Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by martyb on Sunday April 12 2020, @09:00PM   Printer-friendly
from the Cover-of-darkness dept.

China's devious move under cover of virus

As outbreaks debilitate the US navy, there are fears China may be using the coronavirus pandemic as cover for asserting control over the South China Sea.

A Vietnamese fishing boat has been rammed and sunk. Military aircraft have landed at its artificial-island fortresses. And large-scale naval exercises has let everyone know China's navy is still pushing the boundaries, hard.

Meanwhile, the USS Theodore Roosevelt aircraft carrier strike group has retreated from the contested waterway in an unscheduled return to Guam – with hundreds of cases of COVID-19 on board.

China's Peoples Liberation Army knows this presents an opportunity.

"The outbreak of COVID-19 has significantly lowered the US Navy's warship deployment capability in the Asia-Pacific region," an article on its official website declares.

The website insists not a single one of its soldiers, sailors or pilots had contracted COVID-19. Instead, the crisis had served to strengthen the combat readiness and resolve of the Chinese military.

That has international affairs analysts worried that even a short-term withdrawal of US and international from the East and South China Seas could give Beijing the opportunity it has been waiting for.

"I think China is exploiting the US Navy's coronavirus challenges to improve its position in the South China Sea by giving the appearance it can and will operate there at will while the US is hamstrung," former Pacific Command Joint Intelligence Centre director Carl Schuster told CNN.

Previously:
(2020-01-09) China Initiates Conflict with Indonesia in the South China Sea
(2019-12-21) Malaysian Top Envoy: China's 'Nine-Dash Line' Claim 'Ridiculous'
(2019-11-22) US Warships Sail in Disputed South China Sea Amid Tensions
(2019-05-14) China Builds New Type 002 Mega Carrier as the Age of Sea Power Wanes
(2018-05-13) China Begins Sea Trials for its First Domestically Developed Aircraft Carrier
(2017-12-24) World's Largest Amphibious Plane in Production Takes Flight in China
(2017-05-25) US Warship Challenges China's Claims in South China Sea
(2017-04-26) China Launches Aircraft Carrier
(2017-03-14) Japan to Send its Biggest Warship to the South China Sea
(2017-01-13) Chinese State Media Boasts About its New Electronic Reconnaissance Ship
(2016-07-14) China's South China Sea Claims Rejected By "Binding" but Unenforceable Tribunal Ruling


Original Submission

Related Stories

China's South China Sea Claims Rejected By "Binding" but Unenforceable Tribunal Ruling 24 comments

China is a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, but that won't stop it from ignoring this ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague:

An international tribunal in The Hague delivered a sweeping rebuke on Tuesday of China's behavior in the South China Sea, including the construction of artificial islands, and found that its expansive claim to sovereignty over the waters had no legal basis.

The tribunal also said that Beijing had violated international law by causing "severe harm to the coral reef environment" and by failing to prevent Chinese fishermen from harvesting endangered sea turtles and other species "on a substantial scale."

The landmark case, brought by the Philippines, was seen as an important crossroads in China's rise as a global power. It is the first time the Chinese government has been summoned before the international justice system, and the decision against it could provide leverage to other neighboring countries that have their own disputes with Beijing in the South China Sea.

"It's an overwhelming victory. We won on every significant point," said the Philippines' chief counsel in the case, Paul S. Reichler. "This is a remarkable victory for the Philippines."

But while the decision is legally binding, there is no mechanism for enforcing it, and China, which refused to participate in the tribunal's proceedings, reiterated on Tuesday that it would not abide by it. "The award is invalid and has no binding force," the Foreign Ministry said in a statement. "China does not accept or recognize it."

Now the U.S. can feel properly justified as it continues to do nothing. This news is also reported at Time , Reuters, The Guardian , and The Washington Post . Full response at Xinhua.

Previously: China Builds Artificial Islands in South China Sea
U.S. Spy Plane Deploys to Singapore Amid South China Sea Tensions
China Places Surface-to-Air Missile Launchers on Disputed Island
U.S. Admiral Warns of New Activity Near Reef Seized by China
The West Protests as the Chinese Military Continues to Operate in the South China Sea


Original Submission

Chinese State Media Boasts About its New Electronic Reconnaissance Ship 3 comments

Amid continuing tensions in the South China Sea, the People's Liberation Army Navy is showing off its new electronic reconnaissance ship:

China's Navy has launched a new electronic reconnaissance ship, state media said on Thursday, the latest addition to an expanding fleet and as Beijing's new assertiveness to territorial claims in the South China Sea fuels tensions. The People's Liberation Army (PLA) now operates six electronic reconnaissance vessels, the official English-language China Daily newspaper said, noting that the PLA "has never made public so many details about its intelligence collection ships".

Last year, the PLA Navy commissioned 18 ships, including missile destroyers, corvettes and guided missile frigates, the paper said. China has also said it is building a second aircraft carrier. China's only carrier is the second-hand, Soviet-built Liaoning, which this week unsettled neighbors with drills in the disputed South China Sea.

Previously: China's South China Sea Claims Rejected By "Binding" but Unenforceable Tribunal Ruling
Piracy on the Open Sea?


