China reportedly prepares detailed military plans to seize Spratly Islands from the Philippines in 2014

The People’s Republic of China (PRC) is reportedly drawing up plans to invade the Spratly Islands this year, 2014. China’s claim is based on an assertion that the Han Dynasty had “discovered” these islands in 2 BC. The islands were claimed to have been marked on maps compiled during the time of Eastern Han Dynasty and Eastern Wu (one of the Three Kingdoms). Since the Yuan Dynasty in the 12th century, several islands that may be the Spratlys have been labeled as Chinese territory, followed by the Ming Dynasty and the Qing Dynasty from the 13th to 19th Century. In 1755, archaeological surveys on the remains of Chinese pottery and coins have been found in the islands and are cited as proof for the PRC claim.

A report of business and strategy news platform Qianzhan (Prospects) in Mandarin was translated by English news site China Daily Mail and titled “Chinese troops will seize Pag-asa Island, which is called by China Zhongye, back from the Philippines in 2014.”

The report said the Philippines is so arrogant as to announce in the New Year that it will increase its navy and air force deployment at Pag-asa Island which is part of the disputed Spratly Islands.

“According to experts, the Chinese Navy has drawn a detailed combat plan to seize the island and the battle will be restricted within the South China Sea. The battle is aimed at recovery of the island stolen by the Philippines from China,” the report said.

The Philippines’ arrogance, the report said, is an intolerable insult to China.

“There will be no invasion into Filipino territories,” the report said.

Regional arms race: Philippine Navy BRP Gregorio del Pilar

Regional arms race: Philippine Navy BRP Gregorio del Pilar

The Spratlys (collectively referred to as Kalayaan by the Philippine government) are one of three archipelagos of the South China Sea (also known as the West Philippine Sea) which comprise more than 30,000 islands and reefs and which complicate governance and economics in that region of Southeast Asia. Such small and remote islands have little economic value in themselves but are important in establishing international boundaries. No native islanders inhabit the islands which offer rich fishing grounds and may contain significant oil and natural gas reserves.

Subscribe to our Substack community GRP Insider to receive by email our in-depth free weekly newsletter. Opt into a paid subscription and you'll get premium insider briefs and insights from us.
Subscribe to our Substack newsletter, GRP Insider!
Learn more

About 45 islands are occupied by relatively small numbers of military forces from the People’s Republic of China, Taiwan (ROC), Vietnam, the Philippines, and Malaysia. Brunei has also claimed an exclusive economic zone in the southeastern part of the Spratlys encompassing just one area of small islands on Louisa Reef. This has led to escalating tensions between numerous countries over the disputed status of the islands.

Pag-asa island has been occupied by the Philippines since 1970s after the government purchased the whole Free Territory of Freedomland from Tomás Cloma. It has a 1,400-metre (1,500 yd) unconcretized airstrip (named as Rancudo Airfield) which serves both military and commercial air transportation needs. It was the only airstrip in the whole Spratly chain that can accommodate large aircraft, such as Philippine Air Force’s (PAF) C-130 cargo planes, until the ROC constructed an airstrip on Itu Aba in 2007.

An 1801 map of the East Indies Isles which shows the placement of the Spratly islands. Most of the names have changed since then. In 1956, a private Filipino citizen, Tomas Cloma, unilaterally declared a state on 53 features in the South China Sea, calling it “Freedomland”. As the Republic of China moved to occupy the main island in response, Cloma sold his claim to the Philippine government, which annexed (de jure) the islands in 1978, calling them Kalayaan. On June 11, 1978, President Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines issued Presidential decree No. 1596, declaring the Spratly Islands (referred to therein as the Kalayaan Island Group) as Philippine territory.

The Philippine claim to the Spratlys on a geographical basis can be summarized using the assertion that the Spratlys are distinct from other island groups in the South China Sea, because of the size of the biggest island in the group. A second argument used by the Philippines regarding their geographical claim over the Spratlys is that all the islands claimed by the Philippines lie within its 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zone according to the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. This argument still requires that the islands were res nullius (that there was no prior effective sovereignty exercised over the territory), though. The Philippines also argue, under maritime law that the People’s Republic of China can not extend its baseline claims to the Spratlys because the PRC is not an archipelagic state.

