5 ms·

"[USNS] Bowditch had stopped in the water to pick up two underwater drones. At that point a Chinese naval ship that had been shadowing the Bowditch put a small

"[USNS] Bowditch had stopped in the water to pick up two underwater drones. At that point a Chinese naval ship that had been shadowing the Bowditch put a small boat into the water. That small boat came up alongside and the Chinese crew took one of the drones." It's pretty likely this is a shove-back for Trump aggravating China over Taiwan. The mechanics of international one-upmanship are fascinating, it's like watching two big guys doing everything short of actually getting into a bar fight (hopefully), mixed with a prank war.

nkrisc 10y ago
I'll take the prank war over the bar fight. Though you may eventually find the prank way escalates to being nastier than the bar fight.
homero 10y ago
They're also dumping hundreds of billions of usa bonds
- josefresco 10y ago
  [citation needed]
  - tcoppi 10y ago
    http://ticdata.treasury.gov/Publish/mfh.txt http://ticdata.treasury.gov/Publish/mfh.txt Oct 2015 - Oct 2016 they've reduced their total holdings by ~139 billion. This could have been through either outright selling, or just letting them mature and not reinvesting, or some combination. Either way that doesn't really look like dumping and is practically pocket change in the scheme of US debt.
    - forgetsusername 10y ago
      >they've reduced their total holdings by ~139 billion That hardly constitutes "dumping hundreds of billions of usa bonds". The net change in foreign ownership over the past year was only ($60BB).
- forgetsusername 10y ago
  >They're also dumping hundreds of billions of usa bonds First off, no, they aren't: http://ticdata.treasury.gov/Publish/mfh.txt http://ticdata.treasury.gov/Publish/mfh.txt Second: how, exactly, would that work? For the millionth time you cannot sell without a buyer. So if China is "dumping", someone else is buying. Or do you think they're just lighting these bonds on fire? Guess who wins in that scenario. Hint: not China. You know, there's so much controversy about "fake news" lately, but the reality is that people will seek out the stories that fit their narrative, rather than looking at the data. Nobody to blame but ourselves.
  - tossedaway334 10y ago
    If you owe the bank $1000 dollars, the bank owns you. If you owe the bank $1 billion dollars, you own the bank.
- linkregister 10y ago
  This is well-reported in The Economist, Bloomberg, WSJ. The Chinese government is shoring up its currency due to capital injections in its SOEs and banks. This isn't like the mid-1990s dump of the Rupiah; there isn't a malicious aspect to it. If it somehow were malicious, it would be pathetic because the U.S. dollar has increased in value over that time period.
SixSigma 10y ago
> It's pretty likely this is a shove-back for Trump aggravating China over Taiwan. [Citation needed] Is this Trump's fault too ? Obama administration files trade challenge against China Thursday, December 15, 2016 10:48 AM EST WASHINGTON (AP) - Amid new tensions with China, the Obama administration on Thursday launched its 15th challenge against Beijing at the Word Trade Organization, escalating a long-simmering debate over practices that U.S. officials say limit American farmers' ability to export rice, wheat and corn to the Asian powerhouse.
- ceejayoz 10y ago
  http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/16/politics/chinese-warship-underwater-drone-stolen/index.html http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/16/politics/chinese-warship-under... > Although it's unclear what the motivation was for the Chinese, the seizing of the drone comes on the heels of other provocative incidents that have happened since President-elect Donald Trump received a congratulatory call with Taiwan's President, a violation of the US's agreement with China's "One China policy". China publicly voiced their disapproval of that incident and contacted the White House at the time.
  - SixSigma 10y ago
    Oh, CNN. Not a credible source, that's just editorializing. Can you quote a member of the Chinese govt. saying so ? "Motives unclear" yeah ok, must be Trump's fault.
    - kbenson 10y ago
      Are you saying CNN isn't a credible source?
      - elefanten 10y ago
        It's been something of a trope on the (alt)right to rip on CNN. It's up there with NYT and WaPo in terms of ire drawn. Specifically, the news clip of a CNN anchor saying its illegal to read WikiLeaks is often held up as some trump card that CNN is has lost 100% credibility on everything.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
jsnathan 10y ago
Less likely about Trump, and more likely about the 'freedom of navigation' exercises the U.S. has been conducting in the same general area - something which these sailors would be acutely aware of, and which they may well feel the desire to 'shove-back' on. Not to say it can't be both.
- whybroke 10y ago
  Direct theft of hardware, however, is distinct escalation. The US's 'freedom of navigation' exercises have going on for quite some time.
- anigbrowl 10y ago
  I really doubt that such on-the-spot adventurism is tolerated in the Chinese Navy. against a commercial ship this could be plausible but against a navy vessel belonging to another country? If you were the captain of a Chinese Navy ship, would you want to be summoned to Beijing to explain why President Xi had unexpectedly received a nastygram from Washington? Perhaps you are right and I'm misinterpreting early versions of the story, but my impression is that the Chinese military values conformity and command structures rather than spontaneity and initiative. Centralization and respect for hierarchy are hallmarks of Chinese culture.
anigbrowl 10y ago
I had to giggle at the bit in the story where the US ship sent a signal to complain as the Chinese one sailed off and the Chinese acknowledged receipt but didn't reply. Naval protocol is a funny thing; the sea is bigger than any country and it's not hard to picture the personnel on both ships being polite and professional to each other even as an act of piracy took place, because it was directed from elsewhere. It's a bit like professional diplomats delivering notices of a state of war and then shaking hands as they bid each other farewell.

