Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: 8bits who wrote (129650)	2/2/2017 11:05:53 PM
From: TobagoJack	Respond to of 217764

(1) The MSM would have it that China went ballistic after humiliating Hague ruling against claims in South China Sea, whereas I detect no ballistic in so far as attitude went, even as some ballistic were deployed to secure safety of navigation from announced American intention to interfere. American lawyers showed up to argue the Philippines case, and immediately after, Philippines makes deal w/ China to jointly develop resources, simply signing a ready agreement made many years (2005) earlier before the Americans decided to interfere. all evidently very mystifying :0) but humiliation? hardly. (2) re islands, whether claimed by japan or by any other nation, all very confusing ... (2-i) Japan grows islands finance.yahoo.com (2-ii) Philippines invites China to build islands scmp.com (2-iii) Japan and the Republic off China (Taiwan) haggles over a bedroom-sized island latimes.com (2-iv) Republic of China (Taiwan) builds island voanews.com (2-v) Republic of China claims island under dispute between the People's Republic of China and Philippines breitbart.com (2-vi) The reason america talks only about the headline item that was the Hague-ruling w/o delving into the innards of same ruling, that which would deprive america of the world's largest slice of EEZ globalresearch.ca [btw, bloomberg featured a similar argument w/r to the hague ruling, but it has mysteriously disappeared from the web] (2-vii) Vietnam militarises SCS ft.com (2-viii) America militarises SCS scmp.com etc etc All seems quite confusing. (3) Truth? who knows. Should we go by current administration of islands, historic claims, or what? Should we disallow historic claims altogether, there would be a lot of upset people in the world, and around New York City, and Jerusalem. Should we go strictly by current administration, say bye bye to Crimea. (4) So perhaps best to leave to the inevitable future to resolve the confusion. (5) Coincidentally, here on Koh Samui Island en.wikipedia.org , that which is not under dispute at the moment and is firmly under Thai administration, has a majority of ethnic Chinese population due to history samuipedia.com and tourism all seems to get along quite well, perhaps because the Americans are absent. What is your take?

To: 8bits who wrote (129650)	2/2/2017 11:12:32 PM
From: TobagoJack	Respond to of 217764

am guessing that the trump cohort and the bannon cabal shall have to do much climb-down, and in fact so much so that we shall have to pity them, but for the truth that trump is both disgusting and shameless, and doesn't care for truth, facts and favours alt-facts to make sure the bloomberg report stays w/i the fact world and not be relegated to alt-fact universe here it is bloomberg.com Is It an Island or a Rock? Ruling Could Cost U.S. a Huge Swath of Ocean A Chinese dispute has a ripple effect on exclusive economic zones around the world. •July 29, 2016 The Asahi Shimbun/Getty Images Okinotorishima is an island in Japan’s economic zone. The U.S. and other coastal nations could lose millions of square nautical miles of ocean that are now in their exclusive economic zones. The loss would be an indirect result of an arbitration panel’s ruling on China’s dispute with the Philippines in the South China Sea. Largely overlooked in the tribunal’s July 12 decision was a strict interpretation of which dry land is entitled to a 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone—the surrounding ocean where a nation has sole rights to fish, drill for oil, and search for minerals. While not a legal precedent, the 479-page ruling could influence other judges and arbitrators because of its rigorous argument. “These arbitrators knew that this case was being watched around the world,” says Paul Reichler, a partner in law firm Foley Hoag and lead counsel for the Philippines. “They wanted it to be as close to perfect as possible.” The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea doesn’t allow nations to declare exclusive economic zones around “rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own.” What that’s meant has never been clear. Many countries, including the U.S. and Japan, have claimed exclusive economic zones around tiny atolls and outcroppings of rock. The U.S. hasn’t ratified the treaty because of opposition from congressional Republicans, who fear it would open the U.S. to lawsuits. But the U.S. “scrupulously” follows the treaty’s provisions anyway, says James Kraska, a law professor at the U.S. Naval War College. Push could come to shove if another nation seeks to fish or drill or mine in waters surrounding some dinky U.S. rock. The tribunal concluded that having people live on an island doesn’t prove habitability if food and water comes from elsewhere. Countries will “now have a greatly reduced incentive” to fight over ownership of rocks if they no longer have exclusive zones, Kraska says. On the minus side, fisheries might be depleted quickly if countries lose the ability to curb fishing in these zones. The bottom line: An arbitration panel’s definition of what an island is could undermine nations’ claims of economic zones around rock outcroppings. What's the Cost to U.S. of South China Sea Ruling?

