| 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: |
| Vietnam vs China in the Paracel Islands, SCS; updates, discussions | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 25 2012, 06:56 PM (3,404 Views) | |
| Analyst | Jul 29 2012, 05:51 PM Post #51 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I didn't say to shoot, I just said that the gov't must not keep a deaf ear to those commies when protesting against the US basing. |
If you don't want a modern and capable AFP, you might want to get the f*ck off the Philippines because you don't deserve to be a Filipino that's why!
| |
![]() |
|
| ctrlaltdel | Jul 29 2012, 06:12 PM Post #52 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
^ I was referring to your comment at the Big China fishing fleet thread "I think we should shoot the hell out of those Chinese ships, our natural resources are being degraded by these go**amn greedy bastards." bec if we shoot first, then we become the aggressors w/c will definitely turn-off the americans and the rest of the world |
![]() |
|
| Analyst | Jul 29 2012, 07:23 PM Post #53 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Oh I see, I missed the quote. I was referring to the duplication of the Russian response by firing using a Coast Guard vessel and definitely not a military vessel. (and not shoot the Chinese warships ofc) Apologies if I made myself st**id (it just magically changed to brilliant) Edited by Analyst, Jul 29 2012, 07:26 PM.
|
If you don't want a modern and capable AFP, you might want to get the f*ck off the Philippines because you don't deserve to be a Filipino that's why!
| |
![]() |
|
| Prinsipe Abante | Jul 29 2012, 07:34 PM Post #54 |
|
Trainee
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
China may have all the resources, Volume of Soldiers and Advance Military hardware but for sure Vietnam's true posture with actions to prove showing that they are not afraid of China in any case making China to think twice. For me Vietnam will be a tough nut to crack for China. Remember "hindi pa sila nakakagante sa nangyari sa Paracel Island massacre!" Do you think if we'll do the same and wonder around near their mainland EEZ, do the way they are behaving towards us that they wouldn't think twice of shooting our ships??? Kung sa sarili nga nating territoryo sinasagasaan ng walang patawad ang mga mangingisda natin eh hinaharass tayo..! The whole World knows who's the true aggressor here, we are just defending our territorial rights and sovereignty from being stolen we have all the right to fire a warning shot or shoot back if we want to, bahag lang ang buntot ng nasa taas.... He's the one and only leader na nagpapabastos ng ganyan, an act of unbecoming of a leader. Before P.Noy, our Govt. and PNs attitude where to fire warning shots to intruders in Scarborough, blow up the buoys and markers in KIG that where put up by China, may nagawa ba ang China sa atin kahit inferior ang mga kagamitan ng kawal natin sa kanila? There's lots of ways to play it diplomatically at the same time being firm and to really show that you're ready to fight as well at all cost in actions not just words, not to the extent of letting the other party stepping on you like a cockroach regardless if you are weak. The Philippines should follow how Vietnam handles and address the issues, plans, prepare for it's defense against China!
Edited by Prinsipe Abante, Jul 29 2012, 07:47 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| spearhead | Jul 29 2012, 07:47 PM Post #55 |
|
DoctorNO, Your Neutral Observer.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I wonder who will possibly be the major player/players to finish the covert jobs, CIA and MI agents? Can they penetrate this country? I hope so with the help of chinese pro-democracy expats.
|
"Men of War must learn the art of numbers or he will not know how to array his troops." - Plato![]() ![]() | |
![]() |
|
| Prinsipe Abante | Jul 29 2012, 07:59 PM Post #56 |
|
Trainee
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It's only a matter of time comrade and if they don't stop what they are doing to us and other Countries in SE A. humiliating the US further more and worse to Invade Vietnam's territories or worst Spratly's, we might see an inside penetration combination of CIA, KGB bringing them down from within.. this is the best alternative instead of going to war with them. Nasa taas na sila eh sagad sagad na ang economiya ng China, the only way to stay up is not by doing what they are trying to do right now instead to be a responsible superpower in order to be respected or to go down head face!
