APEC 2024 Peru. Biden shafted to a corner in the back row. Xi in front row next to Peru's President
5/27/2015
Hostile acts in peace time
China fired a cruise missile into the America Embassy in Tokyo, blowing it up and killing a few American personnel. China sent a note to Obama claiming that it was a mistake and would pay compensation for the damages and loss of lives. Would the Americans accept the apology?
China flew its spy planes, called surveillance planes, closed to the 12 nm territorial limits of Hawaii or American bases in Japan. Or China flying its nuclear bombers, carrying no bomb under its belly, but heading straight to California. How would the Americans react to such threats and show of force? The nuclear bombers came within range where they could fire its nuclear weapons.
These are hostile acts, acts of war. Any of such acts could force the defending country to activate its defensive mechanism, and strike down the attackers. And these were the hostile acts that the Americans have committed against China, in peace time. China, being militarily weaker, took the aggressive and hostile acts quietly, allowing the Americans to bully them and got away with it.
China is stronger today, though still unable to match the Americans in numbers of nuclear weapons and military might. But China is now able to destroy as many Americans as the Americans could do to them. The Americans are continuing to push the boundaries, crossing the Pacific Ocean to provoke the Chinese with their air intrusions into Chinese airspace. A point has been reached and the Chinese would not take it anymore. The Chinese would allow the Americans to bully them, to provoke them, to humiliate them and do nothing. You want the Chinese dead, the Chinese would bring the Americans along, dead.
The American provocations are increasingly dangerous, highly irresponsible, and China would have to put a stop to them if it wants to protect its sovereignty and territorial integrity. If the Americans refuse to back down, China would have no choice but to take the Americans by the horns. China would have to shoot down the American planes in its air space or nuclear bombers heading straight to China. It has no choice.
China would have to go to war. It cannot run away with the Americans at its door and pointing the guns at them. War is inevitable with the bully standing there with guns drawn. Who is the aggressor? Who is the bully? Who is starting a world war? The Americans are asking for a World War that they cannot control.
When China talks about war with the Americans, it is ready for it. It would not win in this war, but it would set New York, Washington and all the major American cities burning. China would be flattened, so would the USA. Would the ordinary American boys and girls and families want to risk being evaporated because a few evil men and women in Washington and Pentagon thought it is fun to travel a few thousand miles across the Pacific to poke their fingers in someone’s backyard and a few pieces of rock that have nothing to do with their good life?
China won't start any shit lah. They'll continue with their current escapades in the South China Sea, but at the end of the day they won't blow their dough and ruin their economy by doing silly things like getting entangled in military conflicts with the US.
ReplyDeleteAt the moment it is a "war with strong words"...but most fuckers including the likes of us don't have A FUCKING CLUE on what is going on through the "back channels" of diplomacy.
Today is Henry Kissinger's 92nd birthday. If there is one completely amoral and Machiavellian player in global politics, that is good old Henry. He's an ex-spurt at playing everyone's backside, and crafting deals in which protagonist and antagonist merge and get to screw some other hapless party's asshole, which has a bigger PAYOFF than if the protagonist and antagonist went to war with each other.
As long as Kissinger is still alive, all those who are "weaker" than China or the USA better jaga their ka chng/ pantat.
China vs USA could be interesting. However China + USA "joint partnership" would be very fucking bad news for everyone else.
Even though some believe that there's a prospect of war, China vs USA is the "status quo" I prefer.
China now only has one aircraft carrier but without a catapult it cannot operate tactical aircraft that use catapults to launch with a heavier warload than would otherwise be possible. Larger planes, such as the E-2 Hawkeye and S-3 Viking, require a catapult shot.
