China complains of US Navy’s violation of their territorial waters
Mick sends us a link to an article about the Chinese getting thier panties in a wad because the guided missile destroyer USS Lassen got a little too close one of their newest island creations in the South China Sea;
“The actions of the U.S. warship have threatened China’s sovereignty and security interests, jeopardized the safety of personnel and facilities on the reefs, and damaged regional peace and stability,” the Chinese ministry said on its website. “The Chinese side expresses its strong dissatisfaction and resolute opposition.”
Meanwhile, the Philippines welcomed the sail-past by the USS Lassen, calling it a way of helping maintain “a balance of power”.
The article relates how the Chinese have been building islands where there were none before constantly pushing the edges of their territory out towards other nations. The Obama administration has determined that China and the Pacific Rim is the site of our next war, you know, despite the fact that we haven’t ended any wars in the middle east and there’s evidence of Russian aggression in eastern Europe, so I guess they’re doing their best to aggravate the Chinese to make their predictions come true. While I agree that we shouldn’t let the Chinese push around, but we should probably solve some of the other problems created by this administration before we start throwing our lessening weight around somewhere else.
Category: Foreign Policy
Oh, come on! That’s all just recreational property for Chinese citizens to enjoy, isn’t it?
Anyone taking bets on how long before Olongapo and Subic Bay reopen? Do you think they’ve cleaned up Shit River yet? D’you suppose Rose is still working at the D’Wave Club?
Subic is reopen.
Not me but this….Nipa Hut.
http://www.clarkab.com/ck_photown80_002.htm
True Story…a friend of mine went to the PI on leave and was there and got very drunk and was made the floor show with 3 Filipina women.
When he got back to Okinawa, no dairy or alcohol for *quite* a few weeks.
😉
Never went there, but heard about a few who did… and the “peso show”…
Solid Gold
The Runway
Barrio Baretto
Subic City
Good times, good times
Beggars Banquet!
Island Girls, Gilligan’s Island, Marilyn’s, Slims.
Tacos and lumpia at Via’s. Pure heaven.
If you described the place to someone who hasn’t been there, they simply wouldn’t believe it.
Nothing comes close.
Better than an “E” ticket ride at Disneyland….
This one is the best description I’ve ever read. Brings back a ton of memories.
http://goatlocker.org/resources/nav/airdale.htm
Come on Doc, you don’t want all those horn dog fleet sailors and Marines hitting up those joints again, do you? Sick call is going to be pretty busy after those port calls. And for all you you old timers, Magsaysay street is a shell of its former self. Barrio and Subic City have changed a lot as well.
Trobicin after the “bore punch” was the cure in the day… they young ‘uns can handle sick call at the “Social Hygiene Clinic”, especially after payday…
Hey Doc, it hurts when I pee. That girl told me she was a virgin too.
She also said she was going to wait for me and that she love me long time!
You mean you didn’t get ‘I love you, no shit, buy me Honda’??
Gee, I got that straight from a guy who spent a good portion of his life there.
Right now, the PLN is little more than a costal defense force. While that may eventually change, that change is slow in coming.
Fucking with the PLA, however, would not be real high on my list, not because of technology per se, but because of sheer numbers.
They did just buy a carrier off the Russians, and Comrade Vlad seems to be taking an interest in making them a blue-water navy, if for no other reason than to fuck with us. I also heard a rumor saying that among the SinoReds’ many hacks was complete blueprints for the F-35…although if what we hear about that allegedly-flying shitshow is true, they can fucking have it!
More likely Vlad wants a deal for a Pacific port south of Sevastopol, which is not always open in the winter, up there in the Great Frozen North.
Actually, Ex-PH2 . . . Vladivostok IS farther south than Sevastopol – almost 1.5 degrees of latitude farther south (43.1333N vice 44.6000N).
However, I think I’d rather spend the winter in Sevastopol. I understand you see far fewer male dogs frozen to trees on cold winter days in Sevastopol. (smile)
Sevastopol has been moved east? Used to be a Black Sea Port. Now Vladivostok is Russia’s fair-weather Pacific port.
Damn! Sorry about that! I was thinking of Vladivostok and didn’t go look at the map. My bad.
The world has become one massive clusterfuck under the lazy eyes of Obama and Lurch.
Yep.
Jimmy Carter is looking better and better every day.
B. Hussein 0bama makes Jimmeh Kahtuh look like Dwight D. Eisenhower!
Don’t forget Hildebeast!
HELLO CHINA?
Chef has something to say to you.
Ironically, I recently and randomly bought a hard cover book at an estate sale by the name of “Sky Masters” by Dale Brown (fiction). Written in 1994, it is about an escalation of hostility between China, The Philippines, and The USA, over the Spratley Islands… quickly leading to a nuke det. Good read, crazy timing.
That’s odd. I bought a non-fiction book a while back titled ‘The Coming War With China’. I’ll have to go dig up it. I think I bought it for future use, skimmed through it and kind of dismissed the ideas and speculations, but now maybe it’s not so far off.
I don’t think it will matter a lot who gets elected this next time. The damage already done can’t be undone in the blink of an eye. The world will be a vastly different place by 2020. This may be the unfortunate start of it.
If I were deciding the issue regarding whose claim on the islands is the most legit, I’d have to go with China. The Chinese have been at it, along with Vietnam, for centuries. Everyone else can take a ticket and stand in line at the Complaint Station.
you ever look at where the Spratlies are located?
Yeah, I know where they are. I also know some of their history in terms of claims. For some, claim history dates to post WW II. For China. it dates to the 1700s.
