Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

China's Island Factory – New islands being made in disputed China Sea

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 147 posts

Re: China's Island Factory – New islands being made in disputed China Sea

#131

Post by Dylan16807 »

GFK_of_xmaspast wrote: post #81
Jack000 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the claims on the South China sea are patently ridiculous, but I don't think it can be compared with the senkaku islands. From what I've read China actually did have better claim over those islands prior to 1884 and immediately after WWII, but didn't assert those claims because well.. the islands were worthless. Now that they've found oil they want to roll back the clock. I think there is a fundamental cultural diffe…

"To the west if you found a piece of land and lived there for 100 years, it's yours - that's how the US was founded after all" You, uh, do realize that every piece of land in the US was found first by people who were already living there?

Multiple people can find something.

Re: China's Island Factory – New islands being made in disputed China Sea

#132

Post by Dylan16807 »

vilhelm_s wrote: post #129
crapshoot101 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Japan may not officially have nuclear weapons, but they do not lack the capability - if they decided to weaponize (which would never happen short of a Chinese existential threat), they could do so in a matters of days, not months - the nuclear knowhow is clearly there. The rest of your point is fair - for Japan to go to war would take a fundamental shift in the country, and its questionable whether the Senkaku Island…

"Days" seems way too short. I Googled a bit, and the pages that came up (see below) suggest between 6 months and 10 years. The estimates vary depending on how many and what kind of weapons they would build. Apparently Japan has a small stockpile of weapon-grade plutonium, and a huge stockpile of less refined plutonium. So they could build a small number of bombs quickly (the 6 month estimate), but building more would…

How about the traditional nuclear bombing method of a plane?

Re: China's Island Factory – New islands being made in disputed China Sea

#133

Post by justin66 »

meric wrote: post #64
justin66 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but that's stupid on a number of levels. First, territorial claims can be made with or without war, the later of which is (thankfully!) what we're actually talking about with China and the islands. Second, anyone who thinks that the government in Iraq has been a puppet of the United States just isn't paying attention. I get it, you don't like the United States, but you're desperately trying to draw equivalenci…

Whether US wanted to or intended to "colonize" the Middle East is irrelevant. For a few years US used its army so that it could hold swathes of Iraqi territory to do what it does and that is just a fact.

You know, colonialism and the distinction between empires and democracies is one of the preeminent topics in political science and the history of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. If you don't care about any of that, what are we even talking about?

Re: China's Island Factory – New islands being made in disputed China Sea

#134

Post by BrandonMarc »

Jack000 wrote: post #52
veidr wrote: post #20

I've watched with fascination as the Japanese Senkaku islands slowly and gradually came to be labeled 'disputed' in the western media, after China's recent claims. It seems like China has figured out a way to hack the media (the free media outside of China, I mean -- the government there obviously has root on Chinese TV and newspapers). Japanese ownership of this territory is basically as settled under international…

the claims on the South China sea are patently ridiculous, but I don't think it can be compared with the senkaku islands. From what I've read China actually did have better claim over those islands prior to 1884 and immediately after WWII, but didn't assert those claims because well.. the islands were worthless. Now that they've found oil they want to roll back the clock. I think there is a fundamental cultural diffe…

It helps that China has been around for, what, millenia? During the thousand(s) of years, you can probably find a century somewhere in there that they had/enforced a claim to most pieces of land, either owning outright or controlling access to.

Re: China's Island Factory – New islands being made in disputed China Sea

#136

Post by vilhelm_s »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #132
vilhelm_s wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Days" seems way too short. I Googled a bit, and the pages that came up (see below) suggest between 6 months and 10 years. The estimates vary depending on how many and what kind of weapons they would build. Apparently Japan has a small stockpile of weapon-grade plutonium, and a huge stockpile of less refined plutonium. So they could build a small number of bombs quickly (the 6 month estimate), but building more would…

How about the traditional nuclear bombing method of a plane?

The second link says

> A nuclear triad — land- and sea-based missiles combined with weapons delivered by manned bombers — holds little promise in light of Japan's lack of geographic depth and the vulnerability of surface ships and aircraft to enemy action. That means fielding an undersea deterrent would be Tokyo's best nuclear option.

Re: China's Island Factory – New islands being made in disputed China Sea

#137

Post by ekianjo »

mason240 wrote: post #127
ekianjo wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you come with a large army, invade the country, remove the local government, and replace it with puppets working for your country's interests, "territorial claim" is just a twist of words.

>remove the local government, and replace it with puppets working for your country's interests, Not even remotely close to what happened.

I'd like to hear what you think happened then.

Re: China's Island Factory – New islands being made in disputed China Sea

#138

Post by ekianjo »

veidr wrote: post #25
sdrothrock wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because none of the countries whose territories China is going after -- not even Japan -- would do well in a straight up military conflict. I'm curious about why you don't think Japan would do well in a straight-up military conflict.

Japan's self-defense force is better-equipped, I will grant, but there are a few reasons. One is that there is always a higher level China could escalate to. I mean, in the end game they have nukes and Japan doesn't. But even if it didn't get to that level, China is a totalitarian regime with a history of brutally suppressing dissent, and I also assume that China would be willing to lose a lot more lives to make gain…

> Japan is a high-functioning democracy

I almost choked on that one. Yeah, a democracy when there's a change of prime minister every single year or less, can surely be defined as "high functioning". It's as functional as the 4th Republic was in France.

> But they haven't committed any military aggression toward any country in more than 65 years.

They have unconditionally supported the US war operations in many theaters around the world, though. they have not taken directly taken part in conflict but support the US in their wars. That's just because their constitution prevents them to, not that they don't want it...

Re: China's Island Factory – New islands being made in disputed China Sea

#139

Post by ekianjo »

veidr wrote: post #25
sdrothrock wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because none of the countries whose territories China is going after -- not even Japan -- would do well in a straight up military conflict. I'm curious about why you don't think Japan would do well in a straight-up military conflict.

Japan's self-defense force is better-equipped, I will grant, but there are a few reasons. One is that there is always a higher level China could escalate to. I mean, in the end game they have nukes and Japan doesn't. But even if it didn't get to that level, China is a totalitarian regime with a history of brutally suppressing dissent, and I also assume that China would be willing to lose a lot more lives to make gain…

> In a democracy, that public support really matters.

I guess the American's population strong opposition to the Vietnam war or the second Iraq war says a lot about the validity of your comment. No, even democracies can go to war without much public support. Most democracies have actually special measures to go to war without any kind of popular vote.

Re: China's Island Factory – New islands being made in disputed China Sea

#140

Post by ekianjo »

veidr wrote: post #25
sdrothrock wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because none of the countries whose territories China is going after -- not even Japan -- would do well in a straight up military conflict. I'm curious about why you don't think Japan would do well in a straight-up military conflict.

Japan's self-defense force is better-equipped, I will grant, but there are a few reasons. One is that there is always a higher level China could escalate to. I mean, in the end game they have nukes and Japan doesn't. But even if it didn't get to that level, China is a totalitarian regime with a history of brutally suppressing dissent, and I also assume that China would be willing to lose a lot more lives to make gain…

> As with the Philippines, I think the USA is the main deterrent to Chinese aggression. And these days it's a pretty shaky deterrent.

You must be kidding. The US military power is like 50 times what the Chinese can hope to come up with during a conflict. Even in 2014, if China were to try to take on the Pacific, they would be squashed like a mosquito if the US was to be involved. And believe me, they would be involved.

Post reply on HN