![]() |
Link #41 |
Logician and Romantic
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 42
|
Unless some cyclone sink that artificial island, China is keeping that patch of sea. Frankly the rules had always been that if you can put your troops somewhere, then you own that place until someone kick you out, legal or not. Been that way for as long as troops existed.
__________________
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Link #43 |
大佐
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
China would not be the first case of a country ignoring the verdict of an international court. The International Court of Justice for example once ruled the case Nicaragua v. United States of America. Nicaragua in the 1980s sued the United States for damages for their support for the Nicaraguan anti-communist guerillas. The court ruled in favour of Nicaragua and awarded compensations. The US did not participate in the proceedings after their argument that the court did not possess jurisdiction was rejected, never accepted the verdict and never paid the compensations, calling the court "a semi-legal, semi-juridicial, semi-political body, which nations sometimes accept and sometimes don't".
Amusingly the US never signed the UNCLOS which forms the basis for the rule of the Court of Arbitration today.
__________________
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Link #44 |
Princess or Plunderer?
Join Date: May 2009
Location: the Philippines
|
It will be easier for the PH to gain sympathy at least. The Senkaku island dispute means that Japan would know that feel, and a handful of ASEAN nations have their problems with China taking their territorial waters.
__________________
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Link #45 |
大佐
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
You have to separate between territorial waters and EEZs. Nearly all of the disputes and violations are about the EEZs. There's too much throwing together of territorial waters and EEZ. For example, the Philippines do not possess any recognised territorial waters in the area of the Spratly Islands. Their EEZ generated by Palawan though (under the assumption that none of the Spratly Islands generate a recognised EEZ) encompass some of the area of the the Spratly group.
__________________
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Link #46 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Montreal, QC, Canada
Age: 39
|
It would be a good thing that happens. The only problem is that China doesn't have a polarizing Putin-like figure that people worldwide can easily recognize and hate. It's only my opinion, but I think the sanctions would be passed more easily if people saw the Chinese president/premier as some sort of Asian Putin.
Last edited by KiraYamatoFan; 2016-07-12 at 22:10. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Link #47 |
大佐
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
It would be a disaster. The last thing the world needs right now is an economic war with the second biggest economy of the world. And the equation of the severity between the sea disputes and the issue of the Crimea and Donbass is questionable.
__________________
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Link #48 | |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Holy Terra
|
Quote:
China is not Russia, China is worlds second economy that produces some 80% of all world goods and holds the majority of USA debt. To sanction China is to shoot world economy in foot. Nobody wants to see entire world burn in civil unrest because of shortages everywhere. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Link #49 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 45
|
I am pretty sure several isolationist and nationalist in the United States would love to shoot the world economy in the foot in the hopes of bringing businesses by to US soil from China.
__________________
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Link #52 | ||
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Montreal, QC, Canada
Age: 39
|
Quote:
Quote:
That would be a very welcome intervention of Mother Nature. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Link #53 | |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Holy Terra
|
Quote:
To remove entire foreign industrial production from China will take years if not decades. And China has already begun investing a LOT in Europe,Africa and USA, buying industries there and producing or selling their good for incredibly low prices. Plus, countries like Vietnam, Indonesia, Thailand and Philippines where most of industry is relocating are not developed enough to meet the standards of the goods produced in China. So the investors first must build and then invest in that country setting their standards higher to get same quality they are getting from China. A very expensive and a very time consuming thing. Even India is held back a a little because of that. So I am not afraid at all as far as China goes, they are secured their current position for at least next 30 or 40 years. If something major does not happen that is. And time is on their side seeing how UN, USA and Europe global powers are getting weaker and weaker each year while states like Brasil and South Africa grow in power each year. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Link #55 | |
Meh
Join Date: Feb 2008
|
Quote:
http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/10/news...ebt-ownership/ US owns 67.5% of its own debt @ $12.9 trillion, while China owns 7% of the debt @ $1.3 trillion. 7% is very far away from being a majority of anything. Brazil? really? Brazil? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Link #59 | |
Meh
Join Date: Feb 2008
|
Quote:
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0YH08D |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Link #60 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Holy Terra
|
"From 2000 to 2012, Brazil was one of the fastest-growing major economies in the world, with an average annual GDP growth rate of over 5%, with its economy in 2012 surpassing that of the United Kingdom, temporarily making Brazil the world's sixth largest economy. However, Brazil's economy growth decelerated in 2013 and the country entered an ongoing recession in 2014"
All of this in just 3 years? 0_0 I won;t even imagine what will happen if USA ever enter recession... |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
|
|