Original Submission

Japan to Send its Biggest Warship to the South China Sea 38 comments

Reuters reports:

Japan plans to dispatch its largest warship on a three-month tour through the South China Sea beginning in May, three sources said, in its biggest show of naval force in the region since World War Two. China claims almost all the disputed waters and its growing military presence has fueled concern in Japan and the West, with the United States holding regular air and naval patrols to ensure freedom of navigation.

The Izumo helicopter carrier, commissioned only two years ago, will make stops in Singapore, Indonesia, the Philippines and Sri Lanka before joining the Malabar joint naval exercise with Indian and U.S. naval vessels in the Indian Ocean in July.

President of the Philippines Rodrigo Duterte said he may visit the warship. The Chinese navy plans to "shadow" foreign military vessels and aircraft. The U.S. is deploying an attack drone to South Korea to respond to recent North Korean missile launches.


Original Submission

China Launches Aircraft Carrier 24 comments

Chinese government news service Xinhua reports that a newly built aircraft carrier was floated in the sea at Dalian (also known as Port Arthur). The ship must "undergo equipment debugging, outfitting and mooring trials." As yet, the Soviet-built Liaoning is China's only operating aircraft carrier.

According to Shanghaiist and Voice of America (U.S. government outlet), the carrier is named Shandong. Some other reports said that it is unnamed.

Additional coverage:

Previously on SoylentNews: China Moving Full Speed Ahead in Construction of Aircraft Carriers
Chinese State Media Boasts About its New Electronic Reconnaissance Ship


Original Submission #1Original Submission #2

US Warship Challenges China's Claims in South China Sea 14 comments

A US Navy warship sailed within 12 nautical miles of an artificial island built up by China in the South China Sea, the first such challenge to Beijing in the strategic waterway since US President Donald Trump took office.

The US patrol, the first of its kind since October, marked the latest attempt to counter what Washington sees as Beijing's efforts to limit freedom of navigation in the strategic waters.

US officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said on Wednesday the USS Dewey traveled close to Mischief Reef in the Spratly Islands - among a string of islets, reefs and shoals over which China has territorial disputes with its neighbours.

The move angered Beijing, which reiterated its position that China has "indisputable sovereignty" over the Spratly Islands and their surrounding waters.

[...] One US official said it was the first operation near a land feature that was included in a ruling last year against China by an international arbitration court in The Hague. The court invalidated China's claim to sovereignty over large swathes of the South China Sea.

The US has criticised China's construction of man-made islands and build-up of military facilities in the sea and expressed concern they could be used to restrict free movement.

[...] US-based South China Sea analyst Greg Poling, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said [...] the key question was whether the US warship had engaged in a real challenge to the Chinese claims by turning on radar or launching a helicopter or boat - actions not permitted in a territorial sea under international law.

Otherwise, critics say, the operation would have resembled what is known as "innocent passage" and could have reinforced rather than challenged China's claim to a territorial limit around the reef.

War brewing with North Korea, picking fights with China. Good times.


Original Submission

World's Largest Amphibious Plane in Production Takes Flight in China 15 comments

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-42471045

The world's largest amphibious aircraft, China's AG600, has made a successful one-hour maiden flight.

The plane, roughly the size of a Boeing 737 but with four turboprop engines, lifted off from Zhuhai airport in the southern province of Guangdong.

The plane can carry 50 people and can stay airborne for 12 hours.

It has firefighting and marine rescue duties but also military applications, which could be put to use in the disputed South China Sea region. The AG600, codenamed Kunlong, can reach the southernmost edge of China's territorial claims in the area.

State media Xinhua described the plane as "protector spirit of the sea, islands and reefs".


Original Submission

China Begins Sea Trials for its First Domestically Developed Aircraft Carrier 17 comments

China's first home-built carrier sets out for sea trials

China's first domestically developed aircraft carrier left its northeastern port to begin sea trials on Sunday, state media said, the latest milestone in the country's efforts to modernise its military.

The still-unnamed carrier was launched this time last year but since then has been undergoing fitting of weapons and other systems and has not yet entered service.

[...] "Our country's second aircraft carrier set sail from its dock in the Dalian shipyard for relevant waters to conduct a sea trial mission, mainly to inspect and verify the reliability and stability of mechanical systems and other equipment," Xinhua said.

"A sea trial is the testing phase of a watercraft (including boats, ships, and submarines). It is also referred to as a "shakedown cruise" by many naval personnel. It is usually the last phase of construction and takes place on open water, and it can last from a few hours to many days."

Also at CNN.

Previously: China Moving Full Speed Ahead in Construction of Aircraft Carriers
China Launches Aircraft Carrier


Original Submission

China Builds New Type 002 Mega Carrier as the Age of Sea Power Wanes 36 comments

Who's is bigger? Russia or the good old US of A? Do we need to get out the measuring tape? Maybe we do, after China completes what looks to be the latest generation naval defense: the Type 002 aircraft carrier that is currently under construction in a floodable dry dock. Tinfoil hatters among us will be glad to hear that updates of the progress for the construction of this mighty vessel come from satellite imagery. Now that battleships are pretty much obsolete with maybe carriers to follow this latest addition to China's growing fleet may just be an expensive showboat.

Entry for the carrier on Wikipedia.

