It's America's fault that neighboring Asian states are challenging China's Nine-dotted line, which has no basis in international law? America's fault they are taking advantage of the claims the Law of the Sea allows them? Go ahead and take China's side on the issue but dont pretnet it doesnt exist.

What do you mean no basis? The line was agreed upon by China and its neighbors. They made this line public in 1947 and nobody said anything about it. In 1958 the PRC explicitly outlined their territorial waters, and the Vietnamese government agreed.

There is a reason why this has never been a source of militarized tension until now, and that variable is US interest in containing China and depriving it of energy supplies, while finding an excuse for increased military activity.

Go ahead and take America's side, but you can't explain the lack of complaint about China's 9 point line for half a century any other way.

The PRC is communist, and we all know that communism is the greatest evil in the world. Stopping its expansion is in everyone's best interest, and America is going to be the one to do it.

@ Putin33

"the US manufactured the South China Sea dispute to drive up bad feelings between China and its southeast Asian neighbors."

Bullshit. The South China Sea is international waters. Any dispute about whether or not a certain area of water is international IS more than just "internationalizing what once was a marginal local issue between neighbors". It's pointing out the geopolitical implications of a country claiming that much water.

"The US sent an array of warships to the Philippines and has been doing naval exercises for several years."

So? We can do what we want in international waters.

"it is vital for Chinese national interests that the keep the imperialists out."

It is vital for the free world to stop Chinese expansion at all costs.

"America seeks to control the entire Pacific Ocean."

We don't want to control anything. We want to keep the entire Pacific open for international trade while keeping communist influence out.

And how can you criticize America for being imperialist when China is out to get the whole South China Sea, and even more if it wasn't for America.

Gunfighter06: I think we're going to have to ban you for multiaccounting, Tettleton's Chew.

"Stopping its expansion is in everyone's best interest"

LOL, by 'everyone' you mean your corporate paymasters. The plundering rich and their goons. America roams the planet bombing and killing anything they feel like (which you brag about), and you sit here and hope for war because you think killing and burning everything is a happy ending.

"The South China Sea is international waters"

Says who? You? Nobody said this in 1947. Nobody said this in 1958. Your and your goon friends lost your chance to have any legal quarrel with China. The only thing real in your argument is the hate in your heart.

"So? We can do what we want in international waters."

So America militarizes a sea half a world away and yet whines about Chinese 'expansionism'. "Expansionism" in American jargon is any country that doesn't kowtow to American planetary hegemony.

"It is vital for the free world to stop Chinese expansion at all costs."

'Free world'. American murderers have a funny way of helping the 'free world'. Last I checked, Chinese troops weren't busy murdering Iraqis for two decades, or Afghanis. Or orchestrating coups in Honduras. Or installing Al Qaeda in Libya.

"We want to keep the entire Pacific open for international trade while keeping communist influence out."

Right. Too bad for you American policy planners don't exact hide their motives. Have fun keeping the Pacific 'open for trade' while blockading China when China is one of the world's largest trading powers.

"And how can you criticize America for being imperialist when China is out to get the whole South China Sea, and even more if it wasn't for America."

Last I checked America considered the entire western hemisphere off limits to anybody but Americans. America is militarizing a sea in Southeast Asia, which isn't anywhere close to the US's pacific coast, and yet China is 'expansionist', when 80% of its energy resources flows through the SCS. Get real. The Americans already effectively control the Indian Ocean & the Straits of Malacca. Getting their stooges to control the South China Sea is the next step.

Putin33: Please apologize for using 'American' to refer only to people of the United States. I would have expected better of you.

Well the country is called the United States of America, as opposed to Canada, Mexico or Brazil. It makes sense to call them Americans. Everyone knows who he means. It's the done thing. What is he supposed to call them "citizens of the United States of America"?

I went to Canadia once...

@Putin
I agree completely with your appraisal of 'American planetary hegemony' but I really don't think the attitude of China's leadership is any better. I've had many candid conversations with influential Chinese politicians and businessmen and they openly admit their goal is to replace the US as the world's superpower. Admittedly this is in large part a reaction to western aggression but still, China has time and again demonstrated that it's not above using the same violent and oppressive techniques to achieve its ends.

spyman: "U. S." is an adecuate adjective.

