draggers to that of scholars. So?

Their role in creating the structures and machinery of civilisation is in invention, design, supervision and control, for which they have special knowledge. Countless other workers combine in putting it all together. Again, so?

Dear EmperorJulian,

If I had a dollar for every engineer I've heard exclaim 'We're just like doctors!' I would be a millionaire.

You learn an amazing amount on OLO, that, for instance, engineers must be the most grindingly boring people at parties.

And that, somehow, what China is doing in the south China Sea (don't be fooled by names: India does not own the Indian Ocean, nor Mexico the Gulf of Mexico, nor England the English Channel) is relevant to Australian engineers and vice versa. Neither side has proved that relevance yet.

Joe

Dear Loudmouth,

If you keep learning at this rate you'll soon be up there with the engineers. I was there once, about forty years ago.

Opinion,

Have you chosen one of the many languages spoken in China to be your bi-lingual mate yet?
Mandarin would be good as you could talk to Kevin at parties.

If the only dollars I ever had were from an engineer exclaiming "We're just like doctors" I'd be penniless.

Noting "No more than 8 posts per article in any given 24 hour period" I'll bow out of repetitious posting of stuff posted already or phobias about engineers, and suggest the Deppity Dawg claque do likewise.

Dear EmperorJulian,

I think I'm the engineer you heard exclaiming 'I'm NOT like a doctor!' The only reason I can claim that is because I also have degrees in anthropology, sociology and history.

Unless the US wants to give Hawaii back to the Hawaiian people its like the pot calling the kettle black.

I'll defend engineers and their broad array of usefulness.

One may take an engineering course and become a structural engineer creating all sorts of wonders of construction.

An engineer may take up a biomedical engineering position creating medical devices to help peoples quality of life in suffering medical conditions.

Engineers to design and build planes, cars, trains...

I'll certainly defend them, we probably wouldn't be a civilized society without them.

I'd say the first engineer took up his position the day humans invented a hammer.

Pretty important in the whole scheme of things...
Only a fool would disagree, sorry EmperorJulian, though I generally agree with a lot of the other things you usually have to say on different topics.

I'll try to sneak another post in.

Armchair Critic, I can't see where what I have written about engineers disagrees with what you have just written. Are you sure you're not responding to someone else?

Mr Opinion,

Your assumption that it's all about social status is incorrect. 'Tis actually about accuracy.

There is a huge difference between being knowledgeable and having had specialised training (both of which are different from actually being capable). Considering your past form, I suspect you know this and have made a deliberate mistake (and accused me of posting a load of crap) in order to make it look like you haven't lost the argument.

"I have studied engineering and the only subjects I would say engineers are knowledgeable in are mathematics, physics, and chemistry."
I have already explained why that comment is ludicrous when you mean what you say. However, assuming you're still misusing the word "knowledgeable" to mean "the recipient of specialised training", it still depends on the engineers. The previous example of geology is something that's always been part of the standard training for civil engineers. And the biomedical engineers in Armchair's example will have had a lot of specialised training in biology.

"And even that is only to a limited level, definitely not the level a scientist or mathematician would be expected to know."
Again it depends on the engineer – for example I'd expect chemical engineers to have as deep a knowledge of chemistry, and as much formal training in it, as the scientists.

With the possible exception of the pseudosciences (astrology, homeopathy, numerology etc) you'd be hard pressed to find anything that no engineer is trained in, firstly because almost everything relates to engineering in some way, secondly because many people are trained in other things before they become engineers, and thirdly because many university engineering programs include elective non-engineering courses.

But in most cases the number of engineers with specialised training is dwarfed by those who gain knowledge of the subject through technical journals, society meetings, documentaries, conferences, books etc.

Dear Aidan,

Instead of waffling on like an engineer and trying to avoid the question why don't you just add the other subjects you think engineers are knowledgeable to the list. I've given physics, chemistry and maths. Just add to this the other subjects you think engineers are knowledgeable in. Then we have something concrete to discuss on this matter. I am interested to see what you will put on the list. If you don't then we can all assume that I am correct in what I have been saying.

Sorry EmperorJulian, my mistake.
I think my comment was meant to be directed at Mr Opinion.
I'll defend engineers contribution to society.
I'll support anyone that is building or creating our world over those foolish social justice warriors that just want to argue about petty things.
At least these guys went to University for something worthwhile.

Dear Armchair Critic,

That's not a very nice thing to say about lawyers.

They may be only tradespeople like engineers but they do have a very useful function to play in a society.

Hey Aidan!

Q: What's the shortest book in the world?

A: The Engineers' Knowledgeability Almanac.

Opinion,

"...because I also have degrees in anthropology, sociology and history."

How does one get degrees in specific subjects?

Or are they like a degree in Chinese?

I will take a stab in the dark here and say that Mr. opinion was never a fully trained University educated Engineer that finished his course...

My brother, Uncle and two cousins are all university trained Engineers.
One is heavily involved in natural gas exploration and provision in Australia. One is an electronic engineer working with the communications sector. The other two work as mechanical engineers in the mining industry. None have ever been out of a job and all are top in their field.
Is that why you are so upset about Engineers Mr. Opinion, because you feel jealous?

As for my posts about your constant references to the dreaded Chinese people, where have I ever given support either way to China? I just can't stand racists of any origin.

Dear Suseonline,

In actual fact I came very close to not completing my engineering degree. At the end of my final year I decided to walk away from it with only one three hour semester unit of study to complete and just travel around Australia because I had asked myself if I really wanted to be stuck in a second rate profession for the rest of my life.

I got back home after two years and was sitting in a pub when I decided to go back and finish it. So they rushed me into the second half of the final semester and I completed the outstanding subject. That's how I became an engineer. And that's how I got to be stuck in a second rate profession for the last forty years.