Original Submission

US Warships Sail in Disputed South China Sea Amid Tensions 51 comments

US warships sail in disputed South China Sea amid tensions

Navy warships have sailed near islands claimed by China in the disputed South China Sea twice in the past few days, the United States military told Reuters on Thursday, at a time of tension between the world's two largest economies.

The busy waterway is one of a number of flashpoints in the US-China relationship, which include a trade war, US sanctions, Hong Kong and Taiwan.

Earlier this week during high-level talks, China called on the US military to stop flexing its muscles in the South China Sea and adding "new uncertainties" over democratic Taiwan, which is seen as a wayward province and claimed by China.

[...] On Wednesday, the littoral combat ship Gabrielle Giffords travelled within 12 nautical miles of Mischief Reef[*], Commander Reann Mommsen, a spokeswoman for the US Navy's Seventh Fleet, told Reuters.

On Thursday, the destroyer Wayne E. Meyer challenged restrictions on innocent passage in the Paracel islands[**], Mommsen said.

"These missions are based in the rule of law and demonstrate our commitment to upholding the rights, freedoms, and lawful uses of the sea and airspace guaranteed to all nations," she added.

[...] China claims almost all the energy-rich waters of the South China Sea, where it has established military outposts on artificial islands.

However, Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam also have claims to parts of the sea.

The United States accuses China of militarising the South China Sea and trying to intimidate Asian neighbours who might want to exploit its extensive oil and gas reserves.

[*] Mischief Reef
[**] Paracel Islands


Original Submission

Malaysian Top Envoy: China's 'Nine-Dash Line' Claim 'Ridiculous' 29 comments

Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:

Foreign Minister Saifuddin says Malaysia's decision to take South China Sea claim to UN is its 'sovereign right'. Malaysian Minister of Foreign Affairs Saifuddin Abdullah said late on Friday that Kuala Lumpur has the "sovereign right to claim whatever that is there that is within our waters".

"For China to claim that the whole of South China Sea belongs to China, I think that is ridiculous," Saifuddin said in response to an Al Jazeera question about Malaysia's decision last week to take its case to the United Nations.

"It is a claim that we have made, and we will defend our claim. But of course, having said that, anyone can challenge and dispute, which is not something unusual."

The move has angered China, which claims "historic rights" over all of South China Sea. It has also blamed the United States for raising tensions in the area.

In response, the US Navy's Pacific Fleet commander, Admiral John Aquilino accused China of "bullying" its Southeast Asian neighbours.

Malaysia and China are both signatories of the UN Convention for the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which codifies the rights and responsibilities of independent states' use of the oceans.

Under the UNCLOS, coastal states like Malaysia are entitled to an EEZ. Beyond that is considered the high seas, common to all nations. UNCLOS also defines rules in case of overlapping EEZs.

China Initiates Conflict with Indonesia in the South China Sea 48 comments

China has sent armed vessels and fishing boats into Indonesian waters fueling tensions between the nations in another move by China to try to claim ownership of the region. With China now deliberately sending vessels into the waters of other countries, their actions may be seen as the start of armed hostilities. For years China has made political and financial maneuvers to claim control over other nations through debt and intimidation. Indonesia has refused to negotiate with China on the matter as they see the actions as China invading their territory. With both sides bringing both sky and sea vehicles into the region the outcome of this issue may be a deciding point to determine whether or not China will be pushed out of the region. While the ruling by the UN is very clear about the region, China refuses to accept it.

China appears to have forgotten why the UN was formed in the first place. Japan learned a hard lesson in 1945.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 0, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Sunday April 12 2020, @09:08PM (40 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday April 12 2020, @09:08PM (#981696) Journal

    not that China would take advantage of the situation. No, the aggravating thing is, that we allowed ourselves to fall into the situation. Where did the Navy get covid from? And, WTF were they doing there? They couldn't cancel a liberty call during a pandemic? A ship is a perfect place to quarantine an entire crew, if only the leadership has the will to do so.

    Nevermind. This is the same leadership that thinks it important to allow transvestites to serve in the real military.

    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday April 12 2020, @09:17PM (12 children)

      by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Sunday April 12 2020, @09:17PM (#981698) Homepage

      Yep, and instead of crew safety they're getting monthly lectures about rape culture, White privilege, why hazing is wrong, indoctrination into Islam, and a bunch of other Obama-era bullshit that's still left the military fucked up and constantly running at half-steam.

      Actually, if this is a problem for the US military, why isn't it a problem for the Chink military? Chinks are filthy insectoid creatures, at least Americans even on a ship practice some form of hygiene.

      • (Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 12 2020, @09:25PM (7 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 12 2020, @09:25PM (#981702)

        The Chinese navy gets to summarily toss infected sailors overboard to prevent further contamination. If USN tried that the New York Times would get their panties in a knot about human rights.

        • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 12 2020, @09:40PM (5 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 12 2020, @09:40PM (#981707)

          If USN tried that the New York Times would get their panties in a knot about human rights.

          I'll bet we could throw the Runaway over board, and the NYT wouldn't care.

          • (Score: -1, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday April 12 2020, @09:49PM (1 child)

            by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Sunday April 12 2020, @09:49PM (#981712) Homepage

            Of course they wouldn't. NYT are fifth-columnist Jews giving aid to their buddies the Chinese. That's the dirty little secret, the Jews and Chinese are working together to subvert America. Fifth-columnist Feinstein and her Chinese "chauffeur," Liddle Adam Schitt, Weinstein, Epstein, Wasserman-schulz and the Awan brothers, the Jew coup.

            These times present a challenge to America, but they also present an opportunity: to disentangle America's interests from Chinese and Israeli interests. Then send Bill Gates and George Soros to the Hague, like Slobodan. The only difference is that Slobodan was a hero who fought for his people. Bill Gates and Soros are rootless cosmopolitan pieces of shit with no loyalty to anything other than their own psychopathy and god complexes.

            • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @02:30AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @02:30AM (#981803)

              Every time you sit in front of a keyboard, every time you put pen to paper, every time you open your mouth, you show just how stupid you are. I'm sorry you're retarded and the world scares you, but that's not an excuse for willful stupidity. I heard that large amounts of rat poison can cure early-onset dumbness. You should try that.

          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by barbara hudson on Sunday April 12 2020, @11:20PM

            by barbara hudson (6443) <barbara.Jane.hudson@icloud.com> on Sunday April 12 2020, @11:20PM (#981743) Journal
            Sure they (the NYT) would object. Water pollution is still a thing.
            --
            SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
          • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Gaaark on Sunday April 12 2020, @11:27PM (1 child)

            by Gaaark (41) on Sunday April 12 2020, @11:27PM (#981745) Journal

            Throw Trump overboard and see if the world claps!

            --
            --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @02:48AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @02:48AM (#981807)

              If world gets the clap? Huh?

              /s

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 12 2020, @10:04PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 12 2020, @10:04PM (#981713)

          > The Chinese navy gets to summarily toss infected sailors overboard to prevent further contamination.
          > If USN tried that the New York Times would get their panties in a knot about human rights.

          I suspect the worker bees chosen to proudly serve their countries by hurling themselves overboard might object too. That's why we ought to send out the National Guard at the same time to suppress over-enthusiastic responses from the proles. Every man must do his duty - and it turns out yours is to die in the ocean so that the boss doesn't look bad.

      • (Score: 5, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 12 2020, @10:45PM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 12 2020, @10:45PM (#981731)

        It's funny how whenever a racist cockraoch makes a post in a forum, all other racist cockroaches feel enbolden to come out of the walls in the open and spew their racist filth all over the floor.

        • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @08:48AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @08:48AM (#981888)

          And whenever a racist posts, a Communist replies. Having to choose between the two, I'll be a racist every fucking te, as will my multiracial racist children. Fuck niggers, fuck Jews, hang Commies.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @09:02PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @09:02PM (#982224)

          "racism" is anti-white, jewish communist propaganda since it was first spewed. There is nothing wrong with trying to maintain your people's existence or further it's development. Killing millions of whites and having the civilian women and children raped by soldiers during ww2 was not enough for these Jews. Now they seek to destroy what is left of whites in the countries they founded.

      • (Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @01:58AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @01:58AM (#981797)

        Hopefully stupid people like you are too dumb to heed public health directives.

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 12 2020, @09:41PM (8 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 12 2020, @09:41PM (#981708)

      Are you suggesting that telling the commanders out in the fleet to not do or say anything about COVID-19 because it would embarrass the POTUS was actually a bad idea?

      Hmm. Go figure.

      • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday April 13 2020, @04:42AM (6 children)

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 13 2020, @04:42AM (#981827) Journal

        I said no such thing. I suggested that the fleet should have been quarantined to protect the crews from any infection. That quarantine was very easily accomplished, back in January. It's far, far too late in March. So, I'm saying that the medical corps were idiots if they didn't suggest a quarantine to the Chief of Naval Operations, and if they did, then the CNO is an idiot for not taking the advice.

        • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @05:58AM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @05:58AM (#981851)

          Bbbut China virus! China's fault.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @01:09PM (3 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @01:09PM (#981932)

          If only the Commander in Chief were competent, we could have avoided this.

          But that would require taking action based on, "a democratic party hoax!"

          • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday April 13 2020, @01:18PM (2 children)

            by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 13 2020, @01:18PM (#981939) Journal

            Blame the American voter for that. The last competent CinC was either Eisenhower, or Kennedy. Of those two, Ike was the more competent.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @03:13PM (1 child)

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @03:13PM (#982025)

              You are just incapable of criticizing Trump. You do realize every sane person around here knows that "TDS" actually refers to people like you?

              • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday April 13 2020, @04:20PM

                by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 13 2020, @04:20PM (#982047) Journal

                Well, you're entitled to your asinine opinion. I'm also aware that the mayors of major cities were busily telling their constituents to go out, mingle, have fun, ride the subway, don't pay any mind to this Corona Virus as late as March. So - - - the president of the US was roughly equally culpable as the Dems? Are you as ready to castigate the mayor of NYC, as you are willing to denigrate Trump?

                You'll notice, I'm not singing Trump's praises here. I'm making cold comparisons between one office holder, and another. They all suck ass. But, again, selling off stockpiled supplies didn't start with either Trump, or any of those current mayors. It started about fifteen years ago. Which asshole was president then?

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @12:54PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @12:54PM (#981928)

        Definitely don't say anything. Quarantine up. We're not going to win anymore wars because of people like you. Everyone knows the carrier is down.

