Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Sandman_SBM on April 01, 2001, 10:29:00 AM
-
U.S. surveillance plane lands in China after collision with fighter (http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/04/01/us.china.plane/index.html)
Now... if China really has hostile intent towards the U.S., they'll keep this plane and gut it.
-
what if the story read: chinese spy plane crash lands in u.s.? is it ok for them to fly around and spy on us? what was our plane doing flying over china anyway?
-
fish, read the article. The plane was over international waters. Anyone can be there.
I doubt any of the "sensitive parts" are in a condition to be much use to the Chinese. An appropriate question is what was the Chinese fighter doing that close to an aircraft over international waters? Is this a possible intentional downing?? Shadowing is normal as is intel gathering. Bumping or colliding with the aircraft is not normal.
This could turn up the heat a notch depending on how it is handled.
Mav
-
Quote:
"is it ok for them to fly around and spy on us"
They would if they could. And they also give illegal campaign contributions in exchange for nuclear secrets to a scum-bag ex-US President.....
"what was our plane doing flying over china anyway?"
Just some underpaid military slobs making sure no one lands a surprise nuke in the middle of California St. So Libs like you can go beddy-bye in peace......
Cabby
-
They would if they could.
China can't but many other countries can... and do.
Open Skies Treaty (http://www.state.gov/www/global/arms/treaties/openski1.html)
-
I did what that EP-3 was doing almost the whole time I was in the service. I did it in the same place this happened. (We just had a whole lot more and different equipment than an EP-3.)
The Russians were doing the same thing to us. The Brits were doing it with Nimrods. Everybody that could was/is doing it.
It's not illegal as long as you stay over international waters, which the US recognizes as 12 miles offshore. Some other countries use bigger or smaller boundaries but everybody generally observes their own limit plus a few miles "just in case".
It's no big deal.
I was suprised he landed on Hainan though. I bet they take that EP-3 apart the same way we took the Mig-25 apart. All part of the game. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
It's called Reconnaissance. It sometimes helps keep you from getting a very unpleasant surprise.
-
According to the BBC the plane was 10km (6 miles) offshore.
Daff
-
Originally posted by cabby:
Quote:
Just some underpaid military slobs making sure no one lands a surprise nuke in the middle of California St. So Libs like you can go beddy-bye in peace......
Cabby
oh brother...great advertising...sniff sniff <wipes tear and queues music "well i'm proud to be an american where at least i know i'm free....">
Maverick: I only scanned the article, the radio i was listening to made it seem as if they were over chinese territory - you have a point and i stand corrected
cap'n freedom...err cabby...my point is that we were playing the spying game and are entitled to the same consequences as any other country. they were big boys, doing their part and they knew what they were getting into
i hate the double standard because america needs to set the standard for playing on the level. yes our last scumball pres wasn't much of an example to anyone but this isnt about clinton. they were spying and they landed in the country they were spying on. we should be earnestly hoping for their return, but not demanding it as if we have some special rights over any other country. in fact that is extremely arrogant and may jeopardize their return.
what would you do if the chinese had to ditch here? put them up in a howard johnson, take em to the movies and fluff their pillow? leave their plane locked up in a nice cozy hangar and dare not peek til the chinese government got here? gimme a break. you'd be all over their plane, interrogating the crew and telling the chinese govt that they would get their crew back when and if you damned well pleased.
you want an america that rules the world, i think it is dangerous to go arrogantly demanding everything because we are americans - the founding fathers were solid and sincere not blustery cowboys threatening everyone. it only makes enemies and i want to see the crew home safely as well.
-
Daff,
I don't know what the USN ROE are but way back when I did that stuff, the US recognized 12 miles and we flew 20 miles just to have a bit of buffer. At 7-8 miles a minute, you want to have a few seconds or two to make a turn. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Especially since our "little buddies" had this annoying habit of shooting at you as soon as they were pretty sure some of the pieces would land on their dirt. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) (They really seemed to have it "in" for KAL, shooting down a 707 in '78 and a 747 in '83.)
I'd personally think 6 miles was a bit tight; leaves little room for even minor Nav errors, even when you're putting along as slow as a P-3 does.
If the crew was outside of their ROE ..and there WILL be proof (although it probably won't be released)... somebody is going to hang for it. (Oops, another airline pilot or two is born! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) )
However, in most of these affairs of the media, what you hear at first is never the whole story.
