In this continuing section of the discussion on the South China Sea situation I'd like to kick off by adding the following news item that I found posted on the web about an hour ago:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-11/support-urged-for-'motherland'-in-south-china-sea-dispute/7318172

I think I'm the only one to date who has suggested that there would be a reaction from the Chinese in Australia if the Australian government supports the US against making a stand against China's annexation of the South China Sea. You can take the Chinese out of China but you can't take the China out of the Chinese.

If we had a government with guts, the Chinese 'community' would be sent back to their 'Motherland '. There is room for only one community in a democracy. There is no room at all for a group within to be supporting a foreign power on anything. Where you come from is not important. But once you are here, you should support Australia, or bugger off. If this reference to a Chinese community is indicative of Chinese immigrants as a whole, then the Chinese are more dangerous to Australia than Muslims. Given our politicians fawning attitude the the barbarous Chinese, we are in big trouble. I have been somewhat sceptical of Mr, O's opinions of Chinese in the past. But his latest revelation has changed that.

Don't forget the fact that the Chinese Community
in Australia does big business with China so it
should not be surprising that many of the leaders of its
Australian communities would support China. It's good for their
business interests - as well of course for its emotive
ties with their ancestry.

Just as many Eastern
Europeans in Australia supported the Soviet Regime
(for various reasons) during the Cold War. Now of course,
many of the same leaders are worried of Mr Putin's
air-force - (recent aggression) towards the US navy
in the Baltic Sea - fearing that Putin may be planning
a take-over in the Baltic.

It will be interesting to see what develops next both
with China and in the Baltic.

cont'd ...

Australian politicians will undoubtedly be
treading carefully with China due to its own
huge business interests especially with an
election on the horizon.

Dear ttbn & Foxy,

I am watching Turnbull on TV now speaking from China and he has just stated that the Chinese have reassured him that Australia has nothing to worry about wrt China's annexation of the South China Sea. I suppose that it's a bit like Hitler giving Chamberlain a promise that Germany had no more territorial ambitions outside of Czechoslovakia prior to WW2.

I am extremely worried and I think that Chinese aggression won't stop at the borders of a new Chinese South China Sea. Remember Japan justified its attack against the US and European colonies in SE Asia by saying it had to protect its source of resources. I think China will do the same to justify an invasion of Australia.

Thank you Hawke! Thank you Howard! Thank you Rudd! Thank you Onion Eater! Thank you Turnbull! You've sold us out to China and painted us into a corner. I think there'll be bag loads of fake $40K Rolexes for you lot in the not too distant future.

cont'd ...

I am of course against giving China a free hand in the
South China Sea just as most Eastern Europeans living
in Australia - were
against the Soviet Regime during the Cold War. It will
take great leadership and diplomacy for any Australian
Government to resolve this situation in the best
interests of our nation.

Mr. Opinion,

You might be interested to read a news.com article today about what a Chinese university tutor and Australian citizen says about Chinese students. Not directly connected, but interesting.

Mr 0,

When will you get it into your head that different Chinese people have different opinions? Some Chinese Australians, particularly recent immigrants, would support the Chinese government's position, while others (particularly those who came in the 1990s and from Taiwan) would oppose it. And those who you regard as Chinese just because they have Chinese ancestry are unlikely to have a different attitude to the general population. Despite all those degrees you claim to have, you seem to have great difficulty comprehending the fact that opinion does not depend on ethnicity!

I've made it clear whose side I'm on: the side of international law. The boundaries should be set by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague; we should support its findings whatever they may be. If they find against China, we should encourage China and the winners to come to a commercial arrangement. There is a strong precedent for this: the USA acquired Louisiana and Alaska by buying them (from France and Russia respectively).

Do you disagree with me? If so, why?

I've also made it clear that if war does break out, we should apply trade sanctions but not participate in the combat.

Again, do you disagree with my position? If so, why?

Dear ttbn, I saw that thanks.

Dear Foxy,

I don't have any confidence in any of our politicians, Labor or Coalition, to resolve the dilemma that Australia has now been placed in due to the stupidity and greed of former politicians and business leaders.

As I said elsewhere Chinese voters are now in a position to cast the deciding vote at a federal election. Look what happened to Howard when he got the Asian voters in his own election offside. Turnbull can't risk losing the Chinese vote for the Coalition by coming out in support of the US.

Well, I guess the pro-China camp like Suseonline and Aidan will now be happy.

Dear Aidan,

As Sheldon of TV's sitcom The Big Bang Theory would tell you: 'Aidan ..... you're just an engineer.'

In other words, you don't know anything. So stick to being an engineer and you and the rest of us will be happy.

IMO it comes down to when you war with China, now, or in 50 years thru' our grandchildren. History says we'll wait for the bigger fight.

China's aspirations will not be satiated by giving into it now. Once an advanced military beach-head is fully established in the SCS, Australia is at its mercy.

Dear Luciferase,

Isn't that what China is attempting to do by annexing the SCS? Problem with Australia is that we have already let the enemy inside the gates. China has set us up in two important ways: It has locked the Australian economy into a dependency on the Chinese economy and it has planted millions of Chinese into Australia. Or as the Chinese will tell you: 'Aren't the Australians dumb?'

