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

121–130 of 147 posts

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

#121

Post by anigbrowl »

sdrothrock wrote: post #26
veidr wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> But they haven't committed any military aggression toward any country in more than 65 years. Well, yeah. It's in their constitution. > It is my personal opinion that there is almost no way that the people of Japan (where I live, though I am American) would support a war against China. Even if China just up and landed an occupying force on Japan's Senkaku islands. Perhaps not over the Senkaku Islands, but I think th…

Attacks on Japan would draw America into the conflict. We provide their defense by treaty (and vice-versa, for what it's worth - Japan is committed to help the US if it is attacked, although this would typically be in the form of logistics and money since they don't have a lot of military ahrdware or experience these days): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Mutual_Cooperation_an...

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

#122

Post by anigbrowl »

rmc wrote: post #47
veidr wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not necessarily true. Not even probably true. The nuclear-armed USA has invaded a number of smaller and weaker countries over the past decades. China has also attacked several neighbors, though in a less balls-out manner. Armageddon did not ensue. The scariest scenario in Asia right now is: China attacks Japan (e.g. invades the Senkakus, or even accidentally kills some Japanese soldier in one of China's frequent reck…

It's World War One all over again. Someone attacks a Great Power, they demand lots from a small country. Another Great Power swears to protect the small country. Another Great Power will defend first Great Power. Then before you know it, the power keg explodes.

I tend to agree. You have a high number of global flashpoints where conflict already exists or is barely contained and institutional fragmentation of different kinds within great power areas. It's deeply worrying.

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

#124

Post by dragonwriter »

netcan wrote: post #57
veidr wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I wonder how confident the CPC is in the political stability of China. Conflict is a wildcard and it can have all sorts of consequences. I don't really know how to evaluate the claim myself as a removed outsider, but there seems to be a pretty credible claim that politically, China is economic growth addicted. IE, any kind of stagnation or substantially reduced growth rate endangers the political status quo. People s…

> any kind of stagnation or substantially reduced growth rate endangers the political status quo.

OTOH, using (even engineering) an external crisis -- including outright war -- to redirect popular anger over current or expected domestic economic conditions is not unheard of.

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

#125

Post by sixQuarks »

afterburner wrote: post #35
sixQuarks wrote: post #30

I don't like where this is all going. I've seen too often how seemingly trivial things can lead to all-out wars. Thanks to Iraq and Afghanistan, the US has spent a lot of treasure. The population doesn't have the desire for more war. Now Russia and China are seeing how far they can push. I hope I'm wrong, but I feel like we're seeing the beginnings of things that lead to a major war between Russia & China on one side…

Now? Nuclear World War has been a possibility for 60 years now. And 60 years ago the US was actually fighting China.

60 years is merely an eyeblink in human history, and a nanosecond in life's history. Human nature hasn't changed in 100,000 years. How many brutal leaders has the world seen, Hitler being only one. It's not a question of if, but when we will see another one. The difference this time is that he/she can destroy the entire world.

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

#126

Post by Fuzzwah »

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…

"then controlled by the USA for a time after it defeated Japan in WWII"

Perhaps something like:

"then controlled by the USA for a time after Japan surrendered to the Allies in WWII"

... would make your comment sound a little less ignorant.

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

#127

Post by mason240 »

ekianjo wrote: post #59
justin66 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The United States never made a territorial claim to any part of Iraq.

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.

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

#128

Post by mason240 »

akfanta wrote: post #76
melling wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does the US claim all the ocean between the west coast and Hawaii? No, because it's too far from land.

I am not sure where you are going here. China didn't claim all the ocean either, they want the islands.

What is being unsaid here is that the whole reason China needs those islands is because their territorial waters are completely surrounded by other countries. In order for Chinese ships to reach the open Pacific, they have to go through either Russian, Japanese, Philippine, or Vietnamese waters.

Getting these islands mean they get an outlet to open seas.

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

#129

Post by vilhelm_s »

crapshoot101 wrote: post #44
veidr wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 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 require either designing the weapon around less refined plutonium (which increases the risk that it would not work) or building a refinement plant (several years). They would also need some way to deliver the weapons---the most difficult option is ballistic missiles, which gives the 10-year estimate, while cruise missiles on submarines would be faster.

http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/85865 (see footnote 35 on page 11)

http://thediplomat.com/2012/10/japan-joining-the-nuclear-wea...

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/washington_quarterly/v026/26.1k...

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

#130

Post by trhway »

greedo wrote: post #115
trhway wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

not necessary. A modern conflict can happen in the disputed area without anybody bombing cities of the opponent. iPhones will continue to be shipped to US from China while J-20 will be playing hide-and-seek with F-22/35 over, say, the South China Sea. A very related example - Great Britain didn't bomb Buenos Aires 32 years ago nor did Argentina strike at anything Britain's outside of the war zone.

Argentina didn't have the military capability to attack anything outside of the war zone. Great Britain simply exercised restraint in their attacks on the mainland.

> simply exercised restraint

that is the main point. Any country escalating a conflict outside the war zone would pay a heavy price that would make it not worth it. They wouldn't win the war that way, they'd lose it. It is not their good will, it is just their desire to win, not lose. Bombing Argentina outside of war zone would pit Great Britain against whole world - a loosing position, or not-wining at the very least. You wanna fight - take it outside and everybody is happy.

Post reply on HN