Do you think this was part of the radio traffic between the Navy and the Chinese:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLkTuWdKrqY
YOU GO NOW!!!! YOU BEEN HERE FOUR HOUR!!!
R.I.P.
He was a funny guy.
Back in the day my shipmate had an Apple IIc for which he had a game called “Balance of Power”. Said game consisted of nothing but responding to Soviet (or American) statements and actions. I think the Chinese may have lifted their response from that game.
This interesting article from 2012
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/the-warhead-gap/
Ancient Chinese philosophy (and today) is nationalistic in nature and predicated on expansion throughout the globe.
I know! Let’s start a war with Russia AND China, at the SAME time!
Dear China –
Return all the shit you stole in the OPM hack, spend billions to ensure that information doesn’t wind up on criminal AVC sites, and then we’ll consider your complaint.
Until then, go fuck yourselves with a goddamn cactus.
We essentially have no choice but to do this. By floating a warship through this region we signal that these are still international waters despite the claim China is making on them. No other nation could risk this since China is far more likely to engage any other nation in the region over control of these waters and the islands. China logically feels they should be the dominant power in the Pacific region, especially the entire South China sea. However, as they exert power and their ability to project force throughout the Pacific it threatens our relationships and alliances with other Pacific nations as they are forced into frequent decision points in balancing our interests with China’s. If we are perceived as not willing to back them and willingness to continue to maintain our force presence throughout the region those nations are forced to acquiesce to China’s interests over ours more frequently. The existence of these islands directly challenges the security of Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam. We can assure our allies, partners, and positive relationships that we will back their security or we can cede the South China sea to China hegemony. We know and can predict the long term path of ceding hegemony. The “potential” for conflict is less clear. Neither country is willing to consider it but right now China has much more to lose and is militarily much weaker in a conflict so almost certainly will not consider it (except over issues concerning Taiwanese independence which the mainland considers an existential threat to the legitimacy of China’s regime itself). So right now these is very little risk of military conflict over this but absolute and predictable consequences for not doing something. There will likely be other consequences, possible trade consequences, but most likely symbolic consequences, potentially as grave as the mass arrest and or expulsion of American’s the Chinese deem to be assets of the US. We could see an interdiction of an air or sea asset but that is brinkmanship that will have clear diplomatic signaling to keep it from shifting into conflict.… Read more »
Wow, Lars, I’m impressed. I don’t entirely agree, but I’m impressed. For once, you have made a well-reasoned pointed without trolling, being a pretentious dick, or accusing those who disagree of racism or other being-badness. Seriously, why can’t you do this more often?
Anyway, I hesitate to call the Red Chinese “logical.” They’re a totalitarian regime, and as per the norm, they want to dominate the world. They will do whatever they think will give them the best chance of achieving that goal, whether it’s logical or not. They are a wild card, and have been since 1950.
I agree that we can’t and shouldn’t let them run roughshod all over WESTPAC, but I see more risk here. Add the fact that hostility between us and the Red Chinese is something Putin can and will use to his advantage regardless of the outcome. Suffice it to say that I’m a bit worried.
absolutely correct. Now learn that your spell-check cannot be trusted.
Talk to a Chinese and they will tell you that this is “just business”. They fail to appreciate the irony that this statement is the sames as used by Mafia types for the last half-century.
“Neither country is willing to consider it but right now China has much more to lose and is militarily much weaker in a conflict so almost certainly will not consider it…”
It’s that “almost certainly” that is the X factor. We always seem to assume our opponent is rational.
“It is important to remember allowing China to build these islands and use them to claim territorial waters awful precedent.”
I missed the part where you laid the blame for this on George W. Bush.
Come now, guys. He’s laid out some pretty intelligent analysis here. Let’s not hump his prior posts in order to cheapen it.
He’s absolutely correct here.
I am not saying that he is incorrect; however, it seems to me he stops short of saying on whose watch this “dangerous precedent” occurred.
From what I know, China began creating these specific artificial islands in 2014. Obama et al allowed this dangerous precedent to become what it is today. In my opinion, criticism of Obama and his administration is warranted on either end of this crisis, or both.
Note the date of this similar incident.
http://www.windstream.net/news/read/category/News/hashtag/News/article/the_associated_press-qa_impact_of_us_warship_sailing_near_chinaheld_isl-ap
Disregard that last post. Google had it labeled as April, 2008 but it apparently labeled it that way due to the file photo in the story.
I know there was an earlier incident but I am having a hard time finding the story on it. It may have been them adding structures to a reef and labeling it an island and not actually building an island like they did this time.
Roger. So Blame Bush and wait for the evidence to be found. Got it.
I have not blamed Bush. I was responding to the Blame on Obama which is misplaced and is driven by domestic politics not facts
In this case I think the “blame” is on China and trying to claim it is due to a “weak” administration is ridiculous.
First, nobody who is actually paying attention to international affairs and Obama’s use of force would legitimately accuse him of being “weak” with respect to his willingness to be aggressive in protecting US interests. His authorization of the use of force and the projection of military power is measured but is frequent and widespread.
Second, this issue with China and the Spratly Islands goes back a half century. And island building in the South China sea has been going on for decades. I remember this as being a persistent place of potential conflict and the Mickey mouse games the participants were playing a potential trigger since as long as I served. I could not remember every incident and who did what off the top of my head but there has been similar incidents in the Spratlys involving artificial islands and or or structures being built or forces deployed on existing islands and reefs for as long as have conscious adult memories.
I did not expect nor would it have been prudent for the US to stop the games under any presidency.