I have no issue with freedom loving Chinese living here. If they loved the Communist Party so much they'd never have left the mainland, other than for a few spies, no doubt. Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan Chinese hate the Party and are an essential part of the community, IMO.

Dear Luciferase,

As I've already said: You can take the Chinese out of China but you can't take the China out of the Chinese.

If you think the Chinese can be trusted than you probably also think that Adolf Hilter was probably Santa Claus.

Opinion,

Have you decided on which Chinese language you are going to learn?

Good idea starting a new thread, the old one had become boring and you might have gotten lonely posting to yourself.

Dear Is Mise,

This is a topic we can keep discussing right up to the start of the South China Sea War.

Just posted:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-stationing-warplanes-in-philippines-as-part-of-south-china-sea-buildup-1460636272

Looks like the US is mobilising and getting ready to shove China off its man-made islands in the South China Sea.

A UN resolution for China to de-militarise the SCS might be the trigger for a war.

Not surprising.
The human loyalty is always to the bloodline.

In 500years, Australia will be divided up into 3different countries
This was always going to be the end result of multiculturalism

Europe through the centuries, was divided up into countries by the different
Bloodlines, (tribes, ethnic groups).

Australia will end up the same way.

History screams from its pages that this is the ways it goes.

Mr. Opinion, your dislike for anything Chinese has always been quite obvious on this forum.
Red's under the beds.....again....

Mr. Opinion, your dislike for anything Chinese has always been quite obvious on this forum.

Red's under the beds.....again....
Pass the sweet and sour for me will you.

Mr O,

Aidan makes a good point that the Chinese in Australia are as different as chalk and cheese. There is a sizable number who are very much opposed to the existing Chinese regime and would not be prepared to protest.
Watching Malcolm on telly in China, there certainly was no (public) indication of bad feeling between us and them. We can't afford to upset our best Buddy in Asia, now can we. A section of the hard right would be opposed to the Chinese on philosophical grounds, the "reds under the beds" syndrome, and there there would be another section with a vested interest that very much would want nothing upsetting the apple cart.
My view on this is we should stay neutral.

Dear Paul1405,

Aidan wouldn't know his left hand from his right hand. He's only an engineer.

And I'm speculating that Suseonline's only claim to intellectual fame is probably that she has a high school diploma from a private secondary school. She certainly acts like it.

The problem is that Australia cannot hold a neutral position on the South China Sea conflict. It is seen as an insult by the US and conversely seen as supporting China's annexation of the SCS by the Chinese, both in China and here in Australia.

Turnbull is only worried about one thing at the present moment: getting the Chinese in Australia to vote Liberal at this year's federal election. If he upsets the Chinese voters by showing support for the US they will vote against Liberal because they will see it as an attack on their ancestral homeland.

The really big question is: Will there be a war over China's annexation of the South China Sea? What do you think?

Mr 0,

Engineers are defined by what they do know, not what they don't. And I can confidently claim I know a lot more than you do, as you have repeatedly demonstrated that your head is full of misinformation.

I'm sure if I went away you'd be happy in your ignorance, and I expect you'll be happy next week. But meanwhile I'm here and you can no longer hide the illusion that you're not the racist fool I know you to be.

Australia can take a pro international law stance, as I have explained. Do you have a problem with that, other than the fact that an engineer has said it?

The multiculturalism of the lunatic, Malcolm Fraser, is just starting to bite us on the bum. John Howard tried to knock the suicidal idea in the head, but he was howled down and called a 'racist', even by his own, even then, disintegrating party. People of different cultures were never meant to be herded into the same ring as do-gooding nutters have engineered. The idea that people can just throw off their identities and meld in with another culture is idiotic. The entire white race has brought this on itself, with a crazy, totally unecessary, feeling of guilt. Immigration has now become colonisation. Tribal areas are now established. The tribes of non-white, non-European colonists are growing wildly. When they have wiped us out, they will begin warring among themselves. Australia will become part of the Islamic umma, or turn into one big China Town

Lol Mr Opinion!
I forgot your fascination/paranoia with all things Chinese is sometimes overtaken by your fixation on engineers.
I don't feel the need to discuss my extensive education with you at all.

The Chinese Australians are as diverse a group as any other groups of Australians and are no more likely to support the 'Old Country' than any others. To think otherwise is not very bright....for a so called engineer...

Dear Suseonline,

I bet your education is a lot better than Aidan's glorified ditch digger degree.

There is of course a very big moral question connected with the arguments about the conflict in the South China Sea:

Should Australia be associated with any party that is acting belligerently towards others?

China is definitely looking for a fight. It will not negotiate on its claims over the South China Sea and it will not budge from that position. It will not obey a UN resolution to de-militarise (when it is handed down) and withdraw from the South China Sea. It is acting aggressively towards the smaller nations around the SCS with the intention of depriving those nations of access to the huge amounts of oil and gas reserves.

If Australia refuses to support the US and continues to turn a blind eye to China's annexation of the South China Sea it will be acting with immorality. In so doing it will be lowering itself in the eyes of democratic nations and will lose political support, especially the US.

Is this how we want to be seen by the democratic nations of the world? Just another lackey of the Chinese hegemon: a country whose politicians and business leaders will trade off their people's heritage for a bagful for fake $40K Rolexes.