        The chinese definitely have infections in their military, they're just clammed up about it. Plus they have enough personell to ignore the attrition.

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 12 2020, @10:51PM (9 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 12 2020, @10:51PM (#981734)

      Why would you have a problem with "transvestites" serving in the military ? Is "transvestit-ism" negatively correlated with intelligence, discipline, stamina, competence, loyalty, or patriotism ?

      And if you believe so, where is your proof ? Where is your evidence ? Where are your studies ?

      • (Score: 3, Funny) by Gaaark on Sunday April 12 2020, @11:32PM (3 children)

        by Gaaark (41) on Sunday April 12 2020, @11:32PM (#981747) Journal

        WHAT? You want COMPETENT military personnel????

        What you talkin' about Willis?

        --
        --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
        • (Score: 2) by RS3 on Monday April 13 2020, @02:53AM (2 children)

          by RS3 (6367) on Monday April 13 2020, @02:53AM (#981809)

          Not sure which way you're going (sarcasm or not?) but there's this: https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-court-ruled-you-can-be-too-smart-to-be-a-cop/5420630 [globalresearch.ca] which could easily be similarly applied to military personnel by someone... (not me- I'm just remembering a correlation).

          • (Score: 4, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Monday April 13 2020, @08:14AM (1 child)

            by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 13 2020, @08:14AM (#981881) Journal

            Actually, the military puts a premium on intelligence. There are a number of specialties that require high intelligence. Those specialties have rapid promotion schedules, and high enlistment and reenlistment bonuses. The term "push button" was coined for those ratings in the Navy. Supposedly all you have to do is push a few buttons to get a promotion. There are situations in which senior petty officers with ten or more years service are answering to Chief petty officers with less than two years service. Complete "A" school, and BAM, you're a chief.

            For a long time, the Marine Corp shopped for high intelligence. I suppose they still do, but I haven't seen the recruiting posters and advertisements recently. A minimal intelligence is necessary to keep tactical dynamics straight in your head. A somewhat higher intelligence is needed to grasp strategy and tactics, and fit it all together.

            I'm less aware of the Army's valuation of intelligence, but I can't imagine that they want dullards in their ranks.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @09:58AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @09:58AM (#981895)

              It all depends. Artilleryman? Pilot? Anybody giving orders? Those jobs require intelligence. The poor SOB handed a rifle and told to go over the wall? He only needs to know which end goes 'bang' and be able to follow orders.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @01:09AM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @01:09AM (#981776)

        Where are your studies ?

        Here [nih.gov] they [atria.nl] are [nih.gov]

        • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @03:11AM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @03:11AM (#981814)
          Ahem, first link is from the "Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran", which is kinda a big red flag. Even if it were true, if these personality disorders the paper tries to associate with trans people really are such a great impediment to a person's performance in the military, then shouldn't we rather be screening EVERYONE for these disorders, trans or not? Non-transgender persons can be afflicted with narcissism or borderline personality disorder too, you know. The second paper is the same. Neither paper claims that such disorders are inherent to being transgender. The third one is about the mothers of transgender boys. We aren't talking about their mothers here, but the trans people themselves, so it's entirely irrelevant. So all the studies you listed don't really show that all trans people are necessarily unfit for military service.
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @02:21PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @02:21PM (#981974)

            Homosexuality is illegal in Iran, the first paper would indicate over NPD is 50x more prevalent in the LGBT community. The second paper from a transgender journal would support the findings of the first. The third paper is one of many finding a correlation between poor mental health outcomes and parental abuse. [nih.gov]

            So all the studies you listed don't really show that all trans people are necessarily unfit for military service.

            They show what is expected and observed, [politico.com] that the prevalence of personality disorders is significantly higher in individuals identifying as transgender.

      • (Score: 1, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Monday April 13 2020, @04:29AM

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 13 2020, @04:29AM (#981823) Journal

        Trannies, like everyone else, know that becoming a member of the US military entitles them to certain levels of healthcare. Trannies regard their very expensive transiting treatments as healthcare. In their eyes, it becomes the military's responsibility to turn them into the opposite gender. In reality, they have a preexisting condition which should disqualify them from serving. If a heart murmur is sufficient to prevent a person from serving, then being the wrong gender should also disqualify.

        The constitution makes reference to "common defense" as a reason to have a military. There is no reference to "common gender" or whatever the hell.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @01:13PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @01:13PM (#981935)

        Sure maybe some of those things... but also emotional instability. You're telling me someone who goes through with invasive surgeries in the name of cosmetics is a prime candidate to be bossed around and made to put up with discomfort? They'll crack.

        Most people wish they were a golden god or supermodel but it's not high enough on their list to even work out a few times a week.

        The military doesn't have time for that, or the money to pay for surgery, all for 1% of candidates who are affected.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 12 2020, @11:02PM (7 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 12 2020, @11:02PM (#981739)
      And what, pray tell, is the problem with letting trans people serve in the military? If they can do the job that is asked of them, then that should be all that matters. A person's personal life is none of the military's business (it's in general none of any employer's business) unless that personal life interferes with the performance of their duties. It's hard to argue that an average trans person's personal life is really any more disruptive to their duties than an average straight person's personal life. The military long ago stopped caring whether some of the people serving under it were black. Some black people have the qualifications to serve, so serve they do. So too with women. Some women have the qualifications to serve, and do. What's the difference when it's a trans person? Is there something about being trans that inherently makes them unfit to serve in the military?
      • (Score: 2, Flamebait) by PartTimeZombie on Sunday April 12 2020, @11:50PM

        by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Sunday April 12 2020, @11:50PM (#981753)

        Trans people are different to me, and different is scary. I don't like being scared.