I think I'll wait a bit and see what turns up.
-
Mr. Fish,
You are incorrect, chum.
A "Mayday" aircraft should be able to land and leave any country that honors ICAO treaties. China supposedly does that.
It is absolutely NOT a case of "as if we have some special rights over any other country". It's an agreed to worldwide treaty on aviation that China has signed.
The fact that the EP-3 is a US Recon aircraft has NOTHING to do with "spying".
Yeah, we call them "spyplanes" but what they are is RECONNAISSANCE aircraft. As long as this guy was in International Airspace, he wasn't "spying". He was doing "reconnaissance". (Now IF he overflew..that would be different. But nobody knows that yet.)
Just about all countries that think of themselves as "powers", even China, run Recon aircraft in International Airspace.
You are jumping to a conclusion that is not as yet justified. Get this: Reconnaissance in International Airspace IS NOT NOW, NEVER HAS BEEN "spying".
Further, if it turns out that the Chinese aircraft is somehow at fault...in International airspace...reparations are due the US. The flip side of that coin is also true.
However, I will tell you from personal experience that big ole slow US recon planes do not try to maneuver onto the wing of a fighter from the country they are currently tasked against. It's impossible to do first of all (unless he slows way down and let's you do it) and secondly it's stupid and dangerous.
OTOH, fighters from the country you are collecting data from ROUTINELY try to join on the wing of the Recon aircraft and take pictures for their Foreign Intel division.
The real potential for collision (in clear weather) lies here almost every time.
Not making any accusations, just stating a fact. We'll just have to see what turns out to be true.
<EDIT>:
I don't know what the EP-3 has now for NAV, but I'd bet a dollar to a dog turd and hold the stakes in my mouth that it has GPS.
Further, I'd wager that the GPS output is real-time recorded. It almost has to be in order to make use of some of the recon data collected. Therefore, if the crew has retained the tape (and I'll wager that is one of their priority duties) we will know EXACTLY where they were.
Additionally, the NSA has other ways of knowing where their assets are at all times. I don't know if Navy EP-3's work under NSA or not right now, though.
[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 04-02-2001).]
-
Originally posted by Toad:
...I'd bet a dollar to a dog turd and hold the stakes in my mouth...
LOL! I take it you're pretty sure then? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
fair enough toad - finally a factual rebuttal not loaded with rhetoric. although recon and spying gonna make a fine line in the best of circumstances (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
i doubt many (myself included) know much about the treaties governing mayday aircraft, and unfortunately i dont think they care toad -
i am glad to learn of it personally because it would provide a legal guideline for our crew's safe return, but i think there are still many who would simply say "they are 'muhrcans, give em back or we'll nuke ya cuz we are bigger" you know the media is busy drawing 'crisis in china' overlays and composing dramatic music to accompany their anchors and trying to drum up tension-sad thing is it will work.
i want to get a jump on all the flag and dick waving and appeal for some reason. as you say, we'll see what happens - hopefully a fair shake from both sides.
-
Daff,
What the BBC reported was Chinese State Television saying it was 6 miles.
"A ''Chinese aircraft was conducting normal flight operations 10km (6 miles) south of Hainan Island when a US plane suddenly veered towards it,'' Chinese state television quoted the Foreign Ministry as saying."
CNN is reporting this:
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhu Bangzo said two Chinese military planes were following the U.S. plane to monitor it.
The Chinese planes "were flying normally" about 60 miles (100 kilometers) southeast of the Chinese island of Hainan when "the U.S. plane suddenly turned toward the Chinese plane," he said, in a statement. "The head and the left wing of the U.S. plane bumped into one of the Chinese planes, causing it to crash."
So who do you want to believe? Their State Television quoting the Foreign Ministry Spokesman or CNN quoting their Foreign Ministry Spokesman? 10 or 100 kilometers? Who dropped or added a zero? I'm sure we'll hear more on this though. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
The USN is saying 80 miles.
The EP-3 crew would have had to have been totally up and locked to get within 6 miles of Hainan. It's a huge radar target in ground mapping mode (been there, flown the track).
SOB:
That bet would be won before I even picked up the DT. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Mr. Fish:
Don't want to seem like I'm picking on or nit-picking you, but this is an area I am very familiar with (and am a bit sensitive about). (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
This statement is simply NOT correct:
"although recon and spying gonna make a fine line in the best of circumstances "
The line is clear and distinct.