What do you call citizens of the US then?

spyman: "U. S. citizens"

You rarely need to use such phrasing, though. The two times Putin33 used "Americans" in his last long post can be replaced with "U. S." as a noun.

And besides, "U. S." is shorter and has less syllables than both "America" and "American"

.

U.S. as a noun is completely improper. It can only be used as an adjective. I learned that the hard way.

'influential Chinese politicians and businessmen and they openly admit their goal is to replace the US as the world's superpower.'

No surprise there really, pretty much every country exists to extend it's own power and once you reach the top it is all about relative power.

Putin has a refreshing view on every issue, while i might disagree with it. Gunfigther has some weird warped view of America, Freedom, Peace, Prosperity! Seemingly blind to the good and bad in every system. Naive perhaps.

Yes America and China are in competition for world dominance. Yes neither one is better than the other. No neither of them started it... They are also cooperating with each other to gain from trade, inventions, science and technology... While sharing some culture.

Putin33: I'm leaving the U. S. this coming Thursday – true story.

@ JECE

"I think we're going to have to ban you for multiaccounting, Tettleton's Chew."

If I were TC, then I would post a thread worshiping the free market every 6 to 12 hours.

@ Putin33

"you sit here and hope for war because you think killing and burning everything is a happy ending."

Killing and burning communism is a happy ending.

"Says who? You? Nobody said this in 1947. Nobody said this in 1958. Your and your goon friends lost your chance to have any legal quarrel with China."

To be fair, the SCS is much more important than it was in 1947 or 1958.

"So America militarizes a sea half a world away and yet whines about Chinese 'expansionism'."

We militarize the SCS so that no one has to worry about Chinese expansion. Don't pretend that China wouldn't be all over the Pacific if it wasn't for the United States.

"'Free world'. American murderers have a funny way of helping the 'free world'. Last I checked, Chinese troops weren't busy murdering Iraqis for two decades, or Afghanis. Or orchestrating coups in Honduras. Or installing Al Qaeda in Libya."

Coming from a guy who doesn't believe in a free world. Chinese troops are too busy murdering their own people. At least we kill the bad guys most of the time.

"Right. Too bad for you American policy planners don't exact hide their motives. Have fun keeping the Pacific 'open for trade' while blockading China when China is one of the world's largest trading powers."

We will have fun keeping the world's biggest communist country out of the Pacific.

"Last I checked America considered the entire western hemisphere off limits to anybody but Americans. America is militarizing a sea in Southeast Asia, which isn't anywhere close to the US's pacific coast, and yet China is 'expansionist', when 80% of its energy resources flows through the SCS."

I have no problem with cutting off China's energy supply. If China wants to challenge that, they are welcome to do so.

@ orathaic

Gunfigther has some weird warped view of America, Freedom, Peace, Prosperity! Seemingly blind to the good and bad in every system. Naive perhaps."

I know America is a corrupt, formerly imperialist world policeman with a lot of blood on her hands. But America is a hell of a lot better than the alternative.

"neither one is better than the other."

I disagree with that. China = communist America = Constitutional republic

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13748349

That's a good summary of the dispute, and being from the BBC I don't think we can call it biased. As the map shows, China claims the entire South China Sea as its territorial waters based on its claims to the islands. That would mean that China could treat the entire South China Sea the same as it can treat waters a stone's throw off its coasts, and can control what ships are allowed to pass through the South China Sea. That's the same as the United States claiming to be able to control the Caribbean like it does Chesapeake Bay by virtue of owning Navassa Island. It's a ludicrous claim that doesn't pass the laugh test.

China may have a legitimate claim to the islands, but if its claim to them is legitimate then it would only be able to get a 12 mile zone around each, not the entire sea. The uninhabitable islands wouldn't even get an EEZ. China's claim goes against the Law of the Sea, which itself is largely a codification of established customary international law. Maybe China deserves all the islands. Let the ICJ rule on that. But what it doesn't deserve is to control an entire sea as literally its own private domain. Freedom of navigation is incredibly important for the world economy and the international system generally, we can't stand by while China tries to annex one of the most important sealanes on Earth.

