# China on our doorstep



## Stockbailx (24 April 2022)

I understand their would be two different views to the concept of China parking a security presents in the Solomon Islands. Personally I say no worry's mate, China's just moving forward and could help the economy of the Solomon Islands. As for military bases I don't look so far into it and I like to stay away from US intel and reference because their a bad cook, can't be trusted. Plus I believe Australia being a monarchy doesn't help our cause or know were it's coming from exactly.
Scomo on the other hand is sh*ting his dipers, and putting money into defence. fair enough do that any way but it doesn't need the war mung a. A influence he picks up from the US. It's all about who's got the biggest weapons with them. NO NEED

Anyone got any views on the matter? What economic implications it has on Australia I don't know besides Scomo...


----------



## Value Collector (25 April 2022)

Stockybailz said:


> I understand their would be two different views to the concept of China parking a security presents in the Solomon Islands. Personally I say no worry's mate, China's just moving forward and could help the economy of the Solomon Islands. As for military bases I don't look so far into it and I like to stay away from US intel and reference because their a bad cook, can't be trusted. Plus I believe Australia being a monarchy doesn't help our cause or know were it's coming from exactly.
> Scomo on the other hand is sh*ting his dipers, and putting money into defence. fair enough do that any way but it doesn't need the war mung a. A influence he picks up from the US. It's all about who's got the biggest weapons with them. NO NEED
> 
> Anyone got any views on the matter? What economic implications it has on Australia I don't know besides Scomo...



I guess China is just imitating the USA example, how many bases does the USA have on “Chinas door step”

The USA has been trying to extend influence in the Asia pacific for over 100 years, beginning with annexing Hawaii.


----------



## sptrawler (25 April 2022)

Value Collector said:


> I guess China is just imitating the USA example, how many bases does the USA have on “Chinas door step”
> 
> The USA has been trying to extend influence in the Asia pacific for over 100 years, beginning with annexing Hawaii.



Absolutely, why should China moving in on Australia, with its raw materials and intrinsic wealth, be any different to any other superior force in history doing the same, that's what happens.

It is pretty logical really, why should China pay us silly money for iron ore when they could just own it or take it, as you intimated the U.S did it with oil in the middle East.
I cant understand what people are confused about, the U.S is a basket case, Russia is running amok in Europe, why wouldnt China look here, makes perfect sense.
 I did say we should have sold W.A to them, at least we would have got something for it, rather than a lot of greif and mahem.Lol
My guess is they wont worry about Taiwan as the chip manufacturing will mostly have been relocated to the U.S, so plan B squeeze Australia for the raw materials.


----------



## rederob (25 April 2022)

sptrawler said:


> Absolutely, why should China moving in on Australia, with its raw materials and intrinsic wealth, be any different to any other superior force in history doing the same, that's what happens.



But China is not doing this!
In fact China has propped up Australia's economy for most of the past 20 years, and prevented us going into recession during the GFC.


sptrawler said:


> It is pretty logical really, why should China pay us silly money for iron ore when they could just own it or take it,



If it's logical it should make sense that it is the case.  But it has not happened, so does not make sense, does it?


sptrawler said:


> as you intimated the U.S did it with oil in the middle East.



The US has been the champion of regime change and appointment of dictators for well over a century, beginning at its own doorstep with examples from Panama, Honduras, Nicaragua, Mexico, Haiti, and the Dominican Republic.  It's big move on oil was in partnership with the UK when they orchestrated the 1953 Iranian coup d'état.


sptrawler said:


> I cant understand what people are confused about, the U.S is a basket case, Russia is running amok in Europe, why wouldnt China look here, makes perfect sense.



No it doesn't.  Africa is a much better target as it is blessed with greater potential than Australia on *all natural resource fronts*.  Moreover, China would not face any significant military opposition entering African nations at will.


sptrawler said:


> My guess is they wont worry about Taiwan as the chip manufacturing will mostly have been relocated to the U.S, so plan B squeeze Australia for the raw materials.



China will have moved to chip dominance by 2030, and would be there by 2025 except the USA has imposed trade restrictions on nations choosing to enter into commercial arrangements with key Chinese manufacturers.  
The so-called champion of the free world - America - has bullied it's way to international dominance by doing the very things Australia wants to blame China for, but has not done!


----------



## 3 hound (25 April 2022)

Main difference between American imperialism and Chinese imperialism is that China makes its money out of peace and the US makes its money out of war.

Whatever happens you can be sure our leaders and our merchant class will sell us out in a heartbeat.


----------



## Value Collector (25 April 2022)

sptrawler said:


> Absolutely, why should China moving in on Australia, with its raw materials and intrinsic wealth, be any different to any other superior force in history doing the same, that's what happens.
> 
> It is pretty logical really, why should China pay us silly money for iron ore when they could just own it or take it, as you intimated the U.S did it with oil in the middle East.
> I cant understand what people are confused about, the U.S is a basket case, Russia is running amok in Europe, why wouldnt China look here, makes perfect sense.
> ...



As I said I believe China is following the USA example, not the Russian example.


----------



## Stockbailx (25 April 2022)

Value Collector said:


> As I said I believe China is following the USA example, not the Russian example.



Something along those lines, China certainly would be cohourst by a USA Influence, and not really following Russia, but Communist is a concern. I just love their food and some toys for the kiddies and grown ups alike.


----------



## 3 hound (25 April 2022)

Stockybailz said:


> Something along those lines, China certainly would be cohourst by a USA Influence, and not really following Russia, but Communist is a concern. I just love their food and some toys for the kiddies and grown ups alike.



China has great food scenery, artwork, manufacturing ...etc and an  atrocious human rights and environmental record.


----------



## Stockbailx (25 April 2022)

3 hound said:


> China has great food scenery, artwork, manufacturing ...etc and an  atrocious human rights and environmental record.
> 
> Imagine how much you have failed at life if you end up like John Cena.



I'll be cutting the grass fine, looking pretty "smoking up' in dismay about how they brought about the covid situation. Properly don't want them to close to my back door, as a civilization there would be a bit to be said. Just a touch old school communist. (nips). But what it would do for Australian economics, not much but we could learn from our own indifference, and shine our policy's away from the monarchist movement. And stay neutral from the USA influence...


----------



## 3 hound (25 April 2022)

You could always become a white monkey (assuming you are white).


----------



## qldfrog (25 April 2022)

3 hound said:


> You could always become a white monkey (assuming you are white).



Hum too much knowledge of ch8na to be honest.
Remember, Chinese are toiling in rice paddocks for a 1$ a day , are backward, illiterate, just reproducing western technology and are living in angst of the CCP in horrendous conditions..and so we need to help them with trade pacts,  for them to reach democratic Nirvana.
Do i forget something?😂🤣
Before i get cancelled and as we need to highlight it in 2022, this is high irony....


----------



## divs4ever (25 April 2022)

qldfrog said:


> Hum too much knowledge of ch8na to be honest.
> Remember, Chinese are toiling in rice paddocks for a 1$ a day , are backward, illiterate, just reproducing western technology and are living in angst of the CCP in horrendous conditions..and so we need to help them with trade pacts,  for them to reach democratic Nirvana.
> Do i forget something?😂🤣
> Before i get cancelled and as we need to highlight it in 2022, this is high irony....



 i believe the Chinese are fairly advanced in their desire  to create a Moon-base  , seems the majority of labour, exploration will be done by automated ( and remote controlled )  devices  it will be interesting to see if they can also house humans  for days/weeks at a time in the mid-term say 5 to 10 years 

 but yes the Chinese seems to have exported Communism more successfully  than the West exporting democracy to China


----------



## sptrawler (25 April 2022)

rederob said:


> But China is not doing this!
> In fact China has propped up Australia's economy for most of the past 20 years, and prevented us going into recession during the GFC.



So China propped us up, due to its benevolent nature? You are joking aren't you, do you think they didn't need the materials they bought from us. I mean you certainly have a unique way of looking at things.



rederob said:


> If it's logical it should make sense that it is the case.  *But it has not happened,* so does not make sense, does it?



Or it may not have happened as China's ascendance has only happened over the last 25 years and the opportunity and their lack of capability may have factored in to the equation. But don't let logics blur your reasoning.
It was only 20 years ago China was buying a scrapped aircraft carrier to tow it around to their shipyard for a panel and paint job, so as i said they were in no position to do sod all 20 years ago, now things are considerably different. So your comment actually doesn't make any sense unfortunately .








						How China's navy went rogue to get its first aircraft carrier
					

It took some enormous bribes and liquor, plus years of delays, for China to get its hands on what would become the aircraft carrier Liaoning.




					www.businessinsider.com
				






rederob said:


> The US has been the champion of regime change and appointment of dictators for well over a century, beginning at its own doorstep with examples from Panama, Honduras, Nicaragua, Mexico, Haiti, and the Dominican Republic.  It's big move on oil was in partnership with the UK when they orchestrated the 1953 Iranian coup d'état.



Absolutely and I did say history is littered with examples of where countries that are stronger in a financial and military sense, take over control of countries that have resources the want. I don't know why you have an issue with it, why should China be any different, that is the question.



rederob said:


> No it doesn't.  Africa is a much better target as it is blessed with greater potential than Australia on *all natural resource fronts*.  Moreover, China would not face any significant military opposition entering African nations at will.



Africa is a hotbed of political and social dysfunction, which I am sure you are aware of, also the population is large, tribal and in constant conflict, Australia is a much easier target.


rederob said:


> China will have moved to chip dominance by 2030, and would be there by 2025 except the USA has imposed trade restrictions on nations choosing to enter into commercial arrangements with key Chinese manufacturers.
> The so-called champion of the free world - America - has bullied it's way to international dominance by doing the very things Australia wants to blame China for, but has not done!



China may well move to chip dominance, but as yet they haven't, so that is your belief and you as I am entitled to our own beliefs and predictions.


----------



## qldfrog (25 April 2022)

sptrawler said:


> So China propped us up, due to its benevolent nature? You are joking aren't you, do you think they didn't need the materials they bought from us. I mean you certainly have a unique way of looking at things.
> 
> 
> Or it may not have happened as China's ascendance has only happened over the last 25 years and the opportunity and their lack of capability may have factored in to the equation. But don't let logics blur your reasoning.
> ...



The inconvenience of "Ignore" is that you miss a lot of these conversations...so getting hard to follow the thread


----------



## 3 hound (25 April 2022)

sptrawler said:


> So China propped us up, due to its benevolent nature? You are joking aren't you, do you think they didn't need the materials they bought from us. I mean you certainly have a unique way of looking at things.
> 
> 
> Or it may not have happened as China's ascendance has only happened over the last 25 years and the opportunity and their lack of capability may have factored in to the equation. But don't let logics blur your reasoning.
> ...





Democracy, economic freedom and the rights of the individual are recent outlier phenomena not the norm of history. Can those things disappear, we might find out in the coming decades.


----------



## divs4ever (25 April 2022)

3 hound said:


> Democracy, economic freedom and the rights of the individual are recent outlier phenomena not the norm of history. Can those things disappear, we might find out in the coming decades.



 decades ?? 