If an aircraft is in International Airspace, it is NOT spying. With today's navigation and downlink capabilities, there's no problem verifying this data, either. It will depend on if the Navy publicly releases the data.
[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 04-02-2001).]
-
I am *really* surprised that we haven't heard any Chinese fighter pilot jokes! A collision with a fighter plane? Come on!
Now, how many of you blame the US crew? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I'm with Toad. Something is getting left out.
------------------
Voss
13th TAS
<edit> typo </edit>
[This message has been edited by Voss (edited 04-02-2001).]
-
sheesh toad that is nitpicking (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) i thought for sure you'd be more inclined to attack my broad treatment of crisis mongers
it sounds like air force academy: "military textbook definitions 101" wordsmithing.
that may be the technical distinction but really - if our plane is flying very near their territory in an attempt to obtain information that was not intended to be obtained then isn't it spying? i dont think prettying up the word changes things
- but perhaps you could define 'spying' so those who dont have the experience in this area can better understand (not meant to be sarcastic btw)- does it really just come down to whether or not you are over their territory? if so the disticntion seems hollow if the intent is the same -
-
anyway you look at it, could get real nasty real quick as the two superpowers try to save face
Eagler
-
Wonder why the pilot decided to go for China landing field. Must have been losing engine power or hydraulics, and plane musta been too damanged to be able to ditch.
The last time a US plane was in a similar situation, the pilot ditched his aircraft in the water.
All depends on China now; the US were playing by the rules (and, it is the job of the FASTER plane to avoid the slower one, and Chinese pilots get very little airtime, so i dont think the fault is on the US guys), and now China has an opportunity to shape the future relationship.
Will be interesting.
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
"If you return from a mission with a victory, but without your Rottenflieger, you have lost your battle."
- D. Hrabak, JG 54 "Grünherz"
-
I guess US Navy needs to re-visit what they feed their crews - if the pilots like Chineese this much, just include it in the darn menue! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
(as long as no-one got hurt...)
-
Mr. Fish,
I think everyone realizes how delicate the activity of Recon was, particularly during the hotter parts of the Cold War. It still is.
As a result, very nit-picky definitions of what was legitimate "recon" and what was "spying" were required and were generated.
If you violate the airspace (or seaspace) of a potentially hostile power you were/are "spying". In that situation, all bets are off. You can be attacked/killed/captured with generally NO International Laws or protections coming into play on your behalf. Most civilized powers would simply force you down to a landing in their territory. (There are ways.) Less civilized nations would kill you.
When you are over International Airspace, several different International treaties apply. Attacking a Recon aircraft in this situation is generally considered Causus Belli by all the nations that do this sort of thing.
To generally lump recon and spying together is totally incorrect.
From what is developing in the news (and that's a caution right there) this is my "best guess" at what happened:
The fighters were on the wing of the EP-3 as it flew its designated track; a typical occurrence; they probably were in pretty tight. Every track has turn points; usually these points are known to the intercepting nation (after all the same track is often flown on a weekly basis). The EP-3 came to a turn point, made its turn and one of the fighters apparently didn't have the formation skills required to avoid hitting him.
Let me make this clear: An aircraft operating in International Airspace, off controlled airways, is free to fly any track with any turn points that it so desires. If intercepted, it would be the legal responsibility of the fighters not to run into the slower aircraft.
When I used to do this, the interceptors would usually move out to loose route about 10 miles prior to the turn point. They knew where it was. Then they'd close back in on the straight leg. Common courtesy; keeps everyone relaxed.
If this is the case, China is at fault and they should be abiding by ICAO aircraft in distress treaties. Presently, they are not.
For you to simply dismiss this Recon mission as "essentially spying" does a distinct disservice to the crew. If they were in International airspace, we should all be clamoring for their immediate release and the return (untouched) of the aircraft.
From all I've seen so far, these guys are US military on a legitimate recon mission. They deserve our total support.
-
Santa,
The EP's generally loiter on two engines. Losing one most likely wouldn't have put them in a "maday" situation. There's got to be more serious damage than an engine.
(Gets in rocking chair, combs white beard)
Back in my day, sonny, the orders WERE to ditch it in the deepest water you could get to rather than land at any (and I quote) "Communist Dominated Country".
