U.S. B-52s defy China's claimed 'defense zone'

[woolybug25]

This gives me the willies.

(CNN) -- Two U.S. military aircraft flew into China's newly claimed and challenged air defense zone over the East China Sea, a U.S. official said, an action that could inflame tensions between the world powers.
The U.S. Air Force B-52 planes -- which were not armed because they were on a training mission -- set off Monday from Guam and returned there without incident. The mission lasted for several hours, and the aircraft were in China's newly declared air zone for about an hour, according to the U.S. official.
The planes' pilots did not identify themselves upon entering the disputed airspace, as China would have wanted, according to the official.
The official declined to be named because of the sensitivity of the situation.
The flights came two days after China unilaterally announced the creation of a so-called "Air Defense Identification Zone" over several islands it and Japan have both claimed. The two countries have been sharply at odds over those isles, which are believed to be near large reserves of natural resources.
Washington responded negatively to what Secretary of State John Kerry characterized as an "escalatory action (that) will only increase tensions in the region and create risks of an incident." The U.S. government has rallied around its ally Japan, where thousands of its troops are stationed as part of a security treaty.
And specifically regarding China's new air defense zone, the United States has said it won't recognize it -- nor China's call that aircraft entering it identify themselves and file flight plans.
Beijing, though, has dismissed the American position as unjustified and urged Washington to butt out of the territorial dispute.

U.S. B-52s flew over China's newly declared air zone, official says - CNN.com

 

[kmoose]

Pretty provocative move.

I'll reserve judgement until I see how it plays out, but my initial take is that it is a pretty dangerous escalation of tensions.

 

[tko]

Barry Obama smh

 

[Rhode Irish]

You can't allow China to just annex parts of the globe. Necessary move.

 

[johnnycando]

You can't allow China to just annex parts of the globe. Necessary move.

Amen.

 

[Irish#1]

US just calling bullshit on China

 

[Redbar]

You can't allow China to just annex parts of the globe. Necessary move.

Amen.

US just calling bullshit on China

B-I-N-G-O!

 

[Irish Insanity]

Pretty provocative move.

I'll reserve judgement until I see how it plays out, but my initial take is that it is a pretty dangerous escalation of tensions.

I'm sorry, thats not how this board works

The globe doesn't have squaters rights. You don't get to just claim a piece of air space because you've been around it long enough.

 

[Rack Em]

You can't allow China to just annex parts of the globe. Necessary move.

That's a very conservative thing for you to say? I'm confused.

 

[Junkhead]

China's economy will tank when they start a war with the largest customer of their junk. I'm not worried.

 

[kmoose]

I'm sorry, thats not how this board works

The globe doesn't have squaters rights. You don't get to just claim a piece of air space because you've been around it long enough.

Really? This entire country was founded on squatter's rights. We stole the Native Americans' land, and then, when that wasn't enough, we stole the Southwest from Mexico. Having said that, I understand that we cannot allow China to just claim whatever they want. What I hope is that we had an EP-3 Aries shadowing the B-52s, recording and analyzing every radar signal that the Chinese put out there.

 

[Old Man Mike]

What's happening here is apparently this: China's current leader is facing some real economic troubles in domestic issues. He is looking for a public diversion which will show his supporters and the middle public in general that he is strong. He has picked the creation/ declaration of a China Sea no fly zone as bravado overtly aimed at Japan, but covertly aimed at his own internal problems.

The US response is also more than it seems. We issued our bomber thumb-your-nose fly-through not only as a signal to China that we're not going to tolerate their staking out territory in the South China Sea, but also to keep Japan from escalating a hothead retaliatory symbol of some kind.

Our administration has done exactly the correct thing here to signal our loyalty to Japan, while letting the China bonehead politician what he seems forced to do to divert his public's attention to his failing economic policies.

The American public tends to get astonishingly irate about things that they have no concept of the subtleties and layers going on. We need to remember things like China does not have even one functional aircraft carrier in their command, and we have about nine in the general area. The President and the Pentagon have got this.

If you insist on fretting, fret about the number of atomic submarines that these clowns want to build. They know that they can't face down our Leviathan on the surface, and are imagining an undersea projection of power. Fortunately India is outdoing them in this area.

 

[magogian]

You can't allow China to just annex parts of the globe. Necessary move.

+1 and reps.

 

[Rhode Irish]

That's a very conservative thing for you to say? I'm confused.