 BTW the erosion of such things is already happening 

 by the time we are that controlled will we even remember  times like now ??


----------



## divs4ever (25 April 2022)

of course China threw us a lifeline because it was mutually beneficial  , but if it had of been  a straight gift  , you would wonder if they were buying loyalty ( which works really well on politicians and government officials , by the way )


----------



## 3 hound (25 April 2022)

divs4ever said:


> decades ??
> 
> BTW the erosion of such things is already happening
> 
> by the time we are that controlled will we even remember  times like now ??





You sound like you are from Victoria.


----------



## qldfrog (25 April 2022)

3 hound said:


> You sound like you are from Victoria.



Or any Australian resident unable to leave this country for nearly 3y without a gov department exemption, or sacked for refusing to take a jab even if that jab can kill him her.
The West has forgotten.
Poor ANZACs..all this for that


----------



## divs4ever (25 April 2022)

3 hound said:


> You sound like you are from Victoria.



nope am in  Queensland   and have probably never been than a few miles inside Victoria in 2012 ( it was a Greyhound bus picking up fares on the way to Adelaide )

 so not much better  off ( long term )


----------



## divs4ever (25 April 2022)

qldfrog said:


> Or any Australian resident unable to leave this country for nearly 3y without a gov department exemption, or sacked for refusing to take a jab even if that jab can kill him her.
> The West has forgotten.
> Poor ANZACs..all this for that



don't worry you can bet they forced all those jabs into our armed forces 

 i bet Xi had a BIG smile today  when Dutton told us to prepare for war 

 grand father , auntie , and all those great uncles  must have all rolled in their graves today 

 but not great grand-father  .. he was on the  HMS Agincourt  when it ran into Gibraltar ( with the Admiral on board ) ruining a  dust up in the Middle East ( i believe they were going to irritate Turkey )

HMS Agincourt (1865)​








						HMS Agincourt (1865)
					

HMS Agincourt was a Minotaur-class armoured frigate built for the Royal Navy during the 1860s. She spent most of her career as the flagship of the Channel Fleet's second-in-command. During the Russo-Turkish War of 1877–78, she was one of the ironclads sent to Constantinople to forestall a...




					military-history.fandom.com
				




 ( i still have his medal  for the service )


----------



## 3 hound (25 April 2022)

Another way to look at this instead of China on our doorstop is Australia is on China's doorstep...... probably as a door mat. We are an Asian country and have even been referred to  by our former leader as "the white trash of Asia".


----------



## divs4ever (25 April 2022)

and THAT is half of our problem  (decades of less than impressive leaders )

 we had the option of trading PARTNER , but as usual  greed and corruption  eroded the mutual trust needed 

 will be watching New Zealand   , who seemed to have cut the perfect deal ( for NZ ) and look to have gone  back to the old Anglo-colonial ways  ( China might easily punish them first )


----------



## sptrawler (25 April 2022)

divs4ever said:


> and THAT is half of our problem  (decades of less than impressive leaders )
> 
> we had the option of trading PARTNER , but as usual  greed and corruption  eroded the mutual trust needed
> 
> will be watching New Zealand   , who seemed to have cut the perfect deal ( for NZ ) and look to have gone  back to the old Anglo-colonial ways  ( China might easily punish them first )



What was the old saying " beware of Greeks bearing gifts". Lol


----------



## Value Collector (25 April 2022)

Stockybailz said:


> I'll be cutting the grass fine, looking pretty "smoking up' in dismay about how they brought about the covid situation.




Pandemics come from all over the globe, Covid deaths are still tiny compared to some of the pandemics that have started in other places.

In fact the Spanish flu one of the largest pandemics, that killed more than 10 times the number covid has was started by our friends the Americans, and in recent times the Americans also gave us the swine flu.


----------



## divs4ever (25 April 2022)

sptrawler said:


> What was the old saying " beware of Greeks bearing gifts". Lol



 sticking strictly to the deal  has worked for me , if i don't like the deal  , i walk away ( annoys the hell out of the Chinese where haggling is a popular sport )

 but some like the keep changing stuff in the deal , and that makes things complicated ( and the ones that really find trouble   are the ones that brag about screwing the other party )


----------



## sptrawler (25 April 2022)

divs4ever said:


> sticking strictly to the deal  has worked for me , if i don't like the deal  , i walk away ( annoys the hell out of the Chinese where haggling is a popular sport )
> 
> but some like the keep changing stuff in the deal , and that makes things complicated ( and the ones that really find trouble   are the ones that brag about screwing the other party )



I think the Solomons are about to find out.


----------



## rederob (26 April 2022)

sptrawler said:


> So China propped us up, due to its benevolent nature? You are joking aren't you, do you think they didn't need the materials they bought from us. I mean you certainly have a unique way of looking at things.



China and Australia have a mutually beneficial trading arrangement.  That continues to this day, but it's transient as China has the ability to develop trading relationships elsewhere and effectively bypass Australia.  Indeed, through its BRI a great deal of progress has already been made.  Anyway, the simple bottom line is that without China continuing as an economic powerhouse throughout the GFC, we would have suffered like most western nations did, yet we didn't.


sptrawler said:


> Or it may not have happened as China's ascendance has only happened over the last 25 years and the opportunity and their lack of capability may have factored in to the equation. But don't let logics blur your reasoning.



You point lacked logic to begin, so pasting over it with a limp afterthought does not remedy it!
And I have no idea how it is somehow relevant to your idea that China can just take what it wants, if it want to.  Neither proposition is better than a brain fart.


sptrawler said:


> Africa is a hotbed of political and social dysfunction, which I am sure you are aware of, also the population is large, tribal and in constant conflict, Australia is a much easier target.



???
No, you explained precisely why Africa is an easy target.
Anyway, China has only a fleeting interest in Australia as its 25M population is a pittance in terms of the future commercial demand of Africa's 1.2B.   


sptrawler said:


> China may well move to chip dominance, but as yet they haven't, so that is your belief and you as I am entitled to our own beliefs and predictions.



There are two parts to the chip equation.  The first part is having enough to do the job, and in that regard China is ok.  That's why very few of China's local auto industry have been particularly affected.
The second part is leading edge manufacture, and that's the catch-up game China is playing.  Far from me having an opinion, it's a race that's quantifiable and anyone can follow.  Furthermore, China has it prioritised as a key to its its technological future, and is investing hundreds of billions to get there.
You need to work out the difference between someone's personal opinion and a nation's progress towards its stated objectives, or do you need the media to help you?


----------



## rederob (26 April 2022)

divs4ever said:


> sticking strictly to the deal  has worked for me , if i don't like the deal  , i walk away ( annoys the hell out of the Chinese where haggling is a popular sport )



Haggling is a feature of *all *informal markets across the globe, and only putting Chinese in your sights is as myopic as it gets.  
My favourite target in Australia is new car dealerships who think they actually have the bargaining power until I walk away with a final offer.  


divs4ever said:


> but some like the keep changing stuff in the deal , and that makes things complicated ( and the ones that really find trouble   *are the ones that brag about screwing the other party* )



Like what Australia did with the French on submarines, or to the Chinese on Huawei?
I won't even venture into American bragging as I want to keep this post short.

The inept Coalition are presently trying to do a Howard, and instigate a "children thrown overboard" moment to cement votes from those rusted on to the notion that "tough on borders" is a vote winner.  So *here's *what a former Defence Chief has to say, under the headline:
"Sleepwalking" into war: former CDF renews warning​


----------



## 3 hound (26 April 2022)

rederob said:


> China continuing as an economic powerhouse throughout the GFC, we would have suffered like most western nations did, yet we didn't




Internet award for maximum oversimplification of a complex topic.


----------



## Stockbailx (26 April 2022)

sptrawler said:


> I think the Solomons are about to find out.



With the election debate on top of the agenda for all Australian, labor has came up with the initiative of a counter punch to china, by announcing they would strengthen the pacific region by appointing our own security presents in the region by training other nations to fight in the area. Quite logical if you ask me, because while where at strengthen an re-orientate our own defence system and by all means stay away from the monarchist movement. ( could of been done earlier )


----------



## rederob (26 April 2022)

3 hound said:


> Internet award for maximum oversimplification of a complex topic.



Look at China's GDP as a basis"


I present to you the ASF award of the hour for the least useful post.
If you are going to make a point, have a credible basis for it.


----------



## Stockbailx (26 April 2022)

Stockybailz said:


> With the election debate on top of the agenda for all Australian, labor has came up with the initiative of a counter punch to china, by announcing they would strengthen the pacific region by appointing our own security presents in the region by training other nations to fight in the area. Quite logical if you ask me, because while where at strengthen an re-orientate our own defence system and by all means stay away from the monarchist movement. ( could of been done earlier )



I believe it would have strong positive economic implications for the area and be in Australia's best interest. And I stress providing Australia stays away from the monarchist movement and paves its way clear of USA coward est war demographics...


----------



## 3 hound (26 April 2022)

Stockybailz said:


> I believe it would have strong positive economic implications for the area and be in Australia's best interest. And I stress providing Australia stays away from the monarchist movement and paves its way clear of USA coward est war demographics...



I don't think Australia needs to become the military police of the Pacific, we have enough military to have a war for about 15 minutes. Having a military capable of matching China means we print more money to fund it or get rid of roads, hospital welfare...etc. 

The labour party is just making mouth statements before an election - it's what politicians of all stripes do.


----------



## Stockbailx (26 April 2022)

3 hound said:


> I don't think Australia needs to become the military police of the Pacific, we have enough military to have a war for about 15 minutes. Having a military capable of matching China means we print more money to fund it or get rid of roads, hospital welfare...etc.
> 
> The labour party is just making mouth statements before an election - it's what politicians of all stripes do.



Politicians can't be trusted, murder the Governor General for instance he doesn't serve a purpose. As for labor senator Penny Wong for e.g. I can't make heads or tails of her acquirement and I'm not sure if she is sure. But 500m for 4 years, to static nations in the pacific would also boost diplomatic prospects in the region, and perhaps hinder, China's evolution of ruling the pacific, putting Australia on the back foot with no where to run.
 The pacific region can't be neglected and needs to be updated, for Australia's  stability and economic future, but a monarchist model is not the way to go, more trouble then what its worth. We look bad and the short end of the straw, chance why the Solomon Islands deferred to China.  

As for the economics of investing in the Pacific Region if done properly is a small price to pay for a diplomatic future and stability. AUD grows on trees confined by Scomo and I thinks it right as long as the right kind of seed is planted and its well looked after. Just got to stop paying for a ridicules foreign head of state and be real. I would like to know how much tax payer dollar is going in that direction.


----------



## Stockbailx (5 June 2022)

China must be upset with Australia's involvement into the pacific...(Starting a War)

With China trying to stack claims and unite the pacific to there regime and Australia doing the same the tension must have mounted. I'm guessing China must be furious with Australia interfering with their talks there having with the pacific nations trying to get them to sign off on security deals, to bolster their empire?

So this very unspectacular event happened. Channel 7 reported this;

Chinese fighter plane intercepts Australian aircraft in ‘very dangerous’ incident​The incident resulted in the Australian flight crew needing to performing a ‘dangerous manoeuvre’.