To: 8bits who wrote (129650)	2/6/2017 7:54:51 AM
From: TobagoJack	1 Recommendation Recommended By Arran Yuan Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217764

re <<South China sea Islands>> the region seems to be engaging bilaterally and working out historical issues w/o outsider saber-rattling or otherwise kibitzing true reportage requires more facts and less bias, and facts trump bias and attendant alt-facts scmp.com Does the Trump White House know that Asia is opting for diplomacy on South China Sea?Australians noticed when US President Donald Trump’s then nominee for secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, told the Senate on January 11 that China should not be allowed access to its artificial islands in the South China Sea. If this amounted to a blockade, he would probably seek Australian participation. He said: “We’ve got to show back up in the region with our traditional allies in Southeast Asia.” Australians also could not have missed the brutal message emerging from Trump’s phone conversation with their prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull: a volatile White House is poised to ride roughshod over old alliances, putting their contributions under intense scrutiny with an eye to what Washington gets in return. Watch: Trump on tough phone calls ‘The worst call by far’: how Trump’s phone conversation with Australia’s PM Turnbull really wentBut the nations of Southeast Asia that claim territory in the South China Sea have settled on diplomacy. None is seeking a US show of force or asking for US intervention. It’s uncertain for whom America would be mounting blockades. The Philippines is the most dramatic example of one-on-one diplomacy with China, producing a kind of détente. In November, following President Rodrigo Duterte’s visit to Beijing, there was a quiet withdrawal of the Chinese troop ships and dredging barges that had reportedly arrived in Scarborough Shoal a few months earlier. Three hundred Filipino fishermen were reported to have returned to the shoal. The biggest sign that Manila has downgraded the dispute was the low-key way it registered its protest at China’s installation of anti-aircraft and anti-missile systems on artificial islands in the Spratlys. The “note verbale” without fanfare or press releases was a shift from the megaphone diplomacy in place since 2010. Philippines’ Duterte says no concern about Beijing militarisation, man-made isles in South China SeaAnd it is not just the Philippines. The general secretary of the Vietnamese Communist Party, Nguyen Phu Trong, visited Beijing last month and the two sides issued a joint communiqué pledging to “manage well their maritime difference”. This followed a port call by Chinese warships at Cam Ranh Bay in October on Vietnam’s invitation. In short, Vietnam has not stepped forward to assume the leadership that the Philippines once showed in agitating against China. Leaders of communist neighbours China and Vietnam won’t let maritime dispute sour relationsThis cordiality between China and Vietnam is likely to be confirmed when President Xi Jinping (???) visits Vietnam later this year. Some diplomatic sources believe Vietnam has interest in joint management of disputed maritime territory that might focus on environmental questions and fisheries management. That appears to be what the Philippines and China are doing. Two Philippine coast guard vessels arrived at Scarborough Shoal on November 5 to start regular patrols, with four more ships planned for deployment. There have been no reports of clashes with the Chinese. Indeed, both sides cooperated in search-and-rescue efforts for missing Filipino fishermen. Xi tells Duterte that Scarborough Shoal will stay open to Philippine fishermenIf Vietnam is not stepping in to take the place of the Philippines, neither is Malaysia. The visit to Beijing by Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak in November saw the signing of a memorandum of understanding on naval cooperation – the first major attempt at a defence pact between the two countries. There is no sign Jakarta wants to depart from non-alignment, let alone inherit from Manila the leadership of an anti-Chinese position within Asean An Australian news headline last year suggested joint patrols of the South China Sea by Indonesia and Australia. But there is no sign Jakarta wants to depart from non-alignment, let alone inherit from Manila the leadership of an anti-Chinese position within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. So how would Secretary Tillerson justify a blockade? No US allies or partners – Japan, Singapore or India – have shown the slightest interest in joining in. It would arguably be a breach of international law and very likely to be viewed by China as an act of war. As for China, there are competing strands at work in its foreign policy. Its behaviour oscillates between rising-power forcefulness and cautious diplomacy. But with all of Southeast Asia engaging with it, Beijing would lose a lot by returning to assertiveness. In a sense, it is locked into restraint by its recent diplomacy. Meanwhile, Australia should keep its options open and counsel restraint on all sides. It might even let the Trump administration know that, while they have been settling into new offices, in the South China Sea diplomacy seems to have become the order of the day. Elena Collinson is a researcher at the Australia-China Relations Institute at the University of Technology Sydney