Dear Is Mise,

I started to study Chinese when I was in Arts but decided to drop it after two weeks because it is such an ugly language.

Dear Suseonline,

With you having two brothers working as engineers in the mining sector it is now easy to see where your pro-China attitude comes from. A case of don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Opinion,

Ho hum (yawn).

Dear Is Mise,

I'm sorry you find my story so boring. I hope you have never had the misfortune of doing engineering as well. You couldn't be that unlucky could you? If you are then that makes two of us.

Opinion,

I did Engineering for fun, having spent years as an armourer; ran a Defence Dept Engineering Workshop; spent more years as a Metrologist etc., formalising it was fun.

Haven't you realised yet that there is no such language as Chinese?

Dear Is Mise,

I do recall enrolling in Chinese 101. But if as you say there is no such language as Chinese then the Sinologists are going to have a lot of explaining to do.

Anyway, getting back to the topic at hand, it looks like tension is really building up over the South China Sea dispute. Look what I just found on the web posted over the last day:

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/03/vietnam-south-china-sea-tensions-rise-160314072842269.html

and

http://www.morningnewsusa.com/south-china-sea-row-australia-malaysia-india-us-mull-next-move-china-2364111.html

I suppose according to the pro-China lobby on The Forum, Vietnam and Malaysia should also be labelled racist and paranoid because of their anti-Chinese stand. Isn't it amazing how some people will believe anything if they think they are in line to pick up a free fake $40K Rolex. 'Yes folks! Dip your hand into the lucky dip China bag folks and see what you get. Is it a Rolex? Is it a raw unpeeled onion? Yes folks step right up and try your luck!'

If you have a look on the map in this next article you might understand why the smaller countries around the South China Sea are so worried about China's intentions. That's China's claim in the red line.

http://www.breakingnews.com/topic/south-china-sea-dispute/

PS. I just noticed this one from today which is even more alarming:

http://www.morningnewsusa.com/wwiii-russia-joins-south-china-sea-dispute-as-ally-to-china-and-brunei-2322235.html

I have been guessing all along that Russia and China had a secret pact.

"I have been guessing all along...." Agree.

Here's the latest update:

http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2016/03/16/1563591/china-eus-south-china-sea-position-dont-look-us

I think China is using the old 'It's not us, it's you' routine.

I don't think China is going to withdraw its aim of annexing the South China Sea. It wants the undersea resources (especially oil) and it will be able to build a long string of offensive military bases within a stone's throw of Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia. From there it will be able to build up an enormous armada for an invasion of Australia, Taiwan, Japan and Korea.

ROTFL!!

Dear Is MIse,

Could you please let me know what ROTFL says?

Hi Is Mise,

It's OK I just looked it up in wiki.

So I take it you think China will eventually withdraw from the South China Sea and has no imperial ambitions which might involve invading other countries in the western Pacific. I guess I'm sort of like the people in the 1930s who were saying that Hitler was intent on annexing parts of Europe and intending to invade Britain and France. Time will tell.

Hi Mr Opinion,

No, I don't know what ROTFL means either.

We seem to have all agreed that, according to the law of the seas, that reefs and shoals can't be claimed, or built on, by any power, either the dreadfully-evil US or by peace-loving China. It's an act of aggression to build on them, and certainly to drive fishermen away from areas which they have been fishing in for centuries or longer.

And perhaps it is an act of aggression to sink Vietnamese ships in those international waters.

Whether we can get all paranoid and assume that the Chinese are intent on establishing control of all of the sholas in the south Chinese Sea, and then declaring it to be its internal waters. Surely, they could not be so stupid ?

then again .......

Joe.

Dear Loudmouth,

ROTFL means rolling on the floor laughing.

The indisputable fact is that China has annexed 80% of the South China Sea and is creating military bases on reefs and islets across the area in order to keep out all other countries from sailing through it or flying over it. Have a look at the map on the link at page 17 to see how much China has annexed.

China has told the world that the South China Sea belongs to China and that it will not tolerate outsiders entering the territory controlled by China. Further it has said that it will not accept any decision handed down by the international community that contradicts China's sovereignty.

Why do you think China is doing this?

They want off-shore islands to house refugees?

Lebensraum?

One joke aside for another, the Chinese say the airbase and harbour they've built in the middle of the SCS is for "search and rescue' operations. So caring.

The time to start melting the ploughshares?

Dear Is Mise and Luciferase,

Can you two stop behaving like engineers for a moment and start acting like intelligent people?

Dear Luciferase,

China has another word for Lebensraum. They call it Australia.

Hi Mr Opinion,

You ask, "Why do you think China is doing this?"

Pretty obviously, to bully states neighbouring the south China Sea into agreeing that China can

(1) 'nationalise' the south China Sea, i.e. international waters, shoals and reefs, and

(2) control whatever resources may lie underneath.

As for what they might do afterwards, in relation to other areas, and eventually to Australia, I'll let you make suggestions :)

For the record, I think that China's pretensions are totally illegal. Those areas have been used by local people for perhaps thousands of years. The Austronesians traded across that region, for as long. Over the past thousand years, Arabs, Thais, Indians, Indian kingdoms in what is now Indonesia and Malaya, the Chams, etc. have been sailing and trading across that entire area, with Japan and Korea, and even with China: hence mosques and Hindu temples in Canton six hundred years ago.

The Chinese claims are laughably threadbare: what, a Chinese ship sailed off the coast of the Philippines in 1420 and therefore can now claim it ? How imperialist is that ?!

Joe

Opinion,

How can we take seriously the wanderings of someone so laughingly out of touch as to urge us to learn a language that does not exist?

Dear Is Mise,

Time will tell.

PS. Here's an update just off the web:

http://zeenews.india.com/news/world/us-sees-new-chinese-activity-around-south-china-sea-shoal_1866967.html

Another news item folks. Looks like China just aint gonna get out of the South China Sea. And I don't think they'll like the idea of being pushed out.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/china-is-not-leaving-the-south-china-sea/5514847

Problem is it might only take a small spark to ignite the powder keg that has been building up. It'll probably come from some minor incident where Vietnam or Philippines decides to fire a few shots at a Chinese naval vessel.

Isn't it fascinating watching history in the making.

Does anyone know if Australia has decided to throw its support behind the US or China if this dispute breaks out in open warfare? I think Turnbull has no alternative but to support the US but is holding off on the commitment until after the election so as not to turn the Chinese voters against the Liberals, which would mean he would lose the election. Better to come out with a decision after the election and at least have another 3-4 years in office.

Hi folks, here's another news item that popped up several hours ago:

http://www.smh.com.au/world/asian-nations-turn-to-australia-to-combat-china-threat-in-south-china-sea-20160318-gnm872.html

This South China Sea business is going from bad to worse with each day. Unless of course you belong to the pro-China camp like Suseonline, Aidan, et al., then it's just all nonsense, a load of rubbish, and absolutely no truth in the reports.

In China there's a catchy little airline's song 'We still call Australia Lebensraum'. Sort of like the QANTAS number. Ahh ....... there I go being racist and paranoid again!

'We still call Australia Lebensraum'"

Could you translate that into "Chinese"?

I just love this explanation I took out of an article I just found on the web:

'Killing a Chicken to Scare the Monkeys

China’s main frontline opponents in the South China Sea are Vietnam and the Philippines. Analysts in both countries strongly fear that Beijing will seek to make an example of at least one of them, following the venerable Chinese adage that one kills a chicken to scare the monkeys. The question would seem to be which neighbor will serve as the sacrificial chicken; which country China will bully and humiliate as an object lesson to other neighbors that resistance is futile and decisive help from the Americans is unlikely to come.'

Hi Mr Opinion,

Yes, you're probably right, and it will probably be Vietnam:

* it's closer than the Philippines;

* there are active disputes between China and Vietnam over the Paracels, which are sort of midway between Vietnam and China's Hainan province - China has already sunk a couple of Vietnamese ships in that region, so a hot war wouldn't be difficult to imagine;

* on the usual imperialist principle that you try to swallow the nearest 'enemy' first, then move on to 'enemies' further away and harder to conquer, Vietnamese is right there.

The Chinese, being as arrogant as any other run-of-the-mill imperialist power, will probably try to engineer a pretext for the invasion of Vietnam, certainly in the next five years, before its clout starts to wane. Not all of it, just the north coast.

But the Vietnamese have fought wars with China before, and kicked their arses before too. The stories of the Trung Sisters in the eleventh century, the defeat on the Hong River of the Mongols in 1290 or so, and the more recent defeat of the Chinese in 1979, are very fresh, I'm sure, in Vietnamese minds.

Just a note: China has as much right to sail through that area as any other power, but no more than that. It has no right to claim any of it, to build on any shoals, or otherwise breach international law.

After all, every half-baked power in the world could 'claim' that some shoal or other was part of its beloved territory and build on it. There are shoals just off the north coast of New Zealand which were administered from Sydney as part of New South Wales, up until 1840. There are probably shoals just off the coast of China which were, at some time, administered by Japan or Korea or even Vietnam. What's sauce for the goose ......

Joe

Hi Loudmouth,

I concur with your assessment.

China is not interested in just having sole navigation rights in the South China Sea. What it wants most is the oil. If China is going to be a major industrial power then it needs to have an almost inexhaustible supply of oil. And there's a lot of it in the South China Sea. Problem is that these undersea oil fields are just off the coasts of Vietnam, Philippines, Indonesia and Malaysia. So what is China doing about it? Simple, just take it away from them. They who control the oil will control the future.

Hi folks,

Here's something posted about three hours ago:

http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/military/chinese-coast-guard-intervenes-as-indonesia-arrests-illegal-fishermen/news-story/c0c3ba4ff2f897e27cfd09ce44dedd58

Hi folks, here's another little piece you might want to ponder over:

http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/us-casts-wary-eye-on-australian-port-leased-by-chinese/ar-BBqI3ad?li=AAgfIYZ&ocid=mailsignout

Here it is folks, evidence that China really does own the South China Sea:

http://www.news.com.au/world/beijing-details-historic-claim-to-south-china-sea/news-story/8aab3eedb376ced913201871b9e84893

Also, I think the Chinese president told the Australian parliament that China also had a claim over the northern part of Australia due to visits by early Chinese navigators prior to the arrival of European explorers. First the South China Sea, then the northern part of Australia. makes sense after they just purchased Port Darwin.

Hi folks, here's the latest I've found:

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/world/asiapacific/2016/03/21/china--indonesia-in-south-china-sea-row.html

and

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/wall-street-journal/south-china-sea-dispute-us-troops-to-return-to-philippines/news-story/b1d4c3b17cd17b9669523fa887bde2bd

Thanks Mr. Opinion,

We all need to be concerned about this aggression.

'Aggression', Jules ? Against Indonesian ships in Indonesian waters around Natuna ? What else would you call it ?

Joe

Hi Loudmouth,

It's fascinating stuff that's going on in the South China Sea. China is annexing most of the South China Sea right down towards Indonesia because it wants the oil and gas. This piece of the world looks like it might turn out to be another major fiasco over who should control the major undersea oil and gas reserves in SE Asia.