The Chinese activists who are taking China's side in this,
are showing divided loyalty.

That is the whole problem with multiculturalism.

"That is the whole problem with multiculturalism.

Posted by CHERFUL, Sunday, 17 April 2016 12:01:40 A"

No. The whole problem is the total naivety of the multicultural idea and the chimpanzees who came up with it. If any of us went to one of the barbaric countries these interlopers come from, we wouldn't be able to change our culture; neither can the Chinese or or any other race not similar to ours. These Chinese have not divided their loyalty; their loyalty to communist China and dictatorship is still strong. They have no loyalty to Australia, and they never will. The only immigrants allowed here should be people like us. East is East and West is West, and never the twain shall meet

Unlike China with whom Australia has never had a quarrel, America has previously dragged us into two unjustified crazy Asian wars, in Korea and Vietnam. Lets hope Australia for once, remains neutral and is not influenced by the conservative stupidity that the Liberal Party is well known for, No more should Australia support US wars of aggression throughout the world.

Dear Paul1405,

So are you saying that you condone Chinese annexation of the South China Sea on the basis that you were against the Korean and Vietnam wars?

Dear Paul1405,

Also keep in mind that the Korean and Vietnam wars were anti-colonial movements and not acts of aggression like what China is doing in the South China Sea.

The question I am now asking people is: Do you think there will be a war in the South China Sea?

Paul ,

Without America we are toast. Forget your hatred of the 'stupid' Liberal Party; we now have two gutless left-wing parties. Politicians are much the same in Australia now. Like you, they are not aware that we people of a similar kind have to stick together. Playing footsies with anyone other than European type whites is asking for trouble. We are making fools of ourselves with people who have no respect for us or our culture and values.

Who really cares anyway?
Don't you all realise China OWNS everything and soon and we will be tenants in our own country whether we like it or not.

Dear ttbn,

I'm sorry to see you find this topic so personally upsetting.

It's too late to be worrying about who is at fault. The only real question is now whether or not there will be a war over the South China Sea conflict. What do you think?

Dear Armchair Critic,

If you go around making comments like that the only ones who you are making happy are Suseonlines and Aidans in the pro-China camp.

Paul,

What was unjustified about the Korean War, apart from the unjustified invasion of South Korea by the North Korean Communist regime.

Did your Red mate Lee tell you to post that?

The news post referred to in the first post.
Read the Chinese statements out loud.
They are very arrogantly phrased.

They are simply saying we will talk to the diplomats but that is all.

Perhaps Australia should start a nuclear weapons program.
Notice how Israel has been left alone by the Arab governments.
Only the ratbags want to take them on.

Mr. Opinion,

"Personally upsetting"? Not for me. I stopped taking human stupidity and narcissism personally a long time ago. I also know that few people give two hoots what I think and, honestly, I feel the same way about most people. I don't do understanding,sympathy or empathy these days; I'm more of a 'told you so' bloke and, to be honest again, I get a kick out of watching unfold the very things I predicted would happen with the lurch to socialism, multiculturalism, faux compassion and the stupid belief that all people are equal. I clearly remember listening to an ABC reporter on the wireless telling us that, thanks to the raving lunatic, Malcolm Fraser, people who, were not born here could from that time on think of themselves as whatever they were before thay came here; they could also think of themselves as Australian, although there was no pressure for them to make that official as long as they had permanent residency: no need to worry about that loyalty nonsense. Accordingly, the descendants of 1950's migrants who were called 'New Australians' quite happy to be Australian and fit in - these jerks went for dual-citizenship in a big way, and ended up with split personalities to suit their split identities. This BS has now reached the stage where newer migrants expect to take the be benefits provided by Australians - Old and New - wothout paying any homage to Australia at all. They don't even bother to learn our language, unless they want to get into the professions to loot English speakers as well as their own mob.

Do I think there will be conflict with China? Yes. And we damn well need to start finding places to incarcerate these parasites before it starts.

Mr 0,

I've made it clear that I'm on the side of international law.
You regard me as "in the pro-China camp".
Does that mean you think international law favours China?

_____________________________________________________________________________

Bazz,

There've been more attempts to invade Israel than Australia.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Paul1405,

I agree the Vietnam War was unjustified and crazy; probably neither side would've bothered fighting if they'd known their opponents' true objectives. But how was the Korean war unjustified or crazy? Didn't South Korea deserve to be protected?

_____________________________________________________________________________

CHERFUL,

Multiculturalism is about culture, not loyalty.

_____________________________________________________________________________

ttbn,

Parasites?!? Are you trying to outcompete Mr 0 in the racial prejudice stakes?

Dear Aidan,

China has made it quite clear that it will not abide with International Law unless the decision favours the Chinese position. China has said it will not comply with any ruling that is contrary to its annexation of the South China Sea and it is ready to fight a war if does not get its way in the South China Sea.

Your comments on Israel and the Korean War in your last post show that you have a very odd way of constructing history. It's the sort of construction I would expect from a Year 8 secondary school student. I really don't think you have ever studied history at university let alone have a degree in history.

And 'Multiculturalism is about culture .....' Really! This shows that you know even less about anthropology and sociology than you do about history.