ReplyDeleteThe news of their upcoming China-made aircraft carrier must have raised expectations of many Chinese military buffs hoping to see some form of catapult system.
imagine iranian blow up US embassy in middle east
ReplyDeleteiranian express regret over such accidental bombing
because their intelligence officer provide them with outdated map
do you think that US regime going to accept such explanation?
do you think that US media would sided with iran ? like US media sided with US regime on bombing of chinese embassy
It is time US needs another cyclical 10-year war to invigorate its military-industrial complex. The last major ones were aggression in middles east. Gulf war 1990-91 ,Iraq war 2003-2011, Afghan war 2001-2015
ReplyDeleteBefore which two major one were waged in East Asia namely Vietnam war(1955-1975) and Korea war(1950-53).
Which lucky country will kena next time round?
In a defensive war when China is defending its positions, it does not need any aircraft carrier. Carriers are only needed for an invading/attacking force from afar, an expansionist power that wants to take war to other countries. China will sit and wait for the carriers to come within range.
ReplyDeleteThe Americans would have to come to attack the Chinese positions, and would need the carriers. The Chinese already developed anti carrier missiles that would rain missiles onto the carriers. There is no defence against a rainfall of hundreds of missiles. Patroit missile defence system, defence shield or whatever can only be effective if the enemy is stupid enough to shoot one missile at a time to be intercepted at the anti missile system's own time.
No American aircraft carrier would dare to get nearer than the 5000 km radius of China or it would become a sitting duck. The Americans can only rely on its bases in Japan, South Korea and the Ppines to launch attacks against Chinese positions.
When war breaks out, these positions will be taken out by China as first priority targets. China cannot afford to let the Americans operate from these bases. When these are out of action, and the carriers out of range, it would be the subs and satellites to do the fighting. And these are dangerous as it would be flirting with nuclear warfare.
China does not need any carrier as it is not going to attack the American mainland. The American carriers would thus be no advantage and likely to stay as far away as possible for safety and thus not in the game. The carriers have been neutralized by China.
But if the Americans were to escalate the war to a higher level, it would be ICBMs versus ICBMs. Then it would be the end of both countries plus other combatants like Japan and the Pinoys. The South Koreans know better not to get involved as the North Koreans would come in if they join in.
China does not need to use nuclear weapons to trigger all the nuclear weapons in Japan and South Korea. Blowing up these bases with conventional bombs would trigger off the American nuclear weapons there and Japan and South Korea would become victims of the American nuclear arsenal in their land.
ReplyDeleteSerious Man!
ReplyDeleteAnother few more train mishaps in the USA will be enough to keep the Americunts busy.
And if their drinking water contains cyanide, they will beg for peace.
Why the need to talk about nuclear warfare?
The IS Martyrs and other Jihadists could be waiting for the opportune time to strike.
Natural disasters shall be a common feature together with black and white skirmishes from time to time.
The Amerkcunts shall have some great time.
Humans have not much time left. The way we are destroying the environment and the climatic changes now occuring, the way we are meddling with nature by producing GM food, the way we are feeding livestocks with all the growth hormones and consuming the meat, there is really no need for a nuclear war for us to become extinct within a couple of hundred years at most.
ReplyDeleteAnd yet humans are still preoccupied with trying to find out who is more capable of ruling the world. What a joke!
anonymous 9.11
ReplyDeletesovereignty of north American ( USA ) are disputed too
red indian govt in exile had claim over the north american
does it meant that foreign plane can fly into US airspace? " it is international airspace?
can iranian vessel can approach US aircraft carrier in the international water?
US regime is not claimant to the dispute
how can RB been biased towards CHINA?
china had actual control over their island.
technically, island belongs to china ( status quo)
how US regime handle rebellion in the south?
it is our right to attack confederate state!!!
US is the bully.(responsible for 200 war since independence)
US regime did not respond militarily against iraq?
who actually INVADE IRAQ 2003? and get rid of saddam regime?
Anon 9:11, if your neighbour just announce that he is claiming a part of your garden, so your garden is now a disputed garden right?
ReplyDeleteAbout China attacking Taiwan, you need to go for history lessons.