Japan says 4 more Chinese ships in disputed waters

YuriOtani, I don’t think China will attack without provocation. Now it’s just waiting for Japan to start the fight. And if that is the case the battle will be localized in that area. China is trying to be the leader in Asia so it has an image to uphold.

CoreyL there are no Battleships left in service. The Osprey is just another aircraft and can think of better aircraft to use. Only question now is when will China get the nerve to attack the Japanese Coast Guard ships? They are not going to leave on threats. The government of the Peoples Republic would benefit from a short victorious war with Japan. Sinking a few ships and killing a few thousand Japanese will make them popular with the mob.

OssanAmerica, do you think the intimidation would work? There is no reason to intimidate when the real point is to wait until Japan slipped up and started the next move which is the armed confrontation. China already warned Japan about what was going to happen and we all know that Japan is now even more careful not to undermine the treaties by aggressive action. I think you got it all wrong to say that ‘Only Chinas has the motive and aggression to "declare a wsar" on anybody’ From what I can see China has never interfered in other countries’ affairs unlike certain countries. China just wants to be left alone to follow its own path; interference from other countries will only create chaos, civil unrest, and structural problems just like what happened to Soviet Union. How would the US government tell the American people that the US has to defend Japan because of the treaties and causes so much trouble to the rest of the world? There are overwhelming reasons for the US not to interfere. China also warned about the third party. During the election debates China bashing was heated up so much, but in the end and after China warned about the impact on their relationships, the tone was drastically changed. Do you still think that the US would go to war for Japan? You mentioned about those disputes, were they the territorial disputes with the surrounding neighbours? Your bias against China seems to stem from the lack of understanding and fear. China’s military expansion has been for a counter measure to guard against third-party interference and not for invasion of other countries. There are enough proofs that Daiyu Island really belongs to China so Japan has no right to stop the Chinese fishermen from entering the area. I have read about the claims from both sides but tended to believe China more and so do millions of Chinese people. Do you know how much the US has gained from the sales of weapons by creating the instability in the region?

Continued provocation by the Chinese is not likely to result in settling the dispute. It will result in build up of hatred and mistrust on both sides , though. And don't kid yourself in thinking the rest of the world is not taking notice with a wary eye.

BOTH sides have shown provocation,not just the Chinese, and plus China is just sending a few naval vessels, not battleships or ospreys. Please stop the one-sidedness because both sides have shown their commitment to the senkaku/daiyu islands.

OssanAmerica Oct. 31, 2012 - 08:53AM JST Not to mention that the US is also afraid of the Chinese military power,

What the real concern for the U.S. is the issue of Taiwan. The U.S. is absolutely committed to protecting its independence and freedom and they are under an U.S. security blanket. China has never wavered in its view that the island was ‘stolen’ by the capitalists, and is determined to get it back. China was pissed off by U.S. recent $4  billion arms deal with Taiwan which includes the sale of over 100 Patriot anti-ballistic missiles, 60 Blackhawk helicopters and minesweepers.

Yes Indeed, Chinese foreign policy is bleakly consistent: it dismisses pleas from the world’s democracies that, as a new global force, it should play a part in sustaining world order. Japan’s fears of Chinese-North Korean behavior are becoming so acute that the country might even abandon decades of avoiding nuclear weapons, to create a deterrent. Japan has the capability to make nuclear weapons quickly. This might be the path that Japan might make if they feel continous escalation of threats from China.

flowersOct. 31, 2012 - 07:30AM JST OssanAmerica, why do you think China has more ships in the area recently?

Toi intimidate Japan. Anything else?

It’s just waiting for something to happen. Regardless of what the constitution says, when you are in the field >anything can happen.

The only way anything can "happen" is if China starts a military conflict.

It would be naïve to think that the US would risk declaring a war with China. There are due processes with regard to >the treaties, if the American people do not support it no US government would be fool enough to go ahead with it. It >is definitely sure here that the dispute between China and Japan is a good enough reason for the US to >declare>war with China, and there are a lot of other reasons not to.

