China tells U.S. to stop 'close-in' surveillance


The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2014 AFP

©2023 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

I wonder if this spokesman Yang Yujun was able to make this statement with a stern face. LoL

4 ( +6 / -2 )

China's standard song and dance. When we do it it's right. When you do it it's wrong.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

The Chinese air force were doing their jobs and defending their skies, they were doing their duties and protecting their nation. Does US fighters never engage foreign military aircrafts came close at their CVGN group? If the US navy aware their most latest spy plane to be lost of data invsome kind of way, they shouldnt risk their own! There is no such a thing about keeping a distance.... it is just their pretext to express their frustrations of China jeopardize their spying activities in the air but this is what exactly this game is all about

-6 ( +2 / -8 )


NO the PLAAF pilots were pulling off reckless stunts, doing barrel rolls around a US survillance plane in middle of international air space. Doing their job is when they give out warning while keeping safe distance to ensure safety of crew on both vehicles.

If a US pilot did what the PLAAF did the person would be hit by the book faster then the jet the person pilots.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Would like to see China try and surveil the United States by aircraft. I, for one, view surveilance as the most honest aspect of US-China relations: the economic side is pure hypocrisy. Enemies are enemies, no way to change that without a change in Peking.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

I wonder if even China takes these statements seriously anymore...

3 ( +3 / -0 )

We have every right to monitor the Chinese from international waters. Rather than complaining, the Chinese should just focus on R&D on anti-radar or develop some type of aircraft than can make coastal surveillance in international waters near our soil. If they lacked the capability or technology, tough.

With that said, USAF, especially those stationed in Eielson AB in Alaska, like the 354th and others, OFTEN did barrel rolls against the Russians when they get too close. Flashing of the "Belly" was basically invented by us. High speed crossovers were also some of the intimidation techniques we used.

I know you guys like to bash China but get your facts straight first. They ain't the only ones with the balls or skills to pull off these stunts against an enemy aircraft. WE used to do that to the Soviets all the time. In fact, a few "famous" movies hired veteran consultants to tell tales on what we used to do to the Soviets. Although movies dramatized them further but the truth is not that far-fetched. I have personal knowledge that our USAF pilots used to pull off crazier stunts like this all the time back in the days.

And no, the person will not be "hit by the book" because back in the days, air control wouldn't know if you were doing these acts, if your wingman is also doing it. Normally, our fighters used to travel in pairs before the 80s in northern pacific. You can google this. Information is abundant. Please try that before opining.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Depends on whether the surveillance was truly in internationally agreed airspace or not. If it was in internationally agreed airspace but in China's wanna-be over extended ADIZ then China's blowing bunk again and please do something stupid China. Your regime change has been long overdue.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )


Again talking what you don't have a clue about, are you?

This isn't the movies.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Under Obama, Putin has shown China of how to tell U.S. of what to do. Watch out China, Obama will be gone soon, and U.S would remember your dirty mouth. By the way, does international area mean anything to this bully law breaker? Beware of what you ask for. China has nothing to offer to the world, and we are not worshiping neither chairman Mao nor Pol Pot. What a shame.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

The Su27 is capable to launch long range air to air missiles to intercept foreign hostile plane. Unlike that J8 B of 2001 lacking BVR interception capability. If this is a real case of attack, the P8 spy plane has gone long away from hainan island. Thats why until now China has done a very good conduct to escort foreign military plane. Maybe they were over friendly already,so the US counterpart shouldn't complain anything whatsoever ! That spy plane is hunting Chinese submarines at sea, the US navy has harassed a Chinese nuclear sub in 1994. The Chinese airfirce has an obligation to protect their deep sea comarades, that P8 plane is hostile and of course need a special arrangement! The Su27 fighter is stalking is to make sure if any sonar buoys or torpedoes were dropped into sea from that P8

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

China coming to coast of California. Running out of gas halfway back.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

All this stupidity really makes me PO. China could be such an awesome country to have in the UN and security council if it at least didn't have the CCP at the reigns. Why does everything in the world have to be so effed up with stupid "leadership"? Not that I don't include my own country in that list at times.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

@ elephant200

" The Chinese airfirce"

What is an airfirce? That P8 was in international airspace. Do you think the Chinese have sole right to INTERNATIONAL airspace? If so, there is the reason other nations thumb their noses at your petulant, immature leaders in China.

"the US navy has harassed a Chinese nuclear sub in 1994."

One, that was 20 years ago, get over it. Two, that harassed sub was in American waters in Guam and escorted out of said waters by a bigger and more advanced US sub that by all rights could have blasted said Chinese minisub out of the water.

Thanks for playing you get a diaper change and a pacifier as a consolation prize.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )


Learn how to read please. I wasn't referring to "movies"per se. But how movies used veteran and retired pilots on reflecting their "actual" experiences during the cold war. Again, if you don't know, it is ok for you to restrain yourself from further embarrassment.

There are tons of documentary on this topic.

Unfortunately, you are the one who doesn't have a clue on anything you talk about. I'm really tired of trying to correct your statements. It is one thing to post an opinion but totally another to try to past false statements or unfounded statements as facts and muddle the water.

Name me one single source that support your ridiculous opinion about USAF operations and rule of engagement during mid-flight interception. If you can't, you shouldn't state your opinion as a matter of fact.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )


Which documentary, staring Tom Cruise?

The US military does not give Carte blanche to pilots to hotrod a 70 million dollar plane and more over create a possible situation for miss calculation. The rule of engagement in peace time does not give any tolerance and if you think otherwise then I suggest you test your own logic by pointing a gun at a police officer in the US. Believe me you would not want to know the consequences.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites