Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Philippines Defense Forces Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Vietnam vs China in the Paracel Islands, SCS; updates, discussions
Topic Started: Jun 25 2012, 06:56 PM (3,406 Views)
steelDUST
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  * ]
Timing is crucial in all engagements. That said, it's now a matter of question whether China will wait for another 5-10 years to radically solve and consolidate their claim in SCS.

Because, should they wait, the US (and Australia and maybe Canada) will already have formidable presence in the Pacific, not to mention Vietnam, Taiwan, SoKor and Japan (and even Philippines) who are all gearing up for modernization and strengthening of their respective armed forces.

IMO, I say, now is the time for China to forcefully grab their so-called claim in SCS. That's why they're being aggressive now compared to years ago. But somehow, I think, they have doubts to use military force for the reason that it may escalate to a wider-than-regional war involving US and other allies. Hence, Beijing is pushing always for bilateral talks and the like with other claimants.
"Thou must (in commanding and winning, or serving and losing, suffering or triumphing) be either the anvil or the hammer."
- Goethe
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AZKALS
Member Avatar


I think a skirmish between China and Vietnam is imminent due to the recent provocating actions of China by annexing Sansha island which is unacceptable for Vietnam ... :armycool:


http://news.yahoo.com/china-dubs-tiny-island-city-sea-claim-bid-100524879.html
Edited by AZKALS, Jul 25 2012, 08:43 PM.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Samir_Duran
THE GHOST
[ *  *  * ]
seWer Rat
Jul 25 2012, 06:14 PM
Is someone here disagreeing with you?

That's why the US is moving 60% of its military assets over here, other Asian countries from India to Indonesia are also ramping its defense spending and why despite our limited resources the government is making efforts to improve the capability of the AFP.

You said they (Americans ) are not itching for war yet you just posted here that they are otherwise. :lollol:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Samir_Duran
THE GHOST
[ *  *  * ]
steelDUST
Jul 25 2012, 07:09 PM
seWer Rat
Jul 25 2012, 06:14 PM
Is someone here disagreeing with you?

That's why the US is moving 60% of its military assets over here, other Asian countries from India to Indonesia are also ramping its defense spending and why despite our limited resources the government is making efforts to improve the capability of the AFP.

KIndly take TagaLaguna's comments. Ty
declassified intel says that China is reluctant to commit for conflict

one, it is still on it's preparations

two, it is still brainwashing it's citizens

three, it is looking for more resources to outlast it's adversaries should they go to war

fourth, it is making sure

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
seWer Rat
Member Avatar
amateur sewer cleaner

TagaLaguna
Jul 26 2012, 09:10 AM
seWer Rat
Jul 25 2012, 06:14 PM
Is someone here disagreeing with you?

That's why the US is moving 60% of its military assets over here, other Asian countries from India to Indonesia are also ramping its defense spending and why despite our limited resources the government is making efforts to improve the capability of the AFP.

You said they (Americans ) are not itching for war yet you just posted here that they are otherwise. :lollol:
Does moving their military assets here mean the Americans are itching for war? If that is your view then your analysis of the situation is most certainly myopic.

There's a very obvious difference between strategic shifting of forces to counter another power's increasingly dominant presence n the region and immediate,rapid deployment signifying a power's 'itching' for war.



To avoid criticism, write nothing, say nothing, do nothing, BE NOTHING.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Samir_Duran
THE GHOST
[ *  *  * ]
seWer Rat
Jul 26 2012, 10:47 AM
TagaLaguna
Jul 26 2012, 09:10 AM
seWer Rat
Jul 25 2012, 06:14 PM
Is someone here disagreeing with you?

That's why the US is moving 60% of its military assets over here, other Asian countries from India to Indonesia are also ramping its defense spending and why despite our limited resources the government is making efforts to improve the capability of the AFP.

You said they (Americans ) are not itching for war yet you just posted here that they are otherwise. :lollol:
Does moving their military assets here mean the Americans are itching for war? If that is your view then your analysis of the situation is most certainly myopic.

There's a very obvious difference between strategic shifting of forces to counter another power's increasingly dominant presence n the region and immediate,rapid deployment signifying a power's 'itching' for war.



I suggest you need to conduct a survey to the American public about their views on these issues and be surprised. It is NOT MY view. IT IS THE VIEW OF WHITE HOUSE AND THE PENTAGON, MOREOVER, THE AMERICANS IN GENERAL.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Boombanger
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  * ]
^^

TagaL, can you clarify the above statement? I live here in America and so far I cannot feel your claim that majority of Americans itching for war against China.

do you have a link that we can verify ourselves to support your claim that Americans are itching for another war because AFAIK Americans are tired of war and most even want to withdraw the troops from Afghanistan.

or you may have just misunderstood the word "itching"...bec. when you say itching, it means immediate, an overriding need to take up arms and fight.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
truegrit


US Navy hasn't much actions (naval battles) in both Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts since those wars were basically LAND WARS. Now if the US joins the Naval war in West Philippines Sea. it will be the 1st time since World War II that US Navy face a big naval battle of equal firepower and we will know if US technology and firepower has the edge over its closest opponent or rival.

Now for us here, we should in any way support whatever we can. We shouldn't let the Americans fight our own wars coz it would be ashame if US will have the full credit and not us. That is why its best to advocate SRDP program on manufacturing our own Naval ships. PN and DND shouldn't have their program on AT-25 but continue to the next level.....
Edited by truegrit, Jul 26 2012, 12:52 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ctrlaltdel
Member
[ *  *  * ]
gritpaladin
Jul 26 2012, 12:51 PM
US Navy hasn't much actions (naval battles) in both Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts since those wars were basically LAND WARS. Now if the US joins the Naval war in West Philippines Sea. it will be the 1st time since World War II that US Navy face a big naval battle of equal firepower and we will know if US technology and firepower has the edge over its closest opponent or rival.

wrong..us navy assets were and are in the thick of action in these wars, aircraft carriers contributed a lot to the war effort with navy fighter bombers doing a lot of damage, submarines launched cruise missiles at land targets - all adding up to the the already extensive naval warfare experience of the us navy.

in contrast, the china navy has no significant naval combat experience to speak of, its training is not at par with the us navy, much more its vessels & weapons are to date still behind those of the american navy...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
truegrit


ctrlaltdel
Jul 26 2012, 01:05 PM
gritpaladin
Jul 26 2012, 12:51 PM
US Navy hasn't much actions (naval battles) in both Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts since those wars were basically LAND WARS. Now if the US joins the Naval war in West Philippines Sea. it will be the 1st time since World War II that US Navy face a big naval battle of equal firepower and we will know if US technology and firepower has the edge over its closest opponent or rival.

wrong..us navy assets were and are in the thick of action in these wars, aircraft carriers contributed a lot to the war effort with navy fighter bombers doing a lot of damage, submarines launched cruise missiles at land targets - all adding up to the the already extensive naval warfare experience of the us navy.

in contrast, the china navy has no significant naval combat experience to speak of, its training is not at par with the us navy, much more its vessels & weapons are to date still behind those of the american navy...
I guess you got me wrong too.... I am purely referring to Navy to Navy Battles like Battle of Leyte Gulf and Battle of Midway scenario. Wherein its a Battle between 2 Naval Fleets of opposing Forces.

The battles you are referring are Naval to Land Combat Missions.

The Americans may have the experience using their Naval Assets in actual combat but how will the US Navy fair or performed if their Carrier Battle Groups are facing the PLAN Missile Frigates, submarines and who knows PLAN will use their Shi Lang Aircraft Carrier.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · West Philippine Sea · Next Topic »
Add Reply