PBA historian Jay P. Mercado chronicles some of the most notoriously celebrated crowd-clearing brawls in PBA history.read more
Fast and Furious 6 is a high-octane action-packed ride that will make the most hardened action movie fans blushread more
The ADMU Lady Eagles displayed championship cool as they ripped the NU Lady Bulldogs in 3 sets in game 1 of the finalsread more
The highest fan and issue threads will be posted weekly. Check out the gorgeous female celebrities that came out on top this week!read more
Join now and get a chance to win advanced screening tickets to The Hangover 3!read more
some UFO's can be attributed to this black projects of the US.
the chinese tech specially on air combat are mostly knock off migs and su's.
even the cars made for china are knock off's
see this thread
It seems that we have forgotten the lessons of Vietnam War and the maxim of MZT. Only people decides the out come of any war whether revolutionary war or the modern war. Technology is important but it is not the deciding factor.
Remember Ho Chi Minh? He said "They can kill many of us and we can kill a few of them but in the end we will win the war because no advance country will win in a protracted war".
And at the same time the Americans at home were getting frustrated with the ongoing events that they organized protests and demonstrations against the war and the rest is history.
Though appearing on different events in history McArthur in the Pacific War and Ho Chi Minh in the Vietnam War, both are regarded as military geniuses.
baka mamisinterpret nyo ako, i dont support terrorism, bawal sa Islam yung idamay ang innocent people.
The US could not win a war anymore. It can send smart bombs, conduct strike-and-awe campaign, send in its aircraft carriers, etc., but win a war it could not anymore. It takes the support of the American people to win a war, but the people has been withholding that wholehearted support for the recent American wars for oil, for sheer bravado and other imperialistic maneuverings. Truly, it is the people who should declare wars, not the generals.
I don't like Tiglao. He is a Gloria loyalist. But I agree with his views about PNoy's failures with regard to Panatag Shoals and our relationship with China. I quote his op-en in full for your convenience. But also here is the government's lame response:
Now here is Tiglao:
Scarborough fail: How Aquino blew it
By: Rigoberto Tiglao
Philippine Daily Inquirer
2:52 am | Thursday, May 3rd, 2012
Solid as our territorial claims against China are, we could lose these areas if President Aquino keeps making colossal blunders on this front.
Blunder No. 1: The biggest, and the damage done probably irreparable until we get somebody else to represent our nation: Mr. Aquino deployed a warship, the BRP Gregorio del Pilar, to Panatag (Scarborough) Shoal to confront the Chinese fishermen, with naval soldiers even boarding their vessels.
With this move, Mr. Aquino made the Philippines the party militarizing the dispute. The Chinese must be thanking the President for giving them the higher moral ground in this crisis. It gave the hawks in the Chinese leadership all the ammunition they need to demand military action in Panatag.
The Chinese have squeezed every ounce of this blunder, claiming that a “Philippine warship harassed helpless Chinese fishermen who were seeking refuge from a storm inside Scarborough Shoal. It is the Philippine Navy that pointed their guns at our fishermen,” the Chinese embassy spokesman kept repeating.
The People’s Republic of China’s navy is known to be secretly but extensively patrolling the South China and West Philippine Seas. Yet China has never openly deployed naval ships in confrontations in disputed territories, so it wouldn’t be accused of militarizing the dispute. The vessels that went to Panatag to defend the fishermen weren’t even their “naval militia,” but—at least overtly—unarmed surveillance vessels of China’s Oceanic Administration and fisheries department.
Was Mr. Aquino hallucinating that BRP Gregorio del Pilar, our only real warship, was a mighty battleship that he can scare the Chinese away with?
Mr. Aquino just made us the laughing stock of the world. After a few days confronting the Chinese vessels, our warship turned tail and returned to port, as it had ran out of drinking water, food, or fuel—or all of these.
This is even the worst time for Mr. Aquino to create a flashpoint in our territorial disputes with China. The once-every-decade transition of power in China is ongoing, to be formalized in October at the National Congress of China’s Communist Party, and an intense struggle between two factions has broken out. Each faction will try to appear to be the most nationalistic and most determined in defending China’s sovereignty. Currently, that means a hard-line stance on the Panatag crisis.
Blunder No. 2: Matching the deployment of a warship was our officials’ saber-rattling braggadocio that they will be defending our territory “at all costs.” Mr. Aquino himself set the pugnacious tone months back when he boasted that he would respond to threats in our backyard such as Recto bank “as if it were in Recto Avenue.”
There has been no combat situation in Panatag—at least not yet—and, after our warship left, there are only civilian Filipino and Chinese vessels there. Yet our defense secretary, the Navy chief, even the head of the Northern Luzon Military Command have been blabbering about the dispute with their martial tenor, making us look like the bellicose protagonist.
