Author Topic: 南中国海  (Read 2342 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Richard230

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,057
  • Karma: 0
Reply #45 on: April 02, 2024, 10:36:24 pm
Maybe the Philippines should stock up on mines and scatter a few around their disputed island.
2018 16.6 kWh Zero S, 2009 BMW F650GS, 2020 KTM Duke 390, 2002 Yamaha FZ1


GlennF

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,688
  • Karma: 0
Reply #46 on: April 02, 2024, 11:24:43 pm
Australia has plenty all through the outback - oh you meant THAT sort of mine.


AzCal Retred

  • Chennai Wrencher
  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,350
  • Karma: 0
  • a journey of a thousand li starts under one's feet
Reply #47 on: April 03, 2024, 05:30:06 pm
It'll be interesting to see Congress's response to arming up and backing up the PI. I hope Marcos got it in writing, history doesn't really support long-term US backup efforts...

Philippines prepared to respond to China's attempts to interfere with re-supply missions
By Karen Lema ; April 3, 2024

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/philippines-says-it-is-committed-maintaining-position-second-thomas-shoal-2024-04-03/

MANILA, April 3 (Reuters) - The Philippines is prepared to respond to China's attempts to disrupt its supply missions in the South China Sea and protect its troops stationed in the waterway, a top security official said on Wednesday.
Jonathan Malaya, the spokesperson of the National Security Council, said the Philippines is committed to maintaining its position at the Second Thomas Shoal and there will be no let up in re-supply missions to Filipino soldiers on a grounded warship there.
"Our commitment to maintain BRP Sierra Madre will always be there, so any attempt by China to interfere with re-supply missions will be met by the Philippines in a fashion that protects our troops," Malaya told a maritime forum.
Malaya reiterated that the counter-measures announced by Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr last week against "aggressive" actions by China's coastguard will be "multi-dimensional" and not solely military in nature.

xxxxxx

Philippines preparing for ‘worst case scenario’ in South China Sea April 2, 2024
National Security Council emphasises need to exhaust ‘all diplomatic measures’ to resolve escalating tensions

https://www.independent.co.uk/asia/southeast-asia/philippines-south-china-sea-diplomacy-latest-b2521922.html

The Philippines said its navy was preparing for the “worst-case scenario” in the South China Sea to counter China amid growing military tensions in the disputed waters.
A top official tasked with strengthening maritime security in the West Philippines Sea said troops on the east coast were “studying all options”. However, the government of Ferdinand Marcos Jr has been advised to keep the focus on diplomacy to resolve the conflict.
“We are ready for what they are going to do. The troops stationed at Sierra Madre are prepared for the worst-case scenario,” Vice-Admiral Alberto Carlos said. “We are studying all options. It’s unacceptable if we are going to stop the resupply mission.”



A trifecta of Pre-Unit Bullets: a Red Deluxe 500, a Green Standard 500, and a Black ES 350.


him a layin

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 662
  • Karma: 0
Reply #48 on: April 04, 2024, 12:37:21 am
we may play the "arsenal of democracy" game and sit out the first couple of years until someone attacks us directly. like we did in 14, 15, 16, and again in 39, 40 and 41. let's hope we still have some allies left.


GlennF

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,688
  • Karma: 0
Reply #49 on: April 04, 2024, 04:21:27 am
we may play the "arsenal of democracy" game and sit out the first couple of years until someone attacks us directly. like we did in 14, 15, 16, and again in 39, 40 and 41. let's hope we still have some allies left.

Being late turning up is not a huge issue really.

What is a problem internationally is the tendency of the US to abandon allies for internal political benefit.   Vietnam, Afghanistan, Ukraine are all examples where the US withdrew basically because it got them votes at home, though people will come up with all sorts of justifications as to why it was reasonable.


AzCal Retred

  • Chennai Wrencher
  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,350
  • Karma: 0
  • a journey of a thousand li starts under one's feet
Reply #50 on: April 04, 2024, 05:45:32 am
@ GlennF; well spoken. I for one am plenty sick of situational or conditional US politics. Making "Indian Treaties", valid for as long as the "sun shines, the wind blows and the grass grows" or until we lose interest, strike oil or find uranium. The PI may do OK as they have a block of naturalized US voters.
A trifecta of Pre-Unit Bullets: a Red Deluxe 500, a Green Standard 500, and a Black ES 350.