No you got it wrong. Only Chinas has the motive and aggression to "declare a wsar" on anybody. The American public is not aware of 99/9% of the security treaties that the U.S. is bound by opn bilateral and collectvelevels with it;s allies. The US public has nothing to do with implementing treaty obligations. I know you;re trying very hard to argue that the US wioll not defend Japan from China but you are very wrong, You are calling tyhe Chinese leaders naive since ey have been complaining since Sec of Defence Panetta told them that the US would defend the Senkakus.

Not to mention that the US is also afraid of the Chinese military power,

Please... LOL You have that backwards.

it is not a matter whether it is greater or >worse, but it is a matter of the intensity of the war. Why do you think that >China has more to lose when it is a Communist country, it has the flexibility to adapt than any other countries. They >called China “an economic miracle”, it’s because of the Chinese people and not just the government that makes it >happen. Remember that it’s the people that win the war. Why do you think the US lost the Vietnam war when it has >all that great military power?

For your last comment, do you not know that Japan has territorial disputes with every one of its neighbour and there >are no exceptions?

Japan has 6 disputes, Taiwan 7, South Korea 5. China with 23 leads all of Asia with disputes. It;s ridiculoyus for any China support to even bring up the nuimber of disputes.

Japanese government tries to come up with reasons for Japan to be more aggressive and ready for war. Now >Japan is trying to prohibit Chinese and Taiwanese fishermen from fishing in the area where they have been there >for centuries. Making up reasons for more military spending so that Japan can be stronger to fight off all of its >neighbours as the US is trying to make Japan the next leader (or the aggressive puppet) in Asia.

What you are in denial of is the fact that it is China's attitude and behavior as regards the Senkakus, combined with the blatant military and territorial expansion that is behind the increased military spending, not just in Japan but in all of Asia. Chinese and Taiwanese fishermen have fished around the Senkakus for a long time and when found inside Japan's EEZ they were simply told to leave and they left. This routine carried on until 2010 when a drunk Chinedse trawler captain decided to deliberately ram two JCG vessels twice from behind. This was nothing but a law enforcement issue, he was arrested for the ramming. Yet China decided to use this incident as an excuse to make it;s move towards taking he Senkakus. China's intent to take all of he Eat and South China Seas has been declared openly and it;s exapaniionism is resisted by the US, Australia, Phillipines, Singapore, Malaysia, India, Vietnam and Japan. Stealing something while calling the victim a thief is appears to be a standard Chinese MO in foreign policy.

OssanAmerica

There will no "prolonged" conflict from either side. China is not about to throw everything down the toilet by starting an all out war with the United States.

Really you honestly believe that a US strike on China, even in retaliation to a Chinese / Japanese action would not lead to prolonged conflict? Don't know about you but most people realise any action would lead to major and prolonged conflict. You really ink the Chinese government would not try to save face by responding to US aggression? Seriously

You are also confusing the American public's weariness of "long wars" under guerilla/terrorist conflicts and a conflict against a uniformed military like the PLA. Any conflict between the US and China will besjort lived and all air/sea.

That's seriously laughable. You honestly believe that the US people are only sick of one type (insurgency) but would happily enter a full scale shooting war? You think that the Chinese would also conduct an insurgency type conflict against the US after all every nation knows that this is the way to defeat the US. Has been shown time and again. In Korea, Vietnam (both with Chinese involvement), Iraq, Afghanistan... Etc,etc..

The PLA generals most certainly feel that the U.S, is a far greater military power.They are the first to admit they are still trying to "catch up" to the United States. Otherwiose Chimna would own all of he East and South China Seas today and certaibly Taiwan decades ago.

Yes they are playing catch up in terms of vessels. Their airforce is arguably incredibly strong with some types as good as western aircraft. Their ground forces are massive and well armed. Their navy is growing rapidly while the US navy is shrinking. You need to remember the Chinese only started their buildup in the 90's. Since 2001 the Chinese have commissioned 60 new build naval vessels.

the Chinese were saved by Truman refusing to allow McArthur to do what he wanted. Nothing more.

Wow, really. Truman saved the world from a melgomaniac who wanted another major conflict because McArthur loved war (his words). The US and UN where lucky to have got out of Korea with a stalemate and not a defeat. Maybe you should read your history a bit more as there are plenty of good books out there on the subject from people who know the facts. Maybe start with "the coldest winter" or "the Korean War"....