China is determined to annex the South China Sea and I don't think they are going to budge. Question is: Is China also looking at annexing the Northwest Shelf undersea oil and gas reserves off the coast of Western Australia? The Chinese believe that Australia was explored by Chinese before the Europeans and hence China has a claim to the ownership of northern Australia.

Yep, the Prison Republic is committing the offence that the Yanks are committing over a huge swathe of the world every day and the Indos are committing every hour against our neighbour West Papua. Where should Australia stand, and what actions should we pursue, to be consistent and not a mere Deppity Dawg with an endless clamour by a noisy pressure group to go to war against the relative minnow which still far, far outguns us?

Hi Jules,

'Deppity Dawg' - geddit ? Again and again ? Yuk, yuk. Yes, a long time ago.

Oppose aggression wherever it occurs, Jules. Currently it's the Chinese against the Indonesians, Filipinos and Vietnamese who are being aggressive. Call it like it is.

Nobody's saying 'go to war': straw man, Jules. But each of those countries has the right to defend its territory, and Australia has the right, if not the moral duty, to assist them in protecting their waters.

Every country, including China, has the right to travel anywhere in the south China Sea, outside of other countries' economic exclusion zones. But since it's international waters, no country has the right to build up any of those shoals, most certainly not as military bases.

As for any Chinese claim on Australia, it should remember that there were probably Austronesian fishermen and traders - ironically often from what is now the Philippines - operating in what are now Chinese coastal waters south of Fukien thousands of years ago, long before the Chinese empire reached the sea two thousand years ago.

Of course, pig-ignorance and aggression are not strangers to each other.

Joe

"Oppose aggression wherever it occurs"

Yep, let's go to it. Oppose aggression against populated Iraq (still US-occupied), Yemen (drone attacks), Syria (massive aggression devastating populated areas in search of regime change), Afghanistan (war without end), sites of many US military bases throughout North Africa and the Middle East, Palestine, West Papua. Indeed to have the least credibility we need to apologise humbly to the world for our part in the rape of Vietnam and Laos and Cambodia (as Deppity Dawg - live with it).

All that's opposing aggression wherever it occurs.

And in that context oppose Chinese aggression against some uninhabited reefs and any aggression they may be contemplating against actual inhabited countries like the Philippines and Taiwan and Vietnam. and ongoing aggression against Tibet and East Turkestan.

How do we manifest all this opposing of aggression? We call it out wherever we see it. We task our Department of Foreign Affairs with making us known all around the world as a voice to which the Allies signed on at Nuremberg. This is a respectability we earned briefly during and just after the war, until the Libs threw it away by participating in British aggression against Malaya.

A pipe dream? Of course it's a pipe dream, not dreamt for a minute by the noisy claque that's blustering about something we can never manifest (opposing aggression wherever it occurs) and whose real agenda is blindingly obvious - try to egg the Yanks into a repeat of Vietnam by starting a war with China, with us yapping along at their heels.

Dear EmperorJulian,

I get the impression that you are in the pro-China camp with Suseonline, Aidan, etc.

Hi Jules,

"Oppose aggression wherever it occurs."

Yes, there are many trees to bark up, and this thread is dealing with aggression in the south China Sea by the Chinese. Start your own thread and bark up any other tree you like, but this is the one we are barking up, on this thread.

Personally, I would like to bark up the Hittite tree - look what they did to the Hurrians and, anyway, what did they ever do for us ? Bastards !

Good luck,

Joe

So "oppose aggression wherever it occurs" wasn't dinkum then? More a cover-up for a particular crusade against a particular country?

What form is it proposed that this crusade should take? Something more than a tiny handful of narrowly focused zealots frothing at the keyboard surely? Maybe a message for the PM, or DFAT, or ADF, or perhaps a hurrah addressed to Donald Trump or Ted Cruz?

I'll suggest a very long overdue action - take the Prison Republic's proclamations that Taiwan is part of China at their word and formally recognise Taipei, not Peking, as the seat of the only government in "China" legitimised by elections. Australia could take this step without being any empire's Deppity Dawg.

Hi folks, have a look at this news item that talks about Indonesia starting to get upset with China.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-indonesia-southchinasea-idUSKCN0WN0B6

Is Indonesia that slow in realising that China is muscling in and now lay claim to the South China Sea? I don't think the combined effort of Indonesia, Vietnam, Malaysia and Philippines is going to be enough to stop China from taking full control of the South China Sea and establishing an enormous armada to repel any attempts to shift them out.

China will suck the undersea oil and gas fields dry and leave the sea barren of resources. I assume it will then make a move to using the same tactics in the North West Shelf region off the coast of Western Australian. In anthropology we call this predatory expansion. I assume China will eventually use an enormous armada built up inside the South China Sea to break through the Indonesian archipelago. If this happens I image that this will set in progress a mass refuge movement from Indonesia to Australia as millions of Indonesians attempt to escape the advancing Chinese combined air and naval armada.

This is what I love about having done a degree in history because it gives one the skills and knowledge to put the little pieces of evidence together to answer questions about why wars, invasions, etc happen. Studying the events in the South China Sea is just like solving a history problem.

NEWS ALERT! NEWS ALERT!

Look out folks, now Taiwan is buying into the argument! Just off the web:

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/taiwan-takes-media-tour-south-china-sea-island-37859101

This is really going to make China angry now.

This will now make China even more determined to take control of the South China Sea and establish an enormous air and naval armada. An armada that is not only capable of defending their newly annexed watery province but also capable of launching an offensive attack against the nations around the rim of the South China Sea. Probably even giving the Chinese an excuse to invade and exercise its ancient right over Formosa.

God I love this history-in-the-making stuff. Really makes having done my degrees in history, anthropology and sociology worthwhile. This is absolutely fascinating! I'm getting to be an eye witness to what can only be described as one of the great moments in world history.