Edited by Prinsipe Abante, Jul 29 2012, 08:01 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Goose | Jul 29 2012, 08:08 PM Post #57 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well, we will never know unless a full-blown naval battle between Washington and Beijing happens. But first, nobody wants it, both the US and China, but these two countries are nevertheless preparing themselves in case there comes a time they will fight again (the last time was in Korea; maybe this time it will be over Taiwan, near impossibility is over us), and this is because of the tremendous damage that a military conflict would cause on both sides (and this is not including nuclear weapons), and of course the strong economic linkage between the two giants. They are like in a semi semi-cold war status. aircraft carrier-wise, PLA doesn't have this capability yet but one strong concern for the US navy is the so-called "carrier-killer" ballistic missile.. to quote: China for several years has been developing and testing an anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM), which is a theater-range ballistic missile equipped with a maneuverable reentry vehicle (MaRV) designed to hit moving ships at sea. The ASBM is referred to as the DF-21D, and is believed to be a new variant of China’s existing DF-21 (aka CSS-5) road-mobile medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM). US DoD states that the missile has a range exceeding 1,500 km.. (about 810 nautical miles), and that it “is intended to provide the PLA the capability to attack large ships, including aircraft carriers, in the western Pacific Ocean.” Another observer states that “the DF21D’s warhead apparently uses a combination of radar and optical sensors to find the target and make final guidance updates…. Finally, it uses a high explosive, or a radio frequency or cluster warhead that at a minimum can achieve a mission kill [against the target ship].” Observers have expressed strong concern about the DF-21D, because such missiles, in combination with broad-area maritime surveillance and targeting systems, would permit China to attack aircraft carriers, other U.S. Navy ships, or ships of allied or partner navies operating in the Western Pacific. The U.S. Navy has not previously faced a threat from highly accurate ballistic missiles capable of hitting moving ships at sea. For this reason, some observers have referred to the DF-21 as a “game-changing” weapon. Due to their ability to change course, the MaRVs on an ASBM would be more difficult to intercept than non-maneuvering ballistic missile reentry vehicles. Regarding the operational status of the DF-21D, DoD states that “during 2010, China made strides toward fielding an operational anti-ship ballistic missile....” An August 25, 2011, a press report states: China has developed a “workable design” of the world’s first anti-ship ballistic missile,potentially capable of hitting and disabling a U.S. aircraft carrier, according to Pentagon officials. China also has satellites in place “that could provide some targeting data on large surface ships in the region, and this expanding infrastructure is augmented by non-space-based sensors and surveillance assets,” said Navy Commander Leslie Hull-Ryde, a Pentagon spokeswoman on China, in an e-mail. “Over the next few years, we expect China will work to refine and integrate many emerging systems, including the DF- 21D” missile, she said.... China at this time “has provided no indication of whether they consider this an operational system,” Hull-Ryde said. She declined to say if the Pentagon believes the missile currently poses a threat to U.S. carriers. Taiwan, which relies on the U.S. military presence, says in its new 2011 National Defense Report that China already has “produced and fielded” the missile “in small numbers,” A July 12, 2011, news report from China quotes Chen Bingde, the chief of the PLA general staff, as stating that “the missile is still undergoing experimental testing” and that “it is a high-tech weapon and we face many difficulties in getting funding, advanced technologies and high-quality personnel, which are all underlying reasons why it is hard to develop this.” press report from China quoted an unnamed source as saying that the DF-21D “is already deployed in the army.” In December 2010 and January 2011, it was reported that DoD believes the missile has achieved the equivalent of what for a U.S. weapon would be called Initial Operational Capability (IOC). :end of quote |
![]() |
|
| spearhead | Jul 29 2012, 08:49 PM Post #58 |
|