Outta hereOct. 31, 2012 - 07:17AM JST "OssanAmerica U.S, actions based on bilateral security treaties do not require the "approval" of the people. It is already ratifued by congress and all it takes is a foreign military action against Japan to kick in. ".

The US may not require the "people" to approve. However without the support of the masses then there will be no >prolonged conflict. And given the American people are tired of war after over 11 years of constant war and opus >ands of deaths.....

There will no "prolonged" conflict from either side. China is not about to throw everything down the toilet by starting an all out war with the United States. You are also confusing the American public's weariness of "long wars" under guerilla/terrorist conflicts and a conflict against a uniformed military like the PLA. Any conflict between the US and China will besjort lived and all air/sea.

what will happen to China if it starts a war with the United States, a far greater military power?

I actually don't agree that the US is a "far greater" military power. The US military is tired, it's equipment is worn and >stretched thin by a war against a ragtag bunch of fighters. It is suffering massive budget cuts. You haven't even >been able to defeat a poor bunch of folk in Afghanistan let alone fight a major well equipped military. The PLA generals most certainly feel that the U.S, is a far greater military power.They are the first to admit they are still trying to "catch up" to the United States. Otherwiose Chimna would own all of he East and South China Seas today and certaibly Taiwan decades ago.

Look what happened last time you fought the Chinese.

The Chinese were saved by Truman refusing to allow McArthur to do what he wanted. Nothing more.

OssanAmerica, why do you think China has more ships in the area recently? It’s just waiting for something to happen. Regardless of what the constitution says, when you are in the field anything can happen. It would be naïve to think that the US would risk declaring a war with China. There are due processes with regard to the treaties, if the American people do not support it no US government would be fool enough to go ahead with it. It is definitely sure here that the dispute between China and Japan is a good enough reason for the US to declare war with China, and there are a lot of other reasons not to. Not to mention that the US is also afraid of the Chinese military power, it is not a matter whether it is greater or worse, but it is a matter of the intensity of the war. Why do you think that China has more to lose when it is a Communist country, it has the flexibility to adapt than any other countries. They called China “an economic miracle”, it’s because of the Chinese people and not just the government that makes it happen. Remember that it’s the people that win the war. Why do you think the US lost the Vietnam war when it has all that great military power? For your last comment, do you not know that Japan has territorial disputes with every one of its neighbour and there are no exceptions? Japanese government tries to come up with reasons for Japan to be more aggressive and ready for war. Now Japan is trying to prohibit Chinese and Taiwanese fishermen from fishing in the area where they have been there for centuries. Making up reasons for more military spending so that Japan can be stronger to fight off all of its neighbours as the US is trying to make Japan the next leader (or the aggressive puppet) in Asia.

0 Good Bad ShuamiOCT. 31, 2012 - 03:53AM JST Behind the scene who do you think has the most to gain, of course the US.

This is so true. If only the general population of both China and Japan, and especially its politicians (those who actually weld the power of its day-to-day policies) can see.

OssanAmerica

U.S, actions based on bilateral security treaties do not require the "approval" of the people. It is already ratifued by congress and all it takes is a foreign military action against Japan to kick in. ".

The US may not require the "people" to approve. However without the support of the masses then there will be no prolonged conflict. And given the American people are tired of war after over 11 years of constant war and opus ands of deaths.....

What will happen to China if it starts a war with the United States, a far greater military power?

I actually don't agree that the US is a "far greater" military power. The US military is tired, it's equipment is worn and stretched thin by a war against a ragtag bunch of fighters. It is suffering massive budget cuts. You haven't even been able to defeat a poor bunch of folk in Afghanistan let alone fight a major well equipped military. Look what happened last time you fought the Chinese.

flowersOct. 31, 2012 - 02:08AM JST Thinking it over carefully, China is waiting for Japan to make an aggressive move; giving it a reason to strike back >and take over the island.

If you think carefully enough to consider Article 9 of the Japanese constitution, that's a virtual impossibility as it phobits the use of military force to solve diplomatic disputes, Japan would have to viloate it;s constitution in order to take military action, which would be the level of action needed for China to "strike back". But even then...