To: 8bits who wrote (129650)	2/7/2017 11:17:31 PM
From: TobagoJack	Respond to of 217764

some on the thread believes history is not relevant each to his own free choice in the mean time, ... reuters.com China says United States should 'brush up on' South China Sea history FILE PHOTO - Chinese dredging vessels are purportedly seen in the waters around Mischief Reef in the disputed Spratly Islands in the South China Sea in this still image from video taken by a P-8A Poseidon surveillance aircraft provided by the United States Navy May 21,... The United States needs to brush up on its history about the South China Sea, as World War Two-related agreements mandated that all Chinese territories taken by Japan had to be returned to China, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said in Australia. China has been upset by previous comments from the new U.S. administration about the disputed waterway. In his Senate confirmation hearing, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said China should not be allowed access to islands it has built there. The White House also vowed to defend "international territories" in the strategic waterway. However, last week U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis suggested that diplomacy should be the priority in the South China Sea. In comments carried on the foreign ministry's website late on Tuesday, Wang said he had a "suggestion" for this American friends. "Brush up on the history of World War Two," Wang was quoted as saying during a visit to Canberra, Australia. The 1943 Cairo Declaration and 1945 Potsdam Declaration clearly state that Japan had to return to China all Chinese territory taken by Japan, Wang said. "This includes the Nansha Islands," he added, using China's name for the Spratly Islands. "In 1946, the then-Chinese government with help from the United States openly and in accordance with the law took back the Nansha Islands and reefs that Japan had occupied, and resumed exercising sovereignty," Wang said. "Afterwards, certain countries around China used illegal methods to occupy some of the Nansha islands and reefs, and it's this that created the so-called South China Sea dispute." China is committed to having talks with the parties directly involved, and in accordance with historical facts and international law to peacefully resolve the issue, and that position will not change, Wang said. ALSO IN SOUTH CHINA SEA China welcomes Mattis' emphasis on South China Sea diplomacy Mattis says no need for dramatic U.S. military moves in South China Sea Countries outside the region should support the efforts of China and others in the region to maintain the peace and stability of the South China Sea, and not do the opposite, he added. China sets great store on Mattis' comments stressing diplomatic efforts in the South China Sea, as this is not only the position set by China and Southeast Asia but also the "correct choice" for countries outside the region, Wang said. China claims most of the South China Sea, while Taiwan, Malaysia, Vietnam, the Philippines and Brunei claim parts of the waters that command strategic sea lanes and have rich fishing grounds along with oil and gas deposits.

