Forum Index
this forum welcomes all forumers who appreciate decent and well thought out views and discussions. all forumers are encouraged to accept that different forumers have different views and often there is no absolutely right or wrong views.
Menu
 Forum IndexHome
FAQFAQ
MemberlistMemberlist
UsergroupsUsergroups
RegisterRegister
ProfileProfile
Log in to check your private messagesMessages
Log inLogin/Out

Quick Search

Advanced Search

Links
mysingaporenews
Singapore River Tour
Singapore Education
Singapore Orchids
littlespeck
ypapforum
Singapore Hosting
Sample Link 2
Sample Link 2

Who's Online
[ Administrator ]
[ Moderator ]


Google Search
Google

http://www.phpbb.com
US inciting South - East Asian countries against China.
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic     Forum Index -> World Affairs
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13806
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Tue Feb 23, 2016 8:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Malaysia under attack by the Empire
Australia and UK had issued terror attacks warning in KL, Malaysia and telling their citizens to avoid the country. Understandably Malaysia is furious. This terror alert is unwarranted and uncalled for. The question is why, but Malaysia knows the reason and is protesting.
Notice the calls are made by the UK and Australia and not by the Americans? This is similar to the calls made by the Australians on the MH370 missing aircraft. The innocent devil is not saying anything and wearing a halo over his head.
The next question, who the hell are the Australians to claim to know everything, from where the MH370 supposed to plunge into the Indian Ocean and now the terrorist attacks? To know for certain of such information, one must possess the intelligence network to infiltrate into the ISIS movement or have informers? Did the Australians and the British have more informers and intelligence agents collecting the information than the Americans? How credible are the British and the Australians given the big lies about WMD and MH370?
Why are the Americans so quiet and these two smart alecs so loud? Who is calling the shot? Malaysia must have antagonized the Emperor at Sunnylands and now facing the wrath of the Empire. Malaysia better be careful in case another of its aircraft would be shot down or gone missing. These warnings are a prelude to more problems to come for Malaysia for not toeing the line of the Empire.
The Empire is practicing divide and rule as usual this time with Malaysia as the only target among the Asean countries. It would take on one country at a time to give the rest a warning that they could be next and better behave and do what the Empire demands.
Welcome to the Empire. The Emperor has spoken.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13806
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2016 8:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Who is militarising the South China Sea and the world?
By Chua Chin Leng (chinadaily.com.cn)Updated: 2016-02-25 11:04
CommentsPrintMailLarge Medium Small

The Americans are repeating their daily attacks on China militarizing the South China Sea. In the latest attack they released photos of two batteries surface to air missiles in the Paracel Islands to convince the ASEAN leaders in Sunnylands that China is militarizing the South China Sea. They would not tell the world that the missiles are defensive weapons, unlike the offensive B 52 bombers and missile destroyers. Even if China were to build military bases in the South China Sea to the size of Diego Garcia or Guam, it would not only be legitimate, it would be just like a pin in the ocean compared to what the Americans are doing and building in the region. The American military bases are spread across the western Pacific Ocean for many years and with offensive weapons and nuclear capability to hit every country in the region.
Below is a brief extract from a book ' Rebalancing U.S. Forces: Basing and Forward Presence in the Asia-Pacific' by Carnes Lord and Andrew Erickson.
Erickson and Justin D. Mikolay begin the book with an examination of Guam. Political constraints and friction with allies and partners around the region have led U.S. military planners to look to Guam, U.S. territory on the edge of the Western Pacific battle space and an island whose residents and political leaders, unlike those on Okinawa, actually clamor for a larger military presence.
The result is plans to greatly expand the base of submarines, airpower, and Marines on the island. Singapore is now the key logistics and maintenance hub for Navy and Air Force operations in the South China Sea, and is the critical gateway for the U.S. presence into the eastern Indian Ocean….. American bases abroad are one of the clearest manifestations of the United States' own brand of imperialism, deny or disguise it though it will…. In Japan alone there are 109 American bases and another 89 in South Korea. And there are bases in Thailand and the Philippines as well.
And the US deployed 325,000 military personnel in Asia and Africa according to Global Research, 97,000 in Asia, 40,258 in South Korea, 40,045 in Japan, 491 in Diego Garcia, 100 in the Philippines and increasing, 113 in Thailand, 195 in Singapore, 200 in Australia, 16,600 afloat in ships and aircraft carriers.
With the pervasive presence of American bases in the region, who is the one that is militarizing the region and the South China Sea? Who is more dangerous? Who carries more destructive weapons and is more deadly? The US is crying wolf at the sight of a tree when they are hiding behind a forest. The US have been militarizing the region and the whole world for the last 70 years, with bases in foreign lands all across Asia and South East Asia.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13806
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Wed Mar 02, 2016 9:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Part 1: PROOF OF CHINA’S SOVEREIGNTY OVER THE ISLES & REEFS OF THE SOUTH CHINA SEA
==========================

1. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and the Northern Island

a) China Sea Pilot compiled and printed by the Hydrography Department of the Royal Navy of the United Kingdom in 1912 has accounts of the activities of the Chinese people on the Nansha Islands in a number of places.

b) The Far Eastern Economic Review (Hong Kong) carried an article on Dec. 31 of 1973 which quotes the British High Commissioner to Singapore as having said in 1970: "Spratly Island (Nanwei Island in Chinese) was a Chinese dependency, part of Kwangtung Province… and was returned to China after the war. We can not find any indication of its having been acquired by any other country and so can only conclude it is still held by communist China."