        Besides, Alex Jones said they're bad, and he wouldn't lie would he?

      • (Score: 2, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Monday April 13 2020, @04:29AM (5 children)

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 13 2020, @04:29AM (#981824) Journal

        Trannies, like everyone else, know that becoming a member of the US military entitles them to certain levels of healthcare. Trannies regard their very expensive transiting treatments as healthcare. In their eyes, it becomes the military's responsibility to turn them into the opposite gender. In reality, they have a preexisting condition which should disqualify them from serving. If a heart murmur is sufficient to prevent a person from serving, then being the wrong gender should also disqualify.

        The constitution makes reference to "common defense" as a reason to have a military. There is no reference to "common gender" or whatever the hell.

        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @04:55AM (3 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @04:55AM (#981835)

          If the only way to obtain affordable healthcare is to work for a government department, that seems to suggest more about the appalling disparity of US healthcare than being trans.

          And yet if Bernie proclaims universal affordable healthcare as a basic human right as enjoyed in western countries such as the Nordics, he's branded a loony red. Go figure.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @01:19PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @01:19PM (#981942)

            I want to be pretty, the taxpayers should cover it. Go bernie go! Cover my elective cosmetic procedure at the taxpayer's expense. Not having people fawning over me is bad for my emotional health. I don't even feel my body is my own, I'm beautiful in my mind: Who is this ugly person staring back from the mirror. Boob job, nose job, lipo, face lift! Stat!

          • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @01:22PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @01:22PM (#981944)

            Removing your balls so that you can better pretend to be female is not a health care issue - it's a psychiatric issue.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 16 2020, @09:43PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 16 2020, @09:43PM (#983799)

            And if so, why then are the white-right so against universal healthcare for all their aryan brethren?

            Could it be they just see other whites as 'white niggers' to be dealt with when the black and brown, slanty eyed, and sand niggers are all taken care of? Will you be the first when they find out you have Irish blood?

            Americans are only happy when they are stupid, and that is a lot of the time. Which makes it easy for the less stupid among them to take advantage.

        • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @01:52PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @01:52PM (#981959)

          Trannies regard their very expensive transiting treatments as healthcare. In their eyes, it becomes the military's responsibility to turn them into the opposite gender.

          You know, not all trans people actually want or need to have sex reassignment surgery. And just because some of them feel that it's the military's responsibility to cover sex reassignment doesn't mean that military healthcare should cover it. A straight man with an ugly nose might similarly feel that it's the military's responsibility to cover his rhinoplasty for his psychological well being, but that doesn't mean that military healthcare should cover it. So they should all have such elective surgery done on their own dime by saving up for it same as if they worked for the private sector.

  • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 12 2020, @09:41PM (5 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 12 2020, @09:41PM (#981709)

    First rule of invading is don't unless you can take the reaction from the rest of the world.

    This move gives the world a choice:
        Would you rather have the cheap supply chain from China or on open South China Sea?

    The answer is clearly the sea, but the question misses the point that trade is a two way street.

    If China also can't import stuff, what will they miss most? How about food.

    My guess is this is not a serious, long term situation, but rather a show of force to build face.

    • (Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Monday April 13 2020, @12:45AM (4 children)

      by PinkyGigglebrain (4458) on Monday April 13 2020, @12:45AM (#981767)

      My guess is this is not a serious, long term situation, but rather a show of force to build face.

      This is a good point, China has lost face due to how they handled the CORVID-19 outbreak. What better way to distract everyone from that embarrassment, strengthen their hold on the SCS, and build some "cred" than some saber rattling?

      --
      "Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @05:31AM (3 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @05:31AM (#981840)
        Lost face? They did very well if they were really the first to get it. They went from prelim cases to lockdown within a month. Even if there were cases in early december it was still a new unnamed unknown disease at that time.

        In contrast look at all the leading free world nations, who had lots more time to get prepared. They could see China locking down and people dying and still let people attend mass gatherings, schools etc.

        So China can easily encourage their populace to laugh at the USA and the US Navy who can't even keep disease from spreading to their ships.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @06:03AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @06:03AM (#981853)

          > So China can easily encourage force their populace to laugh at the USA

          FTFY

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @12:11PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @12:11PM (#981915)

          "They did very well if they were really the first to get it."

          If you believe their numbers, then yes they did very well.

          We now have a fair selection of example countries to look at and I haven't seen one that looks anything like China.
          It seems like the tooth fairy came in and made things ok as soon as their total got to 80k.
          If their numbers are real, then they really ought to tell the world how to replicate their success.

          I'd like to believe their numbers and understand what they did, but given that the government has the ability and strong incentive to cook the books, let's see some other evidence first.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 14 2020, @09:43AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 14 2020, @09:43AM (#982482)

            We now have a fair selection of example countries to look at and I haven't seen one that looks anything like China.
            It seems like the tooth fairy came in and made things ok as soon as their total got to 80k.