As a pacifists I see all wars as unjustified and crazy, even the so called "police action" in Korea. Some participants see their personal involvement as doing their part in supporting the noble cause, so be it. Am I anti American, yes when it comes to their militarism I am. Post WWII the US has taken a very aggressive and belligerent attitude towards others, During the Cold War they seen the Soviet Union as the great enemy, spreading communism and a danger to capitalism. To some degree that was most likely true, but did it justify wars and the slaughter of millions, no!
Some forumites have a 1960's mentality and once more are waving their 'ALL The Way With LBJ' placards, wanting Australia to provide our usual bit of token support to an aggressive America. Are the Chinese justified in their action, No! That however does not necessarily make the other side right. Australia would be much better served if it took a neutral stance and used its diplomatic influence with both China and the US to help achieve a peaceful outcome, instead of providing some token military backing for the Americans, as per usual. Lets hope Turnbull is a far more enlighten Liberal than his predecessors in the party, and purses a peaceful outcome.

Hey Mr Opinion,
I should've been clearer when I said -

"Who really cares anyway?
Don't you all realise China OWNS everything and soon and we will be tenants in our own country whether we like it or not."

Its not that I don't care, it's more of "What the hell are we going to do about it?"

Our countries mostly gone now, and most people (especially the young) don't even realise its happened.
They are all expecting some easy free ride.. Fools.
And we are so stupid we give it to them.

Should I throw my hands in the air and run around screaming like a madman?
Should I look for someone to blame and if so do I look in the mirror for being so naive in the past?
Do I call treason on our nations leaders past and present?
Whats the point?
The Chinese aren't going to sell any of it back.
And we aren't in a position economically to buy it back even if they were selling.
Our country is slowly dying, what are we supposed to do when our own leaders constantly scream foreign investment?
- Short for "Lets take some of the Australian peoples stuff to cash converters"
And we're broke and uncompetitive.

Dear Armchair Critic,

It's sad, isn't it?

Over the past three decades Australians have been sold out to China by its greedy and stupid politicians and business leaders who thought they could negotiate with China as if they were on equal terms with the Chinese.

All they have achieved is to paint Australia into a corner. Two main reasons: (1) the Australian economy is now locked in with the Chinese economy thus allowing China to control the Australian economy from Beijing; and (2) Chinese make up a large minority of voters in Australia allowing them to cast a deciding vote in a federal election. The result is neither Labor nor the LNP can now afford to upset the Chinese in China or Australia. It would be political suicide.

I think Australia is just going to have to work out how to manage being a lackey of China from here on in. And I think we have only seen the tip of the iceberg of Chinese migration to Australia. I think we can expect to see the Chinese population in Australia grow by 50 million over the next twenty years. I also believe that with this about 75% of industry, real estate, primary production and business will be in the hands of the Chinese. And I would not be surprised if Beijing demands that Canberra hand over the Australian Defence Forces to the Chinese Peoples Liberation Army.

This is why I said that Australia should stay neutral in the South China Sea issue, its not because I don't believe in International Law but more that I don't wish to stir the new landlords up.
And also I get that part of their expansion is a reaction to Americas aggressive posturing or arming up China's neighbours.

This is also why I've made comments lately saying 'we're a nation of complete idiots and we've let this 'lucky country' we had slip right through our fingers and its gone now'.

If you look at the big picture its sad, and shameful.
How stupid we were, and still are.

Dear Armchair Critic,

Australia does not have an option about staying neutral to the South China Sea conflict. I've given my reasons several times elsewhere so I'm not going to keep repeating them.

I think that Turnbull has already demonstrated to the US that he is not willing to support the US endeavour against China in the dispute. Simple reason I think is that he does not want to turn the Chinese voters against the Liberal Party at this year's federal election, which would result in losing government.

Have a look at this 2011 ABS demographic of Sydney to get an idea of how important the Chinese vote will be at the federal election:

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/hurstville-sydneys-real-chinatown-20150218-13ia0l.html

As you can see Chinese voters predominate in a lot of areas, especially Hurstville, Epping, Cabramatta, etc. They can knock a lot of Liberal MPs off their seats if the Turnbull government puts them offside by attacking their ancestral homeland. You've probably noticed that Labor has been silent on the conflict. I think because they don't want to upset the Chinese vote as well and run the risk of forfeiting seats in the Chinese dominated electorates.

Someone suggested that China would ignore UN resolutions.
No they won't because there won't be any to ignore.
China has the veto at the UN !
Mr Opinion, you should add Hornsby to your list.

Mr 0,

"China has made it quite clear that it will not abide with International Law unless the decision favours the Chinese position. China has said it will not comply with any ruling that is contrary to its annexation of the South China Sea and it is ready to fight a war if does not get its way in the South China Sea."
So why do you still regard me as in the pro-China camp?

"Your comments on Israel and the Korean War in your last post show that you have a very odd way of constructing history."
But do you have any objective criticism of them?

"And 'Multiculturalism is about culture .....' Really! This shows that you know even less about anthropology and sociology than you do about history."
No, it shows that unlike you, I know what multiculturalism is!

I see you're still under the illusion that Chinese ancestry will somehow affect people's opinion of which side to support. Do you think the same applies to those with ancestors on the other side of the dispute?