2. France

a) Le Monde Colonial Illustre mentioned the Nansha Islands in its September 1933 issue. According to that issue, when a French gunboat named Malicieuse surveyed the Nanwei Island of the Nansha Islands in 1930, they saw three Chinese on the island and when France invaded nine of the Nansha Islands by force in April 1933, they found all the people on the islands were Chinese, with 7 Chinese on the Nanzi Reef, 5 on the Zhongye Island, 4 on the Nanwei Island, thatched houses, water wells and holy statues left by Chinese on the Nanyue Island and a signboard with Chinese characters marking a grain storage on the Taiping Island.

b) Atlas International Larousse published in 1965 in France marks the Xisha, Nansha and Dongsha Islands by their Chinese names and gives clear indication of their ownership as China in brackets.

3) Japan

a) Yearbook of New China published in Japan in 1966 describes the coastline of China as 11 thousand kilometers long from Liaodong Peninsula in the north to the Nansha Islands in the south, or 20 thousand kilometers if including the coastlines of all the islands along its coast;

b) Yearbook of the World published in Japan in 1972 says that Chinese territory includes not only the mainland, but also Hainan Island, Taiwan, Penghu Islands as well as the Dongsha, Xisha, Zhongsha and Nansha Islands on the South China Sea.
4. The United States

a) Columbia Lippincott World Toponymic Dictionary published in the United States in 1961 states that the Nansha Islands on the South China Sea are part of Guangdong Province and belong to China.

b) The Worldmark Encyclopaedia of the Nations published in the United States in 1963 says that the islands of the People's Republic extend southward to include those isles and coral reefs on the South China Sea at the north latitude 4°.

c) World Administrative Divisions Encyclopaedia published in 1971 says that the People's Republic has a number of archipelagoes, including Hainan Island near the South China Sea, which is the largest, and a few others on the South China Sea extending to as far as the north latitude 4°, such as the Dongsha, Xisha, Zhongsha and Nansha Islands.

5. Viet Nam

a) Vice Foreign Minister Dung Van Khiem of the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam received Mr. Li Zhimin, charge d'affaires ad interim of the Chinese Embassy in Viet Nam and told him that "according to Vietnamese data, the Xisha and Nansha Islands are historically part of Chinese territory." Mr. Le Doc, Acting Director of the Asian Department of the Vietnamese Foreign Ministry, who was present then, added that "judging from history, these islands were already part of China at the time of the Song Dynasty."

b) Nhan Dan of Viet Nam reported in great detail on September 6, 1958 the Chinese Government's Declaration of September 4, 1958 that the breadth of the territorial sea of the People's Republic of China should be 12 nautical miles and that this provision should apply to all territories of the People's Republic of China, including all islands on the South China Sea. On September 14 the same year, Premier Pham Van Dong of the Vietnamese Government solemnly stated in his note to Premier Zhou Enlai that Viet Nam "recognizes and supports the Declaration of the Government of the People's Republic of China on China's territorial sea."

c) It is stated in the lesson The People's Republic of China of a standard Vietnamese school textbook on geography published in 1974 that the islands from the Nansha and Xisha Islands to Hainan Island and Taiwan constitute a great wall for the defense of the mainland of China.
B. The maps printed by other countries in the world that mark the islands on the South China Sea as part of Chinese territory include:

1. The Welt-Atlas published by the Federal Republic of Germany in 1954, 1961 and 1970 respectively;

2. World Atlas published by the Soviet Union in 1954 and 1967 respectively;

3. World Atlas published by Romania in 1957;

4. Oxford Australian Atlas and Philips Record Atlas published by Britain in 1957 and Encyclopaedia Britannica World Atlas published by Britain in 1958;

5. World Atlas drawn and printed by the mapping unit of the Headquarters of the General Staff of the People's Army of Viet Nam in 1960;

6. Haack Welt Atlas published by German Democratic in 1968;

7. Daily Telegraph World Atlas published by Britain in 1968;

8. Atlas International Larousse published by France in 1968 and 1969 respectively;

9. World Map Ordinary published by the Institut Geographique National (IGN) of France in 1968;

10. World Atlas published by the Surveying and Mapping Bureau of the Prime Minister's Office of Viet Nam in 1972; and

11. China Atlas published by Neibonsya of Japan in 1973.

C. China's sovereignty over the Nansha Islands is recognized in numerous international conferences.

1. The 1951 San Francisco Conference on Peace Treaty called on Japan to give up the Xisha and Nansha Islands. Andrei Gromyko, Head of the Delegation of the Soviet Union to the Conference, pointed out in his statement that the Xisha and Nansha Islands were an inalienable part of Chinese territory. It is true that the San Francisco Peace Treaty failed to unambiguously ask Japan to restore the Xisha and Nansha Islands to China. But the Xisha, Nansha, Dongsha and Zhongsha Islands that Japan was asked to abandun by the Peace Agreement of San Francisco Conference were all clearly marked as Chinese territory in the fifteenth map A Map of Southeast Asia of the Standard World Atlas published by Japan in 1952, the second year after the peace conference in San Francisco, which was recommended by the then Japanese Foreign Minister Katsuo Okazaki in his own handwriting.

