Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Community
»
The Flameboard
»
The China Fiasco
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Omega: [QB] Kardde, listen to me very closely. One apologizes when one has done something wrong. We did nothing wrong. Therefore, we should not apologize. Simpe enough? Would you prefer that we lie, and admit to something that didn't happen? I would also point out that under all codes of flight conduct, it is the responsibility of the smaller, faster plane to stay out of the way of the larger, slower one. If Mr. Wei was too dumb to obey the rules, and his stupidity cost him his life, well, too darned bad. It's HIS fault, and we owe no one an apology. The ONLY thing we did was to fly a plane through international airspace, something that, by definition, we have every right to do. CHINA's plane crashed into ours, killing their pilot. CHINA is holding plane and crew, in violation of treaty. CHINA should be apologizing, not we. [i]To pretend that the US would resort to military action is foolhardy and delusional.[/i] Our military personel are being forcibly held by a foreign government, in violation of all international law on the subject. We most certainly would resort to military action to get them out, if it seemed to be the option most likely to succeed. [i]By sending what the Chinese view as a spy-plane down their coast, we are provoking a response.[/i] Irrelevant. We have every right to put a craft anywhere in international airspace that we please. If they don't like it, that's their problem. [i]in China (where, it should be noted, they're being well taken care of)[/i] Of course they are. The Chinese aren't QUITE that stupid. What, would they torture them for information? They lay a finger on those prisoners, they WILL have a war on their hands. [i]President Bush doesn't want to lose face by apologizing or be seen as giving in to the Chinese.[/i] Exactly. First, military morale will drop. He'll effectively be saying, "Well, you're job doesn't REALLY matter, even though you're risking your lives to do it every day." Second, we'll seem weak to rogue nations, like, say, China. There is no reason for us to give in, here. China can not win this battle. Our people must eventually be returned, as well as our plane. We have much to lose, and nothing to gain, by offering an apology for something that we didn't do. [i]there have been lots of cases of larger trucks at fault in accidents for a variety of reasons, including the drivers being asleep[/i] We're talking trained military pilots, here, with multiple pilots aboard. You REALLY think that lack of sleep could possibly cause something like this? 'Cause if so, you need to learn a bit about how a military operates. Me: "If they don't give our people and plane back, they will become an international pariah, on top of their economy being destroyed." You: "No they won't. This scenario had a better chance of happening to the U.S. or Great Britain after we bombed Baghdad." So let me get this straight: you think that engaging in a legitimate war would be looked upon less favorably than stealing another country's plane and kidnapping their military personel, all in violation of treaty? Get a clue, man. [i]YAY! Let's start a WAR!!!!!!!!![/i] The Chinese have already given us more than enough excuse to do just that. Bush is level-headed enough not to persue it at this time, of course. Good thing, too. Clinton would probably have blown up a tylenol factory in Shanghai three days ago. [i]The Chinese view what they see as a spy-plane sent down their coast spying on them as something wrong. Therefore, they deserve an apology.[/i] I see it as wrong that you post such drivel. By your logic, do I not therefore deserve an apology? What the Chinese FEEL is wrong is irrelevant. There is treaty describing what all nations have AGREED is wrong, and THAT is what matters. JR: [i]I have one source that says it begins at 20 miles and one that says 12 miles(does not specify whether its air or seas though). What's your source?[/i] As I understand UN convention on the subject, the maximum you can establish your naval soverignty away from your shoreline is twelve miles. You can establish less, if it suits you. All airspace above your soverign territory is considered yours, presumably up to some arbitrary limit. 'Course, we never ratified the convention in question, but we recognize other people's claims under it. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3