War against China would be futile and universally unpopular. But the international community can react against Chinese aggression without going to war. And you're jumping the gun: we don't even know what the court's decision will be.

What do you have against remaining on the side of international law? You clearly dislike my opinion, but so far the only reason you've stated for your objection is that it came from an engineer!

BTW your demographic projection is astounding. What do you think Australia's population will be in 2050?

___________________________________________________________________________________

Paul1405,

"As a pacifists I see all wars as unjustified and crazy,"
Even WW2?
Are you French? :-)

What is your view about participating in economic sanctions against those who violate international law?

Those demographics tell a story of whats to come.

Dear Aidan,

In 2050 the population of Australia will be mostly Chinese. And you will still be just an engineer who doesn't know anything about history, anthropology and sociology

Dear Armchair Critic,

It is not a projection. That map is of Sydney in 2011. I reckon the proportion of the Chinese population of Sydney has increased by at 20% on those figures over the past 5 years.

I expect by 2025 Sydney will be able to be classified ethnically as a Chinese city with 4 in 5 people being of Chinese descent.

Hi Aiden,

You may misunderstand me, when I say all wars are unjustified and crazy, I am saying war is the result of humanity not yet reaching a level of mature development where the destruction of our fellow man is no longer a part of the human intellect. Looking at the past and present humanity is a long way short of that desirable goal, war and its associated destruction is very much part of the existing human ethos.
You are an intelligent person and I think you do understand where I am coming from. Possibly you may agree. The warmongers who profit from human death and destruction, and their sycophantic supporters, will not.

On this China thing, I've had a good read up and I don't think war is imminent or at this point likely, there is still some way to go before we reach that end. To me the main protagonists China, Vietnam, Philippines and on the East China Sea dispute China and Japan. I hope all parties would respect the rule of law, and given a verdict by a properly constituted international court, I would hope all parties would respect and abide by that verdict.
I do no see any justification for the US to be involved to the extent that it has been, their motives are questionable, more to do with challenging China's dominance in the region at their expense than anything else.
Australia can play a diplomatic role, and certainly should not be involved in any military hostility should it eventuate.

Aiden, on the score of economic sanctions, I think they have mostly had the effect of hurting the general populous rather than the desired effect of influencing the regime, most of the time.

No I am not French, although I do like their food. Are you Icelandic? Thought I would ask just in case.

cont

cont,

Hi Mr O.

Your claim that by "2025 Sydney will be able to be classified ethnically as a Chinese city with 4 in 5 people being of Chinese descent." Is an exaggeration, are you taking about the City of Sydney, Sydney Metropolitan or Greater Sydney? Are you including all of Asian decent as "Chinese".

The Chinese must be laughing their freaking heads off at us.
(My Best Chinese accent)
"Dows ossies arr so stoopid. huh-hu.
Dey so stupid dey not sell China cow, dey sell China whole farm..
And den buy back cow.. ahh-huh-hu-hu."

Well all those that abused Pauline Hanson because of her maiden
speach in parliament can now apologise to her.
While they are at it they might apologise to Enoch Powell the
British member of parliament that predicted what is now going on in Europe.

Will they never learn ?

Mr 0,

I see you haven't even attempted to answer any of the questions that I asked.
(unless you're so dumb that you think "population" means "oversimplified demographics")

Your speculation without evidence is boring. Despite your claimed degrees in history, anthropology and sociology, you've consistently failed to demonstrate any knowledge of those subjects.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Paul1405,
"I am saying war is the result of humanity not yet reaching a level of mature development where the destruction of our fellow man is no longer a part of the human intellect. Looking at the past and present humanity is a long way short of that desirable goal, war and its associated destruction is very much part of the existing human ethos."
I agree, but WW2 disproves that this means "all wars are unjustified and crazy", so why did you extend the latter claim to the Korean War?

I think the effectiveness of sanctions would depend mainly on the leader's vulnerability. I think China would be susceptible, as their stability depends on economic success. Indeed I'd expect China to be more vulnerable to sanctions than to war.

And no I'm not Icelandic. Nor did I think you were French; unlike Mr 0, I recognise that opinions don't depend on ancestry.

Adian,"I am saying war is the result of humanity not yet reaching a level of mature development where the destruction of our fellow man is no longer a part of the human intellect. Looking at the past and present humanity is a long way short of that desirable goal, war and its associated destruction is very much part of the existing human ethos."

Wars do not come from the human intellect, war is driven by human biology.

The prize in all wars is control of countries and land.
Wars are territorial.

A tribe or ethnic group that loses control of their land and resources, can quickly become a dying race, we have seen this happen to races and groups throughout history.
That's why we fight wars so fiercely, it really is a matter of survival of our closest bloodline.

There are two big biological survival instincts in every species on this planet including the human species.
The sexual mating instinct and the terrortorial instinct.
And mankinds history is full , with territorial conquest.

Racism isn't the problem, it's a symptom, of the much more deadly underlying terrotorial hostility.

Racial aggression is really the same kind of hostility we see an animal display when it trys to intimidate or scare another animal who comes on to its territory.
Humans like the animals seek to protect their closest bloodline by providing them with territory filled with plentiful,survival,resources.