Invictus: Do you really think that the P. R. C. would try to impede freedom of navigation? Has it given any indication at all that it would stop ships' access to the South China Sea?

The very nature of territorial waters is that the state has control over the waters in pretty much the same way that they have control over their land and internal waters like lakes and rivers, with exceptions for things like innocent passage. The South China Sea outside of 12 miles off each state's coast (or, in the Philipines' case, set coordinates), is international waters where ships from any state on Earth can do pretty much as they damn well please. China's claim would impugn on the rights of every other country from Albania to Uruguay. As for indications that stopping ships would actually happen, there has been a steady stream of new stories about Chinese ships confronting the ships of other states in both the South China Sea and in other disputed waters like the ones around those islands claimed by the PRC, ROC, and Japan. the name escapes me. I'm about to see the Avengers so I can't get the links for you all, but a quick Google search will show that China is no believer in freedom of navigation and letting it turn the South China Sea into its lake would have huge strategic and economic implications.

Another thing about the Nine-dotted Line shown in my link above and the source of the real dispute here. If it's based off the Chinese claim to the Spratley Islands and others, why does it extend to within 200 miles of Indonesia and basically hug the coast of East Malaysia? And Putin33 says it's America being imperialistic here...

"Yes America and China are in competition for world dominance. Yes neither one is better than the other."

Given the choice I'll take America. It might not be perfect but it's values ate closer to my own. I know what side my bread is buttered on.

Hey, if China gets the ISland and all the resulting sees, then I say the US can calim the entire fucking Pacific Ocean or at least a hug chunk from the Southern moust tip of California to Hawaii up to Alaska and then down to the Northwestern tip of Washington states, granting the 12 miles off the coast for Canada's bit in there.

islands (plural and no capitalization) and sea (spelled right and singular)

Thanks, Invictus. Saved my ass again, as usual.

'I know America is a corrupt, formerly imperialist world policeman with a lot of blood on her hands. But America is a hell of a lot better than the alternative.'

Gunfigther: Do you think there was a perfect time before corruption? And that nothing was wrong with the American system before corruption to the levels we see today? The original colonies revolted against a broken system and tried to build a new one, a better one, and maybe they didn't do a terrible job; but it didn't materialise overnight... And has been trying to improve ever since...

Meanwhile China has been many things and has equally suffered revolution when their system was broken - the most recent one being the communist revolution... They have since adopted many common market practices and will continue to adapt - but are not evil or 'bad'.

Sure they're not perfect, but you don't have to live there and they are not threatening to kill your kids... There is no good versus evil conflict over this tiny archipeligo and the resources to be exploited below the sea... (unless you take the environmentalist extreme position)

Just another shift in global power as the relative lead held by america narrows while the rest of the world develops (more chinese middle class means and entire America of people increasing their consumption - which increases their political awareness and changes China from within) and the fact that you don't even have to live their kinda makes their internal political system none of your business...

" If it's based off the Chinese claim to the Spratley Islands and others, why does it extend to within 200 miles of Indonesia and basically hug the coast of East Malaysia?"

Uh, because there are shoals and reefs which are Chinese which are in that area. Try looking at the map. You can't simultaneously argue that China might have a legitimate claim to the islands while whining that these islands are close to Malaysia and Indonesia. Somebody explain to me how they can simultaneously control the islands as internal territory while it not being Chinese territorial waters.

All this complaining about 'freedom of the sea' when the whole point of controlling this area is to ensure that the US cannot cut off Chinese energy supplies via the Strait of Malacca, which it bullies its southeast Asian puppets into controlling. China is much more vulnerable to trade restrictions and an economic blockade than the US. It is US militarism which is threatening to undermine freedom of the seas, since this issue was a minor local dispute until America had to interject itself into it. The US isn't even a signatory to UNCLOS, yet we need to hear Invictus prattle on about how Uncle Sam is defending the sea lanes.

"Please apologize for using 'American' to refer only to people of the United States. I would have expected better of you."

US should be offensive to Mexicans in the same manner (United States of Mexico), no? Pretty selective in your outrage.

I hate to trigger Godwin's Law but America didn't live in Nazi Germany and wasn't attacked by her yet nobody cried "get us out of Europe" in the early 40s.