In contrast, who were speaking for China? Even the Chinese ambassador had the sense to keep her mouth shut. Those who talked publicly were the embassy spokesperson and a political counselor—both among the Chinese’ lowest-ranking diplomats here. In Beijing, it was solely the foreign ministry spokesman who commented on the crisis. (Only recently, after the Chinese felt they already successfully painted the Philippines as the aggressor did a Chinese general and the foreign affairs vice minister comment on the issue.)
How would we feel if the Chinese defense minister or China’s navy chief made belligerent statements when the crisis started?
Blunder No. 3: Mr. Aquino has done nothing to repair Philippine-China relationship so that there is practically no venue for good-faith negotiations during such a serious crisis as the Scarborough flashpoint. China has not forgiven Mr. Aquino for failing to prosecute the officials who mishandled the 2010 Luneta hostage crisis in which eight Chinese were killed. Mr. Aquino has snubbed China’s official development aid, even demonizing these as prone to corruption.
Mr. Aquino has not even undertaken the most basic step in improving our relations with China: installing a Philippine ambassador in Beijing. For the Chinese and for the diplomatic community, having only a charge d’affaires in Beijing for so long is a veiled insult.
And why hasn’t he? Because Mr. Aquino insisted on long-time family friend Domingo Lee as envoy. Lee, however, is so comically unqualified that it was Sen. Sergio Osmeña III, a zealous administration man, who passionately fought against his confirmation. It’s been nearly a month since the Panatag crisis broke out; Aquino hasn’t even nominated an envoy to Beijing yet.
Blunder No. 4: Aquino has publicly groveled to the United States to intervene, which has only toughened the Chinese position, as it cannot appear to waver at the sight of American might. “Kill the chicken to frighten the monkey,” is an old Chinese proverb that is said to guide China’s foreign policy, as demonstrated since the Korean War up to the Paracels battle against the Vietnamese. Mr. Aquino has obviously made our country the chicken.
Blunder No. 5: Even as the Panatag crisis involves our national security, integrity, and even our economy, Mr. Aquino has not asked the leaders of our nation for advice, in order to forge a national consensus on the crisis. He has ignored the two institutions for this: the National Security Council and the Council of State, which past presidents convened even for less serious crises. So if war breaks out with China, it should only be Mr. Aquino’s war.
And in the middle of all these:
State owned yun CNOOC.Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, Pangilinan revealed that he met with officials of China National Offshore Oil Co. (CNOOC) to discuss the resources in the area otherwise known as Service Contract 72.
“I was in Beijing last week. I met with CNOOC officials but that’s as far as I can go at this stage,” Pangilinan said. “[SC 72] was the primary focus of discussions.”
China TV 'claims' Philippines as Chinese territory
09-May-12, 2:28 PM | Agence France-Presse
Beijing -- An anchor on China's state-run television network has accidentally declared the Philippines a part of China, in an embarrassing gaffe as tensions between the two nations run high.
He Jia, anchor for China Central Television's (CCTV) nationally televised news broadcast, made the claim during a late Monday broadcast that has been repeatedly replayed on the Internet.
The presenter apparently meant to say that the Huangyan islands -- known in the Philippines as the Scarborough Shoal, and claimed by both nations -- is China's territory.
"We all know that the Philippines is China's inherent territory and the Philippines belongs to Chinese sovereignty, this is an indisputable fact," He said in the broadcast, which has since disappeared from the CCTV website but is available elsewhere on the web.
Viewers joked in online postings that the presenter's nationalistic fervour led to her mistake.
"This anchor woman is great, a good patriot, she has announced to the world the the Philippines belongs to China," said a microblogger named helenjhuang.
"We should attack directly, send (Philippine President Benigno) Aquino packing and take back our inherent territory."
Another microblogger named kongdehua said, "the Philippines have basically been making irrational trouble, if they want to start a war then we will strike, no one fears them.
"If every Chinese spat once, we could drown (the Philippines)."
CCTV officials refused comment on He's gaff when contacted by AFP and would not say whether the station had apologised.
When commenting on territorial disputes and separatist movements in Taiwan, Tibet, Xinjiang and neighbouring sea areas, Chinese diplomats and media routinely claim all such areas as an "indisputable part of China's sovereignty and territorial integrity."
Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Fu Ying said late Monday Beijing was ready for "any escalation" of the maritime standoff with the Philippines that has become one of the most high-profile flare ups over the South China Seas and its vast oil and gas deposits in years.
I don't have solutions, but I am seeing that the solutions we have been trying so far have not been effective.