In humans the immediate and closest bloodline is, their children,parents, aunts, uncles,cousins and the tribe around them through generational intermarriage.
This is why multiculturalism is very dangerous in the long term.

Tribes compete with each other for resources to survive, and they will kill for those resources when certain factors come into play.
Like overpopulation and scarce resources(poverty)
When tribal numbers get big, one tribe will demand a separatist state,which basically means they want to carve off a piece of your country, and control it.

Hi folks,

I found this on the web news yesterday:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/latest-news/britain-aligns-with-us-on-china-sea/news-story/e2b4895f12ca3143300c198dc26c28a6

Is there anyone on The Forum who really believes that China will accept the ruling of the Hague court (which looks definitely being in favour of the Philippines) and withdrawing it's forces from the South China Sea? I know Aidain the Engineer believes China will obey the ruling but we can't all be engineers like Aidan and have really unrealistic ideas about history, anthropology and sociology (and going by his latest post it looks like he also sees himself as a philosopher).

I think the key point in this article is that the author alludes to the chance that a ruling in favour of the Philippines will be a trigger for a war by China as it escalates its military forces to protect its annexation of the region.

Well folks, hers'e a piece of news that looks like the UK is now getting concerned about China's annexation of the South China Sea and is now willing to commit to US action against China.

http://www.rappler.com/world/regions/europe/129993-britain-aligns-with-us-response-south-china-sea-case

It's really hard to see this conflict not ending up in a war.

I think Turnbull thinks he can stay neutral. If he does (1) Australia will lose any future US support if it is invaded by China and (2) the Chinese will think Australia is on its side and use that as a future pretext to annex Australia.

I found this curious piece on the web:

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/301935/south-china-sea-trouble-draggin'-on

If Suseonline sees this she'll probably start raving on about how many Sinophobic racist ant-Chinese paranoid 'reds under the beds' crazies there are in New Zealand. And Aidan The Engineer will probably break out in a lengthy discourse on the archaeology of Sino-New Zealand international law.

Looks like China is now pissed off with UK over the South China Sea.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-southchinasea-china-britain-idUKKCN0XH0QS

That raises an interesting question for Australia: If the UK is going to support the US will Australia have to support the UK? After all 'tu reina, mi reina'.

Just think about this;
Japan needs 8 oil tankers to arrive in Japanese ports EVERY day !
Assuming average 1 million barrel tankers.
If China's enforcement in the Sth China sea was implemented some 4 or
5 days later Japan would be out of oil for a week as that is approx
the extra time to go the long way round via Torres Strait.
There might be another "short cut" via Nth of PNG and East of the Phillipines.
Either way it means Japan would have to employ an extra 100 oil tankers.
ie 8 a day X 7 = 56. Double it to cater for the return voyage.
No matter how inaccurate my figures it would still add up to big dollars (or Yen).
These extra costs apply to all trade through what we should start
calling the Sth Asia Sea.

Now do you understand why this is so important ?

Bazz said;
Well all those that abused Pauline Hanson because of her maiden
speach in parliament can now apologise to her.
While they are at it they might apologise to Enoch Powell the
British member of parliament that predicted what is now going on in Europe.

Will they never learn ?

No one said a word, especially those that abused Pauline Hansen.
Cat got your tongue ?

BTW, I see that the banks are having trouble with the mainland
Chinese who have been buying apartments off the plan in getting
the money at settlement time.

--Trixxxx is also concerned that the banks are now becoming too tough
on Chinese buyers — his main client base.
That’s why he went and saw APRA boss Wayne Byers last week.

So all is not lovely in the Chinese real estate business.
A friend of mine said; if doing business with the Chinese make sure
you have it all tied up, i s dotted and ts crossed.
They are merciless in business.
He had many years doing business with them.

Hi Bazz,

Good analysis re Japan being affected by China's closure of the South China Sea.

China will be able to push Japan out of the marketplace and secure a China-only trade system between East Asia and Europe. It will also be in a position to cut off oil to Japan in the event of a war.

This is not something that is happening by chance. China has been working towards these goals for years.

Disgusted with many comments on this.

Are you people blind? Can you not see that the US wants to surround Russia and place military bases on their doorstep? What do you think the Ukraine issue was all about?

Can you not see that China can see the writing on the wall regarding the US intentions towards them, that the US is after them too?

China is simply awake as to what the US is doing and on this matter, they have simply beaten them to the punch.

Just how blind are you people??

Not blind at all, we can see what is happening and we are glad someone
is not just going to sit back.

If you have any doubts ask the Tibetans and the Vietnamese.
.

Bazz,

The country most susceptible to blockading of the South China Sea is China itself.

Japan would not run out of oil at all. You've made two errors: firstly, going through Indonesia and east of the Philippines would not add anywhere near a week to the journey time. The Torres Strait is irrelevant, as no tanker would make that enormous detour. Secondly tankers to other destinations could be diverted to Japan. It is already common practice for oil tankers to change destination mid journey due to other customers being willing to pay more.

As for Pauline Hanson, she's a fool. She thought that Asians weren't like us; now nearly everyone knows that's not true. She also made some racist assumptions about Aboriginal Australians.