Dang glad I never had to ditch... lots of things usually go wrong in ditchings. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Yups, Toad.. Read the same thing in the papers today.
Daff
------------------
CO, 56th Fighter Group
www.56thfightergroup.org (http://www.56thfightergroup.org)
This is Yardstick, follow me"
-
Toad:
It must be a "spy" plane. The unbiased, knowledgeable, and "fair" US Media are reporting it as such.......
Cabby
-
There was a chinese agent onboard the spyplane who forced the crew to land to china. Why else would he have landed a perfectly good plane on chinese ground?
Now all the capitalist secrets will be revealed muuhahaha!
That's the big secret left out.. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
It's common practise to keep civilians onboard top-secret US vehicles, just look at the submarine collision that took place recently! lol.
-
My view from the Liberal Left:
I doubt a pilot of the U.S. Navy was stupid enough to violate the international boundary in the ocean, much less flying over their country.
I could fully see a Chinese F-8 bumping into our plane.
The Chinese are going to have to figure out a way to get this straightened out, while "saving face" with the rest of the world.
We certainly are not going to let 24 good servicemen be turned into prisoners by the Chinese, and we want our damn plane back too.
If Bush hadn't just gotten finished pointing his finger at the Chinese as a damn good reason why he shouldn't be following the Kyoto treaty, we might have them back already.
The Chinese need us as much as we need them as far as manufacturing and commerce are concerned. I'd like to see us try and run our country without the goods they make, and I'd like to see their country get along without the money we pay them to make them.
What we're seeing is a playground pissing contest.
Unfortunately, 24 young men hang in the balance. I think it's about time for both sides to stop blustering at each other and flexing their muscles, and get on with business as usual.
The Chinese need to start playing ball, and Bush needs to stop giving them reasons to act like idiots. The more he shoots his mouth off about how tough a stance he's going to take, the more it makes the Asian mind want to rebel, and not give him what he wants.
Let's hope both sides start acting like world powers, and not 7 year olds on a playground.
Mk
-
Check the list. men and women.
-
Originally posted by Mk10 225th:
The Chinese are going to have to figure out a way to get this straightened out, while "saving face" with the rest of the world.[/b]
No, they are going to have to figure out if they really want to be part of the normal world community and quit acting like petty warlords.
If Bush hadn't just gotten finished pointing his finger at the Chinese...
So if someone says something you don't like about you (true or not), then as a nation you are entitled to illegally detain a declared emergency aircraft and its crew in contravention of international law?
The Chinese need us as much as we need them as far as manufacturing and commerce are concerned.
http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5700.html (http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5700.html)
http://www.uschina.org/press/trade7.html (http://www.uschina.org/press/trade7.html)
Check the balance of trade and check the type of items we actually import from them.
#1 is electrical machinery and equipment. Can you make it without a cheap cell phone and CD player.
#2 on the list is....toys. An amount almost equal to the electrical stuff.
#3 is that fabulous Chinese footwear...like flip-flops and fake leather boots.
#4 is apparel. Probably that hi-fashion stuff I see on CNN all the time.
Wonder if we can get this stuff anywhere else in the world before the lack of it causes us to expire?
Are there any other countries that would like a piece of this trade action?
In Millions USD:
Exports to China: 16,253.00
Imports from China: 100,063.00
US Trade Balance with China -83,810.00
What we're seeing is a playground pissing contest.
Yes, agreed, the schoolyard bully, China is acting up again.
That EP-3 crew did nothing that justifies detaining the crew, keeping them incommunicado or that would allow the Chinese to examine or confiscate the aircraft.
I think it's about time for both sides to stop blustering at each other
Actually it's just time for China to let the crew go and turn over the aircraft. That's all there is to it. Do that, it's ancient history in 7-14 days. It's simply the right thing to do. Oh, yeah... "I'm sorry" would be nice as well but I doubt they have that much class.
The Chinese need to start playing ball, and Bush needs to stop giving them reasons to act like idiots
Apparently, they never need a reason. I really don't feel Bush is giving them one. Any President would make essentially the same remarks... and they have in the past in similar situations.
From CNN:
"President Bush described himself as "troubled" by China's response to the incident and called for "immediate access" to the crew. Twice within an hour on Monday, he called for a release of the plane "without any further tampering."
