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:
Locked Topic
The Kalayaan, Panatag & other disputed islands; Future conflict zones?
Topic Started: Feb 2 2005, 08:00 PM (156,002 Views)
Tsukiyomi
Member
[ *  *  * ]
To be honest a war scenario with the Chinese is the best thing that could happen to the Philippines.
People of all walks of life would be forced to wake up to the realities of our deplorable situation.

We would still have the canos able to step in and keep us from getting overwhelmed.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
spearhead
Member Avatar
DoctorNO, Your Neutral Observer.
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I agree. Sometimes us filipinos dapat mabatukan muna bago kumilos eh.
"Men of War must learn the art of numbers or he will not know how to array his troops." - Plato

Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
TheSaint
Member Avatar
Trainee
[ *  * ]

I disagree. War should always be the last option. Make love not war. Peace man :banana:
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
sb00163
Member
[ *  *  * ]
If it is the only and the last way for us to be awaken with the mistakes that we've done.. I really agree to that - a war with china... hindi kasi enough ang lindol pati bagyo para matauhan ang mga pilipino...
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
ejvgarcia_08
Member
[ *  *  * ]
even if US is our allies..naawa pa din ako sa kanila if magkagulo man dito sa philippines..bakit..kasi mamatay ang mga sundalo nila pra sa atin..napakalaking digmaan nyan pag nagkataon..america have many aircraft carriers aminado tayo pero chinese have many ballistic missles which can destroy US carriers.of course naawa din ako sa military natin..dahil ipagtatangol nila ang bansa natin with limited weapons..i hope matauhan na tayo kesa naman magumpisa ang gulo..we should upgrade our equipment fast..kahit na wlang intel na baka magkaruon ng imminent attack we should always assume na me mga balak mangulo sa ating bansa..so we should upgrade our equipment fast..sana this administration is a wake up call for the military
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
THE_NEWS_MAN
Member
[ *  *  * ]

EU ready to assist in West Philippine Sea dispute
By Pia Lee-Brago (The Philippine Star) Updated November 25, 2011 12:00 AM Comments (0)

BRUSSELS – The European Union (EU) has indicated its readiness to be a useful element of “balance” in the strategic situation in the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea) and may play a mediation role in the territorial dispute.

Speaking on EU-Southeast Asia relations in a briefing at EU headquarters here Wednesday, European External Action Service Southeast Asia Division deputy head Philippe van Amersfoort said EU would welcome any request from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to help resolve the dispute.

“As this strategic situation develops EU may be a useful element of balance,” Van Amersfoort said.

“EU is ready to play a role of mediation. That is a challenge on the side of EU. We are happy to do consider that. We really hope (there is) no further escalation.”

He said the East Asia Summit is seeing a lot of strategic thinking by ASEAN in facing China, US decision to engage more in the region, the feeling of anxiety for members like the Philippines and Vietnam and the role China is playing in the world.

Van Amersfoort said the EU believes that territorial disputes should be resolved in accordance with international law through peaceful and cooperative solutions.

EU-Asia Center director Fraser Cameron said during a forum in Manila that the EU supports a rules-based international system and liberty of navigation.

With risk of tensions impacting on trade and investment and the growing importance of energy security, the EU encouraged all parties to clarify the basis for their claims.


The EU believes that territorial disputes should be resolved “in accordance with international law through peaceful and cooperative solutions.”

According to the EU, the West Philippine Sea is a fragile environment, being the largest maritime route after the Mediterranean and a vital corridor for EU trade to and from East Asia where 25 percent of world maritime cargo transit.

It is also a sensitive military area because of US naval presence, and China is also expanding military capabilities in the region that is bordered by 10 countries with long-standing and competing historical claims covering islands, high seas and coastal areas, believed to be rich in oil and gas.

The EU noted the geopolitical factors growing with the involvement of two nuclear powers, China and the US.

“The EU is not directly involved but keen to promote peaceful resolution,” Cameron said.

The Declaration on the Code of Conduct (DOC) in the West Philippine Sea was drawn up in November 2002 after decades of skirmishes over uninhabited reefs.

It binds the parties to consultative and peaceful processes of dispute settlement based on equality and mutual respect.

The DOC also calls for cooperation in environmental protection, scientific research, safety of navigation, search and rescue, and combating transnational crime.

Further skirmishes in 2010 and 2011 usually involving China led to the July 21 agreement at the ASEAN Regional Forum between ASEAN and China on Implementing Guidelines for the Declaration on Conduct in the West Philippine Sea.

ASEAN countries generally welcomed the agreement, though several found it lacking.

The Philippines in particular took a strong position as Vietnam also remained concerned.

“There is no prospect on horizon yet for a binding DOC (but) China open to discuss when conditions are right,” Cameron said.

Citing problems with the status quo, Cameron said uncertainty remains about the sovereignty of the islands and the overlapping claims on the surrounding waters.

The West Philippine Sea is an important source of protein for 300 million people in the region but fishing is not regulated and fishermen from all coastal states seem to exploit marine resources without any restriction.

The resources are over-exploited and the fishing methods (dynamite fishing being very common) are dangerous for the environment.

There is no multilateral instrument to protect the very sensitive ecosystem of the West Philippine Sea with evidence of coral reef erosion.