I'm pretty hawkish on foreign policy matters. Super liberal on social issues and pretty centrist on economic issues. I know you guys think I am a pinko commie, but that is mostly because we are always arguing about social issues.

 

[Rack Em]

I'm pretty hawkish on foreign policy matters. Super liberal on social issues and pretty centrist on economic issues. I know you guys think I am a pinko commie, but that is mostly because we are always arguing about social issues.

I prefer to think of you as a commie. But that's just me.

 

[BobD]

I thought I heard somewhere today that the Chinese were moving an aircraft carrier group to the area, which I thought was funny because they only have one carrier.

 

[chubler]

I thought I heard somewhere today that the Chinese were moving an aircraft carrier group to the area, which I thought was funny because they only have one carrier.

Yeah, if this is turns into a military pissing contest, we all know who's going to end up covered in urine.

 

[pkt77242]

I thought I heard somewhere today that the Chinese were moving an aircraft carrier group to the area, which I thought was funny because they only have one carrier.

Really it is more like a mini aircraft carrier. It is about half the size of our current aircraft carriers.

 

[irishff1014]

It just sounds that we came across cocky that could look bad on our part.

But these imaginary Fly zones are a bit crazy.

 

[irishog77]

If there weren't Navy boys nearby doing this, then I'll be disappointed:

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/Zmfd9etbXGE?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[GoldenToTheGrave]

If there weren't Navy boys nearby doing this, then I'll be disappointed:

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/Zmfd9etbXGE?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Most 90s movie eva

 

[Irishnuke]

If there weren't Navy boys nearby doing this, then I'll be disappointed:

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/Zmfd9etbXGE?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

That's pretty much all I did in my navy career.

 

[enrico514]

Yeah, if this is turns into a military pissing contest, we all know who's going to end up covered in urine.

It will never get to that! China may not have "real" aircraft carriers but they do have stealth subs, about 1/5 the world's population and ohhh... nuclear weapons.

That being said I think they made a tactical error and I'm glad the US (and others) are calling them on it.

 

[enrico514]

It just sounds that we came across cocky that could look bad on our part.

But these imaginary Fly zones are a bit crazy.

Don't think it came across as being cocky. The military exercise was planed for quite some time. The US, Taiwan and South Korea all rejected this new expanded "air defense zone" and said they had zero intentions of complying.

 

[johnnycando]

I know our ex military boys recall similar moments when things just about got very hairy.

Having used to work with a lot of ex Navy Nukes, these guys play war games every few months with Russians, Japs, Chinese- you name it.

Except it isn't a game.

 

[sparkyND]

What's happening here is apparently this: China's current leader is facing some real economic troubles in domestic issues. He is looking for a public diversion which will show his supporters and the middle public in general that he is strong. He has picked the creation/ declaration of a China Sea no fly zone as bravado overtly aimed at Japan, but covertly aimed at his own internal problems.

The US response is also more than it seems. We issued our bomber thumb-your-nose fly-through not only as a signal to China that we're not going to tolerate their staking out territory in the South China Sea, but also to keep Japan from escalating a hothead retaliatory symbol of some kind.

Our administration has done exactly the correct thing here to signal our loyalty to Japan, while letting the China bonehead politician what he seems forced to do to divert his public's attention to his failing economic policies.

The American public tends to get astonishingly irate about things that they have no concept of the subtleties and layers going on. We need to remember things like China does not have even one functional aircraft carrier in their command, and we have about nine in the general area. The President and the Pentagon have got this.

If you insist on fretting, fret about the number of atomic submarines that these clowns want to build. They know that they can't face down our Leviathan on the surface, and are imagining an undersea projection of power. Fortunately India is outdoing them in this area.

OMM, I think you touch on a really important point here that warrants a bit more explanation. Before I do elaborate on a few points I would also like to point out that what China is doing is a bit absurd. Whether China really believes those islands (and surrounding territories) to be genuinely theirs, slowly engaged in territorial expansion or some diversionary tactics, I really think it is not right. Having said that, let me make a few points:

1) When China grows both economically or militarily, it can pose a threat to us in the long term. But we all know that China is not an imminent threat to our national security. Remember there are other big and powerful countries surrounding China and they will feel more threatened than the US, such as India, Russia and Japan, all countries China has gone to war with in the 20th century and still have border/territorial conflicts remaining.

