Quote:

 

a very piercing indictment of what ills our military today but even if the US bases were not closed, could we really expect our military today to possess advanced military equipment or we just continue to slog on confident of the US protective umbrella?

in the years that Americans had their bases here, our military was as decrepit as it is now...

ColdDeadFish

Jan 4 2005, 06:11 PM

geko

Jan 4 2005, 05:33 PM

maybe this is a silly question but in our school the mutual defense treaty was discussed but can we really expect the USA to help us in the event that a foreign country invade the Philippines? i mean are they really obliged or they can optionally not intervene?

The US have an option not to intervene as the US president has a prerogative to declare temporary war before submitting it to Congress or it can just queue the request to declare war along with other congressional matters.

This should not worry us on an isolated scenario but it should make us worry on a global war as we will be like 1942 all over again. The US gave higher priority on the war in Europe than the war in the pacific. The MDT gave the US such leeway, AGAIN!

Further, we are technically not invaded until our MAJOR cities are threatened, thus an invader can technically occupy 90% of our country yet they have not fallen into the category of invading the RP.

One sided from where I sit. The guys who drafted it "call a spade a spade", from where I came from, we "call a spade a shovel".

Viking

Jan 4 2005, 07:53 PM

Kookie

Jan 4 2005, 06:49 PM

ColdDeadFish

Jan 4 2005, 06:11 PM

Further, we are technically not invaded until our MAJOR cities are threatened, thus an invader can technically occupy 90% of our country yet they have not fallen into the category of invading the RP.

If that is the case then this a very unfair treaty in my opinion, why did the politicians allowed this treaty to be approved ? I thought the American government is sincere in its promise to protect or help our country in case of trouble.

So if the Chinse forces forcibly occupy our Spratly Islands camps, the US is not going to help us because there is no major city in the Spratly!

We should stop insisting being friends with America if they treat us like beggars.

Since the treaty has the same obligations for both countrys, where is the injustice ? You must remember if the treaty had demanded an automatic response you would have had Philippine troops in Afganistan now.

Quote:

 

ARTICLE IV. Each Party recognizes that an armed attack in the Pacific area on either of the Parties would be dangerous to its own peace and safety and declares that it would act to meet the common dangers in accordance with its constitutional processes.

     Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall be immediately reported to the Security Council of the United Nations. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.

ARTICLE V. For the purpose of ARTICLE IV, an armed attack on either of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack on the metropolitan territory of either of the Parties, or the island territories under its jurisdiction in the Pacific ocean, its armed forces, public vessels or aircraft in the Pacific.

MUTUAL DEFENSE TREATY

the way i read Article V is that even a isolated attack on a city or a ship is considered an "armed attack" And regarding the Spratlys the legal nut is "island territories under its jurisdiction" since this concerns international law, and disputes that havent been settled, i am not sure if and how the Spratleys fit in.

AND before you start to post flamers Remember this is not my opinion about your ownership to the Spratleys, It is just my opinion how the treaty COULD be read.

bombeat

Jan 17 2005, 05:55 PM

nasabi mo lang yan maniego dahil amboy ka at empleyado ng mga kano...ano naman ang bigay nila sa atin kung di mga bulok na gamit 

at di naman sila ang biggest contributor sa tsunami kungdi ang mga europeans, napilitan lang silang bumigay ng mas malaking tulong dahil binira sila sa UN...

mga ungas

zeroalpha

Jan 18 2005, 05:09 PM

i have my issue of time magazine here , the largest contributor to tsunami victims is australia with 800 million US, japan with 500m US only has 350 million in pledges...

countries who provided military assets include australia, singapore, japan, france, malaysia and many others...

Quote:

 

Cuisia last week said in a press gathering the Philippines would be purchasing "eight cutters over five years" from the US. The cutters are part of the government-to-government cooperation on heightened Philippines’ coastal watch.

Cuisia formally received the Hamilton class cutter May 13 in California. He said the cutter, named after Philippine hero Gregorio del Pilar, would sail for the Philippines on July 5 and arrive there by August.