4 ms·

It's not ironic, because the United States is not claiming the area as territorial waters belonging to the U.S. China is clearly the "aggressor" in this situat

by hnarn 6y ago

It's not ironic, because the United States is not claiming the area as territorial waters belonging to the U.S. China is clearly the "aggressor" in this situation because they are building military installations in an area that was previously not a militarized zone.

8note 6y ago
The American navy has been going around there for a long time; that's hardly non-militarized. I'm not sure there's a big difference between claiming they're territorial US waters vs claiming that the US gets to decide who's waters they are. In both cases the US has sovereignty over those waters
- AlotOfReading 6y ago
  I'm not aware of the US ever claiming it gets to decide whose waters they are. Can you provide some links for that? I've only seen the US appeal to the convention and various arbitrations on the issue.
- jasonwatkinspdx 6y ago
  No, this is all off the mark. Freedom of navigation cruises are not somehow asserting sovereignty.
dirtyid 6y ago
>clearly the "aggressor" China was the 5th out of 6th claimants to weaponize their holdings on the SCS. The last being Brunei who has nothing. China was merely responding, not initiating SCS weaponization (but mostly in response to US pivot to Asia and increased US basing in the area to contain China - same reason Russia took Crimea in response to NATO encroachment led by US). The difference being China reclaiming land with 2% of Chinese GDP will vastly outscope Vietnam, Malaysia, Philippines or Taiwan. The irony is US pushing Philippines for PCA case against China using a dispute system China opted out during her UNCLOS ratification while US not being signatory to UNCLOS. Or US not recognizing features of other claimants that was also invalidated by PCA ruling which applied uniformly to other parties in the SCS.
- throw5543235 6y ago
  Why is a comment that merely states the facts being downvoted?
  - andi999 6y ago
    well, facts can apart from beiing right or wrong, also be unpopular.

by hnarn 6y ago

8note 6y ago

The American navy has been going around there for a long time; that's hardly non-militarized. I'm not sure there's a big difference between claiming they're territorial US waters vs claiming that the US gets to decide who's waters they are. In both cases the US has sovereignty over those waters

AlotOfReading 6y ago
I'm not aware of the US ever claiming it gets to decide whose waters they are. Can you provide some links for that? I've only seen the US appeal to the convention and various arbitrations on the issue.
jasonwatkinspdx 6y ago
No, this is all off the mark. Freedom of navigation cruises are not somehow asserting sovereignty.

dirtyid 6y ago

>clearly the "aggressor" China was the 5th out of 6th claimants to weaponize their holdings on the SCS. The last being Brunei who has nothing. China was merely responding, not initiating SCS weaponization (but mostly in response to US pivot to Asia and increased US basing in the area to contain China - same reason Russia took Crimea in response to NATO encroachment led by US). The difference being China reclaiming land with 2% of Chinese GDP will vastly outscope Vietnam, Malaysia, Philippines or Taiwan. The irony is US pushing Philippines for PCA case against China using a dispute system China opted out during her UNCLOS ratification while US not being signatory to UNCLOS. Or US not recognizing features of other claimants that was also invalidated by PCA ruling which applied uniformly to other parties in the SCS.

throw5543235 6y ago
Why is a comment that merely states the facts being downvoted?
- andi999 6y ago
  well, facts can apart from beiing right or wrong, also be unpopular.