Defence Minister Richard Marles says the interception of one of Australia’s maritime surveillance aircraft by a Chinese fighter plane over the South China Sea last month was a “very dangerous” situation.
In a statement, the Department of Defence said on May 26 an RAAF P-8 maritime surveillance aircraft was intercepted by a Chinese J-16 fighter during routine maritime surveillance activity in international airspace in the South China Sea region.
“The intercept resulted in a dangerous manoeuvre which posed a safety threat to the P-8 aircraft and its crew,” it said.


----------



## 3 hound (5 June 2022)

Stockybailz said:


> China must be upset with Australia's involvement into the pacific...(Starting a War)
> 
> With China trying to stack claims and unite the pacific to there regime and Australia doing the same the tension must have mounted. I'm guessing China must be furious with Australia interfering with their talks there having with the pacific nations trying to get them to sign off on security deals, to bolster their empire?
> 
> ...




Clip says it all.


----------



## againsthegrain (5 June 2022)

3 hound said:


> Clip says it all.




Yeah except Russians are getting smashed by Ukrainians who are being trained and tutored by Americans. As for China their troops or generals have 0 experience in any real conflicts.


----------



## JohnDe (5 June 2022)

> Chinese fighter’s indefensible action is full of hypocrisy​The interception by a Chinese J-16 fighter aircraft of an Australian surveillance plane in the South China Sea was aggressive, reckless, dangerous, irresponsible, gratuitous and illegal. In other words, it was a typical act of Beijing policy in the Indo-Pacific.
> It gives the lie to the so-called charm offensive being waged by China’s ambassador in Canberra.
> 
> It also helps explain the unmistakeable urgency of the Albanese government’s regional diplomatic agenda, in the South Pacific and in Southeast Asia.
> ...


----------



## Value Collector (5 June 2022)

The crazy part to me is that it was only a couple of weeks ago that the Australian government way upset that China sailed a ship in international water along the Australian coast, but as it turns out we have been flying Surveillance aircraft up there routinely.

As for dangerous intercepts and manoeuvres, this has been almost common between nations that are trying to intimidate other forces who they believe are being to intrusive.

Check out this old footage of Russian bombers doing low passes over US aircraft carriers.


----------



## 3 hound (6 June 2022)

againsthegrain said:


> Yeah except Russians are getting smashed by Ukrainians who are being trained and tutored by Americans. As for China their troops or generals have 0 experience in any real conflicts.



Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.


----------



## JohnDe (6 June 2022)

Value Collector said:


> The crazy part to me is that it was only a couple of weeks ago that the Australian government way upset that China sailed a ship in international water along the Australian coast, but as it turns out we have been flying Surveillance aircraft up there routinely.
> 
> As for dangerous intercepts and manoeuvres, this has been almost common between nations that are trying to intimidate other forces who they believe are being to intrusive.
> 
> Check out this old footage of Russian bombers doing low passes over US aircraft carriers.





Crazy to you? Read the article that I posted before your post, it explains some of the issues that you are struggling with.

_Chinese fighter’s indefensible action is full of hypocrisy. The interception by a Chinese J-16 fighter aircraft of an Australian surveillance plane in the South China Sea was aggressive, reckless, dangerous, irresponsible, gratuitous and illegal._​​_Australia, like most nations, does not recognise the sovereignty or legitimacy of Beijing’s rule over islands in the South China Sea it has taken by force or simply constructed. This was also the ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016, which Beijing refuses to recognise._​​_Nonetheless, in the ship transits and air surveillance that Australian navy and air force assets undertake in the South China Sea, they do not breach the 12 nautical mile territorial waters zone that applies to any nation’s territory._​​_Beyond the 12 nautical miles, there can be absolutely no dispute that Australia is operating legally in international waters or international air space._​​_Thus, while the then Morrison government was unhappy that a Chinese spy ship sailed close to the coast of Western Australia, Canberra did not suggest Beijing was behaving illegally. Nor did it send out Australian war ships to cut off and threaten to ram the Chinese vessel, be the equivalent of Beijing’s action against the Australian P8 maritime surveillance aircraft._​​_Beijing’s aircraft and ships have been behaving aggressively in territory around Taiwan and around Japanese islands which are claimed by China, for some years. The US air force and navy has been frequently surprised by how dangerous and irresponsible Chinese military stunts directed at US assets have often been._​​_Beijing’s intentions appear to be to exercise intimidation, to raise the level or risk and cost for other nations operating in areas where Beijing wants to assert control, and to show its intent is decisive, ruthless and expanding._​​_

_​_       Chinese J-16 jet fighter dumps flares_​


----------



## 3 hound (6 June 2022)

JohnDe said:


> Crazy to you? Read the article that I posted before your post, it explains some of the issues that you are struggling with.
> 
> _Chinese fighter’s indefensible action is full of hypocrisy. The interception by a Chinese J-16 fighter aircraft of an Australian surveillance plane in the South China Sea was aggressive, reckless, dangerous, irresponsible, gratuitous and illegal._​​_Australia, like most nations, does not recognise the sovereignty or legitimacy of Beijing’s rule over islands in the South China Sea it has taken by force or simply constructed. This was also the ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016, which Beijing refuses to recognise._​​_Nonetheless, in the ship transits and air surveillance that Australian navy and air force assets undertake in the South China Sea, they do not breach the 12 nautical mile territorial waters zone that applies to any nation’s territory._​​_Beyond the 12 nautical miles, there can be absolutely no dispute that Australia is operating legally in international waters or international air space._​​_Thus, while the then Morrison government was unhappy that a Chinese spy ship sailed close to the coast of Western Australia, Canberra did not suggest Beijing was behaving illegally. Nor did it send out Australian war ships to cut off and threaten to ram the Chinese vessel, be the equivalent of Beijing’s action against the Australian P8 maritime surveillance aircraft._​​_Beijing’s aircraft and ships have been behaving aggressively in territory around Taiwan and around Japanese islands which are claimed by China, for some years. The US air force and navy has been frequently surprised by how dangerous and irresponsible Chinese military stunts directed at US assets have often been._​​_Beijing’s intentions appear to be to exercise intimidation, to raise the level or risk and cost for other nations operating in areas where Beijing wants to assert control, and to show its intent is decisive, ruthless and expanding._​​_
> View attachment 142577
> _​_       Chinese J-16 jet fighter dumps flares_​



What point are you making (I read the article)?


----------



## Value Collector (6 June 2022)

JohnDe said:


> Crazy to you? Read the article that I posted before your post, it explains some of the issues that you are struggling with.
> 
> _Chinese fighter’s indefensible action is full of hypocrisy. The interception by a Chinese J-16 fighter aircraft of an Australian surveillance plane in the South China Sea was aggressive, reckless, dangerous, irresponsible, gratuitous and illegal._​​_Australia, like most nations, does not recognise the sovereignty or legitimacy of Beijing’s rule over islands in the South China Sea it has taken by force or simply constructed. This was also the ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016, which Beijing refuses to recognise._​​_Nonetheless, in the ship transits and air surveillance that Australian navy and air force assets undertake in the South China Sea, they do not breach the 12 nautical mile territorial waters zone that applies to any nation’s territory._​​_Beyond the 12 nautical miles, there can be absolutely no dispute that Australia is operating legally in international waters or international air space._​​_Thus, while the then Morrison government was unhappy that a Chinese spy ship sailed close to the coast of Western Australia, Canberra did not suggest Beijing was behaving illegally. Nor did it send out Australian war ships to cut off and threaten to ram the Chinese vessel, be the equivalent of Beijing’s action against the Australian P8 maritime surveillance aircraft._​​_Beijing’s aircraft and ships have been behaving aggressively in territory around Taiwan and around Japanese islands which are claimed by China, for some years. The US air force and navy has been frequently surprised by how dangerous and irresponsible Chinese military stunts directed at US assets have often been._​​_Beijing’s intentions appear to be to exercise intimidation, to raise the level or risk and cost for other nations operating in areas where Beijing wants to assert control, and to show its intent is decisive, ruthless and expanding._​​_
> View attachment 142577
> _​_       Chinese J-16 jet fighter dumps flares_​



I did read the article and a few others, I still think it’s crazy that our government is upset by the Chinese ship sailing down here when we are routinely flying up there.

Don’t you think the two are related, eg that maybe China decided to send their ship down here because we have been flying Surveillance planes up in the south China sea.


----------



## JohnDe (6 June 2022)

Value Collector said:


> I did read the article and a few others, I still think it’s crazy that our government is upset by the Chinese ship sailing down here when we are routinely flying up there.
> 
> Don’t you think the two are related, eg that maybe China decided to send their ship down here because we have been flying Surveillance planes up in the south China sea.




The Australian military/Navy did not put the Chinese ship into a dangerous position, it was not approached and no attempt to endanger Chinese lives was made.

_China’s sweeping claims of sovereignty over the sea__—and the sea’s estimated 11 billion barrels of untapped oil and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas—have antagonized competing claimants Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam._​​_In July 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague issued its ruling on a claim brought against China by the Philippines under UNCLOS, ruling in favor of the Philippines on almost every count. While China is a signatory to the treaty, which established the tribunal, it refuses to accept the court’s authority._​​_In recent years, satellite imagery has shown China’s increased efforts to reclaim land in the South China Sea by physically increasing the size of islands or creating new islands altogether. In addition to piling sand onto existing reefs, China has constructed ports, military installations, and airstrips—particularly in the Paracel and Spratly Islands, where it has twenty and seven outposts, respectively. China has militarized Woody Island by deploying fighter jets, cruise missiles, and a radar system._​


----------



## Value Collector (6 June 2022)

JohnDe said:


> The Australian military/Navy did not put the Chinese ship into a dangerous position, it was not approached and no attempt of endangering Chinese lives was made.
> 
> _China’s sweeping claims of sovereignty over the sea__—and the sea’s estimated 11 billion barrels of untapped oil and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas—have antagonized competing claimants Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam._​​_In July 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague issued its ruling on a claim brought against China by the Philippines under UNCLOS, ruling in favor of the Philippines on almost every count. While China is a signatory to the treaty, which established the tribunal, it refuses to accept the court’s authority._​​_In recent years, satellite imagery has shown China’s increased efforts to reclaim land in the South China Sea by physically increasing the size of islands or creating new islands altogether. In addition to piling sand onto existing reefs, China has constructed ports, military installations, and airstrips—particularly in the Paracel and Spratly Islands, where it has twenty and seven outposts, respectively. China has militarized Woody Island by deploying fighter jets, cruise missiles, and a radar system._​



Yes I understand that, and I am not condone if the actions of the fighter jet (although as I mentioned above it has been a common thing done by both USA, Russia and other countries in the past)

What I am shocked about is the fact that the Australian government can be at all upset or shocked by the Chinese ship.


----------



## JohnDe (6 June 2022)

Value Collector said:


> Yes I understand that, and I am not condone if the actions of the fighter jet (although as I mentioned above it has been a common thing done by both USA, Russia and other countries in the past)
> 
> What I am shocked about is the fact that the Australian government can be at all upset or shocked by the Chinese ship.




