China’s defense minister has urged the US not to threaten its sovereignty as well as the nation’s security interests following last week’s incident involving a US naval patrol in the South China Sea.
The concerns were expressed by Chinese Defense Minister Chang Wanquan to US Defense Secretary Ash Carter on Tuesday in Kuala Lumpur, where the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) defense chiefs meeting is taking place.
Chang stressed that the US should not pursue any other dangerous actions that threaten China’s security interests.
Last Tuesday, the USS Lassen passed through a 12-mile limit around Subi Reef in the Spratly Islands archipelago. The reef is one of seven that China has artificially reinforced to support its claim on the archipelago and the sea around it.
Beijing protested the USS Lassen mission in the South China Sea, accusing the US of escalating tensions in the region.
"The actions of the US warship have threatened China's sovereignty and security interests, jeopardized the safety of personnel and facilities on the reefs, and damaged regional peace and stability,” the Chinese Foreign Ministry said in a statement.
The US replied to the criticism by stating it would sail and fly wherever it wants in international waters and airspace.
“The US has conducted naval operations in the South China Sea in recent days and will conduct similar operations in the future,” Carter said.
Beijing responded by conducting training for its naval jets in the same area a few days later.
Washington’s falling out with Beijing over the South China Sea triggered a change of plans at the ASEAN forum, with a decision to drop plans for a ceremonial joint statement after Beijing opposed any mention of the issue.
“Our understanding is there will be no joint declaration,” a US defense official said.
A Chinese submarine is said to have "sailed very close" to the USS Reagan, a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, just days before Washington caused uproar by sending the USS Lassen within 12 nautical miles of man-made islands which Beijing claims as its own, the Washington Free Beacon reported, citing unnamed US defense officials.
"Disclosure of the Chinese submarine encounter comes as Adm. Harry Harris is visiting China for the first time as the commander of US forces in the Pacific. Pacific Fleet and Pacific Command spokesmen declined to comment on the submarine encounter but did not deny that the incident occurred," the media outlet noted.
The encounter is alleged to have happened on or around October 24 in the Sea of Japan after the USS Reagan left its homeport of Yokosuka, Japan. No additional details of the incident are available, including the type of the Chinese submarine or the distance between the two warships.
The Washington Free Beacon referred to the incident as "the closest encounter" between a US aircraft carrier and a Chinese submersible in nearly a decade. A previous incident involving the USS Kitty Hawkand and a Song-class attack submarine took place on October 26, 2006.
On October 26, 2015, the US carried out a so-called "freedom of navigation" operation in the South China Sea, which Beijing denounced as a violation of its sovereignty and a "blatant provocation." On Wednesday, China's Defense Minister Chang Wanquan urged the US to refrain from similar acts in the future.
Chang Wanquan reaffirmed that Beijing is strongly against any US moves that threaten "China's sovereignty and security interests and undermines regional peace and stability," Xinhua news agency reported.
The Syrian Armed Forces have taken control over a strategically important highway in the north of the country, a military source told RIA Novosti on Wednesday.
The highway is connecting the cities of Aleppo and Al-Salamiyah in the Syrian province of Hama. Moreover, the highway is the main supply route for the Syrian government army in the city of Aleppo.
"After fierce fighting with ISIL terrorists, the [Syrian] army has taken full control over the Aleppo-Ithriya-Khanasser-Salamiyah highway. Dozens of terrorists were eliminated. Mine clearance specialists have started to demine explosive devices," the source said.
Surprise, surprise. MoveOn.org has begun another campaign that could potentially damage our country. Pretty much everything they do is damaging in one way or another, but this damage could have disastrous consequences.
In a blast email I received, they begin with the following:
"Here's the situation: Millions of families have fled terrorism and their government's bombs, only to face the impossible choice between trying to survive the winter in tents in refugee camps, or making the often lethal trip to Europe. At present, the United States only plans to welcome 10,000 Syrian refugees next year."
So what do they want of the useful idiots who believe in the MoveOn movement? Well, as usual, they want money. But they also want the useful idiots to contact their Senators and ask (more like demand - we know the left never asks for anything) that they co-sponsor Bill 2145, "the Middle East Refugee Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act."
The Act would provide an extra $1 billion in emergency money to "allow funding for the resettlement of up to 100,000 refugees over two years."
A billion dollars! Where are we going to get that money? Oh, that's right. Congress and the president now have as much money as they want to spend on whatever they want, thanks to the new unlimited 2 year budget. So don't worry about that, silly. We're swimming in fake money!