"Our priorities are the prompt and safe return of the crew, and the return of the aircraft without further damaging or tampering," Bush said outside the White House, saying the Chinese response has been "inconsistent with standard diplomatic practice" and contrary to a desire for "better relations."
Whooo-eee... now that's some incendidary sabre rattling, isn't it? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
Let's hope both sides start acting like world powers, and not 7 year olds on a playground.
I think we've been pretty restrained so far. I imagine that will continue for a bit.
[/b]
[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 04-02-2001).]
-
It's time to roll in there and take back what is ours and being held illegally from us! We should have creamed the plane with cruise missles while the chinamen were doing their little inspection.
Eagler
-
The Chinese are going to have to figure out a way to get this straightened out, while "saving face" with the rest of the world.
No, they are going to have to figure out if they really want to be part of the normal world community and quit acting like petty warlords.
If Bush hadn't just gotten finished pointing his finger at the Chinese...
So if someone says something you don't like about you (true or not), then as a nation you are entitled to illegally detain a declared emergency aircraft and its crew in contravention of international law?
Of course they shouldn't be acting like petty warlords. And of course they shouldn't feel they are entitled to illegally detain a declared emergency aircraft and its crew in contravention of international law.
But on the other hand, I'll ask you a question: Should any reasonable, intelligent person expect a country that has been being unreasonable, and acting like petty warlords for 3,000 years, suddenly do an about-face, and start playing ball?
I mean come on...the history of China makes the American Wild West look like a church social.
These people have been perpetrating cruelty and inhumanity on their OWN people, much less the other people in the world, while we were still foraging with sticks and rocks for food on the European continent. I agree with you that their behaviour is totally wrong and reprehensible...expecting them to change overnight is naive.
#1 is electrical machinery and equipment. Can you make it without a cheap cell phone and CD player.
I wish I could answer this with a hearfelt, "Hell yes! Screw the bastards!", but I can't. It's more like, "Geez, I sure wish we could!"
We have come to rely on their cheap production so much, that it's frightening. And remember, lots and lots of American companies profit by the sale and distribution of goods made in China.
These companies provide jobs for Americans, and use American labor and materials to build their stores and distribution outlets. They pay local taxes that support the areas they are in, and unfortunately are horribly intertwined with our economy, on both a national and local level.
#2 on the list is....toys. An amount almost equal to the electrical stuff.
Kind of the same as above. Mattel, Tyco, Kenner, Hasbro, etc., all provide products for a lot of stores that sell their items...Target, Wal-Mart, K-Mart, Toys 'R Us, etc. It's a very, very, complicated issue.
#4 is apparel. Probably that hi-fashion stuff I see on CNN all the time.
Not sure about this one. I'm not the most well-dressed guy you'd ever see.
What we're seeing is a playground pissing contest.
Yes, agreed, the schoolyard bully, China is acting up again.
That EP-3 crew did nothing that justifies detaining the crew, keeping them incommunicado or that would allow the Chinese to examine or confiscate the aircraft.
Of course they didn't. But again, think, you're fighting 3,000 years of insanity here. They've never needed a reason to do half the toejam they've ever done, outside of maybe building the Great Wall of China. And they couldn't even do that without incredible amounts of violence and what would be thought of as human rights violations in our day and age.
From CNN:
"President Bush described himself as "troubled" by China's response to the incident and called for "immediate access" to the crew. Twice within an hour on Monday, he called for a release of the plane "without any further tampering."
"Our priorities are the prompt and safe return of the crew, and the return of the aircraft without further damaging or tampering," Bush said outside the White House, saying the Chinese response has been "inconsistent with standard diplomatic practice" and contrary to a desire for "better relations."
Whooo-eee... now that's some incendidary sabre rattling, isn't it?
All sarcasim aside, that's the kind of response a world leader SHOULD give, and is a little toned-down to the kind of rhetoric I heard being thrown around on Sunday.
Now he's moving in the right direction. This may be the start of getting a positive result to this situation where a nation with a "petty warlord" mentality steals the flag to get some attention, because really, that's all that this is about.
"Look at us, we're important! Really, we are! I know that day-in, day-out, we look like a bunch of bumbling human-rights violators that don't even care about our OWN people, let alone anyone else, but hey, look! We're not to be trifled with!"