On 2 August 2012, the United States Senate unanimously passed a resolution declaring that China’s recent actions to unilaterally assert control of disputed territories in the South China Sea “are contrary to agreed upon principles with regard to resolving disputes and impede a peaceful resolution.”

In a statement released on 3 August 2012, United States Department of State deputy spokesman Patrick Ventrell said that the US has a “national interest in the maintenance of peace and stability, respect for international law, freedom of navigation, and unimpeded lawful commerce in the South China Sea.” He added that the US does not take a position on competing territorial claims and that it urges all involved parties to clarify and pursue their territorial and maritime claims in accordance with international law. He further said the US is urging all parties to take steps to lower tensions in keeping with the 1992 ASEAN Declaration on the South China Sea and the 2002 ASEAN-China Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea.

A Mutual Defense Treaty between the US and the Philippines signed in 1951 states that “Each Party recognizes that an armed attack in the Pacific Area on either of the Parties would be dangerous to its own peace and safety and declares that it would act to meet the common dangers in accordance with its constitutional processes,” which means that regardless of whatever lack of “position” the US government takes on the matter of the dispute itself could be trumped if ever military conflict between China and the Philippines escalates.

US V-22 Ospreys in action in Leyte in 2013

US V-22 Ospreys in action in Leyte in 2013

The US together with Great Britain have demonstrated a capability to rapidly deploy large military forces into the region back in November 2013 after super-typhoon Haiyan (a.k.a. Yolanda) devastated much of the central Philippine islands. The military hardware and personnel sent by the US alone, supposedly to aid in the relief and recovery effort following the disaster, was awesome to say the least. It consisted of a naval contingent led by the aircraft carrier USS George Washington equipped with more than 80 military aircraft including the state-of-the-art V-22 Osprey tiltrotor vertical take off and landing (VTOL) aircraft (the first of its kind in the world put into active service). It is likely that the Haiyan disaster presented itself to the US military as an excellent opportunity to further evaluate the battle readiness of these new weapons systems.

The deployment of military resources into the region by the US and her allies in the days following the exit of Haiyan from the Philippines was swift and efficient and highlighted the usual severe and often fatal paralysis of the Philippine government in the face of crises requiring fast military response. Indeed, the Philippines has long relied on the United States for military defense. The Philippines’ military capability and state of military preparedness had progressively degenerated since the country gained its independence from the United States in 1946.

The country’s vulnerability to external threats was also exacerbated by a shortsighted 1991 decision to not renew the US’s lease on huge military bases it built all over the country. The US naval base in Subic Bay at its peak was capable of supporting 9,000 military personnel and was home to the US Navy Seventh Fleet back in the good ‘ol days. Furthermore, the US military presence there and in other parts of the Philippines contributed at least $1 billion to the national economy per annum. The Philippines also sits smack within vital sea lanes that serve most of East Asia, specifically the Straits of Malacca which is one of the world’s busiest and most important shipping lanes.

Chinese destroyer on goodwill visit to US in 2006

Chinese destroyer on goodwill visit to US in 2006

Since its withdrawal from the Philippines in 1991, US interest in Philippine affairs and wherewithal to honour its commitments under existing defense treaties has wavered. But the Philippines remains important to the US because it is located near the Straits of Malacca, is within missile and airstrike shot of one notably belligerent Korean regime, and is a more convenient staging platform for any sort of strategic “deterrence” position America aspires to taking in the next several years to balance military power in a region surrounded by the emerging might of China and India.

Unfortunately for the good guys, China remains committed to its resolve to enforce its claim on what it considers its territories in the area. According to China’s state media, a “counterstrike” will be launched against Philippine forces if the Philippine government does not stand down on its provocative activities in the area…

The overseas edition of the People’s Daily, the official newspaper of the Chinese Communist Party, said in a front-page commentary that the Philippines had committed “seven sins” in the South China Sea.

These include the “illegal occupation” of the Spratly Islands, inviting foreign capital to engage in oil and gas development in the disputed waters and promoting the “internationalization” of the waters, said the commentary.