Just because it's "a common thing done by both USA, Russia and other countries in the past", does not make it right or something to be ignored.

I do not understand your confusion. The Australian government has made it quite clear why they are concerned - 

Australia on Sunday said a Chinese fighter jet carried out dangerous maneuvers threatening the safety of one of its maritime surveillance planes over the South China Sea and forcing it to return to the base.​​Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said his government expressed concern to China over the May 26 incident, which the Defense Ministry said took place in international airspace where a Chinese J-16 intercepted a P-8A Poseidon surveillance aircraft on routine patrol.​​“We’re operating completely within our rights ... most of our trade traverses the South China Sea,” Marles said. “This incident will not deter Australia from continuing to engage in these activities, which are within our rights and international law to assure that there is freedom of navigation in the South China Sea, because that is fundamentally in our nation’s interest.”​


----------



## Value Collector (6 June 2022)

JohnDe said:


> Just because it's "a common thing done by both USA, Russia and other countries in the past", does not make it right or something to be ignored.
> 
> I do not understand your confusion. The Australian government has made it quite clear why they are concerned -
> 
> Australia on Sunday said a Chinese fighter jet carried out dangerous maneuvers threatening the safety of one of its maritime surveillance planes over the South China Sea and forcing it to return to the base.​​Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said his government expressed concern to China over the May 26 incident, which the Defense Ministry said took place in international airspace where a Chinese J-16 intercepted a P-8A Poseidon surveillance aircraft on routine patrol.​​“We’re operating completely within our rights ... most of our trade traverses the South China Sea,” Marles said. “This incident will not deter Australia from continuing to engage in these activities, which are within our rights and international law to assure that there is freedom of navigation in the South China Sea, because that is fundamentally in our nation’s interest.”​



Ok, if you can’t see the double standard between us routinely sending Surveillance aircraft into the south China sea, but then acting all shocked and upset when they send a surveillance ship along the coast of Australia then I don’t know what else to say.

(Please don’t bring up the intercept aircraft again, I have already said I don’t condone that and that I am not actually talking about to that, I am talking about how upset The government was a few weeks again about the chineses ship, when they know that we regularly send planes up there)

If the Australian government doesn’t want Chinese surveillance around Australia, maybe we shouldn’t be sending our military up there.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (6 June 2022)

sptrawler said:


> What was the old saying " beware of Greeks bearing gifts". Lol



©


----------



## JohnDe (6 June 2022)

Value Collector said:


> Ok, if you can’t see the double standard between us routinely sending Surveillance aircraft into the south China sea, but then acting all shocked and upset when they send a surveillance ship along the coast of Australia then I don’t know what else to say.




It is you that can not see, even when I show you the reasoning.

I will try in simplistic terms -

The South China Sea is a major trade route, over 50% of Australian trade and 80% of world trade travels through it. The waters of that area are classified as international waters "_International waters are those located outside any nation's territorial waters. Some refer to these waters as the open seas or the high seas"_. The Australian government has a duty to protect Australia's maritime jurisdiction, which includes trade, shipping, cargo, passengers and crew.

_Australia’s national objective for civil maritime security is to deter or prevent illegal activity from occurring in Australia’s maritime jurisdiction and where necessary to interdict and enforce Australian laws. In terms of tonnes of cargo shipped and kilometres travelled, Australia is the world’s fifth largest shipping nation. Australian and foreign ships carry Australian passengers, crew and cargo within and beyond Australian waters. Australia therefore has strong economic and national interests in maintaining civil maritime security within and beyond Australian waters._​
The Australian surveillance plane was conducting a routine patrol in free international waters, which it has done on a regular basis since 1980.

_Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said his government expressed concern to China over the May 26 incident, which the Defense Ministry said took place in international airspace where a Chinese J-16 intercepted a P-8A Poseidon surveillance aircraft on routine patrol._​_“We’re operating completely within our rights ... most of our trade traverses the South China Sea,” Marles said. “This incident will not deter Australia from continuing to engage in these activities, which are within our rights and international law to assure that there is freedom of navigation in the South China Sea, because that is fundamentally in our nation’s interest.”_​


Value Collector said:


> If the Australian government doesn’t want Chinese surveillance around Australia, maybe we shouldn’t be sending our military up there.




Australia may not want "Chinese surveillance around Australia", but I do not see your point. As I have explained numerous times, including once again above, The P-8A was conducting surveillance in international waters. Those trade routes do not belong to China, the P-8A was not near the Chinese mainland.
The Australian government made an official remark about the Chinese ship that was caught conducting surveillance near the Australian mainland. However, the Australian government did not send a Naval ship to harass it, nor did they make an official complaint.

Once again - the P-8A was traveling in defined area of international waters/airspace.

_The South China Sea__ is a critical commercial gateway for a significant portion of the world’s merchant shipping, and hence is an important economic and strategic sub-region of the Indo-Pacific._​_The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which was concluded in 1982 and came into force in 1994, established a legal framework intended to balance the economic and security interests of coastal states with those of seafaring nations. UNCLOS enshrines the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), a 200 nautical mile area that extends sole exploitation rights to coastal nations over marine resources. However, the EEZ was never intended to serve as a security zone, and UNCLOS also guarantees wide-ranging passage rights for naval vessels and military aircraft._​_Australia has significant interests in the South China Sea, both economically, in terms of freedom of trade and navigation, and geopolitically, as the United States is invested in upholding the rules-based order in the region. Australia has been conducting its own airborne surveillance operations in the South China Sea and Indian Ocean, called Operation Gateway, since 1980._​
Read the rules and the history. You got this one wrong, admit it and move on.


----------



## Value Collector (6 June 2022)

JohnDe said:


> It is you that can not see, even when I show you the reasoning.
> 
> I will try in simplistic terms -
> 
> ...



The Chinese ship was also in international waters, in an area where a large amount of its trade passes through. 

What parts of the South China Sea are Chinese is confusing and open for debate, for example Australia still doesn’t  officially  recognise Taiwan, the Australian government considers it as a province of China, so flying anywhere near Taiwan may upset China.

China (just like Australia) claims that many Island and reefs for part of their territory too, so as I said things are debatable as to where certain lines are.

But needless to say if you walk past some ones house filming them every day, you can be upset if they eventually walk past yours doing the same, and maybe throw an egg at you one day.


----------



## JohnDe (6 June 2022)

Value Collector said:


> The Chinese ship was also in international waters, in an area where a large amount of its trade passes through.
> 
> What parts of the South China Sea are Chinese is confusing and open for debate, for example Australia still doesn’t  officially  recognise Taiwan, the Australian government considers it as a province of China, so flying anywhere near Taiwan may upset China.
> 
> ...




And again, Australian military forces did not harass or cause any safety issues with the Chinese navy ship. Unlike the Chinese fighter plane, which “_The intercept resulted in a dangerous manoeuvre which posed a safety threat to the P-8 aircraft and its crew_”

Unlike China, Australia is working within the rules and guidelines of international laws.

Government will not complain about Chinese navy ship near Australian waters​Chinese spy ship has been seen near secretive naval facility off Western Australia​‘Act of intimidation’: Morrison condemns Chinese navy for shining laser at Australian surveillance plane​
China may have claimed many Islands and reefs, using your example of "walking past a house and filming" - walking past the same house does not give you the right to claim it.

China has no right to stop or inhibit shipping or air travel in the South China Seas, just like Australia does not. The difference is that China has and is using intimidatory and dangerous actions, whereas Australia uses words and rules.

Australia has been patrolling the contested area since 1980.

Australia has every right to mention and discuss foreign military ships near its waters, especially when there are incidents that require reporting. Not once has an Australian military personal intimidated the Chinese, unless you believe patrolling our trade routes and protecting our interests is intimidation.

I notice that when your view is question by a valid point, you start to rant and rave, clutching at straws. It undermines all your posts, even the correct ones. Time for you to accept that you are traveling the wrong creek, and without a paddle.

*Law of the Sea - United Nations*

_B. *Recent judgments, awards and orders*
Permanent Court of Arbitration: The South China Sea Arbitration (The Republic of the Philippines v. The People’s Republic of China), 12 July 2016_

_China’s maritime entitlements in the South China Sea, like those of the Philippines, may not extend beyond those expressly permitted by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea;_
_China’s claims to sovereign rights jurisdiction, and to “historic rights”, with respect to the maritime areas of the South China Sea encompassed by the so-called “nine-dash line” are contrary to the Convention and without lawful effect to the extent that they exceed the geographic and substantive limits of China’s maritime entitlements expressly permitted by UNCLOS; _
_..._
_..._
_..._
_..._
_..._
_China has unlawfully interfered with the enjoyment and exercise of the sovereign rights of the Philippines with respect to the living and non-living resources of its exclusive economic zone and continental shelf;_
_China has unlawfully failed to prevent its nationals and vessels from exploiting the living resources in the exclusive economic zone of the Philippines;_
_China has unlawfully prevented Philippine fishermen from pursuing their livelihoods by interfering with traditional fishing activities at Scarborough Shoal;_
_China has violated its obligations under the Convention to protect and preserve the marine environment at Scarborough Shoal, Second Thomas Shoal, Cuarteron Reef, Fiery Cross Reef, Gaven Reef, Johnson Reef, Hughes Reef and Subi Reef;_
_China’s occupation of and construction activities on Mischief Reef
 (a) violate the provisions of the Convention concerning artificial islands, installations and structures;
 (b) violate China’s duties to protect and preserve the marine environment under the Convention; and
 (c) constitute unlawful acts of attempted appropriation in violation of the Convention; _


----------



## Value Collector (6 June 2022)

JohnDe said:


> And again, Australian military forces did not harass or cause any safety issues with the Chinese navy ship. Unlike the Chinese fighter plane, which “_The intercept resulted in a dangerous manoeuvre which posed a safety threat to the P-8 aircraft and its crew_”
> 
> Unlike China, Australia is working within the rules and guidelines of international laws.
> 
> ...



And again, I didn’t condone the actions of that Chinese fighter jet. (You really seem to want to attack points I am not making)

All I am simply saying is, it’s crazy how hysterical the Australian government got just because a Chinese surveillance ship came near by, when we routinely do the same.

(Again I am not talking about the Chinese fighters actions, I am talking about the Australian governments hypocrisy about fretting over Chinese ships when we are the ones sending surveillance craft into Asia routinely)

Also, people freak out the moment China starts laying claim to a few island etc it considers part of China, but it’s the USA that has the longest history of expanding its territory using islands and military bases etc in the Asia pacific.

I can bet if China attempted to fly a surveillance plane near Hawaii the USA would intercept it.


----------



## JohnDe (6 June 2022)

Value Collector said:


> And again, I didn’t condone the actions of that Chinese fighter jet. (You really seem to want to attack points I am not making)
> 
> All I am simply saying is, it’s crazy how hysterical the Australian government got just because a Chinese surveillance ship came near by, when we routinely do the same.
> 
> ...




And again you miss the point.

The Australian government was not "_hysterical_"  when reporting the incident. The actions of the Chinese military and the pilot are illegal and dangerous by international conventions.