2. The International Civil Aviation Organization held its first conference on Asia-Pacific regional aviation in Manila of the Philippines on 27 October 1955. Sixteen countries or regions were represented at the conference, including South Viet Nam and the Taiwan authorities, apart from Australia, Canada, Chile, Dominica, Japan, the Laos, the Republic of Korea, the Philippines, Thailand, the United Kingdom, the United States, New Zealand and France. The Chief Representative of the Philippines served as Chairman of the conference and the Chief Representative of France its first Vice Chairman. It was agreed at the conference that the Dongsha, Xisha and Nansha Islands on the South China Sea were located at the communication hub of the Pacific and therefore the meteorological reports of these islands were vital to world civil aviation service. In this context, the conference adopted Resolution No. 24, asking China's Taiwan authorities to improve meteorological observation on the Nansha Islands, four times a day. When this resolution was put for voting, all the representatives, including those of the Philippines and the South Viet Nam, were for it.

No representative at the conference made any objection to or reservation about it.

Research and posted by Dan Yong

What is important to the above factual articles is whether they are truths or fabrications. Can anyone prove that they are false by quoting factual evidence to back up his claims? Why are the Americans and the western media refusing to acknowledge these facts and events? Why are the Americans and the west lying and not wanting to tell these truths?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13806
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Fri Mar 11, 2016 8:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Americans are militarising Asia
The daft Asians could not bother to think what the American pivot to Asia is all about. They only listen to the Americans screaming China is militarizing the South China Sea. And when they blow the pipes, the daft Asians all fall in line and follow the pipe piper without knowing where they are being led to.
China is the expansionist power. So it is right for the Americans to sail their warships and fly their war planes to balance this new emerging power when the while the world’s Number One hegemon continues to militarise Asia and threatens everyone with wars. The American pivot to Asia is as good as the Americans saying ‘We are back, to take control of you, yes you, the daft Asians.’ We are the Empire and we will rule you, daft Asians. We will tell you who is good and who is bad and we will make you fight among yourself, Asians against Asians, and we will sell you all the weapons to kill yourself.
While the daft Asians are still smoking the American designed drugs, the Americans are moving in, bases in Singapore, negotiating for bases in the Philippines, in Vietnam and Australia. They are going to station nuclear bombers, the B1s and B52s in Australia with enough reach to the South China Sea and the whole of Asia. These are on top of more than 100 military bases in their semi colonies in South Korea and Japan, the military fortresses in Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean that the Indians could do nothing about, and in Guam.
The nuclear bombers are offensive weapons with a global reach. The whole of Asia is now under the American nuclear umbrella. They can do regime change to any Asian country they want and no one can do anything about it. They are here to balance against China? China’s military strength is not even one tenth of the American military power. Who is balancing against who? I am posing this question to the daft Asians.
And what kind of weapons did China placed in the South China Sea? Defensive missiles, to protect the islands, not offensive bombers and aircraft carriers with strike aircraft and bombers.
Daft Asians cannot tell the difference between offensive and defensive weapons. The Chinese are arming themselves with defensive weapons to defend against the American offensive fighters, bombers and aircraft carriers. The American aircraft carriers, bombers, missile destroyers are all attack weapons of war. Understand?
Who is the aggressor? Who is amassing attack weapons in Asia, not just the little pond called South China Sea. Who is in charge, in control, militarily of Asia? Is China putting defensive weapons on the islands a threat or Americans moving in their nuclear weapons and offensive weapons to rule over Asia and the daft Asians a bigger and real threat, clear and present danger?
How daft can Asians be? The Ameicans set up a straw man to distract their real intention and the daft Asians swallowed it without thinking and keep throwing stones at the straw man while the region is taken over by the Empire.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13806
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Sat Mar 19, 2016 9:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The recolonisation of the Philippines and Asean

The Americans have just announced that they have reached an agreement with the Philippines to station American troops and weapons in 5 bases in the Philippines. In the 16th century, the colonialists had to fight their way to colonise the Philippines. Today they are invited by the Philippines to recolonise the country.

The Americans now have bases in several Asean countries. The next American base would be in Malaysia. While the Americans are screwing Najib’s ass, his Defence Minister Hishamuddin has been sleeping with the Americans and talking about military cooperation with the Americans. The Americans would be most happy to make him the next Malaysian PM in a regime change when they got rid of Najib. Then the Americans would have military bases in most of the Asean countries. The pivot to Asia would be complete.

None of the silly Asean countries are asking why is there a need for so many military bases when the Americans could use one carrier group to retake all the islands in the South China Sea? What is the real intent and ambition of the Americans? Do the silly Asean leaders understand the meaning of ‘pivot to Asia’? Put it simply, it is the recolonisation of Asia, starting with Asean.

The South China Sea is just a red herring, a convenient excuse to play up to deceive the daft Asean leaders who are scrambling to claim islands in the South China Sea in direct competition with China, claiming islands that China had claimed centuries ago, centuries before these countries were even countries, long before these countries regained their independence from their colonial masters.

Now, because of their wild ambitions, to claim little islands and rocks in the South China Sea, they are compromising their independence and inviting a colonial power to put soldiers in their countries. It is like inviting the wolves into the house to guard the chickens.

How daft can these Asean leaders be, wanting to fight for a bird in a thorny bush that was already claimed by someone else and risk losing everything, without getting the little bird?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13806
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Mon Mar 21, 2016 8:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The US has no time for the Middle East and ISIS

We know the story of how ISIS came about. We know the story of WMD. We know the story of how two Arab leaders were dethroned and their leaders murdered and their regime changed. We know ISIS is now an international problem for the whole world to cope with. The incidents of suicide bombings and surprise attacks are increasing and the death tolls are getting bigger in numbers. Shanmugam has just spoken about how serious is this ISIS threat with more and more people joining their ranks as fighters and suicide bombers. Singapore is facing the highest level of threat today, from ISIS.