That's all that's going on. We need to understand this for what it is: A game being played by people who have nothing else better to do except harass Taiwan and Tibet, and, one that they can be beaten at, if we play our cards right, without getting into a shooting situation.
It's time to roll in there and take back what is ours and being held illegally from us! We should have creamed the plane with cruise missles while the chinamen were doing their little inspection.
Eagler
Eagler old boy, I'm afraid you just failed the "Could I Someday Be The Leader of a Major World Power?" test that's in the back of your Captain America comic book. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Check the list. men and women.
That probably hurts the most Dinger. I apologize if any offense was given not recognizing the contribution by women to our current military structure.
Let me say that the lives of American Service Personnel hang in the balance.
Anyhoo, in short, let's not expect these people to do a complete about-face from what they've been doing for 3,000 years.
You also can't control people like that by using the fear of retribution. At least not in a military sense.
You do it by outsmarting them, and beating them at their own game. Never underestimate the ability of a greedy American who wants something really, really bad.
You get smooth on their ass. You say things like, "Gee, y'know, I really think here that we were in proper position there. And I'm sorry one of your planes ran into ours. I can understand how that would make you feel upset.
But y'know, if your antiquated aircraft had better avionics, maybe this wouldn't have happened.
Tell you what: Let's get those men and women and their aircraft back, and maybe we can sit down and talk about avionics for your aircraft.
And since we're going to be talking about stuff like avionics, I mean, since we're going to be all together anyway, we could maybe visit topics like Taiwan and Tibet, too.
You see, it'd really make us look bad in the Eyes of the World if anything we ever helped you with got used against those two countries.
But this way, your pilots could do their job, we could do ours, and everybody would be happy.
Oh, and by the way, did we happen to mention that we will be revisiting ideas on how our universities deal with foreign students? Oh, don't worry, we all want the best for everyone, but you see, education is a VERY high priority in this administration!"
And I'm not saying that that is exactly what would work, but I just think if we use our hearts and minds in this endeavour, instead of our muscles, we could come out ahead, and gain respect.
The Chinese have a long history of respecting intelligent, resourceful salesmen. Trade always has been, and always will be a chess game to them.
So, in closing (Thank God! murmurs the crowd), I just want to say that there are no easy answers, but by using our minds, we can win a lot of battles.
Mk
-
Why even deal with people that have a history of, in your own words, "3,000 years of insanity"?
Trade? Just say "no."
Over the course of the next 10 years let's just slowly withdraw from trade with crazy, petty warlords.
I'm sure there are other areas in the world where people would love to be making cheap CD players, GI Joe figures, flip-flop sandals and thin cotton T-shirts for the US market.
It would take some time. 10 years too long? Not long enough? Where's that "Chinese view" I'm always hearing about?
Why do we pretend "insane petty warlords" are "normal" parts of world society? Why do we accept this behavior and continue a relationship with them as if nothing untoward had happened?
Lastly, where are all you folks that are so good at criticizing US actions AFTER THE FACT?
Aren't you going to tell us your foolproof method of handling this one now? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Why even deal with people that have a history of, in your own words, "3,000 years of insanity"?
Trade? Just say "no."
Over the course of the next 10 years let's just slowly withdraw from trade with crazy, petty warlords.
I'm sure there are other areas in the world where people would love to be making cheap CD players, GI Joe figures, flip-flop sandals and thin cotton T-shirts for the US market.
It would take some time. 10 years too long? Not long enough? Where's that "Chinese view" I'm always hearing about?
Not a bad idea. Unfortunately, Big Business would not want any part of the cost of relocating their businesses and offices, and would "just say no" to any ideas like that.
Lionel Trains LLC is the latest to close down its US-based manufacturing, and throw their hat into the Chinese ring.
But Toad, seriously, I wouldn't have anything bad to say about exploring options. I just think that unfortunately, it would be US businessmen that in the end quashed that effort.
Why do we pretend "insane petty warlords" are "normal" parts of world society? Why do we accept this behavior and continue a relationship with them as if nothing untoward had happened?
Well, because, unfortunately, that type of behaviour is prevelent in our world. I'm not saying it's good, it's right, or that it is something that should be applauded or condoned.
But realizing that reality is reality is the first step to winning.
Lastly, where are all you folks that are so good at criticizing US actions AFTER THE FACT?
Aren't you going to tell us your foolproof method of handling this one now?