And, people did not "_freak out the moment China starts laying claim to a few island_". The  loss of islands, damage to reefs, loss of marine habitat, and the livelihood of many people that live in the area has occurred. A government in the region decided to take action.

After diplomatic discussions with China, the matter was taken to the *United Nations - Law of the Sea Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea Office of Legal Affairs*. The outcome of the case is in the document, or you can look at my previous post where I cut & paste some of the decisions that were made.

Stop blurring the issue and hypothesizing, follow the facts. You got this one wrong.


----------



## Value Collector (6 June 2022)

JohnDe said:


> And again you miss the point.
> 
> The Australian government was not "_hysterical_"  when reporting the incident. The actions of the Chinese military and the pilot are illegal and dangerous by international conventions.
> 
> ...



I don’t miss the point at all, it’s just not the point I am making. (Read back to my original statement and you will see it has nothing to do with the point you are being repeatedly trying to make)

Anyway this is getting circular, so I will leave it with you.


----------



## JohnDe (6 June 2022)

Value Collector said:


> I don’t miss the point at all, it’s just not the point I am making. (Read back to my original statement and you will see it has nothing to do with the point you are being repeatedly trying to make)
> 
> Anyway this is getting circular, so I will leave it with you.




_Value Collector said:_​_The crazy part to me is that it was only a couple of weeks ago that the Australian government way upset that China sailed a ship in international water along the Australian coast, but as it turns out we have been flying Surveillance aircraft up there routinely._​​_As for dangerous intercepts and manoeuvres, this has been almost common between nations that are trying to intimidate other forces who they believe are being to intrusive._​
Your point - 

_The crazy part to me is that it was only a couple of weeks ago that the Australian government way upset that China sailed a ship in international water along the Australian coast, but as it turns out we have been flying Surveillance aircraft up there routinely._
And I explained what the issues where - Australian government commented on the Chinese surveillance ship off the coast of Australian water but no action was taken. Whereas the Chinese military has been harassing the Australian surveillance teams in free airspace, with increasingly more dangerous methods. Australia has been openly patrolling the area since 1980 to ensure the safety of Australian trade, cargo, crew and passengers. Recently China has forcibly take islands and are building military infrastructure in open seas, which happen to be a major trade route. 


_As for dangerous intercepts and manoeuvres, this has been almost common between nations that are trying to intimidate other forces who they believe are being to intrusive._
Which I commented with something like - just because other countries do it does not make it legal, correct or to be condoned. Australia, as far as I know, has never used such maneuvers on any country.

My point stands - Australia has done nothing illegal, it has not acted inappropriately, the Australian government and our military has operated above board. Whereas the Chinese government and military has/is using intimidation, breaking international laws and endangering the safety of our personal.

You definitely missed the point of the article that I posted -  *Chinese fighter’s action is full of hypocrisy*


----------



## Value Collector (6 June 2022)

JohnDe said:


> ​Your point -
> 
> _The crazy part to me is that it was only a couple of weeks ago that the Australian government was upset that China sailed a ship in international water along the Australian coast, but as it turns out we have been flying Surveillance aircraft up there routinely._
> And I explained what the issues where - Australian government commented on the Chinese surveillance ship off the coast of Australian water but no action was taken. Whereas the Chinese military has been harassing the Australian surveillance teams in free airspace, with increasingly more dangerous methods. Australia has been openly patrolling the area since 1980 to ensure the safety of Australian trade, cargo, crew and passengers. Recently China has forcibly take islands and are building military infrastructure in open seas, which happen to be a major trade route.




That’s the crazy part, as I said (and you agree with) we have been sending surveillance up there for ages, and they send one ship down towards us and we have a cry about it and called it an “Aggressive Act”, now shouldn’t our surveillance mission then also be labeled aggressive acts?

I am not sure what news you watch but the government certainly did more than make a simple  “comment on it”, the had a little cry about it, maybe that was mainly because it was election time but either way it seems crazy to me for us to get upset when we do the same to things.

(As I said I don’t condone the intercept, I am not talking about the intercept, I am talking about the governments response to the Chinese ship off our coast and the song and dance that happened about it. but hey intercepts are going happen, especially when you fly over contested space, as I said fly over a USA claimed area and see what happens)


----------



## JohnDe (6 June 2022)

Value Collector said:


> That’s the crazy part, as I said (and you agree with) we have been sending surveillance up there for ages, and they send one ship down towards us and we have a cry about it and called it an “Aggressive Act”, now shouldn’t our surveillance mission then also be labeled aggressive acts?
> 
> I am not sure what news you watch but the government certainly did more than make a simple  “comment on it”, the had a little cry about it, maybe that was mainly because it was election time but either way it seems crazy to me for us to get upset when we do the same to things.
> 
> (As I said I don’t condone the intercept, I am not talking about the intercept, I am talking about the governments response to the Chinese ship off our coast and the song and dance that happened about it. but hey intercepts are going happen, especially when you fly over contested space, as I said fly over a USA claimed area and see what happens)





Firstly, that is a lie "and you agree with"

I do not know how to put it any simpler, you either can not grasp the simplest explanations, or you are purposefully trying to muddy the discussion because you can not bring yourself to admit you are wrong.

"_we have been sending surveillance up there for ages_" Yes, that is correct. The reason is to protect our trade routes, cargo, ships, passengers and crew. This has been explained numerous times and examples and reasons given.

"_the government certainly did more than make a simple  “comment on it”_" No counts were done or mentiond. The government could have made a thousand comments and reports, Australia is within its rights as mentioned in the United Nations International Law. The Chinese government has and I breaking International Law. Which part of this is crazy to yo, that Australia is following the law to the letter, or that China is breaking it?

 "_I am talking about the governments response to the Chinese ship off our coast_" And again I have to say I - Australia is within its rights as mentioned in the United Nations International Law. The Chinese government has and I breaking International Law. Which part of this is crazy to yo, that Australia is following the law to the letter, or that China is breaking it?


----------



## Sean K (6 June 2022)

I'm finding it hard to see a level of equivalency with these two actions.

The Chinese ship was there to surveille Australia's coast.
The Australian P8 was there to surveille the SCS.
Australia monitored the Chinese ship off the WA coast and didn't approach it.
China J16 dropped chaff in front of the P8 potentially destroying the engines.

There's probably a level of information that we're not aware of here. Like, exactly where the P8 was and what they were watching and listening to and, what an Australian submarine may or may not have been doing shadowing the Chinese spy ship. 

I think China are very lucky that the chaff didn't destroy an engine and bring it down.


----------



## rederob (6 June 2022)

The idea that Australia needs to defend itself from China has no basis.
However, the interests that like to propound this idea do exceptionally well from Australia's defence spending.  Not on things like drones, mind you, as they are far to cheap.  We need nuclear submarines!

Unlike our good American friends, China has a policy of non-intervention in affairs of State and, instead, is *selling *its expertise to nations which we and our good friends continue to neglect.  We call China's Belt & Road initiatives "debt traps" because we didn't think of helping first.  Our good American friends haven't had an embassy in the Solomon Islands for almost 30 years, but recently sent a high level delegation after China's interest, and Daniel Kritenbrink, assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs (part of the delegation), said afterwards that the US won't rule out military action if China "establishes a base in Solomon Islands."  I guess that's the type of military action they are renown for in the Ukrainian war.

When it comes to hypocrisy, Australia takes the cake.  *China's recent visit to Timor-Leste* concluded with cooperative agreements between the 2 nations.   Whereas Australia is still trying to screw over this fledgling nation on oil/gas deals after secretly bugging high level meetings and *prosecuting anyone* who dares to let the cat out of the bag.  

Hopefully Penny Wong will use her better foreign affairs skills to navigate the murky waters of our present China relationship, and get us onto a solid keel.  Albanese's announcement today of a South East Asia agency in Wong's Foreign Affairs Department is an excellent first step.


----------



## JohnDe (6 June 2022)

Sean K said:


> I'm finding it hard to see a level of equivalency with these two actions.
> 
> The Chinese ship was there to surveille Australia's coast.
> The Australian P8 was there to surveille the SCS.
> ...




Agreed


----------



## Value Collector (6 June 2022)

JohnDe said:


> Firstly, that is a lie "and you agree with"



what is a lie?



> I do not know how to put it any simpler,



You don't have to put it simpler, I understand what you are saying, you are just so set on your path of talking past me you are failing to see the nuance of my point.

My point is simple, Australia has no business getting upset by a Chinese ship patrolling along our coast when we are actively patrolling in their back yard.



> "_we have been sending surveillance up there for ages_" Yes, that is correct. The reason is to protect our trade routes, cargo, ships, passengers and crew. This has been explained numerous times and examples and reasons given.




Yes, I am sure that is the only reason we are up there  however China can use the same excuse, their trade routes to the Pilbara and other Australian ports probably need patrolling in their opinion (two can play at that game)




> Australia is within its rights as mentioned in the United Nations International Law.




As is china when they patrol down our coast, (again don't bring up the fighter jet, I have already said I don't condone that, and its a separate topic.


----------



## 3 hound (6 June 2022)

JohnDe said:


> Agreed



I feel the discussion is focused too much on the legalistics and missing the reality that the incident is more like two dogs flexing over ownership of a bone.


----------



## Value Collector (6 June 2022)

Sean K said:


> I'm finding it hard to see a level of equivalency with these two actions.
> 
> The Chinese ship was there to surveille Australia's coast.
> The Australian P8 was there to surveille the SCS.




Was the Chinese ship there to surveil the coast??? or was it just protecting its trade routes as Australia claims to do to justify our surveillance activities?



> Australia monitored the Chinese ship off the WA coast and didn't approach it.
> China J16 dropped chaff in front of the P8 potentially destroying the engines.
> 
> There's probably a level of information that we're not aware of here. Like, exactly where the P8 was and what they were watching and listening to and, what an Australian submarine may or may not have been doing shadowing the Chinese spy ship.
> ...




I am not condoning that action, all I have said is that it is not unusual, and similar tactics have been used for years between various nations.

The USA (who we are seemingly in bed with in chinas eyes) has been running ships, planes and submarines by china for years spying, as they get more powerful and see themselves on the same footing as the USA we can expect a lot of push back.

As I said before its perfectly legal to stand out the front of my house filming and recording with sound equipment, there is nothing I can legally do to stop you, but if you did it long enough I might begin throwing eggs or some water bombs, now that would be totally illegal for me to do that and you could cry assault. However we all know that you might kinda deserve it, and if you cry to the police about how you could of lost an eye or slipped over due to the egg and water bombs, well thats just you trying to play victim because things aren't going your way and you should probably take the hint I am growing frustrated with your "surveillance"


----------



## JohnDe (6 June 2022)

3 hound said:


> I feel the discussion is focused too much on the legalistics and missing the reality that the incident is more like two dogs flexing over ownership of a bone.




The Australia I grew up with and support is one of equality, world order, and supporting the tules for those ambitions. Australia is not like the UK, l it’s not like the USA and it’s not like Europe, but it is a bit of everyone. We believe in balance ane sharing.