The Philippines has called on the United States to act as a “patron”, while ASEAN has become an “accomplice,” said the commentary, which does not amount to official policy but can reflect the government’s thinking.

“The Philippines, knowing that it’s weak, believes that ‘a crying child will have milk to drink’,” the People’s Daily said, accusing Manila of resorting to many “unscrupulous” tricks in the disputed waters.

China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi had warned last year that “countries with territorial claims in the South China Sea that look for help from third parties will find their efforts ‘futile’, adding that the path of confrontation would be ‘doomed’.”

[NB: Parts of this article were lifted from the articles “Thitu Island”, “Spratly Islands”, and “Spratly Islands dispute” in a manner compliant to the terms stipulated in the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License that governs usage of content made available in this site. Photos of BRP Gregorio del Pilar, US Marine Osprey, and Chinese destroyer in Pearl Harbr courtesy Building for a Better Philippines, and China People’s Daily respectively.]

59 Replies to “China reportedly prepares detailed military plans to seize Spratly Islands from the Philippines in 2014”

  1. This is part of Red China’s broader attempts to enforce the Philippine Sea/South China Sea as “its territory”, along with new edicts ordering international airlines and marine vessels to inform Chinese authorities of their itineraries, even though the area itself is basically international waters (and thus not really required).

    Beijing wouldn’t be trying this, if they didn’t think they had a realistic chance of being successful at it.

    The Americans should be asked to carpet bomb the Spratlys out of existence. Then deliver the pebbles to Beijing.

    1. On the contrary, legit military information rarely leaks off as rumors which means this is probably nationalistic/patriotic chest thumping and saber rattling on the part of the Chinese.

      They know they could do this with us, and they know they could invade Pag-asa if they wanted to, but what they want to gauge is the amount of support we will get from Japan, Korea and the US, which individually wouldn’t be able to hold them back but put together would be too formidable an opponent in a full-scale war.

      1. That’s assuming Japan, South Korea, and the United States will actually go to war with China for us over these disputed territories. I highly doubt they would, though. Consider that 1) Japan’s constitution prevents it from sending its defense forces into foreign soil, and 2) the United States has gone on record to state that they will not allow themselves to be embroiled into territorial disputes, and 3) they would actually gain very little from supporting us militarily. Maybe if China invaded the Philippine mainland would the United States have to step in due to our Mutual Defense Treaty, but until then, all they can do is look on as China takes stuff away from us.

      1. Well kung Satanism ang Communism ng China Ngongoying naman ang Anti-Christ Leader ng Plilipinas na si Abnoy Aquino.

      2. “Always beware” that dropping illogical statements with no context reveals how little you understand China or the situation in Southeast Asia.

  2. This is not something that just affects filipino. China is being increasingly aggressive in it’s expansionism.

    The next world war will definitely be fought in Asia, America has already begun withdrawing from all it’s ME conflicts and pivot towards Asia.

    America doesn’t want to pay it’s debt to China, what better to use the pretense of war to reject the debt. Their previous wars have been over any land with oil, but this time the debt is worth the war.

    Will we be proxies and pawns in this coming conflict? Given our worship of all things American, the answer is most probably.

    When Yolanda came, China insulted us by offering 100k in Aid, implying that thousands of deaths we suffered were worth nothing.

    We must work with America again to defend ourselves soon, but will we once again sell our souls and our women to the Kanos for a bit of protection?

    1. Why on Earth are you so eager for a shooting war to start with millions (not just Filipinos) caught in the middle?

      I reiterate: Dropping illogical statements with no context reveals how little you understand China or the situation in Southeast Asia. Making provocative remarks is not only irresponsible, it’s flat out stupid.

    2. Dangerous words should they be spoken by the wrong people. You are also ignorant about the general attitude of the populace towards another war in the US. This isn’t the 1940’s anymore. No FDR to convince the government to attack the axis of evil to protect freedom. The US economy is stretched enough as it is and making open hostilities of China equates to them to shooting themselves on the foot, much less a trade embargo.

      I’m glad you aren’t in charge of foreign relations because we would be in for a rude awakening.