2. With China making those claims the bigger issue is the reaction of Japan. This not only gives Japan a pretext to arm itself but start mobilization plans for the future and perhaps build nuclear weapons as well. Japan has remained under US security umbrella since the end of WWII. However, the region will emerge as a dangerous area and could lead to spiraling effect with a re-emerging military Japan. This is NOT something we want. Military Japan is still somewhat hypothetical but an idea that has gained more weight over the past two decades. If you read about Sino-Japanese relations, Japan has consistently come out and officially declared China's actions and growth as the big threat to them. Lastly, they have the technological expertise to develop sophisticated weapons (and nuclear warheads) if they really wanted to.

3. Again, there is talk on IE about who will "win" if the US and China somehow engaged in military conflict and that China is not technologically sophisticated to challenge us. Direct conflict will not happen if I had to make a prediction. China does not have a strong navy and will not challenge the US in the short-term. It does have a big and modernizing army but that will not help China if the two countries are separated by the Pacific Ocean. US might be more powerful but we all know that it is damn hard to conquer China because of the size of her population, its 2 million plus standing army and nuclear weapons.

4. China's nuclear weapons, newly remodeled submarines and standing army poses a threat to its neighboring countries, especially Japan. I think one of the key questions that will come out of all this what to do with Japan and her fears. Do we let Japan arm itself and build a powerful force, the source of Japanese expansionism in the first half of the 20th century and something the hardliners in Japan have been demanding for a very long time? Or do we continue to guarantee her security for the foreseeable future?

In conclusion, I doubt we will ever get into a direct military conflict with China. China will not want it as they are on a "peaceful rise" path as they claim. But, there is a growing chance the US could end up being mired into conflict with the Chinese due to all the bilateral security agreements with many of the countries, Taiwan, Japan and South Korea. I think the classic example is the Korean War. Incidents like these worry me gravely as I feel that this might actually be true.

Just my two cents.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

OMM, I think you touch on a really important point here that warrants a bit more explanation. Before I do elaborate on a few points I would also like to point out that what China is doing is a bit absurd. Whether China really believes those islands (and surrounding territories) to be genuinely theirs, slowly engaged in territorial expansion or some diversionary tactics, I really think it is not right. Having said that, let me make a few points:

1) When China grows both economically or militarily, it can pose a threat to us in the long term. But we all know that China is not an imminent threat to our national security. Remember there are other big and powerful countries surrounding China and they will feel more threatened than the US, such as India, Russia and Japan, all countries China has gone to war with in the 20th century and still have border/territorial conflicts remaining.

2. With China making those claims the bigger issue is the reaction of Japan. This not only gives Japan a pretext to arm itself but start mobilization plans for the future and perhaps build nuclear weapons as well. Japan has remained under US security umbrella since the end of WWII. However, the region will emerge as a dangerous area and could lead to spiraling effect with a re-emerging military Japan. This is NOT something we want. Military Japan is still somewhat hypothetical but an idea that has gained more weight over the past two decades. If you read about Sino-Japanese relations, Japan has consistently come out and officially declared China's actions and growth as the big threat to them. Lastly, they have the technological expertise to develop sophisticated weapons (and nuclear warheads) if they really wanted to.

3. Again, there is talk on IE about who will "win" if the US and China somehow engaged in military conflict and that China is not technologically sophisticated to challenge us. Direct conflict will not happen if I had to make a prediction. China does not have a strong navy and will not challenge the US in the short-term. It does have a big and modernizing army but that will not help China if the two countries are separated by the Pacific Ocean. US might be more powerful but we all know that it is damn hard to conquer China because of the size of her population, its 2 million plus standing army and nuclear weapons.

4. China's nuclear weapons, newly remodeled submarines and standing army poses a threat to its neighboring countries, especially Japan. I think one of the key questions that will come out of all this what to do with Japan and her fears. Do we let Japan arm itself and build a powerful force, the source of Japanese expansionism in the first half of the 20th century and something the hardliners in Japan have been demanding for a very long time? Or do we continue to guarantee her security for the foreseeable future?

In conclusion, I doubt we will ever get into a direct military conflict with China. China will not want it as they are on a "peaceful rise" path as they claim. But, there is a growing chance the US could end up being mired into conflict with the Chinese due to all the bilateral security agreements with many of the countries, Taiwan, Japan and South Korea. I think the classic example is the Korean War. Incidents like these worry me gravely as I feel that this might actually be true.