nkrisc 10y ago

I'll take the prank war over the bar fight. Though you may eventually find the prank way escalates to being nastier than the bar fight.

homero 10y ago

They're also dumping hundreds of billions of usa bonds

josefresco 10y ago
[citation needed]
- tcoppi 10y ago
  http://ticdata.treasury.gov/Publish/mfh.txt http://ticdata.treasury.gov/Publish/mfh.txt Oct 2015 - Oct 2016 they've reduced their total holdings by ~139 billion. This could have been through either outright selling, or just letting them mature and not reinvesting, or some combination. Either way that doesn't really look like dumping and is practically pocket change in the scheme of US debt.
  - forgetsusername 10y ago
    >they've reduced their total holdings by ~139 billion That hardly constitutes "dumping hundreds of billions of usa bonds". The net change in foreign ownership over the past year was only ($60BB).
forgetsusername 10y ago
>They're also dumping hundreds of billions of usa bonds First off, no, they aren't: http://ticdata.treasury.gov/Publish/mfh.txt http://ticdata.treasury.gov/Publish/mfh.txt Second: how, exactly, would that work? For the millionth time you cannot sell without a buyer. So if China is "dumping", someone else is buying. Or do you think they're just lighting these bonds on fire? Guess who wins in that scenario. Hint: not China. You know, there's so much controversy about "fake news" lately, but the reality is that people will seek out the stories that fit their narrative, rather than looking at the data. Nobody to blame but ourselves.
- tossedaway334 10y ago
  If you owe the bank $1000 dollars, the bank owns you. If you owe the bank $1 billion dollars, you own the bank.
linkregister 10y ago
This is well-reported in The Economist, Bloomberg, WSJ. The Chinese government is shoring up its currency due to capital injections in its SOEs and banks. This isn't like the mid-1990s dump of the Rupiah; there isn't a malicious aspect to it. If it somehow were malicious, it would be pathetic because the U.S. dollar has increased in value over that time period.

SixSigma 10y ago

> It's pretty likely this is a shove-back for Trump aggravating China over Taiwan. [Citation needed] Is this Trump's fault too ? Obama administration files trade challenge against China Thursday, December 15, 2016 10:48 AM EST WASHINGTON (AP) - Amid new tensions with China, the Obama administration on Thursday launched its 15th challenge against Beijing at the Word Trade Organization, escalating a long-simmering debate over practices that U.S. officials say limit American farmers' ability to export rice, wheat and corn to the Asian powerhouse.

ceejayoz 10y ago
http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/16/politics/chinese-warship-underwater-drone-stolen/index.html http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/16/politics/chinese-warship-under... > Although it's unclear what the motivation was for the Chinese, the seizing of the drone comes on the heels of other provocative incidents that have happened since President-elect Donald Trump received a congratulatory call with Taiwan's President, a violation of the US's agreement with China's "One China policy". China publicly voiced their disapproval of that incident and contacted the White House at the time.
- SixSigma 10y ago
  Oh, CNN. Not a credible source, that's just editorializing. Can you quote a member of the Chinese govt. saying so ? "Motives unclear" yeah ok, must be Trump's fault.
  - kbenson 10y ago
    Are you saying CNN isn't a credible source?
    - elefanten 10y ago
      It's been something of a trope on the (alt)right to rip on CNN. It's up there with NYT and WaPo in terms of ire drawn. Specifically, the news clip of a CNN anchor saying its illegal to read WikiLeaks is often held up as some trump card that CNN is has lost 100% credibility on everything.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

jsnathan 10y ago

Less likely about Trump, and more likely about the 'freedom of navigation' exercises the U.S. has been conducting in the same general area - something which these sailors would be acutely aware of, and which they may well feel the desire to 'shove-back' on. Not to say it can't be both.

whybroke 10y ago
Direct theft of hardware, however, is distinct escalation. The US's 'freedom of navigation' exercises have going on for quite some time.
anigbrowl 10y ago
I really doubt that such on-the-spot adventurism is tolerated in the Chinese Navy. against a commercial ship this could be plausible but against a navy vessel belonging to another country? If you were the captain of a Chinese Navy ship, would you want to be summoned to Beijing to explain why President Xi had unexpectedly received a nastygram from Washington? Perhaps you are right and I'm misinterpreting early versions of the story, but my impression is that the Chinese military values conformity and command structures rather than spontaneity and initiative. Centralization and respect for hierarchy are hallmarks of Chinese culture.

anigbrowl 10y ago

I had to giggle at the bit in the story where the US ship sent a signal to complain as the Chinese one sailed off and the Chinese acknowledged receipt but didn't reply. Naval protocol is a funny thing; the sea is bigger than any country and it's not hard to picture the personnel on both ships being polite and professional to each other even as an act of piracy took place, because it was directed from elsewhere. It's a bit like professional diplomats delivering notices of a state of war and then shaking hands as they bid each other farewell.