Russian invasion of Ukraine

[TxRover]

2 minutes ago, MazzyStar said:

I don’t know enough about it to know if China has claimed that. They certainly have more right to claim at least some of it as their territory than the US has to infringe upon it. 

 

It’s not just over international water though. 

China has claimed nearly the whole South China Sea, and International Courts have ruled against that claim, multiple times, most recently in favor of the Philippines.

It is over International Waters though.

[welshbairn]

3 minutes ago, MazzyStar said:

I don’t know enough about it to know if China has claimed that. They certainly have more right to claim at least some of it as their territory than the US has to infringe upon it. 

Maybe you should ask what Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Vietnam think about the issue.

[MazzyStar]

13 minutes ago, TxRover said:

China has claimed nearly the whole South China Sea, and International Courts have ruled against that claim, multiple times, most recently in favor of the Philippines.

It is over International Waters though.

“International courts”  

Obviously not the entire South China Sea is territory of China but at least some is (therefore not international waters) and the US has definitely infringed by carrying out flights over these waters and even carrying out military exercises near it. 

 

Edited March 15, 2023 by MazzyStar

[hk blues]

5 hours ago, welshbairn said:

Maybe you should ask what Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Vietnam think about the issue.

[Newbornbairn]

Something, something, something, America bad.

[MazzyStar]

15 minutes ago, Newbornbairn said:

America bad.

True 

 

[TxRover]

11 hours ago, MazzyStar said:

“International courts”  

Obviously not the entire South China Sea is territory of China but at least some is (therefore not international waters) and the US has definitely infringed by carrying out flights over these waters and even carrying out military exercises near it. 

 

So the establishment of an International Court that rules on territorial boundaries at sea isn’t valid? The majority of the world agrees and accepts the rulings…the Chinese attempt to game the system by putting some troops on an isolated island chain (claimed by four different countries in an attempt to expand their territorial claims, and not meeting the requirements to do so under treaty) and try to claim a huge swarth of the South China Sea…islands claimed previously by two other countries and rules as belonging to none due to their nature. It’s roughly equivalent to the U.K. Claiming territorial waters over most of the North Seas based upon having an oil platform near Norway.

The Convention on the High Seas codified territorial waters in 1958, and has been superseded by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas. The United States, and a number of other countries, do indeed conduct navigation exercises (transiting the area with shipping) in areas defined by these treaties as international waters but claimed by regimes.

So let’s establish a few things here, please clarify if:

1) You believe that significantly more of the South China Sea than international treaties recognize belongs to China?

2) You reject the claims of Indonesia, the Philippines, Vietnam, Taiwan, Cambodia, Thailand, Singapore and Malaysia, which are based upon the exact same argument, rejected by International Court rulings?

3) You reject the concept of an International Court?

[MazzyStar]

16 minutes ago, TxRover said:

So the establishment of an International Court that rules on territorial boundaries at sea isn’t valid? The majority of the world agrees and accepts the rulings…the Chinese attempt to game the system by putting some troops on an isolated island chain (claimed by four different countries in an attempt to expand their territorial claims, and not meeting the requirements to do so under treaty) and try to claim a huge swarth of the South China Sea…islands claimed previously by two other countries and rules as belonging to none due to their nature. It’s roughly equivalent to the U.K. Claiming territorial waters over most of the North Seas based upon having an oil platform near Norway.

The Convention on the High Seas codified territorial waters in 1958, and has been superseded by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas. The United States, and a number of other countries, do indeed conduct navigation exercises (transiting the area with shipping) in areas defined by these treaties as international waters but claimed by regimes.

So let’s establish a few things here, please clarify if:

1) You believe that significantly more of the South China Sea than international treaties recognize belongs to China?

2) You reject the claims of Indonesia, the Philippines, Vietnam, Taiwan, Cambodia, Thailand, Singapore and Malaysia, which are based upon the exact same argument, rejected by International Court rulings?

3) You reject the concept of an International Court?

Dearie me. 

1) No, but I do believe that the US carrying out naval exercises near to where China does have the right to claim is an act of aggression. 

2) Taiwan isn’t a country. As for the rest, I’ll be sure to get in contact with their embassies to ask about their claims.

3) I reject an international court that ignores the crimes of its biggest backers. Where were these international courts every time the US has violated another countries sovereignty and committed atrocities on a massive scale (Vietnam being one example)? 
 

How is America’s imperialist conquest of Hawaii and Guam any better than what China has done? 

[TxRover]

8 minutes ago, MazzyStar said:

Dearie me. 

1) No, but I do believe that the US carrying out naval exercises near to where China does have the right to claim is an act of aggression. 

