Tuesday, September 20, 2016

Filling the vacuum in a post-American world

About those "constraints" that, according to the Most Equal Comrade, the world's powerful nations need to be willing to accept . . . Russia and China say, "We're going to take a pass on those":

Large-scale war games in the South China Sea by Chinese and Russian naval forces included practice for taking over islands in the disputed waters and appear part of efforts by both states to counter the U.S. pivot to Asia.
The exercises began Sept. 13 and concluded Monday. Dubbed Joint Sea-2016, the Chinese and Russian naval maneuvers involved the use of both warships, aircraft and marines in practice combat operations – a clear sign Beijing continues gearing up for a future military conflict with the United States over China’s expansive maritime territorial claims.

It was the largest joint exercises since the two navies began holding the war games and the first in the contested South China Sea. Chinese military officials described the war games as “a strategic measure” aimed at increasing military and especially naval cooperation.

State-run Chinese and Russian news reports provided a glimpse into some of the operations that took place in three phases, the largest of which involved naval live fire drills, and anti-submarine warfare and air defense maneuvers. Details of the island-seizure practice were omitted in state-controlled media reports from both countries.
A total of 13 warships took part, including guided-missile destroyers, frigates, landing ships, supply ships and significantly – two submarines. The two Chinese submarines were not identified by type but were used in anti-submarine exercises.

Aircraft included 11 Chinese fixed-wing warplanes and eight helicopters. A total of 160 Chinese marines also participated.
Russia dispatched three warships, two supply vessels, two helicopters and 96 marines, along with armored amphibious tanks.
The war games took place not far from the disputed Paracels claimed by China, Vietnam and others.



So this is what becomes of the international waters of the South China Sea when post-America  opts out of its leadership role.


16 comments:

  1. The more things change, the more they stay the same. What you need to realize is that this is not any real sign of American weakeness, and I suppose, unfortunately for you, nothing you can really point the finger at Obama for, but you will sure try. And you will believe what you think of course, because you've been repeating it over and over to yourself and you read it over and over in your favorite hawk literature.

    "In part, theatrics like these are classic Chinese tactics; in part, they’re classic communist tactics. These are people who believe you invent your own truth by saying the same thing over again and again with the utmost petulance. Admiral Turner Joy (17 February 1895 – 6 June 1956) , who headed the UN delegation to armistice talks in Korea reported that Chinese and North Korean emissaries got their way by being as wearisome as possible. They repeated their demands — however outlandish — until their UN interlocutors capitulated just to shut them up. Any parent with a bratty kid can relate."

    http://thediplomat.com/2014/08/exposing-chinas-provocations/

    ReplyDelete
  2. Um, that is a quote from a situation that is now the stuff of history. This post is about a situation that is going on now, and several factors are at play that weren't at play then, most notably the kick-me sign the Most Equal Comrade has hung around post-America's neck.

    But to the extent that it's relevant, Joy is admitting that the bad guys wore the UN down. A bad precedent.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It was much worse then and the ole obladi, oblada thing was going on then too. And, hmmm, who was at the helm then? A Republican's Republican. Try as they might, the Modern Romans are just same shit, different day. What about the show of force with our bombers over in Korea now? What are we supposed to do, bomb the piss out of all them gooks? Been there, done that. To what effect? There is no kick me sign. Go vote for the big talker.

    ReplyDelete
  4. http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/us-bombers-fly-over-skorea-for-second-time-since-north-nuclear-test/ar-BBwq4wE?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=SL5JDHP

    ReplyDelete
  5. We are making a show of force over South Korea now - a bit late, if you ask me - in order to send a message to the Kim regime in the North that the nations allied against it are prepared to stop its nuclear program and its provocations. As I say, though, a bit late. The North now has a nuclear arsenal and a missile program. And submarines. Still, that's the reason.

    But I'm curious as to why, in various contexts, you use these demographically derogatory terms - "them gooks" for east Asian foreign-policy matters, "wetbacks" for immigration matters, and various terms referring to black Americans for civil-unrest matters. It seems to be some sort of rhetorical device. An attempt to paint America as a fundamentally bigoted society, perhaps?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Also, see latest post for Russia's reasoning behind bombing the Syrian aid convoy.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The term gooks was commonly used during our last efforts to bomb some of them back to the Stone Age. What are you trying to do, be politically correct about hate and killing?

    ReplyDelete
  8. I don't care what their reasoning was, it was wrong. What do we do now, bomb somebody some more?

    ReplyDelete
  9. I love our America and you cannot convince me otherwise. We have 6 grandchildren.

    ReplyDelete
  10. If you love America, how about speaking up about how the Left is deliberately orchestrating its decline and diminishment, thereby endangering it and lowering its standard of living?

    ReplyDelete
  11. I'm running that comment "I don't care what their reasoning was" through my mind, trying to come up with some inference other than that you're okay with a nuclear-armed North Korea that also has long-range missiles. Is there one?

    ReplyDelete
  12. I don't believe the left is orchestrating decline.

    ReplyDelete
  13. No to being OK with NORKORs nukes too.

    ReplyDelete
  14. There is no vacuum to be filled either.

    ReplyDelete
  15. You just detest anyone who is not your one. If they are freely elected you have to go with them subject to the existing law as it is ultimately interpreted by the US Supreme Court before which both sides will be argued by generally capable barristers.

    ReplyDelete
  16. You really kill me, the way you throw out these one-line drive-by idiocies like "I don't believe the left is orchestrating decline" or "there is no vacuum" when this blog provides overwhelming evidence on a daily basis that these are glaringly true circumstances.

    ReplyDelete