    3. Proxies? Why yes. China controls the Mexican drug cartels which can be used to massacre civilian populations in the US, among others. Not to mention Cuba and other friendly

      And we can not discount the possibility that China, being the smarter and superior people, has the technology to neutralize the US’s nuclear arsenal. Then in case it is open season on white trash.

    4. yes go to war, and the chinese people have stomaches which are capable of digesting pebbles and grass.

      you guys are forgetting what the chinese economy runs on .

      the philippines economy provides more “GDP” for the chinese than the chinese spending ever will for the philippines?

  3. “Zhōngguó yǒu jù yànyǔ shuō – nàxiē shuí zài zhuōzi xiàmiàn duǒ zhǐ néng chī nítǔ”

    Chinese proverb says those who are yellow will hide under desk and can eat our dirt

  4. Original Proud Pinoy III…….Is the USA prepared to engage in nuclear war to save a couple of tiny uninhabited islands? Why should they? As far as “selling your souls” (what does that mean?) and your women?? If you do not want your women to sell themselves; make sure they have enough rice to eat. No one willingly prostitutes themselves.

    1. Sea Bee,

      Think carefully — why would the United States be willing to elevate this to a NUCLEAR conflict? For that matter, why would the Chinese provoke a nuclear confrontation?

      What does it gain anyone?

      As for the “Proud Pinoy” crew and their ilk — best to ignore their chest beating and mindless bombast. Thankfully, that first post that was full of inane exhortations to start a war.

    2. Sea Bee,

      Think carefully — why would the United States be willing to elevate this to a NUCLEAR conflict? For that matter, why would the Chinese provoke a nuclear confrontation?

      What does it gain anyone?

      As for the “Proud Pinoy” crew and their ilk — best to ignore their chest beating and mindless bombast. Thankfully, that first post that was full of inane exhortations to start a war was deleted.

  5. I do hope China does invade, the need to reminded who runs the world.

    On a personal level, if it brings down the cost of LT barfines back to 500p like the good old days I will be CHEERIN lol!

    Buy one filipina get one free, I can’t wait to go back to Angeles City, it’s definitely more fun in the Philippines! YOLO

  6. First the V-22 Osprey is not made in U.S.A. It is designed and manufactured in Canada. It is just a Cargo Plane. It is used for support, not for combat.
    If your want a combat plane with Vertical Take Off capability. You can have the British Harrier Jet. It is easy to handle, and is good in combat. It was designed for Aircraft Carriers. It works like a Helicopter and a Combat Jet Fighter/Bomber, in one.

    Diplomacy can work for China. China is now beating its war drums. Mr. Aquino is again hiding in his Hole. There is no use dying for small islands. China knows that, and it just wants attention. Talking is better than shooting each other…

    1. Some corrections…

      Isn’t the V-22 Osprey designed/manufactured by Bell Helicopter and Boeing? Bell is a Texas company. Boeing has its main factories in Pennsylvania, with additional facilities in Arizona. It was the product of a US Department of Defence program that was started in 1981. Doesn’t that make the Osprey an American aircraft?

      The V-22 was never intended to replace fighter aircraft. It isn’t a “cargo plane.” It was designed primarily to provide transport for combat troops at speed. It has been used in multiple roles depending on the branch of service using it including close air support, intelligence gathering, reconnaissance and surveillance. And, yes, even cargo transport.

      1. @Johnny Saint:

        Bell Helicopters and other companies may have been manufacturing these planes. They have licensing agreements with the designer and reseacher. Or Bell may have financed the research and development of the plane. The U.S. government may had financed also the R & D. It cost billions of dollars to finance and design in a research facility. The R& D people, have the highest pays. Because, if they are not happy. They will take their ideas /talents elsewhere.

        All these companies do is, pay Royalties to the Designer, who holds the Patent Right.

        1. Sorry. I’m not sure I understand. You’re saying neither Bell nor Boeing had a part in designing or manufacturing the Osprey? The official US DOD history on the aircraft indicates that Aérospatiale, Bell Helicopter, Boeing Vertol, Grumman, Lockheed, and Westland showed interest when the US military started soliciting bids. Eventually the project was awarded to the partnership of Bell and Boeing with an initial cost of US$1.7 billion. Are you claiming someone else did the work?