2) Taiwan isn’t a country. As for the rest, I’ll be sure to get in contact with their embassies to ask about their claims.

3) I reject an international court that ignores the crimes of its biggest backers. Where were these international courts every time the US has violated another countries sovereignty and committed atrocities on a massive scale (Vietnam being one example)? 
 

How is America’s imperialist conquest of Hawaii and Guam any better than what China has done? 

1) Oh, so now you can’t sail too close to a countries maritime boundary…how close it that? Do you argue that countries cannot conduct military exercises and deploy troops too close to their border too?

2) Really? So you are fine with China invading Taiwan to recover a “renegade province”? How about France decides to invade Algeria? Maybe rather Italians like Ethiopia, or the Germans fancy Kaliningrad?

3) So a Court that has no involvement with any of that, and is generally accepted as fair and balanced, is unacceptable because other court have failed?

Addendum) So now we get to the nut cutting. Because America did something and got away with it, you think China (and Russia) should be able to. Except that those offenses occurred before the current International Courts and systems existed. As for the Court being selectively ignored and ineffective, that’s something we work upon over time rather than toss our toys out of the pram about. Your selective outrage isn’t helping your arguments, a simply consistent position would allow your arguments better traction, but you fail to maintain that position, instead shifting as the parties shift.

[TxRover]

7 hours ago, hk blues said:

Since the Philippines have marines aboard a clapped out boat, rusting on an atoll, in the area, they think more than that.

[Tight minge]

24 minutes ago, MazzyStar said:

Dearie me. 

1) No, but I do believe that the US carrying out naval exercises near to where China does have the right to claim is an act of aggression. 

2) Taiwan isn’t a country. As for the rest, I’ll be sure to get in contact with their embassies to ask about their claims.

3) I reject an international court that ignores the crimes of its biggest backers. Where were these international courts every time the US has violated another countries sovereignty and committed atrocities on a massive scale (Vietnam being one example)? 
 

How is America’s imperialist conquest of Hawaii and Guam any better than what China has done? 

Honestly, your seriously either looking for a reaction or have little knowledge of the situation in the South China Sea.

Chinas actions, which have been governed as illegal based on UNCLOS that they were a signatory of are destabilising a region. Americas involvement is far from helpful, but is prinicpally legal.

Right now we have China and the US really destabilising the region and the situation between China and the US should be addressed as is and not based because something happened in the past.

I do not particularly like the US, but if you cannot see the risks that China brings you have your eyes shut. 
 

The politics in the region just now go far beyond just the claims on the South China Sea. It would be better not to have The US pissing about here, but the reality is China is a growing power and I am not sure you would really want that to continue unchecked. Better the devil you know.

 

 

 

[Tight minge]

22 minutes ago, TxRover said:

Since the Philippines have marines aboard a clapped out boat, rusting on an atoll, in the area, they think more than that.

Like nearly every country in the region they are being sucked into a choice they don't want to make. It's a tightrope for nearly all the countries here. There either getting beaten with the stick or force fed a carrot.

[TxRover]

8 minutes ago, Tight John McVeigh is a tit said:

Like nearly every country in the region they are being sucked into a choice they don't want to make. It's a tightrope for nearly all the countries here. There either getting beaten with the stick or force fed a carrot.

Absolutely agree…there was a defacto agreement between the countries in the area that they wouldn’t push things until China started eyeing the mineral wealth in the area. While the U.S. naval presence is somewhat annoying to a lot of them, it’s the only countervailing force to China and is thus begrudgingly supported by those countries. China’s nine-dash line proposal is insane, as is Taiwan’s. In the end, unless all the countries in the area combined and spent huge (unsustainable) sums on their military, the U.S. Navy is the only game in town.

Edited March 15, 2023 by TxRover

[The Other Foot]

@MazzyStar is a bit like @virgintonwithout the phd. 

[Guest]

37 minutes ago, The Other Foot said:

@MazzyStar is a bit like @virgintonwithout the phd. 

I'm glad there's others here who debate the topic rather than just posting bitchy shite like this.

[D Angelo Barksdale]

The rules based international order eh.

You love to see it.

[MazzyStar]

1 hour ago, TxRover said:

1) Oh, so now you can’t sail too close to a countries maritime boundary…how close it that? Do you argue that countries cannot conduct military exercises and deploy troops too close to their border too?

2) Really? So you are fine with China invading Taiwan to recover a “renegade province”? How about France decides to invade Algeria? Maybe rather Italians like Ethiopia, or the Germans fancy Kaliningrad?

3) So a Court that has no involvement with any of that, and is generally accepted as fair and balanced, is unacceptable because other court have failed?