            Most have same numbers. You have to be quite dumb not to see what China said as reality. They said about 12% of the confirmed cases needed hospitalization and 50% of hospitalizations needed ventilators. They had 4% mortality. These numbers fit very very well with rest of the world data given Chinese demographics. Also considering that 25-50% of infected are the ones with symptoms, you can easily see that actual cases in China were probably in the 200k range. And these numbers repeat everywhere.

            Most outside of China pretended like if COVID19 only attacks "chinaman" or have had their own shit excuses about China like "bad air" or trying to assume that China had millions infected. But now reality is sinking in. China told the world reality as best as they knew it. And the world thought China was lying. Well, lookey and see now. And now China was not lying.... except for the people that are either too dumb to know what they are arguing about or just have some pre-existing anti-China disease.

            If their numbers are real, then they really ought to tell the world how to replicate their success.

            Are you fucking serious??? They did!!! They shut down public movement. No fucking trips outside your buildings! No "walking in the park" or going for Easter. Your elevator in 40 storey residential building is shut down. You sit in your house or you get arrested and put into enforced quarantine camp. The virus cannot live a month without new host. China sacrificed 1-2 months of their citizens lives to make sure that virus died because they had no idea who exactly had it. They also didn't want to make mass graves for 10 million. But rest of the world??? Fuck no! Most people can't stay in their house 1-2 days, never mind 1 month. So virus survives.

            These "lockdowns" do nothing except slow down spread. They will never kill the virus. And now since the virus is endemic ... do I need to connect the last dots for you too??

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by legont on Sunday April 12 2020, @11:30PM (3 children)

    by legont (4179) on Sunday April 12 2020, @11:30PM (#981746)

    Chinese navy was also spotted in Pakistan. https://www.forbes.com/sites/hisutton/2020/04/08/satellite-imagery-shows-chinese-navy-in-pakistan/ [forbes.com]
    This is potentially way more important.

    --
    "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday April 13 2020, @12:06AM (2 children)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 13 2020, @12:06AM (#981761) Journal

      This is potentially way more important.

      In what way? Such military cooperation doesn't usually result in significant changes. Perhaps it could indicate a shift in Pakistan from US-oriented politics to Chinese (and perhaps a future shift in India to US or EU-oriented politics). But the South China Sea activities have the potential for open military conflict with Chinese neighbors and the US.

      • (Score: 2) by legont on Monday April 13 2020, @03:36AM (1 child)

        by legont (4179) on Monday April 13 2020, @03:36AM (#981818)

        I hope you are right, but long term China's goals would be to secure oil of Iran then Iraq and Saudis. They are building relationships as well as pipeline infrastructure in the area for awhile now. The plan is a direct route to China. Yes, Afghanistan as well.

        --
        "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
        • (Score: 1) by petecox on Monday April 13 2020, @05:02AM

          by petecox (3228) on Monday April 13 2020, @05:02AM (#981837)

          I'm no Elon-Muskovite but surely it's long been time to ween one's civilization off Persian gulf oil by embracing electric vehicles.

  • (Score: 2) by Snotnose on Sunday April 12 2020, @11:44PM (2 children)

    by Snotnose (1623) on Sunday April 12 2020, @11:44PM (#981750)

    Eric has some good points [ibiblio.org]

    Seems to me we just need to grow a spine and not let them build islands in the ocean willy nilly. Which, I hate to admit, Trump seems perfectly willing to do (not let them build islands willy nilly in the sea, that is). That said, what the rest of the world can do with all those artificial islands is problematic. Assuming the Chinese populate them with Chinese it's not like we can just use a sea-going bulldozer to bulldoze those artificial island back into the sea.

    --
    Why shouldn't we judge a book by it's cover? It's got the author, title, and a summary of what the book's about.
    • (Score: 3, Informative) by PartTimeZombie on Monday April 13 2020, @12:11AM (1 child)

      by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Monday April 13 2020, @12:11AM (#981762)

      Yeah, Eric has some good points, but his shallow biases also show:

      You can count on the U.S.’s media establishment to be pulling for the U.S. to lose any war it’s in, especially against a Communist or Socialist country. If your war goals are limited to ending U.S. naval power projection in the Western Pacific, playing for a rapid morale collapse orchestrated by agents of influence in the U.S. is not completely unrealistic.

      is completely stupid, and ignores the fact that the US media, of all kinds has been right behind every war the US has ever fought. None of the US media is socialist, despite what Fox News says.

      He is correct with his conclusion though. China is not going to war. Particularly with the US, because they would lose big time.

      • (Score: 2) by loonycyborg on Monday April 13 2020, @10:33AM

        by loonycyborg (6905) on Monday April 13 2020, @10:33AM (#981898)

        Entire world will lose since nuclear wars are no fun. It works both ways too, since US isn't too incentivized to stop them from finishing their incomplete civil war by eliminating last stronghold of dictator Chiang Kai Shek's forces on Taiwan.

  • (Score: 3, Funny) by corey on Sunday April 12 2020, @11:52PM

    by corey (2202) on Sunday April 12 2020, @11:52PM (#981754)

    China need to be careful, exploiting this too much and it'll start to fuel the conspiracy theories that this virus was created in China.