Our interests were to maintain the international waters, assure our allies that we will continue or force presence in the region, and to try to diplomatically temper the stupidity so it did not get out of hand.
Presidents have been doing that. And so far, nobody has screwed this up.
“but there has been similar incidents in the Spratlys involving artificial islands and or or structures being built or forces deployed on existing islands and reefs for as long as have conscious adult memories.”
Source(s) please? 2008 file photos don’t count.
“And island building in the South China sea has been going on for decades.”
Well, this discussion was not about the South China Sea… it was about The Spratlys and your idea of an “awful precedent”.
So whose watch did this “awful precedent” occur on L. Taylor? Sources if ya got ’em.
As far as not blaming Bush, why else, in your haste, would you link to an article thinking it was from April of 2008 (above)?
This discussion is about the South China sea, the dispute over the islands is essentially a dispute about strategic control over the South China sea.
I never blamed Bush, stop trying to frame it that way. I explicitly said I do not blame any administration for this issue.
They dispute goes back decades. And similar incidents have happened in the past. Here is a paper opening with a discussion of a 1999 incident.
http://www.stimson.org/images/uploads/research-pdfs/cbmapspratly.pdf
Babble, babble, babble. OH my thin-skinned little candycake!
Ok, kid.
I thought what this discussion was about was what you termed an “awful precedent” of artificial islands being created in the Spratlys… the precedent of creating land where there previously was none, and then claiming sovereignty, exclusion zones, etc.
The paper you cited does not provide any examples of artificial islands being created.
So again, L. Taylor, on whose watch did this “awful precedent” occur?
If you refuse to answer that question (again), then please explain to me what you meant by “awful precedent”. Perhaps I got that wrong but I don’t think so. Countries have laid claim to existing landforms for ages, so I don’t see it as a precedent, awful or otherwise.
What are you asking specifically?
Oh…. I see, you are just trying to claim that this is Obama’s fault.
You really do not care about the history of similar incidents unless they are the EXACT SAME UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE as this one because any other indent could not be pinned on Obama.
What exactly would Obama or any other administration do to stop this?
Read it again sir intel analyst. Look for the question marks. 🙂
Okay L. Taylor, you are starting to piss me off, as always.
YOUR WORDS:“It is important to remember allowing China to build these islands and use them to claim territorial waters awful precedent.”
MY QUESTION: “ON WHOSE WATCH DID THIS AWFUL PRECEDENT OCCUR?
YOU FRAMED THE CONTEXT, NOT ME. DUMBASS.
“What exactly would Obama or any other administration do to stop this?”
Irrelevant to my question, but in your statement “It is important to remember allowing China to build these islands and use them to claim territorial waters awful precedent” explain your use of the word “ALLOW”.
I get it. It does not matter that this conflict has gone on for a half a century. It does not matter than various con tries have deployed troops and occupied various Islands or reefs, it does not matter that there has been an actual military engagement between Vietnam and China over these Islands, it does not matter that both Vietnam and other nations have artificially expanded their islands to solidify their claim.
None of this matters, because none of this is this specific most recent incident which according to your selective worldview is Obama’s fault.
Would anything I say change your word view on this? Why should I bother discussing it with you further? At the end you will just walk away thinking that “It is Obama’s fault.”
So can we just stop now? We are already at the inevitable outcome.
You’re right, none of that matters BECAUSE YOU FRAMED THE CONTEXT PER YOUR STATEMENT: “It is important to remember allowing China to build these islands and use them to claim territorial waters awful precedent”
I cannot take the responsibility for your narrowly framing what an “awful precedent” is. Man up L. Taylor. Own it.
My question still stands. On whose watch did this awful precedent occur?
“It is important to remember allowing China to build these islands and use them to claim territorial waters awful precedent.”
There is TWO CLAUSES in that sentence.
The US could essentially do nothing to stop them from building the islands because there is no international provision preventing them from doing so. Though it does destabilize their agreements concerning the Islands with other nations that had previously reached and agreement with China on the currently occupied Islands.
However, there is international provisions that oppose the legitimacy of China trying to redefine the boundaries of international waters due to their aggressive artificial Island expansion in the Spratly Islands.
So WE CAN push back against that. And we are. We are defying China’s claims to the Waterways within 12 miles of their artificial expansion.
I’ll even give you an out because I feel sorry for your pathetic ass. You could say, “It occurred on Obama’s watch but only because he was busy providing public goods.” Sound familiar? It should. Because that exactly how you gave Bill Clinton a pass.
It happened under Obama, but that does not make it his fault. And you attempts to claim it does if fucking absurd. China is a sovereign nation and an emerging global power. Obama cannot MAKE China do anything any more than Bush could.
Was the capture of a US reconnaissance plane by China Bush’s fault? No it fucking wasn’t.
Our Presidents have no authority to dictate Chinese actions beyond the frameworks of international agreements and their willingness to comply with them except to use military force.
Did you expect Obama to authorize bombing the islands? If you do you are a moron. That would be an act of war. Expanded the islands is legal. Attacking them is not.
I might be a moron, but I am not the moron that wrote “ALLOWING” in my statement about an awful precedent. LOL
Ditto. This administration has already shown that will give the back of its hand to some long term allies who’ve done nothing to deserve it.
I always suspected you were capable of this kind of post, Lars. I never thought I’d see it. Well done laddie
Wrong. Clearly you have never been in a position of seniority in the military and never got the memo that we are essentially at war with China.
Read War College papers and get back to us!