GlennF

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,688
  • Karma: 0
Reply #51 on: April 04, 2024, 10:22:55 pm
There are good arguments that the US should not have interfered in Vietnam or Afghanistan in the first place. However it was like if you have kids, once you are now a parent and you are in it for the duration, you cannot just change your mind and decide it was all a bad idea and abandon them.

With the Ukraine the real issue is the 1994 trilateral agreement where the US promised military support if they were attacked , providing they destroyed their ex-soviet arsenal of cruise missiles, ballistic missiles and long range strategic bombers.

Post Soviet Ukraine possessed 130 UR-100N/RS-18 intercontinental ballistic missiles with six warheads each, 46 RT-23  ICBMs with ten warheads, as well as 33 strategic bombers, totalling approximately 1,700 warheads. These all were dismantled on assurances that the US an UK would back Ukraine in case of an attack.


AzCal Retred

  • Chennai Wrencher
  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,350
  • Karma: 0
  • a journey of a thousand li starts under one's feet
Reply #52 on: April 05, 2024, 02:07:35 am
This says that Ukraine got Fuel rods for its RBMK reactor and some cash, but no NATO-like security guarantees.


https://fsi.stanford.edu/news/ukraine-nuclear-weapons-and-trilateral-statement-25-years-later

The United States agreed to provide Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction funds to finance the elimination of the strategic delivery systems and infrastructure in Ukraine.  Specifically, $175 million would be made available as a start.

The three sides agreed that Russia would compensate Ukraine for the value of the highly enriched uranium in the nuclear warheads transferred to Russia for elimination by providing Ukraine fuel rods containing an equivalent amount of low enriched uranium for its nuclear reactors.  In the first ten months, Ukraine would transfer at least 200 warheads, and Russia would provide fuel rods containing 100 tons of low enriched uranium.

The sides laid out in the Trilateral Statement the specific language of the security assurances that Ukraine would receive once it had acceded to the Non-Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear weapons state.  Although Kyiv had sought security guarantees, Washington was not prepared to extend what would have been a military commitment similar to what NATO allies have; the assurances were the best that was on offer.



However, had Ukraine tried to keep nuclear weapons, it would have faced political and economic costs, including:

·      Kyiv would have had limited relations, at best, with the United States and European countries (witness the virtual pariah status that a nuclear North Korea suffers).  In particular, there would have been no strategic relationship with the United States.

·      NATO would not have concluded a distinctive partnership relationship with Ukraine, and the European Union would not have signed a partnership and cooperation agreement, to say nothing of an association agreement.

·      Kyiv would have received little in the way of reform, technical or financial assistance from the United States and European Union.

·      Western executive directors would have blocked low interest credits to Ukraine from the IMF, World Bank and European Bank of Reconstruction and Development.

To be sure, one can debate the value of these benefits.  But those who now assert that Ukraine should have kept nuclear arms should recognize that keeping them would have come at a steep price.  Moreover, in any confrontation or crisis with Russia, Ukraine would have found itself alone.



A trifecta of Pre-Unit Bullets: a Red Deluxe 500, a Green Standard 500, and a Black ES 350.


GlennF

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,688
  • Karma: 0
Reply #53 on: April 05, 2024, 04:49:32 am
This says that Ukraine got Fuel rods for its RBMK reactor and some cash, but no NATO-like security guarantees.


https://fsi.stanford.edu/news/ukraine-nuclear-weapons-and-trilateral-statement-25-years-later

The United States agreed to provide Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction funds to finance the elimination of the strategic delivery systems and infrastructure in Ukraine.  Specifically, $175 million would be made available as a start.

The three sides agreed that Russia would compensate Ukraine for the value of the highly enriched uranium in the nuclear warheads transferred to Russia for elimination by providing Ukraine fuel rods containing an equivalent amount of low enriched uranium for its nuclear reactors.  In the first ten months, Ukraine would transfer at least 200 warheads, and Russia would provide fuel rods containing 100 tons of low enriched uranium.

The sides laid out in the Trilateral Statement the specific language of the security assurances that Ukraine would receive once it had acceded to the Non-Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear weapons state.  Although Kyiv had sought security guarantees, Washington was not prepared to extend what would have been a military commitment similar to what NATO allies have; the assurances were the best that was on offer.