I don't know if this was directed at me personally, but for a change, I'm going to try and come up with ideas, thoughts for moving forward, and try and leave the infighting and back-stabbing that has been going on by both sides for the last 8 years behind me.
I'd love to see us start weaning our dependence on Chinese manufacturing. But the main opposition would be the people who are backing our president the most vociferously.
I really think our feelings on how the Chinese are handling this incident are the exact same. The difference begins when we discuss how to deal with it.
I don't think wagging our finger at them in front of the cameras and threatening to turn their country into glass is necessarily the best way to handle this situation, that's all.
Well, I just noticed my portfolio dropped another 4% today. My retirement is now about the size of what is required to buy a Kia station wagon. Guess I'll go turn on the news networks and see what the hell is going on.
Mk
-
Wow. Amazing what a few minutes in front of the TV eating lunch can do for a guy.
For the first time in my life, I found myself listening to Oliver North, and thinking, "Yup, that makes sense."
That's scary.
He said that this was a time for diplomacy, to walk softly and carry a big stick.
He pointed out that the Chinese want to get into the WTO, keep their favored nation trading status, and probably wouldn't be too happy if a lot of Chinese professors got deported back to China.
One interesting twist is that apparently we are getting ready to sell some Aegis-class destroyers to Taiwan.
I'm actually starting to think that the Chinese pilot in the F-8 intentionally rammed our aircraft.
And no...I don't think we were doing anything "wrong." And further, I really don't agree with the title "Spy Plane Standoff."
I agree with the presumption that if you're in international waters, even if you've got a bunch of really neat electronic surveillance equipment on your aircraft, you're "listening", not "spying."
But, if you're China, and you're thinking about the pending sale of Aegis-class ships to Taiwan, you're probably toejamting in your pants, worrying that whatever data we've been collecting lately about their defenses and radars will be utilized in setting up the electronic warfare suites in the Aegis-class destroyers that we will sell to Taiwan.
So, I don't think it would be a Clancy-esque stretch to think that maybe that Chinese pilot actually had orders to "bump" our aircraft. Wouldn't surprise me a bit, although we'll never hear the real truth.
It seems as though we'll probably be getting our people back, and that they are healthy and being well-treated. The airplane is another question, but as 'ol Ollie seemed to think, I think the Chinese have more to lose than us in this deal if they keep acting silly.
But now hearing about the pending sale of Aegis-class ships to Taiwan, this is making a little more sense.
It would be fun to start a rumour in the intelligence community that Taiwan was now doubling their order, and the US was going to cut 25% from the price.
And while the whole incident makes a little more sense now, the behaviour of the Chinese makes me think they aren't thinking several moves ahead, but are stuck on whether to move their first pawn out two squares, or to bring one their knights out.
God bless cable news networks.
Toad would know more about whether this is feasible or not, but a future possibility for intelligence-gathering aircraft might be to have the electronics done in modules, in an airframe that could actually open bay doors, or a small rear-loading cargo bay type aircraft, and that in cases like this, personnel would be secured in a safe place in the aircraft, and the banks of gear and computers dumped into the ocean or on land, and then explosive charges that are loaded and armed prior to each flight detonated with a remote transmitter as they fell.
Then they could just keep the damn plane with our compliments. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Mk
-
Mk
There's hope for you yet (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Watchin Ollie on Fox News ? Reads Tom Clancy?
I think one of the Chinese propositions will be to give us the crew if we promise not to sell the ships to Taiwan. I like the way they blame us for the whole thing.
Where's John Clark & Rainbow Six when you need them?
Eagler
-
Mk,
I don't think so.
First of all, like everthing in the military (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif), there is a "bigger! bigger! more! more!" factor involved. Our mainline Recon platforms keep getting heavier.
Everyone likes the RC-135. It's done a great job and the latest versions are even more super-duper. But the techno guys can always think of one more Recon system to add to make it "perfect". They've pretty much outgrown the B-707-720 to the point that they are looking at the B-767-300ER as a replacement. That's a quantum leap in size.
Coupled to this is the fact the systems themselves are extremely sensitive and delicate.
I don't think rapidly removable "pods" are coming. Early on in Recon, some aircraft, notably C-130's had slide-in compartmentalized stuff but it never became the "standard".
The trend was rather to develop specific aircraft for specific tasks. I really don't see that changing in the multi-engine sized Recon platforms.