The Middle East is burning, caught in a war that would last another hundred years and another hundred years to rebuild, if they are successful, or would be in a state of perpetual warfare? Where are the Americans? Mission complete, time to move on to start another fire somewhere in Asia. We came, we saw and he died. The rest are just collateral damages. No need to waste a tear, no need to look back. This is exactly the state of affair that The Americans have planned, wanted and executed. It is time to move elsewhere, to create another Middle East in turmoil.

Pivot to Asia, move 60% of American military resources to Asia to start another war in the region. This is the new American priority. The Americans are busy moving their big weapons into the region, signing up military alliances and negotiating for more military bases and facilities to conduct war. Asia is the next war zone to be burning. Many Asian countries love wars and wanting to show how good they are with their expensive weapons of war. It shall start either in the South China Sea or in the Korean Peninsula. The latter is easier to instigate. No need WMD, just scream loudly that the North Koreans are a threat to peace in Asia, plant a false flag incident and the two Koreans will be so eager to flatten their countries and to kill their own brothers and sisters. See, the Koreans are the perfect specimen of daft and unthinking Asians that could not see anything further than their nose. The Americans and the Japanese are prodding them from behind, go fight, we will support you, the North Koreans are bad.

The fall back position for the Americans, if the Koreans are reluctant to go to war, is the South China Sea. The ambitious Asean states are more silly and more daft than the Koreans. They wanted to go to war with China to claim Chinese islands, some just rocks, in the South China Sea. They could not see themselves as expansionist regimes that are ripe for regime change. They think that they are big and strong countries, with the backing of the Americans, and can claim and seize islands belonging to China. They are buying more American weapons of war, spending more in their military budget, providing military bases and facilities and inviting the Americans into their countries, to prepare to go to war with China. They are going to push China back.

What would happen to their countries and people when war starts in South East Asia? They are going to defeat China, with the help of the Americans, and to own a few pieces of rocks in the South China Sea? Or would the region be turned into another Middle East, all the countries in the region engaging in a senseless war of mutual destruction till eternity?

What are the American’s goal, agenda and strategy for Asia and SE Asia? What is the American game plan? Do Asian countries want to turn themselves into countries in the Middle East, embroiled in incessant warfare and forgo the development and progress they have built in the last few decades of peace and stability, without the Americans messing around with their warships and war planes?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13806
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Wed Apr 13, 2016 8:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