However, had Ukraine tried to keep nuclear weapons, it would have faced political and economic costs, including:

·      Kyiv would have had limited relations, at best, with the United States and European countries (witness the virtual pariah status that a nuclear North Korea suffers).  In particular, there would have been no strategic relationship with the United States.

·      NATO would not have concluded a distinctive partnership relationship with Ukraine, and the European Union would not have signed a partnership and cooperation agreement, to say nothing of an association agreement.

·      Kyiv would have received little in the way of reform, technical or financial assistance from the United States and European Union.

·      Western executive directors would have blocked low interest credits to Ukraine from the IMF, World Bank and European Bank of Reconstruction and Development.

To be sure, one can debate the value of these benefits.  But those who now assert that Ukraine should have kept nuclear arms should recognize that keeping them would have come at a steep price.  Moreover, in any confrontation or crisis with Russia, Ukraine would have found itself alone.




Assuming another Trump presidency, which seems likely - Ukraine will have zero relations with the US and conceivably will get revenge sanctions from Trump due to their refusal to cooperate in efforts to setup Hunter Biden.

Possession of 1700 nuclear warheads would likely have dissuaded Putin from attacking, but even if Putin did attack, and for diplomatic reasons they decided not to use the nukes, the 11 Tu-160 strategic bombers and 27  Tu-95 strategic bombers would still have been useful and the  483 Kh-55 air-launched cruise missiles could have been converted to conventional warheads.



him a layin

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 662
  • Karma: 0
Reply #54 on: April 05, 2024, 08:29:02 am
i'm seeing a big, BIG uptick in russian sympathizers on social media. i say (sarcasm) we just give them the entire pacific coast and hope they're satisfied for a while. then let them fight china for it.
there, back on topic, sorta. you're welcome.

« Last Edit: April 05, 2024, 09:09:28 am by him a layin »


AzCal Retred

  • Chennai Wrencher
  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,350
  • Karma: 0
  • a journey of a thousand li starts under one's feet
Reply #55 on: April 05, 2024, 06:20:08 pm
A big Russian-bot-driven uptick? Maybe we're getting close to the inflection point. The pro-Putin GOP are required to vote on supporting Kiev very soon. We'll see how that goes. The Gipper must be turning near 10K right now...and our Euro-brethren are getting for a rerun of 1939.

China & the PI are ramping up nicely too. Maybe the imminent Pacific war has more to do with avoiding hurricane typhoon season.  ???

Best to get some bottled water, rice, beans, iodine, a 50 pound bag of salt and a quart of Hoppes cleaner salted away. A brick of poacher-grade CB caps wouldn't be amiss either. Cooked on a twig over a small fire most small game will make a meal.
A trifecta of Pre-Unit Bullets: a Red Deluxe 500, a Green Standard 500, and a Black ES 350.


him a layin

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 662
  • Karma: 0
Reply #56 on: April 05, 2024, 07:28:23 pm
isn't it funny how, in the wake of ww2, communism was assumed to have a monopoly on evil?


Racer57

  • Grease Monkey
  • ****
  • Posts: 390
  • Karma: 0
Reply #57 on: April 06, 2024, 04:39:19 am
4. Please refrain from both political or religious discussions, these topics just give moderators an extra headache."


AzCal Retred

  • Chennai Wrencher
  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,350
  • Karma: 0
  • a journey of a thousand li starts under one's feet
Reply #58 on: April 06, 2024, 08:44:01 am
No opinion, no discussion, nothing to debate here, just public record & historical fact:

https://www.justice.gov/storage/US_v_Trump_23_cr_257.pdf
A trifecta of Pre-Unit Bullets: a Red Deluxe 500, a Green Standard 500, and a Black ES 350.


him a layin

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 662
  • Karma: 0
Reply #59 on: April 06, 2024, 01:28:08 pm
oh sweet jesus. (there's a religion reference) i suspect the issue here was that passing mention of communism. note that in doing so, i advocated for neither communism, capitalism, or any other system of governance or economics. now some people will get bent out of shape if you don't advocate for their preferred system, but i'm somewhat of an agnostic (there's that religion thing again) in that i don't put much store in any particular theoretical system. what i do know from personal experience is that if you sit down with your friends and play Parker Brothers' Monopoly, one person wins and everyone else loses. meanwhile, repeatedly crying "WOLF!" tends to dull the senses, and eventually gets you eaten. or so the story goes. i have no personal experience with wolves.