It is a wishful thinking that the US will come to support Japan in this dispute.

No it is a statement made by the U.S. Secretary of Defense. It's a fact and China certainly accepts it as fact since they are complaining about it.

The American people will not allow it so the US will want China and Japan to talk it over.

U.S, actions based on bilateral security treaties do not require the "approval" of the people. It is already ratifued by congress and all it takes is a foreign military action against Japan to kick in. ".

Every step that China makes is calculated and carefully planned. If the conflict escalates to the use of force, what >will happen to the Japanese economy?

What will happen to China if it starts a war with the United States, a far greater military power? Damage from war is not just economic. China has more to lose than any country.

Come to think of it, it’s all because Japanese government tries to fool the Japanese people that the build-up of >armed forces is necessary in order to defend against every one of its neighbours. Behind the scene who do you >think has the most to gain, of course the US. Politics, man, politics!

"China does not constutute "every one of it's nerighbors". China is considred the foremost threat by all nations in Asia because oif IT'S BUILDUP of military power and expansionist agenda. Nobody is being fooled here, China is the the sole reason for the current military buildup through Asia.

Behind the scene who do you think has the most to gain, of course the US.

This is so true. If only the general population of both China and Japan, and especially its politicians (those who actually weld the power of its day-to-day policies) can see.

Thinking it over carefully, China is waiting for Japan to make an aggressive move; giving it a reason to strike back and take over the island. It is a wishful thinking that the US will come to support Japan in this dispute. The American people will not allow it so the US will want China and Japan to talk it over. We are talking about civilized nations here and it will not be like Iraq or Afghanistan where they can easily go in and take over. Every step that China makes is calculated and carefully planned. If the conflict escalates to the use of force, what will happen to the Japanese economy? Japan will suffer for years to come. China will also suffer but not to that extent because Chinese economy is much stronger. Especially now it has huge foreign reserves and low debt level. China will not allow a full-fletch war, but a threat of war will cause the Japanese economy to shrink. Come to think of it, it’s all because Japanese government tries to fool the Japanese people that the build-up of armed forces is necessary in order to defend against every one of its neighbours. Behind the scene who do you think has the most to gain, of course the US. Politics, man, politics!

If Japan were to send Maritime SDF ships with the very publicly stated mission of protecting Japanese territory, it would likely stop the "crisis" in its tracks.

Clearly only suspension of sovereignity and sharing resources from all involved parties can really settle this issue. History prove again and again those who advocate war are cheating people for their own purposes or they were simply without wisdom. BTW, as I know Taiwan welcome eyeryone to share resources but Taiwan never agree to give up sovereignity!

CoreyLOct. 30, 2012 - 09:51PM JST Violence shouldn't be used and even so it wouldn't solve anything. Just give China the fishing rights and Japan >keep the sovereignty of the islands. The world then goes on its merry way...

Nope. While Taiwan my sttle for fishing rights, jnd they hae already hinted at that, RED COMMUNIST CHINA are interested in expanding their territory. Not fishing rights.

crouching$amuraiHiddenNinjaOct. 30, 2012 - 09:24PM JST What I mean by drastic is to say how they warded off fishermen boats and Taiwanese merchant and navy ships a >few weeks ago, you know when they had that big water fight?

I don't consider that "drastic" since those Taiwanese boats weren't there to fish they came to protest. Also I don't recall any Taiwanese ( or anyone else's) Naval vessels being involved.

As well as in 2010 when a fisherman boat collided with a JCG ship remember that?

You obviously did not watch the countless hours of videos as I did, the drunk Chinese trawler captain deliberately . RAMMED two different JCG vessels from behind, TWICE. THat was no "collision".

Drastic as in they move in on the PLAN vessels and move them off by performing maneuvers like moving in close >on them and spaying water from a hose. That can be considered drastic to the PRC. Anything small can be taken >as drastic. And yes they havent been within the area, but they're NOW moving on territorial water marked by the JGC, >so yeah..

So far no PLAN vessels have come near the Senkakus. Forbthat matter nop JMSDF vessels have either, And we all know why. So I don;t quite understand why you keep going on about "naval " vessels. Japan's actions have been far from drastic. The 2010 Chinesev captain was arreseted not for fishing there but for ramming the JCG vessels. The Chinese CCG would have done the same. If you want to say that China will interpet anything as "drastic" yes I agree. China is lokking for any excuse to escalate the issue to further their territorial expansionist ambitions.