Australia is not standing up against China’s bullying tactics because of some dog power mentality, but instead because if we don’t do it now in 10 or 20 years it will be too late.


----------



## 3 hound (6 June 2022)

JohnDe said:


> The Australia I grew up with and support is one of equality, world order, and supporting the tules for those ambitions. Australia is not like the UK, l it’s not like the USA and it’s not like Europe, but it is a bit of everyone. We believe in balance ane sharing.
> 
> Australia is not standing up against China’s bullying tactics because of some dog power mentality, but instead because if we don’t do it now in 10 or 20 years it will be too late.



I agree with what your saying but it's not necessarily about Australia. China is asserting itself as the big dog on the block. We have ready handed them a lot of  power over us thru economic means. Your 10, 20 years  timeline has already came and gone already imo.  The time, money and lives we wasted in the middle east should have been spent in the Pacific.


----------



## Sean K (6 June 2022)

Value Collector said:


> Was the Chinese ship there to surveil the coast??? or was it just protecting its trade routes as Australia claims to do to justify our surveillance activities?




The coast. Google - Harold E Holt Naval Communications Base.


----------



## rederob (6 June 2022)

JohnDe said:


> Australia is not standing up against China’s bullying tactics because of some dog power mentality, but instead because if we don’t do it now in 10 or 20 years it will be too late.



China has not threatened any other country in the last century but now wants Australia.
You are not  good with analysis!


----------



## JohnDe (6 June 2022)

rederob said:


> China has not threatened any other country in the last century but now wants Australia.
> You are not  good with analysis!




Please stop following me, I don’t want to hear any of your nonsense. Your abusive posts towards me, and ridiculously wrong call on EVs is all I can stomach from you.

Edit: All fixed, used the ignore function.


----------



## 3 hound (6 June 2022)

rederob said:


> China has not threatened any other country in the last century but now wants Australia.
> You are not  good with analysis!



Vietnam war?


----------



## Dona Ferentes (6 June 2022)

Suicide waves in Korea.


----------



## 3 hound (6 June 2022)

Beating the living **** out of Buddhist monks in tibet and the Tibetan people?


----------



## 3 hound (6 June 2022)

Chinese people killing the **** out of the Chinese people in the people's revolution?


----------



## againsthegrain (6 June 2022)

Taiwan, Hong Kong... what about the Vietnamese and Philipino fishing boats rammed and water cannoned


----------



## Value Collector (7 June 2022)

Sean K said:


> The coast. Google - Harold E Holt Naval Communications Base.



I am sure there is plenty of sensitive sites in the South China Sea too, but no maybe our ships and planes are just counting sea gulls and tracking turtles 😅


----------



## rederob (7 June 2022)

JohnDe said:


> Please stop following me, I don’t want to hear any of your nonsense. Your abusive posts towards me, and ridiculously wrong call on EVs is all I can stomach from you.
> 
> Edit: All fixed, used the ignore function.



Next time you put me on *Ignore *don't *contradict *yourself with a reply to me that I cannot see due to your choice.
*I  do not follow you *as you think as I don't find your commentary analytical, and that's exactly why I posted here after reading your contributions, which are largely one sided and reflect a poor understanding of China and its actions.

If anyone knew about the Chinese fighter's automated defensive mechanisms they would know that the Australian "spy" plane could have triggered the chaffing incident.  Google can explain how this works.  As @Value Collector notes, these types of incidents have been going on for a very long time and are not one sided.  Just remember that the Defence Department never does well under Labor, and it's in their best interest to get in early with a China kicking incident so their military expenditure can be maintained at the very least.  Just look at the date of the jet fighter incident, the location and timing of Australia's overseas visits, and the announcement of the fighter incident, and work out if it's just a coincidence.

Whenever we read about China in our media there are often  key words and phrases used, including *aggression*, *debt trap diplomacy*, and *trade war*.  Equally less subtle are the containment actions of Australia via FIORC, aka *five eyes*; QSD, aka *the Quad*; *AUKUS*; and ANZUS, which are in addition to the lesser known *Lombok Treaty*,  *Five Power Defence Arrangements* and *Japan-Australia Joint Declaration on Security Cooperation*.  On the other hand China is non-aligned, although clearly has affinity with counties also tarnished with the label of communism.

China is not on our doorstop and has no compelling reason to be.  That is not prevent the yellow peril brigade fomenting this false notion out of hype and distortion.  Who exactly wins from such actions?  That's the picture that needs to be explored rather than a regurgitation of poorly explained circumstances laden with jingoism.

A week ago I did an in-depth analysis of Antony Blinken's recent *China Policy* speech but didn't post it because it was too long and the ASFers that should probably read it have me on ignore anyway.  In summary it contained two glaring contradictions.

Blinken's first contradiction is that he states that America is not indulging in a *cold war*.  I know Blinken is not stupid, but he wants listeners to be, because every action America is undertaking seeks to ring fence China while systematically "gathering" nations in security pacts and allegiances that are supposed to foster Indo-Pacific cooperation yet explicitly exclude China!  The second contradictions relates to economic exclusions and could not be more bald faced than with the establishment of *IPEF* last month which also excludes China.  How exactly IPEF "_will create a stronger, fairer, more resilient economy for families, workers, and businesses in the United States and in the Indo-Pacific region" _remains to be seen as it specifically fosters a clear divide between the worlds largest manufacturing economy and the rest of the Asia Pacific region which rely on its cheap products.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (7 June 2022)

3 hound said:


> Vietnam war



Khmer Rouge leadership in Kunming during the '60s

Sino-Vietnamese border war in early 1979.


----------



## JohnDe (7 June 2022)

3 hound said:


> I feel the discussion is focused too much on the legalistics and missing the reality that the incident is more like two dogs flexing over ownership of a bone.




Or a frog  *Time to Slow Cook China’s South China Sea Frog?*

_"The contest over the South China Sea involves more than besting the Chinese Communist Party. It is a competition over whose maritime order will prevail—a contest that has major economic and security implications for all nations of the region as well as the United States."_​
*The South China Sea in Strategic Terms*

_"If China succeeds, in displacing U.S. power in the Western Pacific and Chinese territorial expansion into the South China Sea becomes permanent and codified, global geopolitics will have entered a new and very different era.  Southeast Asia will inevitably be rendered subordinate and compliant to China’s will.  _*Australia will be isolated* *with an uncertain future*_.  Japan and South Korea will face a perilous new reality with China in control of the seaborne lifeline of both countries.  The credibility of U.S. security support for allies and partners will be shredded.  India will lose its current freedom of access into the South China Sea and much of Southeast Asia.  European access to Asia will be through Beijing.  All this will occur in a region that is increasingly the vibrant center of the world economy.  The message will be clear; the era of American international leadership and predominance is over and a new preeminent power has taken its place."_

"The geopolitical message was unmistakable: Western expectations that China was transitioning toward political democracy were entirely illusory."​


----------



## Sean K (7 June 2022)

JohnDe said:


> Or a frog  *Time to Slow Cook China’s South China Sea Frog?*
> 
> _"The contest over the South China Sea involves more than besting the Chinese Communist Party. It is a competition over whose maritime order will prevail—a contest that has major economic and security implications for all nations of the region as well as the United States."_​
> *The South China Sea in Strategic Terms*
> ...




It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out with maritime access once/if China do control the SCS. It might mean that the SCS is bypassed, or deals are struck to allow China through the Malacca Strait and between the Andaman and Nicobar Islands for passage through the SCS. India could quite easily shut down that path from west to east in the future, isolating China. Hence one of the reasons why India are so important to the Quad.


----------



## JohnDe (7 June 2022)

Sean K said:


> It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out with maritime access once/if China do control the SCS. It might mean that the SCS is bypassed, or deals are struck to allow China through the Malacca Strait and between the Andaman and Nicobar Islands for passage through the SCS. India could quite easily shut down that path from west to east in the future, isolating China. Hence one of the reasons why India are so important to the Quad.




The Lombok Strait would have to take more of our shipping, and Indonesia will be an important ally.

*Anthony Albanese vows to strengthen Australia’s ties on official Indonesia visit*


----------



## rederob (7 June 2022)

Sean K said:


> It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out with maritime access once/if China do control the SCS. It might mean that the SCS is bypassed, or deals are struck to allow China through the Malacca Strait and between the Andaman and Nicobar Islands for passage through the SCS. India could quite easily shut down that path from west to east in the future, isolating China. Hence one of the reasons why India are so important to the Quad.



*How is the South China Sea on our doorstep?*

The so called "freedom of navigation" exercises are utter nonsense.  There is nothing hindering navigation in the SCS.  If there is, perhaps someone can spell it out.

The notion that any nation other than China will be able to "control" traffic in the region will only be dispelled if and when India achieve dominance, and that's the latter part of this century if at all.  It's no secret that US war games have not shown an American victory possible for some years now, and China's might is steadily increasing, numerically and technologically.

But isn't the reality here that most of the world's shipping trade is dominated by China's imports and exports?  In that context China can be seen as ensuring its trade routes are not going to be compromised.  Are we somehow to believe that China needs the west's assistance to maintain safe trade?  Or perhaps that the west protecting our interests by containing China.  The mindless logic to the west's assertions are counterproductive.  The more China is isolated, the more it will do to ensure it does not have to rely on the west.  And whether we like it or not, globalisation is here to stay.  How it works is becoming more problematic, but cold war cliques and trade sanctions will not prove to be our friend into the future.


----------



## rederob (7 June 2022)

Value Collector said:


> I am sure there is plenty of sensitive sites in the South China Sea too, but no maybe our ships and planes are just counting sea gulls and tracking turtles 😅



Maybe the Chinese spy ship off our coast was looking for more sacred sited that were going to be bulldozed to make way for progress, and then  rub our noses in it, à la Uyghurs.


----------



## JohnDe (8 June 2022)

More dangerous flight activity by the Chinese Airforce, now with the Canadian's.

_"accused the Chinese air force of unprofessional and risky behaviour during the incidents._​​_The Canadian aircraft were deployed in Japan as part of a multinational effort to enforce United Nations sanctions against North Korea, which has faced international penalties over its nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles program._​​_In some instances, the Canadian crews had to quickly modify their flight paths to “avoid a potential collision with the intercepting aircraft”, the Canadian military said in a statement."_​


> *Trudeau slams ‘provocative’ air encounter with China*
> 
> Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has denounced Beijing’s “irresponsible and provocative” actions after Chinese jets came dangerous close to Canadian aircraft over Asia.
> 
> ...


----------



## JohnDe (11 June 2022)

_"A dismaying case in point involves fighter jets of China’s People’s Liberation Army (pla), which have in recent months staged dangerous, high-speed passes to intimidate Western military aircraft in international airspace near China."_



> *The hotheads who could start a cold war*
> _China’s deep distrust of America and the West is making it reckless_
> 
> It is almost too polite to call the deepening rivalry between China and the American-led West a new cold war. The original cold war between America and the Soviet Union was grimly rational: a nuclear-armed confrontation between hostile ideological blocs which both longed to see the other fail. For all their differences, China and Western countries profit vastly if unevenly from exchanges of goods, people and services worth billions of dollars a year. Their respective leaders know that global problems from climate change to pandemics or nuclear proliferation can only be solved if they work together. Yet increasingly, interdependency is not enough to stop one side—often China, but not always—from starting reckless disputes rooted in suspicion of the other.
> ...