What Master Chief said: and these islands are NOT being built simply as islands. They are ALL being prepared to accommodate Chinese military equipment, e.g., ships and airplanes, including long-range bombers.
That was in the news last night and again today. This is not to be taken lightly. They have plans that go well beyond just building fake real estate.
If it’s only about territory, why aren’t they squabbling with Russia over parts of Siberia to the north, or dismembering the Kim dynasty and Nork military right now?
I am not taking anything lightly. And I understand what China intends for these Islands. It is an attempt at both an expansion of territory and a projection of power.
Again, that does not make what I said “wrong.”
Nothing I said contradicts your exaggerated “War College” claim. You are also committing an absurd equivocation on the meaning of the word “war”.
Field grade may not be “Senior” but I payed much more attention to China and North Korea in my career than you did.
Most papers passed around in service schools are written from a realist school of thought which essentially views the world in a constant state of strategic conflict.
That is one of many schools of thought, each school of thought is a tool from which we can better understand and evaluate a problem. The shortcoming with realism is the “when you only have a hammer everything looks like a nail” tendency to conclude conflict is imminent or inevitable.
Part of the Chinese commie area denial strategy and a test for the Japan/South Korea/US alliance. If the Spratley’s go quietly into the night then the Senkaku/ Ryuku islands would be a viable next objective in the commie mind. If you get the Senkaku’s then you have basically bottled up the JMSDF and US 7th Fleet, forcing them to sail farther east into the Pacific or pass through these island chains, and their eventual fortifications, to reach any potential conflict area in SE Asia. One of the best things the current administration did is to ensure there is no doubt in the commie mind the US Navy will help the JMSDF defend any attack on the Senkaku islands. The bad news is that as the PLAN grows stronger and more modern, our fleet ages. In a history repeats itself moment, we will find ourselves with the fleet we had at the beginning of WWII, old tired WWI era destroyers and cruisers facing a modern, tactically proficient adversary that creates a number of permanent lat and longs for the US 7th Fleet. Japan defeated the Russian navy in 1905 (on paper the Russians were the superior force, but actually were poorly trained and equipped with marginal material readiness) and less than 36 years later pulled off the most audacious sneak attack in modern warfare. Thankfully, the JMSDF is a capable force and is currently modernizing and building new warships to address this threat.
Using the term “commie” to characterize modern China or its regime discredits you analysis because it ignores how far they are from the personality driven and often irrational regime under Mao. China today is neither communist nor is it irrational. It is perhaps the most technocratic regime in the world. If you understand the assumptions, priorities, and values of the regime what they do is exceedingly logically coherent. Some of their conclusions may seem “irrational” – like the willingness to go to war to stop Taiwanese independence – but if you accept their belief that Taiwanese independence will result in widespread independence movement, a fragmentation of the nation, and civil war, then their willingness to stop it at all costs makes logical sense. China does believe they will be the dominant power in the Pacific by then end of the century. Much of that expectation is the assumption by the Chinese and much of the international community that our current political economy is unsustainable and in decline. Many of the mechanisms keeping it intact are starting to be challenged. All they need to do is position themselves to fill the vacuum. Time is on their side and China is an exceedingly patient nation with respect to international relations strategies. China has zero interest in a war in the US in the short to medium term. Around 2030 or 2035 things will likely change with respect to their risk assessment and willingness to accept conflict, but they will not be willing to engage with us over these territorial disputes for at least a decade. There really is no China/North Korea defense alliance anymore. North Korea has proven itself to be a strategic liability and China’s willingness to defend North Korea has more to do with its value as a territorial buffer, a trading partner, and a spoiler for US and South Korean interests in the region. When North Korea collapses, and it will, China will negotiate an annexation of Pyongyang and a pacific port under the auspices of “defending” the North. They have no interest in a conflict over North Korea… Read more »
You denying that the country is run by commies discredits your analysis. They call themselves communists, why are you denying that? I guess the good part about the CHICOM’s is at least they aren’t afraid to call themselves what they really are, which is communists. Now, if they were calling themselves democratic socialists I’d probably get your point. A commie by any other name is still a commie (feel the Bern). Also, your analysis on the NorK’s is way off. I think you’re a little full of yourself,and before you try and get all high and mighty, I live in the region and have for over 15 years. I have traveled extensively throughout the Far East and know the cultures; so don’t try to talk down your pointy nose to me sonny boy.
They are not communist today, despite the party name. North Korea calls itself a “Democratic Republic”. Nobody accuses them of being democratic. China was a Chinese variation of an authoritarian form of communism under Mao but they moved away from communism beginning with Deng Xioa Ping’s market reforms. They essentially have since abandoned most if not all the tenets of classical Marxism or any collective ownership of the means of production. Most everything in China has been privatized to some degree and many firms are nearly or completely privatized, in some economic zones nearly all firms are privatized. In fact western economic, political, and ideological labels largely fail in China and a few other Pacific nations. China essentially functions as a technocratic capitalist dictatorship where the state owns a share of most companies and shares in the profit of Chinese industries, particularly in the sale of Chinese labor by factory firms to foreign companies. Essentially, China acts as the nations largest corporate shareholder for most industries and then uses state power to ensure that Chinese industries have as much of a competitive advantage in the international market as possible. Primarily by having very few protections on the Chinese environment and allowing much of their population to be exploited for profit due to minimal labor protections and wages and relatively meager social safety net with barriers to access. Very conservative economic policies essentially propose a similar model in the US to make it more competitive. Using the state to maximize the competitive advantage of established US firms while simultaneously implementing domestic reforms to achieve few or no environmental protections, minimal labor rights, low minimum wage, and meager social safety net. Additionally education spending reforms that cut public funding to Universities and reduced the number of universities, and shifted high school education to be more focused on vocational training. This would create a large low cost, minimally skilled labor force with low wage expectations. The idea is that it would shift more factory production back to the US. The primary difference is that in the conservative US model the US government would… Read more »
I was an intelligence officer, analyst, and voice interceptor for more than a decade specializing in Korea. With China as a secondary focus. Went to DLI for both Korean and Chinese.