Addendum) So now we get to the nut cutting. Because America did something and got away with it, you think China (and Russia) should be able to. Except that those offenses occurred before the current International Courts and systems existed. As for the Court being selectively ignored and ineffective, that’s something we work upon over time rather than toss our toys out of the pram about. Your selective outrage isn’t helping your arguments, a simply consistent position would allow your arguments better traction, but you fail to maintain that position, instead shifting as the parties shift.

What a load of pish. 

The false equivalence between Taiwan and Algeria, Ethiopia and Kaliningrad is laughable. You also never specified you were only talking about international courts that deal with marine issues rather than international courts writ large. 

Also, what does this have to do with Russia? I never claimed China should be able to what it wants with regards to the South China Sea.

As for “tossing the toys out the pram”, you seem to be the only doing so because America is being criticised. 

The fact the occupation of Hawaii and Guam started before international courts existed doesn’t matter considering the occupations continue to this day. 

 

1 hour ago, Tight John McVeigh is a tit said:

Honestly, your seriously either looking for a reaction or have little knowledge of the situation in the South China Sea.

Chinas actions, which have been governed as illegal based on UNCLOS that they were a signatory of are destabilising a region. Americas involvement is far from helpful, but is prinicpally legal.

Right now we have China and the US really destabilising the region and the situation between China and the US should be addressed as is and not based because something happened in the past.

I do not particularly like the US, but if you cannot see the risks that China brings you have your eyes shut. 
 

The politics in the region just now go far beyond just the claims on the South China Sea. It would be better not to have The US pissing about here, but the reality is China is a growing power and I am not sure you would really want that to continue unchecked. Better the devil you know.

 

 

 

I doubt people in the region ,Vietnam and Indonesia especially, think that it’s “better the devil you know” when it comes to the US. 

Maybe if Pelosi didn’t visit Taiwan and if Blinken hadn’t cancelled a trip to China because of a balloon the situation between the US and China wouldn’t be so intense.

Both sides have done things to provoke these tensions but you would have to be very biased to suggest it’s China that is the party mainly at fault, considering the trade war was started by the US and the almost constant anti Chinese sentiment put out by the US media.

[TxRover]

8 minutes ago, MazzyStar said:

What a load of pish. 

The false equivalence between Taiwan and Algeria, Ethiopia and Kaliningrad is laughable. You also never specified you were only talking about international courts that deal with marine issues rather than international courts writ large. 

Also, what does this have to do with Russia? I never claimed China should be able to what it wants with regards to the South China Sea.

As for “tossing the toys out the pram”, you seem to be the only doing so because America is being criticised. 

The fact the occupation of Hawaii and Guam started before international courts existed doesn’t matter considering the occupations continue to this day. 

 

I doubt people in the region ,Vietnam and Indonesia especially, think that it’s “better the devil you know” when it comes to the US. 

Maybe if Pelosi didn’t visit Taiwan and if Blinken hadn’t cancelled a trip to China because of a balloon the situation between the US and China wouldn’t be so intense.

Both sides have done things to provoke these tensions but you would have to be very biased to suggest it’s China that is the party mainly at fault, considering the trade war was started by the US and the almost constant anti Chinese sentiment put out by the US media.

No, you clearly did. As for the rest, again your modus operandi of blaming ‘Murica for this while giving China a free pass makes you suggesting that I’m just annoyed and defending ‘Murica laughable. The trade war started a couple of decades ago when the PLA factories started producing good for export to the rest of the world at prices that undercut everyone else due to both a willingness to use prison labour and an ability to sell at a loss for a period to force competitors out of the market.

America is far from blameless, but you are taking this OTT.

Edited March 15, 2023 by TxRover

[MazzyStar]

16 minutes ago, TxRover said:

No, you clearly did. As for the rest, again your modus operandi of blaming ‘Murica for this while giving China a free pass makes you suggesting that I’m just annoyed and defending ‘Murica laughable. The trade war started a couple of decades ago when the PLA factories started producing good for export to the rest of the world at prices that undercut everyone else due to both a willingness to use prison labour and an ability to sell at a loss for a period to force competitors out of the market.

America is far from blameless, but you are taking this OTT.

It’s nothing to do with being my “modus operandi” and more to do with fact America does so many fucked up things that it’s hard not to blame them. Undercutting other businesses isn’t a trade war, it’s capitalism and it’s not as if the US would never indulge in any prison labour. 

The reality is that it is the US and it’s vassals that have been responsible for more damage and destabilisation than any other countries post WW2.

[Cosmic Joe]

I feel we deviated from the thread topic somewhat