Hi folks,

Here's yet another news item that should make your hair curl:

http://thediplomat.com/2016/03/south-china-sea-china-slams-us-philippines-rotational-basing-agreement/

Isn't this fascinating stuff?

"sn't this fascinating stuff?"
No.

Dear Is Mise,

I find the situation in the South China Sea absolutely fascinating. This is history in the making. Of course one cannot predict the outcome because there are so many different paths that events can run along giving rise to numerous different outcomes. But I get to use my training and knowledge from my degrees in history, anthropology and sociology to try working out what might happen. Sort of like being an online analyst.

Let's keep our fingers crossed and hope that the Chinese don't start thinking that Australia as an island in the South China Sea.

Also, I keep getting this image of Malcolm Turnbull coming back from a meeting in Beijing, holding a piece of paper over his head and proclaiming: 'I have a written assurance form the president of China that China has no more territorial ambitions outside the South China Sea'. If he does then I'm going to apply for refugee status in the US.

Do you think China will be successful in annexing the 80% of the South China Sea it is claiming to own?

Hi Mr Opinion,

"Do you think China will be successful in annexing the 80% of the South China Sea it is claiming to own?"

Are you asking all of us or just the Emperor Julian ?

The problem with any hierarchical organisation such as the Mafia or the Chinese Communist party is thst, if you show the slightest sign of weakness, you're finished, and usually pretty brutally too: in North Korea, by artillery, in the Mafia by cement boots. So Xi Jin Ping can't afford to be seen to weaken: he has to ratchet up the rhetoric and match it more and more with action.

So, yes, there will be armed conflict in the south China Sea, initiated by the Chinese, perhaps in Vietnamese uniforms, or disguised as Filipino fishermen. John Bilger will have his draft ready to somehow blame the Yanks within hours.

Joe

Dear Loudmouth,

My question is meant for Is Mise.

A lot of people on The Forum like Suseonline, Aidan, etc would side with John Bilger because they are pro-China and will argue that China is in fact not even in the South China Sea and that all these news reports about aggressive Chinese activities against SE Asian nations bordering the SCS have been fabricated by racists who are paranoid about the Chinese. I suppose they're entitled to their opinion like everyone else.

Mr IdioticOpinion,

When you lie about your background (as there is strong evidence that you have) it's your business. Though I am a bit annoyed by your constant hurling of baseless insults towards engineers, ultimately it's your reputation that suffers, not that of engineers.

However I deeply resent the lies you're spreading about my position. Just because I'm not a racist scumbag like you doesn't mean I support the Chinese government. Though they're competent economic managers (a rarity among governments) they're also thoroughly corrupt and don't respect their own laws. An increasing number of Chinese people recognise this and won't unconditionally support their government.

I'm of the opinion that Australia should abide by international law. We should respect the court's decision. If the decision goes against China and China still really wants those islands, we should encourage China to acquire them peacefully in the way that the USA acquired Louisiana and Alaska.

If China goes to war over those islands, we should implement trade sanctions against China as part of a coordinated international effort. But we should not take military action.

China is only interested in acquiring territory that it considers to be historically part of China. Contrary to your crazy assertions, that does not include Australia. Even they recognise that a few Chinese people going somewhere doesn't make that place part of China.

Dear Aidan,

The only one of us who is lying is you when you claim that engineers are knowledgeable in areas outside of their profession. I asked you to list the subjects engineers have extensive knowledge in and you refused to do it simply because you know that if you were to claim that they know about history, archaeology, anthropology, sociology, philosophy, etc etc people would dismiss your claims as ludicrous. I've worked as an engineer for many years and my experience is that it is a second rate profession, being illiberal and anti-intellectual. That's why I went on to do degrees in history, anthropology and sociology. Because I didn't want to be nothing more than a dummy of an engineer for my entire life.

I'm just posting the latest news reports from the web and I leave it to you to decide about what is happening in the South China Sea. I get the impression from your tirade above that you are upset because your idol China is not behaving the way you expected it to behave. I don't care. As a student of history, anthropology and sociology I am fascinated by what is happening in the SCS from an academic perspective. It's a live case study where I can use all my training to analyse what is happening and try to predict what the end result might be.

Hi people ....... and Aidan,

Here's something just posted several hours ago which gives a good summary and puts forward some concrete likely outcomes:

http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21695565-sea-becomes-more-militarised-risks-conflict-grow-china-v-rest

The map really shows how extensively the Chinese are digging in and how it will be virtually impossible to shift them when they have completed their militarisation and built up an enormous armada.

It's looking like a return to the old days of the 1950s when the US was trying to contain the spread of communism. Looks like the US will build a containment line from South Korea and Japan through Taiwan and long the Philippines to prevent Chinese expansion into the Western Pacific which would pose a front line threat to American territories.

I don't think the US is intending to extend this containment line down through Indonesia and Australia. I think the US has given up on Australia. I think it believes - and I believe with sufficient justification - that Australia has thrown in its lot with the Chinese. The Australian economy will collapse if it breaks with China and the millions of Chinese voters in Australia would vote against the government getting back into power at he next election. Look what happened to John Howard when he upset the Asian voters in his own electorate.

In answer to your ?

Ho hum.

Dear Is Mise,

You are a fascinating individual. You deserve to be something better than an engineer.

You can put your head back in the sand now and we'll wake you when the war is over.

An apt reader comment in this morning's Guardian:

"A nation that cannot afford to spend $80bn on schools and hospitals cannot afford to spend $80bn on submarines to "shirtfront" Chinese ships."

Something for the Deppity Dawg claque to chew on!

Hi folks,

Yet another news item about SCS.