On current update, China has started its gradual tightening of the economic nooze. Tourism travels to the Philippines has been stopped. But now exports of bananas were given the scare. 1,500 containers of bananas were held by authorities and allowed to rot in Chinese port. To thumb our nose further, custom officials claim that the problem is a disease that does not even exist in bananas but only in coconut.
The industry has lost P1 billion so far. One hopeful (deluded) exporter said, “I hope this is really not political because we are in the business. We don’t want to believe that the life of the banana industry is threatened by our country’s problem with China,” Antig said.
Remember the Philippine Government position that we are seeking international arbitration on this issue? That means we want to bring up the issue of Panatag under UNCLOS, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. UNCLOS is supposed good for us because Panatag would be within the exclusive economic zone of the Philippines under this treaty. We even sought the US support in getting this arbitration.
But as Tiglao (I don't like Tiglao, but he is correct here) pointed out that the US is not even a signatory of UNCLOS. While China and the Philippines both ratified UNCLOS, in both countries, they expressed reservations -- ratified partially and excluded some provisions. Specifically, both countries have excluded the treaty's function in resolving conflicting claims on sovereign rights.
Hi Ateo, the following was brought up in my thread: Should we abandon science now and I made mentioned about as target interest: It can be a new factor in the positioning of the two super powers and could clear up their motives.
Chizmojo, thanks for bringing out the China Syndrome issue. If you have checked the reality of fusion reactors it is not difficult to see why China is positioning in our territory. China wants a continuous cheap supply of deuterium, it is the fuel of fusion reactors. The USA wants also a continuous cheap supply of deuterium.
It is no longer a secret now that the USA wants to re-establish a military base in GenSan, Mindanao. The motive of the two super powers is to ensure the supply of deuterium for their future generations.
I have already hinted this to Ateo in his China Syndrome thread. It is easy to check why the sudden interests of the Chinese in our territories. I gathered that the Chinese are into developing their own fusion reactors. You can check their technology programs and development. Is anyone here in this site familiar with the Chinese fiscal budgeting?
The problem of the two super powers is that they do not have deuterium. So, even if they have their own fusion reactors as a source of energy they will need deuterium as fuel to run the fusion reactors. Apparently, they do not have the source of deuterium. As pointed out, deuterium is abundant in the Philippine Deep.
I think we should learn from Finnish, lest we are finished. The Finnish are far advance in the research of deuterium. As previously mentioned, their market of the deuterium fuel is Europe.
Remember that a small country can defeat a big and an advance country if we know what their motives are. Vietnam is one example where technology was useless. Although essential in a war it is not the decisive factor in winning a war. Only the people can decide the outcome of any war. The nuclear bombs of the USA were useless. Tama ba?
Of course, nobody wants a destructive war because nobody wins in a brutal war. It's all economics and the control side of the source of fuel for the fusion reactors. Kanya tama si doombot. Kung nasaan ang source ng langis at crudo andun ang mga kudzu ng USA to control the flow and the world market price of petroleum.
If we can correctly identify the motives of the Chinese and the American Kudzus we can more or less know what to do. I think this new factor should be inputted in the discussions of Ateo's China Syndrome.
As mentioned to chizmojo, the reality is that science has already unlocked the power of the sun with fusion reactors. Google Hans Beth, the theoretical physicist who first discovered how fusion provides Suns enormous eternal source of power.
As a matter of fact, there are already three fusion reactors undergoing efficiency testings. The ITER Russian designed Tokamak fusion reactor started operation in 2005 in Europe. The other two are from the USA and England. You can google ITER now. Sorry, I am not familiar yet with the Internet to have included here their URL for easy connection.
Fusion reactors are non-polluting and non-radioactive. The source of fuel of fusion reactors is deuterium or heavy water. Fusion reactors are the future source of energy of the planet Earth.
Deuterium is abundant in deep oceans. There are two places in our planet Earth that are abundant with this heavy isotope of hydrogen. Scientists have pinpointed (based on satellite imaging): Finland and the Philippine Deep as having abundant supply of deuterium. Undoubtedly, the market for the Finnish source of deuterium is Europe.
Deuterium is an isotope of hydrogen atom. The other isotope is triton. It is abundant in the abyss because its mass is heavy.
Fusion is combining the isotopes of hydrogen. Fission is splitting the atom.
All the existing commercial nuclear power plant reactors in the entire world are fission reactors. Fission reactors use radioactive materials as their source of fuels, thus, they are radioactive pollutants.
The U.S., China, and others are fighting over resources due to peak oil and generally a resource crunch. The idea of abundance in terms of energy resources is negated by EROEI.