----------



## JohnDe (11 June 2022)

> Speaking in April 2021, New Zealand Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta likened her country’s relationship with China to a harmonious connection between two mythical creatures.
> “Taniwha are protectors or guardians, often of water, and hold dominion over rivers, seas, lands and territories,” she told the NZ China Council in Wellington. “The Dragon and the Taniwha can have respect for solutions that seek to benefit kotahitanga (solidarity) and our future generations.”
> 
> Not surprisingly, progressives responded to this declaration with the usual oohs and aahs, particularly given Mahuta was the first Indigenous woman to hold the foreign affairs portfolio. Never mind that she had no formal experience in this field. As she said upon assuming her role six months before this speech, she wanted to bring a “Māori world view” to the role.
> ...


----------



## Sean K (11 June 2022)

The Mocker nails it every week. NZ is almost a liability to ANZUS at the moment.


----------



## 3 hound (11 June 2022)

Wouldn't be so bad if these clowns only hurt themselves but good innocent people will have to suffer for their narcissism.


----------



## bux2000 (12 June 2022)

divs4ever said:


> and yet we live in clown world where even the Australian version of Bernie Sanders just became Prime Minister on a vote of less than 40% ( of first preferences )




Welcome to our world I just hope it isn't to be yours soon too 



Sean K said:


> The Mocker nails it every week. NZ is almost a liability to ANZUS at the moment.




No argument from me

There are so many things going on here at the moment that makes my head spin

3 waters









						What is the Government's Three Waters plan and why is it making mayors so upset?
					

"We don't trust it, we don't have confidence in it, and we don't find it credible."




					www.newshub.co.nz
				




Since then 3 waters has been mandated by our government and there is a lot more to that story. You have to hope there is nothing sinister about a Governments complete control of what is added to its populations drinking water.

and Our only Oil Refinery









						Marsden Point: New Zealand 'naive' to shut down its only oil refinery - Australian analyst
					

"If the oil refinery in New Zealand closes, you are totally reliant on oil companies doing the right things... a really dangerous proposition."




					www.newshub.co.nz
				




If I understand it correctly the nuts and bolts of this refinery has been sold and packed up to go to China and the balance of the bulky items  sent to scrap (China) with the remaining pipework now being filled with concrete. 

What is disturbing is it appears 99% of NZ's population is either unaware of what is going on or uninterested.

NZ's manufacturing has gone along with the generations from the 60's, 70's and 80's with the skills and know how, are to old to build the machines that were once built here to once again create any sort of manufacturing base.

All done to support an emerging economy that is now China.

I am not sure how the Electric Cars are going to travel on roads without bitumen.........that's right we can just import it from China.

bux


----------



## Value Collector (12 June 2022)

bux2000 said:


> I am not sure how the Electric Cars are going to travel on roads without bitumen.........that's right we can just import it from China.
> 
> bux



New Zealand can mine bitumen directly if they need to, but Bitumen is also highly recycled so a lot of the bitumen supply comes from old roads that are resurfaced, you can also add plastics into bitumen during the recycling process. 

Here is a 35 page document from the New Zealand government looking into alternative supplies of bitumen, so I think it’s something they have been looking at for a while.

https://www.nzta.govt.nz/assets/Hig...itumen-alternatives-report-31-august-2021.PDF


----------



## Telamelo (23 July 2022)

https://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/military/chinas-new-nuclear-plans-could-see-them-strike-australia-within-a-week/news-story/1ae74924f37abdd9103aa6e36e9762ce


----------



## mullokintyre (23 July 2022)

The Chinese embassy have accused right wing activist Drew Pavlou with making a bomb Hoax, and had him arrested by british police as a terrorist.
From  The Guardian


> Australian activist Drew Pavlou has been arrested in the UK over a false “bomb threat” delivered to the Chinese embassy in London, that he claims came from a fake email address designed to frame him.
> 
> Pavlou said the “absurd” email claimed he would blow up the embassy over Beijing’s oppression of its Uyghur Muslim minority, but that it was confected by the embassy in order to have him arrested.
> 
> ...



Using something like Proton mail is purely for encrypted anonymity.
It hides the tracks of the sender.
Why you would go to that much trouble  then put your name to the email?
Kinda  makes me think its more likely someone else sending the emai in Pavlou's namel.
I wonder who that might have been??
Mick


----------



## 3 hound (23 July 2022)

mullokintyre said:


> right wing activist....






mullokintyre said:


> a longstanding and vociferous critic of Beijing’s oppression of China’s Uyghur minority,




Geez according to the guardian anyone right of Chairman Mao or Stalin is a right wing activist.


Also

Regards, Drew”.

LMAO.


----------



## againsthegrain (23 July 2022)

3 hound said:


> Geez according to the guardian anyone right of Chairman Mao or Stalin is a right wing activist.
> 
> 
> Also
> ...



surprisingly they haven't labelled him a white nationalist... yet


----------



## qldfrog (24 July 2022)

againsthegrain said:


> surprisingly they haven't labelled him a white nationalist... yet



Maybe he is not white..ohh horror...
How can the West be so dumb.
There is probably a thread on the embassy WeChat full of 😂😂🥂🤣


----------



## 3 hound (24 July 2022)

againsthegrain said:


> surprisingly they haven't labelled him a white nationalist... yet




By definition a sovereign nation has borders = white nationalist = bad.

....goes on to support Ukraine's national sovereignty  with sanctions crippling the world economy, military hardware & intelligence, billions of dollars.....all to maintain Ukraine's borders.


----------



## qldfrog (24 July 2022)

3 hound said:


> By definition a sovereign nation has borders = white nationalist = bad.
> 
> ....goes on to support Ukraine's national sovereignty  with sanctions crippling the world economy, military hardware & intelligence, billions of dollars.....all to maintain Ukraine's borders.



If Ukraine was attacked by a Muslim or non White country, NATO would be bombing Kiev..
Remember Serbia and Kosovo?
Discovered that the poor bugger daring to face CCP is Australian activist.
Silly him, he should have been protesting against Putin and would have been offered protective escort and some grants.
Funny how our country produces truth fighters Assange, this guy who are quickly forgotten by both sides of our politicians..and our citizens...
Maybe as a lessons : keep quiet,  get another booster, and watch their ABC or latest Big Brother or MAFS


----------



## qldfrog (24 July 2022)

And about China....
When i think these dimwit giverning us , both sides, are going to spent billions to get a dozen tin can targets, potentially dangerous when sunk and be unable to defend us.i cry..


			https://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/military/chinas-new-nuclear-plans-could-see-them-strike-australia-within-a-week/news-story/1ae74924f37abdd9103aa6e36e9762ce


----------



## 3 hound (24 July 2022)

qldfrog said:


> And about China....
> When i think these dimwit giverning us , both sides, are going to spent billions to get a dozen tin can targets, potentially dangerous when sunk and be unable to defend us.i cry..
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/military/chinas-new-nuclear-plans-could-see-them-strike-australia-within-a-week/news-story/1ae74924f37abdd9103aa6e36e9762ce




From the article, this gives me so much confidence in our leadership to organise things and stay ahead of the curve.

"Australia’s defence force aspires to a $170 billion force of 12 large, fully crewed submarines.

China’s researchers say they can deliver wolf-packs of the AI-controlled weapon within 10 years.

After 15 years of dithering over a replacement for the ageing Collins-class diesel-electric submarines, Australia’s earliest possible date for constructing nuclear replacements is in the 2040s."


----------



## JohnDe (24 July 2022)

Stockybailz said:


> I understand their would be two different views to the concept of China parking a security presents in the Solomon Islands. Personally I say no worry's mate, China's just moving forward and could help the economy of the Solomon Islands. As for military bases I don't look so far into it and I like to stay away from US intel and reference because their a bad cook, can't be trusted. Plus I believe Australia being a monarchy doesn't help our cause or know were it's coming from exactly.
> Scomo on the other hand is sh*ting his dipers, and putting money into defence. fair enough do that any way but it doesn't need the war mung a. A influence he picks up from the US. It's all about who's got the biggest weapons with them. NO NEED
> 
> Anyone got any views on the matter? What economic implications it has on Australia I don't know besides Scomo...




_...Competition between the US and China is likely to be economic rather than military, Kissinger suggests. But how the US and its allies such as Australia deal with China is “a historic task”. With Taiwan a flashpoint, Kissinger urges a “cooling” of rhetoric by the US and China because it makes the situation more “tense” and heightens the risk of conflict._​​_Describing Australia as part of the “complex tapestry” in Asia-Pacific region, Kissinger believes we should continue to deepen relations with the US; he welcomes the Quad with the US, India and Japan; and encourages continued dialogue with China._​​_“Australia, as an American ally, is entitled to the protection of its security and therefore its close strategic co-operation with the US,” he says. On China, Kissinger adds: “The dialogue can take place in which the two sides are trusting in their conduct towards each other to prevent accidents and unnecessary confrontation.”_​



> Kissinger’s advice to Australia​The US statesman on Australia’s China dilemma, when the Ukraine war is likely to end and names the two historical leaders we most need today.
> 
> Henry Kissinger was an academic theorist and geopolitical strategist who became synonymous with high-level summitry and shuttle diplomacy, a counsellor to successive US presidents, lauded by many as a statesman and Nobel prize-winner yet loathed by others for his realpolitik approach to global affairs.
> In a wide-ranging interview, the nonagenarian former US national security adviser and secretary of state to Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford discusses his new book profiling six world leaders alongside his formative years, academic career, White House tenure, and thoughts on Russia-Ukraine, China’s ambitions, US divisions and Australia’s position in the fracturing world order.
> ...


----------



## Telamelo (24 July 2022)

Australia given our rich natural resources/mineral's can/should thank China for keeping our economy above water so to speak as our largest trading partner over these past several decades. 

Wish this rhetoric around China being our perceived enemy/theat in the Asia Pacific region would stop - what makes it worse is our further strengthening of our alliance with Britain & the US as of course China sees this as a security threat within the Asia Pacific region. No wonder our recent relationship with China has derailed as a result. 

If Australia was neutral in such matters we would be able to trade with everyone & not be impacted by silly sanctions (as imposed by China in recent times). 

We don't need to be spending billions of $$ on national security as it ain't going to achieve anything/no benefit whatsoever as in fact makes us more of an imminent target imo


----------



## 3 hound (24 July 2022)

Telamelo said:


> Australia given our rich natural resources/mineral's can/should thank China for keeping our economy above water so to speak as our largest trading partner over these past several decades.
> 
> Wish this rhetoric around China being our perceived enemy/theat in the Asia Pacific region would stop - what makes it worse is our further strengthening of our alliance with Britain & the US as of course China sees this as a security threat within the Asia Pacific region. No wonder our recent relationship with China has derailed as a result.
> 
> ...





