Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Was this really the Chinese military or a bunch of drunken fratboys? If the former, they've apparently lost their minds and if the latter, they're not the threat we thought they were, as long as we appease them with beer.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Pentagon said Monday that Chinese ships harassed a U.S. surveillance ship Sunday in the South China Sea in the latest of several instances of "increasingly aggressive conduct" in the past week.
The Pentagon says the USNS Impeccable, a surveillance ship, was on routine patrol in the South China Sea.

The Pentagon says the USNS Impeccable, a surveillance ship, was on routine patrol in the South China Sea.

During the incident, five Chinese vessels "shadowed and aggressively maneuvered in dangerously close proximity to USNS Impeccable, in an apparent coordinated effort to harass the U.S. ocean surveillance ship while it was conducting routine operations in international waters," the Pentagon said in a written statement.

The crew members aboard the vessels, two of which were within 50 feet, waved Chinese flags and told the U.S. ship to leave the area, the statement said.

"Because the vessels' intentions were not known, Impeccable sprayed its fire hoses at one of the vessels in order to protect itself," the statement said. "The Chinese crewmembers disrobed to their underwear and continued closing to within 25 feet."

After the Impeccable alerted the Chinese ships "in a friendly manner" that it was seeking a safe path to depart the area, two of the Chinese ships stopped "directly ahead of USNS Impeccable, forcing Impeccable to conduct an emergency 'all stop' in order to avoid collision," the statement said.

"They dropped pieces of wood in the water directly in front of Impeccable's path."

A Pentagon spokesman called the incident "one of the most aggressive actions we've seen in some time. We will certainly let Chinese officials know of our displeasure at this reckless and dangerous maneuver."
Don't Miss

* China accuses U.S. of interference

He said the Chinese crew members used poles to try to snag the Impeccable's acoustic equipment in the water.

The U.S. Embassy in Beijing lodged a protest over the weekend with the Chinese government, a State Department spokesman said Monday.

The Impeccable's crew is composed primarily of civilians and the ship itself is not armed, the spokesman said.

No one at the Chinese Foreign Ministry in Beijing answered CNN's telephone calls seeking comment, and there were no stories about the incident in Chinese media.

The 281.5-foot Impeccable is one of six surveillance ships that perform military survey operations, according to the Navy. It is an oceanographic ship that gathers underwater acoustic data, using sonar.

It has a maximum speed of 13 knots -- or about 15 mph -- but it travels 3 knots, or 3.5 mph, when towing its array of monitoring equipment. It carries a crew of 20 mariners, five technicians and as many as 20 Navy personnel.

The Chinese ships involved were a Navy intelligence collection ship, a Bureau of Maritime Fisheries Patrol Vessel, a State Oceanographic Administration patrol vessel and two small Chinese-flagged trawlers, the statement said.

The Pentagon cited three previous instances of what it described as harassment, the first of which occurred Wednesday, when a Chinese Bureau of Fisheries Patrol vessel used a spotlight to illuminate the the ocean surveillance ship USNS Victorious.

In that incident, which occurred about 125 miles from China's coast in the Yellow Sea, the Chinese ship "crossed Victorious' bow at a range of about 1,400 yards" in darkness without notice or warning. The following day, a Chinese Y-12 maritime surveillance aircraft conducted 12 fly-bys of Victorious at an altitude of about 400 feet and a range of 500 yards.

The next day, a Chinese frigate approached Impeccable "and proceeded to cross its bow at a range of approximately 100 yards," which was followed less than two hours later by a Chinese Y-12 aircraft conducting 11 fly-bys of Impeccable at an altitude of 600 feet and a range of 100 to 300 feet, the statement said.

"The frigate then crossed Impeccable's bow yet again, this time at a range of approximately 400-500 yards without rendering courtesy or notice of her intentions."

And on Saturday, a Chinese intelligence collection ship challenged Impeccable over bridge-to-bridge radio, "calling her operations illegal and directing Impeccable to leave the area or 'suffer the consequences,' " the statement said.

In 2007, the Pentagon filed a formal protest with Beijing over its refusal to allow a U.S. aircraft carrier to make a Thanksgiving port call in Hong Kong so its crew could spend the American holiday with relatives and over its refusal to grant refuge to two U.S. minesweeping ships that were caught in a storm.

And in 2001, an EP-3 surveillance plane collided with a Chinese fighter jet and made an emergency landing on China's Hainan Island, where the Chinese held the plane's 24 American crew members for 11 days before releasing them.

Clearly its George Bush's fault.

Just posturing and sabre rattling I'd imagine.

Possiby (if you'll excuse the pun) testing the water of the new administration.

Nothing serious.

"They dropped pieces of wood in the water directly in front of Impeccable's path."

Wut...? Behold, the devastating weapons of chinese warfare.

This seems like something for politicians to sort out, but I don't like uppity foreign navies harassing us for no reason. This actually pisses me off. If the article is on the level it was a small unarmed boat being harassed by large warships in international waters for no reason.

Clearly its George Bush's fault.

And the broken record keeps spinning.

Well obviously, due to current deployments in Afghanistan and Iraq, the US is not in a position to start a war with China.

I suspect this is a form of provocateurism however China is a much more divided country than the US and the actions may well represent shenanigans by local military/naval leaders rather than central government.

Its not George Bush's fault? It has to be, we're still within the 6 month 'George Bush's fault' time window. Come on, you know you want to say it...