Looks like Indonesia is going to take the Chinese to task on the fishing boat incident by not returning the fishermen:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/24/indonesia-vows-to-prosecute-chinese-trawler-crew-in-south-china-sea-dispute

I don't like the way this one is shaping up. First I think that some of those fishermen might actually turn out to be Chinese military personnel and the fishing boat was really a spy boat. Secondly I think China is looking for a reason to justify a fracas in order to bring its navy into SCS to enforce its annexation of the region.

This is getting to be better than The Game of Thrones. Can't wait for the next episode to come out.

Mr0,

Asking for a list of subjects that engineers have extensive knowledge in is as stupid as asking for a list of foods that engineers like eating!

Many engineers know about history, archaeology, anthropology, sociology, philosophy etc etc. 'Tis not the claim that they do that's ludicrous, but the claim that none do.

Despite your constant habit of ignoring the facts and basing your opinions on the most ludicrous assumptions, for a while I believed you could've been telling the truth when you said you were an engineer. Your using phrases such as "waffling on like an engineer" (when engineers tend to be rather terse) made it seem extremely unlikely, though, and what finally showed you up was your claim to be "stuck in a second rate profession for the last forty years".

I'm well aware of what's happening in the South China Sea.

"I get the impression from your tirade above that you are upset because your idol China is not behaving the way you expected it to behave"
Interesting... the least plausible yet of your lies!

Even if you ignore the fact that the "tirade above" was merely statement of my true position to counter your libellous misrepresentation, and even if you start with your usual racist assumptions, it is impossible to reasonably arrive at the conclusion that I idolise China.

You're incapable of holding an academic perspective because you never let the facts get in the way of your anti-Chinese rhetoric, you assume anyone who doesn't share your extreme position takes the opposite extreme, and you can't even distinguish between Australians with Chinese ancestry, Chinese Australians, the people of the PRC, and the Chinese Communist Party.

Your mind seems to be stuck in the 1950s, when the relatively trivial issue of economic systems dominated nations' foreign policies.

And BTW, there aren't "millions of Chinese voters in Australia". In fact they're greatly outnumbered by the combination of those from Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan, Malaysia and Indonesia. But I guess they all look Chinese to you.

Dear Aidan,

Anybody can say they have knowledge on a particular subject. Proving it is a different matter. If someone tells me that they are knowledgeable in a subject like history, archaeology, anthropology, sociology, philosophy, etc, etc, then I expect that they have at least a bachelors degree in that subject or have done it as a sufficient part of that degree.

Watching a docufilm or reading a book from a local library on a subject does not constitute being knowledgeable on a subject. For example, I have separate degrees in history, anthropology and sociology therefore I consider myself to be knowledgeable on those subjects. I have read books on geology, biology, cosmology and psychology but I do not consider myself to be knowledgeable on those subjects.

Apart from your engineering degree what other degrees do you have? What branch of engineering is your degree in?

Hi Aidan,

Yes, many very distinct ethnic groups 'look' Chinese. I was in a photocopy room at a uni once and found that the pretty young girl who had just finished copying (I was in no hurry) had left her ID papers in the photocopier: she was from Kazakhstan. I was chatting on a bus once with another pretty girl who turned out to be Mongolian.

There are far more Koreans and Japanese in Australia than most people realise - not huge numbers, but more than they may think - mostly students and tourists. What you might call the East Asian population is extremely varied, Vietnamese, Filipino, Taiwanese, Burmese, Thai, Indonesian as well.

Even the 'Chinese' come from different regions, not to mention different overseas countries like Malaya or Singapore, and may speak quite different languages from each other, and begrudgingly learn the dominant Beijing dialect.

The world is more like a kaleidoscope than a single picture :)

Joe

Hi folks, just off the web, this article gives a good synopsis of the various players in the SCS dispute. Note how China is ramping up its militarisation of the region.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/water-wars-south-china-sea-beijing-faces-twin-threats-new-us-military-presence-and-pushback-old

Reading between the lines in the paragraph re Australia I get the impression that Turnbull has become committed to supporting the Chinese. I think this has got the US very worried about supporting Australia. I'm guessing that they are not going to forgive the LNP stalwarts for placing Port Darwin into the hands of the Chinese. I think they see it as a form of alliance building between Australia and China.

I guess we can't blame Turnbull completely for siding with the Chinese. Not supporting the Chinese would probably result in a collapse of the Australian economy. Also aggravating the Chinese voters in Australia would probably result in the LNP coalition losing government at the next federal election.

Hi Mr Opinion,

And now Malaysia:

http://www.news.com.au/world/beijings-fishing-fleet-asserts-claim-to-contested-south-china-sea/news-story/4ed6b3c0a5a1112370931ac684d6cc18

"About 100 Chinese-registered boats have been detected encroaching in Malaysia’s waters in the disputed South China Sea, Malaysia’s state news agency has reported.

"The reported encroachment on Thursday is the latest action by Chinese vessels to raise concern in Southeast Asia, where four countries object to China’s claim to virtually the whole of the South China Sea.

"Malaysia’s national security minister Shahidan Kassim said assets from the Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency and the navy have been sent to the area near the Luconia Shoals to monitor the situation ..... "

The Luconia Shoals are 100-200km off the N-E coast of Sarawak, Eastern Malaysia. The Chinese claim them as part of their territory, 2000 km from China. 100 Chinese 'fishing vessels' ? 100 ? What, inadvertently ? I wonder how John Bilger would explain this away: how might this be the fault of the US ? Hmmmm .......

So, who's next ? Islands and shoals in the Gulf of Thailand ? Islands and shoals on the eastern side of the Philippines ? Because some flea-bitten Chinese ship sailed there once, following the sailing advice of long-experienced traders from across the region from Japan to India ?