        2. @ Johnny Saint:

          It was originally designed by a Canadian. Then, the aircraft was improved when the U.S. government and the U.S. companies financed for its improvements. You can look in the Patent Search on this matter.

        3. What’s the name of your Canadian designer? From what I know of Bell’s planes, they’ve been experimenting with tilt rotor designs since the 1950s, specifically the XV-3, a project involving the US Air Force and the Us Army. This was the precursor of the Osprey design they pitched along with the plane they built for NASA — the XV-15.

      2. That’s why I think the US’s participation in the Haiyan recovery effort was really a veiled military exercise, and possibly a massive show-of-force with China and North Korea as the intended audience.

        1. @ Johnny Saint

          See the British Harrier Siddeley ….or the Canadian / Boeing Company…Osprey Plane designs came from the British Harrier Jet family…the Jump Jets…

        2. Hyden,

          I’m sorry, but for the life of me I still cannot figure out what it is you are trying to say. We’re all looking to learn here, but I have to point out that a number of things you posted are inaccurate.

          The Harrier Jump Jet had its first flight in 1967. It was formally introduced on 01 April 1969. The Harrier was first conceptualised in 1957 as a result of a policy shift in the British Government towards the development of missile technology instead of manned aircraft.

          How can the Harrier jet design be the precursor to the Osprey when the FIRST FLIGHT using TILT ROTOR (NOT VECTORED THRUST AS ON THE HARRIER) technology was CARRIED OUT IN 1955 with the XV-3, Bell’s X-plane design for a joint research program with the US Army and the US Air Force? A FULL TWO YEARS BEFORE DESIGN WORK ON THE HARRIER EVEN STARTED. Going back even further, what was probably the very first tilt rotor design was PATENTED IN THE US in 1930 by George Lehberger. If anything, the Harrier was, at the very least, inspired by Bell Helicopter’s work in S/VTOL capability. NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

          Considering these two aircraft use completely different technologies — tilt rotor on the Osprey and thrust vectoring on the Harrier — I have to ask where is it that Bell and/or Boeing took a Canadian design and improved on it to develop the V-22? You still haven’t identified which Canadian (company) it was. (Or, is it now a British one?)

          At any rate, how does this make any difference as regards the current fleet of Osprey V-22s? If you trace the evolution of this aircraft it all points to Bell Helicopter as the original developer. You even stated that the Americans IMPROVED on a previous design. If that were true, that makes the current aircraft a derivative work, unique to Bell and Boeing. Where is the harm in that if this designer you keep mentioning (still unidentified) was compensated?

        3. Incidentally, Hyden, when the British first started designing the Harrier, it was decided from the very start NOT TO USE ROTORS in favour of vectored thrust using a turbofan engine. This was an innovative departure from conventional fighters and radically different from the Osprey which was designed to combine the functionality of a conventional helicopter with the long-range, high-speed cruise performance of a turboprop aircraft.

        4. Well, do not think too much about it. Instead of putting malice on their good works, be thankful because Americans care much of our affected kababayans. It is unfair to say that Americans are just doing it for show. They have been the super power for the long time because of their capabilities to any combat missions in the world with their sophisticated military hard wares and combat personnel. Yet it doesn’t mean they won every war but the thing is they won the best war ever and that is World War 2 and Cold War.

  7. Give China what they want, Philippines is a country of beggars, slaves, thieves and whores, they cannot defend or survive an attack from the red army.

    Your only hope is the Americans, better start begging them now!

  8. @Yuelingshan,
    China can do that, AFP will not just watch and take our native lands.What they will do is depend our economic zone. As of this time media / social network do the publicity, We are not finish w/ Panatag shoal and china make West Philippines sea as their lake. News whether bluffed or real, we have an eye on you. Do what you supposed to do and the AFP will respond to your hostile action.

  9. we as a filipino does not honored surrender we would rather to die for our country and if we all die dont forget that philippines is a mystic island many legend are born in other dimension we can kill all of you by any means we would rather surrender only to god if he told us to do so.remember that!!!!!!!!!!