Just my two cents.

I agree with most of what you said, but not this one. Militarily, sure the Chinese aren't going toe to toe with the US. They're not dumb.

I saw a 60 minutes special a few months ago. Almost all the attacks from hackers into the US defense/ cyber/ pentagon, etc. are Chinese. It's the new Cold War. If they were somehow able to infiltrate, $hit would get ugly quick. Let's pray we have the best and brightest IT folks in the country protecting us in cyber world.

 

[johnnycando]

Let's pray we have the best and brightest IT folks in the country protecting us in cyber world.

We're not dealing with patriots in this bunch.

Highest bidder gets their services.

 

[Old Man Mike]

As an addition to the discussion [always remember though folks that this is just one ordinary guy talking, so have your crap-detectors always up], two countries immediately concerned about Chinese projection of power are Malaysia and the surprisingly organized and consolidated and economically ambitious Viet Nam. Both countries want to rise in the global economic commons and have zero love for China.

The USA also sees the Philippines as very fragile, and fears destabilization there. In a strange way, Japan is one of the least threatened entities in the near region, though one certainly understands their concerns.

The longer term view is apparently that China, though very resource rich is not rich in EVERYTHING, and would like to somehow extend control over resource areas beyond its current borders. Japan by the way has very little to offer in this area, but one never knows what one might get out of the seabed. Note the huge offshore bonanzas possible in ocean shelf natural gas --- I have an intuition that one should look carefully there for what's behind this longer term.

Longer term also, the Chinese see the Indian Ocean as the Trade Highway of the region. They'd like to control it --- think why the Indians are rapidly building Nuke Subs. As the USA becomes less dependent upon the Persian Gulf [for anything], anyone else left with severe dependences there can no longer count on the US Leviathan maintaining oil flow safe from whacko radical interference. China is VERY dependent upon the Gulf.

All of these things and much more are at play. The US will play policeman on some of this but perhaps increasingly less so. Our apparent reduced "interest" in the Gulf is shaking up a lot of regimes everywhere. One of the few smiling is Putin, who is engineering a brilliant, though short-term, economic coup of "uniting" Russia with Germany and The Netherlands by supplying a dedicated pipeline and energy flow.

The whole world is in these things due to the interconnected Global Economy. Those of us who facilely spew criticism of whoever is in decision-making authority in the US are WAY off base --- THAT I can assure you. This stuff is delicate, unbelievably complicated, and very unpredictable. As far as I can see, we're doing the "Preserving the US Economic Global Positioning" task as well as possible. News organizations here present these matters VERY simplistically and sometimes with seeming deliberate twisted viewpoints. That too seems based on economic rather than truth-seeking "values". What it does is to put garbage simplifications and actual errors into the minds of the public.

It is increasingly mind-blowing to me as to why the public believes that they are getting anything like a sophisticated presentation of the problem on any of these things.

 

[woolybug25]

3. Again, there is talk on IE about who will "win" if the US and China somehow engaged in military conflict and that China is not technologically sophisticated to challenge us. Direct conflict will not happen if I had to make a prediction. China does not have a strong navy and will not challenge the US in the short-term. It does have a big and modernizing army but that will not help China if the two countries are separated by the Pacific Ocean. US might be more powerful but we all know that it is damn hard to conquer China because of the size of her population, its 2 million plus standing army and nuclear weapons.

4. China's nuclear weapons, newly remodeled submarines and standing army poses a threat to its neighboring countries, especially Japan. I think one of the key questions that will come out of all this what to do with Japan and her fears. Do we let Japan arm itself and build a powerful force, the source of Japanese expansionism in the first half of the 20th century and something the hardliners in Japan have been demanding for a very long time? Or do we continue to guarantee her security for the foreseeable future?

These are two concerns of mine. Sure they don't have a bunch of battleships, that's because they have no plans to ever go into other waters to fight wars. They know that any conflicts will most likely be in their waters. That's why they have the biggest nuclear submarine program in the world. They also have 143% more military personnel and four times the available manpower between 15-49 year olds.

Their apparent allegiance to North Korea, Iran and Russia make me very nervous. Especially considering we owe them over $1.2 Trillion in foreign debt. A number, I may add, that many economists opine can never actually be paid back.

I'm not saying Red Dawn is going to happen tomorrow. But there are some clear red flags going on here.