White men speak with fork tongue in a straight face
John Kerry visited Hiroshima to place a wreath at the commemorative site where the atomic bomb landed 65 years ago. The two atomic bombs brought an end to the savages’ imperialistic dream of conquering the world and colonizing Asia. The Americans and the victims of Japanese invasion and savagery were and are still thinking that the bombing was justified. It is not easy to let an army of savages running wild, bombing, killing, looting, raping murdering the peoples of Asia. The Japanese deserved every bit of the two atomic bombs and the 200,000 death which was a small fraction of the millions they slaughtered during their invasion of Asia.
The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a just dessert for the Japanese for their cruelty and barbarity to their victims and brought an end to it abruptly for the good of Asia. What was mischievous about this Kerry visit to Hiroshima was the things that he uttered with a straight face. In an Agencies article in the Today paper on 12 Apr, it has this headline, ‘Kerry reaffirms US anti nuclear stance during Hiroshima visit’. And the article quoted him saying, the nuclear attack on Hiroshima and Nagasaki ‘was a reminder of the need to pursue a world free of nuclear weapons’.
To the innocence, such a statement appears so noble. But when one knows that the Americans possessed the most nuclear warheads among all nations, more than 7000 of them, more ten times the nuclear warheads possessed by all the nuclear countries, what John Kerry said was either crap, white lie or pure stupidity. The USA was the first country that used a nuclear bomb on another country. The USA was the only country that had on several occasions toying with the idea of nuking other countries. And the USA is the country that possessed enough nuclear weapons to wipe the human civilization off the face of the earth. And it is saying that it is anti nuclear weapons! But not to worry, many silly Asian countries will believe the Americans really meant what they said.
And the Americans are pushing very hard against Asian countries possessing nuclear weapons but not their allies and not themselves possessing more than 7000 warheads. The American anti nuclear policy means that all countries that the Americans considered as their enemies cannot possess nuclear weapons. Only America and its allies can have nuclear weapons. Period.
White men speak with fork tongue? No? Why must the Americans built so many nuclear warheads and carry them around the world in bombers and nuclear submarines and in bases across the whole world if they are anti nuclear weapons? Which country possessed the first nuclear weapon and refused to commit a no first use of nuclear weapon policy?
Oh, they are blaming the North Koreans for wanting to go nuclear! It is the fault of the North Koreans that the Americans must have more than 7000 nuclear warheads. It is confirmed, double confirmed. The Americans need 7000 nuclear warheads for peace. The Americans need to sign military alliances everywhere and build military bases all over the world for peace. What more does one need to believe the Americans to be stupid?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13806
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Fri Apr 29, 2016 9:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Singapore bashing China?
Singapore’s two top govt officials, Ong Keng Yong and Bilahari Kausikan, are engaged in a battle with China on China’s intent in the South China Sea and China’s relation with Asean. Kausikan wanted to know China’s action and intention in the South China Sea as if China owes him or Singapore an explanation. Does China need to explain to Kausikan or Singapore what it is doing in its own territories? Does Kausikan, and Singapore, since he is speaking on behalf of Singapore, think he is right to interfere into China’s domestic affairs? What China is doing is totally none of Singapore’s business. Would Singapore and Kausikan accept China’s meddling in Singapore’s domestic affairs? Would Singapore have to explain to China its intention in its reclamation of land within the Singapore’s territorial limits?
Both Ong Keng Yong and Kausikan also took China to task for announcing that Laos, Cambodia and Brunei agreed that the South China Sea disputes were not an Asean issue but between the claimant states. Both accused China for adopting a divide and rule strategy to divide Asean states. There are two puzzling positions that Singapore is taking. One, why is Singapore, a non claimant state to the islands became so vocal about this issue? Is Singapore picking a fight with China? Two, we know that people can be colour blind, and in this case, it is another colour blind issue. Why is Singapore attacking China for adopting a divide and rule tactic and not the Americans who did the same thing? Is Singapore colour blind or ‘American blind’?
Singapore as a small state, must tread carefully in it dealings with the big powers and should not be seen as a lapdog to any big power. Singapore must not think it can really punch above its weight when big powers are concerned. A fart by any big power would send Singapore flying into oblivion.
Ok, what is the intent of Singapore to want to pick a quarrel with China? Does Singapore really believe China needs to explain to Singapore its actions in building its own islands in its own territories? Singapore wants other countries to respect its right to its domestic politics and affairs, is Singapore crossing the line to demand China to explain what it is doing inside China?
Why is Singapore not yelling at the Americans for adopting a divide and rule tactic to divide Asean into pro American and anti China camp? No, the Americans did not do that? Has Singapore compromised its neutrality in this outburst?
Is this Singapore’s fight? Who is Singapore fighting for? Singapore better learns to know its rightful place in international politics and don’t bite on something too big to chew, and looking so ridiculous.
PS. When a monkey screwed an elephant, it asked, does it hurt? The elephant replied, are you in yet?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13806
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2016 9:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The attack on China continues
Tang Siew Mun, Head of Asean Studies Centre at ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute, continues the attack on China by calling on Asean to stick together to confront China in the South China Sea dispute or be hanged separately. I think this must be his personal view and not that of the Institute or the govt.
Let me quote what he said in his article, ‘Hang together or hang separately?’ published in the ST on 12 May. I think as an academic his comments would not draw another strong protest from China for meddling with China’s internal affairs and not having to qualify that he is speaking in a personal capacity.
‘Asean has to take a firm stand on the SCS not because it wants to favour one claimant over another, but in order to protect the integrity and unity of the 10 member organization. If Asean shows that it is susceptible to any kind of external interference, it would lose its credibility and in the process declare itself “fair game” to any external powers. Benjamin Franklin’s advice that “we must all hang together, or assuredly, we shall all hang separately” is particularly pertinent for the Asean leaders.
The above comment emphasizes integrity and unity of Asean and the assumption that Asean as a united block can take on a big power as an equivalent of a big power. Talking about integrity of Asean is laughable since Asean discarded the concept of a Zone of Peace, Freedom and Neutrality. When Asean countries started to become allies of big powers, providing military facilities for big powers to exert their influence in the region, signing military alliances with big powers, engaging in warfare on the side of big powers, the integrity of Asean as a neutral block of countries is already a big question mark.
Asean unity? Asean as a united block too is an aspiration rather than a reality. There are the pro US and pro China camps within Asean.
What is more naďve is to think that Asean, acting together as a block, would be a force to be reckoned with against big powers like the USA, PRC or India. Such big powers would give Asean a kick in the arse when they deemed fit and when their interests are challenged. The insanity of small countries thinking that they can punch above their weight or a small half past six regional block taking on the big powers can only be found in Asean countries. Some wanting to go to war with China, some wanting to push China out of the South China Sea. The most realistic of the Asean countries, and the most powerful militarily, having fought and defeated the Americans and a border war with China, understood what it is like to take on China in war.
The only chance for Asean to hang together is to add on the American factor, to hang together with the Americans and go and fight wars all over the world with the Americans. Other than this reality of joining the international gangster, punching above your weight is only possible when the big powers graciously allows you to do so, partially also to cater to their interests. When their interests are at stake or violated, you will be punching a hard rock. And the weight of a mustard seed against a big rock is not difficult to comprehend.
Singapore is praying very hard to hitch a ride on the Chinese economic locomotive and is best not to be too cocky and indiscreet in taking sides when China’s core interests are involved. Yes, Singapore is a non claimant state in the SCS. Why is Singapore crying out loud everyday when the other claimant states are lying low? Oops, it is not Singapore that is ruffling the feathers of China, but individuals speaking in their private capacity. And pray China would not because of these casual remarks by individual Singaporeans and cut off Singapore from the Chinese gravy train.
Where are these anti China rhetoric coming from? What is the agenda?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13806
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2016 8:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