Maritime traffic is one of the heaviest in the planet and is growing rapidly.

The overlapping claims on the continental shelf prevent any exploitation of the subsoil which holds gas and oil in particular on the coasts of Malaysia, Vietnam, Brunei and China.

Although far from Europe, the EU has important interests at stake in the region.

“EU has ample expertise in sharing sovereignty, resolving difficult issues (common fishing policy, environment) that could be useful for interested countries as well as ASEAN as a whole,” Cameron said.

In 1970 it was agreed that, in principle, EU fishermen should have equal access to member-states’ waters.

Member-states also later decided that the EU was best placed to manage fisheries in the waters under their jurisdiction and to defend their interests in international negotiations.

The Common Fisheries Policy deals with conservation measures, fleet management, environmental issues, control and enforcement, conditions of access to waters and resources.

Cameron said the EU model was still evolving and not really appropriate for Asia although principles are universally applicable.

“EU is also not in a position to lecture Asians,” he said.

“But Asia could cherry-pick some aspect of EU integration (regional aid, monetary cooperation, internal market).”

EU’s experience may also be relevant for the West Philippine Sea, including establishing common fisheries policy and setting quotas for member states and its experience in marine protection and negotiating ever-higher environmental standards for coastal states and resolution of disputes.

The EU is willing to be a useful third party for technical assistance but pointed out that “it is ultimately up to involved parties to resolve the disputes.”

“The only viable solution in the long run is setting aside disputes and joint development,” Cameron said.


http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?artic...ubCategoryId=63

sorry if im posting this one here.i really dont know where to post this news anyway enjoy reading this is a long one :P
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tsukiyomi
Member
[ *  *  * ]
I have no love for war either but in order to have peace one must be ready for war. We have squandered our national resources at home and can't even properly prosecute a war against domestic enemies.

My previous comment may have been a bit too simplistic for some but oftentimes a major disaster is what is needed to wake people up. Right now our citizens are sheep that are more concerned with being able to survive day by day or too busy watching mindless crap on television and not able to focus on the more serious issues plaguing our nation brought on by corrupt politicians and elitist business entities. Our biased media yells "squirrel" when an important issue is receiving too much attention and our "programmed" citizens look away from a major issue to a steamy three minute expose on who was banging who behind closed doors.

Look at the United States; whenever they are hit by adversity they manage to look beyond their many differences at multiple societal levels and attack the problem (no pun intended) head on. It is when the US does not face a very real danger that they fall back into the partisan politics, racial/economic tensions and social decline. Sadly the rally around the flag on 9-11 has been short lived and they have slipped back into the cesspool.

A nation should never have to rely on disaster to rally itself but history is replete with examples. My fear is that we may have slipped too far and we are being sold out to the chicom scum by certain quarters with selfish interests. These traitorous people do so under the self-deluded philosophy that they are positioning themselves to "survive and prosper in the inevitable".

I am enthusiastic about the recent efforts by the current administration to fight the corruption that has been so pervasive and at the nascent military buildup we are starting to see. I long to see a nonlinear acceleration in our acquisition process as we improve our ability to procure assets free of fraud.

If the canos plans succeed, their policy of encirclement and forced diplomatic engagement can protect us if the scum sucking dogs remain pragmatic. In that instance, we will have avoided the bullet but must not let up in our determined efforts at modernization. This new usa policy may only buy us limited time as the chinese are very patient and will try yet again if they believe they have a free hand in Asia. There will come a day when America may no longer be able to protect us let alone themselves and we will be forced to step up to the plate in our own defense.

Will we be ready?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Vermonter
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  * ]
Now the idiots are poisoning the West Philippine Sea;

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2011-12...nt_14295793.htm
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
spearhead
Member Avatar
DoctorNO, Your Neutral Observer.
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Thats not good!
"Men of War must learn the art of numbers or he will not know how to array his troops." - Plato

Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tsukiyomi
Member
[ *  *  * ]
Regarding the gas leak, I find it humourous that the chicoms state that there was no damage to the environment...considering their track record and "truthful" pronouncements I got a chuckle. I will agree that the environmental impact is really not all that serious unless more information comes to light that dictates otherwise.

Now for the so-called Chinese aircraft carrier killing missile... Unless that carrier is sitting very still, it would be very difficult to re-target a ballistic missile or give it a predictive capability. The chicoms would have to be able to locate the carrier, ascertain its heading and speed, get approval to launch the missile, launch and then retarget/compensate to hit the carrier. This does not take into account that the CSG has ABM capabilities.

The chicoms would need to prove the capability truly existed by actually putting the entire scenario into practice. I am not aware of a realistic enough test of the capability from acquisition to kill occurring yet.

A space based asset would be required as the Chinese still do not possess a robust enough deep water navy presence. It is possible they could utilize a submarine to tail a fleet and pass the required data through a satcom relay and that could start the process. The sub could continue to provide course and speed corrections. The missile would launch and follow a predictive course based on the data or utilize some type of updating process to make course corrections.

Even if the hit occurred, unless the missile was a nuke, I doubt there would be enough punch to take the carrier completely out of the fight. The usa carriers are designed to take an incredible amount of punishment before being taken out of a fight.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · West Philippine Sea · Next Topic »
Locked Topic