A neutral world would be nice like something  you would hear about at the Nimbin Mardi Grass days in the 90's.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (7 August 2022)

The last Taiwan Strait crisis in 1996 (Clinton):

Following Beijing’s launching of missiles across the strait that year, Washington sent a battle fleet, including two aircraft carriers, to the area. US Defence Secretary William Perry declared that 


> “Beijing should know, and this US fleet will remind them, that while they are a great military power, the strongest, the premier military power in the Western Pacific is the United States”.


----------



## Value Collector (7 August 2022)

Dona Ferentes said:


> The last Taiwan Strait crisis in 1996 (Clinton):
> 
> Following Beijing’s launching of missiles across the strait that year, Washington sent a battle fleet, including two aircraft carriers, to the area. US Defence Secretary William Perry declared that



Back then the USA was like that one kid on the under 14’s footy team that had hit puberty and was stronger than everyone else so he could afford to be a bit of a bully.

Now though he is on the under 17’s team, and just realised that kid he used to push around last season has hit puberty and the gym, and maybe acting like a bully might get him a blood nose.


----------



## sptrawler (7 August 2022)

Dona Ferentes said:


> The last Taiwan Strait crisis in 1996 (Clinton):
> 
> Following Beijing’s launching of missiles across the strait that year, Washington sent a battle fleet, including two aircraft carriers, to the area. US Defence Secretary William Perry declared that



On the same theme:








						Analysis: Taiwan tensions reveal challenges for U.S. navy as Chinese threat grows
					

The long route of Nancy Pelosi's Tuesday flight over Borneo to Taipei and a U.S. aircraft carrier's complex passage through the South China Sea highlight the difficulties U.S. forces now face against a Chinese military keen to flex its muscles over Taiwan.




					www.reuters.com
				




China's military modernisation in recent decades mean some security analysts say it would be unthinkable for U.S. aircraft carriers to challenge Chinese forces in the seas around Taiwan in the way they did a quarter of a century ago.

Back then, one carrier sailed through the Taiwan Strait as another manouvered close by to end days of Chinese missile launches and military drills as Beijing protested Taiwan's first direct presidential election.

More than half of the U.S. Navy's 111 currently deployed battle force ships are now within the Japanese-based Seventh Fleet's sphere of responsibility that straddles the western Pacific and Indian oceans, according to the tracking by the independent U.S. Naval Institute.

Deploying ships en masse to the Chinese coast is another matter, given China's inventory of advanced cruise and ballistic missiles and its expansive surface fleet, regional security analysts say.

Four powerful vessels - the aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan, the amphibious assault ship USS Tripoli and the guided missile cruiser USS Antietam are east of Taiwan, Reuters has confirmed. Another assault ship - which also carries F-35 strike fighter aircraft - is at port nearby in Japan.
Some security analysts say it was highly likely U.S. attack submarines were also close to such a formation.

The passage of the Reagan strike group was particularly closely watched by regional security analysts in the days before Pelosi's mission.
The Reagan later headed through the tight sealanes of the Philippines' archipelago before reaching waters west of Taiwan, according to an official U.S. naval Facebook page.

Singapore-based security scholar Collin Koh said the passage through the Philippines' San Bernadino strait by an aircraft carrier was unusual, instead of sailing north between the Philippines and south China coast.

"I think it shows some carefully calibrated deployments, designed to not unnecessarily provoke China even while ensuring they're moving to where they need to be."


----------



## 3 hound (7 August 2022)

Has anyone figured out what Pelosi was there for and what she achieved. Did she visit any chip manufacturers to get some inside info??

Has anyone seen the transcript of Biden's phone call with Xi??

The media used to lobe publishing presidential transcripts with foreign leaders...what's changed?


----------



## JohnDe (8 August 2022)

3 hound said:


> Has anyone figured out what Pelosi was there for and what she achieved. Did she visit any chip manufacturers to get some inside info??
> 
> Has anyone seen the transcript of Biden's phone call with Xi??
> 
> The media used to lobe publishing presidential transcripts with foreign leaders...what's changed?




I have a theory, but My views are not going to change anything.



> *Logic lost on Xi as world walks Taiwan tightrope*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Stockbailx (10 August 2022)

I'm not sure if I've heard right but I read on the grape vine, watching ABC this morning, that Taiwan has now started it's own military exercises as a show of force, I guess. Good luck Taiwan...But what troubles me is that if Taiwan and China start butting heads, there's bound to be conflict. Interesting to see how this all plays out...I'll be sitting in my bunker watching closely...

China certainly being a bit of a trouble maker. Should anything exculate  into a war, I would hate to see Taiwan left out to dry, like what had happened to the Ukrainians...


----------



## qldfrog (10 August 2022)

Stockybailz said:


> I'm not sure if I've heard right but I read on the grape vine, watching ABC this morning, that Taiwan has now started it's own military exercises as a show of force, I guess. Good luck Taiwan...But what troubles me is that if Taiwan and China start butting heads, there's bound to be conflict. Interesting to see how this all plays out...I'll be sitting in my bunker watching closely...
> 
> China certainly being a bit of a trouble maker. Should anything exculate  into a war, I would hate to see Taiwan left out to dry, like what had happened to the Ukrainians...




Do not worry, we will boycott trade with china and we the glorious democratic west will win within months...like with Ukraine.
I hope many are not too star stroked to realise that Taiwan is exactly the same play for the US.Push **** to hell , then gain the benefits
2021 US losing hegemony, huge USD crisis and economy, china moving to #1
2025:
China back to main foe and second on world rank, US back number one,EU dead, SE Asia and minors Korea, Japan economically annihilated..oz too
Full bipolar world, US economic crisis over with war effort and new Marshall plan.population brainwashed with new MC Cartyism... The frog in a rééducation camp for daring questionning EV, CC and CO2 or refusing to get his booster number 8 or objecting killing all his methane emitting cattle
Build your shelter..


----------



## Telamelo (5 September 2022)

China has warned it will take “counter-measures” if America doesn’t “immediately revoke” a deal to sell $US1.1 Billion ($A1.6 Billion) worth of arms to Taiwan, after US President Joe Biden approved the package.



			https://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/military/immediately-revoke-china-angered-after-us-reveals-taiwan-arms-deal/news-story/60c8d88ebab0ce52377ecf84cfa0e231


----------



## JohnDe (25 September 2022)

> *China ready to meet Australia ‘halfway’, Xi’s envoy tells Penny Wong*
> 
> Xi Jinping’s top envoy has said China is ready to meet Australia “halfway” in the most promising change in Beijing’s diplomacy since its relationship with Canberra imploded in 2020.
> 
> ...


----------



## bux2000 (26 September 2022)

Value Collector said:


> New Zealand can mine bitumen directly if they need to, but Bitumen is also highly recycled so a lot of the bitumen supply comes from old roads that are resurfaced, you can also add plastics into bitumen during the recycling process.
> 
> Here is a 35 page document from the New Zealand government looking into alternative supplies of bitumen, so I think it’s something they have been looking at for a while.
> 
> https://www.nzta.govt.nz/assets/Hig...itumen-alternatives-report-31-august-2021.PDF






Value Collector said:


> New Zealand can mine bitumen directly if they need to, but Bitumen is also highly recycled so a lot of the bitumen supply comes from old roads that are resurfaced, you can also add plastics into bitumen during the recycling process.
> 
> Here is a 35 page document from the New Zealand government looking into alternative supplies of bitumen, so I think it’s something they have been looking at for a while.
> 
> https://www.nzta.govt.nz/assets/Hig...itumen-alternatives-report-31-august-2021.PDF




Seems theory and reality still have a way to go prior to meeting. It would also appear dangerous when a Government Department takes over control of the supply of a product........... Nothing to see here though.









						Seal of disapproval: New expressway opening 'uncomfortably close' to Xmas
					

Documents reveal almost 13,000 tonnes of asphalt is faulty on Peka Peka to Ōtaki motorway.




					www.nzherald.co.nz
				




bux


----------



## JohnDe (6 January 2023)

Never underestimate nature & change.



> Xi Jinping doubtless expected to celebrate the New Year by touting the superiority of his authoritarian economic and governance model. Instead, he is trying to manage a healthcare crisis, a weakening economy, and political protests. These vulnerabilities – each attributable to the Chinese Communist Party under Mr Xi’s leadership – allow the US to combat the party’s mercantilist policies and debunk its narrative that China’s rise to global dominance is inevitable.
> 
> 
> In Shanghai, a crowd chanted calls for Xi Jinping to step down, a rare act of political defiance that reflected public frustration with his ‘zero Covid’ demands. Picture: Twitter
> ...


----------



## JohnDe (Wednesday at 9:10 AM)

Starting to see some light.



> *China’s extraordinary world view*
> EDITORIAL
> 
> Amid a thawing of tensions between Canberra and Beijing, Tuesday’s shindig at the Chinese embassy in Canberra to mark the new year, to say “thanks” to “our friends” in the media and to heap praise on the Labor government was warm, verging on syrupy – until it turned worrying. In his prepared speech, China’s articulate, urbane ambassador, Xiao Qian, emphasised that the bilateral relationship was “at a critical stage of turnaround”. The bonhomie dried up, however, when he was asked about Japanese ambassador Shingo Yamagami’s warning, revealed in The Australian on Tuesday, that Australia and Japan should be “vigilant” towards China and that Beijing’s more constructive tone was yet to be matched by a shift in behaviour. “I’m afraid our colleague from Japan is not doing his job,” Mr Xiao complained. Or was he doing it too well?
> ...







> *Xiao Qian’s glass half-full and threats half-empty*
> 
> China’s ambassador in Australia caught the national mood well – albeit inadvertently.
> 
> ...


----------



## Dona Ferentes (Wednesday at 11:18 AM)

JohnDe said:


> “Once somebody threatens you, he might threaten you again,” said Xiao Qian at a press conference on Tuesday to begin the new year..




More coercive claptrap ... I'd prefer the ambassador spoke in Mandarin; was the performance urbane? Not really. ,


----------



## UMike (Wednesday at 12:40 PM)

Chinese leaderish flips on a whim.


----------



## Craton (Wednesday at 1:03 PM)

Peter Zeihan's prognosis for China is insightful and thought provoking. Video is 4.34 mins and Australia gets a mention.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (Wednesday at 5:10 PM)

China on our doorstep.

"It is too early to say".



Craton said:


> Peter Zeihan's prognosis for China is insightful and thought provoking. Video is 4.34 mins and Australia gets a mention.





Thanks for the vid @Craton . As for Mr. Zeihan's opinion, I put little store on this. The CCP Padre may have been demoted for any number of reasons and America in general is China-phobic atm. His comments on the demographic challenge are the only ones that hold water with me. Otherwise it is propaganda, not that I have anything against American propaganda.

My guess would be that China is primarily worried about the re-arming of Japan, who have a history of matching the Chinese militarily, the loss of Russia as a bulwark against Europe and finally Covid which they are the masters of mismanagement even outdoing the USA . 

As for our defence against China atm. our alliances with the US, UK, Canada, India and other countries close and far should keep us secure.

My main worry is the US in relation to China. Should the US go "native" again by electing Trump, Biden or some similar muppet then our risks increase exponentially. 

gg


----------