ShumaGorath wrote:

Clearly its George Bush's fault.

And the broken record keeps spinning.

I'm pretty sure that was a sarcastic comment.

Kilkrazy wrote:Well obviously, due to current deployments in Afghanistan and Iraq, the US is not in a position to start a war with China.

I suspect this is a form of provocateurism however China is a much more divided country than the US and the actions may well represent shenanigans by local military/naval leaders rather than central government.

Totally, nobody is in a position to get into a war with China.

Lordhat wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Clearly its George Bush's fault.

And the broken record keeps spinning.

I'm pretty sure that was a sarcastic comment.

It was, I know.

warpcrafter wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Well obviously, due to current deployments in Afghanistan and Iraq, the US is not in a position to start a war with China.

I suspect this is a form of provocateurism however China is a much more divided country than the US and the actions may well represent shenanigans by local military/naval leaders rather than central government.

Totally, nobody is in a position to get into a war with China.

That is debatable.

The Chinese armed forces are big but not sophisticated or well trained. OTOH, no-one in their right mind decides to go to war with a nuclear power.

Maybe they were playing Settlers of Cataan?

"Wood for your sheep?"

warpcrafter wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Well obviously, due to current deployments in Afghanistan and Iraq, the US is not in a position to start a war with China.

I suspect this is a form of provocateurism however China is a much more divided country than the US and the actions may well represent shenanigans by local military/naval leaders rather than central government.

Totally, nobody is in a position to get into a war with China.

And warpcrafter for the FTW there. Actually Killkrazy, I'd be interested to hear your opinions on when we WOULD be ready to go to war with China.

I've given it above.

If you are not prepared to go to war with China they can walk all over you in the Pacific.

You should be trying to make an alliance with Russia.

Of course you first need to decide your strategic aims.

warpcrafter wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Well obviously, due to current deployments in Afghanistan and Iraq, the US is not in a position to start a war with China.

I suspect this is a form of provocateurism however China is a much more divided country than the US and the actions may well represent shenanigans by local military/naval leaders rather than central government.

Totally, nobody is in a position to get into a war with China.

Just use tactics.

If nukes were off the table we could likely take china. They have a considerable numbers advantage, but we have vastly superior sea and air power, and as long as we didn't make it a territory war we could disable their warmachine long before they could bring their vastly superior numbers to bare against us.

Reckon that's a war no one wants to see.

I reckon that would be WW3 on our hands.

"Only Nixon could go to China..."

Hm, well it's time for the U.S. to "posture" back. Send armed escorts to patrol with the civilian ships. Let's see if they want to play chicken with a ship that has 10 inch guns.

Better yet, let's send our bombers over China and drop pieces of wood on them!

This thread is full of crazy talk.

No-one, anywhere, is capable of going to war with China, as long as you're talking about a land war in China. It doesn't matter if there are troops in Iraq or not, China is impossible to occupy. The world combined just doesn't have that many bullets.

But if you're talking about a naval encounter, the US has an overwhelming advantage. In fact, it's probably safe to say that the US could beat the navies of everyone else combined, they're just that far ahead.



As for the article, it is just one source. The 'just conducting standard procedures in international waters' thing was laid on a little thick. I mean, I wouldn't put it past the Chinese to provoke an incident out of nothing, but I also wouldn't put it past the US to wander ever so slightly into Chinese waters to get a better recon.

malfred wrote:"Only Nixon could go to China..."

Nonsense. China has a British Embassy you know. And we have nowt to do with Tricky Dicky

OverbossGhurzubMoga wrote:Hm, well it's time for the U.S. to "posture" back. Send armed escorts to patrol with the civilian ships. Let's see if they want to play chicken with a ship that has 10 inch guns.

Ah, the ship was mostly civilian crewed, but it wasn't a civilian ship. And why posture back? What's the end game in running battleships around the region?

Indeed. Best thing the USA can do here is say 'Ummm...whatcha doing?' and then mention that if it happens again, they may find it necessary to send armed escorts.

This shows an understanding that it could well have been a rogue element just playing silly buggers.

Posturing back straight away really won't achieve much, other than possibly be construed as an over reaction.

Perhaps the chinese were just trying to disrupt the US surveillance ops and keep them from seeing something going on in the South China Sea's murky depths. After all the chinese ships harassing the US ships were intelligence collection ships, and the boards thrown into the water were to damage the US sonar equipment being towed behind the ship.

This is nothing new, I think China is to busy counting all the money they make from selling USA/EU toys and microwaves, to go to war. I say we throw some wood (don't really small rocks float?LoL) in front of their ships and call it even.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

malfred wrote:"Only Nixon could go to China..."

Nonsense. China has a British Embassy you know. And we have nowt to do with Tricky Dicky

It was a joke from Star Trek. "There is an ancient Vulcan saying...only Nixon could go to China."

Here's another, from the balding bad guy in Princess Bride "Thats quite possibly the worst mistake you could have made, other than getting involved in a land war in Asia."

EDIT: Let China have Asia. We should have no troops in Asia except one or two strategic bases. And Australia.

I think events like this happen a lot more than the average person realizes. This reminds me of a pair of 12 year olds. "I'm going to do -this- with my fists, and if you get in my way, it's not my fault."

"EDIT: Let China have Asia. We should have no troops in Asia except one or two strategic bases. And Australia"

What about the poor other contries of Asia? Should we not give a damn about them?