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @12:05AM (11 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @12:05AM (#981759)

    I don't see how it is our place to tell China not to assert themselves when we are spending more time trying to embarrass Venezuela than we are trying to interdict cocaine shipments.

    We have no place or role in Venezuela or off its shores.

    We have no place or role in China or off its shores.

    Say what you want about China, I don't see them allowing their kleptocrats or oligarchs to smuggle tons of cocaine or heroin into China.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by PinkyGigglebrain on Monday April 13 2020, @12:54AM (3 children)

      by PinkyGigglebrain (4458) on Monday April 13 2020, @12:54AM (#981771)

      We have no place or role in China or off its shores.

      Except for the fact that the USA is legally obligated to aid in the defense of Japan under the terms of the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan [wikipedia.org]

      So as much as people don't like it the USA does have a reason to be off China's shores.

      --
      "Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
      • (Score: 3, Touché) by PartTimeZombie on Monday April 13 2020, @01:06AM (2 children)

        by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Monday April 13 2020, @01:06AM (#981775)

        The South China Sea is a long way from Japan.

        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Monday April 13 2020, @04:36AM (1 child)

          by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 13 2020, @04:36AM (#981826) Journal

          A long way - tactically, or strategically? Or, do you just mean that it's further than you can walk in a day? Further than you can ride horseback in a day? Further than you can drive in a day? It's not further than you can travel by train, or by plane, or by spaceship in a day.

          And, the title of this sub-thread is ridiculous. If the China sea is China's by reason of the waves crashing on China's shores, then likewise, all of the Atlantic and Pacific and the Gulf of Mexico belong to the US. How do you think that claim would play out on the world stage?

          • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Monday April 13 2020, @08:22PM

            by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Monday April 13 2020, @08:22PM (#982207)

            Strategically the South China Sea is everyone's business, due to the huge amount of international trade that passes through it.

            I think the point has been made that there is no way China is making war with anyone in that part of the world, due to what they'd lose. Which is everything.

            Also, America can't claim the Pacific, because it already belongs to Fiji.

    • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Monday April 13 2020, @01:04AM (2 children)

      by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Monday April 13 2020, @01:04AM (#981774)

      I was wondering the same thing.

      China has too much to lose to ever block any of these sea lanes, and if they're not going to prevent traffic in the area, what is it that the US is worried about?

      The article says "asserting control over the South China Sea" but then fails to explain how that is any of the US' business.

      • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @05:20AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @05:20AM (#981839)

        Basically they want to control both fishing and mineral and oil extraction from the area.
        The South China Sea is relatively shallow and expected to be an oil rich area. Undersea mining is also developing rapidly and the SCA is a prime area. Every new island they build and declare to be part of China greatly expands their territorial waters.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @05:34AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 13 2020, @05:34AM (#981842)
        Yeah not like the US Navy stricken with covid-19 can do some anti-pirate sweeps or escorts.
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by khallow on Monday April 13 2020, @01:32AM

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 13 2020, @01:32AM (#981786) Journal

      We have no place or role in Venezuela or off its shores.

      We have no place or role in China or off its shores.

      Except of course when US interests are at stake, such as protecting a US ally, Taiwan, navigating most of the South China Sea, which is off a lot of peoples' shores, or acting to reduce the possibility for conflicts that could draw the US into war.

      Say what you want about China, I don't see them allowing their kleptocrats or oligarchs to smuggle tons of cocaine or heroin into China.

      And yet the smuggling happens anyway.

    • (Score: 2) by driverless on Monday April 13 2020, @02:42AM

      by driverless (4770) on Monday April 13 2020, @02:42AM (#981805)

      The other thing is that the various nations surrounding the South China Sea have been squabbling over that area for decades. This is business as usual. If China stopped doing anything there you'd still get news about it, only now it'd be "Covid19 is so bad that China has even stopped messing around in the South China Sea".

    • (Score: 2) by Hartree on Monday April 13 2020, @10:27PM (1 child)

      by Hartree (195) on Monday April 13 2020, @10:27PM (#982267)

      "It's their sea"

      No, it is not "their sea". It happens to be called by the same name as our word for their country. Parts of it are pretty definitely "their sea". As to the rest, Indonesia, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Taiwan, Brunei etc. strenuously disagree and in some cases have a lot of history and precedent on their side.

      China wants to make it "their sea" but people and nations want many things that aren't necessarily reasonable.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 14 2020, @09:47AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 14 2020, @09:47AM (#982484)

        As to the rest, Indonesia, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Taiwan, Brunei etc. strenuously disagree and in some cases have a lot of history and precedent on their side.

        You mean soon to be called "provinces of China" ?? Duterte already sold out Philippines to China by basically ending the defence treaty with US.

        https://www.msn.com/en-ph/news/worldtrendtop/duterte-ph-must-be-able-to-defend-itself/ar-BB10tJ9P [msn.com]

  • (Score: 2) by bart on Tuesday April 14 2020, @01:23PM

    by bart (2844) on Tuesday April 14 2020, @01:23PM (#982570)

    Statistically young(ish), healthy non-overweight non-smokers have little to fear. So why not treat those who get it on board, and end up
    with a nicely immune group of sailors.

(1)