Be nice, tho. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
But on the other hand, I'll ask you a question: Should any reasonable, intelligent person expect a country that has been being unreasonable, and acting like petty warlords for 3,000 years, suddenly do an about-face, and start playing ball?
[/B]
whereas in america, england germany etc, they have been making daisy chains and singing kumbaya for the last 3000 years - nope, no fuedal warlords or imperialism there!
which discovery channel show or pbs special did you get your chinese history education from?
those bastards, they also came up with all those pesky non-violent religions, realistic dimensional rendering in sculpture about 1 thousand years before europe and periods of peace and prosperity that make america's history look like a 'church social'.
you are equating the han majority that rule today with chinese ethnicities that have all but vanished that ruled thousands of years ago - it isnt even the same people - learn your history or better yet just say you hate the chinese and speak your mind - that way its purely emotive and you dont have to distort history or make a double edged sword for yourself to make your point.
-
Gee fish, did you just want to start a fight with someone, and throw a dart at the screen to decide who it was going to be?
You must have just read that one part, because throughout my posts, the only point I've really been trying to make, is that we can't expect China to automatically do what we want them to do, even if it is correct and acceptable by international law.
And I don't think talking about the Great Wall and the hundreds of thousands who died building it, or the warlord concept, not to mention the general attitude of the people that the individual is not as important as the whole, means I am distorting history, or hate the Chinese.
To be quite honest, I take great offense to your remarks, and rather suggest that you read through what I've written again, and see if you think I'm some sort of anti-Chinese hate-monger.
There culture is quite different than my own. Nothing more, nothing less. And it has been different for thousands of years.
I guess I'd be totally out of line if I suggested that one might even think of them as isolationists in a sense, right? Yup, must mean I ain't read no histury books, and I hate the Chinese.
I'm sorry, I didn't think I did anything inflammatory towards the Chinese in my statements, and basically used the "petty warlords for 3,000 years" to make a point using someone else's words that they are in fact different than many other cultures of the world, and we can't expect them to automatically capitulate in this crisis, simply because it would be the right thing to do.
One thing I DO know, is that their culture IS different than many others in the world. I don't think they have a document on file like the Magna Carta or the Constitution, and they have been a little unfriendly at times througout history, and I guess the latest little ditty that's happening now, and that incident with the tank and the student in the Square threw me off a little bit as far as them being "reasonable" right now.
I won't even get into the Taiwan and Tibetan thing.
The REAL kicker in this whole thing is that except for a horrible blunder after the Second World War, they would be our friends right now, instead of forcing down our airplanes, and holding our service people hostage.
Hell, Mao helped WWII aviators in distress. His enemy was our enemy, the Japanese.
If it wasn't for some pig-headed people in power after the war in OUR country, they'd be our ally right now, and not someone we chest-butt on the playground.
Oh toejam, not to mention, we wouldn't have had so much trouble in Korea.
But back to what I posted about. You don't know me, you don't know my politics, you don't know how I feel, you don't know my upbringing, and you sure as hell don't know how to converse on a UBB.
And if you expect me to believe that the entire history of China has been some sort of dreamy, Utopian Shangri-La, I've got some bridges in my inventory I've been needing to sell, and I can make you a GREAT deal!
I've worked with Chinese people in the business world, and have had nothing but pleasurable occurences with them. On the other hand, other than visiting relatives every couple years, it is kind of disconcerting that they don't seem real excited about going back to live there, as opposed to staying here, and raising their families. <raises one eyebrow>
And hell no, I don't think we've all been sitting around in other parts of the world playing patty-cake for the last 3,000 years.
But, I don't think it takes a Rhodes scholar to see that China hasn't been that interested in playing ball with ANYONE in the rest of the world for the better part of this century, and didn't really seem too smitten with the Russians.
So yes, I guess I'm not too excited about how things have gone in the last hundred plus years, and yes, I know that they had periods of peace and prosperity. But often times those periods of peace and properity were enjoyed at the cost of others.
If you just caught that one part of my posts, and thought for a moment I'm some sort of dim-witted racist amazinhunk, then I understand. I'd urge you to read ALL of my posts, and see if you didn't come away thinking that maybe I was simply trying to say you can't take one culture, and force them through a cookie press so they look and think like YOU do.
On the other hand, if you're just cruising around looking for a fight, you've come to the right place.
Mk