    1. “we as a filipino does not honored surrender we would rather to die for our country ”

      Not to burst your bubble or anything but…

      Taken from Wikipedia:

      The Battle of Bataan represented the most intense phase of Imperial Japan’s invasion of the Philippines during World War II. The capture of the Philippine Islands was crucial to Japan’s effort to control the Southwest Pacific, seize the resource-rich Dutch East Indies, and protect its Southeast Asia flank. It was the largest surrender in American and Filipino military history, and was the largest United States surrender since the Civil War’s Battle of Harper’s Ferry.

      “and if we all die dont forget that philippines is a mystic island many legend are born in other dimension we can kill all of you by any means we would rather surrender only to god if he told us to do so.remember that!!!!!!!!!!”

      Da fuq did I just read??? -_-

  10. Chinese Invasion Plan

    One rowing boat.
    One oarsman.
    One soldier armed with 18th century musket,no need to bring the hardware (nuke subs, stealth fighters)as no opposition will be encountered.
    One soldier to carry the large red flag.
    One soldier to carry the picnic hamper.

    1. @Yawn

      They don’t need to invade. They are already here. We have a Chinese President. Just go to Metro Manila and in the Provinces, they are there. They control the businesses, and the economy, in particular.Just walk in Ongpin Street; they are a community…”Pare, babae, Mestiza Chinese, maganda”, whispers a “bugaw”…

  11. Duwag presidente ntn pano may lahi silang chinese c Cory nmn ang ngpadami ng chiese d2 tamo c lucio tan d nkakasuhan

    Pero hndi matatalo ng china ang Pilipinas noh.

  12. The communist Chinese are the new imperialist aggressors of the twenty-first century. They now show their greed for the the maritime resources of the Republic of the Philippines. They are really after the strategic resources of oil and natural gas.The Mutual Defense Treaty with the United States of America will act as a deterrence to armed aggression/invasion. The question is… Are the Chinese willing to risk a war with the USA and its allies in the free world?

  13. The PRC communist hierarchy setting a date for a possible invasion of the Spratley’s is not chest thumping but a real threat the Aquino administration must consider seriously. The ruling communist party are not a bunch of fools like those clowns in Malacanang.

    China always believed that the Philippines was once part of China that drifted away from the mainland during the last earth cycle change. But a German geologist claims that it was unlikely possible because the Philippines, he said, rose from the Pacific only some 3,500 years ago. Secondly, China is now claiming that a 2BC Han dynasty relic was discovered in the Spratley’s and therefore their claim is legitimate. Nobody knows who invented the first row boat. China’s claim that they used row boats back then but was it possible that Chinese seafarers have traveled beyond their own territorial waters during that time to have possibly reach the Spratley’s.

    Towards the end of US Pres. George W. Bush’s term, in an interview with a US network he was asked who he thinks is the richest nation on earth, smiling he said, the Philippines?

    During the Cory Aquino administration when the discovery of the “Deuterium” heavy water in Mindanao was made public, US experts estimated that the Philippines possess the deepest, widest and longest resource flow of Deuterium in the world. It is estimated to generate $30B a year revenue to the Philippine economy that would pay off all it’s foreign debts in one year. Deuterium will render AVGAS, LPG, ILG and other industrial fluids obsolete. Deuterium replenishes itself so will run perpetually unlike the oil in the gulf region where it is estimated to run dry in 300 years.

    All major players are in for the Deuterium scramble except China.

    China is not what it is 25 years ago. They now see themselves as the new power and should flex that new found muscle. Why is China claiming sovereignty over the Spratley’s long after many centuries have past? Under the UN charter, there are two ways a nation can claim sovereignty over a territory. A: By “discovery” and B: by “conquest”. The ICJ or Intl. Court of Justice is the sole mediator in conflicts between nations. Their decisions are final. China knows that the ICJ is not the forum to achieve what it wants and doesn’t seem to care whether their economic success will be tarnished by their recent treat.