Joe

Dear Mr Opinion,

"Anybody can say they have knowledge on a particular subject. Proving it is a different matter."
That much is true. But whether they actually are knowledgeable on it depends not on what they say nor on what they can prove, but on what they have learned.

"If someone tells me that they are knowledgeable in a subject like history, archaeology, anthropology, sociology, philosophy, etc, etc, then I expect that they have at least a bachelors degree in that subject or have done it as a sufficient part of that degree."
Then your expectations will and should be confounded!

"Watching a docufilm or reading a book from a local library on a subject does not constitute being knowledgeable on a subject."
I concur; a single source is rarely if ever sufficient.

"For example, I have separate degrees in history, anthropology and sociology therefore I consider myself to be knowledgeable on those subjects."
Yet there is no evidence of this from the crap you usually post.

"Apart from your engineering degree what other degrees do you have?"
None of my non-engineering qualifications are at degree level.

"What branch of engineering is your degree in?"
Civil. Specializing in transport engineering.

"I guess we can't blame Turnbull completely for siding with the Chinese."
True, for the simple reason that he hasn't!

"Not supporting the Chinese would probably result in a collapse of the Australian economy."
We should never blame China for our own government's economic incompetence.

"Also aggravating the Chinese voters in Australia would probably result in the LNP coalition losing government at the next federal election."
What about all those Indonesian, Malay, Vietnamese, Filipino, Japanese and Taiwanese voters?

Dear Aidan,

In response to your last post, you don't show the attributes of a learned person.

Why would I lie about having several Arts degrees? Actually I'm in the process of applying to do another Arts degree. That's what I am outside of working as an engineer.

It must be so disappointing for you being only capable of getting through an engineering degree. I suppose if you're happy to be stuck in a second rate profession for your entire life then so be it. It was obvious to me from the start that you don't hold a degree in anything outside of engineering.

Time will tell about who is right when it comes to predicting Australia's position wrt SCS situation. If I was a betting man I definitely wouldn't be following the advice of a civil engineer. PS Did you know that a civil engineer is one of my favourite oxymorons.

How long have you known about the Taiwanese not being Chinese? Have you told anybody else? I'll keep your secret safe providing you continue to tell everyone there are no Chinese in Taiwan.

Dear Loudmouth,

Thanks for posting that article. I didn't notice that one.

That is probably the most dramatic article posted to date. I think it really shows that China is intent on annexing the entire SCS and that it is ramping up its militarisation of the region in the face of escalating opposition.

I love the picture of Mabini Reef. That definitely aint no snapshot of a new Disneyworld China theme park they're putting together.

This SCS stuff is just amazing. And it's happening in my lifetime and I get to watch it and analyse it. Just imagine what it'll be like when China has fully fortified the entire SCS and locks out all the nations around it from entering it and using it. The pro-China camp in Australia must be in raptures. As for myself, I've just started to download a copy of the US refugee application forms.

Dear All,

Now that it is clear to all thinking people that China has for all intents and purposes achieved its aim of annexing the South China Sea is there anyone on The Forum who still believes that China can be trusted?

For the past thirty years Australians have been duped by its politicians and business leaders into believing that an integrative association with China would bring them peace and prosperity. To cite 'The Onion Eater': It's good for Australia .........' But now it's all become too clear exactly what China's underlying intentions have always been.

All you can do now is watch as China fortifies itself in the South China Sea and then like a swarm of locusts moves progressively south across SE Asia and into Australia. It's not a matter of if but just a matter of when. If a Turnbull or a Bishop comes back from a trip to Beijing assuring us that China has no further intentions outside of the South China Sea then I suggest you make plans to get out of the country as quick as possible.

But don't pay any attention to me. After all I'm just being racist and paranoid. And there probably isn't any such place as the South China Sea anyway.

Dear Mr Opinion,

What do you think the attributes of a learned person are?

I'm baffled by you think engineering's a second rate profession. 'Tis engineers more than anyone else who will shape our future. I understand you live in Sydney — are you unaware of what Bradfield did?

But perhaps even more baffling, and why I'm so suspicious of your claims, is: if you have several arts degrees and regard engineering as a second rate profession then why would you continue working as a engineer?

I wouldn't want to waste my time doing an arts degree. If I want to increase my understanding of arts, I can do so informally; I've no need of a piece of paper to prove it.

You're lucky you're not a betting man, as the advice of a civil engineer will always be better than the advice of someone who ignores the facts and bases his opinions on his own racial prejudice.

Most (but far from all) Taiwanese people regard themselves as Chinese. However it's no secret that they overwhelmingly oppose the PRC's military expansion in the SCS. So considering the context, it would be misleading not to regard them as separate.

As for whether China can be trusted is also a rather meaningless question. To make a meanignful question, specify what you're asking whether China can be trusted to do!

Dear Aidan,

I still work in engineering because it is the only trade in which I can derive a livelihood. Staying in engineering means I earn a reasonable income, while dabbling in Arts means I get to be smart.

I don't think you have the intellectual capacity to do an Arts degree. You wouldn't get past the first paragraph of an academic monograph in history, anthropology, sociology, etc. If I had a dollar for every engineer I heard say they can teach themselves in Arts I would be a rich man. Unfortunately the boast does not match the reality.

Just found this article which suggests that Indonesia will capitulate to China's demands for it to relinquish any of its rights to the South China Sea. Looks like being third time unlucky for the rulers in the Indonesian archipelago.

I think we should probably call this ongoing dispute in the SCS a 'Silent War' to indicate that not much noise is being made re offensive/defensive action but that the Chinese invasion and annexation of the SCS is definitely in progress.