Violence shouldn't be used and even so it wouldn't solve anything. Just give China the fishing rights and Japan keep the sovereignty of the islands. The world then goes on its merry way...

This is not about fishing rights. It's about a nation which is after hegemony in the region.

China is definitely playing some game with these constant provocations. Maybe it have to go to a small contained war before some kind of radical change is proposed/accepted. Comparing raw numbers between Chinas and Japans naval forces the US doest have to get involved. The Japanese self defence forces can easily defend themselves, at least until it escalates in to a full scale missile war, then of course China would send a few more and bigger "sticks".

Continued provocation by the Chinese is not likely to result in settling the dispute. It will result in build up of hatred and mistrust on both sides , though. And don't kid yourself in thinking the rest of the world is not taking notice with a wary eye.

Violence shouldn't be used and even so it wouldn't solve anything. Just give China the fishing rights and Japan keep the sovereignty of the islands. The world then goes on its merry way...

A war between the U.S. and China would certainly be "Mutually Assured Destruction" without even having to fire any nukes. The last thing either country needs, let alone the world is another war, especially one of the magnitude that could take place with the U.S./Japan vs. China.

Looks like we can expect a Dec 7th Senkaku area attack. Or at least illegal fishing by turkey day.

What I mean by drastic is to say how they warded off fishermen boats and Taiwanese merchant and navy ships a few weeks ago, you know when they had that big water fight? As well as in 2010 when a fisherman boat collided with a JCG ship remember that? Drastic as in they move in on the PLAN vessels and move them off by performing maneuvers like moving in close on them and spaying water from a hose. That can be considered drastic to the PRC. Anything small can be taken as drastic. And yes they havent been within the area, but they're NOW moving on territorial water marked by the JGC, so yeah..

J better get used to it for stirring up the trouble in the first place

crouching$amuraiHiddenNinjaOct. 30, 2012 - 07:15PM JST This is becoming a game of Chicken and on whose gonna take the first strike. Hopefully the JCG will not do >anything drastic like moving in on these ships and attempting to move them away which can easily result with the >PRC naval vessels firing at them; for the sake of the two nation's relationship to possibly heal.

What PLAN vessels are going to be firing at the JCG vessels considering that China has continued to avoid sendiug any military vessels to the Senkakus for fear of engaging thge United States? As for "doing anything drastic" China is the only one doing anything offensively.

This is becoming a game of Chicken and on whose gonna take the first strike. Hopefully the JCG will not do anything drastic like moving in on these ships and attempting to move them away which can easily result with the PRC naval vessels firing at them; for the sake of the two nation's relationship to possibly heal.

If China had any sense they wouldn't even dare fire on the JCG within territorial waters of Japan. If they did they would be seen as the aggressors and Japan would have every right to declare war to protect national interests.

yeah well if Romney were to be President (Theoretically not hopefully.) and if he kept his word on China, I definitely would see some shit around that time too, and a classic hardline response with US naval and marine units to warn the PRC elements off around the area. Which would probably result with a big impact on trade and future dialogue between the US and the PRC, hopefully the Japanese will not be involved too much and let the two sides duke it out

This is becoming a game of Chicken and on whose gonna take the first strike. Hopefully the JCG will not do anything drastic like moving in on these ships and attempting to move them away which can easily result with the PRC naval vessels firing at them; for the sake of the two nation's relationship to possibly heal.

That would be a mistake for china, particularly now that the US election is about to be decided. Its one thing to push when the US has a weak President like Obama, then it is when the US has a guy who looks to be a bit more tough. Having said that though, China does like to pull these stunts, to test US Presidents, so I could definitely see something happening, sometime in January or February.

This is becoming a game of Chicken and on whose gonna take the first strike. Hopefully the JCG will not do anything drastic like moving in on these ships and attempting to move them away which can easily result with the PRC naval vessels firing at them; for the sake of the two nation's relationship to possibly heal.

Do something about it then Japan instead of just whinging.