South China Sea gunboat diplomacy – A divergent establishment view
We heard Bilahari and Ong Keng Yong’s view, one official and one personal, attacking China for trying to divide Asean in the South China Sea island disputes. Last Saturday, the ST published a divergent establishment view about the South China Sea, this time giving it another spin. Instead of a dispute between a few South East Asian countries, claiming islands and coral reefs in the South China Sea, the veil was dropped and the naked truth was exposed. It was an open contest for control of the South China Sea by the Americans, to reinforce its hegemony over the region in the name of Freedom of Navigation.
Leslie Fong, the former editor of the ST, an establishment men, or used to be a part of the establishment. His views must still be a reflection of what the establishment is thinking. But he put it that what he wrote was not his views but the view of a Taiwanese lady by the name Ms Oh Beigong through a letter to the Japanese Admiral in charge of the American Pacific Fleet by the name of Harry Harris. A yellow banana for sure, very like the Singaporean banana, but a very dangerous one.
In brief, Ms Oh Beigong, or in Hokien Ms Black White Said, the Americans were just pretending about Freedom of Navigation but using it to pick on China while the American allies like Japan, the Philippines and Vietnam have been doing exactly what China is doing but no Freedom of Navigation to their reclaimed and militarized islands were conducted by the Americans.
The bottom line, in Leslie’s article, through Ms Oh Beigong, is this. ‘Might is right. The US is out to stymie the rise of China and prevent it from challenging American dominance, if not hegemony. We get that. So do us a favour, please stop talking about high principles and international law. However, if you wish to regain at least a modicum of respect from clear sighted people in this region, here is something you…can do. In the name of asserting freedom of navigation and upholding international law, send your destroyer or whatever to an atoll in the Philippine Sea which the Japanese call Okinotorishima and claim as their territory….the atoll lies 1,700km south of Tokyo, …but less than 500 km from Taiwan itself.’
The American hypocrisy in the South China Sea is exposed by this dear letter to the American banana now called Harry Harris, no Hiroshima or Nagasaki. It is all about gunboat diplomacy, about control of the South China Sea, about American hegemony.
What shit is the talk about splitting Asean countries by the other side of the establishment? What is the real issue? China claiming the islands, Asean countries claiming the islands, or the American claiming the whole South China Sea?
Thank you Leslie Fong. Oops, thank you Ms Oh Beigong.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13806
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Sun Jun 05, 2016 10:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Shangri La Dialogue – Terrorism the real and immediate threat

‘SINGAPORE: Terrorism featured heavily in discussions at a ministerial lunch hosted by Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen on Saturday (Jun 4), in conjunction with the Shangri-La Dialogue.
Leaders acknowledged terrorism as a clear and present threat needing international and regional cooperation to tackle effectively….’ Channel News Asia
The security dialogue at the Shangri La was nearly hijacked by the international terrorists to serve their hegemonic and empire dream of controlling the South China Sea and the countries in South East Asia by insisting on establishing their military bases in these countries on the pretext of an expansionist China that was accused of threatening the freedom of navigation for building infrastructural facilities in their islands in the South China Sea.
It was wise for the host Singapore to take the initiative by redirecting the real and most serious problem faced by the countries in the region, ie terrorism. Every country in South East Asia, including those in other parts of the world, are faced with immediate threats from terrorism. Some had been attacked and had lost lives and destruction of their infrastructure. What is more important than the terrorist threat than crying wolf about a red herring in the South China Sea? Why be coerced by the Americans to serve their hegemonic agenda?
And what is more dangerous and threatening in the region than terrorism? The wolf in sheep clothing, the world’s Number One Terrorist has moved in, has built up military bases and facilities to conduct the most destructive terrorist act in the region. In the guise of freedom of navigation, the Number One Terrorist is forcing the countries in the region to allow its Imperial Forces to station in these countries to engage in a war that these countries did not want and have no reason to want to go war.
Why would South East Asian countries want to fight a destructive war, to claim islands in the South China Sea that belonged to another country? Why would South East Asian countries want to become lackeys of the world’s Number One Terrrorist Nation and be misled into a war when they have been living in peace and making progress in every field of endeavour to better the lives of their people?
Is war so much fun? Is fighting a war dictated by the Number One Terrrorist Nation so attractive, or plain stupidity? Why would Asean countries want to go to war? Beware of the Number One Terrorist. They brought war and destruction in every corner of the globe that they moved in, militarily.
Asean countries must not end up as lackeys of the World’s Number One Terrorist Nation. The Philippines have wisen up to the danger of flirting with the World’s Number One Terrorist and have openly stated that they would not be its lackey. Would there be other stupid Asean countries that wanted to be lackeys to the World’s Number One Terrorist Nation and bring their country and people to war?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13806
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Mon Jun 13, 2016 8:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The USA can play a constructive role to defuse the tension in the South China Sea

Tension has been mounting in the South China Sea due mainly to an intransigent stand taken by the USA and its hidden agenda in the pivot to Asia policy. The tension and dispute in the South China Sea and the East China Sea could be history if the Americans were honest and honourable to face the historical facts and legalities concerning the status and sovereignty of the so called disputed islands. These islands are not disputed islands and the Americans knew the full facts and the legal agreements that they have helped to sign immediately after World War 2.

On 8 June 16, the Assistant Director of the Taipei Representative Office in Singapore, Ms Tsai Chi Yuan wrote to the Straits Times and clearly stated the how Taiwan has been administering the South China Sea islands since the 1930s with full acknowledgement by countries in the region and the world. Here are some of the key points raised by Ms Tsai:

‘Whether from the perspective of history, geography or international law, the Nansha (Spratly) Islands, Shisha (Paracel) Islands, Chungsha Islands (Macclesfield Bank) and Tungsha (Pratas) Islands, as well as their surrounding waters, are an inherent part of Taiwan's territory and waters.
When France attempted to occupy nine of the Shisha and Nansha islands in 1931 and 1933 during its colonisation of Annam (known today as Vietnam), Taiwan responded to this challenge by ordering its embassy in France to issue statements of sovereignty.
On April 29, 1930, at the Far Eastern Meteorological Conference in Hong Kong, the Taiwan-operated observatory in Tungsha Islands was acknowledged as the most important in the South China Sea. The Philippine representative for the Manila Observatory's suggestion that Taiwan set up meteorological observatories on the Shisha and Chungsha islands to enhance navigation safety was also passed unanimously….the International Civil Aviation Organisation's conference in Manila on Oct 27, 1955, a resolution was passed for Taiwan to provide weather reports on the Tungsha, Shisha and Nansha islands….
After World War II, with assistance from the Allies, Taiwan took formal possession in 1946 of South China Sea islands formerly seized by Japan.
The San Francisco Peace Treaty, which entered into force on April 28, 1952, and the Treaty of Peace between Taiwan and Japan signed on the same day, reaffirmed that the South China Sea territories occupied by Japan should be returned to Taiwan.’
And Taiwan is part of China under Chiang Kai Shek that claimed to rule the whole of China as the Republic of China until the PRC replaced the ROC in the UN in 1971.
The historical facts quoted by Ms Tsai were known to the Americans. The Americans cannot plead ignorance to the Treaty of San Francisco and the Treaty of Potsdam. And the Americans have also signed the following treaties with Spain and Britain that were very clear on the sovereignty of the South China Sea islands and the delineation of the Philippines territories. The Chinese islands did not belong to the Philippines as recorded in the 1898 Treaty of Paris between the US and Spain, the 1900 Treaty of Washington between US and Spain and the 1930 Treaty between Britain and the US, all excluded the ‘disputed’ islands as Philippines territory.

How then can the Americans be constructive and defuse the problems and tension in the South China Sea? It simply calls upon the Americans to be honest, honourable, to acknowledge and recognize the terms of these treaties that all clearly said the islands belong to China. It calls upon the American to honour all legally binding international treaties and obligations, to obey the rule of law that they are violating but accusing China of committing when China was playing by the rules of law.

By not wanting to talk about these treaties that were crafted by the Americans and pretending that they did not exist, the Americans are not only dishonest, dishonourable but also very mischievous. The irony is that the Americans are accusing the Chinese of using coercive tactics and might is right to intimidate and bully its neighbours. When the Americans are honest and honourable, and to wave these treaties to the claimant countries and telling them to recognize the terms in these treaties, all the claims by Japan and the Asean claimant countries would become irrelevant, illegal and unfounded. It would then be a case of unreasonable claims by Japan and the Asean countries on Chinese territories. And the issue of coercion, might is right or freedom of navigation will come to a natural end.

Would the Americans do the honourable thing by being honest and tell the historical truths that are written in these treaties that the Americans wrote and signed? There is no dispute in the South China Sea and the claims were based on fallacies and spurious logic and the Americans knew. It is time that the Americans stop their mischievous agenda and defuse the tension in the South China Sea by telling the truths in these treaties.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13806
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Fri Jun 17, 2016 8:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

China Asean Meeting – A case study on deceit and conspiracy
China and Asean just concluded a meeting in Kunming and as usual a lot of red faces. Asean issued a tough statement on the disputes in the South China Sea island claims but promptly retracted it on the excuse that it was sent out in error. The first statement read, ‘We expressed our serious concerns over recent and ongoing developments, which have eroded trust and confidence, increased tensions and which may have the potential to undermine peace, security and stability in the South China Sea.’
And the truth, two Asean countries have rejected the Asean statement that could only be issued when there is a consensus. What is pertinent to this jumping the gun statement is that it revealed whose hands were behind this rush to send out the statement. For sure China has only two friends in Asean and a few fence sitters but several arch foes that would be sticking with the Americans. In this case some arch foes of China are Muslim states but willing to cosy up with Muslim killers for the greed of grabbing a piece of the South China Sea.
China would be interested to know who are these foes, who initiated the crafting of the statement, who authorized to send it out quickly, who is the party that did the sending, and who did the retracting. It is not difficult for China to know the real happenings as it is reported in the media today with a Singaporean journalist calling Cambodia and Laos as Trojan horses of China. The journalist even warned these two states of cost and consequences. The pro American lackeys and the Trojan horses are standing up to be counted. This is like open cards in a poker game. Now China could identify very clearly who is doing what and should know what to do and dispense its cost and consequences as well. The whole episode is political and ‘either you are with us or against us’ depending on which superpower the Asean states have aligned with.
There is also another lesson to be learnt. Asean countries have very short memories and would often love the party that looted and raped their countries, killed and murdered their people and humiliated them by colonizing them. Many of the Asean states were colonies and are still in love with their colonial masters. Some like Vietnam and the Philippines were ravaged by the Americans but are still madly in love with the Americans, with the Japanese Imperialists that massacred their people. China had done nothing but is being seen as enemy to these countries.
The moral of the story is that China must not fear offending these Asean states. China must stand up to its right in the South China Sea and kick asses if needed be. Once China has taught the asses a real lesson in how to behave, after some time, they would love China like they love the Americans and the Japanese. So China need not be sensitive and fear offending asses. Kick them real hard, they only understand when they are kicked hard, and would turn around to kiss China’s arse.
That is the lesson to be learnt from Asean history and their predictable behavior. Trying to be nice and polite to them would be seen as weak and would make them think they are a force to be reckoned with and they could push China around. If China needs a live lesson, just watch the current shadow play between Singapore and Indonesia and Malaysia and the USA. The loser would definitely turn around to kiss the arse of the bully when the bully stood firm and kick asses.
That is the way to deal with Asean states or they will get swelled headed, punching above their weights. That’s what they have been deluding themselves with the might of the Americans behind them and goading them to take on China.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13806
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Sat Jun 25, 2016 8:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

