Milo, though we usually disagree, I do respect you and your posts. So please don’t take it as a personal insult when I ask you: “what are you smoking?” Do you honestly believe that there is even a remote chance that the U.S. would start a military conflict over this incident, regardless of how it turns out? We are going to attack the armed forces of the largest nation in the world, possessed of a large and rapidly modernizing military?
We didn’t attack Israel when they sank one of our ships during the Six-Day War.
We didn’t attack North Korea after the Pueblo incident in 1968.
We didn’t attack North Korea after they shot down a spy plane in 1969.
We didn’t attack the USSR after the downing of flight 007 in 1983.
All of these incidents occurred in international waters and, except for flight 007, involved U.S. military personnel doing their duty.
And we aren’t going to attack China after this.
This could get ugly, no doubt, but the ugliness will be confined to diplomatic and trade relations. The only “military” response I can see the U.S. taking is to resume the survellience flights and station a carrier nearby to provide fighter escorts. There will be a few games of cat and mouse, but the Chinese aren’t going to try to shoot them down.
That’s an interesting article, Milossarian. One thing in particular caught my eye:
Why is China denying any form of contact with those airmen? Why are they going to such extraordinary lengths to establish America’s “responsibility” for this incident at the very outset? Maybe the guys up in Beijing are currently scrambling around trying to formulate damage control for the actions of some cowboy commander down in Guangzhou. Until they do, perhaps, the Chinese don’t want any firsthand accounts leaking out of what might have really happened.
Oh, and regarding TV Time’s glib comment,
Milossarian’s report has an interesting point vis-a-vis China’s actions in the South China Sea:
Sounds to me like a good enough reason to go to war.
Yes, I do think this will cause further friction between the two countries.
No, I don’t think the US was 100% right and China was 100% wrong (hey, we were spying on them, remember?).
Yes, I think Dubya’s recent hawkish policies is largely why China’s being so stubborn about this.
And yes, if the situation were reversed, we’d definitely be doing the same thing China is doing, thanks to Bush’s overblown sense of machismo.
More proof that “President” Dubya is bad for the nation, if ya asks me…
As a brit i am fairly neutral and I think china is totally out of order on this one. Ok force the plane to land, cause an incident and then let it fly off but boarding the plane, taking the crew prisoner !!
Even the ruskies wouldn’t have done something like this, its totally disgraceful.
I think the USA should cut off all trade with china if they do not return the plane and crew NOW, if they go through the UN and this is illegal perhaps do an international embargo.
You give these people most favoured nation status and look what they do, its disgusting.
All countries spy on each other, capture spies and exchange them etc. china is just laughing in bush’s face with this fragrant disregard for protocol.
And put Wal-Mart out of business? Wait a minute, I’m not exactly seeing a downside here. We’d have to do some belt tightening if we can no longer buy cheap, Chinese prison/slave labor goods.
Unfortunately China is far too big a force to ignore. I don’t think such an embargo is possible even if there was the will to do it.
I’m not so sure. Who knows exactly what that plane is capable of? If it can intercept and decipher sensitive Chinese communications, then I think we’re veering into #2. The plane itself is not secret, but what’s inside is.
Perhaps not, I know most industrial nations engage in such activities at some level (or try to). But IMO the Chinese are doing pretty much what we would do if our positions were reversed. I mean, imagine the media and public reaction if a sophisticated Chinese spy plane were forced down, say, off the coast of California?
according to this Times reporter, the cause of the crash could be a combination of several things, one of which is the lack of training of the Chinese pilots who may be unaware of the ‘protocal’ of the more maneuverable plane bearing responsability to avert a crash , and
(emphasis mine - book isn’t closed on that issue yet)
This piece does a good job in flipping the situation around, how would we act if…
this interactive just for fun- non scientific poll on ‘who do you think is responsable’ when I just took it, the poll was something like 80% thought the US was at fault.
this one again makes the maneuverability argument that’s been suggested here (smaller plane must be at fault since larger, slower plane has less maneuverabilty), but goes on to mention a “pincher” move where the larger plane, attempting to divert from one of the smaller planes may hit the other one. Navy denies that’s what happened.
Is the only important thing about the Tonkin Gulf incident the fact that it was used to justify increased involvement? Does the fact that the government deceived the people to encourage pro-war feelings not matter? Even if there is no probability of us going to war, I don’t see how you can say that the Tonkin Gulf incident is irrelevant.
What is it the Chinese hope to do with an american spy plane? Build their own version out of bamboo shoots? I’m sure when they are finished worshiping the great white men from the sky and their giant metal bird, they’ll give it all back.
After that, they’ll go back to making our Nike’s and drinking as much Coke as we can sell them.
Interesting tone. One of the many news stories I’ve read on the subject today stated that the Chinese were among the best at ‘disassembly’ - that is taking apart an item and figuring out how it worked and then creating their own. So, yes, there is quite a bit of legitimate concern as to what information they can glean.
Am I the only one to detect a note of Cold War nostalgia in this thread?
Really folks, it’s not clear what happened.(*) The Chinese have some reason to be irritated and the little diplomatic game will play out. Nothing short term horrible(**) is going to happen, although medium term consequences of new, poorly thought out tough talk coming out of Defense might play into this.
Damn.
(*: e.g. recall the Vicennes incident. Not analagous per se except in re trust in Pentagon location declarations.)