I also am quite well educated in politics and economics – certainly well enough to know what the hell a communist is an is not.
My very recently ex fiancé and still closest friend is Chinese and an expert in Chinese politics.
I also lived in the “region”.
Finally, democratic socialism is not the same as communism. Your claim is an empirically false claim. Democratic socialism is a MARKET ECONOMY. By DEFINITION it is NOT COMMUNISM.
Well, since neither of us can verify the other person’s “street cred” I guess we’ll leave it at that. I could also give two shits about your ex, whatever she is. Why did you get personal? Who friggin’ cares? You obviously have some kind of superiority complex so arguing with you is like arguing with a potato. I generally don’t argue with potatoes. You’re wrong though and, unfortunately for both of us and my offspring (and your potential offspring) I will be proven right about your beloved commission. This is once I don’t want an “I told you so” moment because my son will be fighting off the horde and you’ll probably b pissing your pants. As we say in the navy, go piss up a stiff rope.
Your beloved communists, not commission.
W2 – He did not call you a racist. That means he likes you.
L. Taylor – Sorry about the breakup with the fiance. For the good of the Berkeley collective, please turn all your guns and ammo (including spent shotgun shells) in to Dave Hardin until such time as you are deemed mentally stable.
Go figure Pinky, some of the biggest FOBBIT pogues I ever saw were MI office squirrels. We got SITREPS faster from the internet that we got from our S2.
I am seriously starting to wonder how much time you served. I could not imagine a command putting much trust in your potential to lead given how little awareness you demonstrate.
S2s are staff officers and only one of hundreds of roles MI soldiers and officers have in the battlespace, and S2 “reports” are compilations of other reporting, collection, and analysis – they are not the source so their information is going to generally be a few hours old. Unless it is critical, but then they would not be reporting it to you it would go directly to the commander or the 3 to release.
There are a great many MI soldiers that are not Fobbits.
Look up “Low Level Voice Intercept”, and “Special Operations Team Alpha”. I served in both. That is just one of many roles of MI soldiers in the battlespace and there are a crap ton of roles that have far less internet information.
I was not LLVI/SOT-A in Iraq, not even SIGINT, officers do not serve on those teams.
However, I was on the ground in Iraq operating out of the one of the most austere combat outposts in theater.
No, you almost certainly would never have read my reports. But there is a chance a door you might have kicked came from one of them.
In Afghanistan I was at the division staff level working in the embassy platform. So I was as fobbit as it gets.
Neither role I played in Iraq or Afghanistan should or could be used to diminish my credibility. The fact that you keep trying to twist my jobs into something that is not respectable makes you an ass.
I expect you to continue to be an jackass to me. We have little to no respect for one another at this point
However, you seriously need to check your asshat attitude toward other soldiers in the battlespace that were not infantry. It just makes you look like a gomer with little service time and almost no situational awareness of the battlespace beyond the squad level.
Commie Bastards.
Leave the Democrats out of this.
Jeez. The debate over the fine distinctions between the many flavors of communism has no counterpart when it comes to capitalism, flatly the root of evil–indeed, evil itself–as far as communists (and others) are concerned. So, how about dispensing with the quibbling over communism as a political philosophy and economic nirvana and leave that to the academics who can talk for hours and hours about the silly distinctions that no one but them gives a rat’s ass about.
There is a huge debate over the many forms of capitalism. Google the term “varieties of capitalism”. And that is one of many approaches.
No two capitalist countries operate the same.
And social democracies are far more capitalist than socialist.
In fact technically there are no socialist, capitalist, or communist countries in the world. They all have mixed markets to some degree. All social democracies have market economies, none are actually socialist.
A few communist countries are still planned economies but even they have a large black or grey market economy that plays a significant part in the distribution of good in services through price discovery.
Okay, I did. The result was a very narrow field that hit either on Hall’s and Soskice’s Varieties of Capitalism or other academics’ treatment of that work. That’s not surprising but misses my point, which is that sSome folks are quick to dismiss another’s use of the communist label because, they insist, that term must be qualified every which way from Sunday to convey meaning. That is true in academia but out here, in the real world, it is unnecessary. Who, on the other hand, among communists of whatever variety, demands to know what form, type, or degree of capitalism one is talking about in order to dismiss it as brutal and evil?
Wrong again, and you never do seem to get anything right, taylor. Academia won’t salvage your incorrect opinion.
The CIA labels China a nation with a Communist government. I’ll take their word over your uninformed opinion any day of the century.
You’re wrong about a lot of things. This is only one of many.
I see “Pinky” Lars as a very fine example of what too much education without common sense and real life experience will do to someone, he’ll never to be able to make it in the real world, thus I see him as being just another Government bureaucrat sitting in a chair wasting oxygen!