China would soon have to act against Indonesia
Indonesia is thumping its chest after shooting at Chinese fishing boats and arresting one. So far Indonesia has arrested quite a number of Chinese fishing boats and those of other Asean states and acting very smug. This is the same situation as the 1962 Sino Indian border war when the Indians were thumping their chests after the early initiatives in attacking China’s border guards. The early victories gave the Indian Army a false sense of grandeur and confidence and prepared for a major onslaught with a 4th Army Corp getting into position for an open war. When China mounted a counter attack, it dealt the Indians a shocking and embarrassing defeat that the Indian soldiers simply dropped their weapons and fled. The PLA just marched into India only to pull back when it had attained its objective of returning to a status quo, driving the Indian Army back to where they belonged.
China has not taken any military action yet since the Indonesian shooting incident. This is like the Ip Man movie when he was challenged to a fight in his house. He kept defending without attacking and the opponent got more aggressive, breaking down many of his furniture. Then he was told by his little son that his wife told him that if he still refused to strike back, more furniture would be broken. Only then that he hit back and threw the opponent out in another embarrassing defeat.
If China does not hit back, not only Indonesia would get more aggressive, the Philippines and the Malaysians would think they could do the same as China is really weak and not able to hit back. I have left out the Vietnamese as the latter had a taste of what it would be like trying to take on the PLAN. This is reported in Yahoo News.
‘There have been two armed conflicts between China and Vietnam in the sea.
In 1974, a clash erupted between the South Vietnamese navy and Chinese forces that left about 50 Vietnamese troops dead.
The other major conflict occurred when Vietnam and China fought a naval battle on Johnson Reef in the Spratlys in 1988 that killed about 70 Vietnamese military personnel.’
The Vietnamese have learnt their lesson and would not be crazy to challenge the PLAN again. But for Indonesia, the Philippines and the Malaysians, these twits have not learnt any lessons yet and with the Americans behind their backs, they really think that China would not hit back.
Just wait. China is even prepared to take on the USA and taking on these twits is chicken feat. China is just tolerating their silly chest thumpings for the time being. It is only when before China kick asses.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13806
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2016 8:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

South China Sea turning into another Indonesian wayang kulit
The South China Sea islands have been claimed by China for centuries and have never been an issue with the new countries in Asean for three main reasons. Historically, they were claimed by China and there were no Asean countries to talk about or to contest them. The new countries only came into existence after the end of WW2. They were non countries before that. And thirdly, the Americans came into the picture to agitate and support the new countries to claim the islands longed claimed by China.
What is the issue? It is not China claiming any part of the territory or sea belong to the new countries. It is the new countries wanting to claim islands belonging to China. But the western media gave it a wicked twist, that it was China claiming islands belonging to the new countries.
And the Philippines, with the support of the Americans and engineering a silly international court to hear a case that they have no jurisdiction to hear, put up a claim to this court without the consent of China as the other party for arbitration. It is a cooked deal from the start when an arbitration needs to have the consent of both parties but being heard in a farcical court with only one party presenting its case and the other party not present. What a sham!
Many countries have border issues created during the era of imperialism and colonialism but are peacefully talking and negotiating the difference. Here we have the western media hyping up such border disputes and with the Americans agitating and provoking one or two spurious claimants to push the barrier to the verge of a military conflict and blaming China for it. There was no issue but made an issue by the American and western media.
Now another article by Reuter in the Today paper on 29 Jun framed the posturing by the Indonesian into another wayang kulit. It suggested that Indonesia was facing claims by China, threats by China, confrontation in the sea, clashes etc etc, all very serious stuff and Indonesia is bolstering up its defence and increasing its defence budget to protect its territorial waters.
What is the truth? Indonesia under attack by China?
Indonesian navy in clashes with Chinese navy? Indonesian confronting Chinese navy, in face off? China claiming Indonesian territories, claiming Natuna Islands? Far from it.
The whole farce was kicked up with Indonesian Navy chasing Chinese fishing boats, arresting Chinese fishermen and firing at Chinese fishing boats in disputed territories. It was Indonesian Navy threatening and harassing Chinese fishing boats. Chinese Coast Guard Vessels did not confront or challenge the Indonesian Navy. If they did, they would have sunk the tiny Indonesian frigates. The Chinese Coast Guard vessels are much bigger and much well equipped to take on the Indonesian frigates.
Now who is threatening who? Everything was hyped by the Indonesians with their Navy doing all the confronting and chasing against fishing boats! Yes, unarmed Chinese fishing boats that ran when confronted by the armed Indonesian frigates. Whose is being feared and who is the bully and gangster? Indonesian Navy being threatened by Chinese fishing boats or behaving like gangsters and pirates harassing Chinese fishing boats?
What is the truth? And the Indonesian wayang kulit went further to state that the Indonesian President had to make a visit to the Natuna Islands to make sure they are still there. They need to reinforce the islands with more military hardware!
Is China claiming the Natunas? If China would to do so, imagine what the Americans and the western media would say and how Asean would react? When Vietnam was threatening to run all over Asean, they were shivering in their pants and it was China that came in to stop Vietnam from running all over Asean. Today they are taunting China as if China is hapless against these little street urchins, and crying wolf.
What is the truth? Who is the aggressor, who is the bully, who is the gangster? The new Asean countries have been grabbing Chinese islands and accusing China of being the aggressor with the connivance of the Americans and western media.
Can you beat that?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic     Forum Index -> World Affairs All times are GMT + 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 4 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group. Hosted by Vodien Internet Solutions