To: 8bits who wrote (129650)	5/5/2017 12:39:04 AM
From: TobagoJack	Respond to of 217764

It did not take long for the s china sea brouhaha to avoid boil and return to simmer All folks love winning, and so the Philippines navy won news.abs-cbn.com WATCH: Philippine Navy beats Chinese in hoops, tug of war ABS-CBN News The Philippine Navy wins versus China People's Liberation Army... In basketball. pic.twitter.com/HfmTO0OSSi — Chiara Zambrano (@chiarazambrano) May 1, 2017Unlike in 2013 when Manila took Beijing to the international court for arbitration, the Philippine Navy on Monday took the China People's Liberation Army Navy to a different, more relaxed court--the basketball court. The game happened a day after Chinese warships docked in President Rodrigo Duterte's home province, Davao. In video reports by ABS-CBN News' Chiara Zambrano, the Philippine team led the Chinese team by 4 points at halftime. In the end, the Philippine team emerged victorious. To show sportsmanship, both teams posed for photos doing Duterte's signature fist pose. A gesture for the man who has been trying to make friends with China in the midst of the maritime dispute in the West Philippine Sea pic.twitter.com/LKJH5TQbzK — Chiara Zambrano (@chiarazambrano) May 1, 2017Apart from a game of basketball, the two teams also had a showdown on who's the stronger force--at least in a game of tug-of-war. The Philippine Navy came out as the victors again in this round. Who wants it more? Who's the stronger force? Apparently, it's the Philippine Navy, at least in this tug-of-war match with the Chinese Navy. pic.twitter.com/ijfmX6UKoK — Chiara Zambrano (@chiarazambrano) May 1, 2017The Chinese Navy's ships will reportedly engage in goodwill games with the Philippines in its first-ever visit to the country, which fell a day after a summit of Southeast Asian leaders in Manila concluded. President Duterte is expected to visit the ships, which include a Chinese frigate, a guided missile destroyer, and a replenishment ship. Duterte's administration has sought warmer ties with China and mend relations which had been damaged after his predecessor, former President Benigno Aquino III, lodged a case against the Asian economic giant in 2013. The countries were embroiled in controversy along with other Southeast Asian nations for overlapping claims in territories in the South China Sea. Aquino raised the issue to the international tribunal after a tense standoff between Chinese coast guard ships and a Philippine naval vessel in the Scarborough Shoal. The Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016 ruled in favor of the Philippines and devoided China's historical claim over the disputed area.

To: 8bits who wrote (129650)	5/5/2017 12:41:54 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217764

The USA navy got planes, bombs, and more bombs, but .... The Chinese navy has family values, Jared, Ivanka, and therefore Trump, and logic sputniknews.com Trump’s Pentagon Blocks US Navy Missions in Disputed South China SeaThe Navy wants to send its warships within 12 nautical miles of the Spratly Islands claimed by Taiwan, China and Vietnam, according to multiple published reports. US Pacific Command would not disclose further information to the American military publication Stars and Stripes. The new policy could signal a major softening in posture toward China by the Trump administration. After vowing to label China a currency manipulator, a March Treasury Department report found that China in fact has not been unfairly devaluing the renminbi. Trump later echoed this line. Further, despite claiming that he would renegotiate trade deals between the US and China, no such activity has emerged in the early days of the Trump presidency. “[N]ow is not exactly the right time to call China a currency manipulator,” the president told supporters at a rally April 29, as he is hoping to get China on board to “solve” the North Korean “problem.” — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 28, 2017 ?The US National Security Council is "not holding" freedom-of-navigation operations (FONOPS), an unnamed White House official told Breitbart in March, before Steve Bannon left the National Security Council. Bannon was the executive chairman of Breitbart before joining the Trump administration. The Pentagon simply may not have enough staff to complete the operations, Stars and Stripes noted. While more than 50 positions remain open in the Pentagon that can only be filled by presidential appointments, only Defense Secretary James Mattis has been approved by the Senate. One expert, however, wasn’t so sure that it was a staffing issue. "I think we can conclude this isn’t just inertia," Euan Graham of the Lowy Institute said. "This is taking on the hallmarks of a conscious policy." During his Senate confirmation hearing, now-US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson called Chinese island-building in the South China Sea "illegal" and threatened to blockade China’s access to the South China Sea – statements condemned by Beijing as "unprofessional." The last iteration of FONOPS in the South China Sea occurred in October 2016, before Trump was voted into office.