She should stick to dancing.
___________________________________________________________________________________

Mr 0,

Regarding the philosophical stuff, I think you failed to notice I was quoting Paul1405.

And I suggest that, rather than trying to make up more lies about my position, you read and accept what I've actually said.

Australia should be on the side of international law. We should encourage China to accept the court's ruling. But accepting the court's ruling does not mean giving up territorial ambitions. If (as likely, but by no means certain) the ruling goes against China, we should encourage both sides to come to a commercial arrangement.

But if we don't, and the court rules against China, then I don't expect it to accept the court's decision, nor to go to war. More likely they'd just disregard it.

And in the very unlikely event that war does break out, we should participate in international sanctions against China, but not in the war itself.

Dear Aidan The Engineer (and others in the pro-China camp),

The facts are:
1. China has annexed 80% of the South China Sea.
2. China is building military bases around the perimeter of this area of annexation.
3. China has already said that it will not comply with any determination under international law made by the Hague Court to redraw from the area.
4. China has already threatened action against any nation that tries to force it out of the SCS.

What is it that you find so difficult to come to grips with?

It's your sort of wait-and-see approach that allowed Hitler to invade first Eastern Europe and then Western Europe. It's no wonder you're just an engineer.

Hi folks,

Looks like China has found someone willing to support its annexation of the South China Sea:

http://thediplomat.com/2016/04/did-russia-just-side-with-china-on-the-south-china-sea/

Who would have guessed it would be Russia? Big surprise ........ Heh!

What this signals to me is that China and Russia have a secret non-aggression pact. This means of course that Russia promises not to attack China if China enters a war over the South China Sea.

I think it's time to put the pacifists to bed and get down to the facts.

OK Aiden, as I said my guess may not be accurate but it would add days.
Each day means 16 more tankers have to be employed.
The Chinese claimed area comes right down to the Indonesian coast and the Borneo coast.
The tanker would have to go east of Borneo adding days.
I am aware that cargoes change ownership, but with oil that is not
such a common practise as the oil is purchased by the oil company and
they have ships contracted or they own the ship.
I notice that largely the same ships go to and from Singapore or
Korea and Sydney.
Of course it varies, as some ship appear not to totally unload in Sydney
and then go on to Fiji or New Zealand.
The diversion would be less in the Australian trade as the ships are
carrying petrol & diesel with specific grades and specifications.

Dear Bazz and Aidan The Engineer,

If you two are into calculating shipping speeds maybe you can tell us how long it will take for a Chinese fleet to sail from the South China Sea to Port Darwin to offload a couple of brigades of the Peoples Liberation Army?

Hot off the web news:

Looks like China is constructing floating nuclear power stations to power the man-made islands in the South China Sea.

http://nypost.com/2016/04/22/china-is-allegedly-plotting-sailing-nuclear-plants-in-south-china-sea/

I think a clear picture is now starting to take shape. China seems to be transforming the South China Sea into a massive industrial complex aimed at extracting all of the oil and gas reserves. I think it will ship the extracted oil and gas back to mainland China for storage.

The islands though have a dual role. They will also be fitted out with military bases and these bases will be strengthened and maintained long after the resource extraction plants have completed their task.

The sum is that China has no intention of sharing the huge amounts of gas and oil under the South China Sea with anyone else. It's getting in early, beating everyone to the punch, and stealing all of the gas and oil.

If what Beachy says is true, you have got to give it to the Chinese, they are an industrious mob, not letting the grass grow under their feet. Don't forget they built the 'Great Wall' and invented gun powder, when our ancestors were still looking for a warm cave to live in. Now if that was Aussie's backyard we would be waiting for the Yanks to come in, to dig it up and ship it out, back to Yankeeland! Throwing Aussie no more than a dry bone for our part, as per usual.

The Chinese are the Worlds greatest example of the motto "DO IT YOURSELF", No one but no one, has ever helped China with anything, they have done it all on their own.

Hi Paul1405,

Have you seen the poster: UNCLE MAO WANTS YOU! With a big picture of Zhao Zedong grinning and apparently pointing his finger right at you.

So I assume from the way you write that you'll be cheering on the Chinese if war breaks out over the South China Sea dispute.

Mr O,

No, no, no, I an a pacifists, so I will not be "cheering on" the Chinese, or anyone for that matter in any war. I was stating what is fact. If it came across as pro China, sorry. I could also praise the Yanks for their industriousness and inventiveness. The fact is the Chinese have been at it for about 5,000 years, the Yanks only about 500. Aussie, well, we really haven't open our account as yet, still chewing on that dry bone Uncle Sam threw us back in 1952.

Dear Paul1405,

The Chinese have also been about constructing and maintaining a despotic state and enslaving its peoples for the past few millennia.

The US on the other hand has basically been building the world's greatest democracy and free society ever since its early English plantings in the 17th century.

It's America who has been keeping the totalitarian regimes at bay. WW2 was partly the consequence of America NOT wanting to play the international cop. The US has been trying to maintain world peace since WW2 and all it gets is dirt kicked in its face.

Wait until the Chinese get here. Then you'll start realising how much you have lost. For myself, I hope to be either be dead of old age or able to get asylum in the US.

Mr O,

What can I say, "The home of the brave, and the land of the free".