DoctorNO, Your Neutral Observer.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If china attacked Vietnam, THEN this might be PROC's beginning of an end. Based on numerous accounts, bloggs, government and media interviews, other news and articles, I personally think that the US is POSSIBLY leaning towards and favouring a military approach against china, either hoping to settle their debts or to continue their vast influence in the region for economic benefits. And this might be more inevitable than a war against Iran, since Israel is already a fully pledged Battle - Ready (i believe so) to go against Iran one-on-one (IF other arab nations refused to help Iran), perhaps the reason why the US is only on stand-by in the persian gulf. Comparing this to what is happening in the pacific. I mean what would be the other possible reasons why there's a need to shift their military might to the pacific if they are not itching for war when they could simply use a full diplomatic solution? If they are not really interested, then why not just to continue their military hardware exports thru FMS to their allies instead of establishing a permanent military base in Australia, while using Singapore and the Philippines that are too close in the WPS? Either way if the US doesn't want to contain China then they don't have to tour the whole pacific rim to renew their military alliances, while improving their relationship with Vietnam and India. The reality is that China is growing in both military and economic, therefore the US have to adopt a new policy to contain China. The US knew that China is reluctant to get involved in a regional military conflict because of their economic status. But at the same time the US cannot simply ignore the chinese aggressions and continued irrational assertion in the WPS. Even the highly equipped Japanese Defense Forces are being harrased by China. And the US military alliance with their pacific counterparts cannot be simply abandoned. So there is no other way but to face the threat from China, both military and economic, in the name of freedom. But OFCOURSE, the US government will not publicise any official announcement of this shifted foreign policy, almost certainly will be publicly denied by the US government. Some political belief that US foreign policy strives to diminish the economic and political growth of the People’s Republic of China. Taken to its national conclusion, proponents of this realist theory claim the US will or needs to seek a divided and weak China to continue its hegemony in Asia. It is thought this shall be accomplished by establishing military, economic, and diplomatic ties to countries adjacent to China's borders. If so, American proponents of this policy espouses the US military activities in Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, South Korea, Philippines, and Japan are only US intentions to diminish the PROC. as regional power. Additionally, american efforts to improve relations with India and Vietnam would also be an examples of the US utilizing its economic influence to "box in" the PROC. This is mostly why a military conflict between Vietnam and China with the PROC as the aggressor, the war may drag on and become a regional conflict in the pacific. HERE, help yourselves: Why a U.S. War With China May Be Inevitable September 8, 2011 http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/stephen-glain/2011/09/08/why-a-us-war-with-china-may-be-inevitable How We Would Fight China http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2005/06/how-we-would-fight-china/3959/ Can the United States Win a War Against China? http://www.abytheliberal.com/world-politics/us-winning-war-against-china Many Americans still wary of China http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2008/Aug/10/op/hawaii808100327.html India's military modernisation 'to contain China': PLA Daily http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/article2615757.ece Seeking to Contain China, US to Establish Permanent Military Presence Down Under http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/us-to-establish-permanent-military-presence-down-under/ Should China be “Contained”? http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/should-china-be--contained-- Without Economic Changes, America Can't Contain China http://defense.aol.com/2011/12/29/without-economic-changes-america-cant-contain-china/ Chinese power can't be contained: Smith http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/chinese-power-cant-be-contained-smith-20120427-1xpw6.html Edited by spearhead, Jul 29 2012, 08:55 PM.
|
"Men of War must learn the art of numbers or he will not know how to array his troops." - Plato![]() ![]() | |
![]() |
|
| Furbolling | Jul 29 2012, 09:10 PM Post #59 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
found this on other site. I hope it's ok to post it. delete it if not sir.
Edited by Furbolling, Jul 29 2012, 09:10 PM.
|
|
"Brothers!! What we do in life, Echoes through Eternity" -Maximus | |
![]() |
|
| steelDUST | Jul 29 2012, 09:18 PM Post #60 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Sir Grit: As for your first comment re US tech and firepower have edge over China: My answer is YES! I think I don't need to elaborate more why. But I think the most appropriate question must be directed to China instead and not to the USN. The USCVGs have more carrier ops experiences than all the other operators combined. China? Oh well... :D |
|
"Thou must (in commanding and winning, or serving and losing, suffering or triumphing) be either the anvil or the hammer." - Goethe | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
![]() Our users say it best: "Zetaboards is the best forum service I have ever used." |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · West Philippine Sea · Next Topic » |





![]](http://z1.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)







8:27 AM Jul 11