The “Label” is meaningless. Scroll down to the part where they actually talk about the economy;
“Economy – overview:
Since the late 1970s China has moved from a closed, centrally planned system to a more market-oriented one that plays a major
global role – in 2010 China became the world’s largest exporter. Reforms began with the phasing out of collectivized agriculture, and expanded to include the gradual liberalization of prices, fiscal decentralization, increased autonomy for state enterprises, growth of
the private sector, development of stock markets and a modern banking system, and opening to foreign trade and investment. China has implemented reforms in a gradualist fashion. In recent years, China has renewed its support for state-owned enterprises in
sectors considered important to “economic security,” explicitly looking to foster globally competitive industries. ”
Pretty consistent with how I described the state’s role in the economy.
Isn’t China politically communist and economically capitalist? (I know exactly squat about economics, so I have to ask.)
No, it is an authoritarian technocratic government. Not communist. The party label is because there is still power in maintaining the continuity of that label. Especially in the past when there was internal political struggles over the future of China’s economy. And an attempt to “rename” the Chinese communist party would open up simmering ideological divisions and fracture the party and its power. Can you imagine what would happen if the republican party decided to change its name? The predictable outcome would be a division of the party with some maintaining the name “republican” and others adopting one or many of the proposed alternatives. There is continuity of power in maintaining the continuity of the party, Even as it ideology shifted over the last half century since Mao died. There has not been a prominent Marxist party leader since the death of Mao. Though almost all of them have been generally authoritarian personalities. Communism as a political ideology that promotes the collective societal ownership of resources particularly the means of production. So it is essentially an economic ideology, the “political” aspects of it have to do with accepting a value system of collective ownership. In it purist “Marxist” form their is no state, no government. Just communal living among a society of people that distribute resources according to needs. Of course that is impossible because it is not consistent with human nature or motives so it leads to stagnation of productivity. It also lacks the price discovery of a market economy so it is extremely inefficient at allocating resources since the “value” of the resource is not influenced by supply and demand which are valuable drivers in maintaining a appropriate level of production and efficient distribution. So most communist states adopt an authoritarian model that uses state power to centrally control the economy and dictate production according to state calculations of future need. This authoritarian solution to the lack of price signals for the production and distribution of resources is why communism is so strongly associated with dictatorships despite the fact that communist in it purist form has no government… Read more »
You have a career waiting for you as a Government bureaucrat, you can spout off senseless hot air faster than a career politician! 😀
There is a reason you have managed to live as long as you have and remained as ignorant as you are. And you display the reason with every post.
I didn’t get where I am now by my dashing good looks alone! I’ve earned what I have, creampuff!
We should plant a destroyer right off of Fiery Cross Reef about three miles from the new runway.
On the ship we should hang a BIG banner with Chinese characters.
“FUCK YOU VERY MUCH!”
Wouldn’t it be more effective to run Stealth fight jets right over that spot at low altitudes, running at – oh, say, MACH 2? The sonic boom might rattle their teacups. Geez, I’d volunteer for that gig.
The Chineeze can KMRIA!
As predicted by each of the War Colleges: limited Naval engagement in South China Sea and or Taiwan Straits between US and China will results in lights being turned off, dams busted and the Chineeze being set back to pre Ron Brown days.
Google it!
Here’s a little something from the UK’s Guardian, with a video. Clearly, this construction is for military purposes, not benign as if it were tourist attractions. The reporter in the video does make the point that the air routes of civilian passenger planes ALSO go through that air space. If you recall, the Malaysia plane shot down over Ukraine was a civilian passenger plane, not a war plane of any kind.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/27/tensions-and-territorial-claims-in-the-south-china-sea-the-guardian-briefing
Te Chinee? FOOK TEM!! Put a weak administration in charge, and look what happens.
That’s fine, API, but it ignores the fact that they’ve had this plan in place and underway since they got Hong Kong back into their possession.
Have you ever considered what you are missing when you reach your conclusions? After all, the world system is extremely complex and nuanced, but your world view is awfully simplistic.
And while I don’t know you personally, after reading your drivel on this post I have come to the simplistic conclusion you are an asshole L. Taylor. Rope, urinate, ready, go!
I’d rather he urinate on an electric fence!!!
Oh, My Dog! Commissar, the blunt battering ram, is talking about complexity and nuancing!
Lars, with your weak people skills and your incredibly inflated ego, you probably can get a job in some complex area asking people if they want cinnamon their whipped cream.
You need to learn when to shut the frack up.
I have an ego? You have the arrogance to dismiss information when it is right in fucking front of you because you can’t be bothered to think passed absurd outdated labels like “Communist”.
That kind of proud ignorance is a drain on our nation.
The CIA fact book you quoted describes the economy. And that description explicitly says they are have abandoned collective ownership and a centrally planned economy to a market based system. However, even that EXCEEDINGLY simplistic and superficial description is too much for you to bother to even TRY to comprehend.
Then you take your obstinate ignorance and proudly claim someone WHO KNOWS WHAT THE FUCK HE IS TALKING ABOUT is wrong.
That is about as arrogant as it gets.
REALLY Pinky, you need to go talk your harebrained crap with your fellow hipsters, you’ll always get your ass handed to you over here!
Warning some strong language, classic, but stong.
Here we go: from the CIA’s FACTBOOK, in the section about the People’s Republic of China:
World Factbook Title
PAGE LAST UPDATED ON OCTOBER 20, 2015
CHINA
Country name:
conventional long form: People’s Republic of China
conventional short form: China
local long form: Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo
local short form: Zhongguo
abbreviation: PRC
Government type: Communist state
Capital: name: Beijing
I guess that settles that.
Commissar is wrong. His degree – wait, does he actually have one yet? — plus $1.50 + tip for the waitress will get him a lukewarm cup of coffee at a roadside diner.