Just ask the decedents of the 12.5 million slaves, 11 million survived the journey, African Americans, or the few survivors of the 'Indian Wars' which all but destroyed the Native American population. Ask the Hispanics and other minorities, living in the US how well off they are. Its all a win win situation.

p/s Did you learn history by watching re-runs of old John Wayne movies?

Paul,

So as a pacifist you see all wars as being unjustified, so was it not justified to resist Hitler?

"Roll me over, in the clover,
Roll me over....."

Dear Paul1405,

No I did not learn history from watching re-runs of old John Wayne movies.

I did some history towards my BA and later did an MA in history. Plus I also did an MA in sociology, which as everyone knows is a sister discipline of modern history.

And you my learned friend, how did you acquire your skills and knowledge in history?

Hi Is Mise, salutations, and love to you once more,

Unfortunately you and I will never be able to communicate on an intelligent level. With me supplying the intelligence, and you being at the base level. I will continue to post thoughtful material containing wisdom and knowledge, and you shall continue to reply with your usual grunts and groans. As I respect the other primates I respect you.
Like the Christian Christ spoke to his disciples at a level they could not comprehend, when I speak to you of why war is unjustified and crazy, you like Christs disciples fail to comprehend.

I understand you are a veteran of that unjustified crazy Asian war in Korea. I will gather with others at 6am Monday morning and sincerely and respectfully, remember you and the countless others, who through no fault of their own were subjected to the barbarity, brutality and horrors of war. Peace for ever.

Hi folks,

Hot off the press a news item criticising China for wanting to use nuclear power in the South China Sea for its man-made military-cum-industrial islands:

http://www.smh.com.au/world/south-china-sea-dispute-beijing-plans-floating-nuclear-power-plants-20160422-goddyz.html

Is it just me or does anyone else get the impression that China doesn't give a stuff about anything or anyone except itself and its quest for global dominance?

Mr O,

I note your SMH article came out of Washington from an anonymous source, would it not be somewhat more creditable if it came out of Beijing with a Chinese government reference.

Then there is comment attributed to Patrick Cronin, senior director of the Asia-Pacific Security Program at the Centre for a New American Security,

According to the C for a NAS its goal is to develop "strong, pragmatic and principled national security and defense policies that promote and protect American interests and values."

I am sure you could get a more unbiased opinion watching re-runs of old John Wayne movies.

Hot of the press. Mr O do you work for the CIA or Disneyland? It don't matter, they are one in the same

Dear Paul1405,

I'm not interested in doing a detailed analysis of the articles. I'm only interested in following the events that appear to be leading to a war between China and the US over China's annexation of the South China Sea. I find these news reports on the web are a very good source for keeping track of the way things are heading.

In history we're trained to put together the pieces that show the cause and effect of events e.g. WW1, American Civil War, etc, etc. Historians are the only people I know of who are specifically trained to do this. That skill in dealing with the past also allows historians to trace out the events of a current situation in order to assess what the effects may be.

I'm sorry if I've upset folks on the Forum with my doom and gloom assessment of a pending war right on your doorstep. Maybe everyone would prefer if I said something like:

1. China is a really good and honest nation who doesn't want to cause a war.
2. China is not trying to steal oil and gas from its SE Asian neighbours but is actually in the process of pumping oil and gas into the sea so that others can use it.
3. There are very few Chinese in Australia and none of those have any connection with China. Or in fact even know about China.
4. I only imagine that there are huge numbers of Chinese in Sydney. It's all a figment of my imagination.
5. There are no reports on the web about a conflict in the South China Sea.

Isn't the truth wonderful. Now we can all forget about this nasty talk of war and Chinese takeovers because it's all just a figment of Mr Opinion's imagination. There's no Chinese, there's no South China Sea, and there's nobody eating raw unpeeled onions and collecting free fake $40K Rolexes.

Mr O,

There is a subtle difference between facts and propaganda, and your SMH article contained no relevant facts, just supposition and speculation. Is that how you "historians" work.

This article might help you put a bit more of that history of yours together. It suits your narrative it has China and Russia starting WWIII against your beloved United States. It came from a creditable source a self styled Nostradamus, at least its not by a Greek Cafe owner Mr Anonymous, which is where your article came from.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/621486/New-Nostradamus-Prophet-claims-WWIII-start-JUNE-six-months-after-Europe-closes-borders

Dear Paul1405,

Go to bed, have a good night sleep, and when you wake up in the morning it will all be gone. No more China, no more South China Sea, no more web news. It will all be gone. It's all just a figment of Mr Opinion's imagination.

Mr O,

Could you please explain the reasons for the involvement of the United States in all this? After all its not in their backyard and therefore they should have no territorial claims. Put simply, what business is it of theirs, if not to inflame the situation and pick a fight with the Chinese.

"Could you please explain the reasons for the involvement of the United States in all this? After all its not in their backyard and therefore they should have no territorial claims. Put simply, what business is it of theirs..."

Would the same question need a response if it was Australia being bullied and international laws being broken, Paul1405?

The US is quietly looking to start a war anywhere it can get one.
It's a battle to keep the petrodollar as the worlds reserve currency.

They start wars that keep the oil flowing in US Dollars (and support Israels agenda in the M/E) and undermine other rival global superpowers.