    1. China always believed that the Philippines was once part of China that drifted away from the mainland during the last earth cycle change. But a German geologist claims that it was unlikely possible because the Philippines, he said, rose from the Pacific only some 3,500 years ago. Secondly, China is now claiming that a 2BC Han dynasty relic was discovered in the Spratley’s and therefore their claim is legitimate. Nobody knows who invented the first row boat. China’s claim that they used row boats back then but was it possible that Chinese seafarers have traveled beyond their own territorial waters during that time to have possibly reach the Spratley’s.

      where chinese culture is concerned, once you’ve left the emperor’s domains you pretty much deserved it no matter what happens to you. this has always been clear cut . they do not claim territories overseas, only those connected to “china proper”
      most noticable would be vietnam and korea during the han dynasty where large numbers of chinese were either already in the territories claimed or were moved in for sinicization

  14. I don’t know much and my english is not that proficient. However, I do know one for sure – my own country has no means of fending itself against a giant like China. China knows that for a fact and knows that we’d be asking for help in the US if ever war (or something of a much smaller scale) breaks out. I feel humbled of the fact that the US is making an effort to stop China’s aggresiveness (they even claimed an island in Japan now…) over its neighboring Asian countries. And I am deeply ASHAMED of the leaders this country has who could not even help my fellow brothers and sisters struck by the typhoon Haiyan – they even made the situation worse in some cases instead of alleviating it. I do hope this situation will get solved without resolving to bloodshed…the world is troubled enough as it is. 🙂

  15. It has been said; “God made the world, the rest are made in China”. And sages have spoken; “In the long run China will win”.

    So, if there be war, let it come in my days, so that my children may live in peace -if there’s still a place to live.


      well if it happens and the chinese takes over philippines
      be prepared to be “chinese” albeit a brown version.

      in the long run china have won simply by outlasting their opponents , all of them. not by war. they just flood the area with enough people and boomz , you’re chinese now. the manchus who conquered china are all mostly “han chinese ” now

  16. no doubt Chinese expansionist ambition will inevitable lead to armed confrontation among contending countries- its just a matter of time.It doesn’t help that we have a President continues to deliver `paper tiger’ like remarks(sorry this is already beyond this discussion’s purview). For me, we should come prepared for the inevitable. Our aim as a nation should be in having a navy that could match China’s and not rely on US dole-outs. This is not impossible if we start now.

    1. er..that is “inevitablY (not inevitable) lead to..”
      and “It doesn’t help that we have a President WHO continues to…”
      my apologies.

  17. In truth and in fact china’s Greediness started upon learning that ph waters are abundant in oil and gas resources, she knew for a fact ,that the ph.military are not well equipt to defend themselves..but communist ideology can never be at the top. The. Chinese people knew how good and brave Filipino was proven in the battlefield in south korea ,when the ph sent 1400 filipino soldiers against 40000 chinese…and what happened? The casualties in the sides of filipino soldiers were 24 and how many in the sides of China , only 7000. Hahhahaha…One American officer said “. Give me ten thousand FILIPINO SOLDIERS AND. I WILL CONQUER THE WHOLE WORLD… china…..stop BLUFFING…..

  18. history will tell that arm conflict with filipinos will be your biggest mistake, we will fight anyone to the end. chinese can’t even win against genghis khan. spanish use religion, american use education, japanese didn’t read history so we fight them for 3 years of occupation. go with the arms struggle and we will make sure that all chinese even filipino chinese will die in this conflict. i can’t wait to start.

    1. Seems you got your history lesson mixed up there.
      It’s a known fact that we surrendered during world war 2 and its also a known fact that the current president taunted the chinese to start a war.
      FYI, our military still can’t win against the chinese since this president is a cowardly bastard.
      Ironic that for someone who doesn’t like the chinese, you are using products that are MADE in CHINA.

    2. genghis khan actually died and never conquered china, his son died in the war against china and his grandson was the one who conquered china

      only terrain and natural disasters prevented anyone within the mongol’s sights from being conquered .

      1. and the chinese lost because the mongols used seige engineers from middle east who brought in new technologies like counter weight trebuchets which outranged anything the chinese had.
        the chinese trebuchets were human powered or gunpowdered arty both of which were not advanced enough to counter the counterweight trebuchets.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.