Apparently, Lars cannot separate his head from his ego. He only shows up here to pick fights, and I’ve lost count of the number of times he has said he was going away and not coming back, but he always, always, always comes right back like a crack addict.
And as before, instead of waiting for the insults, he starts picking the fight himself.
Lars, as I’ve said before, if you actually do go away, don’t announce it. Just go. I doubt that anyone will notice, but if you REALLY say you’re NOT coming back, then keep your word. Don’t come back, because when you DO come back after saying you won’t, it proves that you are nothing more than a liar.
I see “Pinky” Lars as an example of someone who makes everyone breathe a sigh of relief when he leaves! All that education he claims to have without a drop of competence, common sense, or real life experience, he also reminds me of some of the LT’s we got rid of in our unit in A-stan, rest assured NONE of them were “fragged” like in Vietnam, they were Relieved for Cause before their stupidity got someone killed, wounded, or injured, and some of them were more competent than Pinky the blowhard!
I have a shit ton of real life experience. More than you fuckstick.
NO YOU DON’T, Pinky! I’ve been in places and worked jobs that creampuffs like you wouldn’t last five minutes in, you think you’re something, but in reality you’re just another overeducated thin-skinned cupcake!! 😀
You are full of shit, Proud.
LOL!! 😀
You never responded to this post. Probably because it calls you out for not knowing what the hell you are talking about concerning the role of MI. L. Taylor says: October 29, 2015 at 11:34 am I am seriously starting to wonder how much time you served. I could not imagine a command putting much trust in your potential to lead given how little awareness you demonstrate. S2s are staff officers and only one of hundreds of roles MI soldiers and officers have in the battlespace, and S2 “reports” are compilations of other reporting, collection, and analysis – they are not the source so their information is going to generally be a few hours old. Unless it is critical, but then they would not be reporting it to you it would go directly to the commander or the 3 to release. There are a great many MI soldiers that are not Fobbits. Look up “Low Level Voice Intercept”, and “Special Operations Team Alpha”. I served in both. That is just one of many roles of MI soldiers in the battlespace and there are a crap ton of roles that have far less internet information. I was not LLVI/SOT-A in Iraq, not even SIGINT, officers do not serve on those teams. However, I was on the ground in Iraq operating out of the one of the most austere combat outposts in theater. No, you almost certainly would never have read my reports. But there is a chance a door you might have kicked came from one of them. In Afghanistan I was at the division staff level working in the embassy platform. So I was as fobbit as it gets. Neither role I played in Iraq or Afghanistan should or could be used to diminish my credibility. The fact that you keep trying to twist my jobs into something that is not respectable makes you an ass. I expect you to continue to be an jackass to me. We have little to no respect for one another at this point However, you seriously need to check your asshat attitude toward other… Read more »
I’ve done my time as a Grunt ‘lil Pinky, and there was more than once we reported what we saw on a mission and were told by candycake desk jockeys like you that we didn’t see it. Like I said earlier, there were times when we got faster and better intel from news sites on the internet than we did from our S2. Many times when we heard that an MI Troop is coming to visit, we assumed it would be a pale Profile-riding REMF type, and most of the time it was. You say you have all that education, but with the way you run your mouth, I automatically deduct that you have near zero common sense or logic. I can see from your reply rants that you’re a very thin-skinned cupcake, and you prove me right!! 😀
You anecdotal and superficial experience with a few MI soldiers is shit.
There is no way someone with your fucking idiotic lack of understanding of the defense intelligence community has much “real world” experience.
You are a fucking joke and the more you talk the more I think you served one tour and was booted.
NOPE, you lose yet again, candycakes! :D. I did another tour in the ME working directly for my CSM who was my 1SG in A-stan. OH, and THE BIGGEST bullshitting blowhard I’ve ever seen in a Military Uniform was one of our unit’s S2 chair jockeys. Try again, pookums!! 😀
I was an idiot for spending so much time debating with you. Your view and understanding of the world is stuck in an unusually ignorant E4’s framework and awareness.
You have failed to grow, become more educated, or more aware since then.
And your dismissal of anyone else’s experience that was not being an infantry enlisted soldier is absurd.
The anecdotes that you use to dismiss the service of the entire intelligence branch are ludicrous and reveal how clueless you are of other soldiers operating in the battle space.
You are a kid, regardless of how many years since your tour you essentially have not grown as a soldier and still evaluate the world like kid.
I suspect you left because nobody was particularly eager to recommend you for promotions or schools. You were already serving at the maximum level of your competence.
Ordinarily I would regard your lack of development and awareness as a failure of leadership. However, based on your comments I suspect your lack of professional development and awareness is entirely your fault. Your entire identify and sense of self is wrapped up in being a very junior infantry soldier. So that is what you remain, to this day, despite having left the service. You have not grown one bit.
Ruminating about your own failings again, are you, Lars?
Everything you’ve said applies to you, particularly your dismissive stance toward anyone who does not kiss the ground at your feet.
Your consistence in hijacking ANY thread to focus its content on YOU says it all.
More bullshit. You still come a crossed as a unusually clueless E-4 and your primary focus of you awareness was returning to your Call of Duty X-box matches between squadies in your hooch after evening chow.
LOL, Swee’ Pea! I had about 200 successful missions under my belt by the time I was done in A-stan as well as an additional AAM because my CoC liked the way I kept the equipment maintained, you really DO sound like a Supply Clerk we had that talked trash when we were in Garrison that screeched he’d go straight to IG if he was ever told to go outside the wire on a mission with us, keep the laughs a’ coming, cupcake!! 😀
Ok, kid.