Yet, the Obama Administration has already announced that it will "allow 10,000 Syrian refugees to resettle in the U.S. over 2015-2016. About 2,000 have arrived since 2012. The administration also plans to increase the number of refugees allowed into the country from 70,000 to 100,000 in 2016-2017." And of course none of them will be Christian or Yazidi. That they'll screen for.
So we could have 5,000 to 7,000 "refugees" already in the United States, with thousands more on the way. But don't worry – we're safe - or are we? FBI director James Comey said just last Thursday that there are "gaps" in our security screening/vetting process. "There is risk associated of bringing anybody in from the outside, but specifically from a conflict zone like that," he told members of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
Allow me to translate. We don't know who these "refugees" are, why they're coming to America, and what they will do when they get here. How many may be ISIS or another terror group? We have no way of knowing. So let's let them all in and pay to get them here! Talk about being agents of our own destruction.
A study of Al-Qaeda operatives found that 70% joined the jihad after moving to a new country."
There's a storm blowing in from the east –the Middle East, and if we're not careful, we will be swept away by it.
EU, US and NATO are preparing a media offensive against Russia inside Russia. The alliance aim to operate propaganda against the Russian government. This will also reduce the likelihood that independent media will thrive in Russia.
The “Strategic Communication Team East,” as this operation is called,” has already “reached its full staffing levels” as of 1 September 2015, according to the German federal government.
Critical voices against this proposal are arising from within the European Union — especially in Germany’s Left Party. …
“The new proposal is an affront to Russia. The media force will be subordinate to the Foreign Service, and thus to the EU’s military arm.” …
This cannot be understood outside its broader context, which is the West’s overall war to defeat Russia — a war that’s heading possibly to become a hot war, perhaps a very hot one. Over what, really?
America’s war to control Russia is not at all defensive (as is claimed), but extremely aggressive. Even in 2010, before there had yet been even a concocted excuse for the West to prepare for war against Russia, the Obama Administration was already struggling, behind the scenes, to get Europe on-board with their aggressive plans, under the pretext that an Anti Ballistic Missile (ABM) ‘defensive’ shield system based in Europe, which would protect against incoming Russian missiles, would be ‘defensive’ not offensive, even though it’s designed to enable a first-strike nuclear-attack knockout blow by the U.S. of Russia’s capacity to defend itself, by eliminating any incoming missile bombs in flight. It thus would be a way to eliminate Russia’s ability to defend itself. According to a wikileaked cable describing a meeting between U.S. ‘Defense’ Secretary Robert Gates and French Minister of Defense Herve Morin:
America’s anti-Russia club, NATO, has crept up to the very borders of Russia and demands that Russians be so stupid as not to recognize what the West is doing, as if John Fitzgerald Kennedy had been so stupid as not to have recognized that the USSR’s placing nuclear missiles in Cuba in 1962 wouldn’t have constituted an aggressive act by the Soviets and thus needed to be blocked. Russians are even more endangered now by the U.S.: Ukraine, after all, directly borders Russia. America’s coup that overthrew the democratically elected government of Ukraine in February 2014 and installed a rabidly anti-Russian one there, was extremely bloody, and the U.S.-backed ethnic cleansing to eliminate the residents in the heavily pro-Russian far east of Ukraine has been even more so. Even Khrushchev’s intent wasn’t so aggressive against the U.S. in 1962.
This aggressive intention of the U.S. government and its allies — extending to Russia’s very doorstep in Ukraine, Poland, and the Baltics — is so intense, that U.S. President Barack Obama holds it even higher in priority than he does the war against the international jihadist movement, a movement that’s actually funded by America’s allies, the royal families of both Saudi Arabia and Qatar. The U.S. now demands that Russia not even try to defeat the jihadists in Syria (which is an ally of Russia, one that’s being attacked by jihadists hired by the Sauds and Thanis) — as if the request for Russian help, by Syria’s President (democratically elected by Syrians because no alternative person stood even a chance to hold the country together) were invalid — as if the request for that military assistance doesn’t have legitimacy, but the demand by America’s imperial President Obama does have legimacy. Obama simply lies. He said on October 3rd (1:08 on the video), “We’re not going to make Syria a proxy war between the United States and Russia,” but that’s exactly what he has been doing.
The Rutherford Institute :: The Real Issues You Won't Hear from the 2016 Presidential Candidates This Election Year
Post a Comment