I'm starting to wonder if China will decide to bypass Vietnam and Malaysia altogether and head straight into Australian waters now that it looks likely that Indonesia will not put up any resistance to the Chinese incursions. Indonesia could remain on friendly terms with Beijing and get an opportunity to settle some old scores with Australia as well as sharing in the access to the undersea gas/oil fields and fishing grounds off NW coast of Australia.

Fascinating stuff! It'll be interesting to see if my predictions work out. Still all subject to how future events pan out and I'm only guessing at this stage. But one thing I think I can call is that China has definitely won the silent Battle of the South China Sea.

PS. Here's the article:

http://www.asiasentinel.com/politics/china-provoked-jakarta-south-china-sea-dispute/

One would think that with your grasp of Arts that you'd be enjoying at least a Lectureship by now and well on your way to a PhD.

Dear Is Mise,

Thanks for thinking so highly of me. But's that not the way things worked out for me. I prefer to have four degrees each in a different area rather than four degrees all in the same area. And I have a good little set up going for me to make a living from engineering.

What do you think of the situation in the SCS? Do you have any predictions you would like to offer for discussion?

Thanks, Mr Opinion, that 'Sentinel' site is very informative, for example, Vietnam's options:

http://www.asiasentinel.com/politics/vietnam-reassess-south-china-sea-strategy/2/

IF China's aim is to 'domesticate' the south China Sea, to claim that it is all China's, where does that leave countries like Vietnam ? Would nearly all their trade have to go through a 'Chinese sea' ? Would that put them in the position of a dependent state beholden to China for its trade links with the outside world ?

I suppose it would be a bit like Russia claiming all of the Black Sea up to the Turkish, Rumanian, Ukrainian, Bulgarian and Moldovan coasts, i.e. as captive states of Russia. Even Putin hasn't been that cheeky.

Yet.

Joe.

The water in the SCS is salt and not fit to drink.

Dear Is Mise,

Have a look at some of the maps contained in the articles posted on the thread and you will see that China is laying claim to virtually all of the undersea gas & oil fields in the South China Sea. I don't think China is going to be deterred by the fact that the sea is salty. The Chinese will tell you that's a fact which would be of more interest to the dumb Australians than it is to the smart Chinese.

Mr0,

"I don't think you have the intellectual capacity to do an Arts degree."
I'm not surprised, as you ignore the evidence when forming your opinions, and instead base then on ridiculous stereotypes. But is there anything I've actually written that supports your doubts?

BTW a lot of the stuff you write makes you appear to lack the intellectual capacity to do an Arts degree, let alone an Engineering degree. You claim dabbling in Arts means you get to be smart, yet not once have you shown any evidence of this, though you frequently demonstrate the opposite.

"You wouldn't get past the first paragraph of an academic monograph in history, anthropology, sociology, etc."
I have difficulty imagining anything duller than writing an academic monograph in one of those subjects, so I concede that claim's plausible.

"If I had a dollar for every engineer I heard say they can teach themselves in Arts I would be a rich man."
That's hardly surprising, as many engineers study some non-engineering subjects at uni and find them much easier than the engineering ones. I've also seen some of the coursework my sister (who was studying Arts) did and it looked comparatively easy.

"Unfortunately the boast does not match the reality."
How do you know?

Opinion,

When I posted "The water in the SCS is salt and not fit to drink."

I really didn't think that you'd be silly enough to respond; I'm glad that I was wrong!

Dear All,

I just found this article which is of related interest to this thread:

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/03/28/japan-to-open-new-radar-station-in-east-china-sea.html

Looks like China is really intent on carving out an empire for itself. I think they have succeeded in annexing the South China Sea owing to the lack of resistance amongst the SE Asian nations around it but I think they will have to try a lot harder to wrestle the East China Sea away from Japan.

All All,

Here's another news item, albeit a minor incident.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asiapacific/taiwan-arrests-41-chinese/2642894.html

I love the last paragraph of this news update:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/obama-china-leader-south-china-sea-tensions-rise-37995091

I think Xi will give Obama the finger just like Turnbull gave Obama the finger over the Port Darwin sale.

More news:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/30/world/asia/obama-xi-jinping-meeting-washington.html

Here's the latest folks. Looks like things are going from bad to worse.

http://news.yahoo.com/china-us-careful-south-china-sea-002058329.html

And now Malaysia is getting upset because China has muscled in and is telling it to piss off.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asiapacific/malaysia-summons-china/2653686.html

Tough bananas Malysia. All belong China now!

Watch out folks, Indonesia is starting to mobilise too according to this latest news item:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-31/indonesia-to-deploy-f-16s-to-guard-its-south-china-sea-territory

Piss off Indonesia! All belong China now!

Just imagine how many refugees will start heading in the boats to Australia from Indonesia if China invades Indonesia. So much for 'Turn Back The Boats'.

This is amazing stuff! Isn't it amazing how things can escalate so quickly?

Here it is folks. Xi giving Obama the finger.

http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2016/04/01/458553/China-Xi-Jinping-South-China-Sea/

PS. And it looks like the US is going to ignore the finger it got from Xi and put China to the test.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/us-plans-third-patrol-nea/2659040.html

Hold on to your seats folks! It's only going to get worse, not better.

Latest news item that US don't like getting the finger from China:

www.swissinfo.ch/eng/u-s--plans-third-patrol-near-disputed-south-china-sea-islands/42062522

Like I said, it's going from bad to worse.

Hi Mr Opinion,

You may get a kick out of these, from around 1982 I think, on Filipinos fishing etc. off the Chinese coast a thousand years ago (which probably gives the Philippines the right to declare sovereignty over southern China):

http://asj.upd.edu.ph/mediabox/archive/ASJ-21-1983/scott.pdf

and

http://www.philippinestudies.net/files/journals/1/articles/1696/public/1696-3504-1-PB.pdf

Cheers,

Joe