| 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: |
| Jackson Atoll; Illegally Annexed by China | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 2 2016, 09:30 AM (3,267 Views) | |
| Geo | Mar 7 2016, 02:01 PM Post #21 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
pachador, the bully doesn't even recognize the authority of the UNCLOS tribunal, so why should the Phil. Government prevents the coast guard and the navy to go there and make our presence felt as Hong indicated. They don't have to do anything to escalate the situation all they have to do is just stay there.
Edited by Geo, Mar 7 2016, 02:05 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| pachador | Mar 8 2016, 01:29 AM Post #22 |
![]()
|
because, personally, I dont believe in ramming. That is like shoving and shouting to settle an argument. if you are right and pushed to the wall, then why shout or shove ? just punch right away. Ramming implies you are trying to intimidate each other to see who will back down and in a ramming situation, the big bully will win because they have the bigger ships. Ramming also implies a gray area or a dispute with no clear-cut resolution. I just want a clear legal justification to start firing. if there was a clear legal violation/tresspassing by the bully based on the upcoming ITLOS ruling, then firing will be legally justifiable if they refuse to leave. Ramming is a losing proposition for us because they will just use their giant white hulls whereas firing will escalate the situation and get the whole world's attention because it will shut down the shipping lanes, which is what we want - we want the eyes of the world to be on us(this is classic terrorist tactic), and since the firing has a legal cover due to the specific ITLOS ruling, the world will be on our side. Sure we will lose the initial battles, but that will have the effect of causing a huge defense budget increase because the congress will now wake up, and secondly, the people will be roused, angry and united. We need to call their bluff and not be intimidated by this bully. losing the first few battles is what is needed to wake us up. once the clearcut ITLOS specific ruling is issued, there is no need to worry about using white hulls or gray hulls because whatever physical enforcement we do including firing if the situation demands it, now has legal cover. The euros and americans are very big on legal stuff and they need also that legal cover to intervene and help us. Again, this is just my opinion :) The big question is what will the govt do once the ITLOS ruling is issued. if the govt will hem and haw again, then time to march and protest angrily infront of congress and malacanang instead of the bully embassy. Marching on the bully embassy will just fall on the bully's deaf ears while marching on congress or malacanang will stir these officials to action because they are facing angry voters, and is bad publicity for them because it exposes even more their lack of action on increasing substantially the defense budget. and their lack of action in the west philippine sea. Edited by pachador, Mar 8 2016, 03:38 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Geo | Mar 8 2016, 11:08 AM Post #23 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Pach like Hong said, All they have to do is make their presence felt, they don't have to do anything, they don't have to ram the Chinese ship. If the Chinese ships attempts to ram them all they have to do is take evasive actions. We just have to let them know that we are there but we don't want any ramming match with them. Edited by Geo, Mar 8 2016, 11:15 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| pachador | Mar 8 2016, 11:23 AM Post #24 |
![]()
|
well for me, if they will just take evasive actions if they are being rammed, its better they not go there. why take evasive actions when it is our area ? it is like we are the guilty party. Again, once ITLOS specifically issues the ruling telling the world which areas are ours, then for our ships to take evasive actions is ridiculous when it should be our ships enforcing the law. it does not matter if they are much stronger because it is the principle of upholding the law, if they destroy our ships then isnt that what is necessary to wake up not only the filipino public and the govt officials but also the whole world . We in this forum already know the level of apathy with many of the officials and general public in general. Edited by pachador, Mar 8 2016, 11:30 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Hong Nam | Mar 8 2016, 12:16 PM Post #25 |
|
Bought by China
![]()
|
One of the reasons why you need PRESENCE.
Looking how the Chinese think and twisting it around. Does "You're not here, therefore it's not yours" apply? |
![]() Constructions Mecaniques de Normandie - C Sword 90 | |
![]() |
|
| pachador | Mar 8 2016, 01:23 PM Post #26 |
![]()
|
Hong, quiet often, when they fish in groups aka 'fishing fleets', they are escorted by the bully coast guard. that is what happened in the scarborough incident when Del Pilar went to confront a fishing fleet. http://globalnation.inquirer.net/32341/ph-chinese-naval-vessels-in-scarborough-shoal-standoff if this incident happened again later this year and the ITLOS ruling already awarded Scarborough shoal to us, then if Del Pilar tried to arrest and if those bully coast guard tried to intervene, then we are on excellent legal footing if Del Pilar choose to fire her guns- with 3 bully coast guard ships blocking the del pilar in area awarded to us by ITLOS, what more justification ? clear as night and day. if the situation ends in the del pilar sinking, who will the world side with ? and with the itlos ruling, this gives allies firm legal ground to intervene and counter-attack, if the FA-50s are inadequate. the aftermath of the sinking will throw the shipping lanes into turmoil and bully exports will slowdown as they have just too many merchant ships/fishing vessels to guard or escort which will be easy prey for the navy's andrada, MPAC class, etc . if the somali pirates can do it, we sure can too.on second thought, if we want to have a better fighting chance , we can delay firing until , at least, we receive all the planned 24 FA-50s(per flight plan), say, 12 missile-armed frigates/corvettes(including existing and second-hands) and batteries of coastal missile system but the risk is the bully would have expanded further the areas they have seized... if our big allies are already raring to pounce and teach the bully a lesson using ,e.g. the sinking of the del pilar this year as a pretext, then no need to wait for those assets to arrive as big brother is ready. Mind you this are just my opinions/scenarios so just ignore them as they are just fanciful musings. Edited by pachador, Mar 8 2016, 03:54 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| dewey | Mar 8 2016, 01:58 PM Post #27 |
|
metro aide sweeper
![]()
|
theyre twisting it alright. we cant fish because you threaten our fisher folks in the area who usually fishes there. the area is a traditional fishing ground of pinoys for along time, that is till the Chinese invaders arrived
|
| IDI@T!!! COWARD!!! | |
![]() |
|
| Geo | Mar 8 2016, 08:00 PM Post #28 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I get you pach, but for me, we must not leave the area, we must evade their ships because they got bigger ships. |
![]() |
|
| Hong Nam | Mar 8 2016, 11:48 PM Post #29 |
|
Bought by China
![]()
|
You quoted "excellent legal footing" and a host of other things... But you haven't answered the question: - Do you really think that you are going to get penalised for doing something that is considered legal and within your rights ??? Seriously ??? -
Edited by Hong Nam, Mar 8 2016, 11:54 PM.
|
![]() Constructions Mecaniques de Normandie - C Sword 90 | |
![]() |
|
| pachador | Mar 9 2016, 12:34 AM Post #30 |
![]()
|
barring filipino fishing vessels from fishing and construction of concrete islands on reefs that contain seafood/marine life infringe on economic activities that coastal states are allowed to regulate. Edited by pachador, Mar 9 2016, 12:35 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · West Philippine Sea · Next Topic » |





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





if the situation ends in the del pilar sinking, who will the world side with ? and with the itlos ruling, this gives allies firm legal ground to intervene and counter-attack, if the FA-50s are inadequate. the aftermath of the sinking will throw the shipping lanes into turmoil and bully exports will slowdown as they have just too many merchant ships/fishing vessels to guard or escort which will be easy prey for the navy's andrada, MPAC class, etc . if the somali pirates can do it, we sure can too.

8:27 AM Jul 11