That label is ridiculous and they explain the nature of the economy ON THE SAME PAGE. But apparently you can’t be bothered to consider anything other than absurd outdated labels.
Scroll down to the part where they actually talk about the economy;
“Economy – overview:
Since the late 1970s China has moved from a closed, centrally planned system to a more market-oriented one that plays a major
global role – in 2010 China became the world’s largest exporter. Reforms began with the phasing out of collectivized agriculture, and expanded to include the gradual liberalization of prices, fiscal decentralization, increased autonomy for state enterprises, growth of
the private sector, development of stock markets and a modern banking system, and opening to foreign trade and investment. China has implemented reforms in a gradualist fashion. In recent years, China has renewed its support for state-owned enterprises in
sectors considered important to “economic security,” explicitly looking to foster globally competitive industries. ”
Pretty consistent with how I described the state’s role in the economy.
Does it hurt? You know, when you constantly pat your self on the back, because you agree with you? Sooner or later, you’re bound to completely tear a rotater cuff.
The world wants to know, why didn’t you keep your word when you promised to leave and not come back.
And that description is not communism, not even fucking close. The fact that the CIA labels China as “communist” has nothing to do with the structure of their economy or government and everything to do with the way the CIA mission and funding benefits from perpetuating a communist threat narrative.
Actual EXPERTS on China, including CIA analysts know China is not communist. In fact the fact that China is no longer communist makes it a BIGGER threat to the US and most of our threat analysis is based on the how much their market reforms have transformed China into an emerging global power. However, politicians like labels like “communist” so the CIA provides them what they like.
The actual description of the economy is what MATTERS and that is not a communist economy. They EXPLICITLY say it shifted from a centrally planned (communist) economy to a market oriented on (price discovery based) in the first sentence.
GO JIFFY-POO, keep the laughs a-coming! 😀
Commie. Commie, Commie. Say it three times, click your heels and maybe you will get your wish to meet Comrade Xi, the filthy red CHICOM commie bastard or spend some time in the worker’s paradise with Comrade Kim the filthy NorK Stalinist douchebag commie. I have to hand it to you though, you did an excellent job demonstrating in this thread that you are a blow hard, know it all fucknuckle.
L. Taylor, fellow traveler, fucknuckle extraordinaire.
It is infuriating that you would quote the CIA fact book and leave out the actual description of the economy that is on the same page.
Integrity much?
I guess facts don’t matter. Only trolling my posts do.
WOW Pinky, you ARE a thin-skinned little creampuff, but what else is new? Go bawl about it over an overpriced cup of some coffee with a foot-long name to your fellow moonbats, cupcake! 😀
Well, by golly, for someone who claims he was in MilIntel, refusing to accept the CIA’s assessment of the PRC’s government structure sounds like an overdose of bloated ego with a HUGE denial of reality.
In other words, everything that everyone in the REAL world of intelligence says and verifies is wrong, because… LARSSSSS!
Okay.
OH. MY. GOD. I think lars has pulled a bernath.
Geez, I was thinking about supper when I composed that bit. I left out the part about my not including China’s economic structure intentionally, because the economic structure is NOT the government of that country. It is OWNED by the government of that country, which may or may not decide to abandon THAT economic structure if its other goals are met on a timely basis.
The ECONOMY of any state (meaning ‘government’, since Lars is easily confused) is NOT the government.
Perhaps Lars should consider giving up the idea of being a consultant with occasional appearances in the electronic media, and instead, try to find a REAL job in the REAL world.
BUUUUUTTTTTHHHHHUUUUURRRRRTTTTTT!
Infuriating? Oh, hardly. You’re only INFURIATED that you keep smacking your head on the table to get attention, and it doesn’t work.
“Mao, Mao, he’s our man. If he can’t do it, nobody can!” Yeah, I know. Mao went the way of Mike and Rosie Ming. Hey, Chiner is allowing all of its citizens to have two babies now. Saw it in the news just today. It seems that restricting family size to one resulted in an increase in the older population. That’s not the threat that it is here. Chiner can just make its oldsters disappear whenever it likes. We have to wait until obamacare is fully and completely implemented.
Yes, they are now down to 400 million aged adults. The newscaster, however, did make a mistake in that particular piece when she said that China has a population of 8 billion, when in reality it is just under 1.402 billion. There aren’t even 8 billion people on the planet just yet.
Situations for qualification are: Ha You should be a US citizen Ha You should not possibly be
having a low credit score score Wi You should be 18 years or
higher in age ‘ You have to have a valid account ‘ You’ll
have a fixed income source sufficient plenty of to guarantee payment
For instance I had been benefiting from calls for someone that
shared this mom’s first and last name and I had to tell that
they to stop calling because my mother died virtually two
years before and I am likely to tell them should they call just as before I will be meeting with
an attorney to end the pestering phone calls to someone who is deceased and doesn’t match up the birthdate or
maybe middle very first of the person under consideration. Many individuals
trying to find information about negotiate federal figuratively speaking also looked online
pertaining to student loan using bad credit, western central techie college,
and perhaps rhode island student loan to pay off unsecured debt,college educational funding
Once they establish your eligibility, they may ask the actual amount of
the loan you want to take away (which is generally between $600 along with $2,500, yet no more than the actual Kelly
Bluebook price of your vehicle), have you hint a few newspapers
saying that people agree to pay the loan way back in full
( blank ) interest bundled – from the timeframe that they designate, please take a picture of this car, hand over the amount to you
then assist you to drive out in your car title-less?